Text -- 2 Thessalonians 2:3 (NET)

2:3 Let no one deceive you in any way. For that day will not arrive until the rebellion comes and the man of lawlessness is revealed, the son of destruction.

Commentary -- Word/Phrase Notes (per phrase)

Robertson: 2Th 2:3

Let no man beguile you in any wise ( mē tis humas exapatēsēi kata mēdena tropon ).

First aorist active subjunctive of exapataō (old verb to deceive, strengthened form of simple verb apataō ) with double negative (mē tis , mēdena ) in accord with regular Greek idiom as in 1Co 16:11 rather than the aorist imperative which does occur sometimes in the third person as in Mar 13:15 (mē katabatō ). Paul broadens the warning to go beyond conversation and letter. He includes "tricks"of any kind. It is amazing how gullible some of the saints are when a new deceiver pulls off some stunts in religion.

Robertson: 2Th 2:3

For it will not be ( hoti ).

There is an ellipse here of ouk estai (or genēsetai ) to be supplied after hoti . Westcott and Hort make an anacoluthon at the end of 2Th 2:4. The meaning is clear. Hoti is causal, because, but the verb is understood. The second coming not only is not "imminent,"but will not take place before certain important things take place, a definite rebuff to the false enthusiasts of 2Th 2:2.

Robertson: 2Th 2:3

Except the falling away come first ( ean mē elthēi hē apostasia prōton ).

Negative condition of the third class, undetermined with prospect of determination and the aorist subjunctive. Apostasia is the late form of apostasis and is our word apostasy. Plutarch uses it of political revolt and it occurs in 1 Maccabees 2:15 about Antiochus Epiphanes who was enforcing the apostasy from Judaism to Hellenism. In Jos 22:22 it occurs for rebellion against the Lord. It seems clear that the word here means a religious revolt and the use of the definite article (hē ) seems to mean that Paul had spoken to the Thessalonians about it. The only other New Testament use of the word is in Act 21:21 where it means apostasy from Moses. It is not clear whether Paul means revolt of the Jews from God, of Gentiles from God, of Christians from God, or of the apostasy that includes all classes within and without the body of Christians. But it is to be first (prōton ) before Christ comes again. Note this adverb when only two events are compared (cf. Act 1:1).

Robertson: 2Th 2:3

And the man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition ( kai apokaluphthēi ho anthrōpos tēs anomias , ho huios tēs apōleias ).

First aorist passive subjunctive after ean mē and same condition as with elthēi . The use of this verb apokaluptō , like apokalupsin of the second coming in 2Th 1:7, seems to note the superhuman character (Milligan) of the event and the same verb is repeated in 2Th 2:6, 2Th 2:8. The implication is that the man of sin is hidden somewhere who will be suddenly manifested just as false apostles pose as angels of light (2Co 11:13.), whether the crowning event of the apostasy or another name for the same event. Lightfoot notes the parallel between the man of sin, of whom sin is the special characteristic (genitive case, a Hebraism for the lawless one in 2Th 2:8) and Christ. Both Christ and the adversary of Christ are revealed, there is mystery about each, both make divine claims (2Th 2:4). He seems to be the Antichrist of 1Jo 2:18. The terrible phrase, the son of perdition, is applied to Judas in Joh 17:12 (like Judas doomed to perdition), but here to the lawless one (ho anomos , 2Th 2:8), who is not Satan, but some one definite person who is doing the work of Satan. Note the definite article each time.

Vincent: 2Th 2:3

Deceive ( ἐξαπατήσῃ )

Better beguile ; since the word means not only making a false impression , but actually leading astray . Except there come a falling away. Before except insert in translation the day shall not come . Such ellipses are common in Paul.

Vincent: 2Th 2:3

Falling away ( ἀποστασία )

Only here and Act 21:21. Comp. lxx, Jos 22:22; 2Ch 29:19.

Vincent: 2Th 2:3

The man of sin - the son of perdition ( ὁ ἄνθρωπος τῆς ἀνομίας, ὁ υἱὸς τῆς ἀπωλείας )

See on children of light , 1Th 5:5. The phrase man of sin ( lawlessness ) does not occur elsewhere, either in N.T. or lxx. Son of perdition is found Joh 17:12, o lxx: τέκνα ἄπωλείας children of perdition (A.V. transgression ), Isa 57:4. The man of sin has been thought to refer to Caligula, Titus, Simon Magus, Nero, the Pope of Rome, Luther, Mahomet, etc.

Wesley: 2Th 2:3

From the pure faith of the gospel, come first. This began even in the apostolic age. But the man of sin, the son of perdition - Eminently so called, is not come yet. However, in many respects, the Pope has an indisputable claim to those titles. He is, in an emphatical sense, the man of sin, as he increases all manner of sin above measure. And he is, too, properly styled, the son of perdition, as he has caused the death of numberless multitudes, both of his opposers and followers, destroyed innumerable souls, and will himself perish everlastingly. He it is that opposeth himself to the emperor, once his rightful sovereign; and that exalteth himself above all that is called God, or that is worshipped - Commanding angels, and putting kings under his feet, both of whom are called gods in scripture; claiming the highest power, the highest honour; suffering himself, not once only, to be styled God or vice - god. Indeed no less is implied in his ordinary title, "Most Holy Lord," or, "Most Holy Father." So that he sitteth - Enthroned.

Wesley: 2Th 2:3

Mentioned Rev 11:1.

Wesley: 2Th 2:3

Claiming the prerogatives which belong to God alone.

JFB: 2Th 2:3

Greek, "in any manner." Christ, in Mat 24:4, gives the same warning in connection with the same event. He had indicated three ways (2Th 2:2) in which they might be deceived (compare other ways, 2Th 2:9, and Mat 24:5, Mat 24:24).

JFB: 2Th 2:3

Rather as the Greek, "the falling away," or "apostasy," namely, the one of which "I told you" before (2Th 2:5), "when I was yet with you," and of which the Lord gave some intimation (Mat 24:10-12; Joh 5:43).

JFB: 2Th 2:3

The Greek order is, "And there have been revealed the man of sin." As Christ was first in mystery, and afterwards revealed (1Ti 3:16), so Antichrist (the term used 1Jo 2:18; 1Jo 4:3) is first in mystery, and afterwards shall be developed and revealed (2Th 2:7-9). As righteousness found its embodiment in Christ, "the Lord our righteousness," so "sin" shall have its embodiment in "the man of sin." The hindering power meanwhile restrains its manifestation; when that shall be removed, then this manifestation shall take place. The articles, "the apostasy," and "the man of sin," may also refer to their being well known as foretold in Dan 7:8, Dan 7:25, "the little horn speaking great words against the Most High, and thinking to change times and laws"; and Dan 11:36, the wilful king who "shall exalt and magnify himself above every god, and shall speak marvellous things against the God of gods; neither shall he regard any god."

