What Time Do You Think It Is??

...What are the signs that indicate the coming of the Lord is near?...

Click to expand...

...We believe that the Lord will appear in the clouds to remove His Church from the earth before the seven year Tribulation begins...

Click to expand...

...We believe this event can take place at any moment...

Click to expand...

...2 Thessalonians 2:3...

This is the second coming of Christ...

Click to expand...

...Rev. 3:10...

Click to expand...

2 Thessalonians 2:1-8 is one of the most controversial passages in the Bible. It is time to examine this section carefully. In this analysis, I will draw on the past insights of historic Protestants, which was commonly accepted doctrine in Europe, England, and America for over 300 years—since the time of the Reformation.

Verse 1—"Now we beseech you, brethren, by the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, and by our gathering unto him," Jesus is "coming" to gather His children. The Greek word used here for "coming" is parousia, which clearly refers to the second coming of Jesus Christ (Matthew 24:27).

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 had." Here Paul warned the Thessalonians not to be troubled by anyone who would suggest that "the day of Christ" on which He would "gather" His children was "at hand" in the first century. No. Something big must happen first.

Verse 3—"Let no man deceive you by any means: for that day [when Jesus comes to gather His children] shall not come, except there come a falling away first, and that man of sin [Antichrist] be revealed, the son of perdition." Here Paul is very clear. "That day" when Jesus comes to "gather" us shall not come until there is first "a falling away" and the Antichrist is revealed! Thus, contrary to popular opinion, Antichrist comes before Jesus comes to gather His people! Paul warned, "Let no man deceive you by any means" into believing anything else.

The phrase, "a falling away," is for the Greek word "apostasia," which means "a falling away" from the truth. Thus, there would be in the history of Christianity, as in the history of Israel, a major "falling away" from God’s Word that would result in the rise of Antichrist. Paul called this antichrist "that man of sin." These words actually point to an earlier prophecy found in Daniel chapter 7.

Daniel chapter 7 predicted the rise of a "little horn" with "eyes like the eyes of a man." Daniel 7:8. Daniel did not say the little horn would be a man, but that it would have "eyes like the eyes of a man." This horn would arise out of "the fourth beast," or "fourth kingdom" (verse 23), which was the Roman Empire. It would arise "among" the 10 horns in Europe (verse 8), would speak proud words against God (verses 8, 25) and would make "war with the saints" (verse 21) in Christian history.

Paul also called the Antichrist "the son of perdition," which is what Jesus Christ called Judas (John 17:12). Judas was an insider, an apostle, one of the twelve. Judas kissed Jesus, calling him "Master" (Mark 14:45). Yet it was a kiss of betrayal. By calling Antichrist "the son or perdition," Paul gives us a clue in that this deceiver would not be a pagan dictator like Adolf Hitler, but rather a professed apostle of Jesus Christ. Yet in reality, he would be a false apostle. (See 2 Corinthians 11:13.)

Verse 4—"Who opposeth and exalteth himself above all that is called God, or is worshipped; so that he as God sitteth in the temple of God, shewing himself that he is God." Paul did not say, as so many believe, that Antichrist will walk into a temple and say, "I am God." Rather, he would sit "as God…shewing himself that he is God." The difference is subtle, yet very important. The Antichrist will not "say it," for this would be too obvious. Yet he will "show it" by his actions.

The Antichrist will "sit." This does not mean he will "sit down" on some chair. In the language of the Bible, to "sit" means to sit in a position of authority. Jesus Christ now "sits" at the right hand of God (Mark 16:19). He is our supreme authority, the only Mediator between God and men (1 Timothy 2:5). According to Paul, the Antichrist will also deceptively "sit" in a position of authority. Yet this "sitting will actually be in opposition to the supreme authority of Jesus Christ!

