Now we ask you, brothers, with regard to the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ and our gathering together to Him, 2 that you not be quickly shaken in your mind or be alarmed whether by a spirit or a word or a letter as if from us, to the effect that the day of the Lord has come. 3 Let no one in any way deceive you, for it has not come unless the apostasy comes first, and the man of lawlessness is revealed, the son of destruction, 4 who opposes and exalts himself above every so-called god or object of worship, so that he takes his seat in the sanctuary of God, exhibiting himself as being God. 5 Do you not remember that while I was still with you, I was telling you these things? 6 And you know what restrains him now, so that in his time he will be revealed. 7 For the mystery of lawlessness is already at work; only he who now restrains will do so until he is taken out of the way. 8 And then that lawless one will be revealed—whom the Lord Jesus will slay with the breath of His mouth and bring to an end by the appearance of His coming— 9 whose coming is in accord with the working of Satan, with all power and signs and false wonders, 10 and with all the deception of unrighteousness for those who perish, because they did not receive the love of the truth so as to be saved. 11 And for this reason God sends upon them a deluding influence so that they will believe what is false, 12 in order that they all may be judged who did not believe the truth, but took pleasure in unrighteousness.
Paul here attempts to comfort the church in Thessolonika. Despite that Paul had already instructed them on these things, some were deeply disturbed. It is likely that they were disturbed by people who had a letter falsely attributed to Paul, or who had been prophesying, claiming that the Day of the Lord was already present (Chrysostom, Homilies on Second Thessalonians, Homily 3). These false teachers, even if sincere, were teaching falsehood from a claimed position of authority. Paul here corrects that their gathering to Christ would not happen until after the apostacy, and the Man of Sin is revealed. Note that he does not say it will happen immediately afterwards, but that it will not happen before the apostacy or revealing of the Man of Sin.
Literal or not?
I want to be as literal as possible, but we must accept that God does not always fulfill prophecy literally. If God promised Elijah would come before the Messiah (Malachi 4:5), those of us waiting for a literal fulfillment would still be waiting and would not recognise John the Baptist was Elijah (Matthew 11:14) – we would have missed the Messiah! So we need to get this right.
There were no clues in Malachi 4:5 that necessitated that God would literally bring Elijah, especially since Elijah was dead. But because we believe that God can raise people from the dead, we accept that it could have literally been Elijah. But that is vastly different from insisting that it must literally be Elijah, and doing so would have made you an unbeliever. So we must be certain that this passage means that the man of sin literally does these things if we are to insist on it, and discount other possible understandings. After all, if the temple had been destroyed as prophesied in Dan 9:26 and Matthew 24:2, and there is no prophecy of its rebuilding, what does this passage mean? Just as with Elijah we believe God can raise Elijah to life, we also believe that God can rebuild the temple. But is that the correct understanding? Must this occur literally?
In which temple?
From the earliest times of the church, many early writers did not consider the temple the antichrist presents himself as a literal rebuilt temple.
Augustine of Hippo (City of God, 20.19) says Paul is uncertain here, “But it is uncertain in what temple he shall sit, whether in that ruin of the temple which was built by Solomon [sic], or in the Church; for the apostle would not call the temple of any idol or demon the temple of God. And on this account some think that in this passage Antichrist means not the prince himself alone, but his whole body, that is, the mass of men who adhere to him, along with him their prince; and they also think that we should render the Greek more exactly were we to read, not “in the temple of God,” but “for” or “as the temple of God,” as if he himself (they) were the temple of God, the Church.” Perhaps in line with such thinking, that it refers to that the antichrist’s religion will put forward that they are the true followers of God, the new church or new revelation, so to speak.
Augustine does not suggest the physical temple is rebuilt, which is hardly surprising given his views on Israel and the Church, and suggests that the antichrist puts himself forward as the dwelling place of God. He raises here the idea that it may not be literal, and might possibly be understood differently. John Chrysostom (Homilies on 2 Thessalonians, Homily 3) also argues that the temple may refer to the church as well as in Jerusalem. After all, the church is the temple of God (1 Corinthians 6, etc) and we are told that ravenous wolves will come in (Matthew 7:15; 2 Peter 2).
