Miles de Libros Cristianos Gratis. Accede a nuestra Biblioteca Virtual

Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of 2 Thessalonian 2:6

Para un estudio avanzado de: “Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of 2 Thessalonian 2:6” utilice nuestra app.

And now ye know what withholdeth that he might be revealed in his time.

6. And now ye know ] After this allusion: “now that yon call to mind what I used to say about the final struggle with the powers of evil, that will precede Christ’s coming.”

(ye know) what withholdeth ] Better, that which restraineth rendered “letteth” in 2Th 2:7; only it is masculine there, denoting personal agency; here neuter, indicating a principle or power. The Thessalonians not only knew what the restraining influence was, they were acquainted with it; it lay within, the range of their experience. We have not therefore to look far a-field for this “restraint.” A hint was sufficient, verbum sapientibus; more than a hint would have been dangerous.

that he might be revealed in his time ] The R. V. is more exact: to the end that he may be revealed in his own season. The unnamed subject is the dread personality whose form looms through this paragraph in ever-growing proportions.

With this ver. comp. 1Ti 6:14-15; where we read of “the appearing of the Lord Jesus, which in its own times He shall show, Who is the blessed and only Potentate” (comp. Act 1:7). As Christ’s advent has its proper season reserved for it, so has that of Antichrist. To this end the restraining power operates, holding back and setting bounds to human lawlessness, until the set time has come for its final outbreak and revelation.

This order of things belongs to God’s purposes. If He allows moral evil to exist in His creatures (and its possibility seems to be inseparable from moral freedom), yet He knows how to control its activity, till the time shall come when its full manifestation will best subserve its overthrow and judgement. This “season” of the Man of Lawlessness, in whom the bad element in human nature gets at length full play, will be the last and worst of many such crises; chiefest of which was that of Luk 22:53: “This is your hour,” said Jesus to His enemies, “and the power of darkness.”

Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges

And now ye know what withholdeth – Margin, holdeth. The reference is, to something that then operated to constrain or hold back the obvious tendency of things, so that the man of sin should not at once appear, or so that things should not soon so develop themselves as to give rise to this anti-Christian power. There were causes at work even then, which would ultimately lead to this; but there was also something which checked the tendency of things, so that the revelation or development of the man of sin was put off to a future period. The obvious meaning of this would be, that, when the apostle wrote, there was a tendency to what would occur under the great apostasy, and that this would soon develop itself if it were not restrained. If the reference is to the papacy, this would consist in corruptions already existing in the church, having a resemblance to those which afterward existed under that system, or which were the germ of that system.

If there was a tendency toward the concentration of all power in an individual in the church, – if there was an assumption of authority by one class of ministers above another, – if there was a denial of the parity of the clergy, the tendency would have been to that ultimate assumption of authority which is found in the Romish hierarchy. But conjecture is useless as to what was the precise form in which this tendency then began to develop itself. That the corruptions early began in the church which terminated in the papacy, and which led on directly to it, we know; and that the apostle was able to foresee and predict such a final development, shows that he was under the influence of inspiration. It is not known precisely what is referred to by the phrase what withholdeth, to katechon. The phrase means properly, something that holds back, or restrains.

The word here is in the neuter gender, What withholdeth. In the following verse it is in the masculine gender, ho katechon – he that letteth, or withholdeth; and the reference would seem to be to some agency or state of things under the control of an individual, or of some civil power, that then operated as a restraint on the natural tendency of things. Of this, the apostle says, they had had full information; but we can only conjecture what it was. The restraining power of anything controlled by an individual, or of any government, or the restraining power of God, would meet all that the phrase implies. The most natural interpretation is that which refers it to civil power, meaning that there was something in the form of the existing administration which would prevent this development until that restraint should be removed. The supposition that there was even then a tendency to concentrate all ecclesiastical power at Rome, and that while the civil authority remained there it would not suffer ecclesiastical power to grow to the exorbitant height which it ultimately reached, will meet all that is implied in the language.

That he might be revealed in his time – The man of sin. The meaning is, that there was then a restraint operating which would prevent the development of this anti-Christian power until the proper time; that is, until the state of the world should be such that in the divine arrangements it would be proper to permit it. It was not to be permitted until the gospel should be extensively preached, and had had an opportunity of showing its fair effects on the nations; until it had become so planted and established that even the rise of this anti-Christian power could not effectually uproot it. If the man of sin had been permitted to rise at once, the consequence might have been that the new religion would have been crushed, so that it could never have revived again. There was then a providential arrangement by which this growth of wickedness should be checked and restrained, until the new religion should take deep root in the earth, and its perpetuity should be secured. Then the great trial was to be permitted under the man of sin.

Fuente: Albert Barnes’ Notes on the Bible

2Th 2:6-7

And now ye know what withholdeth

The restraining power and its withdrawal

What is this restraining power?

1. The explanation, now so difficult, was no difficulty to the Thessalonians. They knew what it was; and the Church of the first three centuries said without hesitation that it was the Roman Empire.

2. History has taught us the literal incorrectness of this, for the Roman Empire has passed away, and it is to play with language to regard it as living on in the German or Austrian Empires. This fact modified the interpretation of the later fathers, who regarded it as the restraining discipline of Divine order; and Christian thinkers are now coming to regard it as the regulated social order, that spirit of obedience to law which is the direct antagonist to the spirit of lawlessness which was embodied in ancient Rome; but this spirit is sustained by the working of the Spirit of God.

3. As a matter of fact the spirit of religion has been in all ages the restraining influence. Man is naturally attracted to lawlessness. Within Christian nations there have been the elements of destruction, but they have been held in check in three ways.

(1) Christianity has created and sustained a public opinion which has supported law and is antagonistic to lawlessness.

(2) It has called the conscience in to the support of constituted order because it has taught men that that order has supernatural sanction.

(3) It has created and administered a healthy discipline and taught men that obedience to the law of righteousness is the true regulation of life. For fifteen hundred years politicians have been ready to recognize this restraining influence.

4. By Gods will there are two great coordinate authorities, the civil and the ecclesiastical; He would have these work in their own sphere, the Church not invading the province of the State, and vice versa. And the Church has thus gone on in union with the State exercising its restraints.

II. What is meant by this power being taken out of the way? I believe it to be that crisis in our race which in the Apocalypse is called the Fall of Babylon–the collapse of the ecclesiastical influence in politics.

1. Babylon is represented as a harlot, a term distinctly applied in the Old Testament, not to heathenism, but to a faithless Church. And so in the New Testament it is only the professed Church that can fall into that depth of iniquity.

2. Turn to Rev 17:1-18 and Babylon is riding, controlling, guiding a scarlet-coloured beast. Afterwards there is the bitterest antagonism, and the beast and ten kings rise up against the apostate Babylon and treat her shamefully.

3. Now go back to mediaeval Europe, and the one arresting political feature is the Church. The Pope is virtually king of kings and lord of lords. In those days priests were judges, ecclesiastics, politicians, and the mystic woman is seen riding on the beast–the Church at least lending her authority to the maintenance of civil order. But her position was full of danger. It was the Masters temptation to world empire over again. Christendom failed where the Master won, and sought to realize a true conception by false means. She lost her spirituality and fell under the power of a mere secular ecclesiastieism. Contrast the Church of the Middle Ages with that of the first.

4. You cannot be surprised at people identifying Babylon with the Papacy, for the description of the apostle almost necessarily leads us to think of Rome. The spirit that rules the Roman see is of the earth earthy. Its policy is ruled not so much by principle as by the intricacies of human politics, and it is ever swayed by the three sad spirits that are predicted of mystic Babylon–ambition, covetousness, and luxury. The ideal of Ultramontanism, that the Church on earth is a perfect entity is true, but its sin is that it is the material realization of a conception that is emphatically spiritual.

5. What is the effect? This, that as the claims of the ecclesiastical spirit have become more and more intense, the nations of the world have revolted against the power with which for centuries they have been in closest alliance, Is not this the case in France, Germany, Belgium, and even Spain? Where can we find a country whose Church gives obedience to the Papacy that is not in conflict with the Papacy?

6. But this is not only with the Churches that own obedience to Rome. What about the great Eastern churches who have delivered up so much of their power to the Czar? What about our own? Is truth never compromised for expediency? Nay, the spirit of corruption has permeated Christendom, and our position is one of humiliation before God. And now mark the movements that are going on. Society and civilization for fifteen hundred years have had a Christian basis, but both are being constructed on a secular basis (See Leckys chapter on the Advance of Secularizing Polities).

Conclusion: What then is our position?

1. We must recognize the withdrawal of this restraining influence of civilization, and in it a warning of the approaching Advent. Christ may see fit to delay–but Be ye ready.

2. We should do all that in us lies to perpetuate the ministry and the restraining power that we may lengthen the days of opportunity for the race. (Canon Body.)

