Copyright © 2024 Michael A. Brown
Introduction
When
the apostle Paul and Silas preached the gospel in the ancient city of
Thessalonica (now called Thessaloniki in northern Greece), and established a
new group of believers there, they could only stay for about three weeks,
before having to be sent away secretly by these new believers, because of the
trouble that the local Jews were stirring up against them (Acts 17:1-10).
However,
it is remarkable just how much teaching they had managed to convey to these young
believers in such a short space of time.
It is clear from 2 Thessalonians 2:5 that Paul thought
it was important to teach young believers about the subject of end-times prophecy. Sometime after leaving them, and around
the year 54 AD, Paul wrote his first epistle to them, that which we know as 1
Thessalonians. In this epistle, he
taught them about the return of the Lord for his bride in the
resurrection-rapture event (1 Thess. 4:13 – 5:11). So both from the time he spent with them and
from his first epistle, these young believers were certainly given a basic
knowledge about end-time events.
However,
it appears that they had at some point become unsettled, because they had received
some kind of written or verbal communication, supposedly from Paul himself,
which had confused them. So Paul wrote a
second epistle to them to state that this communication had not come from him,
but had been written falsely in his name by someone who was trying to deceive
them. In this second epistle to them, he
exposes this false teaching and corrects it (2 Thess. 2:2-3).
The
false teaching that Paul addresses, and what these young believers were
believing, was that ‘the day of the Lord’ had already come, and that they had
therefore somehow missed the gathering of believers to Christ in the
resurrection-rapture event, and so they would have to go through the time of
God’s wrath on earth (2 Thess. 2:1-2).
They were evidently afraid and thinking wrongly that they had somehow become
the objects of God’s wrath, rather than of his salvation! (cf. 1 Thess. 5:9).
So
Paul wrote this second epistle to the Thessalonians specifically to correct
this wrong thinking. The challenge that we face
in understanding 2 Thessalonians ch.2 comes from the fact that it is a supplement to what
Paul had already taught the Thessalonian believers face-to-face when he was
with them, but of course, we don’t know
exactly what that was. When a teacher
has taught a subject, but students are confused on a certain point, the teacher
does not go through it all again, but simply focuses on the part causing the
confusion, bringing clarity and understanding.
This is what Paul is seeking to do in 2 Thessalonians ch.2. He focuses only on their confusion about the
day of the Lord, rather than going once again through everything he had previously
taught them. However, if we study carefully
what this chapter teaches, then we can piece it all together.
Although
much of the language used by Paul in 2 Thessalonians 2:1-12 is of an apocalyptic
character, and it is certainly based in part on the apocalyptic passage in
Daniel 11:36-37, yet Paul evidently desires that these young believers should know
and understand such matters. He does not
want them to think that such topics are beyond them and too deep for them to understand. With the powerful breaking in into this world
of the kingdom of God in Christ, as Spirit-filled believers we live in the days
of the unfolding of eschatological realities.
Therefore, we wait in active expectation of their fulfilment. We know that the day of the Lord will come as
a thief in the night, and that, when it comes, it will bring sudden
destruction. So we stay alert and
self-controlled, living as children of light, patiently watching and awaiting
the return of the Bridegroom (1 Thess. 4:15 – 5:11). And if this was true of these first-generation
Thessalonian believers, then how much more is it true of our present generation
who live in the end of these end-times?!
·
In this exegetical study only vv.1-8 are dealt
with, since the meaning of the rest of the chapter (vv.9-12) is straightforward
to understand in its description of the characteristics of Antichrist’s coming
and reign.
·
Regarding
Bible versions used in the sections below: the AV is given first as a well-known
and time-honoured version; the NIV is then given as being probably the most
popular contemporaneous version among English-speakers, and Young’s Literal
Translation is also given for vv.3-4 in order to make plain the ellipsis in v.3. The use of the AV and NIV together brings out
the significant underlying textual difference in v.2. Reference to the underlying Greek is made at appropriate
points for clarification.
Verse 1
‘Now we beseech you, brethren, by the coming of our
Lord Jesus Christ, and [by] our gathering together unto him, …’ (AV)
‘Concerning the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ and
our being gathered to him, we ask you, brothers, …’ (NIV)
ὑπέρ της
παρουσίας του κύριου – about the
coming of the Lord
καί ημων ἐπισυναγωγής ἐπ αὐτόν – and our
gathering unto him
·
In v.1, the Greek verb ἐπισυναγωγειν
means ‘to be all gathered together to one place,’
so this is clearly referring to the resurrection-rapture (cf. 1 Thess.
4:16-17). However, the context of the following
verses implies that this is not a post-tribulation rapture at the Second
Advent, and, as the sections below also show, neither does it refer to a
mid-tribulation rapture.
Guzik points out that
the wording used implies a difference between the Lord’s coming and our gathering
unto him, i.e. that there are essentially two comings of Jesus. One coming is for his church, and the
other coming is with his church in a separate event at the Second Advent.
Quoting Hiebert, Guzik says that the
grammar of the underlying Greek text in v.1 shows that: ‘The government of the
two nouns under one article makes it clear that one event, viewed under two complimentary
aspects, is thought of.’ So the event of
the Second Coming of Christ has two different aspects or parts to it: the
resurrection-rapture, and then the Second Advent proper.
The resurrection-rapture
aspect is therefore separated by a period of time from the Second Advent proper.
This is consistent with other passages in
the NT that indicate the same thing. Christ’s
return is described in two different ways (1 Thess. 4:16-17, Rev. 19:11). The timing of these two aspects is different:
the day and hour are unknown (Matt. 24:36), and, immediately after the end of a
fixed period of time in the future that we know as the tribulation period
(Matt. 24:29-31). And, different conditions
will prevail in the world at the times of these different aspects (Matt. 24:38-39,42-44
and Matt. 24:21). We first have to be
gathered to him, in order that he can later bring us back with him (cf. 1 Thess.
4:14).