In the prophecy of Daniel 9, the temple was already destroyed by the Babylonians. The prophecy describes the rebuilding of the Temple, and then in verse 26, it is destroyed again after the Messiah is cut off. In verse 27 it is then described that the daily oblations would cease (although it does not say these occur in the temple, it is often assumed) and the Abomination of Desolation is set up. Jesus, speaking of the Temple’s destruction, directs his apostles to look for the Abomination spoken of by Daniel, and does not hint at a restored temple to look for, suggesting there is no rebuilt temple. Perhaps we should consider symbolic or metaphorical options like Augustine and Chrysostom. We are left with 4 options:
- The temple is rebuilt, although it is not stated explicitly in prophecy. Some possible support for this is in 2 Thess 2:4 or Rev 11:1.
- There is no rebuilt temple, and the daily oblations cease on the temple mount, without a rebuilt temple. In Revelation 11:1-2, the whole temple is included, not merely the inner sanctum (Matthew 23:16f, 35 27:40; Mark 14:58; Mark 15:29; John 2:19; Revelation 11:2; Acts 19:24) thus showing temple may here refer to the whole complex or mount itself.
- It is metaphorical or symbolic of the church. Revelation 21:22; 1 Corinthians 3:16; 2 Corinthians 6:16; Ephesians 2:211 Corinthians 6:19 etc.
- The antichrist ascends to the temple/sanctuary/dwelling of God in heaven (Rev 11:19). The word temple (G3485 – ναός/naos) in 2 Thess 2:4 is from the root ναίω/naíō, to dwell. It is the same word used in Rev 11:19 of the temple of God in heaven.
The antichrist ascending into the temple of God in heaven is rarely up for consideration, because how would any human make this happen? Impossible! And yet, we do have a candidate who claimed to ascend and sit in the dwelling place of God in heaven.
Showing himself to be God
Both Augustine and Chrysostom raise important points, that the antichrist will show or put himself forth, and will not actually declare himself to be God himself, as some translations have suggested. The idea that the antichrist will declare himself to be actually God is at odds with the antichrist kingdom (the Sea Beast) presented in Revelation 13. That kingdom is explicitly religious and worships the Dragon (Satan): “And they worshiped the dragon because he gave his authority to the beast, and they worshiped the beast…“.
There is a similar instance in Scripture of a man appearing as God to those he faces. In Exodus 7:1-2 God instructs Moses, “Then Yahweh said to Moses, “See, I set you as God to Pharaoh, and your brother Aaron shall be your prophet. 2 You shall speak all that I command you, and your brother Aaron shall speak to Pharaoh that he let the sons of Israel go out of his land.” Not for one moment did Pharaoh consider Moses God for he says to Moses in Exodus 8:8, “Entreat Yahweh that He may cause the frogs to depart…”. Moses was God’s divine authority to Pharaoh, and in that sense, Moses was as God to Pharaoh, Or to keep it in the language of Paul, puts himself in the place of God and speaking God’s word to Pharaoh, or puts himself in God’s place. Thereby, the understanding a literal temple may not be required at all.
In this sense the putting himself forth as God should 2 Thessolonians 2:4 be understood. Since the people will worship the Dragon who impostures himself as God, the antichrist claims to be the divine authority to the people, to be as God to them. The antichrist encourages worship of the Dragon, and sets himself forth as the divine instrument.
None of this proves that there is no rebuilt temple, that is indeed possible, but it at the least makes it plausible, or probable, in lieu of any prophecy of a rebuilt temple, that the man of sin will put himself in God’s place as God’s divine instrument and authority. For those who insist on a physically rebuilt temple, would you have also insisted on a physical Elijah?
There are currently two primary candidates that could fit such criteria, Mohammad and the Pope. I must discount the Pope as a candidate, because for all that is wrong with Catholicisism, Rome does point people to Christ and not Satan.
