1 and 2 Thessalonians, Volume 45: Second Edition (45) (Word Biblical Commentary) 9780785250210, 9780310139874, 0785250212

Table of contents :
Contents
Editorial Preface
Author’s Preface
Abbreviations
Commentaries on 1 & 2 Thessalonians
General Bibliography
Introduction
1. Thanksgiving (1:2–10)
2. Thanksgiving Unfolded (2:1–16)
3. Paul’s Worry and Relief, Thanksgiving and Prayer (2:17–3:13)
1. Life That Pleases God (4:1–12)
2. Assurance about Christ’s Advent (4:13–5:11)
3. Life Together in the Church (5:12–22)
4. Concluding Wish-Prayer (5:23–24)
1. Thanksgiving (1:3–12)
2. Thanksgiving Renewed (2:1–17) and Transition (3:1–5)
Excursus: The “Restraining Thing” (τὸκατέχον) and the “Restraining Person”(ὁ κατέχων) of the “Lawless Man”
Excursus: Antichrist
1. Exhortations on Idleness (3:6–15)
2. Conclusion with a Wish-Prayer and a Benediction (3:16)
Scripture and Other Ancient Literature Index
Subject Index
Author Index

Citation preview

Seyoon Kim’s 1 & 2 Thessalonians is one of the best commentaries on these letters now available. This lengthy and detailed exposition is especially strong in alerting readers to some of the latest academic treatments of various issues in the letters and in its rich exploration of the interface between these letters and Paul’s wider theology. Douglas J. Moo, professor of New Testament emeritus, Wheaton College Arriving at Manchester, one of the first things I noticed in my office was Seyoon Kim’s justly famous PhD thesis, in a shelf of research by F. F. Bruce’s students. Kim has now greatly honored his former supervisor with a wonderful commentary, incorporating Bruce’s textual notes but essentially a new work. Kim’s commentary faithfully and effectively inherits both Bruce’s concern for well contextualized and judicious interpretation and Bruce’s skill in producing writing that will be very fruitful in the life of today’s churches. Peter Oakes, Rylands Professor of Biblical Criticism and Exegesis, University of Manchester In this updated volume on the Thessalonian letters, Seyoon Kim tackles the challenging feat of revising the work of his mentor, F. F. Bruce. While surely standing on the shoulders of Bruce, Kim deserves commendation for offering a thorough exegesis of these two important, and sometimes overlooked, Pauline letters. At three and a half times the length of Bruce’s original work, Kim handles the textual, linguistic, historical, social, and theological factors with precision, thoroughness, and care. His interaction with secondary sources shows keen discernment, gracefully offering constructive criticism where appropriate. Especially helpful is Kim’s discussion of justification, a doctrine that is often overlooked or even assumed absent in these letters. This volume will surely be an essential reference for anyone studying the Thessalonian correspondence. Jeanette Hagen Pifer, affiliate professor of New Testament, Talbot School of Theology, Biola University Carefully researched, carefully lays out the issues, and offers meaningful insight and explanation. This commentary will provide significant help to both pastors and scholars. Klyne R. Snodgrass, professor emeritus of New Testament, North Park Theological Seminary Seyoon Kim’s commentary is a stunning, magisterial achievement! It will define historical critical studies on Paul’s Thessalonian letters and their connection to his overall theology for a new generation of scholars. It is more than a welcome update to F. F. Bruce’s prior work but offers fresh exegetical analyses on major themes in the Thessalonian correspondence, including

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 1

7/12/23 11:28 AM

justification through faith, realized vs. future eschatology, the Jesus tradition in Paul’s gospel, and Paul’s critique of idolatry and their idolatrous systems, to name just a few. Kim brings the reader up to speed with current debates on Paul, particularly whether or not his gospel is counter-­imperial, or if there is any theological development between his early and latter letters. He constructs a new historical setting (or a new Sitz im Leben) for 1 Thessalonians centering on the role of Paul’s “entry” (εἴσοδος) into the city and offers a new interpretation for the “restraining thing” (τὸ κατέχον) and the “restraining person” (ὁ κατέχων) for 2 Thessalonians. Rich in insight, theologically provocative, and adeptly argued, Kim’s commentary is a masterpiece. Bravo! Max J. Lee, The Paul W. Brandel Professor of Biblical Studies, North Park Theological Seminary Thoughtful, detailed, richly engaged with contemporary discussion and debate, Seyoon Kim has produced a welcome contribution to the understanding of the Thessalonian correspondence, from which many will benefit. Mark A. Seifrid, senior professor of New Testament, Concordia Seminary, St. Louis Prof. Seyoon Kim has not only provided an update to F. F. Bruce’s original commentary but has deployed his keen exegetical skills and senses to some of the most difficult passages in the Pauline corpus. Kim’s commentary on 1–2 Thessalonians is an erudite exposition that captures Paul’s future expectations and exhortations to the believers in Thessalonica. A tremendous achievement in the study of these short, but immensely important letters. Michael F. Bird, academic dean, Ridley College, Melbourne, Australia Mature Pauline scholar Seyoon Kim would make his mentor, F. F. Bruce, proud in this revision of Bruce’s commentary. It displays the independent, incisive engagement with the biblical text and with scholarship that we have come to expect from him. Craig S. Keener, professor of biblical studies, Asbury Theological Seminary Seyoon Kim has produced a superb commentary, exhibiting detailed historical research, rich theological exegesis, and thorough interaction with the secondary literature. Together with a volume of supplementary essays, this brilliant work represents the crowning achievement of a lifetime of careful study of the Pauline texts. It will become the standard by which all commentaries on the Thessalonian letters will be measured for many years to come. Donald A. Hagner, George Eldon Ladd Emeritus Professor of New Testament, Fuller Theological Seminary

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 2

7/12/23 1:19 PM

WORD BIBLICAL COMMENTARY

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 1

7/12/23 11:28 AM

Editorial Board Old Testament Editor: Nancy L. deClaissé-­Walford (2011–) New Testament Editor: David B. Capes (2020–)

Past Editors

Ralph P. Martin (2012–2013) Bruce M. Metzger (1997–2007) John D. W. Watts (1977–2011) Peter H. Davids (2013–2020) Ralph P. Martin (1977–2012)

General Editors

David A. Hubbard (1977–1996) Glenn W. Barker (1977–1984)

Old Testament Editors

James W. Watts (1997–2011)

New Testament Editors

Lynn Allan Losie (1997–2013)

Volumes

1 Genesis 1–15. . . . . . . . . . . . . Gordon J. Wenham 2 Genesis 16–50 . . . . . . . . . . . Gordon J. Wenham 3 Exodus . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . John I. Durham 4 Leviticus. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . John E. Hartley 5 Numbers**. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Philip J. Budd 6a Deuteronomy 1:1–21:9, Second Edition . . . . . . . Duane L. Christensen 6b Deuteronomy 21:10–34:12. . . . . . . . . . Duane L. Christensen 7a Joshua 1–12, Second Edition . . . Trent C. Butler 7b Joshua 13–24, Second Edition. . .Trent C. Butler 8 Judges. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Trent C. Butler 9 Ruth–­Esther. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Frederic W. Bush 10 1 Samuel, Second Edition. . . . . . Ralph W. Klein 11 2 Samuel. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .A. A. Anderson 12 1 Kings, Second Edition. . . . . .Simon J. Devries 13 2 Kings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .T. R. Hobbs 14 1 Chronicles**. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Roddy Braun 15 2 Chronicles**. . . . . . . . . . .Raymond B. Dillard 16 Ezra–­Nehemiah**. . . . . . . H. G. M. Williamson 17 Job 1–20 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . David J. A. Clines 18a Job 21–37 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . David J. A. Clines 18b Job 38–42. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . David J. A. Clines 19 Psalms 1–50, Second Edition**. . . . . . . Peter C. Craigie, with Marvin E. Tate 20 Psalms 51–100**. . . . . . . . . . . . . . Marvin E. Tate 21 Psalms 101–150, Revised Edition**. . . Leslie C. Allen 22 Proverbs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Roland Murphy 23a Ecclesiastes. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Roland Murphy 23b Song of Songs/Lamentations. . . Duane Garrett and Paul House 24 Isaiah 1–33, Revised Edition. . . John D. W. Watts 25 Isaiah 34–66, Revised Edition. . . . . .John D. W. Watts 26 Jeremiah 1–25 . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Peter C. Craigie, Page H. Kelley, and Joel F. Drinkard Jr. 27 Jeremiah 26–52. . . Gerald L. Keown, Pamela J. Scalise, and Thomas G. Smothers 28 Ezekiel 1–19. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Leslie C. Allen 29 Ezekiel 20–48. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Leslie C. Allen

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 2

30 Daniel, Revised Edition . . . . . . John Goldingay 31 Hosea– ­Jonah** . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Douglas Stuart 32 Micah–­Malachi** . . . . . . . . . . . .Ralph L. Smith 33a Matthew 1–13**. . . . . . . . . . . Donald A. Hagner 33b Matthew 14–28**. . . . . . . . . . Donald A. Hagner 34a Mark 1–8:26**. . . . . . . . . . . . Robert A. Guelich 34b Mark 8:27–16:20**. . . . . . . . . . . . Craig A. Evans 35a Luke 1–9:20** . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . John Nolland 35b Luke 9:21–18:34**. . . . . . . . . . . . . John Nolland 35c Luke 18:35–24:53**. . . . . . . . . . . . John Nolland 36 John, Second Edition**. . . . . . . . . . . . George R. Beasley-­Murray 37a Acts 1–9:42*. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Steve Walton 37b Acts 9:43–19:41*. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Steve Walton 37c Acts 20–28* . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Steve Walton 38a Romans 1–8** . . . . . . . . . . . . James D. G. Dunn 38b Romans 9–16** . . . . . . . . . . . James D. G. Dunn 39 1 Corinthians*. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . TBA 40 2 Corinthians, Second Edition. . Ralph P. Martin 41 Galatians**. . . . . . . . . .Richard N. Longenecker 42 Ephesians**. . . . . . . . . . . . . .Andrew T. Lincoln 43 Philippians. . . . . Ralph P. Martin and Gerald F. Hawthorne 44a Colossians*. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Clinton E. Arnold 44b Philemon* . . . Clinton E. Arnold and Daniel K. Darko 45 1 & 2 Thessalonians, Revised Edition. . .Seyoon Kim and F. F. Bruce 46 Pastoral Epistles. . . . . . . . . . William D. Mounce 47a Hebrews 1–8**. . . . . . . . . . . . . . William L. Lane 47b Hebrews 9–13**. . . . . . . . . . . . . William L. Lane 48 James. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ralph P. Martin 49 1 Peter**. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . J. Ramsey Michaels 50 Jude, 2 Peter**. . . . . . . . . .Richard J. Bauckham 51 1, 2, 3, John, Revised**. . . . .Stephen S. Smalley 52a Revelation 1–5**. . . . . . . . . . . . . David E. Aune 52b Revelation 6–16**. . . . . . . . . . . . David E. Aune 52c Revelation 17–22** . . . . . . . . . . . David E. Aune *Forthcoming as of 2023 **Revised/new edition forthcoming as of 2023

7/12/23 11:28 AM

45

WORD BIBLICAL COMMENTARY

1 & 2 Thessalonians Second Edition

SEYOON KIM AND F. F. BRUCE Old Testament Editor: Nancy L. deClaissé-­Walford New Testament Editor: David B. Capes

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 3

7/12/23 11:28 AM

ZONDERVAN ACADEMIC 1 & 2 Thessalonians, Volume 45 Copyright © 2023 by Seyoon Kim and F. F. Bruce First edition by F. F. Bruce, copyright © 1982 by Word, Incorporated. Requests for information should be addressed to: Zondervan, 3900 Sparks Dr. SE, Grand Rapids, Michigan 49546 Zondervan titles may be purchased in bulk for educational, business, fundraising, or sales promotional use. For information, please email [email protected]. Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Names: Kim, Seyoon, author. | Bruce, F. F. (Frederick Fyvie), 1910-1990, author. Title: 1 & 2 Thessalonians / Seyoon Kim, F. F. Bruce. Other titles: Word biblical commentary Description: Second edition. | Grand Rapids : Zondervan, 2023. | Series: Word biblical commentary | Includes bibliographical references and index. Identifiers: LCCN 2023003934 (print) | LCCN 2023003935 (ebook) | ISBN 9780785250210 (hardcover) | ISBN 9780310139874 (ebook) Subjects: LCSH: Bible. Thessalonians--Commentaries. Classification: LCC BS2725.53 .K54 2023 (print) | LCC BS2725.53 (ebook) | DDC 227/.8107​ --dc23/eng/20230516 LC record available at https://lccn.loc.gov/2023003934 LC ebook record available at https://lccn.loc.gov/2023003935 Unless otherwise noted, all Scripture translations are those of the author. Any internet addresses (websites, blogs, etc.) and telephone numbers in this book are offered as a resource. They are not intended in any way to be or imply an endorsement by Zondervan, nor does Zondervan vouch for the content of these sites and numbers for the life of this book. All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any means—­electronic, mechanical, photocopy, recording, or any other—­except for brief quotations in printed reviews, without the prior permission of the publisher.

23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 /TRM/ 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 4

7/12/23 11:28 AM

In grateful memory of Professor F. F. Bruce

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 5

7/12/23 11:28 AM

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 6

7/12/23 11:28 AM

Contents Editorial Preface. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 Author’s Preface. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 Abbreviations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 Commentaries on 1 & 2 Thessalonians. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27 General Bibliography. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31

Introduction

I.. Background to the Thessalonian Letters . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51 Bibliography. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51 1.. Macedonia and Thessalonica. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51 A..Macedonia, a Roman Province. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51 B.. Thessalonica, a Roman Free City . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52 C..Pagan Cults and Imperial Cult. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55 2.. The Gospel Comes to Macedonia. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56 3.. Christianity at Thessalonica. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 58 A..Paul Began His Preaching at a Jewish Synagogue. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 58 B.. Paul’s Preaching Activities outside the Synagogue. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59 C..The Social Composition of the Thessalonian Church . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61 4.. Persecution and the End of the Pauline Mission in Thessalonica. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62 A..Paul’s Christological/Soteriological Gospel Preached to the Thessalonians. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62 B.. Jewish Spinning of Paul’s Gospel and Their Accusation to the Politarchs of Him and Silas as Revolutionaries. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .64 C..The Charge of Violating the “Decrees of Caesar”. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65 D..Did Paul Preach a Counter-­Roman Gospel?. . . . .68 E.. The End of Paul’s Thessalonian Mission . . . . . . . 69 5.. Paul’s Plan of Action. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 71 6.. Paul and the Churches of Macedonia. . . . . . . . . . . . . 72 II..The Thessalonian Letters. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 73 Bibliography. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 73 1.. Authorship of 1 Thessalonians . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 73 2.. Date and Occasion. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 75 3.. Structure and Function of 1 Thessalonians 1–3, or Occasion and Purpose of 1 Thessalonians. . . . . . . 76

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 7

7/12/23 11:28 AM

A..The Fivefold Association of (a) the Effectiveness of the Gospel or the Faith of the Thessalonians with (b) Paul’s Entry (εἴσοδος) . . . 77 B.. Why Does Paul Make This Association and Demonstrate the Integrity of His εἴσοδος So Emphatically?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 81 C..Is Paul Presenting Himself as a Model, or Does He Have a Philophronetic Purpose?. . . . . . 85 D..Comparison with 2 Corinthians. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 87 E.. The Apologetic Function of 1 Thessalonians 1–3. . . 89 F.. The Structure and Function of 1 Thessalonians 1–3. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 93 G..The Purpose of Part 1 of 1 Thessalonians. . . . . .98 H..1 Thessalonians 4–5. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 100 Conclusion. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 101 4.. Authorship of 2 Thessalonians . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 102 A..The Traditional Debate about the Authenticity of 2 Thessalonians Centered on the Literary Relationship between 1 and 2 Thessalonians . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 104 B.. A New Observation of the Literary Relationship between 1 and 2 Thessalonians. . . 105 C..The Presence of Paul’s Justification Doctrine in 2 Thessalonians as Decisive Evidence. . . . . . . 112 Conclusion. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 113 5..Date. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 113 6.. Relationship between the Two Letters . . . . . . . . . . . 114

T ext

and

Commentary

1 Thessalonians I. Prescript (1:1). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 123 II. Part 1: Thanksgiving (1:2–3:13). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 137 1. Thanksgiving (1:2–10) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 139 2. Thanksgiving Unfolded (2:1–16). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 186 A..The Integrity of Paul’s Apostolic Entry (2:1–12). . . . . . . 186 (a). The Thesis and the Divine Commission (2:1–4) . . . 189 (b).Paul’s Apostolic Conduct (2:5–8) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .205 (c). Summing Up His Description of His Eisodos or Missionary Conduct (2:9–12). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 221

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 8

7/12/23 11:28 AM

B.. Thanksgiving Resumed for the Readers’ Faith despite Persecution (2:13–16). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 234 3. Paul’s Worry and Relief, Thanksgiving and Prayer (2:17–3:13). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 261 A..Paul’s Desire to Visit Thessalonica Again (2:17–20). . . . 263 B.. Paul Sent Timothy (3:1–5). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 272 C..Joy and Thanksgiving for the Readers’ Faith (3:6–10). . . 283 D..The Concluding Wish-­Prayer: Transition (3:11–13). . . .295 III. Part 2: The Exhortations (4:1–5:24). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 315 1. Life That Pleases God (4:1–12). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 319 A..Introduction (4:1–2). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 319 B.. Holiness in Sexual Conduct (4:3–8). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 326 C..Sibling Love and a Becoming Life (4:9–12) . . . . . . . . . . 351 2. Assurance about Christ’s Advent (4:13–5:11). . . . . . . . . . . . . 372 A..The Faithful Departed (4:13–18). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 372 B.. The Day of the Lord (5:1–11). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 412 3. Life Together in the Church (5:12–22). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 452 A..Recognition of Leaders and Maintaining the Community Peace (5:12–13). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 457 B.. Ministering to the Weak Members (5:14) . . . . . . . . . . . .463 C..A Basic Christian Principle of Interpersonal Relationships (5:15) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 467 D..Basic Christian Piety (5:16–18) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 472 E.. Prophesying in Congregational Worship (5:19–22). . . . 475 4. Concluding Wish-­Prayer (5:23–24) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .484 IV. Letter Closing (5:25–28). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 495

2 Thessalonians I. Prescript (1:1–2). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 501 II. Part 1: Thanksgiving, Assurance, and Prayer (1:3–3:5) . . . . . . . 503 1. Thanksgiving (1:3–12) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .505 A..Thanksgiving (1:3–4). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .505 B.. The Just Judgment of God (1:5–10). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 511 C..Prayer Report (1:11–12) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 539 2. Thanksgiving Renewed (2:1–17) and Transition (3:1–5). . . 549 A..Coming of the Day of the Lord (2:1–12). . . . . . . . . . . . . 550 (a). The Problem: A False Teaching about the Day of the Lord (2:1–2). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 553

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 9

7/12/23 11:28 AM

(b).The Right Scenario of the Coming of the Day of the Lord (2:3–8). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 562 Excursus: The “Restraining Thing” (τὸ κατέχον) and the “Restraining Person” (ὁ κατέχων) of the “Lawless Man” . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .589 Excursus: Antichrist. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 594 (c). The Coming of the Lawless Man and the Fate of Unbelievers (2:9–12) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .605 B.. Thanksgiving Renewed with Assurance for Believers (2:13–14) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 615 C..The Concluding Exhortation (2:15) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 627 D..Conclusion of Part 1 with First Wish-­Prayer (2:16–17). . . 631 E.. Transition with Second Wish-­Prayer (3:1–5). . . . . . . . . . 638 III. Part 2: Exhortations (3:6–16). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 651 1. Exhortations on Idleness (3:6–15). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 653 2. Conclusion with a Wish-­Prayer and a Benediction (3:16). . 676 IV. Letter Closing (3:17–18) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 681 Scripture and Other Ancient Literature Index. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 687 Subject Index. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 715 Author Index. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 721

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 10

7/12/23 11:28 AM

Editorial Preface The launching of the Word Biblical Commentary in 1977 brought to fulfillment the dream of a new commentary series on the books of the Bible. The founding editorial board determined to include a number of features in the commentary series that were distinctive at the time and remain essential features of a trustworthy commentary in the twenty-­f irst century. The original editorial board sought authors from around the world who, while broadly identified as evangelical in its positive, historic sense, represented a rich diversity of denominational allegiances, and who could offer the best in biblical scholarship. It was important for the editors that while these authors were scholars actively engaged in teaching in university and seminary settings, they were also involved in church ministry. That commitment continues today as revisions and updates are undertaken on various volumes in the series. The board determined that the layout of the commentary series would follow a format consciously designed to assist readers at different levels. First, authors were to use their own Translations of the texts as the basis of their comments and exegesis, examining carefully the textual, linguistic, and structural evidence and providing ample explanatory Notes. Thus, in the words of the original editorial board, while the series is based on the biblical languages, “it seeks to make the technical and scholarly approach to a theological understanding of Scripture understandable by—­and useful to—­the fledging student, the working minister, and colleagues in the guild of professional scholars and teachers as well.” As revisions and updates are produced, the same careful attention to translation has been maintained. Second, an extensive Bibliography at the beginning of each section provided the reader with ample information on the then state of scholarship and an opportunity to dig deeper. That continues in the revisions and updates with only slight changes to the format of the bibliographies. Third, the section titled Form/Structure/Setting discussed the redaction, genre, sources, and tradition. They concern the origin of the text, its canonical form, and its relation to the biblical and extrabiblical contexts in order to illuminate the structure and character of the text. And finally, the Comment and Explanation sections first offered a verse-­by-­verse interpretation of the text and dialogue with interpreters, engaging with current opinion and scholarly research and then discussing its relevance to the ongoing life of faith communities today. These two important sections are maintained in the revised and updated volumes, and to aid in reading, footnotes are now employed in place of in-­text citations. The ongoing revisions and updates also extensively incorporate new

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 11

7/12/23 11:28 AM

12

Editorial Preface

scholarship and provide insights into the relevance of the biblical texts for faith communities in the twenty-­f irst century. The current editorial board, in the spirit of the founding editorial board, pray that “if these aims come anywhere near realization, the intention of the editors will have been met, and the labor of our team of contributors rewarded.” Old Testament Editor: Nancy L. deClaissé-­Walford New Testament Editor: David B. Capes

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 12

7/12/23 11:28 AM

Author’s Preface It gives me a great sense of relief and thanksgiving that by God’s grace at last I have completed this commentary. As is well-­k nown, writing a critical commentary on a biblical book nowadays is an exceedingly complex and difficult task. One of the reasons for this is that a commentator has to proceed with one’s work in constant discussion with so many commentaries on it, as well as a vast number of monographs and articles that are related to it. Such a process is very time-­consuming, but it is a valuable exercise, as through it one not only learns a great deal from them but also develops new insights and solutions in the matters of interpreting the biblical text. I cannot claim that my literature survey has been exhaustive, but I may indicate that I have endeavored to engage in sufficiently thorough discussions with some representative commentaries and other works. I am happy to acknowledge my indebtedness to so many authors, especially to those of several excellent commentaries on 1 and 2 Thessalonians. I will be satisfied if some fellow students and ministers of Scripture find this commentary helpful in developing some new insights into the apostle Paul’s messages expressed in the two Thessalonian letters, despite many shortcomings that it no doubt has. Most New Testament scholars hold 1 Thessalonians as the first of Paul’s surviving letters. Conscious of this fact, its commentators try to appreciate it as witnessing to his early theology. Their efforts often lead them to stress its differences from his later letters, highlighting especially the absence of the Pauline doctrine of justification and the focus on futuristic eschatology in it. So it is quite common to see commentators and other scholars arguing for a theory of substantial development of Pauline theology from its early stage in 1 Thessalonians to its mature stage in Galatians and especially Romans. As a pupil of F. F. Bruce, I hold Galatians to have been written a couple of years before 1 Thessalonians. Nevertheless, I also appreciate 1 Thessalonians as an early letter of Paul, as I view it (together with most commentators) to have been written in AD 50. Even so, I do not find any substantial development between it and Romans in the theological thoughts of the apostle. For me, this view is much more natural than the opposite view, as we are dealing with 1 Thessalonians, a post-­A ntioch controversy epistle, and we are talking about the theological development of Paul, a trained Jewish theologian who, before writing it, had already had about sixteen to eighteen years of Christian theological reflection and ministry experience—­a period that is more than double the seven years or so between it and Romans. In fact, in this commentary I show the implicit yet unmistakable presence of the Pauline doctrine of justification in 1 Thessalonians (and the even clearer presence of it in 2 Thessalonians!), as well as the situation-­conditioned nature of the

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 13

7/12/23 11:28 AM

14

Author’s Preface

focus in 1 Thessalonians on the futuristic aspect of the common Pauline eschatological scheme of “already/not yet.” I try to demonstrate these facts by fully unpacking the gospel encapsulated in 1 Thessalonians 1:9–10; 2:11–12; 3:12–13; 4:14; 5:9–10, 23–24 (cf. also 2 Thess 1:5, 8–10; 2:10–12, 13–14; etc.) and properly appreciating the unparalleled prominence of the “faith” language in that early letter (and also in 2 Thessalonians), as well as by observing how Paul’s relative focus on the realized eschatology or the futuristic eschatology in a letter depends on the situation and needs of its recipients. Thus, this commentary work has led me to affirm the essential unity and continuity of Pauline theology between 1 Thessalonians and his later letters. Furthermore, it has led me to suggest also that some important “Son of Man” sayings of Jesus form a basis for Pauline theology. Of all the things that I have read afresh out of the Thessalonian correspondence, the most impressive one for me is Paul’s great appreciation of the fact that the Thessalonian Christians accepted his gospel and came to the Christian faith despite severe persecution because they saw its truth demonstrated in his “entry” (εἴσοδος) into their city as its preacher (1 Thess 1:5–6, 9–10; 2:1, 13; 3:6), that is, in his apostolic conduct (2:1–12) that was in imitation of the mission of his Lord Jesus Christ (1 Thess 2:6–8; cf. Mark 10:45/Matt 20:28/Luke 22:26) and so was in stark contrast to that of the contemporary wandering Cynic philosophers and Sophists in Hellenistic cities. This theme runs like a red thread through the whole thanksgiving section of 1 Thessalonians 1–3, the first and main part of the letter, so that for me a proper appreciation of it is decisive for a right interpretation of the letter. Furthermore, quite obviously it holds a great missionary and pastoral lesson for our contemporary church. In order to demonstrate these and other points more adequately, I wrote several extended essays on some passages and themes of 1 Thessalonians (and 2 Thessalonians) alongside this commentary. They are collected into a separate volume, Paul’s Gospel for the Thessalonians and Others: Essays on 1 & 2 Thessalonians and Other Pauline Epistles, WUNT 481 (Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2022). It is meant as a companion volume to this commentary, so that in this commentary and in that essay volume there are frequent cross-­ references (so I beg readers for indulgence about so many self-­references and some partial repetitions in both volumes!). It was Ralph P. Martin, the founding New Testament editor of the WBC series and my senior colleague at Fuller Theological Seminary, who honored me with the invitation more than twenty years ago to update my revered teacher F. F. Bruce’s commentary in the series. I presume that, true to his character, Professor Bruce produced it in a timely fashion as the first volume in the series, adhering strictly to all the guidelines of the editors. But during the last forty years since the publication of his commentary, the atmosphere of commentary writing has greatly changed, and there has been an explosion

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 14

7/12/23 11:28 AM



Author’s Preface 15

of commentaries and other literature on Pauline studies. So I could not confine my work just to updating Bruce’s original commentary. At first, I started with the thought that in addition to updating it with new insights drawn from engagement with new research on the two Thessalonian epistles and Pauline studies in general I would try to strengthen especially the theological reflections in the commentary. But soon I realized that for those purposes I could not just insert a few lines or paragraphs of my own into his text here and there. So I have ended up rewriting most of the commentary (except the Translation and Notes sections; I have left the latter largely intact save for some slight updates in light of NA 28). Looking back, I regret that I have not preserved more of Bruce’s original in the sections of Form/Structure/Setting, Comments, and Explanation. I try to comfort myself with the thought that, still, throughout the commentary I wrote in his spirit. Now, it is a pleasant duty for me to thank those who helped me in the process of writing this commentary (the text was practically completed at the end of July 2020) and at the stages of its editing and publication. First of all, I must express my gratitude to the New Testament editors of the WBC series: foremost, to the late Ralph Martin for the trustful patience that he showed me during the tardy beginning of my commentary work; and then to his successors, Peter Davids and David Capes, for their kind words of encouragement and helpful advice. Katya Covrett, associate publisher at Zondervan Academic, took care of the revision of the publication contract. Youngna Park and Kangil Kim, PhD candidates at Fuller Theological Seminary, helped me respectively with the change of Greek font and with compilation of abbreviations and bibliographies. Dr. Amie H. Vaughan and Cody Hinkle helped with proofreading. Christopher Beetham, a senior editor of Zondervan, did an excellent job in copyediting my manuscript. To them all, I am very grateful. I must also thank three institutions: Fuller Theological Seminary, which provided me with a good working environment as well as some research assistants for procurement of literature during the early stages of my commentary work; Tübingen University and its Protestant Theological Faculty, which hosted me as a visiting scholar during the last two years; and the Alexander von Humboldt Foundation, which granted me a renewed fellowship at Tübingen for the fall quarter of 2019. I am much indebted also to the libraries and their staff of Fuller Seminary, Tübingen University, and its Theologicum. Once more, my old friend Prof. Hermann Lichtenberger was my host during my time at Tübingen, and his successor Prof. Michael Tilly as the chair of New Testament/Ancient Judaism and Hellenistic Religion-­history provided me with an office near his own. Prof. Christof Landmesser, who is also writing a commentary on the Thessalonian epistles, also extended a warm welcome to me. Once more, Prof. Peter Stuhlmacher helped me with much encouragement and wise counsel, and it was also a joy to renew fellowship with Prof. Rainer Riesner, another old friend. To them all, I would like to express my

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 15

7/12/23 11:28 AM

16

Author’s Preface

sincere gratitude for making my research stay at Tübingen enjoyable (despite Covid-19) and the final stage of my commentary work fruitful. Finally, it is a distinct joy to express my gratitude to my wife, Yea Sun, who faithfully supported me with loving care and encouragement through all these years of my protracted scholarly labor, and also to our two daughters, Eunice Songi and Claire Hahni, for much joy and cheer with which they sustained me. Seyoon Kim Tübingen, Pentecost, 2021

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 16

7/12/23 11:28 AM

Abbreviations A. General Abbreviations A Codex Alexandrinus acc. accusative ad loc ad locum, at the place discussed ‫ א‬ Codex Sinaiticus Apoc. Apocrypha B Codex Vaticanus C Codex Ephraemi Syri c. century cf. confer, compare ch(s). chapter(s) comm(s). commentary, commentaries contra in contrast to D Codex Bezae DSS Dead Sea Scrolls ed. edited by, editor(s) e.g. exempli gratia, for example esp. especially et al. et alii, and others FFB F. F. Bruce’s original commentary, 1 & 2 Thessalonians Heb. Hebrew i.e. id est, that is LXX Septuagint (the Greek OT) ms(s) manuscript(s) MT Masoretic Text (of the HB) n. note

NA 28

Nestle-­A land, Novum Testamentum Graece. Edited by the Institute for New Testament Textual Criticism, Münster, under the direction of Holger Strutwolf. 28th ed. Stuttgart: Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft, 2012 N.B. nota bene, note carefully nom. nominative NT New Testament OT Old Testament pace in spite of, nevertheless par(r). parallel(s) passim here and there p(p). page(s) pl. plural Q Quelle rev. revised by, revision sc. scilicet, that is to say sing. singular Sym. Symmachus Tg. Targum tr. translated by, translator vol. volume v(v). verse(s) x times (2x = two times, etc.)

B. Translations and Paraphrases ASV CEB CEV

American Standard Version Common English Bible Contemporary English Version

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 17

7/12/23 11:28 AM

18 Abbreviations ESV JB KJV NAB NASB NEB NET NIV NJB NKJV NLT NRSV REB RSV RV TEV TNIV

English Standard Version Jerusalem Bible King James Version New American Bible New American Standard Bible (1995) New English Bible New English Translation New International Version New Jerusalem Bible New King James Version New Living Translation New Revised Standard Version Revised English Bible Revised Standard Version Revised Version Today’s English Version (= Good News Bible) Today’s New International Version

C. Periodicals, Reference Works, Serials, and Books AB AJEC AJP AnBib ANRW

ANTC ANTJ ASNU ASTI ATANT ATR BA BBB BBR BDAG

Anchor Bible Ancient Judaism and Early Christianity American Journal of Philology Analecta Biblica Aufstieg und Niedergang der römischen Welt: Geschichte und Kultur Roms im Spiegel der neueren Forschung. Part 2, Principat. Edited by Hildegard Temporini and Wolfgang Haase. Berlin: de Gruyter, 1972– Abingdon New Testament Commentaries Arbeiten zum Neuen Testament und Judentum Acta Seminarii Neotestamentici Upsaliensis Annual of the Swedish Theological Institute Abhandlungen zur Theologie des Alten und Neuen Testaments Australasian Theological Review Biblical Archaeologist Bonner biblische Beiträge Bulletin for Biblical Research Danker, Frederick W., Walter Bauer, William F. Arndt, and F. Wilbur Gingrich. Greek-­English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature. 3rd ed. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2000

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 18

7/12/23 11:28 AM

Abbreviations 19 BDF

Blass, Friedrich, Albert Debrunner, and Robert W. Funk. A Greek Grammar of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1961 BECNT Baker Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament BETL Bibliotheca Ephemeridum Theologicarum Lovaniensium BEvT Beiträge zur evangelischen Theologie BFCT Beiträge zur Förderung christlicher Theologie Bib Biblica BibInt Biblical Interpretation Series Billerbeck Strack, H. L., and P. Billerbeck. Kommentar zum Neuen Testament aus Talmud und Midrasch. 6 vols. München: Kessinger, 1922–­61 BJRL Bulletin of the John Rylands University Library of Manchester BKAT Biblischer Kommentar, Altes Testament BNTC Black’s New Testament Commentaries BTB Biblical Theology Bulletin BU Biblische Untersuchungen BZ Biblische Zeitschrift BZNW Beihefte zur Zeitschrift für die neutestamentliche Wissenschaft CBC Cambridge Bible Commentary CBQ Catholic Biblical Quarterly CGTSC Cambridge Greek Testament for Schools and Colleges CNT Commentaire du Nouveau Testament ConBNT Coniectanea Biblica: New Testament Series CP Classical Philology CTJ Calvin Theological Journal DPL Dictionary of Paul and His Letters. Edited by Gerald F. Hawthorne and Ralph P. Martin. Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 1993 DOTP Dictionary of the Old Testament Prophets. Edited by J. G. McConville and M. J. Boda. Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 2012 EB Echter Bibel EDNT Exegetical Dictionary of the New Testament. Edited by Horst Balz and Gerhard Schneider. ET. 3 vols. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1990–1993 EgT Eglise et théologie EKKNT Evangelisch-­katholischer Kommentar zum Neuen Testament ETL Ephemerides Theologicae Lovanienses EvQ Evangelical Quarterly EvT Evangelische Theologie ExAud Ex Auditu ExpTim Expository Times FRLANT Forschungen zur Religion und Literatur des Alten und Neuen Testaments

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 19

7/12/23 11:28 AM

20 Abbreviations GTA HKNT HNTC HNT HSCP HThKNT HTR HvTSt IB ICC Int JBL JBLMS JHS JRS JSJ JSJSup JSNT JSNTSup JSPL JSPSup JTS KEK LCL LD LEC LS LSB MHT

MM

MNTC NAC NCB NIB NIBCNT NICNT

Göttinger theologischer Arbeiten Handkommentar zum Neuen Testament Harper’s New Testament Commentaries Handbuch zum Neuen Testament Harvard Studies in Classical Philology Herders Theologischer Kommentar zum Neuen Testament Harvard Theological Review Hervormde teologiese studies Interpreter’s Bible. Edited by George A. Buttrick et al. 12 vols. New York: Abingdon, 1951–1957 International Critical Commentary Interpretation Journal of Biblical Literature Journal of Biblical Literature Monograph Series Journal of Hellenic Studies Journal of Roman Studies Journal for the Study of Judaism in the Persian, Hellenistic, and Roman Periods Supplements to the Journal for the Study of Judaism Journal for the Study of the New Testament Journal for the Study of the New Testament Supplement Series Journal for the Study of Paul and His Letters Journal for the Study of the Pseudepigrapha Supplement Series Journal of Theological Studies Kritisch-­exegetischer Kommentar über das Neue Testament Loeb Classical Library Lectio Divina Library of Early Christianity Louvain Studies La Sacra Bibbia Moulton, James Hope, Wilbert Francis Howard, and Nigel Turner. A Grammar of New Testament Greek. 4 vols. Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1976 Moulton, James H., and George Milligan. The Vocabulary of the Greek Testament. London, 1930. Repr., Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 1997 Moffatt New Testament Commentary New American Commentary New Century Bible The New Interpreter’s Bible. Edited by Leander E. Keck. 12 vols. Nashville: Abingdon, 1994–2004 New International Biblical Commentary on the New Testament New International Commentary on the New Testament

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 20

7/12/23 11:28 AM

Abbreviations 21 NIDNTT NIGTC NovT NovTSup NTC NTD NTF NTM NTOA NTS OCA ÖTK PG PGTO

PKNT PNP

PW

RB REG ResQ RNT RTR SAAB SANT SBLDS SBLMS SBLSBS SBLSP SBS SD SESJ SHCT SJT SMBen SNT

New International Dictionary of New Testament Theology. Edited by Colin Brown. 4 vols. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1975–1978 New International Greek Testament Commentary Novum Testamentum Supplements to Novum Testamentum New Testament Commentary Das Neue Testament Deutsch Neutestamentliche Forschungen New Testament Message Novum Testamentum et Orbis Antiquus New Testament Studies Orientalia Christiana Analecta Ökumenischer Taschenbuch-­Kommentar Patrologia Graeca. Edited by Jacques-­Paul Migne. 162 vols. Paris, 1857–1886 Kim, Seyoon. Paul’s Gospel for the Thessalonians and Others: Essays on 1 & 2 Thessalonians and Other Pauline Epistles. WUNT 481. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2022 Papyrologische Kommentare zum Neuen Testament Kim, Seyoon. Paul and the New Perspective: Second Thoughts on the Origin of Paul’s Gospel. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans; WUNT 140; Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2002 Paulys Real-­Encyclopädie der classischen Altertumswissenschaft. New edition by Georg Wissowa and Wilhelm Kroll. 50 vols. in 84 parts. Stuttgart: Metzler and Druckenmüller, 1894–1980 Revue biblique Revue des études grecques Restoration Quarterly Regensburger Neues Testament Reformed Theological Review State Archives of Assyria Bulletin Studien zum Alten und Neuen Testaments Society of Biblical Literature Dissertation Series Society of Biblical Literature Monograph Series Society of Biblical Literature Sources for Biblical Study Society of Biblical Literature Seminar Papers Stuttgarter Bibelstudien Studies and Documents Suomen Eksegeettisen Seuran Julkaisuja Studies in the History of Christian Thought Scottish Journal of Theology Série monographique de Benedictina: Section paulinienne Studien zum Neuen Testament

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 21

7/12/23 11:28 AM

22 Abbreviations SNTSMS SP ST STDJ TB TBei TDNT

THNTC ThWAT

TJ TSK TU TUGAL TynBul TZ WBC WC WMANT WSB WUNT ZAW ZBK ZK ZNW ZST ZTK ZWT

Society for New Testament Studies Monograph Series Sacra Pagina Studia Theologica Studies on the Texts of the Desert of Judah Theologische Bücherei: Neudrucke und Berichte aus dem 20. Jahrhundert Theologische Beiträge Theological Dictionary of the New Testament. Edited by Gerhard Kittel and Gerhard Friedrich. Translated by Geoffrey W. Bromiley. 10 vols. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1964–1976 Two Horizons New Testament Commentary Theologisches Wörterbuch zum Alten Testament. Edited by G. Johannes Botterweck and Helmer Ringgren. Stuttgart: Kohlhammer, 1970– Trinity Journal Theologische Studien und Kritiken Texte und Untersuchungen Texte und Untersuchungen zur Geschichte der altchristlichen Literatur Tyndale Bulletin Theologische Zeitschrift Word Biblical Commentary Westminster Commentaries Wissenschaftliche Monographien zum Alten und Neuen Testament Wuppertaler Studienbibel Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament Zeitschrift für die alttestamentliche Wissenschaft Zürcher Bibelkommentare Zeitschrift für Keilschriftforschung Zeitschrift für die neutestamentliche Wissenschaft und die Kunde der älteren Kirche Zeitschrift für systematische Theologie Zeitschrift für Theologie und Kirche Zeitschrift für wissenschaftliche Theologie

D. Old Testament and New Testament Old Testament Gen Genesis Exod Exodus Lev Leviticus Num Numbers

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 22

Deut Deuteronomy Josh Joshua Judg Judges Ruth Ruth

7/12/23 11:28 AM

Abbreviations 23 1–2 Sam1 1–2 Samuel 1–2 Kgs2 1–2 Kings 1–2 Chr 1–2 Chronicles Ezra Ezra Neh Nehemiah Esth Esther Job Job Ps/Pss Psalms Prov Proverbs Eccl Ecclesiastes Song Song of Songs Isa Isaiah Jer Jeremiah Lam Lamentations

Ezek Ezekiel Dan Daniel Hos Hosea Joel Joel Amos Amos Obad Obadiah Jonah Jonah Mic Micah Nah Nahum Hab Habakkuk Zeph Zephaniah Hag Haggai Zech Zechariah Mal Malachi

New Testament Matt Matthew Mark Mark Luke Luke John John Acts Acts Rom Romans 1–2 Cor 1–2 Corinthians Gal Galatians Eph Ephesians Phil Philippians Col Colossians

1–2 Thess 1–2 Thessalonians 1–2 Tim 1–2 Timothy Titus Titus Phlm Philemon Heb Hebrews Jas James 1–2 Pet 1–2 Peter 1–2–3 John 1–2–3 John Jude Jude Rev Revelation

E. The Apocrypha and the Pseudepigrapha Ascen. Isa. Ascension of Isaiah Bar Baruch 1 En. 1 Enoch 1 Esd 1 Esdras 1–2 Macc 1–2 Maccabees 2 Bar. 2 Baruch 2 Esd 2 Esdras 4 Ezra 4 Ezra 4 Macc 4 Maccabees Jos. Asen. Joseph and Aseneth 1 2

Jub. Jubilees Mart. Isa. Martyrdom of Isaiah Pss. Sol. Psalms of Solomon Sib. Or. Sibylline Oracles Sir Sirach/Ecclesiasticus T. Benj. Testament of Benjamin T. Dan Testament of Daniel T. Gad Testament of Gad T. Hez. Testament of Hezekiah T. Jos. Testament of Joseph

1–2 Sam = 1–2 Kgdms (LXX) 1–2 Kgs = 3–4 Kgdms (LXX)

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 23

7/12/23 11:28 AM

24 Abbreviations T. Levi T. Naph. T. Reu.

Testament of Levi Testament of Naphtali Testament of Reuben

Tob Tobit Wis Wisdom of Solomon

F. Early Patristic Books 1–2 Clem. Barn. Did. Irenaeus, Haer. Justin, Apol. Pol. Phil. Tertullian, Res. Tertullian, Scorp.

1–2 Clement Barnabas Didache Against Heresies Apology Polycarp, To the Philippians The Resurrection of the Flesh Antidote for the Scorpion’s Sting

G. Mishnah, Talmud, Targumic, and Rabbinic Works Bab. Babylonian Ber. Berakhot Gem. Gemara Gen. Rab. Genesis Rabbah Meg. Megillah Midr. Midrash

Pal. Palestinian Pesah. Pesahim Sanh. Sanhedrin Sop. Soferim Tg. Neof. Targum Neofiti

H. Papyri and Inscriptions CIG

CIL IG

Corpus Inscriptionum Graecarum. Edited by August Boeckh. 4 vols. Berlin, 1828–1877 Corpus Inscriptionum Latinarum. Berlin, 1862– Inscriptiones Graecae. Editio Minor. Berlin: de Gruyter, 1924–

P.Oxy SIG

Papyrus Oxyrhynchus Sylloge Inscriptionum Graecarum. Edited by Wilhelm Dittenberger. 4 vols. 3rd ed. Leipzig: Hirzel, 1915–1924

I. Dead Sea Scrolls and Related Texts 1QH 1QM 1QpHab 1QS

Hodayot or Thanksgiving Hymns War Scroll Pesher Habakkuk Rule of the Community

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 24

11QMelch Melchizedek 11QPsa Psalms Scrolla CD Cairo Genizah copy of the Damascus Document

7/12/23 11:28 AM

Abbreviations 25

J. Josephus Ag. Ap. Ant. J.W. Life

Against Apion Jewish Antiquities Jewish War The Life

K. Philo Abraham Agriculture Dreams Embassy Joseph

On the Life of Abraham On Agriculture On Dreams On the Embassy to Gaius On the Life of Joseph

Rewards Spec. Laws Virtues

On Rewards and Punishments On the Special Laws On the Virtues

L. Greek and Latin Works Achilles Tatius, Leuc. Clit. The Adventures of Leucippe and Cleitophon Aeschylus, Cho. Libation-­Bearers Aristotle, Eth. nic. Nicomachean Ethics Cicero, Att. Letters to Atticus Cicero, Pis. Against Piso Cicero, Quint. fratr. Epistulae ad Quintum fratrem Demosthenes, Olynth. Olynthiac Dio Cassius, Rom. Hist. Roman History Dio Chrysostom, Or. Orations Diodorus Siculus, Hist. Library of History Diogenes Laertius, Lives Lives of the Philosophers Eusebius, Hist. eccl. Ecclesiastical History Herodotus, Hist. Histories Hippolytus, Antichr. On Antichrist Hippolytus, Ap. Trad. The Apostolic Tradition Homer, Il. Iliad Jerome, Jov. Against Jovinian Livy, Hist. History of Rome Marcus Aurelius, Med. Meditations Plato, Apol. Apology of Socrates Plato, Phaedr. Phaedrus Plato, Prot. Protagoras Plato, Tim. Timaeus Plutarch, Aem. Aemilius Paullus Plutarch, Flam. Titus Flamininus Plutarch, Mor. Moralia

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 25

7/12/23 11:28 AM

26 Abbreviations Plutarch, Tim. Timoleon Polybius, Hist. Histories Ps.-­Phoclides, Sent. Sentences Sophocles, Ant. Antigone Sophocles, Oed. col. Oedipus coloneus Strabo, Geogr. Geography Suetonius, Claud. The Deified Claudius Tacitus, Ann. Annals Tacitus, Hist. Histories Theocritus, Id. Idylls Thucydides, Hist. History of the Peloponnesian War Xenophon, Cyr. Cyropaedia Xenophon, Mem. Memorabilia

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 26

7/12/23 11:28 AM

Commentaries on 1 & 2 Thessalonians Commentaries on 1 & 2 Thessalonians are cited in this commentary by their author’s name, followed by page number(s); for example, Malherbe, 188; Weima, 164; Schreiber, I:78–79; Schreiber, II:101. Alford, H. “The First Epistle to the Thessalonians.” Vol. 3 of The Greek New Testament. London: Rivingtons, 1871. Amiot, F. S. Saint Paul, Epître aux Galates: Epîtres aux Thessaloniciens. Verbum Salutis 14. Paris: Beauchesne, 1946. Bailey, J. W. The First and Second Epistles to the Thessalonians. IB 11. New York: Abingdon, 1955. Beale, G. K. 1–2 Thessalonians. IVP New Testament Commentary Series. Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 2003. Bengel, J. A. Gnomon Novi Testamenti. London: Williams and Norgate, 1862. Best, E. The First and Second Epistles to the Thessalonians. HNTC. New York: Harper, 1972. Bicknell, E. J. The First and Second Epistles to the Thessalonians. WC. London: Methuen, 1932. Boor, W. de. Die Briefe des Paulus an die Thessalonicher. WSB. Wuppertal: Brockhaus, 1960. Bornemann, W. Die Thessalonicherbriefe. KEK. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1894. Bruce, F. F. 1 & 2 Thessalonians. WBC 45. Waco, TX: Word, 1982. Calvin, J. The Epistles of Paul the Apostle to the Romans and to the Thessalonians. Translated by R. Mackenzie. Edinburgh: Oliver & Boyd, 1960. Denney, J. The Epistles to the Thessalonians. Expositor’s Bible. London: Hodder & Stoughton, 1892. Dewailly, L.-­M. La Jeune Eglise de Thessalonique. LD 37. Paris: Cerf, 1963. Dibelius, M. An die Thessalonicher I–­II. An die Philipper. HNT 11. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1937. Dobschütz, E. von. Die Thessalonicherbriefe. KEK. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1909. Eadie, J. A Commentary on the Greek Text of the Epistles of Paul to the Thessalonians. London: Griffin, 1877. Ellicott, G. J. St. Paul’s Epistles to the Thessalonians. London: Longmans, 1880. Fee, G. D. The First and Second Letters to the Thessalonians. NICNT. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2009. Findlay, G. G. The Epistles to the Thessalonians. CGTSC. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1925. Frame, J. E. The Epistles of St. Paul to the Thessalonians. ICC. Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1912. Friedrich, G. Der erste Brief an die Thessalonicher, Der zweite Brief an die Thessalonicher. NTD 8. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1976.

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 27

7/12/23 11:28 AM

28

Commentaries on 1 & 2 Thessalonians

Furnish, V. P. 1 Thessalonians, 2 Thessalonians. ANTC. Nashville: Abingdon, 2007. Gaventa, B. R. First and Second Thessalonians. Interpretation. Louisville: Westminster John Knox, 1998. Grayston, K. The Letters of Paul to the Philippians and to the Thessalonians. CBC. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1967. Green, G. L. The Letters to the Thessalonians. Pillar New Testament Commentary. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2002. Hendriksen, W. I & II Thessalonians. NTC. Grand Rapids: Baker, 1955. Hiebert, D. E. The Thessalonian Epistles: A Call to Readiness. Chicago: Moody, 1971. Hobbs, H. H. 1–2 Thessalonians. BBC 11. Nashville: Broadman, 1972. Hogg, C. F., and W. E. Vine. The Epistles of Paul the Apostle to the Thessalonians. Glasgow: Pickering & Inglis, 1914. Holmes, M. W. 1 & 2 Thessalonians. NIV Application Commentary. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1998. Holtz, T. Der erste Brief an die Thessalonicher. EKKNT 13. Neukirchen-­V luyn: Neukirchener Verlag, 1986. Hoppe, R. Der erster Thessalonikerbrief: Kommentar. Freiburg im Breisgau: Herder, 2016 (cited as Hoppe I). —­—­—­. Der zweite Thessalonikerbrief: Kommentar. Freiburg im Breisgau: Herder, 2019 (cited as Hoppe II). Hubbard, D. A. Thessalonians. Waco, TX: Word, 1977. Johnson, A. 1 & 2 Thessalonians. THNTC. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2016. Kelly, W. The Epistles of Paul the Apostle to the Thessalonians. London: Hammond, 1953. Kreinecker, C. M. 2. Thessalonians. PKNT 3. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2010. Lightfoot, J. B. Notes on the Epistles of St. Paul. London: Macmillan, 1895. Lünemann, G. Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament: The Epistles to the Thessalonians. Translated by P. J. Gloag. Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1880. Malherbe, A. J. The Letters to the Thessalonians. AB 32B. New York: Doubleday, 2000. Marshall, I. H. 1 and 2 Thessalonians. NCB. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1983. Martin, D. M. 1, 2 Thessalonians. NAC 33. Nashville: Broadman & Holman, 1995. Marxsen, W. Der erste Brief an die Thessalonicher. ZBK 11.1. Zurich: Theologischer Verlag, 1979. —­—­—.­ Der zweite Thessalonicherbrief. ZBK 11.2. Zurich: Theologischer Verlag, 1982. Masson, C. Les deux Epîtres de Saint Paul aux Thessaloniciens. CNT 11a. Neuchatel: Delachaux & Niestle, 1957. Menken, M. J. J. 2 Thessalonians. New Testament Readings. London: Routledge, 1994. Milligan, G. St. Paul’s Epistles to the Thessalonians. London: Macmillan, 1908. Moffatt, J. The First and Second Epistles of Paul the Apostle to the Thessalonians. Expositor’s Greek Testament 4. London: Hodder & Stoughton, 1910. Moore, A. L. I and II Thessalonians. NCB. London: Nelson, 1969. Morris, L. The First and Second Epistles to the Thessalonians. Rev. ed. NICNT. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1991. Müller, P. G. Der erste und zweite Brief an die Thessalonicher. Regensburger Neues Testament. Regensburg: Pustet, 2001. Neil, W. The Epistles of Paul to the Thessalonians. MNTC. London: Hodder & Stoughton, 1950. Nicklas, T. Der zweite Thessalonicherbrief. KEK 10.2. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2019. Oepke, A. Die kleineren Briefe des Apostels Paulus. NTD 8. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1953.

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 28

7/12/23 11:28 AM



Commentaries on 1 & 2 Thessalonians 29

Plummer, A. A Commentary on St. Paul’s First Epistle to the Thessalonians. London: R. Scott, 1918. Reese, J. M. 1 and 2 Thessalonians. NTM 16. Wilmington, DE: Glazier, 1979. Reinmuth, E. “Der erste Brief an die Thessalonicher” and “Der zweite Brief an die Thessalonicher.” Pages 103–202 in Das Neue Testament Deutsch. Band 8.2. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1998. Richard, E. J. First and Second Thessalonians. SP 11. Collegeville, MN: Liturgical Press, 1995. Rigaux, B. Saint Paul: Les Eptîtres aux Thessaloniciens. EB. Paris: Gabalda, 1956. Roose, H. Der erste und zweite Thessalonicherbrief. Die Botschaft des Neuen Testaments. Neukirchen-­V luyn: Neukirchener Theologie, 2016. Rossano, P. Lettere ai Tessalonicesi. LSB. Torino: Marietti, 1965. Schlatter, A. Die Briefe an die Thessalonicher, Philipper, Timotheus und Titus. Stuttgart: Calwer, 1950. Schlier, H. Der Apostel und seine Gemeinde: Auslegung des ersten Brief an die Thessalonicher. Freiburg im Breisgau: Herder, 1972. Schmiedel, P. W. Die Briefe an die Thessalonicher und an die Korinther. HKNT. Freiburg: Mohr, 1892. Schreiber, S. Der erste Brief an die Thessalonicher. ÖTK 13.1. Gütersloh: Gütersloher Veralghaus, 2014 (cited as Schreiber, I). —­—­—­. Der zweite Brief an die Thessalonicher. ÖTK 13.2. Gütersloh: Gütersloher Veralghaus, 2017 (cited as Schreiber, II). Schürmann, H., and H. A. Egenolf. The Two Epistles to the Thessalonians. New Testament for Spiritual Reading. New York: Herder and Herder, 1969. Shogren, G. S. 1 & 2 Thessalonians. Zondervan Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2012. Smith, A. “The First Letter to the Thessalonians.” Pages 671–737 in The New Interpreter’s Bible. Vol. 11. Edited by Leander E. Keck. Nashville: Abingdon, 2002. Staab, K. Die Thessalonicherbriefe. RNT. Regensburg: Pustet, 1965. Thomas, R. L. “1–2 Thessalonians.” Pages 227–337 in The Expositor’s Bible Commentary. Vol. 11. Edited by F. E. Gaebelein. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1978. Thurston, B. Reading Colossians, Ephesians, and 2 Thessalonians: A Literary and Theological Commentary. Macon, GA: Smyth & Helwys, 1995. Trilling, W. Der zweite Brief an die Thessalonicher. EKKNT 14. Zurich: Benziger; Neukirchen-­V luyn: Neukirchener Verlag, 1980. Walvoord, J. F. The Thessalonian Epistles. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1967. Wanamaker, C. A. The Epistles to the Thessalonians. NIGTC. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans. 1990. Ward, R. A. Commentary on 1 & 2 Thessalonians. Waco, TX: Word, 1973. Weatherly, J. A. 1 & 2 Thessalonians. College Press NIV Commentary. Joplin, MO: College Press, 1996. Weima, J. A. D. 1–2 Thessalonians. BECNT. Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2014. Whiteley, D. E. H. Thessalonians in the Revised Standard Version. New Clarendon Bible. Oxford: Clarendon, 1969. Williams, D. J. 1 & 2 Thessalonians. NIBCNT 12. Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 1992. Witherington III, B. 1 & 2 Thessalonians: A Socio-­R hetorical Commentary. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2006. Wohlenberg, G. Der erste und zweite Thessalonicherbrief. Leipzig: Deichert, 1909.

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 29

7/12/23 11:28 AM

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 30

7/12/23 11:28 AM

General Bibliography For commentaries on 1 and 2 Thessalonians, see the list above. Aasgaard, R. “Like a Child: Paul’s Rhetorical Uses of Childhood.” Pages 249–77 in The Child in the Bible. Edited by M. J. Bunge, T. E. Fretheim, and Beverly R. Gaventa. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2008. —­—— ­ ­. My Beloved Brothers and Sisters!: Christian Siblingship in Paul. New York: T&T Clark, 2004. Ackroyd, P. R. “‫­—נצח‬εἰς τέλος.” ExpTim 80 (1968–69): 126. Aejmelaeus, L. Wachen vor dem Ende: Die Traditionsgeschichtlichen Wurzeln von 1. Thess 5:1–11 und Luk 21:34–36. SESJ 44. Helsinki: Kirjapaino Raamattutalo, 1985. Agosto, E. “Patronage and Commendation, Imperial and Anti-­Imperial.” Pages 103–23 in Paul and the Roman Imperial Order. Edited by R. A. Horsley. Harrisburg, PA: Trinity Press International, 2004. Alvarez Cineira, D. Die Religionspolitik des Kaisers Claudius und die paulinische Mission. Herders Biblische Studien 19. Freiburg im Breisgau: Herder, 1999. Ascough, R. S. “Redescribing the Thessalonians’ ‘Mission’ in Light of Graeco-­Roman Associations.” NTS 60 (2014): 61–82. —­—­— ­. “The Thessalonian Christian Community as a Professional Voluntary Association.” JBL 119 (2000): 311–28. Askwith, E. H. “ ‘I’ and ‘We’ in the Thessalonian Epistles.” Expositor 8.1 (1911): 149–59. Augustine. City of God. Translated by George E. McCraken et al. 22 vols. LCL. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1957. Aus, R. D. “God’s Plan and God’s Power: Isaiah 66 and the Restraining Factors of 2 Thess 2:6–7.” JBL 96 (1977): 537–53. —­—­—­. “The Liturgical Background of the Necessity and Propriety of Giving Thanks according to 2 Thess 1:3.” JBL 92 (1973): 432–38. —­—­—­. “The Relevance of Isaiah 66:7 to Revelation 12 and 2 Thessalonians 1.” ZNW 67 (1976): 252–68. Bacon, B. W. Introduction to the New Testament. New York: Macmillan, 1900. Bailey, J. A. “Who Wrote II Thessalonians?” NTS 25 (1978–79): 131–45. Balz, H., and G. Schneider, eds. Exegetical Dictionary of the New Testament. 3 vols. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1990. Bammel, E. “Judenverfolgung und Naherwartung: Zur Eschatologie des ersten Thessalonicherbriefs.” ZTK 56 (1959): 294–315. —­—­—­. “Preparation for the Perils of the Last Days: 1 Thessalonians 3:3.” Pages 91–100 in Suffering and Martyrdom in the New Testament: Studies Presented to G. M. Styler by the Cambridge New Testament Seminar. Edited by W. Horbury and B. McNeil. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1981. Barclay, J. M. G. “Conflict in Thessalonica.” CBQ 55 (1993): 512–30. —­—­—­. “ ‘That You May Not Grieve, Like the Rest Who Have No Hope’ (1 Thess 4:13): Death and Early Christian Identity.” Pages 131–53 in Not in the Word Alone: The First Epistle to the Thessalonians. Edited by M. D. Hooker. SMBen 15. Rome: Benedictina, 2003.

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 31

7/12/23 11:28 AM

32

General Bibliography

Barnett, A. E. The New Testament: Its Making and Meaning. New York: Abingdon, 1946. Barr, J. The Semantics of Biblical Language. London: Oxford University Press, 1961. Barrett, C. K. The First Epistle to the Corinthians. BNTC. London: Black, 1971. Barton, S. C. “Eschatology and the Emotions in Early Christianity.” JBL 130 (2011): 571–91. Bash, A. Ambassadors for Christ: An Exploration of Ambassadorial Language in the New Testament. WUNT 2/92. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1997. Bassler, J. “The Enigmatic Sign: 2 Thessalonians 1:5.” CBQ 46 (1984): 496–510. Bauckham, R. “Synoptic Parousia Parables and the Apocalypse.” NTS 23 (1976–77): 162–76. Bauman, R. A. The Crimen Maiestatis in the Roman Republic and Augustan Principate. Johannesburg: Witwatersrand University Press, 1967. —­—­—­. Impietas in Principem. München: Beck, 1974. Baumert, N. “Ὁμειρόμενοι in 1 Thess 2, 8.” Bib 68 (1987): 552–63. Baur, F. C. “Die beiden Briefe an die Thessalonicher.” TJ 14 (1855): 141–67. —­—­—­. Paul: His Life and Works. Translated by A. Menzies. 2 vols. London: Williams & Norgate, 1875–76. Beale, G. K., and B. L. Gladd. Hidden but Now Revealed: A Biblical Theology of Mystery. Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 2014. Beauvery, R. “Πλεονεκτεῖν in I Thess 4, 6a.” Verbum Domini 33 (1955): 273–86. Becker, Eve-­Marie. “Ὡς δι᾽ ἡμῶν in 2 Thess 2.2 als Hinweis auf einen verlorenen Brief.” NTS 55 (2009): 55–72. Becker, J. Paul, Apostle to the Gentiles. Translated by O. C. Dean Jr. Louisville: Westminster John Knox, 1993. Bell, H. I. Jews and Christians in Egypt. London: British Museum, 1924. Benson, G. P. “Note on 1 Thessalonians 1.6.” ExpTim 107 (1996): 143–44. Betz, O. “Der Katechon.” NTS 9 (1962–63): 276–91. —­—­—­. “Die Geburt der Gemeinde durch den Lehrer.” Pages 3–15 in Jesus der Messias Israels: Aufsätze zur biblischen Theologie. WUNT 42. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1987. —­—­—­. “Jesus and Isaiah 53.” Pages 70–87 in Jesus and the Suffering Servant: Isaiah 53 and Christian Origins. Edited by W. H. Bellinger Jr. and W. R. Farmer. Harrisburg, PA: Trinity Press, 1998. —­—­—.­ Jesus und das Danielbuch: Die Menschensohnworte Jesu und die Zukunftserwartung des Paulus (Daniel 7,13–14). Vol. 2. ANTJ 6. Frankfurt: Lang, 1985. Bjerkelund, C. J. Parakalô: Form, Funktion und Sinn der Parakalô-­Sätze in den paulinischen Briefen. Bibliotheca Theologica Norvegica 1. Oslo: Universitetsforlaget, 1967. Blass, F., A. DeBrunner, and R. W. Funk. A Greek Grammar of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1961. Blumenthal, C. “Was Sagt 1 Thess 1.9b–10 über die Adressaten des 1 Thess?” NTS 51 (2005): 96–105. Bockmuehl, M. “1 Thessalonians 2:14–16 and the Church in Jerusalem.” TynBul 52 (2001): 1–31. —­—­—­. Revelation and Mystery in Ancient Judaism and Pauline Christianity. WUNT 2/36. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1990. Boers, H. “The Form-­Critical Study of Paul’s Letters: I Thessalonians as a Case Study.” NTS 22 (1975–76): 140–58. Bornkamm, G. Paul. Translated by D. M. G. Stalker. London: Hodder & Stoughton; New York: Harper & Row, 1971. Botterweck G., H. Ringgren, and H.-­J. Fabry, eds. Theologisches Wörterbuch zum Alten Testament. 9 vols. Stuttgart: Kohlhammer, 1973–2000.

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 32

7/12/23 11:28 AM



General Bibliography 33

Bousset, W. The Antichrist Legend: A Chapter in Christian and Jewish Folklore. Translated by A. H. Keane. London: Hutchinson, 1896. Brassac, A. “Une inscription de Delphes et la chronologie de Saint Paul.” RB 10 (1913): 36–53, 207–17. Breneman, J. E. “True and False Prophecy.” Pages 781–88 in DOTP. Breytenbach, C. “Der Danksagungsbericht des Paulus: Über den Gottesglauben der Thessalonicher (1 Thess 1, 2–10).” Pages 3–24 in Not in the Word Alone: The First Epistle to the Thessalonians. Edited by M. D. Hooker. SMBen 15. Leuven: Peeters, 2003. Brocke, C. vom. Thessaloniki—­Stadt des Kasander und Gemeinde des Paulus: Eine frühe christliche Gemeinde in ihrer heidnischen Umwelt. WUNT 2/125. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2001. Brown, Colin, ed. New International Dictionary of New Testament Theology. 4 vols. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1975–1985. Brown, R. E. The Semitic Background of the Term “Mystery” in the New Testament. Philadelphia: Fortress, 1968. Bruce, F. F. The Acts of the Apostles. NICNT. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1954. —­—­—­. The Acts of the Apostles: The Greek Text with Introduction and Commentary. London: Tyndale,1951. —­—­—­. The Epistles to the Colossians, to Philemon, and to the Ephesians. NICNT. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1984. —­—­—­. “Eschatology in the Apostolic Fathers.” Pages 77–89 in The Heritage of the Early Church: Essays in Honor of G. V. Florovsky. Edited by D. Neiman and M. Schatkin. Orientalia Christiana Analecta 195. Rome: Pontificium Institutum Studiorum Orientalium, 1973. —­—­—­. “Josephus and Daniel.” ASTI 4 (1965): 148–62. —­—­—­. “The Romans through Jewish Eyes.” Pages 3–12 in Paganisme, Judaïsme, Christianisme: Influences et affrontements dans le monde antique. Mélanges offerts à Marcel Simon. Edited by A. Benoit, M. Philonenko, and C. Vogel. Paris: de Boccard, 1978. —­—­—­. Tradition Old and New. Exeter: Paternoster, 1970. Buck, C. H., and G. Taylor. St. Paul: A Study of the Development of His Thought. New York: Scribners’s Sons, 1969. Bultmann, R. Theology of the New Testament. 2 vols. Translated by K. Grobel. London: SCM, 1952–1955. Burke, T. J. Family Matters: A Socio-­Historical Study of Fictive Kinship Metaphors in 1 Thessalonians. LNTS. London: T&T Clark, 2003. —­—­—­. “The Holy Spirit as the Controlling Dynamic in Paul’s Role as Missionary to the Thessalonians.” Pages 142–57 in Paul as Missionary: Identity, Activity, Theology, and Practice. Edited by T. J. Burke and B. S. Rosner. London: T&T Clark, 2011. Burkitt, F. C. Christian Beginnings. London: University of London Press, 1924. Burton, E. D. “The Politarchs.” American Journal of Theology 2 (1898): 598–632. —­—­—­. Syntax of the Moods and Tenses in New Testament Greek. Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1898. Cadbury, H. J. The Book of Acts in History. New York: Harper, 1955. —­—­—­. “The Relative Pronouns in Acts and Elsewhere.” JBL 42 (1923): 150–57. Caird, G. B. The Biblical Language and Imagery of the Bible. Philadelphia: Westminster, 1980. Campenhausen, H. von. Tradition and Life in the Church. Translated by A. V. Littledale. London: Collins, 1968. Caragounis, C. “Kingdom of God and Jesus’ Self-­Understanding.” TynBul 40 (1989): 3–23.

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 33

7/12/23 11:28 AM

34

General Bibliography

Cerfaux, L. The Church in the Theology of St. Paul. Translated by G. Webb and A. Walker. London: Nelson, 1959. Chadwick, H. “1 Thess. 3, σαίνεσθαι.” JTS 1 (1950): 156–58. Chow, J. K. Patronage and Power: A Study of Social Networks in Corinth. JSNTSup 75. Sheffield: Sheffield Academic, 1992. Collins, A. Y. “Composition and Performance in Mark 13.” Pages 539–60 in A Wandering Galilean: Essays in Honor of S. Freyne. Edited by A. F. McKinley, M. Daly-­Denton, B. McGing, and Z. Rodgers. Leiden: Brill, 2009. Collins, R. F. “1 Thessalonians and the Liturgy of the Early Church.” BTB 10 (1980): 51–64. —­—­—­. “Apropos the Integrity of 1 Thessalonians.” ETL 55 (1979): 67–106. —­—­—­. “Paul’s Early Christology.” Pages 253–84 in Studies on the First Letter to the Thessalonians. BETL 66. Leuven: Leuven University Press, 1984. —­—­—­. “The Theology of Paul’s First Letter to the Thessalonians.” LS 6 (1977): 315–37. Congar, Y.  M.-­J. Tradition and Traditions. Translated by M. Naseby and T. Rainborough. London: Burns & Oates, 1966. Conzelmann, H. An Outline of the Theology of the New Testament. London: SCM, 1969. Cosby, M. R. “Hellenistic Formal Reception and Paul’s Use of ΑΠΑΝΤΗΣΙΣ in 1 Thessalonians 4:17.” BBR 4 (1994): 15–34. Cullmann, O. “Der eschatologische Charakter des Missionsauftrags und des apostolischen Selbstbewusstseins bei Paulus.” Pages 305–36 in Vorträge und Aufsätze, 1925–1962. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1966. —­—­—.­ “Kyrios as Designation for the Oral Tradition Concerning Jesus.” SJT 3 (1950): 180–97. —­—­—­. “The Tradition.” Pages 55–99 in The Early Church. Translated by A. J. B. Higgins. London: SCM, 1956. Danker, F. W., W. Bauer, W. F. Arndt, and F. W. Gingrich. Greek-­English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature. 3rd ed. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2000. Davies, J. G. “The Genesis of Belief in an Imminent Parousia.” JTS 14.1 (1963): 104–7. Davies, P. E. “The Macedonian Scene of Paul’s Journeys.” BA 26 (1963): 91–106. Davies, W. D. The Setting of the Sermon on the Mount. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1964. Davies, W. D., and D. C. Allison Jr. Matthew: A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Gospel according to Saint Matthew. 3 vols. ICC. London: T&T Clark, 2004. Day, P. “The Practical Purpose of 2 Thessalonians.” ATR 45 (1963): 203–6. Deidun, T. J. New Covenant Morality in Paul. AnBib 89. Rome: Biblical Institute Press, 1981. Deissmann, A. Light from the Ancient East. Translated by L. R. M. Strachan. London: Hodder & Stoughton, 1927. Denis, A. M. “L’apôtre Paul, prophète messianique des Gentiles.” ETL 33 (1957): 245–318. deSilva, D. A. “Paul, Honor, and Shame.” Pages 26–47 in Paul in the Greco-­Roman World: A Handbook, Volume II. Edited by J. P. Sampley. London: Bloomsbury, 2016. —­—­—­. “ ‘Worthy of His Kingdom’: Honor Discourse and Social Engineering in 1 Thessalonians.” JSNT 19 (1996): 49–79. Dibelius, M. From Tradition to Gospel. New York: Scribner’s Sons, 1935. Dickson, J. P. Mission-­Commitment in Ancient Judaism and in the Pauline Communities: The Shape, Extent and Background of Early Christian Mission. WUNT 2/159. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2003. Dodds, E. R. Pagan and Christian in an Age of Anxiety: Some Aspects of Religious Experience from Marcus Aurelius to Constantine. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1965.

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 34

7/12/23 11:28 AM



General Bibliography 35

Donfried, K. P. “2 Thessalonians and the Church of Thessalonica.” Pages 128–44 in Origins and Method: Toward a New Understanding of Judaism and Christianity; Essays in Honour of John C. Hurd. Edited by B. H. McClean. JSNTSup 86. Sheffield: JSOT Press, 1993. —­—­—­. “The Assembly of the Thessalonians: Reflections on the Ecclesiology of the Earliest Christian Letter.” Pages 139–62 in Paul, Thessalonians, and Early Christianity. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2002. —­—­—­. “The Cults of Thessalonica and the Thessalonian Correspondence.” NTS 31 (1985): 336–56. Repr., pages 21–48 in Paul, Thessalonians and Early Christianity. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2002. —­—­—­. “The Epistolary and Rhetorical Context of 1 Thessalonians 2:1–12.” Pages 31–60 in The Thessalonians Debate: Methodological Discord or Methodological Synthesis? Edited by K. P. Donfried and J. Beutler. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2000. —­—­—­. “The Imperial Cults of Thessalonica and Political Conflict in 1 Thessalonians.” Pages 215–23 in Paul and Empire: Religion and Power in Roman Imperial Society. Edited by R. A. Horsley. Harrisburg, PA: Trinity Press International, 1997. —­—­—­. “Issues of Authorship in the Pauline Corpus: Rethinking the Relationship between 1 and 2 Thessalonians.” Pages 81–113 in 2 Thessalonians and Pauline Eschatology. FS for P. Porkorný. Edited by C. Tuckett. Leuven: Peeters, 2013. —­—­—­. “Was Timothy in Athens? Some Exegetical Reflections on 1 Thess. 3:1–3.” Pages 209–19 in Paul, Thessalonica, and Early Christianity. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2002. Dunn, J. D. G. Romans 1–8. WBC 38A. Waco, TX: Word, 1988. Dupont, J. “ ‘Avec le Seigneur’ à la Parousie.” Pages 39–79 in ΣΥΝ ΧΡΙΣΤΩΙ: L’union avec le Christ suivant Saint Paul. Paris: Desclée de Brouwer, 1952. Eckart, K. G. “Der zweite echte Brief des Apostels Paulus an die Thessalonicher.” ZTK 58 (1961): 30–44. Edson, C. “Cults of Thessalonica (Macedonia III).” HTR 41.3 (1948): 153–204. —­—­—­. “A Dedication of Philip V (Macedonia I).” HSCP 51 (1940): 125–26. —­—­—­. “State Cults of Thessalonica.” HSCP 51 (1940): 127–36. Eisler, R. The Messiah Jesus and John the Baptist. Edited by A. H. Krappe. London: Methuen, 1931. Elgvin, T. “ ‘To Master His Own Vessel’: 1 Thess 4.4 in Light of New Qumran Evidence.” NTS 43 (1997): 604–19. Ellingworth, P., and E. A. Nida. A Translator’s Handbook on Paul’s Letters to the Thessalonians. Stuttgart: United Bible Societies, 1975. Ellis, E. E. “Paul and His Co-­Workers.” NTS 17.4 (1971): 437–52. —­—­—.­ Prophecy and Hermeneutic in Early Christianity: New Testament Essays. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1978. Engberg-­Pedersen, T. Paul and the Stoics. Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 2000. Erhardt, A. The Acts of the Apostles. Manchester: Manchester University Press, 1969. Ernst, J. Die eschatologischen Gegenspieler in den Schriften des Neuen Testaments. BU 3. Regensburg: Pustet, 1967. Evans, C. A. “Prophet, Paul as.” Pages 762–65 in DPL. Evans, R. M. “Eschatology and Ethics: A Study of Thessalonica and Paul’s Letters to the Thessalonians.” PhD diss., University of Basel. Princeton, NJ: McMahon, 1968. Faulkenberry Miller, J. B. “Infants and Orphans in 1 Thessalonians: A Discussion of ἀποφανίζω and the Text-­Critical Problem in 1 Thess 2:7.” Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the Society of Biblical Literature. Boston, MA. November 1999. Faw, C. E. “On the Writing of First Thessalonians.” JBL 71 (1952): 217–32. Fee, G. D. God’s Empowering Presence: The Holy Spirit in the Letters of Paul. Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 1994.

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 35

7/12/23 11:28 AM

36

General Bibliography

Fitzmyer, J. A. A Wandering Aramaean: Collected Aramean Essays. SBLMS 25. Missoula, MT: Scholars Press, 1979. Friedrich, G. “Ein Tauflied hellenistischer Judenchristen: 1 Thess. 1,9f.” TZ 21 (1965): 502–16. Fuller, R. H. A Critical Introduction to the New Testament. London: Duckworth, 1966. Funk, R. W. “The Apostolic Parousia: Form and Significance.” Pages 249–68 in Christian History and Interpretation: Studies Presented to John Knox. Edited by W. R. Farmer, C. F. D. Moule, and R. R. Niebuhr. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1967. Gamble Jr., H. The Textual History of the Letter to the Romans. SD 42. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1977. Gaventa, B. R. “Apostles as Babes and Nurses in 1 Thessalonians 2:7.” Pages 193–207 in Faith and History in the New Testament: Essays in Honor of Paul W. Meyer. Edited by J. T. Carroll, C. H. Cosgrove, and E. E. Johnson. Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1991. —­—­—­. Our Mother Saint Paul. Louisville: Westminster John Knox, 2007. Gehring, R. W. Hausgemeinde und Mission: Die Bedeutung antiker Häuser und Hausgemeinschaften—­von Jesus bis Paulus. Bibelwissenschaftliche Monographien 9. Giessen: Brunnen, 2000. Gerber, C. Paulus und seine “Kinder.” Studien zur Beziehungsmetaphorik der paulinischen Briefe. BZNW 136. Berlin: de Gruyter, 2005. Gerhardsson, B. Memory and Manuscript: Oral Tradition and Written Transmission in Rabbinic Judaism and Early Christianity. Translated by E. J. Sharpe. ASNU 22. Copenhagen: Munksgaard, 1964. Gese, H. “Die Sühne.” Pages 85–106 in Zur biblischen Theologie. München: Kaiser, 1977. Geyer, F. Makedonien bis zur Thronbesteigung Philipps II. Beihefte der historischen Zeitschrift 19. München: Oldenbourg, 1930. Geyer, F., and O. Hoffmann. “Makedonia.” Pages 638–771 in PW 14.1.638–771. Giblin, G. H. The Threat to Faith. AnBib 31. Rome: Pontifical Biblical Institute, 1967. Gildersleeve, B. L. “The Encroachments of μή on οὐ in later Greek.” AJP 1 (1880): 45–57. Gilliard, F. D. “The Problem of the Antisemitic Comma between 1 Thessalonians 2:14 and 15.” NTS 35 (1989): 481–502. —­—­—­. “Paul and the Killing of the Prophets in 1 Thess. 2:15.” NovT 26 (1994): 259–70. Gillman, J. “Paul’s ΕΙΣΟΔΟΣ: The Proclaimed and the Proclaimer (1 Thess 2,8).” Pages 62–70 in The Thessalonian Correspondence. Edited by R. F. Collins. BETL 87. Leuven: Leuven University Press, 1990. Gnilka, J. Der Philipperbrief. HThKNT. Freiburg im Breisgau: Herder, 1980. Goguel, M. Introduction au Nouveau Testament. Vol 4. Paris: Leroux, 1925. Gregson, R. G. “A Solution to the Problems of the Thessalonian Epistles.” EvQ 38 (1966): 76–80. Grotius, H. Annotationes in Novum Testamentum. Vols. 1–2. Amsterdam: Blaeu, 1641, 1646. Gundry, R. H. “A Brief Note on ‘Hellenistic Formal Receptions and Paul’s Use of ΑΠΑΝΤΗΣΙΣ in 1 Thessalonians 4:17.’ ” BBR 6 (1996): 39–41. —­—­—­. “The Hellenization of Dominical Tradition and Christianization of Jewish Tradition in the Eschatology of 1–2 Thessalonians.” NTS 33 (1978): 161–78. Gundry Volf, J. M. Paul and Perseverance: Staying In and Falling Away. Louisville: Westminster John Knox, 1990. Gupta, N. K. Paul and the Language of Faith. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2020. Hadorn, W. “Die Abfassung der Thessalonicherbriefe auf der dritten Missionsreise und der Kanon des Marcion.” ZNW 19 (1919–20): 67–72. —­—­—­. Die Abfassung der Thessalonicherbriefe in der Zeit der dritten Missionsreise des Paulus. BFCT 24. Gütersloh: Bertelsmann, 1919.

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 36

7/12/23 11:28 AM



General Bibliography 37

Hagner, D. A. “Paul’s Quarrel with Judaism.” Pages 128–50 in Anti-­Semitism and Early Christianity: Issues of Polemic and Faith. Edited by C. A. Evans and D. A. Hagner. Minneapolis: Fortress, 1993. Hammond, N. G. L. A History of Macedonia. Vols. 1–2. Oxford: Clarendon, 1972–79. —­—­—­. “The Western Part of the Via Egnatia.” JRS 64 (1974): 185–94. Hannah, D. D. “The Angelic Restrainer of 2 Thessalonians 2.6–7.” Pages 28–45 in Calling Time: Religion and Change at the Turn of the Millennium. Edited by M. Percy. Sheffield: Sheffield Academic, 2000. —­—­—­. Michael and Christ: Michael Traditions and Angel Christology in Early Christianity. WUNT 2/109. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1999. Hanson, R. P. C. The Mission and Expansion of Christianity in the First Three Centuries. Vols. 1–2. Translated by J. Moffatt. London: Williams & Norgate, 1908. —­—­—­. “Probabilia über die Adresse und den Verfasser des Hebräerbriefs.” ZNW 1 (1900): 16–41. —­—­—­. Tradition in the Early Church. London: SCM, 1962. Harnack, A. “Das Problem des zweiten Thessalonicherbriefs.” Sitzungsberichte der Prussischen Akademie der Wissenschaften, Philosophisch-­historische Klasse 31 (1910): 560–78. Harrison, J. R. Paul and the Imperial Authorities at Thessalonica and Rome. WUNT 273. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2011. —­—­—­. “Paul and the Imperial Gospel at Thessaloniki.” JSNT 25 (2002): 71–96. Hartman, L. Prophecy Interpreted: The Formation of Some Jewish Apocalyptic Texts and of the Eschatological Discourse Mark 13par. ConBNT 1. Lund: Gleerup, 1966. Hawthorne, G. F., and R. P. Martin. Philippians. Rev. ed. WBC. Nashville: Nelson, 2004. Heil, J. P. “Those Now ‘Asleep’ (Not Dead) Must be ‘Awakened’ for the Day of the Lord in 1 Thess 5.9–10.” NTS 46 (2000): 464–71. Heininger, B. “Die Inkulturation der Nächstenliebe: Zur Semantik der ‘Bruderliebe’ im 1 Thessalonicherbrief.” Pages 65–88 in Die Inkulturation des Christentums. WUNT 255. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2010. Hemer, C. J. “Alexandria Troas.” TynBul 26 (1975): 79–112. —­—­—­. The Book of Acts in the Setting of Hellenistic History. Edited by C. H. Gempf. WUNT 49. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1989. Hendrix, H. L. “Beyond ‘the Imperial Cult’ and ‘Cults of Magistrates.’ ” Pages 301–8 in SBL Seminar Papers. Edited by K. H. Richards. SBLSP 31. Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1986. —­—­—­. “Thessalonicans Honor Romans.” ThD diss., Harvard University, 1984. Hengel, M. Acts and the History of Earliest Christianity. Translated by J. Bowden. London: SCM, 1979. —­—­—­. The Atonement: The Origin of the Doctrine in the New Testament. London: SCM, 1981. —­—­—­. Pre- ­Christian Paul. London: SCM, 1991. —­—­—­. “Sit at My Right Hand!” Pages 163–72 in Studies in Early Christology. Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1995. Hengel, M., and A. M. Schwemer. Paul between Damascus and Antioch: The Unknown Years. Translated by John Bowden. Louisville: Westminster John Knox, 1997. Henneken, B. Verkündigung und Prophetie im ersten Thessalonicherbrief: Ein Beitrag zur Theologie des Wortes Gottes. SBS 29. Stuttgart: Katholisches Bibelwerk, 1969. Hilgenfeld, A. “Die beiden Briefe an die Thessalonicher, nach Inhalt und Ursprung.” ZWT 5 (1862): 225–64. Hill, D. New Testament Prophecy. London: Marshall, Morgan & Scott, 1979. Hock, R. F. “God’s Will at Thessalonica and Greco-­Roman Asceticism.” Pages 159–70 in Asceticism and the New Testament. Edited by L. E. Vaage and V. L. Wimbush. New York: Routledge, 1999.

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 37

7/12/23 11:28 AM

38

General Bibliography

—­—­—­. “Paul’s Tentmaking and the Problem of His Social Class.” JBL 97 (1978): 555–64. —­—­—­. The Social Context of Paul’s Ministry: Tentmaking and Apostleship. Philadelphia: Fortress, 1980. —­—­—­. “The Workshop as a Social Setting for Paul’s Missionary Preaching.” CBQ 41 (1979): 438–50. Hofius, O. “Sühne und Versöhnung.” Pages 33–49 in Paulusstudien. WUNT 51. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1983. Holmberg, B. Paul and Power: The Structure of Authority in the Primitive Church as Reflected in the Pauline Epistles. ConBNT 11. Lund: Gleerup, 1978. Holtz, T. “On the Background of 1 Thessalonians 2:1–12.” Pages 69–80 in The Thessalonians Debate: Methodological Discord or Methodological Synthesis? Edited by K. P. Donfried and J. Beutler. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2000. Hooker, M. “Concluding Reflections: ‘Our Gospel Came to You, Not in Word Alone, but in Power Also’ (1 Thess 1:5).” Pages 155–66 in Not in the Word Alone: The First Epistle to the Thessalonians. SMBen 15. Rome: Benedictina, 2003. Horbury, W. “1 Thessalonians ii.3 as Rebutting the Charge of False Prophecy.” JTS 33 (1982): 492–508. Horn, F. W. Das Angeld des Geistes: Studien zur paulinischen Pneumatologie. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1992. Horsley, R. A. “1 Corinthians: A Case Study of Paul’s Assembly as an Alternative Society.” Pages 242–52 in Paul and Empire: Religion and Power in Roman Imperial Society. Edited by R. A. Horsley. Harrisburg, PA: Trinity Press International, 1997. —­—­—­. “Building an Alternative Society: Introduction.” Pages 206–14 in Paul and Empire: Religion and Power in Roman Imperial Society. Edited by R. A. Horsley. Harrisburg, PA: Trinity Press International, 1997. —­—­—­. “General Introduction.” Pages 1–8 in Paul and Empire: Religion and Power in Roman Imperial Society. Edited by R. A. Horsley. Harrisburg, PA: Trinity Press International, 1997. Horsley, R. A., and N. A. Silberman. The Message and the Kingdom: How Jesus and Paul Ignited a Revolution and Transformed the Ancient World. Minneapolis: Fortress, 1997. Hort, F. J. A. The Christian Ecclesia. London: Macmillan, 1897. —­—­—­. Life and Letters of Fenton John Anthony Hort. Edited by Arthur F. Hort. London: Macmillan, 1896. Hubbard, M. V. “Enemy Love in Paul: Probing the Engberg-­Pedersen and Thorsteinsson Thesis.” JSPL 6 (2016): 115–35. Hughes, F. W. “The Rhetoric of 1 Thessalonians.” Pages 94–116 in The Thessalonian Correspondence. BETL 87. Edited by R. J. Collins. Leuven: Leuven University Press, 1990. —­—­— ­. “The Rhetoric of Letters.” Pages 194–240 in The Thessalonians Debate: Methodological Discord or Methodological Synthesis? Edited by K. P. Donfried and J. Beutler. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2000. Hunter, A. M. Paul and His Predecessors. Philadelphia: Westminster, 1961. Hurd, J. C. “Concerning the Structure of 1 Thessalonians.” Pages 47–83 in The Earlier Letters of Paul—­and Other Studies. New York: Lang, 1998. —­—­—­. “Paul Ahead of His Time.” Pages 21–36 in Anti-­Judaism in Early Christianity: Paul and the Gospels. Edited by P. Richardson. Vol 1. Waterloo, ON: Wilfrid Laurier University Press, 1986. Hyldahl, N. “Auferstehung Christi—­Auferstehung der Toten (1 Thess. 4,13–18).” Pages 119–35 in Die Paulinsche Literatur und Theologie. Edited by S. Pedersen. Teologiske Studien 7. Aarhus: Forlaget Aros, 1980.

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 38

7/12/23 11:28 AM



General Bibliography 39

Jensen, J. “Does Porneia Mean Fornication?” NovT 20 (1978): 161–84. Jeremias, J. “Paarweise Sendung im Neuen Testament.” Pages 132–39 in Abba: Studien zur neutestamentlichen Theologie und Zeitgeschichte. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1966. —­—­—­. Unknown Sayings of Jesus. Translated by R. H. Fuller. London: SPCK, 1964. Jervis, L. A. The Purpose of Romans: A Comparative Letter Structure Investigation. JSNTSup 55. Sheffield: Sheffield Academic, 1992. Jewett, R. “The Agitators and the Galatian Congregation.” NTS 17 (1970–71): 198–212. —­—­—­. Dating Paul’s Life. London: SCM, 1979. —­—­—.­ Paul’s Anthropological Terms: A Study of their Use in Conflict Settings. AGJU 10. Leiden: Brill, 1971. —­—­— ­. “The Rhetoric of Letters.” Pages 194–240 in The Thessalonians Debate: Methodological Discord or Methodological Synthesis? Edited by K. P. Donfried and J. Beutler. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2000. —­—­—­. Romans: A Commentary. Hermeneia. Minneapolis: Fortress, 2007. —­—­— ­. The Thessalonian Correspondence: Pauline Rhetoric and Millenarian Piety. Foundations and Facets. Philadelphia: Fortress, 1986. Johanson, B. C. “1 Thessalonians 2:15–16: Prophetic Woe-­Oracle with ἔφθασεν as Proleptic Aorist.” Pages 519–34 in Texts and Contexts: Biblical Texts in Their Textual and Situational Contexts, Essays in Honor of Lars Hartman. Edited by T. Fornberg and D. Hellholm. Oslo: Scandinavian University Press, 1995. —­—­—.­ To All the Brethren: A Text-­Linguistic and Rhetorical Approach to 1 Thessalonians. ConBNT 16. Stockholm: Almqvist & Wiksell, 1987. Josephus. Translated by Henry St. J. Thackeray et al. 10 vols. LCL. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1926–1965. Judge, E. A. “The Decrees of Caesar at Thessalonica.” RTR 30 (1971): 1–7. —­—­—.­ The Social Pattern of the Christian Groups in the First Century. London: Tyndale, 1960. Judge, E. A., and Thomas, G. S. R. “The Origin of the Church at Rome: A New Solution.” RTR 25 (1966): 81–94. Käsemann, E. “ ‘The Righteousness of God’ in Paul.” Pages 168–82 in New Testament Questions of Today. Translated by W. J. Montague. Philadelphia: Fortress, 1969. Katz, P. “Ἐν πυρὶ φλογός.” ZNW 46 (1953): 133–38. Kaye, B. N. “Eschatology and Ethics in 1 and 2 Thessalonians.” NovT 17 (1975): 47–57. Keener, C. S. Acts: An Exegetical Commentary, Vol. 2: 3:1–14:28. Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2013. —­—­—­. Acts: An Exegetical Commentary, Vol. 3: 15:1–23:35. Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2014. Kelley, J. N. D. The Epistles of Peter and of Jude. BNTC. Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 1969. Kemmler, D. W. Faith and Human Reason: A Study of Paul’s Method of Preaching as Illustrated by 1–2 Thessalonians and Acts 17, 2–4. NovTSup 40. Leiden: Brill, 1975. Kern, F. H. “Über 2 Thess 2,1–12: Nebst Andeutungen über den Ursprung des 2. Briefs an die Thessalonicher.” Tübinger Zeitschrift für Theologie 2 (1839): 145–224. Kern, P. K. Rhetoric and Galatians: Assessing an Approach to Paul’s Epistle. SNTSMS 101. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1998. Kim, S. “2 Corinthians 5:11–21 and the Origin of Paul’s Concept of Reconciliation.” NovT 39 (1997): 360–84. Reprint in pages 214–38 in PNP. —­—­—­. “ ‘Beloved, Never Avenge Yourselves, but Leave It to the Wrath of God’ (Rom 12:19; cf. 2 Thess 1:5–7): The Apostle Paul and lex talionis.” Pages 313–21 in PGTO. —­—­—.­ Christ and Caesar: The Gospel and the Empire in the Writings of Paul and Luke. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2008.

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 39

7/12/23 11:28 AM

40

General Bibliography

—­—­—­. “Christ, the Image of God and the Last Adam,” PNP, 165–213. —­—­—­. “The Gospel That Paul Preached to the Thessalonians: Continuity and Unity of Paul’s Gospel in 1 Thessalonians and in His Later Epistles.” Pages 67–131 in PGTO. —­—­—­. “The Idleness of Some Thessalonians.” Pages 189–91 in PGTO. —­—­—­. “Imitatio Christi (1 Corinthians 11:1): How Paul Imitates Jesus Christ in Dealing with Idol Food (1 Corinthians 8–10).” BBR 13 (2003): 193–226. Reprint in pages 323–53 in PGTO. —­—­—­. “Is Paul Preaching a Counter-­I mperial Gospel in 1 Thessalonians?” Pages 217–22 in PGTO. —­—­—­. “Jesus’ Ransom Saying (Mark 10:45//Matt 20:28) and Eucharistic Saying (Mark 14:21–25 and Parr.) Echoed in 1 Thessalonians.” Pages in 151–70 in PGTO. —­—­—­. “Jesus, Sayings of.” Pages 474–92 in DPL. Reprint as “The Jesus Tradition in Paul” in pages 259–97 in PNP. —­—­—­. “Jesus’ Son of Man Sayings as a Basis for Paul’s Gospel of Jesus the Son of God (1 Thess 1:9–10 and Rom 1:3–4).” Pages 133–49 in PGTO. —­—­—­. “Jesus the Son of God as the Gospel (1 Thess 1:9–10 and Rom 1:3–4).” Pages 117–41 in Earliest Christian History: History, Literature, and Theology: Essays from the Tyndale Fellowship in Honor of Martin Hengel. WUNT 2/320. Edited by M. F. Bird and J. Maston. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2012. Reprint in pages 45–66 in PGTO. —­—­—­. “The Jesus Tradition in 1 Thess 4:13–5:11.” NTS 48 (2002): 225–42. Reprint in pages 170–88 in PGTO. —­—­—­. Justification and God’s Kingdom. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2018. —­—­—­. “Justification by Grace and through Faith in 1 Thessalonians.” Pages 85–100 in PNP. —­—­—­. “The ‘Mystery’ of Rom 11:25–26 Once More.” NTS 43 (1997): 412–29. Reprint in pages 239–57 in PNP. —­—­—­. The Origin of Paul’s Gospel. WUNT 2/4. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1981; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1982. 2nd ed., Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1984. —­—­—­. Paul and the New Perspective: Second Thoughts on the Origin of Paul’s Gospel. WUNT 140. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans; 2002. (abbreviated as PNP) —­—­—­. “Paul and the Roman Empire.” Pages in 277–308 in God and the Faithfulness of Paul: A Critical Examination of the Pauline Theology of N. T. Wright. Edited by C. Heilig, J. T. Hewitt, and M. F. Bird. WUNT 2/413. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2016. Reprint in pages 223–51 in PGTO. —­—­—­. “Paul and Violence.” ExAud 34 (2018): 67–89. Reprint in pages 399–421 in PGTO. —­—­—­. “Paul as an Eschatological Herald.” Pages 9–24 in Paul as Missionary: Identity, Activity, Theology, and Practice. Edited by T. J. Burke and B. S. Rosner. London: T&T Clark, 2011. Reprint in pages 354–71 in PGTO. —­—­—­. “Paul’s Common Paraenesis (1 Thess. 4–5; Phil. 2–4; and Rom. 12–13): The Correspondence between Romans 1:18–32 and 12:1–2, and the Unity of Romans 12–13.” TynBul 62 (2011): 109–39. Reprint in pages 253–77 in PGTO. —­—­—­. “Paul’s Doctrine of Justification in 2 Thessalonians 1–2.” Bib 102 (2021): 78–96. A revised version in pages 279–95 in PGTO. —­—­—­. “Paul’s Entry (εἴσοδος) and the Thessalonians’ Faith (1 Thessalonians 1–3).” NTS 51 (2005): 519–42. Reprint as “The Structure and Function of 1 Thessalonians 1–3, and the Occasion and Purpose of 1 Thessalonians” in pages 9–44 in PGTO. —­—­—­. Paul’s Gospel for the Thessalonians and Others: Essays on 1 & 2 Thessalonians and Other Pauline Epistles. WUNT 481. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2022. (abbreviated as PGTO)

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 40

7/12/23 11:28 AM



General Bibliography 41

—­—­—­. “The Restraining Thing (τὸ κατέχον) and the Restraining Person (ὁ κατέχων) of the Lawless Man.” Pages 297–321 in PGTO. —­—­—­. The “Son of Man” as the Son of God. WUNT 30. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1983; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1985. —­—­—­. “The Structure and Function of 1 Thessalonians 1–3.” Pages 170–88 in History and Exegesis: New Testament Essays in Honor of Dr. E. Earle Ellis on His 80th Birthday. Edited by Sang-­Won Aaron Son. New York: T&T Clark, 2006. Reprint in pages 9–44 in PGTO. —­—­—­. “The Thessalonian Church as Paul’s ‘Hope or Joy or Crown of Boasting’ (1 Thess 2:19–20): Judgment according to Works and Reward for Good Deeds, or the Structure of Paul’s Doctrine of Justification.” Pages 193–215 in PGTO. Klauck, H.-­J. “Die Bruderliebe bei Plutarch und im vierten Makkabäerbuch.” Pages 83–98 in Alte Welt und Neue Glaube. NTOA 29. Freiburg im Breisgau: Herder, 1994. Kloppenborg, J. S. “φιλαδελφία, θεοδίδακτος, and the Dioscuri: Rhetorical Engagement in 1 Thessalonians.” NTS 39 (1993): 265–89. Knox, A. D. “τὸ μηδένα σαίνεσθαι ἐν ταῖς θλίψεσιν ταύταις (1 Thess. iii 3).” JTS 25 (1924): 290–91. Knox, J. “A Conjecture as to the Original Status of II Corinthians and II Thessalonians in the Pauline Corpus.” JBL 55 (1936): 145–53. Koester, H. “1 Thessalonians—­E xperiment in Christian Writing.” Pages 33–44 in Continuity and Discontinuity in Church History: Essays Presented to G. H. Williams. Edited by F. F. Church and T. George. Studies in the History of Christian Thought 19. Leiden: Brill, 1979. —­—­—­. “Imperial Ideology and Paul’s Eschatology in 1 Thessalonians.” Pages 158–66 in Paul and Empire: Religion and Power in Roman Imperial Society. Edited by R. A. Horsley. Harrisburg, PA: Trinity Press International, 1997. Konradt, M. “Εἰδέναι ἕκαστον ὑμῶν τὸ ἑαυτοῦ σκεῦος κτᾶσθαι . . . : Zu Paulus’ sexuelethischer Weisung in 1 Thess 4,4f.” ZNW 92 (2001): 128–35. —­—­—­. Gericht und Gemeinde: Eine Studie zur Bedeutung und Funktion von Gerichtsaussagen im Rahmen der paulinischen Ekklesiologie und Ethik im 1 Thess und 1 Kor. BZNW 117. Berlin: de Gruyter, 2003. Konstant, D., and I. Ramell. “The Syntax of ἐν Χριστῷ in 1 Thessalonians 4:16.” JBL 126 (2007): 579–93. Kooten, G. H. van. “Ἐκκλησία τοῦ θεοῦ: The ‘Church of God’ and the Civic Assemblies (ἐκκλησία) of the Greek Cities in the Roman Empire: A Response to Paul Trebilco and Richard A. Horsley.” NTS 58 (2012): 522–48. Korner, R. J. The Origin and Meaning of Ekkle¯sia in the Early Jesus Movement. AJEC 98. Leiden: Brill, 2017. Kramer, W. Christ, Lord, Son of God. Naperville, IL: Allenson, 1966. Krentz, E. “1 Thessalonians: Rhetorical Flourishes and Formal Constraints.” Pages 287–318 in The Thessalonians Debate: Methodological Discord or Methodological Synthesis? Edited by K. P. Donfried and J. Beutler. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2000. Kuhn, H.-­W. “Die Bedeutung der Qumrantexte für das Versta¨ndnis des Ersten Thessalonicherbriefes: Vorstellung des Münchener Projekts Qumran und das Neue Testament.” Pages 339–53 in The Madrid Qumran Congress: Proceedings of the International Congress on the Dead Sea Scrolls, Madrid, 18–21 March 1991. Edited by J. T. Barrera and L. V. Montaner. STDJ 11. Leiden: Brill, 1992. Kümmel, W. G. “Das literarische und geschichtliche Problem des ersten Thessalonicherbriefes.” Pages 213–27 in Neotestamentica und Patristica: Eine Freundesgabe Herrn Professor Dr. Oscar Cullmann zu seinem 60. Geburtstag überreicht. Edited by W. C. van Unnik. NovTSup 6. Leiden: Brill, 1962.

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 41

7/12/23 11:28 AM

42

General Bibliography

—­—— ­ ­. Einleitung in das Neue Testament. Heidelberg: Quelle und Meyer, 1983. —­—­—.­ Introduction to the New Testament. Translated by A. J. Mattill. London: SCM, 1965. Lake, K. The Earlier Epistles of St. Paul. London: Rivington, 1914. Lambrecht, J. “Loving God and Steadfastly Awaiting Christ (2 Thessalonians 3,5).” ETL 76 (2000): 435–41. —­—­—­. “Thanksgivings in 1 Thessalonians 1–3.” Pages 135–62 in The Thessalonians Debate. Edited by K. P. Donfried and J. Beutler. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2000. Lamp, J. S. “Is Paul Anti-­Jewish? Testament of Levi 6 in the Interpretation of 1 Thessalonians 2:13–16.” CBQ 65 (2003): 408–27. Lang, F. Die Briefe an die Korinther. NTD. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1986. Laourdas, B., and C. Makaronas, eds. Ancient Macedonia. Thessaloniki: Institute for Balkan Studies, 1970. Larsen, J. A. O. Greek Federal States. Oxford: Clarendon, 1968. —­—­—­. “Roman Greece.” Pages 259–498 in An Economic Survey of Ancient Rome. Vol. 4. Edited by T. Frank. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1938. Laughton, Eric. “Subconscious Repetition and Textual Criticism.” Classical Philology 45.2 (1950): 73–83. Lautenschlager, M. “εἴτε γρηγορῶμεν εἴτε καθεύδωμεν: Zum Verhältnis von Heiligung und Heil in 1 Thess 5,10.” ZNW 81 (1990): 39–59. Levison, M., A. Q. Morton, and W. C. Wake. “On Certain Statistical Features of the Pauline Epistles.” Philosophical Journal 3 (1966): 129–48. Lieu, J. M. “Do God-­Fearers Make Good Christians?” Pages 329–45 in Crossing the Boundaries: Essays in Biblical Interpretation in Honour of Michael Goulder. Edited by S. E. Porter, P. Joyce, and D. E. Orton. BibInt 8. Leiden: Brill, 1994. Lightfoot, J. B. “The Church of Thessalonica.” Pages 251–69 in Biblical Essays. London: Macmillan, 1893. —­—­—­. “The Churches of Macedonia.” Pages 235–50 in Biblical Essays. London: Macmillan, 1893. —­—­—.­ Saint Paul’s Epistles to the Colossians and to Philemon. London: Macmillan, 1904. —­—­—­. Saint Paul’s Epistle to the Philippians. London: Macmillan, 1927. Lincoln, A. T. Ephesians. WBC 42. Dallas: Word, 1990. Lindemann, A. “Zum Abfassungszweck des Zweiten Thessalonicherbriefes.” ZNW 68 (1977): 35–47. Lipsius, R. A. “Über Zweck und Veranlassung des ersten Thessalonicherbriefs.” TSK 27 (1854): 903–34. Lohfink, G. Die Himmelfahrt Jesu: Untersuchungen zu den Himmelfahrts-­und Erhöhungstexten bei Lukas. SANT 2. Munich: Kosel, 1971. —­—­—.­ Wie hat Jesus Gemeinde gewollt? Freiburg im Breisgau: Herder, 1982. Lohmeyer, E. “Probleme paulinischer Theologie. I: Briefliche Grussüberschriften.” ZNW 26 (1927): 158–73. Lohse, E. Die Briefe an die Kolosser und an Philemon. KEK 9.2. Göttingen: Vandehhoeck & Ruprecht, 1977. Luckensmeyer, D. The Eschatology of First Thessalonians. NTOA 71. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2009. Luckensmeyer, D., and N. Neil. “Reading First Thessalonians as a Consolatory Letter in Light of Seneca and Ancient Handbooks on Letter-­Writing.” NTS 62 (2016): 31–48. Lüdemann, G. Die gröbste Fälschung des Neuen Testaments: Der zweite Thessalonischerbrief. Hannover: zu Klampen Verlag, 2010. —­—­—­. Paul, Apostle to the Gentiles: Studies in Chronology. Translated by F. S. Jones. Philadelphia: Fortress, 1984.

