Who is Paul discussing in 2 Thessalonians 2?

[Spiritual Israelite]

Like Paul counselled, keep that which is true, reject that which isn't.

Yes, of course. But, we should be like the Bereans and study the scriptures for ourselves to see if what those Reformers taught about this is so or not. It seems to me that some just agree with what the Reformers taught about this without really studying and considering this carefully.

Is the papacy really what 2 Thessalonians 2 is about in relation to unrestrained lawlessness or is the scope of what Paul was talking about even bigger than that? I believe the latter. If it's just talking about those who are deceived by the papacy, then that means all other false religions and teachings are not in scope in relation to "the coming of the lawless one", which is "according to the working of Satan, with all power, signs, and lying wonders, and with all unrighteous deception among those who perish.". Is the "the working of Satan, with all power, signs, and lying wonders, and with all unrighteous deception among those who perish" limited to only the papacy and those deceived by the papacy? I don't believe so.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

I did more... than answer your question. I showed you how that "temple of God" Apostle Paul mentioned has to mean a literal stone temple in Jerusalem, because of the "abomination of desolation" prophecy. Now if you are wanting me to play in your little coloring book following the lines that you set instead of what God's Word says as written, then you assume too much.

No future physical temple could possibly be the temple of God. God does not dwell in temples made with hands (Acts 7:48, Acts 17:24) and "the temple of God" can only be a temple that belongs to God and that He dwells in, which is the case right now in relation to the spiritual temple of God (the church). He will never dwell in any future physical temple, so no future physical temple can be God's temple.

 

[CTK]

Yes, of course. But, we should be like the Bereans and study the scriptures for ourselves to see if what those Reformers taught about this is so or not. It seems to me that some just agree with what the Reformers taught about this without really studying and considering this carefully.

Is the papacy really what 2 Thessalonians 2 is about in relation to unrestrained lawlessness or is the scope of what Paul was talking about even bigger than that? I believe the latter. If it's just talking about those who are deceived by the papacy, then that means all other false religions and teachings are not in scope in relation to "the coming of the lawless one", which is "according to the working of Satan, with all power, signs, and lying wonders, and with all unrighteous deception among those who perish.". Is the "the working of Satan, with all power, signs, and lying wonders, and with all unrighteous deception among those who perish" limited to only the papacy and those deceived by the papacy? I don't believe so.

There are essentially two groups of people in the world: those that follow or press Jesus is our Lied and Savior and those that don’t believe this.

There is absolutely nothing for Satan to do or focus or spend any effort on for those that do not believe in Jesus- they are lost.

The second group INITIALLY, would have began after the cross and the Apostles, Paul and the many other followers would go out into the world preaching the Word of God and the Testimony of Jesus.

Whether this church broke off into many denominations or not they would profess Jesus as their Lord and Savior. This is where Satan would need to focus his energy. And this is exactly what took place almost immediately after the cross.

Paul tells us that “lawlessness” was already at work - 1st century. And it would grow right alongside the Christian church. Soon, the church would come together with the Roman state during Constantine.
Pagan practices, idol worship, change of God’s laws and commandments would be found. The church would not be recognized by the 1st century Christians.

After the demise of pagan Rome in 476 AD (7:11 in Daniel) and in 2 Thessalonians 2 in the NT, the “restrainer” was removed and now the church was no longer subservient to the Empire. Soon, This church would be given power over all religious matters as well as civil matters (Justinian)

This church that began at the cross would now be appropriated by the “little horn” (papacy. They would become “exceedingly great.”

Now, Satan has done well. He has found his earthly followers who were more concerned with their own power, being worshipped themselves, disobeying God’s laws and commandments, declare infallibility, forgive sins, represent God on earth, and a hundred more practices adopted that go against the teachings of Jesus.

This is ALL prophesied in Daniel (in detail), Paul’s writings and certainly in Revelation. It is no accident that God had Paul tell us that “even now lawlessness was present. But so many have believed the writings of the little horn where they created and promoted that an “Anti-Christ” figure (and not “the little horn” would be an end time event. This is such a small part of the prophetic words that God gave to Daniel.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

There are essentially two groups of people in the world: those that follow or press Jesus is our Lied and Savior and those that don’t believe this.

There is absolutely nothing for Satan to do or focus or spend any effort on for those that do not believe in Jesus- they are lost.

Your second statement is completely false and just an unbelievable thing for any Christian to claim. Do you think he has no interest in continuing to deceive the lost in an effort to keep them from ever being saved? Of course he does.

