Podcast appearances and mentions of Colin R Nicholl

Dr. Alan Kurschner explicated here in Part 2 the lines of evidence that Colin R. Nicholl adduces that supports the "Restrainer" being Michael the archangel. 1. Contemporary Jewish literature viewed the characteristics of Michael having eschatological pre-eminence as the chief opponent of Satan and Restrainer of God's people. 2. Michael is viewed as a celestial restrainer of God's people in Daniel 10–12, the passage serving as the source for Paul's exposition in 2 Thessalonians 2:3–8. 3. Daniel's use of the Hebrew term ʿmd comports with the activity of the restrainer in 2 Thessalonians 2:6–7. 4. The Greek term parerchomai in Daniel 12:1 of the Septuagint (LXX) means, “to pass by,” which corresponds with the ceasing of restraint in 2 Thessalonians 2:6–7. 5. Early Rabbinic interpretation of Daniel 12:1 perceived Michael as “passing aside” or “withdrawing” just after Antichrist's establishment near or at the temple mount (Dan 11:45), just before the eschatological unequaled tribulation against God's people (Dan 12:1). 6. Revelation 12:7–17 supports viewing Michael as the Restrainer because it links the cessation of Michael's war against the dragon with the unprecedented persecution of God's people, which is consistent with 2 Thessalonians 2:6–7 and Daniel 11:45–12:1. Given this evidence, the only candidate who can explain the Restrainer being removed is Michael. Other proposals for the Restrainer are hard-pressed to comport with those roles. Thus, this is a strong case that the apostle Paul in 2 Thessalonians 2:6–7 refers to Michael the archangel as the Restrainer, whose ministry ceases and causes the eschatological temple to be desolated by Antichrist, ensued by his great tribulation against God's people. At the conclusion of the program, Dr. Kurschner explained Colin Nicholl's understanding of the masculine and the neuter in reference to Michael, where in verse 6, it is in the neuter gender to katechon (“what holds him back”), and in verse 7, it is in the masculine gender ho katechōn (“the one who holds him back”). Nicholl believes the best explanation is recognizing the Greek can use the neuter gender to refer to a person while the emphasis is on an exceptional quality of the individual (e.g., 1 Cor 11:5; 1 Cor 1:27–28; Gal 3:22; John 3:6; 17:24; 1 John 5:1–4; Matt 12:6). Thus, the neuter in verse 6 refers to Michael with a focus on his restraining ministry, while the masculine in verse 7 refers to Michael himself. Bibliography: In the April 2000 volume of The Journal of Theological Studies, Colin R. Nicholl published the seminal article, “Michael, The Restrainer Removed (2 Thess. 2:6-7),” arguing strongly that Michael is the Restrainer. After his journal article was published Nicholl published it as an appendix in his important monograph (which was his dissertation) From Hope to Despair in Thessalonica: Situating 1 and 2 Thessalonians, Cambridge University Press, 2004.        

Dr. Alan Kurschner explained the context of the Restrainer question. Who is the "Restrainer"? This question stems from Paul's text in 2 Thessalonians 2:6–7.  "And so you know what holds him back, so that he will be revealed in his own time.  For the hidden power of lawlessness is already at work. However, the one who holds him back will do so until he is taken out of the way." Dr. Kurschner is from the persuasion that the identity of the Restrainer in 2 Thessalonians 2:6–7 is the Archangel Michael. There are several compelling lines of evidence to conclude this, and the value of this conclusion is its consistency to the overall prewrath position, even though it is not an essential tenet to the prewrath view. From a negative point of view, it undermines the pretribulational interpretation that the Restrainer is the Holy Spirit. The Michael interpretation is not new since there have been about a dozen theologians and scholars over the last hundred years who have taken this position. Even Robert Van Kampen, a pioneer of the pewrath position, held to this view. But it was not until the year 2000 that a young Thessalonian scholar by the name of Colin R. Nicholl came along that would, for many scholars, put the nail in the coffin of the Restrainer debate. In the April 2000 volume of The Journal of Theological Studies, Colin R. Nicholl published the seminal article, “Michael, The Restrainer Removed (2 Thess. 2:6-7),” arguing strongly that Michael is the Restrainer. After his journal article was published, Nicholl published it as an appendix in his important monograph (which was his dissertation) From Hope to Despair in Thessalonica: Situating 1 and 2 Thessalonians, Cambridge University Press, 2004. Dr. Kurschner gave some context to Paul's restrainer text that helps situate this question for next week's episode. Paul reminds the Thessalonians that they know about the restraining ministry of Antichrist's revelation: “And so you know what holds him back.” The Thessalonians are under the false impression that the day of the Lord is occurring. To correct their error, Paul teaches that before the Lord's revelation happens, the Antichrist's revelation will occur first. But even before the Antichrist's revelation occurs, Paul explains that the individual who restrains Antichrist's revelation must be first taken away. Traditionally, the enigmatic person who restrains has been properly designated “the Restrainer.” Once the Restrainer is removed, this causes Antichrist's revelation, resulting in Antichrist taking his seat in the temple and proclaiming himself as God (2 Thess 2:4). When this happens at the midpoint of the seven-year period it will cause the abomination of desolation and the unabated great tribulation will commence. It was also noted that the issue of the identity of the Restrainer is not essential to the prewrath position, namely because it does not sway the fact that Paul teaches two events must occur before Christ's return: the apostasy and the revelation of the man of lawlessness. So one can be prewrath and disagree that it is Michael because it simply is not inherent to the prewrath position. Conversely, pretribs can hold the Michael view. Similarly, the issues of identifying the religion or ethnicity of the Antichrist, the False Prophet, the Great City of Babylon, or the Two Witnesses are not exclusive to a particular a rapture view. That being said, it is believed that identifying the restrainer as Michael is the most consistent interpretation and that it fits well with the prewrath position. In part 2 next week, Dr. Kurschner will distill Colin Nicholl's argumentation and provide specific lines of evidence.    