Verse 2
‘…that ye be not soon shaken in mind, or be troubled,
neither by spirit, nor by word, nor by letter as from us, as that the day of
Christ is at hand.’ (AV)
‘…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.’ (NIV)
·
In v.2, Paul is referring to the confusion and fear into which
these believers had fallen. Their fear
centred on the fact that they thought the day of the Lord had already come, and
that they would therefore have to endure going through the end-times
tribulation period in which God’s wrath is poured out on earth. See the introduction above.
Paul uses the verb σαλεύω, meaning ‘to agitate or shake,’ ‘to cause to totter,’ ‘to
jolt suddenly,’ or ‘to shake thoroughly,’ and hence to disturb someone by
agitating their mind. It was commonly used
of a ship being tossed around at sea by a storm. And he also uses the verb θροέω, meaning ‘to trouble someone
in their mind,’ by alarming or frightening them.
·
Whereas the AV uses η ἡμέρα
του χριστόυ (the day
of Christ), other versions render it as η ἡμέρα
του κύριου (the
day of the Lord). Many commentators simply gloss over this underlying
textual difference by saying that these two phrases refer to the same thing (vis.
the tribulation period on earth), yet there is a significant difference between
them.
The use of the phrase ‘day of
Christ’ elsewhere in the Pauline epistles refers to the time when believers stand
together before Christ at the bema seat judgement in heaven after the
rapture, and so believers are its focus (cf. 1 Cor. 1:8, 5:5; 2 Cor. 1:14;
Phil. 1:6,10; 2:16). By contrast, the
phrase ‘day of the Lord’ refers to a time of God’s judgements on earth, in
agreement with its similar usage in the OT.
So
unbelievers are its focus, and hence it refers to the coming tribulation period (see above and cf. Acts 2:20, 1
Thess. 5:2-3; 2 Peter 3:10).
My own conviction is that these
two phrases refer to the same period of time, and so they run parallel to each
other. The ‘day of Christ’ focuses on believers in heaven
from the rapture onwards and until they return with Christ at his Second Advent. This sits well with the gathering of believers
in v.1. By contrast, the ‘day of the Lord’ focuses on unbelievers on earth during the
tribulation. This difference
is
reflected in the diagram at the end of this study.
However, the events described in
2 Thessalonians 2:1-12 clearly refer to the end-times tribulation
period on earth when Antichrist arises and reigns, so I have used the phrase ‘day of
the Lord’ throughout this study for clarity.
·
The AV uses the phrase ‘is at hand,’ whereas
the NIV renders it as ‘has already come.’
The Greek verb here is ἐνίστημι, variously meaning ‘to place in or
among,’ ‘to be upon,’ ‘to be impending,’ ‘to be close at hand,’ or ‘to be
present.’ Its use here in the perfect
indicative active form (ἐνέστηκεν) refers to an action which took place in the
past, but which has an ongoing effect in the present (cf. the modern English
present perfect tense). Hence, its
literal rendering would be ‘has come and is now present.’ So Morris says that ‘The verb does not really
mean “to be at hand,” but rather “to be present.”’ This is affirmed by Vine who says that the
translation ‘is at hand’ is wrong, and that its correct rendering should be ‘is
(now) present.’ This verb occurs six
times in the NT, and it is always used in the sense of being present (see Rom.
8:38; 1 Cor. 3:22, 7:26; Gal. 1:4; Heb. 9:9).
In two of these verses, ‘things present’ are distinguished clearly from ‘things
to come,’ (Rom. 8:38, 1 Cor. 3:22). Hence
Alford’s similar remark: ‘The teaching of the Apostles was, and of the Holy
Spirit in all ages has been, that the day of the Lord is at hand. But these Thessalonians imagined it to be
already come…’
This indicates that
these believers were afraid not that the day of the Lord on earth (i.e. the tribulation)
was coming, but that they were actually in it, rather than enjoying the ‘day of
Christ’ in heaven along with other believers during the same period. However, the sections below show that the day
of the Lord had not then come, because, if it had, according to Paul certain
things would be present and discernible in the world, which they evidently weren’t
in Paul’s day.
These believers were
shaken by the thought that they had somehow missed the rapture and were in the
tribulation, specifically because they had previously been taught by Paul that they
would escape the tribulation by being raptured (1 Thess. 4:15-17, 5:4-12). If Paul had taught them that they would go
through the tribulation, then they would certainly have welcomed the thought that
they were going through it, because they would know that it is the prelude to the
Second Advent. They would not have been
afraid.
Verse 3
‘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;’ (AV)
‘Don’t let anyone deceive you in any way, for [that
day will not come] until the rebellion occurs and the man of lawlessness is
revealed, the man doomed to destruction.’ (NIV)
‘…let not any one deceive you in any manner, because –
if the falling away may not come first, and the man of sin be revealed – the
son of the destruction, …’ (YLT)
·
The thing which complicates matters in v.3 is the
presence of an ellipsis. An ellipsis is
when a thought is expressed, but it is not completed. The writer expects the reader to know and understand
what needs to be supplied, in order for the thought to be completed and to make
sense. Paul uses an ellipsis here. He talks about a/the falling away and the revealing
of the man of sin, but he leaves this thought incomplete. He did not complete it, because he was clearly
expecting the Thessalonian believers to understand what he was referring to,
and to supply this part themselves. To
him it was obvious what words to supply, and he expected them to know this, because
he had taught it to them when he was with them.
He was referring to the coming of the day of the Lord. Of the three versions given above, it is the
YLT that perhaps brings out the ellipsis most clearly. The AV and NIV add in the words ‘that day will/shall
not come’ in italics, whereas the YLT adds in an appropriate phrase at the end
of v.4 to complete the sense (see below).
