1. The first class of expositors are those who regard all the usual interpretations as proceeding from a fake assumption as if there were a prophecy, whereas there is in reality no prediction at all. This opinion is adopted by Koppe, Pelt, De Wette, Lunemann, Jowett, and Davidson. Koppe appears to have been the earliest who took this view of the passage. He idealizes the prediction, and supposes that the apostle is only stating his impressions of what might be the future state of the Church from a consideration of the times in which he lived. The apostle was profoundly impressed with the prophecies of Daniel, and from them he dreaded an outburst of evil after his death, and he expressed his forebodings in language coloured from Daniel. Pelt supposes that the mystery of iniquity was the inward principle of evil which the apostle foresaw would afterwards break forth in a more open and violent form; that the restraining power was the wilt of God holding back the kingdom of Satan; and that the coming of Christ was the final victory of good over evil. So also De Wette observes, "He goes altogether wrong who finds here any more than the apostle's subjective anticipation, from his own historical position, of the future of the Christian Church. Instead of rising to the example of Christ, acknowledging the limitation which there is to a definite foreknowledge of the future, the apostle pays a tribute to human weakness, since he wanted to know too much beforehand."£ Lunemann considers that Paul was so entirely engrossed by his ideas of the proximity of the advent that, carried away by his individuality, he "wished to settle more exactly concerning its circumstances and conditions the historical relations of the coming of Christ than is allotted to man in general to know, even although he should be the apostle, the most filled with the Spirit of God."£ "Such passages [Colossians 2:8, Colossians 2:16; Ephesians 6:12]," observes Professor Jowett, "are a much safer guide to the interpretation of the one we are considering than the meaning of similar passages in the Old Testament. For they indicate to us the habitual thought of the apostle's mind; 'a falling away first,' suggested, probably, by the wavering which he saw among his own converts, the grievous wolves entering into the Church of Ephesus (Acts 20:29), the turning away of all them of Asia (2 Timothy 1:15). When we consider that his own converts and Jewish opponents or half converts were all the world to him; that through them, as it were in a glass, he appeared to see the workings of human nature generally, we understand how this double image of good and evil should have presented itself to him, and the kind of necessity that he felt that Christ and Antichrist should alternate with each other. It was not that he foresaw some great conflict, decisive of the destinies of mankind. What he anticipated for man nearly resembled the spiritual combat in the seventh chapter of the Romans."£ And Dr. Davidson remarks, "The passage does not contain a prophecy, but rather the writer's notion on a subject which did not concern the proper faith and duty of mankind. Those notions were shaped by the floating belief of his day, and have nothing beyond an historical interest. They belong to the past of Christianity—to its infantine state, when it was emerging out of Judaism, and assuming that independent position to which no man contributed so much as the apostle of the Gentiles.£
Such a view is at variance with the ides of inspiration—in other words, with the supposition that the apostle was guided in writing by a higher Spirit than his own. The supernatural is entirely overlooked; the apostle writes according to his own fancies; he is led astray by his erroneous opinions. How such a view is "entirely consistent with the apostle's inspiration" is difficult to understand, even although we employ the term "inspiration" in a very broad sense. The power of foretelling the future is denied to the sacred writers. "We take them," observes Dr. Davidson, "as guides to faith and practice generally without adopting all that they propounded, or believing that they could foretell events."£ It is evident the apostle is here giving a prediction of what shall take place; and therefore, if there were no real prediction, he was on this point mistaken and in error, and consequently uninspired. If we admit inspiration, we must receive the truths declared as the revelation of God: the Scripture contains truths to be received, and not the mere opinions of fallen men to be canvassed.
