‘Let no man beguile you in any way, for it will not be except the rebellion come first, and the man of sin (or ‘lawlessness') be revealed, the son of perdition, he who opposes and exalts himself against all that is called God or is an object of worship, so that he sits in the temple of God setting himself forth as God.'
Paul here makes clear that while Christians should be ‘looking for His appearing' there is to be a certain delay because certain things have to happen. This is not surprising. Jesus Himself, while urging watching for His surprise appearing (Matthew 24:42-51), had done the same. He could not come until there had been great wars and earthquakes (Luke 21:10-11), and until all nations had received the Gospel (Mark 13:10), He could not come until Jerusalem had been destroyed and the people scattered among the nations (Luke 21:24), He could not come until certain levels of persecution had been suffered by the Apostles (Luke 21:12; Luke 21:16), He could not come until false Messiahs and many false prophets had arisen (Matthew 24:5; Matthew 24:11). Thus those who were watching for His coming ‘at any time' were also to recognise causes for delay. The two ideas are regularly held in tension.
That there will be first ‘the rebellion' against God is clear from elsewhere (1 Timothy 4:1-3; 2Ti 3:1-5; 2 Peter 3:3-6; Jude 1:18-19), although the seeds of that rebellion were already well rooted and being revealed, and he parallels it with the persecution and tribulation already being suffered by the people of God (2 Timothy 3:11-13).
But we must always remember that all New Testament writers saw the days between the first and second coming of Christ as the final days of the age. The fact that ‘the end times' began at the resurrection is important to understand and is clearly stated in Scripture. ‘He was revealed at the end of the times for your sake', says Peter (1 Peter 1:20), so that he can then warn his readers ‘ the end of all things is at hand' (1 Peter 4:7). So to Peter it is clear that the first coming of Christ has begun the end times.
Likewise Paul says to his contemporaries ‘for our admonition, on whom the end of the ages has come' (1 Corinthians 10:11). What could be clearer? The first coming of Christ was ‘the end of the ages', not the beginning of a new age. The writer to the Hebrews tells us ‘He has in these last days spoken to us by His Son' (Hebrews 1:1-2), and adds ‘once in the end of the ages has He appeared to put away sin by the sacrifice of Himself' (Hebrews 9:26-28). So those early writers saw their days as ‘the last days', the ‘end of the ages', for what we see as this age is the culmination of all that has gone before and introduces ‘the end'. Thus they saw ‘the rebellion' as already begun.
‘And the man of sin (or ‘lawlessness') be revealed, the son of perdition, he who opposes and exalts himself against all that is called God or is an object of worship, so that he sits in the temple of God setting himself forth as God.' The ‘man of sin' (some important manuscripts have ‘lawlessness' (see 2 Thessalonians 2:8) but the idea is the same (1 John 3:4)) may be a parody of the phrase ‘the man of God' of the Old Testament, the man, often anonymous, who brings God's true word and demands obedience to it, or even a contrast with ‘the man of Your right hand -- the Son of Man You made strong for Yourself' (Psalms 80:17). The ‘Man of your right hand' suggests One Who is under the authority of God and receives authority from Him, the ‘Son of Man' represents true manhood in its submission to God. The man of sin (like the wild beasts of Daniel) represents one under the authority of sin and lawlessness, and in rebellion against God. It depicts someone who sums up in himself all the sin and lawlessness of the world.
Indeed he will exalt himself as the epitome of man's religion, above all that is seen as divine or is venerated. Such a figure is described in Revelation 17:8; Revelation 17:11; Revelation 19:19, a man with almost supernatural powers, possessed by or representing a satanic being who is depicted as ‘the Wild Beast' who lives again (Revelation 17:8). He is the son of perdition, bound for destruction (Revelation 17:11).