·
So Paul is not talking here about
the gathering of believers to Christ in the rapture, but about the day of the
Lord (i.e. the tribulation period). He
is not describing events that must happen before the rapture, but events that
are evidence of the tribulation period being present. There is no event given in Scripture that is
a sign that the rapture will take place. The rapture will be a sudden and unexpected event
that breaks into human life like a thief in the night (Matt. 24:42-44, cf. 1
Thess. 5:2). But by contrast, Paul says
here that there are two events that are evidence of the tribulation period
being present: the apostasy, and the revealing of Antichrist. He is assuring these Thessalonian believers that
they could not have missed the rapture and be in the tribulation period, because these two events had clearly not yet happened. They could be certain that the day of the Lord had not come, because these two signs were absent, despite what others might think or say.
·
The first event or sign of the tribulation period
being present is ‘a/the falling away,’ (AV and YLT) or ‘the rebellion’ (NIV). The Greek noun used is ἀποστασία, meaning ‘revolt,’ ‘rebellion,’ ‘defection’ or ‘apostasy.’ It transliterates into English as ‘apostasy,’
of course. Its primary meaning is of defection from religious
belief,
and it therefore carries a negative connotation. This is its meaning in Acts 21:21 which is its
only other use in the NT. In everyday life it was also used of political
rebels.
·
Commentators debate
whether this refers to apostasy among those who once
followed God, or whether it is a
general worldwide rebellion against the
Christian faith or Judeo-Christian values.
Each of these things are true of
the end-times (1 Tim.
4:1-3; 2 Tim. 3:1-5; 4:3-4). The concept of ἀποστασία complements
the increasing lawlessness of the end-times and the eventual removal of
restraint upon it.
·
The use of the definite article
ὁ (i.e. ‘the’) adds significance.
This is not simply ‘a falling away’ which can happen in any generation, but
‘THE falling away,’ suggesting a great end-times defection away from the
Christian faith and Judeo-Christian values.
This end-times apostasy will lead up to the time of the day of the Lord and
into the widespread spiritual deception which will characterise the reign of
Antichrist (vv.9-11). Antichrist will be
the culmination and capstone of this end-times apostasy.
·
The majority of English language translations render
ἀποστασία as ‘falling
away,’ ‘apostasy,’ or ‘rebellion,’ but it is interesting that the pre-1611 English
versions such as Tyndale, Coverdale and the Geneva version each render it as ‘departure.’ This is the secondary meaning of ἀποστασία. Although ‘departure’ can obviously mean ‘departure
from faith’ (i.e. apostasy), some commentators believe that it might be referring
to the rapture of believers when they depart from this earth. I do not hold to this view myself. The word ‘departure’ suggests leaving of one’s
own accord, whereas this is not true of the rapture which is an act of God to suddenly
catch the church away.
In this sense, the church is passive in the rapture. If the word ἀποστασία were used in this sense,
then it would make v.3 teach simply that the rapture precedes
the day of the Lord (the tribulation), and that
Antichrist is revealed. However, regardless of
this, the fact of an end-times apostasy from the Christian faith and from
Judeo-Christian values, leading ultimately into the spiritual deception and
delusion of Antichrist’s reign, is taught elsewhere by Jesus himself (Matt.
24:10-11,24).
·
Note the use
of the Greek adverb πρῶτον (meaning ‘first’) in the context of [the] apostasy. This word is used of the apostasy, but not of
the revealing of Antichrist. So we can
expect to see a significant, perhaps worldwide apostasy before the day
of the Lord and therefore before the rapture, although it is not a sign of the
rapture. But the revealing of Antichrist
happens at the beginning of the day of the Lord, just after the rapture has
taken place (v.8). It is evidence that the
day of the Lord is present.
·
The use of πρῶτον in
v.3 and another adverb of time τότε in v.8
(meaning ‘then’) indicates that there will be a definite chronological order in
the outworking of these eschatological events.
The day of the Lord cannot begin without the ἀποστασία developing first;
Antichrist the man of lawlessness cannot be revealed without that which
restrains him being removed; and, Christ cannot return to earth to annihilate
Antichrist, without Antichrist arising first.
So each of these events has a specific, but as-yet-unknown appointed
time, a ‘proper’ time, for their fulfilment in the purposes of God (cf. 1 Tim.
6:14-15; 1 Thess. 5:1-3; 2 Thess. 2:6).
This order of events is indicated in the diagram at the end of this
study.
·
Given that the day of the Lord is the period of the
pouring out of God’s end-times wrath, this general apostasy will therefore continue
on and worsen during the tribulation after the rapture when
there remain only corrupt and nominal churches anyway. It will culminate in the overt error and
delusion of Antichrist’s reign. However,
this does not necessarily imply that people cannot come to faith and get saved
during that time. Many people assuredly
will, but the general context of Antichrist’s reign and God’s judgements being poured
out on the world, mean that the context of this coming to faith will be markedly
different to what we experience now. It
will be a context of worldwide persecution and martyrdom for believers.
·
The point that Paul is making is clear: ‘You are worried that you somehow missed the
rapture and that you are in the time of the tribulation. But this cannot be true because we have not
yet seen this great apostasy which happens first. Therefore, we cannot be in the time of
the day of the Lord.’
·
The second event which is evidence of the tribulation
period being present is the revealing of Antichrist, the man of sin. The AV and YLT have ὁ
ἄνθρωπος της ἁμαρτίας (‘the man
of sin’), whereas the NIV has ὁ ἄνθρωπος της
ἀνομίας (‘the man of lawlessness’). The
use of ἀνομία is apposite to the context of restraint and
its removal (vv.6-7). Its various renderings
as ‘lawlessness,’ ‘iniquity’ or ‘wickedness’ imply a wilful casting off of restraint
and the flagrant defiance of God-given boundaries (cf. 1 John 3:4). This lawlessness will be reflected deeply in
Antichrist’s satanic character.
·
Antichrist
is a person. In v.3, he is plainly called
‘the man of sin,’ using the Greek noun ἄνθρωπος
which refers to a human being, rather than an organisation or principle. This is how the end-times Antichrist has
always been viewed, both in Judaism and Christianity. Other references to him in the Scriptures all
indicate that he is a person (e.g. Dan.
