Untitled - Wisconsin Lutheran Seminary - WELS

candidate. At the most we can say that the present mood of the world could
become the rebellion. 40
Ward’s key words seem to be “obvious candidate.” This mindset seems to be that once
the Antichrist is revealed, everyone will know, everyone will be able to point and say without a
doubt, “That man is the ‘man of lawlessness’ about whom Paul had warned us.” Yet Scripture
indicates that Satan’s intentions are neither easily nor readily seen. He operates surreptitiously.
In the Garden of Eden, he did not tell Eve that eating of the fruit would condemn the whole
world in sin. Rather, with cunning and craft he presented disobedience against God as
something enticing. As he approached Jesus in the wilderness he did not come out and say, “I
want you to fail your mission.” He approached Jesus with logical alluring arguments, even
misusing Scripture in an attempt to lead Jesus into sin. In today’s world Satan’s approach might
best be described as the use of familiarity. The illustration of the frog in the boiling pot of water
comes to mind. Place a frog into a pot of water and slowly bring the water to a boil. The frog
will remain in the water as the temperature increases. The frog acclimates to the temperature
until it boils to death. Yet drop a frog into that same pot with water already boiling, and it will
immediately jump out. This is one of Satan’s tactics. He does not enter the battle head-on.
Instead he sneaks in from behind. He works behind the scenes and takes advantage of the sinful
nature. Satan tries his best in the time he has to slowly lead people astray without them even
knowing it. Paul will later speak of this deception in verses nine and ten: “The coming of the
lawless one will be in accordance with the work of Satan displayed in all kinds of counterfeit
miracles, signs and wonders, and in every sort of evil that deceives those who are perishing.”
Others, like William Hendriksen, present the thought that this “man of lawlessness” will
be a specific person in the end times whom Christ himself will destroy. Following this line of
thought, logic concludes that anyone in the past could not have been the Antichrist, for no one
person opposed Christ in such a great way. Nor did Christ himself come and bring any person to
their end. Hendriksen says, “It stands to reason that if the man of sin is a definitely
eschatological person, he cannot be the first pope, nor the second, nor the third, etc., neither can
he be the collective concept ‘the papacy.’” 41 It appears that this is a popular thought.
40 Ibid., 156.
41 William Hendriksen, New Testament Commentary: Exposition of I and II Thessalonians (Grand Rapids,
MI: Baker Book House, 1989), 174.
22