Man of Apostasy 2 Thess 2:3-6

[thecone137]

Let no one deceive you in any way. For that day will not come, unless the rebellion comes first, and the **man of lawlessness **is revealed, the son of destruction,who opposes and exalts himself against every so-called god or object of worship, so that he takes his seat in the temple of God, proclaiming himself to be God. Do you not remember that when I was still with you I told you these things? And you know **what is restraining him **now so that he may be revealed in his time.
-2 Thess 2:3-6

Who is the man of lawlessnes and exactly what is restraining him?

 

[R_C]

Who is the man of lawlessnes and exactly what is restraining him?

Sounds a lot like the antichrist?

I don’t know what is restraining him, but I am glad it is! Seriously, the only grasp that I get about the not-yet-coming of the antichrist comes from this quote I read in “Divine Mercy in my Soul”:

To comfort you, My daughter, let Me tell you that there are souls living in the world who love Me dearly. I dwell in their hearts with delight. But they are few. In convents too, there are souls that fill My Heart with Joy. They bear My features; therefore the Heavenly Father looks upon them with special pleasure. They will be a marvel to angels and men. Although their number is very small, they are a defense for the world before the Justice of the Heavenly Father and a means of obtaining Mercy for the world. The love and sacrifice of these souls sustain the world in existence.

Thus it could be that the souls that love God are restraining him, through love.

 

[COPLAND_3]

The Fathers of the Church believed the man of lawlessness is the Antichrist. Some Fathers say the restraining is the Holy Spirit. I believe it is referring to the binding of the Devil as found in Revelation 20. Satan is limited from using all his power until the Great Tribulation at the end of the world. I believe that is the restaint that is delaying the Antichrist.

 

[R_C]

it could be that the souls that love God are restraining him, through love.

Some Fathers say the restraining is the Holy Spirit.

the Fathers of the Church call the Holy Spirit Love (Pope John Paul II, 11/20/1985)

That’s +2 for love :yup:

 

[In_Spiration]

Removing the Restrainer:

Theologians are divided about the meaning of these mysterious words of St. Paul. “What” is it that restrains? And who is “he who now restrains?“ The Early Church Fathers often held that the restrainer was the Roman Empire, based on Daniel 7:24:
Out of this kingdom ten kings shall arise, and another shall arise after them; he shall be different from the former ones, and shall put down three kings. (Dan 7:24)

Now this restraining power [is] generally admitted to be the Roman empire… I do not grant that the Roman empire is gone. Far from it: the Roman empire remains even to this day. —Blessed Cardinal John Henry Newman (1801-1890), Advent Sermons on Antichrist, Sermon I

And yet, St. Paul also refers to “he who restrains,” as in a person or possibly angelic entity. From the Navarre biblical commentary:
*Although it is not altogether clear what St. Paul means here (commentators ancient and modern have offered all kinds of interpretations), the general thrust of his remarks seems clear enough: he is exhorting people to persevere in doing good, because that is the best way to avoid doing evil (evil being the “mystery of lawlessness”). However, it is difficult to say precisely what this mystery of lawlessness consists in or who is restraining it.

Some commentators think that the mystery of lawlessness is the activity of the man of lawlessness, which is being restrained by the rigid laws enforced by the Roman Empire. Others suggest that St. Michael is the one who is holding lawlessness back (cf. Rev 12:1; Rev 12:7-9; 20:1-3, 7)… which show him combating Satan, restraining him or letting him free… others think that the curb on the man of lawlessness is the active presence of Christians in the world, who through word and example bring Christ’s teaching and grace to many. If Christians let their zeal grow cold (this interpretation says), then the curb on evil will cease to apply and the rebellion will ensue.* —The Navarre Bible commentary on 2 Thess 2:6-7, Thessalonians and Pastoral Epistles, p. 69-70

. . .]