JFB: 2Th 2:3

A title applied besides to Judas (the traitor, Joh 17:12), and to none else. Antichrist (the second "beast" coming up out of the earth); therefore he shall at first be "like a lamb, while he speaks as a dragon" (Rev 13:11); "coming in peaceably and by flatteries," "working deceitfully," but "his heart shall be against the holy covenant" (Dan 11:21, Dan 11:23, Dan 11:28, Dan 11:30). Seeds of "the falling away" soon appear (1Ti 4:1-3), but the full development and concentration of these anti-Christian elements in one person are still to appear. Contrast the King of Zion's coming as JESUS: (1) righteous or just; (2) having salvation; (3) lowly; whereas Antichrist is: (1) "the man of (the embodiment of) sin; (2) the son of perdition; (3) exalting himself above all that is worshipped. He is the son of perdition, as consigning many to it, and finally doomed to it himself (Rev 17:8, Rev 17:11). "He whose essence and inheritance is perdition" [ALFORD]. As "the kingdom of heaven" is first brought before us in the abstract, then in the concrete, the King, the Lord Jesus; so here, first we have (2Th 2:7) "the mystery of iniquity," then "the iniquitous one" (2Th 2:8). Doubtless "the apostasy" of Romanism (the abstract) is one of the greatest instances of the working of the mystery of iniquity, and its blasphemous claims for the Pope (the concrete) are forerunners of the final concentration of blasphemy in the man of sin, who shall not merely, as the Pope, usurp God's honor as vicegerent of God, but oppose God openly at last.

Clarke: 2Th 2:3

Except there come a falling away first - We have the original word αποστασια in our word apostasy; and by this term we understand a dereliction of the essential principles of religious truth - either a total abandonment of Christianity itself, or such a corruption of its doctrines as renders the whole system completely inefficient to salvation. But what this apostasy means is a question which has not yet, and perhaps never will be, answered to general satisfaction. At present I shall content myself with making a few literal remarks on this obscure prophecy, and afterwards give the opinions of learned men on its principal parts

Clarke: 2Th 2:3

That man of sin - Ὁ ανθρωπος της ἁμαρτιας· The same as the Hebrew expresses by איש און ish aven , and איש בליעל ish beliyaal ; the perverse, obstinate, and iniquitous man. It is worthy of remark that, among the rabbins, Samael, or the devil, is called איש בליעל ואיש און ish beliyaal veish aven , the man of Belial, and the man of iniquity; and that these titles are given to Adam after his fall

Clarke: 2Th 2:3

The son of perdition - Ὁ υἱος της απωλειας· The son of destruction; the same epithet that is given to Judas Iscariot, Joh 17:12 (note). The son of perdition, and the man of sin, or, as some excellent MSS. and versions, with several of the fathers, read, ανθρωπος της ανομιας, the lawless man, see 2Th 2:8, must mean the same person or thing. It is also remarkable that the wicked Jews are styled by Isaiah, Isa 1:4, בנים משחיתים benim mashchithim , "children of perdition;"persons who destroy themselves and destroy others.

Calvin: 2Th 2:3

3.Let no man deceive you. That they may not groundlessly promise themselves the arrival in so short a time of the joyful day of redemption, he presents to them a melancholy prediction as to the future scattering of the Church. This discourse entirely corresponds with that which Christ held in the presence of his disciples, when they had asked him respecting the end of the world. For he exhorts them to prepare themselves for enduring hard conflicts, ⁶³⁹ (Mat 24:6,) and after he has discoursed of the most grievous and previously unheard of calamities, by which the earth was to be reduced almost to a desert, he adds, that the end is not yet, but that these things are the beginnings of sorrows. In the same way, Paul declares that believers must exercise warfare for a long period, before gaining a triumph.

We have here, however, a remarkable passage, and one that is in the highest degree worthy of observation. This was a grievous and dangerous temptation, which might shake even the most confirmed, and make them lose their footing — to see the Church, which had by means of such labors been raised up gradually and with difficulty to some considerable standing, fall down suddenly, as if torn down by a tempest. Paul, accordingly, fortifies beforehand the minds, not merely of the Thessalonians, but of all the pious, that when the Church should come to be in a scattered condition, they might not be alarmed, as though it were a thing that was new and unlooked for.

As, however, interpreters have twisted this passage in various ways, we must first of all endeavor to ascertain Paul’s true meaning. He says that the day of Christ will not come, until the world has fallen into apostasy, and the reign of Antichrist has obtained a footing in the Church; for as to the exposition that some have given of this passage, as referring to the downfall of the Roman empire, it is too silly to require a lengthened refutation. I am also surprised, that so many writers, in other respects learned and acute, have fallen into a blunder in a matter that is so easy, were it not that when one has committed a mistake, others follow in troops without consideration. Paul, therefore, employs the term apostasy to mean — a treacherous departure from God, and that not on the part of one or a few individuals, but such as would spread itself far and wide among a large multitude of persons. For when apostasy is made mention of without anything being added, it cannot be restricted to a few. Now, none can be termed apostates, but such as have previously made a profession of Christ and the gospel. Paul, therefore, predicts a certain general revolt of the visible Church. “The Church must be reduced to an unsightly and dreadful state of ruin, before its full restoration be effected.”

From this we may readily gather, how useful this prediction of Paul is, for it might have seemed as though that could not be a building of God, that was suddenly overthrown, and lay so long in ruins, had not Paul long before intimated that it would be so. Nay more, many in the present day, when they consider with themselves the long-continued dispersion of the Church, begin to waver, as if this had not been regulated by the purpose of God. The Romanists, also, with the view of justifying the tyranny of their idol, make use of this pretext — that it was not possible that Christ would forsake his spouse. The weak, however, have something here on which to rest, when they learn that the unseemly state of matters which they behold in the Church was long since foretold; while, on the other hand, the impudence of the Romanists is openly exposed, inasmuch as Paul declares that a revolt will come, when the world has been brought under Christ’s authority. Now, we shall see presently, why it is that the Lord has permitted the Church, or at least what appeared to be such, to fall off in so shameful a manner.

Has been revealed. It was no better than an old wife’s fable that was contrived respecting Nero, that he was carried up from the world, destined to return again to harass the Church ⁶⁴⁰ by his tyranny; and yet the minds of the ancients were so bewitched, that they imagined that Nero would be Antichrist. ⁶⁴¹ Paul, however, does not speak of one individual, but of a kingdom, that was to be taken possession of by Satan, that he might set up a seat of abomination in the midst of God’s temple — which we see accomplished in Popery. The revolt, it is true, has spread more widely, for Mahomet, as he was an apostate, turned away the Turks, his followers, from Christ. All heretics have broken the unity of the Church by their sects, and thus there have been a corresponding number of revolts from Christ.

Paul, however, when he has given warning that there would be such a scattering, that the greater part would revolt from Christ, adds something more serious — that there would be such a confusion, that the vicar of Satan would hold supreme power in the Church, and would preside there in the place of God. Now he describes that reign of abomination under the name of a single person, because it is only one reign, though one succeeds another. My readers now understand, that all the sects by which the Church has been lessened from the beginning, have been so many streams of revolt which began to draw away the water from the right course, but that the sect of Mahomet was like a violent bursting forth of water, that took away about the half of the Church by its violence. It remained, also, that Antichrist should infect the remaining part with his poison. Thus, we see with our own eyes, that this memorable prediction of Paul has been confirmed by the event.

