Monday, April 26, 2021

The Great Falling Away: The Semantics of Hype


 

This blog recently published a chart authored by someone in a splinter group and showing a sequence of events for the end of the age. An interesting point is that in a gloss, the author identifies the "great falling away" of 2 Thessalonians 2:3. And something needs to be said about the semantics of this. Nowhere in scripture does it speak of a "great falling away." This coined term cries out for capitalization, like The Great Tribulation, so I will write it as The Great Falling Away (GFA). In particular, the word “great” is absent in the Biblical text. Apparently, Paul really had in mind just your “everyday” falling away.


Scripture clearly speaks of a falling away in this passage from 2 Thessalonians. But almost everything about it is unclear. It is uncertain if it is “the” falling away or “a” falling away. It has been translated both ways and the underlying Greek word translated as “a” or “the” really means something like “which.” Further, whether the article is definite or indefinite, does the term refer to a single monolithic event or to all apostasy generically that precedes the revealing of the man of lawlessness? And nobody knows who the man of lawlessness is. A candidate is Seleucid tyrant Antiochus IV Epiphanes. And nobody knows what the reference to the Temple really intends. It could mean what it says: the Temple of God in Jerusalem. Or some say it could mean the church. So we have a collection of elements of uncertain meaning. And using a particular stew of these elements to concoct a monolithic end-time event is difficult to justify.


To choose to give this terminology a particular rather than generic meaning – from “a falling away” to “the GFA” - requires some sense of the propagandistic value of language. There is no special event that could be termed The GFA as if it were a milestone in the prophetic future as the chart shows. Paul believed that Christ was going to come almost momentarily. And apostasy was to happen first. So it is really unlikely that he saw this falling away far down the corridors of time occurring as a “great” event of the 21st Century.


But this collection of uncertain elements could be packaged as a 21st Century prophetic event with a little imagination and the right semantics. It is done like this. First, without warrant, put the definite article in front of the name of the event. This would be like calling it “the great falling away.” Then it helps to capitalize it. And it becomes The Great Falling Away. It acquires the cachet of a single, isolated event not a phenomenon stretching over time. Then the most important maneuver: Invoke the type-antitype model. So there may have been a former and typical fulfillment. Nobody has identified this. So which falling away is the typical falling away? 

People have been apostatizing from the beginning. This falling away in Thessalonians is just one instance in a class of such events spanning the entirety of church history. But in case someone turns up something that seems unequivocally like the forerunner event, you have that covered. The important matter is that there is yet coming an antitypical end-time event. Finally, use this artfully packaged term in writing and preaching until it takes on a life of its own and becomes unquestionable.


As a sidebar, there is another problem. It is called presumption. Splinterists are afflicted with a hubris that leads them to believe that the great currents of scripture are all about them - little apocalyptic Millerite organizations with very few members and always on the verge of schism in the 21st century. Hence, The GFA is enlisted on the chart to refer to the splintering of Armstrongism, an event that nobody is even aware of except insiders. In this spirit, each Sabbath a globally significant drama, putatively, is played out at services. And the lead player in the dramatis personae is the little denomination itself. It is a profound but dubitable ego trip for followers.


One can note similar semantic issues in regard to "The Great Tribulation." A term of a generic nature is hyped into a specific terminology. Not a good technique for literalists. David Bentley Hart did a NT translation with special attention to what the source Greek actually was saying. And he stated in responding to a review written by Garry Wills: ". . . I had not been aware before reading it (the review) that the term “great tribulation” had any special association with certain nineteenth-century schools of Protestant chiliasm . . ." In other words, at the level of the source Greek, "The Great Tribulation" is a common language reference in koinĂ© to a “really bad time.” It seems to have been recruited as a special term to support special pleading by Dispensationalists in recent history.


And, finally, it is only fair to state that the Protestant movement and the Roman Catholic Church both have interpretations of the passage in 2 Thessalonians. Of particular interest is the Roman Catholic view. It is the most like the splinterist view as to time element. “The Catholic Church, Anglican Church, Eastern and Oriental Orthodox Churches have interpreted this chapter as referring to a future falling-away, during the reign of the Antichrist at the end of time.” (Wikipedia, under the title “Great Apostasy”.)


