Thursday, December 20, 2007

The Next Great Event For Christ's Body= Departure

Great Falling Away after the Departure of the Church

Johan Malan, University of the North, South Africa

Abstract: The revelation of the Antichrist (the man of sin) can only occur after the departure of the true church of Christ.

The departure (Gr. apostasia) of 2 Thessalonians 2:3 will precede the revelation of the Antichrist. The rendering of apostasia as “rebellion”, “apostasy” or “falling away” in most English Bibles is unfortunate since these are secondary, or derived, meanings of the word. Its primary meaning is “departure” which, in this verse, refers to the rapture of the church. In consequence of the rapture, great apostasy will occur on earth while the Antichrist institutes his lawless and utterly sinful reforms. That time will be characterised by a world-wide moral and spiritual falling away.

Speculation is rife about the rapture and the revelation of the Antichrist. Some people spiritualise these concepts, others accept the two events but place them in the wrong chronological order, while many others deny them altogether or allege that the Antichrist was one or other historical figure.

These conflicting opinions cause great uncertainty and confusion among many Christians. However, it is not the first time in the church history that contradictory views and wrong teachings on the end-time gave rise to anxiety among believers. It happened in the first century in the congregation of Thessalonica.

In his first letter, Paul taught the congregation that the Lord Jesus will come at the end of the church dispensation to take the true believers away to heaven:
“For the Lord Himself shall descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel, and with the trump of God: and the dead in Christ shall rise first; then we which are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the air: and so shall we ever be with the Lord. Therefore, comfort one another with these words” (1 Thes. 4:16-18; the word rapture is derived from catch up (Gr. harpazo) in verse 17).

In Paul’s preaching to the Thessalonians, and also in his subsequent letter to them, a clear promise was made that the Lord Jesus would remove the Christians before the revelation of the Antichrist and the commencement of the judgements of the Day of the Lord during the great tribulation. He exhorted them “to wait for [God’s] Son from heaven, whom He raised from the dead, even Jesus, which delivered us from the wrath to come” (1 Thes 1:10). “For God hath not appointed us to wrath, but to obtain salvation by our Lord Jesus Christ” (1 Thes. 5:9).

As in the case of Noah and Lot, the Christians will be saved from hour of God’s wrath over a sinful world. They will escape the time of judgement by way of the rapture, as promised by Jesus in His Olivet Discourse: “Watch ye therefore, and pray always, that ye may be accounted worthy to escape all these things that shall come to pass, and to stand before the Son of man” (Lk. 21:36). Those who pursue a false, humanistic peace outside Christ will not escape the judgements of the tribulation. The destruction of the Antichrist’s reign of terror and the judgements of God will suddenly befall them (1 Thes. 5:3).

The congregation in Thessalonica believed this exposition of end-time events. They were eagerly looking forward to the salvation that the Lord Jesus promised to them through the rapture. They had a “blessed hope” to look forward to (Titus 2:13). In terms of this expectation they comforted and exhorted one another to remain faithful to the Lord.
False teachings

The persecution of Christians in the Roman Empire caused considerable anxiety among believers and gave rise to many questions about the end-times – also in Thessalonica. Under the instigation of enemies of the gospel, a letter containing false teachings was written in the name of Paul and distributed among members of the congregation. Other people claimed to have had ‘spiritual revelations’ to the same effect. In these false teachings it was alleged that the day of the Lord (the time of judgements and tribulation) had already begun and that the Christians would have to go through it. In this way the doctrine of the rapture before wrath was contradicted and scoffed at.

Paul wrote his second letter to the congregation with the following objectives: (1) To refute the false teachings about the end-time; and (2) to answer certain questions that were raised by members of the congregation on the second coming and related matters. He starts Chapter 2 by referring to the rapture as “the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ and our gathering together unto Him.” After that he explained and reconfirmed the correct order of end-time events:
“Now we beseech you, brethren, by the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, and by our gathering unto Him, 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. 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, who opposeth and exalteth himself above all that is called God, or that is worshipped; so that he as God sitteth in the temple of God, showing himself that he is God.

“Remember ye not, that, when I was yet with you, I told you these things? And now ye know what withholdeth that he might be revealed in his time. For the mystery of iniquity doth already work: only he who now letteth will let, until he be taken out of the way. And then shall that Wicked be revealed, whom the Lord shall consume with the spirit of His mouth, and shall destroy with the brightness of His coming: even him, whose coming is after the working of Satan with all power and signs and lying wonders, and with all deceivableness of unrighteousness in them that perish; because they received not the love of the truth, that they might be saved. And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie: that they all might be damned who believed not the truth, but had pleasure in unrighteousness” (2 Thes. 2:1-12).

In this chapter, Paul clearly states the basic facts about the departing of the one who withholds, the revelation of the Antichrist and also the swift judgement that will befall him during the coming of Christ.
Refuting of wrong teachings

The false teachings that were spread in Thessalonica were based on the assumption that the Roman Caesar, who also deified himself, was the Antichrist. The congruent persecution of Christians was viewed as part of the hardships and suffering of the day of the Lord. Panic was caused by the expectation of greater persecution and judgements that were imminent, and also by the false teaching that the Christians would not, as promised by Paul, escape the time of wrath.