In the exposition which I bring forward, there is nothing forced. Believers in that age dreamed that they would be transported to heaven, after having endured troubles during a short period. Paul, however, on the other hand, foretells that, after they have had foreign enemies for some time molesting them, they will have more evils to endure from enemies at home, inasmuch as many of those that have made a profession of attachment to Christ would be hurried away into base treachery, and inasmuch as the temple of God itself would be polluted by sacrilegious tyranny, so that Christ’s greatest enemy would exercise dominion there. The term revelation is taken here to denote manifest possession of tyranny, as if Paul had said that the day of Christ would not come until this tyrant had openly manifested himself, and had, as it were, designedly overturned the whole order of the Church.

Defender: 2Th 2:3

The "falling away" (Greek apostasia) has commonly been transliterated as the apostasy (the definite article in the Greek indicates Paul had already told them about it), and then assumed to apply to the final, great religious apostasy at the end of the age. The context, however, as well as the etymology of the word itself, makes this interpretation unlikely. In this precise form, it is used nowhere else in the New Testament, so its meaning must be defined by its context here. It is derived from two Greek words, apo (meaning "away from") and stasis (meaning "standing"). It could properly be rendered "standing away" instead of "falling away." In Paul's previous letter, he made no reference to a coming departure from the faith, but he had discussed, at length, a coming departure from the earth by all believers when Christ returns to meet them in the air (1Th 4:13-18). This standing away from, in context, seems to refer to all the raptured believers standing away from the earth, as they stand before their returning Lord when they meet Him in the heavens. Here, Paul is simply reminding them that the "sudden destruction" that would come upon unbelievers when the day of the Lord begins could not happen until the rapture - the standing-away from the earth before Christ (Rom 14:10) - had taken place. The entire context, before and after, fits this understanding of the text better than the idea of the apostasy from the faith. Over the 1950 years since Paul wrote these lines, there have been numerous great apostasies from the faith, and none of these introduced the day of the Lord, although persecuted believers in each case might easily have so interpreted them.

Defender: 2Th 2:3

The "man of sin" is also called "the son of perdition" because of his being so fully energized and controlled by Satan that he is, in a unique way, the son of the devil. Judas, who was a type of this evil man, was also called "son of perdition" (Joh 17:12; Luk 22:3; Joh 6:70). The same person is also called "antichrist" (1Jo 2:18), "the prince that shall come" (Dan 9:26) and various other names, but especially "the beast" (Rev 13:1, Rev 13:18). According to this verse, his identity will only be revealed after the rapture has taken place (2Th 2:7-9). Soon (perhaps immediately) thereafter, the great day of the Lord will begin on earth, while the day of Christ is also under way in the heavens (1Co 3:13-15; Rev 4:1-11)."

TSK: 2Th 2:3

no man : Mat 24:4-6; 1Co 6:9; Eph 5:6

except : 1Ti 4:1-3; 2Ti 3:1-3, 2Ti 4:3, 2Ti 4:4

man : 2Th 2:8-10; Dan 7:25; 1Jo 2:18; Rev 13:11-18

the son : Joh 17:12; Rev 17:8, Rev 17:11

Commentary -- Word/Phrase Notes (per Verse)

Barnes: 2Th 2:3

Let no man deceive you by any means - That is, respecting the coming of the Lord Jesus. This implies that there were then attempts to deceive, and that it was of great importance for Christians to be on their guard. The result has shown that there is almost no subject on which caution is more proper, and on which men are more liable to delusion. The means then resorted to for deception appear from the previous verse to have been either an appeal to a pretended verbal message from the apostle, or a pretended letter from him. The means now, consist of a claim to uncommon wisdom in the interpretation of obscure prophecies of the Scriptures. The necessity for the caution here given has not ceased.

For that day shall not come, except there come a falling away first - Until an apostasy ( ἀποστασία apostasia ) shall have occurred - the great apostasy. There is scarcely any passage of the New Testament which has given occasion to greater diversity of opinion than this. Though the reference seems to be plain, and there is scarcely any prophecy of the Bible apparently more obvious and easy in its general interpretation; yet it is proper to mention some of the opinions which have been entertained of it.

Some have referred it to a great apostasy from the Christian church, particularly on account of persecution, which would occur before the destruction of Jerusalem. The "coming of the Lord"they suppose refers to the destruction of the holy city, and according to this, the meaning is, that there would be a great apostasy before that event would take place. Of this opinion was Vitringa, who refers the "apostasy"to a great defection from the faith which took place between the time of Nero and Trajan.

Whitby also refers it to an event which was to take place before the destruction of Jerusalem, and supposes that the apostasy would consist in a return from the Christian to the Jewish faith by multitudes of professed converts. The "man of sin,"according to him, means the Jewish nation, so characterized on account of its eminent wickedness.

Hammond explains the apostasy by the defection to the Gnostics, by the arts of Simon Magus, whom he supposes to be the man of sin, and by the "day of the Lord"he also understands the destruction of Jerusalem.

Grotius takes Caius Caesar or Caligula, to be the man of sin, and by the apostasy he understands his abominable wickedness. In the beginning of his government, he says, his plans of iniquity were concealed, and the hopes of all were excited in regard to his reign; but his secret iniquity was subsequently "revealed,"and his true character understood.

Wetstein understands by the "man of sin,"that it referred to Titus and the Flavian house. He says that he does not understand it of the Roman Pontiff, who "is not one such as the demonstrative pronoun thrice repeated designates, and who neither sits in the temple of God, nor calls himself God, nor Caius, nor Simon Gioriae, nor any Jewish impostor, nor Simon Magus."

Koppe refers it to the King mentioned in Dan 11:36. According to him, the reference is to a great apostasy of the Jews from the worship of God, and the "man of sin"is the Jewish people.

Others have supposed that the reference is to Muhammed, and that the main characteristics of the prophecy may be found in him.

Of the Papists, a part affirm that the apostasy is the falling away from Rome in the time of the Reformation, but the greater portion suppose that the allusion is to Antichrist, who, they say, will appear in the world before the great day of judgment, to combat religion and the saints. See these opinions stated at length, and examined, in Dr. Newton on the Prophecies, Dissertation xxii.

Some more recent expositors have referred it to Napoleon Bonaparte, and some (as Oldshausen) suppose that it refers to some one who has not yet appeared, in whom all the characteristics here specified will be found united.

Most Protestant commentators have referred it to the great apostasy under the papacy, and, by the "man of sin,"they suppose there is allusion to the Roman Pontiff, the Pope. It is evident that we are in better circumstances to understand the passage than those were who immediately succeeded the apostles.

Eighteen hundred years have passed (written circa 1880’ s) away since the Epistle was written, and the "day of the Lord"has not yet come, and we have an opportunity of inquiring, whether in all that long tract of time any one man can be found, or any series of men have arisen, to whom the description here given is applicable. If so, it is in accordance with all the proper rules of interpreting prophecy, to make such an application. If it is fairly applicable to the papacy, and cannot be applied in its great features to anything else, it is proper to regard it as having such an original reference. Happily, the expressions which are used by the apostle are, in themselves, not difficult of interpretation, and all that the expositor has to do is, to ascertain whether in any one great apostasy all the things here mentioned have occurred. If so, it is fair to apply the prophecy to such an event; if not so, we must wait still for its fulfillment.

