Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of 2 Thessalonian 2:3
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;
3. Let no man deceive you by any means ] beguile you, as the Revisers commonly render this Greek verb, and the A. V. in 2Co 11:3; 1Ti 2:14, and Rom 7:11 (comp. Gen 3:13, “the serpent beguiled Eve”). It implies a thorough, commonly a wicked deception; comp. also Rom 16:18. The kindred noun ( deceit) appears in 2Th 2:10.
in any wise (R. V.) points to the variety of ways (“by spirit, word,” &c., 2Th 2:2) in which the readers were being plied with this delusion.
for that day shall not come, except there come a falling away first ] The R. V. supplies the ellipsis more simply: for it will not be. The Apostle’s mind becomes absorbed in his description of “the Man of Lawlessness” (2Th 2:4), and he forgets to complete the sentence; but his meaning is clear enough. For a similar dropped, or broken sentence comp. 1Th 2:11 (see note, and Introd. Chap. VI, on the Style of St Paul). His manner is that of a speaker rather than a studied writer, and such lapses are natural in the freedom of conversation.
“A falling away” is a mistranslation. The Apostle uses the definite article; he refers to the apostasy of which he had spoken distinctly to his readers (2Th 2:5). This word in common Greek denotes a military or political revolt, a defection; then in the LXX it is applied to revolting from God e.g. in Jer 29:32 (“rebellion against the Lord”), 1Ma 2:15 (“revolt,” consisting in sacrificing to idols): so the corresponding verb in Heb 3:12; comp. Act 21:21 (“thou teachest apostasy from Moses”), 1Ti 4:1. Here this ominous expression appears for the first time within the Christian Church, as signifying revolt from Christ, the faithless defection of men “denying the Lord that bought them” (2Pe 2:1). It is sad to find such a prediction in the earliest writings of the N. T. It originated, doubtless, in the words of Christ, Mat 24:10-13: “Then shall many stumble Many false prophets shall arise, and shall lead many astray. And because iniquity shall abound, the love of the many shall wax cold.” Comp. the mournful prophecy of Moses concerning the future of his people (Deu 31:28-29, &c.). This presentiment of St Paul grew in distinctness and was expressed with increasing emphasis, as time went on; comp. Rom 16:17-20; Act 20:29-30; Eph 4:14; 1Ti 4:1, &c. Such words as those of 1Co 16:22 (“If any man love not the Lord, let him be anathema”), and Col 2:19 (“not holding fast the Head”), shew that in his view personal loyalty to Christ was the safeguard of Christianity.
As to the particular form and direction of the apostasy, nothing is said, nor as to the time of its rise or duration. Disloyalty to Christ confronted St Paul in his later years in many forms; and ever since the Church has had to straggle with inward corruption, as well as with outward foes. The Apostle anticipates this conflict; he foresees that tares will spring up along with the wheat, and “both” must “grow together until the harvest” (Mat 13:24-30). Such development of internal evil had not yet taken place, and by this the Thessalonians might be sure that the Day of the Lord had not dawned.
and that man of sin be revealed ] Lit., and there be revealed the man of sin; or, according to the reading of the Greek preferred by Tischendorf, Westcott and Hort, in agreement with the two oldest MSS, the man of lawlessness. In 2Th 2:7 the writer speaks of “the mystery of lawlessness,” as of something present to his readers’ minds; and in 2Th 2:8 this same “man” is styled “the lawless one.” Throughout St Paul lays the utmost stress upon this attribute of the system of evil, with which he apprehends that the Kingdom of Christ must have a final and conclusive struggle. Lawlessness is the essence of that system, and “the man of lawlessness” its complete impersonation (comp. 1Jn 3:4).
Now “lawlessness” is in the Apostle’s eyes a characteristic of the Gentile world, which “knew not God” (ch. 2Th 1:8; 1Th 4:5) and had cast off moral restraint. But he looked beneath the formal and outward possession of God’s law in the letter, and recognized in the Jewish people the like lawlessness of spirit (Rom 2:1; Rom 2:17-19); while “Gentiles not having law,” sometimes “shewed the work of the law written in their hearts” (Rom 2:14-15). “The man of lawlessness” is therefore one in whom St Paul sees the lawlessness of a godless world culminating the ne plus ultra of “the carnal mind” that is “enmity against the law of God,” which “is neither subject to His law nor can be” (Rom 8:7). And he is emphatically “the man of lawlessness” (with no distinction of Jew or Gentile; comp. Rom 3:19; Rom 3:23), being the person in whom human nature, in so far as it is separated from and opposed to God (see next ver.), finds its ultimate realisation.
We must distinguish, then, between “the apostasy” and “the man of lawlessness,” in that the former is the corruption of the church, while the latter is the culmination of the evil of the world. (Comp. “the wild beast” of Rev 13:1, “rising out of the” murmuring and restless “sea” of the nations, the “many waters” of ch. Rev 17:1; Rev 17:15.) But the two influences, though not identical, are in combination. The former naturally contributes to the latter, an apostate Church paving the way for the advent of an atheistic world-power. We shall find in the next verse an echo of the prophecies of Daniel, so clear as to justify us in regarding these two evil powers as analogous to those of Dan 8:23: “When the transgressors are come to the full, a king of fierce countenance shall arise;” where, as it proved in the Maccabean times, the apostasy within Israel gives the signal for the rise of the heathen despot.
“The man of lawlessness” is “the son of perdition,” being the one to whom this doom peculiarly belongs, who like Judas Iscariot (Joh 17:12) in going to “perdition” will “go to his own place” (Act 1:25). For the Hebraistic phrase “son of” comp, 1Th 5:4, and note.
Perdition is synonymous with destruction, ch. 2Th 1:9; there it falls on the godless, here on the Lawless One lawlessness being the moral counterpart of godlessness, and both fatal to man’s true life.
Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges
Let no man deceive you by any means – That is, respecting the coming of the Lord Jesus. This implies that there were then attempts to deceive, and that it was of great importance for Christians to be on their guard. The result has shown that there is almost no subject on which caution is more proper, and on which men are more liable to delusion. The means then resorted to for deception appear from the previous verse to have been either an appeal to a pretended verbal message from the apostle, or a pretended letter from him. The means now, consist of a claim to uncommon wisdom in the interpretation of obscure prophecies of the Scriptures. The necessity for the caution here given has not ceased.
For that day shall not come, except there come a falling away first – Until an apostasy ( apostasia) shall have occurred – the great apostasy. There is scarcely any passage of the New Testament which has given occasion to greater diversity of opinion than this. Though the reference seems to be plain, and there is scarcely any prophecy of the Bible apparently more obvious and easy in its general interpretation; yet it is proper to mention some of the opinions which have been entertained of it.
Some have referred it to a great apostasy from the Christian church, particularly on account of persecution, which would occur before the destruction of Jerusalem. The coming of the Lord they suppose refers to the destruction of the holy city, and according to this, the meaning is, that there would be a great apostasy before that event would take place. Of this opinion was Vitringa, who refers the apostasy to a great defection from the faith which took place between the time of Nero and Trajan.
Whitby also refers it to an event which was to take place before the destruction of Jerusalem, and supposes that the apostasy would consist in a return from the Christian to the Jewish faith by multitudes of professed converts. The man of sin, according to him, means the Jewish nation, so characterized on account of its eminent wickedness.
Hammond explains the apostasy by the defection to the Gnostics, by the arts of Simon Magus, whom he supposes to be the man of sin, and by the day of the Lord he also understands the destruction of Jerusalem.
Grotius takes Caius Caesar or Caligula, to be the man of sin, and by the apostasy he understands his abominable wickedness. In the beginning of his government, he says, his plans of iniquity were concealed, and the hopes of all were excited in regard to his reign; but his secret iniquity was subsequently revealed, and his true character understood.
Wetstein understands by the man of sin, that it referred to Titus and the Flavian house. He says that he does not understand it of the Roman Pontiff, who is not one such as the demonstrative pronoun thrice repeated designates, and who neither sits in the temple of God, nor calls himself God, nor Caius, nor Simon Gioriae, nor any Jewish impostor, nor Simon Magus.
Koppe refers it to the King mentioned in Dan 11:36. According to him, the reference is to a great apostasy of the Jews from the worship of God, and the man of sin is the Jewish people.
Others have supposed that the reference is to Muhammed, and that the main characteristics of the prophecy may be found in him.
Of the Papists, a part affirm that the apostasy is the falling away from Rome in the time of the Reformation, but the greater portion suppose that the allusion is to Antichrist, who, they say, will appear in the world before the great day of judgment, to combat religion and the saints. See these opinions stated at length, and examined, in Dr. Newton on the Prophecies, Dissertation xxii.
Some more recent expositors have referred it to Napoleon Bonaparte, and some (as Oldshausen) suppose that it refers to some one who has not yet appeared, in whom all the characteristics here specified will be found united.
Most Protestant commentators have referred it to the great apostasy under the papacy, and, by the man of sin, they suppose there is allusion to the Roman Pontiff, the Pope. It is evident that we are in better circumstances to understand the passage than those were who immediately succeeded the apostles.
Eighteen hundred years have passed (written circa 1880s) away since the Epistle was written, and the day of the Lord has not yet come, and we have an opportunity of inquiring, whether in all that long tract of time any one man can be found, or any series of men have arisen, to whom the description here given is applicable. If so, it is in accordance with all the proper rules of interpreting prophecy, to make such an application. If it is fairly applicable to the papacy, and cannot be applied in its great features to anything else, it is proper to regard it as having such an original reference. Happily, the expressions which are used by the apostle are, in themselves, not difficult of interpretation, and all that the expositor has to do is, to ascertain whether in any one great apostasy all the things here mentioned have occurred. If so, it is fair to apply the prophecy to such an event; if not so, we must wait still for its fulfillment.
The word rendered falling away ( apostasia, apostasy), is of so general a character, that it may be applied to any departure from the faith as it was received in the time of the apostles. It occurs in the New Testament only here and in Act 21:21, where it is rendered to forsake – thou teachest all the Jews which are among us to forsake Moses – apostasy from Moses – apostasian apo Mouseos. The word means a departing from, or a defection; see the verb used in 1Ti 4:1, Some shall depart from the faith – apostesontai; compare the notes on that passage; see also Heb 3:12; Luk 8:13; Act 5:37. The reference here is evidently to some general falling away, or to some great religious apostasy that was to occur, and which would be under one head, leader, or dynasty, and which would involve many in the same departure from the faith, and in the same destruction. The use of the article here, the apostasy (Greek), Erasmus remarks, signifies that great and before-predicted apostasy. It is evidently emphatic, showing that there had been a reference to this before, or that they understood well that there was to be such an apostasy. Paul says 2Th 2:5, that when he was with them, he had told them of these things. The writers in the New Testament often speak of such a defection under the name of Antichrist; see Rev 13:14; 1Jo 2:18, 1Jo 2:22; 1Jo 4:3; 2Jo 1:7.
And that man of sin – This is a Hebraism, meaning a man of eminent wickedness; one distinguished for depravity; compare Joh 17:12; Pro 6:12, in Heb. The use of the article here – ho anthropos – the man of sin, is also emphatic, as in the reference to the falling away, and shows that there is allusion to one of whom they had before heard, and whose character was well known; who would be the wicked one by way of eminence; see also 2Th 2:8, that wicked – ho anomos. There are two general questions in regard to the proper interpretation of this appellative; the one is, whether it refers to an individual, or to a series of individuals of the same general character, aiming at the accomplishment of the same plans; and the other is, whether there has been any individual, or any series of individuals, since the time of the apostle, who, by eminence, deserved to be called the man of sin. That the phrase, the man of sin, may refer to a succession of men of the same general character, and that it does so refer here, is evident from the following considerations:
(1) The word king is used in Dan 7:25; Dan 11:36, to which places Paul seems to allude, to denote a succession of kings.
(2) The same is true of the beast mentioned in Dan. 7; Dan. 8; and Rev. 13, representing a kingdom or empire through its successive changes and revolutions.
(3) The same is true of the woman arrayed in purple and scarlet Rev 17:4, which cannot refer to a single woman, but is the emblem of a continued corrupt administration.
(4) It is clear that a succession is intended here, because the work assigned to the man of sin, cannot be supposed to be that which could be accomplished by a single individual. The statement of the apostle is, that there were then tendencies to such an apostasy, and that the man of sin would be revealed at no distant period, and yet that he would continue his work of lying wonders until the coming of the Saviour. In regard to this man of sin, it may be further observed:
(1) That his appearing was to be preceded by the great apostasy; and,
(2) That he was to continue and perpetuate it. His rise was to be owing to a great departure from the faith, and then he was to be the principal agent in continuing it by signs and lying wonders. He was not himself to originate the defection, but was to be the creation, or result of it. He was to rise upon it, or grow out of it, and, by artful arrangements adapted to that purpose, was to perpetuate it. The question then is, to whom this phrase, descriptive of a succession of individuals so eminent for wickedness that the name the man of sin could be applied, was designed by the spirit of inspiration to refer. Dr. Newton has shown that it cannot refer to Caligula, to Simon Magus, to the revolt of the Jews from the Romans, or to the revolt of the Jews from the faith, or to the Flavian family, or to Luther, as some of the papists suppose, or to one man who will appear just before the end of the world, as others of the Romanists suppose; see his Dissertations on the Prophecies, xxii, pp. 393-402; compare Oldshausen, in loc. The argument is too long to be inserted here. But can it be referred to the papacy? Can it denote the Pope of Rome, meaning not a single pope, but the succession? If all the circumstances of the entire passage can be shown to be fairly applicable to him, or if it can he shown that all that is fairly implied in the language used here has received a fulfillment in him, then it is proper to regard it as having been designed to be so applied, and then this may be numbered among the prophecies that are in part fulfilled.
The question now is on the applicability of the phrase the man of sin to the Pope. That his rise was preceded by a great apostasy, or departure from the purity of the simple gospel, as revealed in the New Testament, cannot reasonably be doubted by any one acquainted with the history of the church. That he is the creation or result of that apostasy, is equally clear. That he is the grand agent in continuing it, is equally manifest. Is the phrase itself one that is properly applicable to him Is it proper to speak of the Pope of Rome, as he has actually appeared, as the man of sin? In reply to this, it might be sufficient to refer to the general character of the papacy, and to its influence in upholding and perpetuating various forms of iniquity in the world. It would be easy to show that there has been no dynasty or system that has contributed so much to uphold and perpetuate sins of various kinds on the earth, as the papacy. No other one has been so extensively and so long the patron of superstition; and there are vices of the grossest character which have all along been fostered by its system of celibacy, indulgences, monasteries, and absolutions. But it would be a better illustration of the meaning of the phrase man of sin, as applicable to the Pope of Rome, to look at the general character of the popes themselves. Though there may have been some exceptions, yet there never has been a succession of men of so decidedly wicked character, as have occupied the papal throne since the great apostasy commenced.
A very few references to the characters of the popes will furnish an illustration of this point. Pope Vagilius waded to the pontifical throne through the blood of his predecessor. Pope Joan (the Roman Catholic writers tell us) a female in disguise, was elected and confirmed Pope, as John VIII. Platina says, that she became with child by some of those that were round about her; that she miscarried, and died on her way from the Lateran to the temple. Pope Marcellinus sacrificed to idols. Concerning Pope Honorius, the council of Constantinople decreed, We have caused Honorius, the late Pope of Old Rome, to be accursed; for that in all things he followed the mind of Sergius the heretic, and confirmed his wicked doctrines. The Council of Basil thus condemned Pope Eugenius: We condemn and depose Pope Eugenius, a despiser of the holy canons; a disturber of the peace and unity of the church of God; a notorious offender of the whole universal church; a Simonist; a perjurer; a man incorrigible; a schismatic; a man fallen from the faith, and a willful heretic.
Pope John II, was publicly charged at Rome with incest. Pope John XIII usurped the Pontificate, spent his time in hunting, in lasciviousness, and monstrous forms of vice; he fled from the trial to which he was summoned, and was stabbed, being taken in the act of adultery. Pope Sixtus IV licensed brothels at Rome. Pope Alexander VI was, as a Roman Catholic historian says, one of the greatest and most horrible monsters in nature that could scandalize the holy chair. His beastly morals, his immense ambition, his insatiable avarice, his detestable cruelty, his furious lusts, and monstrous incest with his daughter Lucretia, are, at large, described by Guicciardini Ciaconius, and other authentic papal historians. Of the popes, Platina (a Roman Catholic) says: The chair of Saint Peter was usurped, rather than possessed, by monsters of wickedness, ambition, and bribery. They left no wickedness unpracticed; see the New Englander, April, 1844, pp. 285, 286. To no succession of men who have ever lived could the appellative, the man of sin, be applied with so much propriety as to this succession. Yet they claim to have been the true successors of the apostles, and there are Protestants who deem it of essential importance to be able to show that they have derived the true succession through such men.
Be revealed – Be made manifest. There were, at the time when the apostle wrote, two remarkable things:
(1) That there was already a tendency to such an apostasy as he spoke of; and,
(2) There was something which as yet prevented the appearance or the rise of the man of sin; 2Th 2:7. When the hindrance which then existed should be taken out of the way, he would be manifested; see the notes on 2Th 2:7.
The son of perdition. This is the same appellation which the Saviour bestowed on Judas; see it explained in the notes on Joh 18:12. It may mean either that he would be the cause of ruin to others, or that he would himself be devoted to destruction. It would seem here rather to be used in the latter sense, though this is not absolutely certain. The phrase, whichever interpretation be adopted, is used to denote one of eminent wickedness.
Fuente: Albert Barnes’ Notes on the Bible
2Th 2:3
Let no man deceive you by any means; for that day shall not come except there come a falling away first
Christ and Antichrist
The most marked Features in this passage are–
I.
A caricature of Christ; an exact counterpart and mockery of Christ in the man of sin. The latter has, like the former–
1. An apocalypse (2Th 2:8. cf. verses 6-8).
2. A solemn coming on the stage of human history (2Th 2:8).
3. An advent (2Th 2:9).
4. Power, signs, wonders (2Th 2:9).
5. Designation (2Th 2:4).
6. A definitely appointed season of His own (2Th 2:6).
II. A caricature of Christianity. As some of the leading glories of Christ are studiously travestied in the lawless one, and described in language which forces us to think of Christ; so several of the leading features of the Christian system are powerfully travestied by imitative anti-Christianity. This latter is–
1. A mystery (2Th 2:7), imitative of the mystery of godliness.
2. Has an energy, an inworking (2Th 2:7; 2Th 2:11, cf. Eph 2:2), imitative of the energy and inworking of the Word of God (1Th 2:12; Heb 4:12), of God (Php 2:18; Gal 2:8), of the indwelling Spirit (Col 1:29). He shall work in them by such an energy as that of the Holy Ghost, who witnesseth in us concerning God; not a mere apprehension, but an inworking of error, a regeneration into the faith of the lie (E. Irving)
.
3. Has a faith–a solemn making of an act of faith–imitative of the faith of Christians (2Th 2:11).
4. The words eudokein, eudokia are used of Gods good pleasure in His sinless Son, and of His goodwill toward men (Mat 3:17; Mat 12:18; Mat 17:5; Luk 12:32; 1Co 1:21; Gal 1:15), or the good will of Christians in holiness and acts of love (1Th 2:8, etc.). The imitative good pleasure of anti-Christianity is in unrighteousness (2Th 2:12). (Bp. Alexander.)
Signs of the Second Advent
I. A caution: Let no man deceive you. A man may be deceived on this momentous subject.
1. All admit that Christ will come; but few invest it with sufficient importance. Paul thought so much about it that he made it the main subject of these Epistles, and the New Testament is full of it. Little is said about death but much about the Second Advent.
2. There were false teachers who preached that the event was at hand, and many were abandoning the ordinary duties of life, and were troubled and shaken in mind. False expectations were calculated to produce such results. What awful disturbance there would be in the mind of every unconverted man were it now infallibly announced that Christ would come tomorrow. But Paul was writing to the Church. How, then, could they be troubled who were encouraged to look for and hasten unto that event? It is one thing to live in quiet expectation of Christ, and another to feel that He will come tomorrow. We are forbidden to inquire into the day and hour. That is to keep the Church in a state of calm expectation. Think of the trouble many good people would be in were it known that Christ would come directly. Who would have any relish for work. And then there are many true believers whose evidence is not always clear; how it would trouble them. How agitated we should be about the condition of our friends. To prevent these evils, the hour is unrevealed.
II. The events which must transpire before Christ comes.
1. The gospel must be first preached to all nations as a witness, as our Lord said. His object was the formation of a Church as His witness. This Church, like a pilgrim, has gone from place to place. Churches have been formed, and then after a while the candlestick has been removed, as in the case of those of Asia. The effect of this has been the gathering of a people, generation after generation, to the general assembly of the first-born. This, too, is the work of every preacher. He does not convert congregations, but individuals. The net is cast and fish are gathered of every kind forming what we call Christendom. With this body our Lord will deal when He comes, and then the final severance will take place. But before then there will be a great moral separation, viz.
2. A great falling away. This will be of mere professors who, by withdrawing, will leave the whole body of believers sharply defined and intact (Rev 13:8). This apostasy will not be of one or two, here and there; that began in Pauls time, and has been going on ever since; but one of a great and striking character. The cause of this will be the portentous development of the mystery of iniquity which began the work one thousand eight hundred years ago, ripening into all sorts of sin, Romanism, infidelity, religious indifference and worldliness, preparing the visible Church for the reception of a great pretender who is–
3. The man of sin. Some have identified this character with the Pope in his official character but this can hardly be the case inasmuch as the Pope has never exalted himself above God, etc., (2Th 2:4), and has not been worshipped by the world (Rev 13:8). One of the marks of the beast is that all shall worship him but the elect; but surely every non-Papist is not a true believer. Whether a given Pope may yet appear as the man of sin is another matter, but it is quite certain that one has not yet been revealed as such. This individual will–
(1) be a man,
(2) be qualified for his work by the energy of Satan–
(3) be revealed by tribulation which shall sift and purify the elect, at the same time inviting to himself all the ungodly.
III. Then will come the end (2Th 1:7-10). (Capel Molyneux, M. A.)
The falling away
is either that of which he had spoken to them while he was yet with them, or that, which in his own mind was inseparable from the coming of Christ which was to follow. Of what nature was this falling away? What vision of apostasy rose before him as he wrote this? Was it within or without? permanent or passing? persecution of the heathen, or the disorganization of the body of Christ itself? Was it the transition of the Church from its first love to a more secular and earthly state, or the letting loose of a spiritual world of evil, such as the apostle describes in Eph 6:12? So ideal a picture cannot properly be limited to any person or institution. That it is an inward, not an outward evil, that is depicted, is implied in the very name apostasy. It is not the evil of the heathen world, sunk in grossness and unconsciousness, but evil rebelling against good, conflicting with good in the spiritual world itself. And the conflict is of the same nature, though in a wider sphere, as the strife of good and evil in the heart of the individual. It is that same strife, not as represented in Rom 7:1-25, but at a later stage when evil is fast becoming good, and the remembrance of the past itself is carrying men away from the truth. (Prof. Jowett.)
An evil and presumptuous one
The apostle speaks in the eighth verse of the revelation of that wicked, intimating the discovery, which should be made of his wickedness in order to his ruin: here he speaks of his rise, which should be occasioned by the general apostasy; and to intimate that all sorts of false doctrines and corruptions should centre in him.
I. The names of this person.
1. He is called that man of sin, to denote his egregious wickedness; not only is he addicted to and practises wickedness himself, but he also promotes, countenances, and commands sin and wickedness in others.
2. And he is the son of perdition, because he himself is devoted to certain destruction, and is the instrument of destroying many others both in soul and body.
II. The presumption of this person.
1. His towering ambition. He opposeth and exalteth himself above all that is called God, or that is worshipped. Thus he has not only opposed Gods authority, and that of the civil magistrates, who are called gods, but exalted himself above God and earthly governors, in demanding greater regard to his commands than to the commands of God or the magistrate.
2. His dreadful usurpation. He as God sitteth in the temple of God, showing himself that he is God! As God was in the temple of old, and worshipped there, and is in and with His Church now, so Antichrist is the usurper of Gods authority in the Christian Church, and the claimer of Divine honours, for, among the moat blasphemous titles, this one has been given to him, Another God on earth! (T. Scott, M. A.)
Apostasy and Antichrist
I. The general apostasy which must precede Christs coming.
1. Apostasy is any defection from that lord to whom we owe fealty. In religious matters it is defection from our right and proper Lord. The devil was an apostate (Jud 1:6; Joh 8:44); our first parents (Rom 5:19); their posterity (Zep 1:6; Isa 59:13).
2. The apostasy of the text was not civil, the falling away of many kingdoms from the Roman empire; but of the visible Church from its Lord. This is proved–
(1) From the fact that the Thessalonians did not intermingle with State affairs.
