In this clip, Cy Kellett welcomes Joe Heschmeyer to discuss the claim that the Pope is the ‘man of lawlessness’ from 2 Thessalonians. Joe unpacks the biblical context and addresses common Protestant objections to papal authority, providing clarity on this contentious issue.
Transcript:
Caller: I was born in a Protestant evangelical family, okay. And then I committed one of the few mortal sins that anti Catholics recognize, and that is marrying a Catholic.
Caller: and at first the Pope was not a problem, Right. But as I’ve gone down different rabbit holes, one of them I went down was the 1689 London Baptist confession of Faith, where I think it’s chapter 26, paragraph 4. They’re talking about Christ being the one and only head of the Church, and that therefore the Pope is the Antichrist. I listened to a couple podcasts from anti Catholic Christians, and to be fair, they were verily very poorly cited. They didn’t give a lot of references to what they had to say. But the one argument they were making that I’ve had a hard time dissuading, I guess in my mind was there a statement that in second Thessalonians 2 talks about how a man of lawlessness takes his seat in the temple of God and proclaims himself to be God. And so their argument was that, you know, the temple of God is the Church. And so the Pope takes his seat in the Church. Pope Leo the 13th and his encyclical, trying to remember exactly what the phrasing was, but it was something along the lines of, we sit in the seat of God Almighty. And so that, you know, their argument was that, you know, here we have an example of the Pope claiming that he is God, he’s taken his seat in the temple of God in the Church. And, yeah, I’ve just been trying to find some better peace on that topic and wondering if you could help me there.
Joe Heschmeyer: All right, I’d be happy to. So there’s several things there that I want to kind of unpack, if you don’t mind. One of them is, what does the Bible say about the Antichrist? Because, you know, 2 Thessalonians 2 doesn’t actually mention the Antichrist. I mean, it might be the same thing, but it mentions the man of lawlessness and the Son of perdition. Now, one thing that should be clear is it would be very strange to call the Pope the man of lawlessness. Like one of the big raps against Catholicism is we have too many laws and too many rules, and so there’s not this spirit of, you can reject the law of God. So in other words, to view the authority of the Pope as being associated with lawlessness seems like we’re just ignoring what the Bible actually says, even in second Thessalonians 2. Additionally, when the term Antichrist is used. It’s only used by John, and it’s only used in first and second John. And he says, 1 John 2:18 children, it is now the last hour. You’ve heard that Antichrist is coming. So now many antichrists have come, therefore we know that it is the last hour. Then in first John 2:22, just a few verses later, who is the liar but he who denies that Jesus Christ. Excuse me, that Jesus is the Christ, this is the Antichrist, he who denies the Father and the Son. So a good test of Is the Pope the Antichrist? Does he deny the Father and the Son? No, he doesn’t. Then 1 John 4, he says, by this you know the Spirit of God. Every spirit which confesses that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is of God. And every spirit which does not confess Jesus is not of God. This is the spirit of Antichrist, of which you heard that it was coming, and now it is in the world already. Well, does the Pope say Jesus is not of God? Well, no, he doesn’t. He clearly teaches that Jesus comes from God, which is the Spirit of God at work, not the spirit of the Antichrist. So again, like every time you see the term Antichrist, it doesn’t sound remotely like anything the Pope is saying or doing. Then the last part is Second John, chapter one, verse seven. For many deceivers have gone out into the world, men who will not acknowledge the coming of Jesus Christ in the flesh. Such a one is the deceiver and the Antichrist. So the last hallmark is somebody who denies the Incarnation. Does the Pope deny the Incarnation? He doesn’t. So it’s very clear that if you go with what Scripture says about the Antichrist, rather than what London Baptists say about the Antichrist, that just doesn’t sound remotely similar. So what do we do with this other part? Because you’re right, there are these bold claims that the Pope makes where he claims to be able to speak and act with divine authority. And. And this, I would suggest, takes looking at what the Bible has to say about authority more seriously. Luke 10:16. He who hears you, hears me. And he who rejects you, rejects me. And he who rejects me rejects him who sent me. That’s what Jesus says to those who he’s sending out in his name. So you’ve got Jesus, who isn’t the Father, but is sent by the Father, acting with the authority of the Father. He says in Matthew 28 that all authority in heaven, on earth, has been given to him, meaning by the Father, and then he sends out his disciples and says, go therefore and make disciples of all nations. So there are people that Jesus sends into the world with divine authority, not because they’re God, but because God sent them out. The Father sent Jesus with the authority of the Father. Jesus then sends his followers with divine authority and, and we see them speaking and acting with that divine authority. So you have a few obvious places, Matthew 16 and Matthew 18, where Jesus says, whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven. Whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven. This is a promise of divine authority attaching to the apostles. St. Paul says, if we triumph, we will reign with Christ, which is again a promise of sharing in the authority of God. You have Acts 15, when the church speaks on behalf of God and says, it seemed good to the Holy Spirit and to us. You have numerous places in the New Testament where the inspired authors speak on behalf of God. So I would suggest that clearly is not Antichrist, Unless you’re going to say the disciples are all Antichrist or somebody acting with divine authority because they’ve been sent by God. That might be true or not, but that’s not what the Antichrist is. They’re not claiming to be God. They’re claiming to be the Vicar of Christ. Claiming to act on behalf of Christ is not the same as claiming to be him. Does that make sense? Does that make sense to you?
Caller: Yeah, that does. Does make some sense.
Caller: Yeah.
Caller: In that portion, when they call him, I’m sure, you know, they throw the whole book at him. Yeah, it’s just one of those things that I have a hard time.
Joe Heschmeyer: Also, what turns the Antichrist from an individual into an office, which is obviously wrong, you know, because there’s not just like one Pope. There have been a bunch of popes. So were all of them the Antichrist? That seems like, I mean, it just, it has all the hallmarks of being really bad exegesis where you’re. You’re mad at somebody and then you just, you know, like, I don’t know if you’ve ever. Maybe I’m telling on myself too much here. You, you re. You hear something in Mass or you read something in Scripture and you’re frustrated with somebody and you’re like, ah, they need to read this. And it’s like, you probably need to read that. And so similarly, the London Baptist remounted the Pope. And so they’re taking this stuff about usurping the authority of God while forming their own church, which God alone has the power to do. And they’re blaming the Pope and it’s like, guys, the Pope didn’t invent the Catholic Church. You’re doing something the Pope would never dream of doing. Like, you’re forming your own church. That’s much more of an arrogation of divine authority than. Than speaking on behalf of God. All Christians are called to speak on behalf of God. This is part of what it is to be a Christian, like to be baptized priest, prophet and king. You are called to share in the proclamation of the gospel that is speaking on behalf of God. So, yeah, I think some of it is just the Pope speaks in a way that is foreign and off putting to many Protestant ears, but if you were to actually say, well, is it biblical or not? I’d be hard pressed to see why it wasn’t biblical. Okay.
Caller: Yeah, I hope. Thank you. All right.
Joe Heschmeyer: Yeah, absolutely. Justin, please call back on this journey. I’m very excited for you. Dan, thank you very much for the call.