Paul refuted the false teachings and reiterated that first there will be a departure (apostasia), followed by the revelation of the man of sin (the Antichrist). He will be the abominable son of perdition who will enter the temple and show himself that he is God (2 Thes. 2:3-4). During the persecution of the first century when Paul wrote his letter, the departure had not yet occurred, neither did the alleged Roman Antichrist sit in the temple in Jerusalem to declare himself as God.

After his initial exposition of the chronological order of end-time events, Paul confirmed this scenario by the addition of new information. He reminded members of the congregation of the sermons that he preached on this subject: “Remember ye not, that, when I was yet with you, I told you these things?” (v. 5). He then continued to say that first the one who withholds must be taken out of the way (the rapture of the church) and then the Wicked (the Antichrist) will be revealed. He also stated that the Antichrist would be a living person on earth when the Lord Jesus returns to destroy him with the brightness of His coming (v. 8).

There was absolutely no basis for the false teachings that were spread in the name of Paul, to the effect that there would not be a rapture of believers before the tribulation period. There was also no truth in the supposition that the Lord would punish the Christians with the wicked and surrender them to the tyranny of the Antichrist.
The departure (apostasia)

The word apostasia in verse 3, translated in the King James Version as “falling away,” is problematical to many people. In terms of this rendering it is assumed that Christians will not only experience the great falling away of the last days but will also be here during the revelation of the Antichrist. A careful exposition of the verse shows that these assumptions are unfounded.

The Greek word apostasia means departure, withdrawal or separation. A spiritual and moral falling away can be read into this word only as a secondary meaning, deduced from its basic reference to the departure of the truth. Apostasia is derived from the particle apo which means off or away [from something near], in various senses of place, time or relation. It denotes separation, departure, or the cessation [of a relationship]. The verb correlate of apostasia is aphistemi which, according to Strong’s Concordance, means to depart, withdraw, draw (fall) away, remove.

Even in cases where aphistemi is used to denote a spiritual falling away (e.g. Lk. 8:13, 1 Tim. 4:1 and Heb. 3:12) it is grammatically more correct to describe the act as a departing from faith (as in the latter two verses) rather than a falling away (as in Lk. 8:13). The following are examples of the rendering of aphistemi in the King James Version:

“…[she] departed not from the temple” (Lk. 2:37); “…he departed from Him for a season” (Lk. 4:13); “…and in time of temptation fall away” (Lk. 8:13); “Depart from Me” (Lk. 13:37); “…the angel departed from him” (Acts 12:10); “…who departed from them” (Acts 15:38); “…he departed from them” (Acts 19:9); “…they departed from him” (Acts 22:19); “…that it might depart from me” (2 Cor. 12:8); “…depart from the faith” (1 Tim. 4:1); “…from such withdraw thyself” (1 Tim. 6:5); “…depart from iniquity” (2 Tim. 2:19); “…departing from the living God” (Heb. 3:12).

In view of these examples it is clear that the basic meaning of the word apostasia and its verb form of aphistemi is to depart. For this reason, the word apostasia in 2 Thes. 2:3 was translated as departing first in the following seven English Bibles before the King James Version: Wycliffe Bible (1384), Tyndale Bible (1526), Coverdale Bible (1535), Cranmer Bible (1539), Breeches Bible (1576), Beza Bible (1583), and the Geneva Bible (1608).

The Vulgate uses the Latin word discessio, meaning departure. In a footnote to 2 Thes. 2:3 the Amplified Bible makes the following remark: “A possible rendering of apostasia is departure [of the church].” In its full meaning, this verse reads:
“Let no man deceive you by any means: for that day [the day of the Lord] shall not come, except there come a departing [of the church] first, and that man of sin [the Antichrist] be revealed, the son of perdition…”

Different interpretations

Dogmatic prejudice rather than ignorance can account for the conflicting views that still persist on the true meaning of apostasia in this verse. In blind loyalty to the theologians of their church, many people simply refuse to believe in a pre-tribulation rapture. To them, it is more acceptable to stick to the narrow, secondary meaning of apostasia by interpreting it merely as spiritual decline during the last days, followed by the revelation of the Antichrist.

If the context of 2 Thes. 2:3 is considered, it is obvious that apostasia is here meant in the full width of its meaning – both as departing and as a spiritual falling away. In the first instance Paul, by using this word, refers to the physical departure of the true believers who are not destined for God’s judgements. One of the major implications of this departure will be that great spiritual darkness will prevail on earth – the light of the world having been taken away. This situation will allow the Antichrist the opportunity to be revealed. Sin and wickedness will proliferate during his reign, leading to the greatest falling away of biblical norms and Christian standards in the entire history of humankind.