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 42

7/12/23 11:28 AM



General Bibliography 43

—­—­—­. Paulus, der Heidenapostel. Band 1: Studien zur Chronologie. FRLANT 123. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1980. Lütgert, W. Freiheitspredigt und Schwarmgeister in Korinth. BFCT 12.3. Gütersloh: Bertelsmann, 1908. —­—­—­. Gesetz und Geist: Eine Untersuchung zur Vorgeschichte des Galaterbriefs. BFCT 22.6. Gütersloh: Bertelsmann, 1919. —­—­—­. Die Vollkommenen im Philipperbrief und die Enthusiasten in Thessalonich. BFCT 13.6. Gütersloh: Bertelsmann, 1909. Luz, U. Das Geschichtsverständnis des Paulus. BEvT 49. München: Evangelischer Verlag, 1968. Lyons, G. Pauline Autobiography: Toward a New Understanding. SBLDS 73. Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1985. MacMullen, R. Christianizing the Roman Empire (AD 100–400). New Haven: Yale University Press, 1984. —­—­—­. Paganism in the Roman Empire. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1981. Malherbe, A. J. Ancient Epistolary Theorists. SBLSBS 12. Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1988. —­—­—­. “Exhortation in First Thessalonians.” NovT 25 (1983): 238–56. —­—­—­. “ ‘Gentle as a Nurse’: The Stoic Background to 1 Thess. II.” NovT 12 (1970): 203–17. —­—­—­. Moral Exhortation: A Greco-­Roman Sourcebook. LEC 4. Philadelphia: Westminster, 1986. —­—­— ­. Paul and the Thessalonians: The Philosophical Tradition of Pastoral Care. Philadelphia: Fortress, 1987. Manson, T. W. “The Letters to the Thessalonians.” BJRL 35 (1952–53): 428–47. Repr., pages 259–78 in Studies in the Gospels and Epistles. Edited by M. Black. Manchester: Manchester University Press, 1962. Martin, R. P. New Testament Foundations. 2 vols. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1975–78. —­—­—­. Worship in the Early Church. London: Marshall, Morgan & Scott, 1964. Martyn, J. L. Galatians. AB 33A. New York: Doubleday, 1997. Marxsen, W. Introduction to the New Testament. Translated by G. Buswell. Oxford: Blackwell, 1968. März, C.-­P. “Das Gleichnis vom Dieb: Überlegungen zur Verbindung von Lk 12,39 par Mt 24,43 und 1 Thess 5,2.4.” Pages 633–48 in The Four Gospels 1992: Festschrift Frans Neirynck. Edited by F. van Segbroeck et al. Leuven: Leuven University Press, 1992. McNicol, A. J. Jesus’ Directions for the Future. Macon, GA: Mercer University Press, 1996. Mearns, C. L. “Early Eschatological Development in Paul: The Evidence of I and II Thessalonians.” NTS 27 (1981): 137–57. Meeks, W. A. The First Urban Christians: The Social World of the Apostle Paul. 2nd ed. New Haven: Yale University Press, 2003. —­—­—­. “Social Functions of Apocalyptic Language in Pauline Christianity.” Pages 687–705 in Apocalypticism in the Mediterranean World. Edited by D. Hellholm. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1983. Menken, M. J. J. “The Structure of 2 Thessalonians.” Pages 373–82 in The Thessalonian Correspondence. Edited by R. F. Collins. BETL 87. Louvain: Leuven University Press, 1990. Metzger, B. M. A Textual Commentary on the Greek New Testament. 2nd ed. Stuttgart: Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft, 1994. Metzger, P. Katechon: II Thess 2,1–12 im Horizont apokalyptischen Denkens. BZNW 135. Berlin: de Gruyter, 2005. Michaelis, W. Die Gefangenschaft des Paulus in Ephesus und das Itinerar des Timotheus. NTF 1.3. Gütersloh: Bertelsmann, 1925. —­—­—­. “Der zweite Thessalonicherbrief kein Philipperbrief.” TZ 1 (1945): 282–86.

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 43

7/12/23 11:28 AM

44

General Bibliography

Mitchell, M. M. “New Testament Envoys in the Context of Greco-­Roman Diplomatic and Epistolary Convention: The Example of Timothy and Titus.” JBL 111.4 (1992): 641–62. —­—­—­. Paul and the Rhetoric of Reconciliation. Louisville: Westminster John Knox, 1993. Moffatt, J. Introduction to the Literature of the New Testament. Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1918. Moo, D. J. Galatians. BECNT. Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2013. —­—­—­. The Letter to the Romans. NICNT. 2nd ed. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2018. Morgan, M. G. “Metellus Macedonicus and the Province Macedonia.” Historia 18 (1969): 422–46. Morris, L. “Καὶ ἅπαξ καὶ δίς.” NovT 1 (1956): 205–8. Morton, A. Q. “The Authorship of Greek Prose.” Journal of the Royal Statistical Society. Series A 127 (1965): 169–233. —­—­—­. “The Authorship of the Pauline Corpus.” Pages 209–35 in The New Testament in Historical and Contemporary Perspective: Essays in Memory of G. H. C. Macgregor. Edited by W. Barclay and H. Anderson. Oxford: Blackwell, 1965. —­—­—.­ The Integrity of the Pauline Epistles. Manchester: Manchester Statistical Society, 1965. Moss, C. R., and J. S. Baden. “1 Thessalonians 4.13–18 in Rabbinic Perspective.” NTS 58 (2012): 199–212. Moule, C. F. D. An Idiom Book of New Testament Greek. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1959. Mullins, T. Y. “Disclosure: A Literary Form in the New Testament.” NovT 7 (1964): 44–50. Munck, J. Paul and the Salvation of Mankind. Translated by F. Clarke. London: SCM, 1959. Neirynck, F. “Paul and the Sayings of Jesus.” Pages 511–67 in L’Apoˆtre Paul: Personnalité, style et conception du ministère. Edited by A. Vanhoye. BETL 73. Leuven: Leuven University Press, 1986. Nellessen, E. Untersuchungen zur altlateinischen Überlieferung des ersten Thessalonicherbriefes. BBB 22. Bonn: Hanstein, 1965. Nepper-­C hristensen, P. “Das verborgene Herrenwort: Eine Untersuchung über 1 Thess 4,13–18.” ST 19 (1965): 136–65. Nestle, E. “2 Thess 2.” ExpTim 16 (1904–05): 472–73. —­—­—­. “Zu Daniel, 2. Der Gräuel der Verwüstung.” ZAW 4 (1884): 247–48. Neugebauer, F. “Das paulinische ‘In Christo.’ ” NTS 4 (1957–58): 124–38. Nicholl, C. R. From Hope to Despair in Thessalonica. Study in 1 & 2 Thessalonians. SNTSMS 126. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2004. —­—­—­. “Michael, The Restrainer Removed (2 Thess 2:6–7).” JTS 51 (2000): 27–53. Niebuhr, K.-­W. “Die Paulusbriefsammlung.” Pages 196–293 in Grundinformation Neues Testament: Eine bibelkundlich-­theologische Einführung. Edited by K.-­W. Niebuhr. 5th ed. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2020. Oakes, P. “A House-­Church Account of Economics and Empire.” Pages 3–30 in Empire, Economics, and the New Testament. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2020. —­—­—­. “Re-­Mapping the Universe: Paul and the Emperor in 1 Thessalonians and Philippians.” JSNT 27 (2001): 301–22. Repr., pages 135–55 in Empire, Economics, and the New Testament. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2020. Oberhummer, E. “Thessalonike.” PW 2.61.143–63. O’Brien, P. T. Commentary on Philippians. NIGTC. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1991. —­—­—.­ Gospel and Mission in the Writings of Paul: An Exegetical and Theological Analysis. Grand Rapids: Baker, 1995. —­—­—­. Introductory Thanksgivings in the Letters of Paul. NovTSup 49. Leiden: Brill, 1977. Ogg, G. The Chronology of the Life of Paul. London: Epworth, 1968.

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 44

7/12/23 11:28 AM



General Bibliography 45

Ollrog, W.- ­H. Paulus und seine Mitarbeiter: Untersuchungen zu Theorie und Praxis der paulinischen Mission. Neukirchen-­V luyn: Neukirchener Verlag, 1979. Orchard, J. B. “Ellipsis and Parenthesis in Gal 2:1–10 and 2 Thess 2:1–12.” Pages 249–58 in Paul de Tarse: Apôtre de Notre Temps. Edited by L. De Lorenzi. SMBen 1. Rome: Abbaye de S. Paul h.l.m., 1979. —­—­—­. “Thessalonians and the Synoptic Gospels.” Bib 19 (1938): 19–42. O’Sullivan, F. The Egnatian Way. Newton Abbot: David & Charles, 1972. Papazoglu, F. “Quelques aspects de l’histoire de la province Macédoine.” ANRW 2.7.1.302–69. Park, J. S. Conceptions of Afterlife in Jewish Inscriptions. WUNT 2/121. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2000. Park, Young-­Ho. Paul’s Ekkle¯sia as a Civic Assembly: Understanding the People of God in Their Politico- ­Social World. WUNT 2/393. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2015. Pearson, B. A. “1 Thessalonians 2:13–16: A Deutero-­Pauline Interpolation.” HTR 64 (1971): 79–94. Peerbolte, L. J. L. The Antecedents of Antichrist: A Traditio-­Historical Study of the Earliest Christian View on Eschatological Opponents. JSJSup 49. Leiden: Brill, 1996. Perdelwitz, R. “Zu σαίνεσθαι ἐν ταῖς θλίψεσιν ταύταις, 1 Thess 3,3.” TSK 86 (1913): 613–15. Peterson, D. G. The Acts of the Apostles. Pillar New Testament Commentary. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2009. Peterson, E. “Die Einholung des Kyrios.” ZST 1 (1930): 682–702. Pfitzner, V. C. Paul and the Agon Motif. NovTSup 16. Leiden: Brill, 1967. Pilhofer, P. “Περὶ δὲ τῆς φιλαδελφίας . . . (1 Thess 4,9): Ekklesiologische Überlegungen zu einem Proprium früher christlicher Gemeinden.” Pages 139–53 in Die frühen Christen und ihre Welt. WUNT 145. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2002. Piper, J. “Love Your Enemies”: Jesus’ Love Command in the Synoptic Gospels and the Early Christian Paraenesis. SNTSMS 38. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1979. Plassart, A. “L’inscription de Delphes mentionnant le Proconsul Gallion.” REG 80 (1967): 372–78. Plevnik, J. Paul and the Parousia: An Exegetical and Theological Investigation. Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 1997. —­—­—­. “The Taking Up of the Faithful and the Resurrection of the Dead in 1 Thessalonians 4:16–18.” CBQ 46 (1984): 274–83. Pobee, J. S. Persecution and Martyrdom in the Theology of Paul. JSNTSup 6. Sheffield: JSOT Press, 1985. Porter, S. E. “The Theoretical Justification for Application of Rhetorical Categories to Pauline Epistolary Literature.” Pages 100–22 in Rhetoric and the New Testament: Essays from the 1992 Heidelberg Conference. Edited by S. E. Porter and T. H. Olbricht. JSNTSup 90. Sheffield: JSOT Press, 1993. —­—­—­. Verbal Aspect in the Greek of the New Testament, with Reference to Tense and Mood. New York: Lang, 1989. Rabens, V. “The Development of Pauline Pneumatology.” BZ 43 (1999): 178–79. —­—­—­. The Holy Spirit and Ethics in Paul: Transformation and Empowering for Religious-­ Ethical Life. WUNT 2/283. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2010. Rainbow, O. A. “Justification according to Paul’s Thessalonian Correspondence.” BBR 19 (2009): 249–74. Reeves, Marjorie. Joachim of Fiore & the Prophetic Future: A Medieval Study in Historical Thinking. Rev. ed. London: SPCK, 1999. Reiser, M. “Love of Enemies in the Context of Antiquity.” NTS 47 (2001): 411–27. Reynolds, J., and R. Tannebaum. Jews and Godfearers at Aphrodisias. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1987.

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 45

7/12/23 11:28 AM

46

General Bibliography

Riesner, R. “Back to the Historical Jesus through Paul and His School (The Ransom Logion​— ­Mark 10:45; Matthew 20.8).” Journal for the Study of the Historical Jesus 1 (2003): 171–99. —­—­—.­ Paul’s Early Period: Chronology, Mission Strategy, Theology. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1998. Rigaux, B. L’Antéchrist et l’opposition au royaume messianique dans l’Ancien et le Nouveau Testament. Paris: Gabalda, 1932. —­—­—­. “Vocabulaire chrétien antérieure à la premiére épître aux Thessaloniciens.” Pages 380–89 in Sacra Pagina: Miscellanea biblica congressus internationalis catholici de re biblica. Vol. 2. Ed. J. Coppens et al. BETL 13. Gembloux: Duculot, 1959. Robeck Jr., C. M. “Prophecy, Prophesying.” Pages 755–62 in DPL. Robinson, J. A. T. Redating the New Testament. London: SCM, 1975. Röcker, F. W. Belial und Katechon: Eine Untersuchung zu 2 Thess 2,1–12 und 1 Thess 4,13–­ 5:11. WUNT 2/262. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2009. Roetzel, C. The Letters of Paul: Conversations in Context. Atlanta: John Knox, 1975. —­—­—­. “Theodidaktoi and Handwork in Philo and 1 Thessalonians.” Pages 324–31 in L’Apoˆtre Paul: Personnalité, style et conception du ministère. Edited by A. Vanhoye. BETL 73. Leuven: Leuven University Press, 1986. Russell, R. “The Idle in 2 Thess 3.6–12: An Eschatological or a Social Problem?” NTS 34 (1988): 105–19. Sailors, T. B. “Wedding Textual and Rhetorical Criticism to Understand the Text of 1 Thessalonians 2.7.” JSNT 80 (2000): 81–98. Sandnes, K. O. A New Family: Conversion and Ecclesiology in the Early Church with Cross-­ Cultural Comparison. Bern: Lang, 1994. —­—­—­. Paul—­O ne of the Prophets?: A Contribution to the Apostle’s Self-­Understanding. WUNT 2/43. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1991. Schade, H.-­H . Apokalyptische Christologie bei Paulus. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1981. Schermann, T., ed. Prophetarum Vitae Fabulosae. Leipzig: Teubner, 1907. Schippers, R. “The Pre-­Synoptic Tradition in 1 Thessalonians II 13–16.” NovT 8 (1966): 223–34. Schlatter, A. Paulus, der Bote Jesu. Stuttgart: Calwer, 1956. Schlueter, C. J. Filling Up the Measure: Polemical Hyperbole in 1 Thessalonians 2:14–16. JSNTSup 98. Sheffield: JSOT Press, 1994. —­—­—­. “Die jüdischen Prophetenmorde.” Pages 126–43 in Aus frühchristlicher Zeit. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1950. Schmidt, D. “1 Thess 2:13–16: Linguistic Evidence for an Interpolation.” JBL 102 (1983): 269–79. Schmidt, J. E. C. Einleitung in das Neue Testament. Giessen, 1804. —­—­—­. Vermutungen über die beiden Briefe an die Thessalonicher. Bibliothek für Kritik und Exegese des Neuen Testaments. Hadamer, 1801. Schmidt, U. “1 Thess 2.7b.c: ‘Kleinkinder, die wie eine Amme Kinder versorgen.’ ” NTS 55 (2009): 116–20. Schmithals, W. “The Historical Situation of the Thessalonian Letters.” Pages 123–218 in Paul and the Gnostics. Translated by J. E. Steely. New York: Abingdon, 1972. —­—­—.­ The Office of Apostle in the Early Church. Nashville: Abingdon, 1969. —­—­—.­ Der Römerbrief als historisches Problem. SNT 9. Gütersloh: Mohn, 1975. —­—­—­. “Die Thessalonicherbriefe als Briefkompositionen.” Pages 295–315 in Zeit und Geschichte: Dankesgabe an Rudolf Bultmann. Edited by E. Dinkler. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1964.

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 46

7/12/23 11:28 AM



General Bibliography 47

Schnabel, E. Early Christian Mission, Volume 2: Paul and the Early Church. Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 2004. Schnelle, U. Apostle Paul: His Life and Theology. Translated by E. Boring. Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2005. Schoon- ­Janssen, J. Umstrittene “Apologien” in den Paulusbriefen: Studien zu rhetorischen Situation des 1 Thessalonicherbriefes, des Galaterbriefes und des Philipperbriefes. GTA 45. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1991. Schrader, K. Der Apostel Paulus. Teil 5. Leipzig, 1836. Schubert, P. Form and Function of the Pauline Thanksgivings. BZNW 20. Berlin: Töpelmann, 1939. Schwank, B. “Der sogenannte Brief an Gallio und die Datierung des 1 Thess.” BZ 15 (1971): 265–66. Schweizer, E. “Replik.” TZ 1 (1945): 286–89. —­—­—­. “Der zweite Thessalonicherbrief ein Philipperbrief?” TZ 1 (1945): 90–105. —­—­—­. “Zum Problem des zweiten Thessalonicherbriefes.” TZ 2 (1946): 74–75. Seifrid, M. A. “In Christ.” Pages 433–36 in DPL. Sherwin-­W hite, A.  N. Roman Society and Roman Law in the New Testament. Oxford: Clarendon, 1963. Siber, P. Mit Christus leben: Eine Studie zur paulinischen Auferstehungshoffnung. ATANT 61. Zurich: TVZ, 1971. Siegert, F. “Gottesfürchtige und Sympathisanten.” JSJ 4 (1973): 109–64. Simpson, E. K. The Pastoral Epistles. London: Tyndale, 1954. Smallwood, E. M. Documents Illustrating the Principates of Gaius, Claudius and Nero. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1967. Smith, A. “ ‘Unmasking the Powers’: Toward a Postcolonial Analysis of 1 Thessalonians.” Pages 47–66 in Paul and the Roman Imperial Order. Edited by R. A. Horsley. Harrisburg, PA: Trinity Press International, 2004. Smith, D. The Life and Letters of St. Paul. London: Hodder & Stoughton, 1919. Smith, J. E. “1 Thessalonians 4:4: Breaking the Impasse.” BBR 11 (2001): 65–105. Söding, T. “Der erste Thessalonicherbrief und die frühe paulinische Evangeliumsverkündigung: Zur Frage einer Entwicklung der paulinischen Theologie.” BZ 35 (1991): 180–203. Steck, O. H. Israel und das gewaltsame Geschick der Propheten: Untersuchungen zur Überlieferung des deuteronomistischen Geschichtsbildes im Alten Testament, Spätjudentum und Urchristentum. Neukirchen-­V luyn: Neukirchener Verlag, 1967. Stephenson, A. M. G. “On the Meaning ἐνέστηκεν ἡ ἡμέρα τοῦ κυρίου in 2 Thessalonians 2,2.” Pages 442–51 in Studia Evangelica: Papers Presented to the Third International Congress on New Testament Studies Held at Christ Church, Oxford, 1965. Vol. 4. Edited by F. L. Cross. TUGAL 102. Berlin: Akademie, 1968. Stettler, H. “Colossians 1:24 in the Framework of Paul’s Mission Theology.” Pages 185–208 in The Mission of the Early Church to Jews and Gentiles. Edited by J. Ådna. WUNT 127. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2000. —­—­—.­ Heiligung bei Paulus: Ein Beitrag aus biblisch-­theologischer Sicht. WUNT 2.368. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2014. Still, T. D. Conflict at Thessalonica: A Pauline Church and Its Neighbours. JSNTSup 183. Sheffield: Sheffield Academic, 1999. Strobel, A. Untersuchungen zum eschatologischen Verzögerungsproblem auf Grund der spätjüdisch-­urchristlichen Geschichte von Habakuk 2,2ff. NovTSup 2. Leiden: Brill, 1961. Stuhlmacher, P. Biblical Theology of the New Testament. Translated by D. P. Bailey. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2018. Translation of Biblische Theologie des Neuen Testaments. Band I & II. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1992, 1999.

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 47

7/12/23 11:28 AM

48

General Bibliography

—­—­—­. “Jesustradition im Römerbrief?” TBei 14 (1983): 240–50. —­—­—­. Revisiting Paul’s Doctrine of Justification: A Challenge to the New Perspective, with an Essay by Donald A. Hagner. Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 2001. Suhl, A. Paulus und seine Briefe: Eine Beitrag zur Paulinischen Chronologie. SNT 11. Gütersloh: Mohn, 1975. Tacitus. Histories and Annals. Translated by Clifford H. Moore and John Jackson. 4 vols. LCL. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1925–1937. Tarn, W. W., and G. T. Griffith. Hellenistic Civilisation. London: E. Arnold, 1952. Taylor, N. H. “Who Persecuted the Thessalonian Christians?” HvTSt 58 (2002): 784–801. Tellbe, M. Paul between Synagogue and State: Christians, Jews, and Civic Authorities in 1 Thessalonians, Romans, and Philippians. ConBNT 34. Stockholm: Almqvist & Wiksell, 2001. Thieme, K. “Die Struktur des Ersten Thessalonicher-­Briefes.” Pages 450–58 in Abraham unser Vater: Juden und Christen im Gespräch über die Bibel. Festschrift für Otto Michel. Edited by O. Betz, M. Hengel, and P. Schmidt. Leiden: Brill, 1963. Thiselton, A. C. The First Epistle to the Corinthians. NIGTC. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2000. Thompson, M. B. Clothed with Christ: The Example and Teaching of Jesus in Romans 12.1–15.3. Sheffield: JSOT Press, 1991. Thorsteinsson, R. “Paul and Roman Stoicism: Romans 12 and Contemporary Stoic Ethics.” JSNT 29 (2006): 139–61. Tomson, P. J. “Paul’s Practical Instruction in 1 Thess 4:1–12 Read in a Hellenistic and a Jewish Perspective.” Pages 89–130 in Not in the Word Alone: The First Epistle to the Thessalonians. Edited by M. D. Hooker. SMBen 15. Rome: Benedictina, 2003. Torrey, C. C., ed. The Lives of the Prophets: Greek Text and Translation. JBLMS 1. Philadelphia: Society of Biblical Literature and Exegesis, 1946. Travis, S. H. Christ and the Judgement of God: The Limits of Divine Retribution in New Testament Thought. 2nd ed. Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 2009. Trebilco, Paul. “The Assembly—­ἡ ἐκκλησία.” Pages 164–207 in Self- ­Designation and Group Identity in the New Testament. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2012. —­—­—­. “Why Did the Early Christians Call Themselves ἡ ἐκκλησία?” NTS 57 (2011): 440–60. Trench, R. C. Synonyms of the New Testament. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1976 [1880]. Trilling, W. “Literarische Paulusimitation im 2. Thessaloicherbrief.” Pages 146–56 in Paulus in den neutestamentlichen Spätschriften: Zur Paulusrezeption im Neuen Testament. Edited by K. Kertelge. Freiburg: Herder, 1981. —­—­—.­ Untersuchungen zum zweiten Thessalonicherbrief. Leipzig: St. Benno, 1972. Tuckett, C. M. “Synoptic Tradition in 1 Thessalonians?” Pages 160–82 in The Thessalonian Correspondence. Edited by R. F. Collins. BETL 87. Leuven: Peeters, 1990. Turner, M. M. B. The Holy Spirit and Spiritual Gifts. Rev. ed. Peabody, MA: Hendrikson, 1998. Unnik, W. C. van. “The Christian’s Freedom of Speech in the New Testament.” BJRL 44 (1962): 466–88. Repr., pages 269–89 of vol. 2 in Sparsa Collecta. Edited by W. C. van Unnik. 4 vols. NovTSup 30. Leiden: Brill, 1980. Uprichard, R. E. H. “The Person and Work of Christ in 1 Thessalonians.” EvQ 53 (1981): 108–14. Vacalopoulos, A. History of Thessaloniki. Thessaloniki: Institute for Balkan Studies, 1963. Vickers, H. J. “Hellenistic Thessaloniki.” JHS 92 (1972): 156–70. Vögtle, A. “Paraklese und Eschatologie nach Röm 13, 11–14.” Pages 557–73 in Dimensions de la Vie Chrétienne (Rom 12–13). Edited by L. de Lorenzi. Rome: Abbaye de S. Paul, 1979.

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 48

7/12/23 11:28 AM



General Bibliography 49

Vos, C. S. de. Church and Community Conflicts: The Relationships of the Thessalonian, Corinthian, and Philippian Churches with Their Wider Civic Communities. SBLDS 168. Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1999. Vos, G. The Pauline Eschatology. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1930. Vos, J. S. “On the Background of 1 Thessalonians 2:1–12: A Response to Traugott Holtz.” Pages 81–88 in The Thessalonians Debate: Methodological Discord or Methodological Synthesis? Edited by K. P. Donfried and J. Beutler. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2000. Wagner, J. R. “The Heralds of Isaiah and the Mission of Paul: An Investigation of Paul’s Use of Isaiah 51–55 in Romans.” Pages 193–222 in Jesus and the Suffering Servant: Isaiah 53 and Christian Origins. Edited by W. H. Bellinger Jr. and W. R. Farmer. Harrisburg, PA: Trinity Press International, 1998. Walbank, F. W. Philip V. of Macedon. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1940. Walter, N. “Paul and the Early Christian Jesus-­Tradition.” Pages 51–80 in Paul and Jesus. Edited by A. J. M. Wedderburn and C. Wolff. JSNTSup 37. Sheffield: JSOT Press, 1989. Walton, S. Leadership and Lifestyle: The Portrait of Paul in the Miletus Speech and 1 Thessalonians. SNTSMS. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2000. Ware, P. “The Coming of the Lord: Eschatology and 1 Thessalonians.” ResQ 22 (1979): 109–20. —­—­—­. “The Thessalonians as a Missionary Congregation: 1 Thessalonians 1,5–8.” ZNW 83 (1992): 126–31. Warfield, B. B. “The Prophecies of St. Paul.” Pages 463–502 in Biblical and Theological Studies. Edited by S. G. Craig. Philadelphia: Presbyterian & Reformed, 1952. Weatherly, J. A. “The Authenticity of 1 Thessalonians 2:13–16: Additional Evidence.” JSNT 42 (1991): 79–98. Weima, J. A. D. “An Apology for the Apologetic Function of 1 Thessalonians 2.1–12.” JSNT 68 (1997): 73–99. —­—­—­. “But We Became Infants among You.” NTS 46 (2000): 547–64. —­—­—­. Neglected Endings: The Significance of the Pauline Letter Closings. JSNTSup 101. Sheffield: JSOT Press, 1994. —­—­—­. Paul the Ancient Letter Writer: An Introduction to Epistolary Analysis. Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2016. —­ —­ . “ ‘Peace and Security’ (1 Thess 5.3): Prophetic Warning or Political —­ Propaganda?” NTS 58 (2012): 331–59. —­—­—­. “Sincerely, Paul: The Significance of the Pauline Letter Closings.” Pages 307–45 in Paul and the Ancient Letter Form. Edited by S. E. Porter and S. A. Adams. Leiden: Brill, 2010. —­—­—­. “What Does Aristotle Have to Do with Paul? An Evaluation of Rhetorical Criticism.” CTJ 32 (1997): 458–68. Weiss, J. Earliest Christianity: A History of the Period AD 30–150. Edited by F. C. Grant. 2 vols. New York: Harper, 1959. Wengst, K. Pax Romana and the Peace of Jesus Christ. Translated by J. Bowden. Philadelphia: Fortress, 1987. Wenham, D. “Paul and the Synoptic Apocalypse.” Pages 345–75 in Gospel Perspectives: Studies of History and Tradition in the Four Gospels. Edited by R. T. France and D. Wenham. Sheffield: JSOT Press, 1981. —­—­—­. Paul: Follower of Jesus or Founder of Christianity? Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1995. West, J. C. “The Order of 1 and 2 Thessalonians.” JTS 15 (1913–14): 66–74. White, J. L. The Form and Function of the Body of the Greek Letter: A Study of the Letter-­Body in the Non-­Literary Papyri and in Paul the Apostle. SBLDS 2. Missoula, MT: Scholars Press, 1972.

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 49

7/12/23 11:28 AM

50

General Bibliography

White, J. R. “ ‘Peace’ and ‘Security’ (1 Thess 5.3): Roman Ideology and Greek Aspiration.” NTS 60 (2014): 499–510. —­—­—­. “ ‘Peace and Security’ (1 Thessalonians 5.3): Is It Really a Roman Slogan?” NTS 59 (2013): 382–95. Wilckens, U. Die Missionsreden der Apostelgeschichte: Form-­und traditionsgeschichtliche Untersuchungen. WMANT 5. Neukirchen-­V luyn: Neukirchener Verlag, 1974. Wildberger, H. Jesaja, 1. Teilband. 2nd ed. BKAT 10.1. Neukirchen-­V luyn: Neukirchener Verlag, 1980. Wiles, G. P. Paul’s Intercessory Prayers: The Significance of the Intercessory Prayer Passages in the Letters of St. Paul. SNTSMS 24. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1974. Wilson, W. T. Love without Pretense: Rom 12:9–21 and Hellenistic and Jewish Literature. WUNT 2/46. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1991. Winter, B. W. “The Entries and Ethics of the Orators and Paul (1 Thessalonians 2.1–2).” TynBul 44 (1993): 55–74. —­—­—­. “Is Paul among the Sophists?” RTR 53 (1994): 28–38. —­—­—.­ Philo and Paul among the Sophists. SNTSMS 96. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1997. —­—­—­. Seek the Welfare of the City: Christians as Benefactors and Citizens. First-­C entury Christians in the Graeco-­Roman World. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1994. Wischmeyer, O. Der höchste Weg: Das 13. Kapitel des 1. Korintherbriefes. Gütersloh: Gütersloher Verlagshaus, 1981. Witmer, S. E. “θεοδίδακτος in 1 Thessalonians 4.9: A Pauline Neologism.” NTS 52 (2006): 239–50. —­—­—­. Divine Instruction in Early Christianity. WUNT 2/246. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2008. Wolter, M. Der Brief an die Römer (Teilband 1: Römer 1–8). EKKNT. Ostfieldern: Patmos; Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2014. —­—­—­. Der Brief an die Römer (Teilband 2: Römer 9–6). EKKNT. Ostfieldern: Patmos; Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2019. Wrede, W. Die Echtheit des zweiten Thessalonicherbriefs. TU 2.24. Leipzig: Hinrichs, 1903. Wright, N. T. “The Letter to the Romans: Introduction, Commentary, and Reflections.” Pages 393–770 in The New Interpreter’s Bible. Vol. 10. Edited by Leander E. Keck. Nashville: Abingdon, 2002. —­—­—­. Paul: A Biography. San Francisco: HarperOne. 2018. —­—­—­. Paul and the Faithfulness of God. Vol. 2. Christian Origins and the Question of God 4. Minneapolis: Fortress, 2013. —­—­—.­ Paul: In Fresh Perspective. Minneapolis: Fortress, 2005. —­—­—.­ The Resurrection of the Son of God. Christian Origins and the Question of God 3. Minneapolis: Fortress, 2003. Yarbrough, O. L. Not Like the Gentiles: Marriage Rules in the Letters of Paul. SBLDS 80. Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1986. Yinger, K. L. “Romans 12:14–21 and Nonretaliation in Second Temple Judaism: Addressing Persecution within the Community.” CBQ 60 (1998): 74–96. Yoder Neufeld, T. R. Killing Enmity: Violence and the New Testament. Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2011. Zerbe, G. M. Non-­R etaliation in Early Church and New Testament Texts: Ethical Themes in Social Contexts. JSPSup 13. Sheffield: JSOT Press, 1993.

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 50

7/12/23 11:28 AM

Introduction I. Background to the Thessalonian Letters Bibliography Brocke, C. vom. Thessaloniki—­Stadt des Kassander und Gemeinde des Paulus: Eine frühe christliche Gemeinde in ihrer heidnischen Umwelt. WUNT 2/125. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2001. Edson, C. “Cults of Thessalonica (Macedonia III).” HTR 41.3 (1948): 153–204. —­—­—.­ “A Dedication of Philip V (Macedonia I).” HSCP 51 (1940): 125–26. —­—­—­. “State Cults of Thessalonica.” HSCP 51 (1940): 127–36. Evans, R. M. “Eschatology and Ethics: A Study of Thessalonica and Paul’s Letter to the Thessalonians.” PhD diss., University of Basel. Princeton, NJ: McMahon, 1968. Hendrix, H. L. “Thessalonicans Honor Romans.” ThD diss., Harvard University, 1984. Judge, E. A. “The Decrees of Caesar at Thessalonica.” RTR 30 (1971): 1–7. Keener, C. S. Acts: An Exegetical Commentary, Volume 3: 15:1–23:35. Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2014. Riesner, R. Paul’s Early Period: Chronology, Mission Strategy, Theology. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1998. Sherwin-­W hite, A.  N. Roman Society and Roman Law in the New Testament. Oxford: Clarendon, 1963. Tellbe, M. Paul between Synagogue and State: Christians, Jews, and Civic Authorities in 1 Thessalonians, Romans, and Philippians. ConBNT 34. Stockholm: Almqvist & Wiksell, 2001. Vos, C. S. de. Church and Community Conflicts: The Relationships of the Thessalonian, Corinthian, and Philippian Churches with Their Wider Civic Communities. SBLDS 168. Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1999.

1. Macedonia and Thessalonica A. Macedonia, a Roman Province Macedonia was an ancient kingdom in the Balkan Peninsula, to the north of the Greek states. When the Persians invaded Europe in the early fifth century BC, the Macedonian kings collaborated with them and so preserved their position; nevertheless, Alexander I gave covert aid to the Greeks who were attacked by Xerxes in 480 BC (Herodotus, Hist. 5.17–18; 7.173; 9.45). Alexander I and his successors patronized Greek art and letters; indeed, Alexander as a young man was allowed to compete in the footrace at the Olympian Games, perhaps because his family claimed Argive descent (Herodotus, Hist. 5.22; 8.137). By the fourth century, Macedonia was, for most practical purposes, part of the Greek world. Philip II (356–336 BC) made himself master of the formerly independent city-­states of Greece; after his assassination, his son Alexander III (the Great) made this united Greco-­ Macedonian dominion the base for his conquest of Western Asia and Egypt. With the division of Alexander’s empire after his death (323 BC), Macedonia soon became a separate kingdom again. The Macedonian kingdom first clashed with the Romans when Philip V (221–179 BC) made a treaty with Hannibal during the Second Punic War (Polybius, Hist. 7.9). The Romans, however, stirred up sufficient trouble for him east of the Adriatic to keep him occupied, and his treaty with Hannibal

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 51

7/12/23 11:28 AM

52  Introduction remained ineffective. When the Second Punic War was over, and with Hannibal safely out of the way, the Romans invented a pretext for declaring war on Philip. This Second Macedonian War, as it is called (200–197 BC), ended with Philip’s defeat at Cynoscephalae (Polybius, Hist. 28.22–28). He was obliged henceforth to confine his rule to Macedonia, and Rome proclaimed herself the liberator and protector of the city-­states of Greece (Plutarch, Titus Flamininus 10). Philip’s son Perseus in his turn excited Rome’s suspicions, which were further fomented by his enemy the king of Pergamum, Rome’s ally. The ensuing Third Macedonian War (171–168 BC) ended with the Roman victory at Pydna (Polybius, Hist. 31.29). The royal dynasty of Macedonia was abolished; the kingdom was divided by the Romans into four republics, and Thessalonica was made the capital city of the second republic of the four (Livy, Hist. 45.29.5–9).1 But in 149 BC an adventurer named Andriscus, claiming to be a son of Perseus, reunited Macedonia under his rule for a short time (Diodorus, Hist. 32.9b, 15; Florus, Epitome 1.30). When he was put down in 148 BC, the Romans decided that the only course to take with Macedonia was to annex it as a province (Florus, Epitome 1.32.3).2 The four republics set up twenty years before remained as geographical divisions but retained little political significance. To consolidate their hold on the new province, the Romans built a military highway, the Via Egnatia, from Apollonia and Dyrrhachium on the Adriatic coast of Macedonia to Thessalonica; it was in due course extended farther east to Philippi and its port Neapolis, and later still to Byzantium (Strabo, Geogr. 7.7.4). As may be gathered from 1 Maccabees 8:1–16, the story of the overthrow of the Macedonian kings, losing nothing in the telling, made a deep impression on the inhabitants of Syria and Palestine as they learned more and more about those invincible Romans from the distant west.3 Macedonia thus became a base for the further extension of Roman power. Augustus made it a senatorial province in 27 BC. In AD 15 it was combined with Achaia and Moesia to form one imperial province (Tacitus, Ann. 1.76.4; 80.1), but was handed back to the senate in AD 44, with Thessalonica as the seat of provincial administration.4

B. Thessalonica, a Roman Free City Thessalonica, founded about 315 BC by the Macedonian king Cassander and named after his wife (a half-­sister of Alexander the Great), had as its original residents the former inhabitants of Therme and some twenty-­f ive neighboring towns or villages, whom Cassander forcibly settled in his new foundation. It was made the seat of the Roman provincial administration

1 Larsen, Greek Federal States, 295ff. 2 Cf. Morgan, “Metellus Macedonicus.” 3 Cf. Bruce, “The Romans through Jewish Eyes.” 4 Cf. also Papazoglu, “Macédoine.”

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 52

7/12/23 11:28 AM



Background to the Thessalonian Letters 53

when Macedonia was annexed by Rome. Then, for having sided with the eventual winners during the Roman civil wars (first with Antony and Octavian against Brutus and Cassius [42 BC], and then with Octavian against Antony [31 BC]), it was rewarded by the victors with the status of a free city (civitas libera) in 42 BC and with various privileges. These privileges included self-­government in the usual democratic form of Greek cities5 with its own magistrates (the πολιτάρχαι, three to seven in number), a council (βουλή), and an assembly of the people (δῆμος) (IG 10.2.1.5–9, 11; cf. Acts 17:5–6), although the Roman proconsul of Macedonia was resident in the city; exemption from provincial taxes and the right to levy its own taxes; the right to mint its own coins; and no stationing of the Roman garrison inside the city walls.6 With the end of the civil wars and then with the founding of the three provinces in the north—­Dalmatia, Moesia, and Thrace—­during the principates of Augustus, Tiberius, and Claudius, which relieved Macedonia of immediate exposure to the barbarian invasions, the province and its capital Thessalonica enjoyed the peace and security of the pax romana. Due to such a fortunate political situation, Thessalonica grew in prosperity. Its favorable geographical location also supported its growth, with its natural harbor on the Thermaic Gulf (perhaps the best in the Aegean Sea), the improved Roman highway Via Egnatia (which connected Rome with its eastern provinces), and its location on a major north-­south trade route.7 Brocke summarizes the situation of Thessalonica at the time of Paul’s mission thus: “Thessalonica at that time was a commercial and provincial capital city that was on the way to becoming one of the greatest cities in the Aegean region.”8 It was already hailed as the “metropolis of Macedonia” by the early first-­century AD geographer Strabo (Geogr. 7 frg. 21), and for economic power it could be compared only with Corinth on Greek soil.9 It may be assumed that all those favorable conditions of the city attracted a good number of immigrants: traders, artisans, laborers, and others from various parts of the Roman Empire. Certainly the city was a favorite of wandering philosophers, sophists, and poets, some of whom made their living by charming their audience or disciples with their quackery.10 However, the population of the city was largely made up of three groups: Greeks and Macedonians, the majority; Romans, smaller in number but the most influential; and Thracians,

5 6 7 8 9

Cf. Vos, Church, 139–40. Cf. Riesner, Early Period, 339; Tellbe, Paul, 82; Brocke, Thessaloniki, 17. Cf. Riesner, Early Period, 339; Tellbe, Paul, 82; Brocke, Thessaloniki, 17. Thessaloniki, 19–20. Cf. Meeks, First Urban Christians, 46: “[Thessalonica] thus became one of the two most important trading centers in Roman Greece, the other being Corinth” (cited also by Brocke, Thessaloniki, 75). 10 Cf. Brocke, Thessaloniki, 145–51; Schreiber, I:40–41.

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 53

7/12/23 11:28 AM

54  Introduction part of the original inhabitants of the city. Greek was the dominant language.11 Based on some archaeological data and “the usual assumptions of historical demography for ancient cities,” Riesner estimates that the size of the Hellenistic-­Roman city was about 1.3 square kilometers and its population about sixty-­f ive thousand, or about one hundred thousand if the inhabitants of the villages outside the city walls were included.12 However, Brocke objects to this high estimation and suggests instead “20,000 to 30,000, at the most 30,000 inhabitants” as a more realistic figure.13 For other estimates, see, for example, Holtz (413): over fifty thousand; Malherbe (14): sixty-­f ive to eighty thousand; Vos, Church (129): forty to fifty thousand. In Acts 17:1–2 Luke reports that, after his mission in Philippi, Paul and his missionary team “came to Thessalonica, where there was a synagogue of the Jews” and that “according to his custom” he preached the gospel in it for three Sabbaths. In On the Embassy to Gaius 281, Philo records a letter of Herod Agrippa (reigned AD 37–44) to Emperor Caligula (reigned AD 37–41) that mentions Macedonia in the list of the regions that Jews inhabited. If that was true, it would be most likely that there were Jews in Thessalonica, the capital city of Macedonia. However, apart from these two pieces, there is a dearth of first-­century literary and inscriptional evidence about the presence of Jews in Thessalonica. There are some late second-­or third-­century inscriptions that some scholars take as evidencing the presence of Jews in Thessalonica at those times and as enabling the inference of their likely presence there also in the first century.14 However, Brocke is very cautious in evaluating those inscriptions. Nevertheless, he concludes that there was a Jewish synagogue during the first century, as Luke reports.15 He arrives at this conclusion by taking Herod Agrippa’s letter to Caligula seriously, and he combines its testimony with the circumstantial evidence that with the elevation of Macedonia, Thessalonica, as its capital, for the first time obtained a superregional significance and that trade and traffic in the city began to increase markedly only at the turn of the first century AD.16 Pointing out that the Italian traders and merchants settled in Thessalonica during this time, Brocke is inclined to assume that, like them, Jews also immigrated to Thessalonica in significant numbers for the first time during that period. At any rate, by the time of Paul’s mission there was a sizable Jewish community in Thessalonica, as he himself provides the clear testimony that the Jews drove him and his missionary team out of Thessalonica (1 Thess 2:15), which is nicely corroborated by the Lukan

11 12 13 14 15 16

Cf. Brocke, Thessaloniki, 86–101. Early Period, 341. Thessaloniki, 72–73. Cf. also Schreiber, I:29–30. E.g., Riesner, Early Period, 344–47; Tellbe, Paul, 86–88; Weima, 21–22. Thessaloniki, 223–32. For this view, Brocke cites Vacalopoulos, History of Thessaloniki, 13.

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 54

7/12/23 11:28 AM



Background to the Thessalonian Letters 55

account of the Jews in Thessalonica driving Paul and Silas out of their synagogue and from their city (Acts 17:1–10).

C. Pagan Cults and Imperial Cult Like those of other Hellenistic cities, the pagan inhabitants of Thessalonica worshiped many different gods. As none of those gods was supposed to make an absolute and exclusive claim, it was usual for individual Thessalonians to worship a number of gods at the same time. Among the various cults, Brocke especially discusses two public cults, those of Dionysus and Cabirus, and the widespread cults of Egyptian mystery gods, such as Isis, Serapis, Osiris, Anubis, and Harpocrates, who were apparently worshiped in private associations.17 In imparting his exhortations against fornication (1 Thess 4:3–8) and against becoming like those who “sleep” and “get drunk” at night (5:4–8), Paul may have in view the cultic practices or lifestyle of the worshipers of Cabirus and Dionysus.18 Alongside those cults of many gods and goddesses, there was also the imperial cult in Thessalonica. Ever since the Roman general Quintus Metellus put down the rebellion of Andriscus and made Macedonia a province of Rome in 148 BC, the Thessalonians courted the Roman rulers’ favor by honoring the “Roman benefactors,” especially hailing the proconsul Metellus as σωτήρ (“savior,” IG 10.2.1.134). Then, as Thessalonica was awarded with the status of a free city and various other privileges by Antony and Octavian during 42–31 BC (see above), the Thessalonians were eager to express their gratitude and loyalty to Rome and the Roman rulers and thereby to solicit their further beneficence. So they not only honored Antony and Octavian as liberators in various ways but also established the cult of the goddess Roma and Roman benefactors, replete with a special priesthood (IG 10.2.1.31).19 So in the cultic practices of the Thessalonians, worshiping their traditional gods and honoring Roma and the Roman benefactors became increasingly intermixed. Then, during the reign of Augustus, “the temple of Caesar” was built, and a “priest and ago[nothete of the Im]perator Caesar Augustus son [of God]” was attached to it, who apparently took priority over the priesthoods of the gods, Roma and the Roman benefactors (IG 10.2.1.31, 131, 133).20 The coins minted in Thessalonica about 27 BC had the image of Julius with the legend “god” (θεός) on the obverse side and that of Octavian (Augustus)

17

Thessaloniki, 116–38. Cf. also Riesner, Early Period, 373–74, 379, who notes that Zeus, Asclepius and Pythian Apollo, Aphrodite, Demeter, Pallas Athene, etc. were also worshiped in Thessalonica; cf. also the more detailed discussions of Weima, 15–18, and Schreiber, I:34–39. 18 Cf. Riesner, Early Period, 374–75; also Brocke, Thessaloniki, 120–21, 128–31. 19 Cf. Hendrix, “Thessalonicans,” 98–139, 283–92; Tellbe, Paul, 83, citing Edson, “State Cults of Thessalonica,” 133. 20 Cf. Hendrix, “Thessalonicans,” 140–88, 296–312; Brocke, Thessaloniki, 139–41.

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 55

7/12/23 11:28 AM

56  Introduction on the reverse side, thus giving the impression of the latter being “son of god” (υἱὸς θεοῦ/divi filius).21 Such a deification of the emperor was expressed also in the replacement of the head of Zeus on the earlier issues of Thessalonian coins with that of Augustus on the later issues.22 The statue of Augustus found in 1939 near the Serapeum (Archaeological Museum of Thessaloniki, no. 1065) and another statue found near that of Augustus (Archaeological Museum of Thessaloniki, no. 2467; it is headless but presumed to be that of Claudius) depict the emperors in a divine posture.23 Moreover, the coins minted in AD 41 have the image of Claudius on the obverse side and that of Augustus with the legend “θεὸς σεβαστός” (God Augustus) on the reverse side.24 Thus veneration of the Roman emperors continued beyond Julius Caesar and Octavian Augustus to Claudius and Nero (see also IG 10.2.1.131). Recently these archaeological and historical data have been appreciated especially by those who are eager to interpret Paul’s gospel preaching from a counter-­imperial or anti-­Roman perspective. However, there is some disagreement about defining the nature of the Thessalonians’ veneration of the Roman emperors. Hendrix, who thoroughly researched this topic, understands all these in terms of the Thessalonians honoring Roman rulers and benefactors as humans, to express their loyalty to them and solicit their beneficence. He considers such labels as “imperial cult” and “emperor worship” as not quite appropriate for these practices.25 But many recent interpreters, especially the counter-­imperial interpreters, think that the above facts really do amount to “imperial cult.”26

2. The Gospel Comes to Macedonia The gospel reached Macedonia less than twenty years after the death of Christ. One of the earliest Christian documents (if not absolutely the earliest extant)—­the first Pauline letter to the Thessalonians—­w as sent to the Christian community in Thessalonica, probably toward the end of AD 50 from Corinth (see below). From this letter it appears that the community owed its existence to a missionary visit paid to the city by Paul and two of his colleagues not long before. That visit had been preceded by a visit to Philippi, where the missionaries had been “shamefully treated” (1 Thess 2:2). Their sojourn in Thessalonica had also been attended by trouble, and their converts there 21 22 23 24 25

Cf. Hendrix, “Thessalonicans,” 170–72, 295. Cf. Hendrix, “Thessalonicans,” 179. Cf. Brocke, Thessaloniki, 139; Weima, 19. Cf. Brocke, Thessaloniki, 139; Weima, 19. “Thessalonicans,” 297–98, 305–8, 316, 331–35. Cf. also Hendrix, “Beyond ‘the Imperial Cult’ and ‘Cults of Magistrates,’ ” 301–8. 26 Cf., e.g., Tellbe, Paul, 83–86; Green, 42; Weima, 18–19; also Donfried, “Imperial Cults of Thessalonica,” 215–19; Vos, Church, 142; Harrison, “Paul and the Imperial Gospel,” 81–82; cf. also Horsley, “Introduction,” Paul and Empire, 1–4, 10–24; Wright, Paul: In Fresh Perspective, 62–65.

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 56

7/12/23 11:28 AM



Background to the Thessalonian Letters 57

had endured some measure of persecution (1:6; 2:14). From Thessalonica they—­or at least Paul himself—­had gone on to Athens (3:1). Then, with his attempts to return to Thessalonica repeatedly frustrated (2:17–18), he could only send a letter (1 Thessalonians) to the Thessalonian believers to serve in lieu of a personal visit. This outline of events, gathered from 1 Thessalonians, agrees so well with the fuller record of Acts 16:6–18:5 that the record, though it is substantially later than 1 Thessalonians, may confidently be accepted as providing a historical framework within which the data of 1 Thessalonians can be read with greater understanding.27 In his more recent studies, while fully recognizing Luke’s typical stylization of his account of Paul’s mission in Thessalonica, Riesner nevertheless concludes his comprehensive comparison of the Lukan account with that of Paul’s own in 1 Thessalonians by stressing the substantial reliability of the former. He writes: “Of the altogether twenty-­f ive individual pieces of information in the Lukan account of the founding, eighteen to nineteen are either directly or indirectly confirmed by 1 Thessalonians. Of the independent pieces of information in Luke, four can be checked, and two seem possible. . . . On the whole, these are quite admirable findings for an ancient historian.”28 According to the narrative of Acts, shortly after the Council of Jerusalem (Acts 15:5–29), Paul set out with his colleague Silas (called Silvanus in the Pauline letters) to traverse Asia Minor from the Cilician Gates westward. Macedonia played no part in their planned itinerary. So far as can be inferred from the record, they were making for Ephesus. But they were prevented from continuing their journey in that direction and found themselves (accompanied now by Timothy, who had joined them at Lystra) obliged to turn northwest from Iconium or Pisidian Antioch until they reached the Aegean Sea at the port of Alexandria Troas.29 At this point the first of the “we” passages of Acts begins: A vision appeared to Paul in the night: a man of Macedonia was standing beseeching him and saying, “Come over to Macedonia and help us.” And when he had seen the vision, immediately we sought to go on into Macedonia, concluding that God had called us to preach the gospel to them. (Acts 16:9–10)

The missionary party, now increased to four by the addition of the narrator himself (as the transition from “they” to “we” suggests; cf. Acts 16:8 with 27 On Acts as a historical source, cf. Hengel, Acts. 28 Early Period, 366–67. Cf. Tellbe, Paul, 86–123; Brocke, Thessaloniki, 188–271, for a more critical substantiation of this way of reconstructing Paul’s mission in Thessalonica; cf. also Weima, 23–40; Keener, Acts, 3:2533–34. 29 Cf. Hemer, “Alexandria Troas.”

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 57

7/12/23 11:28 AM

58  Introduction 16:10), crossed by sea to Neapolis (modern Kavála) and traveled along the Via Egnatia for about ten miles to the Roman colony of Philippi (16:11–12). There they made several converts and established a promising church, but they ran into trouble with the city authorities. Their two leaders, Paul and Silas/Silvanus, suffered an official beating with the lictors’ rods, followed by a night’s imprisonment in the city jail. When the authorities discovered that the men to whom they had meted out this summary treatment were Roman citizens like themselves, they were alarmed and begged them to leave Philippi; they did not feel strong enough to be responsible for their safety (16:13–40). Leaving the narrator behind in Philippi (it appears), the three others continued their westward journey along the Via Egnatia until they reached Thessalonica, about ninety miles distant from Philippi (17:1).

3. Christianity at Thessalonica A. Paul Began His Preaching at a Jewish Synagogue In Thessalonica there was a sizeable Jewish community with its synagogue (see above), which Paul and his friends attended according to their custom. Paul in particular participated animatedly in the services, especially in the exposition of the Scripture lessons, arguing that the Scriptures foretold a suffering Messiah, and that this Messiah had come in the person of Jesus (Acts 17:2–3). Some members of the congregation were persuaded—­Jason, for example, whose hospitality the missionary party enjoyed in Thessalonica, and Aristarchus, later to be Paul’s traveling companion and fellow-­prisoner (cf. 19:29; 20:4; 27:2; Col 4:10; Phlm 24). Several converts were also made among the fringe of gentile God-­fearers who attended the synagogue without full conversion to Judaism; these included several ladies of upper-­class families, wives of leading citizens (Acts 17:4).30 Those converts formed the nucleus of the church in Thessalonica.31 Their numbers were soon augmented by an even 30 Critical scholars tend to treat this account of Paul’s mission as a mere reflection of Luke’s literary-­theological scheme that lets Paul begin his mission in most of the cities by preaching in a synagogue (Acts 9:20, Damascus; 13:5, Salamis; 13:14, Pisidian Antioch; 14:1, Iconium; 17:1–2, Thessalonica; 17:10, Beroea; 17:17, Athens; 18:4, Corinth; 18:19 and 19:8, Ephesus; cf. also 16:13, Philippi) and thereby expresses narratively the conviction that the gospel was to be preached first to the Jews and then to the gentiles (cf. Acts 3:26; 13:46; 18:6; also Rom 1:16). But Schreiber (I:33) affirms the basic historicity of the Lukan statement in Acts 17:1–2, rightly arguing that this pattern of the Lukan narratives about Paul’s mission reflects “beyond a literary-­t heological scheme, a factual practice of the early church’s preaching, which as a sociological necessity found contact points in the Jewish synagogue in a foreign city.” Actually, this account of Paul’s mission in Thessalonica is well corroborated by Paul’s own testimony in 1 Thess 2:14–16, as we have seen. 31 Cf. Holtz, 10, and Riesner, Early Period, 349, who point out that the language of 1 Thessalonians is essentially Jewish Greek, which would be fully comprehensible only to those who had some contact with the synagogue; cf. also Tellbe, Paul, 92, who points to the presence in our epistle of “several clear allusions to important passages in the Jewish Scriptures and to Jewish covenant theology that seem to presuppose some knowledge of these Scriptures and traditions.”

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 58

7/12/23 11:28 AM



Background to the Thessalonian Letters 59

greater body of converts won from outright paganism (cf. 1 Thess 1:9). After “three Sabbath days” (Acts 17:2), the synagogue authorities decided that they had had enough of the missionaries and their message and so instigated the missionaries’ expulsion from the city.

B. Paul’s Preaching Activities outside the Synagogue Although Luke does not narrate the ministry of Paul’s missionary team after the three Sabbaths, several data from 1 Thessalonians point to the likelihood that they stayed on in Thessalonica and continued preaching and teaching for a longer period before they were finally driven out of the city.32 Paul refers or alludes to the essential instructions on the Christian faith, its theology, Christology, soteriology, and eschatology (1 Thess 1:9–10; 2:11–12; 4:14; 5:2, 9–10), as well as on the “holy” way of life (2:10–12; 4:1–12; see comment on 4:4 below) that he delivered to the readers. It is quite reasonable to think that it would have taken a longer time than a mere three or four weeks for Paul and his team to give those teachings sufficiently clearly and persuasively to convert the former pagans and enable them to start living in accordance with them. Likewise, the continuing existence of the church, even under persecution after Paul’s missionary team was forcefully driven out of Thessalonica (cf. 3:1–10), as well as its maintenance with a leadership structure (5:12–13), points to a sufficiently long period of the team’s ministry to put them on a solid ground of faith and to train some members to take leadership among them. Paul reminds the Thessalonians of his team’s manual labor “night and day” to earn their own living while ministering to them (2:9) and to set an example for them to imitate (2 Thess 3:7–9). This testimony also suggests the team’s stay among the Thessalonians extended beyond a month. Paul’s testimony in Phil 4:15–16 that he received financial aid from the Philippian church more than once while staying in Thessalonica also suggests the same conclusion.33 However, since he shares both how anxious he had been about the budding Thessalonian church succumbing to the temptations and persecutions before he received his envoy Timothy’s report of their perseverance in faith (1 Thess 3:1–9), as well as how earnestly he prays to come to them again to “supply what is lacking in [their] faith” (3:10), his mission in Thessalonica appears to have lasted only for a period that he regarded as very insufficient. So we may support the conclusion of Riesner that “the overall chronological framework [of Paul] also precludes a period much longer than two to four months.”34 Luke does not narrate the Pauline team’s activities outside the synagogue, either. But it can also be deduced from 1 Thessalonians itself that even before 32 Cf., e.g., Holtz, 11–12; Weima, 26; Keener, Acts, 3:2539–40. 33 Cf. Holtz, 11–12; Weima, 26; Keener, Acts, 3:2539–40. 34 Early Period, 364.

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 59

7/12/23 11:28 AM

60  Introduction their expulsion from the synagogue, during the weekdays they preached the gospel to gentiles while working at a tentmaking or leather-­handling workshop to earn their living (1 Thess 2:9–10; 2 Thess 3:7–9).35 It may also be assumed that after their expulsion from the synagogue, they continued preaching to gentiles at the workshop (of Jason?)36 before they were finally driven out of the city. It is likely that during this period they preached to gentiles also at the agora (cf. Acts 17:17). Certainly this assumption makes it easier to understand why Paul defends the integrity of his ministry against the non-­Christian opponents in Thessalonica who apparently accused him à la charlatan philosophers (1 Thess 2:1–12).37 He could also have used the homes of his gentile converts, such as Secundus (Acts 20:4) and the “prominent women” (17:4, 12), just as he must have preached the gospel to Jews at the home of Jason (17:6, 9; cf. Rom 16:21) and possibly also at that of Aristarchus (Acts 20:4; cf. Col 4:10–11; Phlm 24).38 And many of their gentile hearers were impressed by the impeccable integrity of Paul and his colleagues, which was quite unlike the demeanor of many usual itinerant orators (see “The Structure and Function of 1 Thessalonians 1–3” below), as well as by the novelty and attractiveness of their message of deliverance and eternal life at God’s last judgment. So, many of them “turned to God from idols, to serve a living and true God, and to wait for his Son from heaven, whom he raised from the dead, Jesus who delivers us from the wrath to come” (1 Thess 1:9–10; cf. 5:9–10). The church of Thessalonica was thus established, comprising a majority of gentile converts (cf. Acts 17:4b: “a great many of the God-­fearing Greeks and not a few of the prominent women”) and a minority of Jewish believers (cf. Acts 17:4a: “some of them [i.e., the Jews]”). This is confirmed by the fact that in 1 Thessalonians Paul addresses mainly the gentile believers (cf. 1:9; 2:14, see comment ad loc), just as he does the same in the Corinthian letters and Galatians, although undoubtedly there was a minority of Jewish believers in those churches.39 However, in 1 Thessalonians Paul does not deal with the law of Moses or any other issue that relates to the Jew-­gentile relationship, unlike those letters. It may be because the number of Jewish believers in Thessalonica was very small as well as because the time between Paul’s founding of the church and his writing of this letter was too short for those issues to arise seriously in the Thessalonian church. However, here we need to keep in mind the fact that only a couple of years before his mission in Thessalonica he had

35 36 37 38

Cf. Hock, Social Context, 26–49; Malherbe, Paul, 17–20; Vos, Church, 152–54. Cf. Vos, Church, 148; Weima, 29. So Brocke, Thessaloniki, 151; pace Vos, Church, 153, and Weima, 29. But Brocke, Thessaloniki, 243, considers him a Greek, while Riesner, Early Period, 348, considers him a Jew. For Secundus as Paul’s gentile convert in Thessalonica, cf. Riesner, Early Period, 351; Brocke, Thessaloniki, 243–45. 39 Cf. Riesner, Early Period, 348–89; Tellbe, Paul, 90–91; pace Vos, Church, 144–47, who suggests that the Thessalonian church was composed entirely of gentile Thessalonians.

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 60

7/12/23 11:28 AM



Background to the Thessalonian Letters 61

had significant debates concerning the Jew-­gentile relationship in the church at the Jerusalem Council and the Antioch controversy (AD 47–48). So it seems more realistic to assume that, recollecting the arguments that he had delivered at those meetings and also appealing to his dramatic experience of conversion/call from a zealous Pharisee to a gentile apostle on the Damascus road (cf. 2:4 with Explanation on 2:1–4; cf. also Gal 1:13–17, 23), Paul taught his gospel of salvation of both Jews and gentiles by grace through faith in the Thessalonian church. I believe that this assumption is borne out by Paul’s summary references to the gospel that he preached to the Thessalonians (1:10; 4:14; 5:9–10; see comment ad loc) and his repeated affirmation of the Thessalonians’ acceptance of the gospel as their faith in it (1:5–10; 2:13; 4:14; see comment ad loc). Only because Paul so taught in the Thessalonian church, could he have persuaded the Jewish believers like Jason to accept gentile believers as brothers and sisters in Christ and as fellow members of God’s holy people.40 Therefore, apparently the Jewish believers did not raise the issue of gentile believers’ circumcision and observance of the food laws, and so forth (just as Peter, Barnabas, and the Jewish Christians in Antioch had not raised it “before certain people came from James” to them, Gal 2:12). Therefore, in our letter Paul had no need to address it.41

C. The Social Composition of the Thessalonian Church It is generally agreed that most of the members of the Thessalonian church were low-­class freeborn artisans and manual workers (cf. 1 Cor 1:26).42 For Paul’s admonition for the Thessalonian Christians “to work with [their] hands, so that [they] may command the respect of outsiders, and be dependent on nobody” (1 Thess 4:11–12) would have applied only to them (see comment on 4:11). It is quite likely that Paul and his team won many of them to the Christian faith by working alongside them at an insula-­workshop.43 They saw how hard the missionaries worked night and day to earn their living while preaching the gospel and exhorting and encouraging them to live in a manner worthy of God’s kingdom (2:9–12; 2 Thess 3:6–12). But then Paul’s reference in 1 Thess 5:12 to the προϊστάμενοι (leaders who take care of the church, i.e., patrons; see comment ad loc) indicates that there were some wealthy members in the Thessalonian church as well. Certainly Jason in the Lukan narrative (Acts 17:5–9), who sheltered Paul and his colleagues in his house and later posted a bail for them, would be one of them. Secundus “from Thessalonica” 40 Cf. Kim, “Gospel That Paul Preached,” esp. sections 16–18, in PGTO, 97–108. 41 See Kim, “Gospel That Paul Preached” and “Paul’s Doctrine of Justification in 2 Thessalonians 1–2,” in PGTO, respectively 67–131 and 279–95. 42 E.g., Jewett, Correspondence, 120–23; Hock, Social Context, 45; Riesner, Early Period, 377; Vos, Church, 150–54; Tellbe, Paul, 92. 43 Cf. Vos, Church, 152–53.

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 61

7/12/23 11:28 AM

62  Introduction (Acts 20:4), probably a Roman citizen,44 could be another. Luke also mentions that Paul won for Christ some “leading women” (Acts 17:4; probably wives of prominent citizens). The fact that there were some “idlers” in the church who stopped working and apparently lived off the church’s common fund suggests that there indeed were some members in the church who were wealthy enough to contribute to the fund. Some of them could also have provided the church with a meeting place in their house. Arguing against Ascough, who thinks that the Thessalonian church was organized as a professional association,45 Tellbe suggests that it was organized as an association similar to the religious ones or to a household (collegium domesticus).46

4. Persecution and the End of the Pauline Mission in Thessalonica A. Paul’s Christological/Soteriological Gospel Preached to the Thessalonians We can reconstruct the gospel that Paul preached at Thessalonica from his own references to it in 1 Thess 1:9–10; 2:11–12; 4:14; 5:2, 9–10 (cf. 4:1–2). The concise summary of his gospel in 1:10 is especially helpful, as it echoes together with 5:9–10 the christological gospel of Rom 1:3–4 and its soteriological explanation in Rom 1:16–17, as well as their related passages in the rest of Romans and other Pauline letters (see comment ad loc).47 The view that at Thessalonica Paul preached the gospel of Rom 1:3–4 is also supported by Luke’s accounts of Paul’s gospel preaching at Antioch of Pisidia and at Thessalonica. In Acts 13:16–47 Luke fully reports Paul’s lengthy sermon at Pisidian Antioch, which is centered on Christology: Jesus was the seed of David promised in the Scriptures, and he was raised from the dead to be installed as God’s Son in accordance with Ps 2:7 (Acts 13:22–23, 33–34). There Luke includes Paul’s explicit exposition of the soteriological meaning of this gospel (vv. 38–41): through this Jesus, the seed of David/Son of God, everyone who believes, Jew first and then also gentile, receives “forgiveness of sins” or “ justification” (v. 38, δικαιωθῆναι/δικαιοῦται). Luke adds also Paul’s citation of Hab 1:5, which encourages faith in God’s saving work, albeit by the negative way of warning against unbelief that would lead to destruction (Acts 13:40–41). Thus, Paul’s sermon at Pisidian Antioch as reported by Luke appears quite clearly to be an unfolding of “the gospel of God” that Paul says he was “called [and] set apart” to preach as an apostle (Rom 1:1–5). It is also Paul’s exposition of its soteriological meaning in Rom 1:16–17 in terms of justification of everyone who believes in the gospel, Jew or gentile, which includes a citation of Hab 2:4 in order to encourage faith in the gospel of God’s saving work.48 44 45 46 47 48

Cf. Riesner, Early Period, 350–51. “Community,” 316–22. Paul, 93. Cf. also Kim, “Jesus the Son of God as the Gospel,” in PGTO, 45–66. For more details, see section 2, “Parallelism between Paul’s Gospel Preached at the Pisidian

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 62

7/12/23 11:28 AM



Background to the Thessalonian Letters 63

Luke then simply summarizes the gospel that Paul preached in the synagogue of Thessalonica as “Jesus is the Messiah” and elaborates on it by saying only that for three Sabbaths Paul argued from the Scriptures with the Jewish worshipers there to explain and prove the necessity of the Messiah’s death and resurrection (Acts 17:2–3). However, later on Luke also reports that the Jewish opponents in Thessalonica accused Paul and his team to the politarchs of the city of proclaiming the revolutionary message that “there is another king, Jesus!” against “the decrees of Caesar” (Acts 17:6–7). Note that these three points of the sermon at Thessalonica are in fact the summaries of the lengthy explanations in the sermon at Pisidian Antioch (Acts 13:16–47): a. Jesus is the seed of David (Acts 13:22–23) � “Jesus is the Messiah” (Acts 17:3b); b. Jesus’s suffering, crucifixion, and resurrection are according to the prophecies or divine promises (Acts 13:26–37) � “It was necessary for the Messiah to suffer and to rise from the dead” (Acts 17:3a); and c. God raised Jesus, David’s seed, from the dead and declared him to be his Son (the Davidic king) according to Ps 2:7 (Acts 13:32–36) � “Jesus is king” (Acts 17:7). Thus it is clear that the Lukan presentation of Paul’s gospel preaching at Thessalonica is really a summary of his gospel preaching (or its christological part) at Pisidian Antioch. So Luke means that at Thessalonica Paul preached the same “gospel of God” of Rom 1:3–4 as at Pisidian Antioch. It is quite understandable that having reported Paul’s typical preaching of that gospel in Jewish synagogues quite fully in the narrative of his mission in Pisidian Antioch, Luke, the skillful writer, gives only an abbreviated version of it in the subsequent narrative of his mission in Thessalonica (cf. Acts 18:5 for an even briefer abbreviation of Paul’s gospel preached at the Corinthian synagogue: “The Christ [Messiah] was Jesus”). In his report of Paul’s gospel preaching at Thessalonica, Luke omits an explicit reference to Paul’s soteriological exposition of the christological gospel (Acts 13:38–41), which is equivalent to Rom 1:16–17, because in Acts 17:1–9 he is interested mainly in showing how Paul’s christological gospel triggered his trial and expulsion from Thessalonica. Nevertheless, it is fairly clear that by stating that it was necessary for the Messiah to suffer, die, and be raised (Acts 17:3), Luke starkly abbreviates the thought that he expressed in Acts 13:38–41, namely, the Messiah’s death was an atonement (wrought in fulfillment of the prophecies [Acts 13:26–37]) for “forgiveness of sins” or “ justification” of the sinners who have faith (= Rom 1:16–17). Thus, Luke’s reports of Paul’s gospel preaching at Pisidian Antioch and at Antioch (Acts 13:16b–47) and Thessalonica (Acts 17:1–9) and Paul’s Gospel in Rom 1:1–17,” in Kim, “Gospel That Paul Preached,” in PGTO, 67–71.

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 63

7/12/23 11:28 AM

64  Introduction Thessalonica support our inference from Paul’s own summary references to the gospel that he preached to the Thessalonians (1 Thess 1:10; 4:14; 5:9–10), namely, that Paul preached at Thessalonica “the gospel of God” of Rom 1:3–4 and its soteriological corollary (Rom 1:16–17). In fact, Luke’s reports help us understand why there are so many echoes of that gospel of God in those texts of 1 Thessalonians and why there are the clearly visible allusions to Paul’s doctrine of justification in the two Thessalonian epistles.49

B. Jewish Spinning of Paul’s Gospel and Their Accusation to the Politarchs of Him and Silas as Revolutionaries Luke’s report in Acts 17:2–3 suggests that many Jews in the Thessalonian synagogue were particularly offended by the notion of a crucified Messiah, so that Paul concentrated on arguing out of the Scriptures for the necessity of the Messiah’s death and resurrection. Given the traditional expectation of the Messiah in Judaism, this is well understandable. In fact, Luke suggests that at Pisidian Antioch Paul did the same (Acts 13:26–37; see esp. vv. 27, 29, 32–35). However, the Jewish opponents in Thessalonica accused Paul and his team to the politarchs of the city of proclaiming the revolutionary message, “There is another king, Jesus!” (Acts 17:7). We have just seen that this represents the proclamation of Jesus, the seed of David, as the exalted Son of God in “the gospel of God” of Rom 1:3–4. So it appears that whereas during the internal debate with Paul within the Thessalonian synagogue the Jewish opponents centered their attack on the notion of a crucified Messiah, in accusing him and his team to the politarchs they focused on another key element of Paul’s gospel, namely, that Jesus is the Messiah, that he was exalted as God’s Son, his viceroy. They spun this message as a proclamation of Jesus as a king in the political sense in order to persuade the authorities of the city to punish Paul and his missionary team as political criminals. Thus, the supposition that Paul preached in Thessalonica the gospel cited in Rom 1:3–4 as he did in Pisidian Antioch helps us understand the rationale for the Jewish accusation of Paul and Silas and to appreciate its seriousness properly. Luke narrates that, out of jealousy for Paul’s missionary team’s success in winning many gentile God-­fearers and prominent women, the Jews initiated a persecution and staged a demonstration against them by gathering the first-­ century counterpart of our modern “rent-­a-­mob”—­in the delightful idiom of the King James Version, “certain lewd fellows of the baser sort” (τῶν ἀγοραίων ἄνδρας τινὰς πονηρούς, Acts 17:5).50 The Jews may indeed have been concerned about 49 Cf. my essays, “Justification by Grace and through Faith in 1 Thessalonians” (PNP, 85–100); “Gospel That Paul Preached” (PGTO, 67–131); and “The Doctrine of Justification in 2 Thessalonians” (PGTO, 279–95). 50 Cf. Lake, Epistles, 69n1, who translates ἀγοραίοι as “agitators,” citing Plutarch, Aemilius Paullus 38: ἀνθρώπους ἀγεννεῖς δεδουλευκότας, ἀγοραίους δὲ καὶ δυναμένους ὄχλον συναγάγειν, “ignoble and servile fellows, agitators adept at gathering a crowd.”

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 64

7/12/23 11:28 AM



Background to the Thessalonian Letters 65

some of the God-­fearers and prominent gentile women in their midst turning to Paul’s message (cf. Acts 13:45), as those gentiles must have played a positive role in their maintaining a good relationship with the gentile environment of Thessalonica. However, the more important reason for their drastic action against Paul’s team must have been directly concerned with the content of their message, and it was twofold: their fundamental theological objection to the team’s message of a crucified Messiah (cf. 1 Cor 1:22–23; Gal 3:13; 5:11), and their awareness of the political danger of condoning or harboring in their midst the missionaries who proclaimed Jesus as the Messiah, God’s Son and the Lord. They knew well that it would alarm the pro-­Roman Thessalonian authorities and populace as a subversive message against the Roman emperor and could trigger their wrath against the Jewish community. So they decided to get rid of the heretical missionaries or false prophets (cf. 1 Thess 2:3–7 with comment ad loc) by accusing them of proclaiming a new king, Jesus, and attempting a revolution (Acts 17:6–7). This was the surest charge for achieving their purpose as well as a useful means of demonstrating their loyalty to the Roman Empire. Although Luke explicitly mentions only some “lewd fellows” of the agora (marketplace) among the “mob” that the Jews gathered to search for the missionaries and attack their host Jason (Acts 17:5–6), it is likely that the mob also included some relatives and friends of the missionaries’ gentile converts who were not happy to see them swayed by suspicious itinerant orators (cf. 1 Thess 2:3–7 with comment ad loc) to abandon their ancestral gods, their trades, and their city to turn to a strange god (1:5, 9; 2:14; and Explanation on 2:13–16 below). So, the Jews and the gentile mob attacked the house of Jason in order to lay hands on Paul and his coworkers, but, failing to find them there, they seized Jason and some other believers and dragged them before the politarchs, charging: “These men who have subverted the civilized world [οἱ τὴν οἰκουμένην ἀναστατώσαντες] have come here too, and their practices are clean contrary to Caesar’s decrees: they are proclaiming a rival emperor, Jesus!” (Acts 17:6–7). In this way the missionaries were accused of disturbing the order and peace of the world (pax romana) that the Roman Empire was hailed as securing, and of posing a threat to the emperor himself.

C. The Charge of Violating the “Decrees of Caesar” Paul’s proclamation of Jesus as the Davidic Messiah and God’s Son or the viceroy of his kingdom (cf. 1 Thess 2:12), who would come (παρουσία) again to earth from heaven to judge the world and save his people (1:10; 3:12–13; 4:16; 5:2–3; 2 Thess 2:3–8), could naturally be taken as proclaiming Jesus as a rival emperor. But such sedition or treason (maiestas) was an offense against public law and required no specific decree of Caesar to make it illegal.51 However, 51 Cf. Judge, “Decrees,” 2. For the lex Iulia de maiestate, see Bauman, Crimen Maiestatis, and idem, Impietas in principem.

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 65

7/12/23 11:28 AM

66  Introduction Luke reports that the missionaries were accused of contravening “the decrees of Caesar.” It is debated as to what “decrees of Caesar” the Jews and the mob or Luke might have had in view. In his seminal article (“Decrees”), E. Judge made the first serious attempt to answer this question. Against A. N. Sherwin-­W hite, who thinks that Luke “possibly garbled” the report,52 Judge first argues that in view of the usual accuracy of Luke in reporting the matters of legal and political practice in Acts, the difficulty of identifying the decrees should be seen as pointing to the authenticity of the charge.53 He then considers the possibility that the “decrees of Caesar” might refer to the edicts that Augustus and Tiberius issued.54 Both emperors had been very sensitive about the activities of astrologers and other prognosticators. Augustus in AD 11 issued a decree forbidding, among other things, the forecasting of anyone’s death (Dio Cassius, Hist. 56.25.5–6), and five years later this prohibition was reaffirmed and extended by Tiberius (Dio Cassius, Hist. 57.15.8). The practice of magic and divination in general was banned as well as of astrology; in particular, consultation about the emperor’s health or about high matters of state was apparently forbidden under the severest penalties (cf. Tacitus, Ann. 2.27–32; Paulus, Sententiae 5.21). Apparently one of the aims, if not the chief one, of those edicts was to prevent speculations about the change of rulers and attempts at usurpation. So Paul’s gospel of the Davidic Messiah, of Jesus as God’s Son and Lord (or Jesus as another king) could have been taken as proclaiming the change of emperor that those decrees of Caesar were prohibiting. Furthermore, the charge that “these men who have turned the world upside down have come here also” (Acts 17:6) is reminiscent of the phraseology of the letter that Claudius wrote to the Alexandrians in AD 41 to ban the importation of Jewish agitators to Alexandria. Judge considers the possibility that “there may have been an imperial edict covering Jewish messianic agitation which the Thessalonian informers invoked.”55 Judge says that there are good grounds for supposing that the Jewish agitation in Alexandria was a messianic one. He then points to the disturbance in the Jewish community in Rome about the time of Paul’s mission in Thessalonica, the disturbance that took place, according to Suetonius (Claud. 25.4), at the instigation of “Chrestus” (most probably a misidentification of “Christus”). Since Claudius condemned the Jewish agitation as “a general plague which infests the whole world” (Claudius, Letter to the Alexandrines, P.Lond. 1912, CPI 2.153, line 99) and took the drastic action of expelling the Jews from Rome (AD 49), it appears quite possible that he issued an edict against the Jewish messianic

52 53 54 55

Roman Society, 96. “Decrees,” 1. “Decrees,” 3–5. “Decrees,” 7.

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 66

7/12/23 11:28 AM



Background to the Thessalonian Letters 67

agitation. But Judge says that “the lack of the term ‘Christ’ in Acts 17:7 may weigh against this” line of thinking.56 Strangely, he fails to understand that the charge in that verse, “there is another king, Jesus,” is a representation of Paul’s proclamation, “this Jesus . . . is the Christ” (Acts 17:3), the messianic king! It is difficult to understand how Judge can make an issue of the absence of the term “Christ” after he has correctly explained57 that what Paul taught of Christ to the Thessalonian church (1 Thess 4:16; 5:2–3; 2 Thess 2:3, 4, 5, 8; cf. further 1 Thess 1:10; 4:14) could easily have been understood as predictions of a change of ruler. At any rate, several scholars accept this possibility of a connection between the “decrees of Caesar” and Claudius’s letter to the Alexandrians and his edict of expulsion of the Jews from Rome,58 just as several others take it as referring to the edicts of Augustus and Tiberius against forecasting the death (therefore, change) of a ruler.59 Some scholars think that the “decrees of Caesar” could refer both to those of Augustus and Tiberius and to that of Claudius, whose news could have reached Thessalonica just before or during the time of Paul’s mission in Thessalonica.60 However, Judge considers yet a third possibility, that the “decrees of Caesar” might refer to the oaths of loyalty that various municipalities swore to support the house of Caesar and to hunt down and destroy its enemies.61 But he realizes that “the surviving texts of oaths did not give specific enough grounds for taking the word ‘decree’ as a description of their terms.”62 Yet, referring to the oath of loyalty from Paphos in Cyprus that contains the additional elements of reverence and pledges of obedience, he wonders whether a formula of that kind could have been taken by the Thessalonians as a “decree” of Caesar.63 But this is not quite convincing. Nevertheless, Judge’s treatment of the oaths of loyalty is helpful in explaining how or why the Thessalonian politarchs instead of the Roman proconsul of Macedonia dealt with the Thessalonian mob’s charge of Paul’s team for contravening the “decrees of Caesar.”64 For this Judge points especially to an inscription of Samos (5 BC) that shows that the local authorities were responsible for administering the oath.65 From that inscription we may 56 “Decrees,” 7. So also Weima, 33. 57 “Decrees,” 3. 58 E.g., Erhardt, Acts, 96; D. Alvarez Cineira, Religionspolitik, 267–70; Peterson, Acts, 482; Keener, Acts, 3:2555–56. 59 E.g., Donfried, “Cults of Thessalonica,” 32–34; Hemer, Book of Acts, 167; Witherington, 508; Green, 40; Weima, 33–34. 60 E.g., Riesner, Early Period, 356–58; Keener, Acts, 3:2555–56. 61 “Decrees,” 5–6. 62 “Decrees,” 6. 63 “Decrees,” 6. 64 “Decrees,” 5; cf. Riesner, Early Period, 357. 65 “Decrees,” 6–7.

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 67

7/12/23 11:28 AM

68  Introduction infer that, in fulfillment of their oath of loyalty to Caesar, the Thessalonian politarchs tried Jason and the other Christians with him (who stood on behalf of Paul’s mission team) for the accusation that Jews and the Thessalonian mob brought, namely, that the missionaries were proclaiming a new emperor, Jesus, in contravention of the “decrees of Caesar.” And they did so in reference either to the decrees of Augustus and Tiberius or to those plus the decree of Claudius against Jewish messianism (as there could well have been such a decree).

D. Did Paul Preach a Counter-­Roman Gospel? The Thessalonian politarchs, who were ever eager to show their loyalty to Caesar and his empire in order to keep their legal and other privileges, must have taken the anti-­C aesarian charge most seriously, all the more because the rival emperor whom Paul and the others were accused of proclaiming was Jesus, who had been sentenced to death by a Roman judge on a charge of sedition. However, the politarchs contented themselves with “taking security” (λαβόντες τὸ ἱκανόν, cf. Latin satis accipere) from Jason and other Christians with him (Acts 17:9)—­making them responsible for the missionaries’ good behavior, which meant their guaranteeing that they, and in particular Paul, would leave the city quietly. First Thessalonians confirms this implication of the Lukan report that the Thessalonian politarchs just expelled Paul and his team from Thessalonica without any worse punishment (cf. esp. 1 Thess 2:15, 17–18), just as the magistrates of Philippi asked them simply to leave their city after a brief detention even though they were accused of teaching contrary to the Roman law and disturbing the order and peace of the city (Acts 16:19–40). It is understandable that Paul’s gospel of Jesus the Davidic Messiah/God’s Son, the Lord (κύριος) (1 Thess 1:10; 4:16; 2 Thess 2:1, 8) and his criticism of pax romana as a vain glory (1 Thess 5:2–3) were heard as counter-­Caesarean and as subversive to the Roman Empire. Why did the Thessalonian politarchs nevertheless not convict Paul and his colleagues of violating the “decrees of Caesar” or committing treason but let them just leave the city? It is only because Paul and his colleagues were acquitted of that charge in Thessalonica that they could go on preaching the same gospel of Christ in Corinth and elsewhere, just as they could continue to preach it in Thessalonica only because they had been released by the Philippian magistrates with no conviction of counter-­Roman teachings, although initially they were maltreated with a suspicion of such a crime (Acts 16:20–21, 35–40; 1 Thess 2:2). Some counter-­ Roman interpreters of Paul make much of the fact that he was repeatedly accused of preaching a counter-­Roman gospel, but they are strangely silent about such acquittals and about his continuation with the same gospel. They do not consider the implications of these facts. In fact, Paul’s Christology and his stance toward the Roman Empire (critical but redemptive rather than rebellious), at least what can be ascertained

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 68

7/12/23 11:28 AM



Background to the Thessalonian Letters 69

from his letters, make understandable both his prosecution before the municipal or Roman authorities of suspected counter-­Roman teachings and his acquittal of them.66 It is probable that Jason and other Christians explained to the politarchs that Jesus was falsely accused before Pilate and that Paul’s gospel did not mean to pose any threat to the emperor or the empire (cf. Acts 25:8). It is possible that they were known to be men and women of substance who would not readily encourage anti-­Roman revolutionaries, so that the politarchs gave credence to their explanation of the Pauline gospel in a nonpolitical way. Nevertheless, the politarchs were concerned about quieting the commotion surrounding the Pauline mission and restoring the public order. So they ordered the team’s quiet departure from Thessalonica and had Jason and the other Christians with him guarantee it.

E. The End of Paul’s Thessalonian Mission To protect his friends, Paul had no option but to leave, but he left most reluctantly. He believed that the new Christians in Thessalonica had received insufficient instruction to prepare them for the life that they would henceforth need to lead, but successive attempts that he made to return to them were thwarted (1 Thess 2:18). He well knew the kind of treatment they would have to put up with, and he felt for them acutely. What would the leading citizens say to their wives who had joined this new and suspect society? “A fine lot these Jewish spellbinders are! They come here and persuade you to join their following, but as soon as trouble blows up, off they go and leave their dupes to face the music!” Thus, the unbelieving family members, relatives, friends, and colleagues of the new Christians likely tried to reverse their conversion by criticizing Paul and his team à la the charlatan philosophers or false prophets (see “The Structure and Function of 1 Thess 1–3” below). Such pressure was hard enough to bear, but both letters to the Thessalonians make it plain that some of the converts had to endure not just ridicule but 66 Cf. Kim, Christ and Caesar, 65–71. I quote a paragraph from the book (65–66): “Yet Paul’s epistles lead us to assume that he was repeatedly released to continue his mission of preaching the gospel of the Lord Jesus Christ. So he went on preaching messages like those in Rom 1:3–5; 15:12; 1 Cor 2:6–8; 15:24–28; Phil 2:6–11; 3:20–21 without any reservation. It is most remarkable that he had no hesitation in writing Phil 2:6–11; 3:20–21 even while waiting for his trial, most probably, before Caesar. Rather, he vowed to bear witness to the Lord Jesus Christ or to ‘magnify’ him without flinching at the imperial court (perhaps by presenting him as in Phil 2:6–11 and 3:20–21), and yet still expressed his confidence about his eventual acquittal and release (Phil 1:19–26). He must have done this only because he did not see preaching the Lord Jesus Christ—­a s in Rom 1:3–5; 15:12; 1 Cor 2:6–8; 15:24–28; Phil 2:6–11; 3:20–21; 1 Thess 1:9–10; 4:13–5:11—as containing any anti-­imperial meaning, or because he was confident of explaining at the Roman court that his message does not contain any subversive element to the imperial order. The combination of the inclusio of Rom 1:3–5/15:12 with Rom 13:1–7 suggests at least one line of his apologia.” See further my two essays, “Is Paul Preaching” and “Paul and the Roman Empire,” both in PGTO, respectively 217–22, 223–51. Cf. also p. 593n151.

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 69

7/12/23 11:28 AM

70  Introduction probably also ostracism from family, job, and community, as well as other forms of persecution: they are commended for their “steadfastness and faith” in all their “persecutions and . . . afflictions” (2 Thess 1:4; cf. 1 Thess 3:1–10). Paul and Silvanus were spirited away quietly by night and escorted to Beroea, a city lying some way south of the Via Egnatia—­oppidum deuium, “a town off the main road,” as Cicero calls it (Pis. 89). In Beroea as in Thessalonica they visited the synagogue and used the reading of the Scripture lessons as an occasion for communicating the gospel to the congregation (Acts 17:10). The Jews of Beroea gave them unprejudiced attention and showed themselves willing to study the sacred text carefully to see if it could reasonably be interpreted along the lines indicated by the two visitors (v. 11). A number of them were convinced (v. 12). One is known to us by name—­Sopater the son of Pyrrhus (probably identical with the Sosipater of Rom 16:21), who seven years later accompanied Paul to Judea with other delegates from his Aegean mission field, who were taking their respective churches’ contributions to the Jerusalem relief fund (Acts 20:4). In addition, the converts at Beroea, as at Thessalonica, included several “Greek women of high standing” (17:12). Throughout Paul’s Macedonian mission, then, women of substance appear to have played an influential part among his converts, beginning with Lydia, his first convert in Philippi (Acts 16:14). This is in keeping with the traditional status of women in Macedonian society. “If Macedonia produced perhaps the most competent group of men the (western) world had yet seen, the women were in all respects the men’s counterparts; they played a large part in affairs, received envoys and obtained concessions from them for their husbands, built temples, founded cities, engaged mercenaries, commanded armies, held fortresses, and acted on occasion as regents or even co-­r ulers.”67 This example, set by women of the ruling classes, was evidently followed by their freeborn sisters in lower social ranks. But some of Paul’s opponents in Thessalonica, learning of his activity in Beroea, made their way there and stirred up the same kind of agitation as they had done at home (Acts 17:13). Once again Paul had to be spirited away for his own safety and that of his converts (v. 14). His Beroean friends conveyed him to Athens (v. 15), and from Athens, after a short stay, he went on to Corinth (18:1), where he arrived, as he says, “in weakness and in much fear and trembling” (1 Cor 2:3). He had been virtually expelled as a troublemaker from one Macedonian city after another. Had he and his companions been mistaken when they crossed the sea from Asia Minor to Macedonia under a conviction of divine guidance? Had the Macedonian mission proved abortive? In each Macedonian city they visited they had established a community of believers. But the missionaries had been forced to leave these young converts abruptly, and they 67 Tarn and Griffith, Hellenistic Civilisation, 98–99.

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 70

7/12/23 11:28 AM



Background to the Thessalonian Letters 71

were inadequately equipped with the instruction and encouragement necessary to enable them to stand firm in the face of determined opposition. Would their immature faith prove equal to the challenge? It did, outstandingly so, but this could not have been foreseen. The first gospel campaign in Macedonia, in the light of the sequel, can be recognized as an illustrious success, but at the time when Paul was compelled to leave the province it must have been felt as a heartbreaking failure.

5. Paul’s Plan of Action Paul is not said in our records to have had any definite plan of action in mind when he landed in Macedonia. But perhaps, as he and his companions journeyed westward along the Via Egnatia, a plan of action began to take shape in his thinking. It was not by his own choice that he left the Via Egnatia at Thessalonica and turned south to Beroea. If no obstacles had been placed in his path, he could have continued to its western terminus on the Adriatic. But the western terminus of the Via Egnatia would have been no goal in itself; its importance lay in its being a stage on the road to Rome. A short sea-­crossing over the Strait of Otranto would have taken him to Brundisium (modern Brindisi), and from there the Via Appia led to Rome. Some seven years later, Paul tells the Roman Christians that he has frequently been prevented from carrying out a longstanding intention of paying them a visit (Rom 1:13; 15:22). His first steps along the Via Egnatia might certainly have moved him to conceive such an intention. G. Bornkamm judges that “we can be perfectly sure that, at the latest, in Asia Minor and on the journey through Macedonia to Thessalonica, Rome was present in Paul’s mind as a far-­off objective.”68 But he was “hindered” from realizing it at the time, partly by the agitation in Thessalonica, which compelled him to turn south, partly by his involvement in the formation and building up of Christian communities in Corinth and other places in Achaia after his enforced departure from Macedonia, and partly perhaps because news of Claudius’s recent expulsion of Jews from Rome showed him that he need not think of going there at that time. He certainly learned of the expulsion edict at the latest when he came to Corinth and met Priscilla and Aquila, who had been obliged to leave Rome because of that edict (Acts 18:2). But he may have learned of it earlier. If Jews who were expelled from Rome headed for the east, the Via Egnatia offered itself as a major highway along which they might travel. News of the edict (which is probably to be dated AD 49), and possibly some of those who had been evicted because of it, could have reached Thessalonica while Paul was still there. If so, this would help to fill in more of the background against which the charges against Paul and his colleagues at Thessalonica are to be evaluated. 68 Bornkamm, Paul, 51; cf. Harnack, Mission and Expansion, 74–75; Cadbury, Book of Acts, 60–61; Judge and Thomas, “Origin,” 90.

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 71

7/12/23 11:28 AM

72  Introduction

6. Paul and the Churches of Macedonia Paul’s continuing relations with the Thessalonian and other Macedonian churches can be followed to some extent in the letters to the Thessalonians and the Philippians; he alludes to them further in writing to the Corinthians and the Romans. From these references we gather that his relations with them were happy. He commends them for their steadfastness in faith and witness even under severe persecution and for their consistently generous giving—­not only to himself personally but also to the Jerusalem relief fund—­in circumstances of deep poverty (cf. 2 Cor 8:1–5; 11:9; Rom 15:26). Five years after Paul’s enforced departure from Macedonia he was able to revisit the province, and this time no great difficulties appear to have arisen for him. With the accession of Nero in October, AD 54, some of the hindrances imposed in the principate of Claudius may have lapsed. Toward the end of his Ephesian ministry (in the spring of AD 55), Paul planned to pass through Macedonia and continue south to see his friends in Corinth (1 Cor 16:5) and, although troubles in the Corinthian church caused some modification in his plans (2 Cor 1:15–2:13), he did spend a considerable time in Macedonia. It is indicated also by the narrative of Acts (19:21; 20:1–2) that he visited Macedonia at this time, but a careful reading of the evidence suggests that his stay in the province was longer than might appear on the surface of the Acts narrative—­that, in fact, he was able to travel farther west along the Via Egnatia than he had been allowed to do on his first visit. This conclusion is dictated by the wording of Rom 15:19 where Paul, at the end of his apostolic program in the eastern Mediterranean, says that he has completed the preaching of the gospel “from Jerusalem and as far round as Illyricum.” The mention of Illyricum, as the farthest west area where he has preached hitherto, implies that he has traveled along the Via Egnatia possibly as far as its terminus at Dyrrhachium and then turned north to cross the frontier separating Macedonia from Illyricum.69 It was not his intention on this occasion to take ship across the Strait of Otranto. He hoped to visit Rome on the way to Spain in the near future (perhaps he crossed into Illyricum to gain some experience in preaching the gospel in Latin, the language which he would be obliged to use in Spain). Meanwhile, he planned to visit Jerusalem with those delegates of his gentile churches who were to carry their contributions to the fund for the relief of the mother church. He returned from Illyricum in (probably) the late summer of AD 56 and traveled back east along the Via Egnatia; then he moved south from eastern Macedonia to Corinth to spend the winter there. About the beginning of the navigation season in AD 57 he was joined by the delegates of the gentile churches, who were to sail with him from Cenchreae to Judea (cf. Acts 20:4; 69 Cf. also Keener, Acts, 3:2538, 2556.

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 72

7/12/23 11:28 AM



The Thessalonian Letters 73

they represented “all the churches of Christ” from which greetings are sent to the Roman Christians in Rom 16:16). They did indeed sail from Cenchreae, but Paul, learning of a plot against his life, changed his traveling plans, went north to Macedonia by land, and took ship from the port of Philippi to Alexandria Troas, where he found his fellow-­travelers awaiting him. At Philippi he was rejoined by the author of the “we” narrative, who journeyed to Jerusalem with him (Acts 20:5–6). This brief and unplanned visit to Philippi (on which he no doubt passed through Thessalonica) was the last occasion spent by Paul on Macedonian soil. But the churches of Macedonia never forgot him, and his apostolic achievement in the province has endured in vigor to the present day.

II. The Thessalonian Letters Bibliography Boers, H. “The Form Critical Study of Paul’s Letters: 1 Thessalonians as a Case Study.” NTS 22 (1976): 141–54. Funk, R. W. “The Apostolic Parousia: Form and Significance.” Pages 249–68 in Christian History and Interpretation: Studies Presented to John Knox. Edited by W. R. Farmer, C. F. D. Moule, and R. R. Niebuhr. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1967. Hughes, F. W. “The Rhetoric of Letters.” Pages 194–240 in The Thessalonians Debate: Methodological Discord or Methodological Synthesis? Edited by K. P. Donfried and J. Beutler. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2000. Johanson, B. C. To All the Brethren: A Text-­Linguistic and Rhetorical Approach to 1 Thessalonians. ConBNT 16. Stockholm: Almqvist & Wiksell, 1987. Krentz, E. “1 Thessalonians: Rhetorical Flourishes and Formal Constraints.” Pages 287–318 in The Thessalonians Debate: Methodological Discord or Methodological Synthesis? Edited by K. P. Donfried and J. Beutler. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2000. Lyons, G. Pauline Autobiography: Toward a New Understanding. SBLDS 73. Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1985. Malherbe, A. J. “Exhortation in First Thessalonians.” NovT 25 (1983): 238–56. —­—­— ­. “ ‘Gentle as a Nurse’: The Cynic Background to 1 Thess ii.” NovT 12 (1970): 203–17. Schoon-­Janssen, J. Umstrittene “Apologien” in den Paulusbriefen: Studien zu rhetorischen Situation des 1. Thessalonicherbriefes, des Galaterbriefes und des Philipperbriefes. GTA 45. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1991. Schubert, P. Form and Function of the Pauline Thanksgivings. BZNW 20. Berlin: Töpelmann, 1939. Weima, J. A. D. “An Apology for the Apologetic Function of 1 Thessalonians 2.1–12.” JSNT 68 (1997): 73–99. White, J. L. The Form and Function of the Body of the Greek Letter: A Study of the Letter-­Body in the Non-­Literary Papyri and in Paul the Apostle. SBLDS 2. Missoula, MT: Scholars Press, 1972. Winter, B. W. “The Entries and Ethics of the Orators and Paul (1 Thessalonians 2.1–12).” TynBul 44 (1993): 55–74. —­—­—­. “Is Paul among the Sophists?” RTR 53 (1994): 28–38.

1. Authorship of 1 Thessalonians Two letters addressed to “the church of the Thessalonians” have been preserved for us in the New Testament canon. They are included in the corpus Paulinum, but in fact each of them is superscribed in the names of “Paul, Silvanus, and Timothy.” Both Silvanus (Silas) and Timothy (at least by inference) appear in the record of Acts as Paul’s companions during his first visit to Thessalonica (Acts 17:1–9). For a short time after Paul’s departure from

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 73

7/12/23 11:28 AM

74  Introduction Thessalonica the three were separated, but they were reunited in Corinth (Acts 18:5; cf. 2 Cor 1:19). Corinth thus suggests itself as the place from which the letters to the Thessalonian church were sent. Since Paul, Silvanus, and Timothy are named together as joint-­authors of the letters, it is prima facie conceivable that Silvanus and Timothy played a responsible part along with Paul in the composition. Timothy indeed was Paul’s aide-­de-­camp and is named along with Paul in the prescript of some other letters (2 Corinthians, Philippians, Colossians, Philemon), certainly because he was in Paul’s company when these were written and possibly because he served Paul as amanuensis. Silvanus, on the other hand, occupied a more independent status in relation to Paul. He was not a convert of Paul’s (as Timothy was); he was a member of the church of Jerusalem, enjoying the confidence of the leaders of that church, being himself one of the “leading men among the brethren” there (Acts 15:22). The a priori likelihood that such a man would be joint-­author of letters in which he is named as one of the senders, in a substantial and not a merely nominal sense, is borne out by internal evidence. When Paul in other letters expresses his thanks to God for those to whom he writes, he usually does so in the first-­person singular (“I give thanks . . .”), even when others are associated with him in the prescript (cf. 1 Cor 1:4; Phil 1:3; Phlm 4). (Colossians, sent in the name of himself and Timothy to a church not personally known to him, is an exception. Colossians 1:3 begins, “We always thank God . . .”) However, in both the Thessalonian letters the first-­ person plural is used: “We give thanks to God always” (1 Thess 1:2); “We are bound to give thanks to God always” (2 Thess 1:3). This use of the first-­person plural is maintained throughout both letters (except five places: see below). This fact also seems to hint at least at a greater role of Silvanus in the composition of both Thessalonian letters than that which Timothy or Sosthenes (the co-­sender of 1 Cor) played in the composition of other letters of Paul. Then we have to account for the fact that at certain places the first-­person singular (“I”) suddenly appears (1 Thess 2:18; 3:5; 5:27; 2 Thess 2:5; 3:17). In two of these five places the “I” is accompanied by the name “Paul” (1 Thess 2:18; 2 Thess 3:17). All of them are best explained by the supposition that they were added by Paul as the letters were being dictated. Here the use of the first-­ person singular at the letter ending, at the signature section, in both letters (1 Thess 5:27; 2 Thess 3:17) is especially significant. In 2 Thess 3:17 Paul even adds his name to “I” and emphatically draws attention to his autograph. These features suggest that Paul was the chief author of both letters. It is possible that nevertheless Paul adds Silvanus and Timothy as co-­senders just in order to impress upon the Thessalonian Christians that the contents of the letters represent the unity of the minds of all three cofounders of their church.70 But it is also possible that before and during dictation of the letters Paul 70 Cf. Wanamaker, 68; Weima, 67.

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 74

7/12/23 11:28 AM



The Thessalonian Letters 75

consulted Silvanus especially on the Jesus tradition (cf. 1 Thess 4:13–5:11 with comment ad loc) and the Jerusalem gospel (cf. 1 Thess 1:10 with comment ad loc), and also Timothy on the situation of the Thessalonian believers; the “we” of both letters could reflect that fact. Both Silvanus and Timothy could also have participated in the writing of the two letters as the amanuenses,71 perhaps Timothy for 1 Thessalonians and Silvanus for 2 Thessalonians (see comment on 2 Thess 1:3 below). However, this commentary will show many correspondences (including the doctrine of justification) of our two letters to other Pauline letters such as Romans, 1 and 2 Corinthians, Galatians, and Philippians, as well as the likelihood that Paul’s understanding of the salvation-­historical role of his gentile apostleship is involved in the explanation in 2 Thess 2:3–8 of the “thing and person that restrain” the revelation of “the man of lawlessness.” So, on the whole, it appears fair to conclude that Paul was the main author of both letters and that he dictated there mainly his theological thinking in his style.72 Therefore, reflecting this understanding, as well as for the practical reason of convenience, we shall mostly refer to the single subject “Paul” as the author of both letters in this commentary.

2. Date and Occasion It is commonly agreed that 1 Thessalonians, together with 2 Thessalonians, if its authenticity is accepted, should be dated shortly after the first evangelization of Thessalonica, during what is traditionally (but imprecisely) called Paul’s “second missionary journey”—­about AD 50. After being expelled from Thessalonica, and then in turn from Beroea, Paul was taken to Athens, where he waited for his companions to rejoin him (Acts 17:15–16). When they did so, he sent Timothy back to Thessalonica to see how the new converts there were faring and to report on their well-­being. Timothy was personally attached to Paul, so it was by Paul’s authority that he went to Thessalonica (1 Thess 3:5), but Silvanus concurred in his mission (1 Thess 3:1–4). Timothy returned with good news, and it was the receipt of his news that prompted the sending of 1 Thessalonians. By the time Timothy returned, Paul had moved on to Corinth; Silvanus was also there (cf. 2 Cor 1:19), having come back from a visit that he also had paid to some place in Macedonia (Acts 18:5), so that all three could send 1 Thessalonians as coauthors (1 Thess 1:1). We may confidently date 1 Thessalonians in the earlier part of Paul’s stay in Corinth, and 2 Thessalonians not long afterward (cf. 2 Thess 1:1). This dating is supported also by the fact that, contrary to his custom shown in his other letters (Rom 16:21–23; 1 Cor

71 Cf. Best, 53, 58. 72 Cf. the parallelism in style between 1 Thess 1–3 and 2 Cor 1–7 analyzed in section D of “3. Structure and Function of 1 Thessalonians 1–3, or Occasion and Purpose of 1 Thessalonians” below.