2. The second class of interpreters are those who, recognizing a prediction, regard it as already fulfilled. To this class belong Grotius, Wetstein, Hammond, Le Clerc, Whitby, Schottgen, Wieseler, Kern, Dollinger, and Baumgarten. These generally agree in considering that the prophecy received its accomplishment in Christ's coming in spirit to destroy Jerusalem, although they differ widely in details. Grotius supposes that the Man of Sin was Caligula, who demanded supreme and universal worship as god, and ordered his statue to be placed in the temple of Jerusalem; he who restrained was Vitellius, the Proconsul of Syria, who, at the risk of his life, refused to obey the order of Caligula; and the lawless one was Simon Magus. It seemed to Paul that the delineation of Antiochus Epiphanes in Daniel was to be realized in Caligula.£ But the distinction between the Man of Sin and the lawless one is incorrect, and besides, the interpretation involves an anachronism, as the Second Epistle to the Thessalonians was written after the death of Caligula. Wetstein adopts the extravagant opinion that the Man of Sin was Titus, "the delight of the human race," whose army brought their idolatrous ensigns into the captured temple and offered sacrifices there; and that the restraining influence was Nero, that monster of iniquity, whose death was necessary for the rule of Titus. Hammond imagined that, by the Man of Sin, Simon Magus, together with his followers the Gnostics, was meant; the apostasy was the falling away of the Christians into Gnosticism; and the restraining influence was the apostles, who, by still preaching to the Jews, preserved the union still subsisting between Jews and Christians.£ Le Clerc supposes that the apostasy was the revolt of the Jews from the Romans; the Man of Sin was the rebellious Jews, and especially their leader Simon the son of Giora; and the restraining power was the chief of the Jewish nation, who were against the revolt. Whitby also considers the apostasy was the revolt of the Jews from the Roman empire or from the faith; the Man of Sin was the Jewish nation, with their high priest and Sanhedrim; and the restraining power was Claudius, during whose reign the Jews would not rebel, as they were under great obligations to him.£ Schottgen also agrees with Whitby in considering that by the Man of Sin is meant the Pharisees, the rabbis, and the doctors of the Law; but he differs from him in considering that the restraining power was the prayers of the Christians, which warded off the destruction of Jerusalem until they had left the city and retired to Pella. Much more ingenious is the opinion of Wieseler. He also considers the prophecy as a prediction of the destruction of Jerusalem. "He that restraineth" must be some good influence which delayed the catastrophe, and this he considers to be the pious Jews then living, particularly the Christians; and if the singular number requires an individual, then the restrainer is James the Just, the Lord's brother. Not until James was murdered and the Christians had removed from Jerusalem was the city taken.£ Kern considers that the Man of Sin is Nero; he that restraineth is Vespasian and his son Titus; and the apostasy is the revolt of the Jews or the departure of the Christians.£ Dollinger, like Kern, supposes Antichrist to be Nero. Nero was already adopted by Claudius, and was regarded by many as the future Caesar. "He that restraineth" was Claudius. The coming of Christ was his coming to execute judgment on Jerusalem; and although Nero did not personally undertake anything against the Jews, yet he did so by his lieutenant Vespasian. The apostasy was the departure of the Christians into the errors of the Gnostics. Dollinger, however, considers that there may be a more complete fulfilment in the last days.£ Baumgarten thinks that the prophecy reflects the experience of the apostle: the Man of Sin was the Jews who everywhere opposed his preaching the gospel; the apostasy was the renunciation of Jesus as the Messiah; and the restraining influence was the imperial authority which hitherto had protected the apostle and kept the Jews in check. This opinion appears to be partially adopted by Bishop Lightfoot: "It seems, upon the whole, probable,'' he observes, "that the Antichrist is represented especially by Judaism. With a prophetic insight, the apostle foresaw, as he contemplated the moral and political condition of the race, the approach of a great and overwhelming catastrophe... It was to Roman justice and Roman magistrates that the apostle had recourse at this time to shield him from the enmity of the Jews and to check their violence."£ At the same time, he thinks that the prophecy has not yet received its most striking and complete fulfilment.
It would be a mere waste of time to examine these views seriatim. So far as they consider the prophecy as having received its full accomplishment, they do not satisfy its conditions, and have only a general and fancied resemblance. Especially it is fatal to the views of this class of interpreters that the coming of Christ alluded to is evidently not his coming in spirit to destroy Jerusalem, but, as the context shows, and as is the uniform meaning of the phrase in the Epistles of Paul, his coming in person to establish his spiritual kingdom.
3. The third class of exponents are those who regard the prophecy as being fulfilled, or as in the course of fulfilment; that is, as already partially fulfilled, but awaiting its complete accomplishment: we allude to those who find in the passage a prediction of popery. Besides the early Reformers, this opinion is advocated by Hooker, Hurd, Newton, Turretin, Benson, Bengel, Doddridge, Macknight, Michaelis, Elliott, and Bishop Wordsworth.
