Concerning the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ and our being gathered to him, we ask you, brothers, not to become easily unsettled or alarmed by some prophecy, report or letter supposed to have come from us, saying that the day of the Lord has already come. Don’t let anyone deceive you in any way, for (that day will not come) until the rebellion occurs and the man of lawlessness is revealed, the man doomed to destruction. He will oppose and will exalt himself over everything that is called God or is worshiped, so that he sets himself up in God’s temple, proclaiming himself to be God.

Who is this man?

If there is some man of lawlessness who is going to come before the ‘Day of the Lord’, how does this work with the idea that Jesus will come like a theif in the night. If this man is yet to come, then can I relax about Jesus coming, becuse this man has to come first?

My understanding is that this is symbolic of “bad things will happen” and that people will fight against the knowledge of God… just as other epistles talk about “Who is the antichrist?” and it’s anyone, even the nice little old lady rose-gardener down the road (you know who I’m talking about!) who denies that Jesus was and is the Christ. Now just because she’s an anti-Christ doesn’t mean we’re going to shave her head and find a little birthmark.

6
66

Bill Gates?

Geoff Chambers - 03 December 2007 06:13 PM

If there is some man of lawlessness who is going to come before the ‘Day of the Lord’, how does this work with the idea that Jesus will come like a theif in the night. If this man is yet to come, then can I relax about Jesus coming, becuse this man has to come first?

Yes. There is a similar problem in Romans 11:25-36, which seems to imply that there will be a massive revival amongst the Jews before Jesus comes again. Of course, it all depends on how you read it…

Dave Lankshear - 03 December 2007 08:44 PM

My understanding is that this is symbolic of “bad things will happen” and that people will fight against the knowledge of God…

Why do you come to this conclusion? Is that from reading the text in 2 Thessalonians? Or do you assume it must be symbolic because otherwise it won’t fit well with other interpretations of scripture you have?

@ Nathan

I’ve thought about that one as well actually, because I do read it as a large number of Israelites repenting and following Christ before Jesus returns.

hmmmmm

It’s from chatting with a certain mate with a Phd in “millennial fears” told me it was so. I don’t have the paper work or evidence to back it myself… but this mate co-authored “666 and all that” so I’ll recommend the book and leave it there.

Dave Lankshear - 04 December 2007 02:01 PM

It’s from chatting with a certain mate with a Phd in “millennial fears” told me it was so. I don’t have the paper work or evidence to back it myself… but this mate co-authored “666 and all that” so I’ll recommend the book and leave it there.

I had a read of the review of the book, but it didn’t mention 2 Thessalonians. Do you know if the book deals with the passage in question?

Don’t know sorry…

Dave Lankshear - 04 December 2007 02:23 PM

Don’t know sorry…

heh, thanks then :-)

I understand in the letters of 1 John where the antichristis everyone who doesn’t believe God’s testomony about Jesus, but Paul doesn’t say anything like that here.

I know, but this mate said it was a common term back then… a common “image” to quote. So that’s from me, husband of the typesetter, and mate of one of the authors of 666 and all that. High recommendation! ;-)

Some of my thoughts on this passage are:
Paul is writing against the background that some say the second coming of Christ has already arrived.  (Verse 2)
The term ‘’ man of lawlessness’ may imply rulers to come or powerful persons who aren’t too happy for the spread of the gospel .

Verse 3: ‘The Rebellion’: this refers to the final denoument between evil and the Lord Jesus as his coming.  This is clear as the rebellion is the time when the man of lawlessnes is revealed ie publicly.  Verse 4 does not refer to Caligula’s image as some argue, for it is a person, not an image who goes into the temple.  This is figurative language here. 

Note that He is already at work: vv 6-7.  Yet He will be revealed later.  I will happen at the second coming with this man’s public disclosure and defeat.  V 8 is not a last battle and time of evil but his overthrow. Now note the reference to holding back in verse 7.  Holding back’ means ‘restraining’.  Note also, the emphasis in verse 3 is that he is doomed to destruction.  So then, the idea is that the one restrained but at work now is still at work and is not yet revealed and so destroyed.  Verse 4 is NOT FUTURE, IT IS PRESENT TENSE.  ESV GETS IT RIGHT. 

Verse 9 is in PRESENT TENSE in the Greek.  The point is that he comes by the power of Satan.  He is the false prophet/antichrist kind of figure.  At the manifestation of his coming (Jesus being revealed) he’ll be destroyed.

I think that the beast and the false prophet in Revelation can be thought of as recurring individuals throughout church history which culminate in a climatic manifestation before the second coming in which the earlier manifestations are a type (e.g. Antiochus, Domitian, Papacy, Hitler)

I think the man of sin in Thessalonians is an individual antichrist who denies Jesus as the messianic Son of God come in the flesh.

Thessalonians is saying that before the Day of the Lord (the day of Jesus’ coming, our rapture/resurrection and judgement - not seperated in time as in dispensationalism) this man will be revealed. [So the idea of pre-trib doesn’t fit here].

Does this remove expectation of Jesus’ coming? I don’t think so as there have been many antichrists already where people have thought it was likely to be close to the end. The final antichrist will be obvious in the end but maybe is not immediately so.

Adam

Again, I think this is reading literally something that the people of the time would not have read literally.

Andrew, when you say…

The church is promised not to go through the great tribulation. (1 Thes 5:9; Rom 5:9; Rev3:10.

...I find this line of theology patronizes all the terrible suffering of earlier saints. What about those Roman Christians fed to the lions? What about Richard Wurmbrant’s “Tortured for Christ”? What about all the Chinese and Russian and Romanian and African Christians tortured in unspeakable ways, forced to watch their kids raped or stabbed? Yet somehow WE are “good enough” to escape the REAL tribulation.

Sorry, the stuff the church has already experienced has been a real tribulation. One is not meant to read apocalyptic writing as a literal timetable, and it tends to generate cults when people try to.

Andrew Tilsley - 04 December 2007 05:52 PM

Adam, how do you get the man will be revealed BEFORE?

2 Thes 2:7-8 suggests the one who restrains (the Holy Spirit) will be removed prior to the Lawless One being revealed. How can the Holy Spirit be removed if the church isn’t also removed?

The text doesn’t say the one who restrains is the Spirit in the Church.

Hi Adam,
I’m with you most of the way but I don’t think there is one final anti-christ. Revelations shouldn’t be read that way… and I don’t think Thessalonians should be read that way either. The man of lawlessness is an image of those who deny Christ… and it’s happening, always has, always will until the Lord returns.

Regards

Geoff Chambers - 04 December 2007 02:17 PM

Dave Lankshear - 04 December 2007 02:01 PM

It’s from chatting with a certain mate with a Phd in “millennial fears” told me it was so. I don’t have the paper work or evidence to back it myself… but this mate co-authored “666 and all that” so I’ll recommend the book and leave it there.

I had a read of the review of the book, but it didn’t mention 2 Thessalonians. Do you know if the book deals with the passage in question?

Geoff, I fairly certain that that is the/a book that Mark Short bought today. Maybe you should ask him about it?

Cheers,
Andrew