Colin Badger - The Continuity of Babylon - Class 2 - The Man of Sin Prophecy

Automatically transcribed. Accuracy is good but not perfect, and words are sometimes wrong. Trust the audio over the text.

1. 0:01

   Which is entitled The Man of Sin Prophecy, Brother Colin, my brother and sisters. Our subject for the second talk is dealing with the Man of Sin in 2nd Thessalonians 2, but I’d like to draw some threads over from our first study and join them into this second very important study which has very close links with Daniel. Anyways, as we’ll see what we’ve seen so far, I hope, is that our subject of the continuity of Babylon is something indeed that’s easily to demonstrate right back from the time of Genesis, right straight through the Old Testament. That says a lot for the continuity of this theme. We have seen that the early references in Genesis tie in this subject of Babylon with some very important associations as early on as the life of Abraham. It becomes an antagonistic city or power to the people of God. It’s conjunction with Jerusalem and Daniel. Chapter one, verse one.

2. 1:20

   It’s important to note, since it’s those two cities that figure so prominently in the Book of Revelation. We know from the Book of Revelation that in somehow, some way Babylon as a real power is still on the earth in some form of manifestation at the time of Christ’s return. We’ve seen that there is value in looking at the book of Daniel in Revelation from the point of view of large pictures, big themes, the beasts being one very important large picture, and we should hope that by getting that picture understood, some of the smaller supporting details will fit into a definite pattern. We have seen that the question of the beasts in Revelation has to find part of its answer from the book of Daniel itself. Since those beasts are drawn from that source, we’ve seen how Babylon is glued to this whole question of the beasts. They are brought together very early on in the book of Daniel being set in Babylon as it is.

3. 2:30

   And again later on, as we’ve seen in Revelation, we terminated our first class in the book of Zechariah, where we have the last reference to Shinar or Babylon in the Old Testament in conjunction with a woman.

4. 2:45

   Now, brothers and sisters, we’re going to move quickly through three key passages. And Daniel, I’d like to spend a lot more time on them. We’ll come back from time to time in the next two studies. We’re not going to do them full justice, but only to pick up a few more concepts that are important to support the big picture.

5. 3:06

   So Daniel, chapter two we have on the overhead for you fairly standard representation of Daniel’s dream. There are details in this dream which deserve careful attention as they relate to our theme of Babylon continuous. Let’s just notice the following. It is a fairly standard approach to emphasize, when we’re using Nebuchadnezzar’s image in public lectures, the fact that this is our most remarkable prophecy, dealing with the sequence of four great empires.

6. 3:46

   We tend in presentations such as that to put a tremendous amount of emphasis on these metals representing distinct national powers that were once on the earth. And there’s a sense of correctness about that, of course. I fear that at times we may perhaps put the emphasis on the wrong syllable by doing that.

7. 4:14

   No doubt that it is the most remarkable prophecy in advance telling of four great world empires, and it’s valuable for the public platform from that point of view. But we can perhaps overemphasize the thought that these four metals were essentially representing 4 political national powers that came and went. I say we perhaps can overemphasize that aspect, and we’ll try to demonstrate why we suggest that’s a caution to keep in mind. Well, first as an overview, it’s rather curious isn’t it, that as we go from the gold head down to the base metal and clay at the bottom, we have a descending scale of values in the metals, gold being the most valued.

8. 5:04

   And of course down to iron and clay which are base, we have a descending scale of values. Now what seems to be curious in that regard is the following. In your notes I have a map furnished for you on page 4 where we have the boundaries of these four empires outlined for you.

9. 5:26

   I just notice the following When we move from Babylon in the first map to Rome in the last, Babylon was relatively small as an empire compared to the Persian Empire which followed. The Grecian Empire was much larger than the Babylonian, although it would seem somewhat smaller than Persia when it was at its zenith. Rome is about the same size as Greece, perhaps a little larger, maybe not quite as large as the Persian Empire. Now I ask you, brothers and sisters, how is it that we move from a very valuable metal to portray Babylon down to the basest of all metals at the bottom, when in fact the size, the relative size of these empires enlarges as you go from Babylon to Rome?

10. 6:24

    You know, from a human point of view, to have had control over over Rome or Greece or Persia would have been much more attractive in some ways, in some ways than it would have to have controlled Babylon in terms of wealth, people, prestige, power, and the supporting empire that you are ruling over.