This opinion proceeds on the assumption that the restraining influence is the Roman empire. In the prediction, that influence is both masculine and neuter; by the masculine the emperor is meant, and by the neuter the empire. This opinion is that of the early Fathers, and was generally adopted with various modifications by Greeks, Romanists, and Protestants.£ it is in itself highly probable, and may have been handed down by tradition from the Church of Thessalonica, who had been instructed concerning its nature (2 Thessalonians 2:6). If the restrainer was the Roman emperor, we may understand the reason of the reserve of the apostle. If he had stated this in so many words, he would have been regarded as an enemy to the Roman government, because he would then teach the destruction of the empire, and would have involved Christians in persecution. Prudence required a discreet silence on this point. This reason for reserve was recognized by the early Fathers. "If St. Paul," observes Chrysostom, "had said that the Roman empire will soon be dissolved, the heathen world would have destroyed him as a rebel and all the faithful with him, as persons who took up arms against the state. But St. Paul means the Roman empire; and when that shall have been taken away, then the Man of Sin will come. For as the power of Babylon was dissolved by the Persian dynasty, and the Persian was supplanted by the Greek, and the Greek by the Roman, so the Roman will be dissolved by Antichrist, and Antichrist by Christ" (in loco). Now, in the view of those who regard the pope as the Man of Sin, this prediction was fully verified. No sooner was the restrainer removed than the Man of Sin was revealed. As long as the Roman emperor continued heathen and resident at Rome, no ecclesiastical power was permitted to exalt itself; but no sooner did the emperor remove from Rome to Constantinople, than the papacy arose—the restraint on the Bishop of Rome was removed; and after the Roman empire in the West came to an end by the dethronement of Augustulus, the power of the pope mightily increased.
But the great point of inquiry is—Is there a sufficient resemblance between this prophecy and Romanism, so that we may conclude that they are related to each other as prediction and fulfilment? Are the characteristics of the Man of Sin found in popery? Those who belong to this class of interpreters assert that the resemblance is striking and obvious. An apostasy is predicted, and there is in Romanism a falling away from the pure gospel to the traditions of men; the doctrines of purgatory, transubstantiation, the sacrifice of the Mass, the adoration of the Virgin and the saints, are adduced as examples. The Man of Sin is represented as opposing and exalting himself against all that is called God or is an object of worship; and this is considered as receiving its fulfilment in the pope exalting himself above all human and Divine authority, claiming the title "king of kings, and lord of lords," applying to himself the words of the psalmist, "All kings shall bow down before thee," styling himself universal bishop,£ and asserting his power to dispose of the kingdoms of the earth. The Man of Sin is said to seat himself in the temple of God, showing himself as God. The temple of God is here understood to be the Christian Church, and the pope places himself in it as its supreme head, the vicar of Jesus Christ. He shows himself as God by claiming Divine attributes, as holiness and infallibility; assuming Divine prerogatives, as the power of pardoning sins and the opening and shutting of the kingdom of heaven; and using such Divine titles as "Our Lord God the pope," "Another God on earth."£ Every pope, on his election, is placed on the high altar of St. Peter's, and receives the adoration of the cardinals. The coming of the Man of Sin is after the working of Satan, with all power, and signs, and wonders of falsehood. And this is considered as receiving its fulfilment in the false miracles of popery; in the impositions of indulgences and purgatory; in the wonders done by sacred images moving, speaking, bleeding; in the prodigies effected by sacred relics; in the supernatural visitations of the Virgin; and in the pretended power of working miracles which the Church of Rome still claims; as Bellarmine reckons the glory of miracles as the eleventh mark of the Catholic Church. God is represented as punishing sin by sin, "sending to them the working of error that they might believe the lie." The popish legends, which have gained such credit as to be admitted among their ceremonies, and especially the monstrous doctrine of transubstantiation, are regarded as the fulfilment of this part of the prophecy.£ And, besides, in the other passage where Paul predicts the failing away of the latter times, the marks which he gives find their counterpart in the corruption of popery: "Giving heed to seducing spirits, and doctrines of devils; speaking lies in hypocrisy; having their conscience seared with a hot iron; forbidding to marry, and commanding to abstain from meats" (1 Timothy 4:1-3).
