BEMA Episode Link: 162: 2 Thessalonians — Man of Lawlessness
Episode Length: 16:59
Published Date: Thu, 02 Apr 2020 01:00:00 -0700
Session 4
About this episode:

Marty Solomon and Brent Billings look at the second letter to Thessalonica, learn about the “Man of Lawlessness,” and wrestle with the implications of this mysterious character.

Discussion Video for BEMA 162

Transcript for BEMA 162

Notes

*Note: The following notes are handwritten by me, Adam, and I reserve the right to be wrong.

BEMA Episode 162 Study Notes: 2 Thessalonians — Man of Lawlessness

Title & Source Summary

Episode: BEMA 162: 2 Thessalonians — Man of Lawlessness
Hosts: Marty Solomon and Brent Billings
Topic: This episode examines the second letter to Thessalonica, focusing on the “man of lawlessness” passage and challenging popular interpretations of this figure as a future individual “Antichrist.” Instead, the discussion explores how this text likely describes a type of person representing Hellenistic values that oppose God’s kingdom, similar to the cultural critique found in Romans 1.

Key Takeaways

  • The “man of lawlessness” is likely not referring to a specific future individual but rather a type or category of person who embodies opposition to God
  • The passage describes characteristics that would have immediately brought Caesar to mind for the original audience
  • This text addresses the Roman Imperial context the early church was living within, not a distant future scenario
  • The “secret power of lawlessness” was already at work in the first century through Roman imperial ideology
  • The letter reassures believers that they haven’t missed the coming age and encourages them to remain faithful amid imperial pressure
  • Marty expresses scholarly concerns about the authorship of 2 Thessalonians while maintaining its canonical authority

Main Concepts & Theories

The Nature of the “Man of Lawlessness”

The Greek text uses descriptive, qualitative language rather than language pointing to a specific individual. This suggests the passage is describing:

The Type, Not the Person: Rather than predicting a future “Antichrist,” the text characterizes the kind of person who thrives in the present evil age (olam hazeh) - those who “oppose and exalt themselves over everything that is called God” and “set themselves up in God’s temple, proclaiming themselves to be God.”

Imperial Parallels: The description perfectly matches Roman imperial ideology where Caesars claimed divine status, demanded worship, and positioned themselves as ultimate authorities over religious and civil life.

Two-Age Jewish Eschatology

The concept of olam hazeh (this present age) versus olam haba (the age to come) provides crucial context:

Three-Part Eschatology: Unlike two-part eschatology (this broken age → perfect future age), three-part eschatology recognizes an overlap period where both ages coexist. The Messiah has come, inaugurating the age to come, but the old age continues its dying process.

“Last Days” Context: The “last days” referenced in the passage refer to the current era they were living in - the final phase of the olam hazeh before full restoration - not a distant future time period.

Roman Imperial Challenge

The early church faced the fundamental question: Who will win the epic struggle between God’s kingdom and Rome’s empire?

Already at Work: The text states “the secret power of lawlessness is already at work,” indicating this isn’t about future events but present realities of living under Roman imperial ideology.

Encouragement to Persevere: Paul (or the author) reassures the Thessalonians that they haven’t missed God’s redemptive work and should continue standing firm against imperial pressure.

Authorship Questions and Canonical Authority

Marty shares his scholarly concerns while maintaining canonical respect:

Linguistic Issues: The Greek appears “distinctly un-Pauline” and unusually messy compared to other Pauline letters.

Over-Emphasis on Authority: The letter spends unusual energy convincing readers of its Pauline authorship and warning against other letters, which seems heavy-handed even for Paul.

Dating Debates: Scholarship ranges from early 50 AD to as late as 80-115 AD, with significant implications for interpretation depending on whether it was written before or after the fall of Jerusalem.

