Who is the restrainer of 2 Thessalonians 2?

F. N. Lee wrote :

Paul gave an urgent warning to the Thessalonian Christians. Said he: "We beseech you, brethren, by the presence [or coming] of our Lord Jesus Christ and by our gathering together unto Him, that you don't soon be shaken in mind or be troubled (either by spirit or by word or by letter from us) -- as if the Day of Christ is present;3913 or even 'nearby' or 'close at hand.' "Let nobody by any means deceive you! For it shall in no way (ean mee) come -- except first the falling away; and the man of sin [or lawlessness] be unveiled." Such is "the son of perdition, who keeps on opposing and keeps on exalting himself against all that is called God or is worshipped -- so that he like a god keeps on going into the temple of God to be seated [or enthroned] there, claiming to be divine [or while claiming to reign in the place of God or to represent God]. Don't you remember that when I was still with you -- I told you these things? "And now, you know what keeps on holding back [the unveiling of the man of sin or lawlessness], so that he might be unveiled at his time. For the mystery of lawlessness [of the man of sin or lawlessness] already keeps on working. "Only, he who now keeps on holding back [the unveiling of the man of sin or lawlessness -- will keep on holding back] until he [who keeps on holding him back] be out of the way. And then shall the lawless one be unveiled, whom the Lord shall consume with the Spirit of His mouth and shall destroy with the manifestation of His presence -- him whose presence is according to the working of Satan with all power and signs and lying wonders and with all deceivableness of unrighteousness in them who perish -- because they did not receive the love of the truth, so that they might be saved."

AND

It is submitted then, that (in the first instance) the real restraining or "withholding" factor holding back early Roman persecution of Christians -- was the (state- protected) status which Judaism then enjoyed throughout the Roman Empire until the A.D. 66-70 destruction of Jerusalem after a three-and-a-half years' long siege by the pagan Romans. That commenced just sixteen years after Paul was writing his Second Epistle to the Thessalonians. As long as Judaism was tolerated by the Romans, Christianity appeared to the Roman authorities to be little more than a new sect of Judaism itself.3922 Before 66.5 A.D., Christianity was therefore tolerated by the Romans.3923 Yet it was not then tolerated by the apostate or "fallen away" Judaistic leaders. They persecuted Christians whenever they could; and they would soon incite the A.D. 54f Pagan Roman Emperor Nero and his Judaistic wife Poppaea Sabina against the Christians in 64 A.D.

iithess

__________________
Conscience may lash us, but it cannot replenish a languishing life. Conscience may be God's word and minister to you, telling you of your faults and your follies and your destitution. It may point out, but it will never supply you. Christ must give you new life. Hart has well expressed it: "He to the feeble and the faint, His mighty aid makes known; and when their languid life is spent, supplies it with His own." - J. K. Popham

If this all happened around 70AD how does Christ destroy the Man of Sin with His coming, if that coming is an actual coming instead of some sort of metaphorical coming in justice?

__________________
Pergamum


"If a commission by an earthly king is considered a honor, how can a commission by a Heavenly King be considered a sacrifice?"
-- David Livingstone

Good question.

Dr. Lee :

So it is especially through the declaration of the Word of God by the Lord Christ's Spirit-filled Church, that Jesus consumes the lawless one with "the Spirit of His Mouth." In this way too, Jesus progressively destroys "the man of sin" or the Papal Antichrist "with the manifestation of His Presence" through the ongoing powerful preaching of the successors to the Protestant Reformation.

So Lee sees some kind of dual fulfillment on 2 Thess 2? He's like half preterist and half historicist?

__________________
[B]Manley Beasley[/B]
Southern Baptist Convention
Fayetteville, Arkansas

[B]Wir sein pettler. Hoc est verum (We are beggars. This is true.).--Luther's dying words[/B]

I'm still sorting things out...sorry.

I'm quoting a short section in one of his smaller pdf's.

I believe:
That which restrains: The Gospel (and see Calvin, who backs me up here)
He that restrains: The Minister of the Gospel.

__________________
Rev. Bruce G. Buchanan
ChainOLakes Presbyterian Church, CentralLake, MI


When posting friends, kindly bear those words of earthly wisdom in mind:
Oh, that God the gift would give us
To see ourselves as others see us.
--Robert Burns, 1786 (modernized) ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ Click to get: Board Rules -- Signature Requirements -- Suggestions? --

In Calvin's commentary on 2 Thess he mentions your view and the view that the restrainer is Rome. He says he "thinks" it is the gospel being preached that restrains but that it being Rome is "right as far as history is concerned". He then tells the readers they can choose between the 2 interpretations. I don't think he had really made his mind up. He also never gave a explanation as to why Paul was using "obscure" language according to the gospel preaching view.

Dr. Gill :

only he who now letteth, will let, until he be taken out of the way; that is, the Roman empire and Roman emperors, and which were by degrees entirely removed, and so made way for the revelation of this wicked one: and which was done partly by Constantine the emperor receiving the Christian faith, whereby the Roman empire as Pagan ceased; and by increasing the riches of the church, and feeding the pride, ambition, and covetousness of the bishops, especially the bishop of Rome; and next by removing the seat of the empire from Rome to Byzantium, which he called Constantinople: here the Greek emperors continued in succession, and neither they themselves, nor even their exarchs, resided at Rome, but at Ravenna; so that way was made for antichrist to come to his seat, and there was nothing to rival and eclipse the grandeur, power, and glory of the Roman popes: and that which let was also taken out of the way, by the division of the empire, by Theodosius, giving to his elder son Arcadius, the eastern, and to the younger, Honorius, the western parts of it: the eastern empire was in process of time seized upon and possessed by Mahomet and the Saracens; and the western empire was overrun by the Goths, Vandals, and Huns, and became extinct about the year 476, in Augustulus, the last of the Roman emperors, who was obliged to abdicate the government by Odoacer king of the Heruli; when the kingdom of the Lombards took place in Italy, and afterwards that was translated to Charles the great, king of the French; so that there was nothing more of the Roman empire remaining than the bare name, as at this day; and by this means the popes of Rome got to the height of their power and glory, which is meant by the revelation of the man of sin.