The word rendered "falling away"( ἀποστασία apostasia , apostasy), is of so general a character, that it may be applied to any departure from the faith as it was received in the time of the apostles. It occurs in the New Testament only here and in Act 21:21, where it is rendered "to forsake"- "thou teachest all the Jews which are among us to forsake Moses"- apostasy from Moses - ἀποστασίαν ἀπὸ Μωῦσέως apostasian apo Mōuseōs . The word means a departing from, or a defection; see the verb used in 1Ti 4:1, "Some shall depart from the faith"- ἀποστήσονται apostēsontai ; compare the notes on that passage; see also Heb 3:12; Luk 8:13; Act 5:37. The reference here is evidently to some general falling away, or to some great religious apostasy that was to occur, and which would be under one head, leader, or dynasty, and which would involve many in the same departure from the faith, and in the same destruction. The use of the article here, "the apostasy"(Greek), Erasmus remarks, "signifies that great and before-predicted apostasy."It is evidently emphatic, showing that there had been a reference to this before, or that they understood well that there was to be such an apostasy. Paul says 2Th 2:5, that when he was with them, he had told them of these things. The writers in the New Testament often speak of such a defection under the name of Antichrist; see Rev 13:14; 1Jo 2:18, 1Jo 2:22; 1Jo 4:3; 2Jo 1:7.

And that man of sin - This is a Hebraism, meaning a man of eminent wickedness; one distinguished for depravity; compare Joh 17:12; Pro 6:12, in Heb. The use of the article here - ὁ ἄνθρωπος ho anthrōpos - "the man of sin,"is also emphatic, as in the reference to "the falling away,"and shows that there is allusion to one of whom they had before heard, and whose character was well known; who would be the wicked one by way of eminence; see also 2Th 2:8, "that wicked"- ὁ ἄνομος ho anomos . There are two general questions in regard to the proper interpretation of this appellative; the one is, whether it refers to an individual, or to a series of individuals of the same general character, aiming at the accomplishment of the same plans; and the other is, whether there has been any individual, or any series of individuals, since the time of the apostle, who, by eminence, deserved to be called "the man of sin."That the phrase, "the man of sin,"may refer to a succession of men of the same general character, and that it does so refer here, is evident from the following considerations:

(1) The word "king"is used in Dan 7:25; Dan 11:36, to which places Paul seems to allude, to denote a succession of kings.

\caps1 (2) t\caps0 he same is true of the beast mentioned in Dan. 7; Dan. 8; and Rev. 13, representing a kingdom or empire through its successive changes and revolutions.

\caps1 (3) t\caps0 he same is true of the "woman arrayed in purple and scarlet"Rev 17:4, which cannot refer to a single woman, but is the emblem of a continued corrupt administration.

\caps1 (4) i\caps0 t is clear that a succession is intended here, because the work assigned to "the man of sin,"cannot be supposed to be that which could be accomplished by a single individual. The statement of the apostle is, that there were then tendencies to such an apostasy, and that the "man of sin "would be revealed at no distant period, and yet that he would continue his work of "lying wonders"until the coming of the Saviour. In regard to this "man of sin,"it may be further observed:

\caps1 (1) t\caps0 hat his appearing was to be preceded by "the great apostasy;"and,

\caps1 (2) t\caps0 hat he was to continue and perpetuate it. His rise was to be owing to a great departure from the faith, and then he was to be the principal agent in continuing it by "signs and lying wonders."He was not himself to originate the defection, but was to be the creation, or result of it. He was to rise upon it, or grow out of it, and, by artful arrangements adapted to that purpose, was to perpetuate it. The question then is, to whom this phrase, descriptive of a succession of individuals so eminent for wickedness that the name "the man of sin"could be applied, was designed by the spirit of inspiration to refer. Dr. Newton has shown that it cannot refer to Caligula, to Simon Magus, to the revolt of the Jews from the Romans, or to the revolt of the Jews from the faith, or to the Flavian family, or to Luther, as some of the papists suppose, or to one man who will appear just before the end of the world, as others of the Romanists suppose; see his Dissertations on the Prophecies, xxii, pp. 393-402; compare Oldshausen, in loc. The argument is too long to be inserted here. But can it be referred to the papacy? Can it denote the Pope of Rome, meaning not a single pope, but the succession? If all the circumstances of the entire passage can be shown to be fairly applicable to him, or if it can he shown that all that is fairly implied in the language used here has received a fulfillment in him, then it is proper to regard it as having been designed to be so applied, and then this may be numbered among the prophecies that are in part fulfilled.

The question now is on the applicability of the phrase "the man of sin"to the Pope. That his rise was preceded by a great apostasy, or departure from the purity of the simple gospel, as revealed in the New Testament, cannot reasonably be doubted by any one acquainted with the history of the church. That he is the creation or result of that apostasy, is equally clear. That he is the grand agent in continuing it, is equally manifest. Is the phrase itself one that is properly applicable to him Is it proper to speak of the Pope of Rome, as he has actually appeared, as "the man of sin?"In reply to this, it might be sufficient to refer to the general character of the papacy, and to its influence in upholding and perpetuating various forms of iniquity in the world. It would be easy to show that there has been no dynasty or system that has contributed so much to uphold and perpetuate sins of various kinds on the earth, as the papacy. No other one has been so extensively and so long the patron of superstition; and there are vices of the grossest character which have all along been fostered by its system of celibacy, indulgences, monasteries, and absolutions. But it would be a better illustration of the meaning of the phrase "man of sin,"as applicable to the Pope of Rome, to look at the general character of the popes themselves. Though there may have been some exceptions, yet there never has been a succession of men of so decidedly wicked character, as have occupied the papal throne since the great apostasy commenced.

A very few references to the characters of the popes will furnish an illustration of this point. Pope Vagilius waded to the pontifical throne through the blood of his predecessor. Pope Joan (the Roman Catholic writers tell us) a female in disguise, was elected and confirmed Pope, as John VIII. Platina says, that "she became with child by some of those that were round about her; that she miscarried, and died on her way from the Lateran to the temple."Pope Marcellinus sacrificed to idols. Concerning Pope Honorius, the council of Constantinople decreed, "We have caused Honorius, the late Pope of Old Rome, to be accursed; for that in all things he followed the mind of Sergius the heretic, and confirmed his wicked doctrines."The Council of Basil thus condemned Pope Eugenius: "We condemn and depose Pope Eugenius, a despiser of the holy canons; a disturber of the peace and unity of the church of God; a notorious offender of the whole universal church; a Simonist; a perjurer; a man incorrigible; a schismatic; a man fallen from the faith, and a willful heretic."

Pope John II, was publicly charged at Rome with incest. Pope John XIII usurped the Pontificate, spent his time in hunting, in lasciviousness, and monstrous forms of vice; he fled from the trial to which he was summoned, and was stabbed, being taken in the act of adultery. Pope Sixtus IV licensed brothels at Rome. Pope Alexander VI was, as a Roman Catholic historian says, "one of the greatest and most horrible monsters in nature that could scandalize the holy chair. His beastly morals, his immense ambition, his insatiable avarice, his detestable cruelty, his furious lusts, and monstrous incest with his daughter Lucretia, are, at large, described by Guicciardini Ciaconius, and other authentic papal historians."Of the popes, Platina (a Roman Catholic) says: "The chair of Saint Peter was usurped, rather than possessed, by monsters of wickedness, ambition, and bribery. They left no wickedness unpracticed;"see the New Englander, April, 1844, pp. 285, 286. To no succession of men who have ever lived could the appellative, "the man of sin, be applied with so much propriety as to this succession. Yet they claim to have been the true "successors"of the apostles, and there are Protestants who deem it of essential importance to be able to show that they have derived the true "succession"through such men.