Restraints removed

Since a body falls to the ground in consequence of the earths attraction on each of its molecules, it follows that, everything else being the same, all bodies, great and small, light and heavy, ought to fall with equal rapidity, and a lump of sand without cohesion should, during its fall, retain its original form as perfectly as if it were compact stone. The fact that a stone falls more rapidly than a feather is due solely to the unequal resistances opposed by the air to the descent of these bodies. The resistance opposed by the air to falling bodies is especially remarkable in the case of falling liquids. The Staubbach in Switzerland is a good illustration. An immense mass of water is seen falling over a high precipice, but before reaching the bottom it is shattered by the air into the finest mist. In a vacuum, however, liquids fall, like solids, without separation of their molecules. The resistance opposed by the customs and ethics of society is the reason why many men are deterred in a rapid fall into ruin. Take away all the resistance which etiquette, conventional morality, philanthropy and religion, offer to the downfall of men, and, like things in a vacuum, how sadly fast the descent would become. Many men in respectable elevation owe their adventitious position to the happy accident of strong resistance offered to their fall by the circumstances and influences surrounding. (Prof. Ganot.)

Fuente: Biblical Illustrator Edited by Joseph S. Exell

Verse 6. And now ye know what withholdeth] I told you this among other things; I informed you what it was that prevented this man of sin, this son of perdition, from revealing himself fully.

Fuente: Adam Clarke’s Commentary and Critical Notes on the Bible

And now ye know what withholdeth: the apostle it seems had told them, as of his coming, so of what at present withheld the revealing of him. And what this was is difficult to know now, though it seems these Thessalonians knew it: there are many conjectures about it. This I shall say in general:

1. It was something that the apostle thought not safe openly to declare in writing; else he would not have written of it so obscurely.

2. It was both a thing, and a person; a thing, , in this verse, that which withholdeth; and a person, as in the next verse, , he who letteth.

3. It was also such a thing and such a person as were to be removed out of the way, not totally, but as they were hinderances of this revelation.

Expositors, both popish and protestant, pitch upon the Roman emperor and empire as most probably meant here by the apostle; and therefore he wrote not plainly, lest by writing of the taking away that empire, which the Romans thought to be eternal, he might stir up their hatred against the Christians. Some understand it of the removing only the seat of the emperor from Rome to Constantinople, whereby the bishop of Rome had opportunity to grow up into greater power. The popish writers understand it of the total destruction of the empire, which because they see not yet done they conclude the man of sin is not yet revealed. Our protestant writers understand it only of such a weakening of the empire and imperial dominion, as gave the bishop and clergy of Rome advantage to rise up into power both spiritual and secular; as some learned writers have given an account thereof. When the empire was broken into ten kingdoms, the imperial power of the emperors was much weakened; and being afterwards united in the pope as an ecclesiastical monarch, he grew up, and the imperial power declined, the grandeur of them both could not stand together. And this is the beast with the ten horns, and ten crowns upon the horns, which is spoken of, Rev 13:1; whereupon this beast is worshipped, and the voice is: Who is like unto the beast? who is able to make war with him? 2Th 2:4. Some of the ancient fathers had this sense of the text: see Tertul. de Resurrect. 1. 4. c. 24. Chrysost. in locum. Aug. de Civ. Dei, 1. 19. c. 20. Jerome, when he heard of the taking of Rome by Alaricus, expected the coming of antichrist not far off. Whereupon the ancient church did pray that the Roman empire might continue long, that his coming might be delayed: Tertul. Apol. c. 32,39. But it is now evident how it is fallen from what once it was. The eastern part is under the dominion of the Turk; the western divided into ten distinct kingdoms under distinct governments; and in Germany, where it is most remaining, the empire is little more than titular; and Italy and Rome wholly in the popes possession: and hence this man of sin hath been long since revealed.

That he might be revealed in his time: as God appoints seasons for all his works, so for the revealing of him, as also for his ruin.

Fuente: English Annotations on the Holy Bible by Matthew Poole

6. now ye knowby my havingtold you. The power must have been one “known” to theThessalonians.

what withholdeththatwhich holds him back; “keeps him in check”:the power that has restrained the man of sin from his full and finaldevelopment, is the moral and conservative influence of politicalstates [OLSHAUSEN]:the fabric of human polity as a coercive power; as “hewho now letteth” refers to those who rule that polity bywhich the great upbursting of godlessness is kept down [ALFORD].The “what withholdeth” refers to the general hindrance;“he who now letteth,” to the person in whom thathindrance is summed up. Romanism, as a forerunner of Antichrist,was thus kept in check by the Romanemperor (the thenrepresentative of the coercive power) until Constantine, havingremoved the seat of empire to Constantinople, the Roman bishop bydegrees first raised himself to precedency, then to primacy, and thento sole empire above the secular power. The historical fact fromwhich Paul starts in his prediction was probably the emperorClaudius’ expulsion of the Jews, the representative of theanti-Christian adversary in Paul’s day, from Rome, thus “withholding”them in some degree in their attacks on Christianity; this suggestedthe principle holding good to the end of time, and about to find itsfinal fulfilment in the removal of the withholding person orauthority, whereupon Antichrist in his worst shape shall startup.

that he might beGreek,“in order that”: ye know that which keeps him back, inGod’s purposes, from being sooner manifested, “in order thathe may be revealed in his own time” (that is, thetime appointed by God to him as his proper time for beingmanifested), not sooner (compare Da11:35). The removal of the withholding power will be when thecivil polity, derived from the Roman empire, which is to be, in itslast form, divided into ten kingdoms (Rev 17:3;Rev 17:11-13), shall, withits leading representative head for the time being (“he who nowletteth,” Greek, “withholdeth,” as in 2Th2:6), yield to the prevalent godless “lawlessness” with”the lawless one” as its embodiment. The elect Churchand the Spirit cannot well be, as DEBURGH suggests, thewithholding power meant; for both shall never be wholly“taken out of the way” (Mt28:20). However, the testimony of the elect Church, andthe Spirit in her, are the great hindrance to the rise of theapostasy; and it is possible that, though the Lord shall have afaithful few even then, yet the full energy of the Spirit in thevisible Church, counteracting the energy or “working”of “the mystery of lawlessness” by the testimony of theelect, shall have been so far “taken out of the way,” orset aside, as to admit the manifestation of “the lawlessone”; and so DEBURGH’S’S view may beright (Luk 18:8; Rev 11:3-12).This was a power of which the Thessalonians might easily “know”through Paul’s instruction.

Fuente: Jamieson, Fausset and Brown’s Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible

And now ye know what withholdeth,…. Or hinders the revelation of the man of sin, or antichrist; by which is meant not the Apostle Paul, though he by his ministry was a very great hinderance of the growth of error, and the spread of evil practices in the churches, and so of the more open appearance of the man of sin in his forerunners; and after his departure from Ephesus, and imprisonment at Rome, and suffering death, there was a great falling off in the churches, and among professors of religion, which made way for the manifestation of antichrist in due time: nor the preaching of the Gospel, in its power and purity, in the several parts of the world; though so long as this obtained, got ground, and gained success, the man of sin could not show his head; and therefore it must, as it did, decline, and was gradually taken away that he might appear: nor the Spirit of God, as the spirit of truth and holiness, though as long as he continued in his gifts and operations of grace in the churches, they were preserved from antichristian doctrine and worship; but when he removed from them, this enemy and adversary of Christ and his Gospel came in like a flood: nor the general defection in 2Th 2:3 though that was to be previous to the revelation of antichrist, and was to be what would usher him in; nor could he appear until the wickedness of men was come to a pitch, that they would be ready to receive him, and pay homage and worship to him: nor is the decree of God meant, though till the time came fixed by God for his appearance, the decree must be a bar in his way; since as there is a time for every purpose, nothing can come to pass till that time comes: but by that which withheld, let or hindered the open appearance of antichrist, were the Roman empire and emperors; these stood in his way, and while this empire lasted, and the emperors wore the imperial crown, and sat on the throne, and held the government in their hands, the popes could not come at the height of their ambition, dignity, and authority, nor shine in their glory; nor could the whore of Babylon take her seat, and sit upon the seven hills of Rome until the Roman emperor was taken out of the way: this therefore hindered,

that he might be revealed in his time. The Ethiopic version renders it, “until his time appointed came”: wherefore till the time that God had fixed for the appearance of this monster of iniquity, this son of perdition, the Roman empire must continue, and Roman emperors must keep their place and dignity to prevent his appearance sooner: the reason why the apostle expresses this not in plain words, but in an obscure manner, and with so much caution, was, that he might not offend the Roman emperors, and provoke them to a severe persecution of them as seditious persons, that sought the destruction of the empire: the word here used, which is rendered “withholdeth”, or “letteth”, as in the next verse, signifies a ruler or governor, and answers to the Hebrew word , “to keep back, or restrain”; and which is used of kings, who by their laws and government restrain and withhold people from doing what they would; see 1Sa 9:17 to which the apostle, who well understood the Hebrew language, doubtless had reference; so , is rendered, “a magistrate”, in Jud 18:7.

Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible

That which restraineth ( ).