Antichrist will even "sit in the temple of God." Here is the key text! Millions of sincere Christians, like Hal Lindsey, apply this to a rebuilt third Jewish temple in Jerusalem. But is that right? Think about it. Let’s say that a group of Jewish people, who do not believe in the great sacrifice of Jesus Christ, were to rebuild a third temple on the Temple Mount. Could that temple ever really be called "the temple of God"? No! For that temple would be in itself a denial of Jesus Christ! Notice what the famous Christian commentator Adam Clarke had to say about Paul’s words: "By the temple of God the apostle could not well mean the temple of Jerusalem; because that, he knew, would be destroyed with a few years. After the death of Christ the temple of Jerusalem is never called by the apostles the temple of God."

The Greek word Paul used here for "temple" is "naos." One Titanic truth about the temple is that every time Paul used the word "naos" in his letters, he always applied it not to a building in Jerusalem, but to the Church! Paul wrote to "the Church of God which is at Corinth," saying, "Know ye not that ye are the temple ["naos"] of God?" 1 Corinthians 1:2; 3:16. (See also 2 Corinthians 6:16; Ephesians 2:19-22.) Thus, to Paul, "the temple of God" is the Christian Church! Again, Adam Clarke commented: "Under the gospel dispensation, the temple of God is the Church of Christ." And this is where Antichrist will sit! He will deceptively enter the Church, like Judas, who was one of the twelve! Then he will "sit" in a position of supreme, apparently infallible authority, which will ever so subtly counterfeit the supreme authority of Jesus Christ!

If you were the devil, wouldn’t you try to do the same thing? You wouldn’t spend most of your time hanging out in a bar. Your goal would be to try and deceive Christians! If you were Satan, wouldn’t you want to sneak into the Church, get behind the pulpit, and then preach a sermon? (See Acts 20:28-31; 1 Timothy 4:1; 2 Timothy 4:3, 4.) This is exactly what Paul says the Antichrist will do! He will cleverly enter the temple of God, which is the Christian Church, and then he will "sit" in a position of apparently supreme authority as he makes pronouncements on matters of Christian doctrine.

The world-famous Matthew Henry, whose roots were firmly planted in historic Protestantism, commented: "[Paul] speaks of some very great apostasy. …No sooner was Christianity planted and rooted in the world than there began to be a defection in the Christian church. …He is called the man of sin, …the son of perdition. …These names may properly be applied, for these reasons, to the papal state. …The bishops of Rome not only oppose God’s authority, …but have exalted themselves above God. …The antichrist here mentioned is some usurper of God’s authority in the Christian church, …and to whom can this better apply than to the bishops of Rome?"

The above view was shared by John Wycliffe, William Tyndale, Martin Luther, John Calvin, the translators of the King James Bible, John Wesley, Sir Isaac Newton, Charles Spurgeon, Bishop J.C. Ryle, Dr. Martyn Lloyd-Jones, and countless other Protestant reformers. Have we not just discovered a Titanic truth?

Verse 5, 6—"Remember ye not, that, when I was yet with you, I told you these things? And now ye know what witholdeth [restrains] that he might be revealed in his time." This is a very controversial sentence. Multitudes of prophecy scholars today believe that the Christian Church is the restrainer. They teach that when the Church is removed at the rapture, then the Antichrist will appear. They also teach that after this Antichrist shows up, he will then enter the rebuilt Jewish temple in Jerusalem and proclaim that he is God. This will supposedly happen during "the seven years of tribulation." Yet from what we have studied so far, can you not see that there is something wrong with this picture?

Paul did not specify in this letter "what" was restraining Antichrist. Yet the Thessalonians knew, for Paul said in verse 6 that he had previously "told" them. A study of the writings of the early Church fathers, who were Christian leaders living after the apostles, reveals exactly what the early church believed. "The early Church—from whom alone we can learn what Paul told them by word of mouth, but refrained from committing to writing—has left is on record that the Apostle had told them that this hindering power was the dominion of the Roman Caesars; that while they continued to reign at Rome, the development of the predicted power of evil was impossible. …While the Caesars reigned he [the Antichrist] could not appear, but when they passed away he would succeed them."

