Is the Falling Away a false teaching ?

[Revelation Man]

I have evolved with much study on this. I used to argue to all that there had to be this great Falling Away also. All because of this one passage. 2 Thessalonians 2:3. I do agree that the world gets far more evil towards the (now) end, as foretold in Romans chapter 1, and as Peter said, there will be scoffers in the last days etc. etc. But I do not think the True Church can "Fall Away", either you are of Christ/God or you are not, and will get left behind by the Bridegroom. Anyway, here is my understanding of 2 Thessalonians 2:3.

“Let no one in any way deceive you, for it will not come unless the apostasy comes first, and the man of lawlessness is revealed, the son of destruction…” – 2 Thessalonians 2:3 (NASB) This verse is used by many and they say it implies a "Falling Away" from the faith. But a guy named Tommy Ice has shed some exceptional light on this passage.

Mr. Ice has pointed out that the Greek noun, apostasia, is used only twice in the New Testament. The other occurrence is in Acts 21:21 where it states that an accusation was made against Paul that he was “teaching all the Jews who are among the Gentiles to forsake [apostasia] Moses.”

The word is used in verb form a total of 15 times in the New Testament, and only three of these have anything to do with a departure from the faith (Luke 8:13, 1 Timothy 4:1, and Hebrews 3:12). In other settings, the word is used for departing from iniquity (2 Timothy 2:19), departing from ungodly men (1 Timothy 6:5), departing from the temple (Luke 2:27), departing from the body (2 Corinthians 12:8), and departing from persons (Acts 12:10 and Luke 4:13).

This insight about the use and meaning of the word was certainly compelling, but the argument Mr. Ice presented that was most convicting was his revelation that the first seven English translations of the Bible rendered the noun, apostasia, as either “departure” or “departing.”

They were as follows:

1.The Wycliffe Bible (1384)

2.The Tyndale Bible (1526)

3. The Coverdale Bible (1535)

4. The Cranmer Bible (1539)

5. The Great Bible (1540)

6. The Beeches Bible (1576)

7. The Geneva Bible (1608)

Mr. Ice also noted that the Bible used by the Western world from 400 AD to the 1500s — Jerome’s Latin translation known as “The Vulgate” — rendered apostasia with the Latin word, discessio, which means “departure.” The first translation of the word to mean apostasy in an English Bible did not occur until 1611 when the King James Version was issued. So, why did the King James translators introduce a completely new rendering of the word as “falling away”? The best guess is that they were taking a stab at the false teachings of Catholicism.

 

One other point Mr. Ice made that I think is significant is that Paul used a definite article with the word apostasia. The significance of this is emphasized by Daniel Davey in a thesis he wrote for the Detroit Baptist Theological Seminary:

Since the Greek language does not need an article to make the noun definite, it becomes clear that with the usage of the article, reference is being made to something in particular. In 2 Thessalonians 2:3 the word apostasia is prefaced by the definite article which means that Paul is pointing to a particular type of departure clearly known to the Thessalonian church.

In light of this grammatical point, Tommy observed that “the use of the definite article would support the notion that Paul spoke of a clear, discernible notion.” And that notion he had already identified in verse 1 when he stated that he was writing about “our gathering together to Him [Jesus].” This interpretation also corresponds to the point that Paul makes in verses 6 and 7 where he states that the man of lawlessness will not come until what “restrains” him “is taken out of the way.”

And what it is that restrains evil in the world today? The Holy Spirit working through the Church. I think when the Church Departs, the Anti-Christ will be free to come to power.

I do not think this has anything to do with a Falling Away. It is the Church Departing before the Anti-Christ is brought forth. The King James Bible changed the known understanding that has been around for 1500 some odd years.

Edited February 20, 2020 by Revelation Man

[Ezra]

12 minutes ago, Revelation Man said:

But I do not think the True Church can "Fall Away",

Of course the true Church cannot fall away, but Christendom is comprised of both the true Church and false professors within false Christianity.  Theological liberalism contaminated Christendom over 200 years ago, and apostasy has taken root in the mainline denominations, e.g. ordaining homosexual bishops or rejecting the authority of the Bible.  There are many other aspects of the great apostasy. 

[Revelation Man]

1 hour ago, Ezra said:

Of course the true Church cannot fall away, but Christendom is comprised of both the true Church and false professors within false Christianity.  Theological liberalism contaminated Christendom over 200 years ago, and apostasy has taken root in the mainline denominations, e.g. ordaining homosexual bishops or rejecting the authority of the Bible.  There are many other aspects of the great apostasy. 