(2) From the use of the word in Christian doctrine (Luk 13:13).
(3) Because it was expressly foretold (1Ti 4:1).
(4) Because those who are most concerned to maintain the notion of civil apostasy are most notorious in this defection.
3. The proper Lord of the Christian Church is Christ (Rom 14:9; Eph 5:23).
4. Apostasy from Christ is determined by two things.
(1) By undermining His authority. This is done when others usurp His place without His leave, e.g., superinduce a universal head of the Church which Christ never appointed.
(2) By corrupting and destroying the interests of His kingdom, which is the case wherever there is a degeneration from the purity and simplicity of the gospel (2Co 11:3), such as when the faith of the gospel is turned into dead opinions and curious questions; and its worship corrupted into giving Divine honour to saints and angels and turned into a theatrical pomp of empty ceremonies; and its discipline transformed into temporal domination and carried on by sides and interests.
5. This apostasy is notable and discernible, not of a few or many in divers Churches. There have always been backsliders (1Jn 2:18-19; 1Jn 4:3; 1Jn 4:5); but the great apostasy is in some visible Church where these corruptions are generally received and defended. Who then are they–
(1) Who usurp Christs authority by setting up a universal head over all Christians?
(2) Who revive the worship of a middle sort of powers between God and man (1Ti 4:1; Col 2:18), and invent so many lies to defend it, when Christians should keep themselves from idols (1Jn 5:21), not contented with the only Mediator (1Ti 2:5; 1Co 8:5)?
(3) Who plead for indulgences and the supererogatory satisfaction of saints as profitable for the remission of sins?
(4) Who keep believers from reading the Scriptures when expressly enjoined to do so (Joh 5:39; Psa 1:2)?
(5) Who deny one part of the Lords Supper notwithstanding His institution to the contrary (1Co 11:25-26)?
II. The revelation of Antichrist as–
1. The man of sin.
(1) The Jews gave this name to Antiochus (1Ma 2:48; 1Ma 2:62), and it is given to Antichrist because he is a man given up to sin eminently, and giveth excitements to sin. Now how much open sin is allowed in the Papacy their own stories tell Histories witness that the most abominable men have occupied the Papal chair; and no man can sin at so cheap a rate when, by dividing sins into mortal and venial, and these expiated by penance, faculties, licences, dispensations, indulgences until sin is distinguished out of conscience.
(2) Because he is called the man of sin it does not follow that he is an individual. One is often put for a society and succession of men as kings (Dan 7:8; Isa 10:5; Isa 14:9); so the man of God is put for all faithful ministers (2Ti 3:17); high priest (Heb 9:25); the king (1Pe 2:17). So one person represents that succession of men that head the revolt against Christ.
2. The son of perdition. Wherein he is likened to Judas (Joh 17:12). The term may be explained passively as one condemned to everlasting destruction (2Sa 12:5; Eph 2:3), or actively as bringing destruction on himself and others (Rev 9:11, cf. Heb 5:9). Note the parallel.
(1) Judas was not a stranger, but a pretended friend and apostle (Act 1:17). Turks and infidels are enemies to Christ, but Antichrist seeks to undermine Him under a pretence of friendship. There is no mystery in open enmity (verse 7).
(2) He sold Christ for a small matter; Antichrist makes a market of religion.
(3) Judas betrayed Christ with a kiss, and where is there apparently such friends of Christ as at Rome? They are ready to worship the Cross, and yet they are its enemies, because they mind earthly things.
(4) Judas was a guide to those who came to take Christ, and the main work of Antichrist is to be a ringleader in persecuting for religion.
(5) Judas was covetous, and England to its bitter cost knows the exactions of the Papacy. (T. Manton, D. D.)
The development of Antichrist
I. It begins in a falling away–
1. From the power and practice of godliness, though the profession be not changed.
(1) Because this disposes to the entertainment of error. When a people that are carried with great zeal for a while, lose their affections to good, and return to a worldly life, then the bias of their hearts easily prevails against the light of their understandings. And so unsanctified men may the sooner be drawn to apostasy; they never felt the quickening virtue of faith, and were never wrought by it to the true love of God or an holy life.
(2) Because if a lively Christianity had been kept up, Antichrist had never risen, and it is the way to keep him out still (Mat 13:1-58). A sleepy religion and corruption of manners made way for corruption of doctrine, worship, and order (Son 5:2).
(3) Because there is such a compliance between the nature of Antichristianism and the temper of a carnal heart; for superstition and profaneness grow both upon the same root. To prevent this falling away from a lively godliness observe two things–
(a) Coldness in duties, when the will and affections grow more remiss, and the worship of God, which keepeth up the remembrance of Him, is either omitted or performed in a careless and stupid manner (Jer 2:32; Job 27:10; Isa 43:22). When you seldom think or speak of God and do not keep up a delightful communion with Him, there is a falling away.
(b) Boldness in sinning. When men lose their tenderness and strictness, and the awe of God is lessened in their hearts, and they do not only sin freely in thought, but in act, have not that hatred of sin and watch fulness they had formerly, but more abandon themselves to a carnal life, they are falling off from God apace (2Pe 2:20).
Consider the cause of it–
(a) Want of faith in God (Heb 3:12).
(b) Want of love to God (Rev 2:4-5).
(c) Want of a due sense of the world to come (Heb 10:39).
(d) Love of the present world (2Ti 4:10; 1Ti 6:10; 2Ti 3:4).
2. From a true religion to a false, which may be done two ways.
(1) Out of weakness of mind as those do who were never well grounded in the truth (Eph 4:14; 2Pe 3:16). Therefore we need to be established; but the forsaking of a truth we were bred in usually comes from some falseness of heart. Some errors are so contrary to the new nature, that they discern them by the unction (1Jn 2:20).
(2) Out of vile affection, when they forsake the truth for the advantages of a fleshly, worldly life, some places to be gotten by it, etc., and as the whore of Babylon hath a golden cup, riches, and preferments, wherewith it inviteth its proselytes. Now these are worse than the former, for they sell the birthright (Heb 12:16). O Christians! take heed to yourselves. Apostasy brought Antichrist into the Church. Let it not bring him back again into the land, or into your hearts.
II. The next step is the man of sin. As the first apostasy of Adam and Eve brought sin into the world, so this great apostasy brought in a deluge of sin into the Church, and defiled the holy society which Christ had gathered out of the world. Idolatry is often called adultery or fornication; spiritual uncleanness disposeth to bodily, and bodily to spiritual. Usually a corrupt state of religion and corrupt manners go together; otherwise the dance and the fiddle would not suit. The world cannot lie quiet in a course of sin, if there be not some libertine, atheistical doctrine, and carnal worship to countenance it (Rev 11:10).
III. The man of sin is also the son of perdition.
1. Actively. False religions strangely efferate the mind (Jud 1:11; Hos 5:2). Men think no cruelty nor dishonesty unlawful which serveth to promote the interests of their sect, and lose all charity to those that are not of their way.
2. Passively, shall be destroyed. Sometimes grievous judgments come in this world for the corruptions of religion; but in the world to come, dreadful is the end of apostates (2Pe 2:20-21). (T. Manton, D. D.)
The man of sin
Mark–
I. That moral evil on earth is represented in human nature. Sin is connected with man in contradistinction to–
1. Abstract systems.
2. Super-earthly sinners.
II. That it is often found usurping the perogatives of God, such as–
1. Proprietorship in human life.
2. The taking away of human life.
3. Dominion over conscience.
4. The absolving from sin.
5. Infallibility of character.
III. That it is subject to restraint in this world, arising from–
1. Civil law.
2. Social intelligence.
3. The monition of conscience.
4. Physical inability.
IV. That it is associated, with the mysterious (verse 7). Evil is mysterious on account of–
1. The darkness that enfolds its introduction.
2. The mask under which it works.
3. Its wonderful results.
V. That it is satanic in its operations (verse 9). These operations are–
1. Sensuous.
2. Marvellous.
3. Deceptive.
4. Unrighteous.
5. Destructive.
VI. that it is destined to be destroyed by the agency or christ.
1. By His Word.
2. By His manifestation. (D. Thomas, D. D.)
Judas a type of the Papacy
The term son of perdition occurs but once elsewhere, and that on our Lords lips in reference to Judas. The parallel between His character and conduct and the Papacy–not any individual Pope, but the whole system–is most close. We conceive the Papacy to be here intended, because the features of type and prophecy here delineated fit no other subject.
I. Judas and the bishops of Rome alike were ministers–official men in the Church. The antiquity of the Church of Rome, and the dignity, authority, and vast influence of its bishops is undisputed.
II. Both betrayed the trust reposed in them. How fearfully Judas did this we all know; and has not the Papacy? The trust committed to it was the mystery of godliness, the maintenance of the gospel in its purity and simplicity, the care of Christs flock, example not lordship. How was this trust fulfilled by successive bishops of Rome? They gradually began to seek for ascendancy, to accommodate the Scriptures to their own purpose, to vitiate the purity and simplicity of the gospel by tradition, ecclesiastical decisions, fables, and legends as of Divine authority, to set themselves more aloft, and to set the Saviour aside, usurping His preeminence by assuming the title of His vicars, as though He were not with His Church always.
III. Both betrayed him into the hands of his enemies to death. Judas literally, the Papacy in the persons of His persecuted representatives. Judas betrayed Christ into the hands of the civil power, and has not the wretched policy of Rome ever been to screen its own cowardice and heartlessness behind the pretended power of civil authority, to whom her victims after sham trials have been handed over for death?
IV. Both betrayed the Lord with a kiss. The Papacy makes a vain pretence of showing special homage to Christ. Witness its caricature of Christs example when the Pope washes the feet of a few selected beggars, and the spurious honour given to Christs dignity by the mediatorship of Mary and the Saints.
V. Both betrayed the Lord for money. The covetousness of Judas gives point to the apostolic injunction to ministers not to be lovers of filthy lucre; but history is witness that the Papacy from the first has been given to filthy lucre. The requirements and ordinances which Rome has substituted for the ordinances of the gospel have been so many channels for wealth to flow into her treasury. Almost as soon as the Papacy rose on the ruins of the Pagan Empire she imposed the impious tax known as Peters pence. But this is not all. Merchandize is made of Christ. Rome professes that her priests, in the mass, transubstantiate the wafer into Christ, and the mass is offered for the sins of men, for money; so that the priests must be paid as Judas for offering up the Lord Incarnate. And then she sells indulgences, deliverances from penance, prayers, etc., making salvation a matter of money.
VI. Both betray Christ at the instigation of Satan. We could not account for the structure of the Papacy except on this hypothesis.
1. If you trace back the policy of Satan to the beginning you find it to be threefold.
(1) It was to blot out the idea of God. Hence we find no idolatry on the part of the ungodly before the flood.
(2) Failing, then, to set aside religion altogether he corrupted it. No sooner was there knowledge of the true God than he introduced gods many; side by side with prophets, miracles, the Word of God, he set up soothsayers, magic, lying oracles and legends.
(3) When Christianity was set up, and his pagan throne in Rome overthrown, he set up his Papal throne, and repeopled the deserted pantheon with idols for Christians to worship. So exactly has this come to pass that there is scarcely a pagan ceremony that has not its shadow in Popery, and its mission abroad is to paganize Christianity rather than to Christianize paganism.
2. Note the satanic characteristics of the Papacy.
(1) There is no doubt that Satan has much to do with the lying wonders of heathenism, and the strange appearances of power with which Rome caricatures the miracles of Christ. Did not the Pope know that the winking picture which he sent crowns to adorn, and which he endorsed as a miracle, was a most barefaced imposture?
(2) Satan fell by pride, and we need scarcely to be reminded of the awful arrogance of the Papacy. Look at the servile homage the Pope receives when men kiss his feet; and when on the day of his installation he is borne on the shoulders of bishops, and thrice adored; and when on the pontifical throne he is placed on the high altar where the Divine wafer rests, thus sitting in the temple of God, shewing himself as if he were God and is worshipped.
VII. Both fulfil Scripture and accomplish what God in His determinate counsel and foreknowledge declared should be done. How these and other instances in which the wrath of man praises God is a mystery; but the existence of such a system of despotism, delusion, superstition, and cruelty, would be an intolerable burden on any ether hypothesis. But when we see it all foretold in revelation, and that it shall at last serve to magnify Christ, and tend to the glorification of His Church, we bow submissive and tarry the Lords time. VIII. Both are branded the son of perdition, because of their fearful doom (verse 8). (Canon Stowell.)
Fuente: Biblical Illustrator Edited by Joseph S. Exell
Verse 3. Except there come a falling away first] We have the original word in our word apostasy; and by this term we understand a dereliction of the essential principles of religious truth-either a total abandonment of Christianity itself, or such a corruption of its doctrines as renders the whole system completely inefficient to salvation. But what this apostasy means is a question which has not yet, and perhaps never will be, answered to general satisfaction. At present I shall content myself with making a few literal remarks on this obscure prophecy, and afterwards give the opinions of learned men on its principal parts.
That man of sin] The same as the Hebrew expresses by ish aven, and ish beliyaal; the perverse, obstinate, and iniquitous man. It is worthy of remark that, among the rabbins, Samael, or the devil, is called ish beliyaal veish aven, the man of Belial, and the man of iniquity; and that these titles are given to Adam after his fall.
The son of perdition] The son of destruction; the same epithet that is given to Judas Iscariot, Joh 17:12, where see the note. The son of perdition, and the man of sin, or, as some excellent MSS. and versions, with several of the fathers, read, , the lawless man, see 2Th 2:8, must mean the same person or thing. It is also remarkable that the wicked Jews are styled by Isaiah, Isa 1:4, benim mashchithim, “children of perdition;” persons who destroy themselves and destroy others.
Fuente: Adam Clarke’s Commentary and Critical Notes on the Bible
Let no man deceive you: here the apostle urgeth again his charge against this error, though in other words, and begins his arguments to refute it. He had adjured them not to be shaken, and here he cautions them against being deceived, for the one makes way for the other; so also not to be troubled, 2Th 2:2, for troubled minds are apt to be made a prey to seducers. And the caution in the text proves that their shaking and trouble did arise from some deceivers that were amongst them, rather than any misunderstanding of their own of what he wrote in the former Epistle about Christs coming. To be shaken in mind is bad, hut to be deceived is worse, for it is a going out of the path, as the word signifies; and thercfine his caution against it is universal, both as to persons and ways: Let no man deceive you, though he pretend to revelations, or be of the greatest reputation in the church.
By any means; either of era craft, flattery, pretending love, or plausible arguments, or misrepresenting our words, or forging of letters, or misintering our Epistle to you or any other part of Scripture, or feigned miracles, &c. Then he enters the arguments to confute it, which are.
1. The general apostacy.
2. The revelation of the man of sin.
Neither of these are yet, nor will be in this age; and yet that day shall not come till these both first come.
For that doth shall not come, except there come a falling away first; there is a supplement in our translation, for in the Greek it is only,
for, except there come a falling away first, & c., or an apostacy, a recession, a departing, or a standing off, as the world imports; so that apostacy may be either good, when it is from evil to good, or evil, when it is from good to evil: it is always used in this latter sense in Scripture. Again, it is either civil or spiritual: civil, as when people fall off from the civil government they were under, and so some would interpret the text of the defection from the Roman empire, the east part from the west, and the ten kingdoms that arose out of it; which was the opinion of Hierom, Epist. ad Algasiam. But the apostle writing to the church speaks not of civil government, and the affairs of state, and speaks of such an apostacy which would give rise to the man of sin, and the revelation of him. And this man of sin riseth up in the church, not in the civil state; and the consequence of this apostacy is giving men up to strong delusions to believe a lie, and then follows their damnation; and the cause of it is said to be, not receiving the truth in the love of it; so that it is not a civil, but a spiritual apostacy, as the word in Scripture is always (I suppose) so taken. And it is not of a particular person, or of a particular church, but a general apostacy of the church, though not of every individual; that church that is afterwards called the temple of God, where the man of sin sitteth, and is exalted above all that is called God; which cannot be in any particular church; and would not the apostle have specified that particular church? Neither is it some lesser apostacy which may befall the best church; but such as would be eminent, called , that apostacy, greater than that of some believing Jews to Judaism, or of some Christians to Nicolaitanism, which some think is meant. Much less can it be Caius Caesar, as Grotius interprets, or any one person, for the apostle saith not apostate, but apostacy; else a man of sin could not rise out of it, and exalt himself above all that is called God, and worshipped. It is an apostacy from sound doctrine, instituted worship, church government, and true holiness of life, as may be further considered afterwards. Neither is the apostacy all at once, but gradual; for out of it ariseth a man of sin, who grows up to this manhood by degrees; and sin and wickedness are not completed at first, as well as holiness. Much less is this apostacy a falling off from the Church of Rome, as some papists affirm, and make the Reformation to be the apostacy, which was a return from it. Doth the man of sin rise out of the Reformation? Did any of the first Reformers oppose and exalt themselves above all that is called God, or is worshipped? Or, as God sat in the temple of God, &c.? Was any of their coming with all power, and signs, and lying wonders? Or did any of them forbid to marry, and to abstain from meats, &c.? Which is the character our apostle gives of this apostacy, 1Ti 4:1-3. Neither is the Mahometan religion this apostacy, for Mahomet sitteth not in the temple of God. Neither is it in the falling of the converted Jews from the Jewish church to the gospel church; the apostle would never call that an apostacy. And that man of sin be revealed: the next argumnent is from the revelation of the man of sin; this is also to precede Christs last coming: it is a Hebraism. A warlike man is styled a man of war; a bloody man, a man of bloods; a deceitful man, a man of deceit, &c.: so a man eminent in sin is here called a man of sin; not only personally so, but who doth promote sin, propagate it, countenance it, command it. See Platina, Sigebert, Blonetas, Beuno Uspregensis, Matt. Paris. In sins of omission, forbidding what God requireth; in sins of commission, requiring or allowing what God hath forbidden. In sins of the first table; corrupting Gods worship by superstition and idolatry, taking Gods name in vain by heartless devotion, dissembling piety, dispensing with perjury and false oaths, taking away the second commandment and the morality of the fourth commandment, and making mens faith and obedience to rest upon a humau authority, &c. In sins of the second table; to dispense with duties belonging to superiors and inferiors; with murder, adultery, fornication, incest, robbery, lying, equivocation, &c. And besides all these, promoting a false religion, and destroying the true, by fines, imprisonments, banishments, tortures, poisons, massacre, fire, and faggot. And this man of sin is not a single person, but a company, order, and succession of men; because all are acted by the same spirit, therefore called a man; as the man of the earth, Psa 10:18, is all men of an earthly spirit, and a man of the field, Gen 25:27, is men whose minds and employments are in the field. Or, it is a sinful state. As the civil state of the four monarchies in Daniel is represented by four single beasts, and the antichristian state by a beast rising out of the sea, Rev 13:1; so by man of sin is meant a sinful state, which though it consisteth of many people and nations, yet, being under the influence and government of one man, may be also styled the man of sin upon that account; impietatis Coryphaeus. Moulin. And because the sin of the whole community is chiefly centred in him, and springs out from him; a man in whom is the fountain of all sins. Hierein ad Algasiam. And the sin of this state is called a mystery of iniquity, 2Th 2:7, and so differing from the sin in all other political states; and therefore may well be judged to be the same with the whore sitting on many waters, that hath mystery written in her forehead, Rev 17:1,5. And as no expositor takes the whore to be meant of a single woman, and the true apostolic church is represented by a woman in travail, Rev 12:1,2, why then should we take the man of sin to be a single man, as the papists do? viz. a Jew of the tribe of Dan, that shall erect his kingdom and temple in Jerusalem, seduce the Jews, continue three years and a half, make great havoc of the church, to be opposed by Enoch and Elias, and is to come a little before the end of the world. Ridiculous! Neither call this man of sin be Simon Magus and his followers, for he was revealed in the apostles time, seeing the mystery of iniquity belonging to this man of sin began to work in the apostles days, as 2Th 2:7, and he is the same whom St. John calls antichrist, 1Jo 2:18; and the spirit of antichrist began to be in the world in his time, 1Jo 4:3; and the nations are to be made drunk with the cup of his fornication, and to serve and obey him, &c., Rev 13:8; 17:4; all which requires more time than is allotted by them: but they set him a great way off, that none may suspect him to be among themselves; but he that will compare the Church of Rome in the apostle Pauls times with what it is now, and the doctrine of the council of Trent with that laid down in his Epistle to the Romans, may say: How is the faithful city become a harlot! And this man of sin is to
be revealed also, which shows that he is not a single person, not yet born: revealing relates not so much to a person, as a thing; in particular to the mystery of iniquity, mentioned 2Th 2:7; his revealing is either quoad existentiam, or apparentiam. The former is meant here, and the latter 2Th 2:8. He grows up into an existence, as the apostacy grows, as vermin grows out of putrefaction. As the churchs purity, faith, love, holiness declined, and as pride, ambition, covetousness, luxury prevailed, so he grew up: and which was the direct point and time of his full revelation in this first sense is conjectured by many, but determined by none; it is most generally referred to the tithe of Boniface the Third, to whom Phocas granted the style of oecumenical bishop, and to the Church of Rome to be the mother church. But as the apostacy brings forth this man of sin, so as he riseth he helps it forward; so that he both causeth it, and is caused by it. As corruption in doctrine, worship, discipline, and manners brought him forth, so he was active in corrupting them more and more.
The son of perdition; another Hebraism, where sometimes that which any way proceeds from another, as its cause, is called its son, as sparks the sons of the coal, Job 5:7, and branches sons of the tree, Gen 49:22, and the learner the son of the teacher, Pro 3:1; and sometimes that which a man is addicted to, as a wicked man is the son of wickedness, Psa 89:22. Again, that which gives forth what it hath in itself, as the branches of the olive trees giving oil are called the sons of oil, Zec 4:14; and in the text, the man of sin is
the son of perdition, as Judas is called, Joh 17:12; and he is so either actively, as he brings others to destruction, and so may be called Apollyon, Rev 9:11; or rather passively, as devoted to perdition; as Rev 19:20, the beast and false prophet are both cast into the lake of fire and brimstone; and the beast that was, and is not, is said to go into perdition, Rev 17:11. The destroyer of others both in soul and body will be destroyed himself: first, morally, by the word and Spirit, as 2Th 2:8; and then judicially, by Gods revenging justice in this world, and that to come. The apostle, at the very first mentioning him, declares his destiny; at his first rising and revealing, mentions his fall and ruin.
Fuente: English Annotations on the Holy Bible by Matthew Poole
3. by any meansGreek,“in any manner.” Christ, in Mt24:4, gives the same warning in connection with the same event.He had indicated three ways (2Th2:2) in which they might be deceived (compare other ways, 2Th 2:9;Mat 24:5; Mat 24:24).
a falling awayratheras the Greek, “the falling away,” or”apostasy,” namely, the one of which “I toldyou” before (2Th 2:5),”when I was yet with you,” and of which the Lord gave someintimation (Mat 24:10-12;Joh 5:43).
that man of sin berevealedThe Greek order is, “And there have beenrevealed the man of sin.” As Christ was first in mystery,and afterwards revealed (1Ti3:16), so Antichrist (the term used 1Jn 2:18;1Jn 4:3) is first in mystery, andafterwards shall be developed and revealed (2Th2:7-9). As righteousness found its embodiment in Christ, “theLord our righteousness,” so “sin” shall have itsembodiment in “the man of sin.” The hindering powermeanwhile restrains its manifestation; when that shall be removed,then this manifestation shall take place. The articles, “theapostasy,” and “the man of sin,” may also referto their being well known as foretold in Dan 7:8;Dan 7:25, “the little hornspeaking great words against the Most High, and thinking to changetimes and laws”; and Da11:36, the wilful king who “shall exalt and magnify himselfabove every god, and shall speak marvellous things against the God ofgods; neither shall he regard any god.”
the son of perditionatitle applied besides to Judas (the traitor, Joh17:12), and to none else. Antichrist (the second “beast”coming up out of the earth); therefore he shall at first be “likea lamb, while he speaks as a dragon” (Re13:11); “coming in peaceably and by flatteries,””working deceitfully,” but “his heart shall be againstthe holy covenant” (Dan 11:21;Dan 11:23; Dan 11:28;Dan 11:30). Seeds of “thefalling away” soon appear (1Ti4:1-3), but the full development and concentration of theseanti-Christian elements in one person are still to appear. Contrastthe King of Zion’s coming as JESUS:(1) righteous or just; (2) having salvation; (3) lowly;whereas Antichrist is: (1) “the man of (the embodiment of) sin;(2) the son of perdition; (3) exalting himself aboveall that is worshipped. He is the son of perdition, asconsigning many to it, and finally doomed to it himself (Rev 17:8;Rev 17:11). “He whoseessence and inheritance is perdition” [ALFORD].As “the kingdom of heaven” is first brought beforeus in the abstract, then in the concrete, the King, the LordJesus; so here, first we have (2Th2:7) “the mystery of iniquity,” then “theiniquitous one” (2Th2:8). Doubtless “the apostasy” of Romanism (theabstract) is one of the greatest instances of the working of themystery of iniquity, and its blasphemous claims for the Pope (theconcrete) are forerunners of the final concentration of blasphemy inthe man of sin, who shall not merely, as the Pope, usurp God’shonor as vicegerent of God, but oppose God openly atlast.
