I said >
If “apostasy” is supposed to mean a departure from earth (in a pretrib rapture), instead of a departure from the the faith, why is it nobody in church history interpreted the way you do until the rise of pretribulationism in the early 19th century?
Your reply >
Well... maybe because there weren’t many bibles around??? Check your history on that.
My reply >
John Darby and the Plymouth Brethren of England in early 19th century Great Britain was “the rise of pretribulationism” I was speaking about. You seem to be thinking of the middle ages - when Europe, including England, was under the power of the Papacy, when indeed “there weren’t many bibles around.” The common man did not have access to the bible then, only the Catholic priesthood.
After the Protestant Reformation, and by the 19th century, this was no longer the case. You would never know it from today’s British, but the British Empire was at one time very biblical. This was Victorian England, the days of great preachers like Charles Haddon Spurgeon.
Having examined their Bibles, most British Protestants abandoned Roman Catholic Amillennialism, and had became Premillennialists. With Darby’s new theory of the pretrib rapture, a new kind of Premillennialism came on the scene, Dispensationalsm, the pretrib rapture being its main feature.
This caused a major split among Premillennialists between Darby’s new pretrib form of Premillennialism, called “Dispensationalism,” and the “Historic Premillennialists,” “Historic” meaning they held to the “historic” post-tribulation rapture - “historic” as opposed to Darby’s new pretrib view - which has continued to this day. As you might guess, I am the latter.
But not even John Darby nor any of his followers had the temerity to interpret the falling away of 2 Thess. 2 as a pretrib rapture. That notion arose about a century later in America. Most Dispensationalists do not interpret it as you.
>>> Most Dispensationalists do not interpret it as you.
I don’t rely upon the interpretations of others. It doesn’t matter how long they’ve been studying the bible. I certainly don’t dismiss any particular interpretations either unless there is significant evidence to do so.
In this case, I find FAR more evidence supporting the interpretation that “falling away” refers to an EVENT... whether it be the Holy Spirit’s removal from the earth or all Christians being removed from the earth.
The evidence I speak of is other scriptures in multiple books of the bible which refer to the same event.
I find two basic reasons to dismiss the interpretation of “falling away” as referring to the TREND of Christians falling from the faith... 1. As it is a TREND, there is no clear definitive point in time anyone can say that it happens. 2. It signifies a catastrophic failure or defeat of the church which Jesus said would not happen.
It simply makes far more sense to me that what is being said in the scripture here is that the antichrist will not be revealed until that which holds him back is taken away.
The interpretation was well-known at the time it was spoken by the Savior and written by the Apostles. The Institutionalized Church, being devoid of spiritual discernment did not understand nor accept, and deliberately or through disuse, the doctrine was withheld from those seeking salvation truths by those claiming to teach The Faith. (Romans 1:18)
And it is not at all true, as you have mistakenly assumed, that this doctrine has not been lknown throughout history. It simply has been quashed by those whose entire fabrication would have been unraveled by it.
You may look at old hymns prior to Darbyism and Schofield to see that it is taught by psalms and hyms and spiritual songs, under those led by The Holy Ghost, who allowed the Word of The Christ to dwell in them richly in all wisdom, teaching and admonishing one another with those hymns.
But never discount that not only has The God progressively revealed more and more of his truths through faithful prophets, but has also continually revealed applications of those revealed truths through Spirit-controlled expositors, according to the times for which they were fitted. Jesus upset a whole institutionalized God-rejecting religios system. So did Peter Waldo. So did John Hus. So did Martin Luther. So did John Nelson Darby. So did Cyrus Ingerson Schofield. That type of preacher is still crying out today, as the love toward The God of the hoi polloi grows ice-cold, through the overspreading of abomination, as told to Daniel, but not understood by him; and sealed until the time of the end (Daniel 12).
You will either understand this, or you will reject it. Choose now whom you will serve.