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 75

7/12/23 11:28 AM

76  Introduction 16:19–20; 2 Cor 13:13; Phil 4:21–22; Col 4:14), Paul appends no greetings from others to the Thessalonian church at the end of 1 Thessalonians (and also of 2 Thessalonians). For, as Holtz notes, “This can only mean that no church existed at the place where the letter was composed which could enter into a relationship with the recipient congregation, and also no other co-­workers of Paul except Silvanus and Timothy were present who had any connection with them. This speaks decisively for a date soon after the founding of the [Thessalonian] church.”73 So it appears that Paul, Silvanus, and Timothy wrote 1 Thessalonians soon after they arrived in Corinth.74 If we wish to date 1 Thessalonians more precisely, our main piece of evidence is the Delphi inscription (SIG 23, 801), reproducing a letter from Claudius to that city, apparently confirming the citizens in certain privileges and making reference to Gallio, proconsul of Achaia.75 The letter is dated in the period of Claudius’s twenty-­sixth acclamation as imperator—­a period known from other inscriptions (CIL 3.476; 6.1256) to have covered the first seven months of AD 52. It has usually been supposed that the letter mentions Gallio as current proconsul of Achaia; in that case, since proconsuls normally entered on their tour of duty on 1 July, it would follow that Gallio arrived in Achaia as proconsul on 1 July, AD 51 or (less probably) 1 July, AD 52. It would follow further that Paul’s eighteen months in Corinth (Acts 18:11–17) lasted from the late summer of AD 50 to the spring of AD 52 or (less probably) from the late summer of AD 51 to the spring of AD 53, so that the later part of AD 50 or (less probably) AD 51 would be the date of 1 Thessalonians. But it has been argued by Plassart that Claudius in the letter refers to Gallio not as the current proconsul but as having been proconsul in the recent past.76 If this is so (lacunae in the inscription make certainty impossible), then he cannot have entered on his proconsulship later than July, AD 51, and may have done so a year earlier. The later part of AD 50 would in that case be the latest date for the sending of 1 Thessalonians.77

3. Structure and Function of 1 Thessalonians 1–3, or Occasion and Purpose of 1 Thessalonians78 An introduction of a commentary usually discusses such questions as the occasion, purpose, integrity, applicability of form-­critical and rhetorical-­ 73 Holtz, 11 (my translation). 74 Cf. also Riesner, Early Period, 365. 75 Cf. Smallwood, Documents §376; Brassac, “Une inscription de Delphes et la chronologie de Saint Paul.” 76 “L’inscription de Delphes.” 77 Cf. Schwank, “Der sogenannte Brief.” 78 This (except the first introductory paragraph) is a revised and abbreviated version of the following two articles of mine: “Paul’s Entry (εἴσοδος) and the Thessalonians’ Faith (1 Thessalonians 1–3),” NTS 51 (2005): 519–42, and “The Structure and Function of 1 Thessalonians 1–3” in History and Exegesis: New Testament Essays in Honor of Dr. E. Earle Ellis

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 76

7/12/23 11:28 AM



The Thessalonian Letters 77

critical methods, and so forth concerning the subject book. But here, instead of dealing with those questions individually, we will discuss them in the course of dealing with the structure and function of 1 Thess 1–3. The letter is composed of two parts: chapters 1–3 and chapters 4–5. However, with their distinctive structure within the Pauline corpus, the first three chapters represent not just the first part of the letter but in fact its main part. So a careful analysis of the structure of the first part helps us properly understand its function within the letter and its relationship to the second part, and it also yields answers to the above questions. First Thessalonians 1–3 appears to be the thanksgiving section of the epistle. However, it is unusual in that it is incomparably long, containing three thanksgivings (1:2–5 or 10;79 2:13; 3:9–10) and two or three narratives in between them ([1:6–10]; 2:1–12; 2:17–3:8). Furthermore, a fivefold combination of the effectiveness of the gospel or the faith of the Thessalonians with Paul’s missionary entry (εἴσοδος) in their city runs through the whole thanksgiving section as a red thread. These phenomena raise various questions about the structure and function of the section as well as about the relationship of the section with the remaining two chapters of the epistle. And these questions are vital for a proper interpretation of the epistle and for determining its occasion and Paul’s purpose in it.

A. The Fivefold Association of (a) the Effectiveness of the Gospel or the Faith of the Thessalonians with (b) Paul’s Entry (εἴσοδος) 1:5

1:9–10

(a) ὅτι τὸ εὐαγγέλιον ἡμῶν οὐκ ἐγενήθη εἰς ὑμᾶς ἐν λόγῳ μόνον ἀλλὰ καὶ ἐν δυνάμει καὶ ἐν πνεύματι ἁγίῳ καὶ [ἐν] πληροφορίᾳ πολλῇ [hence v. 6b], (b) καθὼς οἴδατε οἷοι ἐγενήθημεν [ἐν] ὑμῖν δι᾽ ὑμᾶς. (b) αὐτοὶ γὰρ περὶ ἡμῶν ἀπαγγέλλουσιν ὁποίαν εἴσοδον ἔσχομεν πρὸς ὑμᾶς, (a) καὶ πῶς ἐπεστρέψατε πρὸς τὸν θεὸν ἀπὸ τῶν εἰδώλων δουλεύειν θεῷ ζῶντι καὶ ἀληθινῷ 10 καὶ ἀναμένειν τὸν υἱὸν αὐτοῦ ἐκ τῶν οὐρανῶν, ὃν ἤγειρεν ἐκ [τῶν] νεκρῶν, Ἰησοῦν τὸν ῥυόμενον ἡμᾶς ἐκ τῆς ὀργῆς τῆς ἐρχομένης.

on His 80th Birthday, ed. Sang-­Won Aaron Son (New York: T&T Clark, 2006), 170–88. They are here reused by permission respectively of Cambridge University Press and Bloomsbury publishing. A fuller version of this essay appears in my volume, PGTO, 9–44. Mohr Siebeck, the publisher of my PGTO, has also provided formal permission for its abbreviated version appearing here. 79 Commentators usually take the whole of 1:2–10 as a thanksgiving section. But it may be better to take 1:6–10 as a narrative, which elaborates on the cause for the thanksgiving (v. 5), especially praising the faith that the Thessalonians came to have. See section F, “The Structure and Function of 1 Thessalonians 1–3” below, as well as comments on 1:6 ad loc.

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 77

7/12/23 11:28 AM

78  Introduction (b) Αὐτοὶ γὰρ οἴδατε, ἀδελφοί, τὴν εἴσοδον ἡμῶν τὴν πρὸς ὑμᾶς (a) ὅτι οὐ κενὴ γέγονεν, (b) Καὶ διὰ τοῦτο [= his εἴσοδος described in 2:2–12] καὶ ἡμεῖς εὐχαριστοῦμεν τῷ θεῷ ἀδιαλείπτως, (a) ὅτι παραλαβόντες λόγον ἀκοῆς παρ᾽ ἡμῶν τοῦ θεοῦ ἐδέξασθε οὐ λόγον ἀνθρώπων ἀλλὰ καθώς ἐστιν ἀληθῶς λόγον θεοῦ, ὃς καὶ ἐνεργεῖται ἐν ὑμῖν τοῖς πιστεύουσιν. 3:6 Ἄρτι δὲ ἐλθόντος Τιμοθέου πρὸς ἡμᾶς ἀφ᾽ ὑμῶν καὶ εὐαγγελισαμένου ἡμῖν (a) τὴν πίστιν καὶ τὴν ἀγάπην ὑμῶν, (b) καὶ ὅτι ἔχετε μνείαν ἡμῶν ἀγαθὴν πάντοτε, ἐπιποθοῦντες ἡμᾶς ἰδεῖν καθάπερ καὶ ἡμεῖς ὑμᾶς (Note the a-­b/b-­a/b-­a/b-­a/a-­b parallelism, though not arranged in an exact chiasm.) 2:1 2:13

(1) In the first thanksgiving section of 1:2–5, Paul reports his thanksgiving to God concerning the Thessalonian believers (v. 2a: εὐχαριστοῦμεν τῷ θεῷ πάντοτε περὶ πάντων ὑμῶν), mentioning the attendant circumstances of the thanksgiving (vv. 2b–4: μνείαν ποιούμενοι . . . μνημονεύοντες . . . εἰδότες . . . ), and stating the reason for the thanksgiving (v. 5a: because of the powerful and effective preaching of the gospel among the Thessalonians, whose effect is spelled out in v. 6 in terms of their joyful acceptance of the gospel).80 Then he relates this success of the gospel or his mission to his missionary conduct among them (v. 5b). Apparently he considers his missionary conduct, or the Thessalonians’ appreciation of it, to have been instrumental in making his gospel come to them in a powerful manifestation of the Holy Spirit and in full conviction, as well as in making the Thessalonians accept the gospel joyfully despite affliction. (2) In 1:9–10 Paul reports that some people in Macedonia and Achaia and elsewhere speak about his εἴσοδος (“entry”) to the Thessalonians and their conversion from idols to the true God for salvation. Albeit with a borrowed word, here again Paul connects the success of his mission (the conversion and faith of the Thessalonians) with his missionary “entry” or conduct. If in 1:5 he indicated with the conjunction καθώς his conduct to have been a cause for the missionary success, here in 1:9–10 he suggests the same with the emphatic positioning of ὁποίαν εἴσοδον ἔσχομεν πρὸς ὑμᾶς before referring to the conversion and faith of the Thessalonians (καὶ πῶς ἐπεστρέψατε πρὸς τὸν θεόν . . . ). (3) In 2:1 Paul again connects his missionary εἴσοδος with the success of his mission. By specifying his εἴσοδος as the first direct object of the predicate 80 For this structural analysis of the first long thanksgiving sentence (1:2–7), see comment on those verses in the commentary below.

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 78

7/12/23 11:28 AM



The Thessalonian Letters 79

verb οἴδατε and then adding to it ὅτι οὐ κενὴ γέγονεν as an epexegetical object, he produces here a similar effect as in 1:9–10. In fact, 2:1 is so constructed as to correspond to the structure of 1:9–10, both being connected to 1:8c: Paul “has no need to say anything” (1:8c), “for they themselves report [αὐτοὶ γάρ . . . ἀπαγγέλλουσιν]” our impeccable εἴσοδος and your wonderful conversion (1:9–10) “for you yourselves know [αὐτοὶ γάρ . . . οἴδατε] our εἴσοδον . . . , that it was not in vain” (2:1)81 However, ὥστε μὴ χρείαν ἔχειν ἡμᾶς λαλεῖν τι (1:8) is a paraleipsis like the similar sentences in 4:9 and 5:1, and in 2:2–12 Paul does go on to speak about what he says he does not need to speak about, as he does likewise in 4:10 and 5:2–11. In addition to what we have just observed in 1:5, 9–10, and 2:1 about the relationship between his εἴσοδος and the success of his mission, the lengthy, emphatic rehearsal of his εἴσοδος in 2:2–12 clearly indicates that his εἴσοδος, or the Thessalonians’ perception of it, is his central concern here. (4) Having rehearsed his εἴσοδος in 2:2–12 in order to substantiate what “they themselves report” (1:9a) and “you yourselves know” (2:1a), that is, that his discharge of his divine commission to preach the gospel of God was impeccable, in 2:13 Paul returns to restate the thought of 1:5, 9–10, and 2:1. The opening καί in 2:13 connects the verse closely with the foregoing, and the following διὰ τοῦτο refers back to 2:2–12. Grammatically speaking, Paul has two causes for giving thanks to God: διὰ τοῦτο (2:2–12: his own impeccable missionary εἴσοδος) and the ὅτι clause (v. 13: because the Thessalonians accepted his message as God’s word).82 But they cannot be two separate causes for thanksgiving. Since in 1:5, 9–10, and 2:1 we have seen Paul repeatedly connecting his εἴσοδος with the success of his mission as its cause, we must assume that here also he is relating διὰ τοῦτο to what he says in the ὅτι clause. He gives thanks to God for the fact that he faithfully discharged his divine commission to preach the gospel of God in a manner that pleases God (2:2–12), because it has brought about the real cause to thank God, namely, that the Thessalonians came to accept his message “not as a word of human beings, but as what it really is, 81 This structure militates against the attempt to see the thanksgiving section end with 1:10 and a new section begin with 2:1. 82 Cf. Holtz, 97n435. The twofold cause for the verb εὐχαριστοῦμεν in 2:13 corresponds to the twofold object of the predicate verbs ἀπαγγέλλουσιν in 1:9 and οἴδατε in 2:1 and of the participle εὐαγγελισαμένου in 3:6, i.e., Paul’s εἴσοδος and the success of the gospel/the faith of the Thessalonians. The διὰ τοῦτο refers to the former, while the ὅτι clause corresponds to the latter.

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 79

7/12/23 11:28 AM

80  Introduction the word of God” (v. 13). Simply put, in 2:13 Paul gives thanks to God because his faithful apostolic εἴσοδος led the Thessalonians to accept the word of God. Thus the thought of 2:13 is a virtual repetition of that of 1:2 + 5.83 (5) In 3:6 Paul refers to the good news that Timothy brought from his visit to the Thessalonians. It is twofold: “your faith and love, and that you always remember us kindly, longing to see us.” As in 1:5, 9–10; 2:1, 13, so here again Paul connects the Thessalonians’ faith (the successful outcome of his mission) with their happy memory of and positive disposition toward him (an expression of their appreciation of his εἴσοδος). By this news Paul is greatly relieved of his anxiety, and so he bursts out into an enthusiastic thanksgiving to God (3:6–9). This fivefold joining of Paul’s εἴσοδος and the powerful effects of the gospel (i.e., the Thessalonians’ faith) in 1:5, 9–10; 2:1, 13; 3:6 clearly runs through the first three chapters of 1 Thessalonians like a red thread. The first four passages repeat the same reference to Paul’s founding εἴσοδος in Thessalonica and its successful outcome, namely, the powerful effects of the gospel and the Thessalonians’ coming to faith. Paul first makes the statement himself (1:5), then reports of others in Macedonia and Achaia as affirming it (1:9–10) and invites the Thessalonians to confirm it (2:1); he rounds this off by reaffirming it himself (2:13). Then, in 3:6 he reports that Timothy has confirmed it as being continually valid in the present. The recognition of this fivefold combination as the red thread of 1 Thess 1–3 has many significant implications, both for exegesis of some individual words and phrases in those chapters and for understanding the structure and function of those chapters, as well as the occasion and purpose of the whole epistle. Most fundamentally, the recognition of the fivefold parallelism leads us to take the whole section of 1:2–3:13 as an indivisible unit. It helps us see the καὶ ἡμεῖς of 2:13 as marking the continuation of the thought of 1:9–10 and 2:1 rather than a strange break from the foregoing, as sometimes alleged: “for they themselves [αὐτοὶ γάρ . . . ] report” our impeccable εἴσοδος and your wonderful conversion (1:9–10) “for you yourselves [αὐτοὶ γάρ . . . ] know our εἴσοδος . . . , that it was not in vain” (2:1) [the εἴσοδος described in 2:2–12] “and we also [καὶ ἡμεῖς] give thanks to God” for our εἴσοδος (= διὰ τοῦτο) as it led to your acceptance of the gospel as God’s word (2:13) 83 The thanksgiving in 1:2 is to be directly construed with the ὅτι clause, which gives the reason for the thanksgiving, and the intervening vv. 3–4 are to be regarded as parenthetical statements about the attendant circumstance for the thanksgiving (see comments ad loc). 1:5 describes the powerful effects of the gospel upon the readers from the perspective of its preacher, while 2:13 describes the same reality from the perspective of its recipients.

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 80

7/12/23 11:28 AM



The Thessalonian Letters 81

Further, seeing this parallelism makes us take 2:17–3:10 as an integral part of the whole section of 1:2–3:13 rather than as a separate section under the questionable title “apostolic parousia,” as well as preventing us from fragmenting 1:2–10 from what follows, as often done.84

B. Why Does Paul Make This Association and Demonstrate the Integrity of His εἴσοδος So Emphatically? Why then does Paul affirm the successful result of his εἴσοδος five times over in 1 Thess 1–3? Why does he rehearse his εἴσοδος so systematically and emphatically in 2:1–12, something that he does nowhere else in quite the same way (see below, pp. 87–93, 97, for a comparison with 2 Cor 1–7)? In 2:1 Paul makes a thesis-­like statement about his successful εἴσοδος in Thessalonica, describing it as that which the readers know. Then in 2:2–12 he expounds the features of that εἴσοδος. Again in 2:2 he makes a summary characterization of his εἴσοδος in Thessalonica, and in the subsequent verses he elaborates on it. It is that he preached the gospel of God frankly and boldly (ἐπαρρησιασάμεθα) with the power supplied by God in the face of much opposition and persecution. He was able to do this because his preaching, or his exhortation (παράκλησις) for the Thessalonians to turn from their idols to the living God for salvation, did not spring from an erroneous doctrine (ἐκ πλάνης) or an impure motive (ἐξ ἀκαθαρσίας) and did not contain any element of guile (v. 3, ἐν δόλῳ). It was so because fundamentally Paul speaks as one who has been approved by God to be entrusted with the gospel (v. 4a, δεδοκιμάσμεθα ὑπὸ τοῦ θεοῦ πιστευθῆναι τὸ εὐαγγέλιον). This divine commission has made Paul accountable to God (and to him only), so that, conducting his preaching ministry always in full consciousness of God who examines his 84 Contra Boers, “Form Critical Study,” 141–54, who fragments 1 Thess 1–3 into the sections of thanksgiving (1:2–10), apostolic apology (2:1–12), and apostolic parousia (2:17–3:13). Despite his own warning against “assum[ing] that Paul’s letters had to conform to a particular pattern” (142), he seems to be eagerly looking for those elements in 1 Thess so that in the end it may prove to have a “more normal structure” (152; similarly also White, Form and Function, 70–72, 76–77). But to talk of 2:17–3:13 as “apostolic parousia” seems rather meaningless. The phrase is well established as a form-­critical concept in Pauline scholarship. But if it is to refer to Paul’s efforts to bring his apostolic presence to bear on the consciousness of his readers through talking of his visit, of sending his emissary, or of sending his letter (cf. Funk, “Apostolic Parousia,” 249–68), then the whole letter should be designated as such, not just a section of his letter (certainly not 2:17–3:13, whose main purpose is to explain the background of his enthusiastic thanksgiving in 3:9). Singling out 2:1–12 as “the central section” (Boers, 152) is also as arbitrary as eliminating 2:13–16 on the alleged form-­critical ground (Boers, 151–52). Likewise, White’s designation of 2:1–4; 2:5–16; and 2:17–3:10, respectively, as the “body-­beginning,” “body-­middle,” and “body- ­closing” (Form and Function, 70–72, 76–77) is also quite arbitrary. It is preferable to observe the peculiarities of 1 Thess carefully and allow them to determine the structure and character of the letter, rather than imposing the preconceived pattern on it. Cf. Lambrecht, “Thanksgivings in 1 Thessalonians 1–3,” 154–55. See further pp. 101n128; 261–63; 315–17 below.

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 81

7/12/23 11:28 AM

82  Introduction heart (τῷ δοκιμάζοντι τὰς καρδίας ἡμῶν), he aims at pleasing (ἀρέσκοντες) God (v. 4b). This sense of divine commission has made him independent of human beings and their opinions. So in his preaching in Thessalonica he did not have to speak flattery (ἐν λόγῳ κολακείας) in order to please (ἀρέσκοντες) his audience nor seek to get applause (δόξα, “glory”) from them (vv. 4b–6). Further, being conscious of God who examines his heart, he did not harbor any impure motives or use tricky methods. He certainly did not use flattery or other cunning methods in order to get financial gain (ἐν προφάσει πλεονεξίας) from his audience (v. 5). As an apostle of Christ, he could indeed have demanded financial support (ἐν βάρει εἶναι) from the Thessalonian church, but he supported himself with his own hard work (τὸν κόπον ἡμῶν καὶ τὸν μόχθον) and did not lay any financial burden (ἐπιβαρῆσαι) on any member of it (vv. 7, 9). His basic apostolic stance was not authoritarian and self-­seeking but gentle (ἤπιοι) or childlike (νήπιοι) and self-­g iving (v. 7). In fact, he was ready to share his own self as well as the gospel with his Thessalonian converts (μεταδοῦναι ὑμῖν οὐ μόνον τὸ εὐαγγέλιον τοῦ θεοῦ ἀλλὰ καὶ τὰς ἑαυτῶν ψυχάς) out of his great love for them, just as a gentle nurse takes care of her children (v. 8). In short, his εἴσοδος was holy, righteous, and blameless (v. 10, ὁσίως καὶ δικαίως καὶ ἀμέμπτως). So he was able to speak frankly and boldly, despite great opposition. Thus, taking up the position of a father speaking to his children, he frankly and boldly exhorted (παρακαλοῦντες) the Thessalonians to turn from their idols to the living God and, having turned, to lead a life worthy of God so as to enter his kingdom and glory (vv. 11–12). Abraham J. Malherbe has demonstrated close parallels between the self-­ commendation of Paul in 2:1–12 and Dio Chrysostom’s self-­commendation in his oration titled To the People of Alexandria (Or. 32).85 Using the same vocabulary and a similar antithetical formulation as Paul does in 1 Thess 2:1–12, Dio criticizes charlatan philosophers for the vices from which Paul distances himself, and he presents himself as a true philosopher who embodies the virtues that Paul claims for himself. Observing that Dio is not using the antithetical formulation in order to defend his personal integrity against any concrete charges, but rather to present himself as an ideal philosopher in contrast to the charlatans, Malherbe concludes that we should understand Paul’s presentation in 2:1–12 in a similar way. Paul is not presenting any defense here against any personal accusations but rather commending his integrity in the vocabulary and antithetic terms that the serious Cynic philosophers like Dio employed in the first-­century Hellenistic world. Scholars have generally been impressed by Malherbe’s observations. However, some of them have rightly found it difficult to accept his conclusion that in 2:1–12 Paul is merely commending himself along the lines of the ideal 85 Malherbe, “ ‘Gentle as a Nurse,’ ” 203–17, develops the suggestion first made by Dibelius, 7–11.

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 82

7/12/23 11:28 AM



The Thessalonian Letters 83

Cynic philosopher. So, for example, I. H. Marshall asks as to “why Paul, a Christian preacher, should have gone to such pains to describe himself in terms of the ideal philosopher if there was nothing in the situation to make him do so.”86 For Bruce W. Winter, the charlatans who were criticized by the philosophers as seeking money, reputation, and praise by means of flattery and other deceptive rhetorical tricks were really wandering Sophists.87 According to Winter, in the first century the Sophists made an “entry” (εἴσοδος) to a city according to a well-­established “entry” convention. Paul’s use of εἴσοδος as a quasi-­technical term in 1:9 and 2:1 suggests that he has this convention in view. In 2:1–12, denying the vices often attributed to the Sophists and claiming the contrary virtues for himself, Paul is contrasting his εἴσοδος with that of the Sophists. His description of his εἴσοδος in Corinth in 1 Cor 2:1–5 and 3:1–2 supports this interpretation, indicating clearly that he deliberately took up an anti-­Sophistic εἴσοδος to Corinth. These observations lead Winter to conclude that Paul rehearses his εἴσοδος in 1 Thess 2:1–12 in order to prevent the Thessalonians from misunderstanding it according to the Sophistic convention. Winter appreciates “the sharp, succinct contrasts Paul makes” in the passage, which “suggest that there was a sense of urgency on his part to warn [the Thessalonians] against misjudging his ministry because of secular perceptions of him as a teacher,” but he still denies any element of apologia in 2:1–12.88 Unfortunately, Winter fails to appreciate sufficiently Paul’s great anxiety and correspondingly great joy in 2:13–3:10, which convey his sense of urgency even more clearly. The readers are being persecuted by their compatriots for their new faith (2:14; 3:3–4). Then there is the “tempter” tempting them (3:5). So there is a real possibility of their being shaken (σαίνεσθαι) by the persecution mixed with temptation (3:3). Therefore, out of his great anxiety about their still weak faith (cf. 3:10), Paul repeatedly tried to come to them, only to be frustrated in the attempts (2:18). Then he became quite desperate: “Therefore when we could bear it no longer, we were willing to be left behind at Athens alone, and we sent Timothy . . . to establish you in your faith and to exhort you that no one be moved by these afflictions. . . . For this reason, when I could bear it no longer, I sent that I might know your faith, for fear that somehow the tempter had tempted you and that our labor would be in vain” (3:1–5). Note the sense of desperation in the twice repeated clause, “when we/I could bear it no longer.” Note also the concentration of Paul’s anxiety for the readers’ “faith,” that no one be shaken or tempted by the afflictions or by the “tempter” away from the faith. Then Timothy brought the good news (εὐαγγελισαμένου) that 86 Marshall, 61. 87 Winter, “Entries and Ethics of the Orators,” 57–71; cf. Brocke, Thessaloniki, 143–51. 88 Winter, “Entries and Ethics of the Orators,” 72–73.

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 83

7/12/23 11:28 AM

84  Introduction the readers were standing firm in the faith and that they were maintaining a positive remembrance of Paul and were longing to see him (v. 6). The relief that this good news brought to Paul was like a death sentence reversed: “now we live!” (v. 8). This cry of joy only underlines the depth of his desperate anxiety. So does also his outburst of thanksgiving to God (v. 9). Seeing all these, we should take the following three facts together in order to determine the context and purpose of 1 Thess 2:1–12 more accurately: 1. the presence of the opponents who are pressuring the readers to give up their new faith; 2. the fivefold connection of the readers’ acceptance of the gospel with Paul’s εἴσοδος; and 3. Paul’s presentation of his εἴσοδος in 2:1–12 as a “holy and righteous and blameless” one over against the despicable ones of Sophists or charlatan philosophers. With these facts properly recognized, the context in which Paul rehearses his εἴσοδος in 2:1–12 becomes clear. In order to dissuade the readers from their new faith, the opponents are clearly denigrating Paul as one of the charlatan preachers who, for money and fame, bewitched their audience with a false doctrine camouflaged in beguiling rhetoric.89 In a situation where the phenomenon of such wandering Sophists and philosophers is well-­known and their vices widely criticized, such an attack on Paul’s εἴσοδος would be the most effective way of persuading the new Christian converts to give up the doctrine they had received from Paul. Probably the opponents are also pointing to his abrupt escape from the persecution in Thessalonica and characterizing him as one of those charlatan preachers who run away from opposition, leaving their pupils in the lurch.90 This understanding seems to be suggested by the following facts taken together: Paul’s insistence that he had preached the gospel frankly and boldly even after his great suffering in Philippi and even in the face of great opposition in Thessalonica (2:2); his praise for the readers for having become imitators of him and the Lord Jesus by suffering for the faith (1:6; 2:14–16); his statement that he told them beforehand about suffering being the common lot of Christians (3:4); and above all, his extended and emphatic statements about his great concerns for them, his repeated attempts to come to them, and his sending of Timothy to their aid (2:17–3:10; cf. also 2:8). Paul was extremely worried about this slander campaign of the opponents against his εἴσοδος in Thessalonica, that it might succeed in moving the readers to give up their new faith so that his “labor would be in vain” (3:5). 89 Cf. Holtz, 93–94; idem, “Background,” 69–80. 90 Cf. Winter, “Is Paul among the Sophists?,” 32; also Malherbe, “ ‘Gentle as a Nurse,’ ” 208–9.

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 84

7/12/23 11:28 AM



The Thessalonian Letters 85

But Timothy has brought the good news that they were still maintaining their faith as well as their full appreciation of Paul’s missionary work among them. This good news from Timothy provides the immediate occasion for Paul to write 1 Thessalonians (3:6). But if Timothy has reported that the Thessalonian Christians were standing up quite well against the opponents’ slander campaign against Paul’s εἴσοδος, why does Paul still feel the need to demonstrate its integrity to them as in 2:1–12?

C. Is Paul Presenting Himself as a Model, or Does He Have a Philophronetic Purpose? A widespread view holds that in the passage Paul is setting himself up as a model for his Thessalonian converts to imitate.91 Apparently Malherbe92 regards this as the logical consequence of his thesis that in 2:1–12 Paul commends himself in the form of the ideal philosopher. In order to show “a direct correlation between what Paul says about himself here [in 2:1–12] and what he later [in chs. 4–5] advises his readers to do,” Malherbe lists several words that he sees the two sections share.93 However, for various reasons the list is hardly convincing.94 In fact, in the paraenetic section of chs. 4–5 Paul gives no hint of relating his example to his advocating the desirable conduct of the readers. In 4:1–12, it is striking that, in order to motivate them to live a life of sanctification, he appeals to so many things, such as God’s will (vv. 3, 8), the Lord’s judgment (v. 6), the work of the Holy Spirit or God’s own teaching (vv. 8–9), and the instructions and charges that he gave them during his initial mission (vv. 1, 2, 6, 11—four times!), but he does not make even the slightest allusion to his own example (4:11 is no exception;95 contrast with 2 Thess 3:7–9).96 Furthermore, his rehearsal of his εἴσοδος in 2:1–12 contains much more than a mere model of sanctified life, and the extra elements, having to do with his apostolic status or preacher’s role, are not applicable to the readers and therefore do not have any correspondence in the paraenetic section. If in 2:1–12 he wants to present himself only as a model of sanctified life for his readers’ emulation, why is he emphasizing so much his apostolic commission (2:4), his gospel being pure and true (v. 3), his preaching it neither with deceit 91 See Weima, “Apology,” 76–79, for the long list of recent writers who represent this view. Add Walton, Leadership and Lifestyle, 154–56. 92 Malherbe, “ ‘Gentle as a Nurse,’ ” 217; idem, Paul and the Thessalonians, 74; idem, Thessalonians, 153–56. Lyons, Pauline Autobiography, 178–221, has been another influential champion. 93 Malherbe, Thessalonians, 156; see also 81. He is rather unique, as most of the proponents of the model theory neglect to substantiate their theory by showing specific cases of Paul’s correlation of his paraenesis in chs. 4–5 with his alleged example in 2:1–12, beyond fastening on 4:11 as their evidence for such a correlation. 94 For the list and my arguments against its validity, see “Structure and Function of 1 Thessalonians 1–3” in my PGTO, 20–21. 95 PGTO, 22. 96 Concerning 1 Thess 3:12, see PGTO, 22.

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 85

7/12/23 11:28 AM

86  Introduction nor flattering speech but with boldness (vv. 2, 3, 5), and his fatherly exhortation (2:11–12)? Or how does he think his readers (N.B. not leaders) should imitate such apostolic conduct of his? In fact, in 1 Thessalonians the absence of Paul’s call for his readers to imitate him is conspicuous, since he often issues this call in other letters (1 Cor 4:16–17; 11:1; Gal 4:12; Phil 3:17; 4:9; 2 Thess 3:7–12; cf. also 1 Cor 4:6; 8:13; 9:24–27; 14:18–19). Indeed, the idea of his converts imitating him is very much present also in 1 Thessalonians, for Paul does talk about the readers as having become “imitators” of him, the Lord, and the Judean churches (1:6; 2:14). But what he has in view is their accepting the gospel in much affliction and not at all their emulating his virtues that he outlines in 2:1–12. If in 2:1–12 he means to present himself as a model for them to imitate, of all his letters it should be in 1 Thessalonians that we most naturally expect a call for his readers to imitate him, for nowhere else does he give a description of his apostolic integrity in such a systematic and yet succinct summary. Indeed, it would be most strange if, having so deliberately and so clearly set himself up as a model for imitation, he failed to issue his usual call for imitation or even to correlate his paraenesis with his example. Here we must also note the fundamental fact that emerges out of the fivefold repetition of his statement about his εἴσοδος in 1 Thess 1–3: whenever Paul comes to speak about his εἴσοδος or his impeccable apostolic ministry, he thinks of its effects on the readers’ acceptance of the gospel but not at all of its model character for their emulation (cf. esp. 2:1–12 with 2:13, where the consequence of his integrity described in the former is directly stated; but see also 1:5–10; 2:17–3:10). Besides the model theory about 2:1–12, Wanamaker takes up another suggestion of Malherbe, namely, that the passage is part of the philophronetic section of chs. 1–3 in which Paul establishes a good relationship with his readers in order to pave the way for his exhortations in chs. 4–5.97 Wanamaker then integrates this view with his theory that 2:1–3:10 is the narratio in the epistle written according to Hellenistic rhetorical convention, in which Paul aims mainly at “establishing his ethos or credibility with his readers”98 in order to impart his exhortations in chs. 4–5.99 But neither Malherbe nor Wanamaker adequately explains how this philophronetic theory about chs. 2–3 (including 2:1–12) is related to their model theory about 2:1–12. In 2:1–12, is Paul presenting the integrity of his conduct as a model for the readers to imitate, or is he doing it to earn their trust so as to prepare them to accept his exhortations well? Why does he need to do the latter when he has come to know from Timothy’s report that the readers already have a

97 Wanamaker, 90–91. Cf. Malherbe, “Exhortation in First Thessalonians,” 240–46; idem, Thessalonians, 104–5, 133–34. 98 Wanamaker, 49–50. 99 Wanamaker, 49–50, 146; cf. also Johanson, Brethren, 157–60.

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 86

7/12/23 11:28 AM



The Thessalonian Letters 87

very positive disposition toward him, cherishing his memory and longing to see him (3:6)? Be that as it may, the actual content of Paul’s exhortations in chs. 4–5 does not support the philophronetic theory,100 just as it does not support the model theory. In 4:13–5:11 there is no hint that the readers are critical of Paul’s eschatological teaching, requiring that Paul establish his “ethos or credibility” to impart it to the readers effectively. Lyons, Malherbe, and Wanamaker themselves emphasize the rather general, traditional, and noncontroversial character of Paul’s moral exhortations in chs. 4–5.101 But then why, in order to impart such usual and noncontroversial moral exhortations that Paul might have imparted to any Hellenistic congregation,102 would he have felt the need to devote such a lengthy section of chs. 2–3 to establishing his ethos or rapport with his readers who already were so well disposed toward him (3:6)? Therefore, for their theory of a philophronetic purpose for 1 Thess 2–3, Malherbe and Wanamaker must explain why Paul felt the need to go to such an unusual length in establishing his ethos. They have to explain also why Paul felt the need to be so emphatic as to call repeatedly upon his readers (2:1, 2, 5, 9, 10, 11) and even God (2:5, 10) as witnesses to his integrity, if his intention was nothing more than to establish a friendly relationship with his readers to impart such simple and ordinary exhortations.103 Can Malherbe and Wanamaker explain these without acknowledging an apologetic element in the philophronetic efforts?104

D. Comparison with 2 Corinthians It is unfortunate that the proponents of the model theory do not pay adequate attention to Paul’s great anxiety about the readers’ possible temptation away from the faith by the opponents (2:17–3:10). Against the background of that real danger, Paul’s demonstration of the integrity of his εἴσοδος in 2:1–12, as well as his fivefold association of the readers’ faith with his εἴσοδος in chs. 1–3, clearly appears to have an apologetic purpose. Now it is time both to strengthen and to clarify this conclusion by taking up the question raised above: Even after Timothy has reported that the readers are withstanding the 100 One need not deny that there are philophronetic elements in 1 Thess 1–3 as there are normally in the thanksgiving sections of the other Pauline epistles. But the trouble is to see the whole of chs. 1–3 or 2–3 mainly as a philophronetic preparation for the exhortations in 1 Thess 4–5. 101 Lyons, Pauline Autobiography, 220; Malherbe, “Exhortation,” 250–52; Wanamaker, 61, 146. 102 Cf. Kim, “Paul’s Common Paraenesis,” 109–39 (now reprinted in PGTO, 253–77). 103 Schoon-­Janssen, Umstrittene “Apologien,” 45–46, also neglects to explain this, while emphasizing the motifs of a friendship letter in 2:1–12. 104 This is in effect conceded by Wanamaker, 61, and Schoon-­Janssen, Umstrittene “Apologien.” Cf. Johanson, Brethren, 164–65, who explicitly recognizes “an anticipatory apologetic function” of 2:1–12, despite his application of rhetorical criticism and his general characterization of 1:2–3:13 as philophronesis (157–60).

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 87

7/12/23 11:28 AM

88  Introduction opponents’ slander campaign against Paul’s εἴσοδος quite well, why does Paul still feel the need to demonstrate its integrity to them as in 2:1–12? At this point it is helpful to observe that there are many points of similarity between 1 Thess 1–3 and 2 Cor, especially between Paul’s demonstrations of his integrity in the two epistles. Just as in 1 Thess 2:2, so also in 2 Cor 3:12 Paul says that he speaks very frankly and boldly (πολλῇ παρρησίᾳ χρώμεθα, cf. 7:4). Just as in the former (1 Thess 2:4), so also in the latter, he grounds his boldness upon his apostolic commission by God (2 Cor 3:4–6; 5:19–20). Just as in the former he implies that he is able to preach frankly and boldly because what he preaches is not an erroneous doctrine but the gospel of God, so also in the latter he says that he preaches frankly and boldly because he preaches the gospel of God’s new covenant for life in the Holy Spirit which has been revealed in unsurpassable glory, unlike the veiled Mosaic covenant (2 Cor 3:4–18). His opponents in Philippi and Thessalonica may have persecuted him with the charges of being an impostor teaching an erroneous doctrine (πλάνος), for as he hints at it in 1 Thess 2:3, so also in 2 Cor 6:8 he includes such an accusation in the catalogue of his apostolic sufferings. Countering it with his insistence on being true (ἀληθής, 2 Cor 6:8) and speaking truth (ἐν λόγῳ ἀληθείας, 2 Cor 6:7), he argues that since he in fact carries out the ministry of God’s word, even in the face of opposition and persecution (2 Cor 4:7–16; 6:1–10), he does not lose heart (ἐγκακοῦμεν), nor does he resort to a method less than honorable and frank (2 Cor 4:1–2). This is just to continue in Corinth his frank and bold preaching that he carried out in the face of persecution in Thessalonica (1 Thess 2:2). As the sense of divine commission enabled him to shun seeking glory (δόξα) from human beings in Thessalonica (1 Thess 2:6), so it also enabled him to dispense with letters of recommendation in Corinth (2 Cor 3:1–6) and to concentrate on preaching Jesus Christ as Lord without any thought of exalting himself (2 Cor 4:5). Just as in 1 Thess 2:4, so also in 2 Cor 5:10–11 Paul indicates that he conducts his apostolic ministry in consciousness of God’s judgment (δοκιμάζειν). This consciousness made him seek only to please God in his ministry both in Thessalonica (1 Thess 2:4) and in Corinth (2 Cor 5:9). Just as this consciousness forbade him to harbor any impure motives and cover them up with flattery or sham sincerity or to use the methods of guile in Thessalonica (1 Thess 2:3–5), so also it made him conduct his ministry in Corinth in a way transparent to human beings as well as to God (2 Cor 3:12–4:2; 5:11), renouncing “disgraceful, underhanded ways” (τὰ κρυπτὰ τῆς αἰσχύνης) and refusing “to practice trickery or to beguile by adulterating God’s word” (μὴ περιπατοῦντες ἐν πανουργίᾳ μηδὲ δολοῦντες τὸν λόγον τοῦ θεοῦ, 2 Cor 4:2). Just as he refused to obtain financial advantage through preaching the gospel, unlike those who camouflage their greed with a pretense of sincerity (προφάσει πλεονεξίας) in Thessalonica (1 Thess 2:5), so also in Corinth, unlike many, he refuses to be a peddler (καπηλεύοντες) of God’s word for profit, “but

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 88

7/12/23 11:28 AM



The Thessalonian Letters 89

as men of sincerity [εἰλικρινείας], as commissioned by God, in the sight of God [he speaks] in Christ” (2 Cor 2:17). Just as in Thessalonica he did not lay any financial burden on any member of the church there (1 Thess 2:9), so also in Corinth he did not take advantage of anyone (2 Cor 7:2). Although as an apostle he had the right to claim the church’s support for his upkeep, a right authorized by the Lord himself, he did not make use of it (see 1 Cor 9:14–17), but instead he maintained the policy of earning his living by his own hard work (κόπος) in Corinth (2 Cor 6:5) as in Thessalonica (1 Thess 2:9). Just as in Thessalonica he did not behave in an authoritarian manner but carried out his pastoral care in a gentle (ἤπιος, or “childlike,” νήπιοι), self-­g iving manner like a wet nurse caring for her children (1 Thess 2:7–8), so also in Corinth he did not try to lord it over the Corinthians (2 Cor 1:24), but instead served them as their slave for Christ’s sake (2 Cor 4:5). Therefore, in a way similar to how he summarizes the character of his εἴσοδος in Thessalonica in terms of complete holiness (ὁσίως), righteousness (δικαίως), and blamelessness (ἀμέμπτως; 1 Thess 2:10), he summarizes the character of his εἴσοδος in Corinth thus: “For our boast is this . . . that we have behaved in the world, and still more toward you, with holiness and godly sincerity [ἐν ἁπλότητι καὶ εἰλικρινείᾳ τοῦ θεοῦ]” (2 Cor 1:12). As a servant of God he commends himself by purity, by truthful speech, and with the weapons of righteousness, as well as by other virtues, so that he may put no stumbling block in anyone’s way and no fault may be found with his ministry (ἵνα μὴ μωμηθῇ ἡ διακονία; 6:3–10). Just as he assures the Thessalonians with his great affection for them (1 Thess 2:8), so also he assures the Corinthians of his great love for them (2 Cor 6:11–13; 7:3). Just as to the Thessalonians (1 Thess 2:11–12), so also to the Corinthians (2 Cor 6:13), he speaks as a father to his children. Just as he exhorts the Thessalonians to lead a life worthy of God who calls them into his own kingdom and glory (1 Thess 2:12), so also he exhorts the Corinthians “not to accept the grace of God in vain” (2 Cor 6:1; cf. 1 Cor 4:14–21).

E. The Apologetic Function of 1 Thessalonians 1–3 Like 2 Cor 1–7, 2 Cor 10–13 also displays a close parallelism with 1 Thess 2:1–12 in words, concepts, and ideas.105 But while with its affectionate tone 2 Cor 1–7 presents a further parallel with 1 Thess 2:1–12, with its strong polemical tone 2 Cor 10–13 presents a contrast to 1 Thess 2:1–12. In 1 Thess 2:1–12 and 2 Cor 1–7, Paul makes the demonstration of the integrity of his εἴσοδος in a calm, affectionate manner, trusting in the full assent of the Thessalonians and the Corinthians respectively, but in 2 Cor 10–13 he makes it in a highly emotional polemic against those who actively dispute it. These comparisons provide a useful key for determining the nature and function of 1 Thess 2:1–12. Clearly, unlike 2 Cor 10–13, it is not a polemical 105 See my essay “Structure and Function of 1 Thessalonians 1–3,” in PGTO, 28–29.

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 89

7/12/23 11:28 AM

90  Introduction apologetic that Paul addresses to his Thessalonian converts because they suspect the integrity of his apostolic stance. On the contrary, it is a rehearsal of his εἴσοδος in Thessalonica that he presents in response to Timothy’s good report that the Thessalonians are maintaining their faith and their kind memory of Paul himself (1 Thess 3:1–10). Here it is vitally important to observe that in this regard also 2 Cor 1–9 provides parallels to 1 Thess 1–3. Just as on receiving Timothy’s good news about the Thessalonians Paul writes 1 Thessalonians (1 Thess 3:6), so also on receiving Titus’s good news about the Corinthians he writes 2 Corinthians (2 Cor 7:6–7). The euphoria to which Paul’s fear about the Thessalonians’ faith gives way when he receives Timothy’s good news about their faith and their good disposition toward Paul himself (1 Thess 3:1–10) is quite similar to the euphoria to which Paul’s fear about the Corinthians’ faith gives way when he receives Titus’s good news about their faith and their good disposition toward Paul himself (2 Cor 1:3–7; 2:12–17; 7:2–16). Just as in 2 Cor 1–7 Titus’s good news that the Corinthians returned to a proper appreciation of Paul’s ministry occasions Paul’s rehearsal of his apostolic stance (2 Cor 1:12–7:16), so also here in 1 Thess 1–3 Timothy’s good news about the Thessalonians’ faith and their appreciation of Paul’s εἴσοδος (whence their kind memory of and longing for Paul spring) occasions Paul’s rehearsal of his εἴσοδος and its wonderful outcome. The same kind of euphoria leads him in 2 Cor 1–7, as in 1 Thess 1–3, to mix narratives about his anxiety, his sending of his assistant, and his subsequent sense of relief with demonstrations of his integrity. From Paul’s more explicit language in 2 Cor 1–7, commentators have easily inferred that he had opponents in the Corinthian church and that under their influence there his apostolic ministry was suspect. Clearly this had caused Paul a great deal of anxiety. But Titus brought the good news that the Corinthian Christians had now shaken off their misunderstanding of Paul’s apostleship, and this made Paul breathe a great sigh of relief and rehearse his apostolic stance in a rather euphoric mood. So, here, we have to ask a question similar to that raised with regard to 1 Thess 1–3 above: When the Corinthians have returned to a proper appreciation of Paul’s apostolic ministry, why, then, does he still feel the need to demonstrate its legitimacy and integrity in 2 Cor 1–7? It is clearly to solidify the Corinthians’ proper appreciation of him, lest they should be misled again if slanders against him arise anew. If 2 Cor 10–13 was written later than 2 Cor 1–9, Paul’s fear would have proved only justified. For it has to be assumed that after writing 2 Cor 1–9 Paul received fresh news that, after Titus’s visit, the feared slanders broke out again in Corinth, so that Paul had to defend his apostolic integrity in such a polemical way in 2 Cor 10–13. If 2 Cor 10–13 was written before 2 Cor 1–9, perhaps as a part of the “tearful letter” (2:4), we not only can understand that the strong apologetic for his apostolic integrity in 2 Cor 10–13 did have its desired effects upon the Corinthians, but also appreciate that he would rehearse his apostolic integrity as in 2 Cor 1–7 in order to confirm their proper appreciation of it and ensure that no misunderstanding of it arises again.

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 90

7/12/23 11:28 AM



The Thessalonian Letters 91

The close parallelism observed so far between 1 Thess 1–3 and 2 Cor 1–7, both in their contents and the immediate occasions of their writing, helps us infer a purpose in 1 Thess 1–3 that also closely parallels that of 2 Cor 1–7. As we have seen above, at Timothy’s report that the Thessalonian Christians are quite successfully withstanding the opponents’ slander campaign against the integrity of Paul’s apostolic εἴσοδος, Paul is greatly relieved. Yet he is still quite concerned about their young and vulnerable faith (1 Thess 3:10), as they are continually exposed to the campaign. The lack of any prospect for his personal coming in the near future to strengthen their faith makes the concern still more serious (vv. 10–11). So, writing a letter, he does something similar to what he does in 2 Cor 1–7. That is, lest they should succumb to the opponents’ slander campaign and give up their faith,106 he seeks to solidify their positive appreciation of the integrity of his εἴσοδος.107 This is vitally important for Paul, of course, because his message, the gospel, stands or falls with his integrity as its preacher. With him disparaged as one of the wandering charlatan preachers, his gospel would be disparaged as a false doctrine and the Thessalonians’ faith would be destroyed.108 Therefore, it is absolutely necessary for him to defend his integrity and help his readers to firmly maintain their positive appreciation of it against the opponents’ continuing slander. However, this apologetic purpose is not just a negative attempt to shield the readers from the opponents’ temptation and persecution. It also has a more positive and missionary side of a true apologetic. With the demonstration of the impeccable integrity of his εἴσοδος, Paul is trying to equip his readers, to use the language of 1 Pet 3:15, to “be ready to make an apologia to anyone who calls on [them] to account for the hope that is in [them].” This is suggested by the fact that, while praising the readers’ zeal for evangelism in Macedonia and Achaia as well as their becoming an example to the believers there despite persecution, he highlights those believers’ appreciative report about his εἴσοδος and the readers’ wonderful conversion (1 Thess 1:7–10). This report clearly suggests that in persuading the Macedonians and the Achaians to accept his message, the gospel, the readers have pointed to Paul’s εἴσοδος as completely different from that of charlatan orators. Thus, 1:7–10 suggests that the readers 106 Whereas the opponents who slander the integrity of Paul’s apostolic εἴσοδος in 2 Cor are some members of the Corinthian church or some Christians who came into that church from outside, the opponents in 1 Thess 1–3 are pagan opponents to the Christian faith. Even so, Paul’s concern in the two letters is the same, since the slandering of his apostolic εἴσοδος, whether by some Christians within the church or by pagans outside the church, would bring the same result, namely, shaking the faith of the Corinthian or the Thessalonian Christians. 107 Thus, in order to explain the apologetic note in 2:1–12, we do not need to posit Paul’s concern about the readers doubting his integrity, as do Weima (“Apology,” 98) and Gillman (“Paul’s ΕΙΣΟΔΟΣ,” 62–70, 68–69). Their supposition results from their failure to appreciate the significance of 3:6b within the context of Paul’s fivefold repetition of connecting his εἴσοδος with the Thessalonians’ faith that has been observed here. Cf. Tellbe, Paul, 99. 108 Cf. Holtz, 94.

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 91

7/12/23 11:28 AM

92  Introduction have already been using Paul’s impeccable εἴσοδος as an evangelistic tool for spreading his message as the true doctrine of salvation, in contradistinction from charlatans’ messages originating “from error or uncleanness.” For this reason, the believers in Macedonia and Achaia, to whom the readers have become an example, speak about his εἴσοδος as well as the readers’ wonderful conversion. Therefore, with the rehearsal of his impeccable εἴσοδος in 2:1–12, Paul tries also to support the readers in that particular way of evangelism. Thus, with the systematic demonstration of the impeccable integrity of his εἴσοδος, Paul is trying, first of all, to consolidate the readers’ positive appreciation of it in order to protect their faith from their opponents’ slander, and then to equip them with an effective tool for rebutting them as well as for preaching the gospel to other, receptive people. That is, he is trying to help the readers point to his impeccable εἴσοδος so as to repudiate the opponents’ efforts to denigrate him as a charlatan preacher of a false doctrine and to make a positive impression of his message, namely, the gospel, upon the receptive (cf. 1 Thess 4:9–12; 1 Pet 2:11–12). For this comprehensive apologetic purpose, Paul tries to secure a maximum rhetorical effect. Clearly the fivefold repetition of the statement about his εἴσοδος itself, which reminds the readers of the integrity of his εἴσοδος and its effective result for their own faith, is designed to have a strong rhetorical effect. In order to show that it is not just his own one-­sided claim, he repeatedly appeals to their knowledge or acknowledgment of his εἴσοδος (1 Thess 1:5; 2:1 [N.B. the emphatic αὐτοί]; cf. also 3:3b–4) and even enlists the testimony of the people of Macedonia, Achaia, and other places about it (1:9–10, N.B. the emphatic αὐτοί). But he does not just repeat the summary reference to it. Since he must consolidate the readers’ positive appreciation of his εἴσοδος against the opponents’ attack on its integrity, he finds it necessary to rehearse at least once the concrete features that testify to its integrity, beyond merely repeating a general reference to it.109 So, after stating the proposition in 2:1, he substantiates it by describing the features of his εἴσοδος in 2:2–12. Again, this is quite like what he does in a similar situation in 2 Corinthians (see esp. 2:12–4:15; 5:11–6:10; 7:2–4). Within 1 Thess 2:1–12, first of all, the series of antithetical statements (2:1–8: “not . . . but . . .”) is striking. With them, he powerfully presents himself as a genuine servant of God and pastor of the Thessalonians, in contrast to charlatan orators. His repeated appeals to their knowledge or remembrance of, or to their being witness to, the features of his impeccable εἴσοδος (2:1, 2, 5, 9, 10, 11) are likewise striking. With them, 109 J. S. Vos, “On the Background of 1 Thessalonians 2:1–12,” 83, properly recognizes that in 2:1–12 Paul makes self-­recommendation in order to strengthen the readers’ “initial acceptance” of him “to ensure that their acceptance of him will endure.” But Vos fails to explain why it has become necessary for Paul to do this. This failure is due to his denial of the actual presence of Paul’s critics in Thessalonica (82) and his unnecessarily sharp distinction between self-­recommendation and apology in the case of our passage.

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 92

7/12/23 11:28 AM



The Thessalonian Letters 93

he does not seek simply to obtain their consent to his claims but rather to recall their actual experience of those features and consolidate their positive appreciation of them. He further underscores the veracity of those features by calling upon God as witness twice over (2:5, 10). By making their acceptance of the gospel (or their standing firm in the faith) as a result of his εἴσοδος the ground of his thanksgiving to God three times (1:2 + 5; 2:13; 3:6–9), again he achieves a strong rhetorical effect. For with the thanksgivings to God, he implicitly praises the readers for their proper appreciation of his εἴσοδος and their good response of faith to it and so encourages them to go on maintaining them (an instance of epideictic or demonstrative rhetoric!).110 Thus we are to affirm that 1 Thess 1–3 as a whole and 2:1–12 in particular have an apologetic purpose,111 like 2 Cor 1–7, though not like 2 Cor 10–13. Since Paul makes this defense in order to prevent the Thessalonian Christians from succumbing to the opponents’ continuing slander campaign against the integrity of his ministry and so losing their faith, this apologetic purpose ultimately serves the paraenetic purpose of exhorting them to stand up against the false campaign and maintain their faith. In 1 Thess 1–3 Paul seeks to achieve his paraenetic purpose through an apology of his apostolic ministry.

F. The Structure and Function of 1 Thessalonians 1–3 Now it is important to take the following three characteristics of 1 Thess 1–3 together in order to understand the structure and function of these three chapters: (1) the fivefold statement associating the readers’ acceptance of the gospel (i.e., their faith) with Paul’s impeccable εἴσοδος runs through the whole passage like a red thread; (2) the statement is the reason for the thrice-­repeated thanksgiving; and (3) the thrice-­repeated thanksgiving is accompanied not only by the statement about his εἴσοδος and the readers’ faith as its reason but also by the thrice-­repeated reference to persecution (1:2 + 5–6; 2:13–14; 3:1–10). We have already seen that the first statement about the gospel’s success with the readers through Paul’s impeccable εἴσοδος in 1:5 is the main reason for Paul’s thanksgiving in 1:2. This is immediately followed by a reference 110 It is doubtful whether Paul really wrote 1 Thess according to ancient rhetorical handbooks and so produced one uniform piece of epideictic rhetoric in the epistle as a whole, as some recent commentators (e.g., Wanamaker) claim (contrast, e.g., Malherbe, 96; see note 128 below). However, it cannot be denied that the three thanksgiving sentences and some other elements in the epistle convey epideictic rhetorical effects, while 2:1–12 has an apologetic character. The apologetic rhetoric in 2:1–12 defends the integrity of his apostolic ministry against the non-­Christian opponents’ criticism, while the three thanksgiving sentences affirm the readers’ positive appreciation of his apostolic integrity. So they serve two different immediate purposes, but ultimately the same purpose, namely, encouraging the readers to maintain their positive appreciation of his εἴσοδος as well as their faith. 111 For some recent upholders of an apologetic purpose in 1 Thess 2:1–12, see Holtz, “Background,” 69–80; Johanson, Brethren, 164–65; Riesner, Early Period, 369–70; Weima, “Apology,” 73–99; Still, Conflict in Thessalonica, 126–49; Brocke, Thessaloniki, 143–51.

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 93

7/12/23 11:28 AM

94  Introduction to the readers’ having become imitators of him and the Lord in that they received the word in much affliction, but with the joy of the Holy Spirit (v. 6). After he refers to their having come to such a joyful faith despite persecution, he feels he cannot just pass over the opportunity to add a word of praise for their faith. So he speaks about them as having become an example to all the believers in Macedonia and Achaia and praises especially their missionary zeal and success (vv. 7–8). But he quickly returns to his main concern by quoting the report of the people in Macedonia, Achaia, and elsewhere that reinforces his earlier statement about his impeccable εἴσοδος and its result in the readers’ remarkable conversion (vv. 9–10). Then, seeking the readers’ assent to that statement (2:1), he concretely demonstrates the impeccable nature of his εἴσοδος (vv. 2–12). This demonstration makes it clear why the readers accepted his message not as the word of mere human beings but as the word of God (2:13). So, with the demonstration of his impeccable εἴσοδος in 2:2–12, Paul in fact has substantiated the statement he made in 1:5. Therefore, at the end of the demonstration in 2:2–12 he restates the assertion of 1:5 as substantiated and resumes his thanksgiving for it that he uttered in 1:2 (2:13). Just as he immediately follows his thanksgiving for the success of the gospel among his readers through his εἴσοδος in 1:2 + 5 with a reference to their having become “imitators” of him and the Lord in receiving the gospel in suffering (v. 6), so in 2:13 also he immediately follows his thanksgiving for the readers’ acceptance of the gospel with a reference to their having become “imitators” of the churches in Judea (and the Lord Jesus, the prophets, and Paul himself) in receiving persecution from their own compatriots (2:14–16).112 Thus, 2:13–14 is an exact restatement of 1:2 + 5–6: 112 Contra the attempts to view 2:13–16 as a later interpolation: e.g., Eckart, “Der zweite echte Brief,” 30–44; Pearson, “1 Thessalonians 2:13–16,” 79–94; Boers, “Form Critical Study,” 151–52; D. Schmidt, “1 Thess 2:13–16,” 269–79. This now widely rejected view (see Schlueter, Filling Up the Measure; Bockmuehl, “1 Thessalonians 2:14–16,” 1–31), as well as the likewise widely rejected view that here another letter (2:13–4:1) is joined, is born of a failure to recognize the structure of 1 Thess 1–3 as shown here. Just as the thought of the Thessalonians coming to such a joyful faith despite persecution triggers Paul to add a word of praise for their faith in 1:7–8, so here the thought of the Thessalonians’ suffering from the persecution by their compatriots just as the Jewish churches have been persecuted by the Jews triggers Paul to add a few words about the Jews’ persecutions of the Lord, the prophets, and Paul himself. Paul may be trying to console the young Christians in Thessalonica who are ostracized and persecuted by their own people by showing that those who stand for the Christian faith always suffer from their own people, as the cases of the Lord Jesus, the prophets, and Paul himself testify (cf. 3:3–4). Or Paul may be highlighting the persecution by the Jews here because he suspects that some Jews are instigating the pagan opponents to denounce Paul and persecute the Christians in Thessalonica (so Holtz, 94). If so, the Jews in Thessalonica may have charged him as a false prophet seducing people with a false doctrine (cf. Acts 17:1–9). This may be the reason why some scholars perceive in 2:1–12 (esp. v. 3) a connotation of Paul’s defense against such a charge. See Horbury, “1 Thessalonians ii.3,” 492–508; Sandnes, Paul, 185–223; both authors show how easily the Jewish charge of a false prophet could be combined with the Hellenistic charge of a charlatan philosopher in the first century.

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 94

7/12/23 11:28 AM



The Thessalonian Letters 95 1. 2. 3. 4.

2:13b � 1:2, εὐχαριστοῦμεν τῷ θεῷ . . . 2:13c � 1:5a, ὅτι τὸ εὐαγγέλιον ἡμῶν . . . 2:13a (διὰ τοῦτο = 2:1–12) � 1:5b, καθὼς οἴδατε οἷοι ἐγενήθημεν . . . 2:14 � 1:6, ὑμεῖς μιμηταὶ ἡμῶν ἐγενήθητε καὶ τοῦ κυρίου, δεξάμενοι τὸν λόγον ἐν θλίψει πολλῇ . . .

The reason Paul is recalling all this is because the readers are still suffering from persecution and are subjected to the opponents’ slander campaign against him, so that he has been extremely worried about their faith. In 2:17– 3:5 he narrates this desperate situation of satanic persecution and temptation for the readers and the satanic hindrance of his coming to their aid. Then he speaks of the good news that Timothy has brought: despite the opponents’ persecution and temptation through a slander campaign against the integrity of Paul’s εἴσοδος, the readers are maintaining their faith and cherishing their memory of his εἴσοδος (3:6). Thus, he makes the statement that connects the readers’ faith with his εἴσοδος for the fifth time in our passage, as we have seen. As in 1:5–6 and 2:13–14, so here again the statement is accompanied by a reference to the readers’ suffering (3:3–5). Then he speaks of what a great relief the good news of Timothy has brought to him (vv. 7–8), and this makes him exclaim: “For what thanksgiving can we render to God for you, for all the joy which we feel for your sake before our God!” (v. 9). Here we can clearly see that his thanksgiving is not simply for the fact that the readers maintain their faith, properly appreciating his εἴσοδος, but rather for the fact that they do this despite persecution and temptation. Thus 3:1–10 helps us understand why he joins the references to the readers’ suffering to his thanksgivings in 1:2–6 and 2:13–14, just as it has helped us understand why he demonstrates the integrity of his εἴσοδος in 2:1–12. He repeats three times his thanksgiving to God for the readers’ having come to the faith with a proper appreciation of his εἴσοδος and for maintaining that stance despite the opponents’ persecution and slander against his εἴσοδος. If in 2:17–3:10 he expresses his deep appreciation of their standing in faith despite persecution by narrating his great sense of anxiety and then of relief, in 1:6 and 2:14 he does it by suggesting, with the connecting καί and the substantiating γάρ respectively, that their willingness to accept the gospel despite persecution was as much a cause for the success of the gospel as the impeccability of his εἴσοδος. This structure demonstrates the unity of 1 Thess 1–3, that 1:2–3:13 is one long thanksgiving section in which the same thanksgiving for the same reason is repeated three times.113 This is to confirm P. Schubert’s long-­standing thesis. 113 Contra those scholars who represent various compilation theories, only to demonstrate their failure to recognize the three special features of 1 Thess 1–3 that have been ascertained here (see the preceding note).

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 95

7/12/23 11:28 AM

96  Introduction Through a detailed analysis of the structure of 1:2–3:13, Schubert comes to the conclusion that the whole passage is one extended thanksgiving that conforms to the formal characteristics of the thanksgivings of the other Pauline letters. He argues that the personal narratives in 2:1–12 and 2:17–3:8 are no real “digressions” but regular parts of the thanksgiving section, just like the similar personal narratives in Phil 1:5, 7b–8 and Rom 1:10–13.114 He further shows that, like the final clause that typically appears at the end of the Pauline thanksgiving pattern, the final clause in 3:10, δεόμενοι εἰς τὸ ἰδεῖν ὑμῶν τὸ πρόσωπον καὶ καταρτίσαι τὰ ὑστερήματα τῆς πίστεως ὑμῶν, signals the climax of the whole thanksgiving section of 1 Thess 1–3 in that verse.115 Then, with his appreciation of λοιπὸν οὖν in 4:1 as signaling the conclusion of the letter “in the strictest sense of the word,”116 as well as of the length of the thanksgiving section of 1:2–3:13 (forty-­three verses, taking up about three-­f ifths of the whole letter),117 Schubert comes to the conclusion that “the thanksgiving itself constitutes the main body of 1 Thessalonians.”118 Using as an interpretative key the fivefold combination of the success of the gospel with Paul’s εἴσοδος and its integral connection with the thrice-­repeated reference to the readers’ suffering and the thrice-­repeated thanksgiving in 1 Thess 1–3, this study has come to confirm all these points of Schubert. However, Schubert’s failure to observe these particular features of the thanksgiving section of 1 Thess 1–3 results in his inadequate explanation of the functions of the personal narratives as integral parts of the thanksgiving section.119 But our new observation of the features in the structure of 1 Thess 1–3 helps us see clearly what integral functions the narratives of 2:1–12 and 2:17–3:8 fulfill within the thanksgiving section, as well as why they are both much more extensive than the narratives within the thanksgiving sections of Philippians (1:5, 7b–8) and Romans (1:10–13). First Thessalonians 2:14–3:8 primarily fulfills the vital function of providing the background for his thanksgiving. Given his great anxiety about 114 Schubert, Form and Function, 19–21. See also O’Brien, Introductory Thanksgivings, 144; Malherbe, 103–5, 133–34. If we are so intent on finding a digression, perhaps 2:15–16 may be so called. But even here, if Holtz’s theory is right, it is not a digression (see note 112 above). 115 Schubert, Form and Function, 20–23. 116 Schubert, Form and Function, 25. 117 Schubert, Form and Function, 17. 118 Schubert, Form and Function, 26. 119 There is the same failure also in O’Brien, Introductory Thanksgivings, 141–61, who, while affirming with Schubert 1:2–3:13 as one thanksgiving section, deals with only 1:2–5; 2:13; 3:9–13, leaving out the narratives completely. Wanamaker, 90, uses this failure as an argument against the form-­critical approach and for his rhetorical-­critical approach. But see note 128 below for the problem of his approach. Observing the structure of 1 Thess 1–3 more carefully than the traditional form-­critical approach has done, this study, I hope, is able to show how different parts of those chapters, including the narrative parts, form an integrated unity.

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 96

7/12/23 11:28 AM



The Thessalonian Letters 97

his readers because of their continuing suffering from persecution and his great joy over the result of Timothy’s mission, it is not at all strange to see Paul explain in an extensive narrative this background of his enthusiastic thanksgiving to God. Paul does exactly the same thing in 2 Corinthians. Note how he provides the background of his enthusiastic thanksgiving in 2 Cor 2:14–17 with a long narrative about his suffering, his inability to keep his travel plan of coming to the readers, the troubles it has caused in his relationship with them, and about Titus’s mission in 2 Cor 1:8–2:13 (cf. 2 Cor 7:5–16).120 We have already observed the necessary function that the narrative of 1 Thess 2:1–12 fulfills within the thanksgiving section of 1 Thess 1–3: in giving thanks to God for the Thessalonians’ acceptance of the gospel with an appreciation of his εἴσοδος in the face of the opponents’ slander, Paul needs to consolidate their appreciation of his εἴσοδος in order to prevent them from succumbing to the opponents’ continuing slander campaign and to equip them with a tool to rebut them as well as to do evangelistic work. So he demonstrates the integrity of his εἴσοδος in the narrative of 2:1–12. Again, this is what Paul does also in 2 Cor 3:1–7:4. After giving thanks to God in 2 Cor 2:14–17 for the comfort that Titus’s good news about the Corinthians’ return to a proper appreciation of his apostolic ministry has brought him, Paul turns to demonstrating the legitimacy and integrity of his apostleship in 2 Cor 3:1–7:4 before resuming his grateful talk of God’s comfort in 2 Cor 7:5–16. We have already said that Paul does this for essentially the same purpose as in 1 Thess 2:1–12. So, Paul’s doing what he does in 1 Thess 2:1–12 in the context of giving thanks to God is not strange at all. That is to say, there is no problem with seeing the two narrative parts, 2:1–12 and 2:17–3:8, as integral parts of the thanksgiving section of 1 Thess 1–3.121 Only those who hold a legalistic notion of the form of a Pauline thanksgiving will say that if 1 Thess 1–3 is a thanksgiving, then Paul cannot do there what he does in 2 Cor 1–7. The form-­critical analysis of Pauline thanksgiving sections is a useful tool. But it has to be flexible enough to recognize the peculiarities of the individual thanksgiving sections as well as their commonalities. Our observation here of the threefold repetition of basically the same thanksgiving, for the same reason given in the fivefold repetition, against the

120 These elements in 2 Cor 1:8–2:13 form rather close parallels to those in 1 Thess 2:14–3:8. See the next note. 121 The structural parallelism between 1 Thess 1–3 and 2 Cor 1–7 may be set out as follows: 1 Thessalonians 2:1–12 narrative (apostolic integrity) 2:13 thanksgiving 2:14–3:8 narrative (background: suffering),

3:9 thanksgiving

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 97

2 Corinthians 3:1–7:4a narrative (apostolic integrity) 7:4b–16 gratitude and joy for God’s comfort 1:8–2:13 narrative (background: suffering, travel plan, Timothy’s mission, travel plan, Titus’s mission) 2:14–17 thanksgiving

7/12/23 11:28 AM

98  Introduction background of suffering that is stated in threefold repetition in direct connection with the threefold thanksgiving, clearly requires us to see the whole of 1 Thess 1:2–3:13 as one indivisible thanksgiving section.122 Once this is recognized, the form-­critical analysis of Pauline thanksgiving sections should be adjusted to accommodate these peculiarities: its unparalleled length, its threefold repetition of thanksgiving, its inclusion of lengthy narratives, and so on.

G. The Purpose of Part 1 of 1 Thessalonians Another serious consequence of Schubert’s failure to recognize the characteristics of the structure of the thanksgiving section of 1 Thess 1–3 that we have observed is that he cannot explain adequately the function or purpose of the thanksgiving section. He rightly says that, whereas in the other Pauline letters the thanksgiving section has the introductory function of indicating the occasion and contents of the letter, in 1 Thessalonians it contains in itself all the primary concerns of Paul. But when Schubert specifies these concerns merely as “the extensive and intimately personal description of his [sc. Paul’s] constant anxiety and longing desire for the Thessalonian church,”123 it is quite disappointing. For he fails to recognize clearly the paraenetic and the apologetic purposes that this thanksgiving also has. We must first recognize that Paul is not uttering this thanksgiving in his private prayer but reporting his thanksgiving in a letter sent to the Thessalonian Christians who are suffering from the opponents’ persecution. In other words, he is letting them know that he is giving thanks to God for their wonderful faith. So, when in chs. 1–3 he gives thanks to God three times over for their exemplary faith, he is, while expressing his genuine thankfulness to God, also implicitly praising the readers for their faith. With the thrice-­repeated reference to their suffering and with his deep concern about it (2:17–3:5), he tries to convey his sympathy with them and thus to comfort them. His repeated emphasis that through their suffering for the sake of the gospel they have become “imitators” of the Lord Jesus, Paul himself, the Judean churches, and the prophets (1:6; 2:14), as well as his reminder of his previous teaching that Christians are bound to suffer (3:4), are both especially designed to bring comfort to the suffering readers, just as his statement about the readers’ having been loved and chosen by God is designed to bring assurance to them (1:4). Against this background of their suffering, Paul holds the readers up as “an example to all the believers in Macedonia and in Achaia” and praises their joyful acceptance of the gospel, sound conversion, fervent hope, and

122 Thus, it is wrong to fragment 1:2–10 from what follows, to view 2:13–16 as a later interpolation, or to take 2:17–3:10 as a separate section under the questionable title “apostolic parousia.” See notes 84 and 112 above. 123 Schubert, Form and Function, 26.

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 98

7/12/23 11:28 AM



The Thessalonian Letters 99

active missionary service (1:7–10), that is, their “work of faith, labor of love, and steadfastness of hope” (v. 3). All these efforts to comfort, reassure, and praise the readers converge on the purpose of encouraging them to remain in faith despite persecution and temptation.124 The thrice-­repeated reference to the readers’ suffering from the opponents’ persecution, together with the long narrative about Paul’s own great anxiety about it in 2:17–3:10, makes it unmistakable that persecution forms the background for the whole thanksgiving section of 1 Thess 1–3. Yet the fivefold repetition of the statement that connects the success of the gospel or the readers’ faith with Paul’s εἴσοδος, together with the emphatic demonstration of the integrity of his εἴσοδος in 2:1–12, makes it clear that the greater emphasis is laid here. This is because the opponents’ pressures take the form of a slander campaign against his εἴσοδος, as we have seen. Thus, in the thrice-­repeated thanksgiving, Paul is, while giving thanks to God, also strongly praising the readers for successfully withstanding that slander campaign. With the praise, he is trying to encourage them to go on maintaining their positive view of his εἴσοδος. In other words, he is trying to consolidate their positive appreciation of his εἴσοδος in order to prevent them from succumbing to the continuing slander campaign. As we have seen, this is the reason why amid the thanksgiving section he includes the systematic and succinct demonstration of the integrity of his εἴσοδος (2:1–12). The affectionate expression of his continuing pastoral concerns in 2:17–3:13 as a whole and his explanation of his repeated efforts to come to their aid and of his sending Timothy there in particular are also designed to strengthen their positive evaluation of his εἴσοδος and to reassure and encourage them in faith. Thus, the thanksgiving section of 1 Thess 1–3 has three major purposes: to give thanks to God for the readers’ faith, to encourage them to stand firm in the faith with a continuing positive appreciation of Paul’s εἴσοδος despite persecution, and to help them rebut the opponents’ slander campaign against his mission and message. In addition, the thanksgiving section also has an introductory purpose. With the traditional triad of “your work of faith, labor of love and steadfastness of hope” in 1:3, Paul may intend to introduce the three topics that he will elaborate on later—­a lready in the thanksgiving section a little but then more fully later (work of faith: 1:5–10; 2:13–16; 3:6–9; labor of love: 1:8; 4:9–10; 5:12–15; steadfastness of hope: 1:10; 4:13–5:11). But he provides the real introduction of the topics for later elaboration in chs. 4–5 (love, holiness, the eschatological hope) in the wish-­prayer of 3:11–13 that concludes the 124 Cf. Malherbe, 85–86. So there is an element of demonstrative rhetoric in chs. 1–3. Even if we do not hold the theory that Paul wrote the whole letter of 1 Thess according to the Hellenistic rhetorical handbooks, or that 1 Thess 2–3 constitutes the narratio in the rhetorical scheme, we must acknowledge the contribution of recent rhetorical critics (especially Wanamaker, 90–91) who have emphasized the epideictic or demonstrative rhetorical character and paraenetic function of the thanksgiving section. See note 128 below.

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 99

7/12/23 11:28 AM

100  Introduction thanksgiving section (cf. Phil 1:9–11). So the thanksgiving section of 1 Thess 1:2–3:13 also has this typical function of the thanksgiving sections of the other Pauline letters. But the fact that this function appears only at the transitional wish-­prayer, while the exceptionally long thanksgiving has been preoccupied with other weighty concerns of Paul’s that are not dealt with in the following section of chs. 4–5, clearly indicates that the introductory function is of minor importance. This means that the thanksgiving section of 1 Thess 1–3 is not a mere “introductory thanksgiving” but rather constitutes the main body of the letter, containing the above three major purposes.

H. 1 Thessalonians 4–5 The opening λοιπὸν οὖν of 4:1 does indicate that what follows is really the concluding exhortation appended to the main body of the letter. However, in view of the fact that the main themes of chs. 4–5 are announced at the end of the thanksgiving section (3:11–13), the two chapters cannot be treated merely as an appendix. This fact, together with its length as well as the weightiness of its subject matters, suggests that the section also constitutes the main body of the letter. So we may see 1 Thessalonians as having two parts, 1:2–3:13 forming part 1 and 4:1–5:24 forming part 2. With its practical exhortations for a sanctified life and a healthy community life inside and outside the church, as well as with its clarification of some points of the eschatological hope that have been bothering the readers,125 the second part also serves the important function of “supplying what is lacking in [their] faith” (3:10) and thus strengthening their faith.126 Of the two parts, however, Paul clearly puts stress on the first. This is indicated by a comparison of the nature of the subject matters dealt with and the manner of his dealing with them in the two sections. In part 1 he undertakes the more vital task of helping the readers maintain their faith and preventing them from falling away, and he carries out this paraenetic and apologetic task with a greater degree of emotional engagement. In part 2, however, he undertakes the comparatively less essential or urgent task of improving the readers’ moral and communal life (4:1–12; 5:12–22), and he carries it out by delivering a list of largely traditional moral exhortations,127 together with clarification on the details of the eschatological hope (4:13–5:11). The secondary nature of part 2 is also made clear by the opening phrase λοιπὸν οὖν of 4:1. To this 125 Apparently, on return from his mission to Thessalonica, Timothy reported to Paul and Silvanus not only that the Thessalonian believers were maintaining their faith in the Lord Jesus firmly despite persecution, but also that they urgently needed more teaching on some concrete issues in these three areas (see Form/Structure/Setting of 4:1–12 below). 126 For more details about the structure and character of part 2, as well as for the applicability of form criticism and rhetorical criticism to our letter as a whole, see the introduction to part 2 below (pp. 317–23). 127 See Kim, “Paul’s Common Paraenesis,” in PGTO, 253–77.

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 100

7/12/23 11:28 AM



The Thessalonian Letters 101

extent, Schubert is right in saying that the thanksgiving section “contains all the primary information that Paul wished to convey. There is no other subject matter in the letter which equals in importance.”128

Conclusion We have ascertained the following three special features of 1 Thess 1–3 as a key to a proper interpretation of this unusually long thanksgiving section of 1 Thessalonians: (1) the fivefold statement associating the readers’ acceptance of the gospel with Paul’s impeccable εἴσοδος runs through the whole passage like a red thread; (2) the statement is made the reason for the thrice-­repeated thanksgiving; and (3) the thrice-­repeated thanksgiving is accompanied also by the thrice-­repeated reference to persecution. These three features help us confirm the unity of the thanksgiving section, while the close parallelism between the section and 2 Cor 1–7 in occasion, tone, vocabulary, structure, 128 Schubert, Form and Function, 26. Contra Wanamaker, 49–50, 90–91, who through his rhetorical critical approach implicitly treats chs. 4–5 as the main section (probatio) to which chs. 1–3 are only a preparation as exordium (1:2–10) and narratio (2:1–3:10). He rejects the thematic approach, contending that “it tends to fragment the letters into sequences of themes without sufficient attention to the unity of their argumentation and the rationale for their overall structure” (45; cf. Jewett, Correspondence, 68, for a similar criticism). In his essay “Rhetoric of Letters,” 194–240, Hughes makes the same point with the claim that “epistological analysis” does not explain well “how the structure and function of a letter is related to its content and the intention of its writer,” but rhetorical analysis can explain the question very well and thereby help establish the Sitz im Leben of the letter being studied (215). But in his actual rhetorical analysis of 1 Thess in his essay, “Rhetoric of 1 Thessalonians,” 94–116, he only repeats that claim without quite demonstrating it (see esp. p. 108). Then, in another essay, “The Social Function Implied by Rhetoric,” which he appends to the aforementioned first essay in the same volume (Correspondence, 241–54), he strangely admits that “though the rhetorical analysis of Pauline and pseudo-­Pauline letters [sc. 1 & 2 Thess] has yielded surprisingly vivid insights into the pastoral practices of Paul and his followers, this analytical method has had relatively little to contribute toward understanding the social and cultural situation of the Thessalonians that Paul addressed” (253). It is hoped that this present “epistological” study (and my commentary based on it) explains the unity of the various parts of 1 Thess, the rationale for its overall structure, its Sitz im Leben, and Paul’s intent in it more coherently than the rhetorical analyses of Wanamaker and Hughes have done (see the introduction to part 2, “The Exhortations [4:1–5:24]” in the commentary below for further criticism of the confusing applications by Wanamaker, Hughes, and B. Witherington of the rhetorical-­critical method to 1 Thess 4–5). Against Wanamaker, see also Krentz, “1 Thessalonians: Rhetorical Flourishes and Formal Constraints,” 317. In the article, arguing against the attempts to see 1 Thess as written according to the Greco-­Roman rhetorical handbooks, Krentz cites M. Mitchell’s criticism of R. Jewett’s “identification of 1:6–3:13, ‘fully half the letter,’ as narratio, despite the fact that epideictic orations use it rarely” and the fact that “narratio properly belongs to forensic oratory” (305; citing M. Mitchell, Paul and the Rhetoric of Reconciliation, 1–19, who criticizes Jewett, Correspondence, 72–74). This criticism by Mitchell and Krentz of Jewett applies also to Wanamaker. See further p. 86 above. Against the view that Paul wrote his letters in accordance with the rules of ancient rhetorical handbooks, see, besides Krentz’s article cited here, also Malherbe, Ancient Epistolary Theorists, 1–11; M. Hengel, Pre-­Christian Paul, 58; Porter, “Theoretical Justification,” 115–16; Winter, “Is Paul among the Sophists?,” 35; Weima, “What Does Aristotle Have to Do with Paul?,” 458–68; Kern, Rhetoric and Galatians.

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 101

7/12/23 11:28 AM

102  Introduction and content helps us explain the vital functions of the two narratives, 2:1–12 and 2:14–3:8, within the indivisible thanksgiving section of 1 Thess 1–3. A comparison of 2:1–12 with its contemporary Sophistic εἴσοδος practices, on the one hand, and with Paul’s apologia in 2 Corinthians on the other, helps us see the apologetic purpose of 2:1–12 and clarify the specific nature of Paul’s apologetic within the overall paraenetically designed thanksgiving section of 1 Thess 1–3. Paul presents his εἴσοδος as impeccable in order to consolidate the readers’ positive appreciation of it so that they may effectively counter the non-­Christian opponents’ slander campaign of denigrating him as a wandering charlatan orator. The character of 1 Thess 4–5 and the relationship of this second part of the letter to the first part (1 Thess 1–3) strengthen this conclusion, as they argue against the theory that in 2:1–12 Paul presents himself as a model for the readers’ imitation, as well as against the theory that the first part merely serves a philophronetic purpose for the second part. These findings lead us to summarize the nature of 1 Thessalonians thus: it is a pastoral letter in which Paul seeks to strengthen the readers’ exemplary faith—­primarily by helping them withstand the opponents’ persecution and temptation centered on disparaging his integrity as a preacher of the gospel, and then also by exhorting them for sanctification and a healthy communal life and clarifying some points of the eschatological hope.

4. Authorship of 2 Thessalonians Bibliography Bailey, J. A. “Who Wrote II Thessalonians?” NTS 25 (1978/79): 131–45. Donfried, K. P. “2 Thessalonians and the Church of Thessalonica.” Pages 128–44 in Origins and Method: Toward a New Understanding of Judaism and Christianity; Essays in Honour of John C. Hurd. Edited by B. H. McClean. JSNTSup 86. Sheffield: JSOT Press, 1993. Kim, S. “Paul’s Doctrine of Justification in 2 Thessalonians 1–2.” Pages 279–95 in PGTO. Kümmel, W. G. Einleitung in das Neue Testament. Heidelberg: Quelle & Meyer, 1983. Lüdemann, G. Die gröbste Fälschung des Neuen Testaments: Der zweite Thessalonischerbrief. Hannover: zu Klampen Verlag, 2010. Trilling, W. “Literarische Paulusimitation im 2. Thessalonicherbrief.” Pages 146–56 in Paulus in den neutestamentlichen Spätschriften: Zur Paulusrezeption im Neuen Testament. Edited by K. Kertelge. Freiburg: Herder, 1981. Wrede, W. Die Echtheit des zweiten Thessalonicherbriefes. TU 2.24. Leipzig: Hinrichs, 1903.

The Pauline authorship of 2 Thessalonians had never been questioned in church history before 1801, when J. E. C. Schmidt came to view the eschatology of 2 Thess 2:1–12 as contradicting that of 1 Thess 4:13–5:11. Although he argued only that the former passage was a later interpolation into Paul’s letter of 2 Thessalonians, his work opened up the scholarly discussion of the authenticity of 2 Thessalonians as a whole in the subsequent decades of the nineteenth century, which was centered on the eschatological question.129 129 Cf. Trilling, Untersuchungen, 143–45.

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 102

7/12/23 11:28 AM



The Thessalonian Letters 103

Then, in 1903 W. Wrede published a monograph (Echtheit) in which he argued that the literary relationship of 2 Thessalonians to 1 Thessalonians is the “schlagende Hauptargument” (decisive main argument) for the inauthenticity of 2 Thessalonians.130 That book set the course of the subsequent scholarly debate of the authenticity question of that letter during the twentieth century, in which the eschatological question still played a part. The next turning point in the debate came with the monograph of W. Trilling (Untersuchungen, 1972), which built further upon Wrede’s view of the literary relationship of the two letters as the main argument but supplemented it with form-­critical and theological arguments. Trilling concluded his work, insisting that the total effects of those arguments make it certain that 2 Thessalonians is a pseudepigraph.131 Together with Wrede’s work, his work has decisively swung critical New Testament scholarship since the second half of the last century to viewing 2 Thessalonians as a pseudepigraph. It has become customary to count only Romans, 1 and 2 Corinthians, Galatians, Philippians, 1 Thessalonians, and Philemon as “the genuine seven letters of Paul” and to designate Ephesians, Colossians, and the three Pastorals (1 and 2 Tim and Titus) as “deutero-­Pauline letters” (works of Paul’s theological heirs), while doubting whether 2 Thessalonians belongs even to the latter group.132 Yet there have also been many scholars who, finding the arguments of Wrede, Trilling, and their followers wanting, continue to uphold the authenticity of 2 Thessalonians. So the debate has continued, and interestingly there has emerged a division, broadly speaking, between German-­speaking scholarship and English-­speaking scholarship. The majority of recent English-­ speaking commentators affirm 2 Thessalonians as authentic,133 while recent German-­speaking commentators134 almost uniformly maintain the pseudepigraphical view of 2 Thessalonians along with most other German-­speaking New Testament scholars. Thus Stuhlmacher,135 Niebuhr,136 and others belong to the small minority of those who uphold the authenticity of 2 Thessalonians, despite W. G. Kümmel, who in his classic Introduction to New Testament137 steadfastly maintained it against the majority of critical scholars in Germany. 130 Wrede, Echtheit, 2. 131 Trilling, Untersuchungen, 157–58. 132 Cf., e.g., Trilling, “Paulusimitation,” 154; Lüdemann, Die gröbste Fälschung, 84–85, who calls it the “crudest forgery” in the NT, alleging that, unlike the other Pauline and non-­Pauline pseudepigraphs, it was written to eliminate a genuine letter of Paul, namely, 1 Thess. 133 E.g., Best; Marshall; Morris; Wanamaker; Green; Fee; Beale; Witherington; Weima. Exceptions: Furnish; Gaventa; Menken; Johnson. Cf. also Donfried, “Issues of Authorship,” 107–10. 134 E.g., Reinmuth; Kreinecker; Müller; Schreiber, II; Hoppe, II; Nicklas. 135 Biblical Theology, 254–55, 488–93. 136 “Paulusbriefsammlung,” 269–70. 137 See the 21st German edition, Einleitung in das Neue Testament (1983), 228–32.

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 103

7/12/23 11:28 AM

104  Introduction

A. The Traditional Debate about the Authenticity of 2 Thessalonians Centered on the Literary Relationship between 1 and 2 Thessalonians Scholars usually summarize the reasons for the inauthenticity of 2 Thessalonians under the following four headings:138 (1) the literary relationship between 1 Thessalonians and 2 Thessalonians; (2) the impersonal or “official” tone in 2 Thessalonians in contrast to the personal and warm tone in 1 Thessalonians; (3) the different theology (esp. eschatology); (4) the autograph in 2 Thess 3:17. These reasons have been fully examined in recent commentaries,139 and we need not rehearse them in full here. The latter two issues can be resolved without much difficulty, and so they will be addressed while commenting on the relevant passages (see comment on 2 Thess 2:5 and 3:17 below). Therefore, here we shall examine only the literary relationship between the two Thessalonian letters and the impersonal or “official” tone in 2 Thessalonians, which are related to each other. Since Wrede,140 it is customary for scholars to tabulate the similar verses, phrases, and words in the two letters to show how close 2 Thessalonians is to 1 Thessalonians in words and phrases, themes, and their order (or structure).141 Wrede, Trilling, and other critical scholars argue that the easiest explanation of this literary relationship between the two letters is that by imitating 1 Thessalonians (to give the air of “Pauline” authorship), a pseudonymous author of 2 Thessalonians sought to replace 1 Thessalonians or at least to correct its imminent eschatology that was seen as having arisen out of 1 Thess 4:13–5:11. So they hold the literary relationship between the two letters as the chief of the four main reasons for denying the authenticity of the letter.142 Many commentators143 have examined this method of criticism and questioned whether the similarities between the two letters are so significant as to lead to the conclusion that 2 Thessalonians is a pseudepigraph written in imitation of 1 Thessalonians, or whether they can in fact be better seen as confirming the genuineness of 2 Thessalonians. So, for example, pointing out how some of the same or similar words and phrases are used in 2 Thessalonians with many little changes from 1 Thessalonians, Best argues that the unique literary relationship between the two letters speaks rather for the authenticity of 2 Thessalonians than inauthenticity, as a forger would

138 139 140 141

E.g., Marshall, 29–30; Malherbe, 365–69; Weima, 47–49; Bailey, “Who,” 132–39. E.g., Best, 50–58; Marshall, 28–49; Wanamaker, 17–28; Malherbe, 349–74; Weima, 46–54. Echtheit, 3–36. Cf. also Bailey, “Who,” 132–36, for a convenient summary of similarities and differences in structure, style, theme, and vocabulary between the two letters; Schreiber II:26–38. 142 E.g., Wrede, 2; Trilling, Untersuchungen, 157; Bailey, “Who,” 136. 143 E.g., Frame, 45–54; Dobschütz, 36–40; Rigaux, 133–52; Best, 50–58; Marshall, 28–45; Wanamaker, 19–28; Malherbe, 349–74.

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 104

7/12/23 11:28 AM



The Thessalonian Letters 105

not imitate Paul’s words and phrases in such a manner, whereas the same author can vary somewhat the use of his words according to the changed situation.144 Going further than Best, Fee has even drawn up ten points of similarities between the two letters which, though neglected by those who hold 2 Thessalonians as inauthentic, “seem to push [their view] beyond the bounds of ordinary historical probability . . . the kind of matters that would seem to require the ‘author’ of the second letter to have gotten into the skin, as it were, of the author of the first letter, which of course would indeed be the case if it is authentic.”145 Thus the literary-­critical method of comparing the words and styles of the two Thessalonian letters has come down to the minute details, so that recent commentaries have become a field of struggle between the pseudonymists, who claim any peculiarity or deviation of 2 Thessalonians in use of the comparable words and phrases from 1 Thessalonians as confirming their theory, and the authenticists, who eagerly highlight some literary features of 2 Thessalonians that cannot be explained on the pseudonymist assumption.

B. A New Observation of the Literary Relationship between 1 and 2 Thessalonians We believe that scholarship has neglected another dimension of the literary relationship between the two Thessalonian letters, namely, their structural similarities and differences,146 which is more effective in settling the question of the authenticity of 2 Thessalonians. It may be briefly set out thus: Broad Similarities in Structure • The thanksgiving section(s) is the main part of both letters. • The thrice-­repeated thanksgiving in 1 Thess 1–3, with the closing prayer in 3:11–13, is followed by λοιπὸν οὖν in 4:1 to turn to the second part of the letter (chs. 4–5). • The twice-­repeated thanksgiving in 2 Thess 1–2, with the closing prayer in 2:16–17, is followed by τὸ λοιπόν in 3:1 to turn to the second part of the letter (3:6–17). 144 Best, 53–54. Cf. also Dobschütz, 45: In comparison with Galatians, “Romans [esp. ch 4] shows how the genuine Paul almost never reproduces the same idea with the same words, how he surprisingly frequently uses even the idea itself in diverse ways.” Donfried, “Issues of Authorship,” 107–8, explains the peculiar literary relationship of the two Thessalonian epistles thus: The Thessalonians misunderstood or misinterpreted some statements in 1 Thess when it was read to them in their assembly. So major clarifications had to be provided “with a degree of exactitude” especially about the coming of the day of the Lord and the problem of “disorderliness.” Therefore, Paul and his co-­senders wrote 2 Thess after carefully reviewing and discussing a copy of their previous letter (1 Thess) which they were keeping “in parchment notebook/proto-­codex form.” 145 Fee, 238–40. 146 The “form-­critical investigation” of Trilling, Untersuchungen, 67–95, notwithstanding.

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 105

7/12/23 11:28 AM

106  Introduction Differences • The second part of 1 Thessalonians (chs. 4–5) contains substantial instructions to build up the readers’ faith and communal life. • In 2 Thessalonians, between the conclusion of the first part (chs. 1–2) and the beginning of the second part (3:6–15), there is a transitional paragraph (3:1–5), and in the second part only one of the issues of 1 Thess 4–5 is treated, namely, the unruly idlers. There are also differences as well as similarities in the details between the first parts, the thanksgiving sections, of the two letters as follows. Paul begins the thanksgiving section of 1 Thessalonians with a long sentence (1:2–5; eighty words). In it, he gives thanks to God for the Thessalonian Christians’ acceptance of the gospel despite persecution with a proper appreciation of his and his missionary team’s conduct as God’s messengers. Thereby he not only establishes a rapport with them and implicitly exhorts them to live up to the praise for them that was implicit in the thanksgiving, but also announces the theme of the whole thanksgiving section that runs right up to the end of ch. 3, making up the first main part of the letter (see Form/Structure/Setting of 1 Thess 1:2–10 below, and “Structure and Function of 1 Thessalonians 1–3” above). Likewise, in the second letter to the Thessalonians, the author begins the thanksgiving section with a long sentence (1:3–10), that, with 151 words, is almost twice as long as that of 1 Thessalonians. In it, similarly to the thanksgiving section of 1 Thessalonians, he gives thanks to God for the Thessalonian Christians’ faith. But whereas in the thanksgiving section of 1 Thessalonians his praise for their faith is focused on their initial act of accepting the gospel that he and his colleagues preached, in the thanksgiving section of 2 Thessalonians his praise is focused on their steadfast faith and its growth despite continuing persecution. As the thanksgiving in 1 Thessalonians slides into a narrative (1:6–10), similarly the thanksgiving in 2 Thessalonians slides into a discourse (1:5–10). But, again, whereas the narrative in 1 Thessalonians is about how the readers appreciated the missionary conduct of Paul and his colleagues and came to accept the gospel despite persecution, thereby becoming examples for believers elsewhere, the discourse in 2 Thessalonians is about how they, the suffering believers, will be rewarded with salvation at the parousia of the Lord Jesus, while their non-­Christian persecutors will be avenged with eternal destruction. Thus, while the narrative in 1 Thess 1:6–10 aims at encouraging the readers to hold on to the gospel with the same positive appreciation of the ministry of Paul, its messenger, the discourse in 2 Thess 1:5–10 aims at encouraging them to hold on to their faith with the full assurance of their salvation and the full knowledge of God’s punishment of their persecutors. Just as in 1 Thess 2:1–12 Paul explains in detail the theme of his missionary conduct and the Thessalonians’ acceptance of the gospel that he

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 106

7/12/23 11:28 AM



The Thessalonian Letters 107

earlier announced in the initial thanksgiving section of 1:2–10, so also in 2 Thess 2:1–12 the author explains in detail the theme of the parousia of the Lord Jesus and God’s judgment that he earlier announced in the initial thanksgiving section of 1:3–10. And just as in 1 Thess 2:13–16 the detailed explanation of his missionary conduct and the Thessalonians’ acceptance of the gospel leads him to renew his thanksgiving to God for their acceptance of the gospel, so also in 2 Thess 2:13–14 his detailed explanation of the parousia of the Lord Jesus and God’s judgment leads him to renew his thanksgiving to God for their faith and their eventual salvation. After offering the second thanksgiving in 1 Thess 2:13–16, Paul goes on to narrate how anxious he was about the Thessalonian Christians’ faith, and how he, hindered from coming to their aid himself, dispatched Timothy to establish them in their faith against the persecutors who were trying to dissuade them from belief in the gospel by disparaging Paul as a charlatan preacher. He relates how he was relieved by Timothy’s report that they were steadfastly maintaining their faith in the Lord with continued appreciation for Paul’s ministry among them (2:17–3:7). This narrative leads him to renew his thanksgiving to God again (3:9–10). Thus Paul’s praise for the readers’ acceptance of the gospel with a proper appreciation of the integrity of his missionary conduct remains the main content throughout the first part of 1 Thessalonians. With it he seeks to encourage them to maintain their faith with the same trust in him amid the persecution that their non-­Christian compatriots are inflicting on them with their continuing slander against his conduct (see “The Structure and Function of 1 Thessalonians 1–3” above for more details). In 2 Thessalonians, there is no third thanksgiving combined with a narrative or discourse that is equivalent to 1 Thess 2:17–3:7. Nevertheless, in 2 Thess 1–2, with the two thanksgivings (1:3–4; 2:13–14) that are accompanied by two discourses on the parousia of the Lord Jesus and the judgment of God (1:5–10; 2:1–12), the author has a similar aim that Paul has with the three thanksgivings (1:2–5; 2:13–16; 3:9–10) in 1 Thess 1–3 that are accompanied by three narratives about his εἴσοδος and the Thessalonians coming to faith (1:6–10; 2:1–12; 2:17–3:7). This aim is to encourage the Thessalonian believers to persevere with their faith despite persecution. Even so, there is a slight difference: whereas in 1 Thess 1–3 Paul is anxious to prevent the Thessalonian believers from succumbing to the non-­Christian slander campaign against him and giving up their faith, in 2 Thess 1–2 the author is anxious to prevent their faith from being shaken by a false message about the parousia of the Lord Jesus, as well as by the non-­Christian persecution. As the thanksgiving section of 1 Thess 1–3 yields to the prayer of 3:11–13, by which Paul makes transition to part 2 of the letter (1 Thess 4–5), so also the thanksgiving section of 2 Thess 1–2 has a similar transitional prayer (2:16–17) to part 2 of the letter (3:6–15). However, while 1 Thessalonians summarily

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 107

7/12/23 11:28 AM

108  Introduction announces the themes of its part 2 (love to one another and to all; sanctification in preparation for the last judgment; the parousia of the Lord Jesus), the latter focuses more on summarizing the themes of part 1 (namely, comforting and reassuring) than announcing the theme of part 2 (unless “every good work” is to be taken as an announcement of the subject matter of 2 Thess 3:6–15; see comment on 2 Thess 2:17 below). In fact, the transition is extended to 3:1–5. Even there a summary of the preceding part 1 with a prayer request and a wish-­prayer makes up the main content, and a preparation for part 2 (3:6–15) is clearly signaled only in 3:4 and somewhat less clearly in the closing wish-­prayer of 3:5 (see Form/Structure/Setting of 3:1–5). It is also noteworthy that, whereas in 1 Thessalonians (1:2–3; 3:10) Paul reports of his prayers for the readers as part of his thanksgiving to God, in 2 Thess 1 the author reports of his prayer for the readers (1:11–12) at the end of the discourse (1:5–10) attached to the thanksgiving (1:3–4). How then are these similarities and differences in the structure of the two letters to be explained? We believe that they can be smoothly explained if it is assumed that in 2 Thessalonians Paul addresses the persecution that has seriously worsened since he had written 1 Thessalonians—­the situation that has made the Thessalonians gullible to a false prophecy about the arrival of the day of the Lord, which has made them nervous (2 Thess 2:1–2). So Paul needs to explain in detail about the coming of the day of the Lord, as well as to comfort them to persevere amid the persecution. Hence, whereas in 1 Thessalonians he concentrated on praising them for their coming to faith and maintaining it despite persecution, in 2 Thessalonians he concentrates on reassuring them of the consummation of their salvation on the day of the Lord, drawing a stark contrast with the lot of their persecutors. So after the thanksgiving in 2 Thess 1:3–4, he plunges right away into a discourse on that reassuring theme (vv. 5–10). Then he goes on to explain that the day of the Lord has not yet come but will come in the future (2:1–8), only to repeat his reassuring message that it will bring judgment to their persecutors (vv. 9–12) but salvation to them (vv. 13–14).147 These differences in the situations of the Thessalonian believers and in the aims of Paul between the two letters go a long way toward explaining the alleged lack of warmth in the tone or, to be more accurate, the more

147 Pace Trilling, Untersuchungen, 71–73, who sees 1:5–10 only as a teaching text made up of “formula-­like tradition-­material,” which “is so general that it is difficult for us to imagine an individual church which it addresses.” Such a judgment can be made only by one who already presupposes 2 Thess to be a pseudepigraph and so reads it with no relation to 1 Thess. Of course, he could counter this view of mine with the same kind of argument: my way of explanation is possible only because I presuppose 2 Thessalonians as authentic and read it in continuity with 1 Thess. Here, however, the question is which of the two different ways of reading 2 Thess makes better sense of the structural similarities and differences between the two letters, for even Trilling and others who hold 2 Thess to be inauthentic still believe that it was written in imitation of 1 Thess.

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 108

7/12/23 11:28 AM



The Thessalonian Letters 109

formal and less personal tone in 2 Thessalonians (as warmth is not really lacking; e.g., note the seven uses of the vocative “brethren” in reference to the readers within its total forty-­seven verses, which are proportionally almost equal to the fourteen uses in eighty-­nine verses of 1 Thessalonians).148 For it is only natural that the extended instructions (discourses) on eschatology and God’s judgment, accompanied by strong condemnations against the persecutors in 2 Thess 1–2, naturally convey a more “official” or even harsh tone, in contrast to the warm and personal tone of the narratives about the readers’ appreciation of his ministry and acceptance of the gospel and about his anxious longing for them in 1 Thess 1–3.149 This judgment is borne by the fact that the instruction sections in 1 Thess 4–5 also similarly convey a more “official” and less personal tone than the narratives in 1 Thess 1–3. Furthermore, the harsh language of rebuke and command for the unruly idlers in 2 Thess 3:6–15 is quite understandable after the instruction imparted already in 1 Thess 4:10b–12 and 5:12–14.150 So we endorse Marshall’s conclusion: “It is surely time that the myth of the cold tone of the letter was exploded.”151 Our analysis of the similarities and differences between the two letters enables us also to explain the relationship between them: 2 Thessalonians is a sequel apparently written in a hurry and sent soon after the first letter upon the news of three urgent problems among the Thessalonian believers: (1) their suffering persecution from the opponents of the faith (cf. 1:4), which had intensified since Timothy’s mission (1 Thess 3:1–10); (2) the false alarm about the arrival of the day of the Lord (cf. 2:1–2), which was at least indirectly caused by or related to their inadequate understanding of Paul’s eschatological teachings in 1 Thess 4:13–5:11; and (3) the worsened situation of the problem of the unruly idlers (cf. 3:11), despite his exhortations in 1 Thess 4:10b–12 and 5:12–14.152 Hence, in 2 Thessalonians Paul (1) uses a structure consisting of a

148 Cf. Weima, 48–49, for more arguments. 149 Note well that even in 2 Thess 1–2, a warm, personal tone is not entirely lacking in the sections (1:3–5, 7, 10–12; 2:13–17) in which the writer seeks to console the readers by affirming their faith and reassuring them of their ultimate salvation. 150 Cf. Best, 55–56; Malherbe, 351, 367; esp. Marshall, 36, who, after a critical examination of all the form-­critical arguments of Trilling (Untersuchungen, 67–108) for the inauthenticity of 2 Thess, comments: “The most that has been established by critics of authenticity (of 2 Thessalonians) is that the letter is less personal than 1 Th.; it concentrates on teaching and paraenesis rather than on personal news and interests.” 151 Marshall, 34. Among the cases of Pauline language and style in 1 Thessalonians that are said to be used with slight changes in 2 Thessalonians, perhaps the thanksgiving formula εὐχαριστεῖν ὀφείλομεν τῷ θεῷ . . . καθὼς ἄξιόν ἐστιν (“we are bound to give thanks to God . . . as is fitting”; 2 Thess 1:3; cf. 2:13) instead of the simple εὐχαριστοῦμεν τῷ θεῷ (“we give thanks to God”; 1 Thess 1:2; 2:13; cf. 3:9) is the most striking. This case is regularly cited as an example of the formal and less warm tone of 2 Thessalonians and as an indicator of its inauthenticity. On this question, see comment on 2 Thess 1:3. 152 Cf. also Malherbe, 351, for the continuity of the two letters.

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 109

7/12/23 11:28 AM

110  Introduction thanksgiving section with repeated thanksgivings and a paraenetic section, as well as many words and phrases, which he had just used previously in 1 Thessalonians;153 he (2) concentrates on dealing with just those three issues, dispensing even with references to the personal relationship between him and the readers (except for a couple of reminders of his previous teachings; see 2:5, 15), since, having narrated extensively and most warmly about that relationship in 1 Thessalonians, which he had sent only a while ago, he saw no need to refer to it again in this urgent letter;154 he (3) fills the spaces between the repeated thanksgivings with the explanations about the coming of the day of the Lord and God’s just judgment instead of narratives like those in 1 Thessalonians, as those explanations were now needed to reassure the confused and anxious readers; and (4) he attaches a short paraenesis dealing only with the issue of unruly idlers. Bailey counters this way of explaining the structural similarities and material differences between the two letters in terms of Paul writing 2 Thessalonians to address a changed situation soon after 1 Thessalonians. He argues, “In that case it is all the more unbelievable that Paul wrote II Thessalonians as if I Thessalonians did not exist. And why would he write a letter which contains nothing distinctively new over against what is found in I Thessalonians except for the eschatological material in ii.1–12, which conflicts moreover with the eschatology of I Thessalonians?”155 But this is an incorrect argument. For the following three facts clearly suggest that Paul wrote 2 Thessalonians in continuity with what he had written in 1 Thessalonians. First, he further expounds God’s judgment for believers and against unbelievers according to his doctrine of justification (see below), in order to reassure the persecuted believers in 2 Thess 1:5–12 and 2:9–14, the doctrine that he only implied in the summary statements in 1 Thessalonians (1:10; 3:12–13; 4:6; 5:9–10; see below and also comments on 1 Thess 1:10). Second, the teaching in 2 Thess 2:3–8 is to be seen as clarifying his teaching about the parousia of the Lord Jesus or the day of the Lord in 1 Thess 4:13–5:11, rather than conflicting with it (see comment on 2 Thess 2:3–8 and Excursus there). Finally, his strong admonitions for and about the unruly idlers in 2 Thess 3:6–12 (or 15) can all the better be appreciated in the light of his earlier brief exhortations in 1 Thess 4:10b–12 and 5:12–14.156

153 Cf., e.g., Best, 59; Marshall, 24–25, 31–32; even Wrede, Echtheit, 29, considers this possibility, only to reject it on an unconvincing ground. 154 Cf. Malherbe, 351; also Wrede, Echtheit, 34, though he rejects this view also on a superficial ground—­see below; contra Bailey, “Who,” 137–38; Nicklas, 76–77. See Form/Structure/Setting of 2 Thess 1:5–10 below. 155 “Who,” 136. 156 Cf. Malherbe, 368–69, who points out that critics can allege differences in theology (esp. eschatology) between 1 Thess and 2 Thess because they compare the two letters without considering the changed situation between them.