Be revealed - Be made manifest. There were, at the time when the apostle wrote, two remarkable things:

\caps1 (1) t\caps0 hat there was already a tendency to such an apostasy as he spoke of; and,

\caps1 (2) t\caps0 here was something which as yet prevented the appearance or the rise of the man of sin; 2Th 2:7. When the hindrance which then existed should be taken out of the way, he would be manifested; see the notes on 2Th 2:7.

"The son of perdition."This is the same appellation which the Saviour bestowed on Judas; see it explained in the notes on Joh 18:12. It may mean either that he would be the cause of ruin to others, or that he would himself be devoted to destruction. It would seem here rather to be used in the latter sense, though this is not absolutely certain. The phrase, whichever interpretation be adopted, is used to denote one of eminent wickedness.

Poole: 2Th 2:3

Let no man deceive you: here the apostle urgeth again his charge against this error, though in other words, and begins his arguments to refute it. He had adjured them not to be shaken, and here he cautions them against being deceived, for the one makes way for the other; so also not to be troubled, 2Th 2:2 , for troubled minds are apt to be made a prey to seducers. And the caution in the text proves that their shaking and trouble did arise from some deceivers that were amongst them, rather than any misunderstanding of their own of what he wrote in the former Epistle about Christ’ s coming. To be shaken in mind is bad, hut to be deceived is worse, for it is a going out of the path, as the word signifies; and thercfin’ e his caution against it is universal, both as to persons and ways: Let no man deceive you, though he pretend to revelations, or be of the greatest reputation in the church.

By any means either of era craft, flattery, pretending love, or plausible arguments, or misrepresenting our words, or forging of letters, or misintering our Epistle to you or any other part of Scripture, or feigned miracles, &c. Then he enters the arguments to confute it, which are.

1. The general apostacy.

2. The revelation of the man of sin.

Neither of these are yet, nor will be in this age; and yet that day shall not come till these both first come.

For that doth shall not come, except there come a falling away first there is a supplement in our translation, for in the Greek it is only,

for, except there come a falling away first & c., or an apostacy, a recession, a departing, or a standing off, as the world imports; so that apostacy may be either good, when it is from evil to good, or evil, when it is from good to evil: it is always used in this latter sense in Scripture. Again, it is either civil or spiritual: civil, as when people fall off from the civil government they were under, and so some would interpret the text of the defection from the Roman empire, the east part from the west, and the ten kingdoms that arose out of it; which was the opinion of Hierom, Epist. ad Algasiam. But the apostle writing to the church speaks not of civil government, and the affairs of state, and speaks of such an apostacy which would give rise to the man of sin, and the revelation of him. And this man of sin riseth up in the church, not in the civil state; and the consequence of this apostacy is giving men up to strong delusions to believe a lie, and then follows their damnation; and the cause of it is said to be, not receiving the truth in the love of it; so that it is not a civil, but a spiritual apostacy, as the word in Scripture is always (I suppose) so taken. And it is not of a particular person, or of a particular church, but a general apostacy of the church, though not of every individual; that church that is afterwards called the temple of God, where the man of sin sitteth, and is exalted above all that is called God; which cannot be in any particular church; and would not the apostle have specified that particular church? Neither is it some lesser apostacy which may befall the best church; but such as would be eminent, called h apostasia , that apostacy, greater than that of some believing Jews to Judaism, or of some Christians to Nicolaitanism, which some think is meant. Much less can it be Caius Caesar, as Grotius interprets, or any one person, for the apostle saith not apostate, but apostacy; else a man of sin could not rise out of it, and exalt himself above all that is called God, and worshipped. It is an apostacy from sound doctrine, instituted worship, church government, and true holiness of life, as may be further considered afterwards. Neither is the apostacy all at once, but gradual; for out of it ariseth a man of sin, who grows up to this manhood by degrees; and sin and wickedness are not completed at first, as well as holiness. Much less is this apostacy a falling off from the Church of Rome, as some papists affirm, and make the Reformation to be the apostacy, which was a return from it. Doth the man of sin rise out of the Reformation? Did any of the first Reformers oppose and exalt themselves above all that is called God, or is worshipped? Or, as God sat in the temple of God, &c.? Was any of their coming with all power, and signs, and lying wonders? Or did any of them forbid to marry, and to abstain from meats, &c.? Which is the character our apostle gives of this apostacy, 1Ti 4:1-3 . Neither is the Mahometan religion this apostacy, for Mahomet sitteth not in the temple of God. Neither is it in the falling of the converted Jews from the Jewish church to the gospel church; the apostle would never call that an apostacy. And that man of sin be revealed: the next argumnent is from the revelation of the man of sin; this is also to precede Christ’ s last coming: it is a Hebraism. A warlike man is styled a man of war; a bloody man, a man of bloods; a deceitful man, a man of deceit, &c.: so a man eminent in sin is here called a man of sin; not only personally so, but who doth promote sin, propagate it, countenance it, command it. See Platina, Sigebert, Blonetas, Beuno Uspregensis, Matt. Paris. In sins of omission, forbidding what God requireth; in sins of commission, requiring or allowing what God hath forbidden. In sins of the first table; corrupting God’ s worship by superstition and idolatry, taking God’ s name in vain by heartless devotion, dissembling piety, dispensing with perjury and false oaths, taking away the second commandment and the morality of the fourth commandment, and making men’ s faith and obedience to rest upon a humau authority, &c. In sins of the second table; to dispense with duties belonging to superiors and inferiors; with murder, adultery, fornication, incest, robbery, lying, equivocation, &c. And besides all these, promoting a false religion, and destroying the true, by fines, imprisonments, banishments, tortures, poisons, massacre, fire, and faggot. And this man of sin is not a single person, but a company, order, and succession of men; because all are acted by the same spirit, therefore called a man; as the man of the earth, Psa 10:18 , is all men of an earthly spirit, and a man of the field, Gen 25:27 , is men whose minds and employments are in the field. Or, it is a sinful state. As the civil state of the four monarchies in Daniel is represented by four single beasts, and the antichristian state by a beast rising out of the sea, Rev 13:1 ; so by man of sin is meant a sinful state, which though it consisteth of many people and nations, yet, being under the influence and government of one man, may be also styled the man of sin upon that account; impietatis Coryphaeus. Moulin. And because the sin of the whole community is chiefly centred in him, and springs out from him; a man in whom is the fountain of all sins. Hierein ad Algasiam. And the sin of this state is called a mystery of iniquity, 2Th 2:7 , and so differing from the sin in all other political states; and therefore may well be judged to be the same with the whore sitting on many waters, that hath mystery written in her forehead, Rev 17:1,5 . And as no expositor takes the whore to be meant of a single woman, and the true apostolic church is represented by a woman in travail, Rev 12:1,2 , why then should we take the man of sin to be a single man, as the papists do? viz. a Jew of the tribe of Dan, that shall erect his kingdom and temple in Jerusalem, seduce the Jews, continue three years and a half, make great havoc of the church, to be opposed by Enoch and Elias, and is to come a little before the end of the world. Ridiculous! Neither call this man of sin be Simon Magus and his followers, for he was revealed in the apostle’ s time, seeing the mystery of iniquity belonging to this man of sin began to work in the apostle’ s days, as 2Th 2:7 , and he is the same whom St. John calls antichrist, 1Jo 2:18 ; and the spirit of antichrist began to be in the world in his time, 1Jo 4:3 ; and the nations are to be made drunk with the cup of his fornication, and to serve and obey him, &c., Rev 13:8 17:4 ; all which requires more time than is allotted by them: but they set him a great way off, that none may suspect him to be among themselves; but he that will compare the Church of Rome in the apostle Paul’ s times with what it is now, and the doctrine of the council of Trent with that laid down in his Epistle to the Romans, may say: How is the faithful city become a harlot! And this man of sin is to