Fuente: Jamieson, Fausset and Brown’s Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible
Let no man deceive you by any means,…. By any of the above means; by pretending to a revelation from the Spirit; or to have had it from the mouth of anyone of the apostles; or to have a letter as from them, declaring the day of Christ to be instant; or by any other means whatever; do not be imposed upon by them for the following reasons, for there were things to be done before the coming of Christ, which were not then done, and which required time: for that day shall not come,
except there come a falling away first; either in a political sense, of the nations from the Roman empire, which was divided into the eastern and western empire; for which, way was made by translating the seat of empire from Rome to Byzantium, or Constantinople; the former of these empires was seized by Mahomet, and still possessed by the Turks; and the latter was overrun by the Goths, Huns, and Vandals, and torn to pieces; Italy particularly was ravaged by them, and Rome itself was sacked and taken: or rather in a religious sense, of the falling of men from the faith of the Gospel, from the purity of Gospel doctrines, discipline, worship, and ordinances; and this not of some Jews who professed faith in Christ, and departed from it, or of some Christians who went off to the Gnostics; but is to be understood of a more general defection in the times of the Papacy; when not only the eastern churches were perverted and corrupted by Mahomet, and drawn off to his religion, but the western churches were most sadly depraved by the man of sin, by bringing in errors of all sorts in doctrine, making innovations in every ordinance, and appointing new ones, and introducing both Judaism and Paganism into the churches; which general defection continued until the times of the reformation, and is what the apostle has respect to in 1Ti 4:1 where he manifestly points out some of the Popish tenets, as forbidding marriage to priests, and ordering abstinence from meats on certain days, and at certain times of the year: this was one thing that was to precede the coming of Christ, another follows, which should take place at the same time;
and that man of sin be revealed; who was now hid, though secretly working; by whom is meant not only any particular person or individual; not the devil, for though he is the wicked one, a damned spirit, an opposer, an adversary of God and Christ, and his people, and who has affected deity, and sought to be worshipped, and even by Christ himself; yet the man of sin is here distinguished from Satan, 2Ti 2:9 nor is any particular emperor of Rome intended, as Caius Caligula, or Nero, for though these were monsters of iniquity, and set up themselves as gods, yet they sat not in the temple of God; nor is Simon Magus designed, who was a very wicked man, a sorcerer, and who gave out himself to be some great one, and was called the great power of God, before big profession of faith in Christ; and afterwards affirmed that he was God, the Father in Samaria, the Son in Judea, and the Spirit in the rest of the nations of the world; and, because of his signs and lying wonders, had a statue erected by the Roman emperor with this inscription, “to Simon the holy god”; but then this wicked man was now already revealed: nor is this to be understood of a certain Jew, that is to be begotten by the devil on a virgin of the tribe of Dan, and who is to reign three years and a half, and then to be destroyed by Christ, which is a fable of the Papists; but a succession of men is here meant, as a king is used sometimes for an order and succession of kings, De 17:18 and an high priest for that whole order, from Aaron’s time to the dissolution of it, Heb 9:7 so here it intends the whole hierarchy of Rome, monks, friars, priests, bishops, archbishops, cardinals, and especially popes, who may well be called “the man of sin”, because notoriously sinful; not only sinners, but sin itself, a sink of sin, monsters of iniquity, spiritual wickednesses in high places: it is not easy to reckon up their impieties, their adulteries, incest, sodomy, rapine, murder, avarice, simony, perjury, lying, necromancy, familiarity with the devil, idolatry, witchcraft, and what not? and not only have they been guilty of the most notorious crimes themselves, but have been the patrons and encouragers of others in sin; by dispensing with the laws of God and man, by making sins to be venial, by granting indulgences and pardon for the worst of crimes, by licensing brothel houses, and countenancing all manner of wickedness; and therefore it is no wonder to hear of the following epithet,
the son of perdition; since these are not only the Apollyon, the king of the bottomless pit, the destroyer, the cause of the perdition of thousands of souls, for the souls of men are their wares; but because they are by the righteous judgment of God appointed and consigned to everlasting destruction; the devil, the beast, and the false prophet, will have their portion together in the lake that burns with fire, Re 20:10 the same character as here is given of Judas, the betrayer of Christ, Joh 17:12.
Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible
Let no man beguile you in any wise ( ). First aorist active subjunctive of (old verb to deceive, strengthened form of simple verb ) with double negative ( , ) in accord with regular Greek idiom as in 1Co 16:11 rather than the aorist imperative which does occur sometimes in the third person as in Mr 13:15 ( ). Paul broadens the warning to go beyond conversation and letter. He includes “tricks” of any kind. It is amazing how gullible some of the saints are when a new deceiver pulls off some stunts in religion.
For it will not be (). There is an ellipse here of (or ) to be supplied after . Westcott and Hort make an anacoluthon at the end of verse 4. The meaning is clear. H is causal, because, but the verb is understood. The second coming not only is not “imminent,” but will not take place before certain important things take place, a definite rebuff to the false enthusiasts of verse 2.
Except the falling away come first ( ). Negative condition of the third class, undetermined with prospect of determination and the aorist subjunctive. is the late form of and is our word apostasy. Plutarch uses it of political revolt and it occurs in I Macc. 2:15 about Antiochus Epiphanes who was enforcing the apostasy from Judaism to Hellenism. In Jos 22:22 it occurs for rebellion against the Lord. It seems clear that the word here means a religious revolt and the use of the definite article () seems to mean that Paul had spoken to the Thessalonians about it. The only other New Testament use of the word is in Ac 21:21 where it means apostasy from Moses. It is not clear whether Paul means revolt of the Jews from God, of Gentiles from God, of Christians from God, or of the apostasy that includes all classes within and without the body of Christians. But it is to be
first () before Christ comes again. Note this adverb when only two events are compared (cf. Ac 1:1).
And the man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition ( , ). First aorist passive subjunctive after and same condition as with . The use of this verb , like of the second coming in 1:7, seems to note the superhuman character (Milligan) of the event and the same verb is repeated in verses 2Thess 2:6; 2Thess 2:8. The implication is that
the man of sin is hidden somewhere who will be suddenly manifested just as false apostles pose as angels of light (2Co 11:13ff.), whether the crowning event of the apostasy or another name for the same event. Lightfoot notes the parallel between the man of sin, of whom sin is the special characteristic (genitive case, a Hebraism for the lawless one in verse 8) and Christ. Both Christ and the adversary of Christ are revealed, there is mystery about each, both make divine claims (verse 4). He seems to be the Antichrist of 1Jo 2:18. The terrible phrase, the son of perdition, is applied to Judas in Joh 17:12 (like Judas doomed to perdition), but here to the lawless one ( , verse 8), who is not Satan, but some one definite person who is doing the work of Satan. Note the definite article each time.
Fuente: Robertson’s Word Pictures in the New Testament
Deceive [] . Better beguile; since the word means not only making a false impression, but actually leading astray.
Except there come a falling away. Before except insert in translation the day shall not come. Such ellipses are common in Paul.
Falling away [] . Only here and Act 21:21. Comp. LXX, Jos 22:22; 2Ch 29:19.
The man of sin – the son of perdition [ , ] . See on children of light, 1Th 5:5. The phrase man of sin (lawlessness) does not occur elsewhere, either in N. T. or LXX Son of perdition is found Joh 17:12, o LXX : tekna apwlei. av children of perdition (A. V. transgression), Isa 57:4. The man of sin has been thought to refer to Caligula, Titus, Simon Magus, Nero, the Pope of Rome, Luther, Mahomet, etc.
Fuente: Vincent’s Word Studies in the New Testament
1) “Let no man deceive you” (me tis humas eksapatese) “Let-not anyone deceive or delude you all”; as Satan deceived Eve regarding heavenly instructions for human conduct; so may men yet be deceived regarding Divine matters; 1Jn 3:7; Eph 4:14.
2) “By any means” (kata medena tropon) “in not (even) one way or means,” Mat 24:24; Rom 16:18.
3) “For that day shall not come” (hoti) “because” “(that day of his marriage and judgment shall not come)”; the entire time of Daniel’s seventieth week, Dan 9:26-27.
4) “Except there come a falling away first” (ean me elthe he apostasia proton) “except, unless, or until the apostasy comes firstly”, or first in order or rank of events, preceding the personal return of Jesus Christ, 1Ti 4:1-3.
5) “And that man of sin be revealed” (kai apokaluphthe ho anthropos tes anomias) “and is revealed the man of lawlessness”, anarchy, enmity, or rebellion against Divine Law; who shall prevail for 31/2 years. Dan 7:25; Dan 11:21; Dan 11:37-38; Dan 11:45; Dan 12:7-12; Rev 13:5-6.
6) “The son of perdition”; (ho huios tes apoleias) “the son or heir of perdition”; Joh 17:12; Joh 5:43. The revelation (recognition or realization of who the man of sin is) appears to come some 42 months or 31/2 years after his appearance in guise, as an angel of light, Dan 9:26-27; Dan 7:25; Dan 11:21; Dan 11:24.
Fuente: Garner-Howes Baptist Commentary
3 Let no man deceive you. That they may not groundlessly promise themselves the arrival in so short a time of the joyful day of redemption, he presents to them a melancholy prediction as to the future scattering of the Church. This discourse entirely corresponds with that which Christ held in the presence of his disciples, when they had asked him respecting the end of the world. For he exhorts them to prepare themselves for enduring hard conflicts, (639) (Mat 24:6,) and after he has discoursed of the most grievous and previously unheard of calamities, by which the earth was to be reduced almost to a desert, he adds, that the end is not yet, but that these things are the beginnings of sorrows. In the same way, Paul declares that believers must exercise warfare for a long period, before gaining a triumph.
We have here, however, a remarkable passage, and one that is in the highest degree worthy of observation. This was a grievous and dangerous temptation, which might shake even the most confirmed, and make them lose their footing — to see the Church, which had by means of such labors been raised up gradually and with difficulty to some considerable standing, fall down suddenly, as if torn down by a tempest. Paul, accordingly, fortifies beforehand the minds, not merely of the Thessalonians, but of all the pious, that when the Church should come to be in a scattered condition, they might not be alarmed, as though it were a thing that was new and unlooked for.
As, however, interpreters have twisted this passage in various ways, we must first of all endeavor to ascertain Paul’s true meaning. He says that the day of Christ will not come, until the world has fallen into apostasy, and the reign of Antichrist has obtained a footing in the Church; for as to the exposition that some have given of this passage, as referring to the downfall of the Roman empire, it is too silly to require a lengthened refutation. I am also surprised, that so many writers, in other respects learned and acute, have fallen into a blunder in a matter that is so easy, were it not that when one has committed a mistake, others follow in troops without consideration. Paul, therefore, employs the term apostasy to mean — a treacherous departure from God, and that not on the part of one or a few individuals, but such as would spread itself far and wide among a large multitude of persons. For when apostasy is made mention of without anything being added, it cannot be restricted to a few. Now, none can be termed apostates, but such as have previously made a profession of Christ and the gospel. Paul, therefore, predicts a certain general revolt of the visible Church. “The Church must be reduced to an unsightly and dreadful state of ruin, before its full restoration be effected.”
From this we may readily gather, how useful this prediction of Paul is, for it might have seemed as though that could not be a building of God, that was suddenly overthrown, and lay so long in ruins, had not Paul long before intimated that it would be so. Nay more, many in the present day, when they consider with themselves the long-continued dispersion of the Church, begin to waver, as if this had not been regulated by the purpose of God. The Romanists, also, with the view of justifying the tyranny of their idol, make use of this pretext — that it was not possible that Christ would forsake his spouse. The weak, however, have something here on which to rest, when they learn that the unseemly state of matters which they behold in the Church was long since foretold; while, on the other hand, the impudence of the Romanists is openly exposed, inasmuch as Paul declares that a revolt will come, when the world has been brought under Christ’s authority. Now, we shall see presently, why it is that the Lord has permitted the Church, or at least what appeared to be such, to fall off in so shameful a manner.
Has been revealed. It was no better than an old wife’s fable that was contrived respecting Nero, that he was carried up from the world, destined to return again to harass the Church (640) by his tyranny; and yet the minds of the ancients were so bewitched, that they imagined that Nero would be Antichrist. (641) Paul, however, does not speak of one individual, but of a kingdom, that was to be taken possession of by Satan, that he might set up a seat of abomination in the midst of God’s temple — which we see accomplished in Popery. The revolt, it is true, has spread more widely, for Mahomet, as he was an apostate, turned away the Turks, his followers, from Christ. All heretics have broken the unity of the Church by their sects, and thus there have been a corresponding number of revolts from Christ.
Paul, however, when he has given warning that there would be such a scattering, that the greater part would revolt from Christ, adds something more serious — that there would be such a confusion, that the vicar of Satan would hold supreme power in the Church, and would preside there in the place of God. Now he describes that reign of abomination under the name of a single person, because it is only one reign, though one succeeds another. My readers now understand, that all the sects by which the Church has been lessened from the beginning, have been so many streams of revolt which began to draw away the water from the right course, but that the sect of Mahomet was like a violent bursting forth of water, that took away about the half of the Church by its violence. It remained, also, that Antichrist should infect the remaining part with his poison. Thus, we see with our own eyes, that this memorable prediction of Paul has been confirmed by the event.
In the exposition which I bring forward, there is nothing forced. Believers in that age dreamed that they would be transported to heaven, after having endured troubles during a short period. Paul, however, on the other hand, foretells that, after they have had foreign enemies for some time molesting them, they will have more evils to endure from enemies at home, inasmuch as many of those that have made a profession of attachment to Christ would be hurried away into base treachery, and inasmuch as the temple of God itself would be polluted by sacrilegious tyranny, so that Christ’s greatest enemy would exercise dominion there. The term revelation is taken here to denote manifest possession of tyranny, as if Paul had said that the day of Christ would not come until this tyrant had openly manifested himself, and had, as it were, designedly overturned the whole order of the Church.
(639) “ Merveilleux et durs combats;” — “Singular and hard conflicts.”
(640) “ Pour tourmenter griefuement l’Eglise;” — “To torment the Church grievously.”
(641) The strange notion here referred to by Calvin as to Nero, is accounted for by Cornelius à Lapide in his Commentary on the Revelation, from the circumstance that Alcazar having explained the expression which occurs in Rev 13:3, “I saw one of the heads as it were killed to death,” as referring to Nero killed, and soon afterwards raised up, as it were, and reviving in the person of Domitian his successor, some of the ancients, understanding literally what was meant by him figuratively, conceived the idea that Nero would be Antichrist, and would be raised up, and appear again in the end of the world. — Ed.
Fuente: Calvin’s Complete Commentary
Text (2Th. 2:3)
3 let no man beguile you in any wise; for it will not be, except the falling away come first, and the man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition,
Translation and Paraphrase
3.
Let no one deceive you (about this) by any method, because (that day shall not come) except (or until) the apostasy (a departure from the faith) come first, and the man of lawlessness be revealed, (he who is) the son of perdition (the man devoted to eternal misery).
Notes (2Th. 2:3)
1.
Have these two thingsthe falling away, and the man of sinyet happened? If they have not, then the Lord cannot come until they do. If they have already appeared, then we can look for the Lord at any time. We believe that these two things have long ago appeared.
2.
Pauls teaching in this verse does NOT indicate that he had changed his mind about the Lords coming from views he had once held. Some allege that Paul had earlier said that Christs coming was near, but that he had changed his mind by the time he wrote this to think that the second coming was far off. In 2Th. 2:5 Paul reminds them that even when he was with them he had told them the same things that he here writes about. Paul had not changed his teachings. The Thessalonians had simply forgotten what he said, or perhaps it never penetrated their minds in the first place.
3.
This falling away (Gr., apostasia) refers undoubtedly to a religious falling away. Another word for falling away is apostasy. Apostasia is always used in the Greek Old Testament (Septuagint) in the sense of a religious falling away. See Jos. 22:22. 2Ch. 29:19; 2Ch. 33:19; Jer. 2:19. Thayer defines apostasia as a falling away, defection, apostasy. The word is found elsewhere in the N.T. only in Act. 21:21, where it might be rendered apostasy from Moses. All of this causes us to think that the falling away predicted by Paul is a falling away from the faith as taught by Christ and the apostles.
4.
This verse speaks not of a falling away, but of the falling away, It is a particular apostasy which Paul has in mind.
Mat. 24:10-12 tells of a falling away which was to precede the destruction of Jerusalem by the Romans. See Mat. 24:15-16. But it is not the same apostasy to which Paul refers in 2Th. 2:3. We mention Mat. 24:1-51, because when some people read that chapter, they fail to observe carefully when Jesus spoke about the destruction of Jerusalem and when he talked about the end of the world. Because of this careless interpretation, they often take passages that clearly pertained to the destruction of Jerusalem (such as Mat. 24:6-12) and apply them to the conditions at the end of the world.
5.
The identification of the man of sin is probably as controversial a matter as anything in the Bible. Paul had given the Thessalonians teaching about the man of sin which we have not heard, and the matter may have been much clearer to them than to us.
6.
We prefer to call the man of sin the man of lawlessness, in accordance with the reading of the Greek text of both Nestle and Westcott and Hort. Both of these have anomia (lawlessness) in the text and hamartia (sin) in the margin.
The name, man of lawlessness, matches up with the phrase, mystery of lawlessness, in 2Th. 2:7. The man of lawlessness (Gr., anomia) is obviously the crowning height of the mystery of lawlessness (or mystery of iniquity as the King James text gives it).
7.
A man of lawlessness would be a man who was not subject to any law. The American Standard version of 1Jn. 3:4 says, Sin is lawlessness. This well describes the mind of the sinner. He refuses to be subject to any law, human or divine. Thus the man of lawlessness will be that person who, above all others, is not subject to the law of God, but obeys only his own desires.
8.
The expression, son of perdition, means (according to Thayer) a man doomed to eternal misery. This same description is applied to Judas in Joh. 17:12. Perdition (apoleia) means destruction or waste (as in Mar. 14:4). Like the word olethros used in 2Th. 1:9, it does not imply annihilation.
9.
When we speak of the man of lawlessness, our minds frequently connect him with antichrist mentioned in 1Jn. 2:18; 1Jn. 2:22; 1Jn. 4:3; 2Jn. 1:7. However, the Bible does not specifically connect them, and any connection that we might make between the two would have to be regarded as only speculation. We hear lots of preaching about THE antichrist. But John makes it rather clear that antichrist is not one supremely evil person, but that anyone who denies that Jesus is the Christ or that He came in the flesh is antichrist. There were antichrists even in Johns time. Many modernist preachers and scholars who deny our Lords deity should rightfully be called antichrist. But we stand on very shaky support when we teach that there will be some one particularly terrible ANTICHRIST in the future.
10.
There are several general schools of interpretation concerning what the falling away, the man of sin, and that which hinders are.
a.
Some just frankly disregard the whole business. In the Interpreters Bible, in the exposition of this section, the view is given that as dwellers in the twentieth century, with its deliverance from much theological ignorance and medieval superstition, we feel superior to any such conception of antichrist as possessed Paul and the Thessalonians. Those who believe that Paul was an inspired apostle of Christ can not, of course, have any such opinions as this.
b.
Some think the man of sin is the papacy
c.
Some think the man of sin is the Roman emperor and the mystery of lawlessness is the Roman empire. It is a fact that some of the Roman emperors demanded worship and exalted themselves just as the man of sin was to do. 2Th. 2:4. Caligula in 39 or 40 A.D. tried to set up his statue in the temple in Jerusalem as an object of worship. But none of the Roman emperors perfectly fulfilled Pauls description of the man of sin. Hence, this interpretation does not seem to be the right one.
d.
Some think that the mystery of lawlessness is Judaism, and that the man of sin is some leader in that faith. By this view that which hinders would be the Roman empire.
e.
Some think that the man of sin is Antichrist, a future world dictator who will rule during a brief period between the taking of the saints out of the world and the thousand years of Rev. 20:3-4. We shall discuss this view more fully in the notes that follow.
f.
Some say he is (or was) Hitler, Stalin, Khrushchev, or some other person.
11.
The two interpretations held by most Bible-believers are the futurist (or pre-millennial) view and the historical view. We want to discuss these interpretations more fully.
I.
THE FUTURIST (or pre-millennial) view.
(This view is held by many devout Christians in our times.)
A.
View summarized.
1.
The falling away refers to the ungodly conditions to exist in the world shortly before the Lord returns. Many people consider that present world conditions are the fulfillment of this prophecy of the falling away.
2.
The man of sin is the Antichrist, one individual, who is to be a world dictator and rule AFTER Christ has taken the church out of the world at the rapture. He will be almost an incarnation of Satan. Some think he will be a Jew (basing this idea on Dan. 11:37, although the meaning of that verse is far from certain), He will supposedly rule the world during the great tribulation to last seven years after Christ had taken the church to himself.
3.
That which hinders the appearance of the man of sin is the Holy Spirit, It is argued that the Holy Spirit is he who restrains evil in this world, and that when Christ takes the church out of the world at the rapture that the Holy Spirit will no longer be in the world in the degree in which He is during the church age, and that evil will run almost unrestrained, and incredible suffering will result to mankind.
B.
Arguments for this view
1.
The fathers of the early church, for at least three centuries after the apostolic age, while differing on some minor details, seemed unanimous in understanding that the man of sin was not a system of deceit and wickedness, or a succession of individuals at the head of such a system, but some one man, the living personal Antichrist, the incarnation of Satan craft and energy, who should put forth his power to weaken and destroy the church. (Preachers Homiletic Com.)
2.
We certainly are living in perilous times, a time when men have fallen away from the old-fashioned faith and virtues, a time like those described by Paul in 2Ti. 3:-5 where he describes the last days. In our times atheistic communism is laboring to the utmost to rule the world, by force if possible, and by subversion, infiltration, and propaganda if force cannot be used. As this book is written Communist governments rule nearly half of the worlds population, and no country on earth has escaped the poison of Communist influence.
Religiously the world is also in a desperate state. Men have religions of every kind, but deny the power of true faith. Churchmen seem more interested in federating denominations than in the faith. They are more interested in this present life than in mens eternal salvation. The World Council of churches seems to be working toward forming a powerful super-church to include everyone who is religious, regardless of what he believes. Some think that this religious monster will join forces with Antichrist. Old-fashioned Bible believers are mocked in many churches and theological seminaries. But I am still proud to be one.
Christians must keep themselves informed about these things that are going on. Only if Christians know what is going on and stand up for Christ and his kingdom will our country, or even civilization, endure. Christians, God shall bruise Satan under your feet shortly. But if you dont know anything about Satans activities, and dont stand for anything, God wont be able to use you to bruise Satan, Rom. 16:20.
C.
This view is not absolutely the only possible one.
1.
What we have said about world conditions is only a speck of the mountain of dirt that we could sweep up about our times. But it is still hotly debatable that conditions in our times are worse than they were in the early centuries of Christianity. Moral conditions were as bad then, or worse, than now. (See our notes on 1Th. 4:1-3, and Introductory Section VI, par. 11.). Christianity was persecuted as much or more in the early centuries as it is now.
2.
Also the ungodly conditions which Paul said would exist in the last days (2Ti. 3:1-5) have existed ever since Paul wrote those words. For we have been living in the last days, or last dispensation, ever since the day of Pentecost. (Act. 2:17.)
3.
Also it is not necessary to interpret the man of sin and the falling away as being events which are limited to a short period immediately before (and after) Christ returns. Certain Scriptures and facts almost compel me to think that the falling away and the man of sin have both been with us for a long time already.
II.
THE HISTORICAL view.
(This view is the one favored by the author of this book.)
A. View summarized.
1.
The falling away refers to that corruption of the apostles teaching by heathenism which occurred during the early centuries of the church and resulted in the development of the Roman Catholic religion. This apostasy is still in progress, as Rome is still adding new doctrines to its creed. And the false doctrines developed during the falling away have been adopted by many Protestants, as well as by the Roman church.
2.
The man of sin probably refers to the papacy, the visible, personal head of the falling away.
3.
That which hinders the appearance of the man of sin (2Th. 2:6-7) probably was the Roman government. For several centuries the Roman government held in check the attempts of power-hungry Roman bishops to take control of both the spiritual affairs of men and the political authority as well.