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 110

7/12/23 11:28 AM



The Thessalonian Letters 111

Thus, the view of 2 Thessalonians as Paul’s sequel to 1 Thessalonians enables us to smoothly explain the historical and literary relationship between the two letters, as well as the peculiarities of 2 Thessalonians itself. It also enables us to explain the change from the warm personal tone of a father to his children in 1 Thessalonians (esp. chs. 1–3) to the more “official” tone of a teacher to his students in 2 Thessalonians.157 This fact should be appreciated in contrast to the fact that the view of 2 Thessalonians as a pseudepigraph has the difficulty of satisfactorily explaining the historical context or the Sitz im Leben of that letter,158 as well as the literary relationship between the two letters. How come a pseudonymous author, writing 2 Thessalonians in imitation of the 1 Thessalonians’ structure of the repeated thanksgivings, decided not even to reflect in a few words (let alone to imitate) the rich narratives about Paul’s own ministry among and his personal relationship with the Thessalonians, which dominate the thanksgiving sections of 1 Thess 1–3? Why in that way did he create what the critics call the most “impersonal” letter within the Pauline corpus while imitating Paul’s most personal letter? How did he manage to create a unique letter among New Testament letters with no information about the author’s relationship with the intended readers?159 Trilling explains the “embarrassing” omission of the big chunks of the personal sections of 1 Thess 2:1–3:10 (except 2:9) in 2 Thessalonians in these terms: “The author could not use any corresponding material or bring in anything new since apparently he had no concrete knowledge of the church in Thessalonica of his time and also since he had to be concerned not to betray his project through improper details.”160 Wrede also highlights the “striking” omission of the long personal sections that are important in 1 Thessalonians, but he explains simply that the pseudonymous author did it because the sections “contained nothing instructive or generally valid.”161 But this superficial explanation stems from Wrede’s failure to ask, as we have done, why the author of 2 Thessalonians concentrates only on imparting instruction about three issues or surrounds the two thanksgivings only with instruction about God’s judgment and the day of the Lord, all the while “imitating” the structure of the repeated thanksgivings of 1 Thessalonians. Trilling makes his unconvincing explanation (cited above) after summarizing Wrede’s explanation of the “central problem” of 2 Thessalonians, namely, the literary relationship of 2 Thessalonians to 1 Thessalonians, in these terms:

157 Cf. Frame, 52: “At every point the exegesis of II [Thess] is easiest on the assumption of genuineness.” 158 Cf. Marshall, 40–45; Malherbe, 370–72; Witherington, 11; Weima, 53–54; Donfried, “2 Thessalonians,” 132; Still, Conflict, 58; also contrast Marshall, 24, with Trilling, 21, 26–27. 159 Cf. Fee, 239; also Best, 53: Why did the pseudonymous author “choose to follow the structure of 1 Thessalonians, and follow it imperfectly”? 160 “Paulusimitation,” 149 (italics his). 161 Echtheit, 34–35.

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 111

7/12/23 11:28 AM

112  Introduction “1. The first letter serves the author of the second as literary template, and 2. The way he uses the first letter takes place not according to a certain scheme or order, but, seen as a whole, strangely unsystematically, eclectically, and in many cases almost haphazardly.”162 However, these explanations sound to us as admissions of their own failure to explain the relationship of the two letters properly. The proponents of the pseudepigraphic view of 2 Thessalonians usually count the literary relationship and the difference of tone between the two letters among the chief grounds for their view.163 So, it is quite ironic that their view renders them unable to explain those matters satisfactorily, while the view of 2 Thessalonians as an authentic sequel to 1 Thessalonians leads us to do it quite naturally.

C. The Presence of Paul’s Justification Doctrine in 2 Thessalonians as Decisive Evidence For us, however, the weightiest evidence for the authenticity of 2 Thessalonians is the strong presence in its main part (chs. 1–2) of the uniquely Pauline form of preaching the gospel, namely, his doctrine of justification. The clear presence of that doctrine in it has been almost completely ignored in scholarship,164 and therefore its significance has never been discussed in connection with the question of the authenticity of the letter. But for us, its prominent presence in 2 Thessalonians is the conclusive evidence for the letter’s authenticity. We have argued that even in 1 Thessalonians the doctrine is implicitly present in encapsulated forms (cf. esp. 1:10; 2:12; 3:12–13; 4:6; 5:9–10, 23–24).165 In 2 Thess 1–2 Paul unfolds it much more explicitly because he must deal with God’s judgment on the day of the Lord, as the readers have such a great anxiety about it. So while explaining that the day of the Lord is yet to come with the parousia of the Lord Jesus after the revelation of the lawless man (2:1–8), both before (1:5–12) and after (2:9–14, 16–17) that explanation he repeatedly expounds God’s “ just judgment” (1:5) on that day in terms of his doctrine of justification by faith. Thus he seeks to reassure the readers that by God’s “ just judgment” they will be judged as worthy to obtain the consummation of salvation in God’s kingdom because they have faith in the gospel, whereas their persecutors will be condemned and destroyed because they have refused to render the obedience of faith to the gospel (see comment on 2 Thess 1:5–12 and 2:9–14, 16–17).166 Thus we can see the continuity between 1 Thessalonians and 2 Thessalonians 162 Trilling, “Paulusimitation,” 148 (italics his). 163 Cf., e.g., Wrede, Echtheit, 2–35; Trilling, “Paulusimitation,” 147; Bailey, “Who,” 135, 136. 164 Apparently O. A. Rainbow, “Justification according to Paul’s Thessalonian Correspondence,” BBR 19 (2009): 249–74, represents the only exception. 165 Kim, “Justification by Grace and through Faith in 1 Thessalonian,” in PNP, 85–100. See comment on those passages below. Cf. also Rainbow, “Justification,” 251. 166 See also Kim, “Paul’s Doctrine of Justification in 2 Thessalonians 1–2,” in PGTO, 279–95.

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 112

7/12/23 11:28 AM



The Thessalonian Letters 113

in showing that Paul preached the gospel fundamentally in terms of deliverance from God’s wrath/condemnation and transference into his kingdom and glory (i.e., the doctrine of justification).167 And we can also see the reason why he expresses that doctrine extensively in 2 Thessalonians, whereas he presented it only in the encapsulated forms in 1 Thessalonians. Therefore, for us, the presence of the doctrine of justification in 2 Thessalonians is the most convincing evidence of the authenticity of that letter, and its appearance in the two letters in the different forms as indicated is evidence of the view that 2 Thessalonians follows 1 Thessalonians and not the other way around.168

Conclusion For all these reasons, we affirm that 2 Thessalonians is a genuine letter of Paul, which was sent to the Thessalonian believers soon after 1 Thessalonians. In various places in the commentary on 2 Thessalonians, we shall go on showing how certain verses, phrases, or clauses point to the authenticity of 2 Thessalonians rather than to its inauthenticity (see esp. comments on 1:5–7 together with the comments in Form/Structure/Setting there).

5. Date How soon after 1 Thessalonians was 2 Thessalonians written? It seems that we need to guess the answer by considering four factors. First, like 1 Thessalonians, 2 Thessalonians does not include the greetings to the readers from the church of the place where the letter was written. So apparently it was sent soon after 1 Thessalonians from Corinth, where Paul and his colleagues had not yet founded a church properly there that could enter into a relationship with the Thessalonians. Second, 2 Thessalonians does not include any reference to office bearers in the church, and the instruction about the unruly idlers in 3:6–15 does not suggest any form of disciplinary process for the deviants within the church. These facts suggest that there was not yet any development in the structure and polity of the church beyond the time of 1 Thessalonians.169 Third, we need to think that 2 Thessalonians was sent soon enough after 1 Thessalonians that Paul could feel it was unnecessary to refer to his relationship with the readers after the extensive narratives about 167 See Kim, Justification, for the view that for Paul justification means both a proleptic acquittal of sins and a change of lordship, a transfer from the kingdom of Satan into the kingdom of God and his Son; note Col 1:13–14. 168 The fact that the doctrine of justification is unfolded in 2 Thess 2:9–14 in close parallelism to Rom 1–2 is a further confirmation of the authenticity of 2 Thessalonians; see comment ad loc; contra Nicklas, 47 (cf. also 40, 41), who summarily states that the theological contents of 2 Thessalonians are different from those of the authentic Pauline letters and that this is evidence for its pseudepigraphical nature. Cf. also Trilling, “Paulusimitation,” 151–54, who characterizes the theology of 2 Thessalonians as a “theological deformation” of Pauline theology. 169 Best, 58; Marshall, 44.

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 113

7/12/23 11:28 AM

114  Introduction it in 1 Thessalonians. Finally, we still yet need to consider a period sufficiently long after 1 Thessalonians for the problems addressed in 2 Thessalonians to develop. So, for example, Frame guesses that 2 Thessalonians was sent five to seven weeks after 1 Thessalonians,170 while Malherbe thinks of a little longer interval (a few months) between the two letters.171

6. Relation between the Two Letters (F. F. Bruce’s original writing is here preserved. As part of a work now forty years old, inevitably it is somewhat outdated, but still it contains some valuable discussion on the subjects that we have omitted above, such as the order of the two letters and the theories that they were addressed to the different groups within the Thessalonian church.) If only 1 Thessalonians had come down to us, the Thessalonian correspondence would present no great problem. The authenticity of 2:13–16 would have to be discussed (see below), and it would be necessary to consider arguments for discerning two distinct letters in this short document (see below); but in general the letter could be accepted without serious question as one sent by Paul and his associates to their converts in Thessalonica shortly after they were forced to leave the city, and from it we could fill in various details about the evangelization of Thessalonica and the fortunes of the church there after the missionaries’ departure. Again, if only 2 Thessalonians had been preserved, its genuineness would be “scarcely contested.”172 From it we could not reconstruct the course of events as can be done from 1 Thessalonians, but it could be gathered that the church was in good heart, so that the writers are prompted to give God spontaneous thanks for it as well as to impart further encouragement. It stood in need of further instruction about the coming day of the Lord, and those members who, because of eschatological excitement or something similar, were idle and becoming a burden to their friends, required plain and stern admonition. It is the fact that both letters have come down to us that raises questions which demand an answer—­questions, in particular, about their relation to one another. In general, 2 Thessalonians covers much the same ground as 1 Thessalonians, if more perfunctorily. Again there is thanksgiving to God for the Thessalonian Christians’ faith and love, amid the persecutions which they are enduring. These persecutions, it is remarked, are a means of fitting them for the kingdom of God, while they are equally certain tokens of the doom of their persecutors when the Lord comes “to be glorified in his holy ones” (1:10). The one outstanding feature which distinguishes 2 Thessalonians is the 170 Frame, 19. 171 Malherbe, 350. 172 Harnack, “Problem,” 562.

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 114

7/12/23 11:28 AM



The Thessalonian Letters 115

eschatological section in 2:1–12. This is followed by exhortation of a general kind, including a severe warning against idleness. Again the readers are reminded, as in 1 Thess 2:9–12, how the missionaries had set them an example in this respect. This example, coupled with teaching to the same effect—­“If any one refuses to work, let him not eat” (2 Thess 3:10)—­formed part of the “traditions” to which the Thessalonians are urged to hold fast (2:15; 3:16). If both letters are authentic, they were evidently sent within a brief interval, one after the other. (Those who view them as sent to distinct groups within the Thessalonian church might conclude that they were sent simultaneously.) Why then should there be so much repetition and overlapping between them? And why, at the same time, should there be a different eschatological outlook in the one as against the other? One of the boldest answers to this double question has been given by Lindemann,173 following in part lines laid down in 1862 by Hilgenfeld.174 He argues that 2 Thessalonians was written as a deliberate replacement for 1 Thessalonians by someone who did not approve of the eschatological perspective of 1 Thessalonians. This person reproduced the substance of 1 Thessalonians in the matter of thanksgiving, encouragement, and admonition in a somewhat abridged and impersonal form, but he replaced the eschatological teaching of 1 Thessalonians, with its emphasis on the imminence of the parousia, with a new section (2 Thess 2:1–12) in which he insisted that the parousia would be preceded by certain events—­in particular by the rise of the “man of lawlessness”—­and that not until the man of lawlessness was entrenched in supreme power would Christ appear in glory and deal him his deathblow. That we have to do with a deliberate replacement, Lindemann maintains, is shown, first, by the writer’s suggestion in 2 Thess 2:2 that any eschatological teaching in Paul’s name which disagrees with that about to be set forth should be treated as a forgery and, second, by the explicit signature of Paul in 2 Thess 3:17. In Lindemann’s view, 2 Thessalonians is not an example of conventional deutero-­Pauline pseudepigraphy (in which a devoted disciple of Paul tries to apply to a new situation the treatment which he believes Paul would have given it); the writer wants his readers to reject the genuine 1 Thessalonians as spurious and sets himself to substitute for it a composition of his own. He was only partially successful in his aim; the church did not reject 1 Thessalonians, but it did accept the new composition and thus saddled itself with the problem of reconciling the two. Mearns explains the different eschatological perspectives in the two letters by Paul’s having changed his teaching so as to mitigate “the enthusiastic

173 “Zum Abfassungszweck.” 174 “Die beiden Briefe an die Thessalonicher.”

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 115

7/12/23 11:28 AM

116  Introduction excesses of an extreme imminentistic hope which followed his expounding of the apocalyptic scheme in I Thessalonians.”175 Another attempt to solve the problem of the relation between the two letters is the suggestion that they were sent to distinct groups in the Thessalonian church. Harnack thought that 2 Thessalonians was addressed more particularly to the Jewish-­Christian membership of the church, 1 Thessalonians having been sent to the gentile Christians.176 This view found favor with Lake and Burkitt.177 But it is difficult to reconcile it with Paul’s policy of integrating former Jews and former gentiles in the new fellowship. Anything calculated to encourage the maintenance of a sense of separateness between the two groups would have been resisted by him. While 1 Thessalonians is expressly addressed to those who have “turned to God from idols” (1:9), there is nothing in 2 Thessalonians which appears to be intended distinctively for Jewish members of the church. The suggestion that 2 Thessalonians was earlier than 1 Thessalonians was first put forward, it appears, by Hugo Grotius in 1641.178 It has been made also by Manson,179 Weiss,180 West,181 Buck and Taylor,182 and Gregson.183 There is nothing antecedently improbable in dating 2 Thessalonians before 1 Thessalonians. The traditional sequence of Pauline letters to churches is based on length, not on date. If 2 Thessalonians is indeed the earlier of the two, this does not affect what has been said above about the occasion of 1 Thessalonians. It would simply have to be assumed that when Timothy was sent back from Athens to Thessalonica (1 Thess 3:2), he carried with him a letter for the church—­our 2 Thessalonians. Then, when he returned with good news from Thessalonica, 1 Thessalonians was written in response to that good news. The main arguments for the priority of 2 Thessalonians are these: a. At the beginning of 2 Thessalonians (1:4–5) the readers are said to be currently enduring persecution for their faith; in 1 Thessalonians (2:14) the persecution is referred to in the past tense. b. The deplorable idleness of some members of the church has just come to the writers’ attention in 2 Thessalonians (3:11–12); in 1 Thessalonians (4:10–12; 5:14) it is mentioned as something well known to writers and readers.

175 Mearns, “Early Eschatological Development,” 157. 176 Harnack, “Problem.” 177 Lake, Epistles, 82–95; Burkitt, Christian Beginnings, 133. 178 Annotationes 1:1032; 2:651. 179 “Letters to the Thessalonians.” 180 Earliest Christianity, 1:289–91. 181 “Order of 1 and 2 Thessalonians.” 182 St. Paul, 150–62. 183 “Solution to the Problems of the Thessalonian Epistles.”

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 116

7/12/23 11:28 AM



The Thessalonian Letters 117 c. The personal signature at the end of 2 Thessalonians, with its explanatory note (3:17), is pointless except in the first letter to a new addressee or addressees. d. If the people addressed had already received the eschatological teaching of 2 Thess 2:1–12, then the statement in 1 Thess 5:1 that they had no need of instruction about “times and seasons” would be very much to the point. e. The two sections in 1 Thessalonians that begin with the words “Now concerning . . .” (περὶ δέ . . . ) take up topics already touched on in 2 Thessalonians—­brotherly love (1 Thess 4:9; cf. 2 Thess 3:6–15) and the times and seasons (1 Thess 5:1; cf. 2 Thess 2:1–12). (Quite apart from the chronological sequence of the two letters, Faw argues that, as in 1 Corinthians, the sections in 1 Thessalonians beginning περὶ δέ introduce apostolic answers to questions which the Thessalonian church had put in a letter.)184

These arguments are of varying cogency; they receive further notice below in the commentary proper. On the other side, it must be said that there is no explicit mention in 1 Thessalonians of a previous letter sent to the church, whereas in 2 Thess 2:15 there is what could well be a reference to an earlier letter: “Hold fast the traditions which you were taught, whether by word of mouth or by a letter from us.” In particular, the eschatological teaching of the two letters is easier to understand if 1 Thessalonians is the earlier. In 1 Thessalonians, the parousia is spoken of as if it were likely to take place in the lifetime of most of the readers (and writers); it will come when least expected, “like a thief in the night” (1 Thess 5:2). This may have led some readers to conclude that it was so imminent that there was no point in going on with the ordinary concerns of daily life; perhaps, indeed, it had already arrived. To correct this error, the writers in effect say in 2 Thess 2:1–12, “The parousia is imminent indeed, but not so imminent as all that. Do not be misled into thinking that the great day is already with us. It will come soon enough, but certain things must first take place—­the climax of world rebellion against God and the appearance of the man who incarnates the spirit of rebellion and claims for himself the worship due to God. When he has reached the summit of his power, then the parousia of Christ will come and with its coming the rebellion will collapse.” If it be thought that the idea of certain well-­defined events preceding the day of the Lord is inconsistent with the idea of its arrival like a thief by night, let it be considered, first, that the same ambivalence is found in the synoptic tradition of Jesus’s eschatological teaching. True, in the Gospels source analysis can be applied to the tradition: it is in Q that the day of the 184 “On the Writing of First Thessalonians.”

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 117

7/12/23 11:28 AM

118  Introduction Son of Man’s revelation overtakes the world with the suddenness of Noah’s flood or the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah (Luke 17:26–30), whereas in Mark’s account of the Olivet discourse “wars and rumors of wars” will be rife, but “the end is not yet”; “the gospel must first be preached to all the nations,” and not until the abomination of desolation is seen “standing where he ought not” will the Son of Man come (Mark 13:7, 10, 14, 26). Luke and Matthew do not appear to have been conscious of inconsistency between these two perspectives: Luke incorporates both separately—­the Q material in Luke 17:22–37 and the Markan material in Luke 21:5–36—while Matthew interweaves the two in one composite discourse (Matt 24:1–51). Moreover, in the two separate strands it is Mark who includes the urgent call to be on the alert, “for you do not know when the time will come” (Mark 13:32–37), while Q not only says that first the Son of Man “must suffer many things and be rejected by this generation” (Luke 17:25)—­this could be regarded as Luke’s insertion of a Markan motif in a Q context—­but suggests that when the spiritually alert recognize a situation ripe for judgment, they may expect the judgment to fall: “where the body is, there the eagles will be gathered together” (Luke 17:37; cf. Matt 24:28). Let it be considered, again, that the eschatological teaching of 1 Thessalonians is mainly on a personal level; it is given in response to questions about the lot of believers who have died before the parousia. This is followed by a brief reference to the day of the Lord as it affects men and women in general: it will take the ungodly by surprise, but believers, being children of light, will be awake and prepared for it. In 2 Thessalonians, believers are told further how they may be prepared for the great day: they will recognize the events that signal its approach. Personal eschatology belongs more to the realm of individual piety and is largely unrelated to world happenings; a cosmic perspective on the day of the Lord calls for some account to be taken of the course of history. Paul’s consuming urge for the evangelization of the world did not blind him to the significance of world events; on the contrary, his missionary strategy would have been less effective had he not paid attention to them. He had been able thus far to exploit the peaceful conditions of the Roman world in the interests of his gentile mission, but there were disquieting straws in the wind. There was mounting unrest in Judea, and this unrest had repercussions elsewhere, as he and his colleagues learned in Thessalonica, where they were branded as men who had “subverted the world” (Acts 17:6). By the time they arrived in Corinth, they had heard of the expulsion of Jews from Rome. The troubles that had driven him from one Macedonian city after another were fresh in Paul’s mind when 2 Thessalonians was written. Probably Gallio’s encouraging judgment at Corinth had not yet been given. Roman law and order were still in control, but it was only too clear that the “hidden power of lawlessness” was already at work, and it would probably

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 118

7/12/23 11:28 AM



The Thessalonian Letters 119

continue to work until it erupted violently and swept all before it. When the Thessalonians are told that the day of the Lord cannot arrive until the great rebellion has broken out, the day is not being postponed to the indefinite future: the great rebellion might well break out within a few years. If they paid heed to what they were being told, they would be ready—­well informed as well as morally alert. Gallio’s judgment may have modified Paul’s perspective, but it was not radically changed. Although in his later letters he does not use the apocalyptic terms of the Thessalonian correspondence, the substance of his outlook remained unchanged, as may be seen even in the maturity of his letter to the Romans. Shortly after the very positive assessment of the powers that be in Rom 13:1–7, he goes on to say, “Recognize this critical season: it is already high time for you to wake up from sleep, for our deliverance is nearer now than when we first believed. The night is far advanced; the day is at hand. Let us then put off the works of darkness and put on the armor of light. Let our conduct be seemly, fit for the light of day” (Rom 13:11–13).

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 119

7/12/23 11:28 AM

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 120

7/12/23 11:28 AM

1 Thessalonians

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 121

7/12/23 11:28 AM

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 122

7/12/23 11:28 AM

I. Prescript (1:1) Bibliography Donfried, K. P. “The Assembly of the Thessalonians: Reflections on the Ecclesiology of the Earliest Christian Letter.” Pages 139–62 in Paul, Thessalonians, and Early Christianity. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2002. Horsley, R. A. “Building an Alternative Society: Introduction,” and “1 Corinthians: A Case Study of Paul’s Assembly as an Alternative Society.” Pages 206–14 and 242–52 in Paul and Empire: Religion and Power in Roman Imperial Society. Edited by R. A. Horsley. Harrisburg, PA: Trinity Press International, 1997. Kim, S. “Is Paul Preaching a Counter-­Imperial Gospel in 1 Thessalonians?” Pages 217–22 in PGTO. Kooten, G. H. van. “Ἐκκλησία τοῦ θεοῦ: The ‘Church of God’ and the Civic Assemblies (ἐκκλησία) of the Greek Cities in the Roman Empire: A Response to Paul Trebilco and Richard A. Horsley.” NTS 58 (2012): 522–48. Korner, R. J. The Origin and Meaning of Ekkle¯sia in the Early Jesus Movement. AJEC 98. Leiden: Brill, 2017. Trebilco, P. “The Assembly—­ἡ ἐκκλησία.” Pages 164–207 in Self-­ Designation and Group Identity in the New Testament. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2012. —­—­—­. “Why Did the Early Christians Call Themselves ἡ ἐκκλησία?” NTS 57 (2011): 440–60. Vos, C. S. de. Church and Community Conflicts: The Relationships of the Thessalonian, Corinthian, and Philippian Churches with Their Wider Civic Communities. SBLDS. Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1999.

Translation Paul, Silvanus, and Timothy to the assembly (church) of the Thessalonians in God the a Father and the Lord Jesus Christ: grace to you and peace.b 1

Notes a. ἡμῶν (“our”) added by A 81 pc lat a r vg.codd copsa.codd. b. ἀπὸ θεοῦ πατρὸς ἡμῶν καὶ κυρίου Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ added by ‫ א‬A I byz lat vg.codd syrhcl** (from 2 Thess 1:2).

Form/Structure/Setting The standard form of the initial salutation or prescript in ancient letters was “A to B, greetings.” Compare Ezra 7:12, “Artaxerxes, king of kings, . . . to Ezra the priest, greetings”; Cicero, Quint. fratr. 1.2 (“Marcus Cicero to Quintus his brother, health”); P.Oxy. 119.1 (Θέων Θέωνι τῷ πατρὶ χαίρειν, “Theon to Theon his father, greetings”). Here A comprises the three names of Paul, Silvanus, and Timothy; B is “the church of the Thessalonians . . .”; the greetings take the form “grace to you and peace.” This is the shortest prescript among the Pauline homologoumena.

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 123

7/12/23 11:28 AM

124

1 Thessalonians 1:1

Comment 1:1 Παῦλος καὶ Σιλουανὸς καὶ Τιμόθεος, “Paul and Silvanus and Timothy.” The same three names appear also in the prescript of 2 Thessalonians. It is not unusual to find Paul’s name combined with others in the prescripts of the Pauline letters; cf. Παῦλος . . . καὶ Σωσθένης ὁ ἀδελφός, “Paul . . . and Sosthenes the brother” (1 Cor 1:1); Παῦλος . . . καὶ Τιμόθεος, “Paul . . . and Timothy” (2 Cor 1:1; similarly Phil 1:1; Col 1:1; Phlm 1); Παῦλος . . . καὶ οἱ σὺν ἐμοὶ πάντες ἀδελφοί, “Paul . . . and all the brothers and sisters with me” (Gal 1:1–2). Only in Romans, Ephesians, and the Pastoral Letters does Paul’s name stand unaccompanied in the prescript. Paul usually identifies himself as an apostle in the prescripts of his letters, except 1 and 2 Thessalonians, Philippians, and Philemon. In Phil 1:1 and Phlm 1 he uses the title “servant/prisoner of Christ Jesus.” With these titles he establishes his authority to address the readers. In the two Thessalonian letters he is conscious of his apostolic authority (cf. 1 Thess 2:7; 2 Thess 3:6 with comment ad loc), and yet he does not use any title in the prescripts. It is probably because his apostolic authority was well accepted there. Note how Philippians and 1 Thessalonians convey the special warmth of the relationship between Paul and the two Macedonian congregations (see esp. Phil 4:1; 1 Thess 2:19; cf. 2 Cor 8:1–5). Paul, Silvanus, and Timothy are named as co-­senders of the letter. But the subject “I” in 2:18, 3:5, and 5:27, which breaks the practice of using the plural subject “we” throughout the letter, suggests that Paul is the primary author of the letter and that, writing it in the name of his missionary team, he switches to the first-­person singular when he has a special need to stress his own personal involvement in the contents of those few verses (see comment on 2 Thess 1:1 for the same phenomenon in 2:5 and 3:17 of that letter). It is not clear how Silvanus and Timothy participated in the composition of the letter. At least they must have been consulted by Paul, and so they endorsed the content (see II.1 “Authorship of 1 Thessalonians” in the Introduction above). By naming Silvanus and Timothy alongside his own name here, Paul reminds the readers of their mission team that founded the church and seeks to impress on the readers that the message contained in the letter is in continuity with that originally imparted by them. Furthermore, by adding Timothy to his and Silvanus’s names as a co-­sender, Paul may be seeking also to endorse the teachings that Timothy imparted in his recent visit to the Thessalonian church, as well as to help the readers receive well both his praise of their “faith and love” and his instructions about “what is still lacking in [their] faith” in this letter, as they are based on Timothy’s fresh report of their situation (1 Thess 3:6–10). Silvanus is mentioned in 2 Cor 1:19 as having shared with Paul and Timothy in the evangelization of Corinth, and an implication of the repeated “we” in 1 Thessalonians is that he similarly shared in the evangelization of

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 124

7/12/23 11:28 AM

Comment 125 Thessalonica. It is uncertain if he is identical with the Silvanus of 1 Pet 5:12. But it is certain that he is identical with the Silas of Acts. Silas was associated with Paul and Timothy in the evangelization of Thessalonica (Acts 17:1–9) and Corinth (18:5). If further evidence may be adduced from Acts to fill in our knowledge of Silvanus, Silas was a member of the Jerusalem church, deputized (along with one Judas Barsabbas) to convey the letter containing the apostolic decree to Antioch (Acts 15:22, 27, 32). Not long afterward, he was co-­opted by Paul as his colleague for a missionary journey. This journey took them from Antioch, through Asia Minor, to Alexandria Troas on the northwest coast of the peninsula, and from there by sea to Macedonia, where he was involved in the evangelization of Philippi, Thessalonica, and Beroea; later he rejoined Paul in Corinth. If it is a reasonable inference from Acts 16:37, where Paul describes Silas and himself as Ῥωμαῖοι, “Romans,” that Silas was a Roman citizen as well as Paul, then Silvanus might be his Roman cognomen while Silas is a hypocoristic (as Epaphras to Epaphroditus), or else it represents his Aramaic name (cf. Talmudic ‫ׁשילא‬, Palmyrene ‫)ׁשאילא‬. First Thessalonians 2:7 suggests that Paul regarded Silvanus as an apostle, like Barnabas (cf. 1 Cor 9:5–6). This would likely mean that Silvanus was a witness to the risen Jesus and was commissioned by him (cf. 1 Cor 9:1; 15:5–8). This agrees with Luke’s report of him as a leader of the Jerusalem church, as her envoy who delivered the apostolic decree to the gentile Christians in Antioch (Acts 15:22–29). This also explains why Paul picked him up as his coworker in place of Barnabas (v. 40). Paul probably wanted him as a bearer of the traditions of Jesus and the mother church, as well as a bridge between his mission and the Jerusalem church, that is, for the roles that hitherto Barnabas had played.1 The fact that he bore his name in the Grecized and Latinized forms may suggest that he had a Hellenistic diaspora background as well as the Palestinian background.2 Paul would have appreciated his dual background and his Roman citizenship as good qualifications for effective missionary work among the gentiles. Thus Silvanus was a perfect replacement of Barnabas for Paul. Indeed, he was more a colleague equal to Paul himself than an underling.3 This may be a reason why in Acts 17 Luke explicitly mentions only Paul and Silas in his report of founding the Thessalonian church, although in the context he also lets us presume the presence of Timothy there. Thus Malherbe seems to be right in understanding that Silvanus “constituted with Paul a ‘yoke’ or pair” in accordance with the biblical requirement for effective witnessing (Num 35:30; Deut 19:15; cf. also Mark 6:7; Luke 10:1).4 Paul and Silvanus formed

1 2 3 4

Cf. Wanamaker, 69. Cf. Holtz, 37. Wanamaker, 69; so also Holmberg, Paul and Power, 65. Malherbe, 102; cf. Jeremias, “Paarweise Sendung,” 132–39.

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 125

7/12/23 11:28 AM

126

1 Thessalonians 1:1

a pair with young Timothy as their assistant during Paul’s second missionary journey (Acts 16:1–3), just as Paul and Barnabas formed a pair with young John Mark as their assistant during Paul’s first missionary journey (13:2, 5). Timothy receives more frequent mention in Paul’s letters. He was plainly an associate in whom Paul had complete confidence, entrusting him with responsible missions, for example, to Thessalonica (1 Thess 3:2, 6), to Corinth (1 Cor 4:17; 16:10), and to Philippi (Phil 2:19). According to Acts he was a native of a south Galatian city (probably Lystra), the son of a Jewish mother and a Greek father, and was converted to the Christian faith during Barnabas and Paul’s first visit to that region. When Paul later revisited the region with Silas, he circumcised Timothy and took him along as a junior colleague. Timothy accompanied Paul and Silas on their journey to Macedonia (Acts 16:1–10; 17:14–15) and later rejoined Paul in Corinth (18:5). This picture of his companionship with Paul in Acts is confirmed by Paul’s own account in Phil 2:20–22: “I have no one like him, who will be genuinely anxious for your welfare. . . . But Timothy’s worth you know, how as a son with a father he has served with me in the gospel.” Τῇ ἐκκλησίᾳ Θεσσαλονικέων ἐν θεῷ πατρὶ καὶ κυρίῳ Ἰησοῦ Χριστῷ, “to the assembly of the Thessalonians in God the Father and the Lord Jesus Christ.” Paul’s early letters are explicitly addressed to “assemblies” (i.e., churches; cf. 2 Thess 1:1; Gal 1:2; 1 Cor 1:2; 2 Cor 1:1), but his later letters to churches are variously addressed to “all God’s beloved . . .  called to be saints” (Rom 1:7); “all the saints” (Phil 1:1); “the saints and faithful brothers in Christ” (Col 1:2); and “the saints who are also faithful in Christ Jesus” (Eph 1:1). For “saints,” see comment on 2 Thess 1:10. The word ἐκκλησία was a common term used for the assembly of citizens in a Hellenistic city like Thessalonica, which had legislative and judicial powers (see below for the “assembly” of non-­civic groups). It was quickly specialized among gentile Christians to designate a company of believers in Jesus Christ; its synonym συναγωγή, “synagogue,” was increasingly reserved to denote a Jewish congregation. The phrase ἐκκλησία κυρίου is found occasionally in the LXX to denote the people of Israel as “the assembly of the Lord” (Heb. ‫קהל‬ ‫­—)יהוה‬repeatedly so in the early part of Deut 23. Recently Paul Trebilco5 has argued that the “Hellenists,” the Greek-­ speaking Jewish Christians, in Jerusalem (referred to in Acts 6:1) first began to designate themselves as the ἐκκλησία (τοῦ θεοῦ), reflecting that LXX background and thereby claiming theological continuity with the Old Testament “assembly” of the people of God while distinguishing themselves from other Jewish communities that had already adopted for themselves συναγωγή, another designation for the assembly of God. 5

Trebilco, “Why Did the Early Christians Call Themselves ἡ ἐκκλησία?,” 440–60; idem, “The Assembly—­ἡ ἐκκλησία,” 164–207.

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 126

7/12/23 11:28 AM

Comment 127 However, disputing this view, both G. H. van Kooten (“Ἐκκλησία τοῦ θεοῦ”) and Young-­Ho Park (Paul’s Ekkleˉ sia) argue that for Paul’s designation of the church as ἐκκλησία the Hellenistic concept of civic assembly is decisive. Especially, Kooten stresses that by designating the church as the ἐκκλησία (τοῦ θεοῦ), Paul intends “to contrast the Christian ‘assembly of God’ with the civic assemblies of the Greek cities in the Roman Empire, as a parallel, an alternative organization existing alongside the latter.”6 Kooten thinks that this understanding of the church is an expression of Paul’s belief that Christians are citizens (πολίτευμα) of heaven (Phil 1:27; 3:20), even while belonging to an earthly city.7 Noting the political overtones of ἐκκλησία, Kooten also argues that by designating churches in terms of the cities (e.g., “the ἐκκλησία of God which is at Corinth,” 1 Cor 1:2; 2 Cor 1:1) or provinces in which they are located (e.g., “the ἐκκλησίαι of Asia,” 1 Cor 16:19), Paul presents the church even as a “competitive” assembly to the civic assembly in those places.8 No doubt the most visible sign of such a countercultural character of the Christian ἐκκλησία was the fact that its membership was not confined to the male and voter-­eligible free citizens of a city, unlike that of the ἐκκλησίαι of Hellenistic cities. It was open to all people who confessed Christ Jesus as Lord and sought to live under his reign, regardless of their ethnic, gender, and social status (cf. Rom 1:16; 10:12; 1 Cor 7:17–24; 12:13; Gal 3:28; Col 3:11; also 1 Cor 1:26–31).9 Yet, pointing to such passages as Rom 13:1–7 and 1 Cor 10:32–33, Kooten criticizes Richard A. Horsley for going too far in drawing out from such a view of Paul’s designation of the church as ἐκκλησία a counter-­ imperial intent, an intent to subvert the Roman imperial order.10 In his recent book, Korner discusses the implications of Paul’s designation of the church as ἐκκλησία in comparison with the various Jewish public and semi-­public assemblies, as well as with the civic and non-­civic assemblies of Greek cities and Greek associations. Korner includes a close examination of the two rare epigraphic examples of non-­civic groups applying the term ἐκκλησία to their assemblies: the gymnastic association of Samos (Samos 119) and the association of the Tyrian Herakleistai (merchants, shippers, and warehousemen) on the island of Delos (Idelos 1519).11 He argues that by using that terminology those non-­civic groups were mimicking the deˉ mokratia of civic assembly (ἐκκλησία) of the citizenry (demos) of the Greek polis, but they Kooten, “Ἐκκλησία τοῦ θεοῦ,” 527; so already Donfried, “Assembly,” 143–45; idem, “Issues of Authorship,” 89–90. 7 Kooten, “Ἐκκλησία τοῦ θεοῦ,” 529, 539. 8 Kooten, “Ἐκκλησία τοῦ θεοῦ,” 535–37. 9 Cf. Schreiber, I:78–79. 10 Kooten, “Ἐκκλησία τοῦ θεοῦ,” 527–28, 538–39. See, e.g., Horsley, “Building an Alternative Society: Introduction,” and idem, “1 Corinthians: A Case Study of Paul’s Assembly as an Alternative Society,” both in Paul and Empire, 206–14, 242–52; cf. also Donfried, “Assembly,” 143–45. 11 Korner, Origin and Meaning, 53–80. 6

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 127

7/12/23 11:28 AM

128

1 Thessalonians 1:1

were not trying to express their counter-­imperial sentiments, nor were they concerned about the possible misconception of them in that direction by outsiders. From these examples, as well as similar examples of Jewish ἐκκλησίαι, Korner draws a similar conclusion to Kooten’s concerning the implications of Paul’s designation of his churches as ἐκκλησία. He stresses that Paul presents the conception of the church as an alternative assembly to civic assemblies, which, standing in continuity with Judaism and yet transcending the divisions according to ethnicity as well as gender and social status (Gal 3:28; 1 Cor 7:17–24) and having love as the governing law (1 Cor 9:21; Gal 6:2), is prodemocratic and counter-­oligarchic rather than specifically counter-­imperial or anti-­Roman.12 In the immediate context (v. 4), Paul applies to the Thessalonian Christians such biblical phrases as “loved by God” and “your election,” both of which are terms used like the phrase “the assembly of the Lord” in the OT to indicate Israel as God’s people. This fact suggests that we are not to overlook the LXX background in his designation of the Thessalonian believers as ἐκκλησία.13 However, it is right to stress in that designation the influence of the Hellenistic usages of ἐκκλησία for civic and non-­civic assemblies as well as Paul’s intent to contrast the church with the civic assembly of a city. As to the question of what sort of contrast Paul is actually making here, we may see two unusual features in the designation of the addressees here as providing the clues. The first unusual feature to note is that here and in 2 Thess 1:1 Paul defines the church in terms of the people who compose it (“the church of the Thessalonians”; cf. also Rom 16:4; Col 4:16), whereas he usually defines it in terms of its locality (“the church of God in Corinth,” 1 Cor 1:2; 2 Cor 1:1; 1 Thess 2:14; or “the churches of Galatia,” Gal 1:2; similarly also Rom 16:1, 5; 1 Cor 16:1, 19; 2 Cor 8:1; 1 Thess 2:14; Phlm 2). Pointing to this unusual feature, Vos insists that Θεσσαλονικέων here has the ethnic sense and that therefore the Thessalonian church was composed only of the native-­Thessalonian citizens.14 He argues that this view fits with his interpretation of the word συμφυλέται (“compatriots”) in 2:14. But it will be shown below that both some ancient evidence of the word συμφυλέται used in a non-­ethnic sense and the context of 2:14–16 suggest that Paul uses the word as a general reference to the residents of Thessalonica, including some Jews. Therefore, together with the majority of commentators, we may take the Θεσσαλονικέων here in the same sense. The second unusual feature is the phrase ἐν θεῷ πατρὶ καὶ κυρίῳ Ἰησοῦ Χριστῷ (“in God the Father and the Lord Jesus Christ”) qualifying τῇ ἐκκλησίᾳ Θεσσαλονικέων (“the assembly of the Thessalonians”; cf. 2 Thess 1:1). Classical usage would require τῇ to be repeated before ἐν θεῷ to maintain the phrase 12 Korner, Origin and Meaning, 174–213. 13 Cf. Weima, 68. 14 Vos, Church, 144–47.

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 128

7/12/23 11:28 AM

Comment 129 in the attributive position, but Hellenistic usage is less strict. We may compare the collocation of God and Christ in a similar expression in 2:14, τῶν ἐκκλησιῶν τοῦ θεοῦ . . . ἐν Χριστῷ Ἰησοῦ (“the assemblies of God . . . in Christ Jesus”). Here, however, unlike 2:14, the believing community in Thessalonica is not called the assembly “of God,” but the assembly “in God.” In the Pauline corpus, this is unique. So Best and Malherbe propose to take the preposition ἐν (“in”) in the instrumental sense and interpret the phrase as meaning “the Christian community brought into being by God the Father and the Lord Jesus Christ.”15 Marshall and Holtz take the phrase “in God the Father” in analogy to the phrase “in Christ,” noting that the latter is a characteristic phrase of Paul,16 which, according to Neugebauer, conveys the sense of “(having been) determined/defined [Bestimmtsein] by the Christ-­event and incorporated into it.”17 However, Marshall is thereby able to bring out only this sense of the unusual phrase: “The church . . . is constituted by its relationship to God the Father and to Jesus,”18 which is as little illuminating as the interpretation of Best and Malherbe. According to Holtz, with the phrase Paul means: “The assembly of the Thessalonians is defined through the God, who is father, and through the Lord, who is called Jesus Christ.”19 But then this is not an interpretation that he can obtain by using the “in Christ” formula as the key here, as the formula usually has in view not Christ Jesus’s lordship but his death and resurrection as the saving event. In fact, in our verse Paul does not say “in Christ” but “in the Lord Jesus Christ.” This being so, we need to remember that the phrase “in the Lord (Jesus Christ)” is another characteristic Pauline formula, with which Paul refers to believers being in the sphere of the lordship of Jesus Christ (or in the kingdom of Christ Jesus, God’s Son) through a transfer from the sphere of Satan’s lordship (cf. Rom 1:3–5; 10:9; 1 Cor 15:23–28; Col 1:13–14). So it seems better to take the phrase “in the Lord Jesus Christ” as the key for interpreting our phrase “in God the Father.” Then we can see that, with the unusual definition “the assembly of the Thessalonians in God the Father and the Lord Jesus Christ,” Paul refers to the readers as constituting the assembly of those Thessalonians who exist in the kingdom of God the Father (who calls them into his own kingdom, 2:12; for the spatial sense of “in God” here, cf. Eph 3:9; Col 3:3) and the Lord Jesus Christ (who reigns as God’s Son on behalf of God the Father; cf. 3:11 with comment ad loc for the same binitarian formula; cf. also Rom 1:3–5; 10:9; 1 Cor 15:23–28; Col 1:13–14). So it appears that, with the unusually rich formulation, Paul seeks to express 15 16 17 18 19

Best, 62; Malherbe, 99. Marshall, 49; Holtz, 38–39. F. Neugebauer, “ ‘In Christo,’ ” 132. Marshall, 49; cf. also Green, 85. Holtz, 39.

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 129

7/12/23 11:28 AM

130

1 Thessalonians 1:1

what he implies in Phil 1:27; 3:20, namely, that although the Thessalonian (or Philippian) believers live on earth at present as the citizens of their city and the members of its assembly, their more essential identity is that they are the citizens of the colony of the kingdom of God the Father and the Lord Jesus Christ in heaven and the members of its assembly, who are “waiting” (1:10; Phil 3:20) for Christ to come from heaven as the deliverer or savior. Thus, Paul appears to designate the church as “the assembly [ἐκκλησία] of the Thessalonians in God the Father and the Lord Jesus Christ” in deliberate distinction from “the assembly [ἐκκλησία] of Thessalonica,” the majority of whose members are not “in God the Father and the Lord Jesus Christ.”20 Pointing out the absence of the numismatic and inscriptional evidence of “the ἐκκλησία of the Thessalonians” outside our 1 and 2 Thessalonians, Korner argues against this interpretation.21 Countering Donfried’s attempt to see a counter-­imperial implication in the designation, he suggests that it could rather have a pro-­imperial implication. However, whatever implication the designation may have vis-­à -­v is the Roman Empire, that does not seem to represent the primary intent of Paul in his use of it. For it appears that, first and foremost, it is to be seen in light of the stark contrast that Paul draws in this letter between the readers who have “turned to God from idols, to serve a living and true God” (1:9) and their pagan compatriots “who do not know God” (4:5; 2 Thess 1:8) and persecute them for their faith (1 Thess 2:14; see also the sharp contrast between the persecuted Christians and their persecuting compatriots in 2 Thess 1:5–12; 2:9–15; see comments ad loc). This means that the phrase “the assembly of the Thessalonians in God the Father and the Lord Jesus Christ” is to be seen together with the phrases that closely follow it, namely, “the hope of our Lord Jesus Christ before our God and Father,” “brothers and sisters beloved by God,” and “your election” (1:3–4). With these and many other phrases and sentences, Paul makes great efforts throughout this letter to reassure the persecuted converts of the certainty of their salvation through the living and true God and the Lord Jesus Christ (1:3–4, 9–10; 2:12, 19–20; 3:3–4, 13; 4:13–18; 5:1–11, 23–24), while clearly stating that their pagan neighbors and persecutors, “who do not know God” (4:5), “have no hope” (4:13), as they are “destined for wrath” as children of darkness (5:3–8; cf. also 2:16). The readers constitute “the assembly of Thessalonica” (ἐκκλησία τῆς Θεσσαλονίκης) together with their pagan neighbors as citizens of that city, but they also belong to another city or kingdom, namely, the kingdom of God the Father and his Son Jesus Christ, and therefore they constitute another assembly as citizens of that kingdom. And the latter identity is what really counts (as Paul says in Phil 1:27; 3:20), and Paul deals with the readers only 20 Cf. Donfried, “Assembly,” 143–44. 21 Korner, Origin and Meaning, 185–87.

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 130

7/12/23 11:28 AM

Comment 131 on that basis. So then how could Paul designate their “assembly” (ἐκκλησία) in contradistinction from the “assembly of Thessalonica,” which is mostly composed of non-­Christians? It appears that he could call it only as “the assembly of the Thessalonians in God Father and the Lord Jesus.” So it is quite understandable that Paul had to coin this new designation for the assembly of the Christians in Thessalonica. Therefore, Korner should not deny this likelihood on the ground that “the ἐκκλησία of the Thessalonians” is not attested elsewhere in the ancient records.22 Paul’s own examples in Rom 16:4 (πᾶσαι αἱ ἐκκλησίαι τῶν ἐθνῶν, “all the assemblies of the gentiles”) and Col 4:16 (ἐν τῇ Λαοδικέων ἐκκλησίᾳ, “the assembly among the Laodiceans”) make it clear that he is quite capable of defining the church or “assembly” in terms of its constituents. Here it is important to note that Paul does not define the church in Thessalonica simply as “the assembly of the Thessalonians,” but rather precisely as “the assembly of the Thessalonians [who are] in [the kingdom of] God the Father and the Lord Jesus Christ.” In Rom 16:4 and Col 4:16 he defines the church(es) simply in terms respectively of “the gentiles” and “the Laodiceans” because in those passages he is not concerned to clarify their distinction from the non-­Christian population. When there is no danger of misunderstanding and therefore no need for such a clarification, Paul could even define the church simply in terms of its locality as in Rom 16:1, 5; 1 Cor 16:1, 19; 2 Cor 8:1; Gal 1:2; Phlm 2. However, in 1 Cor 1:2 and 2 Cor 1:1, being concerned to distinguish the Christian “assembly” in Corinth from the assembly of the general population of that city (the assembly of Corinth), he refers to the former specifically as “the assembly of God that is at Corinth” (cf. also 1 Cor 15:9; Gal 1:13; 2 Thess 1:4). This distinguishing modifier “of God” may be seen as an abbreviation of “the Corinthians who are in the kingdom of God the Father and the Lord Jesus Christ.” In 1 Thess 2:14 Paul refers to the churches in Judea as “the assemblies of God in Christ Jesus which are in Judea” (τῶν ἐκκλησιῶν τοῦ θεοῦ τῶν οὐσῶν ἐν τῇ Ἰουδαίᾳ ἐν Χριστῷ Ἰησοῦ). There, in addition to the indicator of the locality (“which are in Judea”), he has two further distinguishing modifiers: “of God” and “in Christ Jesus.” As in 1 Cor 1:2 and 2 Cor 1:1, the former phrase indicates that the churches in Judea are assemblies of the people who are in the kingdom of God. But then, in order to distinguish them from the non-­Christian Jews who are also claiming their communities to be “the assemblies of God” according to the LXX usage, he adds the latter phrase and thereby indicates further that the Judean churches are the assemblies of the people who are in the kingdom of God by virtue of their participation in the death and resurrection of Christ Jesus through faith in the gospel. This means that, unlike the phrase “[in] the Lord Jesus Christ” in 1 Thess 1:1, the phrase “in Christ Jesus” in 1 Thess 2:14 needs to be taken in terms of 22 Korner, Origin and Meaning, 185–87.

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 131

7/12/23 11:28 AM

132

1 Thessalonians 1:1

Paul’s frequent “in Christ” formula (cf. Rom 6:1–11).23 This is confirmed by the similar definition of the church of Judea in Gal 1:22: ταῖς ἐκκλησίαις τῆς Ἰουδαίας ταῖς ἐν Χριστῷ (“the assemblies of Judea which are in Christ”). All these examples suggest that Paul sometimes defines the church as an “assembly” carefully with well thought-­out modifier(s) to suit various occasions of its references. This observation makes his designation in Gal 1:13–14 of the Christian church simply as “the assembly of God” (as in 1 Cor 1:2; 2 Cor 1:1, without the additional modifier “in Christ Jesus” as in 1 Thess 2:14) remarkable, as he does it implicitly in contrast to “Judaism,” for whose sake he had persecuted the church (cf. also 1 Cor 15:9). Does this imply his denial of the people of Judaism to be “the assembly of God”? And does he here already hint at the contrast that he will draw between the church and Judaism in Gal 4:21–31? See comment on 2:14 for the suggestion that the designation of the Thessalonian church in our verse and the designations of the Jewish church in Judea in 2:14 and Gal 1:22 contain a programmatic claim that believers in Christ constitute the true and new (i.e., eschatological) people of God, regardless whether they are ethnically Jews or gentiles. By addressing the Thessalonian church more fully or powerfully than any other church elsewhere as “the assembly of the Thessalonians in God the Father and the Lord Jesus Christ,” Paul apparently seeks to reassure the persecuted Christians in Thessalonica at the outset that, as the elect people of God (cf. 1:3–4), they are the citizens of the kingdom where the living God cares for them as the Father and his Son the Lord Jesus Christ rules over them (cf. 4:1–3) and will provide them with ultimate deliverance (cf. 1:10; 4:13–18; 5:9–10). Yet then does he also have, at least secondarily, any political intent here? In considering this question, we must note first that actually he never refers to “the assembly of Thessalonica.” So we are not just to assume that when he threatens the non-­Christian Thessalonians with eschatological doom (4:4–5, 13; 5:3–8) that he does so, being conscious of them as members of “the assembly of Thessalonica.” He does not imply that the unbelievers are destined for destruction because they are members of the assembly of Thessalonica that is loyal to the Roman Empire. Instead he says that they would meet their doom because they “do not know God” and do not live a holy life (4:4–5; 5:3–8; for the question of whether 5:3 is an anti-­Roman polemic, see comment ad loc). So it is difficult to discern a specifically counter- ­imperial intent in the significant designation of the Thessalonian church in our verse, even if it is seen in contrast to “the assembly of Thessalonica.”24 It goes without saying that it is equally difficult to discern any pro-­imperial intent in the 23 Cf. also Neugebauer, “ ‘In Christo,’ ” 124–38. 24 Pace Horsley (see above) and Donfried, “Assembly,” 140–45. For the nature and extent of Paul’s counter-­imperial (not just countercultural) intent in this letter, see Explanation on 4:13–18 below; cf. also my Christ and Caesar, and my essays “Is Paul Preaching” and “Paul and the Roman Empire,” in PGTO, respectively 217–22, 223–51.

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 132

7/12/23 11:28 AM

Comment 133 designation of the church as “the assembly of the Thessalonians in God the Father and the Lord Jesus Christ.”25 With the unusually full definition of the Thessalonian church, Paul may also be distinguishing the readers’ ἐκκλησία from the ἐκκλησία or συναγωγή of the unbelieving Jews who persecute “the churches of God in Christ Jesus,” “displease God,” and so make themselves the object of God’s wrath (2:14–16). Together with the designation of the assembly of the mostly gentile believers in Thessalonica as God’s beloved, elect people (v. 4, see comment below), the theologically loaded definition of the Thessalonian church here contains an implicit claim that the community of the believers in Christ, regardless of their ethnic origin, has replaced the community of the unbelieving Jews as God’s people. The joining of “God the Father” and “the Lord Jesus Christ” under a single preposition bears witness to the exalted position that the risen Christ occupies in the thoughts of Paul and his colleagues (cf. 3:11 with comment ad loc). The binitarian formula, which is unfolded in a fuller creedal formula in 1 Cor 8:6, presupposes an understanding that Jesus is the Son of God (1 Thess 1:10) who exercises the kingship or lordship of God the Father on his behalf for the redemption of the world (cf. 1 Cor 15:23–28). Such understanding is already embodied in the earliest Christian confessions such as those in Rom 1:3–4 and Phil 2:9–11, which speak of Christ’s installation as “Son of God in power” or “Lord” through his resurrection and exaltation in fulfillment of Ps 110:1. The fact that here and elsewhere in this letter (3:11–13; 5:9–10, 18, 23; cf. also 2 Thess 1:1, 2, 8, 12; 2:16–17; 3:5) Paul simply joins God the Father and the Lord Jesus Christ together without feeling any need to explain their relationship seems to suggest that he already taught the readers about their relationship as part of his gospel preaching during his mission in Thessalonica. Unless we hold the most unrealistic view that Paul came to know or develop such creedal formulae and their explanations as in Rom 1:3–4, 1 Cor 8:6, 15:23–28, and Phil 2:9–11 only shortly before or during writing those passages, that is, after writing 1 Thessalonians, we can or should assume that he taught the Thessalonians about the relationship between God and Jesus Christ by introducing and expounding those creedal formulae as summaries of the gospel (cf. Rom 1:2–4). In fact, this is confirmed by the summary of the gospel that the readers are reported to be believing (i.e., the gospel that Paul preached to them; 1 Thess 1:10), as it implicitly contains the ideas of Rom 1:3–4 and 1 Cor 15:23–28 as well as other christological/soteriological formulae (see comment on v. 10 below).26 The binitarian formula (which is later developed into the trinitarian with the inclusion of the Holy Spirit) represents, together with his designation of the gentile church as God’s people (vv. 1, 4), an amazing 25 Pace Korner, Origin and Meaning, 185–87. 26 See also my essay, “Jesus the Son of God as the Gospel,” in PGTO, 45–66.

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 133

7/12/23 11:28 AM

134

1 Thessalonians 1:1

revolution that the Christ-­event had brought about in the thinking of Paul, a Jewish theologian who used to be “extremely zealous” for Judaism, his ancestral traditions (Gal 1:13–14)!27 χάρις ὑμῖν καὶ εἰρήνη, “grace and peace to you.” “Peace” (Heb. ‫ )ׁשלום‬was (and is) the normal Jewish greeting, as “rejoice” (χαίρειν, χαῖρε, χαίρετε) was the normal Greek greeting. It is very doubtful if, as has often been suggested,28 χάρις in the prescript of Pauline letters is a Christian adaptation of the greeting χαίρειν. The double form χάρις καὶ εἰρήνη is rather a variant on “mercy and peace” then current in some Jewish circles (cf. Tob 7:11; 2 Bar. 78.2; Gal 5:16). Paul replaces “mercy” with “grace” to emphasize the unmerited love of God grounded in the Christ-­event. The word εἰρήνη as the translation of ‫ׁשלום‬ refers not just to the cessation or absence of conflict but to the comprehensive state of well-­being that results from restoration to a right and harmonious relationship with God (justification and reconciliation, cf. Rom 5:1) and with fellow human beings. “Χάρις is the source of all real blessings, εἰρήνη their end and issue,”29 or “grace” is the ground of Christian existence, and “peace” is the state which is brought about by grace. Lohmeyer argues that the formula χάρις καὶ εἰρήνη was primarily liturgical and only secondarily epistolary.30 To χάρις ὑμῖν καὶ εἰρήνη Paul habitually adds ἀπὸ θεοῦ πατρὸς [ἡμῶν] καὶ κυρίου Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ (Rom 1:7; 1 Cor 1:3; 2 Cor 1:2; Gal 1:3; Eph 1:2; Phil 1:2; Col 1:2; 2 Thess 1:2; Phlm 1:3). The omission of these words here is exceptional. He seems to omit it here because he has already used the binitarian formula in the definition of the Thessalonian church (although it is included in 2 Thess 1:2). If he indeed departed from his usual practice in order to define the church of the Thessalonians as being ἐν θεῷ πατρὶ καὶ κυρίῳ Ἰησοῦ Χριστῷ, that (unusually full) definition must have been very important to him or necessary for them. This observation seems to add weight to our interpretation above.

Explanation Paul, Silvanus (Silas), and Timothy, the three missionaries who had first brought the gospel to Thessalonica and planted the church there, now send a letter to that church a few weeks or, at most, a few months after their departure from the city. They greet the church as “the church of the Thessalonians in God the Father and the Lord Jesus Christ.” With that unique address form, they seek to instill in their readers a new self-­understanding that by their conversion to “the living and true God” and his Son Jesus who exercises his saving lordship on their behalf (1:9–10), they, the (mostly) former pagans,

27 Cf. Fee, 16. 28 Most recently Fee, 17; Weima, 71. 29 Lightfoot, 8. 30 Lohmeyer, Probleme, 159.

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 134

7/12/23 11:28 AM

Explanation 135 have now come to compose a new alternative assembly of the Thessalonians, an assembly of those who are under the fatherly care of “the living and true God” and the saving reign of Christ Jesus his Son. Thus, right from the outset Paul and his colleagues are trying to reassure the persecuted new Christians of their blessedness in contrast to their pagan neighbors, “who do not know God” (4:5) and “have no hope” (4:13).

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 135

7/12/23 11:28 AM

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 136

7/12/23 11:28 AM

II. Part 1: Thanksgiving (1:2–3:13) See “The Structure and Function of 1 Thessalonians 1–3” in Introduction (II.3) above. This part 1 of the epistle falls into the following six sections: 1:2–10: Thanksgiving for the readers’ appreciation of Paul’s eisodos (entry) and their acceptance of the gospel despite persecution 2:1–12: Paul’s eisodos elaborated 2:13–16: Thanksgiving resumed 2:17–3:5: Paul’s worry about the readers in affliction 3:6–10: Thanksgiving renewed 3:11–13: Paul’s prayer report

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 137

7/12/23 11:28 AM

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 138

7/12/23 11:28 AM

1. Thanksgiving (1:2–10) Bibliography Blumenthal, C. “Was sagt 1 Thess 1.9b–10 über die Adressaten des 1 Thess?” NTS 51 (2005): 96–105. Dickson, J. P. Mission-­Commitment in Ancient Judaism and in the Pauline Communities: The Shape, Extent and Background of Early Christian Mission. WUNT 2/159. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2003. Friedrich, G. “Ein Tauflied hellenistischer Judenchristen, 1 Thess. 1,9f.” TZ 21 (1965): 502–16. Gupta, N. K. Paul and the Language of Faith. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2020. Kim, S. “Jesus the Son of God as the Gospel (1 Thess 1:9–10 and Rom 1:3–4).” Pages 45–66 in PGTO. —­—­—­. “The Gospel That Paul Preached to the Thessalonians—­C ontinuity and Unity of Paul’s Gospel in 1 Thessalonians and in his Later Epistles.” Pages 67–131 in PGTO. O’Brien, P. T. Gospel and Mission in the Writings of Paul: An Exegetical and Theological Analysis. Grand Rapids: Baker, 1995. —­—­—­. Introductory Thanksgivings in the Letters of Paul. NovTSup 49. Leiden: Brill, 1977. Vos, C. S. de. Church and Community Conflicts: The Relationships of the Thessalonian, Corinthian, and Philippian Churches with Their Wider Civic Communities. SBLDS. Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1999. Wagner, J. R. “The Heralds of Isaiah and the Mission of Paul: An Investigation of Paul’s Use of Isaiah 51–55 in Romans.” Pages 193–222 in Jesus and the Suffering Servant: Isaiah 53 and Christian Origins. Edited by W. H. Bellinger Jr. and W. R. Farmer. Harrisburg, PA: Trinity Press International, 1998. Ware, J. P. “The Thessalonians as a Missionary Congregation: 1Thessalonians 1,5–8.” ZNW 83 (1992): 126–31. Wilckens, U. Die Missionsreden der Apostelgeschichte: Form-­und traditionsgeschichtliche Untersuchungen. WMANT 5. Neukirchen-­V luyn: Neukirchener Verlag, 1974. Winter, B. W. “The Entries and Ethics of the Orators and Paul (1 Thessalonians 2.1–2).” TynBul 44 (1993): 55–74. Wischmeyer, O. Der höchste Weg. Gütersloh: Gerd Mohn, 1981.

Translation We always give thanks to God for you, continually mentioning you a in our prayers, remembering your work of faith and labor of love and endurance of hope in b our Lord Jesus Christ before our God and Father, 4and knowing your election, brothers and sisters beloved by God, 5because ourc gospel camed to you not in word only but also in power—­in the Holy Spirit and in fullest conviction, as you know what kind of persons we proved to be among you e for your sakes, 6and you on your part became imitators of us and of the Lord, when you accepted f the word amid much affliction, with joy inspired by g the Holy Spirit, 7so that you became an example h to all the believers in Macedonia and in Achaia. 8For from you the word of the Lord has sounded out not only in Macedonia and ini Achaia, but j in every place your faith toward God has gone forth, so that we have no need to speak a word. 9For they themselves report concerning us k what kind of entry we had among you, and how you turned to God from idols to serve the living and true God 10and to wait for his Son from heaven, whom he raised from the l dead, Jesus, who delivers us from the coming wrath. 2 3

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 139

7/12/23 11:28 AM

140

1 Thessalonians 1:2–10

Notes a. ὑμῶν (“you”) is implied; it is expressly read by ‫א‬2 C D F G Ψ byz lat vet syr Ambst. b. This translation treats τοῦ κυρίου ἡμῶν Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ as an objective genitive after the verbal idea implicit in ἐλπίδος (“hope”). c. The phrase τοῦ θεοῦ (“God’s”) is substituted in ‫א‬2 C for ἡμῶν (“our”); the conflated τοῦ θεοῦ ἡμῶν is read by ‫*א‬. d. ἐγενήθη, aorist of γίνεσθαι in default of an aorist of εἶναι (cf. ἐγενήθημεν later in v. 5). e. ἐν is read in B D F G, but omitted before ὑμῖν (yielding the meaning “to you”) in ‫ א‬A C P 048 33 81 1739 pc lat vg.st. f. δεξάμενοι, simultaneous aorist participle. g. καί is read before πνεύματος (“with joy and the Holy Spirit”) in B lat vg.codd. h. τύπους (“examples”) is read instead of τύπον by ‫ א‬A C F G Ψ byz syrhcl. i. ἐν τῇ (“in”) is omitted by B K et al. j. ἀλλὰ καί (“but also”) is read for ἀλλά (“but”) by D2 byz lat vg.cl Ambst. k. ὑμῶν (“you”) is read for ἡμῶν (“us”) by B 81 lat a d vg.codd. l. τῶν is omitted before νεκρῶν by 46vid A C K et al.

Form/Structure/Setting The thanksgiving following the prescript, attested occasionally in Greek epistolography, was developed as a special feature of Paul’s epistolary style. In all of his letters except Galatians, Paul normally has a thanksgiving section as part of the introductory section before embarking on the main body of a letter. In the thanksgiving section, he reports his prayer of thanksgiving to God for his grace bestowed upon the recipients of the letter or for their faith. As it naturally involves praise for their faith or their experiences of God’s grace (captatio benevolentiae), with it Paul establishes a rapport with them, implicitly exhorts them to live up to the praise, and announces the main themes of his teaching in the main body. All these features appear in 1:2–10, so that the passage is usually taken as the thanksgiving section of our epistle. However, this thanksgiving report is repeated in 2:13 and 3:9, and the passages surrounding those verses contain essentially the same contents as 1:5–10. So 1:2–10, 2:1–16, and 2:17–3:10 express one thanksgiving, thrice repeated, for essentially one and the same reason: the readers’ proper recognition of Paul and his missionary team as God’s messengers and their acceptance of the gospel or their maintenance of faith in it. Therefore Schubert is right to see the whole stretch from 1:2 to 3:13 as one thanksgiving section1 and conclude that, in our epistle, the thanksgiving section is not just an introduction to the main body but “itself constitutes the main body of 1 Thessalonians.”2 See section II.3 in the Introduction, in which, with more observations, we confirm 1 Schubert, Form, 17–27. Cf. also O’Brien, Thanksgivings, 144; Malherbe, 103–5. 2 Schubert, Form, 26.

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 140

7/12/23 11:28 AM

Comment 141 that view, though with a slight modification of Schubert’s conclusion—­namely, for us 1:2–3:13 constitutes not the whole main body of the epistle but its first half, with 4:1–5:24 constituting its second half (whose themes are announced in 1:10 as well as in the transitional prayer in 3:11–13). Although 1:2–10, 2:1–16, and 2:17–3:10 in fact compose together one (thrice repeated) thanksgiving, for convenience we may refer to the three passages as three thanksgiving sections. In the first of them, 1:2–10, the report of thanksgiving opens with the main clause “we give thanks to God . . .” in v. 2a and comes to its end with the causal (ὅτι) clause in v. 5 and its continuation in vv. 6–7, which together state the cause for the thanksgiving. The intervening three participle phrases in vv. 2b–4 between the main clause (v. 2a) and the causal clauses (vv. 5–7) provide the attendant circumstances for the thanksgiving. The failure to recognize this structure leads many commentators to face difficulties in explaining the relationship between v. 4 and v. 5 as well as between v. 5 and v. 6. The long sentence of thanksgiving formally comes to an end at v. 7. Yet Paul goes on to elaborate in v. 8 on the theme of the readers’ having become an example for the believers in Macedonia and Achaia (mentioned in v. 7) and again to elaborate in vv. 9–10 on their faith (mentioned in v. 8), so that the thanksgiving section that starts in v. 2 continues right up to v. 10.3 Even with this clarification of the overall run of the first thanksgiving section, it still requires careful attention to comprehend the logical progression from one verse to the next.

Comment 1:2 Eὐχαριστοῦμεν τῷ θεῷ πάντοτε περὶ πάντων ὑμῶν, “We always give thanks to God for you all.” In other letters where the name of one of Paul’s companions is conjoined with his own in the prescript (e.g., Sosthenes in 1 Corinthians or Timothy in Philippians), Paul uses the singular εὐχαριστῶ, “I give thanks,” making it plain that Paul himself is the author (1 Cor 1:4; Phil 1:3). But here the plural form of the verb is used, implying that all three missionaries were in a real sense joint authors of the letter (cf. also Col 1:3, where εὐχαριστοῦμεν may indicate that Timothy is in some degree joint author). However, Paul’s self-­reference in 2:18 and 3:5 (cf. also 5:27) makes it clear that Paul is the chief writer of this epistle. In Rom 1:8 (πρῶτον μὲν εὐχαριστῶ τῷ θεῷ μου, “First, I thank my God”) Paul indicates the importance that he attaches to thanksgiving. In 2 Cor 1:3 and Eph 1:3, thanksgiving takes the form εὐλογητὸς ὁ θεός (“Blessed be the God”; cf. also 1 Pet 1:3). Only in Galatians is the note of thanksgiving absent; the news from the Galatian churches gave Paul nothing to be thankful about. 3 See Explanation below where vv. 2–10 is set down according to this analysis.

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 141

7/12/23 11:28 AM

142

1 Thessalonians 1:2–10

περὶ πάντων ὑμῶν, “concerning you all,” may be construed either with the preceding εὐχαριστοῦμεν τῷ θεῷ (“we give thanks to God”) or with the following μνείαν ποιούμενοι (“making mention”). But in view of Rom 1:8 and 1 Cor 1:4, the former possibility is more likely. Weima sees in Paul’s phrase “you all” here the apostle’s attempt to include those who are critical of his apostleship as well as those whom he would rebuke in the latter parts of this epistle.4 Yet then he would have to explain Paul’s use of the same phrase in Rom 1:8 in a similar way. Then how are we to understand Paul’s failure to use it in the thanksgiving section in 1 Cor 1:4? Since it is unnecessary to see any opponents of Paul or any serious rebuke-­worthy rift or aberration within the Thessalonian church (see the Introduction and the exegesis of ch. 2 below), it is better to regard the phrase simply as representing Paul’s affectionate appreciation of the whole church’s perseverance in faith and their good disposition toward him and his colleagues (1 Thess 3:6–10). πάντοτε, “always,” is reinforced by the following ἀδιαλείπτως, “unceasingly,” and therefore the two virtually synonymous adverbs must be taken together here (N.B. the resumption of the present thanksgiving in 2:13 replacing πάντοτε with ἀδιαλείπτως: εὐχαριστοῦμεν τῷ θεῷ ἀδιαλείπτως). Thus ἀδιαλείπτως, “unceasingly,” is to be taken with what precedes (μνείαν ποιούμενοι, “making mention”) rather than what follows (μνημονεύοντες, “remembering”).5 μνείαν ποιούμενοι, “making mention” (cf. Rom 1:9; Eph 1:16; Phlm 4), means “to mention,” as in Plato (Phaedrus 254a; Protagoras 317e) and other Attic writers. Cf. 3:6 for μνείαν ἔχειν. The reason for his thanksgiving will be stated in the ὅτι clause in v. 5. This structure is borne out by the parallels in 2:13 and 3:6–10 (see the Introduction above). Witherington also recognizes this structure, but he fails to realize that it undermines his own attempt to separate 1:2–3 as the exordium from 1:4–3:10 as the narratio according to his rhetorical theory.6 Before providing the reason for his thanksgiving, with the three following dependent participle phrases Paul describes the circumstances attending his thanksgiving. The first of them, μνείαν ποιούμενοι . . . appears without an object, but it is clear that the immediately preceding phrase (περὶ πάντων ὑμῶν) has led Paul to omit “you” here (cf. Rom 1:9; Phil 1:3; Phlm 4). With this participle phrase μνείαν ποιούμενοι ἐπὶ τῶν προσευχῶν ἡμῶν ἀδιαλείπτως, “mentioning [you all] unceasingly in our prayers,” Paul indicates the manner in which he gives thanks to God for the readers. Malherbe notes the alliteration here in πάντοτε περὶ πάντων . . . ποιούμενοι . . . προσευχῶν . . . ἀδιαλείπτως as seen elsewhere (cf. 1 Cor 1:4; 2 Cor 1:3–7; Phil 4 5

6

Weima, 81–82. So, e.g., TNIV; RSV; NEB; NJB; Rigaux, 359; Best, 66; Wanamaker, 74; Morris, 39; Holtz, 42; Malherbe, 107; Green, 87; Richard, 59; Fee, 21; against NA28; KJV; NIV; NASB; NAB; JB; NRSV; REB; Frame, 75; Dobschütz, 64; Dibelius, 2; Beale, 45; Weima, 82. Witherington, 70.

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 142

7/12/23 11:28 AM

Comment 143 1:3–5) and appreciates Paul’s “aiming at a rhetorically impressive beginning in the oral reading” of his letter (cf. also 5:16–22).7 However, in view of his intense feeling of affection that he expresses for the readers in this epistle, we can see that this language of πάντοτε and ἀδιαλείπτως is not just an epistolary cliché nor a mere hyperbole. It is rather to be taken in connection with the phrase ἐπὶ τῶν προσευχῶν ἡμῶν, which probably refers to his practice of praying at set times every day according to the Jewish custom (e.g., 2 Chr 23:30; Ezra 9:5; Ps 55:17; Dan 6:10; m. Ber 4:1). It is to be understood as his giving thanks to God for the readers on every one of those occasions, explicitly mentioning them as a group or even perhaps as individuals (cf. Phil 1:4):8 “We always give thanks to God for all of you, mentioning [you] unceasingly in our (daily) prayers.” Paul teaches the Thessalonian church to “pray unceasingly” and to “give thanks at all times” (1 Thess 5:17–18) and the Philippian church to pray constantly with thanksgiving (Phil 4:6). Clearly this teaching arises out of his own practice. The following two participle phrases (μνημονεύοντες . . . and εἰδότες . . . ) are usually taken as causal, that is, as giving the reasons for Paul’s thanksgiving, and the following v. 5 is taken either as providing the ground for the third participle phrase (εἰδότες . . . ) in v. 4 or as explanatory of it. But this causal interpretation is called into question not only by the parallels in 2:13 and 3:6–10 (see Form/Structure/Setting above) but also by the fact that then it breaks the symmetry of the three participles since the first one, μνείαν ποιούμενοι, cannot be causal. Therefore, the three participles are to be seen formally or primarily as providing the attendant circumstances for Paul’s thanksgiving, although “remembering” the readers’ good Christian qualities and “knowing” their election naturally function also to strengthen his desire to give thanks to God for them. These two participle phrases strengthen this desire, as they are related to the content of v. 5, the real cause for his thanksgiving: the content of v. 3 confirms the content of v. 5, and the contents of vv. 3 and 5 confirm the content of v. 4. That is, the fact that they have the triad of graces (v. 3) confirms that the gospel has had powerful effects in their lives through the Holy Spirit (v. 5), and the triad of graces (v. 3) as signs of the powerful effects of the gospel (v. 5) confirm that they have indeed been chosen by God (v. 4) 3 μνημονεύοντες, “remembering.” In the Pauline corpus μνημονεύειν regularly means “remember” (cf. 2:9; 2 Thess 2:5; Gal 2:10; Eph 2:11; Col 4:18; 2 Tim 2:8). Here the object of the verb is the threefold genitive ἔργου . . . κόπου . . . ὑπομονῆς. ὑμῶν, “your.” This genitive qualifies ἔργου . . . κόπου . . . ὑπομονῆς (“your work of faith . . . labor . . . endurance”). τοῦ ἔργου τῆς πίστεως καὶ τοῦ κόπου τῆς ἀγάπης καὶ τῆς ὑπομονῆς τῆς ἐλπίδος, “work of faith and labor of love and endurance of hope.” Paul rejoices that the 7 8

Malherbe, 106–7. So Best, 66, stressing Paul’s interest in them as individuals.

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 143

7/12/23 11:28 AM

144

1 Thessalonians 1:2–10

triad of graces—­faith, love, and hope—­are manifested in the life and activity of the Thessalonian Christians. He likes to define the essence of Christian existence in terms of this triad of graces (1 Cor 13:13!; also Rom 5:1–5; Gal 5:5–6; Eph 4:2–5; Col 1:4–5; 1 Thess 5:5–6). But the triad appears also in Heb 6:10–12; 10:22–24; 1 Pet 1:3–8, 21–22; Barn. 1.4; 9.8; Pol. Phil. 3.2–3. So it may have been pre-­Pauline,9 or it may have become the common understanding of life in Christ in the NT churches under Paul’s influence.10 It is remarkable that Paul and the early Christians came to formulate such an apt definition of the essence of Christian existence so early. The genitives τῆς πίστεως, τῆς ἀγάπης, and τῆς ἐλπίδος are genitives of origin: “work” that originates “from faith,” “(hard) labor” that originates “from love,” and “endurance” that originates “from hope” (cf. NIV: “your work produced by faith, your labor prompted by love, and your endurance inspired by hope”). The terms ἔργον and κόπος are synonymous, showing only a rhetorical progression from “work” to “(hard) labor” (cf. 5:12–13; 1 Cor 15:58). Gal 5:6 also says that faith “works,” but there its working is described as “love,” whereas here “love” is associated with κόπος. So we must recognize that the phrases are somewhat rhetorical, so that a precise differentiation, especially between the first two, is probably not intended. Even so, a comparison with Col 1:4–5 where the three graces are also listed up in the thanksgiving section but with different qualifying words suggests that the words ἔργον, κόπος, and ὑπομονή are chosen here for their particular significance for the Thessalonian readers, with a view to the outside pressures against their Christian existence. Cf. Rev. 2:2, where the Lord says to the church of Ephesus, οἶδα τὰ ἔργα σου καὶ τὸν κόπον καὶ τὴν ὑπομονήν σου (“I know your works, your labor, and your enduring”). For the significance of Paul’s stress on faith in this epistle as well as the appropriateness of the phrase “work of faith” within the structure of his doctrine of justification by faith, see Explanation below. For the Thessalonians’ “work of faith” here Paul may have in view any effort that is inspired and enabled by their faith in Christ such as their missionary outreach, kindness to their neighbors and even to their persecutors, and their self-­discipline for a sanctified life. However, the fact that Paul repeats his appreciative reference to their faith in the contexts of speaking about their affliction and his anxiety about it (1:7–8; 2:13; 3:2, 5, 6, 7, 10) suggests that here he has chiefly in view their (continuing) belief and trust in Christ,11 which therefore includes the nuance of their faithfulness to Christ in the situation of persecution.12 Thus with the phrase “your work of faith” here Paul is adumbrating a theme that

9 Hunter, Paul, 33–35. 10 Cf. Best, 67; also Malherbe, 109; Wischmeyer, Weg, 147–58, who argues for the Pauline authorship of the triad of graces. 11 Furnish, 41. 12 Cf. Best, 68; Weima, 86.

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 144

7/12/23 11:28 AM

Comment 145 he is going to address later, as he also does in the thanksgiving sections of other epistles (e.g., 1 Cor 1:4–9; Phil 1:3–8). Ἀγαπᾶν was a relatively infrequent and colorless Greek word, and its substantive ἀγάπη is hardly attested in the Greek literature. However, following the Greek translation of the OT (LXX), which rendered the Hebrew ‫אהב‬/‫אהבה‬ with ἀγαπᾶν/ἀγάπη, Hellenistic Judaism and the early Christian movement adopted that word as their main vocabulary of love, and in the NT it is filled with new Christian meaning through the inspiration of the love that God had shown in giving his Son for his people, or Jesus Christ had shown in his self-­ giving on the cross for them (cf., e.g., John 13:34; Rom 5:1–11; 8:31–39; 1 John 3:16; 4:7–12).13 So loved by God/Christ, Christians exist in a relationship of self-­g iving love to God and to neighbors. Jesus summarized the whole law in terms of the double command of love: love of God and of neighbor (Mark 12:28–34parr.), and at least Matthew presents him as having defined life in the kingdom of God and discipleship to himself in terms of that double command of love (the Sermon on the Mount). Following Jesus, Paul also makes the double command of love as the basic principle of his ethical teaching (e.g., Rom 12:1–2 + 13:8; 1 Cor 8–10 [N.B. the inclusio 8:1–3/10:31–33]).14 Paul uses κόπος/κοπιᾶν mostly for the work of gospel preaching (1 Cor 15:10; Gal 4:11; Phil 2:16; 1 Thess 2:9; 3:5; cf. also 1 Cor 15:58; 16:16; 3:8; 2 Cor 10:15), though also for his manual labor to earn his living (1 Cor 4:12; 2 Cor 11:27; 2 Thess 3:8). So the Thessalonians’ “labor of love” may refer to their missionary efforts (cf. 1 Thess 1:8). Yet since he commends the readers for their sibling love to one another and exhorts them to do it more (4:9–12), praying for the Lord’s help for its increase (3:11–13), the phrase seems to announce also the subject of sibling love, which he is going to address later.15 Like ἔργον (“work”) and κόπος (“labor”) in the preceding two elements of the triad, ὑπομονή in the third element is also to be rendered with its active meaning “endurance”16 rather than the passive “patience” or even “steadfastness.” It is active perseverance in affliction. Being citizens of the kingdom of God and waiting for their salvation at its consummation, Christians are not to conform to this age (Rom 12:2) or this world that is passing away (1 Cor 7:31), and their life at variance with the ethos of this age or world is bound to bring alienation and suffering to them (1 Thess 2:11–12; 3:4; Phil 1:27–30). So, in the NT ὑπομονή is one of the essential virtues urged on Christians.17 The phrase τοῦ κυρίου ἡμῶν Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ, an objective genitive (“in our Lord Jesus Christ”), is to be taken only with “endurance of hope,” not with all

13 14 15 16 17

Cf. E. Stauffer, TDNT 1:35–54; G. Schneider, EDNT 1:8–12; Wischmeyer, Weg, 23–26, 228–30. See Kim, “Imitatio Christi,” in PGTO, 323–53 (esp. 337–53). Fee, 26; Weima, 87. So Holtz, 44. Cf. F. Hauck, TDNT 4:585–88.

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 145

7/12/23 11:28 AM

146

1 Thessalonians 1:2–10

three genitival phrases.18 First and Second Thessalonians as a whole show that, while suffering from ostracism and persecution (1 Thess 1:6; 2:2, 14–15; 3:1–6; 2 Thess 1:4–7), the readers have an especially fervent hope for the parousia of Christ and their final deliverance. So in v. 10 below, Paul characterizes their faith in terms of “waiting” (ἀναμένειν) for Jesus the Son of God to come from heaven for deliverance at the last judgment. Apparently for the special needs of the readers he places “hope” at the emphatic position at the end of the triad here (and at 5:8; just as the needs of the Corinthian church lead him to place “love” at that emphatic position in 1 Cor 13:13), and later in 4:13–5:11 he elaborates on the theme at length. Cf. Rom 5:3–10, where hope and endurance are connected differently. ἔμπροσθεν τοῦ θεοῦ καὶ πατρὸς ἡμῶν, “before our God and Father.” Most commentators19 take the phrase with μνημονεύοντες20 to produce the following meaning here: when Paul comes to God’s presence in prayer, he remembers the readers’ excellent Christian virtues (and is moved to give thanks to God for them). But the phrase is too distant from μνημονεύοντες.21 Nevertheless, Malherbe justifies such a connection, appealing to 3:9, the third thanksgiving, in which Paul gives thanks to God “for all the joy which we feel for your sake ἔμπροσθεν τοῦ θεοῦ ἡμῶν.”22 But the present verse is different from 3:9 in that it has the phrase ἔμπροσθεν τοῦ θεοῦ καὶ πατρὸς ἡμῶν in direct connection with the phrase τῆς ἐλπίδος τοῦ κυρίου ἡμῶν Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ, which alludes to the parousia of the Lord Jesus Christ. This feature makes 3:13 a closer parallel to the present verse. So the phrase ἔμπροσθεν τοῦ θεοῦ καὶ πατρὸς ἡμῶν is to be taken only with the immediately preceding third element of the triad, ὑπομονὴ τῆς ἐλπίδος τοῦ κυρίου ἡμῶν Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ (“endurance of hope in our Lord Jesus Christ”).23 Providing material parallelism, 1:10, 5:8–10, and 5:23–24 also support this judgment (cf. also 2:19). Note the web of mutual relations among these five passages: 1:3: endurance of hope in our Lord Jesus Christ before our God and Father (ὑπομονή τῆς ἐλπίδος τοῦ κυρίου ἡμῶν Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ ἔμπροσθεν τοῦ θεοῦ καὶ πατρὸς ἡμῶν) 3:11–13: Now may our God and Father himself and our Lord Jesus (αὐτὸς δὲ ὁ θεὸς καὶ πατὴρ ἡμῶν καὶ ὁ κύριος ἡμῶν Ἰησοῦς) direct our way to you, and . . . may the Lord (ὁ κύριος) make you increase and abound in love . . . so as to establish your hearts blameless in holiness before our God and Father, at the parousia of 18 19 20 21

So, e.g., Wanamaker, 76; Weima, 88; contra Rigaux, 367; Holtz, 43; Fee, 22–23. See the list in Weima, 88. So also several English versions including NRSV; NIV; TNIV. It is difficult to grant the view of Fee, 22–23, that the phrase forms an inclusio with μνημονεύοντες. 22 Malherbe, 107. 23 Cf. O’Brien, Thanksgivings, 150; Witherington, 59; Weima, 89.

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 146

7/12/23 11:28 AM

Comment 147 our Lord Jesus (ἀμέμπτους ἐν ἁγιωσύνῃ ἔμπροσθεν τοῦ θεοῦ καὶ πατρὸς ἡμῶν ἐν τῇ παρουσίᾳ τοῦ κυρίου ἡμῶν Ἰησοῦ) 1:10: to wait for his Son from heaven, whom he raised from the dead, Jesus who delivers us from the coming wrath (ἀναμένειν τὸν υἱὸν αὐτοῦ ἐκ τῶν οὐρανῶν, ὃν ἤγειρεν ἐκ τῶν νεκρῶν, Ἰησοῦν τὸν ῥυόμενον ἡμᾶς ἐκ τῆς ὀργῆς τῆς ἐρχομένης) 5:8–9: putting on the breastplate of faith and love, and the hope of salvation for a helmet, because God has not appointed us for wrath, but for the obtaining of salvation through our Lord Jesus Christ (ἐνδυσάμενοι θώρακα πίστεως καὶ ἀγάπης καὶ περικεφαλαίαν ἐλπίδα σωτηρίας· ὅτι οὐκ ἔθετο ἡμᾶς ὁ θεὸς εἰς ὀργὴν ἀλλὰ εἰς περιποίησιν σωτηρίας διὰ τοῦ κυρίου ἡμῶν Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ) 5:23–24: Now may the God of peace himself (αὐτὸς δὲ ὁ θεὸς τῆς εἰρήνης) sanctify (ἁγιάσαι) you to be perfect, and may your spirit and soul and body be preserved unblameably (ἀμέμπτως) whole at the parousia of our Lord Jesus Christ (ἐν τῇ παρουσίᾳ τοῦ κυρίου ἡμῶν Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ). He who calls you is faithful; he will do it. In 3:13 the same phrase, ἔμπροσθεν τοῦ θεοῦ καὶ πατρὸς ἡμῶν, closely associated with “the parousia of our Lord Jesus,” alludes to the judgment seat of God. In 5:8–9 Paul refers again to faith and love and hope as in our present verse, and grounds ἐλπίδα σωτηρίας (“the hope of salvation”) on the fact that “God has not destined us for wrath, but to obtain salvation through our Lord Jesus Christ.” Just as the “wrath” of God refers to God’s last judgment both at 1:10 and 5:9, so also the phrase “before our God and Father” both at 1:3 and 3:13 refers to the judgment seat of God. In 3:13 Paul expresses his wish-­prayer that, with the Lord’s help, the readers appear blameless (ἀμέμπτους) in sanctification at the last judgment of God that will take place at the parousia of the Lord Jesus. In 5:23–24 (forming an inclusio with 3:11–13) he repeats the same thought, with the only difference of attributing to God there the sanctifying work of the Lord (Jesus Christ) in 3:13 (cf. 4:8, where the sanctifying work is attributed to God’s Holy Spirit—­see comment on 3:13; 4:8; and 5:23–24). So in our present passage of 1:3, we must understand that Paul is talking about the readers’ hope that in his parousia the Lord Jesus Christ will consummate their salvation at the last judgment of God.24 Thus in our present passage, he expresses basically the same thought as in 1:10: the readers are waiting for the Lord Jesus Christ, God’s Son, from heaven who will deliver them from God’s wrath at the last judgment. In this hope of the Lord’s deliverance of them from divine wrath at the last judgment, which is the consummation of their salvation, they have been enduring all the afflictions. Later in 5:8–11 Paul exhorts them to hold firmly on to that hope. Note his emphasis on the 24 Pace Weima, 89, who appreciates the addition of the phrase “before our God and Father” in our verse merely in terms of “the rhetorical effect of adding more weight to Paul’s praise of the Thessalonians.”

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 147

7/12/23 11:28 AM

148

1 Thessalonians 1:2–10

fatherhood of God in the references to the last judgment, both at 1:3 and 3:13: “before our God and Father.” With this formulation he clearly seeks to assure the readers that God, the judge sitting at the last judgment, is their Father and therefore will surely deliver a favorable verdict for them, his children. At the concluding wish-­prayer in 5:23–24, Paul seeks to give them this assurance even more clearly and thereby encourage them to grow in sanctification, maintaining their steadfast hope for the consummation of their salvation at the last judgment at the parousia of the Lord Jesus Christ. Both the position of this wish-­prayer and the number of the related passages (1:3, 10; 3:13; 5:8–10, 23–24; cf. also 4:6) strongly underline the importance in this brief letter of the theme of perseverance and sanctification in the hope for the consummation of salvation at this last judgment. Thus with our phrase “endurance of hope in our Lord Jesus Christ before our God and Father” in this thanksgiving section, Paul is adumbrating this central theme of the letter. 4 εἰδότες, “knowing.” Paul knows that the Thessalonian believers are truly among the elect people of God. When he calls to mind their “work of faith, labor of love, and endurance of hope” while praying for them (v. 3), he comes to feel certain of God’s election of them. Such are proofs of their divine election, as well as the signs of the powerful effects of the gospel (v. 5). Therefore, the remembrance of their “work of faith, labor of love, and endurance of hope” and the ensuing “knowledge” of their election strengthens Paul’s desire to thank God for the powerful work of the gospel in their lives (v. 5). ἀδελφοὶ ἠγαπημένοι ὑπὸ τοῦ θεοῦ, “brothers and sisters beloved by God.” This form of address is repeated with a slight variation in 2 Thess 2:13, ἀδελφοὶ ἠγαπημένοι ὑπὸ κυρίου; cf. Deut 33:12 (ἠγαπημένος ὑπὸ κυρίου, “beloved by the Lord”); Sir 45:1 (ἠγαπημένον ὑπὸ θεοῦ καὶ ἀνθρώπων Μωϋσῆν, “Moses, beloved by God and human beings”). The perfect participle ἠγαπημένοι suggests that God’s love for them began in the past, in his election, and continues to the present. By addressing the readers as “brothers and sisters,” Paul expresses his affection for them. Yet with the following phrase, “beloved by God,” he emphasizes the divine affection for them. Pilhofer stresses the uniqueness of the early church’s metaphorical use of the kinship term ἀδελφοί (“brothers and sisters”) for the biologically unrelated fellow Christians (regardless of their ethnic, gender, and social status differences, cf. Gal 3:28).25 He does this by pointing out the absence of such a usage in the Hellenistic mystery cults and associations, contrary to the assumption long held in some quarters, as well as by discounting the OT and Jewish practice of referring to fellow Jews as such (e.g., Exod 2:11; Deut 15:3, 12; Ps 22:22; Jer 22:18; Zech 7:9; 1QS 6.10, 22; CD 6.22; cf. also Josephus, J.W. 2.122) because it presupposes co-­sanguinity or the shared ethnic identity of Jews. Pilhofer traces the origin of the early church’s new practice to Jesus’s 25 Pilhofer, “Περὶ δὲ τῆς φιλαδελφίας,” 143–49.

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 148

7/12/23 11:28 AM

Comment 149 teaching that “whoever does the will of God is [his] brother, and sister, and mother” (Mark 3:34–35parr.).26 However, it appears to be wrong to disregard completely the broad background of the Jewish consciousness of Israel as God’s family and Jews as God’s children, and especially of the practice of some Jews referring to proselytes (the gentile converts to Judaism) as ἀδελφοί (Jos. Asen. 8.9; 12.11; 13.1; Philo, Spec. Laws 1.52; Virtues 103–4, 179). To the early Jewish Christians who had this background, Jesus’s use of the kinship language for those “who do the will of God” (i.e., for those who have accepted his gospel of God’s kingdom), his teaching for such people to address God as abba (Mark 14:36; Matt 6:9//Luke 11:2; cf. Rom 8:15; Gal 4:6), and the common apostolic soteriological category of adoption (Christians as children of God) seem to have given a great impetus to apply the kinship language to gentile Christians as well as to Jewish Christians and to develop an intense sense of kinship among themselves (cf. 1 Cor 6:8). Noting that Paul addresses the readers as “brothers and sisters” as many as fourteen times in this short letter (1:4; 2:1, 9, 14, 17; 3:7; 4:1, 10b, 13; 5:1, 4, 12, 14, 25; cf. also 3:2; 4:6, 10a; 5:26, 27), which is proportionately more than in any other letter (10x in Romans; 20x in 1 Corinthians; and 3x in 2 Corinthians), Malherbe says that this is not just “the epistolary convention in so-­called family letters of addressing adelphoi persons not related by blood.”27 While “brothers and sisters” suggests an intimate relationship among fellow believers, the phrase “beloved by God” conveys their intimate relationship to God. So by addressing them as “brothers and sisters beloved by God,” Paul evokes a strong sense of their belonging to God’s family and their being under God’s fatherly care. He further strengthens this sense by surrounding the address with the immediately preceding reference to “our God and Father” and the immediately following reference to God’s “election.” All this is to reassure the readers in the situation where they are suffering from alienation from their families and friends because of their conversion to the Christian faith. τὴν ἐκλογὴν ὑμῶν, “your election.” By speaking of his “knowing” God’s “election” of the readers after his reference to their faith, love, and hope, Paul implies that these graces evidence that they have truly been elected by God. By referring to their having been loved by God and then to their having been chosen by God, he makes it unmistakably clear that God’s election of them has been based on his love for them. The doctrine of election is an expression of the doctrine of salvation by God’s love or grace, and as such it serves the purpose of providing believers with assurance. Therefore, just as in Rom 8:18–39 Paul appeals to divine election and predestination of the Roman Christians in order to assure them of their preservation to the consummation of salvation despite their present and future afflictions, so here 26 Pilhofer, “Περὶ δὲ τῆς φιλαδελφίας,” 149–52. 27 Malherbe, 109.

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 149

7/12/23 11:28 AM

150

1 Thessalonians 1:2–10

also he refers to divine love and election of the Thessalonian Christians in order to reassure them of the certainty of their final salvation despite their present afflictions. It is quite appropriate that having started his epistle with this note of election and assurance, Paul ends it with a strong affirmation of God’s grace of election and faithful preservation: “He who calls you is faithful, and he will do it” (5:24). Adopting the view of Meeks that like “brothers,” “election” is “the language of belonging,” Wanamaker observes that the doctrine of election has a social function of giving the readers the sense of a group identity and superiority.28 Paul’s reference to it here apparently functions to reassure his readers in this way too: although they are ostracized by their family and friends because of their conversion, they may rest assured that they belong to the community of the children of God the Father (1:1) who are destined for salvation (5:9), while their ostracizers belong to the community of perdition that will later be symbolized by “night” and “darkness” (5:4–5). In the combination of the phrases “brothers and sisters beloved by God” and “your election,” Fee sees Paul echoing “the foundational text” of Jewish election theology: “The Lord did not . . . choose you because you were more numerous than other peoples . . . but it was because the Lord loved you . . .” (Deut 7:7–8).29 This echo makes Paul’s application of the privilege of divine election to the gentile Christians of Thessalonica all the more significant. In the OT and Judaism, Israel is God’s elect people. For God chose Abraham (Neh 9:7) and, after him, his offspring, the people of Israel (Deut 4:37; 1 Kgs 3:8; Isa 41:8, 9; 43:10; 44:1, 2; 45:4; 49:7), in order to make himself known through them to the rest of humankind. In the NT, the chosen people are confined within no national frontiers: they are chosen “in Christ”—­by faith-­ union with him in his death and resurrection, who is the elect one of God par excellence—­whether they are Jews or gentiles. Believers in Christ from the people of Israel form “a remnant according to the election of grace” (Rom 11:5), but the same election of grace embraces believers from every nation. So the believing Thessalonians also number among the elect people of God. Clearly there was a revolution in the thinking of Paul, a former Pharisee who had fought with zeal to safeguard the exclusive status of the Jews as God’s chosen people (Gal 1:13–14; Phil 3:5–6).30 5 ὅτι, “because.” Most commentators connect this clause to the immediately preceding participial phrase εἰδότες . . . τὴν ἐκλογὴν ὑμῶν (“knowing . . . your election”). Then they debate whether the clause is causal (Paul knew of his readers’ election because his gospel preaching was effective among them),31 28 Wanamaker, 77, citing Meeks, Urban Christians, 85. 29 Fee, 30. 30 See Explanation below for more appreciation of the significance of Paul’s emphasis on God’s “election” of the gentile Thessalonian Christians in this epistle. 31 So, e.g., O’Brien, Thanksgivings, 151–52; Wanamaker, 78; Green, 93–94.

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 150

7/12/23 11:28 AM

Comment 151 or epexegetical (Paul knew of their election, namely, that his gospel preaching was effective among them).32 But both interpretations cannot explain why, in the thanksgiving section (where Paul should be focusing on the readers, as he normally does in his thanksgivings) and especially while talking about the readers’ election, he highlights his own powerful gospel preaching in v. 5a and even goes on to stress in v. 5b his and his colleagues’ righteous conduct during their mission in Thessalonica. Observing this problem, Weima admits that “viewing the ὅτι clause as epexegetical does not, however, remove the awkwardness of the shift in this verse from the topic of thanksgiving for God’s election of the Thessalonians [v. 4] to the topic of the genuineness of the apostles’ ministry to the Thessalonians [v. 5].” And then Weima attributes this “clumsy transition” to Paul’s “deep concern in this letter to defend himself.”33 So it is difficult to understand how, while failing to explain the relationship between vv. 4 and 5 satisfactorily and highlighting only the apologetic, but not causal, character of v. 5, Weima can still lump vv. 4 and 5 together as “the ultimate cause of thanksgiving” after taking v. 3 as “the immediate cause of thanksgiving.”34 Other interpreters who connect v. 5 directly with v. 4 face similar difficulties in explaining their relationship.35 Instead of taking v. 5 with v. 4, we must see it as connected with εὐχαριστοῦμεν in v. 2, the main verb of the one long sentence (vv. 2–7), and as providing the ground for the thanksgiving.36 The distance between the main clause in v. 2a and the causal clause in v. 5 is created because Paul inserts three participial phrases in vv. 2b–4 to describe the attendant circumstances of his thanksgiving.37 This analysis is supported by the structural characteristics that we have observed in 1 Thess 1–3, namely, the fivefold association of Paul’s entry with the success of the gospel/the faith of the Thessalonians and the threefold thanksgiving (see section II.3 in the Introduction). It also explains why in v. 5 Paul highlights his righteous and powerful preaching ministry, though aiming at its powerful effect on the Thessalonians. So in the long sentence as a whole, he basically gives thanks to God for the success of the gospel, which has resulted in the firm faith of the Thessalonians through his excellent and powerful mission. This thanksgiving is repeated in 2:13 and 3:6–9 (see comments ad loc).38 32 33 34 35 36

So, e.g., Best, 73; Malherbe, 110; Fee, 31–32; Weima, 93. Weima, 92–93. Weima, 84–96. E.g., Marshall, 53; Wanamaker, 78; Fee, 31–32. Cf. Witherington, 70; also Wohlenberg, 26, who comes close to our view, despite his judgment that our ὅτι clause is to be taken with v. 4. 37 Cf. Phil 1:3–6, where the phrase for the cause of thanksgiving, “for your partnership in the gospel” (ἐπὶ τῇ κοινωνίᾳ ὑμῶν εἰς τὸ εὐαγγέλιον) in v. 5, is also separated from the main verb, “I thank [εὐχαριστῶ] my God,” by the long—­a lbeit shorter than 1 Thess 1:2b–4—participial phrase in v. 4 that describes the attendant circumstances of the thanksgiving. 38 Cf. Fee, 10, for a misunderstanding of this structure.

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 151

7/12/23 11:28 AM

152

1 Thessalonians 1:2–10

τὸ εὐαγγέλιον ἡμῶν, “our gospel” (cf. 2 Thess 2:14; 2 Cor 4:3). Since the verse is concerned with the manner of Paul’s and his colleagues’ preaching and the readers’ acceptance of the gospel, here εὐαγγέλιον is nomen actionis, referring to their “gospel preaching” rather than to the content of their gospel,39 unlike “the gospel that we preached” (Gal 1:8) and τὸ εὐαγγέλιόν μου, “my gospel” (Rom 2:16; 16:25; 2 Tim 2:8) or “the gospel that I preach” (1 Cor 15:1; Gal 1:11; 2:2). However, later in 1 Thess 2:2, 8, 9, focusing on the content of the gospel that he and his colleagues preached, Paul repeatedly calls this message “the gospel of God,” emphasizing its divine authorship. The origin of the term εὐαγγέλιον, “glad tidings,” to designate the Christian message is still a disputed question, but no more probable account is given than that which points to the use of the cognate verb εὐαγγελίζεσθαι in LXX Isa 40:9, 52:7, 60:6, and 61:1 of the announcement of Zion’s restoration after the Babylonian exile. The whole context (Isa 40–66) in which these occurrences are found is interpreted in the NT with reference to Christian salvation (Isa 52:7 is quoted in this sense in Rom 10:15, and Isa 61:1 in Luke 4:18).40 οὐκ ἐγενήθη εἰς ὑμᾶς ἐν λόγῳ μόνον ἀλλὰ καὶ ἐν δυνάμει καὶ ἐν πνεύματι ἁγίῳ καὶ [ἐν] πληροφορίᾳ πολλῇ, “did not come to you in word alone, but also with power and with the Holy Spirit and [with?] fullest conviction.” The preposition ἐν is instrumental. The phrase πνεύματι ἁγίῳ appears here and in v. 6 below without the article, but no doubt the Holy Spirit is meant at both places, as in many other Pauline passages where the phrase (as well as the absolute πνεῦμα) also appears anarthrous.41 The antithetical formulation οὐκ . . . μόνον ἀλλὰ καί is for intensification rather than contrast like the one in 2:8, but unlike the ones in 2:3–7. Thus it does not deny the importance of the “word” element in the gospel preaching. In fact, the gospel is preached fundamentally “in word,” and faith comes from hearing the word of the gospel (Rom 10:14). Indeed, in the very next v. 6, the gospel is referred to simply as “the word.”42 But “word alone” without accompaniment of the convincing power of the Holy Spirit is ineffective in evoking faith from the hearers. Compare 1 Cor 2:3–5, where Paul says his λόγος (“word”) and κήρυγμα (“preaching”) are marked not by the persuasive techniques of rhetoric but by the “demonstration of the Spirit and power” (ἐν ἀποδείξει πνεύματος καὶ δυνάμεως), in order that the hearers’ faith might be securely based in the power of God, not in human wisdom.

39 Holtz, 46. 40 Cf. Betz, “Jesus and Isaiah 53,” 70–87; Wagner, “Heralds of Isaiah,” 193–222. On the question whether Paul uses the term εὐαγγέλιον (“gospel”) in conscious effort to counter the Roman political “gospel,” see Kim, “Is Paul Preaching,” and “Paul and the Roman Empire,” in PGTO, respectively 217–22 and 223–51. 41 Cf. Fee, God’s Empowering Presence, 15–24. 42 Cf. Marshall, 53: “There is a proper place for reasoned appeal to the mind in the presentation of the gospel.”

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 152

7/12/23 11:28 AM

Comment 153 As Paul adds “with the power of the Holy Spirit” to “with the power of signs and wonders” in Rom 15:19 in order to indicate that the power with which he performed signs and wonders while preaching the gospel was “the power of the Holy Spirit” (and not magical power or any such thing), so here also he may be adding “with the Holy Spirit” to “with power” in order to define the “power” as the power of the Holy Spirit. In Thessalonica as elsewhere, Paul’s gospel preaching was accompanied by the demonstration of the “power” of the Holy Spirit, probably in the form of miraculous healings (cf. Rom 15:19; 2 Cor 12:12; Gal 3:5). But just as Jesus’s exorcisms and miraculous healings were criticized by his opponents as deceptive works performed with the help of the prince of demons (Mark 3:22–27parr.), so also Paul’s miraculous works seem to have been criticized as magical works done through an unclean spirit. So with a view to his opponents’ charge of him being a false prophet and leading people astray with such deceptive works (see below on 2:3–4), Paul here adds the clarification that he performed the mighty works by the power of the Holy Spirit during his mission to Thessalonica. [ἐν] πληροφορίᾳ πολλῇ, “in fullest conviction.” While “fullness” is a possible translation of πληροφορία, its NT and early Christian usage (Col 2:2; Heb 6:11; 10:22; 1 Clem. 42.3), like that of the verb πληροφορεῖν in Paul (Rom 4:21; 14:5; Col 4:12), points to “full assurance” or “full conviction” as the meaning. With A C K P and other witnesses, ἐν in [ἐν] πληροφορίᾳ πολλῇ should be read, and the instrumental phrase is to be taken as describing the manner of preaching by Paul and his coworkers rather than the effect on the Thessalonian hearers, because whereas in 2:13 the effects of Paul’s gospel preaching are described from the perspective of its recipients, here they are described from the perspective of its preachers. Malherbe correctly notes that the manner of Paul’s preaching that is indicated by ἐν πληροφορίᾳ πολλῇ is taken up in ἐπαρρησιασάμεθα in 2:2 (hence, it is difficult to understand why Malherbe argues against reading ἐν here).43 Paul and his fellow missionaries preached the gospel with full conviction, performing miracles by the power of the Holy Spirit and thus authenticating its truth. However, it is difficult to think that Paul would thank God here (v. 2) just for the mere fact that he and his coworkers preached the gospel to the Thessalonians in the power of the Holy Spirit and in full conviction.44 So it appears necessary to assume that in v. 5a he already has in view the good effect that their preaching produced among the readers,45 namely, their joyful acceptance of the gospel, which he spells out in v. 6 and will do so again in

43 Malherbe, 112. 44 It is equally, if not even more, difficult to think that Paul would present that mere fact as evidence for the readers’ “election” if the present v. 5 is to be taken with v. 4 rather than v. 2—the view rejected here. 45 Cf. Beale, 53–54.