Today, the Roman Empire is believed to subsist in some form through the European Union, which embraced the Treaty of Rome in forming its economic union. America, I might add, finds its roots in the European people, and through a nearly constant history of war, has built an empire of sorts throughout the Middle East and beyond. Others believe the Roman Empire has yet to rise in its final form before it falls for good.

The passage above is part of a post by Mark Mallett, a relatively popular Catholic blogger on that notorious subject of the end times, wherein he offers his personal positions on such matters. The reason I’ve referred to him here, as opposed to so many other self-styled prophecy-writers these days, is that in his citations he usually provides several supportive quotes from major religious authorities who have given their professional opinions about these questions, so his approach tends to be backed by solid information from higher-up sources in the Church. (On the other hand, I’m pretty skeptical whenever he strays from relaying the words of officially-recognized prophets or prestigious clergy and into issuing his own, highly subjective insights.)

Mallett proceeds to quote three recent Popes who expressed a deep fear for our times.
“Apostasy, the loss of the faith, is spreading throughout the world and into the highest levels within the Church.” —Pope Paul VI, 1977.

“Who can fail to see that society is at the present time, more than in any past age, suffering from a terrible and deep-rooted malady which, developing every day and eating into its inmost being, is dragging it to destruction? You understand, Venerable Brethren, what this disease is—apostasy from God… When all this is considered there is good reason to fear lest this great perversity may be as it were a foretaste, and perhaps the beginning of those evils which are reserved for the last days; and that there may be already in the world the “Son of Perdition” of whom the Apostle speaks.” —Pope Pius X, 1903.

“We are now standing in the face of the greatest historical confrontation humanity has gone through. I do not think that wide circles of the American society or wide circles of the Christian community realize this fully. We are now facing the final confrontation between the Church and the anti-Church, of the Gospel and the anti-Gospel. This confrontation lies within the plans of divine providence. It is a trial which the whole Church . . . must take up.” —Cardinal Karol Wojtyla prior to becoming Pope John Paul II, 1976 (from another post)

Anyway, on a more scholarly, exegetical note, here is a link to Haydock’s commentary on the second chapter of 2 Thessalonians. “Man of lawlessness” does mean the antiChrist.

Also, I recommend listening to an informative lesson about the Great Apostasy, particularly as it relates to us today, that was given by one of the anonymous priests at Audio Sancto.

And finally, less directly related, is a post about St. Hildegard’s prophecy on the Great Apostasy by author Emmett O’Regan. (For what it’s worth, I consider O’Regan’s main site, named after his book, to be the most intriguing when it comes to any kind of current, interpretive analysis re: apocalyptic events, at least as far as any recent attempts by more-or-less amateur laymen go, that is.)

 

[Vouthon]

Today, the Roman Empire is believed to subsist in some form through the European Union, which embraced the Treaty of Rome in forming its economic union. America, I might add, finds its roots in the European people, and through a nearly constant history of war, has built an empire of sorts throughout the Middle East and beyond. Others believe the Roman Empire has yet to rise in its final form before it falls for good.

Hmmm…interesting in view of this prophecy:

“…In the latter days there shall be great wars and bloodshed. The fury of wars shall last a long time. Whole provinces shall be left naked and uninhabited, many cities forsaken of people, the nobility slaughtered, principal persons ruined, great changes of kings, commonwealths and rulers.

Germany and Spain will unite under a great prince designated by God. After much slaughtering, the other nations will be forced to come into this union. There is no hope for the unbelievers until all Germany becomes converted; then all will happen quickly. Because of Germany’s unfaithfulness, the time will be prolonged until all countries unite under the Great Ruler. After this union mass conversions will take place by the command of God, and peace and prosperity will follow…”

***- Blessed Amadeus of Portugal, O.F.M., (1420–1482), prophet & Franciscan mystic ***

Undoubtedly I think this refers to the EU as a predecessor to a closer form of union (ie federation). I mean, Germany and Spain are currently united together through the EU. Perhaps the Great Monarch will be a man elected as President of a Federal Europe, which will then one day lead to world federalism.

