Yes, the fathers said things that we know aren't Biblical. However, their ideas about the restrainer are not interpretation - they with "remarkable unanimity" declare what was taught regarding what Paul told the early church about the identity of the restrainer. Tradition tells us that the early church actually PRAYED for the continuation of the Roman Empire. Why? Because they understood when Pagan Rome fell, the Man of Sin would arise and really do damage to the church.
Paul plainly says the Thessalonians had illumination about the identity of the restrainer verse 6 because he says he'd already enlightened them in verse 5.
No darkness surrounding the identity of it - and no mystery why Paul zipped his lip about it in his letter: he knew letters talking about the fall of empires can easily fall into the hands of imperial authorities, which would spell disaster those connected with such letters.
"Unanimity" means nothing. You could just as easily say the leaders in Israel were correct about Christ. If the consensus was wrong, it was wrong.
No, Paul merely said he spoke of it before. But the fact that they were not clear about it and had to be reassured again, is proof that there was no "illumination" on the point. Why do you call darkness light, when Paul clearly writes to them regarding their ignorance? (Rhetorical) Clearly, your reasoning is just as you have said, which is conjecture stemming from believing the same folly - obviously, you share in the same "unanimity."
On the contrary, Paul was clearly vague, knowing "
only in part", however not completely "
ignorant." He told them all he knew with assurance, but confessed that even he did not know "
in full." There is no scriptural support showing that Paul, nor the early church fathers, knew the identity of the man of sin. But there is scriptural support for the fact that they "
knew only in part."
Nonetheless, having the promise of the Holy Spirit leading us into "
all truth", we need not walk in the darkness that lingered during those days because of their unbelief. It was Christ who clearly told us that He had "
come to give sight to the blind", and the prophet Isaiah who declared, "
Who is blind but my servant." By this we know that Israel, and indeed, all who are born of the flesh are blind, are born as the manifestation of sin - as "
the man of sin", who are the sons of the first Adam; and that only by being born again of the spirit of God, are we able to discern the scriptures in spirit as the sons of the Last Adam, Jesus Christ, a life-giving spirit, in whom we have our sight. Which, in Paul's day and that of the early church, was, as he said, still "
dim." For this reason, we should not now join with them in agreement, but should "
press on" to the perfection, which Paul had not yet attained.