Skip to main content

The Man of Sin: A Modern Perspective

Eschatology is one of the most controversial topics in Christian theology, and one of the most controversial issues within Eschatology is the identity of the "Man of Sin."  The phrase is taken from 2 Thessalonians 2, where Paul exhorts the Thessalonian Church to be fearless and to stand firm in the face of impending persecution and uncertainty.  Although they lack explicit warrant, it is not surprising that interpreters have often linked this figure to the Beast of Revelation and the Antichrist. Many view this Man of Sin as a future threat, while others identify him with a historical figure, such as Nero (my personal view).  I do not, however, want to discuss the identity of the Man of Sin, but, rather, I would like to take a look at how we can apply Paul's warning in our day, regardless of who this shadowy villain was or may prove to be.

Paul tells the Thessalonians that the great rebellion cannot occur until the Man of Sin arises.  The word commonly translated sin is more literally lawlessness, that is, he is the man of no law.  He is above and beyond law, or at least he views himself that way.  Sin is not an incorrect translation per se, but in our modern tongue fails to capture the essence of who this man really is.  Paul's subsequent description illuminates this man's narcissism for us even further.  He "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."  This is the epitome of self-absorption.  It is also an apt description of the Roman Caesars, but that's a discussion for another time.

Here's where we begin to apply Paul's warning to ourselves.  Isn't this Man of Sin really just an extreme example of all unregenerate men?  Isn't his attitude an example of the man's depravity unbridled by the grace of God?  Isn't this sort of self-exaltation something with which we all struggle?  Don't we all fight a spirit of lawlessness?  From the time of our first parents we have all sought to be gods unto ourselves.  We loathe compromise, striving always to have our own way. When we plan for the future, we look to our own power and plan for our own goals.  We zealously bow the knee to the idol of self.  We might wonder why God, who guides all the affairs of this world in His sovereign wisdom, would allow someone like the Man of Sin to arise.  I think that He, at least partly, is showing us the depths of our own depravity.  He is revealing to us by means of this grand historical drama just how far we fell in Adam, and, by way of contrast, the transcendence of His own glory and holiness.

The modern humanistic movement demonstrates the pervasive nature of this lawless attitude in mankind.  The human mind is exalted above all things.  If mankind cannot make logical sense of it, it simply can't be true.  Knowledge is, therefore, restrained by man's ability to detect and process it as there is no greater standard by which to define truth.  As we sink further and further into this kind of thinking, we become more and more like Adam and Eve and the Man of Sin.  We plunge more deeply into fallenness.  Conversion, then, is a reversal of this exaltation of the creature over his Creator. Regeneration enables the sinner to recognize his God and to bow the knee to Him.  Being made new men, we are finally able to fulfill our place as man, exercising dominion over Creation as the image-bearers of our Lord.  The Holy Spirit teaches us to submit to the order of the Universe.

So the next time you read about the Man of Sin, don't immediately focus on how he fits into Biblical prophesy.  Think rather, "Am I making myself a god?  Am I placing myself in the Temple of God?" If you have bowed the knee to Jesus Christ as your Lord and Savior, you should think, "But by the grace of God go I!"












Comments

Popular posts from this blog

4 Reasons I Affirm Paedocommunion

If you have interacted with me on social media, you know that I have always been outspoken on the issue of Paedocommunion .  It is a theological position and a liturgical practice about which I am passionate.  Having been raised, and having raised my children, at the Table, I cannot imagine attending a church that didn't allow PC.  I hope that when I am old and gray, I will still be an advocate for bringing little children to the Sacrament. Throughout the 12 years that I have had this blog, I have written scattered thoughts on the topic, but it appears that I have never written a concise summary of my reasons for affirming PC.  I was thoroughly convinced that I had, but I can't seem to locate it, so I guess I never did.  So, to rectify the omission, here are four reasons I hold to PC. 1) Paedocommunion is Biblical.   Any discussion of the topic should start here, and I would hope that both sides of the debate would make this assertion.  However, let me clarify what I mean when

1 Corinthians, the Covenant Hermeneutic, & Paedocommunion

As an adherent to Paedocommunion  (hereafter PC), I have always found it painfully ironic that Credocommunionists use 1 Corinthians 11 to withhold children (among others) from the Table.  One can imagine St. Paul shaking his head as he watches theologians using his discussion of unity at the Table to divide the body at the Table.  You're missing the point! he would say in exasperation.  Not only does 1 Corinthians 11 not forbid PC; I would go so far as to say that there is no better defense of PC in the New Testament than the epistle of 1 Corinthians. Credocommunionist logic is pretty straightforward.  1 Corinthians 11:28 says, "Let a person examine himself, then, and so eat of the bread and drink of the cup."  If, they argue, one is unable to fulfill the exhortation to examine himself, then he may not eat of the bread and drink of the cup.  This is a pretty logical deduction, right? Credobaptists would adamantly agree.  Acts 2:38 says, "Repent and be baptized...&quo

Why do you go to church on Sunday?

Why do you go to church on Sunday?  I would assume there are many reasons, but what is the primary reason that you get up on a cold, snowy Sunday morning and get your butt to church?  Further, why has the Church of Jesus Christ consistently gathered together on Sundays (among other days) for the last 2000 years? Throughout my 34 years of church attendance I would have proffered a variety of answers to that question.  As a child I'm sure I went to church because I had to, to see my cousins (who happened to be my best friends), to get bread and wine (weekly communion for the win), etc.  As my faith matured in adulthood these reasons remained, hopefully deepening, but to them were added concepts like rest and theological training. As I moved into Anglicanism I was struck by the deliberate focus on worship .  Why do Christians gather on Sunday morning?  To worship God!  Are teaching and fellowship important?  Absolutely!  Are they aspects of worship?  Certainly!  Is either the primary