Podcast: Play in new window | Download

Dr. Alan Kurschner talked about Paul’s use of the term “temple” (naos) in 2 Thessalonians 2:4. Does Paul have in mind a literal, physical temple? Or is he referring to a figurative, spiritual sense?

Dr. Kurschner first explained that naos does not require some large Solomaic-like structure. Instead, it can refer to a small tent-like structure or inner sanctuary. In addition, it must be erected before the midpoint when the Antichrist is revealed and commits the abomination of the desolation.

He then responded to the historicist interpretation of “temple” in 2 Thess 2:4. Typically, they interpret it in a spiritual fashion, such as “the church.” He explained two exegetical fallacies that they commit when arguing for this conclusion, including the “corpus fallacy.” This latter fallacy is a common lexical fallacy that is linguistically naive. He gave a couple of analogies to illustrate my point. Historicists, at the end of the day, must import a foreign meaning into 2 Thess 2:4 to maintain their figurative-church interpretation of naos.

Finally, Dr. Kurschner cited three New Testament scholars (two of them Thessalonian scholars) who made excellent points on this issue. Colin R. Nicholl gives four reasons relating to the worship of the Antichrist. Daniel Wallace demonstrates a development of Paul’s thought on the temple. And Gene L. Green makes the point of the orientation of the Antichrist’s claims that militates against a “church” sense.

Links mentioned in the program:

Colin R. Nicholl. From Hope to Despair in Thessalonica: Situating 1 and 2 Thessalonians. Society for New Testament Studies Monograph Series 126. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2004. See also his “Michael, The Restrainer Removed (2 Thess. 2:6–7).” The Journal of Theological Studies, April 2000.

https://bible.org/article/”temple-god”-2-thessalonians-24-literal-or-metaphorical

Gene L. Green. The Letters to the Thessalonians. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2002, 312.