11. 6:43

    Rome or Greece or Persia would have been much more attractive, much more flattering for a ruler to have the opportunity of presiding over it. And yet, gold is what’s placed on the top, the smallest of all the empires. Just keep that in mind. That’s an observation to make. First of all, chapter 2 of Daniel And we look at verse 37 and 38 of Daniel, chapter 2. The terms used to describe Babylon are perhaps in the superlative compared to any of the other ascriptions that are given to the remaining powers, even though they have larger dominions.

12. 7:30

    Verse 37. Thou, O king, art a king of kings. For the God of heaven hath given thee a Kingdom, power and strength, and glory. And wheresoever the children of men dwell, the beasts of the field, the fowls of heaven, hath he given unto thine hand, and hath made thee ruler over them all Thou art this head of gold.

13. 7:51

    And as we go through the descriptions of the remaining empires, there aren’t those superlatives used at all. Why such an attention to what was really the smallest of all the empires? Furthermore, in chapter two we find this description given to Medo, Persia.

14. 8:14

    We look at verse 38 and 39. Wheresoever the children have meant well the beast, the field, the fowls, that they haven’t hath he given his thine hand, and hath given the ruler ruler over them all. Thou art this head of gold. Then verse 39, After thee shall arise another Kingdom inferior to thee, and another third Kingdom of brass, which shall bear rule over all the earth. Now wait a minute.

15. 8:43

    How is that true? As a matter of political history, let’s just remind ourselves, how could that be? That Medo Persia could be described as being inferior to the domain of Babylon. Inferior then? In what sense? The puzzle, when you think about it, You have the descending value of the metals and you have the statement that Medo Persia is regarded by the perspective God is issuing here as being inferior.

16. 9:22

    In fact it was the largest of all the empires stretched even as far as the borders of India and it’s zenith, zenith of power under Cyrus. So we might ask ourselves, what’s the sense in which it is inferior? Again, I’m just going to ask you to suspend your judgment on that. Furthermore, why does it say of grace that she bears rule over all the earth?

17. 9:47

    What political truth was there in that? Well, let’s just review our history. Alexander the Great, who’s described in Daniel 8 as the little horn that comes up. Alexander the Great conquered after his father Philip of Macedon, a large part of the Mediterranean world, and he too went over almost to the borders of India. But as Daniel Eight shows, Alexander held on to that dominion for a very, very short period of time. He no longer he no sooner had conquered all those territories than he died within about a year. He himself never presided over that empire for very long. He never really enjoyed, in other words, the fruits of his victory.

18. 10:35

    In fact, he never even got back home. He died away from home on his campaign back. But furthermore, shortly after Alexander died, the four generals that emerged after him carved up his empire into four, and then into other parts besides. And there really was no single rulership of Greece under one head over the whole dominion like there was with Nebuchadnezzar. Let’s say there never was a time when Greece had that kind of rulership as a matter of political history. So there’s some sense in which medo Persia is inferior to the rulership of Babylon.

19. 11:15

    There is some sense in which Greece is said to bear rule over all the earth. How could that be? It didn’t seem. It doesn’t seem to ring true if one just looks at the facts of political history. Unless there is some other perspective, of course, that God has in mind some other values by which he is measuring the rulership or the control or the dominance of these powers.

20. 11:41

    Let’s just look at another detail concerning the metals. Daniel chapter 2. Going back to verse 35, take a look at this one. Then was the iron, the clay, the brass, the silver and the gold broke into pieces together and became like the chaff of the summer threshing floors.

21. 12:09

    Problem is, what does it mean broken to pieces together? That’s at the time when the stone strikes the image. Of course, it’s at the time of Christ’s return, but how could Babylon political still be described as being in the earth? Will ancient Greece be on the earth as a real power, when Christ returns to destroy and break in pieces all the metals together? Will ancient Rome be on the earth at that time, as she was once a great political power ruled by a Senate or by a Caesar?

22. 12:48

    In what sense then could it be said that these medals are still present at the return of Christ to be destroyed together? And of course, the context by way of time we can see very clearly deals with the latter days. In other words, there are several clues in Daniel chapter 2. But God has a perspective here that isn’t dealing so much with political powers as they rise and fall, as He is concerned, perhaps about another plot or theme altogether. It’s not to downplay entirely the importance of political power as part of the message, but the sense in which these medals could be destroyed together at the return of Christ.

23. 13:38

    The sense in which Medo Persia could be described as inferior to Babylon, considering the facts of history and the size of the boundaries, points to another direction. Now we will suspend our judgment there and move on to Daniel. 4IN Daniel, chapter four we receive a picture of a tree. When we’re told in the vision the tree represents Babylon Nebuchadnezzar, and the tree is cut down.

