Text -- 2 Thessalonians 2:4 (NET)

2:4 He opposes and exalts himself above every so-called god or object of worship, and as a result he takes his seat in God’s temple, displaying himself as God.

Commentary -- Word/Phrase Notes (per phrase)

Robertson: 2Th 2:4

He that opposeth and exalteth himself ( ho antikeimenos kai huperairomenos ).

Like John’ s Antichrist this one opposes (anti̇ ) Christ and exalts himself (direct middle of huperairō , old verb to lift oneself up above others, only here and 2Co 12:7 in N.T.), but not Satan, but an agent of Satan. This participial clause is in apposition with the two preceding phrases, the man of sin, the son of perdition. Note 1Co 8:5 about one called God and Act 17:23 for sebasma (from sebazomai ), object of worship, late word, in N.T. only in these two passages.

Robertson: 2Th 2:4

So that he sitteth in the temple of God ( hōste auton eis ton naon tou theou kathisai ).

Another example of the infinitive with hōste for result. Caius Caligula had made a desperate attempt to have his statue set up for worship in the Temple in Jerusalem. This incident may lie behind Paul’ s language here.

Robertson: 2Th 2:4

Setting himself forth as God ( apodeiknunta heauton hoti estin theos ).

Present active participle (mi form) of apodeiknumi , agreeing in case with auton , showing himself that he is God. Caligula claimed to be God. Moffatt doubts if Paul is identifying this deception with the imperial cultus at this stage. Lightfoot thinks that the deification of the Roman emperor supplied Paul’ s language here. Wetstein notes a coin of Julius with theos on one side and Thessalonikeōn on the other. In 1Jo 2:18 we are told of "many antichrists"some of whom had already come. Hence it is not clear that Paul has in mind only one individual or even individuals at all rather than evil principles, for in 2Th 2:6 he speaks of to katechon (that which restraineth) while in 2Th 2:7 it is ho katechōn (the one that restraineth). Frame argues for a combination of Belial and Antichrist as the explanation of Paul’ s language. But the whole subject is left by Paul in such a vague form that we can hardly hope to clear it up. It is possible that his own preaching while with them gave his readers a clue that we do not possess.

Vincent: 2Th 2:4

That is called God ( λεγόμενον θεὸν )

Above the true God and the false gods. The opposer claims divine honors for himself.

Vincent: 2Th 2:4

That is worshipped ( σέβασμα )

An object of adoration, including things as well as persons. Only here and Act 17:23 on which see note under devotions .

Vincent: 2Th 2:4

Temple of God

According to some, a figure of the Christian Church. Others, the temple of Jerusalem.

Vincent: 2Th 2:4

Shewing ( ἀποδεικνύντα )

Publicly asserting divine dignity. Rev. setting himself forth as God .

JFB: 2Th 2:4

Dan 11:36-37 is here referred to. The words used there as to Antiochus Epiphanes, Paul implies, shall even be more applicable to the man of sin, who is the New Testament actual Antichrist, as Antiochus was the Old Testament typical Antichrist. The previous world kingdoms had each one extraordinary person as its representative head and embodiment (thus Babylon had Nebuchadnezzar, Dan 2:38, end; Medo-Persia had Cyrus; Greece had Alexander, and Antiochus Epiphanes, the forerunner of Antichrist); so the fourth and last world kingdom, under which we now live, shall have one final head, the concentrated embodiment of all the sin and lawless iniquity which have been in pagan and papal Rome. Rome's final phase will probably be an unholy alliance between idolatrous superstition and godless infidelity.

JFB: 2Th 2:4

There is but one Greek article to both participles, implying that the reason why he opposeth himself is in order that he may exalt himself above, &c. ALFORD takes the former clause absolutely, "He that withstands (CHRIST)," that is, Antichrist (1Jo 2:18). As at the conclusion of the Old Testament period, Israel apostate allied itself with the heathen world power against Jesus and His apostles (Luk 23:12; and at Thessalonica, Act 17:5-9), and was in righteous retribution punished by the instrumentality of the world power itself (Jerusalem being destroyed by Rome), Dan 9:26-27; so the degenerate Church (become an "harlot"), allying itself with the godless world power (the "beast" of Revelation) against vital religion (that is, the harlot sitting on the beast), shall be judged by that world power which shall be finally embodied in Antichrist (Zec 13:8-9; Zec 14:2; Rev 17:16-17). In this early Epistle, the apostate Jewish Church as the harlot, and pagan Rome as the beast, form the historical background on which Paul draws his prophetic sketch of the apostasy. In the Pastoral Epistles, which were later, this prophecy appears in connection with Gnosticism, which had at that time infected the Church. The harlot (the apostate Church) is first to be judged by the beast (the world power) and its kings (Rev 17:16); and afterwards the beasts and their allies (with the personal Antichrist at their head, who seems to rise after the judgment on the harlot, or apostate Church) shall be judged by the coming of Jesus Himself (Rev 19:20). Anti-Christian tendencies produce different Antichrists: these separate Antichrists shall hereafter find their consummation in an individual exceeding them all in the intensity of his evil character [AUBERLEN]. But judgment soon overtakes him. He is necessarily a child of death, immediately after his ascent as the beast out of the bottomless pit going into perdition (Rev 17:8, Rev 17:11). Idolatry of self, spiritual pride, and rebellion against God, are his characteristics; as Christ-worship, humility, and dependence on God, characterize Christianity. He not merely assumes Christ's character (as the "false Christs," Mat 24:24), but "opposes" Christ. The Greek implies one situated on an opposite side (compare 1Jo 2:22; 2Jo 1:7). One who, on the destruction of every religion, shall seek to establish his own throne, and for God's great truth, "God is man," to substitute his own lie, "Man is God" [TRENCH].

JFB: 2Th 2:4

(1Co 8:5). The Pope (for instance, Clement VI) has even commanded the angels to admit into Paradise, without the alleged pains of purgatory, certain souls. But still this is only a foreshadowing of the Antichrist, who will not, as the Pope, act in God's name, but against God.

JFB: 2Th 2:4

Rome here again gives a presage of Antichrist. The Greek is Sebasma; and Sebastus is the Greek for Augustus, who was worshipped as the secular ruler and divine vicegerent. The papacy has risen on the overthrow of Cæsar's power. Antichrist shall exalt himself above every object of worship, whether on earth as the Cæsar, or in heaven as God. The various prefigurations of Antichrist, Mohammed, Rome, Napoleon, and modern infidel secularism, contain only some, not all, his characteristics. It is the union of all in some one person that shall form the full Antichrist, as the union in one Person, Jesus, of all the types and prophecies constituted the full Christ [OLSHAUSEN].

JFB: 2Th 2:4

"He will reign a time, times, and half a time" (Dan 7:25), that is, three and a half years, and will sit in the temple at Jerusalem: then the Lord shall come from heaven and cast him into the take of fire and shall bring to the saints the times of their reigning, the seventh day of hallowed rest, and give to Abraham the promised inheritance" [IRENÆUS, Against Heresies, 30.4].

JFB: 2Th 2:4

With blasphemous and arrogant DISPLAY (compare a type, Act 12:21-23). The earliest Fathers unanimously looked for a personal Antichrist. Two objections exist to Romanism being regarded the Antichrist, though probably Romanism will leave its culmination in him: (1) So far is Romanism from opposing all that is called God, that adoration of gods and lords many (the Virgin Mary and saints) is a leading feature in it; (2) the papacy has existed for more than twelve centuries, and yet Christ is not come, whereas the prophecy regards the final Antichrist as short-lived, and soon going to perdition through the coming of Christ (Rev 17:8, Rev 17:11). Gregory the Great declared against the patriarch of Constantinople, that whosoever should assume the title of "universal bishop" would be "the forerunner of Antichrist." The papacy fulfilled this his undesigned prophecy. The Pope has been called by his followers, "Our Lord God the Pope"; and at his inauguration in St. Peter's, seated in his chair upon the high altar, which is treated as his footstool, he has vividly foreshadowed him who "exalteth himself above all that is called God." An objection fatal to interpreting the temple of God here as the Church (1Co 3:16-17; 1Co 6:19) is, the apostle would never designate the apostate anti-Christian Church "the temple of God." It is likely that, as Messiah was revealed among the Jews at Jerusalem, so Antimessiah shall appear among them when restored to their own land, and after they have rebuilt their temple at Jerusalem. Thus Dan 11:41, Dan 11:45 (see on Dan 11:41; Dan 11:45), corresponds, "He shall enter the glorious land (Judea), and he shall plant the tabernacles of his palaces between the seas in the glorious holy mountain"; and then (Dan 12:1) "Michael, the great prince, shall stand up" to deliver God's people. Compare Note, see on Dan 9:26-27. Also the king of Assyria, type of Antichrist (Isa 14:12-14). "Lucifer" (a title of Messiah, assumed by Antichrist, Rev 22:16); "I will exalt my throne above the stars of God." "I will sit upon the mount of the congregation (that is, God's place of meeting His people of old, the temple), in the sides of the north (Psa 48:2); I will be like the Most High." Rev 11:1-2, "The temple of God . . . the holy city" (namely, Jerusalem, Mat 4:5), compare Psa 68:18, Psa 68:29, referring to a period since Christ's ascension, therefore not yet fulfilled (Isa 2:1-3; Eze. 40:1-44:31; Zec 14:16-20; Mal 3:1). "In the temple of God," implies that it an internal, not an external, enemy which shall assail the Church. Antichrist shall, the first three and a half years of the prophetical week, keep the covenant, then break it and usurp divine honors in the midst of the week. Some think Antichrist will be a Jew. At all events he will, "by flatteries," bring many, not only of the Gentiles, but also of "the tribes" of Israel (so the Greek for "kindreds," Rev 11:8-9), to own him as their long-looked-for Messiah, in the same "city where our Lord was crucified." "Sitteth" here implies his occupying the place of power and majesty in opposition to Him who "sitteth on the right hand of the Majesty on high" (Heb 1:3), and who shall come to "sit" there where the usurper had sat (Mat 26:64). See on Dan 9:27; Rev 11:2-3, Rev 11:9, Rev 11:11. Compare Eze 38:2-3, Eze 38:6, Eze 38:9-10, Eze 38:13-14, Eze 38:16, as to Tyre, the type of Antichrist, characterized by similar blasphemous arrogance.

Clarke: 2Th 2:4

Who opposeth and exalteth - He stands against and exalts himself above all Divine authority, and above every object of adoration, and every institution relative to Divine worship, σεβασμα, himself being the source, whence must originate all the doctrines of religion, and all its rites and ceremonies; so that sitting in the temple of God - having the highest place and authority in the Christian Church, he acts as God - taking upon himself God’ s titles and attributes, and arrogating to himself the authority that belongs to the Most High

The words ως Θεον, as God, are wanting in ABD, many others, Erpen’ s Arabic, the Coptic, Sahidic, Ethiopic, Armenian, the Vulgate, some copies of the Itala, and the chief of the Greek fathers. Griesbach has left them out of the text, and Professor White says, Certissime delenda ; "They should most certainly be erased."There is indeed no evidence of their being authentic, and the text reads much better with out them: So that he sitteth in the temple of God, etc.

Calvin: 2Th 2:4

4.An adversary, and that exalteth himself. The two epithets — man of sin, and son of perdition — intimate, in the first place, how dreadful the confusion would be, that the unseemliness of it might not discourage weak minds; and farther, they tend to stir up the pious to a feeling of detestation, lest they should degenerate along with others. Paul, however, now draws, as if in a picture, a striking likeness of Antichrist; for it may be easily gathered from these words what is the nature of his kingdom, and in what things it consists. For, when he calls him an adversary, when he says that he will claim for himself those things which belong to God, so that he is worshipped in the temple as God, he places his kingdom in direct opposition to the kingdom of Christ. Hence, as the kingdom of Christ is spiritual, so this tyranny must be upon souls, that it may rival the kingdom of Christ. We shall also find him afterwards assigning to him the power of deceiving, by means of wicked doctrines and pretended miracles. If, accordingly, you would know Antichrist, you must view him as diametrically opposed to Christ. ⁶⁴²

Where I have rendered — everything that is called God, the reading more generally received among the Greeks is, every one that is called. It may, however, be conjectured, both from the old translation ⁶⁴³ and from some Greek commentaries, that Paul’s words have been corrupted. The mistake, too, of a single letter was readily fallen into, especially when the shape of the letter was much similar; for, where there was written πᾶν τὸ, ( everything,) some transcriber, or too daring reader, turned it into πάντα, ( every one.) This difference, however, is not of so much importance as to the sense, for Paul undoubtedly means that Antichrist would take to himself those things that belonged to God alone, so that he would exalt himself above every divine claim, that all religion and all worship of God might lie under his feet. This expression then, everything that is reckoned to be God, is equivalent to everything that is reckoned as Divinity, and σέβασμα, that is, in which the veneration due to God consists.

Here, however, the subject treated of is not the name of God himself, but his majesty and worship, and, in general, everything that he claims for himself. “True religion is that by which the true God alone is worshipped; that, the son of perdition will transfer to himself.” Now, every one that has learned from Scripture what are the things that more especially belong to God, and will, on the other hand, observe what the Pope claims for himself — though he were but a boy of ten years of age — will have no great difficulty in recognizing Antichrist. Scripture declares that God is the alone Lawgiver (Jas 4:12) who is able to save and to destroy; the alone King, whose office it is to govern souls by his word. It represents him as the author of all sacred rites; ⁶⁴⁴ it teaches that righteousness and salvation are to be sought from Christ alone; and it assigns, at the same time, the manner and means. There is not one of these things that the Pope does not affirm to be under his authority. He boasts that it is his to bind consciences with such laws as seem good to him, and subject them to everlasting punishment. As to sacraments, he either institutes new ones, according to his own inclination, ⁶⁴⁵ or he corrupts and deforms those which had been instituted by Christ — nay, sets them aside altogether, that he may substitute in their place the sacrileges ⁶⁴⁶ which he has invented. He contrives means of attaining salvation that are altogether at variance with the doctrine of the Gospel; and, in fine, he does not hesitate to change the whole of religion at his own pleasure. What is it, I pray you, for one to lift up himself above everything that is reckoned God, if the Pope does not do so? When he thus robs God of his honor, he leaves him nothing remaining but an empty title of Deity, ⁶⁴⁷ while he transfers to himself the whole of his power. And this is what Paul adds shortly afterwards, that the son of perdition would shew himself as God. For, as has been said, he does not insist upon the simple term God, but intimates, that the pride ⁶⁴⁸ of Antichrist would be such, that, raising himself above the number and rank of servants, and mounting the judgment-seat of God, ⁶⁴⁹ would reign, not with a human, but with a divine authority. For we know that whatever is raised up into the place of God is an idol, though it should not bear the name of God.

In the temple of God. By this one term there is a sufficient refutation of the error, nay more, the stupidity of those who reckon the Pope to be Vicar of Christ, on the ground that he has his seat in the Church, in whatever manner he may conduct himself; for Paul places Antichrist nowhere else than in the very sanctuary of God. For this is not a foreign, but a domestic enemy, who opposes Christ under the very name of Christ. But it is asked, how the Church is represented as the den of so many superstitions, while it was destined to be the pillar of the truth? (1Ti 3:15.) I answer, that it is thus represented, not on the ground of its retaining all the qualities of the Church, but because it has something of it remaining. I accordingly acknowledge, that that is the temple of God in which the Pope bears rule, but at the same time profaned by innumerable sacrileges.

Defender: 2Th 2:4

The son of perdition will be the leader and icon of the global religion of evolutionary pantheistic humanism, which will finally triumph in the last days. There will be a great amalgamation of religions ("all that is called God") combining the eastern, ethnic pantheistic religions and modern New Age scientific and occult religions with apostate monotheistic religions (including the pseudo-Christian denominations and cults left behind on earth after all true Christians have been removed by the rapture) under the charismatic, but despotic, reign of this great man who will seem to be the very apex of the age-long process of evolution. This, of course, is essentially the goal of the world's anti-Christian and pseudo-Christian religions today, and they will finally attain it for a brief period in the end-times. This wicked king will be a thorough-going humanist, honoring only "the God of forces" (Dan 11:38), and speaking "great words against the most High" (Dan 7:25), but he will also "cause craft to prosper in his hand ... and by peace shall destroy many" (Dan 8:25). He will make a seven-year treaty with Israel (see note on Dan 9:26, Dan 9:27), re-establishing their temple worship at Jerusalem, but will break that treaty after three and one-half years, and will install his own living image in the temple, proclaiming himself to be the god whom all men must worship (Dan 11:45; Mat 24:15; Rev 13:4-8, Rev 13:14, Rev 13:15)."

TSK: 2Th 2:4

and exalteth : Isa 14:13; Eze 28:2, Eze 28:6, Eze 28:9; Dan 7:8, Dan 7:25, Dan 8:9-11, Dan 11:36; Rev 13:6

called : 1Co 8:5

sitteth : Dan 8:12-14, Dan 11:45; Rev 13:6, Rev 13:7

Commentary -- Word/Phrase Notes (per Verse)

Barnes: 2Th 2:4

Who opposeth - That is, he is distinguished as an opposer of the great system which God has revealed for human salvation, and of those who would serve God in purity in the gospel of his Son. No Protestant will doubt that this has been the character of the papacy. The opposition of the general system to the gospel; the persecution of Wycliffe, of John Huss, of Jerome of Prague, of the Waldenses and the Reformers; the Inquisition, the cruelties in the reign of Mary (Queen of Scots), and the massacre of Bartholomew in France, are obvious illustrations of this.

And exalteth himself above all that is called God - That is, whether among the pagans or the Jews; above a false God, or the true God. This could be true only of one who set aside the divine laws; who undertook to legislate where God only has a right to legislate, and whose legislation was contrary to that of God. Any claim of a dominion over conscience; or any arrangement to set aside the divine laws, and to render them nugatory, would correspond with what is implied in this description. It cannot be supposed that any one would openly claim to be superior to God, but the sense must be, that the enactments and ordinances of the "man of sin"would pertain to the province in which God only can legislate, and that the ordinances made by him would be such as to render nugatory the divine laws, by appointing others in their place. No one can reasonably doubt that all that is here affirmed may be found in the claims of the Pope of Rome. The assumptions of the papacy have related to the following things:

(1) To authority above all the inferior orders of the priesthood - above all pastors, bishops, and primates.

\caps1 (2) a\caps0 uthority above all kings and emperors, "deposing some, and advancing others, obliging them to prostrate themselves before him, to kiss his toe, to hold his stirrup, to wait barefooted at his gate, treading even upon the neck, and kicking off the imperial crown with his foot"- Newton. Thus, Gregory VII made Henry IV wait barefooted at his gate. Thus, Alexander III trod upon the neck of Alexander I. Thus, Celestin kicked off the imperial crown of Henry VI. Thus, the right was claimed, and asserted, of laying nations under interdict, of deposing kings, and of absolving their subjects from their oaths of allegiance. And thus the Pope claimed the right over all unknown lands that might be discovered by Columbus, and apportioned the New World as he pleased - in all these things claiming prerogatives which can pertain only to God.

\caps1 (3) t\caps0 o authority over the conscience, in matters which can pertain only to God himself, and where he only can legislate. Thus, it has been, and is, one of the claims set up for the Pope that he is infallible. Thus, he "forbids what God has commanded,"as the marriage of the clergy, communion in both kinds, the use of the Scriptures for the common people. Thus, he has set aside the second commandment by the appointment of image-worship; and thus he claims the power of the forgiveness of sins. Multitudes of things which Christ allows his people are forbidden by the papacy, and many things are enjoined, or allowed, directly contrary to the divine legislation.

Or that is worshipped - σέβασμα sebasma . This word means "an object of worship;"see Act 17:3, where it is rendered devotions. It may be applied to the worship of a pagan divinity, or of the true God. "It may refer to a person, an idol, or a place. Probably Paul refers here to the heroes and other subordinate divinities of the heathen mythology"- Oldshausen. No one can doubt that the Pope has claimed higher honors, as the vicegerent of Christ, than was ever rendered in the ancient "hero worship."

So that he, as God - That is, claiming the honors due to God. This expression would not imply that he actually claimed to be the true God, but only that he sits in the temple, and manifests himself as if he were God. He claims such honors and such reverence as the true God would if he should appear in human form. It should be observed here, however, that there is much reason to doubt the genuineness of this phrase - "as God"- ὡς Θεον hōs Theon . Mill supposes that it was inserted from the context. It is marked with an asterisk in the Vulgate, the Coptic, and the Syriac, and is omitted by many of the fathers; see Mill and Wetstein. It is rejected by Griesbach and Lachmann, and marked as doubtful by Hahn. It is defended, however, by Matthaei, Koppe, Knapp, and Schott. The sense is not materially affected whether it be regarded as genuine or not.

Sitteth in the temple of God - That is, in the Christian church. It is by no means necessary to understand this of the temple at Jerusalem, which was standing at the time this Epistle was written, because:

\caps1 (1) t\caps0 he phrase "the temple of God"is several times used with reference to the Christian church, 1Co 3:16, 1Co 3:17; 2Co 6:16; Eph 2:21; Rev 3:12; and,

\caps1 (2) t\caps0 he temple was the proper symbol of the church, and an apostle trained amidst the Hebrew institutions would naturally speak of the church as the temple of God. The temple at Jerusalem was regarded as the peculiar dwelling-place of God on earth. When the Christian church was founded, it was spoken of as the peculiar dwelling-place of God; see the passages referred to above. He dwelt among His people. He was with them, and walked with them, and manifested himself among them - as he had done in the ancient temple. The usage in the New Testament would not lead us to restrict this language to an edifice, or a "church,"as the word is now commonly used, but rather to suppose that it denotes the church as a society, and the idea is, that the Antichrist here referred to would present himself in the midst of that church as claiming the honors due to God alone. In the temple at Jerusalem, God himself presided. There he gave laws to his people; there he manifested himself as God; and there he was worshipped. The reign of the "man of sin"would be as if he should sit there. In the Christian church he would usurp the place which God had occupied in the temple. He would claim divine attributes and homage. He would give laws and responses as God did there. He would be regarded as the head of all ecclesiastical power; the source from which all authority emanated; the same in the Christian church which God himself was in the temple. This does not then refer primarily to the Pope as sitting in any particular church on any particular occasion, but to his claiming in the Church of Christ the authority and homage which God had in the temple at Jerusalem. In whatever place, whether in a cathedral or elsewhere, this authority should be exercised, all that the language here conveys would be fulfilled. No one can fail to see that the authority claimed by the Pope of Rome, meets the full force of the language used here by the apostle.

Showing himself that he is God - This does not necessarily mean that he actually, in so many words, claimed to be God; but that he usurped the place of God, and claimed the prerogatives of God. If the names of God are given to him, or are claimed by him; if he receives the honors due to God; if he asserts a dominion like that of God, then all that the language fairly implies will be fulfilled. The following expressions, applied to the Pope of Rome by Catholic writers, without any rebuke from the papacy, will show how entirely applicable this is to the pretended Head of the Church. He has been styled "Our Lord God the Pope; another God upon earth; king of kings and lord of lords. The same is the dominion of God and the Pope. To believe that our Lord God the Pope might not decree as he decreed is heresy. The power of the Pope is greater than all created power, and extends itself to things celestial, terrestrial, and infernal. The Pope doeth whatsoever he listeth, even things unlawful, and is more than God;"see the authority for these extraordinary declarations in Dr. Newton book on the Prophecies, Dissertations xxii. How can it be doubted that the reference here is to the papacy? Language could not be plainer, and it is not possible to conceive that anything can ever occur which would furnish a more manifest fulfillment of this prophecy. Indeed, interpreted by the claims of the papacy, it stands among the very clearest of all the predictions in the Sacred Scriptures.

Poole: 2Th 2:4

A further description of this man of sin, by his opposition and exaltation.

