A.T. Robertson Commentary 2 Thessalonians 2

Touching the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ (υπερ της παρουσιας του Κυριου (ημων) Ιησου Χριστου). For ερωτωμεν, to beseech, see on 1 Thessalonians 4:1; 4:12. Hυπερ originally meant over, in behalf of, instead of, but here it is used like περ, around, concerning as in 1:4; 1 Thessalonians 3:2; 5:10, common in the papyri (Robertson, Grammar, p. 632). For the distinction between Παρουσια, Επιφανεια (Epiphany), and Αποκαλυψις (Revelation) as applied to the Second Coming of Christ see Milligan on Thessalonian Epistles, pp. 145-151, in the light of the papyri. Παρουσια lays emphasis on the

presence of the Lord with his people, επιφανεια on his

manifestation of the power and love of God, αποκαλυψις on the

revelation of God's purpose and plan in the Second Coming of the Lord Jesus.

And our gathering together unto him (κα ημων επισυναγωγης επ' αυτον). A late word found only in II Macc. 2:7; 2 Thessalonians 2:1; Hebrews 10:25 till Deissmann (Light from the Ancient East, p. 103) found it on a stele in the island of Syme, off Caria, meaning "collection." Paul is referring to the rapture, mentioned in 1 Thessalonians 4:15–17, and the being forever with the Lord thereafter. Cf. also Mt 24:31; Mr 13:27.

To the end that (εις το). One of Paul's favourite idioms for purpose, εις το and the infinitive.

Ye be not quickly shaken (μη ταχεως σαλευθηνα υμας). First aorist passive infinitive of σαλευω, old verb to agitate, to cause to totter like a reed (Matthew 11:7), the earth (Hebrews 12:26). Usual negative μη and accusative of general reference υμας with the infinitive.

From your mind (απο του νοος). Ablative case of nous, mind, reason, sober sense, "from your witte" (Wyclif), to "keep their heads."

Nor yet be troubled (μηδε θροεισθα). Old verb θροεω, to cry aloud (from θροος, clamour, tumult), to be in a state of nervous excitement (present passive infinitive, as if it were going on), "a continued state of agitation following the definite shock received (σαλευθηνα)" (Milligan).

Either by spirit (μητε δια πνευματος). By ecstatic utterance (1 Thessalonians 5:10). The nervous fear that the coming was to be at once prohibited by μηδε Paul divides into three sources by μητε, μητε, μητε. No individual claim to divine revelation (the gift of prophecy) can justify the statement.

Or by word (μητε δια λογου). Oral statement of a conversation with Paul (Lightfoot) to this effect

as from us . An easy way to set aside Paul's first Epistle by report of a private remark from Paul.

Or by epistle as from us (μητε δι' επιστολης ως δι' ημων). In 1 Thessalonians 4:5–13:3 Paul had plainly said that Jesus would come as a thief in the night and had shown that the dead would not be left out in the rapture. But evidently some one claimed to have a private epistle from Paul which supported the view that Jesus was coming at once,

as that the day of the Lord is now present (ως οτ ενεστηκεν η ημερα του κυριου). Perfect active indicative of ενιστημ, old verb, to place in, but intransitive in this tense to stand in or at or near. So "is imminent" (Lightfoot). The verb is common in the papyri. In 1 Corinthians 3:22; Romans 8:38 we have a contrast between τα ενεστωτα, the things present, and τα μελλοντα, the things future (to come). The use of ως οτ may be disparaging here, though that is not true in 2 Corinthians 5:19. In the Koine it comes in the vernacular to mean simply "that" (Moulton, Proleg., p. 212), but that hardly seems the case in the N.T. (Robertson, Grammar, p. 1033). Here it means "to wit that," though "as that" or "as if" does not miss it much. Certainly it flatly denies that by conversation or by letter he had stated that the second coming was immediately at hand. "It is this misleading assertion that accounts both for the increased discouragement of the faint-hearted to encourage whom Paul writes 1:3-2:17, and for the increased meddlesomeness of the idle brethren to warn whom Paul writes 3:1-18" (Frame). It is enough to give one pause to note Paul's indignation over this use of his name by one of the over-zealous advocates of the view that Christ was coming at once. It is true that Paul was still alive, but, if such a "pious fraud" was so common and easily condoned as some today argue, it is difficult to explain Paul's evident anger. Moreover, Paul's words should make us hesitate to affirm that Paul definitely proclaimed the early return of Jesus. He hoped for it undoubtedly, but he did not specifically proclaim it as so many today assert and accuse him of misleading the early Christians with a false presentation.

Let no man beguile you in any wise (μη τις υμας εξαπατηση κατα μηδενα τροπον). First aorist active subjunctive of εξαπαταω (old verb to deceive, strengthened form of simple verb απαταω) with double negative (μη τισ, μηδενα) in accord with regular Greek idiom as in 1 Corinthians 16:11 rather than the aorist imperative which does occur sometimes in the third person as in Mr 13:15 (μη καταβατω). Paul broadens the warning to go beyond conversation and letter. He includes "tricks" of any kind. It is amazing how gullible some of the saints are when a new deceiver pulls off some stunts in religion.

