PEOPLE OF LAWLESSNESS

A Crucial Correlative Distinction

I would like to take a brief journey with you through the Gospels. This time, however, we will unfortunately not be focusing on the prophetic wisdom of our Lord Jesus Christ. Rather, I would like to delve into some not-so-subtle inconsistencies in translation.

This will be simple and straight-forward, just a few stops. We’ll start our journey in Mark 2:27, which says, "Then he said to them, 'The Sabbath was made for man, not man for the Sabbath.'" Very cleverly put, He certainly had a way with words.

Next we will zip around to Matthew 4:4: "Jesus answered, 'It is written: "Man shall not live on bread alone, but on every word that comes from the mouth of God."'" We have likely all heard this one before, many times. This, of course, was Jesus’ retort to the devil’s temptation after He had fasted for forty days.

Now, let us fly forward into 2 Thessalonians 2:3, where the Apostle Paul warns us, "Don't let anyone deceive you in any way, for that day will not come until the rebellion occurs and the man of lawlessness is revealed, the man doomed to destruction."

Well, that was relatively quick, right? So what do these all have in common? They all contain the Greek phrase "ὁ ἄνθρωπος" (ho anthropos). Except there’s a problem. In Matthew and Mark this phrase is translated to mean something akin to “people,” or “mankind.” But in 2 Thessalonians it is translated quite literally as the (ho) man (anthropos). Singular, not plural. Maybe it’s just the context?

Well then, I guess we’ll have to make one last stop to get some clarity. Hang on tight because we’re going back from Paul about 400 years to 340-350 BC. And who do we find here? Good old Aristotle, faithfully philosophizing. He wrote two of his most major works around this time, "Nicomachean Ethics" and "Politics." The former work, named after his father or son, both called Nicomachus, focuses on the question of how to live a good life and achieve happiness. The latter work, “Politics,” examines the nature of the state and its role in fostering a good life for its citizens.

As you could likely infer, Aristotle mentions mankind much in these writings. And yes, he uses the phrase "ὁ ἄνθρωπος" (ho anthropos). In these writings combined he uses it approximately 80 to 100 times or more. And not one of them refers to one singular individual. Not one. And I won’t even get into his works “De Anima” and “Metaphysics,” but suffice it to say, it’s more of the same. Not a single instance refers to the singular. In fact, upon scouring the works of Plato, Plutarch, and Xenophon as well, I was unable to find any instance of "ὁ ἄνθρωπος" (ho anthropos) being used to refer to a specific individual rather than mankind, people, or man as a class/type. Misunderstanding this phrase could be compared to misunderstanding the idiom “you’ve got to break a few eggs to make an omelet.” When we say this, we don’t mean it to indicate that you personally, a single individual, must break eggs and make breakfast. Likewise, we could imagine the narrator of a documentary as they explain that “the chimpanzee is a communal creature. It spends it’s day foraging leaves, berries, and insects.”

Now, I know what you’re thinking: what about 2 Thessalonians 2:4, it clearly says, “He will oppose and will exalt himself,” singular. Aristotle didn’t follow "ὁ ἄνθρωπος" (ho anthropos) with the pronoun “he.” This is because in his era of Greek writing, referred to as Classical Greek, the pronoun would have been implied. In later era Koine Greek, such as Paul’s letters, the pronouns were listed. In this case Paul chose αὐτὸν (auton) which typically means “he,” and ἑαυτὸν (heauton), which typically means “himself,” to agree with the number and gender of the well-established, idiomatic phrase "ὁ ἄνθρωπος" (ho anthropos). Using pronouns that aligned in number and gender would have been especially imperative in a language with no punctuation, such as this. The phrase still meant “mankind” in a general sense. That said, Thayer’s Greek Lexicon would allow a translation closer to "Those who oppose and exalt themselves above every so-called god or object of worship, so that they take their seat in the temple of God, proclaiming themselves to be God." Speaking of Paul anyway, let’s get out of here…

We’re back to 52 AD! The Apostle Paul was highly educated, having studied under the prominent Jewish teacher Gamaliel in Jerusalem, which gave him a deep understanding of Jewish law and scripture (Acts 22:3). Paul's writings in the New Testament reflect his extensive knowledge of Jewish traditions, Greek philosophy, and Roman culture. His epistles are known for their theological depth and rhetorical skill, which further underscores his scholarly background. Do you think he was aware of the proper usage of the phrase "ὁ ἄνθρωπος" (ho anthropos)? Yeah, me too. Alright, time to go home.

Brothers and sisters, the evidence is unequivocal. We were not warned about a single individual. (Read more on that here!) We should look out for what Paul intended to warn us about: the people of lawlessness. I believe it will be those who receive the mark of the beast. Be discerning, be wise.

Thank you for reading and God bless!

2 Thessalonians 2:1-4:

"Concerning the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ and our being gathered to him, we ask you, brothers and sisters, not to become easily unsettled or alarmed by the teaching allegedly from us—whether by a prophecy or by word of mouth or by letter—asserting that the day of the Lord has already come. Don’t let anyone deceive you in any way, for that day will not come until the rebellion occurs and the man of lawlessness is revealed, the man doomed to destruction. He will oppose and will exalt himself over everything that is called God or is worshiped, so that he sets himself up in God’s temple, proclaiming himself to be God."