24. 14:10

    Now we get the following information. Verse 14. He cried aloud and said thus hewed down the tree and cut off his branches. Shake off his leaves and scatter his fruit. Let the beasts get away from under it, and the fowls from his branches. Nevertheless, nevertheless, leave the stump. That’s the stump of Babylon.

25. 14:33

    Leave the stump of his roots in the earth, even with a band of iron and brass in the tender grass of the field, and let it be wet with the dew of heaven, and let its portion be wet with the beasts in the grass of the earth.

26. 14:49

    What is the brass and the iron doing together at the same time with this stump which is encased by these two metals? What does it mean that the roots will remain in the earth even after the tree is cut down and after it is cut down and the roots remain in the heart of the earth?

27. 15:13

    How is it that the iron and brass are in a sort of coexistence with the stump of Babylon behind it? That’s not so obvious? You see the point, brothers and sisters. There aren’t clues here in Daniel chapter four that Babylon lives on. There are clues here that Babylon continues as a concern in the kingdoms of men. Even after the national power that had certain boundaries and was ruled by certain dictators of Babylon has long since been cut down, there’s some sense in which Nebuchadnezzar’s empire is going to terminate.

28. 15:53

    Babylon’s going to be destroyed, but the roots of Babylon will remain in the earth after the political power has long since been destroyed. There’s a sense in which the metal and the brass continue together and are meant to be seen together with one another, and they are encasing Babylon, the Babylonian trunk. The source, The root is Babylonish, but in some sense it is seen to be in conjunction with the iron and the brass. Not the silver, not the silver.

29. 16:31

    Somehow, Amito Persia doesn’t figure as being terribly important relative to the other four empires, especially to Babylon. There’s something about Babylon that continues on and is that the clue as to why the head is gold? As to why Babylon is associated with something that doesn’t tarnish, something that doesn’t disappear in a road with time, there’s something about Babylon that is not weathered or destroyed by time it continues on. Is that the clue And is that perhaps the reason why Medo Persia’s importance is downplayed as being inferior? Not in the political sense of boundaries and peoples, but rather in terms of the dominant influence that would continue in the earth.

30. 17:19

    Babylon is pre eminent relative to any of them in Medo. Persia is the least of the four in its importance. It is not one of the bands around the sun. It does not continue as silver any further in the prophecies 4 When we continue in our understanding of the prophecies we discover in Daniel Chapter 7. If you just go there now,

31. 17:55

    we discover in Daniel Chapter 7 that the brass and the iron are mentioned once again, this time in relationship to the 4th beast which has the little horn. Now isn’t that curious that when Daniel sees the 4th beast which is destroyed by Christ, Now we know it’s destroyed by Christ because in Daniel Chapter 7 that’s spelled out very clearly by the angel’s word and by what the man of God sees in vision himself?

32. 18:30

    For example, when we come down to verse 11 of Daniel 7, Daniel says he beholds because of the voice of the great words which the horns spake. I beheld even till the beast was slain. That’s the 4th beast, and his body destroyed and given to the burning flame. Isn’t that interesting? The 4th beast is present at the return of Christ. The 4th beast, though, is now described by the Angel as having two medals.

33. 18:57

    It’s not something Daniel saw at first when he observed it, for in verse 19. Then I would know the truth of the 4th beast, which was diverse from all the others exceeding dreadful, whose teeth were of iron, and his nails of brass, which devoured breaking pieces, stamped the residue with his feet. Now we might ask, how could it be that this 4th beast that will be destroyed by Christ when he returns, which is diverse from the other three beasts.

34. 19:29

    This little horn which is described as being diverse from the other horns, has organic to this beast, brass and iron. There’s a link with the stump. Obviously we were not wrong in surmising in Daniel Chapter 4, therefore that there’s some sense in which there’s a continuous presence of those powers in the earth once their political dominions have actually vanished. Somehow the Babylonious route remains in the earth after Nebuchadnezzar has gone, after the political dominion of Babylon has vanished.

35. 20:09

    There’s some sense in which the brass and the iron that banned that stump are meant to be associated with the stump that lives on, with the roots that continue in the heart of the earth. Not the silver, but the brass and the iron. And then in that beast which arises in Daniel Seven, we’re told once again that brass and iron are Co inexistent with one another.

36. 20:34

    There’s some sense in which brass and iron are still present in this beast that is to be destroyed by Christ, and it’s connected with this little horn that speaks great things. No wonder then, in Nebuchadnezzar’s image, the metals were destroyed together at the return of the stone return of Christ. No wonder it could be said that the metals are ground together. There’s a sense in which those metals have lived on through the centuries in their influence.