For it will not be (οτ). There is an ellipse here of ουκ εστα (or γενησετα) to be supplied after οτ. Westcott and Hort make an anacoluthon at the end of verse 4. The meaning is clear. Hοτ is causal, because, but the verb is understood. The second coming not only is not "imminent," but will not take place before certain important things take place, a definite rebuff to the false enthusiasts of verse 2.

Except the falling away come first (εαν μη ελθη η αποστασια πρωτον). Negative condition of the third class, undetermined with prospect of determination and the aorist subjunctive. Αποστασια is the late form of αποστασις and is our word apostasy. Plutarch uses it of political revolt and it occurs in I Macc. 2:15 about Antiochus Epiphanes who was enforcing the apostasy from Judaism to Hellenism. In Jos 22:22 it occurs for rebellion against the Lord. It seems clear that the word here means a religious revolt and the use of the definite article (η) seems to mean that Paul had spoken to the Thessalonians about it. The only other New Testament use of the word is in Ac 21:21 where it means apostasy from Moses. It is not clear whether Paul means revolt of the Jews from God, of Gentiles from God, of Christians from God, or of the apostasy that includes all classes within and without the body of Christians. But it is to be

first (πρωτον) before Christ comes again. Note this adverb when only two events are compared (cf. Acts 1:1).

And the man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition (κα αποκαλυφθη ο ανθρωπος της ανομιασ, ο υιος της απωλειας). First aorist passive subjunctive after εαν μη and same condition as with ελθη. The use of this verb αποκαλυπτω, like αποκαλυψιν of the second coming in 1:7, seems to note the superhuman character (Milligan) of the event and the same verb is repeated in verses 6,8. The implication is that

the man of sin is hidden somewhere who will be suddenly manifested just as false apostles pose as angels of light (2 Corinthians 11:13ff.), whether the crowning event of the apostasy or another name for the same event. Lightfoot notes the parallel between the man of sin, of whom sin is the special characteristic (genitive case, a Hebraism for the lawless one in verse 8) and Christ. Both Christ and the adversary of Christ are revealed, there is mystery about each, both make divine claims (verse 4). He seems to be the Antichrist of 1 John 2:18. The terrible phrase, the son of perdition, is applied to Judas in Joh 17:12 (like Judas doomed to perdition), but here to the lawless one (ο ανομος, verse 8), who is not Satan, but some one definite person who is doing the work of Satan. Note the definite article each time.

He that opposeth and exalteth himself (ο αντικειμενος κα υπεραιρομενος). Like John's Antichrist this one opposes (αντι-) Christ and exalts himself (direct middle of υπεραιρω, old verb to lift oneself up

above others, only here and 2 Corinthians 12:7 in N.T.), but not Satan, but an agent of Satan. This participial clause is in apposition with the two preceding phrases, the man of sin, the son of perdition. Note 1 Corinthians 8:5 about one called God and Ac 17:23 for σεβασμα (from σεβαζομα), object of worship, late word, in N.T. only in these two passages.

So that he sitteth in the temple of God (ωστε αυτον εις τον ναον του θεου καθισα). Another example of the infinitive with ωστε for result. Caius Caligula had made a desperate attempt to have his statue set up for worship in the Temple in Jerusalem. This incident may lie behind Paul's language here.

Setting himself forth as God (αποδεικνυντα εαυτον οτ εστιν θεος). Present active participle (μ form) of αποδεικνυμ, agreeing in case with αυτον,

showing himself that he is God . Caligula claimed to be God. Moffatt doubts if Paul is identifying this deception with the imperial cultus at this stage. Lightfoot thinks that the deification of the Roman emperor supplied Paul's language here. Wetstein notes a coin of Julius with θεος on one side and Θεσσαλονικεων on the other. In 1 John 2:18 we are told of "many antichrists" some of whom had already come. Hence it is not clear that Paul has in mind only one individual or even individuals at all rather than evil principles, for in verse 6 he speaks of το κατεχον (that which restraineth) while in verse 7 it is ο κατεχων (the one that restraineth). Frame argues for a combination of Belial and Antichrist as the explanation of Paul's language. But the whole subject is left by Paul in such a vague form that we can hardly hope to clear it up. It is possible that his own preaching while with them gave his readers a clue that we do not possess.

When I was yet with you (ετ ων προς υμας). The present participle takes the time of the verb ελεγον (imperfect active),

I used to tell you these things . So Paul recalls their memory of his words and leaves us without the clue to his idea. We know that one of the charges against him was that Jesus was another king, a rival to Caesar (Acts 17:7). That leads one to wonder how far Paul went when there in contrasting the kingdom of the world of which Rome was ruler and the kingdom of God of which Christ is king. Frame notes Paul's abrupt question here "with an unfinished sentence behind him" (verses 3f.), even "with a trace of impatience."