Based on historical research, Matthew Henry agreed. "This is supposed [believed] to be the power of the Roman empire, which the apostle did not think fit to mention more plainly at that time; and it is notorious that, while this power continued, it prevented the advances of the bishops of Rome to that height of tyranny to which soon afterwards they arrived." Thus, the force that "witholdeth," or restrains, was the imperial power of the Roman Empire ruled by the Caesars. It was only after Rome fell, in A.D. 476, that the popes were free to rule. This used to be a common interpretation among Lutheran, Baptist, Presbyterian, and Methodist scholars for 300 years after the Reformation. But times have changed. New scholars are here with new ideas.

Verse 7—"For the mystery of iniquity doth already work: only he who now letteth [restrains] will let, until he be taken out of the way." In Paul’s day, because of the restraining power of the Roman empire, the Antichrist’s rise to power was being hindered. Yet Daniel’s previous prophecy predicted the eventual fall of the fourth beast (the Roman Empire), which would then allow the "little horn" (Antichrist) to fully spring into action (Daniel 7:7, 8). In his epistle to the Thessalonians, Paul did not specify in writing that the Roman Empire would eventually be "taken out of the way." The reason was because his letter might be discovered by Roman authorities, which might have resulted in more "persecutions and tribulations" against his converts for their perceived disloyalty to Caesar. (See 2 Thessalonians 1:4.) This view fits with prophecy and history. Not only that, it makes perfect sense!

In Paul’s day, the "mystery of iniquity" was already working. Yet it was largely hidden. It was not until the Roman Empire finally fell in A.D. 476 that this "mystery" was fully revealed for what it was to the eyes of the world. Then came the Dark Ages, when Europe was held in a grip of terror for almost 1,000 years. Historians estimate that the "Holy Office of the Inquisition" was responsible for the brutal torture and deaths of 50-100 million Christians. And this was done in the name of Jesus Christ! Surely Antichrist has entered the temple of God.

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." Thus "the mystery of iniquity" would start in the days of Paul and would continue to the end. Then it would be destroyed by the "brightness of his coming." The Greek word for "coming" used in verse 8 is the same for "coming" used in verse 1. That word is parousia, which clearly refers to the second coming of Jesus Christ. Thus, according to verses 1 and 8, it is at the second coming, after Antichrist is revealed, that Jesus Christ will come to "gather" His children.


A SIMPLE SUMMARY OF 2 THESSALONIANS 2:1-8

Verse 1—Jesus Christ is "coming" [the parousia] to "gather" His children.
Verse 2—Paul told the early Thessalonian believers not be "shaken" by false ideas that this "day of Christ" was "at hand" in the first century.

Verse 3—Before "the day of Christ" comes, "a falling away" must come first, and the prophesied "man of sin" must be revealed.

Verse 4—This "man of sin" will exalt himself and will even sit in "the temple of God," which is the church, "shewing himself that he is God."

Verse 5—Paul had previously warned the Thessalonians about this.

Verse 6—The Thessalonians knew "what" was then restraining the Antichrist.

Verse 7—The Antichrist was already working secretly in the first century. Soon the restraining power would be "taken out of the way."

Verse 8—Then the Antichrist would be fully "revealed." After his revelation, he would continue until the second coming of Jesus. Then he will be "destroyed" by the "brightness" of Christ’s "coming" [the parousia]. And it is at this second coming, at the parousia, after the Antichrist is revealed, that Jesus Christ will "gather" His children who have remained faithful to the truth!

Click to expand...

...Could that temple ever really be called "the temple of God"?...

Click to expand...

...would be destroyed with a few years...

Click to expand...

...the word "naos"...

Click to expand...

...The bishops of Rome not only oppose God’s authority, …but have exalted themselves above God...

Click to expand...