Paul represents the system as working even in his days: "For the mystery of lawlessness is already working" (2 Thessalonians 2:7). It works inwardly; it is a mystery, something concealed and unknown until it is revealed; the germs of the Antichristian system were already in the Church; the leaven of corruption was at work. Paul knew this because he was inspired by the Holy Ghost, and the Holy Ghost can see what man cannot see (Wordsworth). But, in truth, the germs of the Antichristian system are discernible in the false doctrines and superstitious practices alluded to in Paul's Epistles; and it is asserted that there is a striking resemblance between them and the doctrines and practices of Romanism; as, for example, the worship of angels (Colossians 2:8), the abstinence from certain foods (1 Corinthians 8:8), bodily mortification (Colossians 2:23), the traditions and doctrines and commandments of men (Colossians 2:8, Colossians 2:22); so that, as Bishop Newton observes, "the foundations of popery were laid, indeed, in the apostles' days, but the superstructure was raised by degrees, and several ages passed Before the building was completed, and the Man of Sin was revealed in full perfection."£
Of course, according to this view of the subject, the complete fulfilment of the prophecy is still future. The destruction of the Man of Sin—that is, according to this view, Romanism—is also predicted: "Whom the Lord Jesus will slay with the breath of his mouth, and annihilate by the appearance of his coming" (Titus 2:8). We have shown, in the Exposition, that by this cannot be meant the preaching of the pure gospel, or the diffusion of the Word of God at the Reformation; the language is denunciatory. As, however, this portion of the prophecy is unfulfilled, it is not required to offer any explanations. The interpretation of unfulfilled prophecy is probably beyond the powers of the human mind; the fulfilment is the only key to the interpretation.
To this view of the subject numerous objections have been raised: there are three which merit consideration.
Upon the whole, on an impartial review of the subject, we cannot avoid the impression that the points of resemblance between the prophecy and Romanism are numerous, varied, and striking. Our forefathers had no doubt as to the application of the prediction, and perhaps they were nearer the truth than we in modern times who hesitate. Such an opinion may be considered as uncharitable and unjust, and is certainly not in accordance with the more liberal spirit of our age, where popery is viewed as it presently exists, divested of its power to persecute, and as seen in the culture, refinement, and piety of many of its adherents. But when we reflect upon the abominable persecutions of the Inquisition, the monstrous wickedness of the popes prior to the Reformation,£ the atrocities perpetrated in the name of religion,£ the crimes committed by the priests,£ and the general corruption of the whole system; and when we think that it is only the restraining influence of Protestantism which prevents a repetition of such actions, we may see reason, if not to affirm positively, yet to suspect that such an opinion may be founded on truth, and, if so, be neither uncharitable nor unjust.
4. The fourth class of interpreters consider the fulfilment as future, and that we are not to look for any past occurrences as answering all its requirements. This opinion is the one which is chiefly favoured in our days. It has been adopted by Hofmann, Ewald, Olshausen, Riggenbaeh, Lunge, Alford, Ellicott, Lillie, Eadie, Meyrick, and Bishop Alexander, although there is a considerable difference in their views.
It is maintained that it is unwarrantable to consider the pope as Antichrist, and the papacy as an Antichristian system. The essential doctrines of Christianity are maintained and defended by the Romanists. The cross of Christ is exalted, and his sufferings are declared to be an atonement for sin. The great doctrine of the Trinity is not only maintained, but prominently brought forward. The influences of the Spirit are recognized and depended on. And the pope, instead of opposing himself to God, owns himself to be the servant and worshipper of God.£ Hence it is considered that in the future there may be a fuller completion than has ever yet taken place in the past. Prophecy has many partial fulfilments, until it reaches its climax in a complete accomplishment. Thus the Messianic prophecies of our Lord were partially fulfilled in David, in Solomon, in the Jewish nation. So it may be with this prediction; its final application may be reserved for the last days of this world's probation. The anti-christian elements, which are now found dispersed, may be collected and exhibited in an individual who will be the realization of the Man of Sin.