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.    

What about this star that made it so special? The star of Bethlehem was special because it led the magi to Mary and Joseph and Jesus. Bible scholar Colin R. Nicholl researched astronomy to make his case that this star was actually a comet. His book The Great Christ Comet argues that this interpretation further supports the historicity of the Gospels. The magi mentioned in this second chapter of Matthew were likely Persian astronomers and astrologers who were well-trained to observe and track these types of celestial phenomena. Months after Jesus’ birth, they followed the star to the right house (v. 9). They may have known Messianic prophecies via Jewish exiles in Babylon (such as Daniel), or even from the days of Balaam (see Num. 24:17). How many of them were there? We don’t know, although three is the traditional answer due to the specific mention of gifts (Matt. 2:11). What motivated them? Their stated desire was to worship the newborn King (v. 2). Their arrival would certainly have captured the attention of everyone in Jerusalem! Imagine a caravan of distinguished foreign visitors arriving unannounced and telling everyone they’re in search of a new king. No wonder Herod was fearful. This event substantiated at least five features of the Christmas story. First, it confirmed Bethlehem as the prophesied birthplace of the Messiah (vv. 5–6). Second, it proved again that God would control events (v. 12). Third, it revealed that human authorities would lie and oppose Jesus (v. 8). Fourth, the star provided another miraculous sign of the Incarnation. Fifth and finally, the magi’s visit demonstrated that Christmas is for all, the Gentiles as well as the Jewish people. Jesus is King of all nations. >> Tonight, step out in the darkness of the evening (even if it is chilly) and look to the sky. Observe the stars and marvel at the handiwork of God’s creation, which remains completely under His control today.

In a Christmas Eve edition of the show Justin is joined by Christian guest Colin Nicholl, atheist Aaron Adair and agnostic Mark Kidger, each of whom has written a book on the star of a Bethlehem from different perspectives. Nicholl says his research has led him to conclude the star was a comet. Adair says the star was pious fiction by the writer of Matthew's Gospel. Astronomer Mark Kidger also shares his ongoing research on the possible explanations of the star and the Magi who heralded its appearance.  Get the MP3  For 'The Great Christ Comet' by Colin R. Nicholl: https://www.amazon.co.uk/Great-Christ-Comet-Revealing-Bethlehem/dp/1433542137  For 'The Star of Bethlehem: A skeptical view' by Aaron Adair: https://www.amazon.co.uk/Star-Bethlehem-Skeptical-View/dp/0956694861  For 'The Star of Bethlehem: An astronomer's view' by Mark Kidger: https://www.amazon.co.uk/Star-Bethlehem-Astronomers-View/dp/0691058237  Order Unbelievable? The Conference 2016 DVD/MP3CD & Digital Download http://www.premier.org.uk/Shop  For more faith debates visit http://www.premierchristianradio.com/Shows/Saturday/Unbelievable Join the conversation: Facebook and Twitter Get the MP3 Podcast of Unbelievable? Via RSS or Via Itunes

In part two, I explicated the lines of evidence that Colin R. Nicholl adduces that supports the “Restrainer” being Michael the archangel. 1. Contemporary Jewish literature viewed the characteristics of Michael having eschatological pre-eminence as the chief opponent of Satan and Restrainer of God's people. 2. Michael is viewed as a celestial restrainer of God's people […] Related Posts: Is the Meaning of Harpagēsometha in 1 Thess 4:17… The Greek GRAMMAR in 2 Thessalonians 2:3 Supports… Interview on the Documentary: Problems with the… The post Archangel Michael, the Restrainer Removed, 2 Thessalonians 2:6–7 (Part 2 of 2) – Ep. 35 appeared first on ESCHATOS MINISTRIES.