Ephesians 2:1 And you He made alive, who were dead in trespasses and sins, 2 in which you once walked according to the course of this world, according to the prince of the power of the air, the spirit who now works in the sons of disobedience,

Paul said he "NOW works in the sons of disobedience". He doesn't just lead them astray for a little bit and then leave them alone the rest of their lives.

Look at Revelation 20:7-9. Who are those around the world that Satan is influencing there? The lost. To do what? Actively oppose "the camp of the saints", which I believe refers to the church.

 

[CTK]

Your second statement is completely false and just an unbelievable thing for any Christian to claim. Do you think he has no interest in continuing to deceive the lost in an effort to keep them from ever being saved? Of course he does.

Ephesians 2:1 And you He made alive, who were dead in trespasses and sins, 2 in which you once walked according to the course of this world, according to the prince of the power of the air, the spirit who now works in the sons of disobedience,

Paul said he "NOW works in the sons of disobedience". He doesn't just lead them astray for a little bit and then leave them alone the rest of their lives.

Look at Revelation 20:7-9. Who are those around the world that Satan is influencing there? The lost. To do what? Actively oppose "the camp of the saints", which I believe refers to the church.

What is wrong with you????????

 

[claninja]

Of course. And I've never said otherwise. But, could they potentially be fooled into thinking that the day of the Lord was something different than how Paul described it? Of course they could have. So, that's what you're missing. It has nothing to do with them possibly thinking they missed an unmissable cosmic global event, but rather has to do with them thinking that they missed whatever the false reports indicated that the day of the Lord would entail, which could have been something besides a cosmic global event.
I agree with that, but what I'm saying is that I take Paul to be saying that the day of the Lord couldn't have come yet because even the things that were to happen before the day of the Lord hadn't even happened yet. If you look at it that way, there's no reason to think that he should have instead told them to not believe anyone claiming that the day of the Lord had come because the global destruction associated with the day of the Lord had not yet occurred. Sure, he could have said it that way, but that doesn't mean we should necessarily expect that he should have said it that way in the case that the day of the Lord involves global destruction on the day that Jesus returns in the future. By pointing out that the things that were supposed to happen before the day of the Lord hadn't even happened yet would show how absurd it was for anyone to claim that the day of the Lord had already come.

You expect, in the case of the day of the Lord being a future event involving global destruction when Jesus returns, that he should have at least said to them something like: "Not only has the global destruction that occurs on the day of the Lord not happened yet, as evidenced by the fact that we're still here, but the falling away and man of sin being revealed have to happen first before that day comes and those things haven't happened yet, so the day of the Lord has obviously not yet come". But, I don't think that would have to be the case.

Paul never corrects the Thessalonians’ understanding of what the day of the Lord is. Therefore, any arguments about them misunderstanding the nature of the day are not grounded in Paul’s actual response, and are irrelevant.

The whole premise is not to be deceived that it already happened, not that they didn’t know what it entailed.

If Paul meant an unmistakable cosmic consummation, then appealing to prerequisite signs (man of sin/apostasy) is illogical, and even absurd. The event itself would settle the matter immediately. But Paul instead argues from sequence: “That day will not come unless…” That strongly suggests he viewed the day as something whose arrival could likely be mistaken or falsely claimed, indicating it’s not necessarily a cosmic global event.

But, how would the destruction of Jerusalem result in them experiencing relief from their persecutors who would obviously not be directly affected by the destruction of Jerusalem since they were located in Thessalonica?

70 ad marked the collapse of the primary covenantal and institutional power structure that had driven much of the earliest opposition to Christianity in the apostolic period.

In Acts 17, who were the primary antagonists causing persecution amongst the Thessalonians?

This point makes no sense to me. I don't know how you would not relate a reference to the coming of Christ and our being gathered to Him (2 Thess 2:1) to what Paul wrote in 1 Thessalonians 4:14-17 where He talked about being gathered and caught up to meet the Lord in the air when He comes. I'm pretty sure they would not be concerned about somehow missing being gathered and caught up to meet Christ in the air. Do you really see no connection between 2 Thessalonians 2 and 1 Thessalonians 4:14-17? If you do see that connection, then how would being invited to the wedding feast correlate with meeting Jesus in the air at His second coming?

I said multiple times they are most likely the same event in Paul’s mind. Instead My argument has always been - are 1 and 2 Thessalonians the same event as the OD?