7:8, 11:36f; 2 Thess. 2:8-9; Rev. 17:11).
·
The
additional reference in v.3 to Antichrist as ‘the son of perdition’ (ὁ υἱός της ἀπώλειας) also supports this. The
Greek noun ἀπώλεια refers to utter destruction or
ruination, not in terms of extinction, but in terms of loss of well-being. It highlights the depth
of evil character which will be displayed by Antichrist, and therefore suggests
the lamentable state to which the world will be reduced by the end of his rule
during the tribulation. It also indicates
his final and deserved destiny: he is doomed to destruction in the eternal lake
of fire.
·
The
Greek verb ἀποκαλύπτειν means ‘to take the
cover off something that is there but which has been previously hidden,’ and
hence ‘to unveil,’ ‘to reveal’ or ‘to disclose.’ It is used three times of Antichrist in this
passage (vv.3,6,8). However, the adverb
πρῶτον in this verse does not
apply to the revealing of Antichrist, so he is not revealed before the day of
the Lord. He is revealed at the
beginning of the day of the Lord when his appointed time has come, just after
the restraint on his revealing has been removed, and this is evidence that the
day of the Lord is present (vv.6-8). This is indicated by the aorist
passive subjunctive form ἀποκαλυφθῇ in v.3, which gives the sense ‘that day
shall not be present except… the man of sin has been revealed.’ So the revealing of Antichrist is certainly related
to the ‘day of Christ’ in v.2, but it is a concomitant of the ‘day of the Lord,’
rather than a precursor of the rapture which initiates the ‘day of Christ’ for believers.
·
So,
again, Paul’s point is clear. The
Thessalonian believers were worried that they were in the tribulation period,
and that they had somehow missed the rapture. But Paul assures them that they could know
that they were not in the tribulation, because they had not yet seen the man of
sin revealed. Therefore, before the tribulation
period can be identified with certainty, a particular person, the man of sin,
must be revealed to the world.
Verse 4
‘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.’ (AV)
‘He will oppose and will exalt himself over everything
that is called God or is worshipped, so that he sets himself up in God’s
temple, proclaiming himself to be God.’ (NIV)
‘…who
is opposing and is raising himself up above all called God or worshipped, so
that he in the sanctuary of God as God hath sat down, shewing himself off that
he is God [– the day doth not come.]’ (YLT)
·
As I said above, the YLT adds in a
suitable phrase in italics at the end of v.4 to fill in and make sense of the
ellipsis in v.3.
·
Paul describes this man of sin as ὁ
ἀντικείμενος, the one ‘who lies opposite
and opposes,’ ‘who withstands,’ ‘who is contrary to,’ and ‘who is an adversary’
to Christ. The related verb ἀντίκειμαι
had a figurative meaning of ‘being repugnant to,’ and it is
used in Galatians 5:17 of the antagonism between the Holy Spirit and the flesh in
a believer. He is also described as
being ὁ ὑπεραιρόμενος, the one who ‘becomes haughty’ and ‘raises himself over,’
and so he exalts himself over everything called ‘god,’ including the true God. This is a description of the one who will oppose
Christ and will seek to replace him, so he is the real, end-times ἀντίχριστος: the
Antichrist (cf. 1 John 2:18).
·
When he wrote this description of Antichrist,
Paul evidently had in mind the passage in Daniel 11:36, ‘He will exalt and
magnify himself above every god and will say unheard-of things against the God
of gods,’ and he also had in mind the abomination of desolation which was set
up in the temple in Jerusalem by Antiochus Epiphanes, the historical type of
the end-times Antichrist (cf. Dan. 8:11-13, 9:27, 11:31, 12:11). Antichrist will set himself up as an object
of worship above all others (cf. Rev. 13:4,14-15).
·
This act by Antichrist of setting himself up
for worship together with his image, is the abomination of desolation which was
prophesied by Daniel and also foretold by Jesus (Matt. 24:15, Rev. 13:14-15). It happens at the mid-point of the seven-year
tribulation period (Dan. 9:27, Matt. 24:15).
Some believers think simplistically but wrongly that vv.3-4 taken together
mean that the revelation of the man of sin therefore happens at this point,
i.e. that people will understand that this evil man is the end-times Antichrist
only at this point when he sets himself up in the temple. And so they also believe that the removal of
the restrainer referred to in vv.6-7 must therefore happen at this time, and that
the rapture therefore happens at the mid-point of the tribulation (with the day
of the Lord then following). Hence the
mid-tribulation viewpoint of the rapture.
However, if we follow this kind of thinking, then it would mean that in
v.8 the revelation of Antichrist takes place on the day he meets his demise at
the hands of the Lord Jesus at the Second Advent. But this is nonsense, of course.
·
What Paul is doing here, in both v.4 and
v.8, is to refer forward to things that will happen during the time of Antichrist. Expressed simply, and synthesising vv.3-5 and
v.8, he is saying to these believers, ‘The rebellion will occur and the man of
sin will be revealed, and, oh yes!, that’s the one who will set himself up in
the temple, and who will be overthrown by Jesus at his Second Advent. Don’t you remember I told you this when I was
with you?’ So this reference in v.4 to events
which happen at the mid-tribulation point, does not mean that the day of the
Lord begins then, or that the rapture happens then. See my further comments below in the section
on v.8.
·
The Greek noun used for ‘temple’ is ναός (naos). This indicates the most holy place, rather than
the temple building as a whole. Antichrist
will seat himself down in the most holy place and proclaim himself to be God. This action is clearly a claim to deity.
·
So these words refer to a literal physical
temple. This is the way the early believers
would have understood them, and it is the way that the disciples would have
understood Jesus’ related reference to ‘the holy place’ and the end-times abomination
of desolation (Matt. 24:15). Furthermore,
that this is the way it was understood by the Early Fathers is clear from the
writing of Irenaeus in the second century AD: ‘But when this Antichrist shall
have devastated all things in this world, he will reign for three years and six
months, and sit in the temple at Jerusalem; and then the Lord will come from
heaven in the clouds, in the glory of the Father, sending this man and those
who follow him into the lake of fire; but bringing in for the righteous the times
of the kingdom.’ (Against Heresies 5:30:4).