We do not expect you to accept our opinions about these matters just because we have stated them bluntly. But we do ask you to study seriously the reasons for holding these views.
B.
Arguments for this view.
1.
The mystery of lawlessness (2Th. 2:7) which resulted in the falling away and the appearance of the man of sin, was already at work in Pauls time.
That being so, surely then Paul could not have been referring to things that would not happen until the nineteenth and twentieth centuries when he spoke of the falling away.
There are numerous references in the New Testament which show that false doctrines, unauthorized power grabs, etc. were already developing. See Jud. 1:4, 3Jn. 1:9, Act. 20:29-30, 2Pe. 2:1, Col. 2:8. These seem to be a part of the developing mystery of lawlessness.
2.
In 1Ti. 4:1-3 Paul told how some would depart from the faith. They would forbid to marry, and command to abstain from meats, etc. This is a clear prophecy of such things as the Roman church practices when it forbids its priests and nuns to marry and forbids its members to eat meat at certain times.
In describing this departure from the faith, Paul used the verb form apostesontai. This is a form very similar to the word apostasia, the word translated falling away in 2Th. 2:3. This similarity of language causes us to associate the falling away with Romanism and not with twentieth century Communism or other evils of our times.
3.
In Daniel chapter two, Daniel prophesied about four great world empiresthe Babylonian, Persian, Grecian, and Roman. After those empires the God of heaven would set up a kingdom (which we understand to be the church. See Special Study V.) Gods kingdom would never be destroyed, nor should the sovereignty of it be left to another people. (Dan. 2:44 R.V.)
It appears to us that if some Antichrist is going to rule the world, that Daniels prophecy would have to be wrong in indicating that there would only be four empires before Gods kingdom should prevail and fill the earth. (Dan. 2:35)
4.
Note that the falling away and the man of sin are associated with the mystery of iniquity in 2Th. 2:7. The use of this term mystery suggests that there may be a connection with Rev. 17:5, where the great harlot is given the name MYSTERY. This mystery woman in Revelation is ROME. For she is identified as that city that sits on seven mountains (or hills) and rules over the kings of the earth. Rev. 17:9; Rev. 17:18). Rome is the only city on earth that fulfills those descriptions.
5.
The falling away which occurred over the years and produced the Roman Catholic religion is the greatest falling away of all ages. We list here a few of the many departures from the New Testament faith, which, when all taken together, surely must be THE falling away:
(1)
Bishops take authority over elders (Presbyters) Second century.
(2)
Infant baptism first mentionedAbout 150 A.D.
(3)
Many heathen ritualscandles, incense, robes, etc.added to Christian worshipthird century.
(4)
First human creed (Nicene)325 A.D.
(5)
Christianity made the sole state religion394 A.D.
(6)
Mary entitled Mother of God431 A.D.
(7)
Confession of sins to a human priestAbout 457 A.D. Made compulsory in 1215 A.D.
(8)
Lords supper became a mass (sacrifice) and masses for the dead became frequentSixth century.
(9)
The pope gains universal authorityAbout 606 A.D.
(10)
Transubstantiation1215 A.D.
(11)
IndulgencesAbout 1164 A.D.
(12)
Adoration of images legalizedAbout 800 A.D.
(13)
Tradition made equal to the ScripturesAbout 1545 A.D.
(14)
Apocryphal books added to Bible1546 A.D.
(15)
PurgatoryOriginated in the tenth century. Made official 1438.
(16)
People deprived of the cup in communionAbout 1414.
(17)
Celibacy promoted (405 A.D.) and enforced (1123 A.D.)
(18)
Sprinkling authorized1311.
(19)
Immaculate conception of Mary1854.
(20)
Infallibility of the pope1870.
(21)
Assumption of Mary into heaven1950.
6.
The papacy fulfills the descriptions of the man of sin. He sits in the temple of God, showing himself that he is God. The papacy consists of one official man. He came into power as a result of the falling away from the New Testament faith. (For more about how the papacy fulfills the description of the man of sin, see notes on the verses that follow, 2Th. 2:4-7.)
Fuente: College Press Bible Study Textbook Series
(3) Let no man . . . by any means.Whatever device they may adoptspirit, letter, or what notthey are deceivers or deceived; do not be duped by them. The form of warning is a mark of St. Pauls style. (Comp. 1Co. 3:18; Eph. 5:6)
For . . . except.The words between are rightly supplied in our version. Probably, St. Pauls first intention was to turn 2Th. 2:5 differently, as, for instance: For, except that Man of Sin, &c, ye remember that I told you the day would not come. The length of the sentence made him break off (as he often does) without regard for grammatical completeness.
A falling away.A great change in the purpose of the sentence will be felt directly the is substituted for a. Only one insignificant MS. omits the definite article; the same article in our version is vigorously rendered that before man of sin. In both cases the purpose is by no means to utter a new, strange prophecy, or to add to the knowledge of the readers, but to remind them of careful teaching given during the first few weeks after their conversion. That falling away must undoubtedly imply that the persons so apostatising had formerly held (or, perhaps, still professed to hold) the Christian faith: men cannot fall from ground which they never occupied. This vast and dreadful Apostasy (see Luk. 18:8), so clearly and prominently taught of to the ancient Church, and so mysterious to us, is further defined by the following words, as the Apocalypse or Manifestation of the Man of Sin. Of this revelation of Antichrist the same word (apocalypsis) is used which is often used of Christ, as, e.g., 2Th. 1:7; Luk. 17:30; and thrice in St. Peter; so that we may expect to recognise him when he comes as clearly as we shall recognise Christ. The conception of the Antichrist is not merely that of an opponent of the Christ, but of a rival Christ: there is a hideous parallelism between the two.
That man of sin.It is not absolutely certain from the Greek, but the context makes it tolerably clear that the Man of Sin is the head and centre of the Apostasy itself, and does not form a separate movement from it. The Man of Sin, then, will have at one time formed (or will still profess to form) part of the Christian Church, and the Apostasy will culminate in him. Thus, for instance, the requirements of the passage would not be fulfilled by (with Hammond) interpreting the Apostasy to mean the early Gnostic movement, followed up by the independent appearance of Nero as the Man of Sin. The phrase, the Man of Sin, might, perhaps, be only a poetical personification of a movement, or of a class of men, or of a succession of men (as, e.g., Psa. 89:22; Rev. 2:20; Rev. 17:3); but the analogy of the parallel passages in Daniel 8, 11 leads rather to the supposition that St. Paul looked for the coming of some actual individual man who should be the impersonation of the movement of Apostasy. The genitive (see Note on 1Th. 1:3) is like a forcible epithet: A man so wicked that, bad as other men are, wickedness should be his mark by which he is distinguished from all others; a man who belongs to sin, in whom the ideal of sin has become realised and incarnate. What kind of sin will be most prominent in him is not expressed in the word itself; but the context points clearly to that which is, in fact, the crowning sinspiritual pride and rebellious arrogancy (Eph. 6:12).
The son of perdition.The phrase which is used, in Joh. 17:12, of the false Apostle; it suits well with the description of the Man of Sin, who, like Judas, will have fallen away from high Christian privileges: according to one popular interpretation, like Judas, from the privileges of the Apostolate itself. The expression signifies one who belongs by natural ties to perditionwho from his very birth chooses evil, and in such a sense may be said to be born to be lost (Mat. 26:24; 2Pe. 2:12). Both his malignity and his doom are thus implied in it.
Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)
EXCURSUS ON THE INTERPRETATION OF THE PROPHECY, 2Th. 2:3-12
IN order to deal fairly with this difficult passage, it will be necessary sternly to exclude from our view all other passages of the New Testament which speak of a final manifestation of evil, and, reviewing the words simply as they stand, to consider what St. Paul himself meant when he so assiduously (2Th. 2:5, Note) taught the Thessalonian Church on the subject, and what the Thessalonian Church was likely to gather from his Letter. For though such a passage as Heb. 6:2 shows that the whole Apostolic Church was definitely at one in the eschatological instruction given to its converts at a very early stage of their Christian life; and though the language of 1Ti. 4:1; Jas. 5:3-7; 2Pe. 3:1-2; 1Jn. 2:18; 1Jn. 4:3; Jud. 1:17 (not to mention the Apocalypse)passages representing the most different schools of thought in the early Churchfully bring out this agreement, so that Christians may fairly use those passages to explain each other, yet, on the other hand, we need to put ourselves in the position of the young Church of Thessalonica, which was expected by St. Paul to make out the significant hints of his Letter with no other help than the recollection of his oral teaching and the observation of events. We, therefore, ought to be able in like manner to catch the same significant hints by a like knowledge of the then history of the world, and of the sources from which St. Paul was likely to draw his doctrine of the Last Things.
I. Sources of the Apostolic Doctrine of the Last Things.The prophecy of St. Paul does not appear to beat least, exclusivelythe result of a direct internal revelation of the Spirit. Such direct revelations were, when necessary, made to him, and we have seen him claim that kind of inspiration in 1Th. 4:15. But Gods ordinary way of making prophets seems to be different. He gives to those who are willing to see an extraordinary insight into the things which lie before the most ordinary eyes; He throws light upon the meaning of occurrences, or of words, which are familiar to every one externally (see Maurices Prophets and Kings, pp. 141-145). Even for doctrines like those of the true divinity or the true humanity of our Lord, or of the indwelling of the Spirit, or the Churchs mission, the Apostles do not rest solely on direct revelation made to their own consciences, but rather dwell on the significance of historical facts (e.g., Rom. 1:4; 2Pe. 1:17), or, still more frequently and strongly, on the interpretation of Old Testament Scriptures (e.g., Heb. 1:8; Heb. 2:12-13; 2Pe. 1:19). If, therefore, we can find material in the Old Testament which, taken in conjunction with our Lords own words, could have supplied St. Paulor rather, the catholic consent of the early Churchwith the doctrine of the Last Things as we find it stated in the apostolic writings, we shall be justified in using those Old Testament materials in the explanation of the New.
II. The Book of Daniel.Such materials we find, not only in the general threatenings of Joel, Zechariah (Zechariah 14.), and Malachi, but most clear and definite in the Book of Daniel. Into the question of the date of that book it is not necessary here to inquire. It suffices for the present purpose to know that it was much older than St. Pauls time, and was accepted as prophetic in the ordinary sense. In fact, there was, probably, no other book of the Old Testament which received so much attention among the Jews in the apostolic age (Westcott, in Smiths Dict. Bible, Art. Daniel). It was regarded with full reverence as an inspired revelation; and our Lord Himself (according to Mat. 24:15 and Mar. 13:14) either drew from it (humanly speaking) His own doctrine of the Last Things, or at least used it emphatically for His disciples benefit as a corroboration. The taste for apocalyptic literature was at this time very strong, and the prophecies of Daniel attracted especial attention, inasmuch as the simplest interpretation of some of the most explicit of them pointed unmistakably to the time then present. Tacitus (Hist. v. 13) and Suetonius (Vesp. chap. 4), as is well known, speak of the certainty felt through the whole East, about that time, that universal empire was on the point of passing into the hands of men of Jewish origin. This belief, says Tacitus, was contained in the ancient literature of the priestsi.e., in the Scriptures, kept and expounded by them; and there can be no doubt that first and foremost of those Scriptures (for this purpose) stood the Book of Daniel. For every reason, then, we may well try to find what a believing Jew of the apostolic age would make out of the visions of Daniel, in order to throw light on this passage of St. Paul.
III. The Five Monarchies.Now, in the Book of Daniel there are four main predictions of what was then the future history of the world. These predictions are contained in Daniel 2, 7, 8, 11. The first two visions, vouchsafed to Nebuchadnezzar and to Daniel respectively, both describe Five Monarchies, which were successively to arise and flourish in the world. Amidst a good deal which is matter of controversy, three facts remain agreed upon by all: first, that the Five Monarchies of the one vision are intended to correspond to the Five Monarchies of the other, each to each; secondly, that the earliest of these five represents the Babylonian empire, then standing, with Nebuchadnezzar at its head; thirdly, that the last of the series portrays the establishment of the Theocracy in its full developmentthat is, the Kingdom of God (which had been the main subject of St. Pauls preaching at Thessalonica), or the visible government of the world by the Christ.
IV. The Fourth Monarchy.But the question which most directly concerns us now is how to identify the Fourth of these monarchies. In Nebuchadnezzars vision it was to be in the days of these kingsi.e., the kings of the Fourth Monarchy, while the Fourth Monarchy was still standingthat the Kingdom of Heaven was to come (Dan. 2:44). In Daniels vision this Fourth Monarchy (or rather, its continuation and development) was to exist side by side with the saints of the Most High, and between them and one outgrowth of the Fourth Monarchy a struggle was to take place before the final establishment of the Kingdom of the Saints (Dan. 7:25). What, then, was this Fourth Monarchy intended by the Seer (or by the Spirit of the Christ, 1Pe. 1:11) to represent? Or, to be still more practical, What was in St. Pauls own day, among his own countrymen, the received interpretation of this part of Daniels prophecy? The question is not hard to answer. With irrefragable clearness Dr. Pusey has proved, in the second of his Lectures on Daniel the Prophet, the plausibility and minuteness with which the words concerning the Second and Third Monarchies may respectively be applied to the Medo-Persian and the Macedonian empires; and if even this point be established, there can be no hesitation in naming the Fourth. It can only be the empire of Rome. But Dr. Pusey shows, with the same force, how applicable the description itself is to the Roman empire. Whether, however, this interpretation has any ground in the original intention of the Prophet, or of Him who, we believe, spoke by him, is for our present purpose a matter of secondary importance. We have already mentioned an unimpeachable piece of evidence furnished by two great Roman historians. It was in their days a long-established and uniform belief, entertained not in Juda only, but in the whole of the East, and drawn from the Jewish literature, that a great Jewish empire was destined to appear. But that is not all. Such a belief might have been drawn from Numbers or Isaiah. But Suetonius adds, Eo tempore, at that time; Tacitus adds, Eo ipso tempore, at that very time. From what Jewish literature could the date have been made out, except from the calculation of the Seventy Weeks in Daniel? And as the same prophecy spoke of a world-wide empire, in the days of whose kings this new Jewish power was to arise, that same long-established and uniform belief must have recognised in the Roman empire the Fourth Monarchy which was to be shattered by it. Hence, doubtless, the hopefulness, with which insurgent leaders one after another rose in rebellion against the Roman arms. It was not only that they themselves were the Lords own people. Was not this vast system, dreadful and terrible, and strong exceedingly, definitely doomed in Scripture to utter extinction before their arms? But we have, besides, a less indirect testimony than the foregoing. The Jew Josephus (Ant. x. 11, 7) speaks at length of the prophecies of Daniel, and how he himself was watching their gradual verification. After mentioning the prophecy about Antiochus Epiphanes and its complete fulfilment, he adds: In the very same manner Daniel also wrote concerning the empire of the Romans, and that our country should be made desolate by them. He then passes on to speak of the comfort afforded by seeing so plainly the Providence of God, with true Jewish irony not disclosing that his comfort lay in the promised revenge upon Rome as well as upon Antiochus. In another place (Ant. x. 10, 4) he is recording the vision in the second chapter of Daniel, and after describing the universal dominion of the Iron Kingdom, he proceeds: Daniel also declared the meaning of the Stone to the king, but this I do not think proper to relate, as I have undertaken to describe things past and present, not things that are future. Yet if any one be so very desirous of knowing truth as not to waive such curious points, and cannot refrain his desire to understand the uncertain future, and whether or no it will come to pass, let him give heed to read the Book of Daniel, which he will find among the Holy Scriptures. No doubt can be entertained that this writer understood the Fourth Monarchy to be the Roman empire, and did not wish to be suspected of encouraging sedition by speaking openly of its predicted downfall. This, then, was the common interpretation which St. Paul must have learned from a child: that Daniels Fourth Monarchy, which was to break up before the Kingdom of God, was the Roman empire.
V. The Fifth Monarchy.We may then assume that St. Paul believed Daniel to foretell the coming of the Kingdom of God in the days of the kings of the Roman empire. In one sense, indeed, the prophecy was already fulfilled. The Kingdom was already come. Heralded by the Baptist (Mat. 3:2, et seq.), and expounded by our Lord (Mat. 9:35, et seq.), it had been established by the Resurrection, the Ascension, and the Mission of the Holy Ghost, while the Roman empire actually stood (Psalms 2; comp. Act. 4:25; Act. 5:31; Act. 13:33). St. John regards the world as already virtually subdued in his own lifetime (1Jn. 5:4, Note). But the Church as at present constituted does not answer completely to Daniels prophecy of the Kingdom of the Saints. To the Christian there are two comings of the Kingdom, not only one. In the Prophets the two are fused into one. We may almost say the same of the words of Christ Himself. Even the apostolic writers do not separate the two so sharply as God has historically taught subsequent ages of the Church to separate them. The early Church lived in a daily expectation of the return of Christ. For them, therefore, there was no difficulty in interpreting Daniels prophecies as applying at the same moment to the First and Second Advent. It would not be unfair, therefore, to assume that St. Paul expected the Second Advent to take place, as the First had done, in the days of these kings of the Fourth or Roman Monarchy.
VI. What withholdeth.Turning now to the statement of St. Paul, we see that he is cautioning the Thessalonians not to expect the Second Coming of Christ immediately, because, as they can see, a certain great power is still in the world, which (as they have been carefully taught) must be removed before the way for Christs return is open. This great powerwith the aspect of which his readers are perfectly familiar, though they may have forgotten its significance (Ye know that which withholdeth)is summed up in a person who wields it. This person is he which with holdeth. His removal out of the midst is still a matter of futurity, yet assuredly destined to take place; and the date, though unknown to men, is fixed. The great opponent, who cannot develop so long as he that with holdeth remains, is to be revealed in his timei.e., at the time which Divine Providence has assigned to him. It seems impossible to doubt that this great opponent is the same as the Little Horn of Daniel (whose time is very definitely marked out in Dan. 7:25), and that the power which withholds his development is the Fourth Monarchy of Daniel, and, therefore, the Roman empire. A few considerations will make the latter point clearer:
(1) There was only one power in the world at that time, represented by a single person, in the midst, before all eyes, of sufficient importance to restrain the development of Antichrist. It was the Roman empire and the Roman emperor.
(2) The word rendered withholdeth, or letteth, does not necessarily imply that the obstruction actively, consciously, or designedly obstructs the way. His presence in the midst is quite sufficient for the requirements of the word. Indeed, it would, perhaps, not be necessary that Antichrists delay should even be directly caused by the obstruction; St. Paul might only mean that in prophecy the one thing was destined to come first, and that, therefore, so long as the first thing existed, it (in a manner) kept the second back. Now if Antichrist be the Little Horn of Daniel, and the obstruction the Fourth Monarchy, we get exactly what we want; for (unless the prophecy is to be falsified) before the Little Horn can spring up the Fourth Monarchy must have so totally changed its appearance as to have passed into ten simultaneous kingdoms: therefore, so long as the solid empire stood it was a sign that Antichrist must wait.
(3) Notice the extreme reserve with which St. Paul begins to speak on the subject. He does not teach, but prefers appealing to their memory of words already spoken: Remember ye not? His clauses become intricate and ungrammaticalin strange contrast with the simple structure which characterises these two Epistles. He names nothing, only hints. Nor can we account for this sudden ambiguity by saying that St. Paul is adopting the prophetic style; for his purpose is entirely practical, and he wishes not to awe his readers, but to recall to them plain facts which they knew and ignored. Now recollect the similar reticence of Josephus in speaking of the destiny of the Roman empire when it comes in contact with the Messianic Kingdom, and it will be felt almost impossible to doubt the truth of St. Chrysostoins shrewd observations: A man may naturally seek to know what that which letteth is; and after that, what possible reason St. Paul had for putting it so indistinctly. What, then, is that which lettethi.e., hinderethhim from being revealed? Some say the grace of the Spirit, others the Roman empire. Among the latter I class myself. Why so? Because, had he meant to say the Spirit, he would not have said it indistinctly, but straight out; that now he is restrained by the grace of the Spirit, i.e., the supernatural gifts [presumably that of discerning of spirits in particular; comp. 1Jn. 4:1-3]. Otherwise, Antichrist ought to have presented himself ere now, if he were to present himself at the failure of those gifts; for, as a matter of fact, they have long failed. But seeing that he says this of the Roman empire, he naturally put it enigmatically and very obscurely, for he had no wish to subject himself to unnecessary hostilities and unprofitable perils. For had he said that shortly after the Roman empire would be dissolved, they would soon have transfixed him for a miscreant, and all the believers with him, as living and fighting for this end. Was it not, indeed, for expounding this very prophecy that he had fled for his life from Thessalonica? These all do contrary to the decrees of Csar, saying that there is another emperor, Jesus. Does not the history give startling point to his question, Remember ye not that when I was with you I told you these things ?
VII. The Man of Sin.We have stated our belief that the Man of Sin is not only to be identified with Daniels Little Horn, but that St. Paul consciously drew the doctrine from that passage. But it may be objected that some of the words in which St. Paul most narrowly describes him are taken, not from the description of the Little Horn in Daniel 7, but from that of the Little Horn of Dan. 8:5, which represents quite a different person, viz., Antiochus Epiphanes.[7] It might be thought, therefore, that St. Paul was only borrowing Daniels language, and not adopting his prophecy. The answer is, that even those prophecies of Antiochus in many points do not suit Antiochus at all; and not only so, but the Jewish expositors themselves held that Antiochus had not exhausted the meaning of the prophecy. They themselves applied it to some Antichrist, whose coming should precede, and be defeated by the Christs. Even in St. Jeromes time, From this place onwards (he is commenting on Dan. 11:36) the Jews think that Antichrist is spoken of, that, after the little help (Dan. 11:34) of Julian, a king shall arise who shall do according to his own will, and lift himself up against all which is called God, and speak great things against the God of gods, so that he shall sit in the Temple of God and make himself god, and his will be performed, until the wrath of God be fulfilled: for in him shall the end be. Which we, too, understand of Antichrist. Thus, according to the current explanation of the Jews, Antiochus was looked upon as a type of the Antichrist, whom they expected to arise (in fulfilment of Dan. 7:8) at the overthrow of the Roman empire, whose coming was to precede the Christs. The only change made by the Christian Church is to apply to the Second Advent a prophecy which the Jews applied to the one Advent which they recognised. It is impossible not to do so when, in Dan. 12:2, we have the Resurrection made to follow close upon the development of this Antiochus-Antichrist. So far, then, as St. Pauls date is concerned, the doctrine is drawn from Daniel 2, 7; traits of character are added (in accordance with Jewish interpretation) from Daniel 8, 11.
[7] Sec Dan. 8:11-12; Dan. 8:23-25, and more particularly Dan. 11:36-37.
VIII. St. Pauls probable Personal Expectation.Dr. Lightfoot argues, with great probability (Smiths Dict. Bible, Art. II. Thessalonians), that, as a personal matter, St. Paul expected to witness in his own day the development of the Antichrist (whose secret working was already visible to him), and that he saw in the Jews the makings of the foe to be revealed. Theirs was the apostasyprofessing to cleave to God and to Moses, but departing from the living God, through an evil heart of unbelief, and making the word of God to be of none effect through their traditions. Theirs was the lawlessnesssetting the will of God at naught in the self-willed assertion of their privilege as the chosen people, and using the most unscrupulous means of checking those who preached the more liberal gospel of St. Paul. And if to St. Paul the final Antichrist was represented by the Jews, the Roman Government, which had so often befriended him, might well be called the withholder or restrainer. If such was the personal expectation of St. Paul, it was, indeed, literally frustrated; but if the Judaic spirit, of exclusive arrogance, carnal reliance on spiritual promises, innovating tradition, should pass into the Christian Church, and there develop largely, St. Pauls expectation would not be so far wrong.
IX. The Development of the Horns.The question naturally arises whether the prophecy has not been falsified. The Roman empire has disappeared, and Antichrist is not yet revealed. We do not need to answer with some interpreters that Roman law still rules the world. A closer observation of the two passages of Daniel already mentioned would in itself suggest the true answer. In Nebuchadnezzars vision, indeed, the Roman empire simply comes into collision with the Catholic Church, and falls before it. There is no hint of a protracted struggle between them. The long duration of the Roman empire is perhaps suggested by the words, Thou wast gazing until that a stone (Dan. 2:34); the division into the Eastern and Western empires may be symbolised by the two legs of the colossal figure; the ten toes may bear the same interpretation as the ten horns of the later vision: these points, however, are not the most obvious or prominent points of the dream. But in Daniels vision all is quite different. There, the final triumph of the Church is won only after a long struggle, and that struggle is not with the Roman empire itself. Though the Beast which symbolises the Roman empire is said to continue throughout (Dan. 7:11), it is only in the same sense, apparently, as the three other Beasts are said to have their lives prolonged (Dan. 7:12). The empire itself has altogether changed its form, and developed into ten kingdoms, among which, yet after which (Dan. 7:8; Dan. 7:24), an eleventh has arisen, dissimilar from the other kingdoms, and uprooting some of them. With this power it is that the struggle which ends in the Churchs final victory takes place, and not with the old imperial power of Rome. If, therefore, the dream of Nebuchadnezzar may be said to have been fulfilled in the first coming of Christ, in the days of the Roman emperors, the vision of Daniel must wait for its fulfilment until the Roman empire has passed away into an even more different form than it has at present reached.
