http://steve-finnell.blogspot.com/2017/03/
THE MAN OF SIN
PART II: THE HISTORY
by David Vaughn Elliott
Paul warned that
"the mystery of lawlessness is already at work" (2 Thessalonians 2:7).
Thus the fulfillment of this prophecy began in the first century.
Something was already working in Paul's day which in time produced "the
man of sin... the son of perdition... the lawless one."
"ALL ROADS LEAD TO ROME"
Most students of prophecy, from Paul's day to this, understand that
the little horn of Daniel 7 and the beasts of Revelation 13 and 17 are
related to Rome. Today there are three major views about when Rome is
involved. The preterists place the fulfillment in our past. The
historicists place it in our present. The futurists place it in our
future.
Most agree that 2 Thessalonians 2 is part of the same prophetic
picture. This means that "the man of sin" will be found in Rome. The
evidence studied in Part I: The Prophecypoints
to the conclusion that "the man of sin," "the son of perdition" refers
to the most outstanding apostate church. Add Rome to the equation and
the fulfillment of the prophecy becomes obvious.
"I TOLD YOU... YOU KNOW"
The Bible was not sealed in a vacuum as soon as it was written, to be
untouched by human hands until it reached each of us in the 21st
century. To ignore the intervening centuries is shortsighted and
egotistical. If we do not learn from others, why should we expect others
to learn from us?
"I told you... you know," said Paul, "what is restraining" (2
Thessalonians 2:5,6). This is amazing. The saints in Thessalonica knew.
Paul had taught them in person. But the Holy Spirit prevented Paul from
writing it down. Is there any other place in Scripture like this? The
writer says his readers know what he is talking about, but he shrinks
from writing it down. It becomes irresistible to scan early Christian
writers to learn what they can tell us. Can you conceive that the
first-century Christians would not pass the information on?
Before examining early Christian writers, we need to be aware of three things.
1) They were not inspired. Therefore, they express many contradictory views on prophecy as well as other matters.
2) Before
a particular prophecy is fulfilled, we cannot expect Christians to
understand it all. The apostles, for example, with Jesus in their midst,
did not have correct views of many messianic prophecies.
3) After
a prophecy is fulfilled, there will always be those who will deny its
fulfillment. The Jews, for example, to this very day, deny that Jesus of
Nazareth is the promised Messiah.
With these precautions in mind, it is still very enlightening to
discover what Christians through the ages have believed regarding
various prophecies. Especially is this true in this case in which Paul
said, "You know... "
NOT FULFILLED IN THE FIRST CENTURY
The preterist view teaches that "the man of sin" appeared in the
first century. They apply all the details of 2 Thessalonians 2 to events
surrounding the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 A.D. They quote
authorities with identical views, but never anyone earlier than the
seventeenth century. Why not earlier? The reason is simple. There are no
earlier authorities.
Not one writer prior to 1600 A.D. ever mentions anybody who believed
that "the man of sin" prophecy was fulfilled in the first century.
Notice:
1) The Thessalonians knew who was restraining.
2) Many Christian writers in the second to fifth centuries wrote in detail about this prophecy.
3) Not one early writer thought "the man of sin" prophecy was fulfilled in the first century.
4) The
early writers often discuss views contrary to their own. None of them
mention anyone who applied this prophecy to the first century.
In the 18th century, Thomas Newton, in his famous "Dissertations on
the Prophecies," discusses 2 Thessalonians 2 at length. He mentions five
recent writers who claimed that "the man of sin" prophecy was fulfilled
in the first century. He points out that they disagree with the
majority of interpreters, and indeed disagree with each other as well as
with all who were before them.
Then he remarks: "If this prophecy [2 Thessalonians 2] was fulfilled,
as these critics conceive, before the destruction of Jerusalem, it is
surprising that none of the fathers [early Christian writers] should
agree with any of them in the same application, and that the discovery
should first be made sixteen or seventeen hundred years after the
completion. The fathers might differ and be mistaken in the
circumstances of a prophecy which was yet to be fulfilled; but that a
prophecy should be remarkably accomplished before their time, and they
be totally ignorant of it, and speak of the accomplishment as still
future, is not very credible" (page 400).