The figure here may be partly based on that in Daniel 11:36, ‘he will exalt himself and magnify himself above every god, and will speak marvellous things against the God of gods -- he will magnify himself above all'. Nevertheless the parallel is not exact. The king in Daniel does honour to ‘a god whom his fathers knew not', but Paul goes further. The man of sin will set himself up as God. We can also consider the extravagant claims of the king of Babylon, seeing himself as ‘the Light-bearer (Lucifer), the son of the morning' and saying ‘I will ascend into heaven, I will exalt my throne above the stars of God, -- I will ascend above the heights of the clouds. I will be like the Most High' (Isaiah 14:12-14). Paul had no lack of precedents. Too much power makes men mad.
Note how the description of the man of sin as ‘the opposing one' uses a term that is parallel to ‘the Adversary' (Satan) who is his backer. See 1 Timothy 5:14 with 15. Thus it links him with Satanic influence.
He will be the great Anti-God. Firstly in that he opposes God, and secondly because he represents himself as God. He openly opposes God and exalts himself against all that is of God, or is seen as divine, and he represents himself as God, taking his place in the temple of God. He sets himself up as a supreme divine figure.
‘The temple of God.' He sets himself up as ‘God', so the Temple ‘of God' is his temple. It does not necessarily signify the temple in Jerusalem. Indeed Paul would emphatically see that as replaced by the Christian church, and therefore no longer of any account. But the words can describe any ‘temple of God' used by such a blasphemer in his claim to be ‘God'. The point is that he sets himself up to be worshipped in his own temple.
‘Sits.' Men did not sit in a temple. The only one with right to sit in a temple was the god himself.
Such men have appeared throughout history. Caligula, ten years before, had seriously represented himself as divine and demanded worship from all, and had set up statues of himself in many places and ‘temples of God' and had had the idea of setting up a statue of himself in the temple at Jerusalem and was only prevented by death. This may have been the pattern for Paul's description. Caligula was followed by the ‘divine' Nero and other ‘divine' emperors (some of whom in private laughed at the idea). The main acceptance of this divinity of the emperors was in the Eastern empire.
Later, popes in the middle ages, taking over as Pontifex Maximus, would behave obscenely and make huge claims to represent God, and were even addressed as God by their sycophants, claimed ‘lying wonders' and behaved cruelly to Christians and non-Christians alike. Men like the Mahdi in the Sudan would be seen as having divine status and use it to his own ends. But, while sharing in the essence of the man of sin, and revealed as what they were by their extreme sinfulness and cruelty, these were all shadows of the greater reality. They came and they went. However, it should be considered what comfort these words would bring to people in the midst of persecution from some such figures, that these powerful, almost invincible, ones before whom they were arraigned, were under God's hands, however great their claims, and would shortly give account to Him.
Their status was always hindered by God's restraining hand on Satan. But in the end another will arise, possibly in the Near East (‘the king of the north' - Daniel 11:36-45), with similar claims. This time God's restraint will be removed as Satan is let loose for ‘a short time' (Revelation 12:12; Revelation 20:3; compare ‘one hour' - Revelation 17:12), and seeks worship for himself through his figurehead.
Thus Paul sees some important figure arising who is the epitome of sin and blasphemy, whom we often call the Antichrist, but is rather here represented as the ‘Anti-god'.
John says, ‘Little children it is the last hour, and as you heard that antichrist comes, even now there have arisen many antichrists, whereby we know that it is the last hour. They went out from us, but they were not of us -- this is the antichrist, he who denies the Father and the Son' (1 John 2:18-19; 1 John 2:23). Later on John designates as antichrist those who say that Jesus Christ did not come in the flesh (1 John 4:3; 2 John 1:7).
This is the only specific mention of antichrist in the Bible. Thus John sees antichrist in terms of the spirit of antichrist (1 John 4:3), denying the Father and the Son and denying that Jesus Christ came in the flesh. They deny His deity and true humanity. And the fact that they were already there he saw as an indication that it was ‘the last hour'. But in view of Paul's description we must see one arising who out-blasphemes them all, as John himself represents him in Revelation.
It should, however, be noted that he is not said to actually verbally claim to be God. Possibly we are to see it that his presumptions and claims as he ‘sets himself up' will make this impression, leaving his hearers to draw their own conclusions. We have seen such through history and in our own day.