In verses 3 and 4, Paul states the fact of the departure of the church, followed by the revelation of the Antichrist and the implementation of his wicked reforms. This order of events is again stated in verses 6 to 12, with the addition of more information. The two descriptions of the same scenario can be compared as follows:

The rapture: The apostasia (departing) shall come first (v. 3).


The rapture: He who now withholds will be taken out of the way (v.7).

Coming of the Antichrist: The man of sin will then be revealed (v.3).


Coming of the Antichrist: Then shall the Wicked be revealed (v. 8).

Falling away through anti-Christian reforms: The Antichrist will promote sin and wickedness, exalt himself above all religions, desecrate the temple and declare himself to be God (v. 3-4).


Falling away through anti-Christian reforms: His coming and wicked reforms will be after the working of Satan with evil powers, lies, occult wonders and all kinds of deception (v. 8-10).
The one who withholds

Negative perceptions about the pre-tribulation rapture also lead to distorted views about the one who withholds the Antichrist. There is clearly only one power that is greater than that of Satan and the Antichrist, and that is the power of God. There is no earthly or human power that can effectively resist or overcome the Devil.

In the present dispensation, before the personal revelation of Christ and the Antichrist, a spiritual battle is waged for the control of the world. The Spirit of God and the deceiving spirits of Satan work through people to achieve their objectives. John says:
“Hereby know ye the Spirit of God: Every spirit that confesseth that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is of God: and every spirit that confesseth not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is not of God: and this is that spirit of Antichrist, whereof ye have heard that it should come; and even now already is in the world. Ye are of God, little children, and have overcome them: because greater is He that is in you, than he that is in the world… He that knoweth God heareth us; he that is not of God heareth not us. Hereby know we the Spirit of truth, and the spirit of error” (1 Jn. 4:2-6).

The expression in 2 Thes. 2:7 of “he who now letteth” (withhold or restrain) refers to the church as the body of Christ on earth. We are the temple in which the Holy Spirit dwells, and for that reason we are the light of a dark world and the salt of a corrupt earth. Through the power of the Holy Spirit we withhold the revelation and subsequent rise to power of the Antichrist. Only after the true church has been taken out of the way in the rapture, the Antichrist will be able to personally reveal himself. He will then, without opposition, be accepted as universal Messiah and world leader by a deceived and spiritually dead humanity.

It is unbiblical to allege that the Holy Spirit is the restrainer who will be removed from the world. It is indeed through the power of the Holy Spirit that the church is able to withhold the Antichrist, but the Holy Spirit Himself will not be withdrawn. Millions of people will be saved during the seven year tribulation period (Rev. 7:9-14), and that is only possible through the mediation of the Spirit of God (1 Cor. 12:3). Before the public coming of Jesus at the end of the seven years there will even be a new outpouring of the Holy Spirit over Israel to prepare them for reconciliation with the Messiah:
“And I will pour upon the house of David, and upon the inhabitants of Jerusalem, the Spirit of grace and of supplications: and they shall look upon Me whom they have pierced, and they shall mourn for Him, as one mourneth for his only son, and shall be in bitterness for him, as one that is in bitterness for his firstborn” (Zech. 12:10).

It is, therefore, completely wrong to teach the Holy Spirit’s absence on earth during that time. Because the church, as the temple of the Holy Spirit, will not be here, the Spirit will not operate in His Pentecostal fullness. But He will nevertheless be here as the Spirit of judgement (Is. 4:4) and also the Spirit who convicts people of their sins (Jn. 16:8).
Nature of the falling away

The falling away that will occur after the revelation of the Antichrist on earth will be far worse than the falling away which is experienced during the last days prior to the departing of the Christians (cf. 1 Tim. 4:1, 2 Tim. 3:1-5, 2 Tim. 4:2-4). After the rapture and the revelation of the Antichrist, the whole world will be plunged into utter moral and spiritual darkness. An international culture of sin will emerge from the moral falling away, in which the worst imaginable blasphemy, malignancy, corruption, theft and violence will occur.

The spiritual falling away will lead to the establishing of a deceived alliance of world religions under the leadership of the Antichrist as universal messiah. In the middle of the seven years he will enter the rebuilt temple in Jerusalem and declare himself to be God (2 Thes. 2:4). This rebellious act will be followed by the world-wide worshipping of the Antichrist and the Devil (Rev. 13:4), and will constitute the worst form of spiritual falling away from the truth.
An end-time Antichrist

A very important statement that Paul makes about the Antichrist is that he will be an end-time world dictator. His public appearance will be suddenly and dramatically terminated by the second coming of Jesus Christ, who will consume him with the spirit of His mouth, and destroy him with the brightness of His coming” (2 Thes. 2:8).

This very clear statement disqualifies all historical dictators as the final “man of sin” as they only paved the way for the coming of the end-time Antichrist. John said: “Little children, it is the last time: and as ye have heard that Antichrist shall come, even now there are many antichrists; whereby we know that it is the last time” (1 Jn. 2:18).