Christ said this generation will not pass away until “all these things” occur. Grammatically, the antecedents to “these things” include the abomination of desolation, great tribulation, the gathering etc. Additionally, The OD is not the only place in Matthew that mentions a gathering after the destruction of the city - the parable of the wedding feast also mentions this.


That being said, If Paul’s gathering in 2 Thessalonians is the same gathering into the wedding hall post the destruction of the city, then the “shaken in mind” could refer to the Thessalonians believing they missed redemption and cannot be gathered into the wedding hall.

 

[claninja]

Paul corrects them by giving signs that must occur first shows the deception was about timing, not about them literally missing the visible return of Christ. Paul is not saying, “You would obviously know if Christ had visibly returned.” He is saying, “Do not be deceived; the prophetic sequence has not yet unfolded.”

Edit: I should add that 2 Thessalonians is literally about correcting a deception that the day of the Lord already occurred, contrary to what you argued.

If the day of the Lord was generally understood as a cosmic global event, then correcting the Thessalonians understanding of sequence and timing, as a way to prevent deception that it already occurred, is illogical and absurd.

If it was generally understood that a meteorite was coming to destroy the whole entire planet of earth, why would you write me a letter, “don’t be deceived that a meteorite has already destroyed the entire planet”?

 

[Ronald D Milam]

A. The chronological sequence Paul gives - (These are the time-order elements):​

1. The Thessalonians are being deceived about the day of the Lord
   Paul begins with: “Let no one deceive you.” The whole issue is whether Christ’s return had already come or was immediately present.

Yes, Paul told them not to fear by way of a Gathering unto Christ in the very first verse(2 verses conjoined). People miss this, and its very important when trying to understand all this in full.

2 Thess. 2:1 Now we beseech you(ask URGENTLY), brethren, by the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, and by our gathering together unto him, {{{ So what Paul says in vs. 2 is why he he beseeching them in vs. 1 not to fear, BECAUSE there will be a Gathering unto Christ Jesus [before the DOTL can fall onto mankind the church will DEPART from their/our standing on this earth, as in bein present here.}}}

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.

The falling away must come first
Before the day of the Lord, there must be an apostasy — a departure from truth within the professed people of God.

As you said, a DEPARTURE from the Faith, but nowhere in the whole passage is faith spoken of, BUT in vs. 1 we see the Rapture or DEPARTURE of the Church being spoken of as a Gathering unto Christ Jesus.

So, it not ONE THING that has to happen but two things before the DOTL can arrive. People miss this.

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;

So, the Departure of the Church must happen AND the Anti-Christ must be on the scene BEFORE the DOTL can fall onto mankind, The AC signs a 7 year agreement with Israel and THE MANY [every nation in the Mediterranean Sea Region] and that sets off the Rapture and 70th week events.

1. Something is restraining it
   The lawlessness is active, but prevented from reaching its full revealed form.
2. The restraint must be removed
   Paul says the restrainer continues “until he is taken out of the way.”

Yes indeed, and what restrains evil in this world today? The Church using the Holy Spirit to restrain evil, when we are gone, the holy spirit loses its vessel.

 

[Davy]

You seem afraid to answer the question.

God answered your question per His written Word that I posted, so take your complaints up to Him.

 

[Davy]

No future physical temple could possibly be the temple of God. God does not dwell in temples made with hands (Acts 7:48, Acts 17:24) and "the temple of God" can only be a temple that belongs to God and that He dwells in, which is the case right now in relation to the spiritual temple of God (the church). He will never dwell in any future physical temple, so no future physical temple can be God's temple.

Argue with God, not me. I only posted what God's Word revealed as written. The "abomination of desolation" prophecy from the Book of Daniel was warned about by Lord Jesus for the end of this world, and it involves a standing stone temple in Jerusalem. That is why Jesus told His servants in Judea when they see... that "abomination of desolation" in the holy place (temple) to flee that area, and go to the mountains. Judea means Jerusalem-Judea in the middle east, not Rome or Europe.

 

[covenantee]

God answered your question per His written Word that I posted, so take your complaints up to Him.

Afraid, as I suspected.

Thanks for the confirmation.

 

[CTK]

Edit: I should add that 2 Thessalonians is literally about correcting a deception that the day of the Lord already occurred, contrary to what you argued.

If the day of the Lord was generally understood as a cosmic global event, then correcting the Thessalonians understanding of sequence and timing, as a way to prevent deception that it already occurred, is illogical and absurd.