Who opposeth or, o antikeimenov , the opposer; or rather, opposing, expressed in the participle of the present tense, denoting a continued act, or that which he bends himself strongly to. But against what? The same that he exalteth himself above, as some conceive; but the grammar will not well admit that sense, and we should not so restrain it; and therefore we will take the word indefinitely, as expressed in the text. But we may well conceive, it is Christ himself whom he opposeth; as his name given him by the apostle John doth evidence, when he is called antichrist, or the antichrist, one that is against Christ; not that he openly and professedly opposeth him, but as Judas kissed his Master, and betrayed him: see those that have written of antichrist, as Philip Nicholas, Whitaker, Danaeuns, Chamier, Moulin, Junius, &c. It is iniquity in a mystery. He serveth Christ, but it is to serve himself upon him. He acknowledgeth him in all his offices, and yet doth virtually deny and oppose him in them all: called antichrist, as opposite to the unction of Christ: Christ signifies anointed, and so he opposeth him in the offices to which he is anointed, while he owns his natures. He professeth himself a "servant of the servants of God," and yet persecutes, curseth, proscribes, and killeth them, opposing Christ in his members. He maketh war with the saints, Rev 13:7 . He hath two horus like a lamb, and speaks as a dragon, 2Th 2:11 ; speaks lies in hypocrisy, 1Ti 4:2 . And then he is described by his exaltation; uperairomenov , exalted, which is well supplied, he exalteth himself: it is not from God. He

exalteth himself or lifteth himself,

above all that is called God though not really and essentially God. The apostle well knew that in the Old Testament magistrates were called gods, Psa 82:1,6 ; and 1Co 8:5 : There be that are called gods, whether in heaven or in earth. Magistrates and rulers are of several degrees; some inferior, some superior; some supreme, as kings and emperors; but he exalteth himself above them all, and that not only in spirituals, by excommunications, but in civils, by deposing kings, disposing kingdoms, yea, making emperors to wait at his gate, hold his stirrup, prostrate themselves to kiss his toe, and then to tread upon their neck, as Alexander the Third did to Frederic Barbarossa; and this not condemned as the extravagancy of some particular persons, but allowed and justified by the doctrine and doctors of the Romish Church. And Bellarmine, de Rom. Pont. lib. 5. c. 8, gives it as the reason why the pope would not come to the council of Nice, lest if the emperor should come thither he should attempt to sit above him. So that by these two words in the text, the apostle describes him both in his enmity and pride, opposition and exaltation. Observe, first: He assumeth to himself a higher power than those that are only called gods; theirs is human, his is Divine; theirs on the bodies or estates of men, his over the conscience; theirs only to the living, his to men’ s souls after death. Next, he makes himself like God, and is

as God as the king of old Babylon said, I will be like the Most High, Isa 14:14 . As God’ s residence of old was in the temple of Jerusalem, so he, as God, sitteth in the temple of God: not that temple that was built by Solomon, and afterwards rebuilt, and to be built again, as the popish doctors speak: for it is now destroyed, and if it be built again by this man of sin, as they say, at his coming, would the apostle call that

the temple of God? 2Co 6:16 Rev 3:12 , &c. But it is a spiritual temple, as the church is called, 1Co 3:16,17 . So Augustine, Jerome, Hilary, Chrysostom, understand it. And he is said here to sit, to have here his cathedra. The apostle speaks of him as a bishop, whose episcopal see is called a seat, or cathedra; and here he sitteth as God: the popish writers give the pope that and suchlike titles, Dominus Deus noster Papa, Idem est Dominium Dei et Papae, Tu es alter Deus in Terra, " Thou art another God on earth." Concil. Later. sess. 4. And as God he maketh laws to bind the conscience, and dispenseth with laws natural and moral; pardons sin as he pleaseth, past, present, and to come; can deliver souls out of purgatory, and translate them to heaven: so that this man of sin is not to be looked for among the Turks, pagans, or infidels. He

sitteth in the temple the church, of God not that it can be the true church where he thus sitteth and acteth, but rather the synagogue of Satan; but that which he calleth so, and which beareth that name, and which before the falling away was really so, Rom 1:8 . As Jerusalem is called the holy city after it had lost its holiness, Mat 4:5 ; and the faithful city, when become an harlot, Isa 1:21 ; and Mount Tabor a holy mount, 2Pe 1:18 ; because once so: or called so according to men’ s opinion; as idols, that are nothing, are yet called gods, 2Ch 28:23 1Co 8:5 . Some read the words, eiv ton naon , in templum Dei, as we say, in amicum, i.e. velut amicus, he sitteth for the temple of God, as if he himself was the temple and church of God. So Aug. de Civ. Dei, lib. 20. c. 19. And so some of our protestant writers, applying it to the pope, who, as the head of the church, hath the whole church virtually in himself, and doth exercise all church power.

Showing himself that he is God not saying it with his mouth, as CEcumenius saith, but making such a show before men; though Bellarmine interprets it of an open boasting and vaunting himself to be God, which, saith he, the pope doth not; but by pretended miracles, signs, and wonders, by pardons, indulgences, canonizing saints, dominion over princes and kingdoms, he shows himself as a God before men, and claimns a power to be judged of no man, and to be judge of all men. A seculari potestate non solvi posse nec ligari pontificem, quem constat a Constantino Deum appellatum, cum nee Deum ab hominibus judicari manifestum sit. Decret. distinct. 96. c. 7. Yea, lastly, he exalteth himself above God himself, when he maketh the Scriptures to derive their authority more from the pope’ s canonizing, than God himself; and without it no man is bound to believe them. Decret. lib. 2 Tit 23 Again: If the pope should err by commanding vice and forbidding virtue, the church was bound to believe vice to be good and virtue to be evil. Bellarm. lib. 4. de Summo Pont. c. 5. And it is frequent among their divines and canonists to say, that the pope can dispense against the apostles and the Old Testament, and the Scriptures are inferior to his decrees, and without the authority of the church are a nose of wax, paper, and parchment, &c.; so that upon the whole, as John’ s disciples asked concerning Christ: Art thou he that should come, or must we look for another? So, may we not say to the pope concerning antichrist: Art thou he, &c.? I will speak boldly, either there is no antichrist, or the bishop of Rome is he. Chamier. 1.16. c. 8.

Haydock: 2Th 2:3-4

First, &c.[2] What is meant by this falling away, (in the Greek this apostacy) is uncertain, and differently expounded. St. Jerome and others understand it of a falling off of other kingdoms, which before were subject to the Roman empire; as if St. Paul said to them: you need not fear that the day of judgment is at hand, for it will not come till other kingdoms, by a general revolt, shall have fallen off, so that the Roman empire be destroyed. The same interpreters expound the sixth and seventh verses in like manner, as if when it is said, now you know [3] what withholdeth, &c. That is, you see the Roman empire subsisteth yet, which must be first destroyed. And when it is added, only that he ho now holdeth, do hold, until he be taken out of the way; the sense, say these authors, is, let Nero and his successors hold that empire till it be destroyed, for not till then will the day of judgment come. A. Lapide makes this exposition so certain, that he calls it a tradition of the fathers, which to him seems apostolical. But we must not take the opinion of some fathers, in the exposition of obscure prophecies, where they advance conjectures (which others at the same time reject, or doubt of) to be apostolical traditions, and articles of faith, as the learned bishop of Meaux, Bossuet, takes notice on this very subject, in his preface and treatise on the Apocalypse, against Jurieux. St. Jerome indeed, and others, thought that the Roman empire was to subsist till the antichrist's coming, which by the event most interpreters conclude to be a mistake, and that it cannot be said the Roman empire continues to this time. See Lyranus on this place, St. Thomas Aquinas, Salmeron, Estius, and many others; though A. Lapide, with some few, pretend the Roman empire still subsists in the emperors of Germany. We also find that divers of the ancient fathers thought that the day of judgment was just at hand in their time. See Tertullian, St. Cyprian, St. Gregory the Great, &c. And as to this place, it cannot be said the fathers unanimously agree in their exposition. St. John Chrysostom [4], Theodoret, St. Augustine in one of his expositions, by this falling off, and apostacy, understand antichrist himself, apostatizing from the Catholic faith. And they who expound it of Nero, did not reflect that this letter of St. Paul was written under Claudius, before Nero's reign. According to a third and common exposition, by this revolt or apostacy, others understand a great falling off of great numbers from the Catholic Church and faith, in those nations where it was professed before; not but that, as St. Augustine expressly takes notice, the Church will remain always visible, and Catholic in its belief, till the end of the world. This interpretation we find in St. Cyril[5] of Jerusalem. (Catech. 15.) See also St. Anselm on this place, St. Thomas Aquinas, Salmeron, Estius, &c. In fine, that there is no apostolical tradition, as to any of the interpretations of these words, we may be fully convinced from the words of St. Augustine[6], lib. xx. de Civ. Dei. chap. 19. t. 7. p. 597. Nov. edit. where he says: For my part, I own myself altogether ignorant what the apostle means by these words; but I shall mention the suspicions of others, which I have read, or heard. Then he sets down the exposition concerning the Roman empire. He there calls that a suspicion and conjecture, which others say is an apostolical tradition. In like manner the ancient fathers are divided, as to the exposition of the words of the sixth and seventh verse, when it is said you know what hindereth; some understand that antichrist must come first. Others, that the beforementioned apostacy, or falling off from the Church, must happen before. And when St. Paul says, (ver. 7.) that he who now holdeth, do hold; some expound it, let him take care at the time of such trials, to hold, and preserve the true faith to the end. When the expositions are so different, as in this place, whosoever pretends to give a literal translation ought never to add words to the text, which determine the sense to such a particular exposition, and especially in the same print, as Mr. N. hath done on the seventh verse, where he translates, only let him that now holdeth the faith, keep it until he be taken out of the way. ---

And the man of sin [7] revealed, the son of perdition, so that he sitteth in the temple of God, shewing himself as if he were God. He is called again, (ver. 8.) that wicked one....whom the Lord Jesus Christ shall kill with the spirit of his mouth. By all these words is described to us the great antichrist, about the end of the world, according to the unexceptionable authority and consent of the ancient fathers. It is as ridiculous as malicious to pretend, with divers later reformers, that the pope, and all the popes since the destruction of the Roman empire, are the great antichrist, the man of sin, &c. Grotius, Dr. Hammond, and divers learned Protestants, have confuted and ridiculed this groundless fable, of which more on the Apocalypse. It may suffice to observe here that antichrist, is to be one particular man, not so many different men. That he is to come a little while before the day of judgment. The he will make himself be adored, and pretend to be God. What pope did so? That he will pretend to be Christ, &c. (Witham) ---

St. Augustine (de Civ. Dei. book xx. chap. 19.) says, that an attack would be made at one and the same time against the Roman empire and the Church. The Roman empire subsists as yet, in Germany, though much weakened and reduced. The Roman Catholic Church, notwithstanding all its losses, and the apostacy of many of its children, has always remained the same. (Calmet) The two special signs of the last day will be a general revolt, and the manifestation of antichrist, both of which are so dependent on each other, that St. Augustine makes but one of both. What presumptive folly in Calvin and other modern reformers, to oppose the universal sentiments of the fathers both of the Latin and Greek Church! What inconsistency, to give such forced interpretations, not only widely different from the expositions of sound antiquity, but also widely different from each other! The Church of God, with her head, strong in the promises of Jesus Christ, will persevere to the end, frustra circumlatrantibus hæreticis. (St. Augustine, de util cred. chap. xvii.) ---

In the temple. Either that of Jerusalem, which some think he will rebuild; or in some Christian Church, which he will pervert to his own worship; as Mahomet has done with the churches of the east. (Challoner)

===============================

[BIBLIOGRAPHY]

Nisi venerit discessio primum, Greek: e apostasia. St. Jerome (Ep. ad Algasiam. q. 11. t. 4. p. 209) Greek: Apostasia, inquit....ut omnes Gentes, quæ Rom. Imperio subjacent, recedant ab eis.

===============================

[BIBLIOGRAPHY]

St. John Chrysostom ( Greek: log. d. p. 235) says that by these words, you know what hindereth, is probably understood the Roman empire, &c. and Tertullian (lib. de Resur. Carnis. chap. xxiv. p. 340) on those words, till taken out of the way, donec de medio fiat, Quis nisi Romanorum status?

===============================

[BIBLIOGRAPHY]

St. John Chrysostom ( Greek: log. g. p. 232) Greek: ti estin e apostasia autoi kalei ton Antichriston. See Theodoret on this place.

===============================

[BIBLIOGRAPHY]

St. Cyril of Jerusalem (Cat. xv) says, this apostacy is from the true faith and good works: Greek: aute estin e apostasia. St. Anselm and others mention both expositions, i.e. from the Roman empire, or from the faith.

===============================

[BIBLIOGRAPHY]

St. Augustine: Ego prorsus quid dixerit, me fateor ignorare....suspiciones tamen hominum, quas vel audire, vel legere potui, non tacebo, &c. Quidam putant hoc de Imperio dictum esse Romano, &c.

===============================

[BIBLIOGRAPHY]

Greek: O anthropos tes amartias, o uios tes apoleias, o antikeimenos, &c. ille homo peccati, ille filius perditionis: the Greek articles sufficiently denote a particular man.

Gill: 2Th 2:4

Who opposeth,.... Or is an opposer, an adversary of Christ, the antichrist; who opposes him in his kingly office, styling himself the head and spouse of the church, assuming to himself all power in heaven and in earth, taking upon him to dispense with the laws of Christ, and to make new ones; who opposes him in his priestly office, by pretending to offer him up again in the sacrifice of the mass, and by making angels and saints departed, intercessors and advocates; and also in his prophetic office, by teaching for doctrines the commandments of men, and setting up unwritten traditions before the word of God, requiring the worshipping of images, angels, and saints, when Christ requires that the Lord God only should be worshipped and served; and by introducing the doctrine of works and of merit instead of grace, and with a multitude of other things, in which he most manifestly appears to be diametrically opposite and contrary to Christ:

and exalteth himself above all that is called God, or that is worshipped. The Syriac version renders the last clause, ודחלא, "and religion"; and the Greek word does signify religion, worship, or devotion, as it is translated, in Act 17:23 but here the act of worship is put for the object, and is rightly rendered, "or that which is worshipped"; as it is in the Vulgate Latin version, and in the Arabic version, "or that which is to be worshipped"; and it was usual with the Jews to call God the object of worship, by the name of worship itself, and by which they used to swear: it is said ^c of R. Benjamin the just, that he was appointed over the alms chest; one time a woman came to him and said, Rabbi, relieve me; he replied to her, העבודה, "by the worship" (that is, by God who is worshipped) there is nothing in the alms chest: and elsewhere ^d it is said by one, concerning two that were fatherless, for whom the collectors of alms gathered, העבודה, "by the worship", they go before my daughter: and a little after, העבודה, "by the worship", these things are holy to thee; where the gloss says, it is an oath: and so here the word is to be understood of Deity itself; and the meaning is, that antichrist would exalt himself above all the gods of the Gentiles, who are only nominally, and not by nature, gods; to these were ascribed, some one thing, to some another; one had the government of heaven, another of hell, another of the seas, and an other of the winds, &c. but this haughty creature antichrist assumes to himself all power, both in heaven, earth, and hell. Angels are sometimes called gods, Psa 8:4 because they are sent of God, and sometimes represent him; the popes of Rome have exalted themselves above these; Pope Clement VI. proclaimed a jubilee, and promised forgiveness of sins to all that should come to Rome; and in his bull for it says, that

"if any that was confessed should die by the way, he should be free from all his sins; "and we do command the angels", that they take such a soul out of purgatory entirely absolved, and introduce it into the glory of paradise:''

and in a manuscript in the library at Helmsted are these words,

"we command the angels that they carry such a soul into Abraham's bosom, as soon as it has left the body:''

kings and civil magistrates are called gods, Psa 82:6 and this monster of iniquity and firstborn of Satan, the popes of Rome, have exalted themselves above these; they have not only took upon them to excommunicate emperors and kings, but to depose them, and take away their crowns from them, and give their kingdoms to others, and absolve their subjects from allegiance and fidelity to them; an emperor has held a pope's stirrup while he alighted from his horse, and was severely reprimanded for holding the left instead of the right stirrup; and the same emperor held another pope's stirrup while he got on his horse, and who set his foot upon his neck when he absolved him, being before excommunicated by him, using these words in Psa 91:13 "thou shall tread upon the lion", &c. An emperor and an empress waited at a pope's gates three days barefoot; another emperor and empress were crowned by the Pope with his feet; he took the crown with his feet, and, they bowing down, put it upon their heads, and then kicked it off; and one of our own kings resigned his crown and the ensigns of his royalty to the Pope's legate, who kept them five days; and when he offered a sum of money to the legate as an earnest of his subjection, to show his master's grandeur, he spurned at it; a king was thrown under a pope's table to lick the bones like a dog, while he was eating: so truly has this passage had its accomplishment in that impious and insolent set of men. Rome is by the Jewish ^e writers called "Magdiel", which signifies "magnifying itself"; the reason is, שיתגדל, "because it magnifies itself" above all these ^f; that is, above all kingdoms and states: but what is worse, and most dreadfully blasphemous, follows,

so that he as God sitteth in the temple of God; not in the temple of Jerusalem, which was to be destroyed and never to be rebuilt more, and was destroyed before this man of sin was revealed; but in the church of God, so called, 1Co 3:16 the Ethiopic version renders it, "in the house of God"; for antichrist rose up out of, and in the midst of the church; and it was a true church in which he first appeared, and over which he usurped power and authority; though it has been so corrupted by him, as now to be only nominally so; here he sits, and has homage done him by his creatures, as if he was a god, and is not only styled Christ's vicar, but a god on earth, and our Lord God the Pope; so in the triumphal arch at the entry of Pope Sixtus IV, these lines were put, "oraculo vocis, mundi moderaris habenas, et merito in terris crederis esse Dens"; the sense is, that he governed the world by his word, and was deservedly believed to be God on earth; and their canon law ^g says,

"it is clearly enough shown, that the Pope cannot be loosed or bound by any secular power; since it is evident that he is called God by that pious prince, Constantine, and it is manifest that God cannot be judged by men:''

and Pope John XXII is expressly called ^h "our Lord God the Pope": the Ethiopic version reads, "he shall say to all, I am the Lord God"; see Eze 28:2, the Alexandrian copy, and some others, and the Vulgate Latin version, leave out the phrase, "as God", but the Syriac retains it: however, the same blasphemy is expressed in the next clause,

shewing himself that he is God; by usurping a power over the consciences and souls of men; by dispensing with the laws of God and man; by assuming to himself all power in heaven and in earth; by taking upon him to open and shut the gates of heaven at pleasure; and by pardoning sin, which none but God can do; this is the mouth speaking blasphemies, Rev 13:5.

Commentary -- Verse Notes / Footnotes

NET Notes: 2Th 2:4

¹ tn Grk “the one who opposes,” describing the figure in v. 3. A new sentence was started here in the translation by supplying the personal pronoun (“he”) and translating the participle ἀντικείμενος (antikeimeno") as a finite verb.

² sn Allusions to Isa 14:13-14; Dan 11:36; Ezek 28:2-9 respectively.

³ tn Grk “that he is God.”

Geneva Bible: 2Th 2:4

Who opposeth and ^{( f )} exalteth himself above all that is called God, or that is worshipped; ^{( 4 )} so that he as God sitteth in the temple of God, shewing himself that he is God.

^{( f )} All men know who he is that says he can shut up heaven and open it at his pleasure, and takes upon himself to be lord and master above all kings and princes, before whom kings and princes fall down and worship, honouring that antichrist as a god. ^{( 4 )} He foretells that the antichrist (that is, whoever he is that will occupy that seat that falls away from God) will not reign outside of the Church, but in the very bosom of the Church.

Commentary -- Verse Range Notes

TSK Synopsis: 2Th 2:1-17

1 Paul urges them to continue stedfast in the truth received;

3 shows that there shall be a departure from the faith,

9 and a discovery of Antichrist, before the day of the Lord come;

15 and thereupon repeats his former exhortation, and prays for them.

MHCC: 2Th 2:1-4

If errors arise among Christians, we should set them right; and good men will be careful to suppress errors which rise from mistaking their words and actions. We have a cunning adversary, who watches to do mischief, and will promote errors, even by the words of Scripture. Whatever uncertainty we are in, or whatever mistakes may arise about the time of Christ's coming, that coming itself is certain. This has been the faith and hope of all Christians, in all ages of the church; it was the faith and hope of the Old Testament saints. All believers shall be gathered together to Christ, to be with him, and to be happy in his presence for ever. We should firmly believe the second coming of Christ; but there was danger lest the Thessalonians, being mistaken as to the time, should question the truth or certainty of the thing itself. False doctrines are like the winds that toss the water to and fro; and they unsettle the minds of men, which are as unstable as water. It is enough for us to know that our Lord will come, and will gather all his saints unto him. A reason why they should not expect the coming of Christ, as at hand, is given. There would be a general falling away first, such as would occasion the rise of antichrist, that man of sin. There have been great disputes who or what is intended by this man of sin and son of perdition. The man of sin not only practises wickedness, but also promotes and commands sin and wickedness in others; and is the son of perdition, because he is devoted to certain destruction, and is the instrument to destroy many others, both in soul and body. As God was in the temple of old, and worshipped there, and is in and with his church now; so the antichrist here mentioned, is a usurper of God's authority in the Christian church, who claims Divine honours.

Matthew Henry: 2Th 2:3-12

In these words the apostle confutes the error against which he had cautioned them, and gives the reasons why they should not expect the coming of Christ as just at hand. There were several events previous to the second coming of Christ; in particular, he tells them there would be,

I. A general apostasy, there would come a falling away first, 2Th 2:3. By this apostasy we are not to understand a defection in the state, or from civil government, but in spiritual or religious matters, from sound doctrine, instituted worship and church government, and a holy life. The apostle speaks of some very great apostasy, not only of some converted Jews or Gentiles, but such as should be very general, though gradual, and should give occasion to the revelation of rise of antichrist, that man of sin. This, he says (2Th 2:5), he had told them of when he was with them, with design, no doubt, that they should not take offence nor be stumbled at it. And let us observe that no sooner was Christianity planted and rooted in the world than there began to be a defection in the Christian church. It was so in the Old Testament church; presently after any considerable advance made in religion there followed a defection: soon after the promise there was revolting; for example, soon after men began to call upon the name of the Lord all flesh corrupted their way, - soon after the covenant with Noah the Babel-builders bade defiance to heaven, - soon after the covenant with Abraham his seed degenerated in Egypt, - soon after the Israelites were planted in Canaan, when the first generation was worn off, they forsook God and served Baal, - soon after God's covenant with David his seed revolted, and served other gods, - soon after the return out of captivity there was a general decay of piety, as appears by the story of Ezra and Nehemiah; and therefore it was no strange thing that after the planting of Christianity there should come a falling away.

II. A revelation of that man of sin, that is (2Th 2:3), antichrist would take his rise from this general apostasy. The apostle afterwards speaks of the revelation of that wicked one (2Th 2:8), intimating the discovery which should be made of his wickedness, in order to his ruin: here he seems to speak of his rise, which should be occasioned by the general apostasy he had mentioned, and to intimate that all sorts of false doctrines and corruptions should centre in him. Great disputes have been as to who or what is intended by this man of sin and son of perdition: and, if it be not certain that the papal power and tyranny are principally or only intended, yet this is plain, What is here said does very exactly agree thereto. For observe,

1. The names of this person, or rather the state and power here spoken of. He is called the man of sin, to denote his egregious wickedness; not only is he addicted to, and practises, wickedness himself, but he also promotes, countenances, and commands sin and wickedness in others; and he is the son of perdition, because he himself is devoted to certain destruction, and is the instrument of destroying many others both in soul and body. These names may properly be applied, for these reasons, to the papal state; and thereto agree also,

2. The characters here given, 2Th 2:4. (1.) That he opposes and exalts himself above all that is called God, or is worshipped; and thus have the bishops of Rome not only opposed God's authority, and that of the civil magistrates, who are called gods, but have exalted themselves above God and earthly governors, in demanding greater regard to their commands than to the commands of God or the magistrate. (2.) As God, he sits in the temple of God, showing himself that he is God. As God was in the temple of old, and worshipped there, and is in and with his church now, so the antichrist here mentioned is some usurper of God's authority in the Christian church, who claims divine honours; and to whom can this better apply than to the bishops of Rome, to whom the most blasphemous titles have been given, as Dominus Deus noster papa - Our Lord God the pope; Deus alter in terrâ - Another God on earth; Idem est dominium Dei et papae - The dominion of God and the pope is the same?

3. His rise is mentioned, 2Th 2:6, 2Th 2:7. Concerning this we are to observe two things: - (1.) There was something that hindered or withheld, or let, until it was taken away. This is supposed to be the power of the Roman empire, which the apostle did not think fit to mention more plainly at that time; and it is notorious that, while this power continued, it prevented the advances of the bishops of Rome to that height of tyranny to which soon afterwards they arrived. (2.) This mystery of iniquity was gradually to arrive at its height; and so it was in effect that the universal corruption of doctrine and worship in the Romish church came in by degrees, and the usurpation of the bishops of Rome was gradual, not all at once; and thus the mystery of iniquity did the more easily, and almost insensibly, prevail. The apostle justly calls it a mystery of iniquity, because wicked designs and actions were concealed under false shows and pretences, at least they were concealed from the common view and observation. By pretended devotion, superstition and idolatry were advanced; and, by a pretended zeal for God and his glory, bigotry and persecution were promoted. And he tells us that this mystery of iniquity did even then begin, or did already work. While the apostles were yet living, the enemy came, and sowed tares; there were then the deeds of the Nicolaitans, persons who pretended zeal for Christ, but really opposed him. Pride, ambition, and worldly interest of church-pastors and church-rulers, as in Diotrephes and others, were the early working of the mystery of iniquity, which, by degrees, came to that prodigious height which has been visible in the church of Rome.

4. The fall or ruin of the antichristian state is declared, 2Th 2:8. The head of this antichristian kingdom is called that wicked one, or that lawless person who sets up a human power in competition with, and contradiction to, the divine dominion and power of the Lord Jesus Christ; but, as he would thus manifest himself to be the man of sin, so the revelation or discovery of this to the world would be the sure presage and the means of his ruin. The apostle assures the Thessalonians that the Lord would consume and destroy him; the consuming of him precedes his final destruction, and that is by the Spirit of his mouth, by his word of command; the pure word of God, accompanied with the Spirit of God, will discover this mystery of iniquity, and make the power of antichrist to consume and waste away; and in due time it will be totally and finally destroyed, and this will be by the brightness of Christ's coming. Note, The coming of Christ to destroy the wicked will be with peculiar glory and eminent lustre and brightness.