THE EARLY CHRISTIANS SPEAK
A search into early Christian writings reveals that many believers
had a definite view as to what was restraining or withholding the
appearance of "the man of sin." No, there is no writer who claims to
quote the apostle Paul or one who heard the apostle Paul saying what was
restraining. Nevertheless, these early Christians lived infinitely
closer to the source than we do. They were thus in a far better position
than we are today of being in touch with the information which Paul
imparted to the saints in Thessalonica. What early Christian writers
thought Paul was talking about should surely be seriously investigated
before considering novel interpretations of the 21st century.
In light of the many divergent views on prophecy which we find among
the early Christian writers, it is impressive that there is so much
agreement on the question of what was restraining-withholding-hindering.
In the end, of course, their view has to be tested both by Scripture
and history. But as we follow their view and watch history develop, we
cannot help but be impressed with the fact that the early Christians
were on the right track in regard to much of this prophecy--well before
it was fulfilled.
IRENAEUS: 130 to 202 A.D.
Irenaeus was born about 30 years after the apostle John died. In his
extensive work, "Against Heresies," Irenaeus devoted several chapters to
Daniel 7, Revelation 13 and 2 Thessalonians 2. Typical of believers in
all ages, he understood that the three prophecies are related. Irenaeus
wrote:
"Daniel too, looking forward to the end of the last kingdom, i.e.,
the ten last kings, amongst whom the kingdom of those men shall be
partitioned, and upon whom the son of perdition shall come, declares
that ten horns shall spring from the beast, and that another little horn
shall arise in the midst of them."
"In a still clearer light has John, in the Apocalypse, indicated to
the Lord's disciples what shall happen in the last times, and concerning
the ten kings who shall then arise, among whom the empire which now
rules [Rome] shall be partitioned" ("Against Heresies," book 5, chapter
25, paragraph 3; chapter 26, paragraph 1).
TERTULLIAN: 145 to 220 A.D.
Not many years later, Tertullian, quoting and commenting on 2
Thessalonians 2, wrote the following. He blends "the man of sin"
prophecy with the prophecies of the ten-horned beast.
"Again, in the second epistle he [Paul] addresses them with even
greater earnestness: 'For that day shall not come, unless indeed there
first come a falling away,' he means indeed of this present empire, 'and
that man of sin be revealed,' that is to say, Antichrist, 'the son of
perdition, who opposeth and exalteth himself above all that is called
God... And now ye know what detaineth, that he might be revealed in his
time. For the mystery of iniquity doth already work; only he who now
hinders must hinder, until he be taken out of the way.' What obstacle is
there but the Roman state, the falling away of which, by being
scattered into ten kingdoms, shall introduce Antichrist upon (its own
ruins)?" ("Of the Resurrection of the Flesh," chapter 24).
HIPPOLYTUS: 170 to 236 A.D.
A few years later yet, Hippolytus wrote "A Treatise on Christ and Antichrist." While discussing Daniel 2 and 7, he wrote:
"The golden head of the image and the lioness denoted the
Babylonians; the shoulders and arms of silver, and the bear, represented
the Persians and Medes; the belly and thighs of brass, and the leopard,
meant the Greeks, who held the sovereignty from Alexander's time; the
legs of iron, and the beast dreadful and terrible, expressed the Romans,
who hold the sovereignty at present; the toes of the feet which were
part clay and part iron, and the ten horns, were emblems of the kingdoms
that are yet to rise; the other little horn that grows up among them
meant the Antichrist in their midst" (paragraph 28).
CYRIL OF JERUSALEM: 315 to 386 A.D.
Moving to the fourth century, Cyril, after quoting 2 Thessalonians 2, said the following:
"Thus wrote Paul, and now is the 'falling away'... now the Church is
filled with heretics in disguise. For men have fallen away from the
truth, and 'have itching ears'... This therefore is 'the falling away,'
and the enemy is soon to be looked for...
"But this aforesaid Antichrist is to come when the times of the Roman
empire shall have been fulfilled, and the end of the world is now
drawing near. There shall rise up together ten kings of the Romans,
reigning in different parts perhaps, but all about the same time; and
after these an eleventh, the Antichrist, who by his magical craft shall
seize upon the Roman power...
" 'So that he seateth himself in the temple of God.' What temple
then? He means, the Temple of the Jews which has been destroyed. For God
forbid that it should be the one in which we are!" (Lecture 15,
paragraphs 9,12,15).