If it was generally understood that a meteorite was coming to destroy the whole entire planet of earth, why would you write me a letter, “don’t be deceived that a meteorite has already destroyed the entire planet”?

I agree that it would be absurd if someone claimed the final visible return of Christ had already happened in its fullest sense and the Thessalonians somehow missed it. If Christ had already appeared in final glory, the resurrection and gathering had occurred, and the wicked had been judged, no letter would be needed to tell them it had not happened. But that is exactly why I do not think the deception was, “Jesus visibly returned and you missed it.” The deception seems more likely to have been that the day of the Lord was already present, already underway, or immediately upon them. Their persecution could have made that claim believable. Paul is not saying, “You should have noticed if the world ended.” He is saying, “Do not be shaken; the prophetic sequence has not yet unfolded.”

That is why Paul answers with sequence: the falling away must come first, the man of lawlessness must be revealed, the restraint must be removed, and then Christ destroys that lawless power at His coming. So yes, Paul is correcting deception about the day of the Lord. But the correction itself shows the issue was timing and prophetic sequence, not that they had literally missed the final visible return of Christ.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

What is wrong with you????????

Nothing. But, there's something very wrong with you that would lead you to say this: "There is absolutely nothing for Satan to do or focus or spend any effort on for those that do not believe in Jesus- they are lost.". Was my response to what you said too difficult for you to understand? How about just addressing what I said instead of asking dumb questions?

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

Argue with God, not me.

Don't say stupid things like this. I'm arguing with your interpretations of what you think God's Word has said. Should I tell you to argue with God, not me, when I point out how ridiculous your interpretation of 2 Peter 3:10-12 is?

 

[CTK]

Nothing. But, there's something very wrong with you that would lead you to say this: "There is absolutely nothing for Satan to do or focus or spend any effort on for those that do not believe in Jesus- they are lost.". Was my response to what you said too difficult for you to understand? How about just addressing what I said instead of asking dumb questions?

I think I rather discontinue having any further conversations with you. Best wishes.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

Paul never corrects the Thessalonians’ understanding of what the day of the Lord is. Therefore, any arguments about them misunderstanding the nature of the day are not grounded in Paul’s actual response, and are irrelevant.

The whole premise is not to be deceived that it already happened, not that they didn’t know what it entailed.

That's your opinion, but if you're honest, you'd admit there's no way to prove that. If they could be deceived into thinking that the day of the Lord had already come, then why couldn't they be deceived into thinking the day of the Lord entailed something different than what Paul taught? He had already told them that certain things had to happen first before the day of the Lord, so if they could be convinced that he was wrong about that, why couldn't they be convinced that he was wrong about everything he said that related to the day of the Lord?

If Paul meant an unmistakable cosmic consummation, then appealing to prerequisite signs (man of sin/apostasy) is illogical, and even absurd.

That's what you think, but that is absolutely not necessarily the case. As I've pointed out, and as you are not addressing, he could have been pointing out how absurd it is to think that the day of the Lord already occurred when the things that were to happen before the day of the Lord had not even occurred yet. You have decided what Paul supposedly should have said, but that's you. I'm not convinced by your argument at all.

The event itself would settle the matter immediately.

Of course it would have, but him reminding them about the things that had to happen first having not yet happened also settles the matter immediately. We debate what those things mean, but Paul talked to them about those things in person and most likely explained what those things mean so that they wouldn't have to speculate and debate about what those things mean like we do now because we weren't there when Paul explained these things in person, which he most likely did with more clarity and more detail than what is found in 2 Thessalonians 2.

But Paul instead argues from sequence: “That day will not come unless…” That strongly suggests he viewed the day as something whose arrival could likely be mistaken or falsely claimed, indicating it’s not necessarily a cosmic global event.

Another opinion of yours that I don't find to be convincing. Could they be mistaken about the destruction of Jerusalem? Maybe for a short time, but it wouldn't be too hard for them to confirm whether it actually happened or not. I highly doubt that Paul was intending to tell them to not be deceived by anyone claiming that Jerusalem had been destroyed, as if they could be deceived by that for long. And, as I pointed out to you already before, why would they be shaken in mind and troubled by hearing about that when it was prophesied to happen? They wouldn't have been.

70 ad marked the collapse of the primary covenantal and institutional power structure that had driven much of the earliest opposition to Christianity in the apostolic period.

In Acts 17, who were the primary antagonists causing persecution amongst the Thessalonians?