·
The words of v.4 cannot mean that
Antichrist will set himself up in the spiritual temple of the body of Christ,
i.e. that he will be some kind of false ‘Christian’ religious leader who leads
the worldwide Church into her end-times apostasy. To be consistent with Matthew 24:15 and
Daniel 9:27, it can only refer to him setting himself up in the temple that will
be rebuilt in Jerusalem in the early part of the seven-year period (Rev. 11:1-2,
cf. Dan. 9:27).
Verse 5
‘Remember ye not, that, when I was yet with you, I
told you these things?’ (AV)
‘Don’t you remember that when I was with you I used to
tell you these things?’ (NIV)
·
Paul reminds them that he had already told
them these things when he was with them.
·
This rhetorical question is a
parenthetical interjection into his line of thought which goes from v.4
directly to v.6.
Verse 6
‘And now ye know what withholdeth that he might be
revealed in his time.’ (AV)
‘And now you know what is holding him back, so that he
may be revealed at the proper time.’ (NIV)
·
το κατέχον in v.6 is the neuter form: so it means
‘that (which) restrains,’ or, ‘what is restraining.’
Verse 7
‘For the mystery of iniquity doth already work: only
he who now letteth will let, until he be taken out of the way.’ (AV)
‘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.’ (NIV)
·
ὁ κατέχων in v.7 is the masculine form: so it means
‘the one (who is) restraining.’
Making more
sense of the wider context of vv.1-12
·
A basic principle of hermeneutics (Bible
interpretation) is that passages which are perhaps more difficult to
understand, should be interpreted in the light of others which are easier to
understand, and also in the light of the plain teaching of their immediate
context.
·
So, although the ellipsis in v.3 and the grammar
of vv.6-7 present challenges to our understanding, yet we can certainly discern
and follow Paul’s general line of thought in the wider context of this
passage. It is clear that there is a day
of the Lord. There is an apostasy. There is a man of sin. There is something or someone who presently
restrains, but this restraint will at some point be removed. These are the four main themes of vv.1-8.
·
Furthermore, in terms of the whole passage
in vv.1-12, it is helpful to note the interplay of several contrasting opposites. Antichrist as the end-times antagonist of
Christ. Deception, error and strong
delusion coming in consequence of refusing the love of the truth. And the tension between the lawlessness which
opposes and withstands the will and working of God in this world, and that
which restrains and holds back the full outworking of such lawlessness.
·
This understanding of the wider context
helps us to resolve any difficulty which we may have in understanding vv.6-7.
A note regarding
that which restrains
·
The Greek verb κατέχειν is used twice in its
present participle form in vv.6-7. It variously
means ‘to hold fast,’ ‘to hold down,’ ‘to restrain,’ ‘to hinder the course or
progress of,’ ‘to hold back,’ ‘to keep in check,’ ‘to detain,’ ‘to keep secure,’
or ‘to keep firm possession of.’ Its
neuter present participle form το κατέχον (meaning ‘that which restrains,’ or,
‘what is restraining’) is used in v.6, and its masculine present participle form
ὁ κατέχων (meaning ‘the one who restrains,’ or, ‘the one who is
restraining’) is used in v.7. This present
participle form carries a sense of continuing action.
Verse 6
καὶ νῦν τὸ κατέχον οἴδατε, εἰς τὸ
ἀποκαλυφθῆναι αὐτὸν ἐν τῷ ἑαυτοῦ καιρῷ
·
The modern Greek text places a comma
between the two clauses of this verse to help to understand its sense. This is the version given just above.
·
As I said above, Paul’s rhetorical
question in v.5 is an interjection into his line of thought, so in that sense
it is parenthetical. His line of argument
flows from v.4 directly to v.6.
Therefore, the object of
the participle τὸ κατέχον
(‘that
which is restraining’) in the first clause of v.6, is the man
of sin in vv.3-4. So it is Antichrist,
the one who will oppose and exalt himself over God, whose revealing is being
held back until its appointed time has come.
This participle is expressed in the present tense, implying therefore that
this restraint is presently working in the world, and it is holding back the revealing
of the man of sin, before his appointed time has come.
·
Therefore, τὸ κατέχον is also referring to ‘he’, the αὐτὸν in the second clause of the
verse, i.e. Antichrist. So the sense of
v.6 is: ‘And now you know what is restraining him, that he might be revealed in
his time.’
·
The preposition εἰς (meaning ‘to’ or ‘into’) at
the beginning of the second clause indicates the purpose of τὸ κατέχον, i.e. that the restraint
will continue until the appointed time has come for the revealing of Antichrist. So the sense is ‘…that which restrains him,
that he may not be revealed before his time.’
Verse 7
τὸ γὰρ μυστήριον ἤδη ἐνεργεῖται τῆς
ἀνομίας, μόνον ὁ κατέχων ἄρτι ἕως ἐκ μέσου γένηται
·
Again, the modern Greek version inserts a
comma between the two clauses of v.7, helping us to understand the sense of the
verse. This version is given just above.
·
The secret power of lawlessness (NIV) is called
a ‘mystery’ in the AV (the Greek neuter noun τὸ μυστήριον). This description is also used elsewhere of
the kingdom of heaven (Matt. 13:11); of God’s will (Eph.1:9); of Christ (Eph. 3:4);
of the gospel (Eph. 6:19); of godliness (1 Tim. 3:16), and so on. This Greek word signifies something which is presently
hidden, but which will be revealed at some point. So τὸ
μυστήριον
τῆς ἀνομίας is the as yet secret working of the antichrist power of
lawlessness in this world which will one day be revealed fully in the person of
Antichrist.
