The Wisconsin Evangelical Lutheran Synod and the Antichrist.

Return Response I

Sat, Apr 30, 2005, 3:32pm

Subject: Re: FW: The Antichrist

Dear Tom, you wrote:

"Any number of chronological Bibles, Bible dictionaries, and Bible commentaries will document the near certainty that 2Thessalonians predates 1Corinthians, 2Corinthians, and Ephesians. It is therefore misleading for and unwitting of one to assert that no evidence exists for Paul 'suddenly' using the word 'temple' in Thessalonians to mean something other than 'Christ's believers'. Such an assertion ignores the chronology of the epistles. Such an assertion ignores the near certainty that 'temple' in 2Thessalonians 2.4 is the Holy Spirit's very first use of that term by the hand of Paul in Scripture. . . . "When 'temple' appears in the singular and is to be understood in any way other than an earthly, material, sanctified habitation in Jerusalem in the land of Israel the Holy Spirit seems always to clarify so, and that in the immediate context."

After doing some investigating, I found that if we take Paul's words in Acts to the men of Athens to predate his writing of 2 Thessalonians, we find that he speaks of the meaning of God's temple before writing the word in 2 Thessalonians. I say this because although Acts was probably written after 2 Thessalonians, Paul's words recorded in this book would have predated the second letter to Thessalonians, which he probably wrote in Corinth after his visit to Athens, recorded as history in Acts. In Paul's address to the men of Athens, Luke tells us in Acts 17:24 that Paul said, "The God who made the world and everything in it is the Lord of heaven and earth and does not live in temples built by hands." Of course the word "temple" is plural and not singular in this case. So while the objection to Professor Gurgel's idea of no evidence for a sudden appearance of the use of the word "temple" to mean a physical temple may be warranted, we may be able to say that Paul had the idea of using the term "temple" to mean a metaphysical dwelling of God amongst His believers prior to the use of the word "temple" in 2 Thessalonians. Therefore it is still _possible_ that Paul is not referring to a physical temple in Jerusalem when he speaks of it in 2 Thessalonians. [In response to the closing paragraph of the WELS "Statement on the Antichrist" you wrote:]

"What these penmen either fail or refuse to see or admit is that the marks by which Antichrist is to be recognized _must be interpreted_. The WELS interprets one of these marks, namely 'God's temple' of 2Thessalonians 2.4, as metaphorical, but the literal is not impossible. . . . Professor Gurgel interprets 'the lie' of 2Thessalonians 2.11 as self-righteousness, but 'the lie' might refer to 'counterfeit' in verse 9. Let us pray these brothers and sisters of ours have not closed their minds as they have the question."

I think the "penmen" may be trying to emphasize that the interpretation of the Papacy as the Antichrist is based on Scripture and not just a wild fantasy of men. The "Statement on the Antichrist" doesn't purport to leave out human interpretation unequivocally, but that the doctrine is not based on "MERELY human interpretation" but upon the evidence of Scripture that supports a Papal interpretation of the Antichrist. For example, other evidence of demonic, Antichristal marks of false doctrine that fit papal decrees appear in 1 Timothy 4:1-3. Paul writes, "The Spirit clearly says that in later times some will abandon the faith and follow deceiving spirits and things taught by demons. Such teachings come through hypocritical liars, whose consciences have been seared as with a hot iron. They forbid people to marry [priestly celibacy?] and order them to abstain from certain foods [no meat on Fridays?]..." This passage certainly fits papal teachings over history. While it is _possible_ that a worse Antichrist that fulfills the "man of lawlessness" may come, surely the office of the Papacy fits the bill as the Lutheran confessions outline. It is possible that THE Antichrist may very well be someone else, or perhaps he will be the last Pope, who will go to the extremes set out in 2 Thessalonians. Of course that would be MY interpretation. I liked the quote you gave us by Rev. Graham (1899). Of what church was he from? May the Holy Spirit guide us in all things Scriptural. Peace through Jesus, C.

Copyright © 2005 by Thomas John Dexter. All rights reserved. The matter of this work may be reproduced for distribution, but it is not to be sold.