X. Characteristics of Antichrist.(1) He is a human being. The title Man of Sin excludes Satan, as Chrysostom remarks: Satan acts through the man (1Th. 2:9) to the full extent of his powerenters into him, as he entered into an earlier Son of Perditionbut does not destroy his humanity.
(2) He is a single person. This, too, is involved in the phrase Man of Sin, especially when followed by the Son of Perdition. It is not to be denied that poetically the first title, at any rate, might be a personification of a movement, or (as the kings in Daniel mean kingdoms) the title of a wicked power, the head of which might even be more innocent than his subjects. But not only is it simpler to understand the phrases themselves (especially the second) of a single person, but the sharp dramatic contrast between the Christ and the Antichrist seems to require a personal exhibition of evil. The Antichrist is to have a coming (2Th. 2:9) and a manifestation (2Th. 2:3), so as to be instantly recognised, and will display himself by significant acts (2Th. 2:4), which all require a person. Besides, the types of himAntiochus, Caligula, Nero, &c.could hardly be said, according to Scriptural analogy, to be fulfilled in a mere headless movement. The application of the name Man of Sin to any succession of men (as, for instance, all the Popes of Rome) is peremptorily forbidden by the fact that the detection and destruction of the Man of Sin by the Advent of Christ follows immediately upon his manifestation of himself.
(3) This person, though single, heads a movement. He is the captain of the Apostasy. He has a large and devoted following (2Th. 2:10). Indeed, though his dominion is diverse from other kingdoms, yet he is almost called a king in Dan. 7:24 : the word, however, is (perhaps) carefully avoided. The diversity between his monarchy and theirs might, for instance, consist in its not being, like theirs, territorial or dynastic; it might be a spiritual or an intellectual dominion, interpenetrating the territorial kingdoms.
(4) The movement of Antichrist is not atheistic. The Man of Sin super-exalts himself, indeed, against every God, true or false, but it is not by denial of the Divine existence. On the contrary, he claims himself to be the true God, and exacts the homage due to the true God; thereby acknowledging the existence and working of God, which he avers to have become his own.
(5) The antichristian movement does not even break openly with the Catholic Church. It is an apostasy, indeed, but the same Greek word is used in Heb. 3:12, and in 1Ti. 4:1, in neither of which cases will it suit the context to understand the word of an outward leaving of the Christian Church. The persons must at any rate have been Christians, or they could not be apostates. And the apostasy is all the more terrible if, while the forms of the Church are kept to, there is a departure from the inward spirit. And in this case several points seem to indicate an apostasy within the Church. In the first place, as we have seen above, the movement is distinctly not an atheistic movement, like the German Socialism. Then, the act of session in the Temple of God cannot mean anything else than an attempt to exact divine homage from the Christian Church, which, of course, could only be hoped for through adopting Christian forms. The account of the Satanic miracles which the Man of Sin will work in attestation of his claim shows that the persons who follow him are duped into believing that he actually is the Lord. An atheistic materialism would deny miracles altogether. Now we may venture to say that, even if St. Paul had not (as Bishop Wordsworth supposes) St. Lukes Gospel in his hands, yet he was familiar with the eschatological discourses of our Lord contained in the Synoptic Gospels. In these (which so frequently use the language of the Book of Daniel) our Lord holds up as the greatest terror of the last days, the constant danger, waiting even upon the elect, of being seduced into mistaking certain pretenders for Himself. An Antichrist (in its full meaning) expresses more than an opponent of Christ; like the compound Anti-Pope, it implies a rival claimant to the honours which he himself acknowledges to be due only to Jesus Christ. Antichrist pretends to be actually Jesus. Such pretensions would, of course, be meaningless and ridiculous to all except believers in Jesus Christ and His Church. (See Mat. 24:4-5; Mat. 24:10-12; Mat. 24:23; Mat. 24:26, and the parallel passages in Mark and Luke.) The same would even appear, on close inspection, to be the teaching of the Book of Daniel itself. The Church is given into his hand (Dan. 7:25), a much more powerful expression, supposing the Church to be constitutionally bound to him, and not accidentally subject as to a Decius or a Galerius.
(6) Daniels Antichrist is characterised by ecclesiastical innovation. He shall wear out the saints of the Most High, and think to change times and laws (Dan. 7:25)not to stamp Christianity out altogether, but arbitrarily to alter the Churchs worship (see Pusey, p. 81) and traditional constitution. The same departure from primitive tradition characterises him in Dan. 11:37 : Neither shall he regard the God of his fathers: a God whom his fathers knew not shall he honour. The constant interpretation of new gods among the primitive Fathers is new doctrines : for, as a matter of fact, whatever materially alters our conception of God may be said to make us worship a different Being: the God of the extreme Calvinist, for instance, who creates millions of immortal beings for the express purpose of being glorified by their endless pains, can hardly be called the same as the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ. And this arbitrary innovation is, in fact, the very feature which St. Paul selects. It is the lawlessness or rebellion which marks both his movement (2Th. 2:7) and himself (2Th. 2:8)which lawlessness, or sell-will, is perfectly compatible with exaggerated external reverence for laws and discipline, as is proved by Dr. Lightfoot, who thinks that St. Paul had the Jews specially in mind (Smiths Bible Dict., Art. II. Thessalonians). Other more obvious kinds of sin can hardly be said to characterise the Man of Sin; for (not to mention 1Ti. 4:1, which refers expressly to Daniel) in Dan. 11:37 he is given an ascetic character. This spirit of innovation within the Church, implying as it does that his fiat is as good as Gods, which finally leads him to claim divine honours from the Church, is his characteristic sin.
(7) It may be added that the teaching of the Apocalypse is evidently drawn from Daniel, thereby corroborating our belief that St. Pauls is also, and that such an interpretation as is here suggested has almost the catholic consent of the early Fathers, who almost all teach that the fall of the Roman empire will usher in the Antichrist, and that the Antichrist will be professedly Christian. Their testimony is valuable, inasmuch as some of them seem not merely to be offering an exegesis of particular texts of Scripture, but recording a primitive tradition coeval with the New Testament.
XI. Identification of the Man of Sin.It is not solely a Protestant interpretation, but one which indirectly derives more or less support from several eminent names in past ages in communion with the Roman. See (for instance, St. Gregory the Great, and Robert Grosseteste), that the final Antichrist will be a Bishop of Rome. And the present writer does not hesitate to assert his conviction that no other interpretation will so well suit all the requirements of the case. This is by no means the same as the vulgar doctrine that the Popei.e., any and every Popeis the Man of Sin. The Man of Sin has not yet made his appearance. But the diversity and yet resemblance between his kingdom and the kingdoms of the world; the firm hand over the Church; the claims made upon her homage; the unrecognised movement of rebellion against God while still He is outwardly acknowledged (the mystery of lawlessness); the restless innovation upon the Churchs apostolic traditions; the uncompromising self-assertion: all these are traits which seem to indicate a future Roman pontiff, more clearly than any other power which we could at present point to,and this, without having recourse to those more superficial coincidences which may be found in the Notes of Bishop Wordsworths Greek Testament, or Dr. Eadies Commentary on these Epistles. To those who are familiar with the way in which modern Reman dogmas have been formedexaggerations, at first condemned, becoming more and more popular, till they acquired the consistency of general tradition, and were then stamped with authoritative sanctionand who now watch the same process at work in the popular theology of Italy and France, there would be nothing surprising in the literal fulfilment of the prophecies of Antichrist in some future Pope. Already one Divine attribute has been definitely claimed by and conceded to the occupant of the Roman See, in defiance of primitive tradition, and yet so plausibly as to suggest rather an implicit faith in God than an explicit denial of Him. Comparisons ex aequo between the Life and Passion of our Lord and that of Pius the Ninth formed a large proportion of the spiritual diet of foreign Papists towards the close of his pontificate. Even eminent prelates of the Roman obedience are reported not to have scrupled already to use of the Papacy such phrases as Third Incarnation of the Deity ; and it would be only following analogies of development, if, in process of time, these last exaggerations also should be formulated into dogma, as has been the case with the dogma of Infallibility, and some Pope to come should in some way claim to be actually identified with Jesus Christ.
Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)
3. No man deceive you Words very similar to those of our Lord.
Mat 24:4. Deceive does not necessarily imply a deceptive purpose in the man.
By any means The three above enumerated means, or any other.
That day shall not come Critics agree that the italicised words, though not in the Greek, are properly supplied by our translators. A (or rather, the definite article the) falling away The apostasy the well-known apostasy. Not a political rebellion or revolt. The whole passage indicates that it is a religious apostasy from Christ, led by antichrist, the man of sin, leading to the most blasphemous opposition to God.
Man of sin Not merely sinful man, but man made up of sin. He is concrete wickedness. A deep allusion to the Satanic character lying at the base of antichrist.
Son of perdition Applied by Christ to the antichrist among his apostles, Judas. Joh 17:12.
Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
‘Let no man beguile you in any way, for it will not be except the rebellion come first, and the man of sin (or ‘lawlessness’) be revealed, the son of perdition, he who opposes and exalts himself against all that is called God or is an object of worship, so that he sits in the temple of God setting himself forth as God.’
Paul here makes clear that while Christians should be ‘looking for His appearing’ there is to be a certain delay because certain things have to happen. This is not surprising. Jesus Himself, while urging watching for His surprise appearing (Mat 24:42-51), had done the same. He could not come until there had been great wars and earthquakes (Luk 21:10-11), and until all nations had received the Gospel (Mar 13:10), He could not come until Jerusalem had been destroyed and the people scattered among the nations (Luk 21:24), He could not come until certain levels of persecution had been suffered by the Apostles (Luk 21:12; Luk 21:16), He could not come until false Messiahs and many false prophets had arisen (Mat 24:5; Mat 24:11). Thus those who were watching for His coming ‘at any time’ were also to recognise causes for delay. The two ideas are regularly held in tension.
That there will be first ‘the rebellion’ against God is clear from elsewhere (1Ti 4:1-3; 2Ti 3:1-5 ; 2Pe 3:3-6; Jud 1:18-19), although the seeds of that rebellion were already well rooted and being revealed, and he parallels it with the persecution and tribulation already being suffered by the people of God (2Ti 3:11-13).
But we must always remember that all New Testament writers saw the days between the first and second coming of Christ as the final days of the age. The fact that ‘the end times’ began at the resurrection is important to understand and is clearly stated in Scripture. ‘He was revealed at the end of the times for your sake’, says Peter (1Pe 1:20), so that he can then warn his readers ‘ the end of all things is at hand’ (1Pe 4:7). So to Peter it is clear that the first coming of Christ has begun the end times.
Likewise Paul says to his contemporaries ‘for our admonition, on whom the end of the ages has come’ (1Co 10:11). What could be clearer? The first coming of Christ was ‘the end of the ages’, not the beginning of a new age. The writer to the Hebrews tells us ‘He has in these last days spoken to us by His Son’ (Heb 1:1-2), and adds ‘once in the end of the ages has He appeared to put away sin by the sacrifice of Himself’ (Heb 9:26-28). So those early writers saw their days as ‘the last days’, the ‘end of the ages’, for what we see as this age is the culmination of all that has gone before and introduces ‘the end’. Thus they saw ‘the rebellion’ as already begun.
‘And the man of sin (or ‘lawlessness’) be revealed, the son of perdition, he who opposes and exalts himself against all that is called God or is an object of worship, so that he sits in the temple of God setting himself forth as God.’ The ‘man of sin’ (some important manuscripts have ‘lawlessness’ (see2Th 2:8) but the idea is the same (1Jn 3:4)) may be a parody of the phrase ‘the man of God’ of the Old Testament, the man, often anonymous, who brings God’s true word and demands obedience to it, or even a contrast with ‘the man of Your right hand — the Son of Man You made strong for Yourself’ (Psa 80:17). The ‘Man of your right hand’ suggests One Who is under the authority of God and receives authority from Him, the ‘Son of Man’ represents true manhood in its submission to God. The man of sin (like the wild beasts of Daniel) represents one under the authority of sin and lawlessness, and in rebellion against God. It depicts someone who sums up in himself all the sin and lawlessness of the world.
Indeed he will exalt himself as the epitome of man’s religion, above all that is seen as divine or is venerated. Such a figure is described in Rev 17:8; Rev 17:11; Rev 19:19, a man with almost supernatural powers, possessed by or representing a satanic being who is depicted as ‘the Wild Beast’ who lives again (Rev 17:8). He is the son of perdition, bound for destruction (Rev 17:11).
The figure here may be partly based on that in Dan 11:36, ‘he will exalt himself and magnify himself above every god, and will speak marvellous things against the God of gods — he will magnify himself above all’. Nevertheless the parallel is not exact. The king in Daniel does honour to ‘a god whom his fathers knew not’, but Paul goes further. The man of sin will set himself up as God. We can also consider the extravagant claims of the king of Babylon, seeing himself as ‘the Light-bearer (Lucifer), the son of the morning’ and saying ‘I will ascend into heaven, I will exalt my throne above the stars of God, — I will ascend above the heights of the clouds. I will be like the Most High’ (Isa 14:12-14). Paul had no lack of precedents. Too much power makes men mad.
Note how the description of the man of sin as ‘the opposing one’ uses a term that is parallel to ‘the Adversary’ (Satan) who is his backer. See 1Ti 5:14 with 15. Thus it links him with Satanic influence.
He will be the great Anti-God. Firstly in that he opposes God, and secondly because he represents himself as God. He openly opposes God and exalts himself against all that is of God, or is seen as divine, and he represents himself as God, taking his place in the temple of God. He sets himself up as a supreme divine figure.
‘The temple of God.’ He sets himself up as ‘God’, so the Temple ‘of God’ is his temple. It does not necessarily signify the temple in Jerusalem. Indeed Paul would emphatically see that as replaced by the Christian church, and therefore no longer of any account. But the words can describe any ‘temple of God’ used by such a blasphemer in his claim to be ‘God’. The point is that he sets himself up to be worshipped in his own temple.
‘Sits.’ Men did not sit in a temple. The only one with right to sit in a temple was the god himself.
Such men have appeared throughout history. Caligula, ten years before, had seriously represented himself as divine and demanded worship from all, and had set up statues of himself in many places and ‘temples of God’ and had had the idea of setting up a statue of himself in the temple at Jerusalem and was only prevented by death. This may have been the pattern for Paul’s description. Caligula was followed by the ‘divine’ Nero and other ‘divine’ emperors (some of whom in private laughed at the idea). The main acceptance of this divinity of the emperors was in the Eastern empire.
Later, popes in the middle ages, taking over as Pontifex Maximus , would behave obscenely and make huge claims to represent God, and were even addressed as God by their sycophants, claimed ‘lying wonders’ and behaved cruelly to Christians and non-Christians alike. Men like the Mahdi in the Sudan would be seen as having divine status and use it to his own ends. But, while sharing in the essence of the man of sin, and revealed as what they were by their extreme sinfulness and cruelty, these were all shadows of the greater reality. They came and they went. However, it should be considered what comfort these words would bring to people in the midst of persecution from some such figures, that these powerful, almost invincible, ones before whom they were arraigned, were under God’s hands, however great their claims, and would shortly give account to Him.
Their status was always hindered by God’s restraining hand on Satan. But in the end another will arise, possibly in the Near East (‘the king of the north’ – Dan 11:36-45), with similar claims. This time God’s restraint will be removed as Satan is let loose for ‘a short time’ (Rev 12:12; Rev 20:3; compare ‘one hour’ – Rev 17:12), and seeks worship for himself through his figurehead.
Thus Paul sees some important figure arising who is the epitome of sin and blasphemy, whom we often call the Antichrist, but is rather here represented as the ‘Anti-god’.
John says, ‘Little children it is the last hour, and as you heard that antichrist comes, even now there have arisen many antichrists, whereby we know that it is the last hour. They went out from us, but they were not of us — this is the antichrist, he who denies the Father and the Son’ (1Jn 2:18-19; 1Jn 2:23). Later on John designates as antichrist those who say that Jesus Christ did not come in the flesh (1Jn 4:3; 2Jn 1:7).
This is the only specific mention of antichrist in the Bible. Thus John sees antichrist in terms of the spirit of antichrist (1Jn 4:3), denying the Father and the Son and denying that Jesus Christ came in the flesh. They deny His deity and true humanity. And the fact that they were already there he saw as an indication that it was ‘the last hour’. But in view of Paul’s description we must see one arising who out-blasphemes them all, as John himself represents him in Revelation.
It should, however, be noted that he is not said to actually verbally claim to be God. Possibly we are to see it that his presumptions and claims as he ‘sets himself up’ will make this impression, leaving his hearers to draw their own conclusions. We have seen such through history and in our own day.
Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett
2Th 2:3-4. For that day shall not come, except, &c. “The day of Christ shall not come, except there come the apostacy first.” The apostacy here described is plainly not of a civil, but of a religious nature; not a revolt from the government, but a defection from the true religion and worship. In the original it is the apostacy, with an article to give it an emphasis. The article being added, signifies “that famous and before-predicted apostacy.” So likewise is the man of sin, with the like article, and the like emphasis. If then the notion of the man of sin be derived from any ancient prophet, it must be derived from Dan 7:25; Dan 7:28. Any man may be satisfied that St. Paul alluded to Daniel’s description, because he has not only borrowed the same ideas, but has even adopted some of the phrases and expressions. The man of sin may signify either a single man, or a succession of men: a succession of men being meant in Daniel, it is probable that the same was intended here also. It is the more probable, because a single man appears hardly sufficient for the work here assigned; and it is agreeable to the phraseology of scripture, and especially to that of the prophets, to speak of a body, or number of men, under the character of one. The man of sin seems to be expressed from Dan 7:24 according to the Greek translation, he shall exceed in evil all that went before him; and he may fulfil the character, either by promoting wickedness in general, or by advancing idolatry in particular, as the word sin frequently signifies in scripture. The son of perdition is also the denomination of the traitor Judas, Joh 17:12 which implies, that the man of sin should be, like Judas, a false apostle; like him betray Christ, and, like him, be devoted to destruction. Who opposeth, &c. is manifestly copied from Daniel, He shall exalt himself, &c. The features exactly resemble each other: He opposeth and exalteth himself above all; or, according to the Greek, “above every one that is called God, or that is worshipped.” The Greek word for worshipped, is , alluding to the Greek title of the Roman emperors, , which signifies august or venerable. He shall oppose,for the prophets speak of things future, as present;”he shall oppose and exalt himself, not only above inferior magistrates, (who are sometimes called gods in holy writ,) but even above the greatest emperors, and shall arrogate to himself divine honours:So that he as God sitteth in the temple, &c.” By the temple of God, the apostle could not mean the temple of Jerusalem, because that, he knew, would be totally destroyed within a few years. After the death of Christ, the temple of Jerusalem is never called by the apostles the temple of God; and if, at any time, they make mention of the house or temple of God, they mean the church in general, or every particular believer. Whoever will consult 1Co 3:16-17. 2Co 6:16. 1Ti 3:15. Rev 3:12 will want no other examples to prove, that, under the gospel-dispensation, the temple of God is the church of Christ: and the man of sin’s sitting, implies his ruling and presiding there; and sitting there as God, implies his claiming divine authority, in things spiritual as well as temporal; and shewing himself that he is God, implies his doing it with the utmost ostentation.
Fuente: Commentary on the Holy Bible by Thomas Coke
2Th 2:3-4 . An emphatically-repeated exhortation, and the reason of it. The readers were by no means to be misled into the fancy, that the day of the Lord was now to dawn; for the apostasy and the appearance of Antichrist must precede it.
] does not precisely convey the idea of a deceit occurring from wicked intention, whilst it may be correctly imagined that nothing evil was seen in the mode of deception mentioned in 2Th 2:2 rather it was considered as an excusable vehicle for the diffusion of views which were believed to be recognised as true; only the idea of delusion, i.e. of being misled into a false and incorrect mode of contemplation, is expressed by the verb.
When, then, the apostle says, Let no man befool you, it is, similar to a form of representation usual to him, in the meaning of suffer yourselves to be befooled by no one. Comp. Eph 5:6 ; Col 2:16 ; Col 2:18 .
] not only recapitulates the three modes of misleading mentioned in 2Th 2:2 (Bengel, Baumgarten-Crusius), but is an absolute expression, so that accordingly it may be supposed that some other mode of deception might be employed.
The sentence 2Th 2:3-4 is grammatically incomplete. The finite verb to is wanting, which Paul intended to accompany the conjunction, but easily forgot as he added to a longer description. It is perfectly clear from the connection that from 2Th 2:2 is to be supplied to . In a very forced manner Knatchbull attempts to remove the incompleteness of the construction by placing a comma after , supplying to , and uniting it with into one sentence. “Suffer yourselves to be deceived by no one that (the day of the Lord is at the door), unless first there shall have come,” etc. To maintain this meaning must necessarily be added to . But still more arbitrary is the attempt of Storr and Flatt to remove the ellipsis by explaining as analogous (!) to the Hebrew , in the sense of most certainly, most positively.
] is to be separated from the preceding by a colon, and does not denote indeed (Baumgarten-Crusius), but for.
] a later Greek form for the older . See Lobeck, ad Phryn. p. 528. The expression is to be left in its absoluteness, not, with Chrysostom, Theodoret, Theophylact, Augustin (de civitate dei, xx. 21), and Bolten, to be taken as abstractum pro concreto, so that Antichrist himself is to be understood. But not apostasy in the political sense, but entirely religious apostasy that is, a falling away from God and true religion can have been meant by . (1) What is said of the in direct internal connection with the apostasy, (2) the characteristic of the , 2Th 2:3 , by , 2Th 2:7 , and (3) the constant biblical usage, constrain us to this view. Comp. LXX. 2Ch 29:19 ; Jer 2:19 ; Mal 2:15Mal 2:15 , etc.; Act 21:21 ; 1Ti 4:1 . Accordingly, also, Kern’s view (comp. already Aretius and Vorstius) is to be rejected as inadmissible, that we are to think of a mixture of political and religious apostasy.
Moreover, the apostle speaks of (with the article), and also . . ., either because the readers had already been orally instructed concerning it (comp. 2Th 2:5 ), or because the Old Testament prophets had already foretold the apostasy and the appearance of Antichrist. But the apostasy is not the consequence of the appearance of Antichrist, so that Paul by . . . goes backwards from a statement of its effect to a specification of its author (so Pelt and de Wette, appealing to 2Th 2:9-10 ); but it precedes the appearance of antichrist, so that this is the historical climax of the , and serves for its completion (2Th 2:7-10 ).
The apostle considers Antichrist as a parallel to Christ; therefore he here speaks of an (comp. 2Th 1:7 ), a revelation of what was hitherto concealed, as well as, in 2Th 2:9 , of an advent of the same.
] the man of sin, i.e. in whom sin is the principal matter, and is, as it were, incorporated who thus forms the climax of wickedness.
] the son of perdition, i.e. who on account of his wickedness falls a prey to perdition. Comp. Joh 17:12 . See Winer, p. 213 [E. T. 298]. Schleusner and Pelt erroneously take the expression as transitive: “who will be the cause of perdition to others.” Equally erroneously Theodoret, Oecumenius, and others; also Heydenreich and Schott: the transitive sense is to be united with the intransitive.
Fuente: Heinrich August Wilhelm Meyer’s New Testament Commentary
(3) 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; (4) Who opposeth and exalteth himself above all that is called God, or that is worshipped; so that he as God sitteth in the temple of God, shewing himself that he is God. (5) Remember ye not, that, when I was yet with you, I told you these things? (6) And now ye know what withholdeth that he might be revealed in his time. (7) For the mystery of iniquity doth already work: only he who now letteth will let, until he be taken out of the way. (8) And then shall that Wicked be revealed, whom the Lord shall consume with the spirit of his mouth, and shall destroy with the brightness of his coming: (9) Even him, whose coming is after the working of Satan with all power and signs and lying wonders, (10) And with all deceivableness of unrighteousness in them that perish; because they received not the love of the truth, that they might be saved. (11) And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie: (12) That they all might be damned who believed not the truth, but had pleasure in unrighteousness.