·
The phrase τὸ γὰρ μυστήριον ἤδη
ἐνεργεῖται τῆς ἀνομίας, expressed with ἤδη ἐνεργεῖται (‘already working’)
inserted between τὸ γὰρ μυστήριον (‘for the mystery’) and τῆς ἀνομίας (‘of
lawlessness’), simply emphasises that the mystery of lawlessness is already
working (i.e. in Paul’s day, long before the actual revealing of Antichrist).
·
When we look closely at the second clause
of v.6 and the first clause of v.7, we can see that Paul is highlighting the
tension between ‘a mystery presently hidden,’ as opposed to ‘it being revealed
at some point,’ and between ‘it is already working,’ as opposed to ‘it will be revealed
only when its time has come.’ It is the
presence of restraint, as expressed in the first clause of v.6 and the second
clause of v.7, which creates this tension.
·
So ‘the mystery’ of v.7 (τὸ μυστήριον)
does not refer back to τὸ κατέχον
(‘that
which is restraining’) in v.6. It would
be a grammatical fallacy to identify these as being the same thing simply
because they are both of the same neuter gender. To do so would make lawlessness the restrainer
(expressed in its neuter form in v.6), and therefore that it is God’s truth that
is being restrained in this world. This fallacy
then leads logically on to another similar fallacy, if we identify the man of
sin in vv.3,4,6 with the ὁ κατέχων
of
v.7 (i.e. the restrainer in its masculine form) for the same reason that they
are again both of the same masculine gender.
This would make v.7 imply that Antichrist is present and working in this
world, and he will one day ‘arise from the midst.’ However, he is not yet present and
working in the world: his time has not yet come (v.6).
·
What Paul is saying is that the mystery of
lawlessness is already working in this world, and its culmination will be in
the revealing of Antichrist, but this revealing is presently being restrained, in
order that it may only happen at its God-appointed time. So it is specifically the revealing of Antichrist
which is being restrained. It is true
that evil men can and do suppress the truth (cf. Rom. 1:18 which uses the same
verb κατέχειν),
but it is equally true that the truth, salt and light of God actively working in
this world in and through his Church suppress and restrain lawlessness. Both of these things are true at one and the
same time, and this is why we see the present see-saw political battle in
Western societies between the liberal left and the conservative right. Evil men certainly can and do suppress, restrain
and hinder the progress of truth, but, at the end of the day, they cannot stop
its progress. The point Paul is making here
is that the revealing of Antichrist is prevented altogether until its
appointed time has come. It is ‘held
down fast,’ so that it cannot happen until then, even though lawlessness is presently
working.
·
In the second clause of v.7, the verb ‘letteth’
used in the AV is Old English. It can be
found in the writings of Chaucer, Latimer and Shakespeare, and it was also used
by Coverdale in his earlier English translation. Its meaning was simply ‘to hinder’ or ‘to prevent,’
reflecting the use of the underlying Greek verb κατέχειν. So it should not be confused with the modern
English verb ‘to let’ (meaning ‘to allow’) which would actually suggest the
opposite idea.
·
The italicised form of the words ‘will let’
in the AV indicate that these are not present in the underlying Greek text. Therefore, some commentators see an ellipsis
here. So, just as in v.3, we are
expected to supply the needed words, in order to complete the sense of the whole
sentence. The phrase μόνον ὁ κατέχων ἄρτι (‘only the one
presently restraining’) refers to the ongoing nature of the restraint over the
lawlessness already working. So
the addition of a phrase such as ‘will continue to restrain’ is suitable, and
is suggested by the use of the adverbs ἄρτι (meaning ‘now’ or ‘presently’)
and ἕως (‘until’), and in fact by
the context that the restraint on the revealing of Antichrist will continue
until its appointed time (v.6). Hence,
this part of v.7 can therefore be rendered as ‘only the one presently restraining
[will continue to restrain] until...’. The
working of lawlessness would rise quickly into a fully developed form were it not for this
restraining influence!
However, Alford believes
that ὁ κατέχων is placed in v.7 before ἕως for the sake of emphasis, so that the sense of ‘μόνον ὁ κατέχων ἄρτι ἕως…’ is
actually ‘only until he that presently hinders…’ This then gives a complete sense to the rest
of this clause without the need for supplying an extra verb to fill in an apparent
ellipsis (and see below). Alford believes
that it should be understood this way, rather than supplying another verb to
fill in an ellipsis.
·
The use of the present participle form ὁ
κατέχων in the second clause of v.7 implies the present working of restraint
through this restrainer. It means ‘the
one who is restraining,’ not simply ‘the restrainer’ (which would be a noun). So this person who is restraining is present in
the world today, and continues to do his restraining work, just as we noted for
τὸ
κατέχον in the first clause of v.6. The presence of ἄρτι
(meaning
‘presently’) in the second clause of v.7, and which refers to ὁ κατέχων enforces
this sense of the continuing present working of this restrainer.
·
The Greek verb γίνομαι occurs more than
670 times in the NT Greek text underlying the AV, and it is one of the most
difficult to translate into English. A
simple check through Strong’s and Vine’s shows just what a huge variety of
meanings it can have. The phrase ἕως ἐκ μέσου γένηται
at
the end of v.7 would literally be rendered as ‘until he becomes out of the
midst.’ However, the context of what we
have noted above, and of the wording at the beginning of v.8 (καί τότε),
indicates that what had previously been restraining is withdrawn, leading to the
revealing of Antichrist in v.8.
·
The adverb ἕως (‘until’) is used with the aorist
middle subjunctive form γένηται to express a future action. Furthermore, it also indicates the continuing
action of the restrainer, so the subject of the verb γένηται must be ὁ
κατέχων (the one who is restraining), not Antichrist of the next sentence in
v.8.
·
So the meaning of the phrase ἐκ μέσου
γένηται is that that which has been restraining is no longer ‘in the midst.’ Therefore, it has been taken away, allowing
the revealing of Antichrist to take place in v.8. Hence Alford’s remark that this phrase ‘is
used of any person or thing which is taken out of the way, whether by death or
other removal.’