5. The apostle further describes the reign and rule of this man of sin. Here we are to observe, (1.) The manner of his coming, or ruling, and working: in general, that it is after the example of Satan, the grand enemy of souls, the great adversary of God and man. He is the great patron of error and lies, the sworn enemy of the truth as it is in Jesus and all the faithful followers of Jesus. More particularly, it is with Satanical power and deceit. A divine power is pretended for the support of this kingdom, but it is only after the working of Satan. Signs and wonders, visions and miracles, are pretended; by these the papal kingdom was first set up, and has all along been kept up, but they have false signs to support false doctrines; and lying wonders, or only pretended miracles that have served their cause, things false in fact, or fraudulently managed, to impose upon the people: and the diabolical deceits with which the antichristian state has been supported are notorious. The apostle calls it all deceivableness of unrighteousness, 2Th 2:10. Others may call them pious frauds, but the apostle called them unrighteous and wicked frauds; and, indeed, all fraud (which is contrary to truth) is an impious thing. Many are the subtle artifices the man of sin has used, and various are the plausible pretences by which he had beguiled unwary and unstable souls to embrace false doctrines, and submit to his usurped dominion. (2.) The persons are described who are his willing subjects, or most likely to become such, 2Th 2:10. They are such as love not the truth that they may be saved. They heard the truth (it may be), but they did not love it; they could not bear sound doctrine, and therefore easily imbibed false doctrines; they had some notional knowledge of what was true, but they indulged some powerful prejudices, and so became a prey to seducers. Had they loved the truth, they would have persevered in it, and been preserved by it; but no wonder if they easily parted with what they never had any love to. And of these persons it is said that they perish or are lost; they are in a lost condition, and in danger to be lost for ever. For,

6. We have the sin and ruin of the subjects of antichrist's kingdom declared, 2Th 2:11, 2Th 2:12. (1.) Their sin is this: They believed not the truth, but had pleasure in unrighteousness: they did not love the truth, and therefore they did not believe it; and, because they did not believe the truth, therefore they had pleasure in unrighteousness, or in wicked actions, and were pleased with false notions. Note, An erroneous mind and vicious life often go together and help forward one another. (2.) Their ruin is thus expressed: God shall send them strong delusions, to believe a lie. Thus he will punish men for their unbelief, and for their dislike of the truth and love to sin and wickedness; not that God is the author of sin, but in righteousness he sometimes withdraws his grace from such sinners as are here mentioned; he gives them over to Satan, or leaves them to be deluded by his instruments; he gives them up to their own hearts' lusts, and leaves them to themselves, and then sin will follow of course, yea, the worst of wickedness, that shall end at last in eternal damnation. God is just when he inflicts spiritual judgments here, and eternal punishments hereafter, upon those who have no love to the truths of the gospel, who will not believe them, nor live suitably to them, but indulge false doctrines in their minds, and wicked practices in their lives and conversations.

Barclay: 2Th 2:1-12

This is undoubtedly one of the most difficult passages in the whole New Testament; and it is so because it is using terms and thinking in pictures which were perfectly familiar to those to whom Paul was speaking but which are utterly strange to us.

The general picture is this. Paul was telling the Thessalonians that they must give up their nervous, hysterical waiting for the Second Coming. He denied that he had ever said that the Day of the Lord had come. That was a misinterpretation of his words which must not be attributed to him; and he told them that before the Day of the Lord could come much had still to happen.

First there would come an age of rebellion against God; into this world there had already come a secret evil power which was working in the world and on men to bring this time of rebellion. Somewhere there was being kept one who was as much the incarnation of evil as Jesus was the incarnation of God. He was The Man of Sin, The Son of Perdition, The Lawless One. In time the power which was restraining him would be removed from the scene; and then this devil incarnate would come. When he came, he would gather his own people to him just as Jesus Christ had gathered his. Those who had refused to accept Christ were waiting to accept him. Then would come a last battle in which Christ would utterly destroy The Lawless One; Christ's people would be gathered to him and the wicked men who had accepted The Lawless One as their master would be destroyed.

We have to remember one thing. Almost all the Eastern faiths believed in a power of evil as they believed in a power of good; and believed, too, in a kind of battle between God and this power of evil. For instance, the Babylonians had a story that Tiamat, the dragon, had rebelled against Marduk, the creator, and had in the final battle been destroyed. Paul was dealing in a set of ideas which were common property. The Jews, too, had that idea. They called the Satanic power Belial or, more correctly, Beliar. When the Jews wished to describe a man as utterly bad they called him a son of Beliar (Deu 13:13; 1Ki 21:10, 1Ki 21:13; 2Sa 22:5). In 2Co 6:15Paul uses this term as the opposite of God. This evil incarnate was the antithesis of God. The Christians took this over, later than Paul, under the title Antichrist (1Jo 2:18, 1Jo 2:22; 1Jo 4:3). Obviously such a power cannot go on existing for ever in the universe; and there was widespread belief in a final battle in which God would triumph and this force of anti-God would be finally destroyed. That is the picture with which Paul is working.

What was the restraining force which was still keeping The Lawless One under control? No one can answer that question with certainty. Most likely Paul meant the Roman Empire. Time and again he himself was to be saved from the fury of the mob by the justice of the Roman magistrate. Rome was the restraining power which kept the world from insane anarchy. But the day would come when that power would be removed--and then would be chaos.

So then Paul pictures a growing rebellion against God, the emergence of one who was the devil incarnate as Christ had been God incarnate, a final struggle and the ultimate triumph of God.

When this incarnate evil came into the world there would be some who would accept him as master, those who had refused Christ; and they along with their evil master would find final defeat and terrible judgment.

However remote these pictures may be from us they nevertheless have certain permanent truth in them.

(i) There is a force of evil in the world. Even if he could not logically prove that there was a devil many a man would say, "I know there is because I have met him." We hide our heads in the sand if we deny that there is an evil power at work amongst men.

(ii) God is in control. Things may seem to be crashing to chaos but in some strange way even the chaos is in God's control.

(iii) The ultimate triumph of God is sure. In the end nothing can stand against him. The Lawless One may have his day but there comes a time when God says, "Thus far and no farther." And so the great question is, "On what side are you? In the struggle at the heart of the universe are you for God--or Satan?"

Constable: 2Th 2:1-12

III. CORRECTION OF PRESENT ERROR 2:1-12

Paul next dealt with a doctrinal error that had come into the Thessalonian church to correct this error and to stabilize the church.

Verses 1-23 contain truth about the end times revealed nowhere else in Scripture. This section is key to understanding future events, and it is central to the argument of this epistle.

Constable: 2Th 2:1-5

A. The beginning of the day of the Lord 2:1-5

2:1-2 Paul introduced his teaching by urging his readers not to be shaken from their adherence to the truth he had taught them by what they were hearing from others. The issue centered on Paul's instructions concerning the Rapture (v. 1, cf. 1 Thess. 4:13-18). Other teachers were telling the Thessalonians that the day of the Lord had already begun (v. 2). This seemed to be a distinct possibility since Scripture describes that day as a time of tribulation as well as blessing. The Thessalonians were experiencing intense persecution for their faith.

"False starts have been a common phenomenon among movements predicting the imminent end of the age as people's expectations exceed their patience."²⁵

The false message seems to have gained a hearing also because it came from several different sources. Paul referred to alleged prophetic revelation, the teaching of other recognized authorities, and a letter Paul had supposedly written that had arrived in Thessalonica (cf. 3:17). If the day of the Lord had begun, how could Paul say the Lord's return for his own would precede that day (1 Thess. 1:10; 5:9)? Note that Paul had taught them a pretribulation Rapture.²⁶

"The supposed doctrinal difficulty lies in the failure to distinguish between parousia [appearing] and the day of the Lord. The advocates of the false teaching at Thessalonica conceived that the day of the Lord was not merely at hand,' which was true (Ro 13:12), but actually present,' which Paul denied. Such a view denied the believer the hope of the imminent rapture."²⁷

The subject of verses 1-12 is "the day of the Lord" (v. 2). This day, as the Old Testament and the New Testament refer to it, includes the Tribulation, the Second Coming, the Millennium, and the great white throne judgment (cf. Ps. 2:9; Isa. 11:1-12; 13; Joel 2; Amos 5:18; Zeph. 3:14-20; et al.).²⁸

Some Premillennarians include the Rapture in the day of the Lord,²⁹ but others exclude it.³⁰ Those who include it point to the Rapture as the beginning of God's direct intervention in human history again. They also stress that the parousia ("coming" or "appearing") refers in Scripture to the Lord's coming and to events that follow the Lord's coming. Those who exclude it do so for two reasons. The Rapture is a church event whereas the day of the Lord is an Israel event, and the beginning of that day resumes Daniel's seventy weeks. The seventieth week begins when the Antichrist signs a covenant with Israel allowing the Jews to return to their land (Dan. 9:27). I favor the second view. While the term parousia is broad and refers to the Rapture and to many events that follow it, the term "the day of the Lord" seems more narrowly defined in Scripture and nowhere specifically includes the Rapture.

"This great contrast of attitudes toward the beginning judgment phase of the Day of the Lord and the Rapture [in these verses] is another indicator that the Rapture is not the beginning or any part of the Day of the Lord. Rather, it will be a separate event. Therefore, Paul's reference to the Day of the Lord in 2 Thessalonians 2:2 is not a reference to the Rapture."³¹

2:3-4 Paul explained that three events had to take place before the judgments of the day of the Lord began. These were the apostasy (v. 3), the unveiling of the man of lawlessness (vv. 3-4, 8), and the removal of the restraint of lawlessness (vv. 6-7). The apostle presented these in logical rather than chronological order in this passage. The word "first" refers primarily to the fact that the apostasy will occur before the day of the Lord.³² However it is also true that the apostasy will begin before the revelation of the man of sin.

One major event is the "apostasy" (v. 3, lit. the falling away). The English word "apostasy" is a transliteration of the Greek word apostasia. By definition an apostasy is a departure, an abandoning of a position formerly held. It seems that Paul referred here to the same apostasy he and other apostles spoke of elsewhere (1 Tim. 1:18-20; 4; 2 Tim. 3:1-5; 4:3-4; James 5:1-8; 2 Pet. 2; 3:3-6; Jude). This was the departure of very many professing (saved and unsaved) Christians from the revealed truth of God's Word.

". . . it seems likely that the apostasy Paul had in mind expanded on Jewish apocalyptic expectations and envisioned a dramatic and climactic falling away from the worship of the true God (by both Jews and some portion of the Christian church) as a part of the complex of events at the end of the age."³³

Such a departure had begun in Paul's day. However it had not yet reached the proportions predicted to characterize "the apostasy" about which Paul had instructed his readers when he was with them (cf. v. 5). When the Rapture takes place and all true Christians leave the earth, this apostasy will overwhelm the human race.

"This worldwide anti-God movement will be so universal as to earn for itself a special designation: the apostasy'--i.e., the climax of the increasing apostate tendencies evident before the rapture of the church."³⁴

"It appears more probable from the context that a general abandonment of the basis of civil order is envisaged. This is not only rebellion against the law of Moses; it is a large-scale revolt against public order, and since public order is maintained by the governing authorities' who have been instituted by God,' any assault on it is an assault on a divine ordinance (Rom 13:1, 2). It is, in fact, the whole concept of divine authority over the world that is set at defiance in the rebellion' par excellence."³⁵

Some pretribulationists take a different view. They believe this "apostasy" is a reference to the Rapture, and some of them find support for their view in Paul's reference to the Rapture (v. 1).³⁶

"Nowhere else does the Scripture speak of the rapture as the departure.' A departure denotes an act on the part of the individual or company departing. But the rapture is not an act of departure on the part of the saints. In the rapture the church is passive, not active. At the rapture the church is caught up' or snatched away,' an event wherein the Lord acts to transport believers from earth into His presence (1 Thess. 4:16-17). Everything that takes place with the believers at the rapture is initiated by the Lord and done by Him. Paul has just referred to the rapture as our gathering together unto him' (v. 1); why then should he now use this unlikely term to mean the same thing?"³⁷

Another major event is the unveiling of the "man of lawlessness" (v. 3). This is a person yet to appear who will be completely lawless and whom God will doom to everlasting destruction. The prophet Daniel spoke of such a person. He will make a covenant with the Jews but then break it after three and a half years (Dan. 9:27). The breaking of that covenant seems to be the event that unmasks this individual for who he is, the opponent of Christ. He will eventually seek to make everyone worship himself and will claim to be God (cf. Rev. 13:5-8). The reference to him taking his seat in the temple of God (v. 4) may be figurative representing him as taking the highest position possible. More likely it is literal in which case the material temple of God that will stand in Jerusalem during the second half, at least, of the Tribulation is in view.³⁸ This person, the Antichrist, had not yet appeared when Paul wrote, nor has he appeared yet.³⁹

"In A.D. 40, only a few years before Paul wrote this letter, Gaius Caesar (Caligula), who had declared his own divinity, attempted to have his image set up in the holy of holies in Jerusalem."⁴⁰

2:5 Paul reminded his readers that he had told them of these things when he was with them. Since Paul was evidently only in Thessalonica a few weeks this reference is very significant. Paul did not regard prophecy as too deep or unimportant or controversial for even new Christians. Many Christians today play down the importance of this part of God's revelation. Paul believed prophetic truth was a vital part of the whole counsel of God essential to victorious Christian living. Consequently he taught it without hesitation or apology. So should we.

College: 2Th 2:1-17

2 THESSALONIANS 2

III. INSTRUCTION ON THE LORD'S RETURN (2:1-12)

This section, which is central to the entire second Thessalonian letter, presents one of the most difficult interpretive problems in the New Testament. The problem can be summarized around four specific questions: (1) what is the "rebellion" (v. 3); (2) who is the "man of lawlessness" (v. 3) or "the secret power of lawlessness" (v. 7); (3) what is it that "is holding him back" (v. 6) or "now holds it back" (v. 7); (4) how does all this answer the question which Paul addresses, namely, whether "the day of the Lord" has already come (v. 2)?

The most common answers to these questions have shared an assumption about the passage: Paul speaks primarily of events which are to occur in the future as preliminaries to the return of Jesus. On this basis, conclusions, though widely diverse in particulars, have been confined to a fairly narrow scope. The "rebellion" is generally taken as the period of widespread apostasy from true devotion to God expected in Jewish apocalyptic literature just before God's final act of salvation and judgment at the end of this age. It is further assumed that Paul believes that this period lies in the future, though that may be his own immediate future.

The "man of lawlessness" is generally taken as a future political figure who will lead the climax of opposition to God. The expression is taken as referring to the same figure as the "antichrist" in 1 John 2:18, 22; 4:7, 15; 2 John 7 or the "beast" in Rev 11:7-20:10, a figure based on the Old Testament and intertestamental expectation of a great end-time opponent of God (Dan 7:8, 25; 11:36, 40-41, 45; As. Moses 8:1; Pss. Sol. 2:29; Mart. Isa. 4:2-3; 4 Ezra 5:6; T. Isaac 6:1; T. Jud. 25:3; T. Dan. 5:4; Sib. Or. 2:63, 75). He will be "revealed" (v. 3) when he appears on the world stage and becomes active, a future event, though again one which may lie in Paul's immediate future. In the meantime, he is restrained (vv. 6-7) by some means, but that restraining power will at some point be removed so that he will become fully active. If this general line of interpretation accurately represents Paul's answer, then the "day of the Lord" in v. 2 probably refers not to the actual event of the Lord's return for salvation and judgment but the period immediately preceding that event. The NIV, even more so than most other English versions, strongly reflects this approach to the text; at several points, noted in comments below, where the Greek text is at best ambiguous, the translators have rendered the text in English in such a way as to point clearly toward this interpretation.

While most interpretation of this text has adhered to these established general boundaries, the specifics have varied widely. In particular, the identity of the restrainer, apparently clearly known to the readers (v. 6), has remained mysterious. Suggestions have included the preaching of the gospel, the church, Paul himself, the Holy Spirit, the Roman Empire, the Jewish nation, angels or a particular angel, and the principle of order, among others. Similar confusion reigns in regard to the identity of the man of lawlessness. Does Paul identify this figure with a person or institution of his own period of history, such as the emperor or the Roman government? Does he regard the statement, "he sets himself up in God's temple," as a literal or a metaphorical expression? The answers to these questions are many and the arguments supporting them are cogent at points; consequently, absolutely no consensus among interpreters has arisen.

In addition to the interpretive chaos which this approach to this text has created, it raises another problem. In 1 Thess 4:13-5:11 Paul stresses the imminence of Jesus' return. The Thessalonians' comfort in grief and their motivation to be watchful and ready for Christ's return are based on the hope that his return is imminent, that it could occur at any moment. If this text refers to events which on God's timetable must precede Christ's return, that imminence is sharply qualified, if not contradicted. This tension has led some to deny that Paul wrote 2 Thessalonians or that his view of the Lord's return had changed between the writing of the two letters.

Others, however, insist that in Jewish literature the idea that the final act of judgment and salvation is imminent regularly stands together with the idea that it will be preceded by various preliminary events or signs. In particular it has been argued that in 1 Thess 5:1-11 the Lord's return is unexpected by unbelievers, while the sign provided here is only understood by believers. Against this it must be said that in 1 Thess 5:1-11 the time of the Lord's coming is unknown to all; what distinguishes believers is not their knowledge of the time but their expectation of Christ's return and their consequent watchfulness. Whatever the merits of these explanations, it is admitted by all that if 2 Thess 2:1-12 refers to future events which precede Christ's return, it does create at least a difficult tension with the imminent expectation of the parousia.

Another general weakness with this approach is its lack of congruence with the question which Paul addresses. If in this text Paul is discussing events which precede Christ's return, at best he answers indirectly the question which begins the discussion, namely, whether the day of the Lord has already come (v. 2). Rather than pointing out directly that this event has not occurred, he in effect says that the day of the Lord has not come because the events necessarily prior to the day have not come. While this problem is ameliorated somewhat by taking "day of the Lord" to refer to events just preceding Christ's return, the argument remains less than straightforward. One might have expected the apostle instead to point out what the day of the Lord would bring in itself, noting how those things have not yet been fully realized.

In such a situation of exegetical confusion, established patterns of interpretation deserve reexamination. If the prevailing approach to the text yields so wide a range of possible interpretations and so many problems, it may be that the prevailing approach is not in harmony with the author's intended meaning. To be sure, the traditional understanding of this text may be correct, and the particulars of Paul's meaning may be too remote for us ever to recover them. However, if another approach yields a clear interpretation in harmony with the details of the text and with Paul's teaching elsewhere, it at least deserves a hearing.

One alternative is that the appearance of the man of lawlessness refers to the Roman destruction of Jerusalem in A.D. 70. This interpretation has several merits. One is that Jesus clearly refers to the destruction of the temple in the Olivet Discourse (Matt 24:15-22; Mark 13:14-20; Luke 21:20-24). Since Paul seems to allude to this teaching of Jesus both in this passage (vv. 9-10; cf. Matt 24:23-38; Mark 13:21-23) and in others in these letters (cf. 1 Thess 4:13-5:11; 2 Thess 1:7-10 and comments above), he may do so here as well. The text does refer directly to the temple (v. 4), and "lawless" is used in some other texts to refer to Romans (Acts 2:23; Pss. Sol. 17:11-22). Furthermore, this ameliorates somewhat the tension between the prediction of preliminary events and the imminent expectation of the Lord's return in 1 Thess 4:13-5:11.

There are, however, some serious weaknesses with this approach. One is the lack of substantial verbal parallels between this passage and the specific discussion of the fall of Jerusalem in the Olivet Discourse. Only the statement about sitting in the temple (v. 4) can be offered as a specific allusion to anything in Matt 24:15-22 and its parallels, and then only as an interpretive allusion to "abomination of desolation." If Paul is referring specifically to the Olivet Discourse, he is doing so obliquely at best.

Secondly, in order to see a reference to the destruction of the temple in v. 4, "sets himself up" must be taken figuratively while "temple" is interpreted literally. The comments on this verse below will note that the rest of the verse suggests a consistently figurative meaning for the entire expression.

Thirdly, Jesus' teaching about Jerusalem in the Olivet Discourse presents the fall of Jerusalem less as a preliminary sign of his coming than as an event not to be confused with his coming. It has the impact of a specific warning to Christians living in Palestine to flee the approaching Roman armies, to depend on God's provision for them during a time of great distress, and not to confuse this event and the false messianic claims that will accompany it with the actual return of Jesus. Paul's approach here is significantly different if he refers to that event. Most important is the observation, noted in detail in the comments below, that Paul's language in this text emphasizes not so much the future activity of the lawless one as his present activity. Though obscured at nearly every point by the NIV's interpretive translation, this observation is probably the decisive one in indicating the possibility of a different interpretation.

Recognizing that Paul emphasizes the present activity of the lawless one throughout this passage prompts us to put forward another possibility for consideration. We begin with the recognition that for Paul the "end time" has already begun with the appearance of Jesus in history and especially with his death and resurrection. In a variety of other texts, many of them already noted in previous comments, Paul points out that the promised blessings of the end time are already a reality for the Christian because in Christ God has inaugurated the fulfillment of his promises.

Likewise, the suffering of the faithful which in the Old Testament and intertestamental Jewish apocalyptic literature precedes the final act of salvation (Isa 24:17-23; Dan 12:1; Joel 2:1-11; Amos 5:16-20; Zeph 1:14-16; Jub. 23:11; 24:3; 2 Bar . 22:6; 55:6; 4 Ezra 7:37; 1 Enoch 80:4-5), is also for Paul a present reality (cf. Rom 8:22; 1 Cor 2:6-8; 15:55-57; Eph 6:10-16; Col 2:14), one which begins with Christ's own sufferings and continues in the lives of believers as they are united with Christ and suffer as he did.

The very structure of Paul's thought, then, is that the end-time events have already been manifested in Christ and are being manifested in the lives of believers. What remains to occur, as Paul has stressed in 2 Thess 1:6-10, is for Christ's return to bring an end to the suffering of his people, vindicating them before their enemies - who are also his enemies - and bringing to full realization the glory which already belongs to the people of God and the judgment that already belongs to the others.

Could this be the very point which Paul makes in this text? If the following conclusions, presented in detail in the comments below, have merit, then the answer appears to be affirmative: (1) the "rebellion" refers to Jewish rejection of the gospel, already a reality in Paul's ministry; (2) the "appearance" (or "revelation") of the man of lawlessness refers not to his activity in history, which is already a reality, but the final, definitive revealing that all opposition to God and Christ is ultimately the activity of the great opponent, Satan; (3) "what is holding him back" (v. 6) and "the one who now holds it back" are better rendered as "the one who now prevails" and do not refer to someone or something that restrains the man of lawlessness but instead refer to the man of lawlessness himself as one who appears to prevail in this age. If so, for Paul the "man of lawlessness" was as much a present manifestation of the end-time opponent of God as was the "antichrist" in the epistles of John (1 John 2:18, 22; 4:7, 15; 2 John 7). In this case Paul in this text stresses that the Lord's work will not be complete until the opposition which the Thessalonians and other Christians already experience is revealed for what it is and is fully and finally eliminated at the Lord's return. In effect he assures the readers that the day of the Lord has not yet come because they continue to see the prevalence of evil all around them.

It might be argued that the structure of Paul's thought, with its balance between the present realization of God's end-time promises and the future completion of them, demands that the present manifestation of end-time evil climax in the appearance near the end of history of a great opponent of God. While this assumption does lend a certain symmetry to Paul's eschatology, it remains an assumption only. If the conclusions summarized above and argued below are correct, this text gives no explicit reason to expect an intensification of trouble at some point in the future. If the revelation of the man of lawlessness refers to the revealing of his activity throughout history for what it is and if "what is holding him back" is in fact "the one who prevails," then nothing in the text indicates that in the future the activity of the lawless one will be any worse than it is already. This conclusion does not, however, minimize the intensity or significance of the suffering of Christians in any way. Throughout these letters Paul has shown the readers that their tribulations belong to the context of God's salvation-historical plan (1 Thess 2:14-16; 3:4-5); they are part of the end-time sufferings inaugurated by Christ, not unlike the experience of God's people in the past. These troubles, because they are part of the opposition to God's final act of salvation in Jesus, already represent the climax of evil in the world. Thus, all that remains for the future is the judgment due the opponents (2 Thess 1:6-7). The present sufferings of Christians do not require an intensification in order to fulfill the predicted sufferings of the end. Modern American Christians who have difficulty believing that opposition to the Lord and his people has already reached such a pitch have perhaps focused too much on their relative security and too little on the suffering of their brothers and sisters in other places.