This op-ed has been about an interpretation and a debate in the spirit of Midrash. But the debate is sometimes hindered by the use of tendentious, neologistic terminology. The fact is, splinterists who are preoccupied with prophecy have their own lexicon and it does not always reflect the unadorned language of the Bible. So, if you have formed the impression that this is a confused issue of high uncertainty and making use of The GFA in any prophetic countdown cannot be anything but dubious, you have understood the concern. An event of such uncertain character in nearly every dimension should not be scheduled for the end-time.


By Neo

17 comments:

Hoss said...

GTA (when in ICG) made a point about the missing "great" - some just assumed the word was there.
And if I remember correctly, LCG changed their understanding of the "falling away" doctrine, which Bob Thiel used as one of his reasons for leaving.

Miller Jones/Lonnie C Hendrix said...

Maybe Armstrong and his followers are right about seeing themselves in this passage. Maybe they are part of the apostasia that was to occur before Christ's return. After all, they have rejected THE TRUTH which is Christ, and the law of love which he commanded his followers to observe (and said would identify them as his). The Greek word Apostasia is indicative of a "defection from truth" - it means to forsake or "fall away" from the truth. That would make Herbert W Armstrong a "man of lawlessness," and we are certainly justified in observing that his teachings unleashed a whole lot of destruction and devastation in the lives of his followers. And, Herbie did continuously exalt himself and rail against what other Christians believed and worshipped as God. Moreover, Herbie and his followers believe(d) that they will be equal with God someday. Maybe Paul was talking about them in this passage from his letter to the saints of Thessalonica! (Read II Thessalonians 2:1-12, NLT and tell me you can't entertain the possibility that Paul was talking about Herbie and his followers)

Anonymous said...

I believe that the WCG came to believe that The Great Falling-away was to take place within the WCG. And the "man of lawlessness" was a WCG leader. I recall something like this from a sermon I heard last century. I did not pursue this further because I had no source material and only some dim memories. This would make sense to WCG interpreters because 2 Thessalonians would have to refer to an apostasy from the "truth" and only the WCG had the truth. It could not refer to the Catholics and Protestants because in the view of the WCG they had become apostate long ago.

Something that the WCG never seemed to really confront is the idea that Paul early in his ministry believed that Christ was going to return within his lifetime. Because Paul thought this, the GFA and the man of lawlessness were near term events to Paul. This was all to happen before the Parousia which was going to happen soon. As one read's through chapter 2 of 2 Thessalonians there is language that suggests that this was something that was relevant to people then not something that was to happen in end-times. In verse 2, the Thessalonians are clearly under the mistaken impression that the Day of the Lord was imminent. Paul reassures them and says "Do you not remember that, when I was still with you, I used to tell you these things?" If Paul had already spoken with them, perhaps more than once as suggested by the grammar, why would he have not told them that this was something for the end-times to take place millennia in the future? It's because Paul and the Thessalonians believed this was to be a contemporary unfolding of events. And Paul further states "the mystery of lawlessness is already operating."

It is a big and unjustified leap to place these events at the end of days. Yet, Armstrongists and some Christians have done so. I believe the events already occurred. Could have been connected to Antiochus or Caligula or Simon Magus. It has to have been someone who has the chutzpah to claim that he was God. That seems like it would have made a splash in history. It seems like nobody knows who Paul was really referring to but many are ready to misappropriate these events for all manner of political purposes.

******* Click on my icon for Disclaimer

Anonymous said...


(????) Herbert W Armstrong, with a vehement countenance, and saying statements which appear to be the truth but are not such as *3 tithes, **seven feasts, etc, shall stand up. His power shall be mighty, but not by his own power, and he shall corrupt to an extraordinary degree, and shall prosper, and do his thing, and shall corrupt (a term we use today is brainwash) numerous church people. And through his policy also he shall cause deceit and fraud to prosper in his hand, and he shall magnify himself in his heart by calling himself Christ’s apostle but there are only 12 – Rev 21:14, and during a time of security and prosperity, for 2300 days from the evening of the day of atonement 1979 to the morning of January 16, 1986, shall corrupt many; he shall also stand up against the Prince of princes, but he shall be broken without hand. A paraphrase inspired by Daniel 8:12, 23-25 and Hebrew meanings. For example, "destroy" can mean "corrupt".
*There’s no commandment to tithe today – Hebrews 7:12, 18; 12:27. Laws associated with the Levitical Priesthood – Heb 7:11 are gone. See the Greek meaning for “change” (of the law) (v. 12) and “removing”-KJV (v. 27). **There are 3 feasts (Ex 23:14-16; 2Chr 8:13. Lev 23 lists fixed times (Hebrew moed), not all are feasts, some are annual sabbaths, and the weekly sabbath.