·
With these several points in mind, the
overall sense of v.7 is now made clear: ‘only until he who is presently restraining
is taken away from the midst.’
·
And hence we also arrive at the correct
rendering of the sense of vv.6-7 as follows: ‘And now you know what is restraining
him, in order that he may be revealed in his own time. For the mystery of lawlessness is already
working, only until he that presently restrains is taken away.’ Such a rendering is reflected uniformly in the
majority of different English language translations.
·
So the meaning of vv.6-7 is that there is
a dynamic power of lawlessness working in the world, which opposes Christ and
the work of God, but which is presently being restrained by an evidently
greater power, until at some stage this restraint is removed, allowing the
revealing of Antichrist to take place at its appointed or ‘proper’ time. Antichrist cannot be revealed before his
appointed time has come.
·
The spirit of antichrist, the seductive working
of the spiritual power of lawlessness which opposes the gospel of Christ, is
already working in this world (1 John 2:18-19,22, 4:3; 2 John v.7). However, it is presently being restrained, and
it cannot manifest fully in its destructive influence on the world. So it is not Antichrist himself, but a
precursor of the end-times Antichrist. This
restraint will ultimately be removed, allowing Antichrist to be revealed and
his tyrannical satanic power to then work openly and without restraint on a worldwide
scale, during the day of the Lord (vv.9-10).
Antichrist will be the ultimate embodiment of this spirit of lawlessness.
Who or
what then is the restrainer?
·
So there are actually three things, rather
than just two, that are evidence that we are living in the day of the Lord – the
apostasy (which happens first, as we saw above); the presence of Antichrist;
and also the removal of the restraint, in order that Antichrist can be revealed. In their chronological order: the apostasy happens
first, then the restraint is removed at some point, and this causes Antichrist
to be revealed.
·
There have been many attempts to suggest
who or what the restrainer is. The
reader can pursue their own study of this.
The Thessalonian believers knew what or who this restraining power was,
because Paul had told them previously (vv.5-6).
So he presupposes it here, and he does not state it again.
·
However, many commentators believe that the
change in gender, from the neuter form το
κατέχον in v.6 to the masculine form ὁ κατέχων in v.7, implies that the identity of the restrainer is
a person, rather than it simply being an impersonal force or principle. Therefore, the one who is presently holding
back the revealing of Antichrist and thereby holding back the full, unrestrained
working of lawlessness in the world, is a person. Ridderbos calls this change of gender ‘striking,’
and he does suggest that the restraint is divine.
·
Personally, I believe that the only power
which is capable of restraining the satanic power of lawlessness on a worldwide
scale, is the greater spiritual power of God himself. No human or angelic construct, figure or power,
neither any abstract principle, is capable of doing this.
·
So it is the greater divine power of God himself
which restrains, and continues to restrain, albeit in many unseen ways, the
secret but lesser satanic power of lawlessness, which will have its culmination
in the end-times apostasy and revealing of Antichrist in this world.
·
However, many commentators believe that we
can be more specific regarding this divine restraint. It is clear from vv.3,8 that the day of the
Lord cannot be present without the concomitant revealing of Antichrist, and the
passage in 1 Thessalonians 4:15 – 5:10 further indicates that the end-times day
of God’s wrath, the day of the Lord, is triggered by the resurrection-rapture
event.
·
So it is reasonable then to identify the
removal of restraint with the resurrection-rapture event, and therefore also to
identify the present restraining force in this world with the active divine
presence and power of the Holy Spirit working in and through the body of Christ,
even though the Holy Spirit is not explicitly mentioned in vv.6-7. The Holy Spirit working in this world is the
divine restrainer who is actively holding back the power of lawlessness. His presence and power presently working in
and through the Church, as the light of the world and the salt of the earth, provide
a restraint which holds back the full, unrestrained working of lawlessness in this
world, until the appointed time for the revealing of Antichrist has come. This restraint of his will be removed by the sudden
gathering together of believers to Christ in the resurrection-rapture event (v.1),
triggering the day of the Lord and the subsequent revealing of Antichrist.
·
When we say that the Holy Spirit will be ‘taken
out of the way’ at the time of the rapture, we do not mean that he will be
removed completely from planet earth. He
is God and therefore is omnipresent, so he cannot be removed in that sense. It is simply his restraint that is removed.
He will still be working in and through
people even during the tribulation period (Rev. 7:3-14, 11:3-6). It simply means that his active presence and
power in and through the Church are taken out of the way, by believers being taken
away in the rapture, and therefore that the present restraint upon lawlessness in
this world has been removed, giving the world over to the subsequent rise and reign
of Antichrist at the appointed time.
·
So Antichrist the lawless one will be
revealed when the Holy Spirit removes his restraint, i.e. after the resurrection-rapture
when believers are gathered together to Christ.
Antichrist cannot be revealed until
the rapture has taken place. It is
certainly true that the timing of the removal of restraint does coincide with
the resurrection-rapture event, which triggers the day of the Lord and the revealing
of Antichrist. This is supported contextually
in this passage by the simple fact that these believers were anxious that they
had somehow missed the gathering to Christ and found themselves in the day of
the Lord (vv.1-2).
·
The resurrection-rapture event therefore marks the
beginning of the ‘day of Christ’ for believers, as well as being the trigger of
the end-times ‘day of the Lord’ on earth for those left behind, by removing restraint
and allowing the revealing and rise of Antichrist. This understanding of the restrainer supports
a pre-tribulation view of the rapture.
Further thoughts on the removal of restraint
·
The further question which arises now is:
Does the totality of the divine restraint on lawlessness in this world consist exclusively
in the working of the presence and power of the Holy Spirit in and through the
Church? Or is this latter simply part of
a greater divine restraint, and perhaps its most visible part on earth?
So, are we correct to identify the removal of the Holy Spirit’s presence and power in and through the Church in the resurrection-rapture event, with the totality of the removal of divine restraint which will take place at that time? Or are there also other providential ways in which God restrains lawlessness in this world, apart from what he does in and through the Church as the salt of the earth and light of the world?
