Paul called antichrist, "the man of sin"(2 Thessalonians 2:3). It is primarily because of this phrase that millions have concluded that the word "antichrist" must ultimately apply to only one Mr. Wicked. Kids who read the popular
Left Behind books sometimes call him, the Evil Dude. Apocalyptic Christian films like
The Omega Code,
A Thief in the Night,
Tribulation,
Judgment, and
Megiddo, all reflect the same idea. Is it true? Will there be one Mr. Scary who becomes the antichrist, an Osama bin Laden-number 2? Is that what Paul really meant?
John wrote about "many antichrists"(1John 2:18), and "that spirit of antichrist"(1John 4:3). He also revealed that anyone who denies "the doctrine of Christ" (2John 9) is "a deceiver and an
antichrist (2John 7). Therefor the idea of only
one Mr. Sinister as
the antichrist fails the biblical test. Truth can afford to be fair. It has nothing to hide and is willing to examine every iota of evidence. So what did Paul mean when he referred to "the man of sin"? Doesn't this mean a single person?
First of all, Paul used other phrases in 2 Thessalonians to describe this same antichrist, such as "the son of perdition"(vs3), "the mystery of lawlessness"(vs7), and 'that Wicked" vs8 KJV) In Daniels parallel prophecy, this same abominable horror is also called a little "horn"(Daniel 7:8); and in the book of Revelation it is labeled as "the beast"(Revelation 13:2). Almost everyone agrees these words and phrases apply to the same thing. The big Question is do they all apply to only one "Evil Dude", as is commonly taught, or do they point to something wider and deeper__to something most prophesy teachers aren't telling us about?
Notice carefully, Daniel did not say the little horn would
be a man, but rather it would have "eyes
like a man"(Daniel 7:8). Eyes of intelligence. In the book of Revelation, the same horn is called "the beast". Here's a key question: How does Daniel 7
define a beast? There is no need to guess or to pull an interpretation out of a hat. An angelic interpreter explained to Daniel..."the fourth beast shall be a kingdom on earth"(vs 23). Presto! What is a beast? A man? A giant computer? No. A beast is a
kingdom! That's what the angel said. And once again, just like the angels in Acts 1 who watched Jesus ascend into heaven, this angel had his theology right.
Let's go back to Paul's prophecy. A careful study of 2 Thessalonians 2 actually reveals the utter impossibility of "the man of sin" applying to only on Mr. Diabolical. First of all, Paul said that in his own day this very same "mystery of lawlessness [was] already at work"(vs 7) Thus this predicted antichrist was already becoming active in the first century. Paul was also very emphatic that this "mystery" would continue all the way down to the second coming of Jesus Christ (vs 8). Put the pieces together. How could this refer to only one human being? He would have to be 2,000 years old!
Did Paul ever use this expression, "the man" in any of his other writings in such a way that it does not refer to one individual? Yes indeed. Paul wrote:
All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness, that the man of God may be complete, thoroughly equipped for every good work 2 Timothy 3:16-17)
Look carefully. Does the phrase, "the man of God," in 2 Timothy 3:17 only refer to only one human who might have a name like Joe, Bill, or Frank? No. Instead, it refers to a succession of godly men
throughout history who become "complete" or "perfect"(KJV)
through obeying the word of God.
In Romans 13:4(KJV), Paul also used the phrase, "the minister of God" to refer to
all civil officers
throughout history whom God uses to restrain evil. Therefore, if we let Paul's own writings interpret themselves, his unique phrase, "the man of sin"(2 Thessalonians 2:3), need not apply to one supremely wicked personage. What might it apply to? In the illuminating light of 2 Timothy 3:17 and Romans 13:4, "the man of sin," can properly apply to a historical succession of other men who follow tradition above the Word of Truth.