by William M. Wachtel

In 2 Thessalonians 2, the Apostle Paul foretells by inspiration the coming of what he calls the apostasy (verse 3). The definite article is used with the Greek word apostasia as though the apostle refers to some specific apostasy already known to his readers. He confirms their knowledge of this by saying, in verse 5, “Don’t you remember that when I was with you I used to tell you these things?” He hadn’t simply mentioned this matter to them once, but rather had discussed it with them several times while he was in Thessalonica. Now in his absence he was writing to give them needed instruction to help them avoid deception, disillusionment and fear.

In his first letter to them, Paul had mentioned Christ’s second coming, the parousia, several times (2:19; 3:13; 4:15; 5:23). He taught them that at Christ’s return the believers who had fallen asleep would be raised from the dead (4:13-18; cf. 1 Cor. 15:23). Apparently, the Thessalonians had afterwards heard a report or prophecy, or even had received a spurious letter as if from Paul, to the effect that the Day of the Lord had already arrived (verse 2). This unsettling news must have suggested that they had somehow missed out on the coming of the Lord, their transformation to be made like Him, and their being caught up to meet Him in the air at His descent from heaven!

It was to dispel such fears that Paul declared that the Lord had not yet come, and to prove the truth of this he pointed out that certain events must happen first—events yet future to the Thessalonians but already secretly in preparation (verse 7). The first of these events would be the apostasy, apparently the falling away of a considerable number of believers from the true faith taught by Jesus and His apostles. Jesus Himself had used the verb on which the noun apostasy is based, in Luke 8:13, in the Parable of the Sower. He speaks of those who “believe for a while, but in the time of testing they fall away.” Paul was to warn the elders of the church at Ephesus that some, even from among their own number, would later “arise and distort the truth in order to draw away disciples after them” (Acts 20:30). Paul was later to use the same verb that Jesus had used, in his first letter to Timothy: “The Spirit clearly says that in later times some will abandon the faith and follow deceiving spirits and things taught by demons” (4:1). Paul himself was accused by the Jews of apostasy from Judaism (Acts 21:21), and the writer of Hebrews warns his readers against having an unbelieving heart, with the danger of their apostasy from Christ and their return to Judaism (3:12).

Apostasy, therefore, is clearly a forsaking of the faith that one has earlier professed. This apostasy can be overt, in that one declares publicly that he has given up the faith he once believed. An example of this kind can be seen in a professing Christian who decides to reject Christianity in favor of some other religion or even to become an atheist or agnostic. He is then an “apostate” from Christianity. Apostasy can also be covert: one continues to profess the faith outwardly but in fact abandons its essential content and substitutes a faith and practice quite different from the original. The fact that Paul uses the word “secret” in verse 7 suggests that he means the latter kind of apostasy. This kind is obviously far more dangerous than the other, because of the deception and intrigue that may be involved in its practice and propagation!

Paul’s mention of the “man of sin” (KJV) or “man of lawlessness” (NIV) in 2 Thessalonians 2:3 seems to be linked to the immediately preceding mention of the apostasy, as though this person’s rise is the direct result of that apostasy. It suggests that this person comes to be the leader or major representative of the apostasy, when as a body those who have become apostate choose or recognize him in that role. If, for example, sometime after Paul’s day a considerable number of professing Christians came to believe and practice a faith that had enough error in it to be called “the apostasy,” and if this group had a leader who embodied and promoted those errors and connived to introduce even further errors, such a leader would indeed be a man of sin or man of lawlessness! This, in fact, was exactly what happened—beginning secretly and slowly even as Paul was writing, but gathering speed by the end of the first century, when the Apostles John and Peter, and Jude, warned of what was happening in the church (1 John 2:18-27; 4:1-6; 2 John 7-11; 3 John 9,10; 2 Peter 2:1-22; 3:1-5,17; Jude 3-19). After the apostles had all died, there was no authoritative voice for truth that could stop the rush into false religion and ungodly leadership that ultimately overtook the majority of those within the professing church.

Church historians document the vast changes in Christianity that took place in the second, third, and fourth centuries. An early change that Paul warned about in Colossians 2:8 was the entrance of Greek philosophy into the thinking and doctrinal discussions of the Christians. This philosophy, with its subtle distinctions and abstract terminology, was radically different from the Hebrews’ concrete world view enshrined in the Scriptures. The huge influx of Gentiles into the church brought with it a corresponding Gentile, and particularly Greek, approach to religious matters—with the customs and traditions of those people having their inevitable effect on the church. One of the clearest evidences of the polytheistic Gentile influence on the church was the rise of images, statues, icons and relics of Christ and Mary and the saints and the veneration accorded to them—a practice totally at variance with the Jewish and apostolic church’s hatred of idolatry in all its forms!