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 153

7/12/23 11:28 AM

154

1 Thessalonians 1:2–10

2:13 as the cause for his thanksgiving. Fee writes that Paul has in view both his “Spirit-­empowered preaching” and its effect, the readers’ “Spirit-­experienced conversion.”46 Malherbe tries to understand the antithetical formulation in our verse in terms of the “commonplace” demand of consistency between words and deeds in Hellenistic popular moral philosophy.47 But clearly this is not Paul’s concern here. His concern is rather with letting his readers recall and appreciate the power of the gospel as he preached it, in contrast to the mere words of wandering philosophers and sophists (cf. 1 Cor 2:1–5, 13). καθὼς οἴδατε οἷοι ἐγενήθημεν [ἐν] ὑμῖν δι᾽ ὑμᾶς, “as you know what kind of persons we were [among] you for your sakes.” This καθώς clause is the first of several appeals in 1 Thessalonians to the readers’ recollection to confirm Paul’s testimonies. This use of οἴδατε, “you know,” with reference to the converts’ knowledge of the example shown and the teaching given by Paul and his colleagues appears elsewhere in Pauline correspondence (cf. Gal 4:13; Phil 4:15; 2 Thess 2:6; 3:7), but nowhere so frequently as in this short letter (2:1, 2, 5, 11; 3:3, 4; 4:2; 5:2). Contrast this “(as) you know” formula in this letter with the formula, “Do you not know that . . . ?,” repeatedly used in 1 Corinthians (3:16; 5:6; 6:2, 3, 9, 15, 16, 19; 9:13, 24). Whereas the former reflects Paul’s basic trust in his Thessalonian converts, the latter reflects his disappointment with the deviation of his Corinthian converts from his teachings (except 1 Cor 9:13, 24).48 Compare the comment on 4:2 below. How is this καθώς clause (v. 5b) connected with the foregoing main clause in v. 5a? Commentators usually neglect this vital question. Malherbe does address it, but his explanation is quite banal: “[Paul’s] recollection of how the gospel came to them is in full conformity [katho¯s] with what [the Thessalonians] themselves know about this behavior and demeanor with them at that time.”49 Weima simply says, “The second half of the verse [1:5b] continues Paul’s apologetic concern [of 1:5a].”50 But this comment not only inadequately reflects the force of the conjunction καθώς in v. 5b but also fails, like Malherbe’s comment, to explain why Paul supports his powerful (and so successful) preaching among the Thessalonians (v. 5a) with an appeal to their knowledge of his moral demeanor (v. 5b). Furthermore, when Weima instead sees only the same apologetic concern continuing in the two parts of v. 5, he aggravates the problem that we observed above, namely, the difficulty of explaining why Paul inserts such a long and powerful “apology” in this section of giving thanks to God for his converts.

46 47 48 49 50

Fee, 34. Malherbe, 111. Cf. Kim, PNP, 271–74. Malherbe, 113. Weima, 96.

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 154

7/12/23 11:28 AM

Comment 155 This difficulty is resolved when our v. 5 as a whole is recognized as the first of five occurrences in the first part (chs. 1–3) of this epistle of the association of the success of the gospel/the faith of the readers with Paul’s missionary entry (εἴσοδος; 1:5, 9–10; 2:1, 13; 3:6; see section II.3 in the Introduction). So the καθώς clause (v. 5b) is to be taken as a causal subordinate clause51 that provides a reason for the success of the gospel recounted in the preceding main clause (v. 5a), a reason both for his powerful preaching of the gospel that is explicitly described in it and for the great effect upon the readers that is implied in that description and explained in the following v. 6 (see below). As the first of the five references to what Paul later twice designates as his “entry” (εἴσοδος; 1:9; 2:1), the καθώς clause refers to the manner and conduct that he and his colleagues displayed during their mission among the readers. Later in 2:1–12 he unfolds it as having been free of any falsehood and self-­ seeking on his part, but rather as having been characterized by his altruistic concern for the interest of his hearers (δι’ ὑμᾶς, “for your sake”). There he also elaborates how his morally impeccable and loving behavior served the cause of the gospel—­for it to be preached with such a powerful effect on his readers as described in 2:13 (and as implied here in v. 5a and explained in v. 6). See comment on 2:1–16 below. To understand the hidden logic in the relationship between the main clause of v. 5a and its causal subordinate clause in v. 5b, we need to pay attention to the verb “you know” (οἴδατε) in v. 5b. We need to ask why Paul does not formulate v. 5b straightforwardly as “we conducted our mission among you in a holy and righteous way” but in such a complicated way as “you know what kind of persons we were [among] you for your sake”? The perfect tense οἴδατε used here for the present force “you know” does not mean that the readers have come to realize only now retrospectively that Paul’s mission among them was impeccable. Rather, it presupposes that they knew it during his mission. So apparently before describing his holy and righteous mission himself later in 2:1–12, here he wants first to let his readers recall their appreciative memory of it and confirm it. In this way he is not just trying to show his modesty or to achieve a greater rhetorical effect. Rather, he wants to praise the readers by affirming that not simply his impeccable missionary conduct but rather their “knowledge” or appreciation of it was the cause for the success of the gospel among them. Thereby he also seeks to consolidate their positive appreciation of his eisodos, so that they may maintain it. This aim he would pursue more systematically with his rehearsal of his eisodos in 2:2–12, where also he does not just describe his conduct but does it constantly appealing to their knowledge and appreciation of it (see Introduction, section II.3, and also comment on 2:1–16 below).

51 Cf. BDF §453.

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 155

7/12/23 11:28 AM

156

1 Thessalonians 1:2–10

Here we also need to keep in mind the fact that Paul is writing these words in full consciousness of the hostile environment of Thessalonica in which he preached the gospel and in which his readers are still living (see the immediately following v. 6; and also 2:2, 14–18; 3:3–5). There he faced the persecution of many opponents of his preaching, who apparently charged him with being a charlatan philosopher or false prophet and performing magic to fool the people for his personal gain (cf. 2:1–12). But there was also a small group of people—­the recipients of this epistle—­who, recognizing and appreciating his holy and righteous conduct, distinguished him from such false preachers and began to show their interest in his message. Their positive response emboldened him to preach the gospel with full conviction, performing miracles more freely. This in turn led the readers to accept his gospel not as mere human words like those of itinerant philosophers and sophists but as what it really was, namely, “God’s word” (see comment on 2:13 below), and to convert to the “living and true God” and receive salvation in Christ (1:9–10; cf. comment on 2:1 below). Thus, with the καθώς clause (v. 5b), Paul is expressing in a compact way the fact that the readers’ recognition and appreciation of his holy and righteous way contributed to the successful preaching of the gospel in Thessalonica, both to his powerful preaching of it and to its great effect on them (vv. 5a, 6b). This recognition of a close relationship between our verse and 2:1–13 supports reading ἐν ὑμῖν here (with B D F G and other witnesses), as Paul employs similar prepositional phrases in 1:9 and 2:1 (πρὸς ὑμᾶς) and in 2:7 (ἐν μέσῳ ὑμῶν) in order to speak about his eisodos in Thessalonica.52 Note the especially close parallelism between ἐγενήθημεν ἐν ὑμῖν (“we were among you”) here and ἐγενήθημεν . . . ἐν μέσῳ ὑμῶν (“we were . . . in your midst”) in 2:7 (see the comment on 2:7b below). 6 καὶ ὑμεῖς μιμηταὶ ἡμῶν ἐγενήθητε καὶ τοῦ κυρίου, “and you became imitators of us and of the Lord.” Contrary to most modern translations that, following the Greek editors of the text, put a full stop at the end of v. 5 and make this clause begin a new sentence, Fee and Weima recognize that the coordinating conjunction καί connects v. 6 closely with v. 5.53 However, they take v. 6 as grounding or explaining, together with v. 5, the readers’ election referred to in v. 4.54 But it is important to recognize that the καί connects v. 6 only with the preceding v. 5 and that with the emphatic formulation καὶ ὑμεῖς (“and you on your part”), v. 6a is intended to provide a parallel to “what kind of persons we were among you” in v. 5b while v. 6b is intended to make explicit what is implied in v. 5a:

52 Cf. Malherbe, 113. 53 Fee, 37; Weima, 97. Cf. also Wanamaker, 80; Malherbe, 114. 54 So also Malherbe, 114.

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 156

7/12/23 11:28 AM

Comment 157 Our gospel came to you in great power of the Holy Spirit (and so had great success among you, bringing about your conversion) (v. 5a), as you know what kind of men we were among you for your sakes (v. 5b) and you became imitators of us and of the Lord (v. 6a), accepting the word (even) in much affliction with joy of the Holy Spirit (v. 6b) (a sort of chiasm: v. 5a/v. 6b; v. 5b/v. 6a) However, even while recognizing v. 6 as connected with v. 5, Fee regards v. 5b as a bracket and takes v. 6 as explaining the readers’ election (v. 4), together with v. 5a.55 This inconsistency results from his fixed view of v. 5 as directly connected with v. 4. Free from that assumption, we must rather see that with v. 6 Paul explains the success of the gospel (v. 5a) as having been caused as much by the readers’ eager acceptance of the gospel despite persecution (v. 6) as by his own missionary eisodos (v. 5b). In fact, in v. 6 Paul spells out what is already implicit in the “you know” phrase in v. 5b as well as in the description of his preaching in v. 5a. He has already implied that, responding to his preaching with their “knowledge” or appreciation of his holy and righteous conduct, the readers accepted the gospel. In v. 6 he makes that implication explicit, praising that great act as being an act of imitation of him and of the Lord. In reference to BAGD (s.v. καί 2.f), Malherbe comments that the opening conjunction καί “introduces the result of what precedes.”56 This view supports our interpretation here. Paul frequently asks his churches to imitate him (1 Cor 4:16–17; 11:1; Phil 3:17; 2 Thess 3:7, 9; cf. Gal 4:12; Phil 4:9; 1 Thess 3:12). In all these places, he has in view his converts imitating him in living out the Christian way of life. In this area, he is conscious of his own apostolic function as a representative or revealer of Christ. Therefore, in 1 Cor 11:1 he explicitly connects the church’s imitation of himself with his own imitation of Christ. Sometimes he calls the church to follow Christ’s example directly (Rom 15:1–3, 7–9; 2 Cor 8:9; Phil 2:5–11). But other times he suggests that the church become “imitators” of Christ through “imitating” Paul himself as an apostle (1 Cor 11:1; also 4:16–17; Phil 3:4–17). Paul’s manner in our verse of adding καὶ τοῦ κυρίου (“of the Lord”) at the end of the sentence καὶ ὑμεῖς μιμηταὶ ἡμῶν ἐγενήθητε (“you became imitators of us”) has led some commentators to wonder whether the phrase is not an afterthought by which he seeks to avert the impression of self-­ elevation here.57 Other commentators58 have tried to see here reflected Paul’s

55 Fee, 37. 56 Malherbe, 114. 57 Cf. Dobschütz, 72; Dibelius, 5. 58 E.g., Marxsen, 38–39; Holtz, 48.

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 157

7/12/23 11:28 AM

158

1 Thessalonians 1:2–10

usual understanding of his apostolic mediation for the church’s imitation of Christ. But since the following participial phrase (“accepting the word in much affliction, with joy of the Holy Spirit”) suggests that what the readers are said to have imitated of Paul and the Lord is not the (ongoing) Christian way of life but something that they did at their conversion, it is unlikely that Paul was thinking of his mediation of Christ’s example. In fact, 2:13–16 provides a useful hint for a proper understanding of the order of imitation here. There, in the second thanksgiving section, after unfolding our v. 5 (esp. v. 5b) and rehearsing his impeccable mission in Thessalonica (2:1–12), Paul unfolds our v. 6 and speaks about the Thessalonians’ acceptance of the gospel as God’s word amid affliction. In that context, as in our v. 6, he talks about the readers having become “imitators,” but this time lining up the objects of imitation in the order of the churches of Judea, (by implication) the Lord Jesus and the prophets, and Paul and his colleagues. The reason for this order in 2:13–16 is clear: it is because, focusing on the theme of believers receiving persecution from their own compatriots, Paul finds the example of the Judean churches to be the most immediate parallel to the readers’ situation. Hence he names the Judean churches first, adding after them the ultimate example of the Lord Jesus and the biblical or traditional example of the prophets, and then finally elaborating on his own example. Taking a hint from the order of 2:13–16, therefore, we may understand that in our v. 6 Paul names himself first as the object of the readers’ imitation because here in vv. 5–6 he wants the readers’ attention to be focused on his own mission and their response to it. So by naming the Lord Jesus after the immediately applicable example both in our v. 6 and 2:13–16, Paul does not diminish the significance of the Lord Jesus as an example but rather implicitly suggests that he is the ultimate example for Christians regardless of the situation. δεξάμενοι τὸν λόγον ἐν θλίψει πολλῇ μετὰ χαρᾶς πνεύματος ἁγίου, “accepting the word in much affliction, with joy of the Holy Spirit.” This participle phrase is best seen as epexegetical, as explaining wherein the point of the readers’ imitation of Paul and the Lord lies.59 In 2:13 Paul uses the same verb δέχεσθαι to qualify the readers’ reception (παραλαμβάνειν) of the gospel and thus strengthens the nuance of their welcoming “acceptance” of the gospel (see comment on 2:13). So it is better to render the participle δεξάμενοι here with “accepting” rather than simply “receiving.” Note here that Paul refers to “our gospel” in v. 5 as “the word,” apparently because he is thinking of the actual preaching of the gospel that he did in Thessalonica. In 2:13 he will do the same as he elaborates on what he says here in vv. 5–6, but there he will emphatically declare that it is really “the word of God” (see comment on 2:13). Since Paul explains the readers’ becoming his imitators in reference specifically to their acceptance of the gospel at their conversion rather than 59 Cf. Best, 77; Malherbe, 115.

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 158

7/12/23 11:28 AM

Comment 159 generally to their ongoing Christian way of life, our verse cannot be enlisted to support the attempt to see Paul’s chief concern in this epistle as presenting his own (moral) example in chs. 1–3 and then exhorting the readers to imitate it for their sanctification in chs. 4–5 (see section II.3.C. in the Introduction above).60 The concept of θλίψις in the NT and specifically in Paul is largely determined by the LXX background,61 and so “much affliction” here is to be taken in terms of the affliction mentioned in 2:14 (social distress) rather than the psychological distress of a convert.62 It refers to social ostracism and persecution that the readers experienced when they accepted the gospel and converted to Christ.63 The threefold repetition of the same structure of thanksgiving for the readers’ acceptance of the gospel or maintenance of faith despite persecution (1:2–7; 2:1–16; 3:1–10; see section II.3 in the Introduction) confirms this. “The word” with or without the modifying phrase “of the Lord” is often used in the sense of the gospel in the NT (cf. Mark 2:2; 4:14–20; Acts 4:29, 31; 8:25; 1 Thess 1:8; 2:13). Jesus and Paul (and his missionary colleagues) were persecuted not for “accepting” but for preaching “the word” or the gospel, whereas the readers were persecuted for “accepting” it. So Paul is making this comparison of the readers with himself and the Lord Jesus, seeing their positive treatment of the gospel in common, although they stand on the opposite ends of offering and receiving it. As Jesus preached the gospel, bearing affliction with the joy of the Holy Spirit (Luke 10:21; cf. Luke 6:22–23; Heb 12:2), so did Paul (2 Cor 6:10; 8:2). The readers became imitators of Paul and the Lord by accepting the gospel, bearing affliction with joy that could only be attributed to the Holy Spirit (see Rom 5:3, 5 and Gal 5:22 for joy as a fruit of the Spirit). Rigaux perceives some echoes of Jesus’s sayings here.64 In explaining his parable of the sower, Jesus says that the seeds sown on the rocky ground represent those who “receive the word” (Luke 8:13 δέχεσθαι; Matt 13:20//Mark 4:16 λαμβάνειν; cf. Mark 4:20 παραδέχεσθαι) “with joy” (Matt 13:20//Mark 4:16// Luke 8:13) but then fall away when “affliction” (Matt 13:21//Mark 4:17 θλίψις; Luke 8:13 πειρασμός) arises. Supporting himself with these verbal parallels between Jesus’s parable and v. 6b, Rigaux argues that, in speaking of the readers’ “imitating the Lord” by “receiving the word in much affliction,” here Paul echoes Jesus’s call for his disciples to take up their cross and follow him (Mark 8:34parr.).65 Malherbe rejects this view on the grounds that the verb δέχεσθαι is commonly used by Hellenistic writers for reception of speech and 60 61 62 63 64 65

Contra Malherbe, 125–26. So Holtz, 49, citing H. Schlier, TDNT 3:139–48, and J. Kremer, EDNT 2:152. Contra Malherbe, 127–28; Wanamaker, 81. So, e.g., Holtz, 49; Furnish, 46–47; Weima, 100–101. Rigaux, 380–81. Cf. also Wenham, Paul, 87–90; Benson, “Note,” 143–44.

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 159

7/12/23 11:28 AM

160

1 Thessalonians 1:2–10

that Paul appreciates the earthly Jesus not as a preacher or teacher but as the one who gave himself for others.66 The first of the two arguments does not necessarily stand against the attempt to see some echoes of Jesus’s sayings in v. 6b, and the second argument is put into question already by this epistle, as echoes of Jesus’s sayings can be discerned in several places in it (esp. 2:6–8; 4:13–5:11; see comments ad loc).67 In view of the fact that later in this epistle Paul echoes several sayings of Jesus, it is likely that in our verse also he echoes Jesus’s words in his explanation of the parable of the sower. The Thessalonian believers “received the word with joy” but did not fall away when “affliction” arose, unlike those represented by the rocky ground in Jesus’s parable of the sower. Instead, they went on bearing manifold fruit like those represented by the good soil (Mark 4:20parr.), for which Paul praises them in the following vv. 7–8. μετὰ χαρᾶς πνεύματος ἁγίου, “with joy of the Holy Spirit.” This phrase presupposes the readers’ reception of the Holy Spirit at their conversion. Verses 5–6 show that Paul’s “Spirit-­empowered preaching” has resulted in the readers’ “Spirit-­experienced conversion.”68 They also show that the Spirit works in both parties in the situation of preaching, in the preacher and in the hearers,69 and therefore that the Holy Spirit is the ultimate cause for the success of the gospel or the faith of the Thessalonians. The Holy Spirit who thus initiates believers’ conversion and salvation (cf. Rom 10:9–10 with 1 Cor 12:3) also sustains them, aiding their sanctification (1 Thess 4:3–12; see comment on 4:8–9) and equipping them with spiritual gifts (5:19–22).70 The combination of “affliction” with “ joy” here may appear strange to some modern believers in the gospel of health and wealth.71 But that affliction is the common lot of Christians is taken for granted by Paul (e.g., 3:3; Phil 1:29) and other NT writers (e.g., John 16:33; Acts 14:22; 1 Pet 4:12), and joy in the midst of persecution was a familiar Christian grace in the early church (e.g., Acts 5:41; 2 Cor 8:2; Jas 1:2; 1 Pet 1:6; 4:13). Christian joy that comes from the experience of salvation in Christ and is sustained by the hope of its eschatological consummation enables believers to persevere in affliction (cf. Rom 5:1–5; Phil 4:4–7; 1 Pet 1:3–9; 4:12–13). Since it is the Holy Spirit who assures them of their salvation and nourishes their eschatological hope, interceding for them in suffering, that joy is ultimately also his work in their 66 Malherbe, 115. 67 See also Kim, “Imitatio Christi,” BBR 13 (2003): 193–226 (now in PGTO, 323–53), where it is shown that with regard to the imitatio Christi theme Paul has in view the teaching and example of the historical Jesus as well as his self-­g iving in his incarnation and crucifixion. Moreover, in dealing with the problem of idol food in 1 Cor 8–10, Paul concretely draws some of his guidelines from the historical Jesus’s teaching and example. 68 Fee, 34. 69 Cf. Weima, 101. 70 Cf. Burke, “Holy Spirit,” 142–57. 71 Cf. Weima, 101.

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 160

7/12/23 11:28 AM

Comment 161 lives (cf. Rom 5:1–5; 8:12–27). Hence Paul reckons it among “the fruits” of the Spirit in Gal 5:22, just as here he defines it as “the joy of the Holy Spirit,” the joy that comes from or is given by the Spirit (cf. Acts 13:52; Rom 14:17). 7 ὥστε γενέσθαι ὑμᾶς τύπον πᾶσιν τοῖς πιστεύουσιν, “so that you became an example for all the believers.” By following the example of Paul and his missionary colleagues as well as of the Lord in their joyful acceptance of the gospel despite persecution, the readers became in turn an example to other believers. Thus they had joined the example series that had begun with Christ, then the apostle and his colleagues, then the Thessalonian church, and then other believers in Macedonia and Achaia. The singular τύπος (“example”) here shows that Paul is viewing the Thessalonian church collectively. Along with ἐν παντὶ τόπῳ (“everywhere”) in v. 8, πᾶσιν (“for all”) here may be regarded as a hyperbole employed for emphatic compliment. Or it may truly express Paul’s view that the readers are exemplary to all Christians in Macedonia and Achaia, not only to those who have become believers through hearing of their faith but also to those who have been converted by his and other missionaries’ preaching. πᾶσιν τοῖς πιστεύουσιν, “to all the believers.” Note the absolute use here of the verb πιστεύειν (“believe”; τοῖς πιστεύουσιν, “the believers”) without an accompanying object. In this epistle Paul uses the participle this way twice more in the phrase “you believers” (ὑμῖν τοῖς πιστεύουσιν, 2:10, 13). Later he repeatedly uses the cognate noun πίστις in the phrase “your faith,” again without an accompanying object (3:2, 5, 6, 7, 10). See Explanation below for the meaning of faith and the significance of its emphasis in this epistle. ἐν τῇ Μακεδονίᾳ καὶ ἐν τῇ Ἀχαΐᾳ, “in Macedonia and in Achaia.” The repetition of ἐν τῇ before Ἀχαΐᾳ is strictly correct, since Macedonia and Achaia were two distinct provinces. A less precise construction occurs in Acts 19:21 (τὴν Μακεδονίαν καὶ Ἀχαΐαν); cf. also the variant reading in v. 8. The readers’ example was observed not only in their own province of Macedonia but also in the province of Achaia (comprising central and southern Greece), which adjoined it on the south. For Macedonia as a Roman province, see I.1 in the Introduction. As for Achaia, it was constituted a separate province under Augustus in 27 BC, to be administered by a proconsul from then until AD 15 and again from AD 44 onward (cf. Acts 18:12). Paul is writing this epistle from Corinth, a Roman colony (since 44 BC) and the seat of administration of the province of Achaia; he is thus in an advantageous position to assess the wide-­ranging impact of the Thessalonian Christians’ example. The reference to Macedonia and Achaia here is in line with Paul’s habit of calling his mission fields according to their Roman provincial names (cf. Rom 15:19, 24, 28; 2 Cor 1:1; Gal 1:21). It also corresponds to his mission strategy. Apparently he operated with a concept of “representative universalism” or the principle of “firstfruits”: “If the dough offered as firstfruits is holy, so is the whole lump” (Rom 11:16). Planting a church in a metropolis stands

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 161

7/12/23 11:28 AM

162

1 Thessalonians 1:2–10

for winning the whole area belonging to it. So he regularly goes to major cities along the main highways to preach the gospel and plant churches there, regarding each church as representing the whole province to which its city belongs. Note, for example, besides the Thessalonian church in Macedonia, also the Philippian church in Macedonia (Phil 4:15), the Corinthian church in Achaia (1 Cor 16:15; 2 Cor 1:1), and the Ephesian church in Asia (Rom 16:5; 1 Cor 16:19; 2 Cor 1:8). Only so could he declare in the spring of AD 56/7 that he had “fully preached the gospel of Christ from Jerusalem in a circle as far as Illyricum,” so that “now I no longer have any room for work in these regions” (Rom 15:19, 23).72 However, the next verse (v. 8) indicates that this concept of “representative universalism” or the principle of “firstfruits” does not exclude the idea of the “representative” or “firstfruits” church of a province spreading or emanating the gospel to the outlying districts of the province and beyond. Apparently Paul saw his apostolic calling in harvesting “firstfruits” in major cities and so offering their provinces to God in and through the “firstfruits,” the new converts, in each city, assuming that then the newly planted churches would carry out in their cities and provinces the remainder of his task of bringing all the gentiles to “the obedience of faith” to the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and “offering” them to God as an “acceptable sacrifice sanctified by the Holy Spirit” (Rom 1:5; 15:15–21; 16:26; 1 Cor 3:5–17; 2 Cor 10:13–16). The long sentence of thanksgiving report that began in v. 2 formally comes to a close here at v. 7. In it, Paul relates (a) his impeccable eisodos with (b) the readers’ acceptance of the gospel in affliction and (c) their becoming thereby imitators of Paul and the Lord Jesus. This pattern is repeated with much greater elaboration in the second thanksgiving section (2:1–16). It is also discernable in the third thanksgiving section (3:1–10): (a) an allusion to the readers’ appreciation of Paul’s eisodos in 3:6; (b) allusions throughout the passage to their acceptance of the gospel or their maintenance of their faith amid affliction; and (c) the reference to affliction as Christians’ common lot in 3:3–4 and the reference to Paul’s own affliction in 3:7. This observation of the common pattern in the three thanksgiving sections confirms our interpretation that the first thanksgiving section runs from 1:2a directly to 1:5–7, or that the long ὅτι clause (vv. 5–7) states the real cause for the main verb εὐχαριστοῦμεν in v. 2a, with the intervening vv. 2b–4 functioning primarily to provide the attendant circumstances for the thanksgiving prayer, although with their contents they also function to increase Paul’s desire to give thanks to God. However, here in the first thanksgiving section, Paul goes on to elaborate on the theme of the readers’ having become an example for the believers in Macedonia and Achaia (mentioned in v. 7) in v. 8, and then also to elaborate on their faith (mentioned in v. 8), again relating it to his eisodos, in vv. 9–10. 72 Cf. Bornkamm, Paul, 53–54; Green, 100–101.

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 162

7/12/23 11:28 AM

Comment 163 These elaborations extend or even expand Paul’s praise of the readers’ faith, for which he has been giving thanks to God since v. 2. Therefore, the thanksgiving section that started in v. 2 can be said to continue right into v. 10. 8 ἀφ᾽ ὑμῶν γὰρ ἐξήχηται ὁ λόγος τοῦ κυρίου . . . , ἀλλ’ . . . ἡ πίστις ὑμῶν ἡ πρὸς τὸν θεὸν ἐξελήλυθεν, “for from you the word of the Lord has sounded out . . . , but . . . your faith toward God has gone forth.” With γάρ (“for”), Paul explains how the readers have become an example to all the believers in Macedonia and Achaia (v. 7). However, it is not immediately clear how what Paul says here in v. 8 actually explains the preceding result clause of v. 7. So commentators usually ignore this question. Wanamaker sees the γάρ only loosely connecting v. 8 with v. 7.73 Weima, even while affirming the explanatory nature of the γάρ here, speaks of “the second ‘additional cause of thanksgiving’ ” in v. 8 after “the first ‘additional cause of thanksgiving’ ” in vv. 6–7, thus taking v. 8 as a virtual parallel to vv. 6–7 rather than the ground for v. 7.74 But here Paul is actually explaining how the believers in Macedonia and Achaia have come to know about the readers’ faith, so as to take them as their example.75 The emphatic position of ἀφ’ ὑμῶν (“from you”) and the verb ἐξηχεῖν (“to sound out,” a hapax in the NT and the root of the English word “echo”; ἐξήχηται is a perfect passive) give the picture of the Thessalonian church being the center from which a message sounds forth in all directions like a trumpet blast. “The word of the Lord” is an OT expression (cf. Gen 15:1, 4; Isa 1:10; Jer 2:4; etc.) for the message commissioned by the Lord. It is frequent in Acts as a reference to the gospel (8:25; 13:44, 48; 15:35, 36; 19:10). Elsewhere Paul refers to the gospel as “the word of God” (1 Thess 2:13; see 1 Cor 14:36; 2 Cor 2:17; 4:2) or simply “the word”(1 Thess 1:6; see also Phil 1:14; 2:16). Wanamaker and Fee propose to interpret “the word of the Lord” as the “report concerning what the Lord has done” among the Thessalonians and treat the phrase as synonymous with “your faith” that follows it.76 But it is unlikely that, having spoken of “the word” for the gospel in v. 6, Paul would use such a familiar OT turn of speech with something else chiefly in view than the gospel. When Paul refers to the gospel as “the word of the Lord” here (again 2 Thess 3:1), is the phrase “of the Lord” a subjective genitive in line with the OT idiom? If it is, Paul would be highlighting the gospel as the message originating from the Lord, the Lord being Jesus for him. Or is the phrase an objective genitive (“the word about the Lord”), indicating that the Lord Jesus is the content of the message? Holtz decides for both meanings.77 This seems to be the right interpretation, as in the immediately following vv. 9–10 Paul actually elaborates on “the word of the Lord” in terms of the message about 73 74 75 76 77

Wanamaker, 83; cf. also Holtz, 51. Weima, 97, 103. Cf. Dickson, Mission- ­Commitment, 100. Wanamaker, 83, and Fee, 44. Holtz, 51–52.

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 163

7/12/23 11:28 AM

164

1 Thessalonians 1:2–10

God and his Son Jesus, while, on the other hand, in 2:2–13 he emphasizes the divine authorship of the gospel in his repeated use of the similar phrase “the gospel of God” (or “the word of God” in 2:13). So “the word of the Lord” refers to the gospel whose author and content is the Lord. Some commentators interpret our verse as meaning that the gospel spread to the various parts of Greece through active evangelistic efforts of the Thessalonian believers.78 However, both Ware and Dickson note that by writing here ἀφ’ ὑμῶν (“from you”) instead of δι’ ὑμῶν (“through you”) or ὑφ’ ὑμῶν (“by you”), Paul suggests the readers as having been only the point of departure for the gospel’s spread rather than its active preachers.79 For this and other reasons, Dickson denies the presence of the idea of the Thessalonians’ evangelistic work in our verse.80 Is Paul then commenting here on “the word of the Lord” spreading from Thessalonica to the other parts of Greece through their occasional, spontaneous, and private sharing of their faith with the people of those areas? R. S. Ascough also denies the idea of active evangelistic work. He proposes to understand the spread of the gospel from them in terms of associations in the Greco-­Roman world proclaiming honors for their deities and founders, as well as of travelers and merchants to and from Thessalonica spreading those stories.81 Indeed, Thessalonica, the capital city of Macedonia and a thriving port city, lay near the Via Egnatia, a main east-­west highway. Many visitors and merchants to and from the city who came across the stories of the Christians, who abandoned their ancestral gods and accepted the gospel, could carry the news into other, various parts of Greece.82 Since the Thessalonian Christians are said to have accepted the gospel “with joy” (v. 6), it may also be assumed that they enthusiastically shared their new faith with their relatives and friends who were not hostile to it. It is also natural to assume that some of them did the same when they were traveling to various places outside their city.83 However, the following four factors lead us to presume that Paul has in view here more active and organized evangelistic efforts of the Thessalonian believers than such isolated and spontaneous evangelism. First, the verb ἐξηχεῖν is far too emphatic for a passive, isolated, and private sharing of the gospel.84 Second, even while being mainly concerned to praise the readers’

78 E.g., Richard, 69–73; Malherbe, 116–17; Green, 102; Weima, 105–6; cf. also Barclay, “Conflict,” 522–25. 79 Ware, “Thessalonians,” 128, and Dickson, Mission- ­Commitment, 97. 80 Dickson, Mission- ­Commitment, 95–103. Cf. also Holtz, 52; Fee, 43–44; Schreiber, I:108. 81 Ascough, “Redescribing,” 61–82. 82 Cf. Holtz, 52: “While the faith of the Thessalonians becomes known, the gospel sounds out at the same time.” 83 Cf. Brocke, Thessaloniki, 108–13, for people movement to and from Thessalonica in Paul’s day. 84 Cf. Ware, “Thessalonians,” 126–31.

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 164

7/12/23 11:28 AM

Comment 165 faith in order to encourage them to maintain it despite continuing affliction (vv. 6–8; cf. 3:1–10), as well as seeking to explain how the readers have become an example to all the believers in Macedonia and Achaia (v. 7), Paul puts the strong sentence about “the word of the Lord sounding forth [ἐξήχηται] in Macedonia and Achaia” ahead of the parallel sentence about their “faith in God having gone forth [ἐξελήλυθεν] everywhere.” If the gospel has spread in Macedonia and Achaia just through the readers’ spontaneous sharing of their faith, it would be more natural for Paul to put them in the reverse order: “Your faith in God has gone forth in Macedonia and in Achaia, and (thereby) the word of the Lord has (also) sounded out everywhere.” Third, Paul cites the Macedonians and Achaians’ report of the readers’ faith (vv. 9b–10), which amounts to a full summary of the gospel, including all the major points of it (see below). Admittedly, the summary is formulated by Paul himself, but even so Paul is thereby suggesting that the Macedonians and Achaians have heard the gospel or “the word of the Lord” fully. This points to a more deliberate, organized evangelism than a spontaneous sharing of personal faith on the part of the Thessalonian believers. Fourth and last, when in 4:10 Paul says that the readers “love all the brothers and sisters throughout Macedonia,” he clearly suggests that there are active, organized outreach efforts of the Thessalonian believers toward the wide areas of Macedonia (see comment ad loc). For these reasons, it appears reasonable to see implied in our text the Thessalonian believers’ active evangelistic efforts in the wider areas of Greece.85 Therefore, in the context we may see Paul holding up the Thessalonians’ exemplary faith not only for their joyful acceptance of the gospel despite persecution but also for their missionary outreach with the gospel (and charity work—4:10). ἀλλ᾽ ἐν παντὶ τόπῳ ἡ πίστις ὑμῶν ἡ πρὸς τὸν θεὸν ἐξελήλυθεν, “but in every place your faith toward God has gone forth.” The repetition of the article ἡ marks πρὸς τὸν θεόν as being in attributive relation to πίστις according to the classical construction, and it also prevents ambiguity here (it rules out the rendering “your faith has gone out to God”). This formulation ἡ πίστις ὑμῶν ἡ πρὸς τὸν θεόν occurs only here in the NT, but Holtz points to its Hellenistic-­ Jewish background (4 Macc 15.24: τὴν πρὸς θεὸν πίστιν; 16.22: τὴν αὐτὴν πίστιν πρὸς τὸν θεόν; Philo, Abraham 268, 271, 273).86 Instead of completing the construction of v. 8a, οὐ μόνον ἐν τῇ Μακεδονίᾳ καὶ Ἀχαΐᾳ (“not only in Macedonia and Achaia”), with ἀλλ’ ἐν παντὶ τόπῳ (“but in every place”), Paul starts a new sentence with ἀλλ’ ἐν παντὶ τόπῳ (so he omits καί after ἀλλά) and sets a new subject and predicate in v. 8b: “but in every place your faith toward God has gone forth.” This may be an example of “St. Paul’s impetuous style.”87 But it

85 On the question whether the Pauline churches were engaged in evangelistic activities, cf. further O’Brien, Gospel, 109–31; Dickson, Mission- ­Commitment, 86–152. 86 Holtz, 53. 87 Milligan, 12; cf. Best, 80.

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 165

7/12/23 11:28 AM

166

1 Thessalonians 1:2–10

is more important to note that this “impetuous style” probably reflects Paul’s eagerness to speak about the readers’ faith as the main subject matter. “Your faith” here is a summary reference to their joyful acceptance of the gospel in affliction in proper appreciation of his missionary conduct and powerful preaching (vv. 5–6),88 and its content is given in vv. 9–10 (Paul writes “your faith toward God [πρὸς τὸν θεόν]” here in v. 8 with a view to this later elaboration on it in terms of their “turning to God [πρὸς τὸν θεόν]” in v. 9). Note how in our passage Paul stresses their faith throughout. First he speaks of their conversion not in terms of “what the Lord has done among them,”89 but of what they have done—­their joyful acceptance of the gospel in affliction (v. 6) and their coming to have faith toward God (v. 8). Then, in vv. 9–10 he summarizes “the word of the Lord” or the gospel in which they believed, as concerning the “living and true God” and “his Son” Jesus, the crucified and resurrected one, who is to come “from heaven to deliver us from the wrath to come.” But he gives even this summary of the gospel from the perspective of the readers’ faith: they “turned” to “serve” the “living and true God” and “wait for his Son.” The claim here that the readers’ faith had gone forth “everywhere” beyond Macedonia and Achaia (and had become an example to “all the believers” there, v. 7) is clearly a hyperbole (cf. 2 Cor 2:14; see also Rom 1:8 [ἐν ὅλῳ τῷ κόσμῳ, “in all the world,” more apt in the case of Rome]; Col 1:6 [ἐν παντὶ τῷ κόσμῳ]). This hyperbole, as well as the “impetuous style,” here conveys Paul’s heightened enthusiasm for praising the readers’ faith, the enthusiasm that is manifest already in his making it an example to “all the believers” in Macedonia and Achaia. Yet how did Paul know that the news of the Thessalonians’ faith had reached Macedonia and Achaia and other places beyond the two provinces? We can think of at least a couple of figures who informed him of the news. Since he dispatched Timothy out of great anxiety about the condition of their faith (3:1–5), he could not have obtained the news before Timothy’s mission.90 So it is likely that Timothy heard about their faith being talked about in various places in Macedonia and Achaia on his way to and from Thessalonica and reported it to Paul.91 As commentators usually presume, Priscilla and Aquila also could have reported to Paul in Corinth of what they had heard of the Thessalonians’ faith in the places they visited on their way from Rome to Corinth along the Via Egnatia (cf. Acts 18:1–4). ὥστε μὴ χρείαν ἔχειν ἡμᾶς λαλεῖν τι, “so that we have no need to speak a

88 Pace Green, 104, who takes it as referring to the preceding “the word of the Lord,” i.e., to the gospel. 89 Pace Wanamaker, 83, and Fee, 44. 90 So Malherbe, 131. 91 So Malherbe, 118.

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 166

7/12/23 11:28 AM

Comment 167 word” (for χρείαν ἔχειν with infinitive, cf. 4:9; 5:1). Surely this does not mean that, seeing that the readers’ faith is well-­k nown in Macedonia, Achaia, and elsewhere and that the gospel has spread in all those places, Paul feels no need to preach the gospel in those places anymore.92 Rather, it means that he does not need to talk about the readers’ exemplary faith, as it is already well-­known everywhere and others are talking about it (v. 9). The whole clause is a rhetorical hyperbole employed to encourage the readers to hold on to their exemplary faith, and so it should not be taken literally as if it meant that he would not talk about the readers’ faith at all where it is already known. On a later occasion he thinks fit to boast to the Corinthian Christians about the faith of the churches of Macedonia (including Thessalonica), with special reference to their generous giving even amid severe affliction (2 Cor 8:1–5; cf. also 2 Thess 1:4). In fact, we may appreciate that, to heighten his praise for the readers’ faith, he employs wording that has the character of paraleipsis. This is a rhetorical device whereby a writer introduces a subject by saying that he does not need to deal with it but does then go on to mention the subject matter.93 Here the subject is the readers’ faith, which he then talks about in vv. 9–10 (and further in 2:1–16, where he gives a résumé of his apostolic eisodos that gave rise to their faith). 9 αὐτοὶ γὰρ περὶ ἡμῶν ἀπαγγέλλουσιν ὁποίαν εἴσοδον ἔσχομεν πρὸς ὑμᾶς, “for they themselves report concerning us what kind of entry we had to you.” The reason (γάρ) why Paul has no need to speak about the Thessalonians’ faith is because the believers in various provinces “themselves” (the emphatic αὐτοί) speak about it (this is the first reason; the second reason will be stated in 2:1). Yet surprisingly he first refers to what they say περὶ ἡμῶν (“about us”),94 what kind of entry (εἴσοδος) he and his missionary colleagues had to the Thessalonians, before referring to the actual content of the Thessalonians’ faith in vv. 9b–10. Some commentators95 do note this “surprising” fact, but unfortunately they neglect to ask why he is doing this, just as they and other commentators neglect to ask how the καθὼς οἴδατε clause in 1:5b is related to the ὅτι clause in 1:5a (see the comment ad loc). So they fail to note that he is here emphatically resuming the theme of his entry from 1:5b.96 With this emphatic resumption of that theme here in the midst of praising the readers’ faith, Paul clearly indicates that his paramount concern is about his entry or the readers’ perception of it. The parallelism in 2:1 and the emphatic position of περὶ ἡμῶν indicate 92 Pace Green, 104–5. 93 Cf. Weima, 106. 94 Here we are not to read ὑμῶν, which is supported by only a few, mostly very late manuscripts; see Notes k. above; Best, 81, prefers ἡμῶν as lectio difficilior. 95 Marshall, 56; Holtz, 54; Wanamaker, 84. 96 Fee, 45, represents an exception, but he just suggests Paul’s apologetic motif as an explanation.

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 167

7/12/23 11:28 AM

168

1 Thessalonians 1:2–10

that Paul uses the word εἴσοδος here in its active sense of “entry” or “visit,”97 rather than its passive sense of “reception” (NIV) or “welcome” (NRSV; NAB; NASB).98 In fact, Winter regards εἴσοδος here and in 2:1 as a quasi-­technical term for the visit of sophists and orators to a city in accordance with a well-­ established convention (see below on 2:1–12).99 Whether it is a quasi-­technical term or not, it cannot be denied that here and in 2:1 Paul uses the word to refer to his whole visit to Thessalonica rather than just the act of entering the city, and he has especially his manner and conduct during his visit in view, as 1:5b and 2:2–12 show. Hence, the prepositional phrase πρὸς ὑμᾶς attached to εἴσοδος here and again in 2:1 is to be rendered more inclusively with “among you” rather than narrowly with “toward you.” Just as here (1:8b–9b) Paul lets the readers’ “faith” (v. 8b) stand for both his entry (v. 9a) and their faith (vv. 9b–10), so also in 3:6–7 he lets their “faith” (3:7) stand for both their faith (3:6b, “your faith and love”) and his entry (or their appreciation of it: “your kind memory of us and longing for us,” 3:6c; see comment on 3:6–7 below). Here we have the second of five occurrences of the combination of Paul’s εἴσοδος and the Thessalonians’ faith (or the success of the gospel; see also 1:5–6; 2:1, 13; 3:6–7). His εἴσοδος and the Thessalonians’ faith are bound up inseparably together. Having indicated in 1:5 with the καθώς clause that the manner of his entry was a cause for the success of the gospel with the Thessalonians, Paul implies the same here by making the emphatic clause (“for they themselves report concerning us what an entry we had toward you”) precede the reference to the Thessalonians’ wonderful conversion: “and how you turned to God from idols to serve a living and true God.” What does it mean that the people of Macedonia, Achaia, and elsewhere who have received the report of the Thessalonians’ faith talk about the manner of Paul’s εἴσοδος as well as their conversion? Does it not suggest that the Thessalonian Christians themselves had pointed to the manner of his εἴσοδος while sharing their faith with relatives, friends, and others whom they met? It appears that since they were so impressed by the manner of Paul’s εἴσοδος as to accept his message, the gospel, they praised its excellence (its holiness and righteousness; cf. 2:10) in their efforts to persuade those people to accept the gospel also. In other words, they used the manner of his εἴσοδος as an evangelistic tool. In vv. 9b–10 the report of the faith of the readers is succinctly summarized. Many scholars used to think that Paul is here citing a form of early Christian missionary preaching to the gentiles100 or a pre-­Pauline hymn or 97 Cf. Malherbe, 118, who also points to Acts 13:24; Heb 10:19; 2 Pet 1:11 for further support; Green, 105; Weima, 107. 98 Cf. Fee, 45. 99 Winter, “Entries,” 57–60. 100 E.g., Wilckens, Missionsreden, 81–91; Best, 85–87; Richard, 53–58.

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 168

7/12/23 11:28 AM

Comment 169 creedal formula,101 but recently more commentators have come to affirm the Pauline character of the passage.102 Our observations below will confirm that the report of the faith of the readers here is a genuine echo or summary of Paul’s gospel that the Thessalonians accepted, that is, the gospel that Paul preached to them during his founding mission in Thessalonica as to others in other places.103 ἐπεστρέψατε πρὸς τὸν θεὸν ἀπὸ τῶν εἰδώλων δουλεύειν θεῷ ζῶντι καὶ ἀληθινῷ, “you turned to God from idols to serve the living and true God.” In the LXX, ἐπιστρέφειν (to “turn”) usually translates ‫ׁשוב‬, which, when used in religious sense, means “to convert.”104 With the Septuagintal term, then, this clause speaks about the Thessalonians’ conversion. The term is frequently used in Acts (3:19; 9:35; 11:21; 14:15; 15:19; 26:18, 20; 28:27) in the same sense of conversion as here,105 but within Paul’s letters it appears only in two more passages, 2 Cor 3:16 (a reference to Exod 34:34) and Gal 4:9. However, its relative paucity in his letters should not be adduced as an argument for a non-­Pauline origin of our verse (see the comparison between this verse and Gal 4:8–9 below). For it can naturally be accounted for by the fact that in his letters Paul is usually concerned not about reporting of his initial gospel preaching to the recipients but rather about imparting further teaching to them as those who have already converted by accepting the gospel that he had preached. The term εἴδωλον (“idol”) is the word developed in the LXX both for pagan gods and for their images and conveys the sense that a pagan god is no more a real god than its image. In Acts 17:1–9, Luke gives the impression that the Thessalonian converts were mainly Jews and God-­fearers. But the formulation in this verse as well as the term συμφυλέται in 1 Thess 2:14 is often taken to indicate that, on the contrary, the Thessalonian church was composed only of former pagans (see comment ad loc). Indeed, most of its members may have been converts from paganism. But still it could have contained a minority of Jewish members. Note how Paul uses similar expressions for the Corinthian and the Galatian churches, even though they certainly contained a minority of Jews and God-­ fearers (1 Cor 12:2; Gal 4:8). So this clause in our verse does not exclude the presence of a minority of Jews and God-­fearers in the Thessalonian church.106 In fact, the clause could be quite properly used for Christian converts from

101 102 103 104 105

E.g., Friedrich, “Tauflied,” 502–16; Collins, “Paul’s Early Christology,” 253–84. E.g., Holtz, 54–62; Wanamaker, 84–86; Malherbe, 118–19; Weima, 115–18. See further Kim, “Jesus the Son of God as the Gospel,” in PGTO, 45–66. Cf. Bertram, TDNT 7:723–25. Note esp. Acts 14:15, where Paul is represented as having called the gentiles at Lystra to “turn from” idolatry “to a living God.” 106 Cf. Taylor, “Who Persecuted,” 794–95; pace Vos, Church, 144–47, who takes the phrase as indicating that the Thessalonian church was composed entirely of native Thessalonians and no Jewish or other ethnic persons were included.

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 169

7/12/23 11:28 AM

170

1 Thessalonians 1:2–10

among former God-­fearers, for formerly they had not been converts (proselytes) to the God of the Bible,107 but often remained in their idolatrous practices despite their attraction to Judaism.108 Whereas Luke reports only of the evangelistic efforts of Paul and his colleagues in the synagogue for three sabbaths, they seem to have carried out more evangelization among pagans in Thessalonica after they were driven out of the synagogue. Even during the initial weeks, they seem to have evangelized pagans while working at a workshop during weekdays (cf. 1 Thess 2:9). See Introduction, section I.3.B. θεῷ ζῶντι καὶ ἀληθινῷ, “to a living and real God.” The same expression appearing in Jos. Asen. 11.10 (cf. also Jer 10:10 MT), this designation reflects Jewish insistence on monotheism against heathen idolatry. Describing God as “living” (ζῶν) is a frequent OT-­Jewish practice (Num 14:21, 28; Deut 5:26; 32:40; Ps 42:2; Hos 1:10; Sir 18:1; Jub. 21.3–4; etc.), which is continued in the NT (Matt 16:16; Acts 14:15; Heb 3:12; 1 Pet 1:23; Rev 1:18; Paul also: 2 Cor 3:3; cf. 1 Tim 3:15). God as “real” (ἀληθινός) is also LXX language (Exod 34:6; 2 Chr 15:3; Ps 85:15 [86:15 MT]; Isa 65:16; Wis 12:27; Josephus, Ant. 11.55; Sib. Or. 5.499; etc.). But it occurs only here in the Pauline corpus (cf. Rom 3:4, where Paul speaks of God as being ἀληθής [“true”] to mean that he always speaks the truth). Breytenbach notes that in the OT-­Jewish tradition the designation “living God” is frequently used to underline the victorious or saving power of Israel’s God over against the impotent idols, and that the expression “true (often in association with the adjective ‘living’ as here) God” usually appears in the context of confrontation with pagan polytheism.109 It is quite understandable that in preaching to the polytheistic and idolatrous Thessalonians, Paul stressed that the God of Israel, the creator and ruler of all, who raised his Son Jesus, was the only “living and true God” and demanded their repentance or “turning” from idols to him (cf. 1 Cor 8:5–6), as Luke illustrates with his accounts of Paul’s preaching to the polytheistic and idolatrous Lystrans and Athenians (Acts 14:15–17; 17:22–31). For the anarthrous construction θεῷ ζῶντι here, cf. Acts 14:15; Rom 9:26; 2 Cor 3:3; 6:16; 1 Tim 3:15; 4:10; Heb 3:12; 9:14 (reminiscent of our present formula); 10:31; 12:22; 1 Pet 1:23. There is only one God who, by contrast with idols, can be described as a “living (and true) God”; hence there is no danger of misunderstanding in the absence of the article. Because he alone is the “living God,” he alone is “real” (ἀληθινός). δουλεύειν, “serve.” This infinitive specifies the first of the two purposes or results of the readers’ conversion: they came to “serve” God. The LXX

107 See Riesner, Early Period, 349; Tellbe, Paul, 91–92. 108 See Blumenthal, “Was sagt,” 96–105, and the authors cited in pp. 102–4, i.e., Siegert, “Gottesfürchtige,” 163; Lieu, “God-­Fearers,” 334; Reynolds and Tannebaum, Jews and Godfearers, 65. 109 Breytenbach, “Danksagungsbericht,” 13–17.

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 170

7/12/23 11:28 AM

Comment 171 commonly renders the verb ‫ עבד‬used for service of God in the Hebrew OT with λατρεύειν or δουλεύειν, and it appears that while with the former the focus is on a sense of worship, with the latter it conveys a sense of dependence and service or obedience with total commitment.110 Apparently Paul also chooses δουλεύειν here in order to express the moral dimension of obeying God’s will and pleasing him beyond the basic sense of worshiping. A comparison of our verse with Phil 3:3 and Rom 6:6–23 supports this interpretation. In Phil 3:3, focusing only on the worship of God, Paul says: “We are the true circumcision who worship [λατρεύοντες] God in Spirit.” But in Rom 6:6–23 (cf. also Rom 7:25; 12:1–2), giving another explanation of Christian conversion and using the vocabulary of δουλεύειν/δοῦλος, he makes a running contrast between the old Adamic self that “served” (personified) sin as its “slave” for unrighteousness and the redeemed new self that now serves God as his “slave” for righteousness.111 The Thessalonian Christians who used to serve idols as gentiles (cf. Gal 4:8) have converted to the true or real God, namely, the God of Israel, in order to do what the nation Israel was called to do (e.g., Judg 10:6–16; 1 Sam 7:3–4; Jer 13:10) as God’s “servant” or “slave” (δοῦλος; Isa 48:20; 49:3). While the Jews are failing to serve God since they are persecuting his church and so “displeasing God” (1 Thess 2:14–16), the Thessalonian gentile believers who have newly been “chosen” and “called” to belong to God’s holy people (1:4; 2:12; 4:7; 5:24) have come to “serve” God by “living in a manner worthy of God” (2:12) and obeying his will for their sanctification (4:1–8; 5:23–24). Therefore, while threatening the Jews with God’s wrath (2:16), Paul assures the readers of deliverance from it through the atoning death of Christ Jesus at the last judgment (1:10; 5:9–10). In part 2 of the main body of this letter (4:1–5:24), he will instruct the readers more as to how they ought to serve God in their daily life through faith, love, and hope.112 Our v. 9b represents a succinct formulation of Christian conversion. In Gal 4:8–9 Paul unfolds this formula a little in order to warn the Galatian Christians not to reverse their “conversion” from idols to the true God: “Formerly, when you did not know God, you served [ἐδουλεύσατε] the beings that by nature are no gods; but now that you have come to know God, or rather to be known by God, how can you turn [ἐπεστρέφετε] back to the weak and beggarly elemental spirits and want to serve [δουλεύειν] them all over again?” (cf. also Gal 4:3). The close correspondence between this explanation of the Galatian Christians’ “conversion” from idols to God and that of the Thessalonian Christians in our verse includes the two key verbs, ἐπιστρέφειν

110 Cf. K. H. Rengstorf, TDNT 2:265–68; H. Stratmann, TDNT 4:60; Westermann, ThWAT 2:200. 111 Cf. Best, 83; Marshall, 58; Green, 108. 112 Cf. Holtz, 61.

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 171

7/12/23 11:28 AM

172

1 Thessalonians 1:2–10

and δουλεύειν, and the contrast between idols (the false or unreal gods) and the real God, as well as the implications of the converted gentiles as God’s elect people (cf. Paul’s description of the Galatian Christians as those who “have come to know God,” or rather those who “are known by God,” with his designation of the Thessalonian Christians who have “turned to God,” as God’s “elect” people who “are beloved by God” in 1 Thess 1:4; see comment ad loc). This close correspondence belies all the attempts to see ἐπιστρέφειν as a non-­Pauline term and our vv. 9b–10 as a citation from a pre-­Pauline source (see below). 10 ἀναμένειν τὸν υἱὸν αὐτοῦ ἐκ τῶν οὐρανῶν, “to wait for his Son from heaven.” This infinitive phrase specifies the second result of the readers’ conversion: they came to have a strong hope for the eschatological redemption through God’s Son. The expectation of the coming of Christ is a constant element in the early Christian message. Apparently Paul stressed it during his founding mission in Thessalonica, so much so that with their fervent hope for it the readers developed some questions and anxieties with some aspects of it. Hence, in this letter, while continuing to emphasize it (cf. 2:19; 3:13; 5:23, besides 1:3, 10), he gives some further instructions about it (4:13–18; 5:1–11; cf. also 2 Thess 1–2). Paul speaks of “waiting” for Christ’s parousia and consummation of salvation elsewhere also, but uses ἀποδέχεσθαι for it (Rom 8:23; 1 Cor 1:7; Gal 5:5; Phil 3:20). Here the plural ἐκ τῶν οὐρανῶν, “from the heavens,” apparently reflects the Semitic usage (cf. also 2 Cor 5:1; Phil 3:20). But later in 4:16 the singular form is used (cf. 2 Thess 1:7; also 1 Cor 15:47; 2 Cor 5:2; Gal 1:8), apparently with no difference in meaning. It is assumed in our phrase that the risen Christ Jesus is at present with God as his “Son” in heaven. So our phrase, with Jesus’s title “[God’s] Son” and the following relative clause “whom he raised from the dead,” implies the thought of the risen Christ Jesus’s exaltation to God’s right hand as his Son or the “Lord” in fulfillment of Ps 110:1, the thought that is expressed in the Jerusalem church’s gospel cited in Rom 1:3–4 (cf. also 1 Cor 15:23–28; Phil 2:9–11; 3:20–21). It is expected that Christ Jesus the exalted Son of God is to come from God’s presence in glory. To wait for him has ethical implications: those who wait are bound to live a holy life so as to be ready to meet him or to stand before him (cf. 1 Thess 2:12; 3:12–13; 4:6; 5:6–8, 23). ὃν ἤγειρεν ἐκ [τῶν] νεκρῶν, “whom he raised from the dead.” In the Pauline corpus ἐγείρειν, “to raise,” whether in the active voice (with God as subject) or in the passive (divine passive), is the most common verb denoting resurrection, whether Christ’s or his people’s. The transitive forms of ἀνιστάναι (“to raise”) are not found in Paul; for its intransitive forms (“to rise,” frequent in this sense in Acts), see 4:14, 16 below. Noting both the frequency and remarkable nature of identifying the God of Israel as the one “who raised Jesus from the dead” (cf. Rom 4:24; 6:4; 8:11 [2x]; 10:9; 1 Cor 6:14; 2 Cor 4:4; Gal 1:1; Col 2:12; Eph

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 172

7/12/23 11:28 AM

Comment 173 1:20), Fee approvingly quotes H. Küng: “ ‘he who raised Jesus from the dead’ becomes practically the designation of the Christian God.”113 Paul usually uses the title “Lord” in connection with the themes of Christ’s exaltation and parousia.114 So the use of the title “(God’s) Son” here may appear unusual. But by way of reporting what people in Macedonia and Achaia speak about the Thessalonians’ faith, Paul is in fact reporting in a summary form the gospel that he himself preached to them and they accepted and believed. And, as suggested above, it closely parallels the Jerusalem church’s confession that Paul cites as “God’s gospel . . . concerning his Son” in Rom 1:3–4 and unfolds in 1 Cor 15:23–28 (see Introduction, section I.4.A).115 We shall show presently that the reference to the death of God’s Son here implicitly affirms its atoning nature. See comment on 5:9–10 below for the likelihood that, by formulating “his Son, whom he raised from the dead” here, Paul is conscious of the giving-­up formula, “God delivered/gave up [παρέδωκεν] his Son (and raised him up),” as he is in Rom 4:24–25, where he elaborates on the similar phrase “(God) who raised [ἐγείραντα] Jesus our Lord from the dead,” with the giving-­up formula “who was delivered [παρεδόθη] and was raised [ἠγέρθη].” Thus our v. 10 contains in an abbreviated form all the essential points of the gospel of Christ that Paul preached: Jesus’s atoning death, resurrection and exaltation as God’s Son in heaven, and future parousia for our redemption at the last judgment.116 Note also the parallelism between our passage and 2 Cor 1:18–20. Just as, in our passage, Paul suggests that in Thessalonica he preached the gospel focused on Jesus the Son of God, so also in the Corinthians passage with the emphatic phrase, “the Son of God, Jesus Christ [ὁ τοῦ θεοῦ γὰρ υἱὸς Ἰησοῦς Χριστός], who was preached by us among you,” he suggests that he did the same in Corinth. Thus, in both gentile cities, Thessalonica and Corinth, as well as in Pisidian Antioch according to Luke (Acts 13:16–47; see section I.4.A in the Introduction),117 Paul faithfully carried out God’s commission that he had received on the Damascus road. This commission (ἀφορίσας . . . καὶ καλέσας) was “to preach [God’s] Son as the gospel among the gentiles” (Gal 1:15–16; cf. Acts 9:20), “the gospel of God” concerning “the seed of David”/ “the Son of God” that Paul “was called” [κλητός] and “set apart” [ἀφωρισμένος] as an apostle to preach among all the gentiles (Rom 1:1–5). Ἰησοῦν τὸν ῥυόμενον ἡμᾶς ἐκ τῆς ὀργῆς τῆς ἐρχομένης, “[namely] Jesus who delivers us from the coming wrath.” The name Ἰησοῦς (“Jesus”) underscores 113 114 115 116

Fee, 47, quoting H. Küng, On Being a Christian (Garden City, NY: Doubleday, 1976), 36. Cf. Kramer, Christ, 173–76. See also Kim, “Jesus the Son of God as the Gospel,” in PGTO, 45–66. See Kim, “Jesus the Son of God as the Gospel,” in PGTO, 49–63, where it is shown that Paul sees all these points as focused on or abbreviated in the title “the Son of God”; see also comment on 5:10 below for an explanation as to why, of the three moments of Christ’s saving work, Paul focuses in our verse on his future parousia; cf. 4:14; 5:9–10. 117 See also Kim, “Gospel That Paul Preached,” section 2 (PGTO, 67–71).

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 173

7/12/23 11:28 AM

174

1 Thessalonians 1:2–10

the identity of the risen and coming Son of God with Jesus of Nazareth (cf. 4:14; Rom 8:11; 2 Cor 4:5, 10–11, 14; 11:4; Gal 6:17; Eph 4:21, where also “Jesus” unaccompanied by a title appears to refer to the historical Jesus). The name of the historical Jesus needed to be used here to identify who the “Son” of God is. Another christological title such as “Christ,” “Lord,” or otherwise would not fulfill this function. He whom the Thessalonian Christians await as the eschatological deliverer from heaven is not a mythical figure but a concrete historical figure, Jesus who died and was raised in Jerusalem about twenty years prior to Paul’s writing of this letter to them. “The coming wrath” is the divine judgment to be poured out on the wicked at the time of the end (cf. Rom 2:2–9; 2 Thess 1:6–10; also ἀπὸ τῆς μελλούσης ὀργῆς in the preaching of John the Baptist, Matt 3:7; Luke 3:7). Best sees in the emphatic position of the phrase τῆς ἐρχομένης an implication that the day of wrath is not far away.118 The appearance here of the concept of ὀργή in the summary of the readers’ faith, its two more references in the letter (2:16; 5:9), and the correspondence between 1:10 and 5:9 all suggest that God’s wrath was an important part of Paul’s proclamation of the gospel in Thessalonica. He proclaimed the good news of salvation in terms of deliverance from God’s eschatological wrath. However, thinking that anger is unworthy of the biblical God of love, some modern theologians try to marginalize it in Paul’s thinking or reinterpret it in terms of an impersonal process of retribution (sin reaping its own reward) in the moral universe. This kind of reinterpretation may be possible for a deist, but not for a theist who believes in a personal God and his judgment. Clearly Paul was not the former but the latter. However, the salutary contribution of this debate is to ward off an understanding of God’s wrath in terms of an emotional, arbitrary passion. For us it may be difficult to hold God’s love and his wrath together. But “the Bible sees no tension between them. It is perfectly consistent for God to display his holy and righteous character by judging sinners if they persist in their sin and at the same time by loving them to the limit in giving his Son to be their Savior from sin and its consequences.”119 The thought in our vv. 9–10 has close affinities with Paul’s preaching at Athens as presented by Luke (Acts 17:22–31), where, after pointing out to his hearers the folly of idolatry, he warns them of the urgent need for repentance in view of the fact that God “has fixed a day on which he will judge the world in righteousness by a man whom he has appointed, and of this he has given a pledge to all by raising him from the dead” (v. 31). There we find the same correlation as here between the resurrection/appointment of Jesus as God’s 118 Best, 84. 119 Marshall, 59. For a more detailed discussion of this problem, see Kim, “ ‘Beloved, Never Avenge Yourselves,’ ” in PGTO, 313–21.

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 174

7/12/23 11:28 AM

Comment 175 fully empowered agent (specified as his “Son” in our passage) and the judgment to come, as well as between idolatry and the divine judgment. The thought in our vv. 9–10 is also comparable to Rom 1:18–2:16. In Rom 1:18–32 Paul speaks of God’s ὀργή as already being revealed against the gentiles who have perverted their creaturely duty to serve the true God into serving idols and practicing all sorts of evil, in that they reap in their present life the natural fruit of their misconduct. Then, addressing the Jews who pass judgment on those gentile idolaters and evildoers, he charges them with doing “the very same things” for which they criticize the idolatrous gentiles (Rom 2:1–3). Then he calls them to “repentance” (μετάνοια, “turn back,” “return”),120 warning that with their “hardened heart” they “are storing up wrath” for themselves on “the day of wrath and revelation of God’s righteous judgment” (Rom 2:4–9). Thus the concepts of God’s wrath and repentance (or turning) connect our vv. 9–10 with Rom 1:18–2:16. However, there are yet more parallelisms to be observed between our vv. 9–10 and Romans. The short summary in our vv. 9–10 of the gospel that the Thessalonians received from Paul and were now testifying to others refers to the death and resurrection of Jesus, God’s Son, as well as to the assurance that Jesus will deliver them from God’s wrath at the last judgment at his parousia. However, it does not contain an explanation as to how God’s Son Jesus would do this—­something that Paul must have given the Thessalonians while preaching the gospel to them to make his gospel intelligible or convincing. But, in fact, 4:14 and 5:9–10 suggest that in preaching the gospel of the death and resurrection of Jesus God’s Son to the Thessalonians, Paul explained to them the atoning nature of his death (see comments ad loc). This leads us to Rom 5:6–10, which affirms the atoning death of God’s Son, Jesus Christ.121 Rom 5:6–10 is a recapitulation of the gospel that Paul proclaimed in the preceding 3:21–30. Right up to Rom 3:20, he continued with the warning that he imparted in 1:18–2:16, namely, that all human beings, both Greeks and Jews, were under the power of sin and were unrighteous, so that God’s wrath awaited them at the final judgment. But then he declared the gospel that God’s righteousness had been revealed in and through the atoning death of Christ, so that all who believe in Christ, Jew or gentile, might obtain God’s justification (3:21–30). Then, recapitulating in Rom 5:6–10 this gospel in terms of God’s demonstration of his love for them in and through Christ’s vicarious death for them, the ungodly sinners, Paul draws out the assurance that therefore they shall obtain their salvation from God’s wrath through the atoning death and (resurrection) life of God’s Son, Jesus Christ (v. 10). 120 Cf. Behm, TDNT 4:991–92, who sees in the LXX a relation in meaning between μετανοέω and ἐπιστρέφω, although the former translates ‫ נחם‬but never ‫ׁשוב‬. 121 Cf. Marshall, 59.

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 175

7/12/23 11:28 AM

176

1 Thessalonians 1:2–10

Thus in Rom 5:8–10, just as in our 1 Thess 1:10, Paul declares that God’s Son, Jesus, who died and was raised, will deliver them from God’s wrath at the last judgment. In the Romans passage he explains that “the death of [God’s] Son” Jesus Christ has this saving power because as an atoning sacrifice for sinners, it has wrought their justification and reconciliation with God (v. 10a). But he passes over explaining how “his [i.e., the Son’s resurrection] life” will effect their salvation from God’s wrath (v. 10b). However, we can see him providing the necessary explanation at the conclusion of his exposition of the gospel in Rom 8:31–34: salvation (from God’s condemnation, cf. Rom 8:1, 34) at the last judgment will be wrought through the intercession of the risen and exalted Christ Jesus, God’s Son, on the basis of his atoning death for his people. Thus it is reasonable to see Paul implicitly affirming or abbreviating this thought of Rom 4:25, 5:6–10, and 8:31–34 in his short summary of his gospel in our v. 10, in his reference here to the death and resurrection of God’s Son, Jesus, who will deliver his people from God’s wrath at the last judgment.122 Note also the parallelisms that Hengel and Schwemer observe between our passage and Romans.123 They appreciate the common designation of Christ as the deliverer (ὁ ῥυόμενος) in our v. 10 and in Rom 11:26 as well as the common appearance of the concept of God’s wrath here and in Romans (1:18; 2:5, 8; 3:5; 4:15; 5:9; 9:22; 12:19; 13:4–5). They also find the stress on God’s “election” in our v. 4 and in the rest of 1 Thessalonians (2:12; 4:7; 5:24; cf. also 5:9–10) comparable to what Paul does in Romans (9:11–12; 11:7, 28). In Rom 11:26 Paul refers to Christ as ὁ ῥυόμενος in the quotation from Isa 59:20 in order to affirm Christ’s deliverance of Israel at his parousia through forgiveness of sins, which will fulfill the promise contained in God’s gracious election of them as his people. Having applied in our v. 4 God’s “election” to the gentile believers in Thessalonica—­the keyword indicating Israel as the chosen people of God—­in our v. 10 Paul now applies to the former pagan idolaters the same eschatological salvation—­Christ’s “deliverance” from God’s wrath, that is, forgiveness and justification, at the last judgment—­that is promised to Israel. So, Hengel and Schwemer see here Paul preaching his gospel of “ justification of the godless” (Rom 4:5) as in Romans. All these multiple parallels between our vv. 9–10 and Romans suggest that in Thessalonica Paul preached essentially the same gospel of deliverance of believers in Christ as God’s elect people from God’s wrath (i.e., justification) at the last judgment through Christ’s atoning death on the cross and intercession at the right hand of God at his parousia.124 122 For more details and exegetical justification, see Kim, “Jesus the Son of God as the Gospel,” in PGTO, 49–54. 123 Hengel and Schwemer, Paul, 305–7. 124 Cf. Kim, “Gospel That Paul Preached,” in PGTO, 67–131; see also comment on 2 Thess 1:5–12 and 2:9–14 below, as well as Kim, “Paul’s Doctrine of Justification in 2 Thessalonians 1–2,” in PGTO, 279–95.

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 176

7/12/23 11:28 AM

Explanation 177 Our vv. 9–10 suggest that during his mission in Thessalonica Paul preached this gospel, warning his heathen hearers in terms similar to what he writes in Rom 1:18–2:16, or to what he is represented as having done in Athens (Acts 17:22–31). The Thessalonian Christians responded to such preaching of Paul by repentance from their idolatry and by turning to the living and true God. As they have come to serve God and put faith in his Son, Jesus, who died for them and was raised up and exalted in heaven, they can now confidently expect that for them the last judgment will not be God’s wrath but rather deliverance from it. Hence they wait (too eagerly—­see 4:13–5:11!) for the coming of God’s Son, who will consummate their salvation (cf. 5:9–10). On the question of whether the proclamation of Jesus as God’s Son could have also aimed at subverting the Roman emperor’s claim to a similar title, see my essays, “Is Paul Preaching a Counter-­Imperial Gospel in 1 Thessalonians?” and “Paul and the Roman Empire.”125 Yet in our present context we may wonder how the Thessalonian Christians’ expectation of Jesus, God’s Son, coming to deliver them from God’s wrath at the last judgment could have been perceived as challenging the Roman emperor’s claim or subverting his empire.

Explanation Our exegesis above has laid bare the following structure of this first thanksgiving section of 1:2–10, which helps us follow the logical flow of Paul’s thoughts in it. 2

We give thanks to God always for you, mentioning you constantly in our prayers, 3  remembering your work of faith and labor of love and endurance of hope, 4  knowing your election, brothers and sisters beloved by God,

because our gospel came to you not only in word but also in the power of the Holy Spirit (and so you accepted it—­this implication made explicit 5

in v. 6b),

as you know what kind of persons we were [among] you for your sakes  (i.e., what kind of entry [mission] we had among you for your sakes) 6and you became imitators of us and of the Lord, accepting the word in much affliction, with the joy of the Holy Spirit, 7  so that you became an example to all the believers in Macedonia and Achaia. 125 In my PGTO, respectively 217–22 and 223–51.

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 177

7/12/23 11:28 AM

178

1 Thessalonians 1:2–10 8  For from you the word of the Lord has sounded out not only in Macedonia and Achaia, but your faith toward God (a summary reference to the content of v. 6, esp. v. 6b) has gone forth everywhere (and so was well-­k nown to them all), so that we need not say anything. 9For they themselves report concerning us what kind of entry we had toward you,  and how you turned to God from idols to serve the living and true God, 10 and to wait for his Son from heaven, whom he raised from the dead, Jesus, who delivers us from the coming wrath. (2:1For you yourselves know, brothers and sisters, our entry to you, that it was not in vain)

For a proper appreciation of Paul’s thoughts in this passage, we need to keep in mind what happened during his mission in Thessalonica and what problems the readers are facing at present. When he and his colleagues first entered Thessalonica to preach the gospel, they were met with the opposition of the city’s populace. They accused them of enticing their people for material gain with a false teaching camouflaged in rhetoric, like so many other itinerant sophists and philosophers (2:1–12). However, some of the Thessalonian audience recognized that Paul and his missionary team clearly distinguished themselves from such orators through their impeccable eisodos or “entry” (i.e., their missionary manner and conduct), as well as their demonstration of the power of the Holy Spirit in the form of healing miracles. So they paid close attention to Paul’s message and, accepting it, gave up their traditional gods to serve the “living and true God” who raised Jesus from the dead for the redemption of the world. This report of the readers’ conversion, which Paul compactly summarizes in our passage (vv. 5–6) and later unfolds in 2:1–12, strongly suggests that the gospel is authenticated in the eyes of its audience not by the manifestation of the power of the Holy Spirit alone but also by its association with the integrity of the preachers’ “entry.” In many societies today where religious tradition remains a potent force, renunciation of one’s ancestral religion often causes ostracism and persecution from the family and the community, which sometimes threaten not only livelihood but also life itself. The problem was more serious in the ancient world since familial, social, and economical activities were much more intertwined with cultus. The way Paul formulates the gentile Christians’ conversion in our v. 9b and Gal 4:8–9, which represents the general biblical tradition, contains an absolute requirement for a total forsaking of pagan gods and a total devotion to the one true God of Israel, the Father of Jesus Christ, so that it leaves no room for the gentiles’ practice of adding a new god to their

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 178

7/12/23 11:28 AM

Explanation 179 pantheon in the Greco-­Roman world.126 So in Thessalonica, with their renunciation of ancestral gods as idols, the new Christian converts likely stayed away from the familial, social, and economical activities that were associated with the traditional cults, and their non-­Christian family, neighbors, and coworkers naturally resented it. Thus Christians came to suffer ostracism from their family and community and often lost their jobs as well. Furthermore, as Weima notes, non-­Christian inhabitants of Thessalonica may have feared that their gods would punish their city with disease or disaster for the Christians’ abandonment of their worship.127 Moreover, they might have feared that their city would lose its favored status with Rome for the Christians’ avoidance of participation in the imperial cult, which was often integrated with worship of local gods. So they drove Paul and his missionary team out of their city and persecuted the Christian converts (1:6; 2:14–16; 3:1–10; cf. Acts 17:1–10).128 After Paul’s forced departure from Thessalonica, the opponents of the Christian faith in Thessalonica kept up their campaign to dissuade the converts from their new faith by painting him as a charlatan philosopher or false prophet. Paul, deeply concerned about his converts suffering from such persecution and anxious that their young, immature faith might be shaken by such a slander campaign against him (3:3, 5, 10), sought to return to them several times, yet in vain (2:17–18). So he sent Timothy to them “in order to establish [them] firmly and encourage [them] in respect to [their] faith” (3:2). Timothy then returned to him with the good news that they were standing firm in faith and were remembering him kindly and longing to see him again (3:6), which meant that they were maintaining their positive appreciation of his missionary conduct (“entry”). Overjoyed by this news, Paul pours out his thanksgiving to God for their faith in the three thanksgiving sections of the epistle, each time combining his praise of their faith with a reference to his “entry” among them as the cause for their faith (1:5–6; 2:1–13; 3:6–10; for more details, see II.3 in the Introduction). So in this initial thanksgiving section of 1:2–10, which contains a summary of his thanksgiving that is further elaborated on twice in 2:1–3:10, Paul gives thanks to God for the fact that in the hostile environment of Thessalonica the gospel was powerfully preached with great success, thanks to the readers’ proper appreciation of his holy and righteous “entry” and their eager acceptance of the gospel (1:2a, 5–7). In doing this, in vv. 6–7 Paul stresses his thankfulness to God by highlighting three mutually related facts: that the readers joyfully accepted the gospel despite much affliction, that thus they have become imitators of Paul himself and the Lord, and that thereby in turn

126 Cf. Green, 106. 127 Weima, 108. 128 For more details about the pagan persecution of the Thessalonian believers and the likelihood of the Jewish incitement of it, see below the Explanation after 2:13–16.

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 179

7/12/23 11:28 AM

180

1 Thessalonians 1:2–10

they have become a model to all the believers in Macedonia and Achaia. With these three points, Paul praises the readers’ faith and then goes on to praise it still further by way of explaining how their faith has come to be widely known in Macedonia, Achaia, and beyond, so that the believers in those places could take them as their example (vv. 7–8). But he quickly returns to his main concern by quoting the report of the people in those provinces that reinforces his earlier statement about his impeccable “entry” (eisodos) and its result in the readers’ remarkable conversion and faith (vv. 9–10). Then, seeking the readers’ assent to that statement (2:1), he goes on to demonstrate the impeccable nature of his eisodos (2:2–12). Thus, in our vv. 5–10, while heaping up his praises for the readers’ exemplary faith and giving thanks to God for it, Paul repeatedly refers to his eisodos as its cause. In this way, he seeks to encourage the readers to maintain both their positive appreciation of his eisodos and their faith in the face of their opponents’ slander campaign and persecution. For this paraenetic purpose, Paul does not spare even hyperbole in praise of the readers’ faith. However, even with the hyperbole stripped away, the bare facts of his statements about their faith, namely, their joyful acceptance of the gospel and active and effective sharing of their faith with others in their hostile environment, still remain very impressive. So it is quite understandable that in two of the three participle phrases describing the attendant circumstances of his thanksgiving prayer (vv. 3–4), Paul summarizes their exemplary faith in terms of three graces, “the work of faith and labor of love and endurance of hope in our Lord Jesus Christ,” and takes it as evidence for their election by God as his beloved people. In the following sections of the epistle, Paul will go on both praising the readers for those three graces as well as encouraging them to build them up further. He will urge them to stand firm in their faith in the face of persecution, to build up a community of love, and to live a sanctified life in the fervent hope of their redemption at the parousia of the Lord Jesus Christ.

Faith and “the Work of Faith” It is striking that Paul designates one of the three graces as “the work of faith” (1:3). In fact, it is remarkable that in this short epistle Paul uses the word “faith” as many as twelve times (the noun πίστις in 1:3, 8; 3:2, 5, 6, 7, 10; 5:8; the verbal form πιστεύειν in 1:7; 2:10, 13; 4:14; cf. also nine times in 2 Thess 1:3, 4, 10 [2x], 11; 2:11, 12, 13; 3:2; cf. five times in Philippians, an epistle of similar length, and fifteen and ten times respectively in the much longer 1 Corinthians and 2 Corinthians), even repeatedly defining Christians simply with the absolute participial phrase τοῖς πιστεύουσιν, “those who believe,” the “believers” (1 Thess 1:7; 2:10, 13). By “faith” Paul fundamentally means acceptance of the preached gospel.129 129 Cf. R. Bultmann, TDNT 6:203, 208–10, 217.

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 180

7/12/23 11:28 AM

Explanation 181 This can be seen in 4:14, where he connects the verb “to believe” with the content of the gospel, namely, Christ’s death and resurrection, as its object, as he does in 1 Cor 15:1–5, 11 and Rom 10:10. In 1 Thess 2:13 he summarily designates the Thessalonian Christians’ acceptance of the gospel as their “faith.” Here in 1:6–8 he also seems to be doing the same as he makes their acceptance of “the word” with joy amid affliction their “becom[ing] an example to all the believers in Macedonia and Achaia,” and represents it simply as their “faith (in God).” As acceptance of the gospel, the good news of God’s saving work in Christ’s vicarious death and resurrection, faith enables the believing Thessalonians to acknowledge God as “the living and true God” (1:9), appropriate his salvation in Christ (4:14; cf. also 1:4; 2:12; 4:8; 5:5), and put their trust and hope in him for consummation of their salvation at Christ’s parousia (5:8–10). In this way as “believers” in God (1:7), they are distinguished from unbelievers, who “do not know God” (4:5), live in impurity (4:3–7), and will be condemned by God (4:6). Hence, Paul designates Christians simply as “believers” (1:7; 2:10, 13) and uses “faith” as a comprehensive designation for their Christian existence (3:2, 5, 6, 7, 10). Such emphasis on faith as the sole means of appropriating God’s salvation in Christ is the heart of “Paulinism,” the distinctive theology of Paul. It is remarkable that in this early (if not the earliest) epistle, his “Paulinism” appears so firmly established (cf. also 2 Thess 1:10, 11; 2:12, 13 with comments ad loc). It amazes all the more that Paul, the Jewish theologian turned Christian apostle, places all this emphasis on faith as the governing principle in a person’s relationship to God and his salvation while making no reference to the law or law keeping in the whole epistle. In the essay, “The Gospel That Paul Preached to the Thessalonians,”130 I have attempted to appreciate some implications of this fact. One of them is that, together with the conception of salvation in terms of deliverance from God’s wrath at the last judgment (1:10; 5:9–10; cf. also 3:12–13; 5:23–24; see comment on these texts below), it suggests the implicit presence of the Pauline doctrine of justification by faith (without works of the law) in this epistle. Since in Romans and Galatians Paul unfolds that doctrine by setting the “works (of the law)” in antithesis to faith, it may seem strange that here he joins the two concepts “work” and “faith” together and appreciatively refers to the readers’ “work of faith.” However, for Paul, precisely as acceptance of the gospel that announces God’s salvation wrought in his Son, Jesus Christ the Lord (Rom 1:2–4), faith includes such nuances as trust in God and in Jesus Christ and obedience to their reign or lordship (cf. esp. Rom 1:5; 10:9–13, 16).131 And justification granted to believers of the gospel is not just acquittal of sins but also restoration to a right relationship with God, which is really a redemption from the kingdom of Satan to the kingdom of God and his Son, who reigns 130 In PGTO, 67–131. 131 Cf. Bultmann, TDNT 6:208–22.

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 181

7/12/23 11:28 AM

182

1 Thessalonians 1:2–10

on behalf of God the Father at present (cf. Col 1:13–14). Thus Paul insists that only by faith, that is, only by accepting the gospel, does one appropriate that salvation. He is vehemently opposed to making human works or wisdom and knowledge (cf. 1 Corinthians) a means to justification or salvation instead of or alongside of faith in Christ. Yet Paul does stress that the faith that makes us righteous both demands and enables us through the Holy Spirit to render obedience to God and to Christ (“the obedience of faith,” Rom 1:5; 10:16; 16:26; 2 Cor 9:13; cf. also 2 Thess 1:8 with comment ad loc), fulfilling “the law of Christ” (1 Cor 9:21; Gal 6:2) or “the just requirement of the law” (Rom 8:4) and bearing “the fruit of righteousness” (Phil 1:11; cf. Rom 6:19–22), which is “the fruit of the Spirit” (Gal 5:22–23), with a view to God’s last judgment.132 Paul summarizes this whole doctrine in one phrase in Gal 5:6: “faith working through love.” So faith works, or it makes believers work.133 This short discussion on “faith” in 1 Thessalonians may be contrasted with N. K. Gupta’s discussion in his recent work, Paul and the Language of Faith.134 There, suspecting in the rendering of πίστις as “faith” by the majority of modern English translations of our letter “an ideological concern to preserve the nonworks, ‘passive-­r ighteousness’ theology that can be read into Paul’s anthropological use of πίστις,”135 Gupta argues to take the recurring πίστις language in the letter instead in the sense of “faithfulness” or “loyalty.” For this view, he discusses 1:3, 8; 3:2, 5, 6, 7, and 5:8 but strangely neglects 3:10. Furthermore, he completely ignores the passages (1:7; 2:10, 13; 4:14) where the verb πιστεύειν is used. It is difficult to imagine how one could read out of the absolutely used verb πιστεύειν (in its participial form) in 1:7; 2:10, 13 the sense of “being faithful” rather than “believing.” It is difficult also to understand why Gupta ignores 4:14, where the verb is used in the sense of “to accept” the gospel of Jesus’s death and resurrection like 1 Cor 15:1–2, where he grants its usage in that sense.136 Had he paid attention to 4:14, he would have noticed that the verb πιστεύειν in 2:13 likewise refers to the Thessalonians’ acceptance of Paul’s gospel as the word of God and that the verb πιστεύειν in 1:7 also has in view the Thessalonians’ acceptance of Paul’s gospel (1:5–6) as a model for other believers. Then he would have perhaps noticed that the Thessalonians’ πίστις in 1:8 refers to what is expressed by the verb πιστεύειν in the preceding verses (vv. 5–7) and that it is then explained in the following verses (vv. 9–10) in terms of how they came to convert to the true God and wait for the realization of the eschatological salvation promised in the gospel. Therefore, by πίστις in 1:8 Paul focuses primarily on the Thessalonians’ coming to belief

132 See Kim, Justification, 59–116, and idem, “Thessalonian Church,” in PGTO, 208–15. 133 See further Kim, “Gospel That Paul Preached,” in PGTO, 67–131. 134 Gupta, Paul and the Language of Faith, 79–85. 135 Gupta, Paul and the Language of Faith, 79n3. 136 Gupta, Paul and the Language of Faith, 96.

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 182

7/12/23 11:28 AM

Explanation 183 in the gospel, although it might be possible to argue that that faith includes their faithfulness, as it includes their “serving” God and “waiting” for his Son who will come to save them. Since the exhortation to maintain πίστις in 5:8 is supported by a reference to the gospel (5:9–10), we are to render it not with the narrow concept of “faithfulness” but with the broader concept of “faith” that includes belief, trust, and faithfulness. The Thessalonians are to hold on to their belief in the gospel and go on trusting in God who will save them. Since “faith” includes a sense of “obedience” in Pauline usage as we have seen above, in 1:3 clearly “work of faith” is a better rendering than an awkward “work of faithfulness/loyalty.” Clearly the πίστις in 3:10 refers to the Thessalonians’ total Christian existence, including their sanctification (4:1–12), their eschatological beliefs and hope (4:13–5:11), their communal life, and so on (5:12–22; see comment on 3:10 below), so that it would be a mistake to render it as “faithfulness.” It is unfortunate that Gupta does not recognize that the faith language in 3:2, 5, 6, 7, 10 is also fundamentally connected with Paul’s missionary εἴσοδος like that in 1:5–10 and 2:13, so that in them also it has the basic meaning of the Thessalonians’ belief in the gospel that Paul preached to them, as I am trying to show throughout this commentary.137 The only difference is that, whereas in 1:5–10 and 2:13 Paul uses the faith language in narrating how the Thessalonians came to believe in the gospel that he preached, in 3:2, 5, 6, 7, 10 he uses it in expressing his concern that they maintain that belief in the face of their persecutors who try to force them to give it up. Therefore, it is possible that in the latter (esp. in v. 7, where it appears connected with “standing fast in the Lord” in v. 8) we may overhear the sense of “faithfulness” conveyed in addition to the fundamental meaning “faith” or “belief” (cf. also 1:3 with comment ad loc). It is regrettable that Gupta discusses only a limited number of references to the faith language in 1 Thessalonians (1:8; 3:7; 5:8) and that he does so mainly in the light of the Hellenistic and Hellenistic-­Jewish usage of it but without serious appreciation of its fundamental Pauline usage for acceptance of or believing in the gospel (4:14; see Rom 10:9–17; 1 Cor 15:1–11; cf. also 2 Thess 1:10; 2:11–13),138 as well as of Paul’s peculiar connection of the faith language with his eisodos in this epistle.

Gentile Believers in Jesus Christ as God’s Holy People We have noted how remarkable it is that Paul applies to the (mostly gentile) Christians in Thessalonica the OT-­Jewish language of “election” (ἐκλογή) as God’s beloved people (1:4). Alongside it, Paul also speaks of God’s “call”

137 See esp. section II.3, “The Structure and Function of 1 Thessalonians 1–3,” in the Introduction. 138 Note Gupta’s extremely cursory treatment of “believing faith” in his book (Paul and the Language of Faith, 178–79).

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 183

7/12/23 11:28 AM

184

1 Thessalonians 1:2–10

(καλεῖν) of them into his kingdom and glory (2:12), to sanctification (4:7), and to consummation of salvation at the parousia of the Lord Jesus Christ (5:24; cf. also his predestination [ἔθετο] of them for salvation at the last judgment, 5:9–10). This emphasis on God’s call or election leads Becker to see a “theology of election” as the chief characteristic of the theology of our epistle.139 His claim that it functions as “the organizing coordinate system” of “all other statements” in the epistle seems somewhat exaggerated.140 However, it is still important to appreciate the significance of Paul’s emphasis on God’s election of the readers, who are former pagans, as God’s holy people destined to salvation, especially as the emphasis is based solely on their believing acceptance of the gospel (2:13; 4:14) and their conversion to God and faith in his Son Jesus (1:8–10), with no reference to their circumcision or their taking upon themselves the yoke of the law. This fact may also be seen as reflecting Paul’s doctrine of justification of “all” (πᾶς) by faith in the gospel of Christ alone without works of the law (cf. Rom 1:16–17; 3:22–23, 28–30; 10:9–13; Gal 3:25–29; see also comments on 2 Thess 1:10; 2:12 below). It is no wonder that the Jews in Thessalonica accused Paul of being a false prophet (see comment on 2:3–6) and hindered him from preaching the gospel to the gentiles (see comment on 2:15–16). It is then likely that in this epistle he stresses the readers having become God’s beloved, elect, and holy people to help them maintain their firm conviction in their new identity and their certain salvation as they face the Jewish campaign to denigrate him as a false prophet and them as less than the gentile proselytes of Jewish synagogues (cf. 3:2–3). They must stand firm in the Lord with that conviction (3:2–8) and are to live no longer a life of idolatry and immorality as the pagans of the world do. Instead they must live a life of sanctification as God’s elect people, as a people set apart from the world and consecrated to God as God’s “sanctified” people (2:12; 3:12–13; 4:1–7; 5:23). Thus Paul emphasizes the election of the Thessalonian believers to encourage them to maintain their faith and live a holy life in their hostile pagan environment with assurance of God’s love and salvation.

Conversion Fee notes the significance of our passage for understanding early Christian conversion and stresses that it was “an experienced reality” and that its “essential ingredients” were faith and the gift of the Holy Spirit.141 Indeed, our passage is unique in the Pauline epistles in providing insights about early Christian conversion in a concentrated form. It seems possible to look at the whole passage as providing the ingredients of Christian conversion (especially 139 Becker, Paul, 130–40. 140 Becker, Paul, 132. 141 Fee, 41.

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 184

7/12/23 11:28 AM

Explanation 185 among gentiles): acceptance of the gospel of Christ Jesus’s death and resurrection, renunciation of other gods to serve the one “living and true God,” faith in God’s Son who will come for their eschatological redemption, the experience of the Spirit endowed and the joy provided by the Spirit, endurance of hope in the Lord Jesus Christ, labor of love, and readiness to testify to their new faith even in a hostile environment. As these are the ingredients of the conversion of the Thessalonian believers whom Paul is eager to present as exemplary to other believers, it may not be possible to suggest that all early Christian converts had all these ingredients. Nevertheless, it may be suggested that at least Paul thought or hoped that all the converts should have them.

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 185

7/12/23 11:28 AM

2. Thanksgiving Unfolded (2:1–16) This section resumes and unfolds the thanksgiving of 1:2, 5–7. Formally it starts with a sentence providing the second reason, after the first reason (1:9–10), why Paul has “no need to say anything” (1:8). It is important to note the flow of the thought in this context (see II.3.A. in the Introduction): Paul does not need to say anything (1:8) for two reasons: •  “For they themselves report concerning our eisodos and your conversion” (1:9–10) •  “For you yourselves know our eisodos . . . that it was not in vain” (2:1) Paul’s eisodos explained (2:2–12) Paul’s response to this [the readers’ positive response to his eisodos] (2:13–16): •  “we also give thanks to God for this”—­i.e., for our excellent eisodos (2:2–12) and its wonderful result in your faith (2:13) Our section can be analyzed as follows: A. The Integrity of Paul’s Apostolic Entry (2:1–12)—­unfolding of 1:5 (a) The Thesis, and the Divine Commission (2:1–4) (b) Paul’s Apostolic Conduct (2:5–8) (c) Summing Up the Description of His Apostolic Entry (2:9–12) B. Thanksgiving Resumed for the Readers’ Acceptance of the Gospel amid Persecution (2:13–16)—­unfolding of 1:2, 6–7 (the motif of “imitation” as well)

A. The Integrity of Paul’s Apostolic Entry (2:1–12) Form/Structure/Setting Traditionally, 2:1–3:13 has been regarded as an apologetic section in which Paul defends his practices during his founding mission in Thessalonica (2:1– 12) and his present absence from the Thessalonians (2:17–3:10). It is supposed that such an apologia has been called for by the allegation of some opponents that Paul had insincere motives and displayed dishonest practices during his founding mission, as well as by the Thessalonians’ misunderstanding that his abrupt departure from them and his failure to return to them were his “desertion” of them in persecution.1 But in view of Paul’s appreciation of 1

Cf. Weima, 121–25, for a recent comprehensive representation of this view; see also his essay, “Apology.”

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 186

7/12/23 11:28 AM

Form/Structure/Setting 187 Timothy’s report that the readers maintain their friendly disposition toward him (Paul), as well as their positive memory of his ministry with them (3:6), this apologetic theory cannot be sustained as it is. Malherbe has shown many similarities of words and ideas between 2:1–12 and the writings of Hellenistic moral philosophers, especially Dio Chrysostom.2 Developing the views of Dobschütz and Dibelius,3 Malherbe denies any specific apologetic concern but rather emphasizes the philo­ phronetic and paraenetic intentions of Paul in our section. Rather than defending himself against any real charge, Paul is presenting himself in the form of a true moral philosopher to establish a friendly relationship with his readers for a good acceptance of his exhortations in 1 Thess 4–5, as well as to present himself as a model for their emulation. Recently this view has been adopted by a large number of scholars.4 Furthermore, some rhetorical critics seek to strengthen Malherbe’s view with their analysis of our section as narratio within an epideictic-­rhetorical piece of literature.5 Bruce Winter sees Paul similarly against the background of contemporary itinerant philosophers and yet strikes a somewhat different course from the scholars mentioned above. Winter argues that in our section Paul is contrasting his εἴσοδος (missionary entrance into a city) with that of sophists to prevent the Thessalonians from developing a worldly perception of his ministry similarly to the way the Corinthians did.6 Unfortunately, however, Winter, as well as Malherbe and his followers, fail to consider seriously enough the presence of the opponents who persecute the readers and actively try to dissuade them from their new faith, and so they fail to appreciate Paul’s grave anxiety that the readers’ faith might be shaken by their persecution (1:6; 2:14; 3:1–5). Paul’s intense and systematic demonstration of his apostolic integrity in our section would be overkill if it was meant only for establishing his ethos or credibility for the general, traditional, and noncontroversial moral exhortations in chs. 4–5 (or merely for preventing his readers from forming a worldly perception of his ministry). The lack of correlation between the content of our section and the exhortations in chs. 4–5 undermines the theory of Paul’s modeling in our section.7 Those who see the whole of 1 Thessalonians as a piece of epideictic rhetoric have the additional trouble of having to explain why in 2:1–12 Paul praises not the virtues of the readers but his own and allegedly sets himself up as a model for

2 Malherbe, Paul and the Thessalonians; idem, Paul and the Popular Philosophers, ch. 3. 3 Dobschütz, 106–7, and Dibelius, 7–11. 4 See the list in Weima, “Apology,” 77–79; Weima, 122. 5 E.g., Lyons, Pauline Autobiography, 178–221; Jewett, Correspondence, 71–78; Wanamaker, esp. 91–92; Schoon-­Janssen, Umstrittene “Apologien,” 39–65; Donfried, “Epistolary and Rhetorical Context,” 31–60; Witherington, 24–29, 76–83; etc. 6 Winter, “Entries,” 57–72. 7 See section II.3.C. in the Introduction; cf. also Green, 113.

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 187

7/12/23 11:28 AM

188

1 Thessalonians 2:1–12

them when he should be encouraging them to maintain their virtuous life by praising their virtues. For a proper interpretation of our section, we must take the following four facts into account: (1) Paul connects his εἴσοδος with the success of the gospel or the faith of the readers five times (1:5, 9–10; 2:1, 13; 3:6), implying that his εἴσοδος was a factor for their coming to accept the gospel; (2) his anxiety about the opponents shaking up the faith of the readers (3:1–10); (3) his demonstration of his apostolic integrity in contrast to the bad practices of the contemporary sophists or charlatan philosophers (2:1–12); and (4) the similarities between 1 Thess 1–3 and 2 Cor 1–7 in the tone, content, style, and occasion of his demonstration of his apostolic integrity.8 It becomes clear that Paul provides an emphatic and systematic demonstration of his apostolic integrity in our passage to consolidate the readers’ positive appreciation of it. This is necessary because the opponents are trying to persuade the readers to give up their faith in his gospel by denigrating him as a charlatan philosopher or false prophet who has bewitched them with rhetoric for financial gain. The opponents were mainly the readers’ pagan compatriots (including their relatives, friends, neighbors, coworkers, and city officials), who were disturbed by their withdrawal from the traditional family-­and city-­cults, which resulted in damaging their family and social ties. However, Paul apparently also saw some Jewish opponents adding ammunition for the pagan opponents in their persecution of the readers by labeling him as a false prophet.9 For Paul, it was really a situation of “the message stand[ing] or fall[ing] with the messenger.”10 Therefore, by rehearsing the integrity of his εἴσοδος in Thessalonica, he tries to help his readers withstand such a slander campaign against him and maintain their appreciation of him as a true apostle of Christ and a true bearer of God’s word. Beyond that, he also tries to help the readers use his impeccable εἴσοδος as a winning point in their evangelistic efforts. In this sense, then, in 1 Thess 1–3 as a whole and in 2:1–12 in particular, Paul provides a comprehensive apologetic for his apostolic ministry.11 Note also that our section stands in the middle of Paul’s five references to his εἴσοδος, that is, between the first two (1:5, 9–10) and the last two (2:13; 3:6). Thus it forms the center in the first of the two parts of this epistle, chs. 1–3, in which Paul stresses the theme that, through his impeccable εἴσοδος, the gospel was preached effectively and the readers have come to their firm faith in Christ. Since it is vital that the readers further maintain their positive appreciation of his εἴσοδος in the face of the opponents’ campaign to

8 9 10 11

See II.3 in the Introduction. So Holtz, 94; Tellbe, Paul, 98–99, 107–15. Holtz, 94. See section II.3.E in the Introduction; cf. Holtz, 93–94; Fee, 51–53, 55–56.

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 188

7/12/23 11:28 AM

Bibliography 189 denigrate it, he feels it necessary to demonstrate concretely at least once the impeccable nature of his εἴσοδος, and he does it at this central section. Here he systematically yet succinctly summarizes the features that demonstrate its integrity. By appealing repeatedly to the readers’ personal knowledge, memory, or witness of those features (2:1, 2, 5, 9, 10, 11), he tries to consolidate their positive appreciation of them. He first states his proposition (v. 1) and then makes a summary characterization of his εἴσοδος (v. 2) before elaborating on it in the subsequent verses (vv. 3–12). The demonstration is held in antitheses, and it is characterized by its serialization in a series of three (vv. 3, 5–6, 10, 12) and of two (vv. 6, 9, 10, 12). v. 1: the proposition v. 2: the summary description vv. 3–4: the principle of conduct of a true “prophet” commissioned by God with the gospel vv. 5–8: Paul’s apostolic conduct according to that principle as a true “prophet” in Thessalonica v. 9: substantiation of the foregoing (vv. 5–8) vv. 10–12: concluding summary

(a) The Thesis and the Divine Commission (2:1–4) Bibliography Horbury, W. “1 Thessalonians ii.3 as Rebutting the Charge of False Prophecy.” JTS 33 (1982): 492–508. Kim, S. “The Gospel That Paul Preached to the Thessalonians: Continuity and Unity of Paul’s Gospel in 1 Thessalonians and in His Later Epistles.” Pages 67–131 in PGTO. —­—­— ­. “Paul as an Eschatological Herald.” Pages 9–24 in Paul as Missionary: Identity, Activity, Theology, and Practice. Edited by T. J. Burke and B. S. Rosner. London: T&T Clark, 2011. Repr., pp. 355–71 in PGTO. Malherbe, A. J. “ ‘Gentle as a Nurse’: The Cynic Background to 1 Thess. II.” NovT 12 (1970): 203–17. —­—­— .­ Paul and the Thessalonians: The Philosophic Tradition of Pastoral Care. Philadelphia: Fortress, 1987. Sandnes, K. O. Paul—­One of the Prophets? WUNT 2/43. Tubingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1991. Winter, B. W. “The Entries and Ethics of the Orators and Paul (1 Thessalonians 2.1–12).” TynBul 44 (1993): 55–74. —­—­—­. “Is Paul among the Sophists?” RTR 53 (1994): 28–38. —­—­—­. Philo and Paul among the Sophists. SNTSMS 96. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1997.

Translation For you yourselves know our entry among you, brothers and sisters, that it was not in vain. 2But we had previously endured suffering and been shamefully treated, as you know, in Philippi, but we were emboldened in our God to speak out freely the word of God to you amid great struggle. 3Our appeal (message of encouragement) to you arose neither from error nor from impurity nora was it made by way of guile. 4No: as we have been approved by God to be entrusted with the gospel, so we speak: it is not human beings that we aim to please, but God,b who tests our hearts. 1

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 189

7/12/23 11:28 AM

190

1 Thessalonians 2:1–4

Notes a. οὐδέ, for which D2 byz et al. read οὔτε. b. θεῷ, to which the article τῷ is prefixed by ‫א‬2 A D2 F G Ψ byz et al.

Comment 2:1 αὐτοὶ γὰρ οἴδατε, ἀδελφοί, τὴν εἴσοδον ἡμῶν τὴν πρὸς ὑμᾶς, “for you yourselves know, brothers and sisters, our entry among you.” An appeal is made to what the readers already know, as in 1:5 (see comment ad loc). Commentators are usually at a loss as to where the γάρ here is connecting the present verse, and so, more or less ignoring it,12 they treat the following section as an entirely new section separate from the foregoing (narrowly conceived) “thanksgiving section” of 1:2–10. But in fact it is parallel to the γάρ of 1:9a and likewise refers back to 1:8, where Paul said that he has “no need to say anything” about the exemplary faith of the readers that has been brought about by his εἴσοδος. He has no such need “because they themselves” (the Macedonians, the Achaians, and others) speak about it (1:9a) and “because you yourselves” (the readers) know it.13 Thus the emphatic αὐτοί here is set in parallelism to the emphatic αὐτοί of 1:9a, and the αὐτοὶ γὰρ οἴδατε has the function of intensifying 1:9a: “not only the outsiders are reporting about our (successful) entry among you, but you yourselves know it.” So it is wrong for Malherbe to see here Paul “draw[ing] a contrast between what was generally known about his mission in Thessalonica [1:9a] and what his readers themselves know [2:1].”14 The phrase τὴν εἴσοδον ἡμῶν τὴν πρὸς ὑμᾶς, “our entry among you” (note the classical repetition of τήν before πρὸς ὑμᾶς, preserving that phrase in an attributive relationship to τὴν εἴσοδον) is another expression of ὁποίαν εἴσοδον ἔσχομεν πρὸς ὑμᾶς (1:9) and corresponds to οἷοι ἐγενήθημεν ἐν ὑμῖν (1:5). This shows that his εἴσοδος or missionary conduct is here the central concern, and what follows in 2:2–12 is an unfolding of the thought contained in the sentence οἷοι ἐγενήθημεν ἐν ὑμῖν (1:5). ὅτι οὐ κενὴ γέγονεν, “that it was not in vain.” Many commentators fail to note that the phrase τὴν εἴσοδον ἡμῶν τὴν πρὸς ὑμᾶς is the immediate object of the verb οἴδατε and the clause ὅτι οὐ κενὴ γέγονεν is an epexegetical object: “you yourselves know, brothers and sisters, our entry among you, that it was not in vain.” This failure usually leads them to render our verse in the manner of NRSV, NIV, and so on: “For you yourselves know, brethren, that our [entry among] you was not in vain.” But this rendering fails to bring out the emphatic position of τὴν εἴσοδον ἡμῶν τὴν πρὸς ὑμᾶς and the fact that his “entry” is Paul’s chief concern or main subject here. The perfect γέγονεν 12 Cf. NEB, NIV, and NJB that omit to translate it. 13 Cf. Fee, 51. 14 Malherbe, 135.

