Regarding the connection between APOSTASIA and ANQRWPOS THS ANOMIAS, TDNT makes these comments:
"In 2 Th. 2:3 APOSTASIA is used in the absol. sense as an event of the last days alongside or prior to (?) the appearance of the ANQRWPOS THS ANOMIAS. Here a Jewish tradition is adopted which speaks of complete apostasy from God and His Torah shortly before the appearance of the Messiah. This is applied to the apostasy of Christians from their faith to error and righteousness (v. 11f.) in the last days (Mt. 24:11f.)" (TDNT 1:513).
In the footnote (page 513), TDNT states that APOSTASIA is undoubtedly used of "Christians" in 2 Thessalonians because the word implies a prior turning to God. I might add that the word especially applies to apostate followers of Christ in this context, who are likely nominal disciples of the Lord.
This academic work reckons that the "apostasy" and the ANQRWPOS THS ANOMIAS "are to be differentiated, but only in such a way that the apostasy makes possible the power of the man of sin, and this in turn increases the apostasy" (1:513-514).
4 comments:
"an event of the last days..."
Doesn't the Watchtower teach that the APOSTASIA happened back in the 4th century?
From the 9/1/2003 WT:
The apostasy started in the apostle Paul's day. It accelerated once the apostles died and their restraining influence disappeared. It would be marked, said Paul, by "the operation of Satan with every powerful work and lying signs and portents and with every unrighteous deception." (2 Thessalonians 2:6-12) How accurately that describes the activities of so many religious leaders throughout history!
You draw heavily from TDNT to argue that apostasy began in the days of the apostle Paul and accelerated after the apostles' deaths, leading to what you suggest is the rise of false religious leadership. It's true that Paul warns about a coming apostasy in 2 Thessalonians 2:3 and elsewhere in his writings. However, the way in which you present the concept of apostasy as occurring almost immediately after the apostles' death fails to take into account the resilience and ongoing presence of orthodox Christian faith throughout history.
If the apostasy were as widespread and all-encompassing as your argument suggests, how do we account for the strong theological defenses mounted by early Church Fathers like Ignatius of Antioch, Irenaeus of Lyons, and Athanasius of Alexandria? These figures defended Christian orthodoxy against heretical movements, including Gnosticism and Arianism, which threatened to distort the true faith. Their writings reflect a Church actively preserving the apostolic tradition, not one in full apostasy.
You cite TDNT to assert that apostasy makes way for the "Man of Lawlessness." However, it's important to note that Paul does not give a clear timeframe for when this "Man of Lawlessness" will appear. In fact, Paul's language suggests that this event is still to come, and that the "restraining power" preventing the rise of the Man of Lawlessness was still in place during his time (2 Thessalonians 2:6-7). The apostasy that Paul discusses must be understood within the broader eschatological framework of the final rebellion against God preceding Christ’s return.
Historically, many Christian scholars have interpreted the "Man of Lawlessness" as a figure tied to the end times, not merely as a general symbol of false teaching throughout history. The text itself indicates that this lawless one will "exalt himself over everything that is called God" and that he will be a distinct, identifiable figure closely associated with the ultimate rebellion against God at the end of time.
It's also critical to differentiate between the apostasy Paul refers to and the general presence of heretical teachings in the Church throughout history. The Church has always faced internal threats from heresies, but this does not equate to the total apostasy from the faith. Paul, in his letters, addresses challenges within the Church but never speaks of a complete and total departure from the truth. Instead, he emphasizes the perseverance of the faithful, the role of the Church in upholding the truth (1 Timothy 3:15), and the eventual triumph of Christ.
Theologically, this understanding aligns with Christ’s promise that the gates of hell will not prevail against the Church (Matthew 16:18). Therefore, the view that apostasy completely overtook the Church for centuries is at odds with Christ's assurance of His Church's preservation.
The history of Christianity does not reflect a Church that has succumbed entirely to apostasy. Despite periods of corruption and challenges within the Church, there has been a continual line of faithful adherence to Christian orthodoxy from the early Church up through the present day. The Councils of Nicaea, Constantinople, Ephesus, and Chalcedon all exemplify moments when the Church defended core doctrines such as the Trinity and the nature of Christ, rather than surrendering to heresy or apostasy.
The interpretation that apostasy began immediately after the apostles' deaths and led to the rise of widespread false religious leadership is an oversimplification. Paul’s warnings about apostasy and the "Man of Lawlessness" pertain to eschatological events that have yet to fully unfold, and history demonstrates the Church’s capacity to resist heresy and preserve the faith handed down by the apostles. Therefore, the argument that the Church entered into a state of total apostasy after the apostolic era, and that religious leaders since then have been operating under the influence of Satan, does not align with the broader narrative of Church history, theology, or the scriptural understanding of Christ’s promises to His Church.
Post a Comment