The Great Apostasy

I'm going to do a little comparative analysis of the amil and premil interpretations of 2 Thes 2. My immediate point is not to adjudicate which interpretation is correct. However, comparing and contrasting the two interpretations can be a preliminary exercise in assessing their respective strengths and weaknesses. 

i) According to traditional premillennialism, the advent of the Antichrist is coordinated with a "great apostasy" of the church. One potential complication is that apostasia in v3 isn't necessarily a technical term of apostasy (i.e. repudiating the true faith). It could have a more generic sense of "rebellion." By itself, the term, as well as the passage, doesn't specify large-scale Christian defection. It could simply denote a revolt against authority. 

For instance, when countries whose laws and social values used to embody Christian ethics or natural law assumptions secularize, or become pluralistic, they rebel against general revelation and special revelation alike. "National apostasy" is a more diluted concept than personal apostasy, for civil religion is more diluted to begin with. 

ii) Whether we think "apostasy" is correct depends on other factors. If we think 2 Thes 2 parallels the Olivet Discourse, then that lends some support to widespread apostasy.

iii) There's also the question of how these two events are interrelated. Does apostasy in Christendom pave the way for the Antichrist? Does that make it easier for him to succeed? Or does the Antichrist instigate apostasy through his official policies? Which is the cause, and which is the effect? In principle these might be causally independent events, which nevertheless contribute to a common condition of spiritual defection. 

iv) In the premil interpretation, the Antichrist commits sacrilege or blasphemy by desecrating the rebuilt temple in Jerusalem. 

v) Why would the Antichrist care about the temple in Jerusalem? Jerusalem has come to assume great symbolic significance for three world religions: Judaism, Islam, and Christianity. In that regard it is more significant today than it was in Paul's day. 

That's not to say that Jerusalem is intrinsically significant, but that many people attach great religious significance to Jerusalem. So, if the Antichrist wanted to "make a statement," then trading on traditional pious veneration by staging his actions in Jerusalem would be more emblematic than London, Paris, New York, New Delhi, Beijing, Brasília, &c. That would resonant with many people. 

vi) If the premil interpretation is true, then this raises the specter of a self-fulfilling prophecy. 1 Thes 2 is in the public domain. It wasn't sealed. Presumably, the Antichrist would be acquainted with this oracle. His actions are directed by Satan, and Satan knows his way around the Bible.

In that case, the Antichrist is consciously playing the role he was typecast to play in Scripture. He sees himself in that passage, and he plays the part assigned to him in Bible prophecy. He's pretty cooperative in that respect. 

vii) Let's turn to the amil interpretation. To some extent, how we identify the Antichrist is correlative with how we identify the temple. If we identify the temple with the church, then that furnishes some supporting evidence for understanding apostasia in the technical sense. But that's not available to the premil position. 

viii) If we identify the temple with the church, then that raises the question of whether the "man of sin" is a personal Antichrist, or more in the nature of a malign influence. 

If the temple is the rebuilt temple in Jerusalem, then that's highly localized. But if the temple is the church, that denotes millions of Christian communities around the globe. And that raises the question of how a personal Antichrist can instigate apostasy over such a diffuse collective. If we treat it as a malign influence, then this might tie into the "powerful delusion" which God sends forth (v11). 

An alternative explanation is that the Antichrist is a world rule who instigates massive apostasy through massive persecution. The fair-weather churchgoers would renounce their faith in the face of persecution. Moreover, it might involve carrots as well as sticks. Positive incentives to switch sides. Political and socioeconomic rewards. Historical illustrations include the perks which come from membership in the Nazi party or Communist party.