be revealed also, which shows that he is not a single person, not yet born: revealing relates not so much to a person, as a thing; in particular to the mystery of iniquity, mentioned 2Th 2:7 : his revealing is either quoad existentiam, or apparentiam. The former is meant here, and the latter 2Th 2:8 . He grows up into an existence, as the apostacy grows, as vermin grows out of putrefaction. As the church’ s purity, faith, love, holiness declined, and as pride, ambition, covetousness, luxury prevailed, so he grew up: and which was the direct point and time of his full revelation in this first sense is conjectured by many, but determined by none; it is most generally referred to the tithe of Boniface the Third, to whom Phocas granted the style of oecumenical bishop, and to the Church of Rome to be the mother church. But as the apostacy brings forth this man of sin, so as he riseth he helps it forward; so that he both causeth it, and is caused by it. As corruption in doctrine, worship, discipline, and manners brought him forth, so he was active in corrupting them more and more.

The son of perdition another Hebraism, where sometimes that which any way proceeds from another, as its cause, is called its son, as sparks the sons of the coal, Job 5:7 , and branches sons of the tree, Gen 49:22 , and the learner the son of the teacher, Pro 3:1 ; and sometimes that which a man is addicted to, as a wicked man is the son of wickedness, Psa 89:22 . Again, that which gives forth what it hath in itself, as the branches of the olive trees giving oil are called the sons of oil, Zec 4:14 ; and in the text, the man of sin is

the son of perdition as Judas is called, Joh 17:12 : and he is so either actively, as he brings others to destruction, and so may be called Apollyon, Rev 9:11 ; or rather passively, as devoted to perdition; as Rev 19:20 , the beast and false prophet are both cast into the lake of fire and brimstone; and the beast that was, and is not, is said to go into perdition, Rev 17:11 . The destroyer of others both in soul and body will be destroyed himself: first, morally, by the word and Spirit, as 2Th 2:8 ; and then judicially, by God’ s revenging justice in this world, and that to come. The apostle, at the very first mentioning him, declares his destiny; at his first rising and revealing, mentions his fall and ruin.

PBC: 2Th 2:3

2Th 2:3

What Next? Who is the Man of Sin?

2Th 2:3-5 Let no man deceive you by any means: for that day shall not come, except there come a falling away first, and that man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition; Who opposeth and exalteth himself above all that is called God, or that is worshipped; so that he as God sitteth in the temple of God, shewing himself that he is God. Remember ye not, that, when I was yet with you, I told you these things?

This chapter from 2 Thessalonians frames many fierce battles among Christians concerning eschatology, the doctrine of final things. It seems strange that Christians should draw other Christians’ blood over an interpretation of their archenemy whose primary objective is to draw Christians’ blood!

The language of this passage is somewhat unique so that we cannot go to many other passages that contain similar language as an aid in our efforts to interpret it. However, we must not overlook a central point Paul makes in 2Th 2:5, " ... I told you these things." Great as the difficulty is for us, we cannot doubt that Paul and the Thessalonians knew well what he had in mind. Paul’s intent is not to introduce a new idea to the Thessalonians, but to refresh their minds on an old truth he had already taught them. Although we cannot know what Paul taught this church during his personal presence with them, we have a written record of what he taught them earlier, likely only a year earlier or less, in 1 Thessalonians. Since the words appear in a letter and Paul refers to earlier teaching, we may consider the likelihood that Paul had something in mind that he taught in 1 Thessalonians. At the least what he presents here will not conflict with what he wrote in 1 Thessalonians.

Rather than teaching the Thessalonians that the day of the Lord’s return could occur at any moment, Paul rejected this idea. In fact the idea of an immediate return was the central thought of the error he here confronts and refutes. A. T. Robertson corroborates this idea. " The second coming not only is not " imminent," but will not take place before certain important things take place, a definite rebuff to the false enthusiasts of 2Th 2:2." [i] Thus rather than corroborating the idea that the Second Coming would occur in their lifetime, Paul rejects the idea with specific points regarding events that will precede that final day. An indefinite time will intervene between Paul’s writing and the Second Coming. As the time draws near, a colossal rebellion will occur against God and his dominion. If we accept Paul’s point that he has already taught these same truths, possibly in 1 Thessalonians, we may conclude that the precursors to the Second Coming will appear and unfold first. Then suddenly the trumpet shall blow and the Lord shall return in a universal visible appearance. The dead shall be raised and the final judgment shall occur.

Who is the man of sin?

Perhaps we may find more success in determining who the man of sin is not, However, our search will eliminate a significant number of aberrant views that frequently cloud the theological landscape and obscure what we might learn about this question from Scripture.

False views that have occurred throughout history include the following:

1.   He is the evil emperor Nero raised from the dead and leading the minions of darkness in a final rebellion against God. There is no

Biblical support for this idea.

2.   He is some other Roman emperor who persecuted the early

Christians. Again we find no Biblical support for the idea.

3.   He is Judas Iscariot raised from the dead and leading the evil empire against God. Do I need to repeat my point? There is no

Scripture whatever that hints at such an idea.

4.   He is either a particular pope or the Roman Catholic Church in general. This idea grows more out of hatred for Roman Catholicism than out of Biblical exegesis. True, at times the Church of Rome has stained her hands with Christian blood as during the Inquisition.  However, neither she nor any of her leaders can match the criteria Paul sets for this evil personality. This view first appeared during the Reformation and the heated polarity between Rome and the Reformers.

5.   Over the centuries various Christians have suggested any number of individual men who appeared particularly hostile to Christianity as being the anti-Christ, the man of sin. At times even powerful political leaders who were not particularly hostile to Christianity were suggested as fulfilling this prediction. For example, when Henry Kissinger was Secretary of State and seemed to have so much influence over the world political scene, some Christians even suggested that he would make a move to take over the United Nations and appear as the man of sin! Time has an incredible way of eliminating many false ideas!

What do we actually know from Paul’s writing about this evil figure? First of all, I suggest that Paul’s teaching in these few verses eliminates any human being from consideration. Consider his obvious timelessness. He shall " be revealed" in the last day, but he exists and is quite active in the first century as Paul writes to the Thessalonians. Notice the present tense of the verbs that describe his present activity. He opposes. He exalts himself above all that is called God. He sits in God’s temple. He pretends to be (shows himself that he is) God. For Paul, the man of sin is not a future human being who will be born in the last era of human history as we know it. He existed at the time of Paul’s writing. He will be revealed at the last time, but he existed when Paul wrote the Thessalonian letter. In fact he was quite active at that time according to Paul’s words in these verses. These points eliminate any human being from the competition.