37. 21:10

    Now it can’t be, as we said, first and foremost in the political sense. And that’s why I said that in our lectures we perhaps put the emphasis on a syllable. That isn’t quite the way the scriptures put the emphasis. Those four empires must obviously be illustrating powers that are more important and more long lasting than simply the old ancient powers with certain boundaries.

38. 21:35

    There’s a sense in which Iron Rome lives on. There’s a sense in which the influence of Greece lives on beyond the old empire. There’s a sense in which the influence of Medo Persia was inferior relative to these other powers in the Earth. There’s a sense in which even after Nebuchadnezzar’s empire has fallen and been destroyed by the Persians, in which the roots of Babylon remain in the earth and continue on. Are we wrong in that conclusion?

39. 22:09

    We’re not wrong because when we open the Book of Revelation, Babylon is still there. No wonder Babylon is still there because Daniel Four has told us so. Daniel 4 is the explanation, surely, of how it is that Babylon is present in the Book of Revelation. What is that power? In what sense is that power continuous? In your note, we try to bring these thoughts together by the following diagrams.

40. 22:44

    We’re introduced to the iron and the brass. We show how they are shown again in the stump, even after ancient Babylon has been cut down and destroyed. And we see how that they are organic to the body of the 4th beast which is present to be destroyed by Christ. Conclusion, somehow the metal and the brass mean more than just the political empire. What’s the other choice?

41. 23:11

    Then? What is the other choice? What’s the choice of Babylon? How does Babylon live on to be present at the time of Revelation? How is it that in Zechariah 5 this wicked woman is put into a jar containing her and holding her down, and is taken to the land of Shinar to set up her base there, when Babylon political has already been destroyed at the time of Zachariah? See how it ties together?

42. 23:42

    See brothers and sisters. There’s really a concept here of continuity that is more important than the old political power itself. The only other choice really is ideology. There must be something said here about the philosophy, the ideas, the apostate beliefs, the rebellious forms of worship, the seeds of error and untruth that are behind these powers. And it’s those that live on in the earth. And you know, it’s a fact.

43. 24:16

    You only have to take a course in classical history university without looking very far. In most of those kind of textbooks, they’ll start off by saying that the Western world is furnished by Greek and Roman ideas, Our law system, our various codes, some even some things to do with our language, the Latanic languages and so on. The Romance languages all have had their influence in the thinking, the vocabulary, the values, the ideas of Roman Greece.

44. 24:45

    That is quite apparent to historians and scholars even today. It’s not hard to find proof of that, as we’ve said. But you know what isn’t so obvious? It’s in one of those classical history classes you were to raise your hand and say, but Babylon, it’s very important today too, Sir. Babylon lives on today as well, you know.

45. 25:02

    You’d be laughed at. Babylon. No, no, no. Greece and Rome, yes, not Babylon said yes. From God’s point of view, Babylon does live on. There are ideas, there are beliefs, there are concepts of worship and so on. That, in God’s estimation, have had a continuous corrupting influence and a rebellious influence down through the years in man’s history. The historians can see the brass and they can see the iron, but what’s not so obvious is the fact that they are encasing a rotten Babylonian stump that is not obvious to man’s vision. It’s the iron in the brass which are discernible the most clearly by man, even by an observant scholar. Babylon is not so obvious.

46. 25:50

    Babylon’s influence and ongoing corruption in the earth is not apparent. It takes the scriptures in God’s vision to see who the real villain is behind the scenes, as it were. Now, brothers and sisters, that is where I believe the emphasis should lie. When we look at Nebuchadnezzar’s image, it is first and foremost an image of a man, man’s way of doing things.

47. 26:17

    It is an image of man’s thinking. And Babylon, back in Genesis 10 and Genesis 11, was the first Kingdom of man. And that’s why in Genesis 10 mention of the Gentiles comes first. The Isles of the Gentiles we read and then we zero in on Shinar and Babylon. It’s the first dominion or Kingdom in Genesis 11 that rebelled against God and built their own city. Come, let us build our city, man in his world. So it’s the image of a man man’s way of thinking, man’s way of doing.

48. 26:53

    And in relationship to that, there are certain influences that go right back to the beginning of the kingdoms of men and have had a continuous corrupting thread down through the years. That obviously then explains the sense in which Babylon is still present in Revelation. Now, brothers and sisters, let’s see how that ties in then with our theme. Babylon.

