The Rapture in 2 Thessalonians 2:3 Response
Last Updated:
05/24/2008 11:01
|
|

My comments: In the interest of sharing
what I come across, I include this article which could remove the only
reason I have scripturally to not believe a pre-trib harpazo is possible. It
looks at the meaning of the word "apostasia" which must come before the man
of sin is revealed. I disagree with the conclusion based on a myopic view
that leaves out the context. It focuses only on the third verse, which
sounds very convincing, but it's not showing context. Here is what I mean...
2 Thessalonians 2:1-3
Now we beseech you, brethren, by the coming of our Lord Jesus
Christ, and by our gathering together 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;
The event that is being put in time frame is the "day of Christ." What is
that? To truly understand, it's necessary to look at the
day of the Lord study. At the very bottom, a closer look is taken at the
seemingly different perspective of the
day
of Christ.
What I believe this shows is the two perspectives of the day of the Lord.
For the
Christians, who are not appointed to God's wrath, they see Christ coming
in the clouds and know they are at the finish line of their race. They are
the bride watching and waiting expectantly for the bridegroom, Jesus Christ,
to come for them.
Matthew 25:1-13
The subject of the day that can only come after these two events is the
day of Christ, our blessed hope, the coming of Christ and the
harpazo
of the
bride of Christ to Him in the clouds.
1 Thessalonians 4:16-18 What this does is create the following
situation, which contradicts itself:
- Day of Christ = Christ's coming and our harpazo before the day of the
Lord.
- Apostasia = Christ's coming and our harpazo before the day of the
Lord.
- Man of sin revealed =
Abomination of desolation "in the midst" of the 7-year covenant with
many.
It doesn't make sense to say that #1 can't happen until #2
and #3 happen if #1 and #2 are the same event! So now, here is the
article...
The
harpazo in 2 Thessalonians 2:3 by Thomas Ice
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,
I believe that there is a strong possibility that 2
Thessalonians 2:3 is speaking of the harpazo. What do I mean? Some
pretribulationists, like myself, think that the Greek noun apostasia,
usually translated " apostasy," is a reference to the harpazo and should be
translated " departure." Thus, this passage would be saying that the day of
the Lord will not come until the harpazo comes before it. If apostasia is a
reference to a physical departure, then 2 Thessalonians 2:3 is strong
evidence for pretribulationism.
The Meaning of Apostasia
The Greek noun apostasia is only used twice in the New Testament. In
addition to 2 Thessalonians 2:3, it occurs in Acts 21:21 where, speaking of
Paul, it is said, " that you are teaching all the Jews who are among the
Gentiles to forsake (apostasia) Moses." The word is a Greek compound of apo
" from" and istemi " stand." Thus, it has the core meaning of " away from"
or " departure." The Liddell and Scott Greek Lexicon defines apostasia first
as " defection, revolt;" then secondly as " departure, disappearance." [1]
Gordon Lewis explains how the verb from which the noun apostasia is derived
supports the basic meaning of departure in the following:
The verb may mean to remove spatially. There is little reason then to deny
that the noun can mean such a spatial removal or departure. Since the noun
is used only one other time in the New Testament of apostasy from Moses
(Acts 21:21), we can hardly conclude that its Biblical meaning is
necessarily determined. The verb is used fifteen times in the New Testament.
Of these fifteen, only three have anything to do with a departure from the
faith (Luke 8;13; 1 Tim. 4:1; Heb 3:12). The word is used for departing from
iniquity (2 Tim. 2:19), from ungodly men(1 Tim. 6:5), from the temple (Luke
2:27), from the body (2 Cor. 12:8), and from persons (Acts 12:10; Luke
4:13).[2]
" It is with full assurance of proper exegetical study and with complete
confidence in the original languages," concludes Daniel Davey, " that the
word meaning of apostasia is defined as departure." [3] Paul Lee Tan adds
the following:
What precisely does Paul mean when he says that " the falling away" (2:3)
must come before the tribulation? The definite article " the" denotes that
this will be a definite event, an event distinct from the appearance of the
Man of Sin. The Greek word for " falling away" , taken by itself, does not
mean religious apostasy or defection. Neither does the word mean " to fall,"
as the Greeks have another word for that. [pipto, I fall; TDI] The best
translation of the word is " to depart." The apostle Paul refers here to a
definite event which he calls " the departure," and which will occur just
before the start of the tribulation. This is the harpazo of the church.[4]
So the word has the core meaning of departure and it depends upon the
context to determine whether it is used to mean physical departure or an
abstract departure such as departure from the faith.