“…The origin of European integration after World War II was characterized by an active role of political leaders whose Christian faith and engagement were generally known. Konrad Adenauer, Alcide de Gasperi, and Robert Schumann thought their task of uniting Europe to be in accordance with the social and political doctrines of the Catholic Church. They were encouraged by Pope Pius XII, a convinced European and world federalist…”

- Ferdinand Kinsky, 1998

 

[COPLAND_3]

Here is the footnotes to the Aquinas Study Bible

**2:3 the rebellion comes first: **The Great Tribulation at the end of time. It will be a time when almost all men shall rush from the Truth to that Deceiver. (Ishodad of Merv) **man of lawlessness: **he is the Antichrist; as it is taught to us in both the ancient and the new prophecies, and especially by the Apostle John 1Jn 4:1-3. (Tertullian)

2:4 exalts himself against every: From this it shows that the Antichrist will even overturn idolatry, which the Devil introduced, and he will put an end to every sect which opposes him. (Theodore of Mopsuestia) temple of God: There are a few different interpretations. One is that he means, the Temple of the Jews which has been destroyed. For if the Antichrist comes to the Jews as Christ, and desires to be worshiped by the Jews, he will make great account of the Temple, that he may more completely beguile them; making it supposed that he is the man of the race of David, who shall build up the Temple which was erected by Solomon. (St. Cyril of Jerusalem) For he will not come to us Christians, but to the Jews- not for the sake of Christ and Christians, for which reason he is called Antichrist. (St. John of Damascus) Thus it appears that he will either be of the circumcision or at least circumcised himself, so that the Jews will have the confidence to believe in him. (Ambrosiaster) As for the second interpretation, it will be in the real divine temple, that is in the Catholic Church. (St. Andrew of Caesarea) Or he referred to the churches, in which he will arrogate to himself pride of place, striving to declare himself God. (Theodoret of Cyrus) St. John Chrysostom and Theophylact also include both the Jewish Temple and the Christian Churches. Theodore of Mopsuestia, Theodoret of Cyrus and Oecumenius include only the Christian Churches and not the Temple of Jerusalem. St. Irenaeus, St. Hippolytus, St. Cyril of Jerusalem, Ambrosiaster, St. John of Damascus, Apollinarius of Laodicea and Origen include only the Temple of Solomon. St. Andrew and Haimo give an either/or, as well as St. Augustine and Thietland. St. Augustine, Thietland and Lyra propose that the text may mean that the Antichrist becomes the counterfit temple in comparison to Christ as the Temple.

2:6-7 restraining: Severian says it’s the Holy Spirit that restrains, while Ishodad of Merv, Theodore of Mopsuestia, Theodoret of Cyrus say its God’s decree. St. John Chrysostom, Haimo, Ambrosiaster, Thietland, Tertullian claim its the reign of the Roman Empire. I am of the opinion that this is concerning the binding of the Devil that we read about in Revelation 20. The Fathers don’t appear to make that connection, but it seems quite obvious from the eyes of an ammillenialist. I assume that there are some reasons why the Fathers did not make that connection; 1) is because some Fathers had not considered the book of Revelation to be canonical, and therefore would not have connected those passages together. 2) St. Augustine is the one who brought greatest development early on to Rev. 20 and the binding of the Devil, and therefore had not advanced far enough with it to connect these two passages. mystery of iniquity: Some commentators claimed that to Nero is given the name mystery of iniquity, and that he had become a worker of godlessness. On the contrary, the apostle is indicating the heresies that had sprung up, by leading people away from God. (Theodoret of Cyrus) Or, the mystery of iniquity began with Nero, who in his zeal for idolatry killed the apostles at the instigation of his father the Devil, and went on to Diocletian, and most recently Julian. (Ambrosiaster) And that, all the wicked who have gone before are signs of the Antichrist. (St. Thomas Aquinas)