Kieren said...

Finally a detailed analysis of something incorrect rather than a rant. Fantastic article Neo.

DennisCDiehl said...

Even more interesting is that most scholars now feel that 2 Thessalonians is a forgery and not considered on of Paul's authentic letters. Those would be Romans, I and II Corinthians, Galatians, Philippians, 1 Thessalonians and Philemon.

https://www.biblewise.com/bible_study/questions/pauls-authorship.php

"In the case of 2 Thessalonians, it was initially attributed to Paul. No one really questioned that until the beginning of the 19th century. As biblical scholarship evolved, people began asking different questions of the text. Several issues arose with 2 Thessalonians. If Paul were the author, the books would have had to be written just a few months apart.

Though only three chapters in length, almost 1/3 of the book repeats what is said in 1 Thessalonians. The books are very different in tone and style. 1 Thessalonians is warm and gracious. 2 Thessalonians is commanding and cold. It is very different from any of Paul’s other books.

In the first book, Paul speaks of the Day of the Lord as being imminent, coming as a thief in the night. In the second book he says, “Let no one deceive you in any way; for that day will not come unless the rebellion comes first and the lawless one is revealed, the one destined for destruction.” (2:3) In other words, these things need to happen first, and then people will know that the Day of the Lord is upon them. It will no longer be a surprise."

So the plot thickens and yes, it was written for then, no matter who wrote it, and not for now.

Anonymous said...

Small minds, small worlds.
I have never heard any speaker in WCG or since describe the falling away as "great".I have heard different speakers over the years describe the different splits and 1995 WCG as a falling away but never specifically "great".

Anonymous said...

Miller Jones throwing the condemning accusations around like a medieval Pope. I thought Jesus Christ is to judge all mankind but here now in writing you Miller Jones have condemned many without mercy and ironically love.
How joyful it must be to be you.

Miller Jones/Lonnie C Hendrix said...

Dennis,
The source which you quoted in your comment points out that the attribution of someone's work to another author was quite common in this era and was looked at quite differently than we do today (Hence, the use of the term "forgery" is modern and misleading in this context). The same source also acknowledges that the opinion that II Thessalonians was not written by Paul is NOT universal among biblical scholars. Indeed, the piece concludes with: "Scholars do know the letter is included in the Marcion canon (ca 140 CE) and the Muratorian fragment (ca 170 CE). The Church Fathers of the late second century quoted from it. So it had to be well known and fully accepted by that time.
Other scholars arguing for Pauline authorship have also suggested different scenarios. Maybe there were two church communities in Thessalonica, requiring two different letters. Maybe the first letter is a composite letter. Maybe the second letter was actually written first. And the list goes on.
The bottom line is that no one knows for sure. The arguments continue on both sides. Perhaps the default position is that authorship of the letter is less important than its overall message."
The problem with using literary style, language and themes to determine Pauline authorship is the fact that Paul acknowledges using secretaries or helpers in writing his epistles. Near the end of his letter to the saints at Rome, we read: "I, Tertius, the one writing this letter for Paul, send my greetings too, as one of the Lord's followers." (see Romans 16:22) The first letter to the saints in Corinth opens with: "This letter is from Paul, chosen by the will of God to be an apostle of Christ Jesus, AND FROM OUR BROTHER SOSTHENES." (I Corinthians 1:1) And, near the end of the letter, we read: "HERE IS MY GREETING IN MY OWN HANDWRITING-PAUL." (I Corinthians 16:21) Likewise, the second letter to the saints of Corinth is said to be a joint venture with Timothy (II Corinthians 1:1). The letter to the saints at Philippi is also said to be a joint project with Timothy (Philippians 1:1). The letter to the saints at Colosse ends with: "HERE IS MY GREETING IN MY OWN HANDWRITING-PAUL..." (Colossians 4:18). The first and second letters to the Thessalonians are attributed to Paul, Silas and Timothy (I Thessalonians 1:1 and II Thessalonians 2:1). How did that work? Who wrote what? Did Silas write most of the first one and Timothy more of the second letter? OR Did Paul dictate most of the contents of both?
And what do we do with the fact that Polycarp, Ignatius of Antioch and Clement of Rome employed the same or similar language used in some of these "disputed" letters of Paul? Does the apparent familiarity and acceptance of these early Church fathers lend any credence to these writings? At any rate, almost no one disputes that these letters are part of the Christian canon - so what do we do with that?
Finally, the thesis of NEO's post is that Armstrongites have misrepresented and abused the scripture in question to further their own prophetic musings, interpretations and timelines. I may be wrong, but I'm thinking that his audience will have a much easier time entertaining his arguments than they will embracing the notion that Paul didn't even write the letter in the first place.