Another momentous change was the rise of the so-called “monarchical bishops” and their claim to regional rather than purely local authority. In the New Testament, the term “bishop” (Greek episkopos, overseer) denotes one who is also called “elder” or “pastor” (shepherd). These three terms all referred to the same individuals within a local congregation. Each congregation had a body of elders or pastors who exercised together the direction and guidance of that local body of Christians. These men, also described as overseers, or “bishops,” had no preeminence over one another in authority and responsibility. Historians have shown that gradually the more assertive or talented among this number gained authority over the others and eventually came to be viewed as being more than simply local pastor-elders. The office or title of “bishop” came now to be applied only to those who were overseers over several or many local congregations and pastors. The region over which they exercised authority was called their “bishopric” or, later, diocese. All of this opened the way for the development of a highly organized church hierarchy—so foreign to the character and arrangements for leadership in the early church—and led finally to the exaltation of the man who held the office of bishop in the Roman empire’s capital city, Rome itself! This man would soon become the “bishop” over the entire church and would be called the pope, “father of fathers.” These developments established a totally authoritarian leadership within the church, contrary to Peter’s warning (1 Peter 5:1-4). They led to the popes’ ultimately claiming absolute authority over all Christians, over all earthly rulers and governments, finally even to the point of claiming infallibility in their official pronouncements on doctrine and morals! A person with any sense of history should be able to see how immense were the changes that beset Christianity and which prove that the majority of professing Christians—officially “Christendom” by this time—had come to fulfill the prophecy of the apostasy!

Other changes also contributed to this fulfillment. One was the exaltation of celibacy—the unmarried state—as a “Christian” ideal, with the rise of the monastic movement and with the establishment of a celibate priesthood, as foretold by Paul in 1 Timothy 4:3. Originally, the bishops were required to be married and successfully to have reared children, so as to be qualified “to take care of the church of God” (1 Tim. 4:1-7). Now, so far from being required to be married, they were forbidden to be married, along with all the priests under them! Even the rise of a special class of priests was an integral part of the apostasy, for the apostolic church possessed no priesthood but that of Christ Himself as High Priest and that of His people as an entire body of believers to be a “royal priesthood” under Him (Heb. 5:5-10; 1 Peter 2:1-10).

With the rise of a special priestly class within the church came also the rise of sacramental religion, mediated through the priests. Salvation, then, and men’s being declared just on the basis of faith in Christ was replaced by all manner of ceremonies and pious works: masses, penances, pilgrimages, indulgences, and reliance on the intercession of Mary and the saints. The few references in the Bible to Mary, the mother of Jesus, were made to bear an immense superstructure by means of tradition and legend, leading to her virtual worship and to a central place for her in Catholic theology and devotional practice. The apostate church abandoned a straightforward manner of interpreting Scripture, in favor of what is called allegorism, whereby the inspired text could be understood to say almost anything the interpreter could read into it. This opened the way for all kinds of faulty interpretations and novel doctrines, all contributing to a further decline from the truth and a deeper descent into apostasy!

When Emperor Constantine made “Christianity” the official religion of the Roman Empire in the early fourth century, Pope Silvester was willing to join hands with this worldly ruler and his government and to lay the foundation for a union of church and state—a union which was to become the curse of Europe and Latin America for many succeeding centuries! Along with this union came the sanctifying of war and military service (which Christ and His apostles had specifically forbidden and in which the earliest followers of Christ refused to participate—a stand that is documented in the writings of the early “church fathers”). Along with this sanctification of violence came eventually the hideous doctrine that the church could and should persecute and even execute “heretics”—a doctrine that was used to justify the horrible, truly barbarous treatment of dissenters and suspected dissenters during the infamous Inquisition. It also could justify the church’s massacre of 50,000 Protestants in France on St. Bartholomew’s Day, in 1572, as well as innumerable other such atrocities throughout the centuries, wherever Rome was in power—and all of this “in the name of Christ”! In His name, also, the church sent its “soldiers” to fight the Crusades in the Holy Land, killing people by the thousands in order to establish or to retain its rulership there. Some of the popes personally led armies into battle, the most famous of these being Pope Julius II (reigned 1503-1513), who fancied himself a great military general. Contrast this man, who claimed to be Christ’s vicar on earth, with the real Christ, the “Prince of Peace,” who with His dying words forgave His enemies!

