DID THE APOSTLES WARN THAT CHURCH LEADERSHIP WOULD BECOME CORRUPTED?
In our first study, we asked:
Who were the elders?
We found that the New Testament uses elder, overseer or bishop, and shepherd or pastor to describe the same leadership.
In our second study, we asked:
Who owns the sheep?
The answer was clear.
Christ does.
Elders were given real responsibility, but they were specifically forbidden to lord it over God's people.
Now we come to a more disturbing question.
Did the apostles warn that corruption could arise within the church itself, even among its leaders?
We do not have to begin with later church history.
The warnings began while the apostles were still alive.
PAUL WARNED THE ELDERS THEMSELVES
Acts 20 is particularly important because we know exactly whom Paul was addressing.
He had called:
“the elders of the church”
— Acts 20:17
He told those elders that the Holy Spirit had made them overseers and instructed them to shepherd the church of God (Acts 20:28).
Then came the warning:
“For I know this, that after my departing shall grievous wolves enter in among you, not sparing the flock.”
— Acts 20:29
Danger would come from outside.
But Paul did not stop there.
“Also of your own selves shall men arise, speaking perverse things, to draw away disciples after them.”
— Acts 20:30
Notice every part of that statement.
“Of your own selves.”
Paul was speaking to church elders.
Some danger would arise from among the very men entrusted with caring for God's people.
And what would these men do?
Draw away disciples after themselves.
That is the opposite direction from faithful shepherding.
The faithful elder leads Christ's sheep toward Christ.
The leader Paul warns about draws Christ's sheep toward himself.
THIS WAS NOT MERELY A POSSIBILITY
Paul says:
“shall men arise.”
— Acts 20:30
He expected it.
That does not mean every elder would become corrupt.
Nor does the passage tell us that every later change in church organization would be a departure from the faith.
But Paul plainly warned that men could arise from among the elders themselves and lead disciples away from the truth.
The apostolic church received that warning before the apostles were gone.
JOHN SAW SOMETHING LIKE IT HAPPENING
One of the most revealing little passages in the New Testament appears in 3 John.
John writes about a man named Diotrephes.
“Diotrephes, who loveth to have the preeminence among them, receiveth us not.”
— 3 John 9
That expression deserves attention.
He “loveth to have the preeminence.”
He wanted to be first.
Here is a man associated with a Christian congregation who desires prominence.
But it gets worse.
John says Diotrephes spoke maliciously against him.
Then John says:
“neither doth he himself receive the brethren, and forbiddeth them that would, and casteth them out of the church.”
— 3 John 10
Think about what is happening.
An apostle is still alive.
And a man within a congregation is already exercising enough influence to prevent other Christians from receiving certain believers and to put people out of the church when they do not follow his wishes.
John does not praise this as strong leadership.
He condemns it.
Here, while an apostle is still alive, we see the kind of domination Peter warned elders against.
But notice something else.
John does not tell us that Diotrephes was an elder or a bishop.
We should not give him an office the passage does not give him.
What the passage does show is that the desire for preeminence and the misuse of influence were already problems within the Christian community.
“LOVETH TO HAVE THE PREEMINENCE”
That may be one of the most important descriptions in this entire study.
The problem did not begin with a title.
It began with an attitude.
I want to be first.
That desire can exist whether a man calls himself elder, preacher, pastor, bishop, or something else.
Jesus had said:
“Whosoever will be chief among you, let him be your servant.”
— Matthew 20:27
Diotrephes wanted to be first.
Jesus said the one who would be first should become a servant.
Those are two very different approaches to leadership.
PAUL SAID SOME WOULD DEPART FROM THE FAITH
Paul gave Timothy another warning:
“Now the Spirit speaketh expressly, that in the latter times some shall depart from the faith...”
— 1 Timothy 4:1
Notice where the departure occurs.
Paul is speaking about people who turn away from the faith.
He then identifies teachings associated with that departure, including:
“Forbidding to marry, and commanding to abstain from meats...”
— 1 Timothy 4:3
Paul is not simply warning Timothy about opposition from people outside Christianity.
He is warning about teachings that could lead people away from the faith.
The specific teachings he names matter. We should examine them carefully before claiming that a particular later practice fulfills his warning.
For now, the point is clear:
The apostles warned that departure from apostolic teaching could arise within the Christian community.
PAUL WARNED TIMOTHY AGAIN
Paul also writes:
“For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine...”
— 2 Timothy 4:3
Instead:
“after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears.”
— 2 Timothy 4:3
Then:
“they shall turn away their ears from the truth, and shall be turned unto fables.”
— 2 Timothy 4:4
Notice that the people in this warning still have teachers.
Their problem is not a lack of religious instruction.
It is that they seek teachers who will tell them what they want to hear rather than receive sound teaching.
The structure can remain.
The teachers can remain.
The religious language can remain.
And yet the teaching can change.
PETER GAVE A SIMILAR WARNING
Peter writes:
“But there were false prophets also among the people, even as there shall be false teachers among you...”