Also consider the following pronouncements about the Antichrist: Daniel 9:27 says that for one year-week (of seven years) he will confirm a strong covenant with many nations. In the middle of the week, which is after 3½ years, he will cause the sacrifices in the temple to be ceased. He will desecrate the temple, have an image of himself placed holy of holies, forbid all religions, and force people everywhere to only worship himself and his image. During that time he will institute a devastating reign of terror.

The Lord Jesus referred to this ominous time when He described to the Jews the great tribulation that will occur immediately prior to His coming:
“When ye therefore shall see the abomination of desolation, spoken of by Daniel the prophet, stand in the holy place, (whoso readeth, let him understand): then them which be in Judaea flee to the mountains… For then shall be great tribulation, such as was not since the beginning of the world to this time, no, nor ever shall be… Immediately after the tribulation of those days shall the sun be darkened, and the moon shall not give her light, and the stars shall fall from heaven, and the powers of the heavens shall be shaken: And then shall appear the sign of the Son of man in heaven: and then shall all the tribes of the earth mourn, and they shall see the Son of man coming in the clouds of heaven with power and great glory” (Mt. 24:15-30).

On that day, the Antichrist and the false prophet will be destroyed:
“And I saw the beast [the Antichrist] and the kings of the earth, and their armies, gathered together to make war against Him [Christ] that sat on the horse, and against His army. And the beast was taken, and with him the false prophet that worked miracles before him, with which he deceived them that had received the mark of the beast, and them that worshipped his image. These both were cast alive into a lake of fire burning with brimstone” (Rev. 19:19-20).

The prophecies about the appearance of the Antichrist are, therefore, still future and not historical. There were many forerunners, but now the time has come for the revelation of the great end-time Antichrist whom the Lord will consume with the breath of His mouth when His feet shall stand on the Mount of Olives during His second coming (Zech. 14:4-5).

The scene is rapidly prepared for the coming of the Antichrist. We already experience the falling away of the end of the church dispensation, and the beginning of sorrows. Soon, the hour of the departure of the children of God will come when they will be removed to heavenly places in the twinkling of an eye. Those who withheld the appearance of the Antichrist will then be taken out of way, thereby causing great spiritual darkness on earth. Under the leadership of the man of sin, who will be Satan’s ruler over an utterly depraved and deceived humanity, lawlessness and immorality will take on unprecedented proportions. As in the time of Noah and Lot, The Lord will visit this rebellious generation with great plagues and judgements during the day of the Lord.

QUESTION:

What does "except there come a falling away first" in 2 Thess. 2:3 mean?

ANSWER:

Thanks for the question, this passage has been the subject of much controversy, as to whether this speaks of a period of great "apostasy", or whether it refers to the "departure", or "Rapture" of the Church.

I believe the KJV phrase "falling away", in 2 Thess. 2:3, refers to the "departure", or "Rapture" of the Church.

The KJV English phrase "falling away", in 2 Thess. 2:3, is the one Greek word "apostasia", and its basic meaning is to "depart from" or "go away".

The Greek word "Apostasia" is a compound of two Greek words: "Apo" = "to move away", "stasis" means "standing or state", or "to stand".

Literally, from its basic definition, "apostasia" means "to go away from", or "depart", or "change state or standing from one state to another".

"Apostasia" was used in extra Biblical Greek literature to describe political revolt, or a "going away from the establishment" and in the Septuagint, or Greek Old Testament, when the Jews would "go away" from God to worship other gods.

"Apostasia" is only used one other time in the New Testament, in Acts 21:21 to describe "forsaking", or "going away from" the teachings of Moses.

"Apostasion", the noun form, appears in Matt 5:31, & 19:7, and Mark 10:4 where it describes a "writing of divorcement", or "papers that separate". (Again, so someone can go away).

"Apostasia" literally then means "to depart, or go away from", and to "go away from what" must be determined from the context.

So, what is the "context" of both the First and Second Epistle to the Church at Thessalonica? The sole subject and context of both epistles is the "Rapture", or "Departure" of the Church, or "the called out ones," and advice to the Church while we await the Return of Christ for the Church. The Second letter to the Church at Thessalonica appears to have been written by Paul to clear up misunderstandings about his First Letter. (2 Thess. 2:1-5)

The Greek word "apostasia" in 2 Thess. 2:3 also has the Greek article "the" in front of it, in the Greek text, which makes it, not a general "going away", or "departure", but "The Departure", a special EVENT, that the reader is expected to already know about.

In other words, the use of the article "the" with "apostasia" in 2 Thess. 2:3 indicates that Paul expects the Thessalonian Christians to already understand that this is the title of an event, and he expects them to already know what it means.

Had the Apostle Paul already taught the Thessalonians about an "EVENT" that could be described as a "departure", or "going away"? Absolutely, yes.

Paul had already taught the Thessalonian Church about the EVENT, of the Catching Away and "Departure" of the Church in 1 Thess 4:13-18.

In 2 Thess 2:5, Paul says don’t you remember? When I was with you I taught you about these things?