And now you know ( ), says Paul in this cryptic apocalyptic passage. Unfortunately we do not know what Paul means by

that which restrains (holds back, ), neuter here and masculine in verse 7 . “This impersonal principle or power is capable also of manifesting itself under a personal form” (Milligan). “He is Satan’s messiah, an infernal caricature of the true Messiah” (Moffatt). Warfield (Expositor, III, iv, pp. 30ff.) suggested that the man of lawlessness is the imperial line with its rage for deification and that the Jewish state was the restraining power. But God overrules all human history and his ultimate purpose is wrought out.

To the end that ( ). Another example of and the infinitive for purpose.

In his own season ( ). Note (his), not (his own),

revealed in his time , in the time set him by God.

Fuente: Robertson’s Word Pictures in the New Testament

What withholdeth [ ] . Better restraineth. The verb means to hold fast, as Luk 8:15 : to hold back, as Luk 4:42. See on Rom 1:18. He refers to some power which hinders the revelation of the man of sin or Antichrist.

In his time [ ] . Better, in his own season, Not before his appointed season.

Fuente: Vincent’s Word Studies in the New Testament

1) “And now ye know what withholdeth” (kai nun to katechon oidate) “and now and hereafter ye perceive the restraining (thing),” the Holy Spirit; It is as if Paul were saying that hereafter you should understand clearly, that the day of the Lord will not come, until after the appearance of the man of sin, and even the revelation of who he really is, when he requires worship.

2) “That he might be revealed in his time” (eis to apokaluphthenai auton en to autou kairo) “in order that he may be revealed in his own (proper) time, era, or season”; The Holy Spirit which came to and upon the Church on Pentecost, appears to be the restraining one, force, or power, that holds back the revelation of the man of Sin, until he ascends the temple of God, requires worship as God. It also appears from a harmony of Scriptures bearing on this event, that it will be about this time, the end of the first forty two months, of the seven years of the man of Sin’s covenant week with Israel, that the end of the two witnesses, (1) Israel’s restored worship, and (2) The Church’s witness on earth shall cease. Rev 11:1-4. Only Israel and 1) the Church are ever referred to as 2) God’s olive trees and candlesticks–not individuals; Rom 11:24-25; Mat 5:15-16; Rev 1:20.

When the Church is raptured, it appears that the Holy Ghost, promised to empower her, be with and in her alway, will be taken out with the Church, in the same sense He came on PentecostJoh 14:16-17 forever; Joh 15:26-27; Joh 16:7-11; Act 2:1-4.

Fuente: Garner-Howes Baptist Commentary

6 . And now what withholdeth Τὸ κατέχον means here properly an impediment or occasion of delay. Chrysostom, who thinks that this can only be understood as referring to the Spirit, or to the Roman Empire, prefers to lean to the latter opinion. He assigns a plausible reason — because Paul would not have spoken of the Spirit in enigmatical terms, (655) but in speaking of the Roman Empire wished to avoid exciting unpleasant feeling. He states also the reason why the state of the Roman Empire retards the revelation of Antichrist — that, as the monarchy of Babylon was overthrown by the Persians and Medes, and the Macedonians, having conquered the Persians, again took possession of the monarchy, and the Macedonians were at last subdued by the Romans, so Antichrist seized hold for himself of the vacant supremacy of the Roman Empire. There is not one of these things that was not afterwards confirmed by actual occurrence. Chrysostom, therefore, speaks truly in so far as concerns history. I am of opinion, however, that Paul’s intention was different from this — that the doctrine of the gospel would require to be spread hither and thither, until nearly the whole world were convicted of obstinacy and deliberate malice. For there can be no doubt that the Thessalonians had heard from Paul’s mouth as to this impediment, of whatever sort it was, for he recalls to their remembrance what he had previously taught in their presence.

Let my readers now consider which of the two is the more probable — either that Paul declared that the light of the gospel must be diffused through all parts of the earth before God would thus give loose reins to Satan, or that the power of the Roman Empire stood in the way of the rise of Antichrist, inasmuch as he could only break through into a vacant possession. I seem at least to hear Paul discoursing as to the universal call of the Gentiles — that the grace of God must be offered to all — that Christ must enlighten the whole world by his gospel, in order that the impiety of men might be the more fully attested and demonstrated. This, therefore, was the delay, until the career of the gospel should be completed, because a gracious invitation to salvation was first in order. (656) Hence he adds, in his time, because vengeance was ripe after grace had been rejected. (657)

(655) “ En termes couuerts ou obscurs;” — “In hidden or obscure terms.”

(656) “ D’autant que l’ordre que Dieu vouloit tenir, requeroit que le monde premierement fust d’vne liberalite gratuite conuié a salut;” — “Inasmuch as the order that God designed to maintain, required that the world should first of all be invited to salvation by a gracious liberality.”

(657) “ La droite saison de la vengeance estoit apres la grace reiette;” — “The right season of vengeance was after grace had been rejected.”

Fuente: Calvin’s Complete Commentary

Text (2Th. 2:6-7)

6 And now ye know that which restraineth, to the end that he may be revealed in his own season. 7 For the mystery of lawlessness doth already work: only there is one that restraineth now, until he be taken out of the way.

Translation and Paraphrase

And now you (Thessalonians) know what it is that is hindering (the appearance of the man of lawlessness, and is causing things to work out) so that he may be revealed in his own (divinely appointed) time.

(It should be obvious to you that such a man of lawlessness is coming) for the hidden scheme (and program) of lawlessness is already at work. Only, he who alone is now hindering (the appearance of the man of lawlessness will continue to hinder) until he be (gone) out of the midst (of us).

Notes (2Th. 2:6-7)

There was some force in existence in Pauls time which was hindering the appearance of the man of sin. Phillips translation puts it this way: You will probably also remember how I used to talk about a restraining power which would operate until the time should come for emergence of this man.

The word withholdeth in 2Th. 2:6 is the same Greek word which is translated let in 2Th. 2:7. This is a bad rendering for modern readers. The words is both instances mean to hinder, hold back, restrain. (Note our translation and paraphrase for this meaning.)

The Thessalonians probably knew a lot more clearly that we do what was withholding the appearance of the man of sin. Paul had told them more clearly than it has been told to us. But while we do not have the information they had, we do have much history behind us, by which we can often see the manner of Gods dealings.

If something in Pauls time was withholding the coming of the man of sin, surely the man of sin could not be some twentieth century individual.

It is noteworthy that in verse six the restraining power is described as neuter. But in verse seven, it is masculine, he who alone is now hindering.

This probably indicates that the restraining power is both an abstract force and a personal figure. The restraining authority would be neuter, but the personal force masculine, indicating two aspects of the same power and authority.

Note that God had a specific time designated on His divine calendar of events in which He would permit the appearance of the man of sin. Nothing happens by accident in this world. God may let some men run pretty wild, but He still holds the reins, and no one can get so far out of hand as to defeat His program.

The mystery of iniquity (or mystery of lawlessness) refers to the hidden programs and scheme of the devil and lawless men.

This mystery of iniquity was already at work in Pauls time. Many New Testament references indicate that a falling away from the truth was already developing in apostolic times. See 1Jn. 4:1; 1Jn. 4:3; Jud. 1:3; 1Jn. 2:18-19; 2Jn. 1:7, etc.

The mystery of lawlessness in 2Th. 2:7 is evidently a part of the same ungodly system that produced the man of lawlessness, mentioned in 2Th. 2:3. The mystery of lawlessness seems to be the antithesis of Gods saving mystery in Christ. Eph. 3:3; Eph. 3:9.

The King James version says, Until he be taken out of the way. The word taken is not actually in the Greek text. It is probably better to render it as in our paraphrase, Until he be (gone) out of the midst (of us). The Scripture does not say that God himself was going to take out the restraining power, but that eventually it would be out by some means or other.

10.

What is this force that restrained the appearance of the man of sin. For some ideas about this, see notes on 2Th. 2:3, par. 10.

Some interpreters feel that the Holy Spirit is He who hinders the appearance of the man of sin. Isa. 59:19 is quoted to support this view. However, it is pure speculation to say that the influence of the Holy Spirit is to be withdrawn out of the earth as long as it shall stand. No Scripture actually says this. Also we wonder why the Holy Spirit should restrain this particular evil, that is, the appearance of the man of sin. Evil in many forms is rampant now, and certainly needs to be hindered.

11.

We prefer the view (as stated in our notes on 2Th. 2:3) that the restraining power was the Roman empire.

During the first three hundred years of the history of Christianity it was a persecuted illegal religion. This fact hindered any power-hungry Christian bishop from assuming a lot of authority.
In the years that followed the adoption of Christianity as the state religion (325 A.D.), emperors like Constantine and Theodosius considered themselves not only to be head of the state, but head of the church as well. For example, Constantine called the council of Nicea to settle the dispute about the nature of Christ.
In the fourth century as the barbarians began to invade the Roman empire, it became weaker and weaker, and its emperors became less and less strong.
In those times many of the bishops of Rome were strong-willed, capable men. Gradually the Roman bishops came to have more power and the, emperors less. The Roman bishops were further strengthened when the capital of the Roman empire was transferred to Constantinople in the East.
Leo the Great, bishop of Rome 440461 A.D., greatly strengthened the authority of his office. On two occasions he saved Rome from being sacked, first by Atilla the Hun, and secondly by Genseric the Vandal. In return for such services the Roman emperor gave Leo authority over the bishops and churches in every province.
The Western Roman Empire fell in 486 A.D., and this gave the Roman bishops almost a free hand in Europe.
Bishop Gelasius (492496) contended that although the king rules over men in the world, yet he is duty bound in spiritual things to submit to his religious prelates.
Later Roman bishops, such as Gregory the Great (590604) formed alliances with civil rulers in the West, as well as emperors in the East.
While some strong emperors occasionally resisted the popes for many centuries, the popes became so strong that kings (such as Charlemagne) received their crowns from the hands of popes, and the popes sometimes commanded people in various countries to disobey their kings when the kings would not submit to the authority of the Roman church.