— 2 Peter 2:1
Notice again:
“Among you.”
Peter warns that false teachers will arise among Christians.
He goes on to describe their destructive teaching, greed, and exploitation (2 Peter 2:1–3).
Paul, Peter, and John all describe dangers arising within the Christian community.
That gives us important background for one of Paul's most difficult passages.
THE “FALLING AWAY”
Paul writes to the Thessalonians concerning the coming of Christ.
He says:
“that day shall not come, except there come a falling away first...”
— 2 Thessalonians 2:3
The Greek word translated “falling away” is apostasia.
It carries the idea of rebellion or departure.
Our English word apostasy comes from it.
Paul says that a rebellion or apostasy must occur before the day of Christ.
But he connects that rebellion with a figure he calls:
“the man of sin”
— 2 Thessalonians 2:3, KJV
Many modern translations use the expression:
“The man of lawlessness.”
Who is this figure?
And where does Paul say he takes his seat?
Those questions matter to our study.
WHO IS THE MAN OF LAWLESSNESS?
Paul describes him as one:
“Who opposeth and exalteth himself above all that is called God, or that is worshipped...”
— 2 Thessalonians 2:4
This figure is characterized by opposition to God and extraordinary self-exaltation.
That should remind us of the warnings we have already examined.
Jesus warned against seeking greatness by dominating others.
Peter warned elders not to lord it over the flock.
Diotrephes loved to have the preeminence.
Now Paul describes a figure who exalts himself.
Those passages do not necessarily describe the same person or event.
But they do show why self-exaltation is a serious concern in any discussion of spiritual authority.
Then Paul says something especially important.
WHERE DOES HE SIT?
“so that he as God sitteth in the temple of God, shewing himself that he is God.”
— 2 Thessalonians 2:4
What does Paul mean by:
“The temple of God”?
Some interpreters understand this as a physical temple in Jerusalem.
Others understand it as a reference to God's people—the church.
We should not assume the answer before examining the evidence.
So let us begin with a question:
How does Paul himself use temple language when writing to Christians?
WHAT DOES PAUL CALL “THE TEMPLE OF GOD”?
Paul tells the Corinthian Christians:
“Know ye not that ye are the temple of God, and that the Spirit of God dwelleth in you?”
— 1 Corinthians 3:16
Then:
“the temple of God is holy, which temple ye are.”
— 1 Corinthians 3:17
Again, Paul says:
“ye are the temple of the living God.”
— 2 Corinthians 6:16
And in Ephesians, Paul describes Christians as God's household, built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, with Jesus Christ as the chief cornerstone.
The whole structure grows:
“unto an holy temple in the Lord.”
— Ephesians 2:21
And believers are:
“builded together for an habitation of God through the Spirit.”
— Ephesians 2:22
Paul repeatedly uses temple language for the church.
That does not, by itself, settle the meaning of 2 Thessalonians 2:4.
But it gives us good reason to consider whether Paul is using the expression in the same way there.
Could the man of lawlessness be taking a position of exalted authority within the church itself?
That is a serious possibility.
COULD PAUL BE DESCRIBING A CHURCH LEADER?
If “the temple of God” refers to the church, Paul may be describing someone who rises to a position of exalted authority within the community of God's people.
That person could be a religious leader who claims authority that belongs to God.
This interpretation would fit the concern we have been examining: a person drawing authority and allegiance toward himself rather than directing people toward Christ.
But we need to be careful.
Paul does not explicitly identify this figure as an elder, bishop, pope, or holder of any other church office.
Nor does the expression “temple of God” identify a particular office.
Some Christians understand the passage as referring to a physical temple and a future individual who openly opposes God.
Others understand the language differently.
Our purpose here is not to settle every question about the man of lawlessness.
It is to recognize that a corrupt religious authority arising within the church is one possible interpretation of Paul's warning.
We should keep that possibility before us as we examine history.
But we must not assume that a later leader fulfills Paul's prophecy merely because he holds a prominent position.
WHAT DOES IT MEAN TO “SIT”?
Paul says this figure:
“sitteth in the temple of God.”
— 2 Thessalonians 2:4
Sitting can describe occupying a place or position.
If the temple refers to the church, the expression could portray someone taking a position of authority among God's people.
But we should not ignore the rest of Paul's description.
The figure does not merely sit.
He opposes and exalts himself above what is called God or worshipped.
Paul says he presents himself as God.
This is an extraordinary claim.
We should not reduce it to the ordinary exercise of church leadership or assume that every leader who claims too much authority is therefore the man of lawlessness.
The passage describes a much more serious form of self-exaltation.
“THE MYSTERY OF LAWLESSNESS DOTH ALREADY WORK”
Paul says something else that deserves our attention:
“For the mystery of iniquity doth already work...”
— 2 Thessalonians 2:7
Already.
Paul wrote this in the first century.
Whatever final development he expected, he said that the mystery of lawlessness was already at work.