Anonymous said...

Miller:

I agree with your comment. And it seems like none of these early writers followed the style manual that you may find in English Composition 101. And, as you pointed out, sometimes there are clues about authorship in the body of the document. I think this goes back, once again, to the idea that these people saw the Parousia as coming soon, in their lifetimes. They had letters being passed around and they knew from context who authored them. Documented credentialing was not necessary for them at that time. They never foresaw these letters ever becoming a "bible." Nobody was going to be around that long. But Christ did not come when expected and the letters were collected and preserved. But we do not have the neatly defined "facts of publication" that we would like to see.

There is a definite "Millerite" effect in the NT - people expecting the Parousia but it not happening as expected. I think the early Christians holding all things in common is this kind of effect. But that is another topic.


******* Click on my icon for Disclaimer

Miller Jones/Lonnie C Hendrix said...

Anonymous 4/27 @ 4:20,

To quote another anonymous commentator, "I haven't accused anybody." I merely suggested that Armstrong and his followers may be right about II Thessalonians 2:3 applying to them (personally, I doubt very much that they are right about that). NEO's point (which I support in this instance) is that we are on very shaky ground when we start seeing ourselves in prophecy. And, if anyone condemns them for their errors and behaviors, it will be someone above my pay grade!

WHAT ABOUT THE TRUTH said...

So NEO, you have cut through the semantics, the imaginations and the presumptions and come up with this conclusion:

"So, if you have formed the impression that this is a confused issue of high uncertainty and making use of The GFA in any prophetic countdown cannot be anything but dubious, you have understood the concern. An event of such uncertain character in nearly every dimension should not be scheduled for the end-time."

Interesting though it is, is this the correct conclusion all should accept and cleave unto?

Some intriguing historical perspectives for consideration. Dave Pack, relating to a conversation he had with Herbert Armstrong concerning the Anti-christ, asked him who he thought it was. Herbert Armstrong's answer was the Pope. Dave interjected and said how could that be - the temple wouldn't be in Rome. Herbert answered and said I know Dave but that is all I can see.

Of course the WCG taught that the Anti-christ/False Prophet would be doing his work in the Great Tribulation with the church safely tucked away in Petra. So the "falling away" would be believers established during the Great tribulation who would fall away preceding the return of Jesus Christ at the end of the 3 1/2 years.

The 1990's came in the WCG and 50,000+ thousand people changed their beliefs and observances in a short period of time. In the rear view mirror, the "new" or "continuing" COG leaders termed these mass of people as having never been converted just as Herbert Armstrong had always said ("they just don't get it").

The really big problems for establishing 1994 as the Falling Away are as follows: How do a people (50,000+) fall away from something they were associated with never having in the first place? If a person "never got it" or was never converted in the first place, then that means they were never begotten with the Spirit of Truth. How does a person fall away from the truth if they never had it in the first place?

Secondly, The Man of Sin is tied directly to the Falling Away. So who in the 1990's would qualify as this figure? Who sat in the very temple of God and showed himself as God?

Thirdly, where is the timely return of Jesus Christ in relation to these two events? Twenty seven years and counting since 1994.

So when is the Falling away or The Great Falling Away and the coming of the Man of Sin? Paul in Hebrews 10 touches on it in his writing. Quoting Habakkuk 2 Paul introduces this Man of Sin and by the way frames this introduction of him by writing what he wrote about (read it) for most of chapter 10 and then followed up on the other side of this introduction by writing chapter 11 (read it).

Looking into Habakkuk 2, what is present at this time or the appointed time (vs. 3)? There is a non upright and proud man who gathers unto himself all nations and heapeth unto him all people (vs. 3-5). There is the "just" present (vs. 4). The earth shall be filled with the knowledge of the glory of the Lord, as the water covers the sea (vs. 14). Lastly, the Lord is in his holy temple: let all the earth keep silence before him (vs. 20).

Habakkuk 2 looks like the perfect setup for a great falling away. You have a strong man of sin. You have people that are termed just. You have the knowledge of the glory of the Lord (the truth) and you have a holy temple.

