Part 4 of the rebuttal of the article “Paul refuted Peterism in 10 points”.
Today I would skip point D and E and go to the 1st part of F. I think if I reproduce them, you would agree with me that it’s obvious that if I clarify point F, point D and E would be debunked.
So let’s look at point F first.
“F. A falling away, or apostasy, had to occur before Christ’s coming. This
general and widespread departure from the faith was still centuries away.
1. Jesus Christ could not return and gather His saints together until after a falling away.
2. A falling away, or an apostasy, is a departure from true apostolic doctrine and practice by
leaving the truth, introducing corruptions, ignoring scripture, adding to scripture, etc.
3. Leaving the true gospel for heresy was often warned against in the New Testament (Gal
1:6; 5:4; Col 1:23; I Tim 1:19; II Tim 1:15; 4:4; Heb 6:6; 10:38; II Pet 3:17).
4. Trouble by Jewish legalism occurred while Paul lived, for he had to oppose it throughout
his ministry and wrote several epistles against it, but this falling away was still future.
5. Paul warned Ephesus of apostasy in the church (Acts 20:28-31), which had not occurred
when John wrote them in 67 A.D., according to preterist timing assumptions (Rev 2:1-7).
I will deal with the 2nd part of part F tomorrow as I wish to deal with the scriptures quoted under point F.
Now let first reproduce point D and E.
“D. Preterists adore at hand except here. Paul used a Preterist mantra, at hand,
to refute prophetic deception about timing and declare Christ’s return far off.
1. Here is a real timing passage by successive events, but they reject it and then corrupt it.
2. They will wax loud and long about at hand in I Peter 4:7 and Revelation 1:3 and 22:10.
3. They will not even accept the words here, but instead evilly change the text to help them.
E. II Thessalonians 2:1-3 burns down Preterism’s house of cards. Paul lists
events that must precede Christ’s coming, which Daniel and he prove far away.
1. Russell’s efforts in The Parousia to discount this text valued his agenda over inspiration.
2. Changing God’s word, “at hand,” to, “had come,” allows preterists their idea of 70 A.D.
timing against Paul’s timing of the distant future. [See his notes on the text or the NKJV.]
3. This passage is also abused by futurists, particularly C.I. Scofield in his introduction to
the epistle, just as Paul warned that the doctrine in it would be despised by deceivers.”
Now you would note that points D and E are contingent on point F.
The author’s argument is that this “falling away” must take place first before the return of Jesus and this hasn’t happen.
As such if I were to proof to you this “falling away” had indeed happened then point D and E which are concern about timing would be debunked too.
Let’s look at point F part 1.
The question there we must ask is when did “falling away” takes place.
He then quotes these verses. I will give you my comments within those verses.
I am astonished that you are so quickly deserting him who called you in the grace of Christ and are turning to a different gospel—
You are severed from Christ, you who would be justified by the law; you have fallen away from grace.
You can see from these verses the “falling away” here is about turning to another gospel. That gospel was the gospel of Moses which was the Law. You can clearly see it in the context of Galatians 5:4
if indeed you continue in the faith, stable and steadfast, not shifting from the hope of the gospel that you heard, which has been proclaimed in all creation under heaven, and of which I, Paul, became a minister.
Here again the falling away has to do with the early Jewish believers turning back to the Law.
1 Timothy 1:9
understanding this, that the law is not laid down for the just but for the lawless and disobedient, for the ungodly and sinners, for the unholy and profane, for those who strike their fathers and mothers, for murderers,
The earlier verse actually says this.
1 Timothy 1:7-8
desiring to be teachers of the law, without understanding either what they are saying or the things about which they make confident assertions.
Now we know that the law is good, if one uses it lawfully,
The issue here is teaching the Law to the believers. Again the falling away here is against believers turning back to the Law.
2 Timothy 1:15
You are aware that all who are in Asia turned away from me, among whom are Phygelus and Hermogenes.
This is about telling people the resurrection had happened in AD52. Nothing to do with any apostasy today.
and then have fallen away, to restore them again to repentance, since they are crucifying once again the Son of God to their own harm and holding him up to contempt.
This is a reference to those mentioned in Hebrews 4 people in Sinai. Not a future falling away.
but my righteous one shall live by faith,
and if he shrinks back,
my soul has no pleasure in him.”
Again this is about going back to sacrifices of the old covenant.
2 Peter 3:17
You therefore, beloved, knowing this beforehand, take care that you are not carried away with the error of lawless people and lose your own stability.
Again Peter was speaking about the end of the covenant the destruction of the elements of the old covenant. The temple, the priesthood and the Law.
Pay careful attention to yourselves and to all the flock, in which the Holy Spirit has made you overseers, to care for the church of God, which he obtained with his own blood. I know that after my departure fierce wolves will come in among you, not sparing the flock; and from among your own selves will arise men speaking twisted things.
I will deal with this shortly as this was a focal point of his argument.
2 Timothy 3:9
But they will not get very far, for their folly will be plain to all, as was that of those two men.
Again we have dealt with these issue as these 2 men were saying that the resurrection had happen in AD52.
So you see all the verse quoted was contemporary to the events happening at that time. Not a future “falling away”.
Now let me deal with this point.
“5. Paul warned Ephesus of apostasy in the church (Acts 20:28-31), which had not occurred
when John wrote them in 67 A.D., according to preterist timing assumptions (Rev 2:1-7).”
Is this really true?
1 Corinthians 15:32
What do I gain if, humanly speaking, I fought with beasts at Ephesus? If the dead are not raised, “Let us eat and drink, for tomorrow we die.”
Notice Paul said he had already fought the wild beasts at Ephesus, the very same wolves he was speaking about in Acts 20 at THAT time.
So again there is no future falling away. With regards to the issues with the man of sin, and the rebellion he caused we have already covered under part 1 of this series.
Again you see all the allegations made in the article he wrote is pure subjective interpretation.
I will deal with the rest of point F tomorrow as this has to do with his attack on the Catholic church.
For further reading:
So you would note point D and E are effectively debunked as well. The coming was about then not our future.