Examples & Applications

Historical Context Examples
  • Caesar Worship: Roman emperors regularly claimed divine status, built temples to themselves, and demanded worship throughout the empire - perfectly matching the “man of lawlessness” description
  • Imperial Ideology: The Roman system promoted leaders who exalted themselves above traditional gods and established themselves as ultimate authorities
  • Early Church Pressure: Christian communities faced constant pressure to participate in imperial cult activities that directly contradicted their allegiance to Jesus
Contemporary Applications
  • Political Idolatry: The passage warns against any human leader or system that claims ultimate authority or demands allegiance that belongs only to God
  • Cultural Resistance: Just as early Christians resisted imperial ideology, modern believers must discern and resist cultural values that oppose God’s kingdom
  • Type Recognition: Instead of speculating about future individuals, believers should recognize “lawless” characteristics in current leaders and systems
Interpretive Methodology
  • Contextual Reading: Understanding the Roman imperial context prevents misapplying the passage to distant future speculation
  • Audience Awareness: Reading through the eyes of the original recipients reveals the practical, immediate relevance of the warning
  • Literary Analysis: Recognizing descriptive versus predictive language helps avoid over-interpretation

Potential Areas for Further Exploration

Theological Studies
  • Compare the “man of lawlessness” description with other New Testament critiques of imperial ideology
  • Study the relationship between this passage and Jesus’s teachings about false messiahs and political pretenders
  • Examine how early church fathers interpreted this passage within their historical contexts
  • Investigate connections between 2 Thessalonians and the book of Revelation’s critique of Roman power
Historical Research
  • Research specific Roman emperors who claimed divine status and demanded worship during the New Testament period
  • Study Jewish resistance literature contemporary to early Christianity for parallel critiques of imperial authority
  • Examine archaeological evidence of imperial cult practices in Thessalonica and surrounding regions
  • Investigate the specific political and religious pressures faced by the Thessalonian church
Biblical Studies
  • Analyze textual and linguistic evidence regarding the authorship of 2 Thessalonians
  • Compare the Greek style and vocabulary of 2 Thessalonians with undisputed Pauline letters
  • Study the canonical formation process and early church acceptance of 2 Thessalonians
  • Examine the relationship between 1 and 2 Thessalonians in terms of themes and historical situation
Contemporary Applications
  • Develop frameworks for recognizing “lawless” characteristics in modern political and cultural leaders
  • Study how Christian communities in authoritarian contexts have applied these principles
  • Examine the role of civil disobedience and resistance in Christian discipleship
  • Investigate how imperial ideology manifests in contemporary global systems

Comprehension Questions

  1. Interpretive Approach: How does understanding the “man of lawlessness” as a type of person rather than a specific future individual change your reading of this passage? What are the implications for how Christians should engage with political authority?

  2. Historical Context: In what specific ways would the description of the “man of lawlessness” have brought Roman emperors to mind for first-century readers? How does this context affect the passage’s meaning?

  3. Eschatological Framework: Explain the difference between two-part and three-part eschatology and how this affects the interpretation of “last days” and “olam hazeh” in 2 Thessalonians. Why is this distinction important?

  4. Canonical Considerations: How should modern readers handle scholarly questions about authorship while maintaining respect for biblical authority? What is the difference between critical scholarship and destructive skepticism?

  5. Contemporary Relevance: If the “secret power of lawlessness” was already at work in the first century through Roman imperial ideology, how might similar powers be at work today? What would faithful Christian resistance look like in contemporary contexts?

Brief Personalized Summary

BEMA Episode 162 challenges popular end-times interpretations of 2 Thessalonians by grounding the text firmly in its first-century Roman imperial context. Rather than speculating about future individuals, Marty and Brent demonstrate how the “man of lawlessness” passage served as both warning and encouragement for believers living under the pressure of imperial ideology.

The episode’s most valuable contribution may be its interpretive methodology - showing how contextual reading prevents speculation while revealing practical relevance. The description of someone who “opposes and exalts himself over everything called God” and “sets himself up in God’s temple” would have immediately brought Caesar to mind for original readers, making this a contemporary political issue rather than distant prophecy.

Marty’s honest struggle with authorship questions models how to engage scholarly concerns without undermining canonical authority. His transparency about finding the Greek “distinctly un-Pauline” while maintaining the text’s authority demonstrates intellectual honesty combined with faithful commitment to Scripture.

The discussion of three-part eschatology provides crucial context for understanding “last days” language throughout the New Testament. This framework helps readers avoid the trap of pushing every challenging passage into the distant future while missing its immediate relevance for faithful living under opposing systems.

The episode ultimately calls for vigilance in recognizing “lawless” characteristics in any human authority that claims ultimate allegiance, while encouraging believers to “stand firm” and continue the work of God’s kingdom regardless of external pressure. This interpretation transforms 2 Thessalonians from an obscure prophecy into a practical guide for Christian discipleship in any context where human authority opposes divine authority.

Edit | Previous | Next