I don't see where Paul taught them at all about "a falling away from the truth" in his first letter, but he taught them about the Rapture of the church in at least five passages in 1st Thessalonians:

1. 1 Thess 1:10 "And to wait for his Son from heaven, whom he raised from the dead,[even] Jesus, which delivered us from the wrath to come."

2. 1 Thess 2:19 "For what [is] our hope, or joy, or crown of rejoicing? [Are] not even ye in the presence of our Lord Jesus Christ at his coming?"

3. 1 Thess 3:13 "To the end he may stablish your hearts unblameable in holiness before God, even our Father, at the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ with all his saints."

4. 1 Thess 4:13 - 5:10:


Verse 13 "But I would not have you to be ignorant, brethren, concerning them which are asleep, that ye sorrow not, even as others which have no hope.

14 For if we believe that Jesus died and rose again, even so them also which sleep in Jesus will God bring with him.

15 For this we say unto you by the word of the Lord, that we which are alive [and] remain unto the coming of the Lord shall not prevent them which are asleep.

16 For the Lord himself shall descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel, and with the trump of God: and the dead in Christ shall rise first:

17 Then we which are alive [and] remain shall be CAUGHT UP together with them in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the air: and so shall we ever be with the Lord.

18 Wherefore comfort one another with these words.

Chapter 5

Verse 1 But of the times and the seasons, brethren, ye have no need that I write unto you.

2 For yourselves know perfectly that the day of the Lord so cometh as a thief in the night.

3 For when THEY shall say, Peace and safety; then sudden destruction cometh upon THEM, as travail upon a woman with child; and THEY shall not escape.

4 But YE, brethren, are not in darkness, that that day should overtake YOU as a thief.

5 Ye are all the children of light, and the children of the day: we are not of the night, nor of darkness.

6 Therefore let us not sleep, as [do] others; but let us watch and be sober.

7 For they that sleep sleep in the night; and they that be drunken are drunken in the night.

8 But let us, who are of the day, be sober, putting on the breastplate of faith and love; and for an helmet, the hope of salvation.

9 For God hath not appointed us to wrath, but to obtain salvation by our Lord Jesus Christ,

10 Who died for us, that, whether we wake or sleep, we should live together with him.

5. 1 Thess 5:23 " And the very God of peace sanctify you wholly; and [I pray God] your whole spirit and soul and body be preserved blameless unto the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ."

Also, in Paul's second letter to the Thessalonian Church, in 2 Thess. 2:2, we find that someone had apparently written a letter to the Thessalonian Church saying that the "Day of Christ", the Rapture, was past, in other words, they had missed it, and now they were in the "Day of the Lord", or seven year Tribulation.

In 2 Thess 2:3, Paul is attempting to prove that they have not missed the Rapture, that the Rapture is still future. He says "Let no man deceive you by any means, for that day (the "day of Christ", of the coming of the Lord Jesus, and our gathering together unto Him" in 2 Thess. 2:1) shall not come, except there come a "falling away" first, and "that man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition."

In the above verse, Paul tells them that TWO things must occur before the "day of the Lord", or 7 year Tribulation, arrives, #1 a "falling away" first, and #2 "that man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition".

So, I believe Paul proves to the Church at Thessalonica that they are not in the "Tribulation", as someone had written them, because the Seven Year Tribulation cannot begin until the "Rapture" of the Church occurs and the "man of sin", the "Antichrist" is revealed.

If Paul had been referring to a "general falling away from the truth", it would have "proved" nothing to the Church at Thessalonica, because there was "apostasy" at the time, and there have been, and will continue to be great periods of falling away from the truth throughout the Church Age.

Every reference, that I find, to the "catching away" of the living saints, is described as "imminent", and can happen at any moment - there is no prophesy to be fulfilled before the Rapture can occur.

Think about it, if the "falling away" Paul refers to is a distinct period of "apostasy", of "falling away from the truth", and the world has now been through the "Dark Ages", when Christians were persecuted and Bibles were burned, then Paul would mean a "period of falling from the truth" that is worse and more defined than the Dark Ages - and it would still be in the future, and the Rapture could not occur until it comes!

To me, "The Departure" of 2 Thess 2:3 is the exact opposite of "falling away" from God’s truth. This is in a context of the "Rapture of the Church", the "day of Christ", the Day when Jesus will return, in the air, below the highest mountain top, and catch the Church (all the born again Christians in the world) up into the air, and take them to the Third Heaven.

In 2 Thess 2:5, Paul says don’t you remember when I was with you I taught you about these things? - and the subject of Paul's First Letter is "The Departure of the Church", from this earth to the third heaven.

Bob Jones

3 comments:

Irv said...

Where have I heard that interpretation before? I take it that you haven't yet traveled to Google and typed in "Pretrib Rapture Desperados." Also "Pretrib Rapture Diehards." Also "Famous Rapture Watchers." What was it that can travel around the earth in an hour while truth is still getting its boots on? Irv

Unknown said...