Translation History
The first seven English translations of
apostasia all rendered the noun as either " departure" or " departing." They
are as follows: Wycliffe Bible (1384); Tyndale Bible (1526); Coverdale Bible
(1535); Cranmer Bible (1539); Breeches Bible (1576); Beza Bible (1583);
Geneva Bible (1608).[5] This supports the notion that the word truly means "
departure." In fact, Jerome' s Latin translation known as the Vulgate from
around the time of AD 400 renders apostasia with the " word discessio,
meaning ' departure.' " [6] Why was the King James Version the first to
depart from the established translation of " departure" ?
Theodore Beza, the Swiss reformer was the first to transliterate apostasia
and create a new word, rather than translate it as others had done. The
translators of the King James Version were the first to introduce the new
rendering of apostasia as " falling away." Most English translators have
followed the KJV and Beza in departing from translating apostasia as "
departure." No good reason was ever given.
The Use of the Article
It is important to note that Paul uses a
definite article with the noun apostasia. What does this mean? Davey notes
the following:
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.[7]
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 harpazod dead in the
clouds (1 Thess. 4:17)," notes Dr. Lewis.[8] 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 harpazo
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 harpazo 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.[9]
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 harpazo (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 harpazo. It should not be surprising that he uses another term
to reference the harpazo 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.[10]
Departure and The Restrainer
Since pretribulationists believe that the restrainer
mentioned in verses 6 and 7 is the Holy Spirit and teaches a pre-trib
harpazo, 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.[11]
Kenneth Wuest, a Greek scholar from Moody Bible Institute added the
following contextual support to taking apostasia as a physical departure:
But then hee apostasia of which Paul is speaking, precedes the revelation of
Antichrist in his true identity, and is to katechon that which holds back
his revelation (2:6). The hee apostasia, therefore, cannot be either a
general apostasy in Christendom which does precede the coming of Antichrist,
nor can it be the particular apostasy which is the result of his activities
in making himself the alone object of worship. Furthermore, that which holds
back his revelation (vs. 3) is vitally connected with hoo katechoon (vs. 7),
He who holds back the same event. The latter is, in my opinion, the Holy
Spirit and His activities in the Church. All of which means that I am driven
to the inescapable conclusion that the hee apostasia (vs. 3) refers to the
harpazo of the Church which precedes the Day of the Lord, and holds back the
revelation of the Man of Sin who ushers in the world-aspect of that
period.[12]
Conclusion
The fact that apostasia most likely has the meaning of physical departure is
a clear support for pretribulationism. If this is true, (Dr. Tim LaHaye and
I believe that it is), then it means that a clear prophetic sequence is laid
out by Paul early in his Apostolic ministry. Paul teaches in 2 Thessalonians
2 that the harpazo will occur first, before the Day of the Lord commences.
It is not until after the beginning of the Day of the Lord that the
Antichrist is released, resulting in the events described by him in chapter
2 of 2 Thessalonians. This is the only interpretation that provides hope for
a discomforted people. Maranatha!
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Endnotes
[1] Henry George Liddell and Henry Scott, A Greek-English Lexicon, Revised
with a Supplement [1968] by Sir Henry Stuart Jones and Roderick McKenzie
(Oxford, Eng.: Oxford University Press, 1940), p. 218.
[2] Gordon R. Lewis, " Biblical Evidence for Pretribulationism," Bibliotheca
Sacra (vol. 125, no. 499; July 1968), p. 218.
[3] Daniel K. Davey, " The ' Apostesia' of II Thessalonians 2:3," Th.M.
thesis, Detroit Baptist Theological Seminary, May 1982, p. 27.
[4] Paul Lee Tan, The Interpretation of Prophecy (Winona Lake, IN: Assurance
Publishers, 1974), p. 341.
[5] H. Wayne House, " Apostasia in 2 Thessalonians 2:3: Apostasy or
harpazo?" in Thomas Ice and Timothy Demy, eds., When the Trumpet Sounds:
Today' s Foremost Authorities Speak Out on End-Time Controversies (Eugene,
OR: Harvest House, 1995), p. 270.
[6] House, " Apostesia" , p. 270.
[7] Davey, " Apostesia" , p. 47.
[8] Gordon R. Lewis & Bruce A. Demarest, Integrative Theology 3 vols in 1
(Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1996), vol. 3, p. 420.
[9] E. Schuyler English, Re-Thinking the harpazo (Neptune, NJ: Loizeaux
Brothers, 1954), p. 70.
[10] House, " Apostesia" , pp. 275- 76.
[11] Allan A. MacRae, Letter to E. Schuyler English, published in " Let the
Prophets Speak," Our Hope, (vol. LVI, num. 12; June 1950), p. 725.
[12] Kenneth S. Wuest, Letter to E. Schuyler English, published in " Let the
Prophets Speak," Our Hope, (vol. LVI, num. 12; June 1950), p. 731.
Related Topics:
|