49. 27:19

    Continuous in the Earth, Babylon has a kind of continuity which goes all through the scriptures. Babylon is not to be viewed so much as a political power with distinct boundaries and a certain type of rulership. Roman Greece, coming second in importance, are to be viewed as part of this whole picture, as having influences in the earth that are really far more important than just when they were within certain years on the earth as a political power. Somehow or another, Babylon is fused with those other two, or they are at least fused with Babylon. Are they not in some ways the major perpetrators, the major mouthpieces through which Babylonious Doctrine and Babylonious ideas and concepts will continue to be spoken and taught and have their influence on the earth, suggest brothers and sisters that that is the case. It is the best explanation which explains the meaning of the stump, how it is related in drawing 2 metals out of the image.

50. 28:30

    How it is that the 4th beast in turn draws out those same 2 metals and puts them organic to a beast that is still present when Christ returns. More than that, look at Daniel Seven once again. Even after the 4th beast is destroyed in verse 11 there is something said you know about the other beasts that is about the bear.

51. 28:54

    There is something implied about the leopard still. Just notice what is said after the 4th beast is destroyed. We read in verse 12 as concerning the rest of the beasts. They had their dominion taken away, yet their lives were prolonged for a season and a time. That’s the return of Christ after he’s destroyed the 4th beast.

52. 29:22

    There still is a sense in which the rest of the beasts, even though they’re shorn of their dominion, have their lives prolonged. So they’re present at the return of Christ, and there’s a sense in which they still continue in the earth in some way or another, although they don’t have dominion, although they’re not exercising real authority and power. Even after Christ act against the 4th beast, the seeds of their influence may be lying dormant. Is still there.

53. 29:57

    That we believe has a very important link with rebellion at the end of the Millennium. There still is a sense in which mortal flesh can organize itself at the end and rebel against God in so doing. What happens then? The attitudes, the ideas, the challenges that occur there at the end of the Millennium have their roots with these beasts.

54. 30:18

    They still, in a certain sense, are not totally obliterated. That then, perhaps doesn’t change by any means 100% our understanding of Nebuchadnezzar’s image. Not at all. But there’s a certain emphasis that perhaps we might give it, namely the political old empires that really aren’t the major point of the lesson. He wants us to see that Babylon continues.

55. 30:44

    He wants us to notice the brass and iron especially living on and being coextensive with that Babylonious root. That’s what Daniel for is trying to bring to our attention after the image. That’s what Daniel 7’s fourth beast is trying to emphasize, even after the stump vision has been given. And you know, when I went back, having done this little study myself, I went back from Eureka.

56. 31:10

    He says this in volume to page 652, that he, Nebuchadnezzar, might know the thoughts of his heart. A symbolical representation was presented before him in a dream illustrative of the general fortunes and consummation of the Kingdom of Babylon. In the latter days. Thomas is constructing that sentence presented before Nebuchadnezzar in a dream illustrative of the general fortunes and consummation of the Kingdom of Babylon in the latter days. But Thomas was looking at that image as being a representation of things, especially to do with the last days. Not so much the emphasis of these being 4 consecutive political empires that will come and go. Rather he says hence the Kingdom of Babylon has been in continuous existence from his reign until now in continuous existence.

57. 32:15

    See the point, mother? Thomas didn’t have that point to elude him at all. In fact, the inflection that we placed on Daniel chapter 2 is somewhat aside from the emphasis for the Thomas is giving them in continuous existence from his reign until now, for we are living in the last days. Another quotation from Mother Thomas.

58. 32:39

    This is a game from Eureka. It is true that the House of the Kingdom has not always been the Babylon, which was the beginning of Nimrod’s dominion, Genesis 10. It has been sometimes at one place, sometimes at another, until at length Rome became the House of the great city. Various dynasties have come, have become the inheritors.

59. 33:00

    That’s the key point. The inheritors of the Kingdom of Babylon after Nebuchadnezzar’s, there was the Silver Dynasty and the Brazen Dynasty and the Iron Dynasty and the Clay Dynasty. 5 dynasties ruling over the one in the same Kingdom, called also the Kingdom of Men. See the point? The image is a picture of the Kingdom of Men and Babylon is shown to be in continuous existence through the Kingdoms of Men. Again, another quotation, this time from the third volume. The literal Babylon was the beginner and supporter of tyranny and idolatry, first by Nimrod and afterwards by Nebuchadnezzar.