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 190

7/12/23 11:28 AM

Comment 191 “offers a verdict on the visit in the light of subsequent events: the visit had not proved to be in vain.”15 Questions surround Paul’s use of the word κενός here. Is it referring to the character of Paul’s mission as having been empty of substance, purpose, and power, or is it referring to its effect as having been fruitless? Paul uses the word frequently, but usually in the latter sense (3:5; see 1 Cor 15:10, 58; 2 Cor 6:1; Gal 2:2; Phil 2:16). Yet Malherbe argues for the former sense here, saying that in 2:1–12 Paul follows the philosophical tradition of contrasting “powerless speech and emboldened frankness” and the antitheses in our section have to do with the character of his ministry rather than its result.16 Indeed, Paul’s statements in 2:2–12 demonstrate that his εἴσοδος was impeccable in character, but they can hardly be said to demonstrate that it was a powerful one in contrast to a powerless one. Malherbe appeals further to 1:5.17 At first sight Paul’s claim there that his gospel came to the Thessalonians “not only in word, but also in power and in the Holy Spirit and with full conviction” appears to support Malherbe’s interpretation. But Paul is there describing the result of his εἴσοδος rather than its character. This is made clear by the parallel passages 1:9–10, 2:13, and 3:6. Furthermore, in view of the parallelism between our verse and 3:6, κενός must be taken in the same sense as in 3:5. His εἴσοδος has borne such wonderful fruit in the readers’ faith (3:6), but “the tempter” is tempting them and he fears that his labor would be brought to nothing (καὶ εἰς κενὸν γένηται ὁ κόπος ἡμῶν, 3:3–5). So here he means that his εἴσοδος to the Thessalonians “was not fruitless.” He thus sets up the proposition or thesis for the whole demonstration of his εἴσοδος in the subsequent verses (vv. 2–12). This conclusion is also supported by the likelihood that here Isa 49:4 and 65:23 are echoed. Sandnes suggests that, as in Gal 2:2 and Phil 2:16, so here also Paul is echoing the language of Isa 49:4.18 Similarly, observing an exact reproduction of a part of Isa 65:23 (οἱ δὲ ἐκλεκτοί μου οὐ κοπιάσουσιν εἰς κενόν) in Phil 2:16 as well as the connection of Isa 65:17–25 with Isa 49:4, Fee sees here an “almost certain echo” of Isa 65:23.19 Detecting echoes of Isa 49:4 and 65:23 here is further supported by the following three facts: (1) that in 2:3 below Paul seems to reflect the language of the prophetic tradition, (2) that his εὐαγγέλιον/παράκλησις language in the context seems to echo the language of Isaiah 40–66 (see comment on 2:3), and (3) that he echoes the call of the servant of Yahweh in Isa 42, 49, and 61 in 2 Cor 1:21–22; 4:6; Gal 1:15–17; and so on, suggesting that he understands his apostolic call in terms of the call of the servant of Yahweh in Isaiah 40–66.20 N. T. Wright stresses that Paul, 15 Marshall, 62 (italics his). 16 Malherbe, 135–36. Cf. also Schreiber, I:134–35. 17 Malherbe, 136. Cf. also Marshall, 63. 18 Sandnes, Paul, 218. 19 Fee, 57. 20 See Kim, “Eschatological Herald,” in PGTO, 359–65.

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 191

7/12/23 11:28 AM

192

1 Thessalonians 2:1–4

interpreting his apostolic call in terms of the servant of Isa 49, was often haunted by the question of whether his apostolic labor was “in vain.”21 This view is borne out by his repeated concern about it (besides our verse, see 3:5; cf. 1 Cor 15:10; 2 Cor 6:1; Gal 2:2; Phil 2:16; also 1 Cor 15:58). 2 ἀλλὰ προπαθόντες καὶ ὑβρισθέντες, καθὼς οἴδατε, ἐν Φιλίπποις, “but having endured suffering and having been shamefully treated, as you know, in Philippi.” This verse is connected to v. 1 by the οὐ . . . ἀλλά structure: Paul’s mission was not “in vain” but was a bold preaching of the gospel out of confidence in God despite opposition and persecution, which therefore, it is implied, has borne fruit in the readers’ faith. The two opening participles are concessive, and the prefixed preposition πρό on the first, προπαθόντες, is temporal (“beforehand”). What is described in Acts 16:22–24 fits well with them: the illegal beating and imprisonment in Philippi. They describe not two different kinds of suffering but one kind from different perspectives. With the word ὑβρίζεσθαι, Paul expresses his sense of outrage at having been insulted (i.e., treated below his dignity), as he was publicly stripped and flogged without any inquiry into the charges brought against him in Philippi, a Roman colony—­a treatment from which Roman citizens were legally exempt.22 It is implied in καθὼς οἴδατε that the readers had heard about their ill-­treatment in Philippi, probably from Paul and Silvanus themselves. ἐπαρρησιασάμεθα . . . λαλῆσαι, “we were emboldened . . . to speak out freely.” They do not say, “Having been ill-­treated at Philippi, we were more circumspect in Thessalonica,” but rather, “We were emboldened in God to preach the gospel there too.” The word group παρρησία/παρρησιάζεσθαι refers to confidence or boldness that leads to freedom from any inhibition in action.23 In the NT it is used for the Christian confidence and freedom to enter into God’s presence (e.g., Eph 3:12; Heb 4:16; 10:19; 1 John 2:28; 3:21). Paul uses it for his confident and inhibition-­free attitude to Philemon (Phlm 8) or to the Corinthians, with whom he is now reconciled (2 Cor 7:4). He uses it especially to emphasize his boldness and frankness or openness in speaking (besides our verse, see 2 Cor 3:12; Phil 1:20; Eph 6:19–20), just as Luke repeatedly does the same in Acts (9:27–28; 13:46; 18:26; 19:8; 26:26; 28:31; cf. also 2:29; 4:29, 31). When Paul characterizes his preaching of the gospel in Thessalonica with this construction (ἐπαρρησιασάμεθα . . . λαλῆσαι), he means that it was marked by both boldness and frankness in the face of opposition and persecution. This summary description of his gospel preaching in Thessalonica is then unfolded in the remainder of the passage, with substantiation especially for its frank or transparent character. ἐν τῷ θεῷ ἡμῶν, “in our God.” The phrase may be so formulated to balance 21 Paul: A Biography, 95, et passim. 22 So Marshall, 63. 23 Cf. BDAG; H. Schlier, TDNT 5:871–86; Unnik, “Freedom of Speech.”

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 192

7/12/23 11:28 AM

Comment 193 the following phrase ἐν πολλῷ ἀγῶνι, “amid great struggle.” The preposition ἐν appears to have a spatial sense here. However, any talk of some sort of mystical union with God is out of place. Paul adds ἡμῶν (“our”) to “God” here, not to draw a contrast between his God and pagan gods but rather to imply that he and his colleagues have relationship with God—­the one “living and true God” (1:9), or that they have this God on their side, whereas their persecutors do not.24 Our phrase may be taken in a similar way as the phrase “in God the Father” in 1:2 and construed as “by the courage we have as those who exist in the kingdom of God and therefore under the care of our (living and true) God.” It would then yield essentially the same meaning as that which some commentators obtain by taking ἐν in the instrumental sense: “by the courage supplied by our (living and true) God.” At any rate, with the phrase Paul indicates that the source of his boldness is not in himself but in God. For the divine source of his courage and strength, compare 2 Cor 3:12; 4:7; 12:9–20. τὸ εὐαγγέλιον τοῦ θεοῦ, “the gospel of God.” The phrase τοῦ θεοῦ denotes God as the author of the gospel (cf. Rom 1:1; 15:16; 2 Cor 11:7). Paul designates this gospel also as “the gospel of Christ” (τοῦ Χριστοῦ) since Christ is its content (1 Thess 3:2), and as “our [ἡμῶν] gospel” since it is preached by him and his missionary colleagues (1:5). In the formula “the gospel of God” here, the reference to God seems to be emphasized to support the preceding phrase “in our God” and to imply that Paul had confidence in God’s help because he preached God’s gospel.25 But note the repetition of this formulation in vv. 8 and 9 and the emphasis on the divine origin of the gospel in the thrice-­ repeated formula. This repetition is further enhanced by the reference to the fact that the readers received it as “the word of God” (2:13 twice) and not as the mere “word of human beings” (cf. “the word of the Lord,” 1:8). With the formula Paul seems to also intend a contrast with false prophets or charlatan philosophers preaching their own words—­words that the Lord has not given them—­mere “human words” (cf. Deut 18:18–22). The subsequent unfolding of the summary statement of this verse in vv. 3–12 appears to support this interpretation.26 ἐν πολλῷ ἀγῶνι, “amid great struggle.” Most commentators see that by ἀγών Paul refers to his struggle with the external forces that were opposed to his gospel preaching in Thessalonica.27 But Malherbe points to the fact that Stoic and Cynic philosophers loved to use the athletic metaphor to refer to their struggle for virtue against such internal vices as those that Paul mentions in vv. 3–6 (error, uncleanness, guile, a desire to please, greed, desire for reputation). He thinks that Paul is referring not only to his struggle with the 24 Cf. Holtz, 68; Malherbe, 137. 25 Best, 91. 26 For the question of whether the formulation “the gospel of God” carries an anti-­imperial connotation, see Kim, “Is Paul Preaching,” in PGTO, 217–22. 27 See esp. Best, 91–92.

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 193

7/12/23 11:28 AM

194

1 Thessalonians 2:1–4

opponents of the gospel but also to his struggle with such emotional and moral problems that he felt in his mind while preaching the gospel.28 However, nowhere in the context does Paul suggest that he had to “struggle” in his mind to dispel temptations to such internal vices. What he does suggest is that both he and his readers faced persecution by the opponents of the gospel during his mission in Thessalonica (1:6; 2:13–16). Furthermore, as Best points out, Paul’s reference to his “bold preaching” (ἐπαρρησιασάμεθα . . . λαλῆσαι) here fits well with the context of physical persecution but ill with the context of internal struggle.29 Therefore, it is natural to see the ἀγών as referring to the kind of struggle that he had in Thessalonica as reported in Acts 17:5–9.30 Being conscious of the care of the living God and drawing courage from him, he preached the gospel of God boldly, even in the face of great persecution by the opponents of the gospel. 3 ἡ γὰρ παράκλησις ἡμῶν, “for our message of encouragement.” The conjunction γάρ introduces the long sentence with the οὐκ . . . ἀλλά structure in vv. 3–4 as the reason why Paul could speak so boldly even against great opposition. The noun παράκλησις is capable of all the variations of meaning found with the verb παρακαλεῖν (to appeal, exhort, comfort, encourage, strengthen). Here, in view of 2:11–12, commentators usually take it as referring to the appealing/ exhorting part of gospel preaching, in which the preacher appeals for the hearers’ response to accept the gospel of God’s kingship and his salvation (cf. Acts 13:15; 2 Cor 5:20; 6:1; 1 Tim 4:13; Heb 13:22). However, the παράκλησις here seems to be paraphrased in 2:12 not just by the first of the three participles used there, παρακαλοῦντες . . . καὶ παραμυθούμενοι καὶ μαρτυρόμενοι, but by all three of them together. So, it is to be understood as including the full range of its meaning: comfort, exhortation, appeal, and even charge. The element of “comfort” cannot be ignored here, especially if Paul is composing the present sentence in consciousness of the charge of being a false prophet (see the following paragraph). Hence, combining both the sense of “comfort” and “exhortation,” we may render παράκλησις here with “[the message of] encouragement,” which “comforts” the gentile audience with the “gospel” of salvation in Christ and “exhorts” them to turn from idols to the living God. Sandnes argues that παράκλησις also has the sense of prophetic message of “comfort.”31 For this view, he notes first that ἡ παράκλησις ἡμῶν is a synonym here for τὸ εὐαγγέλιον τοῦ θεοῦ (2:2) and τὸ εὐαγγέλιον ἡμῶν (1:5). Then he observes that εὐαγγελίζεσθαι and παρακαλεῖν appear together as synonyms in Isa 40–66, to which the origin of the NT term εὐαγγέλιον is primarily traced. See especially Isa 61:1–2 where ‫( בׂשר‬to “bring good news”) and ‫נחם‬ 28 Malherbe, 138. 29 Best, 92. 30 So Best, 92. 31 Sandnes, Paul, 217–18.

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 194

7/12/23 11:28 AM

Comment 195 (to “comfort”) in the MT are rendered with εὐαγγελίζεσθαι and παρακαλεῖν respectively in the LXX. In Isa 41:27, ‫“( מבׂשר‬a herald of good news”) in the MT is rendered as παρακαλέσω in the LXX (cf. also Tg). In Isa 40:9–11, in view of ‫( מבׂשר‬εὐαγγελιζόμενος) in v. 9, the LXX inserts παρακαλεῖν in v. 11. Sandnes’s third observation is that in the present verse Paul repudiates the charge of being a false prophet. These observations of Sandnes are quite helpful. So with ἡ παράκλησις ἡμῶν here Paul appears to be referring to both sides of his gospel: comforting and appealing (cf. 1 Thess 4:13; 5:11). See further Horbury (“1 Thessalonians ii.3,” 493–97) for an interpretation of παράκλησις as a prophetic term with both senses of comfort and exhortation in the LXX, postbiblical Jewish literature, and the NT. οὐκ ἐκ πλάνης οὐδὲ ἐξ ἀκαθαρσίας οὐδὲ ἐν δόλῳ, “neither from error nor from impurity nor by way of guile.” Paul formulates a series of three negative concepts for the rhetorical effect of fullness. This verse and the following verse are connected by the οὐκ . . . ἀλλά structure. The preposition ἐκ before πλάνης and ἀκαθαρσίας indicates source or motive, while the ἐν before δόλῳ is instrumental: by a deliberate deception or manipulation. In view of ἐν δόλῳ, πλάνη must be taken in the passive sense of “error” rather than the active sense of “deceit.” Paul is first denying that his gospel originates from error or that his gospel is a false doctrine (cf. 2 Cor 6:8). The phrase ἐξ ἀκαθαρσίας must refer to the impure motive in the moral, rather than the ritual, sense. Since ἀκαθαρσία is contrasted with “sanctification” in 4:7 and “sanctification” is contrasted with “sexual immorality” in 4:3 (cf. also Rom 1:24; Col 3:5), it could be taken here in the sense of sexual immorality. However, there is no evidence that Paul was ever suspected of sexual immorality, whereas he was suspected or accused of financial greed and cheating during his Corinthian mission, which was a similar situation to his Thessalonian mission (2 Cor 2:17; 7:2; 11:7–9; 12:13–18). Since in our text he denies using a “cloak for greed” (v. 5) as well as stresses his policy of self-­support (v. 9), it is possible to see his reference to ἀκαθαρσία here as referring to greed. However, he also denies seeking glory from human beings (v. 6) and unduly wielding his apostolic authority (v. 7). Therefore, he seems to be using the word ἀκαθαρσία here as a comprehensive designation for such vices as greed, popularity-­seeking, power-­seeking, and so on (cf. Rom 6:19; Eph 4:19).32 Thus, with οὐδὲ ἐξ ἀκαθαρσίας he is denying that his ministry of gospel preaching springs from the impure motive of gaining popularity and material benefit from his hearers or power to rule over them. However, if he has in view here a charge of being a false prophet, he may also be denying that his preaching is directed by an unclean spirit that is supposed to possess false prophets (see below).33 With οὐδὲ ἐν δόλῳ he is denying that he uses cunning and deception to trick his audience into accepting his teaching 32 Cf. Best, 94; Marshall, 65; Holtz, 71; Wanamaker, 95. 33 Cf. Horbury, “1 Thessalonians ii.3,” 506.

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 195

7/12/23 11:28 AM

196

1 Thessalonians 2:1–4

(cf. 2 Cor 4:2; 12:16; contrast 11:13). Fee thinks that the pagan opponents of Paul’s mission in Thessalonica made the charge of trickery in reference to the miracles that attended his preaching.34 In that case, Paul is rejecting their charge because they are in fact the genuine signs of the power of the Spirit of God (1 Thess 1:5). Malherbe develops the suggestions of Dibelius and argues that our 2:1–12 should be interpreted in the light of Hellenistic moral philosophers’ depictions of the ideal philosopher in contrast to sophists and charlatan philosophers. In his influential essay,35 Malherbe notes especially how in Oration 32 Dio Chrysostom employs the same kind of vocabulary in similar antithetical contrasts of charlatan philosophers’ vices with the ideal philosopher’s virtues, as in our section. Moreover, Dio Chrysostom does this not to defend himself against any charges but to commend himself as a true philosopher. This observation led Malherbe to argue that, likewise in our passage, Paul is not defending himself against any actual charges but simply commending his integrity in distinction from the vices of wandering philosophers, in order for his readers to imitate his example.36 Malherbe’s view has been followed by a number of scholars.37 Malherbe, commenting on our v. 3, cites Dio Chrysostom, Oration 4.34–35, 37 and Ps.-­Cebes, Table 4–5 for interchangeable uses of πλανᾶν and ἀπατᾶν (to “deceive”), and Epictetus, Discourse 3.22.19, 93 and Dio Chrysostom, Oration 77/78.36–38 for the true Cynic philosopher purifying his reason while the charlatan fails to do it.38 Malherbe also cites Dio Chrysostom, Oration 32.11 (cf. 12.48) for the ideal philosopher being ἀδόλος.39 Malherbe has made a valuable contribution in drawing our attention to the wandering charlatans as part of the cultural context of Paul’s mission in the Hellenistic cities. Those charlatan orators and philosophers made their way about the Greek world, peddling their religious or philosophical nostrums with beguiling oratory and living at the expense of their devotees (like Lucian’s false prophet Alexander). The importance of this Hellenistic cultural context for interpreting our epistle and Paul’s Corinthian correspondence has also been stressed by Winter.40 So we need to understand Paul’s language and thoughts here against that background. However, regarding his purpose here, Malherbe’s thesis is quite implausible. For it is difficult to understand, 34 Fee, 61. 35 Malherbe, “ ‘Gentle as a Nurse,’ ” 203–17; now also in his Paul and the Popular Philosophers, 35–48; cf. also his essays in Paul and the Thessalonians. 36 See also the short summary of this thesis in Malherbe, 154–56. 37 E.g., Wanamaker, 90–91; Smith, 698–700; Richard, 88–89; Gaventa, 5–6, 25–26; Lyons, Pauline Autobiography, 177–221; Schoon-­Janssen, Umstrittene “Apologien,” 39–65. 38 Malherbe, 140. 39 Malherbe, 140. 40 Winter, “Entries,” 57–64; idem, “Is Paul among the Sophists?,” 28–38; idem, Philo and Paul, esp. 145–230; cf. also Brocke, Thessaloniki, 143–51.

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 196

7/12/23 11:28 AM

Comment 197 as Marshall rightly points out, “why Paul, a Christian preacher, should have gone to such pains to describe himself in terms of the ideal philosopher.”41 It is even more difficult to imagine that he was trying to encourage his readers to imitate him when they were not philosophers or preachers. Horbury and Sandnes supplement this line of interpretation that takes our text in its Hellenistic context and suggest seeing it also in the light of the OT-­Jewish prophetic tradition.42 They interpret the present verse as Paul’s rebuttal to the Jewish charge of being a false prophet. They observe, first of all, that in the biblical and Jewish tradition πλάνη/πλανᾶν is the standard charge of false prophecy (e.g., Deut 13:6; Isa 30:10; Jer 23:13, 32; Ezek 13:10; 14:11; Mic 3:5; CD 5.21–22; 12.3; Josephus, Ant. 2.286; Matt 27:63; John 7:12, 47; Rev 13:14; 19:20) and that false prophets are often seen as possessed by an unclean spirit (‫ רוח הטמאה‬/ τὸ πνεῦμα τὸ ἀκάθαρτον, Zech 13:2–3; see Acts 13:6–10; 1 John 4:1–6; 1 Tim 4:1; Rev 16:13–14) and as leading people astray to idolatry and sorcery, which are unclean (Deut 13:3–5, 15–17; 18:9–14; Ezek 13:17–19; Rev 2:20–21; 13:11–14).43 Sandnes notes Paul’s charge in Acts 13:10 of the false prophet Bar-­Jesus as being “full of all deceit” (πλήρης παντὸς δόλου).44 Horbury and Sandnes both also observe how John Chrysostom (Homily on First Thessalonians) interprets our verse in terms of the false prophet Theudas (Acts 5:36) as well as charlatans and wizards (γοήτων καὶ μάγων).45 Since Justin Martyr (Dialogue with Trypho 7.7–8) describes false prophets with the same vocabulary as our verse (ἀπὸ τοῦ πλάνου καὶ ἀκαθάρτου πνεύματος), he might have interpreted our verse likewise in terms of a false prophet.46 Further, Horbury and Sandnes note how, with the identification of a false prophet as a γόης, the language of sophist critique is merged with that of false-­prophet critique in the works of Philo, Josephus, Lucian, Hermas, John Chrysostom, Eusebius, and others.47 It is likely that as a former “Pharisaic scribe”48 trained to think in biblical categories, Paul saw the wandering philosophers and sophists of the Hellenistic world in terms of the false prophets of the OT-­Jewish tradition, just as the Hellenistic-­Jewish writers and the Hellenistic-­Christian writers did. Therefore, here he presents his apostolic message and conduct as those of a true prophet, in contrast to the message and conduct of the Hellenistic charlatan philosophers, the false prophets. 41 Marshall, 61. 42 Horbury, “1 Thessalonians ii.3,” 493–97, and Sandnes, Paul, 185–223. So, before them, already Denis, “L’apôtre Paul.” 43 Horbury, “1 Thessalonians ii.3,” 497–99; Sandnes, Paul, 203–11. 44 Sandnes, Paul, 211. 45 Horbury, “1 Thessalonians ii.3,” 493–94, and Sandnes, Paul, 215. 46 Horbury, “1 Thessalonians ii.3,” 506; Sandnes, Paul, 214. 47 Horbury, “1 Thessalonians ii.3,” 493–94, and Sandnes, Paul, 215–16. Cf. also Dibelius, 539–40. 48 Hengel and Schwemer, Paul, 101.

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 197

7/12/23 11:28 AM

198

1 Thessalonians 2:1–4

4 ἀλλὰ καθὼς δεδοκιμάσμεθα ὑπὸ τοῦ θεοῦ πιστευθῆναι τὸ εὐαγγέλιον, “but as we have been approved by God to be entrusted with the gospel.” Formally ἀλλά here builds with the οὐκ . . . οὐδέ . . . οὐδέ . . . (“neither . . . nor . . . nor”) of the preceding verse an antithetical (οὐκ . . . ἀλλά) structure. But this structure is made complicated with the comparative structure of καθώς . . . οὕτως (“as . . . so”) within this verse. The verb δοκιμάζειν means both “to test, try, or examine” and “to approve” what stands the test (cf. BDAG). The word is used in this verse first in the latter sense, but then at the end of the verse in the first sense. The verb appears here in the perfect tense (δεδοκιμάσμεθα), which refers to a past action that has resulted in a present state. Does Paul thereby suggest that God’s examination has proved him to be qualified for his commission with the gospel? It is difficult to believe that he means this, as he usually refers to his apostolic commission by highlighting his total inadequacy for it (1 Cor 15:8–10; Gal 1:15–16; cf. also 2 Cor 3:5–6) and emphatically characterizing it as God’s pure grace (note his habit of referring to his apostleship as “the grace that was given to me”: Rom 12:3; 15:15; 1 Cor 3:10; Gal 2:9; Eph 3:2, 7, 8; cf. also Rom 1:5; 2 Cor 4:1). Paul’s use of the perfect tense here seems to be dictated by two needs. On the one hand, he needs to use a tense that conveys the sense of the past event of his apostolic commission on the Damascus road, and, on the other hand, he needs to stress God’s present approval of him (cf. v. 4b). So we may understand that here he defends his (present) apostolic conduct against his opponents’ criticism and with the formulation is trying to convey that, since his apostolic commission on the Damascus road, he has continued to be tested and approved by God to fulfill his commission with the gospel (cf. 1 Tim 1:12–24). Note the divine passive, πιστευθῆναι τὸ εὐαγγέλιον (cf. 1 Cor 9:17; Gal 2:7). With it Paul further strengthens his claim about the divine origin of his apostleship and gospel, rejecting the charge of being a false prophet. In the standard polemic against false prophets in the OT, it is charged that they are the ones who have received neither a commission nor a message from God and therefore speak words out of their own hearts, which are really lies (e.g., Deut 18:20; Neh 6:12; Jer 14:14–15; 23:16–38; 27:15; 28:15; 29:8–9; Ezek 13:2–8; 22:28; Zech 13:2–3). Paul claims that, unlike false prophets, God has examined and approved him to be entrusted with the gospel. οὕτως λαλοῦμεν, οὐχ ὡς ἀνθρώποις ἀρέσκοντες ἀλλὰ θεῷ τῷ δοκιμάζοντι τὰς καρδίας ἡμῶν, “so we speak, not as seeking to please human beings, but to please God who tests our hearts.” Note the καθώς . . . οὕτως structure here: Paul preaches in a way befitting one approved and commissioned by God. Note also the present tense (λαλοῦμεν), with which Paul indicates that what he says in vv. 3–4 is his apostolic principle or standard practice everywhere.49 This means that the verb omitted after ἡ γὰρ παράκλησις ἡμῶν in v. 3 is the present 49 Cf. Holtz, 72.

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 198

7/12/23 11:28 AM

Comment 199 ἐστίν or γίνεται.50 Yet with the οὕτως λαλοῦμεν here he looks back to the preaching that he did in Thessalonica—­in accordance with that standard practice of his. Therefore, the phrase οὕτως λαλοῦμεν is to be seen as an elaboration on the (ἐπαρρησιασάμεθα . . . ) λαλῆσαι of v. 2:51 the reason (γάρ, v. 3) why in Thessalonica he was bold to speak freely, openly, or transparently in the face of great opposition was because he always “speaks” the God-­entrusted gospel in accordance with his apostolic principle specified in vv. 3–4. Paul has been commissioned by God with the gospel, so he speaks to please God his commissioner and him only (οὐχ ὡς ἀνθρώποις ἀρέσκοντες). The phrase ἀνθρώποις ἀρέσκοντες appears only in biblical Greek. His life before his conversion could be seen in a way (in retrospect) as an attempt to please human beings (Gal 1:10), but ever since his apostolic commission his sole aim is to please God his master. Of course, even after his commission he does try to please human beings, too, and in fact he goes to the extent of “becoming all things to all human beings” (1 Cor 9:22) to “please all human beings” (1 Cor 10:33). With this Paul means that he serves the interests of others rather than his own (cf. Rom 15:1–2), which is really his obedience to the second half of the Lord Jesus’s double command of love (“love your neighbor as yourself,” Mark 12:28–34parr.; Rom 13:8–10; 1 Cor 9:21; Gal 5:14; 6:2). But here and in Gal 1:10 he is concerned about the different demands that God and human beings make of a preacher. God requires him to preach the gospel truthfully, but human beings want him to adapt it to their liking. To please human beings, he would have to resort to flattery and other rhetorical devices that would earn him their respect (1 Thess 2:5–6). But he refuses to do this. False prophets proclaim the deceitful messages of peace, success, and salvation that please their hearers (e.g., 1 Kgs 22:6–28; Jer 14:13; 23:16–17; 27:9, 14, 16; 28:2–11; Ezek 13:10, 16). But he refuses to tailor his message to suit his audience’s taste. He preaches the gospel truthfully, as God has commissioned him to do. ἀλλὰ θεῷ τῷ δοκιμάζοντι τὰς καρδίας ἡμῶν, “but God who tests our hearts.” This is a biblical turn of speech. Cf. Rom 8:27, where God is ὁ . . . ἐραυνῶν τὰς καρδίας (also cf. Acts 1:24, σὺ κύριε καρδιόγνωστα πάντων, and 15:8, ὁ καρδιογνώστης θεός, with Rev 2:23, where the risen Lord speaks as ὁ ἐραυνῶν νεφροὺς καὶ καρδίας). The present participle δοκιμάζοντι defines an attribute of God as the judge, and it reveals that, having been tested and approved (δεδοκιμάσμεθα) by God to be entrusted with the gospel, Paul is conscious of constantly standing under divine testing for his ministry. “Heart” refers to the innermost part of a person, the seat of the mind and will as well as emotion and desires.52 The idea of God as the searcher and tester of hearts is common 50 So Malherbe, 139. 51 Cf. Malherbe, 140. 52 Cf. Baumgärtel and Behm, TDNT 3:605–7, 608–13.

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 199

7/12/23 11:28 AM

200

1 Thessalonians 2:1–4

in the OT (cf. Pss 7:9; 139:23 [138:23 LXX]; Prov 17:3; Jer 11:20; 12:3; 17:10; 1 Chr 28:9; 29:7). Malherbe recognizes our phrase as an allusion to Jer 11:20,53 and he comments that, like the preceding clause δεδοκιμάσμεθα ὑπὸ τοῦ θεοῦ πιστευθῆναι τὸ εὐαγγέλιον, it also “reveals Paul’s prophetic self-­understanding.” This admission is quite significant for a commentator who denies any reflection of a charge of false prophecy in v. 3 in the interest of interpreting the present paragraph exclusively in terms of Hellenistic moral philosophers’ vocabulary.54 At any rate, the participial definition of God, repeating the word δοκιμάζειν deliberately, emphasizes that God’s judgment is the only one that matters and therefore Paul is responsible only to him. Paul is unconcerned about his human critics who judge him only according to his appearance. He is concerned only about God who tests his motives springing from his innermost part (cf. 1 Cor 4:3–5). Hence he must preach his gospel truthfully. The οὐκ . . . ἀλλά structure of vv. 3–4 may not be formally so neat. Yet the material correspondence between the two parts of the sentence is unmistakable: Paul’s preaching is not “from error,” as it is “the gospel” that God has entrusted to him; it is not “from impurity,” as it is from the purity of the heart that is approved by God; and it is not “with guile,” as it does not seek to please people but only God who tests hearts. So Paul is able to preach the gospel of God boldly and transparently, and he did so in Thessalonica despite fierce opposition (and so it bore good fruit, v. 2).

Explanation Right at the start of our passage of 2:1–14, Paul announces the subject of his discussion, his apostolic “entry” or mission in Thessalonica, and declares his thesis that “it was not in vain.” In vv. 2–12 he describes his “entry” and then will show the thesis proven (vv. 13–14): his holy and righteous missionary conduct has led the Thessalonians to accept his gospel as the word of God and believe it despite persecution. Having received the report from Timothy that the readers were cherishing his entry (eisodos) and maintaining their faith amid the continuing persecution (3:6), Paul confidently calls them to confirm his explanation of his entry and its fruitfulness. As one who draws much inspiration from Isa 40–66 for his apostolic ministry of preaching the gospel, especially the accounts of the call of the servant of Yahweh in it (Isa 42; 49; 61), he is satisfied to make a summary assessment of his apostolic work in Thessalonica, echoing Isa 49:4 and 65:23. In v. 2 Paul launches the description of his entry or missionary conduct with a summary statement about it. Persecuted severely at Philippi and driven out of the city, he with his coworkers entered Thessalonica only to meet there again great opposition to his gospel preaching. Yet he did not flinch but rather 53 Malherbe, 141; so also Evans, “Prophet,” 763. 54 Malherbe, 139.

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 200

7/12/23 11:28 AM

Explanation 201 proclaimed the gospel with boldness and transparency that sprang from his consciousness of his standing under the care of the one true and living God as a preacher of his gospel. With this summary description of his entry, he implies that this bold preaching has borne good fruit. Then, in vv. 3–4 Paul explains why he was able to preach the gospel so freely with courage even against great opposition. It was fundamentally because he was approved by God to be entrusted with the gospel, so that he has made it his apostolic principle to preach it in the way of pleasing God, his commissioner, who continues to test him and his innermost thoughts and motives. By contrast, false prophets and charlatan philosophers try to please people to gain popularity and financial benefit. They thus tailor their message to the whims and desires of human beings with impure motives, and they distort truth and employ deceptive techniques to trick their audience. Paul does not do such things but always preaches the gospel with truthfulness and transparency in faithful adherence to the will of God, who has commissioned him as an apostle and prophet. Since this is his apostolic principle, during his mission (eisodos) in Thessalonica he was able to preach the gospel with unflinching courage even in the face of the opponents, who were accusing him of being a false prophet or charlatan philosopher, whereas real false prophets and charlatan philosophers would have run away in such a situation, fearing that their true identity and their false teachings would be exposed. Our passage shares many parallels with Gal 1–2 and 2 Cor 3–4. A comparison of them helps us see how Paul obtained his apostolic principle and how firmly he holds it. First, notice how the clause δεδοκιμάσμεθα ὑπὸ τοῦ θεοῦ πιστευθῆναι τὸ εὐαγγέλιον in our v. 4 is reminiscent of the clause πεπίστευμαι τὸ εὐαγγέλιον τῆς ἀκροβυστίας in Gal 2:7, which is a summary of Paul’s account of his apostolic commission with the gospel that he narrated in Gal 1:11–17. The denial that he tries to please human beings (ἀνθρώποις ἀρέσκοντες) in our v. 4 also recalls the similar denial in Gal 1:10b–­c (ἀνθρώποις ἀρέσκειν). Further, the claim in our vv. 5–6 that he does not seek to obtain applause from human beings by flattery and other rhetorical tricks that hide greed, but rather seeks to please God who tests his heart, corresponds to his implicit claim in Gal 1:10a that he does not seek to “persuade” (i.e., obtain approval of) human beings (by flattery and other trickery) but God (by preaching the true gospel). Thus there is a close linguistic and conceptual affinity between our passage (vv. 3–6) and Gal 1:10–17.55 Paul is saying basically the same thing in both: since he was commissioned by God with the gospel, he does not pervert the gospel to please human beings and obtain their applause. If in Gal 1:6–9 he charges his opponents for having “perverted” (μεταστρέψαι, v. 7) the gospel in contrast to his faithful preaching of it, in our passage he defends himself

55 This is partly recognized by Martyn, Galatians, 139.

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 201

7/12/23 11:28 AM

202

1 Thessalonians 2:1–4

as a faithful preacher of the divine gospel against the charge that he perverts truth like a false prophet or a sophist (1 Thess 2:3). This close affinity between our passage and Gal 1:10–17 may allow us to infer from the clause δεδοκιμάσμεθα ὑπὸ τοῦ θεοῦ πιστευθῆναι τὸ εὐαγγέλιον in 1 Thess 2:4 the same kind of apostolic self-­understanding as he presents in the Galatians passage. In Gal 1:15–17 he interprets his apostolic call in terms of the call of the servant of Yahweh in Isa 42 and 49 (as well as the call of the prophet Jeremiah [Jer 1:5]).56 By its very nature it is unlikely that he developed this interpretation only at the moment of writing Galatians. In view of his understanding of God’s purpose in his call (Gal 1:16: “in order that I might preach [God’s] Son to the gentiles”), which echoes Isa 42:1, 6–7; 49:1, 6; and Jer 1:5, we can presume that he had developed it before he launched his systematic gentile mission. Even if our epistle should have been written earlier than Galatians, it is possible that he is conscious of his apostolic call having been like the call of the servant of Yahweh and the prophet Jeremiah. If so, this will add further weight to the need to read our passage in terms of the Jewish prophet category as well as the Hellenistic orator category. The affinity of our passage with Gal 1:6–17 and 2:7–9 suggests that, from his understanding of his apostolic commission in light of the OT prophetic tradition, Paul developed his apostolic principle of preaching the God-­g iven message, the gospel of God, truthfully and fearlessly as a true prophet (like Jeremiah, cf. Jer 11:20 with comment on v. 4 above). He preached it in accordance with God’s will, shunning the ways of false prophets (like the opponents of Jeremiah) who compromised their message with the whims and desires of its audience and mixed it with their ulterior motives. All this is confirmed by several linguistic and conceptual parallels that also exist between our vv. 2–6 and 2 Cor 3–4 (3:4–6, 12; 4:1–6). As in our v. 4a (and Gal 1:15–16; 2:7–9), so also in 2 Cor 3–4 Paul speaks of his apostolic commission by God with the gospel. In 2 Cor 3:5–18 he compares it with God’s commission of Moses with the Torah (Exod 34), and in 2 Cor 4:1, 6 he echoes the call of the servant of Yahweh (Isa 42:6–7; 49:6) as in Gal 1:15–16. Then, similarly to what he says in our v. 2 (see comment above), in 2 Cor 3–4 he speaks of not losing heart in the face of threatening opposition (4:1, 16: ἐγκακεῖν, cf. BDAG; cf. 4:7–18) but of drawing his confidence from the God who commissioned him (3:4; cf. also 2:17) and preaching his gospel with courage and freedom (παρρησία, 3:12). So he does not tamper God’s word with deceptive tricks (δολοῦντες, 4:2; cf. ἐν δόλῳ in 1 Thess 2:3), nor does he employ underhanded, cunning, and disgraceful ways (2 Cor 4:2; cf. 1 Thess 2:3, 5–6), like false prophets and charlatan philosophers. Rather, he “commends himself (as a true messenger of God) to the conscience of all human beings with an open statement of the truth in the sight of God” (2 Cor 4:2), 56 See Kim, PNP, 101–27.

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 202

7/12/23 11:28 AM

Explanation 203 that is, conscious of God who tests him in all his actions (cf. 1 Thess 2:4b). In 2 Cor 4:5 Paul says that he does not preach himself but Jesus Christ as Lord, presenting himself as a slave of the Corinthians. The spirit of this statement is comparable to that manifested in his denial of self-­seeking, his affirmation of his love for the Thessalonians, and his willingness to share his own self or life with them in our passage (1 Thess 2:3–8). Thus in 2 Cor 3–4, Paul, faced with a similar situation in Corinth to that in Thessalonica in which he is accused of being a false apostle or prophet, explains the principle of his truthful apostolic mission in a way very similar to what he does in our passage, as well as in Gal 1–2. It is the principle that he has obtained by interpreting his apostolic commission on the Damascus road in light of the OT prophetic tradition. Seeing that Paul affirms essentially the same principle of his apostolic conduct in the three epistles, we can assume that it belongs to his fundamental apostolic self-­understanding and practice and that he maintains it everywhere he goes. In the subsequent vv. 5–12 of our epistle, he goes on to explain how he concretely carried out his mission in accordance with it in Thessalonica.

The Jewish Opposition to Paul in Thessalonica We have seen that in our passage Paul presents his apostolic conduct in contrast to both false prophets of Judaism and charlatan orators of the Hellenistic world. The apologetic tone in our passage, as well as the indications of the Jewish opposition to his mission in 2:14–16 (see below), suggest that in our passage Paul is defending himself against the Jewish charge of being a false prophet as well as the gentile charge of being a charlatan orator. From 1:10, 4:14, and 5:9–10 where Paul recalls his preaching of the gospel in Thessalonica, we can easily surmise that Paul’s Christology and soteriology, that is, his preaching of the crucified Jesus as the Messiah, God’s Son, and of salvation through his death and resurrection at God’s last judgment, figured prominently in the Jewish denunciation of him as a false prophet (cf. 1 Cor 1:23; Gal 3:13). Luke’s account of Paul’s mission in Thessalonica (Acts 17:1–7) confirms this conjecture: Paul was accused of proclaiming a false messiah. Above (in Explanation after 1:2–10), we suggested that Paul’s teaching about the gentile Thessalonian believers in Jesus the Messiah belonging to God’s holy people could also have provoked the Jews to denounce him as a false prophet, as they were in their Jewish eyes just uncircumcised pagans. It is difficult to believe that the Jewish charge of Paul as a false prophet for such teachings was made without any reference to the law. Already at Paul’s synagogal debates with the Jews (cf. Acts 17:2–4), they must have charged him by arguing that his teachings were contrary to Scripture and blasphemous to the law. With his report in Acts 17:2–4 that Paul “argued with them in the synagogue from the Scriptures, explaining and proving that it was necessary for the Christ to suffer and to rise from the dead,” Luke says that they actually

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 203

7/12/23 11:28 AM

204

1 Thessalonians 2:1–4

did that (cf. Acts 17:10–12 for Luke’s report of a “nobler” response of the Jews in Beroea). And 1 Thess 2:14–16 suggests that they were still agitating the gentile opponents with that charge to oppose Paul’s mission and persecute the church in Thessalonica (see below). Hence, Paul’s apologetic in our passage has in view the false-­prophet charge as well as the Hellenistic version of that charge. However, his defense against that charge does not reflect the Jewish dispute about the scriptural and legal basis of his teachings. In fact, in our epistle he does not make any reference to the law, nor does he try to present his teachings as being in conformity to the Scriptures (except echoing some scriptural texts to show the genuineness of his apostolic call and conduct), unlike in Galatians and Romans (cf. 1 Corinthians, where he also points to the Jewish objection to the notion of a crucified messiah [1:23], but does not engage in scriptural or legal justification of it). How can we explain this absence of reference to the law and the Scriptures in our epistle? Surely it is not because Paul, the former rabbinic student turned Christian apostle, has not thought through the salvific meaning of the Messiah crucified and raised for Jews and gentiles in reference to the law and the Scriptures—­even by the time of writing 1 Thessalonians, a post-­Jerusalem Council and post-­A ntioch controversy epistle. No, long before writing this epistle, in fact, at least by the time of launching his systematic gentile mission, he must have worked out his Christology and soteriology scripturally, so that he was able to “argue” with the Jews in the Thessalonian synagogue “from the Scriptures” for “the necessity for the Christ to suffer and to rise from the dead” (Acts 17:2–3), as well as to preach the gospel to the gentiles without demanding their observance of the law, declare the uncircumcised gentile believers in the gospel as God’s elect people, and assure them of the deliverance by God’s Son Jesus from God’s wrath at the last judgment (justification!) at the eschaton (1 Thess 1:10; 5:9–10). Therefore, it appears that the reason for the absence of a reference to the law and an appeal to the Scriptures for his teachings in our epistle must be found in the fact that in our epistle Paul is not engaged in expounding and defending his gospel. Since in this epistle he does not discuss or expound his Christology or soteriology or any other aspect of his gospel (except in dealing with the readers’ anxiety about some points of eschatology, 4:13–5:11), he has no reason or occasion to refer to the law or the Scriptures to explain or support his gospel. In this brief epistle, he is mainly concerned with consolidating his largely gentile converts in their positive appreciation of his apostolic entry (his integrity and missionary conduct) and with encouraging them to maintain a sanctified life of faith, hope, and love in their hostile environment. He appears unconcerned about persuading them to hold on to his doctrine of Christ or his gospel against a Jewish scriptural or theological disputation of it. Even if he is defending himself against the Jewish charge of being a false prophet and the Hellenistic charge of being a charlatan philosopher,

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 204

7/12/23 11:28 AM

Bibliography 205 his apologetic is focused on showing that his conduct was virtuous unlike that of false prophets and charlatan philosophers, rather than proving the correctness of his teachings over against Jewish or Hellenistic criticism of them. Hence, in our epistle he finds no need to refer to the law or the Scriptures (see further Explanation on 4:1–8 below), just as he has no need or occasion to expound or defend his doctrine of justification.57

(b) Paul’s Apostolic Conduct (2:5–8) Bibliography Aasgaard, R. “Like a Child: Paul’s Rhetorical Uses of Childhood.” Pages 249–77 in The Child in the Bible. Edited by M. J. Bunge, T. E. Fretheim, and B. R. Gaventa. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2008. —­—­—.­ My Beloved Brothers and Sisters!: Christian Siblingship in Paul. New York: T&T Clark, 2004. Baumert, N. “Ὁμειρόμενοι in 1 Thess 2, 8.” Bib 68 (1987): 552–63. Betz, O. “Die Geburt der Gemeinde durch den Lehrer.” Pages 3–15 in Jesus der Messias Israels: Aufsätze zur biblischen Theologie. WUNT 42. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1987. Burke, T. J. Family Matters: A Socio-­Historical Study of Fictive Kinship Metaphors in 1 Thessalonians. LNTS. London: T&T Clark, 2003. Gaventa, B. R. Our Mother Saint Paul. Louisville: Westminster John Knox, 2007. Gerber, C. Paulus und seine “Kinder”: Studien zur Beziehungsmetaphorik der paulinischen Briefe. BZNW 136. Berlin: de Gruyter, 2005. Kim, S. “Jesus’ Ransom Saying (Mark 10:45//Matt 20:28) and Eucharistic Saying (Mark 14:21–25 and Parr.) Echoed in 1 Thessalonians.” Pages 151–70 in PGTO. Malherbe, A. J. “ ‘Gentle as a Nurse’: The Cynic Background to 1 Thess. II.” NovT 12 (1970): 203–17. Sailors, T. B. “Wedding Textual and Rhetorical Criticism to Understand the Text of 1 Thessalonians 2.7.” JSNT 80 (2000): 81–98. Schmidt, U. “1 Thess 2.7b, c: ‘Kleinkinder, die wie eine Amme Kinder versorgen.’ ” NTS 55 (2009): 116–20. Weima, J. A. D. “But We Became Infants among You.” NTS 46 (2000): 547–64.

Translation For never were we ever with a word of flattery, as you know, nor with any pretext for covetousness, God is witness, 6 nor seeking applause from human beings, neither from you nor from others 7 (although we could have demanded you to respect our authority as apostles of Christ),a but we were infants b among you.c Asd a nurse cherishes her own children, 8 so we, having great affection e for you, were resolved f to share with you not only the gospel of God g but also our own selves. 5

Notes a. Until the second printing of its 28th edition, Nestle-­A land had here a period, but since its third printing (2014) it has changed it to a comma. b. ἤπιοι (“gentle”) is read by ‫א‬c A C2 D2 Ψc byz lat vg.st copsa.codd.. But νήπιοι (“infants”) is to be read here as it is better attested (65 ‫ *א‬B C* D* F G I Ψ* pc lat vet vg.ww copsa.cod bo Clem.) and is a more difficult reading. The variation is due to haplography of ν.

57 See Kim, “Gospel That Paul Preached,” in PGTO, 67–131.

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 205

7/12/23 11:28 AM

206

1 Thessalonians 2:5–8

c. Until the second printing of its 28th edition, Nestle-­A land had here a comma, but since its third printing (2014) it has changed it to a period. d. ὡς ἐάν . . . θάλπῃ, an indefinite construction. In Hellenistic Greek (especially in the LXX, NT, and papyri), ἐάν frequently replaces ἄν in relative clauses (see BDF §107). e. ὁμειρόμενοι (“ardently desiring”), for which ἱμειρόμενοι is read in a number of minuscules. The verb ὁμείρεσθαι is Hellenistic (also spelled with a smooth breathing); it has the meaning of classical ἱμείρεσθαι (but the two are not etymologically related). f. For εὐδοκοῦμεν (which is to be understood as imperfect, though it does not have the augmented spelling ηὐδοκοῦμεν), a few minuscules have the aorist εὐδοκήσαμεν. (Cf. 3:1.) g. For τοῦ θεοῦ (“of God”) a few minuscules have τοῦ Χριστοῦ (“of Christ”); cf. 3:2.

Form/Structure/Setting Having laid out the principle of his apostolic conduct in vv. 3–4, in vv. 5–12 Paul goes on to explain how he carried out his mission in Thessalonica in accordance with that principle. In this subsection, as in the preceding and following sections, there is an appeal to the readers’ knowledge of the facts (v. 5; cf. vv. 1, 2, 11) and an insistence that the gospel that he preaches is God’s (v. 8; cf. vv. 2, 9). Just like the preceding section of vv. 3–4, this section also has the “not . . . but” (οὔτε . . . ἀλλά) structure. Just as in the former, so also in this section the “not . . . but” antithesis has a series of three members in the negative part (vv. 5–7a). Similarly to the comparative “ just as . . . so” (καθώς . . . οὕτως) structure within the positive part (v. 4) of the antithesis in vv. 3–4, the antithesis in this section also has the “ just as . . . so” (ὡς . . . οὕτως) structure within its positive part (vv. 7c–8). This structural analysis makes it clear that v. 7a’s δυνάμενοι ἐν βάρει εἶναι ὡς Χριστοῦ ἀπόστολοι, “being able to command respect as Christ’s apostles,” is dependent on the preceding ζητοῦντες of v. 6 rather than the following ἀλλὰ ἐγενήθημεν of v. 7b.58 There is also the question of whether the sentence beginning with ἀλλά ends with ἐν μέσῳ ὑμῶν or τέκνα, that is, whether v. 7b’s ἀλλὰ ἐγενήθημεν νήπιοι ἐν μέσῳ ὑμῶν goes with the preceding vv. 6–7a or with the following clause ὡς ἐὰν τροφὸς θάλπῃ τὰ ἑαυτῆς τέκνα (v. 7c). The correlation between ὡς (v. 7c) and οὕτως (v. 8) speaks for v. 7c going with v. 8. Therefore, v. 7b must go with vv. 6–7a, as most commentators now affirm. So then we must punctuate like NEB: a comma after ἀπόστολοι, a period after ὑμῶν, and a comma after τέκνα.59 The new sentence begins with ὡς in v. 7c and runs into v. 8. The structure of the sentences from v. 5 to v. 8 may be set out thus:

58 So Best, 98–99; Marshall, 68; Wanamaker, 98; many English versions over against the poor verse division in the Greek versions prior to NA 28 3rd printing (2014). 59 So also Wanamaker, 100–101; Gillman, “Paul’s ΕΙΣΟΔΟΣ,” 63n6. The NA 28 3rd printing (2014) has made changes to this reading.

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 206

7/12/23 11:28 AM

Comment 207 2:5 οὔτε γάρ ποτε ἐν λόγῳ κολακείας ἐγενήθημεν καθὼς οἴδατε, οὔτε ἐν προφάσει πλεονεξίας, θεὸς μάρτυς, 6 οὔτε ζητοῦντες ἐξ ἀνθρώπων δόξαν οὔτε ἀφ᾽ ὑμῶν οὔτε ἀπ᾽ ἄλλων, 7a δυνάμενοι ἐν βάρει εἶναι ὡς Χριστοῦ ἀπόστολοι, 7b ἀλλὰ ἐγενήθημεν νήπιοι ἐν μέσῳ ὑμῶν. 7c ὡς ἐὰν τροφὸς θάλπῃ τὰ ἑαυτῆς τέκνα, 8 οὕτως ὁμειρόμενοι ὑμῶν εὐδοκοῦμεν μεταδοῦναι ὑμῖν . . . 2:5 For never were/became we ever with a word of flattery, as you know, nor with any pretext for covetousness, God is witness, 6 nor seeking applause from human beings, neither from you nor from others 7a (although we could have demanded you to respect our authority as apostles of Christ), 7b but we were/became infants among you. 7c As a nurse cherishes her own children, 8  so we, having great affection for you, were resolved to share with you . . .60

Comment 2:5 Οὔτε γάρ ποτε ἐν λόγῳ κολακείας ἐγενήθημεν, καθὼς οἴδατε, “for never were we ever with a word of flattery, as you know.” Having spoken of the general principle of his apostolic conduct in vv. 3–4, with ποτε and the aorist ἐγενήθημεν (“came to be,” the verb already used in 1:5b for his “entry”; cf. the aorist ἐπαρρησιασάμεθα in v. 2), he now returns to his “entry” at Thessalonica,61 calling the readers and God to witness as to how he faithfully adhered to that principle during his mission in their midst. Thus the conjunction γάρ introduces the following description of his missionary conduct in Thessalonica (vv. 5–8) as confirmation of the general principle of his apostolic conduct in vv. 3–4 or as a basis for making the statement about that general principle. The κόλαξ, “flatterer,” a stock character in the ancient Hellenistic literature

60 For essentially the same analysis, see Sailors, “Textual and Rhetorical Criticism,” 95; Weima, “But We Became Infants among You,” 555–56, 560; and Holtz, 81; Fee, 66–71; Schreiber, I:141. 61 Cf. Holtz, 72, 75.

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 207

7/12/23 11:28 AM

208

1 Thessalonians 2:5–8

of ethics and manners, habitually employs flattery to gain some advantage for himself. According to Aristotle, “the man who joins in gratifying people . . . for the sake of getting something for himself in the way of money or money’s worth is a flatterer” (Eth. nic. 4.6.9). Paul denies “words of flattery” (κολακεία, a hapax in the NT), the opposite of παρρησία, in the first place, because that characterized much of the oratory of charlatan philosophers of his time.62 καθὼς οἴδατε, “as you know.” Harking back to the repeated “as you . . . know” in 2:1, 2, Paul adds this clause again to invite the readers to confirm his virtuous missionary conduct and thereby to consolidate their positive appreciation of it (cf. also vv. 9–12). οὔτε ἐν προφάσει πλεονεξίας, θεὸς μάρτυς, “nor with any pretext for covetousness, God is witness.” Ostensibly the language might be above suspicion, but if its real purpose is the speaker’s advantage, it is but a pretext (πρόφασις) for covetousness (πλεονεξία). The phrase προφάσει πλεονεξίας (the latter word is a genitive of definition) refers to a pretense which hides covetousness, “a cloak of greed.” Many itinerant charlatan philosophers covered their speech with sincerity, hiding their real intention to exploit their audience.63 False prophets also delivered deceitful messages for material gain (e.g., Jer 6:13; 8:10; Mic 3:5, 11). This was not so with Paul and his companions. For an emphatic denial here, Paul calls God to witness, just as he called the readers to witness for his denial of speaking flattery in the preceding clause. Later in his summary description of his eisodos in v. 10 he brings these parallel witnesses together: “You are witnesses, and also God.” In 2 Cor 12:16–18 (cf. also 2:17; 7:2), Paul defends himself vehemently against the suspicion of having worn a cloak of greed. But in 1 Thessalonians there is no evidence for such a suspicion existing in the Thessalonian church.64 On the contrary, both this verse and v. 9 suggest that the Thessalonian Christians well recognized his self-­support through hard labor. But then why does he strongly deny this here? Why does he even call God to witness (cf. Rom 1:9; 2 Cor 1:23; Phil 1:8; see also Job 16:19; Ps 89:37)? Wanamaker thinks that he uses this “asseveration formula” “when his inner motivations are in question and can only be verified independently by God.”65 Is it possible then to see Paul here as only touting himself as a moral example for his readers to emulate? Is it not much more natural to think that he is here defending himself against an attempt of the anti-­Christian opponents to denigrate him to the level of a wandering sophist or false prophet? Weima, appreciating an apologetic intent in the clause θεὸς μάρτυς (“God is witness”), also comments that, having added “as you know” in v. 5a because there Paul was referring to his outward behavior that the readers could

62 63 64 65

Cf. Dio Chrysostom, Or. 3.16–24. Cf. Malherbe, 142–43, for the references. So Holtz, 76. Wanamaker, 97–98.

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 208

7/12/23 11:28 AM

Comment 209 observe, he adds the clause “God is witness” because he refers to the integrity of his inner motive, which only God can judge.66 6 οὔτε ζητοῦντες ἐξ ἀνθρώπων δόξαν οὔτε ἀφ᾽ ὑμῶν οὔτε ἀπ᾽ ἄλλων, “nor seeking applause from human beings, neither from you nor from others.” Paul denies yet a third charge, which was also frequently levied against wandering orators. Some propagandists stood on their dignity and required respectful attention and subservience. Paul could not esteem too highly the glory of the message with which he was entrusted (cf. 2 Cor 4:7–11), but he himself and his colleagues were mere “earthen vessels” in which the treasure of the gospel was placed (2 Cor 4:7). Far from demanding service and deference from their converts, they presented themselves as their converts’ “slaves for Jesus’s sake” (2 Cor 4:5). Regarding ἐξ ἀνθρώπων . . . ἀφ’ ὑμῶν . . . ἀπ’ ἄλλων, it would be hypercritical to press a distinction between ἐξ and ἀπό here. Compare Rom 2:29, οὗ ὁ ἔπαινος οὐκ ἐξ ἀνθρώπων ἀλλ’ ἐκ τοῦ θεοῦ, with 1 Cor 4:5, καὶ τότε ὁ ἔπαινος γενήσεται ἑκάστῳ ἀπὸ τοῦ θεοῦ. Does “others” refer to those of 1 Thess 1:9 who praise him for his successful mission as well as the Thessalonians for their acceptance of the gospel?67 Here Paul seems to make an implicit contrast between seeking honor from human beings and from God (cf. 2:4).68 As one who is destined to obtain the divine δόξα (v. 12), he is not interested in getting δόξα from human beings.69 He set no store by the recognition or assessment of human beings, and he was content to abide by the Lord’s judgment (1 Cor 4:3–4). Thus our verse elaborates on the thought already expressed in v. 4b, namely, his principle of pleasing not human beings but God. On the worthlessness of δόξα παρὰ ἀνθρώπων, “the praise of human beings,” compare John 5:41–44. Malherbe stresses that Paul is repudiating seeking honor and money “because it was a standard part of the description of the ideal philosopher made necessary by the large number of sophists.”70 But why was it necessary for Paul to do this? Merely to present himself as an ideal philosopher? That would have been most unusual of him.71 Or perhaps to urge the readers to imitate him and conduct themselves like true philosophers? That would have been even more strange of him. 7a δυνάμενοι ἐν βάρει εἶναι ὡς Χριστοῦ ἀπόστολοι, “although we could have demanded you to respect our authority as apostles of Christ.” Δυνάμενοι is a concessive participle, and the whole phrase is connected to the preceding ζητοῦντες . . . phrase of v. 6 as its parenthetical extension rather than the following ἀλλὰ ἐγενήθημεν . . . clause of v. 7b (see Structure above). Malherbe 66 67 68 69 70 71

Weima, “But We Became Infants,” 561. So also Fee, 63. So Holtz, 77. So Best, 99. A comment made by a student in my class at Fuller Theological Seminary. Malherbe, 143. Cf. Marshall, 61.

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 209

7/12/23 11:28 AM

210

1 Thessalonians 2:5–8

recognizes this connection properly, but curiously in his translation of the passage and his subsequent discussion of βάρος he connects our phrase with v. 7b, taking βάρος in contrast to “gentleness” (reading ἤπιοι in v. 7b).72 The phrase ἐν βάρει εἶναι means literally “to be in weight.” Since our participial phrase is connected to the immediately preceding v. 6 rather than v. 5b, Paul appears to be using βάρος (“weight”) for his apostolic authority or dignity in general (cf. 2 Cor 4:17). However, in view of v. 9 (ἐπιβαρῆσαι, “to become burdensome), we may see him including also the specific thought of his apostolic right to make financial demands on his church (cf. 1 Cor 9:3–14; Gal 6:6; 1 Thess 2:9; 2 Thess 3:8).73 These two references to weightiness or a burden are then contrasted with the two following metaphors, νήπιοι (“infants,” v. 7b) and τροφός (“nurse” or “wet nurse,” v. 7c; see below). However, the attempt of Malherbe to take βάρος here in the sense of “harsh demands” in the light of the Hellenistic philosophers’ discussions on παρρησία seems to go too far.74 Does the word βάρος appearing here in connection with δόξα in v. 6 suggest that Paul has in mind the Hebrew ‫“( כבד‬glory”), which may etymologically be traced to the concept of “weight”?75 The phrase Χριστοῦ ἀπόστολοι refers to the fully empowered envoys of Christ, to be distinguished from the apostles of the churches (2 Cor 8:23; Phil 2:25). Note the plural here. Holtz thinks that it is a literary plural that in fact refers to Paul alone.76 Best supposes that Paul considers Silvanus and Timothy also as apostles because at this stage he had not yet fully formulated his view of apostleship as at the time of the Corinthian correspondence.77 But as Wanamaker points out, 1 Cor 15:3–7 indicates that the meaning of apostleship had already been fixed in the tradition that Paul received.78 Paul’s two criteria for apostleship, witness to the resurrection of Christ and commission by him (1 Cor 9:1; 15:8; Gal 1:12–17), correspond to those implied in the tradition. According to these criteria, Timothy, a convert of Paul himself, was not an apostle, and so Paul never calls him as such. But Silvanus, a leader of the Jerusalem church (Acts 15:22), could well have seen the risen Lord and been commissioned by him to be one of “all the apostles” whom Paul refers to in 1 Cor 15:7. Hence, it seems that Paul uses the plural “apostles” here because he is thinking of himself and Silvanus.79 As apostles of Christ, Paul and Silvanus could command respect from the Thessalonian converts and even demand them to support them financially

72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79

Malherbe, 134, 144–45. So Marshall, 68; pace Best, 100; Holtz, 78–79; Wanamaker, 99. Malherbe, 144. Cf. Best, 100; Weima, 143. Holtz, 78. Best, 100. Wanamaker, 99. So Marshall, 70, citing Schmithals, Office of Apostle, 23, 65–67; similarly also Fee, 64.

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 210

7/12/23 11:28 AM

Comment 211 (cf. 1 Cor 9:1, 4, 14), but they did not. Here Paul implicitly reflects his consciousness of his apostolic authority. When the legitimacy of his gospel is at stake, Paul asserts his apostolic authority in full, as they are inseparably bound together (e.g., 2 Corinthians; Galatians). But here he speaks of his voluntary surrender of it, as in 1 Cor 9. All this suggests that his opponents were not fellow Christians taking issue with his apostleship and his version of the gospel but non-­Christians denigrating him in opposition to the Christian faith. 7b ἀλλὰ ἐγενήθημεν νήπιοι ἐν μέσῳ ὑμῶν, “but we became infants among you.” The ἀλλά here corresponds to the threefold οὔτε of vv. 5–6 (and the parenthetical extension of v. 6 in v. 7a), and thus Paul now makes an affirmation in contrast to the preceding threefold negation. Although νήπιοι, “infants,” is much more strongly attested than its variant ἤπιοι, “gentle,” in the ancient manuscripts (see Notes above), most commentators (as well as English versions) prefer reading the latter here, regarding the former reading as having developed through dittography of the final letter of ἐγενήθημεν. Their chief reason for such a reading is that whereas ἤπιοι (“gentle”) suits the context well with its contrast with the preceding phrase ἐν βάρει εἶναι (“to be in weight,” i.e., to exert authority) as well as with the following metaphor τροφός (v. 7c), νήπιοι looks inappropriate in the immediate context, where Paul and his colleagues go on to compare themselves not to infants but to a “nurse” or “wet nurse” or a parent caring for her children (v. 11). Furthermore, it is argued that Paul uses the word “infant” usually in a pejorative sense (Rom 2:20; 1 Cor 3:1; 13:11; Gal 4:1, 3; cf. Eph 4:14). However, this argument is invalid. In 1 Cor 14:20b Paul uses the metaphor of an infant in a positive sense of moral innocence (albeit in the verbal form): “Be infants [νηπιάζετε] in evil.” Paul envelopes this exhortation by two contrasting exhortations: “Do not be [γίνεσθε] children [παιδία] in thinking . . .  in thinking be adults [τέλειοι],” indicating that in this case he uses the metaphor of “child” for immaturity in thinking or understanding. In Rom 2:20; 1 Cor 3:1; 13:11; Gal 4:1, 3 he also uses the metaphor of an infant in this same sense of intellectual immaturity that is natural with children, but it is unclear how much pejorative intent we must discern in those places (except in 1 Cor 3:1). At any rate, since the context of our verse is not concerned with the question of the intellectual attainment of Paul and his colleagues but rather their moral character (in contrast to the vices of vv. 5–7a), we can easily understand that Paul could effectively use νήπιος (“infant”) in the sense of 1 Cor 14:20b. If v. 7b is taken with v. 7c, the ἤπιοι (“gentle”) reading in the former fits well with the τροφός (“nurse”) metaphor of the latter, whereas the νήπιος (“infant”) does not.80 However, we have seen above that a better structural analysis shows v. 7b as ending the first sentence of the “not . . . but” structure of vv. 6–7b and v. 7c as beginning a new sentence of the “as . . . so” structure of vv. 7c–8 (see Structure above). So the change of metaphors between v. 7b 80 Pace Gaventa, Our Mother, 25–27; Schmidt, “1 Thess 2.7b, c,” 116–20.

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 211

7/12/23 11:28 AM

212

1 Thessalonians 2:5–8

(νήπιος) and v. 7c (τροφός) does not appear so inappropriate.81 For these and other reasons, some scholars have strongly advocated following the NA 27 and NA 28 editions in taking the better attested reading νήπιοι.82 Note the reappearance here of the main verb ἐγενήθημεν of v. 5. Paul advises his Corinthian converts to “be infants [νηπιάζετε] in evil,” though not in thinking (1 Cor 14:20). In his apostolic ministry he practices his own advice, so that he (and Silvanus) “became infants” during his mission in Thessalonica, unlike false prophets and charlatan philosophers who practiced flattery for material gain. So he (and Silvanus) sought to be pure and innocent like infants. They did not seek honor from any human beings either, although as apostles of Christ they could have done so, exerting their authority. Instead, they presented themselves as humble and innocent as infants (cf. Matt 11:25//Luke 10:21). It is unfortunate that Sailors sees this v. 7b related only to vv. 5–6 but not to v. 7a.83 In fact, with the metaphor νήπιοι here in v. 7b, Paul is affirming that he did not claim his apostolic βάρος (“weight,” v. 7a) or δόξα (“glory,” v. 6). It is even more unfortunate that, failing to see the “not . . . but” structure of vv. 5–7b, Aasgaard thinks that here “Paul presents himself as a helpless baby, dependent on the . . . goodwill of a mother,” that is, the Thessalonians.84 See the comment on v. 7c below for the new proposals of C. Gerber and U. Schmidt.85 For the similarity of ἀλλὰ ἐγενήθημεν νήπιοι ἐν μέσῳ ὑμῶν here with the dominical saying in Luke 22:26–27, γινέσθω ὡς ὁ νεώτερος, . . . ἐγὼ δὲ ἐν μέσῳ ὑμῶν ὡς ὁ διακονῶν (“Let [the greatest] . . . become as the youngest . . . I am among you as the one who serves”), see below. 7c ὡς ἐὰν τροφὸς θάλπῃ τὰ ἑαυτῆς τέκνα, “as a nurse cherishes her own children.” As said above (Structure), this clause forms together with the following v. 8 a new comparative sentence of ὡς . . . οὕτως (“as . . . so”). Having used the metaphor of “infant” to counter the slander that he behaved like a false prophet or a charlatan preacher during his mission in Thessalonica, Paul now begins to depict his actual ministry there with the metaphor τροφός. Citing Frame, Fee thinks that the metaphor “infant” in v. 7b triggered the new metaphor τροφός here and that the latter finally evolves into the metaphor “father” in v. 11.86 However, the exact meaning of τροφός is difficult to ascertain. If it means “nurse” employed to care for somebody else’s children,

81

Cf. Weima, “But We Became Infants,” 557, for Paul’s rapidly changing metaphors in 2 Cor 2:14 and Gal 4:19, as well as in our text of 2:7–11. 82 E.g., Sailors, “Textual and Rhetorical Criticism,” 81–98; Fee, 66–71; Weima, “But We Became Infants,” 547–64; cf. also Gaventa, 26–27, and idem, Our Mother, 18–20, despite her taking v. 7b together with v. 7c rather than v. 7a. 83 Sailors, “Textual and Rhetorical Criticism,” 95. 84 Aasgaard, “Like a Child,” 264–65. 85 Gerber, Paulus und seine “Kinder,” 277–92; Schmidt, “1 Thess 2.7b, c.” 86 Fee, 73.

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 212

7/12/23 11:28 AM

Comment 213 it appears somewhat incongruous with the object that appears with a reflexive pronoun, τὰ ἑαυτῆς τέκνα (“her own children”). In describing the model of Christ’s care for his church in Eph 5:29, the verb θάλπειν (lit. “to make warm”; fig. “to cherish, comfort”; see BDAG) is paired with the verb ἐκτρέφειν (from the root verb τρέφειν [“feed, nourish”] from which the noun τροφός derives). So with the metaphor τροφός here Paul may have especially a wet nurse in mind. But even interpreting the word specifically to refer to a wet nurse87 does not alleviate the incongruity with the emphatic reflexive pronoun in τὰ ἑαυτῆς τέκνα (“her own children”). So, Best interprets the word τροφός as “nursing-­mother,”88 but Holtz thinks that that sense is not well attested.89 Marshall supposes that here Paul really means a mother caring for “her own children,” but writes “nurse” instead of “mother” in order to stress the element of loving care.90 But surely the element of loving care is expressed better through the figure of mother than that of nurse! According to Wanamaker, by “alluding to the fact that a nurse who cares for other people’s children cherishes her own even more,” Paul seeks to heighten the sense of his loving care for the readers.91 But Gaventa observes that “the way in which nurses are described in the literature makes it difficult to think of a nurse with children that were, in fact, her own biological children.”92 So then should we disregard the emphasis in the phrase τὰ ἑαυτῆς τέκνα (“her own children”) as an unfortunate formulation93—­appreciating it only as reflecting Paul’s overeagerness to stress a nurse’s dedication in caring for her charges, that is, his dedication in caring for the readers (note the parallel τέκνα ἑαυτοῦ in v. 11 below)? Recently C. Gerber has proposed to interpret Paul as presenting himself as a wet nurse who cares for her own (biological) children—­therefore, without receiving payment for it.94 This interpretation fits well with Paul’s concern in the overall context of vv. 3–12, in which he presents himself as having ministered to the Thessalonians with purity and sincerity and out of sheer love, without claiming any apostolic right (including the claim to financial support). And it makes the reflexive pronoun in τὰ ἑαυτῆς τέκνα have its full emphatic force and turn out to be the key point of the figurative speech.95 Unfortunately Gerber presents this interpretation through a strange analysis of the structure of vv. 7–8 with unusual punctuation, which ignores both the οὔτε . . . οὔτε . . . οὔτε . . . ἀλλά structure of vv. 5–7b and the ὡς . . . οὕτως structure

87 So Malherbe, 146. 88 Best, 101; cf. also Fee, 74; Burke, Family, 151–54. 89 Holtz, 82n340. 90 Marshall, 71. So also Weima, 147. 91 Wanamaker, 101. So also Aasgaard, “Like a Child,” 263. 92 Gaventa, “Babes and Nurses,” 205. 93 So Holtz, 83. 94 Gerber, Paulus und seine “Kinder,” 277–92, esp. 277. 95 Cf. also Schreiber, I:142.

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 213

7/12/23 11:28 AM

214

1 Thessalonians 2:5–8

of vv. 7c–8.96 Furthermore, she accompanies it with a most unlikely interpretation of νήπιοι in v. 7b as a vocative, referring to the Thessalonians.97 However, quite apart from these mistakes, her interpretation of v. 7c itself makes good sense, even within the structure as we have analyzed it here (see Structure above). And we can well appreciate that here Paul writes not simply “as a mother cares for her children” but “as a τροφός [“nurse” or “wet nurse”] cares for her own children,” because the latter expresses much more effectively his apostolic service that he rendered free of charge, forgoing his right to claim financial payment for it. So we can see that with the metaphor τροφός (v. 7c) Paul is affirming that he neither asserted his apostolic βάρος (“weight,” v. 7a) or used tricks for financial gain (v. 5) but instead served the Thessalonians in a most self-­g iving way (which is further elaborated on in vv. 8–9). U. Schmidt accepts Gerber’s interpretation of v. 7c, but he takes νήπιοι in v. 7b as referring to Paul and his colleagues and interprets the figure in the sense of their total dependence on God’s gracious attention and care (Zuwendung).98 He then claims that this idea of Zuwendung is the connecting link between the mixed metaphors of “infants” (v. 7b) and “wet nurse” (v. 7c) and suggests that Paul is saying that, as one who lives himself on God’s gracious care, he granted the Thessalonians his apostolic service graciously with no financial charge, like a wet nurse who cares for her own children gratis.99 But this interpretation is dependent on Gerber’s strange reading of v. 7, which combines v. 7b and 7c with no punctuation in between and inadequately takes into account the contrast of v. 7b with the preceding clause (vv. 5–7a). In fact, as with the metaphor τροφός (v. 7c), Paul contrasts his self-­sacrificial ministry with apostolic βάρος (“weight,” v. 7a) or apostolic δόξα (“glory,” v. 6), so with the metaphor νήπιοι in v. 7b he contrasts his innocent and humble apostolic ministry with apostolic βάρος (“weight,” v. 7a) or seeking financial gain (v. 5). Thus we may see a chiastic structure here around the metaphor βάρος in v. 7a: A: not seeking financial gain (v. 5) B: not seeking apostolic δόξα (v. 6) C: not seeking apostolic βάρος (v. 7a: combination of A and B) B´: but became νήπιοι (v. 7b) A´: as τροφός cares for her own children (free of charge) (vv. 7c–8) Malherbe believes that Paul derives the image of “nurse” here and that of “father” in v. 11 below from the Hellenistic moral philosophers’ vocabulary for

96 Gerber, Paulus und seine “Kinder,” 278. 97 Gerber, Paulus und seine “Kinder,” 290–91. 98 Schmidt, “1 Thess 2.7b, c,” 116–20. 99 Schmidt, “1 Thess 2.7b, c,” 119.

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 214

7/12/23 11:28 AM

Comment 215 their care of their pupils.100 But Gaventa criticizes this view and seeks the background of the metaphor rather in the OT and Jewish tradition such as Num 11:12, where Moses protests to God for imposing on him the responsibilities of a mother and a nurse for the erring Israelites. She notes also 1QH 7.19–23, 25, where the Teacher of Righteousness also applies the images of foster father and nursing mother to himself for his relationship to his followers in the Qumran community.101 This interpretation appears plausible in view of the fact that Paul occasionally compares and contrasts his apostolic ministry with the ministry of Moses (cf. Rom 9:3; 2 Cor 3). We may compare this metaphor of nurse here with that of mother that Paul employs in Gal 4:19, “my children, for whom I suffer birth pangs again.” Cf. Paul’s use of the metaphor of father (along with the parallel τέκνα ἑαυτοῦ) in v. 11 below.102 8 οὕτως ὁμειρόμενοι ὑμῶν εὐδοκοῦμεν μεταδοῦναι ὑμῖν οὐ μόνον τὸ εὐαγγέλιον τοῦ θεοῦ ἀλλὰ καὶ τὰς ἑαυτῶν ψυχάς, “so we, having great affection for you, were resolved to share with you not only the gospel of God but also our own selves.” The adverb οὕτως is to be taken with εὐδοκοῦμεν rather than ὁμειρόμενοι, as it builds the ὡς . . . οὕτως (“as . . . so”) construction with v. 7c. Just as a nurse cares for her own children, so Paul and his colleagues “were resolved to” care for the readers. The verb ὁμείρεσθαι (see Notes above) is an obscure Greek word, attested elsewhere only three more times in all Greek literature (Job 3:21 LXX; Ps 62:2 Symmachus; and an epigram from Iconium [CIG III 4000, 7]). BDAG defines it as “to have a strong yearning, long for (someone).” Yet many modern translations and commentators, realizing that this sense is not quite appropriate in the present context, tend to render it in ways that smooth out the sense of longing. Baumert interprets the verb in the sense of “to be separated from (someone/thing)”103 and argues for this meaning here (“being separated from [you]”).104 He sets a semicolon or full stop at the end of v. 7 and argues that v. 8 begins a new sentence, in which Paul applies to his present situation his past attitude that he has recounted in vv. 5–7. Baumert produces this interpretation: “But we were child-­like among you, as when a nursing-­mother warms her own (biological) children. So, while we are separated from you, we are resolved to share with you not only the gospel but also our own lives.”105 But it does not appear right to connect v. 7c with

100 Malherbe, 160. 101 Gaventa, “Babes and Nurses,” 198–203. Cf. Betz, “Geburt,” 9–11; also Riesner, Early Period, 368–69, referring to 11QPsa 21.14–15, where ‫לה‬‎‫( ע‬nurse) appears in parallelism to ‎‫מלמד‬ (teacher). 102 For all these various metaphors—­“ father,” “mother,” and “nurse”—­t hat Paul employs for his apostolic ministry for the church, cf. Gaventa, Our Mother, 3–75; Burke, Family, 130–62. 103 Baumert, “Ὁμειρόμενοι,” 555–61. 104 Baumert, “Ὁμειρόμενοι,” 561. 105 Baumert, “Ὁμειρόμενοι,” 561–62.

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 215

7/12/23 11:28 AM

216

1 Thessalonians 2:5–8

v. 7b like this, as it produces such a strange meaning (see our comment on the verse above). It is also not easy to see v. 8 as an application of the attitude recounted in v. 7b–­c. But, more seriously, it is a question of whether Paul would have employed such an obscure word ὁμειρόμενοι only to state such a plain, obvious fact that did not really need to be stated. It should be pointed out that even when the ὡς . . . οὕτως (“as . . . so”) construction of vv. 7c–8 is accepted, the phrase ὁμειρόμενοι ὑμῶν in Baumert’s sense proves to be an unnecessary interruption within the construction and makes the whole verse yield an even more awkward meaning (“as a nurse cherishes her own children, so, being separated from you, we are resolved to share with you . . .”) than the traditional interpretation does. For understanding Paul’s use of the unusual word ὁμείρεσθαι here, the observation of Fee appears more helpful: “It seems likely that it has double entendre at this point. Grammatically it functions as part of Paul’s reminding them of the past, but relationally it is equally true in the present.”106 If so, with the choice of this rare and strong word Paul may have wanted to convey his present great affection to the readers as well as his past “longing” for them. His desire to convey his present feeling while recounting his past attitude toward the readers may also have led him to write the main verb εὐδοκοῦμεν in the present tense instead of the aorist or imperfect tense (see Notes above; cf. the aorist form εὐδοκήσαμεν in 3:1). Then we may need to understand this verb also as having double entendre. The verb εὐδοκεῖν means “to determine, resolve” and “to be well pleased, take delight” (BDAG). Some commentators107 prefer the former, stressing Paul’s will, while others108 opt for the latter, pointing to the overall affectionate tone of the present context. If Paul intends a double entendre with it by reminding the readers of the great “delight” that he had in sharing the gospel with them during his mission in Thessalonica, he may be seeking also to have them sense how “resolved” he is to do it again if there is any chance for him to return (note again the same verb εὐδοκεῖν in the aorist form in 3:1). This line of interpretation of our verse seems to be supported by 2:17–3:10, where Paul spells out his fervent “longing” for the readers and his “resolution” or “determination” to come to them to share the gospel (and his life) further with them (see comment on 2:17–20). The infinitive μεταδοῦναι has two objects, τὸ εὐαγγέλιον τοῦ θεοῦ (cf. v. 2) and τὰς ἑαυτῶν ψυχάς. Although Paul uses the verb παραδιδόναι to form a pair with παραλαμβάνειν for transmission of the gospel (1 Cor 15:3; cf. 1 Cor 11:23), he nowhere else uses the verb μεταδιδόναι with the gospel as the object. So it appears that the verb is used here mainly with the second object, τὰς ἑαυτῶν ψυχάς, in view (cf. Rom 1:11; 12:8; Eph 4:28 for the use of the verb for sharing 106 Fee, 75. 107 E.g., Holtz, 83; Malherbe, 146; Green, 128. 108 E.g., Fee, 75; Weima, 146.

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 216

7/12/23 11:28 AM

Comment 217 spiritual and material gifts). With this phrase (lit. “our own souls”), Paul means his and his colleagues’ “selves” or lives seen especially from the perspective of affection and will, for the ψυχή is the seat of affection and will (cf. μιᾷ ψυχῇ, Phil 1:27; σύμψυχος, 2:2; ἰσόψυχος, 2:20). The reflexive pronoun ἑαυτῶν, which originally belonged to the third person, is here extended in scope to cover the first person (also 2 Thess 3:9; cf. 2 Cor 4:5; for its extension to cover the second person, cf. 1 Thess 5:13). Paul did not conduct his ministry like an ancient sophist (or a modern-­ day “professional”) who works only on imparting his wisdom without a real personal and existential engagement with his audience. In preaching the gospel to the Thessalonians, he and his colleagues were willing to give their own lives for them. This involved earning their living through hard labor instead of burdening the Thessalonians, as he goes on to relate in v. 9. The thought is reminiscent of another memorable formula of Paul’s resolution found in 2 Cor 12:15, namely, to “spend and be spent” for the Corinthians. It appears to involve the active spending of all his resources—­h is time, energy, love, wisdom, and even money (cf. 2 Cor 12:14)—­for their sake. Further, in view of what Paul says in 1 Thess 2:2, 15–16, we may see that his and his colleagues’ resolution to “share [their] own lives” involved even risking their lives in the face of the authorities’ persecution. Thus, in this verse he seems to be implicitly carrying on his presentation of his apostolic ministry in contrast to the self-­seeking and exploitive behavior of wandering wisdom merchants of his day (cf. vv. 5–7a), who did not hesitate to run away from persecution, leaving their pupils in the lurch.109 Those addressed seem to have followed and reciprocated the apostolic example to judge from 2 Cor 8:5, where it is said that the Macedonian churches “first gave themselves [ἑαυτούς] to the Lord and to us [Paul and his companions] by the will of God.” διότι ἀγαπητοὶ ἡμῖν ἐγενήθητε, “because you had become so dear to us.” This repeats the sense of ὁμειρόμενοι ὑμῶν and, in doing so, emphasizes the warmth of Paul’s and his colleagues’ love for their converts. This powerfully affectionate language in vv. 7c–8110 is clearly designed to move the hearts of the readers and thus to consolidate their happy memory of him and their own longing for him (3:6). Paul seeks to evoke their longing (ἐπιποθεῖν, 3:6) for him by mentioning here his affection and longing for them. 109 Cf. P.Oxy. 930 and Favorinus, Or. 37.16, cited from Winter, “Is Paul among the Sophists?,” 32. See 2:14–3:10 for Paul’s worry that the Thessalonians might be viewing his forced departure from them amid persecution in terms of such charlatan behavior, and his sigh of relief at the news that they were not doing so. Compare Paul’s description of his apostolic ministry in contrast to the Hellenistic sophists here with Jesus’s presentation of himself as the good shepherd, in contrast to the thief and hireling in John 10:10–15. 110 Cf. Wanamaker, 102, who stresses its extraordinariness in the whole Pauline corpus.

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 217

7/12/23 11:28 AM

218

1 Thessalonians 2:5–8

Explanation In our passage, Paul describes his apostolic conduct during his entry or eisodos at Thessalonica as closely conforming to Jesus’s ransom saying (Mark 10:45parr.), as he does in explaining his apostolic conduct in 1 Cor 9:19, 22; 10:33–11:1. So there is a close parallelism between our 2:1–12 and 1 Cor 9–10 in describing his apostolic stance on the church’s financial support. They show that Paul made imitating the Christ of the ransom saying a fundamental principle for his apostolic ministry. For a detailed demonstration of these points, see part 1 of my essay, “Jesus’ Ransom Saying (Mark 10:45//Matt 20:28) and Eucharistic Saying (Mark 14:21–25 and Parr.) Echoed in 1 Thessalonians” (in PGTO, 151–55). Here we just provide the following three layouts to show how Paul echoes the ransom saying in our passage as well as in 1 Cor 9:19, 22; 10:33–11:1. First, note how the sequence of Paul’s statements in 1 Thess 2:6–8, as well as the concepts in them, parallel those of Mark 10:35–45: 1 Thess 2:6–7b: “We did not seek glory from human beings . . . but became infants [ἐγενήθημεν νήπιοι] among you.” Mark 10:35–44parr.: Do not seek lofty positions among human beings, but become slave of all (cf. esp. the version in Luke 22:26: “become as the youngest,” γινέσθω ὡς ὁ νεώτερος). 1 Thess 2:7: “Although we might have demanded you to respect our authority as apostles of Christ, we became infants among you. As a nurse [normally a servant] cares for her own children . . .” Mark 10:45a: “[Although the Son of Man has authority to demand service; cf. Dan 7:13–14], the Son of Man came not to be served but to serve.” 1 Thess 2:8: “. . . we were resolved [εὐδοκοῦμεν] to share [μεταδοῦναι] with you . . . our own souls/selves [τὰς ἑαυτῶν ψυχάς].” Mark 10:45b: “the Son of Man came [ἦλθεν] . . . to give [δοῦναι] his soul/ self [τὴν ψυχὴν αὐτοῦ] . . . for many.” Second, note how the likelihood that in our vv. 6–8 Paul echoes Jesus’s sayings in Mark 10:35–45parr. is enhanced by the fact that in 1 Cor 9:19, 22 and 10:33 in the context of revealing basically the same apostolic stance as in our passage, Paul echoes the ransom saying of Mark 10:45parr.: 1 Cor 9:19: “I have made myself a slave to all, so that I might win the more [πᾶσιν ἐμαυτὸν ἐδούλωσα, ἵνα τοὺς πλείονας κερδήσω].” 1 Cor 9:22: “I have become all things to all (people), so that I might . . . save some [τοῖς πᾶσιν γέγονα πάντα, ἵνα πάντως τινὰς σώσω].”

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 218

7/12/23 11:28 AM

Explanation 219 Mark 10:44–45: “ . . . slave of all, for the Son of Man came . . . to serve and to give his soul/self . . . as a ransom for many [πάντων δοῦλος . . . ἦλθεν . . . διακονῆσαι καὶ δοῦναι τὴν ψυχὴν αὐτοῦ λύτρον ἀντὶ πολλῶν].” Note well here the same idea and vocabulary of becoming a slave of all in order to save “many” (a Semitic expression meaning “all”). Note, too, Paul’s talk of his being under “the law of Christ” in 1 Cor 9:21. Third, compare also 1 Cor 10:33 and Mark 10:45: 1 Cor 10:33: “I try to please all people [πάντα] . . . , NOT seeking my own advantage, BUT that of many [πολλῶν], that they [all/many] may be saved.” Mark 10:45: “NOT to be served, BUT to serve and to give his life [for many/all people—­πάντων in Mark 10:44] as a ransom for many [πολλῶν].” Note the same thought structure, the “not . . . but,” as well as the same idea and vocabulary, and Paul’s immediate explanation of this as his imitation of Christ—­see 1 Cor 11:1.111 Paul’s description of his apostolic ministry in our passage is also similar to Jesus’s presentation of himself as the good shepherd in John 10:10–16. We can see that it is so because the latter also echoes Jesus’s ransom saying (i.e., because it is a Johannine version of the ransom saying). See the following parallels: John 10:10–11: “I came [ἐγὼ ἦλθον] that they may have life. . . . I am the good shepherd. The good shepherd lays down his life [τὴν ψυχὴν αὐτοῦ τίθησιν] for the sheep.” (See further vv. 15, 17, 18; 15:13; 1 John 3:16.)112 Mark 10:45: “The Son of Man came [ἦλθον] . . . to give his life as a ransom for many [δοῦναι τὴν ψυχὴν αὐτοῦ λύτρον ἀντὶ πολλῶν].” John 10:13: A hireling does not care (μέλει) for the sheep—­implying that in contrast Jesus the good shepherd does care for the sheep. Mark 10:45: “The Son of Man came . . . to serve.” 111 For the echoes of the ransom saying in 1 Cor 9:19, 22 and 10:33, see also my “Imitatio Christi,” 197–98 (now in PGTO, 326–27; cf. Riesner, “Back to the Historical Jesus,” 182–86, who also affirms these echoes. 112 Cf. C. Maurer, TDNT 8:155–56, who shows that both τίθημι here and δίδωμι in Mark 10:45 render the Hebrew ‫ שים‬of Isa 53:10.

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 219

7/12/23 11:28 AM

220

1 Thessalonians 2:5–8

John 10:16: “I have other sheep that are not of this fold; I must bring them also.” Mark 10:45: “The Son of Man came . . . to give his life as ransom for many” (πολλῶν/‫ רבים‬of Isa 53:11, meaning “all”; cf. 2 Tim 2:6).113 When Paul disclaims the use of flattery to disguise an underlying ambition to secure wealth, power, and high repute, we are not surprised that he appeals to the Thessalonians’ knowledge that such a disclaimer is well-­founded. All the evidence at our disposal indicates that Paul and his friends spoke the simple truth. If they had indeed aimed at wealth, power, and high repute, they would have to be dismissed as men who signally failed to achieve their aim. By secular standards they were marked to the end of their days by poverty, weakness, disrepute, and all sorts of tribulation; but they assessed their lot by other than secular standards—­“as having nothing, and yet possessing everything” (2 Cor 6:10). But more impressive than their disclaimer of unworthy motives and actions is the assertion of their loving care for their converts. The note of maternal affection in v. 7 comes from Paul’s very heart. Far from seeking any material help from their converts, they were eager to share with them all that they had, and indeed all that they were. No other attitude would befit the preachers of a gospel that proclaimed as Lord and Savior one who “came to serve and give his life as a ransom for many” (Mark 10:45) or “became poor for [our] sake, so that by his poverty [we] might become rich” (2 Cor 8:9). Jesus conducted himself among his disciples as a servant; from his example they were expected to learn that they, in turn, should be servants to one to another and to their fellow men and women. Any doctrine of Christian ministry that presents the minister as a ruler in the church is unworthy of the precedent set by the church’s Lord and Master; in accordance with Jesus’s precedent, the minister is not a ruler but a servant. The pope himself has no more honorable designation than “servant of the servants of God.” The extent and nature of the tradition that Paul and his colleagues had received about the life and teaching of Jesus may be debated, but this is not in dispute: in that tradition (independently preserved in the canonical Gospels) Jesus came to serve, not to be served, and taught his followers accordingly. Moreover, it is not that lowly service will be rewarded by promotion to a position of greatness but that, in his kingdom, lowly service is true greatness (cf. Mark 10:35–45//Matt 20:20–28//Luke 22:24–27).

113 For the view that John 3:13–17 and 6:35–58 also echo Jesus’s ransom saying as well as his eucharistic saying, cf. Kim, “Jesus’ Ransom Saying,” in PGTO, 160–61.

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 220

7/12/23 11:28 AM

Bibliography 221

(c) Summing Up His Description of His Eisodos or Missionary Conduct (2:9–12) Bibliography Evans, R. M. “Eschatology and Ethics: A Study of Thessalonica and Paul’s Letters to the Thessalonians.” PhD diss., University of Basel, 1967. Hock, R. F. “Paul’s Tentmaking and the Problem of his Social Class.” JBL 97 (1978): 555–64. —­—­—­. The Social Context of Paul’s Ministry: Tentmaking and Apostleship. Philadelphia: Fortress, 1980. —­—­—.­ “The Workshop as a Social Setting for Paul’s Missionary Preaching.” CBQ 41 (1979): 438–50. Lohfink, G. Wie hat Jesus Gemeinde gewollt? Freiburg: Herder, 1982. Oakes, P. “A House-­Church Account of Economics and Empire.” Pages 3–30 in Empire, Economics, and the New Testament. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2020. Russell, R. “The Idle in 2 Thess 3.6–12: An Eschatological or a Social Problem?” NTS 34 (1988): 105–19.

Translation For you remember, brothers and sisters, our labor and toil. We a worked by night and day so as not to become burdensome to any of you when we preached the gospel of God to you. 10You are witnesses, and so is God, how devout, just, and blameless our behavior was toward you believers b—­11how, as you know, we exhorted each one of you as a father would exhort his own children.c 12Thus we exhorted you,d encouraged you, and charged e you to conduct yourselves in a manner worthy of God, the one who calls f you into his own kingdom and glory. 9

Notes a. The sentence begins with νυκτός (“by night”), to which γάρ (“for”) is added by D2 byz syrhel.mg. b. For the present participle πιστεύουσιν (“believers”),  65 lat (cf. vg qui credidistis) read the aorist participle πιστεύσασιν, “(who) have believed.” c. The ὡς before ἕνα ἕκαστον (“each one”), like ὡς before ὁσίως κτλ. in v. 10, depends on ὑμεῖς μάρτυρες κτλ. (“you are witnesses . . . how . . .”), but the clause introduced by the second ὡς has no principal verb corresponding to ἐγενήθημεν in the clause introduced by the former ὡς. The ὡς before πατήρ is the comparative particle meaning “as” or “like.” d. After παρακαλοῦντες (“exhorting”), ὑμᾶς (“you”) is omitted by ‫ א‬lat vg.cod. e. For μαρτυρόμενοι (“charging”) D* F G byz read μαρτυρούμενοι (“being witnessed to”), which is inappropriate in this context. f. For τοῦ καλοῦντος, present participle (“who calls”), τοῦ καλέσαντος, aorist participle (“who called”) is read by ‫ א‬A and a few minuscules with lat a f vg syr cop.

Form/Structure/Setting In this paragraph Paul rounds off the recounting of his entry or eisodos in Thessalonica with a summary depiction of it: • v. 9: summary evidence for his freedom from personal greed and for his care for the Thessalonians that he claimed in vv. 2–8 • v. 10: summing up in one sentence the integrity of his eisodos that he explained in vv. 1–9

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 221

7/12/23 11:28 AM

222

1 Thessalonians 2:9–12

• v. 11: a summary description of the nature of his ministry in terms of a fatherly pastoral exhortation • v. 12: a summary of the content of the exhortation that he imparted during the eisodos Within this short space he appeals to the readers’ recollection of his virtuous conduct three times over, as well as invoking God as witness for it. In this way he seeks to solidify their positive appreciation of it.

Comment 2:9 μνημονεύετε γάρ, ἀδελφοί, τὸν κόπον ἡμῶν καὶ τὸν μόχθον, “For you remember, brothers and sisters, our labor and toil.” The γάρ indicates that this statement is to substantiate what have been said in the preceding verses. Thus Paul is here providing effective evidence for the claims that he has made in vv. 3–8: the first half of our verse (v. 9a) substantiates his claim to have been free from the impure motives of self-­seeking and greed, while the second half (v. 9b) substantiates his claim to have cared for the Thessalonians out of self-­g iving love for them. The verb μνημονεύετε is indicative rather than imperative, but still, by adding the emphatic hortatory ἀδελφοί, Paul calls the readers to remember his κόπος (hard labor) καὶ μόχθος (its painfulness), which are to be taken together: “our toil and moil,”114 with a suggestion of hardship and fatigue (cf. 2 Cor 11:27; 2 Thess 3:8 for the same coupling). νυκτὸς καὶ ἡμέρας ἐργαζόμενοι, “working by night and day.” Paul’s hard labor is further emphasized by νυκτὸς καὶ ἡμέρας (cf. 3:10). With the genitive phrase he indicates that he worked “both at night and by day”115—­not the whole night and day continuously, for which the accusative case would have been used, as in Acts 20:31, νύκτα καὶ ἡμέραν . . . νουθετῶν, “admonishing all night and all day.” The present verse implies that in Thessalonica Paul preached the gospel while doing manual labor (cf. 1 Cor 4:12) in a workshop during the weekdays (cf. Acts 17:2; 18:4, where it is indicated that on the Sabbaths he preached in the synagogue). The Greeks and the Romans generally despised manual labor. In Judaism, a later teacher, Rabban Gamaliel III, gave voice to a traditional principle when he said that study of the Torah was excellent if combined with a secular occupation (m. Abot 2.2). It appears that, having learned the trade of tentmaking (or, more generally, leatherwork) in accordance with this principle, Paul carried the principle over into his apostolic ministry (Acts 18:3). Recently, this more traditional view has been challenged by Hock and Malherbe,116 who point to the late date of the Jewish tradition and argue that some Cynic philosophers advocated an ideal similar to that of Paul here. 114 Lightfoot, 26. 115 Marshall, 72. 116 Hock, Social Context, 22–35, and Malherbe, 160–61.

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 222

7/12/23 11:28 AM

Comment 223 Anyway, in Thessalonica, as later in Corinth (1 Cor 4:12) and Ephesus (Acts 19:12; 20:34), Paul maintained himself by manual labor, and his coworkers evidently did the same. R. M. Evans describes how, in Greece and Macedonia of the first century, unemployment among the proletariat or working-­class people was rampant and how poorly even those who had a job were remunerated.117 When read in the light of that reality, Paul’s statement here that he and his missionary colleagues “labor[ed] and toil[ed] by night and by day” to earn their living appears not as rhetorically exaggerated but as very realistic and all the more striking. Because the pay was so bad, they had to work hard and incredibly long hours to earn their sustenance! Evans reckons such poor economic conditions were a factor for the rise of the problem of the idlers in the Thessalonian church (4:11–12; 5:14; 2 Thess 3:6–15). So we can appreciate how, with the emphatic statement here and its repetition in 2 Thess 3:8, Paul seeks to urge the idlers to find even a poor-­paying job and work hard to earn enough for their living, as well as reminding the whole church of his and his colleagues’ example and impeccable integrity.118 The question arises why nothing is said here of financial help received from Philippi during the mission in Thessalonica. In Phil 4:15–16, Paul reminds the Christians in Philippi that, when he left Macedonia after his first gospel preaching there, they were the only church to communicate with him “in respect of giving and receiving” and adds that, already in Thessalonica, they sent to relieve his need καὶ ἅπαξ καὶ δίς (which may mean “and that more than once” or, less probably, “and more than once”; for the Greek phrase, cf. v. 18 below). It may be that the money sent from Philippi was insufficient to remove completely his need to do manual labor in Thessalonica; it may be, too, that there was a desire not to embarrass the Thessalonian Christians by mentioning gifts received from other Christians. There was no need to make the Thessalonian Christians feel ashamed of themselves by using the kind of language that Paul uses to chastise the church of Corinth in 2 Cor 11:8–9. πρὸς τὸ μὴ ἐπιβαρῆσαί τινα ὑμῶν, “so as not to burden any of you.” This refers to financial burden (and is repeated in 2 Thess 3:8; cf. also καταβαρεῖν, 2 Cor 12:16, and ἀβαρής, 2 Cor 11:9, used in the same sense), although as an apostle of Christ he could lay upon his converts the burden of supporting his daily needs (v. 7a) so that he need not do such hard labor. Other traveling preachers, both Christian (cf. 2 Cor 11:20) and non-­Christian, did make themselves burdensome financially and in other ways. Paul in particular made it his policy to be different from them (1 Cor 9:4–6, 14–15) and to shut the mouths of those who would have liked to say that he, like others, was in this

117 Evans, “Eschatology and Ethics,” 52–56. Cf. also Oakes, “House-­Church Account,” 3–30, for the economically precarious existence of the majority of the members of first-­century house churches. 118 Cf. also Russell, “The Idle,” 111–13.

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 223

7/12/23 11:28 AM

224

1 Thessalonians 2:9–12

preaching business for what he could get out of it (vv. 3, 5–6; cf. 2 Cor 11:12). More positively, he made financial self-­support his policy, as his apostolic self-­understanding demanded service and self-­g iving for his converts rather than putting a burden on them to serve him (vv. 7–8; see Explanation above). In 2 Thess 3:8–9 Paul repeats our phrase to explain the motive for his practice of self-­support through his own “labor and toil” and then adds another element in the motive: “to present ourselves as an example for you to imitate.” His neglect to mention this second element in our present context suggests that in our chapter it is not his primary concern here to present himself as a model for the readers.119 ἐκηρύξαμεν εἰς ὑμᾶς, “we proclaimed to you.” For εἰς denoting the recipients of such a proclamation, cf. Mark 14:9; Luke 24:47; Acts 17:15. The verb κηρύσσειν is frequently used in the NT for preaching the gospel (e.g., Mark 1:14; 1 Cor 1:23); the noun κῆρυξ, “herald,” from which it is derived, is used of Paul in 1 Tim 2:7 and 2 Tim 1:11, and its own derivative κήρυγμα is used of the content of the preaching in Rom 16:25 (τὸ κήρυγμα Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ; cf. also 1 Cor 1:21; 2:4; 2 Tim 4:17). For the phrase τὸ εὐαγγέλιον τοῦ θεοῦ, “the gospel of God,” see comment on 2:2, 8. 10 ὑμεῖς μάρτυρες καὶ ὁ θεός, “you are witnesses, and so is God.” This collocation of the Thessalonians’ testimony and God’s is repeated from v. 5 (καθὼς οἴδατε . . . θεὸς μάρτυς). Paul solemnly invokes the readers and God as witnesses. It is an advance on his appeal to the readers’ memory in v. 9. To forestall any suspicion that the Thessalonians as mere human beings could have been deceived by his “pretext” (προφάσις, v. 5), Paul cites also God “who tests our hearts” (v. 4). He goes to this extent probably because the opponents of the church tried to persuade the new believers in Christ that they had been duped by Paul.120 For a mere paraenesis, would he have invoked God like this?121 ὡς ὁσίως καὶ δικαὶως καὶ ἀμέμπτως . . . ἐγενήθημεν, “how devout, just, and blameless our behavior was.” With the verb γίνεσθαι, the adjectival forms of the predicates (ὅσιοι καὶ δίκαιοι καὶ ἄμεμπτοι) are usual. But here their adverbial forms appear (cf. Acts 20:18; for the regular adjectival construction, cf. 1 Thess 2:7, ἐγενήθημεν ἤπιοι). The adverbs here may be functioning simply as adjectives.122 However, it is more likely that Paul deliberately chooses the adverbial forms here to remind the readers specifically of “the form and manner” of his missionary team’s ἐγενήθημεν,123 that is, of the character of the actual behavior that they displayed, rather than more generally the character of their persons (cf. 2 Clem. 5.6: τὸ ὁσίως καὶ δικαίως ἀναστρέφεσθαι).124 This view 119 120 121 122 123 124

Contra Marshall, 72; Wanamaker, 103; Malherbe, 161. So Marshall, 73; also Best, 104–5. Pace Wanamaker, 104–5; Malherbe, 155–56. Cf. BDF §434; MHT, 3:226. Malherbe, 149. So Wanamaker, 105; Richard, 85; Fee, 79.

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 224

7/12/23 11:28 AM

Comment 225 seems to be supported by a comparison with 1:5b. There Paul speaks of the same subject as in our verse, but with a different construction, καθὼς οἴδατε οἷοι ἐγενήθημεν (“as you know what kind of persons we were”), implicitly expecting an answer that would naturally have adjectives as predicates. Thus, there Paul is concerned to remind the readers broadly and generally of the character of their persons that they displayed to them during his entry or eisodos. The words ὁσίως and δικαίως and their cognates often appear together in Greek literature (including the NT: Luke 1:75; Eph 4:24; Titus 1:8; Rev 16:5; cf. also Wis 9:3). The term ὁσίως refers to conduct that conforms to divine ordinance and therefore is proper toward deity, and so it refers to piety. The word δικαίως denotes proper behavior in accordance with the laws. When the two concepts are coupled together, ὁσίως refers to the godward aspect of the conduct and δικαίως to its manward aspect, and together they describe the conduct of a wholesome person.125 Lightfoot goes on to see δικαίως corresponding to “you are witnesses” and ὁσίως to “God also” in our verse.126 But more likely Paul means that both the readers and God are witnesses to Paul and his missionary team having behaved themselves both in a pious and just way. Green suggests that, with the two adverbs, Paul claims to have conducted himself in conformity to both divine and human law; that he makes this claim against the opponents’ charges that, by teaching his converts to abandon their civic and family cults, he was “impious”; and that by preaching Jesus as the Lord he was “defying Caesar’s decrees” (Acts 17:7).127 But those charges could have been, if at all, only a small part of Paul’s concern here. For our ὡς clause should really be seen as a summary statement of what Paul has illustrated as his missionary behavior in Thessalonica in the foregoing verses of 2:1–9. He sums up with the two conventionally coupled concepts all the points he has made of the manner of his missionary conduct in those verses (so the two adverbs may be seen as two summary headings). He is claiming that during his mission in Thessalonica he and his team conducted themselves in reverence to God and in righteousness toward human beings. Then, by adding the third adverb ἀμέμπτως, he conclusively stresses what is asserted with the previous two adverbs: in both godward devoutness and manward uprightness, he and his missionary team behaved in a blameless manner. ὑμῖν τοῖς πιστεύουσιν, “toward you believers.” Does the dative ὑμῖν mean “among you believers,”128 “toward [or to the benefit of] you believers,”129 or 125 E.g., “Socrates was “ just [δίκαιος] in his dealings with human beings and pious [ὅσιος] in his dealings with the gods” (Marcus Antonius 7.66.3). See Lightfoot, 27–28; F. Hauck, TDNT 5:490–91; Malherbe, 150, with more examples cited. 126 Lightfoot, 28. 127 Green, 133. 128 A locative dative; Rigaux, 427–28; Marshall, 73; Wanamaker, 105. 129 A dative of advantage; Lightfoot, 28; Best, 105; Fee, 80.