Cyril, living before the fulfillment, preferred to think that "temple
of God" meant the temple of the Jews. He recoiled from the idea of "the
man of sin" sitting in the church. Nevertheless, the way he expresses
himself shows that he understood that "temple of God" could well refer
to the church. Many today miss this point.
CHRYSOSTOM: 347 to 407 A.D.
Later in the fourth century, Chrysostom wrote multitudes of homilies
based on Scripture texts. In his Homily on 2 Thessalonians 2:6-9, he
says:
"What then is it that withholdeth, that is, hindereth him from being
revealed? Some indeed say, the grace of the Spirit, but others the Roman
empire, to whom I most of all accede. Wherefore? Because if he meant to
say the Spirit, he would not have spoken obscurely, but plainly... But
because he said this of the Roman empire, he naturally glanced at it,
and speaks covertly and darkly. For he did not wish to bring upon
himself superfluous enmities, and useless dangers...
" 'Only there is one that restraineth now, until he be taken out of
the way,' that is, when the Roman empire is taken out of the way, then
he shall come. And naturally. For as long as the fear of this empire
lasts, no one will willingly exit himself, but when that is dissolved,
he will attack the anarchy, and endeavor to seize upon the government
both of man and of God" (paragraphs 1-2).
JEROME: 340 to 420 A.D.
Jerome wrote this first letter in 396 A.D. and the second in 409 A.D.
Already the Roman Empire was in deep trouble from the barbarians.
"I shudder when I think of the catastrophes of our time... The Roman
world is falling: yet we hold up our heads instead of bowing them...
"Rome's army, once victor and Lord of the world, now trembles with
terror at the sight of the foe" (Letter #60 to Heliodorus, paragraphs
16,17).
"But what am I doing? Whilst I talk about the cargo, the vessel
itself founders. He that letteth [restrains] is taken out of the way,
and yet we do not realize that Antichrist is near. Yes, Antichrist is
near whom the Lord Jesus Christ 'shall consume with the spirit of his
mouth'...
"For thirty years the barbarians burst the barrier of the Danube and
fought in the heart of the Roman Empire... Rome has to fight within her
own borders not for glory but for bare life" (Letter #123 to Ageruchia,
paragraphs 16, 17).
AUGUSTINE: 345 to 430 A.D.
In his famous "City of God," Augustine wrote: "I can on no account
omit what the Apostle Paul says, in writing to the Thessalonians, 'We
beseech you, brethren, by the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ,' etc.
"No one can doubt that he wrote this of Antichrist and of the day of
judgment, which he here calls the day of the Lord, nor that he declared
that this day should not come unless he first came who is called the
apostate... Then as for the words, 'And now ye know what withholdeth,'
i.e., ye know what hindrance or cause of delay there is, 'that he might
be revealed in his own time;' they show that he was unwilling to make an
explicit statement, because he said that they knew... I frankly confess
I do not know what he means. I will nevertheless mention such
conjectures as I have heard or read.
"Some think that the Apostle Paul referred to the Roman empire, and
that he was unwilling to use language more explicit, lest he should
incur the calumnious charge of wishing ill to the empire which it was
hoped would be eternal... But others think that the words, 'Ye know what
withholdeth,' and 'The mystery of iniquity worketh,' refer only to the
wicked and the hypocrites who are in the Church, until they reach a
number so great as to furnish Antichrist with a great people, and that
this is the mystery of iniquity" (book 20, chapter 19, paragraphs 1-3).
Christian writers of the second, third and fourth centuries have
spoken. From these brief excerpts, we can make the following general
observations of what was widely believed:
1) that Daniel 7, 2 Thessalonians 2, and Revelation 13 and 17 are interrelated, all prophesying about Rome.
2) that the little horn of Daniel 7 and the "man of sin" of 2 Thessalonians 2 refer to a future (to them) "antichrist."
3) that
the antichrist would appear when Rome fell; that the Roman Empire was
that which, in their time, was restraining the rise of the "man of
sin."
A TINY WORD REGARDING THE "DARK AGES"
Before historical fulfillment, it was impossible for the early
Christians to understand exactly what was going to transpire. But what
is very impressive is that, being students of God's prophetic Word, many
of them rightly understood that the "man of sin" would appear when Rome
fell.