60. 33:38

    Therefore, in Isaiah 47 and 12, she’s accused of the magical enchantments from her youth or infancy, namely from the very first origin of her being a city or nation Literal Babylon was the beginner and the supporter of tyranny and idolatry. It’s the ideology the brother Thomas is underscoring as the most important that is connected with the continuous existence of that power finding. From his book on Daniel, the Kingdom of man has been diversified in his constitution, extent and throne. Since its foundation by Nimrod to the present time, it has nevertheless been the same Nimrodian Kingdom with Babylon and Assyria for its characteristics. Now to be honest with you, brothers and sisters, I must admit, having gone through this exercise myself, come to these conclusions myself, I was amazed and somewhat ashamed to go back and finally check out these references to Brother Thomas’s writings and discover that really that was his emphasis himself.

61. 34:49

    It’s not so much a picture of a successive, A successive number of empires as it is that these empires pick up a common chorus. And these powers, two of them especially Roman Greece, become the most vocal agent for this tyranny and idolatry in the kingdoms of men. And that’s the common thread. And that surely is the plot of the story.

62. 35:14

    So we’re really not trying to say anything radical, brothers and sisters. It amounts to a matter of emphasis, but it’s an emphasis we believe that can’t be lost sight of. Tell you why recent expositions have tended to stress a gap perspective in Daniel and Revelation. We won’t go into that in detail, but some recent expositions in the Brotherhood have tended to stress the idea that Nebuchadnezzar’s image and some of the other visions in Daniel are looking at a picture where we have a continuous line up to a certain point and a mammoth gap. And then after that gap is over, with a whole number of details from Revelation and Daniel are squeezed into that 3 1/2 final years at the time of Christ’s return. It’s what we would call a parenthesis or a gap perspective on the timeline of prophecy in Daniel in Revelation. Now I believe that what we’ve seen so far completely counters that the picture and the emphasis in Daniel 4 and Nebuchadnezzar’s image is a perspective of continuity of no gap whatsoever.

63. 36:25

    Babylon is there and has always been there and manifest its influence on the earth in many, many forms through 2 chief agents, Greek and Roman ideology, but it’s really Babylon down below now, brothers and sisters. With that in mind, we’d like to take a look now, and we’ll perhaps need more than just this class at the Man of Sin.

64. 36:50

    And we’re going to see, I believe, how this prophecy in the New Testament is a great help in unlocking some of the more difficult parts of our expositions of Daniel and Revelation. So let’s take a look at 2nd Thessalonians chapter two. First we’re going to look at it from an overview, and then we’re going to take a look at some of its finer details. But we’re going to do it with a specific purpose in mind. We’re going to discover that this book, or rather this prophecy in 2nd Thessalonians 2 has undoubtedly linked with Revelation and Daniel.

65. 37:34

    In fact, all of our recent expositions that have taken a different course from that of Brother Thomas, all of our recent expositions have all agreed on at least one thing, and that is that the Man of sin, prophecy and the beast system and Daniel revelation are one of the same. That is agreed by the three chief expositions in the community today that take a different course than that found in Eureka. They have a common note on this that the man of sin is linked with the beast system.

66. 38:06

    Who he is and who they are is one of the same. Now that’s important to have seen that common denominator and bear that in mind. If we then can solve the mystery of who the man of sin is, if we can solve the mystery of who the man of sin is, we have it’s so factor, the old saying automatically got the key as to who the beast system is.

67. 38:31

    We’ve got the key of who it is not only in Daniel but in Revelation. And I believe that’s a valid statement to make. The connections with those two other books, Daniel in Revelation make it obvious that here is a master key in explaining identity. As I said, even the other three major expositions that differ so widely from Bubba Thomas have themselves concluded from the clues within this prophecy. But you can’t separate it from the B system in either Daniel or Revelation to that we would agree conclusions would be otherwise.

68. 39:03

    So we want to start off by saying, as we look at 2nd Thessalonians 2, what’s the nature of this man, this man of sin? Is he religious? Is he essentially political? Or is he both? And what’s the timing? Is this man of sin a power that is to arise only in the future, let’s say at the time of Christ, as some of our brethren have suggested?

69. 39:29

    Does he represent a power or a system that would arise immediate to the time of the apostle, contemporary with him, and only contemporary for a few years, and then go away and that’s it? Or instead, does the man of sin represent a continuous link past and future? Now let’s bear those questions in mind.

70. 39:50

    I’ve got to come back to them when we finish our exposition of 2nd Thessalonians 2. Two key questions. Now remember what we said in our first class? The man who asked the right questions is the one who’s going to find the right answers. A lot of it depends on what questions you’re asking yourself.