Before it is insisted that the antichrist will literally claim this title, consider the events of John 10. In John 10:33, the Jews tried to stone Jesus because he called himself God. But Jesus didn’t do this directly. How did Jesus claim this? Jesus explains in verse 36 that it was because he said that he called himself the “Son of God”, that the Jews understood this as claiming to be God. And they were right. In Jesus’ defense, Jesus points to the fact that God called the Jews ‘god’ (Psalm 82), not because they considered or even declared themselves ‘God’, but because of how they acted. God calls the gods of other nations “gods” although even saying at times they were “not gods“. If God himself describes the Jews and other things as ‘god’ even when they were not actually God should we expect the Man of Sin to declare himself to be the literal Almighty?
Satan, the Dragon, who inspires this Man of Sin, said that he would ascend and be like the Most High.
12 How you have fallen from heaven, O star of the morning, son of the dawn!
Isaiah 14:12-14
You have been cut down to the earth, You who have weakened the nations!
13 But you said in your heart, ‘I will ascend to heaven;
I will raise my throne above the stars of God,
And I will sit on the mount of assembly In the recesses of the north.
14 I will ascend above the heights of the clouds; I will make myself like the Most High.’
And in accordance with Revelation 13, this is explicitly religious empire worshipping the Dragon, we are not looking for one who calls himself the Almighty or calls himself Yahweh – even Satan himself doesn’t seek this – but one who seeks to portray or have that authority.
Fulfillment
As mentioned above, there are only two possible candidates that put themselves in the place of God, the Pope, and Mohammad. And for all the wrongs of the Catholic church, they cannot meaningfully be said to encourage worship of the Dragon. Whereas, Islam does require worship of Allah.
Islam teaches that Mohammad ascended in to the temple of God in heaven. There he proclaimed that he was greater than all and the greatest prophet of all, the only one through whom Allah speaks. In Islam, Mohammad has been described as the “greatest miracle of Allah is the living embodiment of His speech”. To memorialise his ascent to heaven, Islam built the Dome of the Rock which stands on the temple mount, and caused 1260 years of desolation of Israel. It is covered in blasphemous writings against the Son, the atonement, and the Holy Spirit; It is the most antichrist writing one can write.
Paul writes too that the Man of Sin will perform miracles. The story of Mohammad varies between Mohammad performing many false wonders, and none.
- Miracles of Muhammad (peace be upon him): The Mightiest Messenger of Allah, Dr Abdul Qader Ismail, https://books.google.com.au/books?id=l43iEAAAQBAJ&printsec=frontcover#v=onepage&q&f=false
- https://simplyislam.academy/blog/miracles-of-prophet-muhammad
- https://www.whyislam.org/miracles-of-prophet-muhammad/
- https://www.islamreligion.com/articles/150/viewall/miracles-of-muhammad-part-1
- https://medium.com/@ahmadjnaous/the-3000-miracles-of-prophet-mohamad-peace-be-upon-him-7cac42510e40
If Mohammad and Islam fulfilled this passage, why haven’t we been raptured?
That’s a common question.
Firstly, Paul does not write that the rapture happens immediately afterward, and Jesus explicitly states that persecution and tribulation would follow the Abomination, and then after the Tribulation there would be a time when the sun would be darkened etc, all before the ratpure.
The lawless one can’t be Mohammad, because Jesus hasn’t returned and killed him
…whom the Lord Jesus will slay with the breath of His mouth and bring to an end by the appearance of His coming…
2 Thessalonians 2:8
The argument goes that the personal antichrist must exist at Christ’s return so Jesus can kill him. However, Revelation uses the language of Beasts as empires, not individuals, so the description must be understood with this in mind. In fact, in Revelation there is no depiction of a personal antichrist at all. And as for the depiction in 2 Thessalonians 2:8, as Augustine indicated, this refers to the host that follow the Man of Sin, not solely the man himself.
In Revelation 19:15 Jesus returns and defeats the armies who have come against Israel. with a sword that comes from his mouth. The ones mentioned by name are the Sea Beast (Islam), and False prophet (Image Beast). In Daniel 7:12, the other beasts are not killed – they are allowed to live – but their dominion is taken away. Thus we see that the this lawless one whom Jesus destroys is Islam as the Beast, not the individual person.