That means his warning was not entirely disconnected from the circumstances of his own time.
But notice the distinction.
Paul says the mystery of lawlessness was already working.
He does not say that the man of lawlessness had already been fully revealed.
We should not treat those two statements as though they were identical.
Paul describes an evil already at work, a restraint upon its development, and a later revealing of the lawless figure.
He does not tell us enough here to trace every stage of that development through church history with certainty.
WHAT WAS RESTRAINING IT?
Paul continues:
“only he who now letteth will let, until he be taken out of the way.”
— 2 Thessalonians 2:7
In this older English translation, “letteth” means restrains.
Who or what is the restrainer?
This is one of the most debated questions in the passage.
Paul reminds his readers:
“Remember ye not, that, when I was yet with you, I told you these things?”
— 2 Thessalonians 2:5
The Thessalonians had heard Paul's earlier teaching.
We have this letter, but we do not have a complete record of everything he told them in person.
Christians have proposed different explanations of the restrainer.
We should therefore resist building our entire interpretation upon an identification Paul does not explicitly give us in this letter.
What we can say is:
The mystery of lawlessness was already working.
Something was restraining the lawless figure's revelation.
That restraint would be removed.
The lawless figure would then be revealed.
And Paul goes on to say that the Lord Jesus will bring him to an end (2 Thessalonians 2:8).
DOES “LAWLESS” MEAN WITHOUT RELIGION?
Not necessarily.
Paul describes this figure in connection with God's temple, worship, self-exaltation, and deception.
He also says:
“whose coming is after the working of Satan with all power and signs and lying wonders”
— 2 Thessalonians 2:9
The passage describes deception with religious dimensions.
If the temple refers to the church, that deception could arise in a setting where people still use religious language and claim spiritual authority.
That possibility matters.
But the passage does not permit us to identify the man of lawlessness simply by finding a church leader whose teachings we believe are wrong.
We must consider Paul's whole description, not just one phrase that seems to fit a particular interpretation.
IS PAUL PREDICTING THE PAPACY?
This question has been asked by Christians at different times in church history.
Some Protestant interpreters have identified the man of lawlessness with the papacy. Other Christians reject that identification and understand Paul's prophecy in different ways.
At this point in our study, we have not yet examined the historical development of bishops or the papacy.
We should not announce an identification before examining the evidence.
Our present question is narrower:
Does Paul's prophecy allow for the possibility of a corrupt religious authority arising within Christianity itself?
Yes. If the temple refers to the church, that is a possible reading of the passage.
But Paul does not explicitly name a later church office or institution.
We must keep that distinction clear.
WHAT HAVE THE APOSTLES ACTUALLY WARNED US ABOUT?
Let us bring the passages together.
In Acts 20:29–30, Paul warned the Ephesian elders that men would arise from among their own number and draw disciples after themselves.
In 3 John 9–10, John described Diotrephes, a man who loved preeminence and used his influence to reject other Christians and put people out of the church.
In 1 Timothy 4:1–3, Paul warned that some would depart from the faith and follow false teaching.
In 2 Timothy 4:3–4, Paul warned that people would seek teachers who told them what they wanted to hear.
In 2 Peter 2:1–3, Peter warned that false teachers would arise among Christians and exploit them.
And in 2 Thessalonians 2, Paul described a rebellion and a lawless figure characterized by extraordinary self-exaltation and deception.
The first five passages clearly warn about dangers arising within the Christian community.
The sixth is more difficult to interpret.
But Paul's use of temple language elsewhere gives us a reason to consider whether the man of lawlessness could also be associated with corruption arising within the church.
We have not established that all these passages predict one person, one office, or one historical development.
What we have established is that the apostles did not teach Christians to assume that every person claiming spiritual authority would necessarily remain faithful to Christ.
They told Christians to be watchful.
NOW WE ARE READY FOR HISTORY
So far, we have stayed primarily inside the New Testament.
We have examined:
WHO THE ELDERS WERE.
Then:
HOW THOSE LEADERS WERE SUPPOSED TO LEAD.
And now:
WHAT THE APOSTLES WARNED COULD GO WRONG WITHIN THE CHRISTIAN COMMUNITY.
Our next question requires us to turn to the historical evidence.
What happened to church leadership after the apostles?
Did elder and bishop continue to describe the same leadership?
Or did the way those titles were used begin to change?
If a change occurred, how early can we document it?
What reasons did Christians give for it?
And what authority did those leaders claim?
We must not assume that every organizational change was corruption.
Nor should we assume that every development was faithful to apostolic teaching.
We need to read the earliest evidence and examine it carefully.
That is where we go next.
TEXT B4 TRADITION
Read First. Conclude Later.
RETURN TO MAIN SERIES: ONE CHURCH, SO MANY DIVISIONS—WHAT HAPPENED?
NEXT STUDY: WHAT HAPPENED TO THE ELDERS AFTER THE APOSTLES DIED?