So what? Those particular Jews who were persecuting the Thessalonian believers would not have been killed or taken captive like the ones in Jerusalem were, so what would keep them from continuing to oppose Christianity? I'm sure they most likely did.

I said multiple times they are most likely the same event in Paul’s mind. Instead My argument has always been - are 1 and 2 Thessalonians the same event as the OD?

You need to be willing to address what event was Paul talking about in passages like 1 Thessalonians 4:14-5:3, 2 Thessalonians 1:7-10 and 2 Thessalonians 2:1-12 in terms of his references to Christ's coming and His own being gathered to Him "in the air"? Do you really think it's even possible that Christ's second coming with the resurrected dead in Christ and those who are alive and remain being caught up to meet Him in the air has already occurred? If so, why and how? If not, then why would you think that Paul was talking about things related to 70 AD in 2 Thessalonians 2?

Christ said this generation will not pass away until “all these things” occur. Grammatically, the antecedents to “these things” include the abomination of desolation, great tribulation, the gathering etc.

This is where you go astray. No, "all these things" do not refer to literally all of the things that Jesus had previously mentioned. That would include His second coming and the gathering of the elect. That's complete nonsense. The gathering of the elect refers to the gatheringthose who are in church to meet Jesus in the air. That clearly has not yet occurred. All these things don't even includes the wars, rumors of wars, earthquakes and pestilences that Jesus mentioned. Those were only the beginning of birth pains or sorrow and not things that would indicate that His second coming was near.

Additionally, The OD is not the only place in Matthew that mentions a gathering after the destruction of the city - the parable of the wedding feast also mentions this.

Jesus mentioned a gathering of the elect by angels. So, it's ONLY a gathering of the elect and no one else. Yet, that's not what we see in the parable of the wedding invitation.

Matthew 22:11 “But when the king came in to see the guests, he saw a man there who did not have on a wedding garment. 12 So he said to him, ‘Friend, how did you come in here without a wedding garment?’ And he was speechless. 13 Then the king said to the servants, ‘Bind him hand and foot, take him away, and cast him into outer darkness; there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth.’

Jesus refers here to an example of someone who was part of the gathering for the wedding, yet the man didn't have the proper wedding garment on. He was not elect. So, the parable does not refer to the gathering of the elect by the angels that will occur when Jesus comes again. That gathering will be only of the elect and we will be gathered and caught up to meet Christ in the air when He comes.

That being said, If Paul’s gathering in 2 Thessalonians is the same gathering into the wedding hall post the destruction of the city, then the “shaken in mind” could refer to the Thessalonians believing they missed redemption and cannot be gathered into the wedding hall.

Can you please make up your mind whether or not you believe that the gathering Paul referred to in 2 Thessalonians 2:1 is the same gathering to meet Christ in the air that he wrote about in 1 Thessalonians 4:14-17? You said earlier that most likely is the case, so how in the world does Matthew 22:1-13 describe people being gathered to meet Jesus in the air at His second coming? Where does the parable refer to the dead in Christ being resurrected and then gathered to Christ? Nowhere. You are trying to relate unrelated passages.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

I think I rather discontinue having any further conversations with you. Best wishes.

Why can't you be a Christian and at least tell me what I said that you had a problem with? Maybe you misunderstood something I said, for all you know? I truly have no idea of why you would react to my post the way you did.

 

[Davy]

Don't say stupid things like this. I'm arguing with your interpretations of what you think God's Word has said. Should I tell you to argue with God, not me, when I point out how ridiculous your interpretation of 2 Peter 3:10-12 is?

No, you are arguing with God's 'written' Word, for all I have done is proclaim it to you. It is not 'my' word.

 

[TazzJazz]

The "man of lawlessness" represents christendom's false teachers, the clergy. (See Matt.7:21-23) Among other things, they've supported the warfare of the nations, condoning brothers killing brothers, due only to political geography....although Jesus told His followers to "love one another" & be 'no part of the world.'

That which "acts as a restraint" but gets removed, were the Apostles... when they had all died -- that last one to die was the Apostle John c. 100 C.E.-- after they had died, there was really no restraint against the foretold apostasy.

 

[TazzJazz]

Why can't you be a Christian....

Huh?

Saying to someone "there's something very wrong with you", and that they're "asking dumb questions", is not Christ-like.
"Love is ... kind." -- 1 Cor.13:4

Those who really understand and share the Truth of God's Word, are gracious & speak kindly to individuals. -- Colossians 4:6