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 225

7/12/23 11:28 AM

226

1 Thessalonians 2:9–12

“in the eyes of you believers”?130 In view of 1:5 (ἐν ὑμῖν) and 2:7 (ἐν μέσῳ ὑμῶν; cf. also πρὸς ὑμᾶς in 1:9; 2:1, 3), we can presume that for the first sense Paul would have used a prepositional construction. Note the fact that ὑμῖν occurs in a context (vv. 7b–9) in which he has been describing his entry or eisodos in Thessalonica, especially highlighting its character of loving care for the readers. So it appears more natural to take it in the second sense than the third sense. Although Paul is here describing his eisodos in Thessalonica, that is, his missionary conduct among the Thessalonians in general, he writes specifically “toward you believers” because from v. 7b on he has been describing his apostolic conduct especially from the viewpoint of its effect upon the readers, upon those who came to accept his gospel—­his exhortation, encouragement, and charge (vv. 11–12). On the significance of the absolute form “the believers” as a designation for Christians, see comment on 1:7 above. 11 καθάπερ οἴδατε, ὡς ἕνα ἕκαστον ὑμῶν ὡς πατὴρ τέκνα ἑαυτοῦ, “how, as you know, [we exhorted] each one of you as a father [exhorts] his own children.” This ὡς clause appears to stand in parallelism to the ὡς clause of the previous verse, being dependent, like the latter, on the main clause of v. 10 (“You are witnesses, and so is God”). But there is no verb in this ὡς clause. So, Fee sees the ἐγενήθημεν of the first ὡς clause in v. 10 also serving this second ὡς clause here.131 But the accusative case of ἕνα ἕκαστον ὑμῶν . . . τέκνα ἑαυτοῦ here (unlike the dative ὑμῖν τοῖς πιστεύουσιν in v. 10) makes this suggestion implausible. So it appears best to think that here a verb such as “to exhort” is omitted. It would be neater if Paul completes his summary description of the moral character (the first ὡς clause in v. 10) and the pastoral nature of his ministry (the second ὡς clause in this verse) during his eisodos by adding a verb (such as “exhorted” or “treated”) to this second ὡς clause (i.e., at the end of v. 11) in parallelism to the ἐγενήθημεν of the first ὡς clause (v. 10). But, instead, he immediately proceeds to describe the actual content of his exhortation (v. 12), expressing the sense of the omitted verb with the emphatic threefold participle παρακαλοῦντες ὑμᾶς καὶ παραμυθούμενοι καὶ μαρτυρόμενοι (“exhorting and encouraging and charging you”). Understanding his fatherly care for his converts chiefly in terms of exhortation and intending to stress it, he rushes to heap up the three related words for it, forgetting to properly complete the second ὡς clause with a verb.132 The words καθάπερ οἴδατε (“as you know”) reinforce the main clause in v. 10. This is the sixth appeal to the readers’ personal knowledge of the facts about his eisodos or apostolic ministry (cf. vv. 1, 2, 5, 9, 10) within the short passage of 2:1–12. With these repeated appeals, he does not seek simply to obtain their consent to his assertions but rather to help them recall their actual experience of those 130 A dative of opinion or credit; Malherbe, 149. 131 Fee, 79. 132 Cf. Best, 106.

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 226

7/12/23 11:28 AM

Comment 227 features of his eisodos and thereby to consolidate their positive appreciation of them. ἕνα ἕκαστον ὑμῶν, “each one of you” (cf. Acts 20:31). This individualizing phrase, as well as the following phrase ὡς πατὴρ τέκνα ἑαυτοῦ, adds force to Paul’s emphasis on his pastoral dedication: he did not just treat the readers en masse, but rather he cared for each of them, paying attention to their individual needs. ὡς πατὴρ τέκνα ἑαυτοῦ, “as a father (exhorts) his own children.” Paul often uses the image of father and children for the relationship between himself and his converts (1 Cor 4:14–21; 2 Cor 6:11–13; Phil 2:22; Phlm 10) to express the ideas of his having brought them to spiritual birth (cf. Gal 4:19, an image of a mother) and of his pastoral care and discipline of them. The “father” image here is parallel to the “nurse” image in v. 7, and with the emphatic formula “her/his own children” added to both images, he conveys the same loving care for the readers. However, the former makes an advance on the latter; if with the “nurse” image he stressed the aspect of care in his pastoral work, with the “father” image here he highlights the aspect of teaching and discipline. Thus the authority of the father, as well as his loving concern, is presupposed.133 12 παρακαλοῦντες ὑμᾶς καὶ παραμυθούμενοι καὶ μαρτυρόμενοι, “exhorting and comforting and charging you.” The three participles represent another series of three, and they are dependent on the omitted verb in v. 11 (or they emphatically express the sense that the omitted verb would have expressed). Thus, vv. 11–12 make up one long sentence, which most of the Greek editions divide, appropriately marking this participial phrase as the beginning of a new verse, in contrast to most English translations that make the purpose phrase εἰς τὸ περιπατεῖν ὑμᾶς (“in order for you to walk”) begin the new verse, which is less appropriate. With the phrase led by the three participles, Paul specifies the content of his fatherly pastoral ministry. The first two participles are practically synonymous, meaning “to encourage” in the sense of both comforting and exhorting. But παρακαλεῖν apparently has a broader meaning, as it has a broader usage. Παραμυθεῖσθαι is less common in Paul’s writings than the first; when he uses it (or a cognate noun), it is regularly in association with παρακαλεῖν (or the noun παράκλησις; see 1 Thess 5:14; also 1 Cor 14:3; Phil 2:1). So here they should be taken together, despite the intervening ὑμᾶς, and be rendered as “exhorting and comforting.” The element of comfort was necessary because the new converts had to be reassured to remain faithful in their new Christian “walk” in the face of opposition.134 Malherbe sees here an inclusio with παράκλησις of v. 3 above.135 No matter whether the inclusio is 133 Cf. Holtz, 89; Wanamaker, 106; Burke, Family, 131–57. 134 Pace Holtz, 90. 135 Malherbe, 151. Cf. also Holtz, 90.

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 227

7/12/23 11:28 AM

228

1 Thessalonians 2:9–12

intended or not, it is noteworthy that both in v. 3 and here Paul characterizes his preaching as παράκλησις, and that here the παράκλησις gets an elaboration in terms of an exhortation for the Thessalonians to accept God’s call into the kingdom of God and lead a life worthy of God. The verb μαρτύρεσθαι means to “urge something, as a matter of great importance” (BDAG). So μαρτυρόμενοι has a more authoritative nuance than the two preceding participles (cf. Gal 5:3; Eph 4:17). The prepositional phrase that follows indicates both the purpose and the content of the exhortation and charge. εἰς τὸ περιπατεῖν ὑμᾶς ἀξίως τοῦ θεοῦ, “that you should walk in a manner worthy of God.” (For the construction, cf. 3:10; 4:9.) This metaphorical use of περιπατεῖν (“walk,” i.e., “conduct oneself”) for an ethical sense is found in a number of NT writers as well as in many Jewish writings (rendering the Hebrew ‫)הלך‬,136 but it is particularly common in Paul (cf. 4:1, 12; 2 Thess 3:6, 11). It may be compared with the use of ὁδός (“way”) to denote a course of life, either absolutely (as when ἡ ὁδός is used of the Christian faith in Acts 9:2; 19:9, 23; 24:14, 22) or in a construction that makes its meaning plain (as in 1 Cor 4:17, where Paul speaks of τὰς ὁδούς μου τὰς ἐν Χριστῷ Ἰησοῦ, “my ways in Christ Jesus”). According to the context, περιπατεῖν may denote evil or good conduct (for the former cf. 2 Cor 4:2, περιπατοῦντες ἐν πανουργίᾳ, “walking in craftiness”; 2 Cor 10:2, κατὰ σάρκα περιπατοῦντας, “walking according to the flesh”). “The just requirement of the law [is] fulfilled in us, who walk not according to the flesh but according to the Spirit” (Rom 8:4), because if we “walk by the Spirit” or “are led by the Spirit” we bear the fruit of the Spirit, while if we walk by the flesh we bear the fruit of the flesh (Gal 5:16–26). In our verse, the context indicates clearly the character of the “walk”: it is to be ἀξίως τοῦ θεοῦ, “in a manner worthy of God,” that is, in conformity to the character and will of God. Cf. Rom 16:2 (ἀξίως τῶν ἁγίων, “in a manner worthy of the saints”); Eph 4:1 (ἀξίως περιπατῆσαι τῆς κλήσεως, “walk worthily of the calling”); Phil 1:27 (ἀξίως τοῦ εὐαγγελίου τοῦ Χριστοῦ πολιτεύεσθε, “live worthily of the gospel of Christ”); Col 1:10 (περιπατῆσαι ἀξίως τοῦ κυρίου, “walk worthily of the Lord”). τοῦ θεοῦ τοῦ καλοῦντος ὑμᾶς εἰς τὴν ἑαυτοῦ βασιλείαν καὶ δόξαν, “God who calls you into his own kingdom and glory.” With this participial phrase, Paul specifies concretely what will of God the readers should seek to conform their conduct to. The present participle καλοῦντος is textually better attested (B D G) than the aorist participle καλέσαντος that appears in some manuscripts (‫ א‬A and a few minuscule; see Notes above). The latter obviously represents a later alteration to conform our text to Paul’s usual practice of using the aorist (or perfect) tense to refer to God’s call at conversion (e.g., 4:7; 2 Thess 2:14; Rom 8:30; 1 Cor 7:17–24; Gal 1:6, 15). In Deutero-­Isaiah 136 Cf. Michaelis, TDNT 5:48–65; Bertram, TDNT 5:941–43; Seesemann, TDNT 5:943–45; similarly also in nonbiblical Greek writings, often in the form of its synonym πορεύεσθαι.

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 228

7/12/23 11:28 AM

Comment 229 the language of God’s “call” is repeatedly used for Israel as his servant in a theologically significant way (Isa 41:9; 42:6; 43:1; 48:1, 12; 49:1; 50:2; 51:2), and this forms a background for Paul’s language of God’s “call,”137 perhaps together with Jesus’s “call” of sinners and his disciples (Mark 1:20//Matt 4:21; Mark 2:17parr.; Matt 22:1–14//Luke 14:16–24). Just as for Deutero-­Isaiah and Jesus, so also for Paul, God’s “call” entails both a (gracious) offer of salvation and a requirement for service (or obedience to God’s will or rule): it is a call both to salvation and to service (1 Cor 7:17–24; Gal 1:15–16).138 Weima suggests that Paul uses here the present tense for God’s “call” (cf. also 5:24; Gal 5:8) to highlight its ongoing and effective nature and stress that “this ongoing call of God must be responded to with the ongoing need ‘to lead a life worthy of God.’ ”139 Having called the readers “into his kingdom” at their conversion (4:7), God renews that calling constantly in the present (no doubt Paul has in mind God doing this through his Son and his Spirit; see the next paragraph). God does not do this just so that they eventually receive the eschatological blessings of the kingdom but also that they might render obedience to his reign at every moment of ethical choice or decision here and now, so that they may indeed obtain the blessings of his consummated kingdom at the eschaton (cf. 5:23–24 with comment there). Like Jesus, Paul speaks of the kingdom of God both as a present reality (Rom 14:17; 1 Cor 4:20) and as a future reality (1 Cor 6:9–10; Gal 5:21; 2 Thess 1:5). In the present the “Lord” Jesus Christ, God’s Son, executes his kingly reign on God’s behalf (1 Cor 15:20–28; Col 1:13; cf. Rom 1:3–4; Phil 2:9–11), and when Christ destroys all the anti-­G od forces including death, “the last enemy,” he will deliver kingship back to God, so that God’s kingly reign may prevail over the whole creation (1 Cor 15:20–28). Here the association of God’s kingdom with “glory,” an eschatological concept, indicates that Paul ultimately has the future consummation of God’s kingdom in view. The preposition εἰς reflects Jesus’s language of “entering into the kingdom of God” and indicates that God’s kingdom here has primarily the nuance of the realm in which God’s saving reign is manifested. When believers enter that eschatological kingdom of God, they shall participate in divine “glory,” divine majesty, or share in his divine essence or fullness (as the fundamental meaning of the biblical concept δόξα, “glory,” is the radiance of divine nature or essence in manifestation).140 So to “walk in a manner worthy of God who calls you into his own kingdom and glory” is to conduct one’s life in the present in such a way as to be “counted as worthy [καταξιωθῆναι] of the kingdom of God” at the last judgment (2 Thess 1:5) and allowed to “inherit the kingdom of God” or

137 138 139 140

Cf. K. L. Schmidt, TDNT 3:490. Cf. Kim, Origin, 288–96. Weima, 157. Cf. G. Kittel, TDNT 2:244, 247–48, 250–51.

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 229

7/12/23 11:28 AM

230

1 Thessalonians 2:9–12

to “enter” into its blessings (cf. 1 Cor 6:9–7; 15:24, 50; Gal 5:21) and obtain God’s “glory” or divine fullness or the resurrection life (cf. Rom 5:2; 8:1–18, 30; 1 Cor 15:42–57; 2 Cor 3:18; Phil 3:20–21; Col 1:27; 2 Thess 1:5, 12; 2:14). However, God’s eschatological kingdom is also already present here and now in the form of the kingdom of his Son, Jesus Christ the Lord (1 Cor 15:20–28; Col 1:13). Therefore, to “walk in a manner worthy of God who calls you into his own kingdom and glory” is to live in obedience to the lordship of Christ Jesus, God’s Son, who executes God’s kingly reign in the present through the guiding and enabling power of the Spirit of God (Rom 8:9–11), namely, the Holy Spirit (1 Thess 4:8). This will lead to believers’ participation in the consummated kingdom and God’s glory at the end. In Rom 8:1–17 and Gal 5:16–26, Paul designates this way of life as “walking [περιπατεῖν] according to the Spirit” and the opposite way of life as “walking [περιπατεῖν] according to the flesh,” and in 1 Cor 6:9–11 and Gal 5:21 he issues a serious warning that those who follow the latter way of life and commit various sorts of evil “shall not inherit the kingdom of God.” What exactly, then, were Paul’s concrete exhortations for a life that is “worthy of God who calls” the Thessalonians “into his own kingdom”? Fortunately for us, later in 4:1–12 he recounts (at least some of) the exhortations that he imparted to them for such a life (4:1–2, 11): “how [they] ought to walk [περιπατεῖν] and to please God” (4:1b). The passage is full of references to God’s kingly reign or Christ’s lordship: besides that decisive clause in 4:1b, see also “what instructions we gave you through the Lord Jesus” (4:2); “this is the will of God” (v. 3); do not be “like heathen who do not know God” (v. 5); “because the Lord is an avenger” (v. 6); “for God has called us” (v. 7, “calling,” as here in our present verse, 2:12); do not “disregard God, who gives his Holy Spirit to you” (4:8); and “you yourselves have been taught by God” (v. 9). With all these references to God’s reign or Christ’s lordship, Paul exhorted the readers then, while he was with them, and exhorts them again now through this letter to live a sanctified and loving life. In summary, then, a life of holiness and love is a life that is “worthy of God who calls [them] into his own kingdom.” It is true that Paul’s exhortations recounted in 4:1–12 are focused on these two themes of sexual chastity and love for neighbor (see comment ad loc); that his summary description of his own conduct “as holy and righteous and blameless” in 2:10 is made specifically in connection with his apostolic ministry (rather than a common Christian life); and that he does not ask his readers to imitate him either here or at 4:1–12 (unlike in other epistles). Even so, we may assume that during his eisodos or founding mission among the Thessalonians he exhorted them more broadly to live a “holy and righteous and blameless” life as the people of God’s kingdom in imitation of him (including his self-­supporting life), as he himself was seeking to do (cf. 3:12–13; 2 Thess 3:8–9; also 1 Thess 4:11–12). However, as we have already noted, 4:1–12 contains hardly any suggestion that Paul exhorted the

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 230

7/12/23 11:28 AM

Explanation 231 Thessalonians to undertake a counter-­Roman activity as part of their leading a life befitting God’s kingdom. On the contrary, there is only an exhortation for them to live a quiet life and maintain an amicable relationship with their non-­Christian neighbors (see comment ad loc below).141 Generally, reference to “the kingdom of God” is rare in the NT outside the Synoptic Gospels. It is so because in the apostolic preaching, Jesus’s gospel of God’s kingdom had to be re-­presented with the gospel of Christ’s death and resurrection according to the salvation-­historical and perspectival changes brought about by Good Friday and Easter. Nevertheless, the fact that Paul uses the idiom eight or ten times over (Rom 14:17; 1 Cor 4:20; 6:9–10; 15:10; Gal 5:21; Col 4:10–11; 1 Thess 2:11–12; 2 Thess 1:5; cf. 1 Cor 15:24; Col 1:13) basically in the same sense as Jesus, as well as the fact that here in our verse he summarizes his preaching in terms of that idiom, indicates that he knew the Jesus tradition well and carried it on in his preaching, which is focused on Christ’s death and resurrection.142

Explanation In 2:1–12 Paul recounts his entry or eisodos in Thessalonica. It is made necessary by his Jewish and pagan opponents who denigrate him as a false prophet or charlatan preacher in order to persuade his converts to give up their new Christian faith. Therefore, lest his converts should buy their slander, Paul seeks to establish his integrity by recounting his missionary conduct in Thessalonica in contrast to the conduct of false prophets and charlatan philosophers. For this, he stresses in vv. 3–8 that, unlike those people, he did not seek reputation and financial gain from the Thessalonians through rhetorical and other deceptive tricks, but rather served them with God’s gospel and his self-­g iving love. Then, in our section (vv. 9–12), by way of conclusion, Paul substantiates this claim by appealing to the readers’ memory of his manual labor to earn his living during his mission among them and summarizes the description of the integrity of his apostolic conduct, as well as the content of his pastoral exhortation that he imparted to them. This exhortation is still valid for the young church in Thessalonica, so he will expound it yet again in chs. 4–5 to establish his converts on firmer ground of Christian faith and life. However, he finds it more urgent to prevent them from being swayed by the slander campaign of his opponents to give up their faith (cf. 3:3, 5). Hence, in our chapter, by repeatedly inviting his readers to confirm his account of his apostolic conduct and its integrity (vv. 1, 2, 5, 9, 10, 11), and even invoking God as witness for them (vv. 5, 10), he seeks to consolidate their appreciation of the integrity of his apostolic conduct. 141 Cf. Kim, “Is Paul Preaching,” in PGTO, 217–22. 142 Cf. Kim, PNP, 269–70, 75–78; idem, “Paul’s Gospel of Justification as a Post-­E aster Soteriological Form of Jesus’ Gospel of God’s Kingdom,” in Kim, Justification, 127–39.

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 231

7/12/23 11:28 AM

232

1 Thessalonians 2:9–12

In our v. 9 Paul emphasizes that he preached the gospel while doing hard manual labor in order not to bring any financial burden on his converts, although as an apostle of Christ he had the right to make them bear such a burden (v. 7a; 1 Cor 9:1–6, 14). In this context he discloses his motives for this policy to be, first, his love for them (in the manner of following the Lord Jesus’s example; 1 Thess 2:5–8, 9b) and then, implicitly, his desire to establish the credibility of his person and his message in contrast to the charlatan preachers (vv. 3–8). In 1 Cor 9:15–18, he further explains his motive of illustrating the gracious character of the gospel through that policy: the gospel proclaims God’s salvation in Christ as grace or gift, and so Paul the apostle is to preach it free of charge and offer it as a free gift. Thus, in the rich Hellenistic cities like Thessalonica and Corinth he seeks to preach the gospel effectively, preventing his audience from identifying him merely as one of the itinerant philosophers and his gospel merely as a variety of their philosophic wisdom. We can fully appreciate the significance of Paul’s self-­support policy and his motives for it only if we seriously consider the fact that it was in transgression of Jesus’s “command” (διέταξεν) for “the preachers of the gospel to get their living by the gospel,” which he cites in 1 Cor 9:14 (Matt 10:10// Luke 10:7). Apparently Paul understood that Jesus gave this instruction to his disciples so that they might concentrate on their gospel preaching without wasting time to earn their living; they could expect material assistance from some supporters of Jesus’s gospel in some Jewish communities in Judea and Galilee.143 Yet Paul, in his Hellenistic mission fields where there were no such supporters of the gospel but only charlatan orators who preached for money, realized that a literal obedience to Jesus’s instruction would actually bring only the reverse effect of its intent (effective gospel preaching). Therefore, he decided not to follow the letter of Jesus’s “command” (1 Cor 9:15) but to earn his living through his own manual labor. In this way he radically distinguished himself and his message from the charlatans and their messages and demonstrated the gracious character of the gospel as he sought to preach the gospel effectively in Thessalonica and Corinth. In this way he sought to fulfill the intent of Jesus’s “command.” This is a good example of Paul’s hermeneutic: we are to fulfill the spirit or intent rather than the letter of a commandment (cf. 2 Cor 3:6; see also Rom 7:6). In 2 Thess 3:8–9, Paul explicitly says that during his mission in Thessalonica he supported himself through his manual labor to present himself as a model for the Thessalonian believers to imitate, as well as not to burden his converts there with his upkeep. In 1 Thess 4:11–12 he does not say the former purpose so explicitly; nevertheless, as he says that he “commanded” them “to aspire to live quietly, to mind [their] own business, and to work with [their] own hands,” it is 143 Cf. G. Lohfink, Wie hat Jesus Gemeinde gewollt?, 67.

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 232

7/12/23 11:28 AM

Explanation 233 natural for us to infer that he issued that “command,” pointing to the example of his own life. Similarly, in our passage, he follows up the reference to his hard labor for his own upkeep during his mission in Thessalonica (2:9) with a reference to the exhortation he issued at that time, namely, the exhortation for them “to lead a life in a manner worthy of God, who calls you into his own kingdom” (vv. 11–12). We may infer that Paul issued that exhortation, pointing to his own life (including his self-­supporting labor) as a model for imitation. However, it is important to note that that was what he did during his founding mission in Thessalonica but that here, and even 1 Thess 4:11–12, unlike 2 Thess 3:6–12, he is not concerned to exhort the readers to imitate him (see II.3.C. in Introduction). In our passage, he is single-­m indedly focused on consolidating the Thessalonian believers’ perception of him as a genuine messenger of God, in contradistinction to false prophets and charlatan orators. In writing in vv. 9–11 about his past acts of doing hard manual labor and issuing the strong exhortation, he may have been conscious of the fact that in doing those things during his mission in Thessalonica he did call his converts there to imitate him. Equally possible is that in reading or hearing those verses his converts may be reminded also of Paul’s past call for imitation and feel challenged to go on making efforts to imitate him. However, that is not what Paul is aiming at in our passage. Here, he is aiming only at consolidating their appreciation of him as a genuine apostle of Christ and of his message as the true word of God so that they may not be swayed by the slander campaign of the opponents but may stand firm in the Lord (cf. 3:1–10 with comment ad loc; see section II.3 in Introduction). Therefore, it is wrong for Malherbe, Wanamaker, and others to tout Paul’s intent to present himself as a model as the primary reason for Paul’s reference to his hard labor for self-­support in our v. 9.144 This intent is at most only implicit. We have already referred to several scholars who, like Malherbe, take not only v. 9 but the whole of 2:1–12 in terms of Paul’s setting himself as a model for the readers to emulate (see Form/Structure/Setting above).145 But this view must be rejected. For, on the one hand, Paul makes no direct connection between his description of his eisodos in 2:1–12 and his exhortations for the readers in chs. 4–5. In 4:1–12 it is striking to observe that in order to motivate them for a life of sanctification he appeals to God’s will (4:3, 8), to the Lord’s judgment (v. 6), to the work of the Holy Spirit (v. 8), and even to God’s own instruction (v. 9), but he does not make any reference to his own example. There he does emphatically appeal to the instructions and charges that he gave them during his initial mission (four times! 4:1, 2, 6, 11), but even then he does not refer to the example he showed while delivering those instructions and charges. As we have just seen, we can only infer from 4:11–12 that he 144 Malherbe, 161; Wanamaker, 103. 145 Malherbe, 154–56.

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 233

7/12/23 11:28 AM

234

1 Thessalonians 2:13–16

must have delivered those charges, pointing to his exemplary life, during his mission in Thessalonica. On the other hand, his rehearsal of his eisodos in 2:1–12 contains much more than a mere model of sanctified life, and the extra elements, having to do with his apostolic status or preacher’s role, are not applicable to the readers and therefore do not have any correspondence in the paraenetic section. If in 2:1–12 he wants to present himself only or even chiefly as a model of sanctified life for his readers’ emulation, why is he emphasizing so much his apostolic commission (v. 4), his gospel being pure and true (v. 3), his preaching of it with παρρησία but neither ἐν δόλῳ nor ἐν λόγῳ κολακείας (vv. 2, 3, 5), and his fatherly exhortation (vv. 11–12)? Or how does he think his readers (N.B. not leaders) should or could imitate such apostolic conduct of his? Nevertheless, we could think that Paul’s apostolic conduct as recounted in 2:1–12 has a model character for all the ministers of the gospel then and now. Out of a clear sense of God’s commission, the ministers of the gospel are to preach God’s gospel only to please him and without compromising it either with their own ulterior motives or the whims and desires of their audience. They should shun all temptations to manipulate their audience with deceptive tricks for self-­promotion but instead serve them with self-­sacrificing love in imitation of Jesus and in the spirit of his ransom saying (Mark 10:35–45), as well as in imitation of Paul. These lessons are especially valuable today when so many Christian preachers behave like the charlatan preachers who stand behind our passage and thereby cause people to turn away from the faith—­ thus demonstrating only in a negative way the proverbial saying, “the message stands or falls with the messenger.” However, in 2:1–12 Paul recounts his apostolic conduct not to give those lessons for other ministers of the gospel then and now but to encourage the Thessalonian Christians to go on trusting in him as a genuine messenger of God and in his message as the gospel of God.

B. Thanksgiving Resumed for the Readers’ Faithdespite Persecution (2:13–16) Bibliography Bockmuehl, M. “1 Thessalonians 2:14–16 and the Church in Jerusalem.” TynBul 52 (2001): 1–31. Gilliard, F. D. “Paul and the Killing of the Prophets in 1 Thess. 2:15.” NovT 26 (1994): 259–70. —­—­— ­. “The Problem of the Antisemitic Comma between 1 Thessalonians 2:14 and 15.” NTS 35 (1989): 481–502. Hagner, D. A. “Paul’s Quarrel with Judaism.” Pages 128–50 in Anti-­Semitism and Early Christianity: Issues of Polemic and Faith. Edited by C. A. Evans and D. A. Hagner. Minneapolis: Fortress, 1993. Johanson, B. C. “1 Thessalonians 2:15–16: Prophetic Woe-­Oracle with ἔφθασεν as Proleptic Aorist.” Pages 519–34 in Texts and Contexts: Biblical Texts in Their Textual and Situational Contexts, Essays in Honor of Lars Hartman. Edited by T. Forberg and D. Hellholm. Oslo: Scandinavian University Press, 1995. Lamp, J. S. “Is Paul Anti-­Jewish? Testament of Levi 6 in the Interpretation of 1 Thessalonians 2:13–16.” CBQ 65 (2003): 408–27. Pearson, B. A. “1 Thessalonians 2:13–16: A Deutero-­Pauline Interpolation.” HTR 64

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 234

7/12/23 11:28 AM

Translation 235 (1971): 79–94. Schippers, R. “The Pre-­Synoptic Tradition in 1 Thessalonians II 13–16.” NovT 8 (1966): 223–34. Schlueter, C. J. Filling Up the Measure: Polemical Hyperbole in 1 Thessalonians 2:14–16. JSNTSup 98. Sheffield: JSOT, 1994. Schoeps, H. J. “Die jüdischen Prophetenmorde.” Pages 126–43 in Aus frühchristlicher Zeit. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1950. Steck, O. H. Israel und das gewaltsame Geschick der Propheten: Untersuchungen zur Überlieferung des deuteronomistischen Geschichtsbildes im Alten Testament, Spätjudentum und Urchristentum. Neukirchen: Neukirchener Verlag, 1967. Still, T. D. Conflict at Thessalonica: A Pauline Church and Its Neighbours. JSNTSup 183. Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1999. Taylor, N. H. “Who Persecuted the Thessalonian Christians?” HvTSt 58 (2002): 784–801. Tellbe, M. Paul between Synagogue and State: Christians, Jews, and Civic Authorities in 1 Thessalonians, Romans, and Philippians. ConBNT 34. Stockholm: Almqvist & Wiksell, 2001. Vos, C. S. de. Church and Community Conflicts: The Relationships of the Thessalonian, Corinthian, and Philippian Churches with Their Wider Civic Communities. SBLDS 168. Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1999. Weatherly, J. A. “The Authenticity of 1 Thessalonians 2:13–16: Additional Evidence.” JSNT 42 (1991): 79–98.

Translation And a for this reason we ourselves also give thanks to God unceasingly, because when you received the word of God which you heard from us, you accepted it not as a human word, but as it truly is, the word of God, which is indeed at work in you believers. 14 For you, brothers and sisters, became imitators of the assemblies of God in Christ Jesus which are in Judea, in that you in your turn suffered the same things at the hands of your own fellow-­countrymen as they for their part did at the hands of the Jews—­15the very people who had killed the Lord Jesus and the b prophets and have driven us out, who do not please God and are opposed to all human beings, 16who prevent us from speaking to the gentiles so that they may be saved. Their continuous aim has been to fill full the measure of their sins. But wrath c has overtaken d them at last. 13

Notes a. καί is omitted by D F G byz lat syr pesh. b. Between τούς and προφήτας D1 Ψ byz syr insert ἰδίους (“their own prophets”); according to Tertullian (Marc. 5.15.1), the insertion is originally Marcion’s. c. After ἡ ὀργή D F G 629 lat add τοῦ θεοῦ, “the wrath of God,” which of course is implied (cf. Rom 1:18; Eph 5:6; Col 3:6; also John 3:36; Rev 19:15). d. For ἔφθασεν (aorist), ἔφθακεν (perfect) is read by B D* Ψ 104 pc. Whichever reading be adopted, it may reflect the OT prophetic perfect.

Form/Structure/Setting Wanamaker, alleging a “seeming lack of connection” with what precedes and what follows, considers this section as a digression within the narratio.146 He rejects Holtz’s recognition of the causal connection between 2:13–16 and 2:1–12, as it is based on the view of the latter as an apology.147 But in 146 Wanamaker, 109. 147 Holtz, 94.

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 235

7/12/23 11:28 AM

236

1 Thessalonians 2:13–16

our examination, contrary to Wanamaker’s denial, 2:1–12 has turned out to have an apologetic character. Once that is recognized, 2:13–16 appears well-­ connected with what precedes and follows.148 In fact, as we have observed above (see “The Structure and Function of 1 Thess 1–3” in section II.3.F. of the Introduction), this section is a restatement or resumption of the thanksgiving that Paul offered in 1:2 + 5–7. In the latter, (a) Paul thanked God (b) for the mighty effect of the gospel among the readers (c) as they responded to his eisodos, and (d) Paul did that especially affectionately because the readers became imitators of himself and the Lord in accepting the gospel with joy despite much persecution. Here he repeats the same points exactly. Hence the following correspondence: (a) 2:13a with 1:2 (b) 2:13b–­c with 1:5a, 6b (c) 2:13aa (διὰ τοῦτο) with 1:5b (d) 2:14 with 1:6149 Paul makes only two slight variations. First, whereas in 1:5a he looked at the success of his eisodos from the perspective of his gospel preaching, how it was preached mightily among the Thessalonians, here in 2:13b–­c he does it from the perspective of their acceptance of the gospel, how they accepted the gospel as God’s word. Then, whereas in 1:6 Paul spoke about the readers having become imitators (μιμηταί) of him and the Lord, in 2:14–16 he speaks about their having become imitators (μιμηταί) of the Judean churches, the Lord, the prophets, and Paul himself. If we compare what Paul follows his thanksgiving up with in the two sections, we find the following structural similarity with material variance: in the first instance of his thanksgiving, he elaborates on the wonderful faith of the readers (point [b]) by referring to their having become examples to the believers in Macedonia, Achaia, and elsewhere and to the latter’s praises about their faith (1:7–10). But in restating the thanksgiving in 2:14–16, he elaborates on their persecution by their compatriots, comparing it to the Judean churches’ persecution by the Jews (point [d]). In the former, the elaboration on the readers’ exemplary faith leads Paul to highlight his eisodos and thus creates the opportunity for him to demonstrate its integrity (2:1–12), which is a major concern in chs. 1–3. In the latter, the elaboration on the readers’ suffering of persecution creates the opportunity for him to explain the problem of the Jewish opposition (2:15–16) and further his anxiety about their faith (2:17–3:5). The flow of thought may be tabulated as follows: 148 Cf. also Marshall, 9, 76. 149 Cf. Hurd, “Paul ahead of His Time,” 29, and Lyons, Pauline Autobiography, 203, who also observe similar parallels between the two passages.

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 236

7/12/23 11:28 AM

Comment 237 • 1:2–7: (a) We give thanks to God (b) because our gospel was effectively preached to you (c) as (καθώς) you know what kind of eisodos we had among you, and (d) [as] you accepted the gospel with joy amid much persecution. •1  :9–10: T hey themselves report about (c) our eisodos and (b) your wonderful faith. •  1:7–10: elaboration on (b) their faith • 2:1: You yourselves know (c) our eisodos, that (b) it was not in vain (i.e., it was fruitful [you became believers]). •  2:2–12: elaboration on (c) Paul’s excellent eisodos (that moved the readers to faith) • 2:13: ( aa) For (c) this reason (our eisodos of 2:2–12) (a) we [ourselves] also give thanks to God because, moved by that excellent eisodos of ours, (b) you accepted our message as God’s word (you became believers). •  2:14–­16: elaboration on (d) their persecution • 2:17–3:5: Paul’s anxiety about (d) their persecution • 3:6–9: (a) We give thanks to God for the good news of (b) your faith and for (c) your kind remembrance and longing for us (i.e., your appreciation of our eisodos). This structural analysis clearly demonstrates the unity of chs. 1–3 and the integrity of 2:13–16 within it. In view of this, the view occasionally proposed without any manuscript support, that 2:13–16 (or vv. 14–16) is a later interpolation,150 need not be entertained here. In any case, recent studies generally reject that view on other grounds.151 Our structural analysis also obviates the attempt of Richard to divide 1 Thessalonians into an “earlier missive” (2:13–4:2) and a later letter (1:1–2:12 + 4:3–5:28).152 Of course, it also explains quite naturally the unusual repetition of thanksgiving three times in chs. 1–3.

Comment 2:13 Καὶ διὰ τοῦτο καὶ ἡμεῖς εὐχαριστοῦμεν, “And for this reason we ourselves also give thanks.” The failure to recognize properly the overall structure of 150 E.g., Eckart, “Der zweite echte Brief,” 32–33; Pearson, “1 Thessalonians 2:13–16,” 79–94; Boers, “Form-­Critical Study,” 149–52; Richard, 17–18. 151 E.g., Weatherly, “Authenticity,” 79–98; Schlueter, Filling Up, 25–38; Still, Conflict, 24–45; Bockmuehl, “1 Thessalonians 2:14–16,” 3–17; Tellbe, Paul, 105–6; see also commentaries, e.g., Holtz, 97; Wanamaker, 29–33; Malherbe, 164–65; Fee, 91; Weima, 41–46. 152 Richard, 11–19.

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 237

7/12/23 11:28 AM

238

1 Thessalonians 2:13–16

the first part of this epistle (chs. 1–3), and especially the failure to see 2:1–16 as renewing and unfolding the thanksgiving in 1:2 + 5–7, have led many commentators to much confusion about the connection of the opening καί, the referent of τοῦτο, and the reason for Paul’s thanksgiving here.153 But the καί before διὰ τοῦτο is a simple copula, connecting the verse closely with the preceding 2:1–12. The (second) καί before ἡμεῖς could be taken as emphasizing εὐχαριστοῦμεν, “and for this reason also we give thanks,”154 but both the word order and the presence of the emphatic ἡμεῖς suggest that it in fact emphasizes ἡμεῖς, “and for this reason we [ourselves] also give thanks.” This emphatic καὶ ἡμεῖς corresponds to the emphatic “they [themselves]” in 1:9 and “you yourselves” in 2:1 (see Form/Structure/Setting above; cf. Lightfoot, 30). Hence, our rendering “we ourselves also” here.155 This recognition determines that τοῦτο in διὰ τοῦτο refers backward to Paul’s excellent entry or eisodos described in 2:1–12,156 rather than forward to the ὅτι clause of v. 13b (cf. Col 1:9, where the similarly constructed διὰ τοῦτο καὶ ἡμεῖς . . . οὐ παυόμεθα . . . προσευχόμενοι refers backward to the news brought by Epaphras [vv. 3–8]). However, διὰ τοῦτο with reference to Paul’s eisodos does not stand alone. In view of the repeated combination of his eisodos with the success of the gospel or the readers’ faith in 1:5, 9, 2:1, and 3:6, the phrase has to be seen as constituting, together with the following ὅτι clause, the ground of Paul’s thanksgiving here. Basically, Paul is trying to say here as in 1:5 that he gives thanks to God for the success that the gospel had with the readers, as it was caused by his upright eisodos. But in context, in view of the heathen slander campaign against him, he is very much concerned to stress his blameless eisodos as a cause for the wonderful result. This concern has led him to demonstrate the integrity of his eisodos extensively in 2:1–12. This concern, as well as the immediate context of this demonstration, has led him to frontload this summary reference to his eisodos (καὶ διὰ τοῦτο) in the prominent position, separated from the main causal clause that begins with ὅτι. See the flow of the thought as tabulated in the Form/Structure/Setting above. Thus 2:13 is really a resumption of the thanksgiving of 1:2 + 5–7. In the latter, having said that “we” give thanks to God for the effective preaching of the gospel through his eisodos in 1:2 + 5–7, Paul supported this assertion by calling on the report of the Macedonians, the Achaians, and others (“they [themselves]”) and the endorsement of the readers (“you [yourselves]”) in 1:9–10 and 2:1, respectively. Now, in our verse, where he resumes the thanksgiving of 1:2 + 5–7, he underlines their assessment of his eisodos and its effect by adding his emphatic agreement to it: καὶ ἡμεῖς, “we [ourselves] also.”

153 154 155 156

Cf. conveniently Weima, 160, and also Fee, 85–87. So BDF §442.12; O’Brien, Thanksgivings, 154. Cf. Frame, 106: “we too as well as you”; Lightfoot, 30: “we also, we on our part.” Cf. Lightfoot, 30; see Johanson, Brethren, 95–96, for more reasons for this view.

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 238

7/12/23 11:28 AM

Comment 239 ἀδιαλείπτως, “without intermission,” “unceasingly,” as in 1:2, 3 (see 5:17; cf. Rom 1:9). ὅτι παραλαβόντες . . . ἐδέξασθε, “because, having received . . . you accepted.” The verb παραλαμβάνειν is used especially of receiving a message or body of instruction handed down by tradition, to be delivered (παραδιδόναι) to others in turn. Compare the noun παράδοσις (“tradition”) in 2 Thess 2:15; 3:6 (also 1 Cor 11:2). The correlative verbs παραλαμβάνειν and παραδιδόναι are used together in 1 Cor 11:23; 15:3. Here, as in 1 Cor 15:3, the reference is to the gospel, delivered by Paul and his coworkers and received by the Thessalonians.157 λόγον ἀκοῆς παρ’ ἡμῶν τοῦ θεοῦ, “(when you received) the word of God which you heard from us.” For λόγος ἀκοῆς, cf. Heb 4:2; also Rom 10:17, ἡ πίστις ἐξ ἀκοῆς, ἡ δὲ ἀκοὴ διὰ ῥήματος Χριστοῦ (“faith comes from what is heard, and what is heard comes by the preaching of Christ”); Gal 3:5, ἐξ ἔργων νόμου ἢ ἐξ ἀκοῆς πίστεως (“by works of the law or by hearing with faith,” cf. Gal 3:2). The OT background for this use of λόγος ἀκοῆς or ἀκοὴ πίστεως in the sense of the gospel may be found in Isa 53:1, “Who has believed what he has heard from us?” (τίς ἐπίστευσεν τῇ ἀκοῇ ἡμῶν), which is used in the NT as a testimonium of the gospel (cf. John 12:38; Rom 10:16). In παρ’ ἡμῶν the preposition catches up the prefix of παραλαβόντες. By adding παρ’ ἡμῶν immediately to ἀκοῆς, Paul emphasizes that it is the word that has been proclaimed by him. The phrase τοῦ θεοῦ goes with λόγος, and it is a genitive of authorship or origin. That phrase, as well as the phrase παρ’ ἡμῶν that follows ἀκοῆς, leads us to take the verbal noun ἀκοῆς in the active sense of “hearing” rather than the passive sense of “what is heard” (i.e., an account or report). Note the somewhat awkward word order (lit. transl.): “(having received) the word of (your) hearing from us of God.” Paul starts with λόγον ἀκοῆς παρ’ ἡμῶν, “the word that you heard from us,” as he is talking about the message that he delivered to the readers during his missionary entry. But then he immediately adds the phrase τοῦ θεοῦ (“of God”). In the light of the immediately following main clause (ἐδέξασθε οὐ λόγον ἀνθρώπων ἀλλὰ καθώς ἐστιν ἀληθῶς λόγον θεοῦ, “you accepted it, not as the word of human beings, but as it truly is, the word of God”), this phrase appears redundant.158 So its addition here is to be seen as reflecting Paul’s strong consciousness of his job as the preaching of God’s word and his eagerness to deflect any suspicion of his message as his own, merely human teaching (cf. 2:3–4). Paul uses the term “the word of God” for God’s promises in the OT (Rom 9:6) and for God’s instructions for the church spoken through prophets (1 Cor 14:36). But most frequently he uses the term for the missionary preaching of the gospel, as in our verse and in 2 Cor 2:17, 4:2, Phil 1:14, and Col 1:25. 157 Cf. Davies, Setting, 354; Gerhardsson, Memory, 265, 290, 295–96. 158 Cf. Wanamaker, 111.

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 239

7/12/23 11:28 AM

240

1 Thessalonians 2:13–16

Here, “the word of God” corresponds to “the gospel of God” in 1 Thess 2:2, 8, 9. He uses this term here rather than the latter because he has in view the actual word that he spoke and that the readers “heard” (λόγον ἀκοῆς παρ’ ἡμῶν; cf. 1:6b with comment). Together with 2 Cor 2:17, 4:2, Phil 1:14, and Col 1:25, our verse suggests that he likes to designate the gospel as “the word of God” when he wants to make it clear that the word of his missionary preaching is the gospel of God. The gospel is proclaimed through the word of an apostle, but since the gospel is “the gospel of God,” the word of the apostle that proclaims it is “the word of God.” This seems to be the rationale behind Paul’s daring identification of his word (preaching) with the word of God.159 So God’s word itself encounters human beings in the preached word of an apostle.160 This being so, God’s word can easily be misunderstood as a mere human word. But the Thessalonians accepted it as “what it really is,” namely, as “the word of God.” ἐδέξασθε οὐ λόγον ἀνθρώπων ἀλλὰ καθώς ἐστιν ἀληθῶς λόγον θεοῦ, “you accepted it, not as the word of human beings, but as it truly is, the word of God.” While παραλαβόντες indicates that the message was delivered to them, ἐδέξασθε indicates their own initiative in eagerly embracing it or accepting it as valid, as God’s word. Paul was accustomed to having his message dismissed by his detractors as human-­made, as something he himself devised. Hence his solemn protest in Gal 1:11–12: “the gospel which was preached by me . . . is not according to a human being; for I did not receive it [παρέλαβον] from a human being nor was I taught it (by a human being).” Furthermore, by the accepted standards of secular wisdom, his gospel had nothing to commend it to the pagans of Thessalonica and other Greek cities; the message of salvation through a crucified Savior was more likely to arouse derision than admiration (cf. 1 Cor 1:18). But the fact of its divine origin was demonstrated by the power of the Holy Spirit that accompanied its preaching (1 Thess 1:5). The phrase οὐ λόγον ἀνθρώπων ἀλλὰ καθώς ἐστιν ἀληθῶς λόγον θεοῦ, “not the word of human beings, but as it truly is, the word of God,” corresponds to the phrase οὐκ . . . ἐν λόγῳ μόνον ἀλλὰ καὶ ἐν δυνάμει καὶ ἐν πνεύματι ἁγίῳ, “not in word alone, but also with power and with the Holy Spirit,” in 1:5, while the verb ἐδέξασθε here repeats the participle δεξάμενοι (τὸν λόγον) of 1:6b. Convinced of its divine origin as well as its power (cf. Rom 1:16; 1 Cor 1:18, 24), Paul takes extreme care to present it truthfully, without tampering or diluting it with human wisdom, rhetoric, or trickery (1 Cor 1:18–24; 2 Cor 2:17; 4:2; 10:3–4). So also in Thessalonica he preached the gospel in such a truthful way (1 Thess 2:2–12) and with such a demonstration of its divine power (1:5) that the readers accepted it not as a mere human word, “but as it truly is, the word of God.” Here, he seems to be emphatically affirming his gospel as God’s 159 Cf. Best, 111; Marshall, 77. 160 Holtz, 98.

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 240

7/12/23 11:28 AM

Comment 241 word and not a mere human word because the opponents are denigrating it as a variety of false prophecy or sophistry. ὃς καὶ ἐνεργεῖται ἐν ὑμῖν τοῖς πιστεύουσιν, “which is indeed at work in you believers.” The relative pronoun ὅς refers to the λόγον (“word”) rather than θεοῦ (“God”), since the middle voice ἐνεργεῖται (“is at work”) occurs only with an impersonal subject in Paul.161 The conjunction καί is best taken here as intensive, “indeed.”162 The use of the verb ἐνεργεῖται here reflects the contrast between (mere) word and power that was made in 1:5. The word of human beings, however wise in substance or eloquent in expression, cannot produce spiritual life; this is the prerogative of the word of God, which works effectually (ἐνεργεῖται) in believers. Like the Corinthian Christians a few weeks later, the Thessalonian Christians had proved that “the word of the cross . . . is the power of God” (1 Cor 1:18). Through the medium of his word, God appears on the scene, working (cf. Phil 2:13; Heb 4:12). Having stressed in 1 Thess 1:5 the outward demonstration of the miracle-­working power of the Holy Spirit, here Paul stresses the continuing work of God’s word, which operates in the hearts of believers through the Spirit.163 He wants to draw the readers’ attention to the changes that are actually being brought about in their hearts by the gospel, to their faith, love, and hope (1:3), in order to help them counter the opponents’ campaign of slandering the gospel as a bewitching sophistry. The phrase “in you believers” shows (1) that the fundamental meaning of faith is to “accept” the gospel preached by the apostle as the word of God (see comment on 1:7 above), and (2) that the power of the gospel is connected to human faith: the gospel operates powerfully to bring salvation to those who accept it by faith (Rom 1:16; 10:8–13; 1 Cor 1:18) and produces transformation in their lives (Eph 6:17; Rev 1:16; 19:11–16; but cf. Heb 4:12: God’s word operates also with unbelievers, in their case, however, for judgment).164 On the significance of the absolute form “the believers” as a designation for Christians, see comment on 1:7 above. 14 Ὑμεῖς γὰρ μιμηταὶ ἐγενήθητε, ἀδελφοί, “For you, brothers and sisters, became imitators.” The emphatic ὑμεῖς stands in correspondence to the emphatic ἡμεῖς in 2:13 (“we give thanks to God for your acceptance of our message as God’s word, for you have become imitators of the churches in Judea through suffering persecutions by your own people”)165 and then also to the ἡμεῖς in 2:17 (“you have suffered . . . but, on our part, we also have suffered with much anxiety about you”). With γάρ Paul provides the ground for the preceding ὅτι clause: the readers’ suffering for their new Christian faith is the proof that they had accepted Paul’s preaching as God’s word. In this they have 161 162 163 164 165

BDAG; Holtz, 99; Malherbe, 167; Fee, 88. So Weima, 164; TNIV. Pace Fee, 89, who takes “in you” in a corporate sense of “among you.” Cf. Holtz, 99; Malherbe, 167; Weima, 164. Cf. Malherbe, 167.

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 241

7/12/23 11:28 AM

242

1 Thessalonians 2:13–16

become “imitators” of the churches in Judea. By the word μιμηταί (“imitators”) here, Paul does not mean that the Thessalonian believers made conscious efforts to copy the example of the churches of Judea but rather that what they experienced was like that which the latter had experienced. By accepting the gospel despite persecution by their own people, they followed the road that the Judean churches had traveled. He inserts the vocative ἀδελφοί here not to mark a transition to a new subject (as he often does; within this epistle, e.g., 4:1, 13; 5:1, 12),166 but to convey his sympathy and affection for the readers as he turns to speak of their suffering for their faith. On the first occasion of thanksgiving (1:2 + 5–7), Paul followed up his thanksgiving to God for the success of the gospel brought about by his upright entry among the Thessalonians with a commendation of them for having become imitators (μιμηταί) of himself and his coworkers, as well as of the Lord, in accepting the gospel with joy despite much affliction. As we have seen above, the renewed thanksgiving here in 2:13–16 has the exact same structure as the previous one, but here Paul expands the theme of the readers having become imitators in suffering persecution for their faith. Here, with references to the Jewish killing of the Lord Jesus and to their persecution of him and his coworkers (vv. 15–16), he not only unfolds the thought of 1:6a, but with the introduction of a new idea, namely, their having become imitators of the Judean churches, he also extends the thought of 1:6. τῶν ἐκκλησιῶν τοῦ θεοῦ τῶν οὐσῶν ἐν τῇ Ἰουδαίᾳ ἐν Χριστῷ Ἰησοῦ, “of the assemblies of God in Christ Jesus which are in Judea.” These “assemblies of God” comprised the original assembly (or church) of God in Jerusalem (cf. 1 Cor 15:9; Gal 1:13), now in dispersion (as a result of the persecution that broke out after Stephen’s death, according to Acts 8), together with her daughter churches (in Acts 9:31 they are referred to comprehensively in the singular as “the church throughout all Judea and Galilee and Samaria”). The participle τῶν οὐσῶν is to be taken closely with ἐν τῇ Ἰουδαίᾳ. Cf. Acts 13:1, ἐν Ἀντιοχείᾳ κατὰ τὴν οὖσαν ἐκκλησίαν (“in Antioch, in the church that was there”), where (as also in Acts 11:22) the participle of εἶναι has practically the sense of “local” (we still speak of “the local church”). Note the plural “the churches of God” in our verse. Paul uses “assembly/church” both for the one universal community of God’s people (cf. 1 Cor 10:32; 12:28; Col 1:18, 24) as well as for local communities of God’s people (cf. Rom 16:1; 1 Cor 1:2; Gal 1:22; even “house churches” in Rom 16:5).167 This indicates “that the whole is not regarded merely as the sum total of the units but rather that the whole appears as smaller units in particular places, the whole being the basic conception.”168 In our comments on 1:1, we have advanced the views that (1) the modifier 166 Pace Weima, 165. 167 See the comment on 1:1. 168 Best, 61.

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 242

7/12/23 11:28 AM

Comment 243 τοῦ θεοῦ for the “assemblies” here in 2:14 may be seen as an abbreviation of “in God the Father and the Lord Jesus Christ” in 1:1, that (2) the further modifier ἐν Χριστῷ Ἰησοῦ is added here to distinguish the Christian communities in Judea from the Jewish communities there that are also claiming to be the ἐκκλησία of God according to the LXX usage, and that (3) our whole phrase here indicates the Judean churches as being the assemblies of the people who are in the kingdom of God by virtue of their being “in Christ” through faith in the gospel. Note that the formulation τῶν ἐκκλησιῶν τοῦ θεοῦ τῶν οὐσῶν ἐν τῇ Ἰουδαίᾳ ἐν Χριστῷ Ἰησοῦ here is for the Jewish Christians who are being persecuted by the unbelieving Jews, about whom Paul says “[God’s] wrath has overtaken them at last” (v. 16). The contrast of the Christian church as “the assembly of God” (ἡ ἐκκλησία τοῦ θεοῦ) with the unbelieving and persecuting Jews here is similar to that in Gal 1:13–14, where Paul recounts his zeal for Judaism that led him to persecute “the assembly of God” (ἡ ἐκκλησία τοῦ θεοῦ). In Gal 1:22 Paul unfolds this simple designation of the Judean church in Gal 1:13 more fully as αἱ ἐκκλησίαι τῆς Ἰουδαίας αἱ ἐν Χριστῷ (“the assemblies of Judea which are in Christ”). Note that the two designations of the Judean church in Gal 1:13 and 22, when combined, amount to more or less the same designation of it here at 1 Thess 2:14: αἱ ἐκκλησίαι τοῦ θεοῦ τῶν οὐσῶν ἐν τῇ Ἰουδαίᾳ ἐν Χριστῷ Ἰησοῦ (“of the assemblies of God in Christ Jesus which are in Judea”). The references to the believing Jews of Judea at Gal 1:13 and 22, in contrast to Judaism or the unbelieving Jews, seem to hint already at the thought of Gal 4:21–31, namely, that the Christian Jews or the church are the true heirs of Abraham while the (unbelieving) Jews or Judaism are not. So we may see the reference to the Judean church in our verse in contrast to the unbelieving Jews doing the same. Then we must also recall the designation of the (predominantly) gentile Thessalonian church as ἡ ἐκκλησία Θεσσαλονικέων ἐν θεῷ πατρὶ καὶ κυρίῳ Ἰησοῦ Χριστῷ in 1:1 above, which is similar to those of our verse and Gal 1:13 and 22. All these designations of the Jewish and gentile churches contain an implicit claim that believers in Christ Jesus the Lord constitute the new (i.e., eschatological) and true people of God, regardless of whether they are ethnically Jews or gentiles. Why does Paul refer particularly to the churches in Judea here? It may be because they have a special position as original churches (cf. Rom 15:31–32; Gal 2:1–10), and/or because he sees the persecution of the Thessalonian believers in line with those of the prophets, Jesus, and Jesus’s (immediate, Jewish) followers.169 Besides these, two more reasons may be mentioned: one, because Paul wants to comfort the readers by showing that the mother church in Judea also suffered persecution by their own people (i.e., suffering persecution by one’s own people has been the common lot for all Christians 169 Marshall, 78.

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 243

7/12/23 11:28 AM

244

1 Thessalonians 2:13–16

right from the beginning; cf. 1 Thess 3:4), and the other, because he wants to introduce the topic of the Jewish persecution of the church at this point. He feels the need to address the topic, as he sees the Jews standing behind the pagan Thessalonians’ persecution of the church.170 ὅτι τὰ αὐτὰ ἐπάθετε καὶ ὑμεῖς ὑπὸ τῶν ἰδίων συμφυλετῶν, “because you in your turn suffered the same things at the hands of your own compatriots.” This clause explains how the readers became imitators of the churches in Judea. Later in 3:1–4 Paul will say that he sent Timothy to Thessalonica to strengthen the readers’ faith in the face of the still on-­going afflictions. But here he uses the aorist ἐπάθετε (“you suffered”) because, renewing what he already said in 1:6, he has in view the afflictions that they had to bear at the time of their accepting the gospel preached by him and his colleagues.171 The word συμφυλέτης is a Hellenistic compound conveying the sense that in Attic Greek was conveyed by the simple φυλέτης, “member of the same φυλή (tribe).” Does “your own compatriots” in parallel here to “the Jews” in Judea suggest that the Thessalonian church was composed only of gentile converts and that it was persecuted only by their gentile compatriots without any involvement of the Jews in Thessalonica, in contrast to the testimony of Acts 17:5? Still and Vos argue for this view,172 but it is rebutted by Taylor as well as by Tellbe.173 The view that συμφυλετῶν here in 1 Thess 2:14 excludes the Jews makes Paul’s outburst against the Jews in vv. 15–16 inexplicable. So it is better to take the word in a local sense than an ethnic sense and as including some Jews, even if the majority of them were gentiles. However, if it is taken in an ethnic sense, it must be understood that Paul uses the term here because the actual persecutors of the readers were their gentile compatriots, and that nevertheless he denounces the Jews here rather than the gentile persecutors because he took more seriously the small number of the Jews instigating the gentile persecutors.174 Since v. 16 corresponds to the report in Acts 17 quite well, it is to be presumed that some Jews incited their fellow gentile citizens to interpret Paul’s gospel of Messiah Jesus politically (Jesus as “another king”) and so to persecute the believers in the gospel for treason to Caesar (Acts 17:5–9; see section I.4.A. in the Introduction).175 καθὼς καὶ αὐτοὶ ὑπὸ τῶν Ἰουδαίων, “as they for their part (suffered) at the hands of the Jews.” The adverb καθώς replaces ἅ, which might have been expected after the antecedent τὰ αὐτά. One could translate Ἰουδαῖοι here as “Judeans” 170 Cf. Holtz, 101, 111. 171 Contra Wanamaker, 219, who takes the aorist ἐπάθετε as evidence for his views that, by the time of writing this letter, the persecution of the Thessalonian Christians was a thing of the past and that therefore 1 Thessalonians was written after 2 Thessalonians; see comment on 2 Thess 1:4 below. 172 Still, Conflict, 218–26, and Vos, Church, 157–58. 173 Taylor, “Who Persecuted,” 789–93; Tellbe, Paul, 113–15. 174 Cf. Tellbe, Paul, 113–15. 175 Cf. Taylor, “Who Persecuted,” 797.

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 244

7/12/23 11:28 AM

Comment 245 and not “Jews” in a more general sense, since it was the Jews of Judea who persecuted the Judean churches. But the following relative (participial) clauses of vv. 15, 16 require “the Jews” in a more general sense as the antecedent. The persecution of the Judean churches referred to here might be the persecution following Stephen’s death. But in that persecution Paul had played an active part; yet not the slightest hint of that is given here, in contrast to Gal 1:22–23, where he is mentioned as a “former persecutor” of “the churches of Judea which are in Christ.” One might think also of the persecution of “some who belonged to the church” that was initiated sometime between AD 41 and 44 by the elder Herod Agrippa, which resulted in the martyrdom of James, the brother of John, and Peter’s flight from Judea (Acts 12:1–19). Probably we should think here of a more recent persecution associated with the increase of Jewish nationalistic intolerance and insurgency in Judea around the time of Ventidius Cumanus’s arrival as procurator in AD 48 (cf. Josephus, Ant. 20.105–36). Jewett finds good reason to believe that the zealous spirit risen at that time was responsible for the campaign of enforcing circumcision on gentile Christians in the churches of Antioch and Galatia, as well as for the pressure on Jewish Christians in Judea itself.176 Bockmuehl refers to the testimony of the sixth-­century chronicler Malalas of Antioch that in AD 48/49 the Jews persecuted the apostles and their followers (Malalas 10.247), and argues that Paul writes here with the fresh memory of this recent persecution as well as with the memories of the earlier persecution by Agrippa and others.177 15 τῶν καὶ τὸν κύριον ἀποκτεινάντων Ἰησοῦν καὶ τοὺς προφήτας, “who killed both the Lord Jesus and the prophets.” “The Jews” at the end of the preceding verse is now modified by a long articular participial phrase in this verse, in which one article (τῶν) is associated with four participles (ἀποκτεινάντων, ἐκδιωξάντων, ἀρεσκόντων, and κωλυόντων). Observing that Paul normally uses a participial modifier with the article like a restrictive relative clause in English (e.g., 1:7, 10; 2:4, 10, 12, 14; 4:8, 15, 17 in this epistle alone), Fee argues to take this phrase as restrictive (“the Jews who killed the Lord Jesus and the prophets”) rather than as unrestrictive (“the Jews, who killed the Lord Jesus and the prophets”) and to interpret “the Jews” as referring specifically to those Jews who were actually responsible for killing Jesus and the prophets and persecuting Paul and his coworkers, rather than to the Jews in the generic sense.178 This interpretation leads Fee to take “the prophets” here as referring to the prophets of the early church like “Stephen and James,”179 whereas even 176 Jewett, “Agitators,” 204–6. 177 Bockmuehl, “1 Thessalonians 2:14–16,” 22–24. 178 Fee, 94–99. So also Malherbe, 169; Weima, 168; for more detailed arguments, see Gilliard, “Antisemitic Comma,” 481–502. 179 Cf. Gilliard, “Antisemitic Comma,” 499: “John the Baptist and Stephen”; also idem, “Killing of the Prophets,” 259–70, with an implausible explanation of the appearance of τὸν κύριον (“the Lord”) separated from Ἰησοῦν (“Jesus”) here.

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 245

7/12/23 11:28 AM

246

1 Thessalonians 2:13–16

with the same restrictive interpretation Malherbe and Weima join most commentators in seeing it as referring to the prophets of the OT.180 With such an interpretation of the articular participial phrases in our verse, Fee, Weima, and Gilliard argue that here Paul has in view only the restricted group of the Judean Jews at a particular time, and they thus dispel any suspicion of Paul expressing “anti-­Semitism” in condemning the Jews in the generic sense.181 However, this strictly grammatical interpretation of the articular participial phrases faces some serious problems. First of all, if we are to take “the prophets” here as referring to the OT prophets, surely the Jews who killed the prophets were not the same Judean Jews who killed the Lord Jesus but were those who belonged to different generations before Jesus’s time. Second, the Jews who drove out Paul and his coworkers and hindered their preaching to the gentiles (vv. 15b–16a, the second and fourth participial phrases) are not the Judean Jews who killed the Lord Jesus, nor the Jews who killed the prophets. Malherbe and Weima see them as referring to the Thessalonian (and other diaspora) Jews.182 So Malherbe and Weima have to grant that in our passage Paul has in view at least three different groups of Jews. Fee, trying to be more consistent with his restrictive interpretation, goes so far as to argue that the Jews who drove out Paul (v. 15b) were also the Judean Jews,183 but even he cannot help but acknowledge that the Jews who hindered Paul and his coworkers from preaching to the gentiles (v. 16a) are the Thessalonian Jews.184 Therefore, even with his rather unrealistic interpretation of v. 15b and of the “prophets” in v. 15a as Christian prophets, Fee tacitly grants that Paul has in view at least two different groups of Jews: the Judean Jews and the diaspora, especially the Thessalonian, Jews. Finally, surely the Jews referred to by the pronouns “their” (αὐτῶν) and “them” (αὐτούς) in v. 16b–­c at the end of listing up the sins of the Jews cannot refer to the Judean Jews alone but to all the Jews of these different generations and places that have been referred to in vv. 15b–16a, that is, to the Jewish nation as a whole. Again, Fee himself recognizes this (Paul’s “ancient people”), as Weima does (“the long and consistent history of Jewish opposition to the Lord Jesus, the OT prophets, and the Pauline mission [vv. 15–16a] has a logical outcome”).185 It is therefore safer to conclude that Paul is using “the Jews” in v. 14 in the generic sense; that the articular participial phrases in our v. 15 are unrestrictive; that by “the prophets” he refers to the prophets of the OT; and that here Paul is reflecting the Jewish and early Christian tradition of the martyrdom of prophets (see below). Fee himself acknowledges that the articular participial 180 181 182 183 184 185

Malherbe, 169, and Weima, 170–71. Fee, 94–101, and Weima, 168–71, and Gilliard, “Antisemitic Comma.” Malherbe, 170, and Weima, 171, 173. Fee, 99. Fee, 100. Fee, 102; Weima, 174.

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 246

7/12/23 11:28 AM

Comment 247 phrase in 4:5 (τὰ ἔθνη τὰ μὴ εἰδότα τὸν θεόν) is ambiguous,186 although in the end he decides for the restrictive use (“the gentiles who do not know God”) instead of the unrestrictive use (“the gentiles, who do not know God”; cf. also 4:13).187 But does Paul really refer to only “those gentiles who do not know God” as if he were distinguishing a small number of gentiles (Christian gentiles, and perhaps also “God-­fearing” gentiles?) who know God and the vast majority who do not? It appears simpler to think that, along with the case of 4:5 (see comment ad loc), the articular participial phrase here is an exceptional case of the unrestrictive use in Paul.188 If “the prophets” here is taken as referring to the prophets of the OT rather than to those of the early church, it is striking that the reference to the Lord Jesus precedes the reference to them here. For the chronological consideration would require the reverse order within the καί . . . καί (“both . . . and”) structure. Apparently Paul refers first to the Jewish “killing” of the Lord Jesus, as it was for him their most heinous sin and the climax of their transgression against God. This view is supported by his placing τὸν κύριον (“the Lord”) ahead of the participle ἀποκτεινάντων (“killed”) and so separating it from Ἰησοῦν (“Jesus”), which stresses “the Lord”: “(the) Jews, who killed the Lord, namely, Jesus.” This way of writing heightens the irony and heinousness of the sin of the Jews (cf. 1 Cor 2:8).189 Because Jesus’s messianic work is seen as having been wrought in his death and resurrection, Paul, following the pre-­Pauline tradition, usually uses the title “Christ” in connection with his death (and resurrection).190 See comment on 4:14 below. He sometimes uses the name “Jesus” instead of the title “Christ” in connection with his death. He usually does this when he has in view the concrete historical event of Jesus’s death rather than its soteriological significance (2 Cor 4:10; Gal 6:17; 1 Thess 4:14; probably also Rom 8:11 but cf. Rom 4:24–25), or when he needs to have the bearer of the title “the Lord”(1 Cor 11:23; 2 Cor 4:14) or “the Son (of God)” (1 Thess 1:10) identified. Here in our present verse, Paul seems to be writing “Jesus” instead of “Christ” for both reasons: to identify “the Lord” he needs the name of the bearer of the title rather than another title, and perhaps even more Paul has in view the concrete historical event of Jesus’s execution, in which he sees the Jewish leaders involved. In vv. 15–16 Paul reflects several traditional ideas. The verses have a close parallel in Matt 23:29–36 (//Luke 11:47–51), using ἀποκτείνειν (“to kill”) of the prophets, διώκειν (“to persecute”) of the envoys of God, πληροῦν (“to fill”) of the measure of sin, and the mention of the certainty of judgment on “this generation.” So several commentators think that here Paul is echoing some 186 187 188 189 190

Fee, 95. Cf. Fee, 168n17. Cf. Hagner, “Paul’s Quarrel,” 134–35. Cf. Malherbe, 169. Cf. Kramer, Christ, 131–50.

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 247

7/12/23 11:28 AM

248

1 Thessalonians 2:13–16

pre-­Synoptic traditions.191 This is the only place in the Pauline corpus where “the Jews” are made responsible for Jesus’s death. Such language is more characteristic of the Fourth Gospel (e.g., John 5:18; 7:1; 11:31). It is the Romans who killed Jesus by their extreme form of execution, crucifixion. Yet the apostles are repeatedly represented in Acts as condemning the Jews for having killed Jesus (2:23, 36; 3:13–17; 4:10; 7:52; 13:27–28; cf. also Mark 8:31parr.; 12:1–9parr.). Clearly this reflects the view that, in participating in the arrest and trial of Jesus that led to the Roman condemnation and execution of Jesus, some Jerusalemites, especially their rulers, represented the Jewish nation as a whole. In view of those speeches in Acts, Holtz presumes that there existed an old kerygmatic formula to the effect, “You the Jews killed Jesus, but God has raised him up.”192 The OT contains several accounts of true prophets having been killed by the disobedient Jewish people (1 Kgs 18:4; 19:9–18; 2 Chr 24:19–21; Neh 9:26; Jer 2:30; 26:7–24), and at a later time even the prophets like Isaiah and Jeremiah, whose deaths are not documented in the OT, were celebrated as heroes in martyrologies (Mart. Isa. 5.1–14).193 So in Judaism there was a well-­established tradition of true and faithful prophets killed by their own unfaithful people.194 In the Gospels also Jesus is reported as having reflected this tradition (Matt 23:29–36//Luke 11:47–51; Matt 23:37// Luke 13:34). This tradition was taken up into the early church (cf. Acts 7:52; Tertullian, Scorp. 8; Jerome, Jov. 2.37). Here Paul is also reflecting that tradition (cf. also Rom 11:3 with 1 Kgs 19:10). καὶ ἡμᾶς ἐκδιωξάντων, “and drove us out.” Since Paul usually uses the simple form of the verb διώκειν for persecution (Rom 12:14; 1 Cor 4:12; 15:9; Gal 1:13, 23; 5:11; 6:12; Phil 3:6), the compound form ἐκδιώκειν, which he uses only here, seems to mean “expulsion” rather than the more general “persecution.” Using the aorist participle of the verb, he here appears to refer to the specific past event of their expulsion of him and his colleagues from Thessalonica (Acts 17:5–10) and Beroea (17:13–14),195 rather than making a general statement about the many synagogal persecutions he suffered (2 Cor 11:24–26). This interpretation is supported by the aorist phrase ἀπορφανισθέντες ἀφ’ ὑμῶν (“made orphans from you”) in v. 17 below.196 Thus, Paul quietly reminds the readers that his departure from them was an involuntary one, resulting from the persecution. Note how he sees the Jews who persecuted him in

191 E.g., Schippers, “Pre-­Synoptic Tradition,” 223–34; Best, 215–16, 121–22; Wanamaker, 116; Malherbe, 174; Wenham, Paul, 320–24, who notes also an echo of Luke 21:23 in “(God’s) wrath has come upon them” in 1 Thess 2:16c; cf. also Steck, Israel, 274–78, who argues that Paul reflects Mark 12:1–9. 192 Holtz, 104. 193 See Scherman, Prophetarum Vitae Fabulosae; Torrey, Lives of the Prophets. 194 Cf. Schoeps, “Die jüdischen Prophetenmorde”; Steck, Israel. 195 So Marshall, 79; Riesner, Early Period, 353; Tellbe, Paul, 107; Still, Conflict, 133–35. 196 Cf. Malherbe, 170.

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 248

7/12/23 11:28 AM

Comment 249 Thessalonica and Beroea as being in continuity or solidarity with the Jews who killed the prophets and Jesus, and how he aligns himself along with the Lord Jesus and the prophets as a recipient of the Jewish persecution. He sees his own apostolic work as continuing the work of God that Jesus and the prophets carried out, while seeing the Jews as always opposed to the work of God. He makes this latter thought still clearer with the immediately following phrase: along with their killing of the Lord Jesus and the prophets, the Jews’ driving him out of his mission field constitutes behavior that displeases God. καὶ θεῷ μὴ ἀρεσκόντων, “and do not please God.” Paul frequently uses the expression ἀρέσκειν θεῷ for the proper behavior required of God’s people (Rom 8:8; 1 Cor 7:32; Gal 1:10; 1 Thess 2:4; 4:1; cf. 2 Cor 5:9). Note the switch from the aorist tense of the previous two participles to the present tense here. With the present tense, Paul indicates that the Jewish failure to please God is a constant one. This and the following phrase constitute a generalizing summary judgment about the misdeeds of the generations of Jews, including the present one, which have been listed in the previous phrases. By contrast, Paul himself seeks to please God with his apostolic ministry (1 Thess 2:4) and taught the Thessalonian Christians how they ought to please God (πῶς δεῖ ὑμᾶς . . . ἀρέσκειν θεῷ, 4:1). καὶ πᾶσιν ἀνθρώποις ἐναντίων, “and (are) opposed to all human beings.” This sounds like an echo of slanders that were current in the Greco-­Roman world against the Jewish life of separation from their pagan environment. The Roman historian Tacitus (Hist. 5.5.2), for example, says of the Jews, adversus omnes alios hostile odium, “toward all others [i.e., not of their own race] they cherish hatred of a kind normally reserved for enemies.” Earlier than Tacitus, and indeed contemporary with Paul, was the Egyptian Apion, who went so far as to say that the Jews swear by the Creator to show no goodwill to any alien, least of all to Greeks (Josephus, Ag. Ap. 2.121). (The same slander soon rubbed off on Christians who, according to Tacitus, Ann. 15.44.5, were accused of “hatred of the human race.”) Often the charge is combined with the charge of godlessness (Josephus, Ag. Ap. 1.310; 2.125, 148). Paul seems to reflect this polemic in combining here the charges of displeasing God and being hostile to all people. However, it is hard to believe that Paul would really have accepted such charges of his own people as a whole. His pronouncements here must be treated as a rhetorical outburst caused by the depth of his disappointment, specifically with those of his compatriots who “killed” Jesus the Lord, persecuted his church, and opposed the gospel preaching of Paul himself. So even though in his sweeping rhetorical statements he refers to the Jews in general, we should not interpret the hyperbolic pronouncements literally as representing his general sentiment and sober judgment about all the Jews, which he expresses quite differently in Rom 9:1–5, 10:1–4, and 11:25–32 (see Explanation below).

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 249

7/12/23 11:28 AM

250

1 Thessalonians 2:13–16

16 κωλυόντων ἡμᾶς τοῖς ἔθνεσιν λαλῆσαι ἵνα σωθῶσιν, “hindering us from speaking to the gentiles so that they may be saved.” Observing that the phrase is not introduced by καί, Best takes it to be explanatory to the immediately preceding phrase, “being contrary to all human beings,”197 but Marshall sees it as explaining the phrase “not pleasing God” as well.198 Fee links our phrase further back to the phrase καὶ ἡμᾶς ἐκδιωξάντων (“and drove us out”), as well as to those two phrases.199 This view seems correct: The Jews drove out Paul and his colleagues, “hindering [them] from speaking to the gentiles so that they may be saved,” and this was an act that both displeased God who wills all human beings to be saved (and so commissioned him to preach the gospel to them), as well as an act that was hostile to all human beings (as it deprives them of their opportunity to be saved through the gospel). If this is the correct line of interpretation, we may ask why Paul does not write in a more orderly manner such as: “the church in Judea was persecuted by the Jews, who killed both the Lord Jesus and the prophets, and drove us out, hindering us from speaking to the gentiles so that they may be saved—­ thus displeasing God and opposing all human beings.” In other words, why does Paul separate the phrase “and drove us out” from its elaborative phrase “hindering us from speaking to the gentiles so that they may be saved” and insert between them the two generalizing or resultant phrases “not pleasing God” and “opposing all human beings”? No doubt, like other features of our vv. 14–16, this unusual word order reflects Paul’s strong emotional disturbance at this point. Listing the Jews’ persecutions of the Judean church, Jesus, the prophets, and now himself, Paul becomes so disappointed and indignant at their deeds that are exactly the opposite of what they have been called to do as God’s people (Haven’t they been called to convey God’s revelation and salvation to the gentiles [e.g., Isa 42:6; 49:6]? Isn’t Paul carrying this task out on their behalf [2 Cor 4:6; Gal 1:15–16]?). So even before completing the description of their act of persecuting him and his coworkers (καὶ ἡμᾶς ἐκδιωξάντων) with the elaborative phrase (κωλυόντων ἡμᾶς . . . ), he hastens to add the summary condemnation of them as displeasing God and then expands that summary condemnation with a reference to their opposing all human beings. He makes this summary condemnation especially with the consequence of their opposition to his gospel preaching to the gentiles in view, which he is about to express in his phrase, “hindering us from speaking to the gentiles so that they may be saved.” The ἵνα clause has its proper final force: the purpose of Paul’s preaching to the gentiles was that they might come to salvation through believing the gospel; the purpose of the opposition was that the gentiles might pay no heed 197 Best, 117; so also Holtz, 106; Wanamaker, 115; Malherbe, 170. 198 Marshall, 79–80. 199 Fee, 99.

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 250

7/12/23 11:28 AM

Comment 251 to the gospel (and so, from Paul’s point of view, be prevented from coming to salvation). Here it is implicitly affirmed that by accepting (or believing) the gospel preached one obtains salvation (cf. Rom 1:16; 10:8–17; 1 Cor 15:1–2). Luke illustrates the Jewish hindrance of Paul’s preaching to the gentiles repeatedly in Acts (e.g., 13:45–50; 14:2, 19), and his account of it during Paul’s mission in Thessalonica (17:5–9) agrees well with Paul’s charge here. So Paul seems to be formulating the charge, in this verse specifically, with the intention to remind the readers of their own experience and possibly also to warn them of the negative influences that the Jews in their city continue to exert against their Christian life, as well as against the progress of the gospel among their gentile neighbors. Paul’s strong condemnation of the Jews in vv. 15–16 as a whole would be inexplicable if there had been no Jewish opposition to his mission in Thessalonica. Especially, his adding our present phrase would be quite uncalled for if only gentiles had persecuted him and his colleagues in Thessalonica.200 So the present phrase appears to reflect what had actually happened in Thessalonica, something that the readers and he experienced together.201 εἰς τὸ ἀναπληρῶσαι αὐτῶν τὰς ἁμαρτίας πάντοτε, “always to fill up their sins.” In Greek the construction εἰς τό with an infinitive is used to express purpose or result, and Paul usually uses it for purpose.202 As it is absurd to think that the Jews themselves committed those sins in order to fill up their own sins, some commentators take the phrase here as expressing God’s purpose.203 But it is also difficult to make sense of that view. Anyway, the adverb πάντοτε (“always”) leads us to take our phrase as expressing result, as Best points out: “it is easier to envisage a continuous result than a purpose continuously achieved.”204 The πάντοτε also makes it more natural to take our phrase as covering all the sins referred to in vv. 15–16a than just the sin of hindering Paul’s gentile mission that is referred to in the immediately preceding phrase of v. 16a.205 The combination here of the aorist infinitive ἀναπληρῶσαι (expressing a punctiliar action or a series of actions viewed as a whole) with its adverbial modifier πάντοτε (expressing a constant or continuous action) appears incongruous. But apparently Paul considers each of the various persecutions of the Jews that he has just listed in vv. 15–16a as having added its share each time toward making up the full measure of their sins. And so Paul, seeing that this process has gone on throughout their history, adds πάντοτε at the end of the phrase.206 200 201 202 203 204 205 206

So Holtz, 94; Tellbe, Paul, 113. Cf. Fee, 100. Cf. MHT 3:143. E.g., Frame, 113; Marshall, 80; Malherbe, 170. Best, 118. Cf. also Lightfoot, 34; Richard, 122; Weima, 175. So Wanamaker 116; Weima 174; against Malherbe, 170–71; Fee, 101. Cf. Frame, 113; most commentators.

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 251

7/12/23 11:28 AM

252

1 Thessalonians 2:13–16

The broad background for this statement may be the apocalyptic assumption that a divinely fixed measure of sin is to be committed before divine judgment (cf. Dan 8:23; 2 Macc 6:14; cf. also Gen 15:16), just as a divinely fixed measure of suffering is to be borne before eschatological salvation (cf. Col 1:24; Rev 6:11). But the more immediate background may be Jesus’s saying in Matt 23:29–36. As we noted above, our present verse, together with the previous v. 15, is close in thought and language to that Matthean text, where Jesus charges scribes and Pharisees for following their forebears in persecuting and killing prophets and other envoys of God and thus “fill[ing] up the measure of [their] fathers” (καὶ ὑμεῖς πληρώσατε τὸ μέτρον τῶν πατέρων ὑμῶν, Matt 23:32) and warns them of the imminent vengeance of God. Thus, in view of many allusions to and echoes of Jesus’s sayings that are observable in this epistle (see comment on 1:10; 2:6–8, 12; 3:13; 4:13–5:11), we may see Paul here also drawing inspiration from the Jesus tradition to speak of the Jews’ killing the prophets and the Lord Jesus and persecuting his envoys in terms of their “filling up their sins” for God’s judgment.207 The prefix ἀνα-­ in ἀναπληρῶσαι may be intensive: their cup of guilt is already well on the way to being filled, and their present conduct is contributing its share toward filling it up to the brim (ἕως ἄνω, as in John 2:7). Yet the added πάντοτε (“always”) creates the impression that it has not yet been completely filled up.208 ἔφθασεν δὲ ἐπ’ αὐτοὺς ἡ ὀργὴ εἰς τέλος, “but wrath has overtaken them at last.” This is one of the most difficult phrases in the entire New Testament. Commentators usually ignore the function of the adversative particle δέ (“but”) here. Being an exception, Malherbe views it as “introduc[ing] an explicit statement of what has been implicit so far in v. 16” and interprets our phrase thus: “But, Paul now affirms, God’s wrath is not deferred; it has already come upon them.”209 This seems to be correct. The Jews, with their hindrance of Paul’s gentile mission on top of their sins of killing the prophets and the Lord Jesus, are filling up the cup of their guilt, “but (even if the cup is not yet completely filled up) God’s wrath has already come upon them.” Since ὀργή with the article is used two more times in this brief epistle for God’s eschatological judgment (see 1:10; 5:9) and appears in connection with a phrase that has eschatological fulfillment in view, it is natural to take the term here also in the same sense.210 But the exact meanings of ἔφθασεν and εἰς τέλος are disputed. There is a striking parallel to our statement in T. Levi 6.11: ἔφθασεν δὲ ἡ ὀργὴ κυρίου ἐπ’ αὐτοὺς εἰς τέλος. However, its provenance is uncertain,211 and its 207 208 209 210 211

Cf. Green, 148. So Fee, 101. Malherbe, 171. So most commentators; cf. esp. Best, 119. Some scholars suspect it to be a later Christian interpolation from our text into the Jewish pseudepigraphical text, whose manuscript dates from the tenth century AD.

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 252

7/12/23 11:28 AM

Comment 253 usefulness for interpretation of our text here is generally denied.212 Even so, recently J. S. Lamp has made a renewed attempt to interpret our text in the light of that statement.213 Seeing that it is pronounced by Levi in reference to the past event of Jacob’s sons’ slaughter of the men of Shechem for the rape of their sister Dinah (Gen 34), Lamp argues for interpreting εἰς τέλος here in a temporal-­modal sense, “finally and decisively,” allowing ἔφθασεν its natural aorist sense (describing an action completed in the past), and taking the whole clause as Paul’s “present pronouncement of a verdict related to a past exertion of divine wrath.”214 This interpretation leads Lamp to presume that Paul is referring to Jewish rejection of the Messiah Jesus as “mark[ing] the consummation of the divine wrath.”215 But Paul is here speaking of the Jews’ killing of the Lord Jesus not as the manifestation of divine wrath itself but rather as one of the evil acts that “fill up the measure of their sins” for divine wrath. So our phrase cannot be taken as an interpretation of an event that was completed in the past (i.e., ἔφθασεν cannot be taken as a simple aorist verb). So ὀργή here will have to be understood as referring to the future eschatological judgment or condemnation of God. In 1:10, Paul makes this quite clear by modifying “the wrath” with the phrase “to come,” as well as setting it at the time of the parousia of God’s Son, Jesus. In 5:9–10 he does the same by speaking of it as occurring on the day of the Lord. However, here in 2:16 it appears with the aorist verb ἔφθασεν, “arrived.” Therefore, the verb will have to be taken either as a prophetic aorist or a proleptic aorist, which keeps the sense of the future fulfillment intact. Some commentators take it as a prophetic aorist,216 which is a mode of speaking about a future event as if it had already happened, in order to stress the certainty and imminence of it.217 But more commentators prefer to take it as a proleptic aorist as in Rom 1:18, that is, as a mode of speaking about God’s wrath as having already arrived, although its full impact is yet to be realized in the future.218 B. C. Johanson strengthens this view by analyzing our passage form-­critically in terms of the OT woe oracle.219 In a similar way, Marshall and Malherbe interpret ἔφθασεν here on analogy to Jesus’s statement that the kingdom of God ἔφθασεν, “has come” (Matt 12:28//Luke 11:20).220 The wrath of God has drawn so near that the Jews have begun to experience it, just as the kingdom of God has drawn so near that Jesus’s followers have begun to experience it. Observing the

212 213 214 215 216 217 218 219 220

Cf. Frame, 115–16; Schlueter, Filling Up, 23. Lamp, “Is Paul Anti-­Jewish?,” 408–27. Lamp, “Is Paul Anti-­Jewish?,” 426–27. Lamp, “Is Paul Anti-­Jewish?,” 426. E.g., Dobschütz, 116; Rigaux, 452; Best, 119–20; Fee, 102; cf. also Konradt, Gericht, 85–89. Also Caragounis, “Kingdom of God,” 20–23, cited from Tellbe, Paul, 108n118. E.g., Holtz, 108; Weima, 176; Schreiber, I:163–64. Johanson, “1 Thessalonians 2:15–16,” 519–34. Marshall, 81, and Malherbe, 177.

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 253

7/12/23 11:28 AM

254

1 Thessalonians 2:13–16

proleptic structure of both salvation and wrath of God in the NT, Malherbe puts Paul’s point thus: “The Jews, who hindered Paul from preaching to the Gentiles so that the latter could now lay hold of a salvation [cf. 1 Cor 1:18; 15:2; 2 Cor 6:2] still to be fully realized in the future [1:10; cf. Rom 5:9–10], have now proleptically experienced God’s wrath [cf. Rom 1:18; 1 Cor 1:18] that will also be fully realized in the future [1:10; 5:9].”221 Then how is εἰς τέλος here to be understood? BDAG lists its possible meanings as (1) “in the end, finally,” (2) “to the end, until the end,” (3) “forever, through all eternity,” or (4) “decisively, extremely, fully, altogether.”222 Marshall argues for a combination of the first and fourth nuances: “fully and finally.”223 Even if with ἔφθασεν Paul means only a proleptic arrival of God’s eschatological wrath, with εἰς τέλος he could mean “finally,” since for him the long-­expected wrath of God has begun to exert its force. However, with its proleptic arrival in view, surely he would not say that it “has come fully.” So it may be better to render εἰς τέλος here with just “finally” or “at last,” or at most, “finally and decisively.” If so, what concrete experience(s) of the Jews would Paul be thinking of as their proleptic experience(s) of the eschatological wrath of God? For this several proposals have been made: the destruction of the temple and Jerusalem in AD 70;224 the expulsion of the Jews from Rome by Claudius in AD 49 (Acts 18:1–13; Suetonius, Claud. 25.4);225 the massacre in the temple courts at the Passover of AD 49 (Josephus, J.W. 2.224–27; Ant. 20.105–12);226 “the violent upheavals in Judaea most recently under . . . Ventidius Cumanus [AD 48–52], and more generally to the sense, attested in a number of Jewish texts, that the violent and famished years after the death of Agrippa [AD 44] constituted a grave decline in Jewish fortunes”;227 and so forth. Among these proposals, the first one requires taking 2:13–16 as a later interpolation. But this view has little foundation (see Form/Structure/Setting above). However, since in Luke 21:20–24 the desolation of Jerusalem is interpreted as the outpouring of God’s “wrath [ὀργή] upon this people,” we can imagine that the other calamities of the Jews referred to above, though not as horrible as the destruction of the temple and Jerusalem, could also be seen as signs of God’s wrath upon them. So Paul may be thinking here of all those troubles for the Jews that were taking place in so many parts of the world at that time as the signs of the proleptic manifestation of God’s eschatological wrath upon them.228

221 Malherbe, 177. 222 BDAG 998. 223 Marshall, 81, citing Ackroyd, “‫­—נצח‬εἰς τέλος,” 126. Cf. also Johanson, “1 Thessalonians 2:15–16,” 531. 224 Pearson, “1 Thessalonians 2:13–16,” 82–84. 225 Bammel, “Judenverfolgung,” 300–301. 226 Jewett, Correspondence, 37–38. 227 Bockmuehl, “1 Thessalonians 2:14–16,” 30. 228 Cf. Riesner, Early Period, 354, adopting this view of Bruce.

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 254

7/12/23 11:28 AM

Explanation 255 Some commentators have seen our sentence also in connection with Paul’s pronouncement in Rom 11:25 that God has hardened (part of) Israel.229 In Rom 9–11 Paul assumes that the Jews as well as the gentiles have already fallen under divine wrath (cf. also Rom 1:18–3:20). There he explains Israel’s unbelief and disobedience both as the cause for God’s judgment and as the result of it (cf. Rom 11:7–10, 15, 32, etc.). So it is possible that here he is thinking of the Jewish obduracy shown in their unbelief and opposition to the gospel, along with the physical calamities that the Jews have recently suffered from the hands of the Romans, as a sign of God’s wrath that has already gripped them and will soon engulf them fully and finally. Note also the contrast between the present verse (God’s wrath that has already overtaken the Jews) and 1:10 and 5:9–10 (the gentile believers waiting for deliverance from God’s wrath). The irony is that by preventing the gentiles from being saved or delivered from God’s wrath, the Jews (the first intended beneficiaries of that redemption in Christ—­Rom 1:16) themselves come under God’s wrath.

Explanation Having given a detailed account of his impeccable eisodos or mission in Thessalonica, constantly appealing to the knowledge or memory of the readers for endorsement (2:1–12), Paul gives thanks to God for the fact that, appreciating his holy and righteous conduct and so recognizing him as a true apostle of God, the readers accepted his message as God’s true word. Thus, here he renews the thanksgiving that he already offered in 1:2–7. In the latter, he included as a reason for his thanksgiving the fact that, by accepting the gospel despite persecution, they became imitators of the Lord Jesus and Paul himself (1:6). Here he renews that thanksgiving and also his heartfelt appreciation of their acceptance of the Christian faith despite persecution, this time explaining it as an imitation of the churches in Judea who suffered persecution for their faith by the Jews just as they are suffering persecution from their compatriots. Thus Paul, expanding the theme of imitation in suffering persecution for the gospel, condemns the Jews, echoing both the OT-­ Jewish tradition and the Jesus tradition, for their constant opposition to God’s word and their persecution of its bearers—­namely, the prophets, the Lord Jesus, and Paul himself. By detailing the Jewish persecution of Paul himself through the language of “driving out” and “hindering” him from preaching to the gentiles, he concludes his recounting of his mission in Thessalonica and his renewal of thanksgiving (2:1–16), and he prepares a smooth transition to the next section, in which he shares how he, being in forced separation from the readers, has been anxious about them (2:17–3:5).

229 E.g., Wanamaker, 117; Hagner, “Paul’s Quarrel,” 132–33.

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 255

7/12/23 11:28 AM

256

1 Thessalonians 2:13–16

In passing, we may note that in speaking of the Thessalonian Christians’ “imitation” of the churches in Judea (2:14) as well as the Lord Jesus and Paul himself (1:6), Paul has in view only their acceptance of the gospel despite persecution, a subject matter that does not feature in the paraenesis section of this epistle (chs. 4–5). Together with the fact that in this epistle Paul does not issue his usual paraenetic call for his readers to imitate him (cf. 1 Cor 4:16–17; 11:1; Gal 4:12; Phil 3:17; 4:9; 2 Thess 3:7–12; also 1 Cor 4:6; 8:13; 9:24–27; 14:18), this fact makes it difficult to accept the attempts of Malherbe and Wanamaker to see Paul in 1 Thess 2 as setting himself up as a model for their imitation.230 In speaking of the Thessalonian Christians “imitating” the Lord Jesus, Paul and his colleagues, and the churches in Judea, Paul means only to praise their faith and thereby comfort and encourage them for perseverance in faith amid persecution. Here, Paul condemns the Jews in extremely harsh language, in a context where he speaks about the Thessalonian Christians suffering persecution from their compatriots. From this fact we may surmise that he saw the Thessalonian Christians’ persecution by their own people as linked with the Jews in Thessalonica. In section I.4.A–­D in the Introduction, we have already discussed how the Jews spun Paul’s gospel and accused him and his team to the politarchs of Thessalonica for proclaiming another king in violation of the decrees of Caesar. We saw how that accusation incited the Thessalonians, who were eager to display their loyalty to the Roman Empire, to persecute the Thessalonian church, as well as how the politarchs nevertheless did not take Paul’s gospel as a serious political or counter-­imperial crime; they just made him and his colleagues leave the city quietly, after taking bond for them from Jason. There we also argued that the undoubtedly historical fact that they did get out of Thessalonica and went on with their mission elsewhere confirms the basic veracity of the Lukan account in Acts of the release of Paul and his team. Here, we may add that the continued existence, albeit in affliction, of the fledgling church in Thessalonica itself also suggests that no matter what “subversive” elements the Thessalonian authorities may have suspected of their beliefs and practices, they were not so serious as to prosecute the Christians and ban the church’s existence. If the charge of the counter-­imperial nature of their faith proved to be not so serious, why were the Thessalonian Christians nevertheless further persecuted? From the three facts in 2:1–16, namely, (1) Paul’s efforts to differentiate himself from a Jewish false prophet and a Hellenistic charlatan preacher; (2) his connection of the Thessalonians’ persecution by their own compatriots with the Judean churches’ persecution by the Jews; and (3) his vehement denunciation of the Jews, we may surmise that Paul saw the Thessalonian Christians’ persecution by their own people as agitated 230 Malherbe, 167, and Wanamaker, 95–97, 155–57.

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 256

7/12/23 11:28 AM

Explanation 257 by the Jews in Thessalonica.231 It is easy to imagine that, even after Paul and his team had left the city, the Jews there retained their hostility to Paul’s mission and the fledgling church in their midst, as they were fundamentally provoked by his gospel of the crucified Jesus as the Messiah, God’s Son, and by his inclusion of the Christ-­believing gentiles into the assembly of their God, Yahweh-­Kyrios. So the Jews kept criticizing Paul as a false prophet and his gospel as false prophecy, which would have led the gentile Thessalonians to understand Paul in terms of charlatan philosophers and their quackery and to continue to harbor suspicion of political subversion (despite the official clearance of Paul and his colleagues). The gentile Thessalonians would have been extremely agitated at seeing their society disturbed by such dangerous false teachings of foreign origin as well as at seeing their own relatives and friends charmed away by them. In such a situation, the behavior of the Christians probably did not help win the trust and acceptance of their unbelieving relatives and friends either. In recent scholarship, the reason for the pagan Thessalonians’ persecution of converts in their families and neighborhoods has been sought partly in the exclusive nature of the gospel and the social withdrawal of the converts.232 From the fact that, in our epistle, Paul only praises the Thessalonians’ conversion from idols to the one true living God and his Son Jesus Christ (1:9–10) and does not warn them about the danger of idolatry, even while warning about pagan immorality (4:1–8), we may assume that they were not like some of the Corinthian Christians, who apparently took the exclusive claims of the gospel lightly and were willing to continue with participation in pagan cults (cf. 1 Cor 8–10) and follow the dominant pagan lifestyle (cf. 1 Cor 5–6). Thus, in Thessalonica, a polytheistic city of “many gods and many lords” like Corinth (cf. 1 Cor 8:5), the Christians’ devotion to the one God of Israel and his Son Jesus Christ and their repudiation of the gods that their families and their city honored would have been looked upon as a betrayal of their families and their city.233 Their actual withdrawal from the family rites and city ceremonies that were centered around the worship of their traditional gods must have given great offense to their non-­Christian family members and neighbors.234 Thus the non-­Christian Thessalonians sought to dissuade the Christians from believing in the gospel by denigrating its preachers, Paul and his

231 Cf. Holtz, 111–12; Tellbe, Paul, 107–15. 232 E.g., Meeks, “Social Functions,” 69; Barclay, “Conflict,” 514–15; Vos, Church, 155–60; Still, Conflict, 229–67; Taylor, “Who Persecuted,” 793–95, 798. 233 Cf. Still, Conflict, 229–32, for an illustration of this point with the pagan and the Hellenistic-­ Jewish sources showing pagan persecution of converts to Judaism. 234 Cf. MacMullen, Christianizing the Roman Empire, 19; Kelly, Peter and Jude, 171, both cited in Still, Conflict, 238n30; cf. Sandnes, New Family, 21–31, who shows how conversion was regarded as an offense against family honor in ancient cultures; also Malherbe, Paul and the Thessalonians, 36–46, who shows how converts to philosophy experienced similar ostracism.

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 257

7/12/23 11:28 AM

258

1 Thessalonians 2:13–16

colleagues, as wandering charlatan philosophers and sophists, for they regarded the small band of the recent converts as having fallen victim to a babbler of an exotic cult (cf. Acts 17:18) and as posing a threat to the unity of their families and the well-­being of their city (cf. 16:20–21). When the Christians nevertheless remained faithful to their new faith, the non-­Christians persecuted them.235 If the exclusivism of the gospel and the social withdrawal of the converts added fuel to the pagan Thessalonians’ fear that the Christians would disturb the unity and peace of their society and thus provoked them to persecute the Christians, the form of persecution would have involved at least verbal abuse and ostracism from family and society, which often resulted in their losing jobs, putting their livelihood in jeopardy.236 It is moreover likely that there also was mob violence and looting, which were condoned by the city authorities (cf. Acts 17:1–9; Heb 10:32–34). This is suggested by Paul’s citation of the Judean churches’ persecution by the Jews as analogous to the Thessalonian church’s persecution by their own people (1 Thess 2:14–15), as well as by his testimony that “Satan hindered” his repeated attempts to revisit the Thessalonian church (vv. 17–18). Perhaps in 2 Cor 8:2 Paul refers to this situation when he describes “the churches of Macedonia” (probably not just the church of Philippi but also that of Thessalonica) as being “in a severe test of affliction” and “extreme poverty.” Some of the exhortations in 1 Thess 4:9–12 and 5:12–22 may also reflect such a situation. It is possible that, as some members of the church were driven out of their homes and jobs, they were taken care of by the generous donations of some better-­off members of the church (see comment on 4:11–12 below). Yet then some of the dependent ones became “idlers” (5:14), abusing the common fund of the church and playing busybodies in the affairs of the church and the lives of other people (cf. 2 Thess 3:11). Hence, Paul may be admonishing them “to aspire to live quietly, to mind [their] own affairs, and to work with [their] hands, so that [they] may . . . be dependent on nobody” (4:11–12), as well as praising and encouraging those who practice sibling love with their charity work (vv. 9–10). Paul’s admonitions for the Thessalonian Christians to earn the respect of the outsiders (v. 12) and to “seek to do good . . . to all” rather than “repay[ing] evil for evil” (5:15), though reflecting his common paraenesis (see below), also fit with this particular situation well. Such a reaction as presumed here as having occurred to Paul’s mission in Thessalonica and elsewhere in the Hellenistic world is quite understandable, as a similar reaction has often taken place in the modern history of Christian

235 For the suggestion of Barclay, “Conflict,” 520–24, which is followed by Still, Conflict, 246–50, that the persecution was also provoked by the Thessalonian Christians’ aggressive evangelism, see comment on 4:11–12 below. 236 Cf. Furnish, 46–47.

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 258

7/12/23 11:28 AM

Explanation 259 mission in Asia and elsewhere. In some Asian countries, Christian missionaries were abused as “foreign [or Western] devils,” and Christianity was charged with disturbing families and society by causing its converts to repudiate their ancestral religions and withdraw from family rites such as ancestor worship, as well as from national ceremonies. Christian converts were often charged with being disloyal or unpatriotic. So their ostracism and physical persecution took place very often among many traditional societies of Asian countries, and they take place even today in some places. They have especially been severe in the countries where there is a national (or de facto national) religion, but even in countries of multiple religions they have taken place—­w ith the additional charge of Christian exclusivism to and intolerance of other religions. At any rate, Paul’s recounting of his own and the Judean churches’ experiences of persecution by the Jews, their own συγγενεῖς (Rom 9:3) or συμφυλέται (1 Thess 2:14), and his bitter polemic against them must have comforted and encouraged the Thessalonian Christians, who might be bothered by the question of whether in converting from their “national” or ancestral religion to the Christian faith they might not have “betrayed” their own city-­state, tribe, or family—­the question that also troubles many Asian Christian converts today. Thus, one may try to understand Paul’s great anger at the Jewish slander directed at him and his gospel, as well as his desire to comfort those suffering converts. Even so, the denunciation of the Jews in vv. 15–16 cannot help but be judged as extremely harsh. Therefore, as we have seen, thinking that Paul could not possibly have made such “anti-­Semitic” statements, some scholars have tried to excise them as a later interpolation. But many recent commentators reject such attempts, and we have shown that vv. 14–16 are an integral part of Paul’s second thanksgiving section, which elaborates on what he referred to in his first thanksgiving section (1:6). Furthermore, Paul’s statements in our vv. 14–16 should not be understood in terms of the modern concept of “anti-­S emitism” or “anti-­Judaism.” For Paul is not denouncing the Jews because they are Jews, but because, in his view, they have disobeyed God by rejecting his Messiah and persecuting his messengers. Paul here reflects the critical prophetic and apocalyptic tradition within Judaism of pronouncing the Deuteronomistic form of judgment against their own Jewish nation for their disobedience to God (e.g., Deut 32; 1QM 3.9; 1QS 2.15).237 We must recognize also that, however v. 16 may be interpreted (esp. the phrase εἰς τέλος), it is clearly a hyperbole.238 Compare the hyperbole in 1:8 above. If the declaration of God’s final wrath is literally meant, why would he make efforts to save Jews even after making that declaration (Rom 1:16; 11:13–14; 1 Cor 9:20; cf. also 2 Cor 11:24–26)? Even if Paul perceives some of the recent misfortunes of the Jews as signs of the revelation of God’s 237 Cf. Holtz, 103; Hagner, “Paul’s Quarrel,” 134–35. 238 Cf. Schlueter, Filling Up.

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 259

7/12/23 11:28 AM

260

1 Thessalonians 2:13–16

eschatological wrath, the fact that he makes such efforts indicates that he regards the present revelation of God’s wrath upon the Jews as a proleptic revelation rather than the ultimate and complete condemnation of them. So basically our v. 16 is to be understood like Rom 1:18. In the latter, Paul declares that “God’s wrath is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and wickedness of humanity.” Yet he does not regard it as the final and full revelation but rather as a proleptic revelation, and he uses it to warn all humanity, the Jews as well as the gentiles, about the ultimate revelation of God’s wrath at the last judgment and to call them to repent of their sins and obey God. He is telling them not to waste the time that God in his kindness, forbearance, and patience still allows them to make such a conversion and receive eschatological salvation (Rom 2:1–16). Thus he is eager to preach the gospel to all the gentiles as well as the Jews during the interim period before the final and full revelation of God’s wrath (Rom 1:14–17). In our passage, feeling most severely frustrated by the obduracy and disobedience to God that the Jews show by hindering his mission and agitating gentile persecution of his converts in Thessalonica on top of “killing the Lord Jesus,” Paul heightens the tone of his declaration of the revelation of God’s wrath with the phrase εἰς τέλος. But in a calmer moment, he returns to his fundamental theological conviction about God, who is faithful to his covenant with Israel. So even while believing that God has hardened the hearts of many Jews (probably as part of his wrath for their “killing” the Lord Jesus), he not only goes on making efforts to win some Jews for Christ (Rom 11:13–14) but also affirms that the hardening is temporary until the fullness of the gentiles comes into God’s kingdom, “and so all Israel will be saved” in the end (Rom 11:25–26). Thus, our v. 16 is really an outburst made in the polemical heat of the moment.239 Only a commentator who insists on literalism as the sole principle of interpretation would think that this verse is incompatible with Rom 11:25–26.240

239 Cf. Hagner, “Paul’s Quarrel,” 133–36. 240 See Kim, “The ‘Mystery’ of Rom 11:25–26 Once More,” 412–29.

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 260

7/12/23 11:28 AM

3. Paul’s Worry and Relief, Thanksgiving and Prayer (2:17–3:13) Bibliography Funk, R. W. “The Apostolic Parousia: Form and Significance.” Pages 249–68 in Christian History and Interpretation: Studies Presented to John Knox. Edited by W. R. Farmer, C. F. D. Moule, and R. R. Niebuhr. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1967. Jervis, L. A. The Purpose of Romans: A Comparative Letter Structure Investigation. JSNTSup 55. Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1992.

Form/Structure/Setting R. Funk (“Apostolic Parousia,” 249–68) observed that Paul’s letters usually have section(s) (e.g., Rom 15:14–33; 1 Cor 4:14–21; 16:1–11; 2 Cor 12:14–13:10; Phil 2:19–21; 1 Thess 2:17–3:13; Phlm 21–22) in which he expresses his reason for writing, his intention to send an emissary, and his hope or plan to pay the congregation a personal visit. Understanding that by speaking of these things in those sections Paul makes his apostolic presence felt and his authority effective in the church addressed, Funk called them sections of “the apostolic parousia.” Some scholars1 have sought to refine this view through their epistolary form criticism, and some commentators2 adopt it for our section, 2:17–3:10. However, it appears to us quite arbitrary. For if a letter is a means whereby Paul asserts his apostolic authority and conveys his apostolic presence, then the whole letter, not just a section of it, should be seen from that point of view. Indeed, Paul usually has section(s) in which he explains his reason for writing and shares his hope of visiting his congregation or sending an emissary to it. But the section is not particularly more marked by apostolic presence than the sections of doctrinal exposition or ethical exhortation. For example, in our epistle it can hardly be said that Paul is trying to bring his apostolic presence or authority to bear in 2:17–3:10 more than in 2:1–16, where he constantly recalls the readers’ memory or knowledge of his apostolic presence and conduct among them, or in chs. 4–5, where he exhorts and commands them with repeated reminders of his previous instructions. Therefore, analyzing our 2:17–3:10 form-­critically and viewing it as an “apostolic parousia” section appears inappropriate.3 The same has to be said also about Wanamaker’s

1 2 3

E.g., White, Form and Function, 99–151; Boers, “Form Critical Study,” 146–51; Jervis, Purpose, 110–31. E.g., Weima, 189–91; cf. also Wanamaker, 119. Cf. Malherbe, 180, who also dismisses the usefulness of the form-­critical approach here.

