The Temple of Antichrist

Though the Apostle Paul had spent only a relatively brief period in Thessalonica before his de facto eviction by the civil authorities, he must have spent a fair amount of time talking about the return of Christ. This is not surprising, as suffering Christians find hope in the promise of the Lord's return, and the Thessalonians experienced persecution from the start. Nonetheless, the Thessalonians must have been confused about this teaching, as Paul spends much of I and II Thessalonians reiterating and correcting understanding of the second coming.

Thus, in II Thessalonians 2 Paul tells his readers that they should not be deceived by false teachers claiming that the day of the Lord had already come. This could not be true, because "the man of lawlessness," a phrase usually thought to refer to the Antichrist, has not arrived on the scene. Because Paul says that this figure "takes his seat in the temple," proclaiming himself to be God and receiving worship, some Christians argue that the passage requires a rebuilding of the Jewish temple in order for the Antichrist to conduct these blasphemous acts. While one might hesitate to be dogmatic about this, it seems to this writer to be an unlikely interpretation.

Perhaps I should start by providing my understanding of who the Antichrist is as presented in the Bible. I do regard this language as referring ultimately to an individual who will become known near the end of the age; however, the Bible also emphasizes that the spirit of anti-Christ can be found throughout the period between Christ's two advents. Thus, Paul says in our present passage that "the mystery of lawlessness is already at work," and in I John the Bible says that "many Antichrists have come" (2:18, ESV). Thus, while an end times Antichrist will prominently personify evil opposition to God, that person simply rolls up a set of characteristics seen throughout the age. As such, it is appropriate to differentiate between a persistent spirit of Antichrist and an end of the age personification of Antichrist.

Importantly, to speak of the spirit of Antichrist is not the same as decrying every form of evil: specific characteristics are associated with that evil, among them being explicit public opposition to God and harmful influence inside the church. Thus, when John writes about the many Antichrists he references in I John 2, he makes clear that their work is manifested in the departure of members who had been deceived from the church. That seems to be also what Paul has in mind in II Thessalonians 2: Antichrist had set himself up as an object of worship actually in the visible church.

Besides this contextual backdrop, there are other reasons for thinking that the reference to the "temple" in II Thessalonians 2 does not refer to a Jewish temple, but to the church. First, as we have concluded throughout this study, there does not seem to be any compelling reason outside of this passage for thinking that Solomon's temple will be rebuilt. More significantly, as we have seen from my two previous posts, Paul is in the habit of speaking of the temple in terms of the church. Those factors, combined with the emphasis to be found in this passage and in I John, seem to point toward an engagement of an influential figure of ghastly evil who manages to deceive even many within the visible body. Let those of us who think we stand take heed, lest we fall.

Without knowing who that man of sin will be at the end of the age, it is not hard to see precursors of his activity. Certainly, throughout history great evil has been done in the name of Christ's church. While we can say contra Christ's enemies that such is not the whole story, neither should we pretend that the devil has not done his work there. This is why Christians must compassionately, but clearly, point out and root out evil in the church.