Paul jumped a little ahead of this appointed time but it was all there before him and he was preparing the Hebrews for it when it came. Here is what he spoke about in Hebrews 10: The knowledge of the truth (vs.26). The Man of Sin (TO COME) (vs.37). The temple, Jerusalem temple or (vs. 19-21). The warnings about and potential for falling away. (vs. 23,26,29,35,38,39).

So Paul goes on to write a whole chapter (Hebrews 11) on how to overcome this coming Man of Sin.

The Great Falling Away is pretty plain to see as a future big event in the prophetic timeline unless I am missing something NEO that tells me it is just a dubious invention for prophetic exuberance.

Anonymous said...

What about the truth:

Your comment shows influence from the standard beliefs of the WCG. Here are some issues that beleaguer that perspective:

1. Why should the antichrist be identified with "the man of lawlessness?" John stated "even now are there many antichrists; whereby we know that it is the last time." It seems like the antichrists form a class of people not just a single person. Which one of them is "the man of lawlessness?" (And Johns seems to think the "last time" was then when he wrote the epistle.)

2. Why would we think that the events of II Thessalonians 2 have a future fulfillment when in scripture they are anchored chronologically in the first century? The GFA could be past and the Parousia yet future. In fact this is a stronger exegetical argument than the GFA and the Parousia both being future.

3. You wrote ". . . The Man of Sin is tied directly to the Falling Away." How do we know that? There could be a general apostasy lasting for some time, geographically dispersed and then, as a separate event, along comes the "Man of Sin."

4. Why should we assume that the events of II Thessalonians 2 will be global events? Absent the particular type-antitype hermeneutic used by splinterists, it makes sense that Paul was talking about a local event - probably to take place in the environs of Jerusalem in 70 AD.

If you strip away the apocalyptic Millerite hype, reject the arbitrary application of
type-antitype and go back to the language of the Bible, a different scenario emerges. A much simpler scenario with historicity - all focused on 70 AD.

******* Click on icon for Disclaimer

Anonymous said...


“The Great Falling Away: The Semantics of Hype”


The Great Apostasy happened way back in January 1995 when the Devil's apostate Joseph W. Tkach, Sr. threw out of the Worldwide Church of God virtually everything that Herbert W. Armstrong had taught up until the time of HWA's death in January 1986. The WCG leadership had continually denied that it was making any doctrinal changes, but then suddenly made even more changes. This huge doctrinal change was openly written up in the WCG's Worldwide News newspaper. Joe, Sr. had been influenced by his son Joe, Jr. and his son's buddies into doing this great big change. Joe, Jr. was reportedly willing to lose up to 50% of the church people in order to push through his doctrinal changes, but he ended up losing more like 90% of them, and changed the name of the church to Grace Communion International, a ham-eating, Sunday-keeping group of Trinitarians who observe Christmas, Easter, and Halloween.

None of the numerous splinter groups that came from the Worldwide Church of God is currently even one-tenth of the size that the WCG was at its peak.

The falling away was so great that even some people who thought that they were not part of the falling away ended up going with bad characters like Satan's false prophet Gerald R. Flurry who edited, changed, warped, mangled, and totally perverted the things that Herbert W. Armstrong had taught while falsely claiming to be faithfully holding on to them.

WHAT ABOUT THE TRUTH said...



NEO said unto me: "Your comment shows influence from the standard beliefs of the WCG. Here are some issues that beleaguer that perspective"

NEO, I purposely steered clear of what John said about this subject and I purposely steered clear of what Peter said about this subject and I purposely steered clear of what Jesus Christ said about this subject. The Hebrews 10 and the conjoining Habakkuk 2 information that I presented is from my own personal study apart from anything any COG has presented that I am aware of.

As to your four points of rebuttal and support for your perceived understanding of the GFA and man of sin scenario, I am not going to comment. You have done much better in the past and often have been brilliant in your analysis.

As it stands, it is clear for the reader to see where you stand and I will leave it at that.

Anonymous said...

What about the Truth:

I wasn't trying to skirmish with you. The four points are concerns I have with many interpretations. Somehow the Catholics have arrived at the conclusion that Paul was talking about an end-time event, for instance. I am puzzled as to what line of reasoning they followed.

******* Click on my icon for Disclaimer

Anonymous said...

What about the truth
The accusation of members not being converted, or not having God's holy spirit is common in just about all Christian cults towards members who question or disagree with a groups teachings. It's a thought control ploy. It's often used in politics. A persons character is smeared in order to discredit their point of view.