71. 40:07

    We can fresh around in this whole area of study and ask all kinds of questions that won’t be helpful at first. Who are the frog like spirits? Why is the #666? All kinds of supporting detail, But they are the small details, The supporting detail. If you start with those, we may never find a satisfactory answer to the big picture.

72. 40:28

    We’re looking at the B system, and we’re looking at some important concepts that are tied with it. If we master that and have a relatively good understanding of what that represents, then the other pieces of the puzzle will fit in. So here we come to a New Testament passage. It’s nowhere near as symbolic as Daniel. It’s not a symbolic book like Revelation. The clues for the timing and the nature of this man are much easier to discern than Daniel seven or the Beast of Revelation.

73. 41:02

    So it’s kind of like starting with the easier section that’s relevant to an answer to our question, who are the beasts? What are they? Well, let’s very quickly take a look at how the prophecy of a man of sin is structured. This reveals a great deal. I’m going to have to do this fairly quickly, but the notes I’m showing you now are in your book anyway. Well, first of all, it seems apparent when one analyzes the details of the man of sin prophecy that several key concepts are brought out in the prophecy. There seems to be a movement here described, not just a man. We know from the third verse that this man of sin is described as being to do with a falling away first. Now the Greek word for falling away is only one. It’s only one word that represents that falling away in English, and it’s the word in the Greek Apostasia that’s important.

74. 42:11

    In the Greek, falling away is one word and it’s the Greek word apostasy from which we get the word apostasy. So right off the start, this movement or this individual is associated with apostasy, which means to have been on a course of action and then to have deviated or fallen from it. The English says falling away or turning away.

75. 42:36

    And that’s that’s the general sense, to be on a certain course and then to later leave it to break away from that course. He is described as being lawless. In verse 7, Paul says that he already exists. In fact, he who now letteth Speaking of the restraining power, he who now letteth or he who now restrains will continue to restrain the RSB is more helpful there than the King James. He who now letteth means he who now restrains or holds down will continue to hold down or restrain until the time comes where the man of sin system will be full blown and revealed. Now if the restraining power on the man of sin was doing its restraining at the time of the Apostle Paul, there was something to restrain.

76. 43:30

    Already there was something being held down until the right time, and that holding down had something to hold down. There was then, in a German state, at least some aspect of the man of sin contemporary with the apostle Paul, some aspect still contemporary at the time of the Apostle Paul. He was restrained, verse 6, but later to be revealed.

77. 43:57

    But this is to be focalized, we’re told in a man. First we’re told it’s apostasy. Then we’re told that it’s to do with a man of sin. Verse three tells us he will be lawless. He will oppose God. He will exalt himself. He has a seat. Verse four, he sits in the temple of God, or what seems to be the temple of God, and he proclaims himself to be God.

78. 44:27

    His converts are one or seduced by verse 9. Satanic activity. He exercises power pretended signs. Verse 9 wonders. Verse nine. He perpetrates belief in lies. Verse 11. He has pleasure in unrighteousness. Verse 12 And he has a strong delusion from God. Verse 11. He’s labeled as the son of perdition before his end in verse 3, he’s destroyed by Christ in verse 8, and his followers are condemned. Verse 12.

79. 45:07

    And it’s that verse that reinforces the fact that this is a movement, not just a single man, not just an autocrat. He was working on his own. There’s the confirmation that the man is representing a system as well as just himself. Now, as you survey that picture, even before you see the links with the Old Testament, certain facts emerge.

80. 45:30

    Is automatically an apparent link with the 4th beast. That 4th beast, who when he appeared, had a little horn that emerged amongst the other ten, finally tore down three of those, and who spoke great things against the Most High, and as a power that was diverse, says the Angel. As a power that was diverse from the other horns, a different nature, a different type of horn, he was nevertheless organic to this larger body. To this fourth beast there was something he was attached to, larger than just himself, and as a horn part of a body in this body is iron and brass, two medals that go right back to the image, into the stump, to ancient powers. But Daniel seven shows that he and the beast are destroyed by flaming fire from Christ.

81. 46:41

    Who is this horn? Who is the beast? Or what is the beast that he was organic to that was really greater than him? In a certain sense, he was part of a system that has links with Roman Greece in some way, and by having those connections he’s connected with a little stump and therefore connected with the Babylonian root around which those two metals are encased, whose root remains in the heart of the earth. He is part of a beast that has two metals that go right back to the image that is destroyed by Christ. Those two metals are two of the metals that are ground together and destroyed together.

82. 47:21

    When the image is destroyed, he is tied in with some power or system that has continuity, that has ancient links with the past, and yet he is present as part of his beast to be destroyed by burning fire when Christ comes. Here is a man who speaks great things against the Most High who is apostate.