An alternate view that does not directly conflict with the passage holds that the man of sin will not be one individual human being, but the general character or personality of evil men in their active rebellion against God. Whether Paul had this idea in mind or not we cannot know with any significant degree of certainty, but the idea presents a self-evident truth. The character and conduct of evil men always presents itself in this manner and with these traits.

We should note a practical and instructive point in this context. Vine notes that the Greek word translated falling away was used of political rebellion in the first century. Sometimes passive Christians will speak of apostasy and backsliding as neutral or at least a passive something that happened to them, almost like stubbing one’s foot on an object and stumbling or falling. Paul will have nothing to do with such an irresponsible attitude! For Paul falling away constitutes active rebellion against God, whether we consider it in terms of Christians turning from their active and pure faith or in terms of this " man of sin." He never allows any of the believers in the churches to whom he wrote to view sin as a passive event! The very idea smacks of modern antinomianism. " God loves you so much that he doesn’t really care how you live. Do your best, but don’t work up a sweat over your Christianity." For Paul this abominable attitude constitutes active rebellion against God! We should reject it with equal disdain.

We occasionally speak of the personification of a particular idea in terms of an individual. The cosmopolitan man or woman displays certain traits, but we actually do not intend to identify one particular individual. This idea offers at least a possible interpretation of Paul’s intent in our study passage.

Perhaps Paul’s intent (indeed the Holy Spirit’s intent) is to identify the chief anarchist who always leads the spiritual revolt against God. Given the fact that later {2Th 2:9} Paul refers to this being in terms of his coming being " after the workings of Satan," a point that suggests that it is not Satan himself, but perhaps a being who stands close beside him, working intimately and powerfully with him. Christians should view any being or influence other than God that demands their worship as coming in the spirit of the man of sin.

339

[i] Robertson, A. (1997). Word Pictures in the New Testament. Vol. V c1932, Vol. VI c1933 by Sunday School Board of the Southern Baptist Convention. {2Th 2:3} Oak Harbor: Logos Research Systems.

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 2:3

Let no man deceive you by any means,.... By any of the above means; by pretending to a revelation from the Spirit; or to have had it from the mouth of anyone of the apostles; or to have a letter as from them, declaring the day of Christ to be instant; or by any other means whatever; do not be imposed upon by them for the following reasons, for there were things to be done before the coming of Christ, which were not then done, and which required time: for that day shall not come,

except there come a falling away first; either in a political sense, of the nations from the Roman empire, which was divided into the eastern and western empire; for which, way was made by translating the seat of empire from Rome to Byzantium, or Constantinople; the former of these empires was seized by Mahomet, and still possessed by the Turks; and the latter was overrun by the Goths, Huns, and Vandals, and torn to pieces; Italy particularly was ravaged by them, and Rome itself was sacked and taken: or rather in a religious sense, of the falling of men from the faith of the Gospel, from the purity of Gospel doctrines, discipline, worship, and ordinances; and this not of some Jews who professed faith in Christ, and departed from it, or of some Christians who went off to the Gnostics; but is to be understood of a more general defection in the times of the Papacy; when not only the eastern churches were perverted and corrupted by Mahomet, and drawn off to his religion, but the western churches were most sadly depraved by the man of sin, by bringing in errors of all sorts in doctrine, making innovations in every ordinance, and appointing new ones, and introducing both Judaism and Paganism into the churches; which general defection continued until the times of the reformation, and is what the apostle has respect to in 1Ti 4:1 where he manifestly points out some of the Popish tenets, as forbidding marriage to priests, and ordering abstinence from meats on certain days, and at certain times of the year: this was one thing that was to precede the coming of Christ, another follows, which should take place at the same time;

and that man of sin be revealed; who was now hid, though secretly working; by whom is meant not only any particular person or individual; not the devil, for though he is the wicked one, a damned spirit, an opposer, an adversary of God and Christ, and his people, and who has affected deity, and sought to be worshipped, and even by Christ himself; yet the man of sin is here distinguished from Satan, 2Ti 2:9 nor is any particular emperor of Rome intended, as Caius Caligula, or Nero, for though these were monsters of iniquity, and set up themselves as gods, yet they sat not in the temple of God; nor is Simon Magus designed, who was a very wicked man, a sorcerer, and who gave out himself to be some great one, and was called the great power of God, before big profession of faith in Christ; and afterwards affirmed that he was God, the Father in Samaria, the Son in Judea, and the Spirit in the rest of the nations of the world; and, because of his signs and lying wonders, had a statue erected by the Roman emperor with this inscription, "to Simon the holy god"; but then this wicked man was now already revealed: nor is this to be understood of a certain Jew, that is to be begotten by the devil on a virgin of the tribe of Dan, and who is to reign three years and a half, and then to be destroyed by Christ, which is a fable of the Papists; but a succession of men is here meant, as a king is used sometimes for an order and succession of kings, Deu 17:18 and an high priest for that whole order, from Aaron's time to the dissolution of it, Heb 9:7 so here it intends the whole hierarchy of Rome, monks, friars, priests, bishops, archbishops, cardinals, and especially popes, who may well be called "the man of sin", because notoriously sinful; not only sinners, but sin itself, a sink of sin, monsters of iniquity, spiritual wickednesses in high places: it is not easy to reckon up their impieties, their adulteries, incest, sodomy, rapine, murder, avarice, simony, perjury, lying, necromancy, familiarity with the devil, idolatry, witchcraft, and what not? and not only have they been guilty of the most notorious crimes themselves, but have been the patrons and encouragers of others in sin; by dispensing with the laws of God and man, by making sins to be venial, by granting indulgences and pardon for the worst of crimes, by licensing brothel houses, and countenancing all manner of wickedness; and therefore it is no wonder to hear of the following epithet,

the son of perdition; since these are not only the Apollyon, the king of the bottomless pit, the destroyer, the cause of the perdition of thousands of souls, for the souls of men are their wares; but because they are by the righteous judgment of God appointed and consigned to everlasting destruction; the devil, the beast, and the false prophet, will have their portion together in the lake that burns with fire, Rev 20:10 the same character as here is given of Judas, the betrayer of Christ, Joh 17:12.

Commentary -- Verse Notes / Footnotes

NET Notes: 2Th 2:3

¹ tn Grk “for unless the rebellion comes first.” The clause about “the day” is understood from v. 2.

² tc Most mss (A D F G Ψ Ï lat sy) read ἁμαρτίας (Jamartia", “of sin”) here, but several important mss (א B 0278 6 81 1739 1881 al co) read ἀνομίας (anomia", “of lawlessness”). Although external support for ἁμαρτίας is broader, the generally earlier and better witnesses are on the side of ἀνομίας. Internally, since ἁμαρτία (Jamartia, “sin”) occurs nearly ten times as often as ἀνομία (anomia, “lawlessness”) in the corpus Paulinum, scribes would be expected to change the text to the more familiar term. At the same time, the mention of ἀνομία in v. 7 and ὁ ἄνομος (Jo anomo", “the lawless one”) in v. 8, both of which look back to v. 3, may have prompted scribes to change the text toward ἀνομίας. The internal evidence is thus fairly evenly balanced. Although a decision is difficult, ἀνομίας has slightly greater probability of authenticity than ἁμαρτίας.

³ tn Or “the one destined for destruction.”