Edward Gibbon’s famous work, The Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, documents the gradual loss of the doctrine of the Second Coming of Christ and His establishing the Kingdom of God on earth at His coming. This hope, so precious to the early Christians and to all serious Bible believers today, fell into almost total obscurity when the church became apostate and began to consider herself the Kingdom of God already established—now that she had achieved massive political, economic, and military dominance in the world.

How the “Man of Sin” Arose

Paul had reminded the Thessalonians that they knew what it was that was keeping the Man of Sin from being revealed (v.6). He not only used the neuter “what” in verse 6, but also the masculine “who” in verse 7. Some power then in existence, embodied in some individual, was preventing and would continue to prevent the rise of the Man of Sin until it or he were no longer present on the scene. Much debate has raged over Paul’s reference to this mysterious power. Whatever and whoever it was, Paul’s readers knew its identity. But why did Paul seem reticent to mention that identity here? Could there be a danger in doing so? A popular recent theory suggests that it was and is the Holy Spirit that is keeping the Man of Sin from being revealed. When the Holy Spirit is “taken away at the rapture of the church”—so the theory goes—then this Wicked One will appear. But there seems to be no good reason for Paul not to mention the Holy Spirit if this is what he meant!

A possible solution can be found in considering Daniel’s famous interpretation of King Nebuchadnezzar’s dream (Dan. 2). The image that the king saw in his dream was made up of various metals—the head of gold, the chest and arms of silver, the belly and thighs of bronze, the legs of iron, and the feet of iron and clay mixed. Daniel interprets the image to refer to four great empires, beginning with Babylonia and Nebuchadnezzar himself. Babylonia was later conquered by Medo-Persia, which in turn came to its end at the hand of Alexander the Great and the Greek empire. The Greek empire was absorbed and replaced at last by the Roman empire—the longest lasting of all four.

A distinctive feature of this fourth empire is that it was interpreted by Daniel as having two stages. The first, pictured in the iron legs, would exercise total control (2:40). The second or final stage of this empire, symbolized by the feet of iron and clay mixed, would be a divided kingdom or have a divided rulership. Yet, there would still be in this mixture “some of the strength of iron” (2:41-43). This fourth empire, in its two stages, would finally be replaced by the Kingdom that God will set up on this earth someday (2:35,44,45). It seems clear from the details of the image and Daniel’s inspired interpretation that the fourth empire was to prolong its existence by means of this second stage until the end of the present age of man’s rule. This end would mark the beginning of the age or time period when Christ will rule the entire world (Matt. 25:31ff.).

Daniel, in fact, was given a preview of history as it actually occurred long after his lifetime! The Roman Empire, in its total dominance over every aspect of life, was well symbolized by iron! The emperors ruled with an iron hand, and during their heyday no one could escape from their clutch. Paul himself lived during the first stage of the Roman Empire and knew that the emperors had the power of life or death over their subjects. He took advantage of this fact when he appealed to Caesar, the emperor, for a fair trial when he knew that the Jewish leaders were determined to have him executed. The Roman emperors continued to have this power within their domains until the first stage of the empire came to its end and the last emperor, Romulus Augustulus, lost his throne, A.D. 476. The Germanic tribes divided the empire among themselves and set the stage for the second phase of the Roman empire.

The power vacuum in Europe that resulted from the disappearance of the emperors could not last indefinitely. There was still one institution in Rome that was determined to revive the empire under its own leadership, despite the division now existing because of the rival tribes that were to become the foundation of the several nations of Europe. That institution was, of course, the church, by now apostate. One of the chief titles of the emperors—Pontifex Maximus, Supreme Pontiff—was taken over by the leader of that institution, the pope. The popes claimed and exercised, as had the emperors before them, the authority and right to crown and to depose the rulers under them. This now became the new stage of Rome, and is called in history “the Holy Roman Empire.” The masterminds in charge of this final stage of Rome never gave up their claim to have the right to rule the world, and their successors and present representatives are still busily at work seeking to impose that rule once more, after several centuries of challenge from various sources--political as well as religious.

To return to our theme of how the Man of Sin arose and why Paul did not identify what was holding back his rise, we may see that it was precisely the existence and presence of the emperors that made impossible the rise of the papacy and its “Holy Roman Empire” along with the present-day manifestation of Rome in the revival of Catholic power throughout the world—the final stage of the fourth empire! If Paul had named the empire of his day and the emperor as that which had to be “taken out of the way” before the Man of Sin could arise, this could have been used against him and the Christians to charge them with treason or sedition. Paul and the Thessalonian believers knew from Daniel that the current “iron-leg stage” of Rome had to come to an end, but there was no need to declare that in public writings, such as letters read openly to the church. Rather, there was real danger in doing so! “After the accusation brought against Paul at Thessalonica (Acts 17:6f.) any allusion to the imperial power had best be as vague as possible lest the letter fall into the wrong hands” (F. F. Bruce, in The New Bible Commentary, p. 1060).