However we answer these
questions, it is true that the resurrection-rapture event does signify at the
very least a major part of the removal of divine restraint, with God simultaneously
removing other unseen providential parts of his restraint.
Verse 8
‘And then shall that Wicked be revealed, whom the Lord
shall consume with the spirit of his mouth, and shall destroy with the
brightness of his coming:’ (AV)
‘And
then the lawless one will be revealed, whom the Lord Jesus will overthrow with
the breath of his mouth and destroy by the splendour of his coming.’ (NIV)
καί τότε
ἀποκαλύφθησεται ὁ
ἄνομος – and then the lawless one
will be revealed
·
The Greek uses ὁ ἄνομος (the lawless one,
cf. v.3).
·
The use of the conjunction and the adverb of time –
καί τότε – meaning
‘and at that time,’ or, ‘and then,’ makes it clear that Antichrist will be
revealed after the one who is restraining the power of lawlessness in this
world has been taken out of the way.
The position of καί τότε at the beginning of the clause means that the
emphasis is on ‘then.’ So he who was restraining has been taken
away, and the mystery of lawlessness in v.7 is finally and fully
unveiled in the revealing of Antichrist.
This revealing of Antichrist is not simultaneous with the rapture (when
restraint is taken away), it follows shortly afterwards.
·
Furthermore,
the reference in v.8 to him being destroyed by Christ, clearly refers to Christ’s
Second Advent (cf. Isa. 11:4, Rev. 19:11-21).
The revelation of Antichrist is self-evidently not concomitant with his
destruction at the Second Advent. So Paul
here is simply referring ahead to Antichrist’s ultimate demise, just as in v.4
he referred ahead to him as being the one who will seat himself in the temple
and proclaim himself to be God (which happens at the mid-point of the seven-year
tribulation period). So vv.3-4 should be
understood in this same kind of way, just as here in v.8. Paul is not saying that the revelation of
Antichrist in v.3 will occur at the same time as the event of v.4 which is at the
midpoint of the tribulation. The revelation
of Antichrist in v.3 occurs earlier than this.
·
The two
verbs ἀναλίσκω and καταργέω mean respectively ‘to consume’ or ‘to destroy,’
and ‘to reduce to inactivity,’ ‘to nullify,’ or to ‘bring to nought.’ Some versions render the latter verb as ‘to
annihilate.’
·
This singularly evil man, possessed and
empowered by Satan, will represent and embody within himself the zenith of
human hostility, defiance, enmity and rebellion against God. He will fight against everything that Christ
stands for in this world. During the time
of his reign, people will be deceived and deluded by every sort of error and evil.
Unbelief, godlessness, lawlessness and immorality
will have no restraint and will know no bounds.
They will be gelled together into an organic unity fully embodied and
concentrated in Antichrist, and will throw themselves in any and every way
against the knowledge of God and Christ.
This then is the totality of what it means to be fallen humanity, all
gathered together and embodied in one human figure: Antichrist.
·
Unbelievers, who are already perishing and
on their way to perdition (τοις απολλυμενοις, v.10), will be deceived by the powerful
delusions of Antichrist’s reign (literally, ‘the working of error,’ ενεργειαν πλανης,
v.11), because they did not receive the love of the truth when it was offered
to them, but rather believed the seductive lie of the mystery of lawlessness
working among them. So they will
ultimately be condemned (vv.10-12). If people
do not believe the truth, then they will a priori have faith in the lie.
·
So, two facts are clear from vv.6-8: Antichrist will be revealed after
the Holy Spirit has removed his restraint on lawlessness at the rapture, and, he
will be destroyed by the Lord Jesus at his Second Advent. He will then be cast into the lake of fire to meet
his eternal fate (Rev. 19:20).
So Antichrist will be dealt with
decisively by Jesus and destroyed, together with all the ungodliness and human
defiance which opposed him and which was embodied in Antichrist.
·
I do not believe that Paul was concerned
at all about the very short gap in time between the rapture and revealing of
Antichrist. He saw the different concepts
in this passage as interrelated, and he is giving an overview of their
interconnectedness, rather than attempting to give an account of their chronological
order with mathematical exactitude. This
reflects a fundamental difference between Paul’s Hebrew mindset and modern analytical
thinking. The day of the Lord on earth
is triggered by the rapture, but Antichrist is only revealed very shortly afterwards. In that very short intervening interval, Antichrist
evidently hasn’t been revealed. If we
were to have missed the rapture just a very short time ago, and therefore knew
that we were now in the ‘day of the Lord,’ then we would know exactly what was
going to happen very quickly: it would be the time for Antichrist to be
revealed with wrath to follow. This is
the way that Paul is thinking.
Paul’s teaching in 2 Thessalonians 2:1-12 is summarised diagrammatically below:
Bibliography
Alford,
H. Commentary on the Greek New Testament, available in e-Sword, accessed
24.02.2024.
Guzik,
D. Enduring Word Commentary, 2020, e-Sword Version, 2020, accessed 24.02.2024.
Ridderbos,
H., De Witt, J.R. (Tr.), Paul: An Outline of His Theology, Eerdmans:
Grand Rapids, 1997, pp.508-528.
Copyright Notice
THE HOLY BIBLE, NEW
INTERNATIONAL VERSION®, NIV® Copyright © 1973, 1978, 1984, 2011 by Biblica,
Inc.® Used by permission. All rights reserved worldwide.
Scripture
quotations from The Authorized (King James) Version. Rights in the Authorized
Version in the United Kingdom are vested in the Crown. Reproduced by permission of the Crown’s
patentee, Cambridge University Press.
Scripture
quotations marked (YLT) are taken from the 1898 YOUNG’S LITERAL TRANSLATION OF
THE HOLY BIBLE by J.N.Young, (Author of the Young’s Analytical Concordance),
public domain.
No comments:
Post a Comment