83. 47:47

    Lawless existed at the time of Paul, but was somewhat subdued, restrained later to be revealed. He would sit, if it were in the temple of God, be pompous and proclaiming himself to be God, do certain signs and wonders, and significantly, let’s look at how he’s destroyed in Second Thessalonians chapter two.

84. 48:14

    He is destroyed exactly in the same way as the 4th Beast and Daniel seven with the little horn. No wonder there are links. Verse 8.

85. 48:27

    Then shall that wicked the man of sin be revealed, whom the Lord shall consume with the spirit of his mouth, and shall destroy with the brightness of his coming, with the brightness of his coming. Now when you see how that is linked with the flaming fire of first the Thessalonians, chapter one just mentioned previously by Paul.

86. 48:54

    Verse 7, verse 8, verse 9. The Lord will come and be revealed with His mighty angels. Chapter one, verse seven in flaming fire, verse 9. Punished with everlasting destruction from the presence of the Lord and from the glory of his power. The language used here to describe the destruction of the man of sin and Chapter 2 is drawing upon the language of chapter one, which in turn has a very close word link with the destruction of the 4th beast and Daniel 7. Now that’s an overview.

87. 49:32

    There are closer details to watch. We’ll take the end of this class as we just terminated now, and part of the next one just to exhaust some of the highlights. Just before we end, let’s notice the following Back to Second Thessalonians Chapter 2. Look at the scriptural associations with the language chosen to describe the man of sin. We’ve mentioned the word apostasy. Apostasy doesn’t mean a power that is atheistic like communism, or like some dictator that will arise in the future, that will oppose Christ and have really no basic religious front to describe in scriptural terms as apostate. Apostasy means to have once been on the right course and then to have deviated from it to have wandered away. So term #1, as it’s used elsewhere in scripture and as it’s associated with scriptural thoughts, shows that there must be a must have been some link with religion, some link with God’s teachings to start with.

88. 50:41

    Secondly, look at verse 3. He is called the Son. Of perdition. Now that’s an extremely important clue, brothers and sisters, as to who he is or what kind of person or system he represents. Only one other place in the Bible is the term son of perdition used. It’s used in the Gospel of John, and it’s used to describe Judas only other place in the New Testament. In other words, in terms of how Scripture reveals its own terms. Son of perdition is first used of Judas and secondly used of the man of sin.

89. 51:25

    Was Judas an atheist? Was he a political power all on his own? Did he represent instead though an individual who had some connection with Christ, who had some semblance of being a follower of Christ? Yes, he did. He was one who was a kind of 5th columnist in the end. But he did have associations with Christ. He did have the trappings, as it were, of some kind of discipleship in his way of life for a period of time. And yet he rebelled and went away, and he ended up being, of course, in revolt against Christ. So to.

90. 52:03

    Be a son. Of perdition describes, again with the word apostasy, someone who’s got religious semblance, someone who is appearing to be the true but in fact is the false, Someone who looks like or appears to be one of the followers of Christ, but instead is a betrayer to the real cause and the real truth. A.

91. 52:29

    Furthermore, it says here in this second Thessalonians 2 context, that they shall or he shall be associated with a lie and with strong delusion. One of the details we just noticed earlier on. Now the Greek word is the Greek word plenaille, and it means to cause to wander, and it’s used in the New Testament elsewhere of wandering from the path of truth once. Again by strong.

92. 52:59

    Delusion or a lie. Their associations reinforced the concept of apostasy and the concept of being a son of perdition. Furthermore, we see that he has a temple in verse four. He poses to be as God. He thinks he is God. He acts as though he actually is the God of the earth in heaven. That’s.

93. 53:26

    Not obviously the terms that would be. Used of an atheistic figure, it is someone who is trying to mimic God, trying to reveal himself or present himself. Although he is God and he sits in a place that in some ways mimics God or the true temple, and he even claims to have a seat of authority in that temple as though he was sitting on a throne. Everything about him is intended to mimic or parallel the true although in fact he’s a betrayer, he is apostate. He in fact is to be destroyed by Christ, although he’s got links here with the first entry now brothers and. Sisters will terminate.

94. 54:07

    At that point. With one final thought. Which will lead us into our next study. Although we’ve said that Son of perdition is only found one other place in the New Testament, namely for Judas and John’s Gospel, the only other time perdition occurs. The only other time Perdition occurs is in the Book of Revelation, and it’s not surprising that it has to do with the Beast system.