Martin Luther (1483-1546) (Lutheran): "Martin Luther was the first to identify the papacy as such with the Antichrist. At first he discounted the value of John's Apocalypse. But then he saw in it a revelation of the Church of Rome as the deceiving Antichrist who secretly served Satan … a view that was to become dogma for all Protestant Churches." Newsweek, November 1, 1999. p. 71.


<DT>
"Luther... proved, by the revelations of Daniel and St. John, by the epistles of St. Paul, St. Peter, and St. Jude, that the reign of Antichrist, predicted and described in the Bible, was the Papacy ... And all the people did say, Amen! A holy terror seized their souls. It was Antichrist whom they beheld seated on the pontifical throne. This new idea, which derived greater strength from the prophetic descriptions launched forth by Luther into the midst of his contemporaries, inflicted the most terrible blow on Rome." Taken from J. H. Merle D'aubigne's classic work, History of the Reformation of the Sixteen Century, book 6, chapter 12, p. 215.&nbsp;

On August 20, 1520, Luther declared, "We here are of the conviction that the papacy is the seat of the true and real Antichrist." Quoted in LeRoy Froom's monumental work, The Prophetic Faith of Our Fathers, Vol. 2, p. 121.&nbsp;


<DT>John Calvin (1509-1564) (Presbyterian): "Daniel and Paul had predicted that Antichrist would sit in the temple of God. The head of that cursed and abominable kingdom, in the Western Church, we affirm to be the Pope." Institutes of the Christian Religion, by John Calvin. Vol. 2, pp. 314, 315 (1561 edition).&nbsp;

"Some persons think us too severe and censorious when we call the Roman pontiff Antichrist. But those who are of this opinion do not consider that they bring the same charge of presumption against Paul himself, after whom we speak and whose language we adopt... I shall briefly show that (Paul's words in II Thess. 2) are not capable of any other interpretation than that which applies them to the Papacy." Ibid. p. 410.&nbsp;

John Knox (1505-1572) (Scotch Presbyterian): John Knox wrote about "that tyranny which the pope himself has for so many ages exercised over the church." Along with Martin Luther, Knox finally concluded that the Papacy was "the very antichrist, and son of perdition, of whom Paul speaks." The Zurich letters, by John Knox, p. 199.&nbsp;

Thomas Cranmer (1489-1556) (Anglican): "Whereof it followeth Rome to be the seat of antichrist, and the pope to be very antichrist himself. I could prove the same by many other scriptures, old writers, and strong reasons." Taken from Works by Cranmer, Vol. 1, pp. 6-7.&nbsp;

<DT>
Roger Williams (1603-1683) (First Baptist Pastor in America): Roger Williams spoke of the Pope as "the pretended Vicar of Christ on earth, who sits as God over the Temple of God, exalting himself not only above all that is called God, but over the souls and consciences of all his vassals, yea over the Spirit of Christ, over the Holy Spirit, yea, and God himself...speaking against the God of heaven, thinking to change times and laws; but he is the son of perdition (II Thess. 2)." Quoted in Froom's The Prophetic Faith of Our Fathers, Vol. 3, p. 52.&nbsp;

The Westminster Confession of Faith (1647): "There is no other head of the church but the Lord Jesus Christ. Nor can the pope of Rome in any sense be head thereof; but is that Antichrist, that man of sin and son of perdition that exalteth himself in the church against Christ and all that is called God." Reproduced in The Creeds of Christendom, With a History and Critical Notes, by Philip Schaff. Vol. 3, p. 658, 659, Chapter 25, Sec. 6.&nbsp;

Cotton Mather (1663-1728) (Congregational Theologian): "The oracles of God foretold the rising of an Antichrist in the Christian Church: and in the Pope of Rome all the characteristics of that Antichrist are so marvelously answered that if any who read the Scriptures do not see it, there is a marvelous blindness upon them." The Fall of Babylon, by Cotton Mather. Quoted in Froom's book, The Prophetic Faith of Our Fathers, Vol. 3, p. 113.&nbsp;