I get all that, but that wasn't really the thrust of my point. It is that the word means Departing not Falling Away. It seems to if you read the passage. Translations easily lead us astray. The first seven English Translations was Depart, the Vulgate Latin bible from AD 400 on said Depart. The Church Departs then the Anti-Christ is revealed. Maybe my title choice was bad. 

[Revelation Man]

10 minutes ago, inchrist said:

Hey Revelation man,

Mr Ice rendering makes no sense

“Let no one in any way deceive you, for it will not come unless the apostasy comes first, and the man of lawlessness is revealed, the son of destruction.

Mr Ice rendering would be as follows

Let no one in any way deceive you for the rapture cannot happen until the rapture happens first?

That makes no contextual sense.

³ Let no man deceive you by any means: for that day shall not come, except there come a falling away first, and that man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition;

Let no man deceive you for that day [day of the Lord] shall not come except the Church Departs First, then the Man of Sin will be Revealed. 

You have of course heard that phrase you mentioned bandied around as I have. Where they deceive everyone is, the Second Coming is not the Rapture, if the Rapture has already happened. The Second Coming, happens with us Saints who come back with Jesus from Heaven, just like Rev. 19 describes. But this isn't even speaking of the Second Coming per se anyway, the Day of the Lord is Gods 3 1/2 year period of Wrath.

Now what is THAT DAY referring to ? 2 Now we beseech you, brethren, by the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, and by our gathering together unto him,

² That ye be not soon shaken in mind, or be troubled, neither by spirit, nor by word, nor by letter as from us, as that the day of Christ is at hand. ( What is the Day of Christ or the Day of the Lord ? It is mentioned 31 times in the Bible, and it always refers to Wrath, Troubles etc. ) So THAT DAY will not come, until the Church Departs (Seven Years before Christ Returns) and until the Anti-Christ comes onto the scene then and ONLY THEN can the Day of the Lord or GODS WRATH start at the 3 1/2 year Mark, after the Anti-Christ comes forth.

 

Is self explanatory when read properly in the right context. 

God Bless.

 

[Ezra]

8 hours ago, Revelation Man said:

It is that the word means Departing not Falling Away.

A departure from the Bible, from the true Gospel, and from Bible Truth is indeed a falling away.  That is what apostasy is.

[Guest]

You gave your interpretation of another man's interpretation of the Bible. Others have rebutted that interpretation. It doesn't seem necessary that you have to defend this person's interpretation. Let his works speak for themselves, and let Scripture speak for Itself. The Truth will be revealed.

[Bible_Gazer]

I think Paul is addressing to the church that Jesus is not returning until these things happens first. Then they can look for him after the man of sin does his part.

[Revelation Man]

4 hours ago, Ezra said:

A departure from the Bible, from the true Gospel, and from Bible Truth is indeed a falling away.  That is what apostasy is.

If you read the text in full, you will see that there are many more instances where apostisia means to depart from sin, depart from ungodly people, to depart from the Temple, departing from the body etc. 

 

There is a definite article used by Paul in the passage and a definite article only means that something is already commonly known between two peoples, and there is no need to expound on it in detail.

'The' is the definite article is English. It is used to restrict the meaning of a noun to make it refer to something that is known by both the speaker or writer and the listener or reader: He's gone to the shops. (Here the listener knows which shops I mean) It can also be used to refer back to something that has already been mentioned: There's a word for that. Now, what is the word ? It can be used to refer forwards to something that is coming: The key to the front door is under the mat. It can be used to refer to a group: The car has changed our way of living.

The Use of the Article

It is important to note that Paul uses a definite article with the noun apostasia. What does this mean ?

Since the Greek language does not need an article to make the noun definite, it becomes clear that with the usage of the article reference is being made to something in particular. In II Thessalonians 2:3 the word apostasia is prefaced by the definite article which means that Paul is pointing to a particular type of departure clearly known to the Thessalonian church.

Dr. Lewis provides a likely answer when he notes that the definite article serves to make a word distinct and draw attention to it. In this instance he believes that its purpose is " to denote a previous reference." " The departure Paul previously referred to was ' our being gathered to him' (v. 1) and our being ' caught up' with the Lord and the raptured in the clouds (1 Thess. 4:17)," notes Dr. Lewis. The " departure" was something that Paul and his readers clearly had a mutual understanding about. Paul says in verse 5, " Do you not remember that while I was still with you, I was telling you these things ?"