If this interpretation is correct, several difficulties with this text are addressed in a single stroke. The mysterious identities of the man of lawlessness and the one who restrains are immediately resolved. If both expressions refer to Satan as he is at work in this age, then the text speaks less cryptically than is regularly assumed. Secondly, the tension between the imminence of Christ's return and the prediction of preliminary events is eliminated. If what Paul addresses here is the present activity of evil, which at once will be revealed for what it is and destroyed when Christ returns, then Christ's return remains imminent. Furthermore, the resulting emphasis of the text is that his return will mean deliverance and vindication for the believers, who in the meantime must remain alert and steadfast as they resist the deceptive activity of the Evil One and look forward to his final defeat at Christ's return, precisely the emphasis of the rest of Paul's eschatological teaching in these letters. Finally, the impact of the argument for the question which begins the discussion is direct and cogent. Paul's point is to reassure the Thessalonians that the day of the Lord has not yet occurred because when it does, the opposition which they now endure will be eliminated entirely. It offers them the reassurance that God's work in history is not finished until his people experience the fullness of fellowship with him, no longer restricted or hindered by the activity of Satan and those who belong to him.

Such are the general merits of the interpretation which this commentary sets forth; the specifics are spelled out in the verse-by-verse comments below. Recognizing, however, that this interpretation represents a departure from the approach to this text which has prevailed for some time, the comments will also note the way in which this text has traditionally been interpreted.

A. THE DAY OF THE LORD NOT YET PRESENT (2:1-2)

¹ Concerning the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ and our being gathered to him, we ask you, brothers, ² 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.

This section begins with the question which prompts Paul's discussion. As in other cases where Paul addresses a specific problem in a church, we can only speculate about the circumstances which led to the problem. The prevailing opinion is that the expectation of the Lord's return, fueled in part by 1 Thessalonians 4:13-5:11, has reached a fever pitch in the Thessalonian church, so that the Christians there believed themselves to be living in the period immediately before Christ's return. To lessen the intensity of this expectation, Paul wrote the section that follows, correcting their imminent hope for Christ's return with the reminder that certain events, namely the rebellion and the appearance of the man of lawlessness, must occur first.

This explanation has the virtue of seeing in Paul's answer a direct address of the problem. If the Thessalonian church includes a large contingent of former pagans (cf. 1 Thess 1:9 and comments above), Paul's use of language and images from Jewish apocalyptic literature might be surprising. However, if the problems in the church were prompted by a message which employed such language, we would not by surprised that Paul would correct the problem using similar language.

There are, however, other ways in which the problem may have arisen. Later in Corinth it appears that a species of teaching arose which asserted that all of God's promises, including the promise of the resurrection, had already been fulfilled in their entirety in what Christians had already received in Jesus and through the Holy Spirit. Paul appears to address this problem in its many manifestations throughout 1 Corinthians, but especially in 1 Corinthians 15. To the idea that all of God's work is complete in what the Christian has already received, Paul there asserts emphatically that God has a work yet to come, the resurrection of the dead at Christ's return. Later Paul reflects a similar idea in 2 Tim 2:18, where he refers to those who teach that the resurrection had already occurred. The problem may be similar in Thessalonica. The possibility that some had taught the Thessalonians, with alleged apostolic authority, that the Lord's work was finished, in effect that the promise of a coming "day of the Lord" had been fulfilled, is all the more likely because Paul addresses a church not far removed geographically, culturally or chronologically from the Corinthian church. As noted below, this scenario allows the phrase "day of the Lord" to have its usual meaning for Paul: it refers not to the period just preceding the end but to the end itself, which will bring the final victory of God's purposes in the world (cf. 1 Thess 5:2 and comments above).

The value of this text for the modern reader lies in precisely this area. Ultimately the New Testament's expectation of the Lord's return promises the ultimate fulfillment of God's eternal good purposes for creation and humanity. As long as evil is active in the world, even more when it appears that evil prevails, God's purpose remains incomplete. So in addressing the question of the Lord's coming, Paul is not simply settling the matter of the eschatological calendar. He is asserting the utter goodness and power of God, which will finally prevail completely over every manifestation of evil. When his people are persecuted, they can be assured that God's power and goodness will one day triumph fully.

2:1 Concerning the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ and our being gathered to him,

Paul announces here the general subject which he will address. "Coming" is parousiva ( parousia ), a term which Paul uses later in this section (vv. 8-9) and often in the first letter (1 Thess 2:19 [see comments]; 3:13; 4:15; 5:23) to refer to the Lord's return as his visitation or presence as an important official. This visitation also signifies the gathering of his people to be with him, as Paul has stated specifically in 1 Thess 4:17. If, as both internal evidence and tradition would indicate, 1 Thessalonians was written before this letter, Paul is in effect reminding the readers of the content of that first letter and offering a clarification or expansion on its teaching. The word translated "being gathered, ejpisunagwghv ( episynago-ge- ) occurs only here and at Heb 10:25, but the cognate verb appears in Matt 24:31; Mark 13:27. So the unusual expression here may echo the teaching of Jesus about his return. This gathering fulfills the expectation of the Old Testament that the scattered people of God would be gathered again (Isa 43:4-7; 52:12; 56:8; Jer 31:8; Ezek 28:9; Ps 106:47) and for Christians signified the gathering of believers from all parts of the earth as well as the reuniting of the living and the dead.

The fact that Paul here equates the "coming" of the Lord, implying his abiding presence, with the "gathering" of his people again leaves us with little reason to see the gathering as an secret event years prior to a second, open return of Christ when he will remain on earth. When it is observed that this coming also will mean the final defeat of the great opponent (v. 8), that conclusion is even more secure. Whatever the specific interpretation of this section, it is at least clear that the Lord's coming and the gathering of his people are a single event which signal the end, not the beginning, of the troubles described in the following verses.

we ask you, brothers, 2:2 not to become easily unsettled or alarmed by some prophecy, report or letter supposed to have come from us,

Apparently the Thessalonian church had received some communication asserting what Paul indicates here and purporting to have come from him or his associates. Paul's difficulties with others who claimed apostolic authority equal to or greater than his own are very much in evidence in the Corinthian letters and Galatians; here the problem seems to be some who represent themselves as actually speaking for Paul. The string of terms which Paul uses here - prophecy (literally "spirit," pneu'ma , pneuma ), report (literally "word," lovgo" , logos ) or letter - probably indicates that Paul knows that the Thessalonians have been disturbed by a message but is uncertain as to how it came precisely. It is possible that the "letter" to which Paul refers to 1 Thessalonians, since the problem may have arisen from a misunderstanding of it. Since "supposed" is a likely inference from the Greek text but is not strictly necessary, Paul could refer to an authentic letter. But the combination of terms more likely indicates some imitation of the inspired messages delivered through a prophet or apostle and falsely claiming to have come from Paul or his associates. In effect Paul is calling for a specific application of his instructions in 1 Thess 5:21: the Thessalonians are to test this alleged apostolic message by what they know to be true about the gospel, as Paul will remind them of it in vv. 3-12. He further addresses the problem of messages falsely claiming to come from him in 3:17.

Paul urges them not to be "easily" shaken, literally "quickly" (tacevw" , tacheo-s ). As in Gal 1:6, any departure from confident faith in the gospel is quick, since the right response is to hold faithfully to the message until Christ returns (1 Thess 5:4-11). Two verbs describe the effect of the false message on the Thessalonians: saleuvw ( saleuo- ), which indicates a shaking from a position of confidence, and qroevw ( throeo- ), which implies a mental arousal or disturbance. Both are used here in a negative sense, indicating not excitement but distress. They demonstrate that the problem addressed is not merely a matter of abstract theology; it seriously affects the readers' entire Christian outlook.

saying that the day of the Lord has already come.

The specific problem concerns whether the "day of the Lord" has already come. As noted above, a key interpretive question in this section is whether this phrase refers to the Lord's coming itself or includes the period immediately preceding the Lord's coming. In favor of the latter is the sense it makes of Paul's argument if he is discussing events which occur prior to the Lord's return. If "day" includes the period just before Christ comes back, then the Thessalonians have received a report that those days have come and so they are living in a state of great excitement and anticipation, indicated with "unsettled or alarmed" in this verse. Paul in turn tones down their agitation by stating in what follows that Christ will not return until the man of lawlessness makes his appearance on the world stage, that in effect his appearance is what will signal the period just before the end.

There are, however, several specific difficulties with this interpretation. One is the fact that Paul represents the situation of the Thessalonians not merely as over-excitement but actual disturbance. The verbs in v. 2 are more consistently understood if Paul sees the Thessalonians' situation not simply as too much of a good thing, that is, anticipating Christ's return, but as a threat to their confident hope. More significant is the fact that in the other eight uses of "day of the Lord" or the equivalent in Paul's letters (1 Cor 1:8; 2 Cor 1:14; Phil 1:6, 10; 2:16; 1 Thess 5:2, 4; 2 Thess 1:10; N.B. that Paul uses the expression much more frequently than any other New Testament writer), it never refers to anything other than the actual climax of God's work in salvation and judgment. This meaning is confirmed for this passage in the way that Paul begins the discussion in v. 1, referring to "the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ and our being gathered to him." Therefore, though in other literature it is at best conceivable that the phrase could be used for the period preceding this climax, there is little in this text or in Paul's letters generally to indicate that meaning here.

Alternately the verb ejnivsthmi ( eniste-mi ) may mean "be imminent" instead of "has come." However, such a meaning is not clearly attested for this word, since in the examples in which it may be implied the sense of "be present" is equally consistent. Furthermore, the verb here is in the perfect indicative, indicating a past action and so allowing at best only the awkward sense, not attested in any other use, of "has become imminent." The NIV's rendering of the verb is highly preferable.

If in this sense "the day of the Lord" had already come, then God's work in history is finished. For the Thessalonian Christians - small in number, persecuted by their neighbors, and suffering the grief of separation from dead brothers and sisters - that prospect would be disturbing and depressing indeed. Their hope of final vindication and glorification, of which Paul wrote in 1:5-10, would vanish. They would have no prospect that God would finish the work begun in them (Phil 1:6). They would indeed "be pitied more than all men" (1 Cor 15:19). Reassuring them that this is in fact not the case is Paul's task in the following verses.

B. THE APOSTASY AND THE MAN OF LAWLESSNESS (2:3-12)

Following the tradition of most English versions, the NIV translators have made a number of interpretive decisions that sharply affect the impression which this text makes on the reader. In particular, the Greek present tense has been rendered with the English future in vv. 4, 9, and an object for the verb translated "is holding"/"holds" has been supplied in vv. 6-7. While none of these renderings is impossible, the fact that so many unusual translations are necessary to support the traditional interpretation of this passage suggests that another interpretation may more closely reflect Paul's meaning. In the comments below, the specifics of Paul's Greek text will be examined closely and alternative translations suggested. These will converge on a single point, that Paul sees the activity of the man of lawlessness not as something which lies in the future but as something already present, something which already dominates this age but which will come to its outright end when Christ returns.

If this interpretation is correct, then the impact of this text for the Thessalonians is as clear as it is for the Christian of any period who doubts the future return of Christ. Paul's reminder is that as long as evil is active in the world - claiming God's place, appearing to prevail in everyday life, deceiving the spiritually gullible and so denying them salvation - God's work in Christ is not complete. But because God's promise is faithful and his power supreme, Christ will indeed return to destroy all evil and the one who stands behind it, establishing the fullness of his righteous kingdom for which his people yearn.

1. The Apostasy and the

Revelation of the Man of Lawlessness (2:3)

³ Don't let anyone deceive you in any way, for that day will not come until the rebellion occurs and the man of lawlessness ^a is revealed, the man doomed to destruction.

^a 3 Some manuscripts sin

2:3 Don't let anyone deceive you in any way, for that day will not come until the rebellion occurs

In response to the false report which the Thessalonians have received, Paul first urges a healthy and holy skepticism. The message that the day of the Lord has come is deception, like that of the serpent with Eve (2 Cor 11:3; 1 Tim 2:14), because of what Paul is about to explain. Paul warns against this deception emphatically; "anyone . . . in any way" is literally "not anyone . . . in no way," a double-negative expression that stresses the prohibition.

Following the warning about deception, the rest of the verse in the Greek text is an anacoluthon, a subordinate clause with no clause to complete it. Literally the text reads, "Because unless the rebellion comes first and the man of lawlessness is revealed." Translators must supply the clause introduced with "because" (o{ti , hoti ), which can be clearly inferred from v. 2. Since the question concerns the coming of the day of the Lord, Paul obviously expects the reader to infer that the day is preceded by the rebellion and revelation of the man of lawlessness.

Interpreters of this passage have generally taken the "rebellion" to refer to something in the future, a widespread departure from the church, a civil rebellion or a combination of the two which will be an immediate prelude to the Lord's return. Though the language of this text could be consistent with that idea, elsewhere Paul gives reasons to believe that he saw this rebellion as something already at work during his lifetime. "Rebellion" translates ajpostasiva ( apostasia ), sometimes rendered "apostasy"; in the LXX this word and its cognates are especially used to refer to sinful departure from the worship of God. Especially in light of v. 11, this is clearly its sense here. In intertestamental Jewish apocalyptic literature, this word group was used sometimes to refer to a great period of religious unfaithfulness just before the age to come ( Jub. 23:14-23; 4 Ezra 5:1-13; 2 Apoc. Bar. 70:1-10; 1 Enoch 5:4; 91:3-10; 93:9; 1QpHab 2:1), but in some cases it clearly referred to the present departure of members of a Jewish sect (1QS 7:18-22).

Grammatically the sentence allows this rebellion to be an event in either the future or the present for Paul: the verb e[lqh/ ( elthe- ) is in the subjunctive mood, which has no time value, and the rest of the clause requires only that this event occur before the day of the Lord. Clearly elsewhere Paul indicates that such rebellion is already a reality (1 Tim 4:1; 2 Tim 3:1). But what is most significant for understanding this word as Paul intended it is the concern which he expresses elsewhere for the rebellion against God of those Jews who have rejected the gospel (1 Thess 2:14-16; Rom 9-11). This point is difficult to appreciate for modern Christians who take for granted the division between Christians and non-Christian Jews, but for Paul and his contemporaries this was a crucial problem. For early Christians who proclaimed that through Jesus they had received the fulfillment of God's promises to Israel, the unbelief of so many in Israel demanded an explanation. Part of that explanation is probably implied here: Jewish refusal of the gospel is a manifestation of the expected end-time rebellion. So here Paul uses "rebellion" as it is used in the Old Testament, to refer to the falling away of those who are ostensibly God's people. If the Thessalonians had undergone persecution prompted by Jewish opponents of the gospel (Acts 17:5-9), Paul's meaning would be entirely clear and relevant to them.

and the man of lawlessness is revealed, the man doomed to destruction.

The revelation of the man of lawlessness is similarly regarded by most interpreters as a future event, specifically as the appearance at the end of this age of an archenemy of the Lord, one who is presently restrained from appearing by some being or force. Certainly some Jewish groups of this period expected such a figure to appear in the future, though some of the intertestamental literature which has been interpreted as referring to such a figure may in fact have been intended to refer to some specific opponent of God's people at the time of writing. The question here, though, is whether Paul uses "is revealed" to refer to the appearance of this figure in history or to something else.

While the traditional meaning is not impossible, Paul elsewhere uses this verb, ajpokaluvptw ( apokalypto -) and its cognate noun ajpokavluyi" ( apokalypsis ) to indicate not that something formerly inactive becomes active but that something formerly hidden to the world but nevertheless real becomes visible to all. Hence in 1:7 the revelation of Christ is the making visible to all of his supreme authority as judge, authority which has been his since his resurrection but has not been perceived by any but his followers. Likewise, as Bruce notes, in Rom 8:19 the revealing of the sons of God is the final disclosure that the Christians are indeed God's sons, the unveiling of the identity which has always been theirs but has been hidden to unbelievers. If the word has similar impact here, then Paul refers not to a point when the man of lawlessness becomes fully active in history but the point when he is revealed for who he is. This interpretation is corroborated when we observe that the rest of the text stresses not the future activity of this figure but his present activity. Hence, Paul's point is to say that the readers can be sure that the day of the Lord has not yet come because God's purpose will not be complete until this man of lawlessness, already at work in the world, is revealed for who he is, the archenemy of God and deceiver of humanity.

Exactly who is this "man of lawlessness"? He is generally assumed to be a figure of history, what might be termed a political figure, who will bring to a climax all human rebellion against God. Beyond that general identification, interpreters have found no unity whatever in understanding this expression. Noting especially stress on the present activity of this lawless one, some have understood the writer to be referring to the Roman government or emperor. Some therefore see this prophecy as a failed one, since Rome has fallen and the expected "day" has not come. Others have attempted to reclaim this line of interpretation, offering that the rebellion and the revelation of the man of lawlessness refers to the destruction of Jerusalem, which Paul merely presented as a necessary preliminary to the Lord's return, not necessarily as an event which point to Christ's return immediately afterward. Luther identified the man of lawlessness with the pope, a conclusion clearly based on his own polemical needs and now almost universally abandoned. The predominant view remains that this "man" is an uncertain figure of the future, whose appearance is the immediate harbinger of the Lord's return.

As already indicated, this traditional interpretation runs afoul of the stress in the text on the present activity of this evil one. Moreover, the fact that his evil activity is expressed as comprehensively as it is in the text that follows and the focus elsewhere in the New Testament on Christ's final destruction of Satan and his minions suggest that the "man of lawlessness" is here a way of referring to Satan as the one who stands behind every act of rebellion against God's work. If, as noted above, "revealed" has its expected sense here, then Paul's point would be that Christ's work, to be completed on his "day," is not finished until Satan, the Evil One, is revealed to all as the one who stands behind all human rejection of God's will.

"Man of lawlessness" is an apt description of such a figure. For Paul God's law was, among other things, that which defined God's people as those who genuinely belong to him. Lawlessness can therefore be used as a comprehensive description for the one who opposes all of God's work for his people and inspires rebellion against him (cf. Rom 6:19; 2 Cor 6:14; Titus 2:14; 1 John 3:4). "Man" translates a[nqrwpo" ( anthro-pos ), which normally refers to a human being. However, the word was commonly used with a weakened sense, almost as an indefinite pronoun, when the emphasis was not on the word "man" but on the words which qualify it. That would be the case here, where the emphasis lies on "lawlessness" as the characteristic of this figure (cf. Rev 13:18). This is confirmed by the next expression: the second occurrence of "man" in the NIV translates uJiov" ( huios ), literally "son," which is used in a similar indefinite fashion to put the emphasis on the descriptive noun "destruction" (cf. Matt 8:12; 13:38; Luke 16:8; 20:34; John 17:12; Acts 3:25; Eph 2:2; 5:6; Col 3:6). That the terms do not necessarily stress humanity in this context is indicated later in the text, where Paul will refer more indefinitely to "the mystery of lawlessness" (v. 7) and "the lawless one" (v. 8; cf. Matt 6:13).

As the NIV footnote indicates, many Greek manuscripts read "man of sin" instead of "man of lawlessness," substituting aJmartiva ( hamartia , "sin") for ajnomiva ( anomia , "lawlessness"). This variant is widely attested, but since "lawlessness" occurs twice later in this passage, it appears to be the more likely original reading. A later copyist may have substituted "sin" since it is a more common word in Paul's letters.

"The one doomed to destruction," as indicated above, is literally "the son of destruction." The same term is used of Judas Iscariot in John 17:12. Like the first expression, this one suggests the activity of this opponent, but it points also to his destiny. "Destruction" is ajpwvleia ( apo-leia ), signifying complete loss or ruin, often used of the final destruction of judgment. Paul will later speak generally of those who "perish" (v. 10), a cognate of this word. The implication as the section develops is that the one here described brings destruction on those whom he deceives as all who follow him will share in the destruction which will finally be his (v. 8). The combination of terms at the beginning of the section thus serves not only to identify the subject of Paul's discussion but also to warn against following him and sharing his fate.

2. A Description of the Man of Lawlessness (2:4)

⁴ 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.

2:4 He will oppose and will exalt himself over everything that is called God or is worshiped,

Assuming a future point of reference to the entire context, the NIV inserts "will" twice in this text. On this reading the activity of the man of lawlessness lies in the future from Paul's perspective. Literally, however, Paul's words have no explicit reference to the future. "Will oppose" and "will exalt" represent two Greek present participles which have no particular time value but stress that the action named is continuing. Literally this part of the text could be translated, "the one opposing and exalting himself over everything that is called 'God' or an object of worship." The NRSV captures the literal sense clearly: "He opposes and exalts himself above every so-called god or object of worship." At this point, therefore, it is at least uncertain whether the man of lawlessness is a present or future figure. The language later in this section will resolve this question.

The description given here is one of comprehensive opposition to God and utter arrogance and presumptuousness. Paul is no doubt echoing earlier biblical expressions of great opponents of God, like Isaiah's prophetic description of Babylon (Isa 14:12-15), Ezekiel's of Tyre (Ezek 28:2, 11-19) or Daniel's of Antiochus IV Epiphanes (Dan 8:11, 23-26; 9:26-27; 11:31, 36; 12:11; cf. 1 Macc 1:54). These figures have several features in common: they oppress the people of God, assume the supreme place of God and demand worship, and finally meet a decisive judgment which puts an end to their presumption.

For each prophet these descriptions have a significance wider than their immediate reference to specific historical figures. Babylon in Isaiah stands at the head of a catalogue of nations, all of which will be judged by the universal God for their rebellion against him (Isa 13-26). It is, in effect, the archetype of all sinfulness in this section of Isaiah. Likewise, in Daniel the Abomination of Desolation is the most horrid of the opponents of Daniel's visions, but all such opponents and their human kingdoms will be destroyed with the coming of God's kingdom (Dan 7:13-14, 23-28; 9:27; 11:31; 12:11). In Ezekiel Tyre is pictured as the great opponent in Eden, the serpent (Ezek 28:12-17).

It can be argued with some cogency, then, that these prophets saw the particular manifestations of evil to which they were referring as part of a larger pattern of human sinfulness which stands under the comprehensive judgment of God. This pattern continues in later Jewish literature: in Sib. Or. 5:33, for example, Nero is described as declaring himself as God's equal, though he proves not to be.

These prophetic descriptions of supreme pride and sinfulness suggest intriguing comparisons to the description of the first sin of Genesis 3 (cf. Ezek 28:12-17). There the temptation is to become "like God" (Gen 3:5) through a deliberate act of rebellion against God. Likewise, the sin of Babel in Genesis 11, motivated by the desire "to make a name for ourselves," has as its objective to be able, like God, to do whatever the people of Babel desire (Gen 11:4, 6). Against this background it is not surprising that Paul would use similar language to describe the one who stands behind every act of sinfulness as supremely arrogant and presumptuous, to the point of usurping the very place of God himself. The idea that Paul refers not to a specific person who will appear in history to manifest these evil qualities but to the archenemy of God who provokes all such manifestations is consistent with the what follows this initial description. It is also consistent with his usage elsewhere, as he focuses the struggle between the people of God and God's enemies as the final spiritual battle between the people of God and Satan (Rom 16:20; 2 Cor 2:11; 11:13-15; Eph 2:1-10; 6:10-17; 1 Thess 3:5). If the end of the age has truly begun with the cross, it should be no surprise that for Paul the end-time struggle with evil should already be actualized.

The specifics of Paul's description here are consistent with this interpretation. "Oppose" translates ajntivkeimai ( antikeimai ), which is used elsewhere for opposition to Jesus, his disciples or the gospel (Luke 13:17; 21:51; 1 Cor 16:9; Phil 1:28). In 1 Tim 5:14 Paul uses the same expression found in this text to refer to the devil, and similar examples can be found in the Apostolic Fathers ( 1 Clem. 51:1; Mart. Pol. 17:1). "Exalt" is uJperaivrw ( huperairo -), used to refer to an inappropriate or exaggerated exaltation of the self (cf. 2 Cor 11:7). The first object of this opposition and exaltation is "everything that is called God." Such a comprehensive description is necessary to point out that Paul speaks not merely of paganism, which might make claims for deities other than the God of Israel, but to that which falsely claims superiority to anything regarded as deity. Paul may have in mind a perspective like the one found in Deut 32:16-17: the pagan gods are but representatives of demons. The one who ultimately claims priority over all such "gods" is the prince of demons. That point is reiterated with "object of worship," sevbasma ( sebasma ), which broadens the point to include anything that might receive human reverence and so be a rival to the lawless one.

so that he sets himself up in God's temple, proclaiming himself to be God.

The arrogation of divine status which Paul describes is pictured in concrete terms here. "Temple" here is naov" ( naos ), which normally is used to refer specifically to the central "house" of the temple, the Holy Place and Most Holy Place, representative of the dwelling of God. The image of an opponent of God who desecrates his temple has a long history in Jewish history and literature. The Philistines (1 Sam 4:10-11) and the Egyptians (1 Kgs 14:25-26) both put the tabernacle or temple to the sack, but it is the Babylonians who bring destruction to Solomon's temple and so stand as the archetypical temple violators.

Even closer to the image here, though, was the action of Antiochus IV Epiphanes, the Seleucid king who in 167 B.C. erected a statue of Zeus in the Jerusalem temple. Also similar were the actions of the Roman general Pompey, who when he captured Jerusalem in 63 B.C. entered into the Most Holy Place, and Caligula, who in A.D. 41 unsuccessfully planned to have his own image erected in the temple. After Paul wrote, of course, the temple was again destroyed by the Romans in A.D. 70.