The Blasphemies of the Man of Sin

In verse 4 Paul describes the arrogance and blasphemous pretensions of the Man of Sin. “He opposes and exalts himself over everything that is called God or is worshiped . . . proclaiming himself to be God.” We may ask ourselves whether the popes have fulfilled this prophecy. A simple look at their claims and demands for adulation and power down through the centuries will verify that they have indeed fulfilled it to the letter! Not only have they insisted that they are above all earthly rulers and governments, but they have demanded absolute allegiance and obedience from their subjects. They claim to have the keys of heaven and hell and the power to decide who is worthy to enter either destination. Their theologians have repeatedly called them “God on earth” and rendered them a worship that can only be rightfully given to God. As recently as 1894, Pope Leo XIII declared in an official encyclical, “We hold upon this earth the place of God Almighty.” These claims of the papacy and the practices that go along with such claims can be found reiterated over and over again in the historical records. The church has not made a secret of who and what the pope is supposed to be and to represent! The culminating blasphemy was spoken and made an official dogma in 1870, when the pope was declared to be infallible (incapable of error) when he pronounces on matters of faith and morals. This places him above the Scriptures themselves, and he then becomes the final authority and arbiter in all religious matters.

Furthermore, the Man of Sin “sets himself up in God’s temple.” Literally translated, he “takes his seat” in the temple of God. The “temple of God” in all of Paul’s other letters is always figurative, referring either to the body of an individual believer or to the church as a whole. In those letters the term never refers to the literal building in Jerusalem. This would support the view that he is saying that the Man of Sin sets himself up as leader of the church—he usurps a leadership that does not belong to him! It is significant that the pope calls his office or rule the “Holy See.” In this case, the word “see” comes from the Latin word sedes, “seat.” The Greek equivalent is kathedra, from which we get the word “cathedral”—the church in which is located the seat or throne of a Catholic bishop. Also suggestive is the fact that the pope is supposed to be infallible when he pronounces on a doctrine ex cathedra, that is, from the seat of his authority!

The pope is a temporal ruler as well as a religious or spiritual ruler. He rules his own sovereign territory which is independent of Italy--the Vatican City. Before 1870 he ruled the whole city of Rome and the so-called Papal States, a large area in central Italy. The nations of the world sent and continue to send their ambassadors to him, just as they do to any other government or political ruler. All this time he claims to be the “Vicar of Christ,” the representative of the One whose Kingdom was not “of this world” (John 18:36). The word vicar is from the Latin vicarius, meaning one who serves as substitute or agent for another. The same root is seen in our word “vicarious”—in the stead of. It is also the root of our word vice, as in vice-president—the man who stands in the stead of the president in case of the latter’s death or disability. The Greek preposition that expresses the same idea is the word anti, as in Matthew 2:22, where Archelaus becomes king anti, in place of, his father Herod. This means that the Greek manner of expressing “Vicar of Christ” is Antichrist! The pope, by his own claim to be Vicar of Christ, shows

himself to be in fact an Antichrist. A simple reading of First and Second John will reveal the nature of any who can be called “Antichrists.” History shows that the popes have amply demonstrated by their claims, and often by their morals, that they fulfill the role!

The Man of Sin will continue in his role of usurping Christ’s position and authority until the return of Christ Himself. The Lord Jesus will overthrow him “with the breath of his mouth and destroy [him] by the splendor of his coming” (verse 8). Meanwhile, this leader’s claims and power are upheld by Satan himself, through counterfeit miracles, signs and wonders, and in every sort of deception and evil (verses 9, 10). The true church, made up of those who love Christ and righteousness and who have been saved by His grace, continues to be hated, despised and persecuted by the apostate church and its papal leadership. The popes continue to seek the power, prestige, adulation, and wealth of this world; and it is demanded that their followers continue to offer these things to them along with their total obedience. By contrast, all who love, believe and obey the Word of God must recognize what the apostate church is and how the papacy fulfills the prophecy of the Man of Sin. This recognition will fortify and prepare the true church to withstand the deceptions and the persecutions that are still a part of the agenda of Satan’s false church! God’s people must never let themselves be beguiled by the soothing, but lying, words of the Man of Sin and his servants!

Return to Articles