Rome fell in 476 A.D. The bishop of Rome stepped into the vacuum and
took the place of the Emperor. As the years went by, the popes gained
incredible powers over the bodies and souls of men. Popes crowned
emperors. In a clash between Emperor Henry IV and Pope Gregory VII, the
Emperor was left standing barefoot in the snow for three days in January
1077, until Gregory withdrew his excommunication. This style of power
lasted for centuries. The entire history of this period is well covered
in the history books and is beyond the scope of this article.
THE REFORMERS KNEW THE TRUTH ABOUT ROME
Nearly a millennium after the last writers quoted--as early as the
13th century, if not before--one voice after another began to cry: "The
pope of Rome is antichrist"; "the pope is the man of sin." The voices
grew louder and louder until a full-blown Reformation Movement took
shape. From that day until recent times, Protestants have been united in
calling the Roman Pontiff "the man of sin."
Rather than prove this with endless quotations from Protestants over
the centuries, let us rather see that both preterists and futurists
admit this historical fact.
Gary DeMar, a modern preterist, totally rejects the idea that the
pope is "the man of sin." He thinks 2 Thessalonians 2 and related
prophecies were fulfilled in the first century by Nero and the Jews.
Nevertheless he admits:
"For centuries the papacy was the unanimous candidate for the
Antichrist. The papal system was identified as 'both "the man of sin"
and the Babylonian whore of which Scripture forewarns (2 Thessalonians
2; Revelation 19). In the conviction of the sixteenth-century
Protestants, Rome was the great Anti-Christ, and so firmly did this
belief become established that it was not until the nineteenth century
that it was seriously questioned by evangelicals' " ("Last Days
Madness," page 207,208).
Again: "The Reformers, almost without exception, believed the 'man of
lawlessness' to be the Roman Pontiff. In their dedication to the King
James Version of the Bible (1611) the translators identified the Pope as
the 'man of sin' of 2 Thessalonians 2: 'The zeal of your majesty [King
James] toward the house of God doth not slack or go backward but is more
and more kindled, manifesting itself abroad in the farthest parts of
Christendom by writing a defence of the truth which hath given such a
blow to that man of sin as will not be healed' " (page 330). You will
find this in the "Dedicatory" in the front of your King James Bible.
Later in the same "Dedicatory," the translators speak of "Popish
Persons" on one hand and "Brethren" on the other hand.
Dave Hunt is a well-known futurist. He does believe that the Roman
Catholic Church is the "whore" called Babylon in Revelation 17. However,
being a futurist, he believes that the beasts of Revelation 13 and 17
are in the future, as are also the little horns of Daniel 7 and 8 and
"the man of sin" of 2 Thessalonians 2. He believes the antichrist is
probably alive now but will not be revealed until during "the
tribulation" after "the rapture." With all these beliefs, he yet
admits:
"Early Protestant creeds unanimously called the Pope Antichrist."
"It is only after the Russian Revolution that Christians began to
view Communism as the Antichrist system. Yet for 400 years before 1917,
Catholicism was so identified by Protestants" ("Global Peace and the
Rise of Antichrist," pages 108, 136).
TURNING THEIR BACKS ON HISTORY
History shows that the early Christians understood that the
antichrist would arise when Rome fell. History shows that they were
right. History shows that when the Reformation came, preachers,
politicians and the populace declared that the pope was "the man of
sin," the antichrist. History shows that the vast majority of Bible
believers continued in this conviction until recent times. History shows
that modern evangelicals are preaching a new doctrine when they refuse
to believe that the pope is "the man of sin."
To reject the pope of Rome as "the man of sin" is to forget those who
were burned at the stake because they dared translate or even possess a
Bible in any language but Latin! To deny that the pope is "the son of
perdition" is to turn one's back on the thousands of martyrs whose
bodies were twisted and wrenched by the "Holy" Inquisition. To deny that
the Roman Church is "the falling away" (apostasy) is to minimize the
gross perversion of sound doctrine that still emanates from the
Vatican.
Among the hottest items in the religious marketplace today are the
sensational books and videos about "the rapture," "the tribulation" and
the "antichrist," which the producers openly advertise as fiction.
Instead of prophecy-fiction, it would be a far more beneficial use of
time, money and energy to produce historical documentaries on the church
of the Middle Ages. Truth is stranger and more startling than fiction.
Those who think that a mere seven years of tribulation in our future
could possibly be worse than the realities of the Dark Ages need to
brush the dust off their history books.
No comments:
Post a Comment