You need to be care about adding to or taking away from the Word of God.
lest you have the plaques added to your life that the word talks about.

During hee apostosia, actually time of our departure (2 Thessalonians 2:1-3)

One of the most painful pieces of Bible translation that the one who is interested in eschatology can find is the way that practically all translators have treated 2 Thessalonians 2:3. It is in their translating hee apostosia as "a [religious] falling away." In the first place the Greek definite article, hee, , "the" has been ignored or mistranslated by the indefinite article "a" in English by most translators. That would seem to be an insignificant change at first. However, the definite article repeatedly is used as an article of previous reference. That is, it tells us that the noun that follows the article refers to a previous mention of the same subject. In other words, the reader is told by the definite article to look for the same subject earlier discussed by hee apostosia in the immediately preceding context. The significance of the mistake of ignoring the definite article will become obvious in the following discussion.

The second problem in 2 Thessalonians 2:3 is the fact that the translators have assumed that the noun apostosia is being used in an extended meaning, and not in its basic meaning, "departure." It has been translated "a falling away" in the King James Bible. The New American Standard Bible transliterates the noun into English letters, "apostasy," thus suggesting that the word refers the departure of a believer from the truth. This improves the reading only in that the definite article is acknowledged and is correctly translated by the English article, "the." But to what previous reference to "the departure from the truth" is there in the previous context of this book? There is none. And that raises serious question concerning the accuracy of the translation of the noun and article, hee apostosia by "the apostasy." The New International Version provides a translation that has somewhat better possibility of being accurate. It renders the noun "the rebellion." I say that it has somewhat better possibility since there are obvious signs of rebellion in chapter one. However the question must be asked, "Is "the rebellion" really a valid translation of hee apostosia ? Is this a word that properly is applied to the rebellion of the unsaved against the Lord Jesus Christ? Would it not be more appropriately used of the departure of those involved in the faith from their Biblical foundations? But is that the meaning?

Now there are several verses in the New Testament that clearly do announce that in the latter days there will be much religious apostasy. Indeed, that is precisely the case in the much of the Church today. But, by assuming that the Greek noun was referring to religious apostasy, the going away from the faith, the translators have ignored the possibility that the noun is being used in its basic meaning instead of its extended meaning. The noun actually is used in its basic meaning in four other passages in the New Testament. It is amazing to see modern day translators misunderstanding the meaning of the noun when both Tyndale and Cloverdale long ago properly translated the phrase simply as "the departure." And here is the basic and common meaning of the noun in Greek useage.

Is there a departure mentioned in the preceding context to which the article of previous reference could be pointing? Indeed, there is, and it is only two verses before. For this reason I reject the translation of hee apostosia in ways that imply that the noun as used here refers to religious apostasy. After all, the antecedent "going away" or "departure" in 2 Thessalonians 2:1 specifically refers to the going away of the Church in "the up-gathering-together" of the saints of the Church. For this reason I insist that 2 Thessalonians 2:3 must be referring to the rapture and that the verse should be translated in this way. "Let no man deceive you by any means [including the mistranslating of he apostosia], for that day will not come [i.e., the day of the Lord] except the previously mentioned going away comes first and the man of lawlessness comes to be revealed, the son of perdition." Properly understood the verse perfectly harmonizes with Paul's comforting assurance in the first verse of the chapter that the believers at Thessalonica were not already in the day of the Lord. Indeed, verse three gives the basis for that assurance. Paul clearly is saying that the day of the Lord and the manifestation of the man of sin in the day of the Lord cannot possibly arrive before the going away of the Church in the "up gathering together," the rapture of the Church. What a pity that this great truth has been lost for so many in the Church as a result of the amillennial translators who refused the accurate work of Tyndale and Cloverdale because they did not even believe in the rapture, with the result that they rendered he apostosia as "a falling away."

This article determines the context
which defines apostasia. The translators took the context of 2 Thessalonians
2:10-12 as deciding the significance of the word, but they went too far
afield, not grasping the function of the definite article preceding
apostasia which points back to the rapture of 2 Thessalonians 2:2, not ahead
to the refusal to believe the truth of 2 Thessalonians 2:10-12. The article
is all-important here, as in many instances of its use in the Greek New
Testament. In 1 Thessalonians 4:13-18, Paul had given these saints teaching
on the rapture, and the Greek
article here points to that which was well known to both the reader and the
writer, which is another use of the Greek definite article. Thus, the
departure of the church from earth to heaven must precede the great
tribulation period. And we have answered our questions again. It might be
added that the reason why Paul merely speaks of a pretribulation rapture
rather than a preseventieth week rapture is that he is addressing himself to
the needs of the Thessalonian saints and is not explaining the particular
place of the rapture in the prophetic program of God."

Unknown said...

A tell tail comment that lets
the cat out of the bag about how
ignorant one is about the end times,
.....is when they try to say the Rapture idea was invented somewhere
about 1830 etc. etc.