While all of these events closely parallel Paul's description, none literally matches it: the Babylonians' destruction of the temple and Pompey's entry into it are not the same as receiving worship in the temple, Antiochus did not demand worship of himself (though Daniel nearly describes him so [Dan 11:36], and the title "Epiphanes" did imply a divine claim) but of a pagan god and erected the image at the altar rather than in the temple building (1 Macc 1:54), and Caligula's image was never actually put in place. So if Paul's expression is intended to remind the reader of these events, as it appears to be, he would seem not to be uttering a prophecy which he expects to be fulfilled with absolute literalness but supplying a vivid, evocative image for the broader kind of hubris which he describes throughout this verse. That understanding is confirmed by the phrase which follows, "proclaiming himself to be God," which serves to specify the meaning of the previous expression. All in all the text drives home the emphatic point that the man of lawlessness seizes for himself divine authority which is in no way his, thereby assuring his utter defeat.

3. Reminder of Oral Instruction on the Subject (2:5)

⁵ Don't you remember that when I was with you I used to tell you these things?

Paul's instruction in this passage is no innovation for the readers but is based on the oral teaching which they had first received while he was establishing the Thessalonian church (cf. 1 Thess 2:13; 3:4; 4:1). His language here indicates that the readers should know this point very well: ouj ( ou , "don't") indicates that the question anticipates a positive answer. This teaching had been a point of continued instruction: "used to tell" translates the imperfect-tense verb e[legon ( elegon ) which implies a continuing action.

If this teaching was a matter of repeated instruction for the Thessalonians, we might expect to see it reflected elsewhere in these letters. Paul may well have in mind the kind of instruction found in 1 Thess 3:4, that persecution is inevitable for believers, 1 Thess 1:10 and 2:16, that God's wrath is coming on unbelievers, and 2 Thess 1:6-10, that God will bring a final judgment on all who oppose him and his people. The difference in this passage as opposed to those is that Paul expresses these ideas with apocalyptic language, probably because the false report (v. 2) had employed similar images for different ends.

4. The One Who Restrains/Prevails (2:6-10)

⁶ And now you know what is holding him back, so that he may be revealed at the proper time. ⁷ For the secret power of lawlessness is already at work; but the one who now holds it back will continue to do so till he is taken out of the way. ⁸ And then the lawless one will be revealed, whom the Lord Jesus will overthrow with the breath of his mouth and destroy by the splendor of his coming. ⁹ The coming of the lawless one will be in accordance with the work of Satan displayed in all kinds of counterfeit miracles, signs and wonders, ¹⁰ and in every sort of evil that deceives those who are perishing. They perish because they refused to love the truth and so be saved.

2:6 And now you know what is holding him back, so that he may be revealed at the proper time.

The concept that the "man of lawlessness" is a figure who has yet to appear in history largely hinges on the interpretation of this verse and v. 7. "What is holding him back" translates a Greek substantive participle, toΙ katevcon ( to katechon ), from the verb katevcw ( katecho- ). There is considerable reason, however, to question the accuracy of the translation "holding . . . back" in this context. While katevcw often does mean to restrain or hold back, it has this meaning only when it occurs with an object. Though an object has been supplied for this verb in the NIV and most English versions, there is no object in either occurrence of the verb in the Greek text of vv. 6-7. It is therefore more likely that it carries the intransitive sense, normal when it has no object, of "prevail." In this case, the text can be translated, "And you know what prevails now." If this is Paul's sense here, this expression probably does not refer to one opposed to the man of lawlessness but serves as another way of referring to the man of lawlessness or his activity. He is, indeed, the one who now prevails, who works pervasively through the world system in opposition to God's purposes (cf. Eph 2:2).

Paul says that the readers already know the identity of this restraining/prevailing one, presumably from the instruction which they have already received (v. 5). Traditionally it has been assumed that while he was in Thessalonica Paul had identified orally for the Thessalonians the identity of the one who restrains the man of lawlessness, information now lost to us. But if the interpretation set forth here is correct, Paul is merely reminding the readers, as he has elsewhere, of the application of the core of the gospel which they have already received, namely, that evil and the Evil One will appear to prevail in this age until Christ returns.

"Now" clearly contrasts with "at the proper time," literally "at his/its own time." But is it the prevailing or the Thessalonians' knowing that Paul stresses is "now"? Though the effect is largely the same, the Greek word order suggests that "now" is connected to "the one who prevails," providing a contrast to his future revelation and defeat. However, the text also contrasts the Christians' present knowledge of the prevailing one with the future revelation to all of his true identity, so the difference is slight at best.

In v. 6 Paul's expression for the restraining/prevailing one is neuter, suggesting an abstraction or principle (" what is holding him back"; better, "what is prevailing"), whereas in v. 7 the expression is masculine, oJ katevcwn ( ho katecho-n ), indicating a person ("the one who now holds him back"; better, " the one who now prevails"). This difference is relatively inconsequential, however, since a similar alternation between masculine and neuter expression also occurs with "lawless one" (vv. 3-4, 8, masculine; v. 7, "secret power of lawlessness," neuter). If Paul is indeed discussing the pervasive power of evil in the world which ultimately derives from Satan himself, such an alternation between masculine and neuter is quite consistent with his point. The masculine pronoun "him" in the latter part of the verse (aujtovn , auton ) can therefore easily have the same referent as "what prevails" in the first part of the verse, its gender assigned by its larger sense.

The second part of the verse makes a statement of contrast: the readers know the one who restrains/prevails "so that he may be revealed at the proper time." Again, if "revealed" has the sense it carries elsewhere for Paul (cf. v. 3 and comments above), this revelation signifies not the beginning of the activity of the man of lawlessness but the final disclosure that all opposition to God and his people has been inspired by the great Evil One. In this case "his time" is not the time when he will be more powerful, since he prevails "now"; rather, it refers to the time of his destruction, the emphasis in vv. 7-8. Emphasizing that even the present dominance of the man of lawlessness is under the supervision of God's final authority, Paul expresses the final revelation and destruction of the man of lawlessness as the purpose of his present activity. Though the dominance of evil might make it appear that God has lost control, his purpose will be fully and finally realized in the future. Thus, Paul can even present the final revelation of this opponent as the purpose of his present dominance: "so that" translates a Greek articular infinitive which almost certainly expresses the purpose of the "prevailing," not of what the Thessalonians "know."

2:7 For the secret power of lawlessness is already at work;

Paul's language is compressed and difficult, but the point emerges clearly when this verse is connected to the verses that precede and follow. "Secret power of lawlessness" translates toΙ musthvrion . . . th'" ajnomiva" ( to myste-rion . . . te-s anomias ), literally "the mystery of lawlessness." Even those who assume that in this text Paul predicts the future appearance in history of an "antichrist" note that he asserts the present activity of the principle of lawlessness here. But the reason that Paul refers to this activity as a "mystery" is clearer when we understand that the future revelation of the man of lawlessness points not to his becoming more active but his being revealed for what he is. In this case, the present lawlessness activity of the lawless one is a "mystery" precisely because the world does not yet recognize it for what it is, as they also fail to recognize the "mystery" of God's purpose in history declared in the gospel (1 Cor 2:1, 7; 4:1; 15:51; Eph 1:9; 3:3-4, 9; 5:32; 6:19; Col 1:26-27; 2:2; 4:3; 1 Tim 3:9, 16), though it is clearly known by the Christians (v. 6). The warning about the deceptive power of evil in vv. 9-12 is entirely consistent with this understanding: the world, under the deceptive power of Satan, does not yet realize the nature of "the god of this age" (2 Cor 4:4).

The verb translated "is . . . at work," ejnergei'tai ( energeitai ) is grammatically ambiguous. It could either be in the middle voice, in which case it merely indicates that lawlessness is at work, or in the passive voice, in which it would mean "has been put at work" and implies that someone has taken that action. It appears that Paul probably uses this verb with impersonal subjects like "mystery" with the simpler middle sense. However, if Paul does in fact use the verb as a passive here, he could be implying either that the mystery is put in place by Satan (v. 9) or more broadly through the providence and judgment of God (vv. 11-12).

but the one who now holds it back will continue to do so till he is taken out of the way.

As in v. 6, "the one who now holds it back" is better rendered as "the one who now prevails." This phrase constitutes the subject of the clause, but Paul has given no predicate. The NIV supplies "will continue to do so," which probably reflects Paul's general implication. The NIV also translates Paul's movnon ( monon ) as the conjunction "but"; however, this conjunctive use of the word is not clearly attested in Paul's letters elsewhere. The usual meaning for movnon is "only," which fits the text well here, yielding the result, "The one who prevails now [will continue to do so] only until he is taken out of the way." However, it is also possible that the Greek conjunction e{w" ( heo-s , "till") is out of its usual position, in which case the sentence could be taken with good sense as, "The mystery of lawlessness is already at work only until the one who prevails is taken out of the way." In this case, what Paul supplies here is the additional assurance that the dominance of the man of lawlessness, already experienced by the readers, will last not forever but only until he is removed by the Lord at his coming, as the next verse will further explain. If the traditional interpretation is followed and "the one who holds it back" is the opponent of the man of lawlessness, then the text is ambiguous as to whether it is the restrainer or the man of lawlessness who is taken away. If the view put forward here is correct, no such ambiguity arises because the two are identical.

2:8 And then the lawless one will be revealed, whom the Lord Jesus will overthrow with the breath of his mouth and destroy by the splendor of his coming.

The close connection between the revelation of the man of lawlessness and his final judgment, implied in the earlier discussion, is explicit here. It must be carefully noted that if this "revelation" signifies intensified activity, nothing at all in this text expresses it. If Paul is referring to a future appearance of an antichrist and a period of greater evil, that period of evil must be assumed between the revelation and the Lord's coming mentioned here.

Paul has shifted from the neuter back to the masculine for the lawless one, focusing on the unveiling of the evil personality who is ultimately responsible for the work of lawlessness in this age. "Then" (tovte , tote ) connects this unveiling with the removal of the prevailing one in the previous verse; "whom" (o{n , hon ) connects it to his destruction. The resulting sequence signifies the comprehensive elimination of every aspect of his activity: (a) he will no longer be present to prevail in the world; (b) he will be revealed to all for who he is; (c) he will be utterly ruined for any further activity.

The description of Jesus' decisive activity against the lawless one emphasizes his supreme power in contrast to the opponent's pretensions (v. 4). As the great enemy of Dan 8:23-25 could not be defeated by any human hand, this greatest enemy will be defeated instantly by the Lord himself. Jesus is first of all "Lord," implying his divine authority (cf. 1 Thess 1:1 and comments above). His power is so superior that he is able to bring immediate and effortless destruction on his opponent "by the breath of his mouth." Paul has probably borrowed this expression from the description of the coming king in Isa 11:4; the apocryphal 2 Esdr 13:9-11, 38 uses a similar image to indicate the messiah's total triumph over his enemies.

Likewise, the "splendor of his coming" will be such that all who have opposed him will be thoroughly overwhelmed. This phrase combines two significant words. "Splendor" translates ejpifavneia ( epiphaneia ), often used as a technical term for the visible manifestation of a deity, especially a sudden appearance in a hostile situation. In the New Testament it is used only of the appearance of Christ, usually of his return (1 Tim 6:14; 2 Tim 4:1, 8; Titus 2:13), though once of his first appearance on earth (2 Tim 1:10). Here it especially implies that the one who is truly divine but is hidden in this age will by his appearance utterly shatter all the pretensions of his opponent. This event is identified as his "coming," or parousiva ( parousia ), used elsewhere in 1-2 Thessalonians for Christ's return as the visitation of a great dignitary (1 Thess 2:19; 3:13; 4:15; 5:23; 2 Thess 2:1; see comments above). This expression is apt for the point that Paul makes here, but it also supplies the basis for further comparison with the lawless one in the verses that follow.

2:9 The coming of the lawless one will be in accordance with the work of Satan displayed in all kinds of counterfeit miracles, signs and wonders,

In this verse the NIV translators have made their most significant interpretive move, rendering a present, indicative verb, ejstin ( estin ), as a future, "will be." While such futuristic uses of the present tense are possible, there is little to support such a translation here except for the assumption that the entire text discusses the future appearance of the man of lawlessness. Elsewhere Paul indicates that he regards the Satanic activity described here as already at work in the world (2 Cor 11:14; 1 Tim 3:1-9; cf. Rom 1:18-32; 1 Cor 2:8), so in light of the unequivocal statement of v. 7, this present-tense verb should be taken in its ordinary sense, as it is rendered in the NRSV: "The coming of the lawless one is apparent in the working of Satan . . . ."

The idea of false miracles has a long history in Scripture. Pharaoh's priests were able to duplicate in part the works of Moses (Exod 7:11-12, 22; 8:7, 18; 9:11) and later the Pentateuch warned of false prophets who could deceive with similar signs and induce Israel to worship false gods (Deut 13:1-3). In the Olivet Discourse Jesus picks up the pentateuchal language and applies it to the false prophets who will be characteristic of the age in which his disciples await his return (Matt 24:11, 24; Mark 13:22). These lure the people of God to follow a false messiah, just as the false prophets of old encouraged the worship of false gods. The same concept is found in Rev 13:13-14, where the beast from the earth performs false miracles. As a corollary, the Gospels indicate that Jesus is accused of performing his own miracles by demonic power (Matt 12:24; Mark 3:22; Luke 11:15). Paul is probably picking up on the language of the Olivet Discourse but is doubtlessly aware of the larger biblical context of Jesus' statement also. For Paul such deceptive activity is entirely in accord with the character of Satan, who "masquerades as an angel of light" (2 Cor 11:14) and "has blinded the minds of unbelievers, so that they cannot see the light of the gospel and the glory of Christ" (2 Cor 4:4). Hence, these signs represent his "work" or activity in the world, the visible manifestation of one who remains invisible until he is revealed at the Lord's return.

The terms used here for these false miracles are commonly found in combination in the New Testament referring to the miracles of Jesus or the apostles (John 4:48; Acts 2:22, 43; 4:30; 5:12; 6:8; 14:3; 15:12; Rom 15:19; 2 Cor 12:12; Heb 2:4; cf. Acts 7:36). Here these are literally "power and signs and wonders of a lie," the last term identifying them unequivocally as false because of their power to entice people away from the truth of Jesus. Hence, Paul makes a play on words at the beginning of the verse, speaking of the "coming" of the lawless one, his parousiva ( parousia ), a counterfeit of the coming of Jesus which the readers anticipate (v. 8). Though "coming" is certainly an adequate translation of this expression in this context, the English reader must not misunderstand it as having a future orientation. As noted above, the verb in this verse stresses the present reality of this activity, and parousia indicates less a future coming than the visitation of a dignitary or his presence with a people. Thus, the expression here suggests that the Christians must endure this false visitation, recognizing it for the lie that it is, until the genuine visitation reveals its genuine nature.

It may be argued that the phrase "in accordance with the work of Satan" indicates that Satan is distinct from the man of lawlessness. This may not be the case, however, if Paul's point is that the Christians can already perceive this work of lawlessness, even supported by false signs, to be the work of Satan himself, since they have been taught to expect such counterfeiting by him. Throughout the text "man of lawlessness" then indicates the clandestine activity of Satan in this age, whereas the name "Satan" here reveals the full identity of the one who is secretly responsible for that work.

2:10 and in every sort of evil that deceives those who are perishing.

The description of the current activity of the man of lawlessness continues here, now with an emphasis on its consequences and the responsibility of those who follow it. "Every sort of evil that deceives" is literally "all deceit of unrighteousness," pointing comprehensively to every aspect of evil which would seduce people away from salvation and toward destruction. By this expression Paul indicates that this seductive influence is to be found in more than what could narrowly be described as miracles. Those who fall prey to this deceit are already under judgment for their choice; hence, Paul uses a present participle, ajpollumevnoi" ( apollumenois , "those who are perishing") to stress that their ruin is a continuing reality (cf. 1 Cor 1:18; 2 Cor 2:15; 4:3).

They perish because they refused to love the truth and so be saved.

Though these have fallen prey to the deception of the Evil One, they are not helpless victims. Their fate is a result of their willful decision to reject the message of salvation. Literally Paul's statement is "they did not receive the love of the truth so that they would be saved." By naming "the love of the truth" as the object of their refusal, he stresses that in rejecting the gospel, the heart of God's truth, these have repudiated any commitment to truth of any kind, devoting themselves instead to the deception of the Evil One. They have in effect "exchanged the truth of God for a lie" (Rom 1:25). Having rejected salvation, they are therefore already perishing. Paul's language here is sharply dualistic, drawing a strict division of humanity into two camps, the saved and the perishing. As far as this text is concerned, there is no middle ground of uncertainty.

5. God's Consequent Actions (2:11-12)

¹¹ For this reason God sends them a powerful delusion so that they will believe the lie ¹² and so that all will be condemned who have not believed the truth but have delighted in wickedness.

2:11 For this reason God sends them a powerful delusion so that they will believe the lie

In the previous verse Paul has noted that the deceptive activity of Satan in no way compromises human responsibility. Here he indicates that Satan's activity in no way compromises God's sovereignty. This same interplay between the deceit of the Evil One, human refusal of God's will, and God's control of the universe is also seen in such episodes as the hardening of Pharaoh's heart, which is both Pharaoh's own action (Exod 8:15, 32; 9:34; cf. 1 Sam 6:6) and the action of God (Exod 4:21; 7:3; 9:12; 10:1, 20, 27; 11:10; 14:4, 8); the evil spirit which troubles Saul, sent by God as a judgment on Saul's stubborn disobedience (1 Sam 16:14; 18:10; 19:9; cf. 15:11, 16:1); and, most directly, in Paul's statement that in response to human rejection of knowledge of God, God "gave over" humanity to idolatry and degeneracy (Rom 1:18-32).

In all these cases God's rule over the world is preserved along with human responsibility. In each case God sends that which leads to hardening, deception and sin, but in each case he sends it only in response to the rejection of his message which the human subject has already chosen. In effect God gives to those who reject him a greater measure of that which they have chosen for themselves, demonstrating to those with the will to see the consequences of the choice which was made. Here the concept is much the same. Satan's deceptive activity should not be seen as a failure of God's rule over the world. Rather, God's larger purpose of judgment and redemption, in which his free creatures experience the full consequences of their choices, is achieved as the full force of rejecting God's truth is felt in Satan's deceptive power. In this sense, even though the adversary appears to prevail now, he is still subject to the rule of God (cf. Job 1:6-12; 2:1-6), ironically bringing to bear the consequences of judgment on sinful humanity in this age even as he will himself be fully judged in the age to come.

The language of these verses closely connects them to the statement about Satan's deception in vv. 9-10. "For this reason" translates diaΙ tou'to ( dia touto ), used also by Paul in the similar discussion in Rom 1:26, indicating that the acceptance of Satan's deception is the reason God acts as he does here. "Powerful delusion" is literally "a working of error"; ejnevrgeia ( energeia , "working") is the same term used for the "work" of Satan in v. 9 and is the cognate of the verb rendered "is . . . at work" in v. 7. Likewise, "lie" (yeu'do" , pseudos ) is repeated from v. 9, where the NIV translates the same Greek word as "counterfeit." "So that they will believe the lie" is also syntactically parallel to "and so be saved" in v. 10 (both are articular infinitives introduced by eij" ( eis) , indicating purpose), sharply contrasting the consequences of acceptance or rejection of the truth.

2:12 and so that all will be condemned who have not believed the truth but have delighted in wickedness.

Rejection of the truth is again underlined in v. 12, where Paul reiterates the point of v. 10 that these are judged for their refusal to believe the truth. In place of believing truth these have "delighted in wickedness," literally "approved of unrighteousness." This last expression, ajdikiva ( adikia , "wickedness, unrighteousness") probably stands as a reminder of the lawlessness (ajnomiva , anomia ) of the one who inspires it (v. 7). Paul's aim throughout is to make the readers see that this work of Satan is ultimately used by God in his providence to achieve his own purpose of judgment in the world. We should certainly understand that it is not God but Satan who deceives, but that he does so by the permission of God, who thereby accomplishes his objective to bring to bear on sinners the full consequences of their rejection of his salvation.

The effect of these last four verses on the readers is to do more than correct their understanding of the Lord's coming. By attributing unbelief to the deceptive work of Satan and its consequences to God's judgment, Paul has provided a partial answer to a question which must have troubled the small, persecuted Thessalonian church, namely, why did the truth of the gospel not persuade everyone who heard it? Likewise, this instruction would reinforce their own loyalty to the gospel, since it stated in unequivocal terms the nature of the division between believers and unbelievers.

The complexity of the interpretive issues surrounding vv. 1-12 are such as to require a concluding summary of the interpretation argued above. In short: Paul regards the promised end-time to be already present because of the work of Christ. The prevalence of evil, variously manifested, is ultimately the work of Satan. That fact is already recognized by the Christians, but the world is unaware of it, having fallen prey to Satan's deceptive powers. But when Christ returns, he will reveal Satan and his activity for what it truly is, ending his rule over this age and consigning him to eternal punishment. Therefore, as long as evil still prevails in the world, the Christians can know that God's work is not yet complete. They can therefore be confident in the faithfulness and power of God, remaining true to the gospel despite the difficulties they face and looking forward to their vindication at the final judgment.

IV. RENEWED THANKSGIVING, ENCOURAGEMENT AND PRAYER (2:13-17)

As in 1 Thess 2:13, Paul renews the letter's initial thanksgiving (cf. 1:3). Here the repetition of the thanksgiving allows Paul to remind the readers again of their standing with God as those who have responded in faith to the gospel. This reminder has special impact because of the preceding discussion. The readers need to remember this status as they continue to resist the deceptive power of evil (vv. 9-12). Furthermore, after the emphasis in the preceding section on the work of God which still lies in the future, this section will remind the readers again of what they have already received. If the problem of 2:2 stemmed from seeing all of the promises of God as already fulfilled, the Thessalonians should not conclude from Paul's counter-argument that all of the fulfillment still lies in the future. Remembering what they have already received holds the key for steadfastness in awaiting the fulfillment yet to come.

Such steadfastness is exactly what Paul seeks to stimulate in this section, and so he ends it, as in 1 Thess 3:11-13, with a prayer for the readers' future, focusing on God's work in enabling the readers to remain firm against the pressures of this age. This in turn becomes the transition point for the final section of the letter in ch. 3.

A. THANKSGIVING FOR THE SALVATION OF THE THESSALONIANS (2:13-14)

¹³ But we ought always to thank God for you, brothers loved by the Lord, because from the beginning God chose you ^a to be saved through the sanctifying work of the Spirit and through belief in the truth. ¹⁴ He called you to this through our gospel, that you might share in the glory of our Lord Jesus Christ.

^a 13 Some manuscripts because God chose you as his firstfruits

2:13 But we ought always to thank God for you, brothers loved by the Lord,

Paul begins this section with the emphatic personal pronoun hJmei'" ( he-meis ), perhaps to shift the focus of attention after the long discussion of the lawless one (cf. 1 Thess 2:17 and comments above). As in 1:3 (see comments above), Paul expresses the thanksgiving indirectly as that which he "ought to do." Again the term expresses obligation or necessity. That obligation is based on the readers' standing with God. Paul points to this status first with "brothers," his habitual form of address in both letters (1 Thess 1:4; 2:1, 9, 14, 17; 3:7; 4:1, 10, 13; 5:1, 4, 12, 14, 25; 2 Thess 1:3; 2:1, 15; 3:1, 6, 13), which suggests their shared membership in God's family. The point is reinforced by "beloved by the Lord," which, like the similar phrase in 1 Thess 1:4 (see comments above) stresses that the readers are the unworthy objects of divine favor. There the reference is to the love of God the Father; here "Lord" refers to Jesus, again assuming his divine status equal to the Father. Paul may focus particularly on Jesus' love here because of the earlier focus on Jesus' return or because of the assurance it gives as he returns for judgment.

because from the beginning God chose you

Paul's explicit reason for the thanksgiving is God's choosing of the readers to be his people, again echoing 1 Thess 1:4. As in that passage, this combination of expressions stresses that through their response to the gospel the readers have been incorporated into the people of God, what might be termed the Israel of fulfillment. Such an identity would be too precious to lose through a lack of diligence in resisting the evil power that prevails in this age.

A rather difficult textual problem occurs in this verse, as indicated in the NIV's footnote. The expression ajp ' ajrch'" ( ap' arche-s , "from the beginning") followed in the NIV, appears as ajparchvn ( aparche-n , "firstfruits") in several manuscripts. Either expression is coherent in the context, both have wide attestation in the manuscripts, and the difference between the two, since no spaces appeared between words in Greek uncial manuscripts, is only one letter.