Geneva Bible: 2Th 2:3

Let no man deceive you by any means: ^{( 3 )} for [that day shall not come], except there come a falling away first, and ^{( e )} that man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition;

^{( 3 )} The apostle foretells that before the coming of the Lord, there will be a throne set up completely contrary to Christ's glory, in which that wicked man will sit, and transfer all things that appertain to God to himself: and many will fall away from God to him.

^{( e )} By speaking of one, he singles out the person of the tyrannous and persecuting antichrist.

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 2:1-3

From these words it appears that some among the Thessalonians had mistaken the apostle's meaning, in what he had written in his former epistle about the coming of Christ, by thinking that it was near at hand, - that Christ was just ready to appear and come to judgment. Or, it may be, some among them pretended that they had the knowledge of this by particular revelation from the Spirit, or from some words they had heard from the apostle, when he was with them, or some letter he had written or they pretended he had written to them or some other person: and hereupon the apostle is careful to rectify this mistake, and to prevent the spreading of this error. Observe, If errors and mistakes arise among Christians, we should take the first opportunity to rectify them, and hinder the spreading thereof; and good men will be especially careful to suppress errors that may arise from a mistake of their words and actions, though that which was spoken or done was ever so innocent or well. We have a subtle adversary, who watches all opportunities to do mischief, and will sometimes promote errors even by means of the words of scripture. Observe,

I. How very earnest and solicitous this apostle was to prevent mistakes: We beseech you, brethren, etc., 2Th 2:1. He entreats them as brethren who might have charged them as a father charges his children: he shows great kindness and condescension, and insinuates himself into their affections. And this is the best way to deal with men when we would preserve or recover them from errors, to deal gently and affectionately with them: rough and rigorous treatment will but exasperate their spirits, and prejudice them against the reasons we may offer. He obtests and even conjures them in the most solemn manner: By the coming of Christ, etc. The words are in the form of an oath; and his meaning is that if they believed Christ would come, and if they desired he would come, and rejoiced in the hope of his coming, they should be careful to avoid the error, and the evil consequences of it, against which he was now cautioning them. From this form of obtestation used by the apostle, we may observe,

1. It is most certain that the Lord Jesus Christ will come to judge the world, that he will come in all the pomp and power of the upper world in the last day, to execute judgment upon all. Whatever uncertainty we are at, or whatever mistakes may arise about the time of his coming, his coming itself is certain. This has been the faith and hope of all Christians in all ages of the church; nay, it was the faith and hope of the Old Testament saints, ever since Enoch the seventh from Adam, who said, Behold, the Lord cometh, etc., Jud 1:14.

2. At the second coming of Christ all the saints will be gathered together to him; and this mention of the gathering of the saints together unto Christ at his coming shows that the apostle speaks of Christ's coming to judgment day, and not of his coming to destroy Jerusalem. He speaks of a proper, and not a metaphorical advent: and, as it will be part of Christ's honour in that day, so it will be the completing of the happiness of his saints. (1.) That they all shall be gathered together. There will then be a general meeting of all the saints, and none but saints; all the Old Testament saints, who got acquaintance with Christ by the dark shadows of the law, and saw this day at a distance; and all the New Testament saints, to whom life and immortality were brought to light by the gospel; they will all be gathered together. There will then come from the four winds of heaven all that are, or ever were, or ever shall be, from the beginning to the end of time. All shall be gathered together. (2.) That they shall be gathered together to Christ. He will be the great centre of their unity. They shall be gathered together to him, to be attendants on him, to be assessors with him, to be presented by him to the Father, to be with him for ever, and altogether happy in his presence to all eternity. (3.) The doctrine of Christ's coming and our gathering together to him is of a great moment and importance to Christians; otherwise it would not be the proper matter of the apostle's obtestation. We ought therefore not only to believe these things, but highly to account of them also, and look upon them as things we are greatly concerned in and should be much affected with.

II. The thing itself against which the apostle cautions the Thessalonians is that they should not be deceived about the time of Christ's coming, and so be shaken in mind, or be troubled. Note, Errors in the mind tend greatly to weaken our faith, and cause us trouble; and such as are weak in faith and of troubled minds are oftentimes apt to be deceived, and fall a prey to seducers. 1. The apostle would not have them be deceived: Let no man deceive you by any means, 2Th 2:3. There are many who lie in wait to deceive, and they have many ways of deceiving; we have reason therefore to be cautious and stand upon our guard. Some deceivers will pretend new revelations, others misinterpret scripture, and others will be guilty of gross forgeries; divers means and artifices of deceit men will use; but we must be careful that no man deceive us by any means. The particular matter in which the apostle cautions them not to be deceived is about the near approach of Christ's coming, as if it was to have been in the apostle's days; and harmless as this error might seem to many, yet, because it was indeed an error, it would have proved of bad consequences to many persons. Therefore, 2. He gives them warning, and would not have them be soon shaken in mind, nor be troubled. (1.) He would not have their faith weakened. We should firmly believe the second coming of Christ, and be settled and established in the faith of this; but there was danger lest the Thessalonians, if they apprehended the coming of Christ was just at hand, upon finding that they, or others whom they too much regarded, were mistaken as to the time, should thereupon question the truth or certainty of the thing itself; whereas they ought not to waver in their minds as to this great thing, which is the faith and hope of all the saints. False doctrines are like winds, that toss the water to and fro, and they are apt to unsettle the minds of men, who are sometimes as unstable as water. Then, (2.) He would not have their comforts lessened, that they should not be troubled nor affrighted with false alarms. It is probable that the coming of Christ was represented in so much terror as to trouble many serious Christians among them, though in itself it should be matter of the believer's hope and joy; or else many might be troubled with the thought how surprising this day would be, or with the fear of their unpreparedness, or upon the reflection on their mistake about the time of Christ's coming: we should always watch and pray, but must not be discouraged nor uncomfortable at the thought of Christ's coming.

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 2:3

let no man beguile you in any wise: for it will not be, except the falling away come first [Paul uses the article "the" because this apostasy was well known to the church, its coming having been announced by Jesus (Mat 24:10-12), and reiterated by Paul while at Thessalonica. This apostasy, or falling away, may be defined to be a desertion of the true religion and the true God], and the man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition [Literally, son of perishing. The man of sin is identical with the antichrist of 1Jo 2:18 . Though he is distinguished from Satan in verse 9, yet is he in a sense an incarnation of Satan, for as Satan entered into the heart of Judas (Joh 13:27), who was the first great apostate and son of perdition (Joh 17:12), so he shall enter into the heart of this second apostate and son of perdition, who shall be a man made up of sin, a veritable manifestation of concrete wickedness, and thus self-fitted for perdition. The language clearly shows that he is a person, but there is nothing to forbid us from regarding him as an official rather than an individual personality, as, for instance, a line of popes rather than an individual pope. Those who have denied the right to thus construe his personality, have for the most part straightway fallen into the solecism of interpreting the phrase "one that restraineth," of verse 7, so as to make it mean a line of emperors, or succeeding generations of rulers in our human polity, or some other official personality that existed in Paul's day and long afterward, though the assertion of personality is as strong in verse 7 as it is in verse 3. Antichrist does not cause the apostasy, but is rather the cap-sheaf of it, being revealed in connection with it, and exalted by it],

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