<DT>
John Wesley (1703-1791) (Methodist): Speaking of the Papacy, John Wesley wrote, "He is in an emphatic sense, the Man of Sin, as he increases all manner of sin above measure. And he is, too, properly styled the Son of Perdition, as he has caused the death of numberless multitudes, both of his opposers and followers... He it is...that exalteth himself above all that is called God, or that is worshipped...claiming the highest power, and highest honor...claiming the prerogatives which belong to God alone." Antichrist and His Ten Kingdoms, by John Wesley, p. 110.&nbsp;

A Great Cloud of Witnesses: "Wycliffe, Tyndale, Luther, Calvin, Cranmer; in the seventeenth century, Bunyan, the translators of the King James Bible and the men who published the Westminster and Baptist confessions of Faith; Sir Isaac Newton, Wesley, Whitfield, Jonathan Edwards; and more recently Spurgeon, Bishop J.C. Ryle and Dr. Martin Lloyd-Jones; these men among countless others, all saw the office of the Papacy as the antichrist." Taken from All Roads Lead to Rome, by Michael de Semlyen. Dorchestor House Publications, p. 205. (1991).

Click to expand...

...not paying attention in history class...

Click to expand...

...Do you think the church would not raise a mighty fuss if this man of sin rose to power and tried to sell his plan for the mark of the beast now?? He would be exposed at the drop of a hat...

Click to expand...

...I believe that the restrainer is the Holy Spirit that is living inside of every believer...

Click to expand...

...Then you will see the apostate Church set up, with the great falling away...

Click to expand...

How does the&nbsp;papacy "opposeth and exalteth himself above all that is called God, or that is worshipped?" And how&nbsp;is the papacy&nbsp;"shewing himself that he is God?" (2 Thessalonians 2:4)

Click to expand...

...titles only appropriate to God alone...

Click to expand...

Originally posted by postrib
When has the Pope ever claimed that "he is God?" (2 Thessalonians 2:4)

Click to expand...

...he claims to have "supreme, full, immediate, and universal power in the care of souls"...

Click to expand...

...the historical timeframe of His opposer, the Antichrist...

Click to expand...

#1. "The Pope is of so great dignity and so exalted that he is not mere man, but as it were God, and the vicar of God."
(#1. "Papa tantae est dignitatis et cesitudinis, ut non sit simplex homo, sed quasi Deus, et Dei vicarius.")

#13. "Hence the Pope is crowned with a triple crown, as king of heaven and of earth and of the lower regions."
(#13. Hinc Papa triplici corona coronatur tanquam rex coeli, terre et infernoram.")

#18. "As to papal authority, the Pope is as it were God on earth, Sole sovereign of all the faithful of Christ, chief king of kings, having a plentitude of unbroken power, entrusted by the omnipotent God to govern the earthly and heavenly kingdoms."

(#18. "Deveniendo ad Papae auctoritatem, Papa est quasi Deus in terra unicaus Christifidelium princeps, regum omnium rex maximus, plenitudinem potestatis continens, cui terreni simul, ac coelestis imperii gubernacula ab omnipotenti Deo credita sunt.")

&nbsp;#30. "The Pope is of so great authority and power, that he is able to modify, declare, or interpret even divine laws."
(#30. "Papa tantae est auctoritatis et potestatis, ut possit quoque leges divinas modificare, declarare, vel interpretari, ad num.")

The following scanned pages from Prompta Bibliotheca (“Handy Library”) are from Vol. 5, published in Petit-Montrouge (Paris) by J. P. Migne, 1858 edition:

Click to expand...

Pope John Paul I and then John Paul II, in 1978, both refused a formal coronation ceremony with the&nbsp;triple-tiered crown, as it was considered to be out of step with the less pompous tone set by their predecessor Pope Paul VI and Vatican II's recent emphasis on the pastoral role of the Papacy, rather than its temporal authority. However, nothing really prevents the next Pope from returning to the tradition of the coronation and wearing of the triregno crown.

Click to expand...

...future events are probably yet to be played out...

Click to expand...