We have here a very awful prophecy, and most awfully hath it been fulfilled, and still is now fulfilling, in the earth. And what makes it still, if possible, more awful is, that though the Apostle, by the expressions man of sin, and the son of perdition, might seem at first view, to allude to somewhat personal; yet it is not so. It is national: yea, general. It was long since said, by the beloved Apostle John, that as Antichrist should come: so, there were in his days (and how increased in our’s) many Antichrists. 1Jn 2:18 . The best service which I can render, under the Lord, to the Reader of this Poor Man’s Commentary, in helping to the proper apprehension of the solemn subject contained within these verses, will be, to gather out the several parts of the passage, one by one, and then consider them, as they appear before us.
And first. Let the Reader remark with me, the names , by which the Apostle hath distinguished this heresy. He calls it the man of sin; the son of perdition: the mystery of iniquity; that wicked, which shall be revealed: him whose coming is after the working of Satan: and who comes with all power, and signs, and lying wonders; and with all deceivableness of unrighteousness. These are the awful names, by which the Holy Ghost hath made known to the Church through Paul, in this scripture, the alarming heresy, which was to appear.
Secondly. The acts, and deeds, by which the character of this delusion should be discovered. He is said to oppose and exalt himself, above all that is called God, or that is worshipped. That he as God, sitteth in the temple of God, showing himself that he is God. And he is known by the power he is said to assume, and the signs, and lying wonders he comes with, after the working of Satan; and with all deceivableness of unrighteousness.
Thirdly. The awful consequences which shall follow, in them that perish, which are his followers. God shall send them strong delusions, that they should believe a lie; that all might be damned who believed not the truth, but had pleasure in unrighteousness.
Fourthly. The sure destruction of this Wicked himself, whom the Lord shall consume with the spirit of his mouth, and destroy with the brightness of his coming. So much for the Apostle’s description of this awful heresy; which, under the Lord the Spirit, he told the Church, would be revealed in the after times, when the Lord, who then withheld it, would remove the cause of obstruction out of the way. Now let us, under the Lord’s teaching, look at those characters, one by one; and examine, by scripture testimony, and the facts which have since appeared, to what age of the Church they particularly refer. And, first, respecting the names. The man of sin, and the son of perdition; the mystery of iniquity, and the wicked. It is plain that these all refer to one and the same. And not simply to one person; but rather the name of one, and the same heresy. Not Satan, who is emphatically called the Wicked One; for this heresy is said to be after the working of Satan; consequently could not be Satan himself. Neither any new revelation of the traitor Judas, whom our Lord calls the son of perdition. Joh 17:12 . For Jesus did not so name him, as though he, and he only, should be known by that name. All are sons of perdition, which are lost. Neither did the Apostle mean any individual person, among the enemies of Christ, winch in after ages shall arise to oppose Christ’s Gospel, however desperately wicked, and bitter they might be. It is not a person, but a body; an apostacy from the Church, a falling away; still professing Christ, but in works denying him. For the character is further defined, of silting in God’s temple, and calling himself god; yea, exalting himself above all that is called God.
And where are we to look for the fulfillment of this prophecy? If a Church professing christianity can be found, to whom those titles clearly belong; there will remain no shadow of doubt, but that this is the very one the Apostle had in view, in this scripture prophecy. And all that have written upon the subject, from the first moment the scriptures have been commented upon, to the present hour, have uniformly, and with one voice, declared it to be the Church of Rome. The selling of indulgencies, pardons, grants, and the like, are too nearly allied to the man of sin; and where practiced, too strikingly represent him, whom Paul describes as sitting in the temple of God, showing himself that he is God. And it is to oppose Christ in all his offices, as the Prophet, Priest, and King of his Church; when teaching the worship of saints; when setting up merit, and joining intercessors with Christ; and when taking up the title of supremacy, as head of the Church. And, it is certainly not a little remarkable in confirmation, that what Paul calls in this place, the mystery of iniquity, in allusion to the heresy he had been describing; John, in the book of the Revelations, calls Mystery, Babylon the Great, the Mother of harlots, and abominations of the earth. Rev 17:5 . From these, and numberless other testimonies, which, if necessary, might be brought forward, there cannot be the shadow of a doubt, but that the Apostacy the Apostle had in view in this scripture the See of Rome was all along designed.
But it would have been a blessing to the true Church of Christ, if apostacy had marked only the character of the See of Rome. Alas! what errors have sprung up, in this our own land, in what is called the Reformed Church. Who that reads the beloved Apostle’s account of his days, and takes the same mirror to look in for ours; but must be struck with the resemblance. Little children (said he) it is the last time, and as ye have heard that antichrist shall come, even now are there many antichrists: whereby we know that it is the last time. 1Jn 2:18 . Let any man read this blessed Epistle of John, and then look to the professions of men around him! Let him behold how the Godhead of Christ is denied: the Person, Godhead, and, Ministry of God the Holy Ghost is questioned; and then say, are there not many Antichrists?
And, let my Reader bear with me, to make one observation more. What did the Apostle mean, in this scripture, by deceivableness of unrighteousness? Mark the expression. With all deceivableness of unrighteousness in them that perish. Did there need, the Church should be told, that unrighteousness would end in destruction? Certainly this could not be Paul’s meaning. Neither in the common sense, and acceptation of the word, unrighteousness could never deceive a man with hopes of being saved by it. But, if a self-righteous Pharisee, fancying himself righteous before God; makes his own good deeds, and prayers, and alms, and ordinances, a part Savior; all of which are unrighteous before God: here is a fallacy indeed, deep, and wretched. And this will well suit the name of all deceivableness of unrighteousness. Reader! it is right to exercise a jealousy over our own hearts. The day is awful. In contending earnestly for the faith once delivered unto the saints, we not only labor to preserve God’s truth, but our own happiness. And it is a truth well worth laboring for. For if righteousness come by the law, then Christ is dead in vain. Gal 2:21 .
Fuente: Hawker’s Poor Man’s Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
3 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;
Ver. 3. Except there come a falling ] Gr. , an apostasy, viz. of people from the truth, when the whole world went a wondering and a wandering after the beast, Rev 13:3 . To the fathers these prophecies of Antichrist were riddles. The prophecy is sealed to the end, Dan 12:9 , till unsealed by event. Austin saith ingenuously, he understood not this text. And herein he did better than those other of the Latin Fathers that interpreted it of the falling away of various nations from the Roman empire. Daniel set forth Antichrist typically, in that little Antichrist, Antiochus; Paul topically, in this chapter. John writeth the mystery of Antichrist, in his Revelation; Paul sets a commentary upon him, and graphically describeth him, calling him apostasy in the abstract here, as some will have it; and in the next verse, “that man of sin,” that is, meram scelus, sheer wickedness, as Beza hath it.
And that man of sin ] That breathing devil, so portentously, so peerlessly vicious, Ut eius nomen non hominis, sed vitii esse videatur (as Lipsius saith of one Tubulus, a Roman praetor), that sin itself can hardly be more sinful.
The son of perdition ] Destined to destruction, even to be cast alive into the “lake of fire burning with brimstone,” Rev 19:20 . Well might Pope Marcellus II strike his hand upon the table, and say, Non video quomodo qui locum hunc altissimum tenent, salvari possunt, I see not how any pope can be saved. (Onuph. in Vita.) When I was first in orders (said Pope Pius Quintus) I had some good hopes of salvation; when I was made a cardinal, I doubted; but now that I am pope, I do almost despair. (Cornel. a Lapide in Num 11:11 )
Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
3 .] Let no man deceive you in any manner (not only in either of the foregoing, but in any whatever): for ( that day shall not come ) (so E. V. supplies, rightly. There does not seem to have been any intention on the part of the Apostle to fill up the ellipsis: it supplies itself in the reader’s mind. Knatchbull connects with , and supplies after it: but this is very harsh) unless there have come the apostasy first (of which he had told them when present, see 2Th 2:5 ; and probably with a further reference still to our Lord’s prophecy in Mat 24:10-12 . There is no need, with Chrys., Thdrt., Thl., Aug., to suppose to mean Antichrist himself ( ; , Chr.), nor to regard him as its only cause: rather is he the chief fruit and topstone of the apostasy), and there have been revealed (ref. ch. 1. As Christ in his time, so Antichrist in his time, is ‘ revealed ’ brought out into light: he too is a , to be unfolded and displayed: see 2Th 2:8-9 ) the man of sin (in whom sin is as it were personified, as righteousness in Christ. The gen. is called by Ellicott that of the predominating quality ), the son of perdition (see ref. John, where our Lord uses the expression of Judas. It seems merely to refer to Antichrist himself, whose essence and inheritance is , not to his influence over others, as Thdrt. (both: . , . ), c., Pelt, al.), he that withstands (the construction is not to be carried on by zeugma, as if . . . belonged to as well as to (the omission of the second article is no proof of this, as Pelt supposes, but only that both predicates belong to one and the same subject), but is absolute, ‘ he that withstands CHRIST,’ the , 1Jn 2:18 ), and exalts himself above (in a hostile sense, reff.) every one that is called God (cf. , 1Co 8:5 . “The expression includes the true God, as well as the false ones of the heathen but is a natural addition from Christian caution, as would have been a senseless and indeed blasphemous expression for a Christian.” Lnem.) or an object of adoration (= numen , and is a generalization of . Cf. the close parallel in Dan 11:36-37 (Theod. and similarly LXX): . . , . . .), so that he sits (not , as Grot., Pelt, al., but , intransitive, as in reff.) in ( constr. prgnans ‘enters into and sits in.’ The aor. usually denotes that one definite act and not a series of acts is spoken of: but here, from the peculiar nature of the verb, that one act is the setting himself down , and the session remains after it: cf. Mat 5:1 ; Mat 19:28 , &c.) the temple of God (this, say De W. and Lnemann after Irenus, Hr. v. 30. 4, p. 330 (cited in Prolegg. 2Th 2:3 note), cannot be any other than the temple at Jerusalem : on account of the definiteness of the expression, , and on account of . But there is no force in this. to used metaphorically by St. Paul in 1Co 3:17 bis: and why not here? see also 1Co 6:16 ; Eph 2:21 . From these passages it to plain that such figurative sense was familiar to the Apostle. And if so, makes no difficulty. Its figurative sense, as holding a place of power, sitting as judge or ruler, is more frequent still: see in St. Paul, 1Co 6:4 ; and Mat 23:2 ; Rev 20:4 ; to which indeed we might add the many places where our Lord is said on the right hand of God, e.g. Heb 1:3 ; Heb 8:1 ; Heb 10:12 ; Heb 12:2 ; Rev 3:21 . Respecting the interpretation , see Prolegomena, v.) shewing himself ( , Chrys. Hardly that, but the sense of the present , as in it is his habit and office to exhibit himself as God) that he it God (not ‘a god,’ nor is it equivalent to but designates the divine dignity which he predicates of himself. The construction is an attraction, for . ; and the emphasis is on , ‘that he IS God’).
Fuente: Henry Alford’s Greek Testament
2Th 2:3 . ., the apostasy and the appearance (so of Beliar, Asc. Isa. , iv. 18) of the personal anti-Christ or pseudo-Christ form a single phenomenon. From the use of as a Greek equivalent for Belial (LXX of 1Ki 21:13 , A, and Aquila), this eschatological application of the term would naturally flow, especially as might well be represented by on the analogy of 2Sa 22:5 (LXX) = Psa 17 (18):4. Lawlessness was a cardinal trait in the Jewish figure of Belial, as was persecution of the righteous (2Th 1:4 , 2Th 2:7 , see Asc. Isa. , ii. 5, etc.). The very order of the following description ( set between and , etc., unchronologically, but dramatically) suggests that this incarnation of lawlessness was a doomed figure, although he challenged and usurped divine prerogatives. He is another Antiochus Epiphanes (Dan 11:36 , , though Paul carefully safeguards himself against misconception by inserting in his quotation of the words). This conception of a supernatural antagonist to Jesus Christ at the end is the chief element of novelty introduced by Paul, from Jewish traditions, into the primitive Christian eschatology. The recent attempt of Caligula to erect a statue of himself in the Temple at Jerusalem may have furnished a trait for Paul’s delineation of the future Deceiver; the fearful impiety of this outburst had sent a profound shock through Judaism, which would be felt by Jewish Christians as well. But Paul does not identify the final Deception with the Imperial cultus, which was far from a prominent feature when he wrote. His point is that the last pseudo-Messiah or anti-Christ will embody all that is profane and blasphemous, every conceivable element of impiety; and that, instead of being repudiated, he will be welcomed by Jews as well as pagans ( cf. Act 12:21-22 ).
Fuente: The Expositors Greek Testament by Robertson
no man = not (App-105) any one (App-123)
deceive. Greek. exaptao. See Rom 7:11.
by any means. Literally according to (App-104) no (Greek. medeis) way. A double negative for emphasis.
for = because.
except = if (App-118) . . . not (App-105).
a = the.
falling away = apostasy. Greek. apostasia. Only here and Act 21:21.
that = the.
man. App-123.
sin. App-128. Some texts read III. 4, as 2Th 2:7.
be revealed. App-106.
son. App-108.
perdition. See Joh 17:12. Rev 17:8, Rev 17:11.
Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics
3.] Let no man deceive you in any manner (not only in either of the foregoing, but in any whatever): for (that day shall not come) (so E. V. supplies, rightly. There does not seem to have been any intention on the part of the Apostle to fill up the ellipsis: it supplies itself in the readers mind. Knatchbull connects with , and supplies after it: but this is very harsh) unless there have come the apostasy first (of which he had told them when present, see 2Th 2:5; and probably with a further reference still to our Lords prophecy in Mat 24:10-12. There is no need, with Chrys., Thdrt., Thl., Aug., to suppose to mean Antichrist himself ( ; , Chr.), nor to regard him as its only cause: rather is he the chief fruit and topstone of the apostasy), and there have been revealed (ref. ch. 1. As Christ in his time, so Antichrist in his time, is revealed-brought out into light: he too is a , to be unfolded and displayed: see 2Th 2:8-9) the man of sin (in whom sin is as it were personified, as righteousness in Christ. The gen. is called by Ellicott that of the predominating quality), the son of perdition (see ref. John, where our Lord uses the expression of Judas. It seems merely to refer to Antichrist himself, whose essence and inheritance is ,-not to his influence over others, as Thdrt. (both: . , . ), c., Pelt, al.), he that withstands (the construction is not to be carried on by zeugma, as if … belonged to as well as to (the omission of the second article is no proof of this, as Pelt supposes, but only that both predicates belong to one and the same subject), but is absolute, he that withstands CHRIST, the , 1Jn 2:18), and exalts himself above (in a hostile sense, reff.) every one that is called God (cf. , 1Co 8:5. The expression includes the true God, as well as the false ones of the heathen-but is a natural addition from Christian caution, as would have been a senseless and indeed blasphemous expression for a Christian. Lnem.) or an object of adoration (= numen, and is a generalization of . Cf. the close parallel in Dan 11:36-37 (Theod. and similarly LXX): . . , …), so that he sits (not , as Grot., Pelt, al., but , intransitive, as in reff.) in (constr. prgnans-enters into and sits in. The aor. usually denotes that one definite act and not a series of acts is spoken of: but here, from the peculiar nature of the verb, that one act is the setting himself down, and the session remains after it: cf. Mat 5:1; Mat 19:28, &c.) the temple of God (this, say De W. and Lnemann after Irenus, Hr. v. 30. 4, p. 330 (cited in Prolegg. 2Th 2:3 note),-cannot be any other than the temple at Jerusalem: on account of the definiteness of the expression, , and on account of . But there is no force in this. to used metaphorically by St. Paul in 1Co 3:17 bis: and why not here? see also 1Co 6:16; Eph 2:21. From these passages it to plain that such figurative sense was familiar to the Apostle. And if so, makes no difficulty. Its figurative sense, as holding a place of power, sitting as judge or ruler, is more frequent still: see in St. Paul, 1Co 6:4; and Mat 23:2; Rev 20:4; to which indeed we might add the many places where our Lord is said on the right hand of God, e.g. Heb 1:3; Heb 8:1; Heb 10:12; Heb 12:2; Rev 3:21. Respecting the interpretation, see Prolegomena, v.) shewing himself ( , Chrys. Hardly that, but the sense of the present, as in -it is his habit and office to exhibit himself as God) that he it God (not a god, nor is it equivalent to -but designates the divine dignity which he predicates of himself. The construction is an attraction, for . ; and the emphasis is on , that he IS God).
Fuente: The Greek Testament
2Th 2:3. , by no means) He indicates three means in which they might be deceived, 2Th 2:2.-, because) Supply from what goes before, the negative particle with the substantive verb, it does not come to pass (that day shall not come), unless, etc. But this ellipsis shows , pious, reverent caution. He is , reverently cautious, who comprehends well, and receives in a right spirit, the matter set before him, not with an unseasonable and foolhardy rashness, sachte, scheu, etc. is shown in the fact, that Paul does not expressly say: The day of Christ does not come, unless, etc. He speaks mildly (moderately); he abstains from words to which the lover of the coming of Christ would not willingly listen.- , unless) What we read in 2Th 2:3-8 demands a fuller consideration. And, first, we shall look closely into this paragraph by itself; then we shall compare the Apocalypse with it. The former aspect of it comprehends something like the following positions:-
I. The object of Paul is to admonish the Thessalonians not to think the day of Christ nearer than it really is.-The expectation of future events, which is supposed to rest upon Divine testimony, and which after all is discovered in the end to be false, occasions great offence (raises a great stumblingblock in the way of religion). Such an expectation of the day of Christ might occasion very great offence: wherefore Paul anxiously obviates it. The Thessalonians had been prepared to receive the Lord with joy, ch. 2Th 1:11; 1Th 1:10 : and indeed a desire of that sort presupposes hope and faith; but yet this very desire may be out of due order. It is therefore reduced to order.
II. Paul especially teaches, that some great evil will first come.-Paul does not enumerate all the events which were to intervene between that age and the day of Christ; but he points out a certain one thing, especially remarkable, the explicit declaration of which was even already at that time seasonable and salutary to the Thessalonians. He therefore describes the apostasy, the Man of Sin, etc.
III. Not only does the apostle point out the evil, but also the check upon it.-He who hindereth or checketh, , is made mention of, the person who checks or holds back the Man of Sin. That check is in some measure prior to the evil itself, and therefore the announcement of it appertains much (in a great degree) to the design of the apostle, which is, that the time may be defined, though with a proper latitude, when the adversary is to be revealed.
IV. The evil extends itself from the times of Paul, even up to the appearance of the coming of Jesus Christ.-That evil is not only most widely extended, 2Th 2:4; 2Th 2:10; 2Th 2:12, but also very long continued; and although it rises up by various degrees, yet it is also continuous from its first beginnings (staminibus, threads in weaving the web) even to its end. Now already, says the apostle, the mystery of iniquity is working. It already wrought in the time of the apostles, but more after their death, most of all after the death of the men who were the contemporaries and immediate successors of the apostles (i.e. the apostolic fathers). They do not arrive at the best and wisest conclusion, who entertain the opinion, that the ideal and rule of the Church lie in the ancient practice (the antiquity) of some of the earliest ages, rather than in the truth itself, seeing that those ages merely rebuke the greater declension of posterity [and do not, by the fact of their antiquity, establish their own complete coincidence with the truth].
V. There was also a check in the time of Paul, and that check then, and not till then, ceases to exist in the way, when the evil breaks out in all its force.-He who now holdeth (the evil) back [letteth, Old Engl.], says Paul, until he be taken out of the way. Hence it is evident, that the restraining check was not the preaching of the Gospel, either universal or apostolical. The check remained even after the time of the apostles, who finished their course long before the check ceased to act as a check; but the preaching of the Gospel is never wholly taken from among men [out of the way].
VI. The evil is described first in the abstract, then in the concrete.-The mystery of iniquity is said to be now already working; but after an interval, that Iniquitous one (Wicked) himself[10] shall be revealed. The event turned out corresponding with this order. Not dissimilar is the fact, that in 2Th 2:3, previously, the appellation given is first apostasy, then the Man of Sin. In preaching of Christ, it was said first, in the abstract, the kingdom of heaven is at hand; then Christ Himself, with His glory, was more openly manifested. So, on the opposite side, the testimony is similarly framed concerning [the coming] evil. The vicious humour is drawn together, and breaks out at length in one abscess.
[10] , ver. 8, the embodiment and incarnation of the previous .-ED.
VII. The apostasy and the mystery of iniquity are a great evil.-The description of the evil in the abstract and concrete has different parts, and these mutually explain each other. Apostasy is a falling away from the faith, and is clearly described, 1Ti 4:1. This apostasy is not determined in its extent by any particular place;-as widely as the faith extended, so widely, for the most part, does the apostasy extend;-yet it prevailed in the greatest degree among the Jews. There is also the apostasy of those to whom faith had been offered, although they did not receive it. Some of those who had received it [11]drew back [departing from the living God]: comp. Heb 3:12. The people is treated as equivalent to one man, whether regard is had to the Divine grace, which offers itself, or to mans refusal of it, under whatever circumstances. It was apostasy in the people who refused to enter into the promised land, LXX. Num 14:31. The bitterness of the Jews was excessive, especially at Thessalonica, Act 17:5; Act 17:11; Act 17:13; and Judaism at Rome occasioned great damage to Christianity. In like manner, iniquity, the mystery of which was then already working, is not iniquity of any kind whatever, although it be manifold, Mat 24:12, but that from which the Iniquitous one (Wicked: ) himself is denominated, 2Th 2:8, with which comp. 2Th 2:3-4. The mystery of this iniquity was then already working (comp. Deu 31:21; Deu 31:27), and was so concealed, that it crept in among men almost without themselves being conscious of it, and went on increasing for many ages. But even yet it is working, until the working of Satan shall bring forth the Iniquitous one himself (that wicked): 2Th 2:9. Judaism, infecting Christianity, is the fuel; the mystery of iniquity is the spark.
[11] Perhaps the italicised resilierunt of Beng. refers to the and of Heb 10:38-39, which see; also Psa 78:57.-ED.
VIII. The Iniquitous one (Wicked) himself is the greatest evil.-He is the Man of Sin, the son of perdition, opposed to and exalted above all that is called God, or that is worshipped; so that he sits himself as God in the temple of God, and declares himself to be God (a god). He is the very Iniquitous (Wicked) one, whose coming is according to the working of Satan, etc. These points we shall afterwards consider one by one.
IX. The check is used indifferently in the masculine and neuter gender [ and ]: unless the neuter be put first in the text for this purpose, namely, in order that , He who holdeth back (letteth, viz. the evil), may be afterwards opposed to the adversary, who is described in the singular [2Th 2:8].-HE WHO NOW holdeth back (letteth), says he, will cease to be in the way (to be among men); and a little before, Now ye know THAT WHICH withholdeth (holds back), so as that he may be revealed in HIS TIME [and not sooner; but for , he would be revealed sooner than the proper time].
X. That check, whatever it is, does not restrain the apostasy and the mystery of iniquity-but the Man of Sin himself that iniquitous, or wicked one.-The mystery of iniquity, and he who holdeth back (letteth), fall upon one and the same time [are coincident in time]; but, when he who holdeth back, and that which holdeth back (withholdeth), have ceased to be in the way, then the Iniquitous one (Wicked) is revealed.
XI. At length out of the apostasy arises the Man of Sin; moreover, the political power of Rome, as a check, holds this very person back.-We clearly see, from the mutual comparison of the evil and the check upon it, and of the qualities of each, what both are. That Iniquitous one (Wicked), besides marks of falsehood, has also a certain degree of majesty, set off under a spiritual disguise, as if he were a god. The civil authority acts as a check upon him; and this authority was assuredly in the hands of the Romans in the time of Paul, and comprehended Jerusalem; Rome, and Corinth, from which he was writing, as also Thessalonica, to which he was writing, etc.
XII. The date of this epistle in no small degree helps the interpretation.-It was written in the time of Claudius; comp. Act 18:2; Act 18:5, with 1Th 3:1; 1Th 3:6 : and this very circumstance utterly refutes Grotius attempt to interpret the prophecy of Paul concerning Caligula. The ancients were of opinion, that Claudius himself was absolutely this check; for from this circumstance, as it appears, it came to pass, that they considered Nero, the successor of Claudius, to be the Man of Sin; and when the wickedness of Nero, how furious soever it might be, had not, however, filled up that measure, they accounted Domitian, and the other emperors of a similar character, as a kind of complement to make up the full measure of the evil. They certainly did not by this interpretation exhaust the prophecy; but yet they attained to some part of the truth, namely, that something connected with Rome is here intended, whatever might be the mode of its exhibition.