12.

Maybe we are wrong, but all of this history which we have mentioned, and a lot more like it, sounds to us like a description of what Paul was talking about when he prophesied about the appearance of the man of sin after the power that hindered him had gone.

13.

McGarvey lists nine ways in which the papacy fulfills the prophecy about the falling away and the appearance of the man of sin:

(1)

It has one official man at its head, and the arrogancy of its claims are centered in him.

(2)

That man came with, and out of, an apostasy, the very kind of an apostasy such as Paul describes elsewhere. 2Ti. 3:1-9; 1Ti. 4:1-3.

(3)

The spiritual pride, lawlessness, and desire for power which worked in Pauls day was curbed by the Roman civil government which dominated and persecuted.

(4)

When the bishop of Rome began to assert power, he was in conflict with the civil government.

(5)

When the Roman empire collapsed, the Roman church became all-powerful.

(6)

The same apostasy has been preserved carefully. The line of popes has been preserved, and will apparently be continued until Christ returns.

(7)

The papacy exalts itself against God and Christ, taking unto itself titles which God alone has the right to wear.

(8)

The popes sit in the temple of God.

(9)

The papacy proves its claims by fraudulent miracles, signs, and wonders, cures effected by relics and shrines. See notes on 2Th. 2:9, par. 3.

Fuente: College Press Bible Study Textbook Series

(6) And now ye know.Not now, because of what I have just said, for nothing has yet been said in the Letter from which the Thessalonians could gather what withheld the premature manifestation of the Man of Sin. The word now is not used exactly in a temporal sense, but as introducing another item. You remember about Antichrist and his characteristics: very good; and now, what keeps Antichrist back? You know that too. Knowing not only that Antichrists apocalypse must precede Christs, but also that Antichrist could not reveal himself yet, because the way was blocked by something still (as they saw) unremoved, the Thessalonians were absurd in acting as if the day of the Lord was come.

What withholdeth.Rather, that which withholdeth: they did not merely know it as a dogma, but as a familiar object. You are perfectly acquainted with the thing which acts as a check upon the Man of Sin. Unlike the Man of Sin himself, who was a dim figure in the mysterious future, the Obstacle was present and tangible. They may have forgotten what the thing is, but St. Paul stirs their memory by telling them that they well know the thing itself. It must needs be a marked and mighty power which can prevent the development of the great Antichrist. At the same time, St. Pauls doctrine is that this marked power is destined by-and-by to be removed (2Th. 2:7). Possibly, then, St. Paul may shrink from naming it in writing, not only because he wishes to exercise the Thessalonians memories, but also for fear the power should discover and disapprove of his prophecies. For the question what the withholding power is, see the Excursus on the Interpretation of the Prophecy.

That he might . . . in his time.Or, with a view to his being revealed at his proper moment. Not that the withholding power is conscious of such desire, but Gods design is to use that power for the purpose.

Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)

6. Ye know So that all the specific points, the characteristics of antichrist were already known to them.

What withholdeth He who now letteth, or hindereth, or prevents from coming. This hindering, or holding back, is done (2Th 2:7) both by a what, in the neuter gender, signifying a thing, and by a who, in the masculine, signifying a person. This thing and person, who thus hinder antichrist, his readers know; but St. Paul persists in not here naming it and him. Now there is a universal Christian tradition, held in the Greek, Roman, and Protestant Churches alike, which explains both the hinderer and the reason for this mysterious silence. The hindering thing was the Roman empire, and the hindering person was the emperor. And says Chrysostom, “If St. Paul had said that the Roman empire was to be destroyed, the heathen would have destroyed him as a rebel, and all the faithful with him as persons who took up arms against the Roman empire; and when that shall have been taken away, then the ‘man of sin’ will come.” Similar in very explicit terms (as given by Bishop Newton) were the views of Justin Martyr, Irenaeus, Tertullian, Origen, Lactantius, Ambrose, Jerome, and Augustine.

We have already said that John’s Apocalypse largely supplements this Apocalypse of St. Paul. With a great body of commentators, we identify this “ man of sin ” with the “beast” of Revelation 13; and the Roman empire with the great red dragon of 11 and 12. Each, as we have noted, is the antichrist, the historic guise of the personal Satan of his period. And we thus can understand why the man of sin cannot appear until the emperor disappears. For the beast antichrist cannot develop until the dragon antichrist has finished his career, both beast and dragon being guises and phases of the personal Satan.

When the dragon (Satan under insignia of the Roman empire) is cast down, his guise drops off, and he is the naked “Satan.” Rev 12:9. He next infuses his “power” into the “beast,” and gives him his “seat” and external “authority.” Rev 13:2. Though he does not merge his personality in the “beast,” yet he is the corporate soul of the organic monster, (papal Rome,) and constitutes it the regular successional antichrist of history. While the beast is in power, Satan is latent in him; but when the beast is destroyed by the conquering Christ, Rev 19:11-21, (Christ versus Antichrist,) the naked Satan reappears, as at Rev 12:9, is arrested, and cast into prison. At the close of the thousand years he makes his true literal, personal, incarnate parousia, and perishes before the divine parousia. He probably “deceives the nations” by professing to be the glorious Messiah, but turns out to be Satan-Messiah, such a Messiah as he tried to tempt Christ to be. Note on Mat 4:8. He will exhibit all the traits described in this, St. Paul’s, Apocalypse in a far deeper atrocity than the more immediate subject, and will verify the primitive Christian belief of a personal “man of sin.” The climax of blended human and diabolic wickedness will be attained, and the “brightness of His coming” before the “great white throne” will cut it short.

Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments

‘And now you know that which restrains, to the end that he might be revealed in his own season. For the mystery of lawlessness already works, only there is one who restrains who will be taken out of the way.’

What could restrain the man of sin and hold back the Anti-god? Rev 20:2 depicts the idea as God’s chain in the hands of an angel, restraining the one who is behind the man of sin. In other words in the final analysis the restrainer is God by whatever means He uses. This ties in also with the picture of the restraint in the Abyss of one who is probably Satan’s man of his right hand (Rev 17:8; Rev 9:1; Rev 9:11 compare Rev 20:7). Thus the one behind the man of sin, the son of ‘destruction’ (apoleias), may be identified with ‘the Destroyer’ (Apollyon – Rev 9:11), the king of the Abyss who is restrained there until released by the angel. These are all, of course, pictures of spiritual reality. None of these have literal bodies.

So the man of sin will be restrained, because his mentor is restrained, until his time comes, his own season, when he will be ‘revealed’ (known as what he is), and the ‘ten rulers’ will have their power ‘for one hour’ (a short time) under ‘the Wild Beast’, that is the one who lives again and behaves like a wild beast (Rev 17:12). All will be restrained until God’s time comes.

The fact that the restraint is by the chain and the angel, can include all measures of restraint used by God. The chain is not literal for it chains a spiritual being. It does not preclude other possibilities, the earthly links of the heavenly chain. Thus it may include Roman justice, which has continued as a restraining influence long after Rome had ceased, and still affects international Law today, and it may include the moral laws of the Old Testament, and ‘the ten commandments’, still held in outward approval by mankind, and it may include the church which for all its faults has proved a restraining influence on sin. These are three of the restraints put in place by God. But, as Jesus Himself revealed, in the end God is the One behind all the restraint of whatever kind it is, using His various links of chain, for Satan can only do what God allows (Luk 22:31).

All claims that the Holy Spirit is uniquely intended by the restrainer, Who is then removed, must be viewed with suspicion. If he meant the Holy Spirit why did he not say so? We can understand why he might refer indirectly to mysterious angelic power, for it would increase the mystery, we can understand why he might refer indirectly to the removal of law, for that might be seen as treason. But if he meant that the Holy Spirit was to be taken out of the way, with all its consequences, it was such a revolutionary idea that it would surely have been spelt out, not leaving in the dark those who had not heard Paul’s first teaching.

Indeed the idea that people of God could function without the Holy Spirit is unscriptural. The ‘coming of the Holy Spirit’ was not something totally new, it was the giving to the many what had only been experienced by the few. All through history the Holy Spirit (or ‘Spirit of God’) was at work, both on behalf of God’s people (Isa 63:9-11; Isa 63:14; Isa 59:21; Hag 2:5; Zec 4:6) and in their inner lives (Psa 51:10-12; Psa 139:7; Psa 143:10; Eze 18:31-32 with Eze 36:26; Eze 37:14). The Holy Spirit absent from God’s people is a contradiction in terms. Without Him there would be no God’s people. Any more than they could function without the grace of God. And His working is always within. While prepositions may help us to appreciate more of the work of the Spirit, we see little future in teaching which seeks to differentiate ‘with’ (or any other preposition) from ‘in’ as though He could be with and not in. Joh 14:17 means that both are true not that one can be had without the other. God works both with and within.

