Thought I had it too, but after starting to type it out realized there was a flaw in my logic.
So basically my understanding of this after some more reading:
People are thinking that the rapture happened, so one of Jesus’ people are telling them it hasn’t since there needs to be a powerful anarchist and/or Anti-Christ that comes about (the “lawless man”). The anarchist is gonna have powerful magic and will be preaching that he’ll give the people a better life than god or whatever to get them off the path of god.
Okay cool, so the people (who are pre-sorted by god into the godly and condemned) will see this guy and some will be tempted by the lawless man, but won’t necessarily do anything to deviate from.gods path. So god is gonna come along and do something* to make them actually deviate from the path of god (which is the delusion).
*the specific Greek phrase used in the original text is only used once here and so there isn’t a good bead on what that delusion is/could be. The key thing appears to be that god will actively do something to make the damned be damned.
I know virtually nothing about this, but “the lawless man” in an ancient context doesn’t sound to me like an anarchist. I think “tyrant” is the more likely interpretation.
You’re probably right, but I like the funny image of the Catholic Church having a pic of a angsty teen in a shirt with the Anarchy ‘A’ as it’s “ultimate enemy”.
Yeah, a tyrant is lawless in the sense that they’re “above” the law, and uses a hierarchy to enable that end. An anarchist is lawless in the grassroots “I ain’t licking your boots” questioning the asserted authority of others sort of way
you’re not missing much. The bible contains two letters (“1 Thessalonians” and “2 Thessalonians”) which were written by Paul and addressed to the Christian community in Thessalonica (in Greece). Paul was a Jewish religious figure who initially rejected the idea that Jesus was the Messiah, and persecuted anyone who did believe it. Probably just imprisonment, nothing as bad as replacing “Happy Christmas” messages with “Happy Holidays” like modern Christians are subjected to.
Anyway, he had some kind of mental breakdown on the road to Damascus, details are unclear, it was very hot and he was probably dehydrated so heatstroke is the likely cause. In any case, after that point he had a 180 and became a massive fan of Jesus and wrote a load of letters like this, and he was convinced that Jesus would be coming back very soon to enact violent retribution throughout the land. In Thessalonians 1, he says, “we who are alive, who are left until the coming of the Lord”, which echoes what Jesus allegedly said, “Truly I tell you, this generation will not pass away before all these things take place.”
Of course they were both wrong. The world did not end in their lifetimes, and that’s why everyone today accepts that both of them were merely having a mental breakdown and, to be blunt, chatting shit. Right?
I still don’t get it.
Thought I had it too, but after starting to type it out realized there was a flaw in my logic.
So basically my understanding of this after some more reading:
People are thinking that the rapture happened, so one of Jesus’ people are telling them it hasn’t since there needs to be a powerful anarchist and/or Anti-Christ that comes about (the “lawless man”). The anarchist is gonna have powerful magic and will be preaching that he’ll give the people a better life than god or whatever to get them off the path of god.
Okay cool, so the people (who are pre-sorted by god into the godly and condemned) will see this guy and some will be tempted by the lawless man, but won’t necessarily do anything to deviate from.gods path. So god is gonna come along and do something* to make them actually deviate from the path of god (which is the delusion).
*the specific Greek phrase used in the original text is only used once here and so there isn’t a good bead on what that delusion is/could be. The key thing appears to be that god will actively do something to make the damned be damned.
I know virtually nothing about this, but “the lawless man” in an ancient context doesn’t sound to me like an anarchist. I think “tyrant” is the more likely interpretation.
You’re probably right, but I like the funny image of the Catholic Church having a pic of a angsty teen in a shirt with the Anarchy ‘A’ as it’s “ultimate enemy”.
Yeah, a tyrant is lawless in the sense that they’re “above” the law, and uses a hierarchy to enable that end. An anarchist is lawless in the grassroots “I ain’t licking your boots” questioning the asserted authority of others sort of way
you’re not missing much. The bible contains two letters (“1 Thessalonians” and “2 Thessalonians”) which were written by Paul and addressed to the Christian community in Thessalonica (in Greece). Paul was a Jewish religious figure who initially rejected the idea that Jesus was the Messiah, and persecuted anyone who did believe it. Probably just imprisonment, nothing as bad as replacing “Happy Christmas” messages with “Happy Holidays” like modern Christians are subjected to.
Anyway, he had some kind of mental breakdown on the road to Damascus, details are unclear, it was very hot and he was probably dehydrated so heatstroke is the likely cause. In any case, after that point he had a 180 and became a massive fan of Jesus and wrote a load of letters like this, and he was convinced that Jesus would be coming back very soon to enact violent retribution throughout the land. In Thessalonians 1, he says, “we who are alive, who are left until the coming of the Lord”, which echoes what Jesus allegedly said, “Truly I tell you, this generation will not pass away before all these things take place.”
Of course they were both wrong. The world did not end in their lifetimes, and that’s why everyone today accepts that both of them were merely having a mental breakdown and, to be blunt, chatting shit. Right?