Let us go a little closer. The check is something with which the Thessalonians were unacquainted when Paul had been with them not long before: and now, when the same apostle wrote these things, they knew it, from the fact of the beginnings of the events corresponding [to his words] more than many, a little before, would have thought. This is evident from the antithesis between the fifth and sixth verses. The epistle was written about the eighth year of Claudius, 48 of the Dion. ra, as we show in Ordo temporum p. 278. At that period Claudius had expelled from Rome the Jews, whether believers or unbelievers, and this because the latter were constantly raising tumults; and in Juda itself, too, Cumanus was grievously oppressing them. Therefore, in the provinces, the prefects and procurators, in Italy and at Rome the Emperor himself, was holding back the evil. It is a remarkable proof of this fact, that the Jews did not kill James until after the death of Festus, and before the arrival of Albinus. Whatever they did on that occasion, they would willingly have done on other occasions against Christ, but could not for the Romans. So Gallio held them back at Corinth, Claudius Lysias at Jerusalem, Act 18:14; Act 18:21; Act 18:23. In the time of Paul, the Roman power certainly held back the evil; not immediately (directly): therefore it must have been mediately (indirectly). Moreover, the instrumentality or medium of holding it back was severity towards the Jews, who would have proceeded farther, if they had been permitted by the Romans. I shall willingly listen to an easier and simpler (I should be glad to hear a more ready and probable) interpretation.
XIII. When the check ceased to be in the way, that Iniquitous one [Wicked] is revealed.-This position agrees with the fifth, and yet it also differs from it. The former marks the long continuance of the check; the latter, the time of revealing the Iniquitous one [Wicked]. The coming of the Iniquitous one [Wicked] is according to the working of Satan in all power, and signs, and lying wonders, etc. This coming has not yet taken place, although its preludes are for a long time not wanting; therefore the check still exists. And it is evident from this most powerful argument, that the political power in the hands of the Romans is the check. For no other check, so powerful and so long-continued, will anywhere be found. This check, however, did not restrain the working of Satan, but the setting up of the dominion of the Iniquitous one [Wicked]; and when it is removed, Satan lends his aid to the Iniquitous one [Wicked].
We shall now take the assistance of the Apocalypse.
XIV. That Iniquitous one [Wicked] is the beast ascending out of the bottomless pit.-So long and so continuous is the evil described by Paul, iv., that it cannot but fall in at some period with the times of the apocalyptic beast; and the resemblance between the Iniquitous one [Wicked] and the beast is so great, the power so widely spread and so exalted, that they can only be one subject [they must be one and the same person or existence]. The Iniquitous one [Wicked] will not finally perish [his destruction will be deferred] until after the destruction of the beast; for in that battle, which is described in Revelation 19, the Lords enemies are so completely destroyed, that the calamity described by Paul cannot be extended to a period farther on. Moreover also the Iniquitous one [Wicked] will not perish previously [before the destruction of the beast, etc., in Revelation 19]: for he remains even till the appearing of the coming of the Lord, [2Th 2:8.]
XV. Therefore the whole evil described by Paul is strictly and intimately connected with the Roman empire.-What tie of relationship the apostasy and the Man of Sin himself had with the city Rome, could not be known by the Thessalonians, unless Paul taught them it face to face. The Apocalypse and the event teach us, and will teach posterity more and more fully. We then, according to our present ability, will institute a comparison.
XVI. That Iniquitous one [Wicked] is yet to come.-It is one and the same beast which ascends first from the sea, then from the bottomless pit. That beast has very much to do with the woman, who is Babylon, Rome. Sometimes it carries the woman, at length it destroys her with the assistance of the ten horns [Rev 17:16]. The beast out of the sea is the papacy of Hildebrand; but the beast from the bottomless pit, excepting the succession in the papacy (which does not take away the ancient tradition concerning the rise of Antichrist from the Jews, but leaves it in its own place [just as it finds it]), will have a quite new and singular character of wickedness, on account of which he is called the Man of Sin, etc. All these observations are demonstrated in my German and Latin interpretation of the Apocalypse. Antichrist, or the Man of Sin, as being about to come in the nineteenth century, could not be retarded by the Roman power of the first and following centuries, on which comp. Rev 8:9. Therefore the Roman Emperor will be among the ten kings; and when he, with the nine others, shall give his power to the beast, he will be taken out of the way, and will give place to the Man of Sin. The Roman power is the check even up to the time of the rising of the Iniquitous one [Wicked], who, after he has arisen, makes the whore desolate, with the assistance of the ten horns.
XVII. Rome is, notwithstanding, the channel in which the apostasy and the mystery of iniquity have flowed for many ages.-Claudius did not long exclude the Jews, and along with them the Christians, from Rome; a short time after, they returned, and with the good the evil also obtained abundant opportunity of being increased. The two parts of the evil are, the apostasy [falling away], and the mystery of iniquity. Apostasy from the faith, and or divisions, which lead men to forsake the doctrine of the apostles, are very closely connected; and the latter already at that time were arising at Rome on the part of some, who were under the influence of Satan; Rom 16:17, with which comp. Rom 2:20. Moreover, apostasy from the faith, bringing in doctrines concerning the worship of intermediate divinities (intercessors),[12] concerning the avoiding of marriage under pretence of spiritual perfection, and abstinence from meats, only indeed some kinds of meat, 1Ti 4:1; 1Ti 4:3, is peculiarly applicable to Rome, although it was long untainted by other heresies. The iniquity [ 2Th 2:7] chiefly consisted in the most deadly sin of pride, 2Th 2:3-4. The beginning of mans pride was his apostatizing from God; since his heart withdrew itself from Him who made him. For pride is the beginning of all sin.[13] Sir 10:14-15. The seeds and commencing fibres lay concealed in the elevation of human authority, in Petrism [I am of Cephas]; 1Co 1:12, note. Hence by degrees arose the primacy of the Bishop of Rome, and the whole system of the papacy.
[12] Alluding to the doctrines of 1Ti 4:1, not devils, as Engl. Vers.; but inferior divinities, genii, etc.-ED.
[13] The Wisdom of Sir 10:12-13; , , , .-ED.
XVIII. Also, now and then, the Pope very closely approaches the characteristics of the Man of Sin himself.-The Pope is in some respects the Man of Sin, while he eagerly promotes the transgression of the Divine law and the Divine commandments, and greatly impedes the observance of them, but defends with the utmost severity his own decrees: he is the son of perdition, in that (whilst) he has plunged innumerable souls into destruction, and has delivered to death immense multitudes of men either devoted to himself or in any way resisting him: he is opposed [2Th 2:4] to the majesty of Csar, formerly his master, and is exalted above all that is called God or worshipped, by the fact of his claiming as his right the highest authority, the highest worship, by his commanding angels, and subjecting the Emperor to himself. It is not merely once that the paroxysm of pontifical pride has broken out to such degree, that he called, or permitted himself to be called, god or vice-god [vicegerent of God]; and the solemn titles, Most Holy Lord (for godhead and holiness are synonymous in the language of Scripture), and, Most Blessed Father, have the same meaning: comp. Mat 19:17. Sometimes the Pope, as if he were the divine image[14] [or pageant representing God], is placed with his chair [comp. sitteth, 2Th 2:4] upon the altar [comp. in the temple, 2Th 2:4], by princes acting as bearers. Their due praise remains undiminished to the first bishops of Rome; but yet in the progress of time, by gradual advances in spiritual and civil authority, according to the order in the text, the lineaments are to be seen of that form which will put itself forth before the world as palpably as possible in that Iniquitous one [Wicked] in its own time.
[14] The Latin word is ferculum, one of whose meanings is, bearing in the hands the images of the gods. Csar had a ferculum decreed to him, which implies, that his statue was to receive the same honour as those of the gods. If I understand this passage aright, it means, that the Pope, as the earthly image or representative of God, was to be placed on the altar of God, to receive the same honour as God-TRANSL.
XIX. First he who withholdeth, next that which withholdeth, ceases to be in the way.-We have mentioned this circumstance already, 9: but here it comes to be repeated more strictly. He who withholdeth, is he who hath Rome under his sway; that is, heathen, or Christian emperors at Rome, or Constantinople; the kings of the Goths, and Lombards; again the Carlovingian and German emperors, from whom comes the wound of the sword, Revelation 8. This is He that withholdeth, going far into the middle of the times of the beast that arose out of the sea. Those princes so held back the papacy, as even notwithstanding to give it help; they so helped it, as notwithstanding to hold it back also. In the last time that which withholdeth is the power of Rome itself, when the beast carries the woman, and itself is not [Rev 17:8]. When that shall be removed out of the way, the Iniquitous one [Wicked] will be revealed.
XX. The Iniquitous one [Wicked] is revealed, when he begins to act with open wickedness.-Revelation is opposed to mystery, and the former is thrice mentioned, 2Th 2:3; 2Th 2:6; 2Th 2:8. Therefore that is not called revelation by which the Iniquitous one [Wicked] is convicted through the testimony of the truth; but that by which he himself, after the check is removed, acts with open wickedness, although few perceive (see through) the wickedness.
XXI. The appearance of the coming of Jesus Christ, by which the Iniquitous one [Wicked] will be destroyed, will precede the actual coming itself, and the last day.-This appearance, with the destruction of the beast, or the Iniquitous one [Wicked], is described, Rev 19:11, etc.: where these two, the beast and the false prophet, are cast alive into the lake of fire, that burns with brimstone; moreover the kings of the earth and their armies are slain, Rev 19:20-21. Lastly, the captivity of Satan and the kingdom of the saints follow. For the Apocalypse clearly interposes a thousand years between the destruction of the beast and the last day. But how will these years be reconciled with the language of Paul? Ans. Paul, looking back (referring here) to Daniel, as we shall afterwards see, at the same time implies those things, which are marked by the same prophet as about to happen between the destruction of the little horn and the end of the world, Dan 7:7; Dan 7:9; Dan 7:14; Dan 7:22; Dan 7:26-27. Many things long prior to the destruction of the beast, as well as also the entrance of Jesus Christ through suffering into glory, are connected with His coming in the clouds; Mat 26:64; Joh 21:22, notes. Therefore the same coming might be connected with the destruction of the adversary, which is a matter of very great importance between the two comings of Christ. And as the end of the world admitted of being (was able to be) connected with the destruction of Jerusalem, because the revelation of the intermediate events was not yet mature; so Paul might connect the coming of Christ with the destruction of the adversary, because [the revelation of] the thousand years were reserved for (against the time of giving) the Apocalypse, which much more clearly explains these points, so that the prophecy of Daniel itself may obtain light from the Apocalypse subsequently given. However, Paul appropriately [skilfully] terms it, the appearance of the coming, not the coming itself. It was not yet the time for more special information, and yet the Spirit of truth dictated those words to Paul, that they might exactly agree with the very things, which were afterwards to be more particularly revealed. The prophecy proceeds gradually. The Apocalypse speaks more explicitly than Paul; and Paul in this passage speaks more explicitly than the Lord Himself, before He was glorified; Mat 24:29 : where see the notes. Moreover we ought to interpret the more ancient and more involved expressions by such as are most recent and most distinct, and not abuse the former for the purpose of weakening and eluding the latter. Nay, even in actual fact the destruction of the adversary coheres (is connected) with the coming of Christ; for there are two things especially illustrious in the glory of Christ, namely, that He is the Son of God, and that He is coming to judgment. Concerning each of these the Scripture has a similar mode of speaking, which we should carefully observe. It alleges the generation of the Son as a thing then present [then vividly realized], as often soever as anything very worthy of the only-begotten of the Father occurs; Act 13:33, note. And thus it also represents [vividly presents to us] the glorious coming under the aspect of the judgments, which are altogether worthy of the Judge of the living and the dead; comp. Rom 2:16, note. The beast and the false prophet are first of all cast into the lake of fire at the appearance of the coming of the Lord Jesus; and when He actually comes, all who are not found written in the book of life are cast into the lake of fire. The first judgment is a prelude and altogether peculiar specimen of the second judgment; nay, it is in reality one and the same judgment, only separated by time, and out of the whole period [Rev 8:2 to Rev 11:15], falling under that portion which is marked now by the trumpet of the seventh angel.
The principal points of the subject-matter have been, I think, cleared up; and we shall now proceed to illustrate what remains, viz. the phrases or particular expressions.- , the apostasy [falling away]) The Greek article is frequent in this paragraph, – , and it is to be referred (ascribed) either to what Paul had previously said, or to the prophecies of the Old Testament.- , the Man of Sin) who is the greatest enemy of true righteousness. Paul so describes him, as to allude by way of contrast to Jesus Christ, and especially to the passage, Zec 9:9-10 : for the King of Zion is, 1) Righteous; 2) Full of salvation; 3) Meek, and riding on an ass: in short, He is the author of peace. But His enemy is, 1) The Man of Sin; 2) The son of perdition; 3) He opposes and exalts himself: in short, he is the Iniquitous one [Wicked]. For where justice and equity [as opposed to the Iniquitous one: nefarius, fas] flourish, peace flourishes. The whole benefit derived from Christ is indicated by peace. But the Iniquitous one [Wicked] occasions all misery and calamity. The law is holy and just and good; the , on the other hand, is profane and unjust and evil. Moreover, what Paul principally declares elsewhere concerning Jesus, he declares the exact reverse concerning the enemy, ascribing to him revelation and mystery, coming signs, etc.- , that son of perdition) who will both consign as many as possible headlong to destruction, and will himself go away to the deepest perdition, Rev 17:8; Rev 17:11.
Fuente: Gnomon of the New Testament
2Th 2:3
let no man beguile you in any wise:-[They were surrounded by many influences tending either to lead them into error and delusion or into unbelief. Whatever device they might adopt-spirit, letter, or whatnot-they were deceivers or deceived; they were warned not to be deceived by them.]
for it will not be, except the falling away come first,-A widespread apostasy from God, on the part of his followers, was to arise within the church. The foundation principle of the falling away is the assumption of the right to change or modify the laws and commandments of God.
and the man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition,-There has been much diversity in the religious world as to what is the man of sin, the son of perdition. Most Protestants say the Roman Catholic Church is the man of sin. I doubt if any organization is the man of sin. A principle was at work that would set aside Gods order and establish one of its own in its stead. It leads to ruin and perdition-is called the son of perdition.
Fuente: Old and New Testaments Restoration Commentary
for that day
The order of events is:
(1) The working of the mystery of lawlessness under divine restraint which had already begun in the apostle’s time 2Th 2:7
(2) the apostasy of the professing church 2Th 1:3; Luk 18:8; 2Ti 3:1-8.
(3) the removal of that which restrains the mystery of lawlessness 2Th 2:6; 2Th 2:7. The restrainer is a person–“he,” and since a “mystery” always implies a supernatural element (See Scofield “Mat 13:11”) this Person can be none other than the Holy Spirit in the church, to be “taken out of the way”; 2Th 2:7; 1Th 4:14-17.
(4) the manifestation of the lawless one 2Th 2:8-10; Dan 7:8; Dan 9:27; Mat 24:15; Rev 13:2-10
(5) the coming of Christ in glory and the destruction of the lawless one 2Th 2:8; Rev 19:11-21
(6) the day of Jehovah 2Th 2:9-12; Isa 2:12
Fuente: Scofield Reference Bible Notes
no man: Mat 24:4-6, 1Co 6:9, Eph 5:6
except: 1Ti 4:1-3, 2Ti 3:1-3, 2Ti 4:3, 2Ti 4:4
man: 2Th 2:8-10, Dan 7:25, 1Jo 2:18, Rev 13:11-18
the son: Joh 17:12, Rev 17:8, Rev 17:11
Reciprocal: Psa 89:22 – son Psa 89:44 – Thou Psa 102:23 – He weakened Pro 30:13 – General Jer 29:8 – Let Jer 37:9 – Deceive Dan 7:24 – another Mat 18:7 – for Mar 13:5 – Take Luk 21:8 – Take Joh 16:13 – he will show Act 5:36 – boasting Act 10:26 – Stand 1Co 11:26 – till 2Co 11:3 – so Gal 6:7 – not Phi 3:11 – by 2Th 2:6 – revealed Heb 10:39 – unto 2Pe 2:1 – even 2Pe 3:7 – and perdition Rev 9:1 – a star Rev 11:2 – it is Rev 12:9 – deceiveth Rev 17:4 – golden Rev 22:10 – for
Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge
THE SPIRIT OF ANTICHRIST
That day shall not come, except there come a falling away first, and that man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition.
2Th 2:3
The spirit of Antichrist is always in the world.
I. The spirit of Antichrist is the spirit of opposition to all moral restraint, and to all rule and authority. It is the spirit of corruption as St. Peter says, that is to say, of undoing and decomposition. Corruption is the opposite to life. Life builds up, corruption destroys.
II. The spirit of Antichrist is the spirit of hindering and forbidding the Church to do the work Christ has set her to do. It is the spirit that hates and would tread down worship offered to Christ. It is the spirit that abhors and would eliminate all definite belief in the truths of the gospel.
III. The antichristian spirit is not only engaged in attack from without, it is a corrupting spirit acting within, degenerating that which is good. Now we are expressly told that before the end the man of sin will be revealed, who is to oppose and exalt himself above all that is called God, or that is worshipped; so that he as God sitteth in the temple of God, showing himself that he is God.
IV. But the end is not yet.As you look into the summer sky on the advent of a storm, you see fitful flashes and hear distant rumblings before the tempest bursts with full fury on you; so throughout the age of the Christian Church we see the flash and hear the mutter of persecution, the signs preceding the advent of Antichrist and the coming of our Lord in glory. Such was the destruction of Jerusalem, such persecution following persecution; such in France, the outburst of the Revolutionbut the whole series of events, the full stress of that terrible time will not be yetnot till the end.
Rev. S. Baring-Gould.
Illustrations
(1) I cannot say that the Papacy is the Antichrist, but it has shown the antichristian spirit. It is founded on lies, for its claims rest on forged title-deeds, the Decretals; it has been a corrupting power, encouraging, sanctioning lying wonders, conferring indulgences on such as worship this and that image which the Pope solemnly crowns; it withdrew the cup from the laity, withheld the Bible from the people, revolutionised the divine order of the Church, by the Pope exalting himself over all the bishops of the Latin communion, making them derive their authority and mission from him; it has used torture and the sword and fire to exterminate those who revolted against its supremacy, and it has finally proclaimed its infallibility.
(2) The most striking foreshadowing of the great falling away, and the revolt against Christ and His kingdom, was shown on a small scale, and in one land onlyin the French Revolution. Then the Sunday was abolished and the week made to consist of ten days. The churches were desecrated and turned into debating club rooms, the worship of Christ was forbidden, and it was a matter of death for Christians to assemble for Divine worship, priests wherever caught were hung to a tree or the next lamp-post, and volleys of shot were poured upon those who assembled for prayer, and finally in place of God, in the temple of God, Human Reason was elevated to be publicly worshipped.
(SECOND OUTLINE)
THE MAN OF SIN
Very solemn, to the ear of faith, are all those deep notes of prophecy which foretell what shall be in the last days. Solemn in every age of the Church, the words and prophetic warnings seem to increase in solemnity as the ages roll by. Consider what Holy Scripture delivers concerning the great apostasy which shall usher in the end, and specially concerning the man of sin, the son of perdition, who is to be revealed before the final advent of Christ to judge the world. Would we make the teaching of the Spirit practical, we shall
I. As knowing that we have no assurance that Antichrist will not come in our own day, survey his features attentively as they are given in Gods Word, in order that we may know him if we see him. And
II. If exaltation of self against and above Godif a blasphemous assumption of the privileges and prerogatives of the Godhead be a prime note of Antichrist, then let us look warily in the direction of Rome.
III. But He is called the lawless one; and although superstition is ever near akin to unbelief, yet we must in fairness acknowledge that the licentiousness of speculation finds its most congenial atmosphere in other branches of the Church than the Roman. All may read the signs of the times, and must be aware that the nations of the north could contribute a feature to the man of sin, no less than those that dwell beyond the Alps.
IV. Keep these the great verities of faith, and suffer not the business or the calling, the family ties or the social duties, to elbow everything else clean out of your sight.
Dean Burgon.
Illustration
When we recall our Lords Prayer that all might be one as He with the Father, it is not possible to avoid the conclusion that the spirit of Antichrist will be the sectarian spirit striving to make Christs prayer of none effect. That there will be finally a great conjuration among all who hate the truth, or are jealous of the Church, and are in revolt against the moral law, is clearly laid down in Scripture, under the form of a great gathering against Jerusalem, and a final and terrible persecution, so terrible that men will fall away and deny the Faith so as to save their lives, or so as to stand well with the World Power; and doubtless there will be all sorts of attempts at compromise. The great bulk of men may have sufficient faith in Christ to wish to obey Him and worship Him, but will not have the moral courage to resist the power of the world when a confederate attack is made upon the Church.
Fuente: Church Pulpit Commentary
2Th 2:3. All who accepted this disquieting teaching were being deceived, and Paul bids them not to be deceived by any means. The words in italics denote that any information, from whatever source, that claims to teach this disquieting theory, is false. The second coming of Christ will not occur until after the falling away. Those words are from the Greek word APOSTASIA, which Thayer defines, “a falling away, defection, apostasy,” which is a name for the formation of centralized rule in the church, described in “general remarks” at the beginning of this chapter. Man of sin would be a term of general application, were it not for the description that follows through several verses. It shows it means the bishop who finally got to the head of the church as it came to be, and he was finally known as the Pope of Rome. He is called the son of perdition, because the first word means “one who is worthy of a thing” (Thayer).
Fuente: Combined Bible Commentary
2Th 2:3. Let no man deceive you by any means, either by professing superior enlightenment as if a spirit spoke through him, or by interpreting my words as if I had meant what he affirms.
The apostasy, of which Paul had spoken while at Thessalonica, and which our Lord predicted in Mat 24:12 as a characteristic of the last days. Comp. also the concluding words of the parable of the importunate widow, When the Son of man cometh, shall He find faith on the earth. This general going out from us of those who were not of us, this widespread falling away from faith in Christ, will apparently be produced by distressing outward circumstances, the perplexed and disturbed state of nations, and calamities of the kind most difficult to be borne. So that when our Lord speaks of this apostasy, pity rather than surprise or reproach is the pre-dominating sentiment in His mind.
The man of sin. This title might appropriately be used of an element existing in many men, as Paul elsewhere speaks in that sense of the old man; or it might be used as the designation of a class of men rather than of an individual, as we speak of the intemperate man; but when we read on and find that all the expressions Paul uses regarding the man of sin and his coming are not only personal but individual, we cannot but think he expected that the final outburst of evil would be headed by a personal Antichrist
Be revealed. Before Christ is revealed, Antichrist must first be revealed. The same term is used of both; strengthening the supposition that Paul speaks of a personal, individual Antichrist. Paul speaks of the revelation of the man of sin in contrast with the hidden working of iniquity which had already begun, 2Th 2:7. Even as Christ is now spiritually present in His Church, to be personally revealed more gloriously hereafter, even so the power of Antichrist is now secretly at work, but will hereafter be made manifest in a definite and distinctive bodily personality (Ellicott).
The son of perdition. The term applied to Judas, and signifying the most intimate connection of the person with perdition.
Fuente: A Popular Commentary on the New Testament
As if the apostle had said, “Let no man deceive you in this article of your faith, by any pretence whatsoever; for before Christ’s coming there shall come a great falling away from the catholic faith, and by that means the man of sin will be revealed, who is the son of perdition:”–
Note here, 1. Such a proneness there is in the nature and mind of man to embrace and entertain error, when once vented, that there is need of repeated dissuasives from it, and to guard persons against the poison and infatuation of it. Let no man deceive you by any means.
Note, 2. A general apostasy or defection of the visible church from the faith of Christianity, must be before Christ’s coming to judgment; Except there come a falling away first. It is foretold as a thing that would certainly come to pass.
Note, 3. The revelation of Antichrist declared, That man of sin shall be revealed, the son of perdition; where by the man of sin, understand not a particular individual person, but a society and succession of men, such as is found in and amongst the papacy, where the sodomy, blasphemy, incest, adultries, sorceries, murders, treasons, which are not only committed, but countenanced; not only acted, but authorized; do most evidently declare that there never was such an apostasy from Christianity since it had a being in the world, as is found amongst them.
Note, 4. This man of sin is also styled the son of perdition.
(1.) Actively, a destroying son, one that brings others to destruction.
(2.) Passively, a son that shall be destroyed; Antichrist and all his adherents shall be destroyed, utterly destroyed, by Jesus Christ, and his kingdom shall perish without any hope of recovery; first destroying, and at last destroyed.
Where note, That our apostle at the first, the very first, mentioning Antichrist, doth declare his destiny; at his first rising he declares his fall and ruin. That man of sin, the son of perdition.