According to Hofmann, the whole passage refers to the visions of Daniel. Paul applies the prophecy therein contained to the latter days. The power that restraineth the outburst of evil is a good principle; just as Michael, the guardian angel of the Jews, withstood the Prince of Persia (Daniel 10:20). When the good principle which was preserving the world in agreement with God is removed, then Antichrist will appear in the form of some mighty lawless conqueror. Hofmann appcars actually to expect the revivification of Antiochus Epiphanes.£ Ewald, again, applies to the prophecy the prediction of Malachi concerning the coming of Elijah. He supposes that by that which hinders the appearance of Antichrist the coming of Elijah is meant, and that Antichrist will not be revealed in all his atrocious wickedness until Elijah be taken out of the way and again translated to heaven.£
Omitting these interpretations, which must appear to our English minds fanciful and extravagant, based on mere conjecture, and wholly arbitrary in their nature, we come to the more rational statements of other divines. In general, according to them, the Man of Sin is an individual of gigantic mental power, enormous daring, and extreme wickedness, who shall appear on the earth in the latter days; and the restraining influence which prevents the appearance of such an individual is moral order or government. Thus, according to Olshausen, the Man of Sin is an individual. All the manifestations of evil, the revolt of the Jews from the Romans, Nero, Mohammed, the development of the papacy in the Middle Ages, the French Revolution of 1789, with the abolition of Christianity, and the setting up of a prostitute as the goddess of Reason in the cathedral church of Paris, and the present diffusion of infidelity and atheism, are the precursors of Antichrist; but they contain only some of his characteristics, not all.£ Similarly Dean Alford observes, "Though eighteen hundred years later, we stand, with regard to this prophecy, where the apostle stood; the day of the Lord not present, and not to arrive until the Man of Sin be manifested; the mystery of iniquity still working, and much advanced in its working; the restrainer still hindering. And let us ask ourselves—What does this represent to us? Is it not indicative of a state in which the lawlessness is working on, so to speak, underground, under the surface of things, gaining throughout these many ages more expansive force, more accumulated power, but still hidden and unconcentrated? And might we not look, in the progress of such a state of things, for repeated minor embodiments of this lawlessness; the many Antichrists (1 John 2:18) springing up here and there in different countries, the apostasy going onward and growing, just as there were of Christ himself frequent types and minor embodiments before he came in the flesh? Thus in the papacy, where so many of the prophetic features are combined, we see, as it were, a standing embodiment and type of the final Antichrist—in the remarkable words of Gregory the Great, the praecursor Antichristi; and in Nero, and in every persecutor as he arose, and Mahomet, and Napoleon, and many other forms and agencies of evil, other and more transient types and examples of him."`£ And Bishop Ellicott remarks, "The adversary is Antichrist, no mere set of principles or succession of opponents, but one single person, being as truly man as he whom he impiously opposes." And he observes, "The restraining principle is the power of well ordered human rule, the principles of legality as opposed to those of lawlessness, of which the Roman emperor was the then embodiment and manifestation."£ Similiar views are adopted by Bishop Alexander,£ Dr. Eadie, Lillie, and Riggenbach. Meyrick, in his interesting and exhaustive article on "Antichrist," in the appendix to Smith's 'Dictionary of the Bible,' thus expresses his view of the sum of Scripture teaching with regard to Antichrist: "It would appear that there is to be evolved from the womb of the corrupt Church an individual Antichrist, who, being himself a scoffer and contemner of all religion, will yet act as the patron and defender of the corrupt Church, and compel men to submit to her sway by the force of the secular arm and by means of bloody persecutions. He will unite the old foes, superstition and unbelief, in a combined attack on liberty and religion. He will have the power of performing lying miracles and beguiling souls, being the embodiment of Satanic as distinct from brutal wickedness." Or, as Lange puts it, "Antichrist may proceed from a coalition between completed absolutism and completed radicalism."
Of course, according to this view, the fulfilment being yet future, we cannot apply to its truth or falsehood the characteristics given us in the prophecy itself. It appears to be the uniform doctrine of Scripture, as seen both in the prophecies of the Old Testament and of the New, that before the consummation of all things there will he a final and desperate struggle between the principles of good and evil. The revolt against all rule and authority, the spread of Nihilism, the increase of infidelity and agnosticism, the unblushing proclamation of atheism and the support given to it in the scientific and political world, the deification of materialism, are all the precursors of Antichrist. It may only require a dissolution of order and a corruption of morals, greater and more universal than that which occurred in the great French Revolution, to usher in the coming of the Man of Sin, who, amid the confusion, will seize upon the sceptre of dominion. We may figure him as an individual, a man of more commanding abilities and far greater wickedness than the first Napoleon; one who will subdue the world, and in the height of his impiety and ambition proclaim his atheism, and that man himself is God. We cannot penetrate into the future, but we may rest confident that, if such a state of things should happen, the final victory of the good over the evil cannot be doubted; the breath of the Lord is sufficient to overthrow the kingdom of Antichrist, and to baffle all his pretensions. "Whom the Lord shall slay with the breath of his mouth, and annihilate by the appearance of his coming."
2 Thessalonians
2 Thessalonians 2 - 2-thessalonians-2 - worlddic.com