But note that the principle of lawlessness, once hidden but now revealed, was even then at work while Paul was writing. The restraint was being stretched by man’s sin. Man’s rebellion against God has continued since then, chafing against all restraints, inspired by the one who will in the end control the man of sin, but can only work surreptitiously until the release of ‘the Wild Beast’ is finally permitted, to inspire the man of sin. As we have suggested the one who restrains is either the angel or God Himself.

This coming of the man of sin is the evidence that things will get worse before Christ’s coming. And yet in some ways he will be but a reproduction of all who have gone before, the wild beast of Revelation 13, the Roman Empire of the divine emperors and all that followed, although more of a force for evil. Whether we will easily recognise him is another question, for he may not openly reveal his lawlessness against God. Lawless man may welcome him and he may seem to offer what man is looking for. But those with spiritual insight will know him, and will beware.

It is probable that this one who is pictured as the man of sin is a man possessed by Satan or by one of his chief minions (the Wild Beast from the Abyss), thus he will have influence over evil forces granted to him by the one who possesses him (Rev 9:3-10), forces which are invisible but effective. The descriptions of these forces are not to be taken literally. They picture what they can achieve. Thus the end days will experience more of the evil of the occult. But they cannot touch those who are Christ’s (Rev 9:4).

Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett

2Th 2:6 . ] is that which keeps back, that which hinders ( , Chrysostom). But it does not denote, as Heinsius thinks (here and in 2Th 2:7 ), that which hinders the apostle from speaking freely of Antichrist; [46] also not that which hinders the commencement of the advent of Christ (Noack, der Ursprung des Christenthums , Bd. 2, Leipz. 1857, p. 315), but that which hinders the appearance of Antichrist . This follows from the additional sentence . . ., in which (1) can only be referred to the , and (2) forms a contrast to the idea of keeping back contained in . is therefore, according to its objective side, to be completed by . What, on the other hand, the apostle supposes to be the subject of this preventing power can only be explained at the conclusion of this section.

. . .] not donec, usque dum , but in order that (the aim of God in the ).

] in his time, i.e. in the time appointed for him by God. More difficult than these determinations is the solution of the question, In what connection this verse is conjoined to the preceding by means of . Storr, with whom Flatt agrees, finds in a contrast to , 2Th 2:5 . The thought would then be, that the advent cannot commence until Antichrist appears, this I have told you by word of mouth; but now , after my written declaration (2Th 2:3 ), you know also why the appearance of Antichrist is still delayed, namely, by the circumstance that the must precede his appearance. But if Paul had actually wished to have expressed this contrast, he would have been obliged to write in 2Th 2:5 , , and in 2Th 2:6 , . Related to Storr’s view is the interpretation of Kern, with whom Hilgenfeld ( l.c. p. 247) agrees: “That the advent of Christ does not take place until the man of sin be revealed, is already known to you: and now, in reference to what the present presents to you , ye know also that which hinders.” The same objection is decisive against this view. Further, according to Hofmann, who considers 2Th 2:5-6 as “two halves of one question united with ,” stands not, indeed, in opposition to , 2Th 2:5 , but must express “the present in reference to that future which was known to the readers,” that they know that in the present by which its commencement is still hindered. But the temporal can never form a contrast to in 2Th 2:5 ; and to assume that the words in 2Th 2:6 are still contained in the question in 2Th 2:5 is entirely erroneous, because in this case . . . could only be considered as dependent on , [47] but it is not necessary to recall to mind what is actually known in the present.

is also understood as a particle of time , by Whitby, Macknight, Heydenreich, Schrader, Olshausen, Baumgarten-Crusius, Wieseler, and Bisping, but they do not connect it with , but with : “and ye know that which at present hinders.” But only a grammatical impropriety would be expressed thereby, as would be required. For it is inconceivable that an adverb, whose proper place is between the article and the participle , should by a hyperbaton be placed first, because it has already in its natural position the same emphasis which it would receive by its being placed first. The passages appealed to, as 2Th 2:7 , 1Co 7:17 , Rom 12:3 , etc., are not analogous. And as little do the temporal particles and , 2Th 2:7 , decide for this construction. For the emphasis lies not on , but on , so that might be omitted without injury to the sense; and is not put in exchange for , but for . Likewise is understood by Schott as a temporal and consecutive particle, but is then taken in the sense of also : “For ye know also now (not only have ye learned it at that time when I was with you), why the appearance of Antichrist is still delayed.” But (1) would require to have been written; (2) must refer to a point formerly already explained ; but it is entirely a new point, as in what goes before what hindered the appearance of Christ , but not what hindered the appearance of Antichrist , was spoken of; (3) lastly, to what an idle, dragging, and trivial addition would 2Th 2:6 be degraded! The only correct view is to take in a logical sense, but not, with Koppe and Krause, as an inferential particle (“and accordingly”), but with de Wette, Alford, and Ewald, as a particle of transition to a new communication: and now , comp. Act 7:34 ; Act 10:5 ; Act 13:11 ; Act 20:25 , etc.; Hartung, Partikellehre , II. p. 26. Accordingly, the emphasis does not lie on , but on . The meaning is: and now to pass on to a further point ye know what hindereth , namely, wherein it consists, and why the appearance of Antichrist is still prevented, that it should be revealed in its appointed time, marked out by God. The Thessalonians knew this point from the apostle’s oral instructions, so that they required only to be reminded of it.

[46] “Neque ignoratis, quid sit, quod me nunc aperte vetat loqui;” and on ver. 7: “ille, qui nunc obstat, quo minus aperte loquar.” Heinsius makes the words refer to the apostle’s fear of offending Nero!

[47] For if in the presumed, question, not and , but and and were to correspond, would require to have been written.

Fuente: Heinrich August Wilhelm Meyer’s New Testament Commentary

6 And now ye know what withholdeth that he might be revealed in his time.

Ver. 6. What withholdeth, &c. ] viz. The Roman empire, which had its rise, reign, and ruin, whereupon the popedom was founded, and grew to that excessive greatness, that it laboured with nothing more than with the weightiness of itself.

Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)

6 .] And now (not temporal , but as in 1Co 13:13 , ‘rebus sic stantibus’ ‘now’ in our argument. We most not for a moment think of the ungrammatical rendering of Whitby, Masker., Heydenr., Schrader, OlSh., B.-Crus., and Wieseler, ‘ that which at present hinders ,’ which must be : and for which 2Th 2:7 , Rom 12:3 , 1Co 7:17 , are no precedent whatever, not presenting any case of inversion of an adverb from its emphatic place between an article and a participle.

is a mere adverb of passage, and the stress is on ) ye know that which hinders (viz. ‘ him ’ the man of sin: not, the Apostle from speaking freely , as Heinsius, nor the coming of Christ ) in order that (the aim of (in God’s purposes) q. d. ‘that which keeps him back, that he may not be revealed before his,’ &c.) he may be revealed (see on 2Th 2:3 ) in his own time (the time appointed him by God: reff.).

Fuente: Henry Alford’s Greek Testament

2Th 2:6 . Well now, you know what restrains him from being manifested (coming fully into play and sight) before his appointed season . probably goes with , not with (as e.g. , in Joh 4:18 , so Olshausen, Bisping, Wieseler, Zahn, Wrede), and is not temporal, but “a mere adverb of passage” (Lnemann, Alford) in the argument (so with in Act 3:17 ). Were temporal, it would mean ( a ) that during the interval between Paul’s teaching and the arrival of this letter fresh circumstances (so Zimmer) had arisen to throw light on the thwarting of the adversary. But of this there is no hint whatsoever in the context. Or ( b ), preferably, it would contrast with the following , as an equivalent for “already” (Hofmann, Wohl., Milligan, etc.).

Fuente: The Expositors Greek Testament by Robertson

know. App-132.

withholdeth = holds fast. Greek. katecho. See the other occurances of this word, 2Th 2:7; Mat 21:38. Luk 4:42; Luk 8:15; Luk 14:9. Joh 5:4. Act 27:40. Rom 1:18; Rom 7:6. 1Co 7:30; 1Co 11:2; 1Co 15:2. 2Co 6:10. 1Th 5:21. Phm 1:13. Heb 3:6, Heb 3:14; Heb 10:23.

his time = his own season. That which holds him fast is neuter. It is a place, the pit of the abyss (Rev 9:1; Rev 11:7; Rev 13:1).

Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics

6.] And now (not temporal, but as in 1Co 13:13, rebus sic stantibus-now in our argument. We most not for a moment think of the ungrammatical rendering of Whitby, Masker., Heydenr., Schrader, OlSh., B.-Crus., and Wieseler, that which at present hinders, which must be : and for which 2Th 2:7, Rom 12:3, 1Co 7:17, are no precedent whatever, not presenting any case of inversion of an adverb from its emphatic place between an article and a participle.

is a mere adverb of passage, and the stress is on ) ye know that which hinders (viz. him-the man of sin: not, the Apostle from speaking freely, as Heinsius,-nor the coming of Christ) in order that (the aim of (in Gods purposes)-q. d. that which keeps him back, that he may not be revealed before his, &c.) he may be revealed (see on 2Th 2:3) in his own time (the time appointed him by God: reff.).

Fuente: The Greek Testament

2Th 2:6. , that which withholdeth, holdeth back) Some interpret it of one obtaining authority; but is not thus used absolutely, much less : , is to detain, to delay, in LXX., Gen 24:56, , Hinder me not. On , –, coming presently afterwards, depends. If there were not the , the Wicked would be sooner revealed.-, ye know) They knew from the present information given to them in this epistle, and by adding a view of existing events. He speaks safely [with prudent caution], nor was it necessary to say anything more openly.- , in his proper time) not sooner.

Fuente: Gnomon of the New Testament

2Th 2:6

And now ye know that which restraineth, to the end that he may be revealed in his own season.-The disposition to amend and change the appointments of God was at work and was restrained in its growth by Pauls authority as an apostle of the Lord; but when he was taken out of the way it had free course and developed rapidly. It is not difficult to trace its growth through the succeeding centuries, culminating in hierarchies for which Gods word made no provision. But that principle is not confined to one or two churches. Its presence is manifest in a greater or lesser degree in all the churches, in the changes in the order of worship, in the ordinances of the church; and in the multiplication of societies and organizations that seem for a time to add to its beauty and activity, but which in the end, as parasites, sap the life out of the churches. This principle is manifest especially in the organizations of the churches themselves into societies and ecclesiasticisms that first usurp the work of the churches and then control them and come between man and God.

God placed the churches as distinct congregations connected with each other only by the bonds of faith and love. The office of the congregation is in the ordinances and teachings to bring man into close and constant contact with God and to cultivate a sense of personal responsibility and nearness to him. This condition will bring out all that is best in him and stir him to zeal in the service of God. Gods service leads to doing good to man in his name. All added organizations come between and separate man from God. They make his service a proxy service, which destroys his sense of accountability to God and weakens his zeal and devotion. Obedience to Gods order as he gave it builds up his kingdom, and the substitution of a human order destroys it, and changes it into the man of sin. All efforts to consolidate the churches into one organization for any purpose must be manifestations of this principle, and must result in the turning of the churches from fidelity to God. This was typified in the Jewish people. The consolidation of the people into one nation was rebellion against God, and resulted in their ruin as a people. No power should come between the churches of Christ and God. Any such breaks the sense of responsibility to God, and is the mystery of iniquity that sits in the seat of God, displeases him, and will bring ruin sooner or later to his church.

Fuente: Old and New Testaments Restoration Commentary

withholdeth: or, holdeth, 2Th 2:7

revealed: 2Th 2:3, 2Th 2:8

Reciprocal: Hab 2:3 – the vision 2Ti 3:13 – evil

Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge

2Th 2:6. Withholdeth (likewise letteth in next verse) is from KATECHO, which Thayer defines, “to restrain, hinder, “and he comments on it as follows: “That which hinders, namely, Antichrist [the pope], from making his appearance; the power of the Roman empire is meant.” I urge the reader to consult “general remarks” again, to learn why the Roman emperor was a hindrance to the coming of the pope into universal power over the church. In verse 5 Paul refers to previous information which he had given to the Thessalonians, to the effect that certain men were already showing signs of wanting this great power, and who finally would come out in the open and strive for it. The brethren might wonder why such a development did not then come to the fore, and he is explaining that this Roman power (which then professed the heathen religion), was withholding or hindering such a movement. Revealed in his time means when the time came that the religion of Rome would not be any hindrance, then would be the time for the pope to be revealed or come out in the open.

Fuente: Combined Bible Commentary

2Th 2:6. And now. These words may either mark the present time in contrast with the time when Paul was with them, alluded to in the preceding verse; or may mark the slight transition to a different aspect of the subject.

Ye know what withholdeth. They knew because Paul had told them; we have not that advantage, and can but surmise what it is which from Pauls time till now has exercised the restraining influence on wickedness. If we turn to our Lords discourse, the only thing to which such power is ascribed is the purpose of God that the Gospel should first be preached for a witness unto all nations, before the end come (Mat 24:14). Until this be accomplished the fit time for the revelation of the man of sin has not arrived, and he is therefore held in check. By this interpretation, he who withholdeth (2Th 2:7) must be God Himself, and interpreters have generally refused to accept this reference, because the words until he be taken out of the way could not be used of God. It is to be observed, however, that the expression so rendered in the Authorised Version is equally applicable to a voluntary withdrawal; indeed, it was not an unusual expression among the Greeks for declining battle. This interpretation might therefore appeal to the history of the world before the flood, in which God for a time kept down the wickedness, but when the time for judgment came pronounced the final word, My Spirit shall not always strive with man. The interpretation which most modern writers agree in accepting is that which understands that which withholdeth to be the restraining power of well-ordered human rule, the principles of legality as opposed to those of lawlessness, of which the Roman Empire was the then embodiment and manifestation. This is corroborated by Pauls own experience of the protection afforded by the Roman government, and also by the prophecy of Daniel already cited. In conformity with this, he who withholdeth is understood to be the Emperor or other person in whom for the time being such government resides, or (as in Dan 10:5; Dan 10:13; Dan 10:20) the good spirit (or angel) who aids the cause of God and His people by aiding human governments in the repression of those outbursts of godless lawlessness which threaten the destruction of all civil arrangements and institutions. Obviously, whatever the words signify, they must mean something which has existed from Pauls day to our own, something which during that whole period has had the effect of restraining wickedness.

That he might be revealed in his own time. The purpose contemplated by God in thus restraining the man of sin was that he might not be revealed before his appointed time (comp. Dan 11:36).

Fuente: A Popular Commentary on the New Testament

Observe here, 1. How our apostle intimated to the Thessalonians that Antichrist was not then revealed, and consequently that they were not then to expect the coming of Christ to judgment.

Observe, 2. The impediment that then hindered his revelation: Now ye know what withholdeth; by which the Roman empire is generally understood: the man of sin could not rise to his greatness, so long as the Roman emperor possessed Rome, and the seat was full, until it was void it could not be the seat of Antichrist.

But why did not the apostle name it then?

Ans. That he might not incense the Roman emperors against the Christians, as he must have done, had he openly said, “Antichrist shall not come till the Roman empire is destroyed;” he therefore covertly says, Ye know what witholdeth.

Fuente: Expository Notes with Practical Observations on the New Testament

And now ye know [because Paul had told them verbally] that which restraineth [i. e., retards and delays the antichrist], to the end that he may be revealed in his own season. [And not prematurely. Thus we see that the Thessalonians had a key to Paul’s prophecy that we do not possess. His probable reason for withholding from his Epistle that which he freely stated verbally will be given later.]

Fuente: McGarvey and Pendleton Commentaries (New Testament)

Verse 6

What withholdeth, &c.; that is, what cause prevents the development of the apostasy now.

Fuente: Abbott’s Illustrated New Testament

2:6 And now ye know {g} what withholdeth that he might be revealed in his time.

(g) What hinders and stops.

Fuente: Geneva Bible Notes

B. The mystery of lawlessness 2:6-12

Paul continued his instruction concerning the events that must take place at the beginning of the day of the Lord and stressed the lawlessness of that period. His purpose was to explain more clearly that his readers had not missed the Rapture and had not entered the eschatological day of the Lord.

Fuente: Expository Notes of Dr. Constable (Old and New Testaments)

When he was with them Paul had told the Thessalonians what was restraining the unveiling of the man of lawlessness (i.e., Antichrist, 2Th 2:3; cf. 1Jn 2:18). However, he did not restate the identity of the restrainer here. Nevertheless it seems that the Holy Spirit is the restraining influence in view. [Note: See Gerald B. Stanton, Kept from the Hour, pp. 92-107, for a full discussion.]

"To one familiar with the Lord Jesus’ Upper Room Discourse, as Paul undoubtedly was, fluctuation between neuter and masculine recalls how the Holy Spirit is spoken of. Either gender is appropriate, depending on whether the speaker (or writer) thinks of natural agreement (masc. because of the Spirit’s personality) or grammatical (neuter because of the [neuter] noun pneuma; see Joh 14:26; Joh 15:26; Joh 16:13-14) . . ." [Note: Thomas, "2 Thessalonians," p. 324.]