Fuente: Expository Notes with Practical Observations on the New Testament
2Th 2:3-4. Let no man deceive you by any means By any of these ways fore-mentioned, or any other; for that day shall not come, unless a falling away, , the apostacy, come first The article here is emphatical, denoting both that this was to be a great apostacy, the apostacy, by way of eminence, (the general, grand departure of the whole visible church into idolatrous worship,) and that the Thessalonians had been already apprized of its coming. Although the Greek word here used often signifies the rebellion of subjects against the supreme power of the country where they live, or the revolt of soldiers against their general, or the hostile separation of one part of a nation from another; yet in Scripture it commonly signifies a departure, either in whole or in part, from a religious faith or obedience formerly professed, Act 21:21; Heb 3:12. Here it denotes the defection of the disciples of Christ from the true faith and worship of God, enjoined in the gospel. Accordingly, the apostle, foretelling this very defection, (1Ti 4:1,) says, , some shall apostatize from the faith. See the note on that verse. And that man of sin The head of this apostacy, given up to all sin himself, (Rev 13:5-6,) and a ringleader of others unto sin, 2Th 2:12; 2Th 2:14. If this idea be derived from any ancient prophet, it must be from Daniel, who hath described the like arrogant and tyrannical power, Dan 7:25; He shall speak great words against the Most High, and shall wear out the saints of the Most High, and think to change times and laws. See also Dan 11:26. Any man may be satisfied that St. Paul alluded to this description by Daniel, because he hath not only borrowed the ideas, but hath even adopted some of the phrases and expressions. The man of sin may signify either a single man, or a succession of men; the latter being meant in Daniel, it is probable that the same is intended here also. Indeed, a single man appears hardly sufficient for the work here assigned; and it is agreeable to the phraseology of Scripture to speak of a body, or a number of men, under the character of one. Thus a king (Dan 7:8.; Revelation 17.) is often used for a succession of kings, and the high-priest, (Heb 9:7; Heb 9:25,) for the series and order of high-priests. A single beast, (Daniel 7, 8.; Revelation 13.) often represents a whole empire or kingdom, in all its changes and revolutions. The woman clothed with the sun, (Rev 12:1,) is designed as an emblem of the true church, as the woman arrayed in purple and scarlet, (Rev 17:4,) is the portrait of a corrupt communion. This man of sin is said to be revealed when he enters on the stage, and acts as he is described. The son of perdition One who brings destruction upon others, both spiritual and temporal, (Rev 17:2; Rev 17:6,) and is devoted to destruction himself, 2Th 2:8. Thus the Papacy has caused the death of numberless multitudes both of opposers and followers, has destroyed innumerable souls, and will itself go to destruction. The son of perdition is also the denomination of the traitor Judas, (Joh 17:12,) which implies that the man of sin should, like Judas, be a false prophet, should betray Christ, and be devoted to destruction.
Who opposeth Or shall oppose, (the prophets speaking of things future as present,) and exalt himself above all Greek, , above every one, that is called God This is manifestly copied from Daniel; He shall exalt and magnify himself above every god, and speak marvellous things against the God of gods. Or that is worshipped , alluding to the title of the Roman emperors, , august, or venerable. He shall oppose and exalt himself, not only above inferior magistrates, who are sometimes called gods in holy writ, but even above the greatest emperors, and shall arrogate to himself divine honours; so that he, as God Assuming the authority of Christ; sitteth in the temple of God Exercises supreme and sovereign power over the visible church, as head thereof, even over all that profess Christianity. By the temple of God, the apostle could not well mean the temple of Jerusalem, because he knew very well that would be totally destroyed within a few years. It is an observation of the learned Bochart, that after the death of Christ the temple at Jerusalem is never called by the apostles the temple of God; and that when they mention the house or temple of God, they mean the Christian Church in general, or every particular believer; which indeed is very evident from many passages in their epistles: see 1Ti 3:15; 1Co 6:19; 2Co 6:16; Eph 2:19-22; 1Pe 2:5. Besides, in the Revelation by St. John, which was written some years after the destruction of Jerusalem, there is mention made of mens becoming pillars in the temple of God, (Rev 3:12,) which is a further proof that the sitting of the man of sin in the temple of God, by no means implies that he was to appear in the temple of Jerusalem. In short, the meaning of the verse is, that the wicked teachers, of whom the apostle speaks, would first oppose Christ by corrupting the doctrine of the gospel concerning him, and after that they would make void the government of God and of Christ in the Christian Church, and the government of the civil magistrate in the state, by arrogating to themselves the whole spiritual authority which belongs to Christ, and all the temporal authority belonging to princes and magistrates; showing himself that he is God Exercising all the prerogatives of God, accepting such titles, and doing such things, as, if they indeed belonged to him, would show him to be God: an exact description certainly of the Papal power.
Fuente: Joseph Bensons Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
let no man beguile you in any wise: for it will not be, except the falling away come first [Paul uses the article “the” because this apostasy was well known to the church, its coming having been announced by Jesus (Mat 24:10-12), and reiterated by Paul while at Thessalonica. This apostasy, or falling away, may be defined to be a desertion of the true religion and the true God], and the man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition [Literally, son of perishing. The man of sin is identical with the antichrist of 1Jo 2:18 . Though he is distinguished from Satan in verse 9, yet is he in a sense an incarnation of Satan, for as Satan entered into the heart of Judas (Joh 13:27), who was the first great apostate and son of perdition (Joh 17:12), so he shall enter into the heart of this second apostate and son of perdition, who shall be a man made up of sin, a veritable manifestation of concrete wickedness, and thus self-fitted for perdition. The language clearly shows that he is a person, but there is nothing to forbid us from regarding him as an official rather than an individual personality, as, for instance, a line of popes rather than an individual pope. Those who have denied the right to thus construe his personality, have for the most part straightway fallen into the solecism of interpreting the phrase “one that restraineth,” of verse 7, so as to make it mean a line of emperors, or succeeding generations of rulers in our human polity, or some other official personality that existed in Paul’s day and long afterward, though the assertion of personality is as strong in verse 7 as it is in verse 3. Antichrist does not cause the apostasy, but is rather the cap-sheaf of it, being revealed in connection with it, and exalted by it],
Fuente: McGarvey and Pendleton Commentaries (New Testament)
ARGUMENT 5
THE MAN OF SIN, POPE AND ANTICHRIST
3. Let no one deceive you in any way, because unless there may first come an apostasy and the man of lawlessness, the son of destruction may be revealed. The spirit of prophecy on Paul reveals certain events, destined to transpire before the return of our Lord, though giving him no dates as to the time of the predicted interventions. The great apostasy here revealed transpired in the fourth century, as the immediate result from the great change in the attitude of the political and religious world toward the Church. During the first three centuries following the conflagration of Rome, martyrs blood flowed incessantly, each succeeding emperor enforcing the cruel edict of Nero, pursuant to which Paul was beheaded, Peter crucified; and an indiscriminate massacre of the saints, especially their ejectment to the wild beasts in the Coliseum, followed in ten great persecutionary epochs. at intervals of about thirty years, thus mowing down each succeeding generation with the bloody sword of martyrdom, till the conversion of Constantine, A.D. 325. This radically revolutionized the relation of the Church to the world. Constantine, by an imperial edict, proclaimed Christianity the religion of the empire, thus bringing the pagan millions into the visible Church; the effect of which was to paganize Christianity, and degenerate the Church into Roman Catholicism. Martyr blood and fire had kept the Church humble, poor, unpopular, and despised three hundred years. Meanwhile she had no creed but the Bible. Now that she was become popular, influential, and wealthy, the great Council of Nice in Bithynia convenes, the Emperor Constantine sitting in a golden chair, presiding over it, while they make the first human creed, which has been followed by others in subsequent ages, thus recognizing and inaugurating human authority, going off into ecclesiasticism, no longer content with New Testament simplicity, substituting the Antinomian heresies for the gospel of purity, thus turning over the nominal Christian dispensation to the devil as the Antediluvian, Patriarchal, and Mosaic. The Man of sin (E.V., is the man of lawlessness). Greek Anomia, lawlessness, is from alpha, not, and nomos, law. Hence, it means the man who ignores the law; i.e., treats it with contempt. The law of God says positively and repeatedly, The soul that sinneth, it shall die; The wages of sin is death; He that committeth sin is of the devil. Satan counterfeits all of Gods work, and thus dudes the world, making them believe that he is God, and in this way rules earths millions. As the result of the great apostasy, sinning religion sailed out under the cognomen of Christianity, boldly offering the world salvation in sin in contradistinction to the Bible, which offers salvation from sin. Before the apostasy, Christianity was unpopular and terribly persecuted. As the result of the Constantinian apostasy, a system of popular Christianity, congenial to the world and provoking no persecution, has been propagated in all lands. However, God has always had a true people on the earth, and always will till he takes up his Bride. These faithful few who survived the great apostasy, soon so provoked the animosity of popular religion as again to become the victims of blood and slaughter. No wonder this Antinomian heresy of the sinning religion is denominated by the Holy Spirit, the Son of destruction; because nothing but wholesale ruin, death, and damnation can follow in its tread. Every institution is abstract before it can become concrete. Satan, in Pauls day, was busy sowing the seed of sinning religion in the hearts of the people; which in after ages, when martyrdom abated for a season, assumed a visible organization in the fallen Church, and concrete personality in the pope.
4. Who opposeth and exalteth himself above everything called God, or Divinity, so that he sitteth in the temple of God, shewing himself off that he is God. This applies directly to the pope, whose deluded votaries actually call him our lord god the pope. He exalts himself above God, in that he claims that, as the vicar of Christ and vicegerent of God, the government of the world, political and ecclesiastical, has been turned over into his hands, Christ having retreated away to heaven, and left him in the rulership of the world, to reign in his room and stead. This is the very definition of antichrist, as anti means instead of; hence antichrist is a person in the place of Christ. While the pope is the antichrist, all the preachers of a sinning religion offer the people salvation independently of Christ and in opposition to him, and consequently practically fall under the cognomen of antichrist, as the subordinates of the pope. The Bible positively reveals that all in sin are lost, and salvation is only possible in the eradication of sin, which none but Christ can do. Hence, the man who offers you salvation, without going to Christ and having your sins exterminated by Omnipotent Grace, assumes the attitude of antichrist; i.e., a substitute for Christ. John said there were many in his day. The world is flooded with them at the present day, just as Christ is the personal head of all true soul-savers, who faithfully hold him up as the only One competent to impart actual salvation in the utter destruction of sin; even so the pope of Rome is the personal head of all who offer salvation to the people on various lines of human substitution. While the pope is, and always has been, the antichrist in the proper sensei.e., the chief antichristthere is no doubt but in prophetic fulfillment he will in a future day assume much greater prominence in the development and manifestation of the antichristhood. Doubtless the great tribulation will open a wide door to the assumption of the old papistical claims of a universal pontificate, which has in all ages been the climacteric dream of the papacy. A similar door was opened in the fall of the Roman Empire, when the pope did boldly arrogate to himself this universal pontificate. When all human thrones shall fall (Daniel 7), rest assured the pope, pursuant to his long-cherished pretensions, will assume absolute autocracy, thus developing into the eighth head of the Roman beast (Revelation 17); as John says that this eighth is one of the seven, it must be the pope, because he is the only surviving head of the seven-headed Roman beast (Revelation 13), the other six; i.e., the kingdom, the consulate, the triumvirate, the dictatorship, the tribuneship, and the empire (the empire having long ago passed away), leaving the papacy the successor of the sixth imperial head, which received the deadly wound in the destruction of the empire by the Goths, Huns, and Vandals; the only survivor, the deadly wound on the imperial head having been healed in the papacy. During the terrible confusion of the tribulation, when all human thrones shall be cast down (Daniel 7), rely upon it the pope will endeavor to occupy and recuperate every fallen throne. For this he is making vigorous preparations in the United States of America as well as other countries. As the Christhood develops and culminates in the second Coming, doubtless Satan, the uncompromising rival of Christ, will perpetuate a corresponding development of the antichristhood. O what a grand open door for the magnification of the antichristhood, when all kingdoms shall totter and human governments collapse and fall amid the terrible revolutions of Armageddon (Revelation 16)! Paul here describes the pope as sitting in the temple of God, showing himself off that he is God. This prophecy received a signal fulfillment in 1870. On the day appointed to proclaim the dogma of his infallibilty in presence of fifty thousand people in St. Peters Cathedral, arrangements were made, at tremendous cost, to so encompass the multitude with concentric mirrors as to reflect the splendors of the popes person, most gorgeously decked with gems, rubies, diamonds, and gold, so as to throw an unearthly splendor from his person, dazzling the eyes of the multitude, and impressing them with the very presence of God. All this blasphemous enterprise was signally defeated by Him who sits upon the circle of the heavens, and turns the seasons round. At the very hour appointed for the blasphemous proclamation of the popes infallibility, God sent a terrible thunderstorm, so darkening the elements as to utterly disqualify them to use the mirrors, and thus permit the pope to show off himself as God.
6. Now you know that which hindereth, that He should be revealed in his time.
7. For already the mystery of lawlessness is working; only there is one hindering until he be taken from the midst. In Pauls day the Satanic mystery of a sinning religion in the normal Church of Christ was at work, which in after ages developed into the papacy and Romanism, and is now rapidly developing in the swift apostasy of all the Protestant Churches outside the holiness movement. The hindering one here mentioned by Paul as keeping back the manifestation of this man of lawlessnessi.e., the popewas the Roman Emperor, who would have killed the pope if he had risen in his day. The world could not have a Caesar and a pope at the same time. Hence, Caesar must fall before the pope can rise. Paul here very judiciously in this prophecy withholds the personal mention of the Roman Emperor, as he very probably would have expedited his own martyrdom by a direct statement. It is a historic fact that the bishop of Rome, who became pope, actually did assume supremacy over the Roman world soon after the fall of the emperor, and has claimed it ever since, and is only now awaiting an opportunity to enforce his claim, which he will doubtless find in the great Tribulation.
8. And then that lawless one shall be revealed, whom the Lord Jesus will destroy by the breath of his mouth, and annihilate by the brightness of his presence. The breath of his mouth evidently means the Bible. (2Ti 3:16.) All Scripture is given by inspiration of God. The Greek says, All Scripture is God breathed; i.e., the Bible from Alpha to Omega is the breath of God. O how the Bible has been destroying the power of the pope the last two hundred years! The sword of the Spirit hews the papistical pretensions all to pieces wherever it goes. If you would successfully fight the devil and the pope, take the Bible all the time. Will annihilate him by the brightness of His presence. John devotes four chapters (Revelation 16, 17, 18, 19) to a climacteric description of the great Tribulation. In the sixteenth chapter, the bloody wars of Armageddon shake all kings from their thrones. In the seventeenth chapter, antichrist lays claim to all the vacated thrones. In the eighteenth chapter the tide turns terrifically against antichrist in the fall of Babylon, his Bride. In the nineteenth chapter there is a mighty culmination. Christ rides forth on the white horse. All the kings of the earth are marshaled against him, only to suffer signal defeat and final overthrow. Last of all the rivals of Christ on the earth (except Satan), Babylon having fallen and the kings all perished, still pope and Mohammed survive upon the earth, hopeful again to raise up armies and Churches. But we see them
both cast alive into the lake of fire that burneth with brimstone. (Rev 19:20.)
The next verse says,
The rest were slain by the sword proceeding out from the mouth of him that sitteth upon the horse;
i.e., all their leaders having been taken out of the world, the surviving millions inhabiting the globe at the close of the Tribulation will all be converted to God, there being no devil on the earth, either personally, through his demoniacal myrmidons, nor through human agency, to lead them.
9. Whose coming is according to the working o Satan in all power, signs, and wonders of falsehood. This is the coming of the pope; i.e., antichrist. Jannes and Jambres in the days of Moses wrought miracles by the power of the devil. Satan can perform works so far superhuman as to be incomprehensible by us; i.e., miraculous in our estimation. Though he is a finite being, and utterly incompetent to compete with God, yet he can do works so far above our comprehension as to pass off currently for miracles. The Tribulation will be the great final conflict, in which, doubtless, Satan, through the pope and others, will dazzle the eyes of the world with his miracles, deceiving, if possible, even the elect.
10. In every delusion of unrighteousness to them that perish, because they did not receive the Divine love of the truth, that they might be saved. This agape, so prominent in the New Testament, is poured out in the heart by the Holy Ghost (Rom 5:5), and is the very essence of Holy Ghost religion, and the only thing that gives you the Divine nature and saves you. While the Bible is going to the ends of the earth, the division here is rapidly being drawn between the savable and unsavable people. Proportionately to the circulation of the Scriptures, infidelity is on the increase, as action always produces reaction, and Satan works wherever God works, contesting every inch of ground, and dividing the spoils with him, the calling out of the elect always revealing the non-elect.
11. Therefore God sends on them the working of delusion, that they may believe a lie,
12. That they may all be condemned who believe not the truth, but take pleasure in unrighteousness. The world is all on probation, being duly tested and tried for the unchangeable state of eternity. Satan could not be in the world if God did not permit him, as in due time he is going to take him out. (Revelation 20.) The culmination is rapidly developing, and the gospel, with unprecedented expedition, is speeding its flight to every nation, revealing the appreciative elect in every land, and rendering conspicuous the non-elect millions, who are fast ripening for destruction. Though the Bible is in every home in many countries, how few comparatively read, believe, and obey it! It lies on every pulpit, to be insulted with the human dogmata of a sinning religion. The issues of eternity are culminating on all sides. How very few have the grit and grace to preach the Word as it is, fearless of men and devils! If God were to save people against their will, he must dehumanize them. When they do not will to receive his truth in the love of it, what can he do but leave them in the hands of the devil, to believe a lie (and that lie is a sinning religion), and all be damned who do not believe the truth, but take pleasure in unrighteousness. Gods religion is self-denial throughout. Satans counterfeit offers you salvation and heaven without self-denial. The people of this world will have the pleasures of sin. If they become religious, they still hold on to the worlds sinful pleasures, thus worshipping the devil instead of God, believing his lies rather than Gods truth, and receiving damnation instead of salvation. We should expedite the gospel to the ends of the earth for the sake of the elect; meanwhile the non-elect, who reject and abide under the delusions of Satan, will only plunge into a hotter hell than if they had never heard the silver trumpet blow.
Fuente: William Godbey’s Commentary on the New Testament
Verse 3
A failing away; an apostasy.–Be revealed; openly appear.
Fuente: Abbott’s Illustrated New Testament
2:3 Let no man deceive you by any means: {3} for [that day shall not come], except there come a falling away first, and {e} that man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition;
(3) The apostle foretells that before the coming of the Lord, there will be a throne set up completely contrary to Christ’s glory, in which that wicked man will sit, and transfer all things that appertain to God to himself: and many will fall away from God to him.
(e) By speaking of one, he singles out the person of the tyrannous and persecuting antichrist.
Fuente: Geneva Bible Notes
Paul explained that three events had to take place before the judgments of the day of the Lord began (i.e., the judgments of the Tribulation). These were the apostasy (2Th 2:3), the unveiling of the man of lawlessness (2Th 2:3-4; 2Th 2:8), and the removal of the restraint of lawlessness (2Th 2:6-7). The apostle presented these in logical rather than chronological order in this passage. The word "first" refers to the fact that the apostasy will occur at the very beginning of the day of the Lord, and before the revelation of the man of sin. [Note: Thomas, pp. 320-21; idem, Evangelical Hermeneutics, pp. 72-75.]
One major event is the "apostasy" (2Th 2:3, lit. the falling away). The English word "apostasy" is a transliteration of the Greek word apostasia. By definition an apostasy is a departure, an abandoning of a position formerly held (cf. Jos 22:22 LXX; Act 21:21).
"In classical Greek the word apostasia denoted a political or military rebellion; but in the Greek Old Testament we find it used of rebellion against God (e.g. Jos. xxii. 22), and this becomes the accepted Biblical usage. Paul’s thought is that in the last times there will be an outstanding manifestation of the powers of evil arrayed against God." [Note: Morris, The Epistles . . ., p. 126.]
It seems that Paul referred here to the departure from the Christian faith of professing (not genuine) Christians soon after the Rapture, at the beginning of the day of the Lord. This was not the same apostasy he and other apostles spoke of elsewhere when they warned of departure from the faith before the Rapture (1Ti 4:1-3; 2Ti 4:3-4; Jas 5:1-8; 2 Peter 2; 2Pe 3:3-6; Jude).
"It is not so much forsaking one’s first love and drifting into apathy that is meant, as setting oneself in opposition to God." [Note: Idem, The First . . ., p. 219.]
". . . it seems likely that the apostasy Paul had in mind expanded on Jewish apocalyptic expectations and envisioned a dramatic and climactic falling away from the worship of the true God (by both Jews and some portion of the Christian church) as a part of the complex of events at the end of the age." [Note: Martin, p. 234.]
The portion of the Christian church in Paul’s view would be the non-genuine Christians who compose Christendom. "Christendom" refers to all professing Christians, genuine and non-genuine. Such a departure had begun in Paul’s day (1Ti 4:1-3; 2Ti 4:3-4; Jas 5:1-8; 2 Peter 2; 2Pe 3:3-6; Jude). However it had not yet reached the proportions predicted to characterize "the apostasy" about which Paul had instructed his readers when he was with them (cf. 2Th 2:5). When the Rapture takes place and all true Christians leave the earth, this apostasy will overwhelm the human race.
"This worldwide anti-God movement will be so universal as to earn for itself a special designation: ’the apostasy’-i.e., the climax of the increasing apostate tendencies evident before the rapture of the church." [Note: Thomas, "2 Thessalonians," p. 322.]
"It appears more probable from the context that a general abandonment of the basis of civil order is envisaged. This is not only rebellion against the law of Moses; it is a large-scale revolt against public order, and since public order is maintained by the ’governing authorities’ who ’have been instituted by God,’ any assault on it is an assault on a divine ordinance (Rom 13:1-2). It is, in fact, the whole concept of divine authority over the world that is set at defiance in ’the rebellion’ par excellence." [Note: Bruce, p. 167. Cf. David A. Hubbard, The Second Epistle to the Thessalonians," in The Wycliffe Bible Commentary, p. 1363.]
Some pretribulationists take a different view. They believe this "apostasy" is a reference to the Rapture, and some of them find support for their view in Paul’s reference to the Rapture (2Th 2:1). [Note: E.g., E. Schuyler English, Re-Thinking the Rapture, pp. 67-71; John R. Rice, The Coming Kingdom of Christ, p. 188-91; and Kenneth S. Wuest, Prophetic Light in the Present Darkness, pp. 38-41.]
"Nowhere else does the Scripture speak of the rapture as ’the departure.’ A departure denotes an act on the part of the individual or company departing. But the rapture is not an act of departure on the part of the saints. In the rapture the church is passive, not active. At the rapture the church is ’caught up’ or ’snatched away,’ an event wherein the Lord acts to transport believers from earth into His presence (1Th 4:16-17). Everything that takes place with the believers at the rapture is initiated by the Lord and done by Him. Paul has just referred to the rapture as ’our gathering together unto him’ (2Th 2:1); why then should he now use this unlikely term to mean the same thing?" [Note: Hiebert, p. 306.]
Another major event, in addition to "the apostasy," is the unveiling of "the man of lawlessness" (2Th 2:3). This is a person yet to appear who will be completely lawless and whom God will doom to everlasting destruction. The prophet Daniel spoke of such a person. He will make a covenant with the Jews but then break it after three and a half years (Dan 9:27). The breaking of that covenant seems to be the event that unmasks this individual for who he is, the opponent of Christ. He will eventually seek to make everyone worship himself and will claim to be God (cf. Rev 13:5-8). The reference to him taking his seat in the temple of God (2Th 2:4) may be figurative representing him as taking the highest position possible. More likely it is literal in which case the material temple of God that will stand in Jerusalem during the second half, at least, of the Tribulation is in view (cf. Dan 11:36). [Note: See John F. Walvoord, "Will Israel Build a Temple in Jerusalem?" Bibliotheca Sacra 125:498 (April-June 1968):99-106; Thomas S. McCall, "How Soon the Tribulation Temple?" Bibliotheca Sacra 128:512 (October-December 1971):341-51; idem, "Problems in Rebuilding the Tribulation Temple," Bibliotheca Sacra 139:513 (January-March 1972):75-80; and Bruce, p. 169.] Amillennialists, who do not believe in a future reign of Christ on the present earth, take this temple as the one that stood in Jerusalem when Paul wrote this epistle. [Note: E.g., Wanamaker, p. 246.] This person, the Antichrist, had not yet appeared when Paul wrote, nor has he appeared yet (cf. 1Jn 2:18). [Note: See the excursus on Antichrist in ibid., pp. 179-88.]
"In A.D. 40, only a few years before Paul wrote this letter, Gaius Caesar (Caligula), who had declared his own divinity, attempted to have his image set up in the holy of holies in Jerusalem." [Note: Martin, p. 237.]
"All attempts to equate the Man of Lawlessness with historical personages break down on the fact that Paul was speaking of someone who would appear only at the end of the age." [Note: Morris, The First . . ., p. 221.]