The use of the definite article would also support the notion that Paul spoke of a clear, discernable event. A physical departure, like the rapture would fit just such a notion. However, the New Testament teaches that apostasy had already arrived in the first century (cf. Acts 20:27- 32; 1 Tim. 4:1- 5; 2 Tim. 3:1- 9; 2 Pet. 2:1- 3; Jude 3- 4, 17- 21) and thus, such a process would not denote a clear event as demanded by the language of this passage. Understanding departure as the rapture would satisfy the nuance of this text. E. Schuyler English explains as follows:

Again, how would the Thessalonians, or Christians in any century since, be qualified to recognize the apostasy when it should come, assuming, simply for the sake of this inquiry, that the Church might be on earth when it does come ? There has been apostasy from God, rebellion against Him, since time began.

Whatever Paul is referring to in his reference to " the departure," was something that both the Thessalonian believers and he had discussed in-depth previously. When we examine Paul' s first letter to the Thessalonians, he never mentions the doctrine of apostasy, however, virtually every chapter in that epistle speaks of the rapture (cf. 1:9- 10; 2:19; probably 3:13; 4:13- 17; 5:1- 11). In these passages, Paul has used a variety of Greek terms to describe the rapture. It should not be surprising that he uses another term to reference the rapture in 2 Thessalonians 2:3. Dr. House tells us:

Remember, the Thessalonians had been led astray by the false teaching (2:2- 3) that the Day of the Lord had already come. This was confusing because Paul offered great hope, in the first letter, of a departure to be with Christ and a rescue from god' s wrath. Now a letter purporting to be from Paul seems to say that they would first have to go through the Day of the Lord. Paul then clarified his prior teaching by emphasizing that they had no need to worry. They could again be comforted because the departure he had discussed in his first letter, and in his teaching while with them, was still the truth. The departure of Christians to be with Christ, and the subsequent revelation of the lawless one, Paul argues, is proof that the Day of the Lord had not begun as they had thought. This understanding of apostasia makes much more sense than the view that they are to be comforted (v. 2) because a defection from the faith must precede the Day of the Lord. The entire second chapter (as well as 1 Thessalonians 4:18; 5:11) serves to comfort (see vv. 2, 3, 17), supplied by a reassurance of Christ' s coming as taught in his first letter.

Departure and The Restrainer

Since pre-tribulationists believe that the restrainer mentioned in verses 6 and 7 is the Holy Spirit and teaches a pre-trib rapture, then it should not be surprising to see that there is a similar progression of thought in the progression of verse 3. Allan MacRae, president of Faith Theological Seminary in a letter to Schuyler English has said the following concerning this matter:

I wonder if you have noticed the striking parallel between this verse and verses 7- 8, a little further down. According to your suggestion verse 3 mentions the departure of the church as coming first, and then tells of the revealing of the man of sin. In verses 7 and 8 we find the identical sequence. Verse 7 tells of the removal of the Church; verse 8 says: " And then shall that Wicked be revealed." Thus close examination of the passage shows an inner unity and coherence, if we take the word apostasia in its general sense of " departure," while a superficial examination would easily lead to an erroneous interpretation as " falling away" because of the proximity of the mention of the man of sin.

 

[Last Daze]

1 hour ago, Bible_Gazer said:

I think Paul is addressing to the church that Jesus is not returning until these things happens first. Then they can look for him after the man of sin does his part.

Agreed.  If you try to substitute the apostasy with the rapture (for "the departure") then the verse becomes nonsensical.  It makes the verse essentially sound like this:

The rapture will not happen until the rapture happens first.

Huh??

 

[Revelation Man]

18 hours ago, Last Daze said:

Agreed.  If you try to substitute the apostasy with the rapture (for "the departure") then the verse becomes nonsensical.  It makes the verse essentially sound like this:

The rapture will not happen until the rapture happens first.

Huh??

 

Again, as I have stated in depth, and will do so again in brief. That is a "saying" by people and a ready made quote that makes no sense in itself.

 

The Rapture is not after the Seven Year Tribulation, but before, thus it seems you confuse the Two. Why would there be two raptures?  If the Rapture happens before the Anti-Christ appears as we say, which is true, then the Second Coming is not the Rapture per se, so the quote sounds nothing like you imply, but you still think the Rapture is at the Second Coming so you see two Raptures in your thinking, even though that's not the case.

 

^{2 Thess. 2:3} Let no man deceive you by any means: for that day(Day of the Lord) shall not come, except there come a falling away(DEPARTURE/RAPTURE OF THE CHURCH) first, and that man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition; {{ Now please show me in that verse where this second rapture is, because I fail to see it. The Second Coming is not a Rapture, but it is not in this verse anyway. The Rapture happens, the Anti-Christ comes on the scene. Then Seven years later we the Church (Revelation 19) comes back with Jesus immediately after the Tribulation, which we do not partake in.}}

Edited September 17, 2016 by Revelation Man