There are, however, several reasons to conclude that "firstfruits" is Paul's original expression here: (1) ap' arche-s is not used elsewhere in Paul's letters, but proΙ /avpoΙ tw'n aijwvnwn ( pro/apo to-n aio-no-n , "from eternity") appears with a similar meaning in 1 Cor 2:7 and Col 1:26 and proΙ katabolh'" kovsmou ( pro katabole-s kosmou , "from the foundation of the world") does the same duty in Eph 1:4; (2) Paul uses ajrchv ( arche- ) to mean "power" everywhere but Phil 4:15; (3) Paul uses ajparchv six other times; (4) in two other texts copyists altered ajparchvn to ajp ' ajrch'" (Rom 16:5; Rev 14:4), even though the latter expression did not fit those contexts. On balance then, the reading in the NIV footnote is probably to be preferred. "Firstfruits" suggests the Old Testament offering of the first part of the harvest to the Lord, a pledge that the remainder of the harvest, though not yet received, would be dedicated to him as well (Deut 26:1-11). As a small group facing an enormous struggle for their faith, the Thessalonian Christians needed the reminder that as "firstfruits" they too were pledged to God as his possession and were the vanguard of a greater people of God to be harvested in the future (cf. 3:1).

to be saved through the sanctifying work of the Spirit and through belief in the truth.

The purpose of God's choosing of the readers is their salvation, the very thing refused by those under the deception of evil in v. 10. This salvation comes by two means. "Sanctifying work" or "sanctification" (aJgiasmov" , hagiasmos ; cf. 1 Thess 4:3 and comments above) indicates a making holy, the particular work of the Spirit both in identifying the Christian as one who belongs to God (Eph 1:13; 4:30; cf. 2 Cor 1:22) and in producing in the believer a life that imitates God's holiness (Gal 5:22-25; 1 Thess 4:7-8). It is possible that pneu'ma ( pneuma ) refers to the human spirit here, in which case it gives the object of sanctification: "through sanctifying the human spirit." But Paul's repeated statements elsewhere about the Spirit's work in sanctification suggest that the NIV's rendering is correct. "Belief in the truth" certainly contrasts with the false belief of vv. 10-12, again underlining that those who have believed the gospel are resisting the trend and pressure of this age. Maintaining such belief and growing in the sanctification that accompanies it are the obvious, fundamental responses of anyone who values his standing as one of God's saved people.

While it has been argued that the order of these two phrases, first the work of the Spirit and then faith, indicates that the work of the Spirit is the cause of that faith, nothing in this text indicates that connection explicitly. More likely is the connection which each idea makes to the concepts of the surrounding context than a cause-and-effect connection between them. And as Marshall notes, if the Spirit's work guarantees the result of faith, then the command of v. 15 to remain firm in the faith has little cogency. In fact, the statement that God chose his people "through" or "by" (ejn , en used instrumentally) their faith in the truth is more consistent with the concept of conditional election than the Calvinistic view.

2:14 He called you to this through our gospel, that you might share in the glory of our Lord Jesus Christ.

The new sentence here in the NIV is in fact a continuation of the previous sentence. "To this" refers loosely to the entire preceding discussion, including membership in God's people, salvation, the sanctifying work of the Spirit, and belief in the truth; a Greek neuter pronoun o{ ( ho ) refers not to any one word in the preceding clause but to the entire preceding idea. Here Paul stresses that God's choice of the readers is actualized through their response to the gospel (cf. 1 Thess 1:5 and comments above). As noted in the discussion of 1 Thess 1:4 above, Paul's larger concept is not that God first chooses unconditionally those who will be his and then causes them to believe in Jesus; rather, as Rom 8:29 implies, he chooses them conditionally, on the basis of their faith which he foreknows. It is probably significant here that Paul stresses that the call is issued through the gospel: one becomes a member of God's family through heeding the message of salvation (Rom 10:17; cf. Rom 10:10-11), not by a direct operation of God on the heart which then causes belief.

The purpose of this call is to obtain (peripoivhsi" , peripoie-sis , "share"; cf. 1 Thess 5:9) the Lord's own glory (cf. 1 Thess 2:12 and comments above; Rom 8:17, 29-30; 1 Cor 15:43; 2 Cor 3:18; Phil 3:21). In light of Paul's earlier discussion, this glory is primarily what the believers will share with him when they are gathered (v. 1) at his triumphant return (v. 8; cf. 1 Cor 15:43; Phil 3:21), though Paul also understands glory to be a present possession through God's call (Rom 8:30). Again, in light of what Christ's return will mean both for believers and opponents, the need to stand firm in the faith which brought them this salvation is entirely clear to the readers.

B. ENCOURAGEMENT TO REMAIN FAITHFUL TO THE TRADITIONS DELIVERED BY PAUL (2:15)

¹⁵ So then, brothers, stand firm and hold to the teachings ^a we passed on to you, whether by word of mouth or by letter.

^a Or traditions

2:15 So then, brothers, stand firm and hold to the teachings we passed on to you,

The implication of 2Thes vv. 13-14 is now made explicit; Paul uses two Greek particles a[ra ou ( ara oun , "so then") to stress that this command is a direct inference from the previous discussion. Paul uses two verbs to express this command, both in the Greek present tense to emphasize continuing action. The Thessalonians must first of all "stand," as Paul urged in 1 Thess 3:8 (Cf. 1 Cor 16:13), remaining firm in their faith so that the result of their faith, the fullness of salvation, will be theirs. In effect, they are told not to be affected as Paul had described in v. 2. This standing firm is specified with the second verb and its object. Holding a genuine faith means not holding to the gospel teaching which they have received (cf. 1 Cor 11:2). Paul uses paravdosi" ( paradosis ) here, which, as reflected in the NIV's footnote, commonly referred to traditions delivered by word of mouth (cf. 1 Thess 2:13; 4:1; 2 Thess 3:6). This term underscores that the Thessalonian church must remain true to the original gospel deposit, including what Paul has just clarified about the day of the Lord, not accepting any of the innovations or misunderstandings with which they have been confronted. This original deposit is theirs through Paul's own teaching. As Paul noted in the first letter, they can have confidence in this teaching both because of the way Paul brought it to them (1 Thess 2:1-12) and because of what it produced in their lives (1 Thess 1:4-10).

whether by word of mouth or by letter.

That teaching, first delivered orally, is now supplemented by the letters which they have received. Whether Paul is referring to 1 or 2 Thessalonians or both is a moot point, since his expression here implies any letter that he might write. Linking letters to oral teaching reflects Paul's perspective that his letters served as substitutes for his own presence and direct teaching activity with the church. Both now are to serve as the touchstones by which they will measure the content of their faith and evaluate other teaching which they will encounter. That Paul was conscious of the authority of his teaching is abundantly clear here. Though he does not seek to "canonize" his letters with this statement, the authority which he expresses here is the basis for the later formal recognition of his letters as Scripture (cf. 1 Thess 5:27 and comments above).

C. PRAYER FOR THE LORD'S ENCOURAGEMENT AND STRENGTH (2:16-17)

¹⁶ May our Lord Jesus Christ himself and God our Father, who loved us and by his grace gave us eternal encouragement and good hope, ¹⁷ encourage your hearts and strengthen you in every good deed and word.

Like the prayer of 1 Thess 3:11-13 (see comments above), this one is expressed as a wish. Paul begins with an emphatic reference to Christ: "himself" translates the Greek pronoun aujtov" ( autos ), which puts particular emphasis on the subject. Paul also mentions Christ before the Father, an unusual position for Paul which may reflect further emphasis, though Paul may have mentioned Christ first to avoid awkwardness with the long phrase describing God at the end of the verse. Having just referred twice to the Lord's glory ( vv. 8, 14), Paul now calls on this glorious one to bring his power to bear on the readers' lives. Likewise, God is the one "who loved us," as in v. 13, and who has acted "by grace," a concept clearly integral to the point in vv. 13-14. Through his gracious love he has already given "eternal encouragement," enabling them to face with assurance the persecutions of the present and the judgment of the future (2 Thess 1:5-10). Likewise they have "good hope," a phrase commonly in use in the first century to refer to life after death, enabling them to face the kind of difficulties described in vv. 3-12 with confidence.

Because he has already given "eternal encouragement," God can be counted on to encourage the readers in every situation. So just as before (1 Thess 3:11-13), Paul prays that God would give to the Thessalonians more of what he has already given them, especially under their pressurized circumstances. "Encourage" is coupled with "strengthen," the Greek verb sthrivzw ( ste-rizo- ), which indicates especially causing the object to be "more firm and unchanging in attitude or belief," again an appropriate prayer when the problems addressed in vv. 1-13 are in view. Paul sees this strengthening of attitude and mind to have a comprehensive effect on behavior, as he prays that it may take place both in "deed and word." The inclusion of this last term may suggest that the Thessalonians' own right proclamation of the gospel, threatened by the false teaching of v. 2, will be reinforced by God's encouragement.

-College Press New Testament Commentary: with the NIV

McGarvey: 2Th 2:4

he that opposeth and exalteth himself against all that is called God or that is worshipped; so that he sitteth in the temple of God, setting himself forth as God . [The antichrist will be antagonistic to God, and will exalt himself as a rival to everything that is worshiped, whether it be king or emperor, mythical god or true God, even entering, not only into the outer courts of the temple, but penetrating to the inner sanctuary, and taking his seat where God alone has a right to rest, and there making an arrogant display of himself as an object of worship (comp. Act 12:21-23). The Greek word for "worship" is sebasma: from it came Sebastus or Augustus (i. e., the Worshipful), which was the title of the Roman emperors. A man of that age could hardly see this word in such a connection without thinking that Paul meant to convey the idea that the antichrist would arrogate to himself all the reverence then claimed by the great civil lords of the earth, such as emperors, kings, etc. The temple is Paul's favorite metaphor for the church -- 1Co 3:16-17 ; 2Co 6:16 ; Eph 2:21]

Introduction / Outline

Robertson: 2 Thessalonians (Book Introduction)

Second Thessalonians

From Corinth a.d. 50 Or 51

By Way of Introduction

It is plain that First Thessalonians did not settle all the difficulties in Thessalonica. With some there was precisely the opposite result. There was some opposition to Paul’s authority and even defiance. So Paul repeats his " command" for discipline (2Th_3:6) as he had done when with them (2Th_3:10). He makes this Epistle a test of obedience (2Th_3:14) and finds it necessary to warn the Thessalonians against the zeal of some deceivers who even invent epistles in Paul’s name to carry their point in the church (2Th_2:1.), an early instance of pseudepigraphic " Pauline" epistles, but not for a " pious" purpose. Paul’s keen resentment against the practise should make us slow to accept the pseudepigraphic theory about other Pauline Epistles. He calls attention to his own signature at the close of each genuine letter. As a rule he dictated the epistle, but signed it with his own hand (2Th_3:17). Paul writes to calm excitement (Ellicott) and to make it plain that he had not said that the Second Coming was to be right away.

This Epistle is a bit sharper in tone than the First and also briefer. It has been suggested that there were two churches in Thessalonica, a Gentile Church to which First Thessalonians was sent, and a Jewish Church to which Second Thessalonians was addressed. There is no real evidence for such a gratuitous hypothesis. It assumes a difficulty about his sending a second letter to the same church that does not exist. The bearer of the first letter brought back news that made a second necessary. It was probably sent within the same year as the first.

JFB: 2 Thessalonians (Book Introduction)

Its GENUINENESS is attested by POLYCARP [Epistle to the Philippians, 11], who alludes to 2Th 3:15. JUSTIN MARTYR [Dialogue with Trypho, p. 193.32], alludes to 2Th 2:3. IRENÆUS [Against Heresies, 7.2] quotes 2Th 2:8. CLEMENT OF ALEXANDRIA [Miscellanies, 1.5, p. 554; The Instructor, 1.17], quotes 2Th 3:2, as Paul's words. TERTULLIAN [On the Resurrection of the Flesh, 24] quotes 2Th 2:1-2, as part of Paul's Epistle.

DESIGN.--The accounts from Thessalonica, after the sending of the first Epistle, represented the faith and love of the Christians there as on the increase; and their constancy amidst persecutions unshaken. One error of doctrine, however, resulting in practical evil, had sprung up among them. The apostle's description of Christ's sudden second coming (1Th 4:13, &c., and 1Th 5:2), and the possibility of its being at any time, led them to believe it was actually at hand. Some professed to know by "the Spirit" (2Th 2:2) that it was so; and others alleged that Paul had said so when with them. A letter, too, purporting to be from the apostle to that effect, seems to have been circulated among them. (That 2Th 2:2 refers to such a spurious letter, rather than to Paul's first Epistle, appears likely from the statement, 2Th 3:17, as to his autograph salutation being the mark whereby his genuine letters might be known). Hence some neglected their daily business and threw themselves on the charity of others, as if their sole duty was to wait for the coming of the Lord. This error, therefore, needed rectifying, and forms a leading topic of the second Epistle. He in it tells them (2Th. 2:1-17), that before the Lord shall come, there must first be a great apostasy, and the Man of Sin must be revealed; and that the Lord's sudden coming is no ground for neglecting daily business; that to do so would only bring scandal on the Church, and was contrary to his own practice among them (2Th 3:7-9), and that the faithful must withdraw themselves from such disorderly professors (2Th 3:6, 2Th 3:10-15). Thus, there are three divisions of the Epistle: (1) 2Th 1:1-12. Commendations of the Thessalonians' faith, love, and patience, amidst persecutions. (2) 2Th. 2:1-17. The error as to the immediate coming of Christ corrected, and the previous rise and downfall of the Man of Sin foretold. (3) 2Th. 3:1-16. Exhortations to orderly conduct in their whole walk, with prayers for them to the God of peace, followed by his autograph salutation and benediction.

DATE OF WRITING.--AS the Epistle is written in the joint names of Timothy and Silas, as well as his own, and as these were with him while at Corinth, and not with him for a long time subsequently to his having left that city (compare Act 18:18, with Act 19:22; indeed, as to Silas, it is doubtful whether he was ever subsequently with Paul), it follows, the place of writing must have been Corinth, and the date, during the one "year and six months" of his stay there, Act 18:11 (namely, beginning with the autumn of A.D. 52, and ending with the spring of A.D. 54), say about six months after his first Epistle, early in A.D. 53.

STYLE.--The style is not different from that of most of Paul's other writings, except in the prophetic portion of it (2Th 2:1-12), which is distinguished from them in subject matter. As is usual in his more solemn passages (for instance, in the denunciatory and prophetic portions of his Epistles, for example, compare Col 2:8, Col 2:16, with 2Th 2:3; 1Co 15:24-28, with 2Th 2:8-9; Rom 1:18, with 2Th 2:8, 2Th 2:10), his diction here is more lofty, abrupt, and elliptical. As the former Epistle dwells mostly on the second Advent in its aspect of glory to the sleeping and the living saints (1Th. 4:1-5:28), so this Epistle dwells mostly on it in its aspect of everlasting destruction to the wicked and him who shall be the final consummation of wickedness, the Man of Sin. So far was Paul from laboring under an erroneous impression as to Christ's speedy coming, when he wrote his first Epistle (which rationalists impute to him), that he had distinctly told them, when he was with them, the same truths as to the apostasy being about first to arise, which he now insists upon in this second Epistle (2Th 2:5). Several points of coincidence occur between the two Epistles, confirming the genuineness of the latter. Thus, compare 2Th 3:2, with 1Th 2:15-16; again, 2Th 2:9, the Man of Sin "coming after the working of Satan," with 1Th 2:18; 1Th 3:5, where Satan's incipient work as the hinderer of the Gospel, and the tempter, appears; again, mild warning is enjoined, 1Th 5:14; but, in this second Epistle, when the evil had grown worse, stricter discipline (2Th 3:6, 2Th 3:14): "withdraw from" the "company" of such.

Paul probably visited Thessalonica on his way to Asia subsequently (Act 20:4), and took with him thence Aristarchus and Secundus: the former became his "companion in travel" and shared with him his perils at Ephesus, also those of his shipwreck, and was his "fellow prisoner" at Rome (Act 27:2; Col 4:10; Phm 1:24). According to tradition he became bishop of Apamea.

JFB: 2 Thessalonians (Outline)

• ADDRESS AND SALUTATION: INTRODUCTION: THANKSGIVING FOR THEIR GROWTH IN FAITH AND LOVE, AND FOR THEIR PATIENCE IN PERSECUTIONS, WHICH ARE A TOKEN FOR GOOD EVERLASTING TO THEM, AND FOR PERDITION TO THEIR ADVERSARIES AT CHRIST'S COMING: PRAYER FOR THEIR PERFECTION. (2Th 1:1-12)
• CORRECTION OF THEIR ERROR AS TO CHRIST'S IMMEDIATE COMING. THE APOSTASY THAT MUST PRECEDE IT. EXHORTATION TO STEADFASTNESS, INTRODUCED WITH THANKSGIVING FOR THEIR ELECTION BY GOD. (2Th. 2:1-17)
• HE ASKS THEIR PRAYERS: HIS CONFIDENCE IN THEM: PRAYER FOR THEM: CHARGES AGAINST DISORDERLY IDLE CONDUCT; HIS OWN EXAMPLE: CONCLUDING PRAYER AND SALUTATION. (2Th. 3:1-18)

TSK: 2 Thessalonians (Book Introduction)

The First Epistle to the Thessalonians, it is generally agreed, was the earliest written of all St. Paul’s epistles, whence we see the reason and propriety of his anxiety that it should be read in all the Christian churches of Macedonia. - " I charge you by the Lord, that this Epistle be read unto all the holy brethren" (1Th 5:27). " The existence of this clause," observes Dr. Paley, " is an evidence of its authenticity; because, to produce a letter, purporting to have been publicly read in the church at Thessalonica, when no such letter had been read or heard of in that church, would be to produce an imposture destructive of itself. Either the Epistle was publicly read in the church of Thessalonica, during St. Paul’s lifetime, or it was not. If it was, no publication could be more authentic, no species of notoriety more unquestionable, no method of preserving the integrity of the copy more secure. If it was not, the clause would remain a standing condemnation of the forgery, and one would suppose, an invincible impediment to its success." Its genuineness, however, has never been disputed; and it has been universally received in the Christian church, as the inspired production of St. Paul, from the earliest period to the present day. The circumstance of this injunction being given, in the first epistle which the Apostle wrote, also implies a strong and avowed claim to the character of an inspired writer; as in fact it placed his writings on the same ground with those of Moses and the ancient prophets. The second Epistle, besides those marks of genuineness and authority which it possesses in common with the others, bears the highest evidence of its divine inspiration, in the representation which it contains of the papal power, under the characters of " the Man of sin," and the " Mystery of iniquity." The true Christian worship is the worship of the one only God, through the one only Mediator, the man Christ Jesus; and from this worship the church of Rome has most notoriously departed, by substituting other mediators, invocating and adoring saints and angels, worshipping images, adoring the host, etc. It follows, therefore, that " the Man of sin" is the Pope; not only on account of the disgraceful lives of many of them, but by means of their scandalous doctrines and principles; dispensing with the most necessary duties, selling pardons and indulgences for the most abominable crimes, and perverting the worship of God to the grossest superstition and idolatry. It was evidently the chief design of the Apostle, in writing to the Thessalonians, to confirm them in the faith, to animate them to a courageous profession of the Gospel, and to the practice of all the duties of Christianity; but to suppose, with Dr. Macknight, that he intended to prove the divine authority of Christianity by a chain of regular arguments, in which he answered the several objections which the heathen philosophers are supposed to have advanced, seems quite foreign to the nature of the epistles, and to be grounded on a mistaken notion, that the philosophers designed at so early a period to enter on a regular disputation with the Christians, when in fact they derided them as enthusiasts, and branded their doctrines as " foolishness." In pursuance of his grand object, " it is remarkable," says Dr. Doddridge, " with how much address he improves all the influence which his zeal and fidelity in their service must naturally give him, to inculcate upon them the precepts of the gospel, and persuade them to act agreeably to their sacred character. This was the grand point he always kept in view, and to which every thing else was made subservient. Nothing appears, in any part of his writings, like a design to establish his own reputation, or to make use of his ascendancy over his Christian friends to answer any secular purposes of his own. On the contrary, in this and in his other epistles, he discovers a most generous, disinterested regard for their welfare, expressly disclaiming any authority over their consciences, and appealing to them, that he had chose to maintain himself by the labour of this own hands, rather than prove burdensome to the churches, or give the least colour of suspicion, that, under zeal for the gospel, and concern for their improvement, he was carrying on any private sinister view. The discovery of so excellent a temper must be allowed to carry with it a strong presumptive argument in favour of the doctrines he taught....And, indeed, whoever reads St. Paul’s epistles with attention, and enters into the spirit with which they were written, will discern such intrinsic characters of their genuineness, and the divine authority of the doctrines they contain, as will, perhaps, produce in him a stronger conviction than all the external evidence with which they are attended." These remarks are exceedingly well grounded and highly important; and to no other Epistles can they apply with greater force than the present most excellent productions of the inspired Apostle. The last two chapters of the first epistle, in particular, as Dr. A. Clarke justly observes, " are certainly among the most important, and the most sublime in the New Testament. The general judgment, the resurrection of the body, and the states of the quick and the dead, the unrighteous and the just, are described, concisely indeed, but they are exhibited in the most striking and affecting points of view."

TSK: 2 Thessalonians 2 (Chapter Introduction)

Overview

2Th 2:1, Paul urges them to continue stedfast in the truth received; 2Th 2:3, shows that there shall be a departure from the faith, 2Th 2:9, and a discovery of Antichrist, before the day of the Lord come; 2Th 2:15, and thereupon repeats his former exhortation, and prays for them.

Poole: 2 Thessalonians 2 (Chapter Introduction)

THESSALONIANS CHAPTER 2

MHCC: 2 Thessalonians (Book Introduction)

The second epistle to the Thessalonians was written soon after the first. The apostle was told that, from some expressions in his first letter, many expected the second coming of Christ was at hand, and that the day of judgment would arrive in their time. Some of these neglected their worldly duties. St. Paul wrote again to correct their error, which hindered the spread of the gospel. He had written agreeably to the words of the prophets of the Old Testament; and he tells them there were many counsels of the Most High yet to be fulfilled, before that day of the Lord should come, though, because it is sure, he had spoken of it as near. The subject led to a remarkable foretelling, of some of the future events which were to take place in the after-ages of the Christian church, and which show the prophetic spirit the apostle possessed.

MHCC: 2 Thessalonians 2 (Chapter Introduction)

(2Th 2:1-4) Cautions against the error that the time of Christ's coming was just at hand. There would first be a general apostacy from the faith, and a revealing of the antichristian man of sin.

(2Th 2:5-12) His destruction, and that of those who obey him.

(2Th 2:13-17) The security of the Thessalonians from apostacy; an exhortation to stedfastness, and prayer for them.

Matthew Henry: 2 Thessalonians (Book Introduction)

An Exposition, with Practical Observations, of The Second Epistle of St. Paul to the Thessalonians

This Second Epistle was written soon after the former, and seems to have been designed to prevent a mistake, which might arise from some passages in the former epistle, concerning the second coming of Christ, as if it were near at hand. The apostle in this epistle is careful to prevent any wrong use which some among them might make of those expressions of his that were agreeable to the dialect of the prophets of the Old Testament, and informs them that there were many intermediate counsels yet to be fulfilled before that day of the Lord should come, though, because it is sure, he had spoken of it as near. There are other things that he writes about for their consolation under sufferings, and exhortation and direction in duty.

Matthew Henry: 2 Thessalonians 2 (Chapter Introduction)

The apostle is very careful to hinder the spreading of an error into which some among them had fallen concerning the coming of Christ, as being very near (2Th 2:1-3). Then he proceeds to confute the error he cautioned them against, by telling them of two great events that were antecedent to the coming of Christ - a general apostasy, and the revelation of antichrist, concerning whom the apostle tells them many remarkable things, about his name, his character, his rise, his fall, his reign, and the sin and ruin of his subjects (2Th 2:4-12). He then comforts them against the terror of this apostasy, and exhorts them to stedfastness (2Th 2:13-15). And concludes with a prayer for them (2Th 2:16, 2Th 2:17).

Barclay: 2 Thessalonians (Book Introduction)

A GENERAL INTRODUCTION TO THE LETTERS OF PAUL

The Letters Of Paul

There is no more interesting body of documents in the New Testament than the letters of Paul. That is because of all forms of literature a letter is most personal. Demetrius, one of the old Greek literary critics, once wrote, "Every one reveals his own soul in his letters. In every other form of composition it is possible to discern the writercharacter, but in none so clearly as the epistolary." (Demetrius, On Style, 227). It is just because he left us so many letters that we feel we know Paul so well. In them he opened his mind and heart to the folk he loved so much; and in them, to this day, we can see that great mind grappling with the problems of the early church, and feel that great heart throbbing with love for men, even when they were misguided and mistaken.

The Difficulty Of Letters

At the same time, there is often nothing so difficult to understand as a letter. Demetrius (On Style, 223) quotes a saying of Artemon, who edited the letters of Aristotle. Artemon said that a letter ought to be written in the same manner as a dialogue, because it was one of the two sides of a dialogue. In other words, to read a letter is like listening to one side of a telephone conversation. So when we read the letters of Paul we are often in a difficulty. We do not possess the letter which he was answering; we do not fully know the circumstances with which he was dealing; it is only from the letter itself that we can deduce the situation which prompted it. Before we can hope to understand fully any letter Paul wrote, we must try to reconstruct the situation which produced it.