For the record, Amil, preterism, and postmil teach that this is symbolic of the gospel going forth by which the Beast is defeated. I contend that this is not the natural meaning, for the description in context there are actual dead bodies, and the Beast is not merely defeated but also thrown into the lack of fire.
The Restrainer
And you know what restrains him now, so that in his time he will be revealed. For the mystery of lawlessness is already at work; only he who now restrains will do so until he is taken out of the way.
2 Thessalonians 2:6-7
Paul uses “what” and “he” to describe the Restrainer. The pre-tribulationist argues this proves this is the Holy Spirit via the church, proving the rapture before the Tribulation. However, there is a fundamental problem with this. We are explicitly told that we are not gathered to Christ until this lawless one has been revealed. But for him to be revealed as the lawless one, the Restrainer needs to be taken away. This is a catch-22 for the pre-tribulationist. If the Holy Spirit working through the Church is what restrains the lawless one, then the Church must be taken away to him to manifest, but that runs directly contrary to Paul’s statement that we aren’t taken until he is revealed as the lawless one.
The early church writers mostly taught that the Roman Empire was the Restrainer and not the Holy Spirit or the church..
John Chrysostom ( Homilies on Second Thessalonians, Homily 4) teaches:
One may naturally enquire, what is that which withholds, and after that would know, why Paul expresses it so obscurely. What then is it that withholds, that is, hinders him from being revealed? Some indeed say, the grace of the Spirit, but others the Roman empire, to whom I most of all accede. Wherefore? Because if he meant to say the Spirit, he would not have spoken obscurely, but plainly, that even now the grace of the Spirit, that is the gifts, withhold him. And otherwise he ought now to have come, if he was about to come when the gifts ceased; for they have long since ceased. But because he said this of the Roman empire, he naturally glanced at it, and speaks covertly and darkly. For he did not wish to bring upon himself superfluous enmities, and useless dangers. For if he had said that after a little while the Roman empire would be dissolved, they would immediately have even overwhelmed him, as a pestilent person, and all the faithful, as living and warring to this end. And he did not say that it will be quickly, although he is always saying it — but what?
that he may be revealed in his own season,he says.
Many other early church writers concurred with this assessment. I shall not suppose another hypothesis at this time, but simply evaluate Chrysostom’s idea.
Islam defeated the Roman Empire which allowed Mohammad’s religion to ascend. Mohammad was commonly described as lawless and a brigand. He taught his followers how to break every command of God, such as temporary marriage rather than being adulterous. In fact, he taught that Allah said if Muslims will not sin, that Allah would kill them and replace them with people who will sin and seek Allah’s forgiveness. INSERT REFERENCE
Chrysostom writes complaining that Paul always describes things as quickly, that are in fact, not quick at all, but “in his own season.” But here he points out that Paul did not say this would happen quickly. Augustine of Hippo (City of God, 20.19) says he does not know what Paul means here, but says the letter recpients did know. He goes on to give some theories, starting with the Restrainer is the Roman Empire and gives the same reasons given by Chrysostom. The other main identification given in the early church is that it refers to the wicked within the church who will grow in great number to furnish the antichrist with many followers. Augustine does not identify the Holy Spirit as the restrainer, and does not consider Nero the antichrist but says that because “the mystery of lawlessness is already at work” he recounts that some believe of in his day that Nero would come back to life and he did not give that much credibility.
Conclusion
At this point in time, there are only two serious contenders for the Man of Sin who puts himself in the place of God as God’s divine agent, the Pope, and Mohmamad. While I personally do not consider the Pope to support or encourage worship of the Dragon, at least not directly, I cannot enirely dismiss Rome. Even so, at this point in time, I think the evidence points to Mohammad, who ascended to the dwelling place of God in heaven, and the Dome of the Rock, which sits on the Temple Mount testifies all manner of antichrist and blasphemous sayings, and caused 1260 years of desolation of Israel from AD.688 to AD.1948.