Is the Falling Away a false teaching ?
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 1500's - 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 1100 years.
"Apostasia" as "rapture" was unknown in Christian orthodoxy until its sudden appearance in 1895.
Here is the elaboration on 2 Thes. 2:3 in the Wycliffe translation:
3 [That] No man deceive you in any manner. For but dissension come first [For no but departing away, or dissension, shall come first], and the man of sin be showed, the son of perdition
Note that dissension (consistent with apostasy, separation, schism) is the elaboration. Rapture is unseen.
Departing away as a synonym of dissension thus means departing away from the faith, i.e. apostasy, not rapture; falling away, not flying away.
Wycliffe identified the man of sin as the apostate papal antichrist, at whose hands the true church was suffering. He did not believe in a pretrib rapture of which he had never heard, and which had never occurred.
From Calvin's Geneva Study Bible:
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;
Calvin also identified the man of sin as the papacy, and did not believe in a pretrib rapture of which he had never heard, and which had never occurred.
Same with Tyndale. He was martyred by the papacy.
Same with Cranmer. He too was martyred by the papacy.
Coverdale was an associate of Tyndale's, and of like persuasion.
Beza was also of like persuasion.
There is
no Reformer who considered the word to mean anything other than
departure from the faith.
A definition of "discessio," the word used in the Vulgate, is found at
this site.
Included near the end is a specific ecclesiological subdefinition:
"In the church,
a separation, schism (eccl. Lat.),
Vulg. Act. 21, 21;
id. 2 Thes. 2, 3."
Occurrences are cited as being
Acts 21:21 and 2 Thes. 2:3.
Letting Scripture interpret Scripture, the use of the word in
Acts 21:21 is translated "forsake," which is fully consistent with the subdefinition above, and has nothing to do with rapture.
Apostacia: What Modern Greeks say about "Apostacia" in 2 Thess 2:3.
Excerpt: "I could find no debate among Greek speaking Christians on how to interpret this verse. They all interpret "apostacia" in 2 Thess 2:3 to mean "apostacy"."
Does Apostasia in 2 Thessalonians 2:3 Refer to a ‘Physical Departure’ (i.e. the Rapture)?
2 Thess 2:3 in the Early Church Writings; How early Greek, Latin and Aramaic speaking Christians interpreted "Apostacia"/"Apostacy
The Latin Influence on 2 Thess 2:3
Of the
several dozen contemporary English Bible versions in existence,
not a single version translates "apostasia" as "rapture", but rather as
apostasy, falling away, or the equivalent.
The early church believed that the imperial Roman empire, under which the church was then living, was the restrainer which would eventually be "taken out of the way", but which was forestalling the emergence of the papal Roman empire, which Paul describes as the lawless one; and its eventual apostasy. Notice in the related verses in 2 Thess. 2 that Paul does not reveal the identity of the restrainer. If Paul had believed that the Holy Spirit or the Church was the restrainer, there would have been no reason for him not to explicitly name either one. But Paul did have a reason. John Chrysostom, an apologist of the later early post-apostolic era, reveals it:
"Because if he meant to say the
Spirit, he would not have spoken obscurely, but plainly, that even now the
grace of the
Spirit, that is the gifts, withhold him...But because he said this of the Roman empire, he naturally glanced at it, and speaks covertly and darkly. For he did not wish to bring upon himself superfluous enmities, and useless dangers. For if he had said that after a little while the Roman empire would be dissolved, they would immediately have even overwhelmed him, as a pestilent person, and all the faithful, as living and warring to this end."
Paul did not wish to jeopardize the Church by attracting the attention of the Roman authorities.
History subsequently confirmed the validity of Paul's inspired prescience.