The Ancient Letters

It is a great pity that Paulletters were ever called epistles. They are in the most literal sense letters. One of the great lights shed on the interpretation of the New Testament has been the discovery and the publication of the papyri. In the ancient world, papyrus was the substance on which most documents were written. It was composed of strips of the pith of a certain bulrush that grew on the banks of the Nile. These strips were laid one on top of the other to form a substance very like brown paper. The sands of the Egyptian desert were ideal for preservation, for papyrus, although very brittle, will last forever so long as moisture does not get at it. As a result, from the Egyptian rubbish heaps, archaeologists have rescued hundreds of documents, marriage contracts, legal agreements, government forms, and, most interesting of all, private letters. When we read these private letters we find that there was a pattern to which nearly all conformed; and we find that Paulletters reproduce exactly that pattern. Here is one of these ancient letters. It is from a soldier, called Apion, to his father Epimachus. He is writing from Misenum to tell his father that he has arrived safely after a stormy passage.

"Apion sends heartiest greetings to his father and lord Epimachus.

I pray above all that you are well and fit; and that things are

going well with you and my sister and her daughter and my brother.

I thank my Lord Serapis [his god] that he kept me safe when I was

in peril on the sea. As soon as I got to Misenum I got my journey

money from Caesar--three gold pieces. And things are going fine

with me. So I beg you, my dear father, send me a line, first to let

me know how you are, and then about my brothers, and thirdly, that

I may kiss your hand, because you brought me up well, and because

of that I hope, God willing, soon to be promoted. Give Capito my

heartiest greetings, and my brothers and Serenilla and my friends.

I sent you a little picture of myself painted by Euctemon. My

military name is Antonius Maximus. I pray for your good health.

Serenus sends good wishes, Agathos Daimonboy, and Turbo,

Galloniuson." (G. Milligan, Selections from the Greek Papyri,

36.)

Little did Apion think that we would be reading his letter to his father 1800 years after he had written it. It shows how little human nature changes. The lad is hoping for promotion quickly. Who would Serenilla be but the girl he left behind him? He sends the ancient equivalent of a photograph to the folk at home. Now that letter falls into certain sections. (i) There is a greeting. (ii) There is a prayer for the health of the recipients. (iii) There is a thanksgiving to the gods. (iv) There are the special contents. (v) Finally, there are the special salutations and the personal greetings. Practically every one of Paulletters shows exactly the same sections, as we now demonstrate.

(i) The Greeting: Rom_1:1 ; 1Co_1:1 ; 2Co_1:1 ; Gal_1:1 ; Eph_1:1 ; Phi_1:1 ; Col_1:1-2 ; 1Th_1:1 ; 2Th_1:1 .

(ii) The Prayer: in every case Paul prays for the grace of God on the people to whom he writes: Rom_1:7 ; 1Co_1:3 ; 2Co_1:2 ; Gal_1:3 ; Eph_1:2 ; Phi_1:3 ; Col_1:2 ; 1Th_1:1 ; 2Th_1:2 .

(iii) The Thanksgiving: Rom_1:8 ; 1Co_1:4 ; 2Co_1:3 ; Eph_1:3 ; Phi_1:3 ; 1Th_1:3 ; 2Th_1:3 .

(iv) The Special Contents: the main body of the letters.

(v) Special Salutations and Personal Greetings: Rom 16 ; 1Co_16:19 ; 2Co_13:13 ; Phi_4:21-22 ; Col_4:12-15 ; 1Th_5:26 .

When Paul wrote letters, he wrote them on the pattern which everyone used. Deissmann says of them, "They differ from the messages of the homely papyrus leaves of Egypt, not as letters but only as the letters of Paul." When we read Paulletters we are not reading things which were meant to be academic exercises and theological treatises, but human documents written by a friend to his friends.

The Immediate Situation

With a very few exceptions, all Paulletters were written to meet an immediate situation and not treatises which he sat down to write in the peace and silence of his study. There was some threatening situation in Corinth, or Galatia, or Philippi, or Thessalonica, and he wrote a letter to meet it. He was not in the least thinking of us when he wrote, but solely of the people to whom he was writing. Deissmann writes, "Paul had no thought of adding a few fresh compositions to the already extant Jewish epistles; still less of enriching the sacred literature of his nation.... He had no presentiment of the place his words would occupy in universal history; not so much that they would be in existence in the next generation, far less that one day people would look at them as Holy Scripture." We must always remember that a thing need not be transient because it was written to meet an immediate situation. All the great love songs of the world were written for one person, but they live on for the whole of mankind. It is just because Paulletters were written to meet a threatening danger or a clamant need that they still throb with life. And it is because human need and the human situation do not change that God speaks to us through them today.

The Spoken Word

One other thing we must note about these letters. Paul did what most people did in his day. He did not normally pen his own letters but dictated them to a secretary, and then added Ws own authenticating signature. (We actually know the name of one of the people who did the writing for him. In Rom_16:22 Tertius, the secretary, slips in his own greeting before the letter draws to an end). In 1Co_16:21 Paul says, "This is my own signature, my autograph, so that you can be sure this letter comes from me." (compare Col_4:18 ; 2Th_3:17 .)

This explains a great deal. Sometimes Paul is hard to understand, because his sentences begin and never finish; his grammar breaks down and the construction becomes involved. We must not think of him sitting quietly at a desk, carefully polishing each sentence as he writes. We must think of him striding up and down some little room, pouring out a torrent of words, while his secretary races to get them down. When Paul composed his letters, he had in his mindeye a vision of the folk to whom he was writing, and he was pouring out his heart to them in words that fell over each other in his eagerness to help.

INTRODUCTION TO THE LETTERS TO THE THESSALONIANS

Paul Comes To Macedonia

For anyone who can read between the lines the story of Paulcoming to Macedonia is one of the most dramatic in the book of Acts. Luke, with supreme economy of words, tells it in Act_16:6-10 . Short as that narrative is, it gives the impression of a chain of circumstances inescapably culminating in one supreme event. Paul had passed through Phrygia and Galatia and ahead of him lay the Hellespont. To the left lay the teeming province of Asia, to the right stretched the great province of Bithynia; but the Spirit would allow him to enter neither. There was something driving him relentlessly on to the Aegean Sea. So he came to Alexandrian Troas, still uncertain where he ought to go; and then there came to him a vision in the night of a man who cried, "Come over into Macedonia and help us." Paul set sail, and for the first time the gospel came to Europe.

One World

At that moment Paul must have seen much more than a continent for Christ. It was in Macedonia that he landed; and Macedonia was the kingdom of Alexander the Great, who had conquered the world and wept because there were no more worlds left to conquer. But Alexander was much more than a military conqueror. He was almost the first universalist. He was more a missionary than a soldier; and he dreamed of one world dominated and enlightened by the culture of Greece. Even so great a thinker as Aristotle had said that it was a plain duty to treat Greeks as free men and orientals as slaves; but Alexander declared that he had been sent by God "to unite, to pacify and to reconcile the whole world." Deliberately he had said that it was his aim "to marry the East to the West." He had dreamed of an Empire in which there was neither Greek nor Jew, barbarian or Scythian, bond or free (Col_3:11 ). It is hard to see how Alexander could have failed to be in Paulthoughts. Paul left from Alexandrian Troas which was called after Alexander; he came to Macedonia which was Alexanderoriginal kingdom; he worked at Philippi which was called after Philip, Alexanderfather; he went on to Thessalonica which was called after Alexanderhalf-sister. The whole territory was saturated with memories of Alexander; and Paul must surely have thought, not of a country nor of a continent, but of a world for Christ.

Paul Comes To Thessalonica

This sense of the wide-stretching arms of Christianity must have been accentuated when Paul came to Thessalonica. It was a great city. Its original name was Thermal, which means The Hot Springs, and it gave its name to the Thermaic Gulf on which it stood. Six hundred years ago Herodotus had described it as a great city. It has always been a famous harbour. It was there that Xerxes the Persian had his naval base when he invaded Europe; and even in Roman times it was one of the worldgreat dockyards. In 315 B.C. Cassander had rebuilt the city and renamed it Thessalonica, the name of his wife, who was a daughter of Philip of Macedon and a half-sister of Alexander the Great. It was a free city; that is to say it had never suffered the indignity of having Roman troops quartered within it. It had its own popular assembly and its own magistrates. Its population rose to 200,000 and for a time it was a question whether it or Constantinople would be recognized as the capital of the world. Even today, under the name Salonika, it has 70,000 inhabitants.

But the supreme importance of Thessalonica lay in this--it straddled the Via Egnatia, the Egnatian Road, which stretched from Dyrrachium on the Adriatic to Constantinople on the Bosphorus and thence away to Asia Minor and the East. Its main street was part of the very road which linked Rome with the East. East and West converged on Thessalonica; it was said to be "in the lap of the Roman Empire." Trade poured into her from East and West, so that it was said, "So long as nature does not change, Thessalonica will remain wealthy and prosperous."

It is impossible to overstress the importance of the arrival of Christianity in Thessalonica. If Christianity was settled there, it was bound to spread East along the Egnatian Road until all Asia was conquered and West until it stormed even the city of Rome. The coming of Christianity to Thessalonica was crucial in the making of it into a world religion.

PaulStay At Thessalonica

The story of Paulstay at Thessalonica is in Act_17:1-10 . Now, for Paul, what happened at Thessalonica was of supreme importance. He preached in the synagogue for three Sabbaths (Act_17:2 ) which means that his stay there could not have been much more than three weeks in length. He had such tremendous success that the Jews were enraged and raised so much trouble that Paul had to be smuggled out, in peril of his life, to Beroea. The same thing happened in Beroea (Act_17:10-12 ) and Paul had to leave Timothy and Silas behind and make his escape to Athens. What exercised his mind was this. He had been in Thessalonica only three weeks. Was it possible to make such an impression on a place in three weeksime that Christianity was planted so deeply that it could never again be uprooted? If so, it was by no means an idle dream that the Roman Empire might yet be won for Christ. Or was it necessary to settle down and work for months, even years, before an impression could be made? In that event, no man could even dimly foresee when Christianity would penetrate all over the world. Thessalonica was a test case; and Paul was torn with anxiety to know how it would turn out.

News From Thessalonica

So anxious was Paul that, when Timothy joined him at Athens, he sent him back to Thessalonica to get the information without which he could not rest (1Th_3:1-2 , 1Th_3:5 ; 1Th_2:17 ). What news did Timothy bring back? There was good news. The affection of the Thessalonians for Paul was as strong as ever; and they were standing fast in the faith (1Th_2:14 ; 1Th_3:4-6 ; 1Th_4:9-10 ). They were indeed "his glory and Ws joy" (1Th_2:20 ). But there was worrying news.

(i) The preaching of the Second Coming had produced an unhealthy situation in which people had stopped working and had abandoned all ordinary pursuits to await the Second Coming with a kind of hysterical expectancy. So Paul tells them to be quiet and to get on with their work (1Th_4:11 ).

(ii) They were worried about what was to happen to those who died before the Second Coming arrived. Paul explains that those who fall asleep in Jesus will miss none of the glory (1Th_4:13-18 ).

(iii) There was a tendency to despise all lawful authority; the argumentative Greek was always in danger of producing a democracy run mad (1Th_5:12-14 ).

(iv) There was the ever-present danger that they would relapse into immorality. It was hard to unlearn the point of view of generations and to escape the contagion of the heathen world (1Th_4:3-8 ).

(v) There was at least a section who slandered Paul. They hinted that he preached the gospel for what he could get out of it (1Th_2:5 , 1Th_2:9 ); and that he was something of a dictator (1Th_2:6-7 , 1Th_2:11 ).

(vi) There was a certain amount of division in the Church (1Th_4:9 ; 1Th_5:13 ).

These were the problems with which Paul had to deal; and they show that human nature has not changed so very much.

Why Two Letters?

We must ask why there are two letters. They art, very much alike and they must have been written within weeks, perhaps days of each other. The second letter was written mainly to clear up a misconception about the Second Coming. The first letter insists that the Day of the Lord will come like a thief in the night, and urges watchfulness (1Th_5:2 ; 1Th_5:6 ). But this produced the unhealthy situation where men did nothing but watch and wait; and in the second letter Paul explains what signs must come first before the Second Coming should come (2Th_2:3-12 ). The Thessalonians had got their ideas about the Second Coming out of proportion. As so often happens to a preacher, Paulpreaching had been misunderstood, and certain phrases had been taken out of context and over-emphasized; and the second letter seeks to put things back in their proper balance and to correct the thoughts of the excited Thessalonians regarding the Second Coming. Of course, Paul takes occasion in the second letter to repeat and to stress much of the good advice and rebuke he had given in the first, but its main aim is to tell them certain things which will calm their hysteria and make them wait, not in excited idleness, but in patient and diligent attendance to the daywork. In these two letters we see Paul solving the day to day problems which arose in the expanding Church.

FURTHER READINGS

Thessalonians

J. E. Frame, Thessalonians (ICC; G)

G. Milligan, St. PaulEpistles to the Thessalonians (MmC; G)

W. Neil, The Epistles of Paul to the Thessalonians (MC; E)

Abbreviations

CGT: Cambridge Greek Testament

ICC: International Critical Commentary

MC: Moffatt Commentary

MmC: Macmillan Commentary

TC: Tyndale Commentary

E: English Text

G: Greek Text

Barclay: 2 Thessalonians 2 (Chapter Introduction)

The Lawless One (2Th_2:1-12)

God's Demand And Our Effort (2Th_2:13-17)

Constable: 2 Thessalonians (Book Introduction)

Introduction

Historical background

This epistle contains evidence that Paul had recently heard news about current conditions in the Thessalonian church. Probably most of this information came to him from the person who had carried 1 Thessalonians to its recipients and had returned to Paul at Corinth. Perhaps other people who had news of the church had informed Paul, Silas, and Timothy also. Some of the news was good. The majority of the Thessalonians were continuing to grow and to remain faithful to Christ in spite of persecution. Unfortunately some of the news was bad. False teaching concerning the day of the Lord had entered the church and was causing confusion and leading some of the Christians to quit their jobs in expectation of the Lord's return.

In view of these reports Paul evidently felt constrained to write this epistle. He commended his children in the faith for their growth and faithfulness, corrected the doctrinal error about the day of the Lord, and warned the idle to get back to work.

Almost all conservative scholars believe that Paul wrote 2 Thessalonians from Corinth. The basis for this conclusion is that Paul, Silas, and Timothy were present together in Corinth (Acts 18:5). The New Testament does not refer to them being together from then on, though they may have been. Paul evidently wrote 1 Thessalonians from Corinth. The topics he treated in the second epistle seem to grow out of situations he alluded to in the first epistle. They reflect a very similar situation in the Thessalonian church. Corinth, therefore, seems the logical site of composition of 2 Thessalonians.

For these reasons it appears that Paul composed 2 Thessalonians quite soon after 1 Thessalonians, perhaps within 12 months.¹ This would place the date of composition in the early 50's A.D., perhaps 51 A.D., and would make this the third of Paul's canonical writings assuming Galatians was his first.

"The external evidence for the Pauline authorship of 2 Thessalonians is stronger than for 1 Thessalonians."²

Purpose

Three purposes are evident from the contents of the epistle. Paul wrote to encourage the Thessalonian believers to continue to persevere in the face of continuing persecution (1:3-10). He also wanted to clarify events preceding the day of the Lord to dispel false teaching (2:1-12). Finally, he instructed the church how to deal with lazy Christians in their midst (3:6-15).

Message³

We could contrast 1 and 2 Thessalonians by saying that Paul wrote the first epistle primarily to comfort the Thessalonians whereas he wrote the second epistle primarily to correct them.

Paul had said some things in his first epistle from which his readers drew a false conclusion. He had said that Christ would return and His return could be very soon (1 Thess. 4:15-18). He also said the day of the Lord would come as a thief in the night, unexpectedly (1 Thess. 5:2).

In view of what Paul had taught the Thessalonians about the day of the Lord when he was with them (2 Thess. 2:5), they wondered if that day had already begun. They wondered if they were in the Tribulation and if the second coming of Christ was imminent. Teaching from several other sources that confirmed their suspicions (2 Thess. 2:2) intensified their questions about Paul's statements regarding future events that he had written in 1 Thessalonians.

The apostle wrote 2 Thessalonians to correct these erroneous ideas. The return of Christ of which Paul had written was not His second coming but the Rapture. While the day of the Lord would arrive unexpectedly it would be unexpected only by unbelievers. Several predicted events would precede its commencement.

The central message of this epistle is the truth about the day of the Lord.

Paul made an important distinction in this epistle about future events.

In 1 Thessalonians he taught that the Lord's return could take place very soon and that the day of the Lord would come as a thief in the night. Consequently he urged his readers to wait expectantly for the Lord (1 Thess. 4:16-17; 5:2).

In 2 Thessalonians he wrote that the day of the Lord cannot begin immediately. Therefore his readers should continue their work (2 Thess. 2). These statements may seem contradictory, but they are not.

Paul distinguished these two truths in 2 Thessalonians 2:1-2. The distinction is between "our gathering together to Him" (v. 1) and "the day of the Lord" (v. 2). He wrote verses 1-12 to show the difference between the first event and the second period.

Paul also gave definite new revelation about the day of the Lord.

He said that presently the mystery of lawlessness is at work (2:7). Paul did not say the mystery of "sin" or "evil" but "lawlessness." He did so because lawlessness (rebellion against divine law) is the root trouble with human life individually, socially, nationally, and in every other sphere. The "mystery" of lawlessness is the new revelation he expounded here concerning the course of lawlessness in the world and history, in space and time.

Second, he revealed that in the future God will remove what is presently restraining lawlessness (2:7). The restrainer probably refers to the Holy Spirit who indwells the church. Lawlessness produces corruption, but the church is the salt of the earth, and salt prevents the spread of corruption. Lawlessness also produces darkness, but the church is the light of the world, and light dispels darkness. Lawlessness is presently working, but what keeps it from running wild is the Holy Spirit's ministry through Christian men and women.

Third, Paul announced that in the future there will also be a crisis: the man of lawlessness will be revealed (2:8). When will God withdraw the Spirit from the world? He will do so when He withdraws the church from the world. When will He withdraw the church from the world? He will do so at "our gathering together to Him" (v. 1, i.e., the Rapture). After that, the human leader of lawlessness will appear. He will be entirely godless, but he will be such a remarkable character that he will convince most people that he is divine. This is the Antichrist.

Finally, Paul taught that after this crisis Jesus Christ will return to the earth to set up His kingdom (2:8). He will come when the man of lawlessness is the prominent character on the stage of history. However when Christ comes, He will destroy this Antichrist and curtail lawlessness (cf. Ps. 2).

In view of this revelation Paul called on his readers to do two things.

First, he called on them to be courageous. He did not want them to be mentally upset (2:2) but comforted and established (2:17). A clear understanding of the course of future events and the time of the Lord's return is essential for the mental and spiritual encouragement and stability of Christians. We need this to be courageous in the face of all the lawlessness we encounter in the world. Give this to the people you serve in ministry.

Second, Paul called his readers to responsible conduct. He instructed them to go on with life, to wait but also to work. Christians must behave responsibly by providing for our own needs. The hope of Christ's imminent return at the Rapture is no excuse for irresponsibility. Paul was not just urging activity (witnessing, praying, etc.) but specifically earning a living.

The gravest danger we face in our world today is not socialism or communism or fascism but lawlessness specifically refusal to submit to God's laws. The person who lives this way is anti-Christ.

We need to recognize this danger for what it is and to combat it by being salt and light in the world. However, we should also remember that Christ will eventually be victorious. This will keep us from becoming frantic and losing our stability.

Each of us also needs to make sure lawlessness does not characterize our personal lives. We must be submissive to divine rule if we would be consistent and confident Christians.

Outline⁴

I. Salutation 1:1-2

II. Commendation for past progress 1:3-12

A. Thanksgiving for growth 1:3-4

B. Encouragement to persevere 1:5-10

C. Prayer for success 1:11-12

III. Correction of present error 2:1-12

A. The beginning of the day of the Lord 2:1-5

B. The mystery of lawlessness 2:6-12

IV. Thanksgiving and prayer 2:13-17

A. Thanksgiving for calling 2:13-15

B. Prayer for strength 2:16-17

V. Exhortations for future growth 3:1-15

A. Reciprocal prayer 3:1-5

1. Prayer for the missionaries 3:1-2

2. Prayer for the Thessalonians 3:3-5

B. Church discipline 3:6-15

1. General principles respecting disorderly conduct 3:6-10

2. Specific instructions concerning the idle 3:11-13

3. Further discipline for the unrepentant 3:14-15

VI. Conclusion 3:16-18

Constable: 2 Thessalonians

2 Thessalonians

Bibliography

Barclay, William. The Letters to the Philippians, Colossians and Thessalonians. Daily Study Bible series. 2nd ed. and reprint ed. Edinburgh: Saint Andrew Press, 1963.

Baxter, J. Sidlow. Explore the Book. 6 vols. London: Marshall, Morgan & Scott, 1965.

Best, Ernest. A Commentary on the First and Second Epistles to the Thessalonians. Harper's New Testament Commentaries series. New York: Harper and Row, 1972.

Bicknell, E. J. The First and Second Epistles to the Thessalonians. Westminster Commentaries series. London: Methuen, 1932.

Bruce, F. F. 1 & 2 Thessalonians. Word Biblical Commentary series. Waco: Word Books, 1982.

Chafer, Lewis Sperry. Systematic Theology. 8 vols. Findlay, Oh.: Dunham Publishing Co., 1948.

Constable, Thomas L. "Analysis of Bible Books--New Testament." Paper submitted for course 686 Analysis of Bible Books--New Testament. Dallas Theological Seminary, January 1968.

_____. "2 Thessalonians." In Bible Knowledge Commentary: New Testament, pp. 713-25. Edited by John F. Walvoord and Roy B. Zuck. Wheaton: Scripture Press Publications, Victor Books, 1983.

Darby, John Nelson. Synopsis of the Books of the Bible. 5 vols. Revised ed. New York: Loizeaux Brothers Publishers, 1942.

Denney, James. The Epistles to the Thessalonians. The Expositors' Bible series. New York: Hodder and Stoughton, n.d.

Dictionary of the Apostolic Church, Edited by James Hastings. 1915 ed. S.v. "Thessalonians, Epistles to the," by F. S. Marsh.

Dictionary of the Bible, Edited by James Hastings. 1910 ed. S.v. "Thessalonians, Second Epistle to the," by W. Lock.

Donfield, Karl P. "The Cults of Thessalonica and the Thessalonian Correspondence." New Testament Studies 31:3 (July 1985):336-56.

Edgar, Thomas R. "An Exegesis of Rapture Passages." In Issues in Dispensationalism, pp. 203-23. Edited by Weslay R. Willis and John R. Master. Chicago: Moody Press, 1994.

English, E. Schuyler. Re-Thinking the Rapture. Travelers Rest, S.C.: Southern Bible, 1954.

Epp, Theodore H. "The Restrainer Removed." Good News Broadcaster, March 1975, pp. 20-22.

Fickett, Harold L. Keep On Keeping On! Bible Commentary for Laymen series. Glendale: Gospel Light Publications, Regal Books, 1977.

Frame, James Everett. A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Epistles of St. Paul to the Thessalonians. International Critical Commentary series. Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1912.

Gaebelein, Arno C. The Annotated Bible. 4 vols. Reprint ed. Chicago: Moody Press, and New York: Loizeaux Brothers, Inc., 1970.

A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament. By C. G. Wilke. Revised by C. L. Wilibald Grimm. Translated, revised and enlarged by Joseph Henry Thayer, 1889.

Gundry, Robert H. The Church and the Tribulation. Contemporary Evangelical Perspectives series. Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, Academic Books, 1973.

Guthrie, Donald. New Testament Introduction. 3 vols. 2nd ed. London: Tyndale Press, 1966.

Hendriksen, William. New Testament Commentary: Exposition of I and II Thessalonians. Reprint ed. Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1974.

Hiebert, D. Edmond. The Thessalonian Epistles. Chicago: Moody Press, 1971.

Hodges, Zane C. Grace in Eclipse. Dallas: Redencion Viva, 1981.

Hubbard, David A. "The Second Epistle to the Thessalonians." In Wycliffe Bible Commentary, pp. 1361-66. Edited by Charles F. Pfeiffer and Everett F. Harrison. Chicago: Moody Press, 1962.

International Standard Bible Encyclopedia. Edited by James Orr. 1957 ed. S.v. "Thessalonians, The Second Epistle of Paul to the," by M. N. Tod.

Ironside, Harry A. Addresses on the First and Second Epistles to Thessalonians. New York: Loizeaux Brothers, 1959.

Kitchens, Ted G. "Perimeters of Corrective Church Discipline." Bibliotheca Sacra 148:590 (April-June 1991):201-13.

Ladd, George E. The Blessed Hope. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1956.

Laney, J. Carl. "The Biblical Practice of Church Discipline." Bibliotheca Sacra 143:572 (October-December 1986):353-64.

