[jude24]

The only problem with your speculation about the Holy Spirit in 2 Thes. 6 is that it directly contradicts the first three verses of the same chapter.

Verses 1-3 tell us that the "coming of Christ, and our being gathered to him" will not happen until after the "man of sin is revealed". Your speculation on verse 6 results in the rapture before the man of sin is revealed. So the speculation that the "removal of the restrainer" signifies the rapture must be wrong.

Au contriare. The "second coming" is distinct from the Rapture. One is hidden, the other is not. "The day of Christ" is the 2nd coming, NOT the rapture. The "day of Christ" comes "in flaming fire taking vengence on them that know not God." (II Thess 1:8). The Rapture is a time of hope and reunion with Christ in I Thessalonians. No contradiction.

[watchin]

The "second coming" is distinct from the Rapture.

Agreed.

One is hidden, the other is not.

Sorry, that "hidden" business is the invention of man and his novels. So many Christians find it shocking, but there is really not a peep in the Bible about a hidden or invisible rapture. The only way you could support that is the "thief in the night" motif. A thorough study of that shows that the meaning is "suddeness" not "secrecy".

2 Peter 3:10
¹⁰But the day of the Lord will come like a thief. The heavens will disappear with a roar; the elements will be destroyed by fire, and the earth and everything in it will be laid bare.

It's pretty hard to make the thief in the night hidden in that passage.

Many passages are assumed to describe the invisible rapture, like the "one taken, the other left" passage. The truth is, that passage not only says nothing about secrecy or invisibility, it doesn't even refer to the rapture.

"The day of Christ" is the 2nd coming, NOT the rapture.

The passage in 2 Thes 2:1-3 is about the "coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, and our being gathered together to Him". Any other interpretation does violence to the context of the passage, rendering it meaningless.

You're suggesting something like this, "Concerning the day you get up early and open gifts around the tree, I don't want you to worry, thinking that you've missed New Year's Day. Don't let anyone deceive you, for New Years cannot come unless ..." No disrespect intended, but that's nutty.

Why would Paul begin a passage "concerning the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, and our being gathered together to Him" and then switch to another event in verses 2 and 3? The only reason to dodge the clear implication of the passage is discomfort with the fact that it won't fit a predetermined doctrine.

The "day of Christ" comes "in flaming fire taking vengence on them that know not God." (II Thess 1:8).

You bet it does. The Christians rise in the air (not vanish), and the unbelievers realize that their doom has come. It is a great day for believers, and the beginning of vengence - the Wrath of God - for unbelievers.