The date of 2 Thessalonians.

[Ben C. Smith]

to Ben,
2 Th 2:3b-4 the man of lawlessness is revealed, the son of perdition,
who 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.

At second look, the man in question might be Domitian (having people calling him "my Lord and my God"), presented here as a part of a prophecy (the author pretending to be Paul, writing some 40 years earlier). I figure that was intended to give hope that the Day will arrive soon, because that man was in power.

Cordially, Bernard

What would it mean to author and reader for Domitian to take a seat in the temple of God?

[Bernard Muller]

to Ben,

What would it mean to author and reader for Domitian to take a seat in the temple of God?

A usurper, a pretender, a deceiver, as in the Didache:
Ch.16 "... and then shall appear the deceiver of the world as a son of god [also translated as "the Son of God" but ancient Greek has no capital letters], and shall do signs and wonders
[in Mt24:24, "great signs and wonders" will be given by false christs & false prophets, right before the "end"]
` and the earth shall be given over into his hands and he shall commit iniquities which have never been since the world began [Mt24:21].
... And then shall appear the signs of the truth: first, the sign of an outspreading in heaven, then the sign of the sound of the trumpet [Mt24:31]. And third, the resurrection of the dead"

Cordially, Bernard

[Charles Wilson]

2 Options appear:

1. Domitian. I'm OK with this one. Domitian was Damnatio'd shortly after his death which makes him a good candidate for the Holy Spirit. The Baptism of the Holy Spirit replaces the Baptism of John before more than a coupla' hundred/thousand even know that there WAS a Baptism of John.

2. Nero. His Bio-Father was a despicable human being and that's being generous. He probably had Claudius' son Britannicus poisoned (He almost snagged Titus in this as well...). He ascends to the Emperorship but that would be by Appearance only.

CW

[Ben C. Smith]

to Ben,

What would it mean to author and reader for Domitian to take a seat in the temple of God?

A usurper, a pretender, a deceiver, as in the Didache:
Ch.16 "... and then shall appear the deceiver of the world as a son of god [also translated as "the Son of God" but ancient Greek has no capital letters], and shall do signs and wonders
[in Mt24:24, "great signs and wonders" will be given by false christs & false prophets, right before the "end"]
` and the earth shall be given over into his hands and he shall commit iniquities which have never been since the world began [Mt24:21].
... And then shall appear the signs of the truth: first, the sign of an outspreading in heaven, then the sign of the sound of the trumpet [Mt24:31]. And third, the resurrection of the dead"

Unfortunately, that does not tell me much about why the image of the temple would have been used. Are there other examples of the temple being used in this nonspecific way (after 70, that is)? The passages you adduce from the Pauline letters themselves are not really the same thing; there the symbolism is obvious; here it is not so much obvious as confusing.

[John2]

The only thing I've read before about 2 Thes. 2:1-4 is something on Neil Godfrey's site which discusses Turmel's argument that the "man of sin" is Bar Kokhba:

http://vridar.org/2011/05/31/identifyin ... salonians/

But after looking at some other commentaries, "man" part notwithstanding, I'm tentatively inclined to the view that it refers to Satan and/or the Anti-Christ (if there is any difference) because 2:4 says, "He will oppose ... everything that is called God or is worshiped," and Satan in Hebrew means "opponent" or "adversary."

I'm also wondering if the reference to the Temple could be metaphorical, like (perhaps) Moses' seat in Mt. 23:2 (which I suppose could be applicable whether or not the Sanhedrin existed):

The scribes and the Pharisees sit on Moses’ seat.

[John2]

And now I see a little further on that 2 Thess. 2:9-11 says:

The coming of the lawless one will be in accordance with how Satan works. He will use all sorts of displays of power through signs and wonders that serve the lie, and all the ways that wickedness deceives those who are perishing. They perish because they refused to love the truth and so be saved. For this reason God sends them a powerful delusion so that they will believe the lie ...

The "lie" part catches my eye, because as I was looking up references to the Anti-Christ I noticed that 1 John 2:22 uses the same word to describe the Anti-Christ:

Who is the liar? It is whoever denies that Jesus is the Christ. Such a person is the antichrist--denying the Father and the Son.

And 1 John 4:3 says:

... and every spirit that does not confess Jesus is not from God. This is the spirit of the antichrist, which you have heard is coming, and is already in the world at this time.

And 2 John 1:7 says;

For many deceivers have gone out into the world, refusing to confess the coming of Jesus Christ in the flesh. Any such person is the deceiver and the antichrist.

I wonder if there is any connection then between these and 2 Thess. 2:1-4.