Recently, pre-wrath advocate Marvin Rosenthal wrote that the pre-trib rapture was of Satanic origin and unheard of before 1830. "To thwart the Lord's warning to His children, in 1830," proclaims Rosenthal, "Satan, the 'father of lies,' gave to a fifteen-year-old girl named Margaret McDonald a lengthy vision."1 Rosenthal gives no documentation, he merely asserts that this is true. However, he is wrong. He is undoubtedly relying upon the questionable work of Dave MacPherson.

Another thing amazing about Rosenthal's declaration is that a few paragraphs later in the article he characterizes his opposition as those who "did not deal with the issues, misrepresented the facts, or attempted character assassination."2 This description is exactly what he has done in his characterization of pre-trib rapture origins. Why would Rosenthal make such outlandish and unsubstantiated charges about the pre-trib rapture?

THE BIG LIE

One of the things that facilitated the Nazi rise to power in Germany earlier this century was their propaganda approach called "The Big Lie." If you told a big enough lie often enough then the people would come to believe it. This the Nazis did well. This is what anti-pretribulationists like John Bray3 and Dave MacPherson4 have done over the last 25 years. Apparently the big lie about the origins of the pre-trib rapture has penetrated the thinking of Robert Van Kampen5 and Marvin Rosenthal to the extent that they have adopted such a falsehood as true. This is amazing in light of the fact that their own pre-wrath viewpoint is not much more than fifteen years old itself. Rosenthal must have changed his mind about pre-trib origins between the time he wrote his book The Pre-wrath Rapture of the Church (1990) and the recent article (Dec. 1994) since, in the former, he says that the pre-trib rapture "can be traced back to John Darby and the Plymouth Brethren in the year 1830."6 Rosenthal goes on to say, "Some scholars, seeking to prove error by association, have attempted (perhaps unfairly) to trace its origin back two years earlier to a charismatic, visionary woman named Margaret MacDonald."7 Even this statement is in error, since the Margaret Macdonald claim has always been related to 1830, not 1828. However, Rosenthal is correct in his original assessment that these charges are "unfair" and probably spring out of a motive to "prove error by association," known as the ad hominem argument.

Pretribulationists have sought to defend against "The Big Lie" through direct interaction against the charges.8 In a rebuttal to these charges I made in 1990, I gave two major reasons why "The Big Lie" is not true. First, it is doubtful that Margaret Macdonald's "prophecy" contains any elements related to the pre-trib rapture.9 Second, no one has ever demonstrated from actual facts of history that Darby was influenced by Macdonald's "prophecy" even if it had (which it did not) contained pre-trib elements.10 John Walvoord has said,

The whole controversy as aroused by Dave MacPherson's claims has so little supporting evidence, despite his careful research, that one wonders how he can write his book with a straight face. Pretribulationalists should be indebted to Dave MacPherson for exposing the facts, namely, that there is no proof that MacDonald or Irving originated the pretribulation rapture teaching.11

There is a third reason why MacPherson's theory is wrong, Darby clearly held to an early form of the pre-trib rapture by January 1827. This is a full three years before MacPherson's claim of 1830.

DARBY AND THE PRE-TRIB RAPTURE

Brethren writer, Roy A. Huebner claims and documents his belief that J.N. Darby first began to believe in the pre-trib rapture and develop his dispensational thinking while convalescing from a riding accident during December 1826 and January 1827.12 If this is true, then all of the origin-of-the-rapture-conspiracy-theories fall to the ground in a heap of speculative rubble. Darby would have at least a three-year jump on any who would have supposedly influenced his thought, making it impossible for all the "influence" theories to have any credibility.

Huebner provides clarification and evidence that Darby was not influenced by a fifteen-yea-old girl (Margaret Macdonald), Lacunza, Edward Irving, or the Irvingites. These are all said by the detractors of Darby and the pre-trib rapture to be bridges which led to Darby's thought. Instead, he demonstrates that Darby's understanding of the pre-trib rapture was the product of the development of his personal interactive thought with the text of Scripture as he, his friends, and dispensationalists have long contended.

Darby's pre-trib and dispensational thoughts, says Huebner, were developed from the following factors: 1) "he saw from Isaiah 32 that there was a different dispensation coming . . . that Israel and the Church were distinct."13 2) "During his convalescence JND learned that he ought daily to expect his Lord's return."14 3) "In 1827 JND understood the fall of the church. . . 'the ruin of the Church.'"15 4) Darby also was beginning to see a gap of time between the rapture and the second coming by 1827.16 5) Darby, himself, said in 1857 that he first started understanding things relating to the pre-trib Rapture "thirty years ago." "With that fixed point of reference, Jan. 31, 1827," declares Huebner, we can see that Darby "had already understood those truths upon which the pre-tribulation rapture hinges."17

German author Max S. Weremchuk has produced a major new biography on Darby entitled John Nelson Darby: A Biography.18 He agrees with Huebner's conclusions concerning the matter. "Having read MacPherson's book . . ." says Weremchuk, "I find it impossible to make a just comparison between what Miss MacDonald 'prophesied' and what Darby taught. It appears that the wish was the father of the idea."19