Barnes :

Such a supposition as that the civil power of Rome was such a restraint, operating to prevent the assumption of the ecclesiastical claims of supremacy which afterward characterized the papacy, will correspond with all that is necessarily implied in the language.

And

This will be an effectual check on these corruptions, preventing their full development, until it is removed, and then the man of sin will appear. The supposition which will best suit this language is, that there was then some civil restraint, preventing the development of existing corruptions, but that there would be a removal, or withdrawing of that restraint; and that then the tendency of the existing corruptions would be seen. It is evident, as Oldshausen remarks, that this resisting or restraining power must be something out of the church, and distinguished from the anti-Christian tendency itself; yon der Kirche und vom Antichristenthum. It is necessary, therefore, to understand this of the restraints of civil power. Was there, then, any fact in history which will accord with this interpretation? The belief among the primitive Christians was, that what hindered the rise of the man of sin was the Roman empire, and therefore “they prayed for its peace and welfare, as knowing that when the Roman empire should be dissolved and broken in pieces, the empire of the man of sin would be raised on its ruins.”

I think:
1) that Calvin is more partial to the thought that the gospel is "that" (neuter) which restrains.

2) I didn't read him as commenting on the Minister as being "he who" (masculine) restrains. And I didn't attribute that idea to him. He does lean (ISTM) in this latter toward the "Roman" notion.

3) In all this, I simply see a failure to distinguish between the two references (impersonal/personal), leading to the confusion on the part of many. And I think my solution suits the context, and solves an ongoing "conundrum" nicely.

4) I think there is too much (past and present) warrantless running to secular history or circumstances to explain things in the Bible that have spiritual reference.

My solution thus makes an end run entirely around whatever extra-ecclesial reference may be supposed. I have made such speculation irrelevant, as well as making the point Paul makes atemporal. The reference doesn't need to be "time-specific" to Paul day. It applies precisely to any and every age.

The People's New Testament, B.W. Johnson, 1891:

4. Who opposeth and exalteth himself. I shall endeavor in a few words to identify this power. Various explanations have been given, but there is only one power that exhibits all the marks given by Paul. Observe these: (1) The man of sin exalts himself above God. (2) He sits in the temple, that is, in the church, for that is always the sense in which Paul uses the term. He is a church power. (3) He claims powers that only belong to divinity. (4) He shows off signs and lying wonders (verse 9); or, in other words, lays a claim to miraculous powers. Every one of these marks applies to the papacy: (1) Its development was simultaneous with that of the apostasy. (2) Its development was let (hindered) until the pagan Roman empire fell, but was rapid after it was taken out of the way (verse 7). (3) The papacy has set aside divine laws and has made other spiritual laws to bind men, and has claimed divine prerogatives. A newly-elected Pope is adored and styled "Lord God, the Pope." (4) It is in the temple of God, that is, it arose in the church, and still claims to be the "Holy Catholic Church." (5) The claim of Infallibility is "sitting as God in the temple." (6) The papacy has always claimed miraculous powers, and it is a fact well known that it has often worked off lying wonders (verse 9). No fact is better established than that the hierarchy of the church have often deceived by false miracles. Indeed, these have often been detected and explained.

6-10. Ye know now what withholdeth. They knew because Paul had told them when with them. We have not that advantage, but I believe that he told them that this development could not take place until pagan imperial Rome fell. We know that it did withhold, or prevent it. 7. For the mystery of [253] iniquity. This revelation of the man of sin. It was a mystery, that is, something yet hidden. Doth already work. Causes are beginning to work which will lead to it. Only he who now letteth. He that hindereth must first be taken out of the way. There was no room for an arrogant spiritual power in Rome as long as imperial Rome continued to persecute the church. A persecuted church cannot be a haughty church. Two things were needful before the papal power could be developed; viz., the overthrow of paganism, and the removal of the capital of the Empire from Rome. When these things were done, it was free to seize the old Roman scepter. 8. Then shall that Wicked be revealed. After the hindering power is removed. Whom the Lord shall consume. The Wicked power will be destroyed by the Lord's coming, and will continue to exist, possibly, until that event. 9. Whose coming. That of the Wicked power. Is after the working of Satan. That is, it will deceive men as Satan does. Lying wonders. False miracles. 10. Deceivableness of unrighteousness. Unrighteous delusions which will be accepted by its votaries, them that perish. Those that perish, receive not the love of the truth. They have a disinclination to receive it.

I agree he is more partial to your view.

I will say that I think it is impossible to not examine history in light of Paul's proclamation. The Thessalonians were believing that they day of the Lord had come and Paul was making the point that it wouldn't come until some things had happened in time.

3 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. (2 Thess 2:3a)

Regardless of interpretation history has to be examined by the language Paul is using.

I have heard premil dispys use the idea that it is Christians or the gospel that restrains and that with the secret rapture of them they are taken out of the way for Antichrist to rise.

Check out Thomas Manton's sermons on 2Thess.2:

http://www.truecovenanter.com/manton/2thes2.htm

__________________
Jim
An Elder, Harvest Reformed Church (RCUS),Minot, ND
http://www.harvestreformedchurch.org/
http://tbftgoggi.wordpress.com/

Upon a life I did not live; upon a death I did not die, Another's death, Another's life, I'd rest my soul eternally
Omnia dicta fortiora,si dicta Latina
Si vis pacem, para bellum