Posttribulationists, and some pretribulationists, have suggested other possible restrainers. These include the Roman Empire [Note: William Barclay, The Letters to the Philippians, Colossians and Thessalonians, p. 247.] and or the emperor, [Note: Wanamaker, p. 256.] God, [Note: George E. Ladd, The Blessed Hope, p. 95.] Antichrist, Satan, and human government. [Note: Bruce, pp. 171-72; Hubbard, p. 1364; Morris, The Epistles . . ., p. 129.] Marvin Rosenthal, the "pre-wrath rapturist," believed the restrainer is Michael the archangel. [Note: Marvin Rosenthal, The Pre-Wrath Rapture of the Church, pp. 257-61. See John A. McLean, "Another Look at Rosenthal’s ’Pre-Wrath Rapture,’" Bibliotheca Sacra 148:592 (October-December 1991):395-96; and Renald E. Showers, The Pre-Wrath Rapture View: An Examination and Critique.] These suggestions do not fit Paul’s description. [Note: For refutation of the major views, see Robert H. Gundry, The Church and the Tribulation, pp. 122-25.] Some scholars eventually confess ignorance. [Note: E.g., Morris, p. 130.]

The Holy Spirit accomplishes His ministry of restraining lawlessness in the world mainly through the influence of Christians whom He indwells, specifically through their gospel preaching. [Note: See Charles E. Powell, "The Identity of the ’Restrainer’ in 2 Thessalonians 2:6-7," Bibliotheca Sacra 154:615 (July-September 1997):329.]

"One of the distinctive features of the dispensation of grace in contrast to prior periods is the fact that the Holy Spirit indwells everyone who is regenerated. In the coming period of the kingdom on earth this divine blessing will also be a prominent feature and everyone who is saved will be indwelt by the Holy Spirit.

"There is little evidence that believers will be indwelt by the Spirit during the tribulation. The possibility of a universal indwelling of all believers in the tribulation is opposed by the revelation of 2Th 2:7, that the one restraining the world from sin, i.e., the Holy Spirit, will be ’taken out of the way’ during the tribulation. Unrestrained evil characterizes the tribulation, though the lack of restraint is not total (cf. Rev 7:2; Rev 12:6; Rev 12:14-16). The indwelling presence of the Holy Spirit in the saints in itself would contribute to the restraint of sin, and it, therefore, is taken away. The tribulation period, also, seems to revert back to Old Testament conditions in several ways; and in the Old Testament period, saints were never permanently indwelt except in isolated instances, though a number of instances of the filling of the Spirit and of empowerment for service are found. Taking all the factors into consideration, there is no evidence for the indwelling presence of the Holy Spirit in believers in the tribulation." [Note: John F. Walvoord, The Holy Spirit, pp. 151, 230. Cf. Thomas, "2 Thessalonians," p. 325; and Charles C. Ryrie, First and Second Thessalonians, p. 113.]

Many interpreters use the absence of specific revelation about the Spirit’s indwelling during the Tribulation to their advantage. Some (e.g., normative dispensationalists) believe the silence argues for no indwelling. Others (e.g., progressive dispensationalists) believe it assumes that indwelling continues.

Fuente: Expository Notes of Dr. Constable (Old and New Testaments)

Chapter 20

THE RESTRAINT AND ITS REMOVAL

2Th 2:6-12 (R.V.)

CHRIST cannot come, the Apostle has told us, until the falling away has first come, and the man of sin been revealed. In the verses before us, we are told that the man of sin himself cannot come, in the full sense of the word, he cannot be revealed in his true character of the counter-Christ, till a restraining force, known to the Thessalonians, but only obscurely alluded to by the Apostle, is taken out of the way. The Last Advent is thus at two removes from the present. First, there must be the removal of the power which holds the man of sin in check; then the culmination of evil in that great adversary of God; and not till then the return of the Lord in glory as Saviour and Judge.

We might think that this put the Advent to such a distance as practically to disconnect it from the present, and make it a matter of little interest to the Christian. But, as we have seen already, what is significant in this whole passage is the spiritual law which governs the future of the world, the law that good and evil must ripen together, and in conflict with each other; and it is involved in that law that the final state of the world, which brings on the Advent, is latent, in all its principles and spiritual features, in the present. That day is indissolubly connected with this. The life that we now live has all the importance, and ought to have all the intensity, which comes from its bearing the future in its bosom. Through the eyes of this New Testament prophet we can see the end from the beginning; and the day on which we happen to read his words is as critical, in its own nature, as the great day of the Lord.

The end, the Apostle tells us, is at some distance, but it is preparing. “The mystery of lawlessness doth already work.” The forces which are hostile to God, and which, are to break out in the great apostasy, and the insane presumption of the man of sin, are even now in operation, but secretly. They are not visible to the careless, or to the infatuated, or to the spiritually blind; but the Apostle can discern them. Taught by the Spirit to read the signs of the times, he sees in the world around him symptoms of forces, secret, unorganised, to some extent inscrutable, yet unmistakable in their character. They are the beginnings of the apostasy, the first workings, fettered as yet and baffled, of the power which is to set itself in the place of God. He sees also, and has already told the Thessalonians, of another power of an opposite character. “Ye know,” he says, “that which restraineth only there is one that restraineth now, until he be taken out of the way.” This restraining power is spoken of both in the neuter and the masculine, both as a principle or institution, and as a person; and there is no reason to doubt that those fathers of the Church are right who identified it with the Empire of Rome and its sovereign head. The apostasy was to take place among the Jews; and the Apostle saw that Rome and its Emperor were the grand restraint upon the violence of that stubborn race. The Jews had been his worst enemies, ever since he had embraced the cause of the Nazarene Messiah Jesus; and all that time the Romans had been his best friends. If injustice had been done him in their name, as at Philippi, atonement had been made; and, on the whole, he had owed to them his protection against Jewish persecution. He felt sure that his own experience was typical; the final development of hatred to God and all that was on Gods side could not but be restrained so long as the power of Rome stood firm. That power was a sufficient check upon anarchic violence. While it held its ground, the powers of evil could not organise themselves and work openly; they constituted a mystery of iniquity, working, as it were, underground. But when this great restraint was removed, all that had been labouring so long in secret would come suddenly to view, in its full dimensions; the lawless one would stand revealed.

But, it may be asked, could Paul imagine that the Roman power, as represented by the Emperor, was likely to be removed within any measurable time? Was it not the very type and symbol of all that was stable and perpetual in mans life? In one way, it was; and as at least a temporary check on the final eruption of wickedness, it is here recognised to have a degree of stability; but it was certainly not eternal. Paul may have seen plainly enough in such careers as those of Caligula and Claudius the impending collapse of the Julian dynasty; and the very obscurity and reserve with which he expresses himself amount to a distinct proof that he has something in his mind which it was not safe to describe more plainly. Dr. Farrar has pointed to the remarkable correspondence between this passage, interpreted of the Roman Empire, and a paragraph in Josephus, in which that historian explains the visions of Daniel to his pagan readers. Josephus shows that the image with the head of gold, the breast and arms of silver, the belly and thighs of brass, and the ankles and feet of iron, represents a succession of four empires. He names the Babylonian as the first, and indicates plainly that the Medo-Persian and the Greek are the second and third; but when he comes to the fourth, which is destroyed by the stone cut out without hands, he does not venture, as all his countrymen did, to identify it with the Roman. That would have been disloyal in a courtier, and dangerous as well; so he remarks, when he comes to the point, that he thinks it proper to say nothing about the stone and the kingdom it destroys, his duty as a historian being to record what is past and gone, and not what is yet to come. In a precisely similar way does St. Paul here hint at an event which it would have been perilous to name. But what he means is: When the Roman power has been removed, the lawless one will be revealed, and the Lord will come to destroy him.

What was said of the man of sin in the last chapter has again its application here. The Roman Empire did not fall within any such period as Paul anticipated; nor, when it did, was there any such crisis as he describes. The man of sin was not revealed, and the Lord did not come. But these are the human elements in the prophecy; and its interest and meaning for us lie in the description which an inspired writer gives of the final forms of wickedness, and their connection with principles which were at work around him, and are at work among us. He does not, indeed, come to these at once. He passes over them, and anticipates the final victory, when the Lord shall destroy the man of sin with the breath of His mouth, and bring him to nought by the appearance of His coming; he would not have Christian men face the terrible picture of the last workings of evil until they have braced and comforted their hearts with the prospect of a crowning victory. There is a great battle to be fought; there are great perils to be encountered; there is a prospect with something in it appalling to the bravest heart; but there is light beyond. It needs but the breath of the Lord Jesus; it needs but the first ray of His glorious appearing to brighten the sky, and all the power of evil is at an end. Only after he has fixed the mind on this does St. Paul describe the supreme efforts of the enemy.