Lange, John Peter, ed. Commentary on the Holy Scriptures. 12 vols. Reprint ed. Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1960. Vol. 11: Galatians-Hebrews, by Otto Schmoller, Karl Braune, C. A. Auberlen, C. J. Riggenbach, J. J. Van Oosterzee, and Carl Bernhard Moll. Translated by C. C. Starburk, M. B. Riddle, Horatio B. Hackett, John Lillie, E. A. Washburn, E. Harwood, George E. Day, and A. C. Kendrick.

Lenski, Richard C. H. The Interpretation of St. Paul's Epistles to the Colossians, to the Thessalonians, to Timothy, to Titus and to Philemon. Reprint ed. Minneapolis: Augsburg Publishing House, 1964.

Lewis, Gordon R. "Biblical Evidence for Pretribulationism." Bibliotheca Sacra 125:499 (July-September 1968):216-26.

Lightfoot, J. B. Notes on the Epistles of St. Paul. Reprint ed. Winona Lake, In.: Alpha Publications, n.d.

Lowery, David K. "A Theology of Paul's Missionary Epistles." In A Biblical Theology of the New Testament, pp. 243-97. Edited by Roy B. Zuck. Chicago: Moody Press, 1994.

Manson, Thomas W. "St. Paul in Greece: The Letters to the Thessalonians." Bulletin of the John Rylands Library 35 (1952-53):428-47.

_____. Studies in the Gospels and Epistles. Manchester: University of Manchester, 1962.

Marshall, I. Howard. 1 and 2 Thessalonians. New Century Bible Commentary series. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., and London: Marshall, Morgan & Scott Pub. Ltd., 1983.

Martin, D. Michael. 1, 2 Thessalonians. The New American Commentary series. N.c.: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 1995.

McCall, Thomas S. "How Soon the Tribulation Temple?" Bibliotheca Sacra 128:512 (October-December 1971):341-51.

_____. "Problems in Rebuilding the Tribulation Temple." Bibliotheca Sacra 129:513 (January-March 1972):75-80.

McLean, John A. "Another Look at Rosenthal's Pre-Wrath Rapture.'" Bibliotheca Sacra 148:592 (October-December 1991):387-98.

McNeile, A. H. An Introduction to the Study of the New Testament. 2nd ed. revised by C. S. C. Williams. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1965.

Milligan, George. St. Paul's Epistles to the Thessalonians. Evangelical Masterworks series. Reprint ed. Old Tappan, NJ: Fleming H. Revell, Co., n.d.

Morgan, G. Campbell. Living Messages of the Books of the Bible. 2 vols. New York: Fleming H. Revell Co., 1912.

Morris, Leon. The Epistles of Paul to the Thessalonians. Tyndale New Testament Commentary series. London: Tyndale Press, 1966.

_____. The First and Second Epistles to the Thessalonians. New International Commentary on the New Testament series. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1959.

_____. The Gospel According to John: Revised Edition. New International Commentary on the New Testament series. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1995.

Peterson, Robert A. "Does the Bible Teach Annihilationism?" Bibliotheca Sacra 156:621 (January-March 1999):13-27.

Powell, Charles E. "The Identity of the Restrainer' in 2 Thessalonians 2:6-7." Bibliotheca Sacra 154:615 (July-September 1997):320-32.

Poythress, Vern S. "2 Thessalonians 1 Supports Amillennialism." Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 37:4 (December 1994):529-38.

Reese, Alexander. The Approaching Advent of Christ. London: Marshall, Morgan and Scott, 1937; reprint ed., Grand Rapids: Grand Rapids International Publications, 1975.

Rice, John R. The Coming Kingdom of Christ. Wheaton, Il.: Sword of the Lord Publishers, 1945.

Robertson, Archibald Thomas. Word Pictures in the New Testament. 6 vols. Nashville: Broadman Press, 1931.

Rosenthal, Marvin. The Pre-Wrath Rapture of the Church. Nashville: Thomas Nelson Publishers, 1990.

Ryrie, Charles Caldwell. First and Second Thessalonians. Moody Colportage Library series. Chicago: Moody Press, 1959.

Showers, Renald E. Maranatha Our Lord, Come: A Definitive Study of the Rapture of the Church. Bellmawr, Pa.: Friends of Israel Gospel Ministry, 1995.

Stanton, Gerald B. Kept from the Hour. Fourth ed. Miami Springs, Fl.: Schoettle Publishing Co., 1991.

Theological Dictionary of the New Testament. S.v. "olethpos," by J. Schneider, 5 (1967):168-69.

Thiessen, Henry Clarence. Introduction to the New Testament. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1962.

Thomas, Robert L. "1 Thessalonians." In Ephesians--Philemon. Vol. 11 of Expositor's Bible Commentary. 12 vols. Edited by Frank E. Gaebelein and J. D. Douglas. Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1978.

Thornton, Larry R. "Salvation in the Tribulation in Light of God's Working unto Delusion'." Calvary Baptist Theological Journal 3:2 (Fall 1987):26-49.

Walvoord, John F. The Blessed Hope and the Tribulation. Contemporary Evangelical Perspectives series. Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1976.

_____. The Holy Spirit. 3rd ed. Findlay, Oh.: Dunham Publishing Co., 1958.

_____. The Millennial Kingdom. Revised ed. Findlay, Oh.: Dunham Publishing Co., 1963

_____. The Thessalonian Epistles. Study Guide series. Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1979.

_____. "Will Israel Build a Temple in Jerusalem?" Bibliotheca Sacra 125:498 (April-June 1968):99-106.

Wanamaker, Charles A. The Epistles to the Thessalonians. New International Greek Testament Commentary series. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., and Exeter, Eng.: Paternoster Press, 1990.

Wiersbe, Warren W. Be Ready. BE Books series. Wheaton: Scripture Press Publications, Victor Books, 1980.

Wuest, Kenneth S. Prophetic Light in the Present Darkness. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1955.

Copyright 2003 by Thomas L. Constable

Haydock: 2 Thessalonians (Book Introduction)

THE SECOND

EPISTLE OF ST. PAUL, THE APOSTLE,

TO THE THESSALONIANS.

INTRODUCTION.

In this epistle St. Paul admonishes the Thessalonians to be constant in the faith of Christ, and not to be terrified by the insinuations of false teachers, telling them that the day of judgment was near at hand, as there must come many signs and wonders before it. He bids them to hold firm the traditions received from him, whether by word or by epistle; and shews them how they may be certain of his letters by the manner he writes. This epistle was written soon after the former, and also from Corinth, about A.D. 52. (Challoner; Witham) --- From the context we learn that the present is a continuation of the former epistle. He not only rectifies wrong impressions caused by his former letter, but finding that those indolent characters whom he had reprimanded were no ways corrected, he determines to reprimand them still more severely in this letter, which he tells us he writes because he has it not in his power to visit, as he could wish, the Thessalonians.

====================

Gill: 2 Thessalonians (Book Introduction)

INTRODUCTION TO 2 THESSALONIANS

This second epistle was written, not from Athens, as the subscription testifies, nor from Rome, as Athanasius ^a supposes; but from Corinth, from whence was sent the former, and where the apostle and Timothy, and Silvanus met; and which was sent about half a year after the other. The design of which is to comfort and support the Thessalonians under the afflictions and persecutions they endured for the sake of the Gospel; and to rectify a mistake they had gone into, and which might be occasioned by what the apostle had said in his former epistle, concerning the second coming of Christ, as though it was just at hand; which might lead them to neglect their worldly business, and duties of civil life, and give the enemies of the Gospel an advantage against the whole of it as false, should not this prove true; as also to exhort this church to take notice of disorderly persons such as were idle, and busy bodies, and withdraw from them, and remove them from their communion, as being not only burdensome to them, but a reproach to their profession.

Gill: 2 Thessalonians 2 (Chapter Introduction)

INTRODUCTION TO 2 THESSALONIANS 2

In this chapter the apostle guards against a notion, as if the second coming of Christ was at hand; declares that, previous to it, there must be a great apostasy, and a revelation of antichrist; comforts the saints against fears of being included in this defection; exhorts them to stand fast in the faith, and closes this chapter with petitions for them. He entreats them in a most tender and solemn manner not to imagine that the day of Christ was at hand, and that they would not be disturbed and moved at it; and points unto the several ways, and cautions against them, they might be imposed upon and deceived by men with respect to it, 2Th 2:1 and assigns his reasons why it could not be yet, because before this time there was to be a general apostasy, and antichrist must appear; whom from his character, he calls the man of sin, and from his end, the son of perdition; and describes him as an opposer of God, an exalter of himself above all that is called God, as sitting in the temple of God and declaring himself to be God, 2Th 2:3 of which things he had told them before, 2Th 2:5 nor were they ignorant of what at present hindered the revelation of the man of sin, who was then in being, and was working and growing up apace; only there was something (the Roman empire) which hindered, and would continue to do so, until the fixed time of his revelation was up, 2Th 2:6 when be should be manifest; though he should not always continue, being to be consumed and destroyed by the breath of Christ's mouth, and the splendour of his coming, 2Th 2:8 and the appearance of antichrist in the world, being a matter of considerable importance, it is described by being after the working of Satan, and as attended with lying and false miracles, and with all deceitful and unrighteous doctrines and practices; which reprobate men would be left to give into, as a punishment of their not receiving cordially the truth of the Gospel; upon which account God would give them to such judicial blindness, as to give credit to a lie, which would bring on their final damnation, they not believing the truth, but taking pleasure in unrighteousness, 2Th 2:9, but lest this account of things should be discouraging to the saints at Thessalonica, the apostle styles them brethren; asserts them to be the beloved of the Lord; gives an instance of it, for which he gives thanks, namely, their election of God; the date of which was from everlasting; the means sanctification of the Spirit, and belief of the truth; the end salvation by Jesus Christ; and the evidence of which was their effectual calling by the Gospel, to the obtaining of the glory of Christ, 2Th 2:13 and then he exhorts them to stand fast in the doctrines that had been taught them, either in an epistolary way, or by the ministry of the word, 2Th 2:15 and concludes the chapter with petitions for them made to God the Father, and to Christ who had loved and comforted them, and given them good hope of everlasting things; that they might be comforted more and more, and be established in every good doctrine and practice, 2Th 2:16.

College: 2 Thessalonians (Book Introduction)

INTRODUCTION

The pressures of persecution, apparent in 1 Thessalonians, have intensified in this letter. In its three brief chapters the reader perceives the vital importance for suffering believers of confident hope in the Lord's return. Likewise intensified is the problem of idleness. In the face of abuses of Christian generosity, 2 Thessalonians gives a sharp reminder of the individual Christian's duty to live as a responsible member of the community, hard-working and self-supporting.

Much of what was said about the circumstances and organization of 1 Thessalonians can also be affirmed of the second letter (see introduction to 1 Thessalonians above). But unlike 1 Thessalonians, this letter presents two major critical problems. Brief attention will be given to these below.

AUTHORSHIP

Unlike 1 Thessalonians, the second letter has widely been taken as a pseudepigraph, composed after Paul's death by one of his followers who used 1 Thessalonians as a model. Several lines of evidence have been cited to support the hypothesis that 2 Thessalonians is not an authentic letter of Paul.

One of these concerns the letter's eschatology. While 1 Thessalonians emphasized that the Lord's return was imminent, that is, that it could occur at any time (5:1-11), 2 Thessalonians appears to propose a series of preliminary signs which must occur before the Lord can return (2:1-12). If this is indeed the case, then, it is argued, that the tension between the two letters is such that Paul could not have written both. More particularly, it is often argued that the less imminent expectation of 2 Thessalonians reflects a later period in the life of the church, when the vivid expectation that the Lord would return within the lifetime of the first generation of Christians had been disappointed. If so, then it is clearly a production of the generation after the apostle Paul.

Secondly, it is argued that the tone of 2 Thessalonians is considerably colder and more formal than 1 Thessalonians. As an example, "we ought to thank" in 2 Thess 1:3; 2:13 is regarded as less warm than "we thank" in 1 Thess 1:2. Likewise, the repeated use of "command" in 2 Thess 3:6, 12 is said to reflect a less intimate relationship between the writer and the readers. Such a shift in tone is thought to be unlikely if Paul had written both letters, especially if 1 Thessalonians was written first, but is entirely to be expected if the second letter was a pseudepigraph.

Thirdly, the background of the readers appears to be different. 1 Thess 1:9 appears to indicate a predominantly Gentile audience, but in 2 Thessalonians references to the final judgment (1:6-10) and the man of lawlessness (2:1-12) appear to assume knowledge that could be expected only of Jews. It is consequently argued that the second letter was not written for the same church, indicating that the addressee and so also the author named in the salutation are fictions.

Combined with these concerns is the literary style of 2 Thessalonians. In some respects it closely resembles 1 Thessalonians, following a similar outline (including a double thanksgiving: 1 Thess 1:2-10; 2:13-16; 2Thess 2 Thess 1:3-12; 2:13-17) and discussing similar themes (eschatology, idleness). However, it has been argued that the sentence structure of 2 Thessalonians is significantly different from the undisputed letters of Paul. In particular, 2 Thess 2:3-12 is a more complex sentence than is found elsewhere in Paul's letters, constructions with the genitive are more frequent, and subordinating conjunctions are more numerous. Likewise it is argued that a number of terms and concepts from Paul's authentic letters are used in a different sense in 2 Thessalonians. The combination of similarity and dissimilarity is said to point to a post-Pauline imitator, who at some points incorporated elements of Paul's style and substance from 1 Thessalonians and at others reflected followed his own course.

The force of these arguments is considerable, and a large number of contemporary scholars have been persuaded by them to reject Pauline authorship of this letter. However, the idea that 2 Thessalonians is pseudepigraphical is itself problematic. It is first of all difficult to understand why someone would write 2 Thessalonians and ascribe it to Paul, since presumably it contained nothing so controversial as to demand the apostle's authority for its acceptance. Furthermore, if written by a later imitator, that person knew only 1 Thessalonians, since the major parallels are only with that letter. Such a situation would be surprising for a second-generation disciple of Paul. The reference to the temple in 2:4 gives no indication that the Jerusalem temple has been destroyed by the Romans, again surprising if the letter were written near the end of the first century when the fall of Jerusalem was well known. Furthermore, 3:6-15 give every appearance of having been written to a specific congregation in response to a particular problem. It would be most unusual for a letter to be written to specific church in the name of Paul after his death and not be detected as a pseudepigraph. And if all in the church recognized the fiction and accepted it as such, we must explain how the later church forgot the origins of the letter, since all external evidence affirms that Paul is the author (Marcion, c. A.D. 150, and the Muratorian Canon, c. A.D. 180, both ascribe it to Paul). These considerations make the hypothesis of pseudepigraphy less than likely.

In fact, each argument for pseudepigraphy can be explained on the hypothesis that Paul wrote 2 Thessalonians himself. The eschatological tension in fact has less to do with a lessening of expectancy than is often allowed. Exegesis of 2:1-12 in the comments below will indicate that what Paul discusses here is probably not a series of preliminary signs but the present reality that evil and the Evil One appear to dominate and that such dominance is itself proof that the Lord has not yet returned. In this case, there is absolutely no tension between the eschatology of the first and second letters. However, even if this interpretation should be wrong, it is not impossible that Paul would express a different perspective on the Lord's coming in 2 Thessalonians and not view it as contradictory, just as he does in 1 Cor 15:1-58, which stresses the general resurrection, and 2 Cor 5:1-10, which stresses individual immortality.

Likewise, the change in tone between the two letters can be explained by the change in circumstances. In 1 Thessalonians part of Paul's concern was to reassure the readers of his affection for them despite his absence. That need having been met, the second letter - preoccupied with the persecution of the church, the problem about the Lord's return and the idleness of some members - reflects less of the personal warmth emphasized in the first. Furthermore, if Paul used a different amanuensis for each letter, or if Silas and Timothy had different roles in the composition of each letter, the tone and style could easily have changed.

The change from a Gentile to a Jewish background is more apparent than real. As noted in the introduction to 1 Thessalonians, that letter includes a number of phrases which assume knowledge of the Old Testament and Judaism. The Jewish orientation of the second letter is more explicit but hardly necessitates a different audience. This observation also obviates the need for other hypotheses, such as that Paul sent the two letters to two different factions of the church, one Gentile and the other Jewish, or that he sent the first letter to the church at large and the second to the leaders of the church.

The stylistic differences between 2 Thessalonians and the other letters of Paul are real, but they can be exaggerated. The complexity of sentences and concentration of subordinating conjunctions are in fact not two matters but one, since complex sentences require subordinating conjunctions. The sentence of 1:3-12 is exceptional, but it is approximated in Ephesians and Colossians. The authorship of those letters is also disputed, but to base an argument for one letter's inauthenticity on its similarity with another questioned letter is to build a supposition on another supposition. It would be fairer to admit that in a short letter like 2 Thessalonians, a few unusual expressions may create a false impression of stylistic variance. Furthermore, it is admitted by all that Paul's style changed with each letter. Only in Romans, for example, do we find the rhetorical question, "What shall we say then?" (3:5; 4:1; 6:1; 7:7; 8:31; 9:14, 30), and no one disputes the authenticity of Romans on that basis. Alleged differences in the use of key terms and presentation of concepts have likewise been exaggerated. Paul's usage elsewhere is often more flexible than some critics will allow. And 2 Thessalonians contains some Paulinisms which would have been difficult for an imitator to compose. The combination of similarities and differences between the two Thessalonians letters and between the second and the rest of the Pauline corpus is at least as consistent with the hypothesis that Paul wrote both under changing circumstances as it is with the hypothesis of a pseudepigrapher.

Thus, though the controversy over the authorship of this letter is likely to continue among scholars, the arguments against Paul's authorship are not sufficient to overturn the testimony of the letter itself and of the early church. By nature of the case, evidence to prove the authenticity of an ancient document always falls short of absolute proof. But those who have accepted 2 Thessalonians as a genuine letter of Paul can do so with integrity, knowing that the balance of evidence favors their conclusion.

ORDER AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF WRITING

The traditional assumption has always been that 2 Thessalonians was written not long after 1 Thessalonians, while Paul was still in Corinth. Paul had apparently received a report, perhaps from Timothy after the delivery of the first letter, of ongoing problems in the Thessalonian church. The persecution had not abated, misunderstandings about the Lord's return continued, and the willfully idle had not repented. Therefore, Paul composed a second letter to address the developing situation, probably only months after writing the first.

There have been several scholars who have questioned the traditional order, however, postulating that 2 Thessalonians was in fact written first. The traditional order of Paul's letters, these have argued, is based not on chronology but length, longer letters of Paul being placed before shorter ones in the canon. Therefore, internal considerations alone, the evidence of the letters themselves, must determine the order of writing.

The most recent and important advocate of the priority of 2 Thessalonians is Charles Wanamaker. His argument, which in the main follows a line marked out by others, may be summarized as follows. First, the persecution of 2 Thess 1:4-7 appears to be a matter of the past in 1 Thess 2:14. Secondly, the idlers of 2 Thess 3:6-15 appear to be a new problem, while 1 Thess 4:10-12 and 5:14 address it as something well known and already under control. Thirdly, the signature of 2 Thess 3:17 appears to be more fitting in Paul's first letter to the church. Fourth, the eschatological teaching of 1 Thess 4:13-5:11, especially in light of the remark in 5:1 that the readers had no need of such instruction because they had received it before, is more coherently explained if it is an elaboration on 2 Thess 2:1-12, especially if some implications of that passage had been misunderstood. On the other hand, if the church had already received 1 Thess 4:13-5:11, it is difficult to see how they would have concluded that the day of the Lord had already come (2 Thess 2:2), since the dead had not yet been raised and united with the living in the Lord's presence (1 Thess 4:17). Therefore, Wanamaker argues with earlier advocates of the hypothesis that 2 Thessalonians was written by Paul after he received a vague report about problems in the Thessalonian church and was delivered by Timothy in the visit described in 1 Thess 3:1-10.

While Wanamaker has succeeded in showing how little evidence there actually is for the priority of 1 Thessalonians, the case for the priority of 2 Thessalonians is far from proved. External evidence must be weighed also: Marcion apparently referred to 1 Thessalonians as the first letter despite the fact that he did not arrange his canon by length. As far as internal matters are concerned, if 2 Thessalonians was the first letter, it is surprising that Paul makes no reference to it in 1 Thessalonians as a part of his passionate discussion of his prior work with the Thessalonian church (2:1-12) and his attempts to return to them since his departure (2:17-20). Wanamaker suggests that the mention of Timothy's visit may be a tacit reference to it, since Timothy can be assumed to have carried some letter from Paul on this visit. Still, one might expect a more specific mention of so substantial a letter as 2 Thessalonians had it been written first. On the other hand, the references to letters in 2 Thess 2:2, 15; 3:17 are at least consistent with the idea that 1 Thessalonians had already been received, though they do not demand it.

If 1 Thessalonians is prior, as the slight balance of probability suggests, we can assume that the persecution of the church, which may have abated after Paul's departure, has heated up again, or at least that the church is in greater turmoil because of it. Likewise, we must assume that the church's misunderstanding of the Lord's return in 2:2 occurred despite the logical force of 1 Thess 4:13-18. Also, the idle who were warned briefly in 1 Thess 4:11-12 and 5:14 did not heed that warning. Such developments will surprise those who assume that human behavior is always reasonable and orderly, but those who have experienced the give and take of pastoral leadership will recognize that churches and Christians, like stocks, seldom move in a straight line. Against such a background Paul dictated his second letter, seeking to correct the church's course and reinforce its growth.

THEOLOGICAL VALUE

2 Thessalonians focuses primarily on three issues: persecution, the Lord's return, and the problem of idleness. Each has remarkable relevance for today's church.

Persecution is perhaps less a part of the experience of Christians in North America than in other parts of the world. Nevertheless, for many Christians it remains a real threat. More broadly, all believers experience the hostility of unbelievers at various points, and all can be subject to the hurt of their ridicule, even if they are relatively safe from physical violence. 2 Thessalonians provides the important reminder that God notices such suffering and promises to bring vindication for his people. The suffering of the church will one day end.

Likewise, the pervasive dominance of evil, obvious to every modern observer, will one day end as well. Whatever the precise nature of the "man of lawlessness" (2:3), Paul certainly focuses attention on his present activity (2:9-12). Christians who wonder whether their faith is true when they see the opponents of Christianity with the upper hand have their answer in this letter. Evil will continue to run rampant in this age, but when Christ returns, he will utterly destroy every manifestation of it and the One who stands behind it. The goodness and faithfulness of God can be trusted to answer every aspect of injustice in this age.

Unemployment, underemployment and wide gaps in income are no less a social reality now than they were for Paul's readers. And so the need for Christian charity continues as it did in the first century. But the dangers inherent in such sharing are still real as well. Paul's reminders about the need for personal responsibility and self-support (3:6-12), coupled with the reminder to continue in good works of generosity (3:13) are messages to be heeded as today's church considers its role in addressing the pressing issues of poverty and the failures of the secular welfare state.

The observation that problems had intensified since Paul wrote his first letter contains a pertinent message in itself. Even in Paul's ministry, the life of the church was characterized by trouble as much as progress. Yet through such trouble the work and will of God are accomplished. Christians frustrated by the one-step-forward-two-steps-back trajectory of the church can take heart that in similar circumstances the great apostle still found much for which to give thanks and boast (1:3-4; 2:13-14). God's will, which will be fully realized only when Christ returns, is even now being worked out in the life of the church, even when outwardly it appears defeated.

-College Press New Testament Commentary: with the NIV

College: 2 Thessalonians (Outline)

OUTLINE

I. GREETING - 1:1-2

II. OPENING THANKSGIVING, ENCOURAGEMENT AND PRAYER - 1:3-12

A. Thanksgiving for the Thessalonians' Growth and Endurance in Persecution- 1:3-4

B. Encouragement in Light of God's Judgment - 1:5-10

C. The Content of Paul's Prayer - 1:11-12

III. INSTRUCTION ON THE LORD'S RETURN - 2:1-12

A. The Day of the Lord Not Yet Present - 2:1-2

B. The Apostasy and the Man of Lawlessness - 2:3-12

1. The Apostasy and the Revelation of the Man of Lawlessness - 2:3

2. A Description of the Man of Lawlessness - 2:4

3. Reminder of Oral Instruction on the Subject - 2:5

4. The One Who Restrains/Prevails - 2:6-10

5. God's Consequent Actions - 2:11-12

IV. RENEWED THANKSGIVING, ENCOURAGEMENT AND PRAYER - 2:13-17

A. Thanksgiving for the Salvation of the Thessalonians- 2:13-14

B. Encouragement to Remain Faithful to the Traditions Delivered by Paul - 2:15

C. Prayer for the Lord's Encouragement and Strength - 2:16-17

V. EXHORTATIONS - 3:1-16

A. General Exhortations - 3:1-5

B. Exhortations Regarding Church Discipline - 3:6-15

1. Exclusion of the Willfully Idle - 3:6-13

2. Exclusion of the Disobedient - 3:14-15

VI. CONCLUSION - 3:16-18

-College Press New Testament Commentary: with the NIV