[Ben C. Smith]

The only thing I've read before about 2 Thes. 2:1-4 is something on Neil Godfrey's site which discusses Turmel's argument that the "man of sin" is Bar Kokhba:

http://vridar.org/2011/05/31/identifyin ... ssalonians

I know you are not vouching for the argument there, but it is a pretty thorough one. Unfortunately, I am not as familiar with the actual evidence for some of the claims made there (and very often elsewhere) about Bar Kokhba as I probably should be. For example, what is the evidence that he worked signs and wonders, especially the fire-from-the-mouth trick mentioned? What is the evidence that he retook Jerusalem and founded some kind of temple there, however temporary or modest? (I believe Andrew has laid out some arguments against this possibility before; I may have time to do some searching later.) The entire argument hangs on those kinds of contingencies, and IIUC much of the more specific details about Bar Kokhba come from the Talmud and other late Jewish literature; this is not at all to say that it is invalid, but it would have to be sifted, for certain.

And now I see a little further on that 2 Thess. 2:9-11 says:

The coming of the lawless one will be in accordance with how Satan works. He will use all sorts of displays of power through signs and wonders that serve the lie, and all the ways that wickedness deceives those who are perishing. They perish because they refused to love the truth and so be saved. For this reason God sends them a powerful delusion so that they will believe the lie ...

The "lie" part catches my eye, because as I was looking up references to the Anti-Christ I noticed that 1 John 2:22 uses the same word to describe the Anti-Christ:

Who is the liar? It is whoever denies that Jesus is the Christ. Such a person is the antichrist--denying the Father and the Son.

And 1 John 4:3 says:

... and every spirit that does not confess Jesus is not from God. This is the spirit of the antichrist, which you have heard is coming, and is already in the world at this time.

And 2 John 1:7 says;

For many deceivers have gone out into the world, refusing to confess the coming of Jesus Christ in the flesh. Any such person is the deceiver and the antichrist.

I wonder if there is any connection then between these and 2 Thess. 2:1-4.

I suspect that the idea of (plural) antichrists from the Johannine epistles, the (singular) man of sin from 2 Thessalonians, and the (singular) deceiver of the world from Didache 16 (and note again there the motif of deceit) all share common roots grown from soil fertilized by the likes of Antiochus Epiphanes.

[John2]

What about the "dragon" and "beast" in Rev. 13 and 20 (which is coming up in commentaries I'm seeing)? I see that 13:6-7 says:

It opened its mouth to blaspheme God, and to slander his name and his dwelling place and those who live in heaven. It was given power to wage war against God’s holy people and to conquer them.

Then 13:1-18 says:

The dragon stood on the shore of the sea. And I saw a beast coming out of the sea ... This calls for wisdom. Let the person who has insight calculate the number of the beast, for it is the number of a man. That number is 666.

The "man" here is the same word (or based on the same word) as the man in 2 Thes. 2:3.

Rev. 20:1-4:

And I saw an angel coming down out of heaven, having the key to the Abyss and holding in his hand a great chain. He seized the dragon, that ancient serpent, who is the devil, or Satan, and bound him for a thousand years. I saw thrones on which were seated those who had been given authority to judge. And I saw the souls of those who had been beheaded because of their testimony about Jesus and because of the word of God. They had not worshiped the beast or its image and had not received its mark on their foreheads or their hands. They came to life and reigned with Christ a thousand years.

[Ben C. Smith]

What about the "dragon" and "beast" in Rev. 13 and 20 (which is coming up in commentaries I'm seeing)? I see that 13:6-7 says:

It opened its mouth to blaspheme God, and to slander his name and his dwelling place and those who live in heaven. It was given power to wage war against God’s holy people and to conquer them.

Then 13:1-18 says:

The dragon stood on the shore of the sea. And I saw a beast coming out of the sea ... This calls for wisdom. Let the person who has insight calculate the number of the beast, for it is the number of a man. That number is 666.

The "man" here is the same word (or based on the same word) as the man in 2 Thes. 2:3.

Rev. 20:1-4:

And I saw an angel coming down out of heaven, having the key to the Abyss and holding in his hand a great chain. He seized the dragon, that ancient serpent, who is the devil, or Satan, and bound him for a thousand years. I saw thrones on which were seated those who had been given authority to judge. And I saw the souls of those who had been beheaded because of their testimony about Jesus and because of the word of God. They had not worshiped the beast or its image and had not received its mark on their foreheads or their hands. They came to life and reigned with Christ a thousand years.

Yes, I think those figures are related, as well.

[Bernard Muller]

to Ben,
I do not think a Pauline Christian would consider the Jewish temple of Jerusalem (even if still existing) as the temple of God.
But by claiming to be Lord & God, Domitian would appear wanting himself to replace the "true" Christian God in the spiritual temple of God of the Christians.

Cordially, Bernard