His coming, he says-and he uses the word applied to Christs advent, as though to teach us that the event in question is as significant for evil as the other for good-his coming is according to the working of Satan. When Christ was in the world, His presence with men was according to the working of God; the works that the Father gave Him to do, the same He did, and nothing else. His life was the life of God entering into our ordinary human life, and drawing into its own mighty and eternal current all who gave themselves up to Him. It was the supreme form of goodness, absolutely tender and faithful; using all the power of the Highest in pure unselfishness and truth. When sin has reached its height, we shall see a character in whom all this is reversed. Its presence with men will be according to the working of Satan; not an ineffective thing, but very potent; carrying in its train vast effects and consequences; so vast and so influential, in spite of its utter badness, that it is no exaggeration to describe its “coming” (), its “appearing” () and its “revelation” (), by the very same words which are applied to Christ Himself. If there is one word which can characterise this whole phenomenon, both in its principle and in its consummation, it is falsehood. The devil is a liar from the beginning, and the father of lies; and where things go on according to the working of Satan, there is sure to he a vast development of falsehood and delusion. This is a prospect which very few fear. Most of us are confident enough of the soundness of our minds, of the solidity of our principles, of the justice of our consciences. It is very difficult for us to understand that we can be mistaken, quite as confident about falsehood as about truth, unsuspecting victims of pure delusion. We can see that some men are in this wretched plight, but that very fact seems to give us immunity. Yet the falsehoods of the last days, St. Paul tells us, will be marvellously imposing and successful. Men will be dazzled by them, and unable to resist. Satan will support his representative by power and signs and wonders of every description, agreeing in nothing but in the characteristic quality of falsehood. They will be lying miracles. Yet those who are of the truth will not be left without a safeguard against them, a safeguard found in this, that the manifold deceit of every kind which the devil and his agents employ, is deceit of unrighteousness. It furthers unrighteousness; it has evil as its end. By this it is betrayed to the good; its moral quality enables them to penetrate the lie, and to make their escape from it. However plausible it may seem on other grounds, its true character comes out under the touchstone of conscience, and it stands finally condemned.

This is a point for consideration in our own time. There is a great deal of falsehood in circulation-partly superstitious, partly quasi-scientific-which is not judged with the decision and severity that would be becoming in wise and good men. Some of it is more or less latent, working as a mystery of iniquity; influencing mens souls and consciences rather than their thoughts; disinclining them to prayer, suggesting difficulties about believing in God, giving the material nature the primacy over the spiritual, ignoring immortality and the judgment to come. The man knows very little, who does not know that there is a plausible case to be stated for atheism, for materialism, for fatalism, for the rejection of all belief in the life beyond the grave, and its connection with our present life; but however powerful and plausible the argument may be, he has been very careless of his spiritual nature, who does not see that it is a deceit of unrighteousness. I do not say that only a bad man could accept it; but certainly all that is bad in any man, and nothing that is good, will incline him to accept it. Everything in our nature that is unspiritual, slothful, earthly, at variance with God; everything that wishes to be let alone, to forget what is high, to make the actual and not the ideal its portion; everything that recalls responsibilities of which such a system would discharge us forever, is on the side of its doctrines. But is not that itself a conclusive argument against the system? Are not all these most suspicious allies? Are they not, beyond dispute, our very worst enemies? And can it be possible that a way of thinking is true, which gives them undisputed authority over us? Do not believe it. Do not let any plausibility of argument impose upon you; but when the moral issue of a theory is plainly immoral, when by its working it is betrayed to be the leaven of the Sadducees, reject it as a diabolical deceit. Trust your conscience, that is, your whole nature, with its instinct for what is good, rather than any dialectic; it contains far more of what you are; and it is the whole man, and not the most unstable and self-confident of his faculties, that must judge. If there is nothing against a spiritual truth but the difficulty of conceiving how it can be, do not let that mental incapacity weigh against the evidence of its fruits.

The Apostle points to this line of thought, and to this safeguard of the good, when he says that those who come under the power of this vast working of falsehood are those who are perishing, because they received not the love of the truth that they might be saved. But for this clause we might have said, Why expose men, defenceless, to such a terrific trial as is here depicted? Why expect weak, bewildered, unstable creatures to keep their feet, when falsehood comes in like a flood? But such queries would show that we mistook the facts. None are carried away by the prevailing falsehood but those who received not the love of the truth that they might be saved. It is a question, we see, not of the intelligence simply, but of the whole man. He does not say, They received not the truth; that might have been due to some cause over which they had no control. They might never have had so much as a good look at the truth; they might have got an incurable twist in their education, a flaw in their minds like a flaw in a mirror, that prevented them from ever seeing what the truth was like. These would be cases to stand apart. But he says, “They received not the love of the truth.” That truth which is presented for our acceptance in the gospel is not merely a thing to scrutinise, to weigh, to judge by the rules of the bench or the jury box: it is a truth which appeals to the heart; from cultured and uncultured, from the clear-headed and the puzzle-headed, from the philosopher and the message boy, it demands the answer of love. It is this which is the true test of character-the answer which is given, not by the brain, disciplined or undisciplined, but by the whole man, to the revelation of the truth in Jesus Christ. Intelligence, by itself, may be a very little matter; all that some men have is but a tool in the hands of their passions; but the love of the truth, or its opposite, shows truly what we are. Those who love it are safe. They cannot love falsehood at the same time; all the lies of the devil and his agents are powerless to do them any harm. Satan, we see here, has no advantage over us that we do not first give him. The absence of liking for the truth, want of sympathy with Christ, a disposition to find less exacting ways than His, a resolution to find them or to make them, ending in a positive antipathy to Christ and to all the truth which He teaches and embodies, -these give the enemy his opportunity and his advantage over us. Put it to yourself in this light if you wish to discern your true attitude to the gospel. You may have difficulties and perplexities about it on one side or another; it runs out into mystery on every hand; but these will not expose you to the danger of being deceived, as long as you receive the love of it in your heart. It is a thing to command love; the truth as truth is in Jesus. All that is good in us is enlisted in its favour; not to love it is to be a bad man. A recent Unitarian lecturer has said that to love Jesus is not a religious duty; but that is certainly not a New Testament doctrine. It is not only a religious duty, but the sum of all such duties; to do it, or not to do it, is the decisive test of character, and the arbiter of fate. Does not He Himself say-He who is the Truth-“He that loveth father or mother more than Me is not worthy of Me”? Does not His Apostle say, “If any man love not the Lord Jesus Christ, let him be anathema”? Depend upon it, love to Him is all our goodness, and all our defence against the powers of evil. To grow cold and indifferent is to give the enemy of our souls an opening against us. The last two verses in this passage are very striking. We have seen already two agents in the destruction of mens souls. They perish by their own agency, in that they do not welcome and love the truth; and they perish by the malevolence of the devil, who avails himself of this dislike to the truth to befool them. by falsehood, and lead them ever further and further astray. But here we have a third agent, most surprising of all, God Himself. “For this cause God sendeth them a working of error, that they should believe a lie: that they all might be judged who believed not the truth, but had pleasure in unrighteousness.” Is God, then, the author of falsehood? Do the delusions that possess the minds of men, and lead them to eternal ruin owe their strength to Him? Can He intend anybody to believe a lie, and especially a lie with such terrific consequences as are here in view? The opening words-“for this cause”-supply the answer to these questions. For this cause, i.e., because they have not loved the truth, but in their liking for evil have turned their backs upon it, for this cause Gods judgment comes upon them, binding them to their guilt. Nothing is more certain, however we may choose to express it, than the word of the wise man: “His own iniquities shall take the wicked himself, and he shall be holden with the cords of his sin.” He chooses his own way, and he gets his fill of it. He loves the deceit of unrighteousness, the falsehood which delivers him from God and from His law; and by Gods righteous judgment, acting through the constitution of our nature, he comes continually more and more under its power. He believes the lie, just as a good man believes the truth: he becomes every day more hopelessly beclouded in error; and the end is that he is judged. The judgment is based, not on his intellectual, but on his moral state. It is true he has been deluded, but his delusion is due to this, that he had pleasure in unrighteousness. It was this evil in him which gave weight to the sophistries of Satan. Again and again in Scripture this is represented as the punishment of the wicked, that God gives them their own way, and infatuates them in it. The error works with ever greater power in their souls, till they cannot imagine that it is an error; none can deliver himself, or say, Is there not a lie in my right hand? “My people would not hearken to My voice, and Israel would none of Me. So I gave them up unto their own hearts lust: and they walked in their own counsels.” “When they knew God, they glorified Him not as God, neither were thankful; wherefore God gave them up to uncleanness.” “They changed the truth of God into a lie; for this cause God gave them up unto vile affections.” “They did not like to retain God in their knowledge. God gave them over to a reprobate mind.” “They received not the love of the truth: and for this cause God sendeth unto them a working of error.” Sin bears its punishment in itself; when it has had its perfect work, we see that it has been executing a judgment of God more awful than anything we could conceive. If you would have Him on your side, your ally and not your adversary, receive the love of the truth.

This is the final lesson of the passage. We do not know all the forces that are at work in the world in the interest of error; but we know there are many. We know that the mystery of iniquity is already in operation. We know that falsehood, in this spiritual sense, has much in man which is its natural ally; and that we need to be steadily on our guard against the wiles of the devil. We know that passion is sophistical, and reason often weak, and that we see our true selves in the action of heart and conscience. Be faithful, therefore, to God at the core of your nature. Love the truth that you may he saved. This alone is salvation. This alone is a safeguard against all the delusions of Satan; it was one who knew God, who lived in God, who did always the works of God, who loved God as the only begotten Son the Father, who could say, “The prince of this world cometh, and hath nothing in Me.”

Fuente: Expositors Bible Commentary

Disfruta de miles de canciones cristianas en exclusiva sólo en Bibles