Translation
the one who opposes
Go to footnote numberand exalts himself above everything called a god or worshipped, so as to sit
Go to footnote numberin the temple of GOD, declaring himself to be GOD.
Go to footnote numberParaphrase
He is the one who opposes God and exalts himself above everything that men refer to as a deity, either properly or falsely, and above everything that is worshipped as a deity, either properly or falsely; he even goes so far as
to establish himself firmly and steadfastly in a prominent role in
the manner in which people meet with THE CREATOR AND OWNER OF ALL THINGS, and he tries to prove that he is indeed THE CREATOR AND OWNER OF ALL THINGS.
Footnotes
1: “Opposing”
This is not the same word, but it carries the same idea as the name Satan, which means “adversary.”
2
This word comes from a word which comes from another word meaning “to sit, to be well based, to be steadfast and firm.” The word in question can also mean “to set, settle or to appoint.” Here the word cannot mean “sit” in a literal way because there was no place to sit down in the temple or in the Holy of Holies, other than the floor, but people of importance never sat on the floor.
3
The second half of this verse would immediately bring to the mind of every Jew the actions of Antiochus Epiphanes who thought he was Zeus and had pigs sacrificed in the temple on an altar which stood before a statue (which was likely of himself pretending to be Zeus.) It is also the exact thing that Satan did while he was in heaven and is the reason he was kicked out of heaven (see Is 14:13-14).
PAUL WAS TALKING ABOUT SOMEONE LIKE ANTIOCHUS
Based on the words of Jesus, Paul knew that another person of power and influence would come and do things to the temple in Jerusalem that should not be done. His description of that person is strong and ugly because he was picturing what Antiochus did in 168 BC and imagining it happening again. He envisioned another person pretending to be a god. He imagined a person overflowing with evil intent.
Did General Titus fit that description well? No, not really. He wanted to spare the temple, not destroy it. But had he succeeded in capturing Jerusalem without destroying the temple he and his father, the Emperor Vespasian, would have used it to worship other gods, for that was their expressed intent. Titus never got the chance to do that, so he does not appear as ugly in our eyes as Antiochus did, but had he done what he wanted to do, it would have meant continual desecration of that structure for as long as it would stand.
WHEN WILL JESUS REVEAL HIMSELF AND ARRIVE ON THE SCENE TO SHOW HIS GREAT POWER?
We don’t know, but this is what II Thess 2:3-4 says about it. Verse three clearly says that before Christ’s arrival in great power there will be a time characterized by apostacy which will somehow be different from other times of apostacy. At the same time, a certain extremely wicked individual will come forth. Will this person who is consumed by sin or lawlessness be one of the believers who turns away from faith in Jesus (an apostate) or someone who has never been a believer? We cannot know for sure. Is this individual the one promoting and fomenting the apostacy of many believers? Is he the one seducing and deceiving them? We cannot know for sure. Verse four says to watch for someone like Antiochus Epiphanes, who was not a believer. So is this someone who acts like Antiochus acted but had different roots? Again, we don’t know.
In Matthew 24 Jesus spoke quite a bit about the fall of Jerusalem and the destruction of the temple as one of two major signs that the former age (the age of the Law) had come to an end. (To see my study lesson on this topic go to The End of What Age.) It is during Jesus’s comments about the destruction of the temple that He predicts that something similar to what Antiochus did would be done again. Jesus also predicted (in Mt 24:10-12) that many would fall from the faith, their love would grow cold, and many false prophets would appear and deceive many people. Did all of that happen before AD 70, or was some of this referring to a future event? It happened to some degree prior to the destruction of the temple. Will this prophecy see a greater fulfillment before the next “arrival” of Jesus in great power and glory? Quite possibly so! We know that several of the things Jesus said in Matthew 24 will likely have a double fulfillment, so this apostacy might be one of them. Thus the words of Paul had some degree of fulfillment in AD 70 and may be likely to have greater fulfillment at the next “arrival” of Jesus.
Who is this “man of lawlessness”? That’s the wrong question because we don’t know, and Jesus told us not to try and figure these things out. When it happens, it will be obvious.
Should we freak out every time we see something that looks like apostacy? No.
Should we be careful to avoid apostacy? This is the right question, and the answer is: Absolutely!
WILL A FUTURE FULFILLMENT INVOLVE THE PHYSICAL LOCATION OF THE TEMPLE AND POSSIBLY A PHYSICAL STRUCTURE ON THAT PLACE?
I highly doubt it. In my opinion God looks at the heart and “his people” are those that follow Him from the heart, not those who happen to have Jewish blood running through their veins. God loves Jewish people, but that can be said of all people. Jesus destroyed the temple (using the hands of the Romans to do it), and gave no hope of that system being restored because He is the new system and He is all we need. His sacrifice meets all our needs, while the Old Testament sacrifices never did. Why would God want that old system to be restored? It would be a major leap backwards!
Whenever the Bible talks about the temple, it is always a picture of the connection between God and man. It can refer to the place where that connection happens, or to the manner in which it happens. But it is obvious that it has something to do with the followers of the true God but does not need to be a physical location with a material building built on it. In fact, since God’s work is in the hearts of men, it is more likely that it will not be a physical temple in Jerusalem. If we are looking for this to happen in a physical way, we will miss its fulfillment if the passage is intended to be interpreted figuratively.
The word for “temple” also could refer to the innermost part of a temple, as all temples of ancient times had an inner sanctum. The Jews called their inner room the Holy of Holies. So the use of this word may refer to that most special place. If so, the figurative meaning is that this individual will claim to be in charge of the most important aspects of a spiritual connection with God. In my mind those have to do with prayer, Bible reading and personal obedience. I cannot say what that will look like, but this is what I understand from the text.
Understanding these predictions as having physical fulfillments limits the ways God might fulfill them. Actually we cannot limit God, so all we are doing is fooling ourselves into thinking that things will happen one way, when God has a variety of ways He can fulfill His own words. Expecting the temple to be rebuilt in order for certain prophecies to be fulfilled would also include the reinstating of the sacrificial system. Such teaching begs the question – is the sacrifice of Jesus enough? Or isn’t it?