When reading Darby's earliest published essay on biblical prophecy (1829), it is clear that while it still has elements of historicism, it also reflects the fact that for Darby, the rapture was to be the church's focus and hope.20 Even in this earliest of essays, Darby expounds upon the rapture as the church's hope.21

SCHOLARS DO NOT ACCEPT THE BIG LIE

The various "rapture origin" theories espoused by opponents of pre-tribulationsm are not accepted as historically valid by scholars who have examined the evidence. The only ones who appear to have accepted these theories are those who already are opposed to the pre-trib rapture. A look at various scholars and historians reveals that they think, in varying degrees, that MacPherson has not proven his point. Most, if not all who are quoted below do not hold to the pre-trib rapture teaching. Ernest R. Sandeen declares,

This seems to be a groundless and pernicious charge. Neither Irving nor any member of the Albury group advocated any doctrine resembling the secret rapture. . . . Since the clear intention of this charge is to discredit the doctrine by attributing its origin to fanaticism rather than Scripture, there seems little ground for giving it any credence.22

Historian Timothy P. Weber's evaluation is a follows:

The pretribulation rapture was a neat solution to a thorny problem and historians are still trying to determine how or where Darby got it. . . .

A newer though still not totally convincing view contends that the doctrine initially appeared in a prophetic vision of Margaret Macdonald, . . .

Possibly, we may have to settle for Darby's own explanation. He claimed that the doctrine virtually jumped out of the pages of Scripture once he accepted and consistently maintained the distinction between Israel and the church.23

American historian Richard R. Reiter informs us that,

[Robert] Cameron probably traced this important but apparently erroneous view back to S. P. Tregelles, . . . Recently more detailed study on this view as the origin of pretribulationism appeared in works by Dave McPherson, . . . historian Ian S. Rennie . . . regarded McPherson's case as interesting but not conclusive.24

Posttribulationist William E. Bell asserts that,

It seems only fair, however, in the absence of eyewitnesses to settle the argument conclusively, that the benefit of the doubt should be given to Darby, and that the charge made by Tregelles be regarded as a possibility but with insufficient support to merit its acceptance. . . . On the whole, however, it seems that Darby is perhaps the most likely choice--with help from Tweedy. This conclusion is greatly strengthened by Darby's own claim to have arrived at the doctrine through his study of II Thessalonians 2:1-2.25

Pre-trib rapture opponent John Bray does not accept the MacPherson thesis either.

He [Darby] rejected those practices, and he already had his new view of the Lord coming FOR THE SAINTS (as contrasted to the later coming to the earth) which he had believed since 1827, . . . It was the coupling of this "70th week of Daniel" prophecy and its futuristic interpretation, with the teaching of the "secret rapture," that gave to us the completed "Pre-tribulation Secret Rapture" teaching as it has now been taught for many years. . . . makes it impossible for me to believe that Darby got his Pre-Tribulation Rapture teaching from Margaret MacDonald's vision in 1830. He was already a believer in it since 1827, as he plainly said.26

Huebner considers MacPherson's charges as "using slander that J. N. Darby took the (truth of the) pretribulation rapture from those very opposing, demon-inspired utterances."27 He goes on to conclude that MacPherson

did not profit by reading the utterances allegedly by Miss M. M. Instead of apprehending the plain import of her statements, as given by R. Norton, which has some affinity to the post-tribulation scheme and no real resemblance to the pretribulation rapture and dispensational truth, he has read into it what he appears so anxious to find.28

CONCLUSION

F. F. Bruce, who was part of the Brethren movement his entire life, but one who did not agree with the pre-trib rapture said the following when commenting on the validity of MacPherson's thesis:

Where did he [Darby] get it? The reviewer's answer would be that it was in the air in the 1820s and 1830s among eager students of unfulfilled prophecy, . . . direct dependence by Darby on Margaret Macdonald is unlikely.29

John Walvoord's assessment is likely close to the truth:

any careful student of Darby soon discovers that he did not get his eschatological views from men, but rather from his doctrine of the church as the body of Christ, a concept no one claims was revealed supernaturally to Irving or Macdonald. Darby's views undoubtedly were gradually formed, but they were theologically and biblically based rather than derived from Irving's pre-Pentecostal group.30

I challenge opponents of the pre-trib rapture to stick to a discussion of this matter based upon the Scriptures. While some have done this, many have not been so honest. To call the pre-trib position Satanic, as Rosenthal has done, does not help anyone in this discussion. Such rhetoric will only serve to cause greater polarization of the two views. However, when pre-trib opponents make false charges about the history of the pre-trib view we must respond. And respond we will in our next issue where we will present a clear pre-trib rapture statement from the fourth or fifth century. This pre-trib rapture statement ante-dates 1830 by almost 1,500 years and will certainly lead to at least a revision of those propagating The Big Lie.