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 261

7/12/23 11:28 AM

262

1 Thessalonians 2:17–3:13

rhetorical analysis of our section along with 2:1–12 as narratio, as only a preparation for the explicit paraenesis in chs. 4–5 (see section II.3.C. of the Introduction). So our section is neither an “apostolic parousia” in the form-­critical sense, nor a “narratio” in the sense of a rhetorical handbook, nor a “personal relationship” section for building rapport before imparting practical exhortations in a “friendship letter,”4 nor an apology for absence from Thessalonica.5 It is part of the main body of the letter, in which Paul explains the background of his thanksgiving to God and also the background of this letter. For the sake of clarity, we need to repeat our thesis here: in this letter, certainly in its primary part 1 (chs. 1–3), Paul’s main theme is (a) to thank God for the Thessalonians’ faith that has been brought about (b) by his impeccable eisodos—­t he faith that they still maintain along with their positive appreciation of his eisodos in the face of (c) the opponents’ slander campaign and persecution. In 1 Thess 1–3 Paul elaborates on each of these three elements in turn and renews his thanksgiving: having given thanks to God and expressing these three points in summary form in 1:2–7, he first elaborates on (a) the faith of the readers in 1:7–10; then, elaborating on (b) the integrity of his eisodos in 2:1–12, he renews the thanksgiving in 2:13–14; and then now in 2:14–3:8, elaborating on (c) their suffering under the opponents’ persecution, he renews the thanksgiving again, combining it with prayer (3:6–10). In elaborating on the theme of the readers’ suffering in 2:14–3:8, he first comforts them by putting their suffering in perspective—­they share in the same lot of the Lord Jesus Christ, the prophets, the Judean churches, and Paul and his colleagues. Then he makes a slight digression to denounce the Jews, seeing them as the instigators of the gentile Thessalonians who are persecuting the readers. But he returns to the main theme and comforts the readers by showing his intense pastoral concern for them. He narrates how extremely worried he was about their faith as he had to leave them in persecution, how he endeavored to come to their aid, and how he sent Timothy to help them persevere amid the persecution. He also expresses how relieved he was to hear from Timothy the good report of their faith and their good will toward him. By culminating this narrative of his intense concern for and great sense of relief about their faith with his renewed thanksgiving to God, Paul indicates that this whole narrative is aimed at explaining the background of his heartfelt thanksgiving. This is exactly like what he does in 2 Corinthians, where he provides the background of his emotional thanksgiving in 2 Cor 2:14–17 with a long narrative in 1:18–2:13 about his suffering, his inability to keep his travel plan to come to the readers (which has caused troubles in his relationship with them), and about Titus’s mission (cf. 7:5–16). One difference of our 4 5

Pace Malherbe, 180–81. Pace Weima, 188.

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 262

7/12/23 11:28 AM

Bibliography 263 passage from 2 Cor 1:18–2:17 is that there is no evidence that the Thessalonian Christians had doubt, like the Corinthian Christians, about Paul’s sincerity because of his failure to return to them. For Timothy confirmed only that they were cherishing their memory of Paul and longing to see him (1 Thess 3:6). Hence our section is no apology for his absence from Thessalonica. Nevertheless, as the readers are still exposed to the opponents’ slander campaign against Paul’s integrity as well as to their persecution, Paul aims with the lengthy and emotional narrative6 (1) to comfort them, (2) to affirm them in their faithful stance, and (3) to inoculate them against any charges that the opponents may still be bringing against his pastoral character.7

A. Paul’s Desire to Visit Thessalonica Again (2:17–20) Bibliography Faulkenberry Miller, J. B. “Infants and Orphans in 1 Thessalonians: A Discussion of ἀποφανίζω and the Text-­Critical Problem in 1 Thess 2:7.” Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the SBL, 1999. Kim, S. “The Thessalonian Church as Paul’s ‘Hope or Joy or Crown of Boasting’ (1 Thess 2:19–20): Judgment according to Works and Reward for Good Deeds, or the Structure of Paul’s Doctrine of Justification.” Pages 193–215 in PGTO. Konradt, M. Gericht und Gemeinde: Eine Studie zur Bedeutung und Funktion von Gerichtsaussagen im Rahmen der paulinischen Ekklesiologie und Ethik im 1 Thess und 1 Kor. BZNW 117. Berlin: de Gruyter, 2003. Malherbe, A. J. “ ‘Gentle as a Nurse’: The Cynic Background to 1 Thess. II.” NovT 12 (1970): 203–17. Winter, B. “Is Paul among the Sophists?” RTR 53 (1994): 28–38.

Translation But as for us, brothers and sisters, when we were orphaned from you for the time being, in face but not in heart, we endeavored most earnestly, with great longing, to see you face to face again. 18In fact we made up our minds to come to you—­I Paul, for my part, more than once—­but Satan hindered us. 19For what is our hope, our joy, our crown of boasting,a, b before our Lord Jesus at his advent? Is it not indeed you?c 20Yes, you are our glory and joy. 17

Notes a. For καυχήσεως (“boasting”), the synonym ἀγαλλιάσεως (“exultation”) is read in A (cf. Tertullian, Res. 24: exultationis corona). b. ἐλπὶς ἢ χαρὰ ἢ στέφανος καυχήσεως (“hope or joy or crown of boasting”). The ἤ (“or”) here functions as a copulative rather than disjunctive conjunction (cf. BDF §446), as suggested by the answer to the question in v. 19 in v. 20: ἡ δόξα ἡμῶν καὶ ἡ χαρά.

6 7

Cf. Malherbe, 183, for the striking pathos of Paul’s language in this section. Cf. also Marshall, 9, 76.

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 263

7/12/23 11:28 AM

264

1 Thessalonians 2:17–20

c. ἦ οὐχὶ καὶ ὑμεῖς (“is it not indeed you?”). It seems preferable to accent the first word ἦ (synonymous with ἆρα), introducing a question not involving an alternative. If we accent ἤ (with most editors, including NA 28), it suggests that two questions have overlapped: (1) τίνες ἄλλοι ἢ ὑμεῖς (“who other than you?”) and (2) οὐχὶ καὶ ὑμεῖς (“is it not indeed you?”). The interrogative clause of four words is parenthetical; the following phrase “in the presence of our Lord Jesus at his advent” completes the question immediately preceding the parenthesis (“For what is our hope . . . ?”).

Form/Structure/Setting In this section, Paul spells out what he implied in 2:8 (see comment ad loc).

Comment 2:17 ἡμεῖς δέ, ἀδελφοί, “But we, brothers and sisters.” As usual, the address “brothers and sisters” marks a transition, but in view of the empathetic content that follows it, we may sense that Paul is loading it here with a greater degree of affection than usual.8 After the strong broadside against the Jews (vv. 15–16), he returns to the subject of suffering that the readers have been experiencing for their faith (v. 14). Their suffering was especially hard for them because their pastor Paul was not with them, as he had been driven out of their city. Hence, he tries to convey his empathy to them. He begins with the emphatic ἡμεῖς δέ to correspond to the emphatic ὑμεῖς in 2:14: “You have been suffering for your faith under the persecution of your compatriots, without our pastoral presence as we were driven out of your city. On our part, we, also suffering from bereavement from you, have eagerly endeavored to come to your aid.” ἀπορφανισθέντες ἀφ’ ὑμῶν, “having been orphaned from you.” The participle ἀπορφανισθέντες is used here in both temporal and causal senses. The traditional interpretation has assumed that in Greek literature ὀρφανός was used of parents who have lost their children as well as of children who have lost their parents.9 With the use of the causative verb ἀπορφανίζειν (to “make an orphan”) in the aorist passive, which corresponds to the aorist participle ἐκδιωξάντων in v. 15 above, Paul conveys that he was involuntarily and forcibly deprived of the church. Clearly this strongly emotional word is chosen to identify himself with the readers and thereby to comfort them. With the departure of their pastors (Paul and his coworkers), they, the babies in the faith, were feeling like they had been “orphaned.” Paul says that he and his coworkers also felt like parents who were “orphaned” from their children, that is, who were bereft of them. Most commentators have understood our phrase thus. However, recently Weima has asserted that in Greek literature ἀπορφανίζειν was used only for children who were orphaned from their parents but not for parents who lost their children.10 Therefore he interprets that here Paul 8 Cf. Weima, 196. 9 Cf. H. Seesemann, TDNT 5:487. 10 Weima, 197, appealing to J. B. Faulkenberry Miller (“Infants and Orphans”).

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 264

7/12/23 11:28 AM

Comment 265 presents himself and his coworkers as children who were “orphaned” from the Thessalonian believers. Weima (apparently following Faulkenberry Miller) thinks that this interpretation is supported by Paul’s employment of the metaphor “infants” for himself and his coworkers in 2:7. However, there Paul uses the infant metaphor for his moral innocence, not for his family relationship with the readers. Hence, it is improper for Weima to appeal to that metaphor for his unusual interpretation here. It would be most strange for Paul to present himself and his coworkers as children and the readers as parents after having spoken of himself as a nurse who takes care of them as her own children (2:7) and as a father who exhorts them as his children (vv. 11–12). In 1 Cor 4:14–17 Paul, as the founding apostle of the Corinthian church, claims a unique relationship to his converts there, as that of “father” to “children.” Is it then imaginable that in our verse Paul reverses the relationship? At any rate, in the emphatic formulation, ἡμεῖς δέ, ἀδελφοί, ἀπορφανισθέντες ἀφ’ ὑμῶν, we may see Paul’s implicit concern that the readers not be swayed by the opponents’ possible accusation that he just fled from persecution, leaving his converts in the lurch, as some charlatan philosophers desert their pupils in adversity.11 The prepositional phrase πρὸς καιρὸν ὥρας is a combination of two synonymous phrases: πρὸς καιρόν (“for a time”; 1 Cor 7:5) and πρὸς ὥραν (“for an hour”; 2 Cor 7:8; Gal 2:5; Phlm 15), to intensify the sense of temporariness—­ “for the time being” or “for a short time.” Marshall takes this phrase as referring to the period between Paul’s eviction from Thessalonica and his attempts to return and sees him as saying that his “concern for his friends was so great that only a very short time passed before he made concrete efforts to go back to Thessalonica.”12 But it appears more natural to take it as referring to the whole period of separation and to see Paul as expressing his confidence that the separation would not last long.13 προσώπῳ οὐ καρδίᾳ, “in face, not in heart.” Though separated in terms of physical contact, Paul keeps them in his thoughts and feelings. Paul uses here an epistolary commonplace (cf. 1 Cor 5:3, ἀπὼν τῷ σώματι, παρὼν δὲ τῷ πνεύματι, “absent in body but present in spirit”; also 2 Cor 8:16; Phil 1:7; Col 2:5), but by adding an emphatic clause that expresses his intense longing for the readers, he clearly conveys that the phrase is genuinely meant. περισσοτέρως ἐσπουδάσαμεν τὸ πρόσωπον ὑμῶν ἰδεῖν ἐν πολλῇ ἐπιθυμίᾳ, “we endeavored most earnestly, with great longing, to see you face to face.” The piling up of words expressing eager longing emphasizes his ardent desire to see the readers. It is simpler to take the comparative adverb περισσοτέρως 11 Cf. Winter, “Is Paul among the Sophists?,” 32; also Malherbe, “Gentle as a Nurse,” 208–9. 12 Marshall, 85. 13 So Holtz, 115, and most commentators.

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 265

7/12/23 11:28 AM

266

1 Thessalonians 2:17–20

(“more earnestly”) in the superlative sense (“most earnestly”), as in 2 Cor 2:4.14 Paul, as well as the NT as a whole, usually uses ἐπιθυμία in the negative sense of “craving” or “lust” (e.g., Rom 7:7–8; Col 3:5; 1 Thess 4:5), but here he uses it in the positive sense of “longing” (cf. Phil 1:23; see BDAG). With the adverb περισσοτέρως and the adverbial phrase ἐν πολλῇ ἐπιθυμίᾳ (“with great desire”) to modify the already emphatic verb σπουδάζειν (to “do one’s best, work hard”), Paul leaves no room for any doubt about his serious efforts to return to Thessalonica. The phrase τὸ πρόσωπον ὑμῶν ἰδεῖν, “to see your face” (i.e., “to see you face to face” or “to see you in person”) here, which is repeated in 3:10, thus forming an inclusio,15 increases the degree of emphasis still further. There is nothing merely rhetorical about this language. Paul, having no children of his own, found his unbounded capacity for paternal affection amply employed in his relationship with his converts. Note also Gal 4:20, where he wishes he could be present right then with his Galatian converts and show them by his tone of voice the intensity of feeling that could not be adequately expressed in written words. On the other hand, when he knew that a personal encounter would be painful on both sides, he preferred to wait until the trouble had been set right, in written correspondence or through messengers, so that, when in due course he met his converts, the occasion would be a joyful one for all of them (cf. 2 Cor 1:23–2:3; 13:10). 18 διότι ἠθελήσαμεν ἐλθεῖν πρὸς ὑμᾶς, “because we made up our minds to come to you.” As if what was said in the previous verse were not enough, Paul adds a further substantiating clause: “(you can take this [the assurance of our longing to see you] as true) because in fact we desired (or were resolved) to come to you.” ἐγὼ μὲν Παῦλος, “I, Paul.” This phrase interjected into the “we” speech shows that Paul is the real author of the letter and expresses the degree of his personal engagement in the pastoral care of the Thessalonians. Here, the particle μέν (“on the one hand”) used without a corresponding δέ (“on the other hand”) seems to reflect his strong desire to stress his personal resolution in particular (cf. Rom 10:1).16 καὶ ἅπαξ καὶ δίς, “more than once.” This phrase is to be taken closely with ἐγὼ μὲν Παῦλος probably rather than with ἠθελήσαμεν ἐλθεῖν πρὸς ὑμᾶς (for the phrase, cf. Phil 4:16). Morris, after an examination of the phrase ἅπαξ καὶ δίς (lit. “once and twice”) in the LXX (cf. Deut 9:13; 1 Sam 17:39; Neh 13:20; 1 Macc 3:30), concludes that this idiomatic phrase means “more than once,” and this is the sense here, the καί before ἅπαξ adding emphasis: “and that more than once.”17 While stating that Silvanus and Timothy also wanted to come to the Thessalonians,

14 15 16 17

See the discussion in Weima, 198. Malherbe, 180. Cf. BDAG 630 (2); Malherbe, 183; Weima, 199. Morris, “Καὶ ἅπαξ καὶ δίς,” 205–8; So also idem, 88n89; cf. Frame, 120–21.

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 266

7/12/23 11:28 AM

Comment 267 Paul emphasizes his own several concrete efforts to come to them. The whole clause should be rendered: “because we were resolved to come to you, and indeed (or to speak of myself) I, Paul, endeavored more than once . . .” καὶ ἐνέκοψεν ἡμᾶς ὁ σατανᾶς, “and (but) Satan hindered us.” For ἐγκόπτειν in this sense, compare with Rom 15:22, where Paul has been repeatedly hindered in his plans to visit Rome, and Gal 5:7, where the Galatian Christians have been hindered in continuing the “race” they began so well. σατανᾶς. The Aramaic emphatic state in -­â (Satanâ) supplied with the Greek masculine termination -­ς (Satanâς) is the invariable nominative form in the NT (cf. Rom 16:20 for the accusative σατανᾶν; 2 Thess 2:9 for the genitive σατανᾶ; and 1 Cor 5:5 for the dative σατανᾷ). While ‫“( ׂשטן‬adversary,” “prosecutor”) is a common noun in the OT, Satan in the NT is the adversary par excellence of God and his people. In 3:5 below, he will be called ὁ πειράζων, “the tempter” (cf. 1 Cor 7:5: “lest Satan tempt you”; cf. 2 Cor 4:4; 2 Thess 3:3 for other names). Here Paul attributes to Satan the circumstances adverse to his plan. For Satan is understood as the ultimate spiritual force standing behind all the physical obstacles in the way of God’s people carrying out God’s will (e.g., 2 Cor 12:7; 1 Thess 3:5; 2 Thess 2:9). But what does Paul have concretely in view here? We should probably find the answer in the immediate context of 2:14–17. Apparently Paul sees satanic agency behind all those opposing the gospel: the Jews (vv. 15–16) and the lawless mobs and other Thessalonian opponents, including the politarchs, who together drove him out of Thessalonica (v. 17; Acts 17:5–9) and are still persecuting the readers (v. 14) and hindering him from returning to the city (cf. 1 Cor 2:8; 2 Cor 4:4; 2 Thess 2:9). 19 τίς γὰρ ἡμῶν ἐλπὶς ἢ χαρὰ ἢ στέφανος καυχήσεως, “For what is our hope, or joy, or crown of boasting?” The connective γάρ in this rhetorical question explains the reason why Paul longs to see his Thessalonian friends. The conjunction ἤ functions as a copulative (see Notes above), and the three substantives, “hope,” “ joy,” and “crown of boasting,” describe one and the same reality of eschatological blessing from three different perspectives. The verb is omitted here, but in view of ἐστε (“are”) in the next verse, ἔστιν (“is”) is to be supplied. Even if they are in the present tense, the eschatological context in which they appear lets them both point to the future. Elsewhere he speaks of his converts as the “fruit” of his service (Rom 1:13), the “seal of his apostleship” (1 Cor 9:2), and “our letter [of recommendation]” (2 Cor 3:2). But only to another Macedonian church, namely, the Philippian church, does he apply the same epithets, “my joy and crown” (Phil 4:1), as he does here to the Thessalonian church. It clearly reveals his especially cordial relationship with and particular affection for the two Macedonian churches (cf. 2 Cor 1:14). The “crown of boasting” is a Hebraism, meaning “crown to boast of or to exult in” (Prov 16:31; Ezek 16:12; 23:42). It alludes to the laurel wreath that was awarded to the victor in an athletic contest; victory in such a contest afforded

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 267

7/12/23 11:28 AM

268

1 Thessalonians 2:17–20

the victor and all associated with him ample ground for καύχησις (“boasting”). Paul repeatedly portrays the Christian life, and in particular his apostolic ministry, in athletic terms. In earthly races, he says, the contenders run “to receive a perishable wreath [στέφανος], but we an imperishable” (1 Cor 9:25). At the last judgment, his converts will prove to be his “crown of boasting.” ἦ οὐχὶ καὶ ὑμεῖς; “well, is it not indeed you?” (reading ἦ, rather than ἤ—­see the Notes above). Even before completing the interrogative sentence of our verse, Paul interjects this rhetorical question and anticipates the answer that he will give in the next verse. Thus he shows again his eagerness to express his affection for the readers. Most editions and commentators read ἤ (“or”), but this would imply that Paul has in view alternative(s) to the Thessalonian church. Indeed, some commentators have presented him as doing precisely that by interpreting καὶ ὑμεῖς here in the sense of “you also (along with others).”18 For this interpretation, Best refers to Phil 4:1, where Paul extols the Philippian believers in similar language as he does the Thessalonian believers here.19 However, this is to miss Paul’s concentration here on his relationship with the Thessalonian believers20 and to introduce unnecessarily “a red herring” into this context.21 So it is better to read ἦ here22 and take it as an adverb, meaning “well” or “now, then,” like ἆρα,23 or “truly, indeed,”24 as well as taking καὶ ὑμεῖς in the emphatic sense (“indeed you”) rather than the inclusive sense (“you also”). ἔμπροσθεν τοῦ κυρίου ἡμῶν Ἰησοῦ ἐν τῇ αὐτοῦ παρουσίᾳ, “before our Lord Jesus at his advent.” This is the occasion of final review. Paul, we know, is content to ignore assessments of his ministry made by others and to abide by the Lord’s adjudication: “do not pronounce judgment before the time, before the Lord comes” (1 Cor 4:5). When the time comes, he is sure that the Lord’s adjudication will depend on the quality of his converts. Therefore, for example, he urges the Philippian Christians to maintain a worthy life and witness “so that in the day of Christ I may be proud [εἰς καύχημα ἐμοί] that I did not run in vain or labor in vain” (Phil 2:16). What is called “the day of Christ” in Phil 2:16 is referred to here as Christ’s advent (παρουσία). This is the earliest occurrence in literature of παρουσία in its distinctive Christian sense of the advent of Christ in glory. (It appears in its nontheological sense of “presence” or “arrival” in 1 Cor 16:17; 2 Cor 7:6, 7; 10:10; Phil 1:26; 2:12.) The thought of Christ’s return is common in Paul. He usually expresses it in terms of “the day of the Lord/Christ” or similar language (1 Cor 1:8; 5:5; 2 Cor 1:14; Phil 1:6, 10; 2:16; cf. also Rom 2:5; 13:12; 1 Cor 3:13; 1 Thess 5:4; 18 19 20 21 22 23 24

E.g., Frame, 122; Dibelius, 12; Best, 129; Richard, 131. Best, 129. So Malherbe, 185. Fee, 108. Wanamaker, 124; Malherbe, 185; Weima, 204. Cf. BDF §440.2. Cf. BDAG 433; Weima, 204.

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 268

7/12/23 11:28 AM

Comment 269 2 Thess 1:10). But in 1 and 2 Thessalonians he expresses it more frequently in terms of the παρουσία of the Lord (1 Thess 2:19; 3:13; 4:15; 5:23; 2 Thess 2:1, 8; also in 1 Cor 15:23). In 1 Thess 5:2 and 2 Thess 2:1–2 he identifies the παρουσία of the Lord with “the day of the Lord” (just as he identifies the latter in Phil 2:16 with the former). So we may assume that he has filled the concept of the παρουσία of the Lord with the content derived from the OT concept of the day of the Lord, the eschatological “day” when the Lord is to come to judge the world and save his people (e.g., Isa 13:6; Ezek 30:3; Joel 3:14; Amos 5:18). That the Thessalonians had been taught to expect this great event is plain from 1:10; they had probably also been told that Christ at his parousia would be accompanied by his “holy ones” (see 3:13), but there were certain associated details that they had still to learn (see 4:13–5:11). See a more detailed discussion on παρουσία below in comment on 4:15. Here Paul expresses his eager expectation that before the judgment seat of the Lord Jesus at his parousia the Thessalonian church would prove to be his “hope, joy, and crown of boasting.”25 20 ὑμεῖς γάρ ἐστε ἡ δόξα ἡμῶν καὶ ἡ χαρά, “For you are our glory and joy.” The conjunction γάρ (“for”) catches up the parenthetical question of v. 19 (ἦ οὐχὶ καὶ ὑμεῖς; “Is it not indeed you?”), and ὑμεῖς (“you”) is appropriately set in the emphatic position. Thus the present verse gives the question the affirmative answer that its form with οὐχί already implies: “Yes, it is you; for you are our glory and joy.” For δόξα in the sense of “that in which one takes pride,” cf. 1 Cor 11:7, where “the woman is the glory [δόξα] of the man” (or, perhaps, “a man’s wife is his glory”), and possibly 2 Cor 8:23, where two messengers sent to Corinth with Titus are described as δόξα Χριστοῦ, “a credit to Christ” (or “men in whom Christ can take pride”). Konradt suggests the sense of “Ehre [honor], Ansehen [prestige].”26 Here, it is the shorthand for the “crown of boasting” of the previous verse. Fee stresses that, unlike the question in the previous verse, the answer in this verse does not have an eschatological dimension: “What [Paul] says here is not what they will be for him at the Lord’s coming, but about what they are for him now. And that is probably . . . why the word ‘hope’ is not repeated.”27 This is a strange interpretation for Fee, who correctly affirms, like all other commentators, that in our verse “Paul now follows his rhetorical question [of v. 19] with the answer already implied in the rhetoric itself.”28 If the present answer lacks an eschatological dimension, how can it be the answer to the eschatological question in v. 19? Does Paul mean that since the Thessalonian church is already now his “glory and joy” they will be 25 Pace Schreiber, I:178, who presents an interpretation of vv. 19–20 that is in part similar to ours here but thinks that here Paul does not have in view a judgment scenario in which missionaries will receive their verdict at the last judgment; cf. also Konradt, Gericht, 183–85. 26 Konradt, Gericht, 186. 27 Fee, 111. Cf. also Weima, 205, pointing to the present tense of ἐστε. 28 Fee, 111.

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 269

7/12/23 11:28 AM

270

1 Thessalonians 2:17–20

it at the parousia of the Lord Jesus?29 But it is difficult to think that having just used the concepts of glory and joy in the eschatological sense in the rhetorical question, now in the answer Paul is using them in the present sense. Apparently, sensing this difficulty, Weima avoids formulating his explanation in a straightforward way but creates confusion by substituting “evidence of the faithful fulfillment of Paul’s apostolic calling” for the phrase “glory (or pride) and joy.” He writes, “The Thessalonian church will be evidence of the faithful fulfillment of Paul’s apostolic calling at the return of Jesus because they are already now . . . the source of his pride and joy.”30 Actually, it is simpler and more natural to see Paul in our verse as affirming that the Thessalonian church will be his “glory and joy” at the parousia of the Lord Jesus. The reason why he here takes up only “glory” (for “crown of boasting”) and “ joy,” omitting “hope” from the triad in the rhetorical question in v. 19, is because, whereas he formulated the question as one who is still hoping for the Thessalonian church to be those blessings of his at the parousia, now in this answer he refers to the blessings that they will actually be for him then. At that hour of the last judgment and the consummation of salvation, hope becomes reality, so that Paul would no longer need to hope for anything or to have anything as his hope. As an apostle or steward entrusted with the gospel, Paul expects to be examined by the Lord Jesus Christ at his parousia as to whether he has been faithful to his commission (1 Cor 4:1–4). The examination consists of putting his entire apostolic work to the judgment fire, which will reveal the quality of his portion of the work of building God’s church. If he builds it at present with human wisdom and ulterior motives (i.e., with “wood, hay, and straw”), it will be burnt up by the fire of judgment, but if he builds it in a way faithful to the gospel by availing himself of God’s grace by faith (i.e., with “gold, silver, and precious stones”), it will remain and be manifest glorious by the fire of judgment (1 Cor 3:10–17). The fruit of his apostolic labor (i.e., the church that he has built up), which is revealed as golden or glorious by the judgment fire, is the “reward” (μισθός) that he expects at the last judgment (1 Cor 3:14; 9:18) for having preached the gospel of the crucified Christ effectively, without contaminating it with human wisdom or Jewish legalism (1 Cor 1:18–3:23) or employing underhanded methods (2 Cor 4:1–6), but even forsaking his apostolic right for the church’s financial support (1 Cor 9:1–18). In Thessalonica he carried out his apostolic ministry in such a “holy and righteous and blameless” way (1 Thess 2:10), expecting and praying that the church there stand “blameless” before God’s judgment seat at the parousia of the Lord Jesus (1 Thess 3:13; 5:23). So, in our vv. 19–20, Paul is expressing his confidence that

29 Cf. Weima, 205. 30 Weima, 205.

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 270

7/12/23 11:28 AM

Explanation 271 the Thessalonian church will be revealed as “blameless” by the judgment fire at the parousia of the Lord Jesus. Thus the church will prove that he has built it with “gold, silver, and precious stones” (i.e., he has fulfilled his apostolic commission faithfully). So by being his “reward” itself (rather than a ground for a “reward” understood to be something added to salvation), the church will provide him with “ joy” and the ground of “boasting.” By expressing such a confidence, he is conveying his affection to the church and encouraging them to go on aspiring to be such a church.31

Explanation Having been driven out of Thessalonica and so forcefully separated from his readers, Paul is greatly concerned about them since they face continuing persecution. Realizing painfully that they would be feeling like orphans, he carefully chooses his words to convey his empathy with them and his eagerness to come and see them. So he says that he also feels like a parent who has lost his children and therefore has made repeated attempts to come to them. But those attempts have been frustrated by the circumstances over which he has no control and in which he discerns the malignant agency of Satan at work (probably to include the Jewish and pagan opponents of the Christian faith as well as the city authorities). Paul heightens his sense of frustration over these circumstances by spelling out what the Thessalonian church means to him: they are his “hope,” even as they will be his “glory and joy (or crown of boasting)” before the Lord Jesus at his parousia. By expressing his appreciation of the church in such exuberant language, he implicitly both intimates his longing for them and issues an exhortation for them to live up to it.32 Given the biblical worldview, ultimately we must appeal to the figure of Satan in explaining the presence of evil in the world. Furthermore, if we are serious about the actual reign of God over the world and in the course of history, we must be conscious of the work of his adversary, Satan. This consciousness helps us in our existential decision to follow the Lord Jesus Christ into the paths of righteousness, rather than Satan into the paths of unrighteousness, at the moments of value judgment and ethical choice. However, too much consciousness of Satan can cripple Christians and imprison them in the dungeon of fear. When this happens, they ought to remember that the risen Lord Jesus Christ has overcome Satan and liberated them from his bondage (cf. Col 1:13–14). They are to enjoy freedom instead of fear, although they are to “be awake and sober” lest they should fall to the temptations of

31

For a more detailed discussion on the various questions that are raised by Paul’s designation of the Thessalonian church as his “hope or joy or crown of boasting” (cf. also Phil 4:1), such as “reward,” “boasting,” the last judgment according to works and its relationship with the doctrine of justification by grace, etc., see Kim, “Thessalonian Church,” in PGTO, 193–215. 32 Cf. Malherbe, 188.

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 271

7/12/23 11:28 AM

272

1 Thessalonians 3:1–5

Satan (1 Thess 5:6; see Rom 13:11–14; 1 Cor 7:5) and “use [their] freedom as an opportunity for the flesh” (Gal 5:13). Further, we must be aware that an appeal to Satan can be abused as an excuse for our failure to take personal responsibility. Highlighting this danger (“often what is the fault of men themselves has been traced to this superhuman power and the actual causes of evil have not been fully explored and conquered”), Best goes so far as to say that “it is questionable if [Satan’s] entrance into Jewish thought . . . really advanced theological clarity.”33 H. Conzelmann points out that “Paul outlines . . . the nature of sin, judgment and salvation without using the idea of Satan.”34 On the whole, this is true, and its significance is to be duly appreciated. However, note how Paul implicitly relates Satan’s temptation to human failings in 1 Cor 7:5 (“lest Satan tempt you through your lack of self-­control”). Marshall has a proper balance in his comment here: Paul, who sees Satan’s operation behind the opposition to the gospel, “is careful to recognize that Satan is only half the story, and that sin results when people respond to the temptations which come from him.”35

B. Paul Sent Timothy (3:1–5) Bibliography Chadwick, H. “1 Thess. 33, σαίνεσθαι.” JTS 1 (1950): 156–58. Donfried, K. P. “Was Timothy in Athens? Some Exegetical Reflections on 1 Thess. 3.1–3.” Pages 209–19 in Paul, Thessalonica, and Early Christianity. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2002. Ellis, E. E. Prophecy and Hermeneutic in Early Christianity: New Testament Essays. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1978. Johanson, B. C. To All the Brethren: A Text-­Linguistic and Rhetorical Approach to 1 Thessalonians. ConBNT 16. Stockholm: Almqvist & Wiksell, 1987. Knox, A. D. “τὸ μηδένα σαίνεσθαι ἐν ταῖς θλίψεσιν ταύταις (1 Thess. iii 3).” JTS 25 (1924): 290–91. Ollrog, W.-­H . Paulus und seine Mitarbeiter: Untersuchungen zu Theorie und Praxis der paulinischen Mission. Neukirchen-­V luyn: Neukirchener Verlag, 1979.

Translation For this reason, because we could hold out no longer,a we resolved b to be left behind alone in Athens, 2and sent Timothy, our brother and fellow worker with God c in the gospel of Christ, to establish you firmly and encourage you d in respect of e your faith, 3so that no one should be perturbed f in the midst of these afflictions. You know yourselves that we are appointed g for this. 4Indeed, when we were with you, we warned you that we are bound to suffer affliction, even as it has turned out, as you know. 5Therefore, because I for my part could hold out no longer, I sent to learn about your faith, lest the tempter should have (successfully) tempted you and our labor should be in vain. 1

33 Best, 127. 34 Conzelmann, Outline, 18, cited from Wanamaker, 122. 35 Marshall, 86. Cf. also Fee, 120.

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 272

7/12/23 11:28 AM

Notes 273

Notes a. It is doubtful if the use of μηκέτι rather than οὐκέτι before στέγοντες is to be explained otherwise than as an instance of the encroachment of μή on οὐ in Hellenistic Greek, especially with a participle. Lightfoot, 39, tries to maintain the subjective force of μηκέτι by rendering the phrase “as being no longer able to contain, we thought fit.”36 b. εὐδοκήσαμεν. The augmented spelling ηὐδοκήσαμεν is exhibited in a few MSS (‫ א‬B P). (Cf. 2:8.) c. συνεργὸν τοῦ θεοῦ. Variant readings seem to be mainly designed to avoid the boldness of calling Timothy “God’s fellow-­worker.” B omits τοῦ θεοῦ, while ‫ א‬A P Ψ 6 81 629* 1241 1739 pc lat cop read διάκονον τοῦ θεοῦ. There are various conflations, e.g., διάκονον τοῦ θεοῦ καὶ συνεργὸν ἡμῶν D2 byz syr pesh hcl**. The strength of συνεργὸν τοῦ θεοῦ (read by D* 33 latb m* Ambst Pelag) is that it explains the rise of the other readings. d. ὑμᾶς appears after παρακαλέσαι (as well as after στηρίξαι) in D2 byz syr pesh. e. ὑπέρ, for which περί is read by D2 byz. f. The difficulty of finding a suitable meaning for σαίνεσθαι (see comment below) has led to variants and conjectures. F G read σιαίνεσθαι (“to feel disgust”); A. D. Knox conjectured παθαίεσθαι, “to be filled with emotion,” “to break down.”37 For the construction (τὸ μή with the infinitive expressing purpose) cf. 4:6, τὸ μὴ ὑπερβαίνειν. We might have expected εἰς before τὸ μὴ σαίνεσθαι, but perhaps εἰς before τὸ στηρίξαι κτλ. does duty for the missing εἰς here. g. κεῖσθαι serves as a quasi-­passive of τιθέναι, as in Phil 1:16, “I am put here [κεῖμαι] for the defense of the gospel.”

Form/Structure/Setting As he himself could not return to Thessalonica, Paul sent Timothy there on his behalf. In narrating Timothy’s mission, Paul explains the reason for dispatching him in two ways: in connection with the church’s need (vv. 2–3a) and in connection with his own need (v. 5). He does this within a chiastic structure between vv. 1–3a and v. 5 (see comment on v. 5 below).

Comment 3:1 Διό, “For this reason,” that is, because he could not carry out his strong wish to come to the Thessalonians whom he cherishes so much. Thus this conjunction should be seen in connection with the whole preceding paragraph of 2:17–20, rather than just vv. 19–20.38 μηκέτι στέγοντες, “because we could hold out no longer.” The verb στέγειν, originally of keeping out or keeping in water or another fluid (e.g., of a watertight house or of a vessel that does not leak), comes to mean generally “to contain” and then “to endure,” as in 1 Cor 9:12, πάντα στέγομεν (“we endure everything”); 13:7, (ἡ ἀγάπη) πάντα στέγει (“love endures everything”).

36 Cf. B. L. Gildersleeve, “The Encroachments of μή on οὐ in Later Greek,” AJP 1 (1880): 45–57. 37 Knox, “Τὸ μηδένα σαίνεσθαι ἐν ταῖς θλίψεσιν ταύταις,” JTS 25 (1924): 290–91. 38 So most commentators; pace Fee, 113: “because they themselves are part of Paul’s eschatological hope.”

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 273

7/12/23 11:28 AM

274

1 Thessalonians 3:1–5

From the context, what Paul could “no longer endure” was his inability to come to the Thessalonians to know about their well-­being and to strengthen them. This very strong expression of his intense concern for their well-­being, still further intensified by its repetition in v. 5 and by his cry of joy at Timothy’s good news in vv. 6–10, clearly suggests what is uppermost in Paul’s mind in writing this letter. εὐδοκήσαμεν καταλειφθῆναι ἐν Ἀθήναις μόνοι, “we resolved to be left behind in Athens alone.” Athens was but a temporary way station on the way from Thessalonica to Corinth, and the same impression is given by Luke’s narrative, although he makes Paul’s short stay in Athens the setting for his speech on the knowledge of God to the court of the Areopagus (Acts 17:22–31). The plural εὐδοκήσαμεν καταλειφθῆναι ἐν Ἀθήναις μόνοι is to be judged as epistolary in view of Paul’s restatement of its substance in the first-­person singular in v. 5.39 The reference to Athens here supports an important point in Luke’s report of his itinerary in Acts 17. According to Luke, when Paul, Silvanus, and Timothy were evicted from Thessalonica, they went to Beroea, and then with the Jewish pressure building up there also Paul had to leave for Athens hurriedly, sending a message back for Silvanus and Timothy to rejoin him as soon as possible. Paul moved on to Corinth, and there Silvanus and Timothy rejoined him. According to this report, we should understand our verse implying that Paul sent another message to Beroea from Athens, revising his earlier message, namely, for Timothy to go to Thessalonica instead of joining him in Athens.40 Best rejects this conjecture, arguing that it deprives Paul’s “willing determination ‘to remain behind alone in Athens’ of meaning.”41 But why should it be so judged? With his repeated experiences of expulsion from Thessalonica and Beroea, he was so anxious that he eagerly wanted the company of his colleagues as soon as possible. But then in Athens his anxiety about the well-­being of the Thessalonians outweighed his anxiety about his own. So he “resolved to be left behind in Athens alone” and sent word to Timothy to go to the Thessalonians instead of coming to join him in Athens. Wanamaker considers the probability that Silvanus, as the representative of the Jerusalem church on Paul’s team, was especially concerned with evangelization of Jews, as well as the Lukan report that the Jewish community in Beroea showed a positive response to the gospel (Acts 17:10–11), and he presumes that Silvanus stayed on in Beroea.42 Rather than simply stating that he sent Timothy, with carefully chosen words Paul emphasizes what that meant for him: by formulating the infinitive καταλειφθῆναι in the passive voice (“to be left behind, abandoned”) and 39 Marshall, 89–90; Wanamaker, 126–27; Malherbe, 190; Weima, 208; Donfried, “Was Timothy in Athens?,” 209–19. 40 Cf. Dobschütz, 131. 41 Best, 131. 42 Wanamaker, 127.

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 274

7/12/23 11:28 AM

Comment 275 placing the adjective μόνοι (“alone”) at the end for emphasis,43 he conveys not only a sense of his loneliness44 but the sense that he is in the same situation as the readers, just as he did with the passive participle ἀπορφανισθέντες (“having been orphaned”) in 2:17.45 This empathy, as well as the strongly emotional expressions of his concern and longing for them from 2:17 on, are rhetorically designed to convince them that he has not deserted them for his selfish interest. 2 καὶ ἐπέμψαμεν Τιμόθεον, “and we sent Timothy.” As he himself could not go, Paul sent Timothy as his representative. Timothy functions as Paul’s messenger also in Corinth (1 Cor 4:17) and Philippi (Phil 2:19, 23). Cf. 2 Cor 2:13; 7:6, 13–14; 8:6, 16, 23; 12:18 (Titus); 9:3 (brothers); Phil 2:25, 28 (Epaphroditus); Col 4:8 (Tychicus). The messengers represent the apostle. Using his messengers and letters, Paul pastored the churches he had planted. From this, office and Scripture developed.46 τὸν ἀδελφὸν ἡμῶν καὶ συνεργὸν τοῦ θεοῦ, “our brother and fellow worker for God.” With this phrase Paul indicates Timothy’s credentials and confirms him as his beloved and trusted messenger. Malherbe notes that Paul formulates here Timothy’s credentials relatively simply (cf. 1 Cor 4:17; 16:10–11; Phil 2:19–20; also 2 Cor 8:18, 22; Phil 2:25; Col 4:7–8), because the Thessalonians knew him well as Paul’s coworker in the work of founding their church and he had just come back from them (1 Thess 3:6).47 But then why is this commendation necessary for Timothy, who has just returned from them (vv. 6–10)? Is Paul thereby seeking to influence the readers to go on honoring the exhortations that Timothy imparted on his behalf? Fee thinks that he makes this commendation because he is going to send Timothy back to the readers as the bearer of the present letter and that he does so in conformity to Greco-­ Roman custom of “authenticating the letter by authenticating its bearer.”48 Following E. E. Ellis,49 some commentators see Paul using “brother” here as a title reserved for his close coworkers in missionary work (cf., e.g., 1 Cor 16:19–20; 2 Cor 8:18; 9:3, 5; 12:18; Phil 1:14; 2:25; 4:21–22) rather than as a general epithet for fellow believers.50 At any rate, there is no question that it conveys the sense of Paul’s affection for and trust in Timothy. The reading συνεργὸν τοῦ θεοῦ is to be preferred although it is poorly attested, because it is the “more difficult reading” (lectio difficilior), which best accounts for the rise of the other readings: see the Notes above for later

43 Cf. Rigaux, 467. 44 Cf. Weima, 207. 45 Cf. Malherbe, 196. 46 Cf. Holtz, 125. 47 Malherbe, 190–91. 48 Fee, 115. 49 Ellis, Prophecy and Hermeneutic, 13–22. 50 Holtz, 125; Malherbe, 191; Weima, 209; but otherwise Marshall, 90; Fee, 115.

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 275

7/12/23 11:28 AM

276

1 Thessalonians 3:1–5

copyists’ various alterations to avoid a misunderstanding of the phrase in the sense of “God’s coworker.” Paul uses the same expression for Apollos in 1 Cor 3:9. The phrase τοῦ θεοῦ is to be taken as an objective genitive rather than a possessive genitive: Timothy is Paul’s “coworker in service of God” rather than “God’s coworker.”51 ἐν τῷ εὐαγγελίῳ τοῦ Χριστοῦ, “in the gospel of Christ.” Thus far in this letter the gospel has been called repeatedly “the gospel of God” (2:2, 5, 9) and once “our gospel” (1:5); now it is called “the gospel of Christ” (cf. Rom 15:19; 1 Cor 9:12; 2 Cor 2:12; 9:13; 10:14; Gal 1:7; Phil 1:27; also 2 Thess 1:8, “the gospel of our Lord Jesus”)—­because Christ is its content or embodiment (it is, as Paul puts it in Rom 1:1–3, “the gospel of God . . . concerning his Son”; cf. also 1 Cor 1:23; 2 Cor 1:19; Gal 1:16). The gospel is “the gospel of God” because it is the news about the saving work that God wrought in Christ; it is “the gospel of Christ” because it is the narrative of the Christ-­event as God’s saving work; and it is “our gospel” because it is the gospel preached by Paul and his colleagues. Timothy is a coworker of Paul in preaching the gospel of Christ, and by preaching this gospel Paul and Timothy serve God together. εἰς τὸ στηρίξαι ὑμᾶς καὶ παρακαλέσαι ὑπὲρ τῆς πίστεως ὑμῶν, “to establish you firmly and encourage you in respect of your faith.” This is the first of five references to “your faith” in this section (see further vv. 5, 6, 7, 10). It refers to their Christian existence that is determined by their acceptance of the gospel (i.e., belief in it) and subsequent trust and hope in God, who has wrought their salvation in Christ and will consummate it at his parousia.52 The verbs στηρίξαι53 and παρακαλέσαι (“to encourage, exhort”) belong to the terminology of pastoral work of the early church, and they are sometimes used together (2 Thess 2:17; see also Acts 14:22; 15:32; Rom 1:11–12). So Best proposes to take them together.54 But it appears better to see the use of στηρίξαι here as more focused on the danger of the readers’ being “shaken” (σαίνεσθαι, v. 3) in their faith (and therefore as having more of the original sense of helping them stand firm in their faith or “in the Lord,” v. 8),55 and the use of παρακαλέσαι as focused on their “affliction” (v. 4; if so, παρακαλέσαι is to be rendered “to encourage” rather than “to exhort”). Timothy’s mission was to establish the Thessalonians firmly in their new convictions (perhaps with more doctrinal expositions) and encourage them (perhaps with references to the Lord Jesus’s

51

Holtz, 125; Green, 159–60; Beale, 96; Fee, 115–16; Hoppe, I:199; against Best, 134; Marshall, 90; Wanamaker, 128; Malherbe, 191; Witherington, 92; Weima, 209; Schreiber, I:184; Ollrog, Paulus, 67–71. 52 See Explanation on 1:7 above for the meaning of faith and the significance of its emphasis in this epistle. 53 BDAG: originally “to fix firmly in a place, set up, establish, support”; in the transferred sense, “to cause to be inwardly firm or committed, confirm, establish, strengthen.” 54 Best, 134. So also Weima, 210. 55 Cf. Malherbe, 192: to “stabilize” their faith.

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 276

7/12/23 11:28 AM

Comment 277 present help and future salvation), so that they might stand firm in their faith (ὑπέρ used like περί: in respect of your faith) in the face of the opponents’ attempts to shake it through persecution (v. 4) and temptation (v. 5). 3 τὸ μηδένα σαίνεσθαι, “that no one should be perturbed.” Weima sees this articular infinitive as joined to the preposition εἰς in v. 2 and so as expressing purpose, just like the two preceding articular infinitives (τὸ στηρίξαι . . . καὶ παρακαλέσαι).56 But in view of the passive form of the infinitive σαίνεσθαι here, unlike the active forms of the two preceding infinitives, it appears better to take the present infinitive phrase as a “substantivized infinitive, which with to meˉ is the equivalent of a hina meˉ clause.”57 Note as well the Pauline usages of this construction in Rom 14:13, 21; 2 Cor 10:2; 1 Thess 4:6. If so, the present infinitive phrase is to be seen as elaborated on by the clause μή πως ἐπείρασεν ὑμᾶς ὁ πειράζων . . . in v. 5b below, which is (grammatically) somewhat loosely connected with the main verb ἔπεμψα in v. 5a, just as the present infinitive phrase is with the main verb ἐπέμψαμεν in v. 2. Paul sent Timothy in order to help the readers stand firm in their faith so that they might not be tempted and perturbed by their opponents. Thus, this third infinitive phrase represents the “ultimate purpose” of Paul’s sending Timothy to the readers.58 The verb σαίνειν appears only here in the Greek Bible. In Greek literature, its active form is used of a dog wagging its tail and then, with the accusative of the person, of its fawning over someone.59 Taking this latter figurative sense, some older commentators60 understood Paul here as worried about the readers being flattered and beguiled to turn away from their new faith by its opponents. But this interpretation ill fits the context, especially the immediately following phrase “in the midst of these afflictions.” Therefore, most recent commentators take the verb in the sense of “to unsettle, perturb, or shake mentally,” as attested in Diogenes Laertius, Lives of the Philosophers 8.41, and especially in a papyrus from Tura (discovered in 1941) that refers to a discussion between Origen and Bishop Heraclidides (τὰ μὲν περὶ πίστεως ὅσα ἔσηνεν ἡμᾶς συνεξετάσθη, “all matters concerning the faith which have perturbed us have been examined”).61 This is the sense required here, which exactly corresponds to the preceding infinitive (στηρίξαι). The analogy of the papyrus extract just quoted helps us take τὸ μηδένα σαίνεσθαι closely with the preceding ὑπὲρ τῆς πίστεως ὑμῶν and understand Paul meaning in vv. 2–3 here thus: “and we sent Timothy . . . to establish you firmly and encourage you in respect of your faith, so that no one should be perturbed [in faith] in the midst of these afflictions.” 56 57 58 59 60 61

Weima, 211. So also Lightfoot, 41–42; Bruce, 59. Malherbe, 192, pointing to BDF (§399.3) and Moule (Idiom-­Book, 140). So Fee, 117. Cf. F. Lang, TDNT 7:54–56. E.g., Lightfoot, 42; Frame, 128; Morris, 96; also Richard, 141–42. Cf. Chadwick, “1 Thess. 33, σαίνεσθαι.”

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 277

7/12/23 11:28 AM

278

1 Thessalonians 3:1–5

ἐν ταῖς θλίψεσιν ταύταις, “in the midst of these afflictions” (cf. comment on 1:6). Paul has already referred to the afflictions that the readers suffered (1:6; 2:14) and has also alluded to the fact that the opponents’ hostile actions continue (2:17; cf. 3:5). With “these afflictions” here, he refers to the troubles that continue to afflict both the readers and him (cf. 2:17; 3:7), but he is thinking primarily of their exposure to the afflictions (2:14), which could be unsettling their faith.62 In view of 2:14–16 and 3:5, the “afflictions” are to be seen as referring not to the troubled psychological state of new converts,63 but rather to persecutions by the opponents of the Christian faith (so most commentators), which included the ostracism of the readers from their families and society and naturally had unsettling effects on their minds. Paul is worried that such physical afflictions might shake the readers’ young faith. In view of what follows in vv. 3b–4, it is possible that he understands these afflictions or tribulations as part of the “messianic woes.” 64 Timothy is to “establish firmly and encourage” them in their faith “so that no one should be perturbed [in faith] in the midst of these tribulations.” αὐτοὶ γὰρ οἴδατε ὅτι εἰς τοῦτο κείμεθα, “for you yourselves know that we are destined for this.” Here Paul interrupts his narrative about the sending of Timothy in order to insert the two explanatory (γάρ) clauses in vv. 3b–4. The “we,” the subject of κείμεθα here, is an inclusive “we,” referring to both the readers and Paul himself as Christians, and the passive voice of the verb (κεῖμαι used as perfect passive of τίθημι) is to be understood as a divine passive: it is God who has destined both Paul and the readers to suffer afflictions. With this formulation Paul seeks to help the readers accept afflictions as a normal part of Christian life and appreciate the fact that not only they but also he and his missionary colleagues are suffering them. Christians are destined to suffer afflictions. This is so because they, as the people of God who seek to live in obedience to the lordship of God’s Son Jesus, are bound to face the opposition of this ungodly world. It is a common NT teaching, which continues the OT-­Jewish doctrine of the righteous having to suffer. Paul and his colleagues had taught the readers about these before they left Thessalonica (cf. v. 4). So they know them, and he affirms their knowledge of them so that they may not take the afflictions as a shock. If God has appointed (ἔθετο) his people to obtain salvation on the day of judgment (5:9), he has equally appointed them to endure afflictions in their present mortal life (cf. Phil 1:29). Thus, according to the consistent testimony of the NT, they follow the example of Christ (1 Thess 1:6; cf. John 15:20) and, indeed, share his sufferings in the certain hope of sharing his glory hereafter: “if we suffer with him, that we may

62 So Marshall, 91–92; Fee, 118; Weima, 212–13; Schreiber, I:186; against Dobschütz, 134–35; Holtz, 127–28; Malherbe, 193; Hoppe, I:201. 63 Pace Richard, 149; Malherbe, 193. 64 So Wanamaker, 129–30, following Bammel, “Preparation,” 99–100; cf. also Best, 135.

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 278

7/12/23 11:28 AM

Comment 279 also be glorified with him” (εἴπερ συμπάσχομεν ἵνα καὶ συνδοξασθῶμεν, Rom 8:17). Such suffering is not only evidence for the reality of their faith but is also an earnest of the coming glory (cf. Phil 1:28–29; 2 Thess 1:4–10). 4 καὶ γὰρ ὅτε πρὸς ὑμᾶς ἦμεν, “For indeed when we were with you.” For this Hellenistic use of πρός with the accusative of persons in the sense of “with” (cf. Latin apud, French chez), cf. Mark 6:3, “Are not his sisters here with us [πρὸς ἡμᾶς]?” The best-­known NT instance of this use of πρός is in John 1:1–2, where the Word is said to have been in the beginning “with God” (πρὸς τὸν θεόν)—­a statement fraught with theological significance. Here, however, there is no particular theological significance in the choice of πρός with the accusative rather than μετά with the genitive or σύν with the dative. προελέγομεν ὑμῖν ὅτι μέλλομεν θλίβεσθαι, “we warned you that we are bound to suffer affliction.” The verb προελέγομεν here connotes a warning next to its obvious meaning of foretelling.65 Note the imperfect tense and its iterative nuance: “we repeatedly foretold.” Weima, pointing to the present tense of μέλλομεν within the sentence led by the imperfect προελέγομεν, as well as to the similar construction in 2 Thess 3:10, plausibly argues that the ὅτι clause here represents a direct speech: “we kept telling you beforehand: ‘we are bound to suffer affliction.’ ”66 Note further that by formulating the sentence with μέλλομεν plus the infinitive instead of a simple future, Paul stresses the certainty of his prediction.67 Thus, with all these features he strongly emphasizes that he forewarned the readers about the certain coming of afflictions, so that they know that Christians are destined (κεῖμαι) to suffer affliction. Cf. Acts 14:22, where Paul and Barnabas warn their south Galatian converts that “through many tribulations [διὰ πολλῶν θλίψεων] we must enter the kingdom of God,” and strengthen and encourage them to persevere in faith and so be enabled to endure the afflictions. καθὼς καὶ ἐγένετο καὶ οἴδατε, “even as it has come to pass, and as you know.” This verse seems to suggest that Paul had taught the Thessalonians about Christians suffering afflictions before persecution actually broke out against them and that therefore they experienced the persecution as confirmation of his teaching. He had Christian suffering as an essential component of his gospel preaching (cf. Phil 1:28–29). Having opened this little insertion with the clause “as you know” (v. 3b), Paul closes it with it here. Thus he tries again to underscore that the readers should not take their afflictions as unexpected and strange. Paul is clearly seeking to mitigate their shock at their afflictions and prevent them from being shaken in their faith. Note that he inserts these clauses here while writing this letter after receiving a positive and reassuring 65 Malherbe, 194. 66 Weima, 214. Cf. also Lightfoot, 43; Johanson, Brethren, 105; Malherbe, 194. 67 Malherbe, 194.

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 279

7/12/23 11:28 AM

280

1 Thessalonians 3:1–5

report of their faith from Timothy (vv. 6–8). Apparently, knowing that they will continue to be exposed to persecutions that would threaten their faith, he wants to ensure that they go on standing firm in their faith, even as they are doing at present according to Timothy’s report. 5 διὰ τοῦτο κἀγὼ μηκέτι στέγων ἔπεμψα, “For this reason, because I could hold out no longer, I for my part sent.” After the brief explanatory insertion in vv. 3b–4, Paul resumes the theme of vv. 1–3a with διὰ τοῦτο and by repeating μηκέτι στέγων ἔπεμψα from vv. 1–2. Although διὰ τοῦτο here takes over the διό in v. 1, there is a slight shift in the focus of its reference. Whereas with the latter he referred primarily to his frustration about his inability to come to the readers (2:17–20, with his desire to know their well-­being and to strengthen their faith standing in the background; see comment ad loc), with διὰ τοῦτο here he now refers primarily to his concern for their faith and the need to strengthen it (3:2–4, with his frustration with his inability to come to the readers receding into the background). He also changes the subject to the first-­person singular and emphasizes it by use of the word κἀγώ (by crasis from καὶ ἐγώ), which proves that he is the primary author of the letter (cf. 2:18; 5:27). Here, he wants to emphasize his personal engagement. εἰς τὸ γνῶναι τὴν πίστιν ὑμῶν, “that I might know your faith.” Paul now states the purpose for Timothy’s mission in terms of his desire to know their faith, to know how they stand in their Christian existence. Here he states the purpose in terms of his own need, whereas in vv. 2–3a he stated it in terms of the readers’ need. Thus, there is a sort of chiastic structure between vv. 1–3a and v. 5, which shows both parallelism and contrast: A: v .  1a διό: referring to his own need to come to the readers (to strengthen their faith) (2:17–20) B: v v. 2–3a the purpose of Timothy’s mission: to help with the readers’ need to get their faith strengthened B´: v. 5aa διὰ τοῦτο: referring to the readers’ need to firmly maintain their faith in affliction (vv. 3–4) A´: v. 5ab the purpose of Timothy’s mission: to get help for Paul’s own need to know the state of their faith (NB: B´: v. 5aa refers only to the opening phrase διὰ τοῦτο in v. 5a, which refers back to the content of vv. 3–4, while A´: v.5ab refers to what is stated in v. 5a after the διὰ τοῦτο) Through this structure Paul indicates that his own need is really nothing but to help meet the readers’ need, and therefore the two statements about the purpose of Timothy’s mission are really the two sides of one coin. Paul makes this clearer with the following clause (v. 5b): μή πως ἐπείρασεν ὑμᾶς ὁ πειράζων, “lest perchance the tempter should have tempted you.” This clause further explains the purpose of Timothy’s mission.

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 280

7/12/23 11:28 AM

Comment 281 As we observed above, corresponding to the phrase in v. 3a, this clause expresses that point in another way. Thus this clause makes it clearer that the purpose of Timothy’s mission, newly stated in our v. 5, is really the same as that which is stated in vv. 2–3a. The words μή πως (“lest somehow”)68 express apprehension. The aorist indicative ἐπείρασεν here implies successful temptation, temptation that had succeeded in overthrowing their faith. Thus the clause expresses Paul’s apprehension over what might be discovered by Timothy on his arrival. “The tempter” is identical with Satan of 2:18, bent on frustrating the work of God by putting hindrances in Paul’s path or setting traps to bring about the converts’ spiritual downfall. He is called ὁ πειράζων in Matthew’s temptation narrative (Matt 4:3; cf. also 1 Cor 7:5, ἵνα μὴ πειράζῃ ὑμᾶς ὁ σατανᾶς διὰ τὴν ἀκαρσίαν ὑμῶν, “lest Satan tempt you through your lack of self-­control”). Here, Paul indicates that, behind the opponents of the Christian faith who persecute the readers and “shake” their faith (v. 3a), he sees Satan, who “tempts” the readers away from the faith. Thus he demonizes the persecutors of the church as the agents of Satan. Wanamaker thinks that in this way he seeks to “strengthen the identity of his readers as Christians over against their social world.”69 But, more importantly, this way of speaking about the opposition to the progress of the Christian mission reveals his basic apocalyptic worldview, namely, the view of the kingdom of God’s Son, the Lord Jesus Christ, in battle with the kingdom of Satan (e.g., Rom 8:31–39; 16:20; 1 Cor 5:4–5; 15:23–28; 2 Cor 4:4; Gal 1:4; 4:8–9; Col 1:13–14; 2 Thess 2:3–12; cf. also Rom 6:1–23). καὶ εἰς κενὸν γένηται ὁ κόπος ἡμῶν, “and our labor should be in vain.” With κόπος in the emphatic position at the end of the sentence, Paul tries to impress on his readers his strenuous work in founding their church.70 With the aorist subjunctive γένηται, he expresses his fear of the consequence that might result from a successful temptation of the tempter: the collapse of the readers’ faith and thus their church. He established it successfully (“not in vain”) with his hard labor (κόπος) during his eisodos or founding mission in Thessalonica, in the face of great opposition (2:1–2, 9–12). But the unbelieving Thessalonians, driven by Satan, have continued to harass the readers. So he is anxious to know how their faith is weathering this assault, and he must prevent it from collapsing, which would turn his labor in vain (see Explanation on 5:9 below for God’s predestination/preservation and the possibility of a believer’s fall). Therefore Timothy is to find out the state of their faith (v. 5) and “strengthen and encourage” their faith (v. 2). For the idea of labor in vain, compare 1 Cor 15:58; also Phil 2:16, where the Philippian Christians’ perseverance will give Paul cause to rejoice on the day of Christ that he has neither run nor labored in vain (οὐδὲ εἰς κενὸν ἐκοπίασα). In Isa 65:23 LXX God says, “My chosen ones 68 BDAG 901 (2.b). 69 Wanamaker, 133. 70 Cf. Holtz, 130.

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 281

7/12/23 11:28 AM

282

1 Thessalonians 3:1–5

will not labor in vain” (οὐ κοπιάσουσιν εἰς κενόν); contrast Isa 49:4, where the Servant complains that he has “labored in vain” (κενῶς ἐκοπίασα). It is likely that Paul echoes this word of Isa 49:4 here,71 as he elsewhere also echoes it in interpreting his apostolic call (2 Cor 4:6; Gal 1:15–16). In Gal 2:2, probably echoing Isa 49:4 again, he says that he laid his law-­free gospel before the leaders of the Jerusalem church, “lest perchance I should prove to be running, or to have run, in vain” (εἰς κενόν). The sense of εἰς κενόν (κενῶς) is expressed also by εἰκῇ, as in Gal 4:11, “lest perchance I have labored over you in vain” (εἰκῇ κεκοπίακα), or (εἰς) μάτην, as in Ps 126:1 (127:1 MT), “the builders have labored in vain” (εἰς μάτην ἐκοπίασαν).

Explanation Since the setting of this paragraph belongs to the period following on the end of Paul’s first visit to Thessalonica, there can be no reasonable doubt that the stay in Athens mentioned here is identical with that described in Acts 17:15–34. Indeed, the geographical sequence of Paul’s ministry as recorded in Acts is confirmed point by point by the evidence of his letters. It was Paul who took the initiative in sending Timothy back to Thessalonica; his reason for sending him was his concern lest the pressure of opposition should have proved too great for the Thessalonian Christians to resist and their faith might have collapsed. Then indeed the evangelizing energy of the weeks that he and his colleagues had spent in Thessalonica would have gone for nothing. But the confidence that he later expressed in 1 Cor 10:13 was illustrated by the experience of his Thessalonian friends: “God . . . will not let you be tempted beyond your strength, but with the temptation will also provide the way of escape, that you may be able to endure it.” How was it possible for Timothy to go back to Thessalonica when the way was barred for Paul himself—­and probably for Silvanus too? We can only speculate, but Timothy, as the junior partner in the missionary team, may not have been so much in the public eye as his two senior colleagues. Moreover, Timothy, the son of a Greek father, perhaps looked like a Greek and therefore attracted no special attention in a Greek city, whereas Paul and Silvanus were full Jews and were probably immediately recognizable as such—­a s they had been at Philippi (Acts 16:20). How Paul and the others learned about the persecution that the church of Thessalonica had to endure after their departure we are not told, but it would not have been difficult for a message to be sent to them in Beroea or Athens with the news (cf. 1:8 with comment ad loc). Fortunately, they had warned their converts in Thessalonica, as elsewhere, that persecution and similar afflictions would be their inevitable lot. The suffering of the righteous had 71 So Malherbe, 195; see comment on 2:1 above with a reference to Wright, Paul: A Biography, 95, and passim.

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 282

7/12/23 11:28 AM

Bibliography 283 been felt as an acute problem in OT times; now it had come to be recognized as an essential feature of God’s purpose for his people. Since their Lord had suffered, they knew that they could expect nothing else; they learned rather to “glory in tribulations” (Rom 5:3).

C. Joy and Thanksgiving for the Readers’ Faith (3:6–10) Bibliography Bash, A. Ambassadors for Christ: An Exploration of Ambassadorial Language in the New Testament. WUNT 2/92. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1997. Mitchell, M. M. “New Testament Envoys in the Context of Greco-­Roman Diplomatic and Epistolary Convention: The Example of Timothy and Titus.” JBL 111 (1992): 641–62. O’Brien, P. T. Introductory Thanksgivings in the Letters of Paul. NovTSup 49. Leiden: Brill, 1977. Wiles, G. P. Paul’s Intercessory Prayers: The Significance of the Intercessory Prayer Passages in the Letters of St. Paul. SNTSMS 24. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1974.

Translation But now that Timothy has just come to us from you and brought us the good news of your faith and love, telling us that you always remember us kindly, and that you long to see us as we long to see you—­7for this reason, brothers and sisters, we have been reassured about you in all our distress and affliction,a through this faith of yours. 8For now we live, if b you stand fast c in the Lord. 9What (adequate) thanksgiving can we render to God d about you for all the joy with which we rejoice on your account in the presence of our God e? 10Night and day we pray with the utmost earnestness that we may see you face to face and make good the deficiencies in your faith. 6

Notes a. καί is added before διὰ τῆς ὑμῶν πίστεως in A. b. ἐάν with the indicative is a colloquialism; the more classical ἐάν . . . στήκητε (subjunctive) is read by ‫ *א‬D. For the indicative cf. Mark 11:25, ὅταν στήκετε. c. The Hellenistic present στήκειν (in NT more common in Paul than in other writers; cf. 2 Thess 2:15) is formed from the classical perfect ἕστηκα, which continued to be used concurrently with στήκειν even by Paul (e.g., in 1 Cor 15:1, ἐν ᾧ καὶ ἐστήκατε). d. τῷ κυρίῳ (“to the Lord”) is read for τῷ θεῷ (“to God”) by ‫ *א‬D* F G lat a b vg.codd copbo.codd. e. κυρίου is read for θεοῦ by ‫ *א‬181 lat a b m vg.codd.

Form/Structure/Setting M. M. Mitchell, inferring from our passage that Timothy acted, first, as an envoy of Paul to the Thessalonian church and, on return, as an envoy of that church to Paul in the pattern of Hellenistic diplomatic and epistolary convention, sees Paul writing our 1 Thessalonians in response to the letter of the Thessalonian church that Timothy delivered to him.72 She similarly 72 Mitchell, “Envoys,” 641–62.

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 283

7/12/23 11:28 AM

284

1 Thessalonians 3:6–10

interprets Paul’s narrative about Titus’s mission to the Corinthian church in 2 Cor 7. But in his thorough study of the ambassadorial language of the NT against the background of the functions of ambassadors and other agents of communication in the Greco-­Roman world, A. Bash repudiates her interpretation and confirms instead what appears to be the plain meaning of our text, namely, that Timothy acted only as Paul’s envoy to the Thessalonian church and that our epistle is a response to what Timothy had reported about the Thessalonians rather than to a message coming from the Thessalonians.73 However, Malherbe points to many “epistolary clichés” in our passage (3:6–10) as well as in 2:17–18, and the peri de in 4:9, 13; 5:1, and compares our epistle with 1 Corinthians and Philippians, and so expresses his sympathy for the minority view that Timothy brought a letter of the Thessalonians to Paul, in which they expressed their longing to see him and sought his advice on some questions.74 But most commentators have not taken those features of our epistle as constituting clear evidence for such a view (see comment on 4:9 and the Form/Structure/Setting of 4:13–18). Here Paul narrates about the report that Timothy has brought to him from his visit with the readers and about the relief that he has received from that report. He summarizes the report in terms of the “good news” of the readers’ “faith and love” and their kind remembrances of him and their longing to see him again (v. 6). He then bursts out in thanksgiving to God (v. 9). Thus, in this passage Paul connects the Thessalonians’ faith with their appreciation of his eisodos for the fifth and last time (cf. 1:5–6, 9–10; 2:1, 13) and, for the third time, repeats thanksgiving to God for their faith that has been brought about by his blameless missionary eisodos among them. So, having started his thanksgiving to God in 1:2(–10) and resumed it in 2:(1–)13, Paul brings it to conclusion in 3:(6–)9 in an exuberantly rhetorical form, thus marking the whole of chs. 1–3, or part 1 of the epistle, as the thanksgiving section. Then the thanksgiving turns into a prayer for the readers in 3:10. The prayer-­report continues the thought of vv. 2–3 and incidentally indicates a purpose of the letter—­the letter is to serve as an interim communication until the prayer is answered and a reunion takes place. Then it will be possible to fill in the remaining gaps in their faith more adequately; meanwhile, the more urgent matters have to be dealt with, as effectively as possible, by letter.75

Comment 3:6 Ἄρτι δὲ ἐλθόντος Τιμοθέου πρὸς ἡμᾶς ἀφ’ ὑμῶν, “But now that Timothy has just come to us from you.” The letter was evidently written as soon as possible after Timothy’s recent arrival. So ἄρτι δέ (“but now”) conveys the depth of 73 Bash, Ambassadors, esp. 34–35. 74 Malherbe, 208–10. So, e.g., Frame, 9, 107; Masson, 1–8. 75 Cf. Wiles, Prayers, 183–86.

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 284

7/12/23 11:28 AM

Comment 285 Paul’s care for his readers. The place where Timothy met Paul again was probably Corinth (Acts 18:5), and this letter was written from there. καὶ εὐαγγελισαμένου ἡμῖν, “and brought us the good news.” Is this a singular instance of the nontechnical use of εὐαγγελίζεσθαι? Such a usage is well-­attested in the Hellenistic literature and the LXX. However, observing that in the NT the verb is usually used of preaching the gospel of Jesus Christ (the εὐαγγέλιον of 1:5, etc.), some recent commentators76 try to see here the technical sense included: as the “faith and love” of the readers that Timothy reported demonstrated the saving activity of the Lord Jesus in their adverse circumstances, Paul regards Timothy’s good news as part of the “gospel of Jesus Christ.” But this interpretation appears to be reading too much into the verb.77 Compare Luke 1:19, where the verb is used for the good news brought by Gabriel that Zechariah and Elizabeth are to have a son. It is probable that, like the Lukan passage, Paul chooses this verb to convey how much he appreciated Timothy’s report as good news. Compare with 2 Cor 7:7, where Paul uses the more general verb ἀναγγέλλειν for Titus’s report of the Corinthians’ similarly positive disposition toward him, although it comforted and gladdened Paul in a similar situation of anxiety and affliction as Timothy’s report did. There he does so probably because Titus’s report also contained the news of the Corinthians’ “mourning” for their past suspicion and mistreatment of Paul. τὴν πίστιν καὶ τὴν ἀγάπην ὑμῶν καὶ ὅτι ἔχετε μνείαν ἡμῶν ἀγαθὴν πάντοτε, ἐπιποθοῦντες ἡμᾶς ἰδεῖν καθάπερ καὶ ἡμεῖς ὑμᾶς, “your faith and love, and that you always have kind remembrances of us, longing to see us as we long to see you.” Timothy’s good news had two parts: the Thessalonians’ “faith and love” and their positive disposition toward Paul and his colleagues. “Faith” and “love” comprehend the totality of Christian existence from two different perspectives: “faith” represents its grounding in God and his saving act, while “love” its relationship to neighbors and world.78 But they ultimately belong together, as faith expresses itself in love (cf. Gal 5:6, πίστις δι’ ἀγάπης ἐνεργουμένη, “faith working through love”), so that they are joined here to characterize the readers’ Christian existence more comprehensively. In 1:3 Paul already characterized the readers’ Christian existence in terms of faith and love (and hope; cf. 1 Cor 13:13) and praised their faith in 1:6–10. He will go on praising the love that they show for one another and for “the brothers and sisters throughout Macedonia” in obedience to God’s teaching (4:9–10). So it is apt for him here to represent with “faith and love” the Christian existence of the readers that Timothy reported to him (cf. also Eph 1:15; Col 1:4; Phlm 5). Malherbe, however, separates love from faith here and sees it applied 76 Best, 139–40; Marshall, 94; Holtz, 132; Malherbe, 201; Schreiber, I:189. 77 So Wanamaker, 103; Fee 122; Weima, 219. 78 Cf. Holtz, 133.

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 285

7/12/23 11:28 AM

286

1 Thessalonians 3:6–10

specifically to Paul (“love for Paul”).79 But it is difficult to imagine that Paul elevates the readers’ love for him to the same level as their faith (“your faith [in God/Christ] and love [for me]”) or emphasizes it more than the latter with the following clause (καὶ ὅτι . . . ), which in this interpretation would have to be viewed as an elaboration on “love [for Paul].”80 In 1:3 Paul affirmed that the readers had “the steadfastness of hope” as well as the “work of faith and labor of love.” But the absence of a reference to their “hope” in our verse should not be construed as signifying the readers’ lack of it or trouble with it (cf. 4:13–5:11).81 Actually, the third element, “the steadfastness of hope in our Lord Jesus Christ” that Paul mentions next to faith and love in 1:3 as the hallmark of the readers’ Christian existence, may be seen as implicitly present here, as it seems to be echoed in v. 8b: “if you stand fast in the Lord” (ἐὰν ὑμεῖς στήκετε ἐν κυρίῳ). The readers’ “faith and love” (and hope) are fruits of Paul’s eisodos or missionary work among them. The fact that they maintain “kind remembrances” of Paul and are “longing to see” him reflects their continual appreciation of his eisodos. So Timothy’s good news was that the readers were maintaining the fruits of his eisodos as they were still maintaining a very positive appreciation of his eisodos among them. Thus, here we have Paul associating the faith of the readers with his eisodos among them for the fifth time (cf. 1:5–6, 9–10; 2:1, 13). The clause καὶ ὅτι ἔχετε μνείαν ἡμῶν ἀγαθὴν πάντοτε, ἐπιποθοῦντες ἡμᾶς ἰδεῖν καθάπερ καὶ ἡμεῖς ὑμᾶς is somewhat awkwardly82 coordinated with the genitive absolute construction of εὐαγγελισαμένου, in order to refer to the second part of Timothy’s good news: “You always remember us kindly and long to see us as we long to see you.” This relatively long and emphatic statement betrays that Paul had a grave concern about their attitude toward him. Wanamaker thinks “ἀγαθὴν μνείαν implies that Paul was concerned about how the Thessalonians viewed him after his departure.” He contemplates three possible reasons for this concern: (1) his hasty departure; (2) the persecution, which could have led them to resent Paul for having brought bad news instead of “good news”; and (3) his failure to return to them. Reading our clause in the light of 2:17–18, Wanamaker writes, “This looks like an apology for his failure to return.”83 This is quite an admission on the part of a commentator whose rhetorical-­critical reading of our letter leads him to deny any element of Paul’s apology in it. Weima insists on seeing here Paul’s apologetic concern for his

79 Malherbe, 201, 207. Cf. also Fee, 123, who suggests that Paul is expressing here his appreciation of the readers’ love for him despite the opponents’ slander of him (2:1–12). Note also Weima, 220, who propounds the same view, though in reference to Paul’s worry about his absence from the readers (2:17–20). 80 As is actually done by Fee, 122–23, and Weima, 220. 81 Best, 140; Marshall, 94; Holtz, 132; against Dobschütz, 140; Rigaux, 478. 82 Cf. Holtz, 133: “forcefully.” 83 Wanamaker, 134.

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 286

7/12/23 11:28 AM

Comment 287 departure from and failure to return to the readers.84 It is proper to read our clause in the light of 2:17–18. In fact, “as we long to see you” is here added to remind the readers of the strong statements that he made to that effect in 2:17–18. However, ἀγαθὴν μνείαν betrays that Paul’s concern was not about how the Thessalonians viewed him after his departure but about what their remembrance was of his character and ministry during his stay with them. Therefore, we cannot help but connect ἀγαθὴν μνείαν here with Paul’s reminding the readers in 2:1–12 of the integrity he maintained in their midst. This clearly indicates that in 2:1–12 he was trying to consolidate their positive appreciation of the integrity that he showed during his eisodos in their city. They not only have maintained (N.B. the force of “always” here) their “friendly remembrances” of him but also “long to see” him. From this Paul is assured that they are still very much appreciative of him and not blaming him for his hasty departure. So there was no reason for him to make an apology here about his abrupt departure or his failure to return to them.85 But then why was he so anxious that they might not be maintaining their positive appreciation of his character and ministry any longer and might have come to misunderstand his forced departure as leaving them in the lurch? He had to be anxious because he knew that Satan was tempting them (v. 5b), that is, that the opponents were trying to persuade them to abandon their faith by slandering Paul and his colleagues as charlatan preachers who had exploited them and then deserted them for selfish interests. However, Timothy’s good news has assured him that they had not succumbed to that slander. It may be noted that the message of Timothy summarized in this verse gives the impression of Timothy’s own oral reporting rather than an allusion to a letter of the Thessalonians that Timothy brought to Paul. 7 διὰ τοῦτο παρεκλήθημεν, ἀδελφοί, ἐφ’ ὑμῖν ἐπὶ πάσῃ τῇ ἀνάγκῃ καὶ θλίψει ἡμῶν διὰ τῆς ὑμῶν πίστεως, “for this reason we were encouraged because of you in all our distress and affliction through your faith.” As the protasis has gotten long, Paul resumes the main sentence with a resumptive διὰ τοῦτο, referring to the good news of Timothy in the protasis. He refers to it two more times in this sentence: ἐφ’ ὑμῖν and διὰ τῆς ὑμῶν πίστεως. The prepositional phrase ἐφ’ ὑμῖν is to be translated “because of you” (ἐπί, esp. in connection with verbs of feeling, indicates basis).86 This phrase is to be further elaborated on through the phrase διὰ τῆς ὑμῶν πίστεως (“through your faith”) at the end of the sentence. So it makes sense to observe with Malherbe that with this prominently placed phrase Paul is trying to strengthen his personal bond with the readers.87

84 85 86 87

Weima, 221. Pace Wanamaker and Weima. Cf. BDF §235.2. Malherbe, 202.

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 287

7/12/23 11:28 AM

288

1 Thessalonians 3:6–10

ἐπὶ πάσῃ τῇ ἀνάγκῃ καὶ θλίψει ἡμῶν, “in all our distress and affliction.” The preposition ἐπί is best understood here as having temporal force (“at the time of”; cf. 2 Cor 1:4: ἐπὶ πάσῃ τῇ θλίψει; Phil 1:3: ἐπὶ πάσῃ τῇ μνείᾳ ὑμῶν). “Distress” (ἀνάγκη) and “affliction” (θλίψις) appear in combination together in 2 Cor 6:4 as well as in the LXX (Ps 24:17 [25:17 MT]; 118:143 [119:143 MT]; Job 15:24; Zeph 1:15), and we cannot make a fine distinction between them as though the former denoted physical privation and the latter denoted sufferings inflicted by others.88 The “distress and affliction” for Paul at this time may have been more psychological than physical. For one thing, his anxiety over the Thessalonians had been hard to bear (1 Thess 3:1, 5); for another thing, it is evident that the first phase of Paul’s stay in Corinth was beset by “weakness and much fear and trembling” (1 Cor 2:3). And no wonder: having been expelled from one place after another in Macedonia, Paul and his colleagues might well have wondered if, despite their confident interpretation of God’s call (“the Macedonian call,” Acts 16:10), they had been divinely guided to that province after all. They had no reason to expect more positive acceptance in Achaia, to which they had now perforce come. διὰ τῆς ὑμῶν πίστεως, “through your faith.” It is “through your faith,” that is, through the news that their faith holds firm, that Paul has been reassured (cf. v. 2, ὑπὲρ τῆς πίστεως ὑμῶν). Being a summary reference to the content of Timothy’s news in v. 6, this specifies the preceding ἐφ’ ὑμῖν. As in v. 5, “faith” here stands for the total Christian existence. Here it appears to abbreviate the “faith and love” of v. 5 and is paraphrased in terms of “standing firm in the Lord” in the following v. 8. Since “faith” is paired with “love,” which refers to an activity done in obedience to the Lord Jesus Christ’s command (cf. 4:9–10; Gal 6:2; Mark 12:28–34parr.), as well as paraphrased in terms of “standing firm in the Lord,” it seems to carry the connotation of active trust in the Lord (that issues in obedience to him) beyond that of mere confession and allegiance to him. Out of anxiety about their “faith,” Paul sent Timothy to them (v. 5), and Timothy returned with the good news of their firm “faith” and fervent “love,” as well as their positive disposition toward Paul himself (v. 6). They had not succumbed to the opponents’ slander campaign against his eisodos and bowed to their persecution. The good news of their firm “faith” had brought comfort and encouragement to Paul to overcome both aspects of his “distress and affliction.” It obviously had greatly reduced his anxiety about the readers, but it also strengthened his own faith in the protection of the Lord Jesus Christ over the current troubles in Corinth. As the readers had not allowed their afflictions to destroy their faith and love, Paul and Silvanus found in this good news a sovereign remedy for their own “distress and affliction.” With the reference to “all” his “distress and affliction” here, does Paul 88 Cf. Lightfoot, 45.

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 288

7/12/23 11:28 AM

Comment 289 intend to help the readers relativize their own suffering with the knowledge that he (and Silvanus) are also suffering the divinely appointed lot for Christians (cf. v. 3)?89 If so, he also wants them to know the reciprocity of encouragement: he sent Timothy to strengthen and encourage them (v. 2), and now their good news brought by Timothy is giving him encouragement.90 Note the close parallelism between our passage here and 2 Cor 7:3–7, where Paul expresses himself similarly in response to the good news brought to him by Titus about the Corinthian Christians’ spiritual health and friendship toward him, after a long period of great anxiety (see section II.3.D in the Introduction).91 8 ὅτι νῦν ζῶμεν ἐὰν ὑμεῖς στήκετε ἐν κυρίῳ. “For now we live, if you stand fast in the Lord.” This formally causal subordinate clause is attached to the main clause (v. 7), not so much to provide a further reason for what is stated there (“we were encouraged”) as to elaborate on that “encouragement,” that is, to explain emphatically what it means: “now we live!”92 Hence, ὅτι is better rendered with “for” than “because.”93 The νῦν picks up ἄρτι of v. 6: “now,” since Timothy came and Paul and Silvanus heard the good news from him. “We live” here is contrasted with the twice repeated “when we/I could bear it no longer” (vv. 1, 5). Before he heard the news, his life was oppressed by the anxiety about the Thessalonian church to an unbearable degree, but now his life is restored to its full vigor through the good news of Timothy. It was as if a death sentence had been reversed. The hyperbole once more underscores the extent of his desperate anxiety as well as his care for them. ἐὰν . . . στήκετε ἐν κυρίῳ. The ἐάν (instead of εἰ) with the present indicative (instead of subjunctive στήκητε) is a somewhat irregular conditional construction. With it, Paul seeks to add a further thought: the good news that they are maintaining their faith has brought life to him (“now we live!”); but if they continue to “stand fast in the Lord,” he would go on “living.” Thus, this further thought implicitly conveys his paraenetic wish.94 “Standing fast in the Lord” is a paraphrase of what is said in v. 7, the readers’ maintaining their “faith (and love)” amid temptations and afflictions (vv. 2–5). The “Lord” refers to Jesus Christ who has been raised and exalted to the right hand of God to exercise the universal lordship on God’s behalf (Rom 1:3–4; 1 Cor 15:23–28; Phil 2:9–11; cf. Ps 110:1) and is to return to consummate salvation (1 Thess 3:13; 4:13–18; 5:1–11, 23). Believers come to be “in the Lord” through a transference from the sphere under satanic lordship (the kingdom of Satan) to the sphere under Jesus Christ’s lordship (the kingdom of 89 90 91 92 93 94

Cf. Weima, 223. Cf. Wanamaker, 136; Malherbe, 202. Cf. also Malherbe, 203. Cf. Holtz, 134. So Wanamaker, 136; also Weima, 223, citing BDAG 732 (4.b) and BDF §456.1. Holtz, 135; Wanamaker, 136, and Malherbe, 203, citing Grundmann, TDNT 7:637.

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 289

7/12/23 11:28 AM

290

1 Thessalonians 3:6–10

God, which is ruled by his Son, the Lord Jesus Christ, Col 1:13). The transference is accomplished by one’s acceptance of (or faith in) the gospel of Jesus’s death and resurrection and the confession of Jesus as Lord at baptism (Rom 10:9–10), which is at once a pledge of allegiance and obedience to him (cf. Rom 1:4–5; 10:16; Phil 4:1–2) and a plea for his protection and salvation (e.g., Phil 4:4).95 To “stand fast in the Lord” is to maintain one’s existence steadfastly in dependence upon and obedience to the Lord, and as such it is the opposite of “being perturbed” (v. 3) and being “tempted” (v. 5). One can overcome temptation and persecution and “stand firm in the Lord” not only by drawing on the help of the risen Lord at present (cf. 3:11–13) but also by hoping for the consummation of salvation that the Lord will bring at his parousia. So “standing fast in the Lord” involves “hope” as well as “faith and love,” or trusting in the risen Lord for his loving protection and obeying the sovereign Lord’s command to “love.” The importance of standing steadfast in the faith is repeatedly emphasized in Paul’s letters (cf. 1 Cor 16:13 [στήκετε ἐν τῇ πίστει]; Gal 5:1 [στήκετε οὖν]; Phil 1:27 [ὅτι στήκετε ἐν ἑνὶ πνεύματι]; 4:1 [οὕτως στήκετε ἐν κυρίῳ, the same idiom as here]; further 1 Cor 15:1–2; 2 Thess 2:15). 9 τίνα γὰρ εὐχαριστίαν δυνάμεθα . . . ἀνταποδοῦναι, “For what (kind of) thanksgiving can we . . . render?” The sustained thanksgiving introduced in 1:2–7 and resumed in 2:13 reaches its climax here. It is a long interrogative sentence comprising all of vv. 9–10. The rhetorical question is reminiscent of Ps 116:12 (LXX 115:3), τί ἀνταποδώσω τῷ κυρίῳ περὶ πάντων ὧν ἀνταπέδωκέν μοι, “What shall I render to the Lord for all his bounty to me?” No thanksgiving would be adequate. The γάρ in a question is inferential: “therefore, so then.” The verb ἀνταποδοῦναι means “to give back as an equivalent,” although there is not an emphasis on equivalence here as there is in 2 Thess 1:6. τῷ θεῷ, “to God.” As in 1:2, 2:13, and elsewhere, “the apostle’s prayers of thanksgiving are directed to the God of the Psalmists . . . , who is known to Paul as the Father of Jesus Christ (cf. Col. 1:13).”96 However, here Paul does not include his usual expressions that refer to his mentioning of them in his regular times of prayer, namely, “always” (πάντοτε, 1 Thess 1:2; see 1 Cor 1:4; Phil 1:4; Col 1:3; 2 Thess 1:3; 2:13; Phlm 4) or “unceasingly” (ἀδιαλείπτως, 1 Thess 1:2; 2:13). He omits those expressions here while employing the aorist tense ([δυνάμεθα] . . . ἀνταποδοῦναι) to express punctiliar action, because his thanksgiving here is focused on Timothy’s good news.97 Even so, for the good news of the readers maintaining their firm faith, Paul directs his thanks not to them but to God, even while praising their faith (vv. 6–8). On the two earlier occasions (1:2–10; 2:13–14), he did the same (in fact, he regularly does the same in his other letters as well). This formula of 95 For a more detailed explanation of all these, see Kim, Justification, 65–91. 96 O’Brien, Thanksgivings, 156. 97 O’Brien, Thanksgivings, 156; Malherbe, 204.

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 290

7/12/23 11:28 AM

Comment 291 praising them for their faith and thanking God for it reveals Paul’s understanding of faith and other Christian virtues as human works that are enabled by God, that is, they reflect his understanding of “the fruit of righteousness/ sanctification” (Rom 6:22; Phil 1:11) fundamentally as “the fruit of the Spirit” (Gal 5:22). Paul urges believers to work to bear “the fruit of righteousness,” but he is convinced that they can bear it only by the enabling of the Holy Spirit (cf. 1 Thess 4:1–8 with comments below; also Rom 8:1–17; 14:17; Gal 5:16–26; Phil 2:12–13). Therefore, while praising them for “the fruit of righteousness” that they have borne, Paul gives thanks to God for having enabled them by his Spirit to bear it.98 Paul first states the cause for the thanksgiving generally as περὶ ὑμῶν, “about you,” and then specifies it with ἐπὶ πάσῃ τῇ χαρᾷ ᾗ χαίρομεν δι’ ὑμᾶς, “for all the joy with which we rejoice on your account.” The adjective πάσῃ is for emphasis (as in v. 7), and χαρᾷ ᾗ χαίρομεν is in Hebraic idiom. Here is a recompense indeed for “all our distress and affliction” of v. 7. Verse 9 is built in close parallelism to v. 7 to emphasize the overcoming of his “distress and affliction” with the “ joy”: 3:9

3:7

περὶ ὑμῶν (“about you”)

ἐφ’ ὑμῖν (“because of you”)

ἐπὶ πάσῃ τῇ χαρᾷ ᾗ χαίρομεν (“for all the joy with which we rejoice”)

ἐπὶ πάσῃ τῇ ἀνάγκῃ καὶ θλίψει ἡμῶν (“in all our distress and affliction”)

δι’ ὑμᾶς (on your account)

διὰ τῆς ὑμῶν πίστεως (“through your faith”)

The anxiety that he felt about the readers intensified his general “distress and affliction”; the joy he now feels over them makes him forget it all. In both verses Paul emphatically repeats mention of the readers as the cause for his encouragement or thanksgiving. Not only the high number of four references to them within the two verses (cf. seven more in the rest of the paragraph of vv. 6–10), but also the way he refers to them is noteworthy. He first states them as the cause of his encouragement and thanksgiving (ἐφ’ ὑμῖν in v. 7 and περὶ ὑμῶν in v. 9), respectively, and then goes on to elaborate on it (διὰ τῆς ὑμῶν πίστεως in v. 7 and [the joy that he felt] δι’ ὑμᾶς in v. 9). In this way, he may be seeking to convey his genuine appreciation of the readers as persons, not just their deed; their maintenance of faith has comforted and gladdened him. In the preceding two thanksgivings (1:2 + 5–6; 2:13), as the cause for thanksgiving Paul referred to the readers’ faith that had been brought about by the powerful working of the gospel through his missionary 98 Cf. Marshall, 97; Weima, 225–26.

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 291

7/12/23 11:28 AM

292

1 Thessalonians 3:6–10

conduct (eisodos). Here, in this concluding thanksgiving, he does the same by connecting this thanksgiving with their faith, the subject matter of vv. 6–8, through the inferential conjunction γάρ. But then he spells out an additional cause, namely, the joy that their faith (and appreciation of his eisodos) gave him—­something that he kept only implicit in the previous two thanksgivings. ἔμπροσθεν τοῦ θεοῦ ἡμῶν, “in the presence of our God.” This or a similar phrase (expressed with ἔμπροσθεν) is more common in 1 Thessalonians than in any other Pauline letter. In 1:3, 2:19, and 3:13 it has an eschatological reference; here, it has a connotation of worship. “Joy in the presence of God” is an OT idiom (Lev 23:40; Deut 12:12, 18; Isa 9:3) that gratefully acknowledges the divine origin of the cause for the joy.99 The joy that Paul has over the readers’ steadfast faith is ultimately God’s gift, because it is God who had made Paul’s missionary preaching bear fruit in the faith of the readers and preserved them in their faith in the face of the persecution of the opponents. So he bursts out in thanksgiving to God. 10 νυκτὸς καὶ ἡμέρας ὑπερεκπερισσοῦ δεόμενοι, “petitioning night and day most earnestly” (cf. 2:9). Grammatically this participial phrase appears to be taken with the preceding verb χαίρομεν, but the thought thereby produced is not smooth: “We rejoice because of you by petitioning . . .” Hence, commentators100 note that the connection is loose, and some translations101 treat it just as an independent sentence. But observing that Paul regularly attaches a participial phrase of praying to a verb of thanksgiving in his opening thanksgiving sections (1 Thess 1:2; Rom 1:8–10; Eph 1:16; Phil 1:4; Col 1:3; Phlm 4), Weima sees Paul repeating this pattern here by following the verb χαίρομεν with our participial phrase.102 Weima’s observation of Paul’s pattern of thanksgiving is quite appropriate here. However, precisely for that reason it appears that our participial phrase should be taken with τίνα γὰρ εὐχαριστίαν δυνάμεθα . . . ἀνταποδοῦναι of v. 9.103 Along with the distance between the main clause and the dependent participial phrase, the shaping of the thanksgiving uniquely here in the form of a rhetorical question may make their connection appear awkward. But strip the rhetorical framework, and the whole sentence of thanksgiving of vv. 9–10 appears quite in keeping with Paul’s usual pattern of thanksgiving combined with prayer: “I give thanks to God for you . . . petitioning night and day most earnestly that we may see you.” The distance between the main clause and the participial phrase is created by Paul’s eagerness to elaborate on the cause of his thanksgiving, but in the whole context of this concluding thanksgiving (2:17–3:10) that is also quite understandable (cf. Rom 1:8–10). 99 100 101 102 103

Marshall, 97. E.g., Lightfoot, 47; Frame, 135; Holtz, 136; Malherbe, 204. E.g., NIV, NRSV, JB, NAB, NLT. Weima, 227. Pace Lightfoot, 47.

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 292

7/12/23 11:28 AM

Comment 293 Paul normally uses the more general and common verb προσεύχεσθαι for his prayer in the thanksgiving sections of his letters (Rom 1:10; Eph 1:16; Phil 1:4; Col 1:3; Phlm 4), and he did the same in his first thanksgiving in our letter (1:2). However, in the thanksgiving here he uses δεῖσθαι, the verb that conveys the more concrete and strong sense of requesting and petitioning.104 Note also that he uses the cognate noun δέησις in Phil 1:4, and in Rom 1:10 he specifies the “request” (δεόμενος) that he makes in his “prayer” (προσευχή). He further enhances the intensity of his prayer for the readers with two adverbial phrases, the temporal νυκτὸς καὶ ἡμέρας, “both at night and by day” (see comment on 2:9) and the qualitative ὑπερεκπερισσοῦ, “exceedingly abundantly” (cf. 5:13; Eph 3:20). In Dan 3:22 (Theod.) Nebuchadnezzar’s furnace is said to have been heated ἐκ περισσοῦ, “excessively,” but here the prefix ὑπερ-­ adds a further degree to that. Paul is fond of forming compounds with ὑπέρ to express superlativeness; compare ὑπερπερισσεύεσθαι of the superabundant grace of God in Rom 5:20 and of the superabundant joy with which Paul received reassuring news about the church of Corinth in 2 Cor 7:4 (which, like the present news from Thessalonica, more than compensated for all his “affliction,” θλῖψις). See further Rom 8:26, 37; 2 Cor 9:14; Phil 2:9; 1 Thess 5:13; 2 Thess 1:3. For all these reasons, we find it appropriate to render δεόμενος here with “petitioning.”105 εἰς τὸ ἰδεῖν ὑμῶν τὸ πρόσωπον, “that we may see you face to face,” echoing 2:17 (ἐσπουδάσαμεν τὸ πρόσωπον ὑμῶν ἰδεῖν). The simple infinitive is sufficient after a verb of praying to express the purpose. But here Paul uses the construction εἰς τὸ (equivalent of ἵνα) as in 2:12; 4:9. To see the Thessalonians was both the content and the purpose of his prayer to God. καὶ καταρτίσαι τὰ ὑστερήματα τῆς πίστεως ὑμῶν, “and make good the deficiencies in your faith.” The noun ὑστέρημα (“deficiency”) appears only in Luke 21:4 in the NT outside the Pauline epistles, but Paul uses it eight times total, often in the formula (προσ-­ or ἀντί-­) ἀναπληροῦν τὸ ὑστέρημα (1 Cor 16:17; 2 Cor 9:12; 11:9; Phil 2:30; Col 1:24). Here καταρτίζειν (“restore, repair, complete”) is used instead of the usual ἀναπληροῦν (“make complete, fill a gap, fulfill”), and it lets the ὑστέρημα take on a negative nuance.106 However, in the light of the enthusiastic welcome given to Timothy’s news about their faith and love in vv. 6–8, it is unlikely that the genuineness or sincerity of the Thessalonians’ faith is felt to be defective; rather, there are important areas in which they require further instruction or even some correction. What some of those areas are may be gathered from the subject matter of 4:1–5:22. Paul’s abrupt and forced departure from the readers after only a brief time with them must have originally created this wish in his mind to impart further instruction to the 104 Cf. BDAG 218; H. Greeven, TDNT 2:40–41. 105 Cf. Malherbe, 204: “begging”; Weima, 227: “pleading.” 106 Holtz, 138.

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 293

7/12/23 11:28 AM

294

1 Thessalonians 3:6–10

readers, but then it has most likely been strengthened by Timothy’s report of them. Although they laudably maintain their faith as well as their appreciation of Paul’s apostolic conduct, they still need further instruction in some areas for a more mature faith and wholesome Christian life. Since it is unlikely that in the near future Paul would have an opportunity to give them the necessary instruction face-­to-­face, he gives it in the next part of the letter. As usual, the written word is a substitute for the spoken word. The thanksgiving of v. 9 leads up to this prayer report, which in turn anticipates the “wish-­prayer” of vv. 11–13.

Explanation The relief and encouragement that Paul has received from Timothy’s good news leads him to offer thanksgiving to God again. This thanksgiving renews the earlier two thanksgivings of 1:2, 5–6 and 2:13–14. There he gave thanks to God for the powerful effects of the gospel and the faith of the readers that had been brought about by their appreciation of his impeccable eisodos, despite the opponents’ persecution. Then, having received Timothy’s good news that they are still standing firm in the faith and maintaining their appreciation of his eisodos in the face of the opponents’ smear campaign against it, Paul gives thanks to God afresh, and he does it most profusely. With this thanksgiving Paul reaches the climax of the first half of the letter, which is, as a whole, the thanksgiving section. The fivefold combination of the powerful effects of the gospel/the faith of the readers with his excellent eisodos, the threefold reference to their persecution as the circumstance in which they came to faith and are maintaining it, and the threefold thanksgiving to God for their faith despite persecution form the basic framework of chs. 1–3. And this framework is filled up with elaborations on the constituent elements, one after another: their faith (1:7–10), Paul’s eisodos (2:1–12), their suffering (2:14–20), and maintaining their faith despite persecution (3:1–8). By structuring the first three chapters of this epistle thus, Paul seeks to consolidate the readers’ positive appreciation of his eisodos and encourage them to maintain their faith with it in the face of the opponents’ persecution. We can discern this overall intent of the thanksgiving section of chs. 1–3 the most clearly in this concluding passage. Here he gives thanks to God for the readers’ faith and their appreciation of his eisodos, narrating how he was anxious about their possible abandonment of faith due to the slander campaign of their opponents, and how he then has been relieved by Timothy’s good report of their perseverance in faith with a positive appreciation of his eisodos. However, this intent is generally missed by commentators, especially by those who try to understand Paul as seeking in chs. 2–3 to present himself as a model for the readers’ imitation, and/or to make a philophronetic preparation

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 294

7/12/23 11:28 AM

Bibliography 295 for imparting exhortations in chs. 4–5.107 But those commentators fail to see the unique structure of chs. 1–3 that we have observed and do not properly appreciate Paul’s bitterness about the opponents’ persecution (2:14–16), the depth of his anxiety concerning the readers (2:17–3:5), and the great emotion of his relief (3:6–9). This is exemplified by Malherbe, a pioneer of the theories of modeling and philophronetic intents,108 when he sees Paul’s grave concern for the readers’ positive remembrance of him here merely as reflecting the general background of ancient moral philosophy: “The remembrance of a mentor was a feature of the instruction by ancient moral preachers, and Paul’s statement must be viewed in the context of that practice. . . . A disciple continued to be guided by the exemplary life of his teacher in his absence by remembering him.”109 But there is nothing in this passage or even the whole letter about the readers living or needing to live after the exemplary life of Paul (see section II.3.C. in the Introduction above). In v. 10, Paul’s thanksgiving for God’s grace bestowed upon the Thessalonian church and upon him thus far yields to his petitions for its further bestowal in the future. Rather than letting Timothy’s good report of the Thessalonians’ faith close now his concern for them, he prays night and day exceedingly abundantly for an opportunity to renew fellowship with them and minister to them in the future. The content of prayer is, first of all, to see their face and then to make good the deficiencies in their faith. Ever since his forced departure from them, he has longed to see them face-­to-­face (2:17). As he could not come himself, he sent Timothy to them. Timothy’s mission has fulfilled the objectives of strengthening and encouraging them, and his report of their faith has brought great relief to him. So he gives thanks to God. Yet there are areas in which only Paul can adequately teach. Therefore, even after Timothy’s successful mission, Paul still insists on his personal visit and teaching. As he cannot see his visit in the foreseeable future, he attempts to make good the deficiencies of their faith in chs. 4–5 of this letter. Thus, the present passage provides an explanation for the occasion and purpose of this letter.

D. The Concluding Wish-­Prayer: Transition (3:11–13) Bibliography Kim. S. “The Gospel that Paul Preached to the Thessalonians—­Continuity and Unity of Paul’s Gospel in 1 Thessalonians and in His Later Epistles.” Pages 67–131 in PGTO. —­—­—­. “Jesus’ Son of Man Sayings as a Basis for Paul’s Gospel of Jesus the Son of God (1 Thess 1:9–10 and Rom 1:3–4).” Pages 133–49 in PGTO. —­—­— ­. “Jesus the 107 See also Weima, 122. For examples of the advocates of these views, see the Form/Structure/ Setting section of 2:1–12. 108 Malherbe, 207–8. 109 Malherbe, 207.

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 295

7/12/23 11:28 AM

296

1 Thessalonians 3:11–13

Son of God as the Gospel (1 Thess 1:9–10 and Rom 1:3–4).” Pages 117–41 in Earliest Christian History: History, Literature, and Theology: Essays from the Tyndale Fellowship in Honor of Martin Hengel. WUNT 2/320. Edited by M. F. Bird and J. Maston. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2012. Reprint in pages 45–66 in PGTO. —­—­—­. Justification and God’s Kingdom. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2018. Konradt, M. Gericht und Gemeinde: Eine Studie zur Bedeutung und Funktion von Gerichtsaussagen im Rahmen der paulinischen Ekklesiologie und Ethik im 1 Thess und 1 Kor. BZNW 117. Berlin, 2003. Stettler, H. Heiligung bei Paulus: Ein Beitrag aus biblisch-­theologischer Sicht. WUNT 2/368. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2014.

Translation Now may our God and Father himself and our Lord Jesus direct a our way to you, 12 and as for you, may the Lord make you increase b and abound in love c to one another and to all, even as we (abound) to you, 13so that he may support your hearts to stand securely as blameless in holinessd before our God and Father, at the advent of our Lord Jesus with all his holy ones. [Amen.] e 11

Notes a. κατευθύναι, aorist optative. The optative mood expressing wish is the “proper optative”; E. D. Burton (Syntax of the Moods and Tenses in New Testament Greek, 3rd ed. [Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1898], 79) lists thirty-­f ive occurrences of this in the NT, of which fifteen are accounted for by the idiomatic μὴ γένοιτο (fourteen times in Paul). Of the remaining twenty, the Pauline corpus accounts for fourteen, and of these 1 and 2 Thessalonians account for five and four respectively (cf. v. 12 [2x]; 5:23 [2x]; 2 Thess 2:17 [2x]; 3:5, 16). b. πλεονάσαι, aorist optative of wish (with transitive force). c. περισσεύσαι τῇ ἀγάπη. The verb περισσεύσαι is an aorist optative of wish (with transitive force). The variant τῆς ἀγάπης (F G) for τῇ ἀγάπῃ (dative) exhibits the classical use of the genitive after a verb of filling. d. ἀμέμπτους ἐν ἁγιωσύνῃ. For the adjectival form ἀμέμπτους; B L 33 81 et al. read the adverb ἀμέμπτως (cf. 2:10; 5:23); for ἁγιωσύνῃ (“holiness”) A pc read δικαιοσύνη (“righteousness”). e. ἀμήν is read by ‫ *א‬A D* 81 629 pc lat a m vg copbo; it is omitted by ‫א‬2 B D2 F G Ψ byz lat vet syr copsa.

Form/Structure/Setting Having told his readers of his prayer (with the two concerns) in v. 10, here Paul actually offers that prayer, spelling out those concerns: his wish to see them (v. 11) and to strengthen their faith (vv. 12–13). But since he is writing a letter, he puts the prayer in the form of a wish by referring to God in the third person and using the optative mood.110 The prayer marks a transition in that it concludes the first part of the letter (especially with the first petition) and at the same time introduces with the second petition the new themes to be treated in the following second part: love (4:9–12; 5:12–22), holiness (4:1–8), and the parousia of the Lord Jesus Christ (4:13–5:11). In other letters also 110 So Wiles (Paul’s Intercessory Prayer) terms it a “wish-­prayer.”

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 296

7/12/23 11:28 AM

Comment 297 Paul closes the thanksgiving section with a prayer in which he announces the themes of the letter (1 Cor 1:4–9; Phil 1:9–11; Col 1:9–12; Phlm 6; cf. 2 Thess 1:10–12). Phlm 4–6 seems to indicate how closely thanksgiving and prayer belong together to build a unit in Paul’s mind. The prayer here has its parallel in 5:23–24, and the latter may be seen as an abbreviated version of this prayer (see comment ad loc). Since our prayer here marks a transition with the announcement of the themes of the paraenesis in chs. 4–5 and the parallel prayer in 5:23–24 closes the paraenesis, they are to be seen as forming an inclusio.111

Comment 3:11 Αὐτὸς δὲ ὁ θεὸς καὶ πατὴρ ἡμῶν καὶ ὁ κύριος ἡμῶν Ἰησοῦς κατευθύναι τὴν ὁδὸν ἡμῶν πρὸς ὑμᾶς, “Now may our God and Father himself and our Lord Jesus direct our way to you.” The δέ introduces each of Paul’s prayers in 1 Thess (5:23) and 2 Thess (2:16; 3:5, 16; cf. Rom 15:5, 13). Since all these prayers are wish-­prayers in the optative mood and they all (except 2 Thess 3:5) contain the introductory emphatic pronoun αὐτός, this opening αὐτός appears to be an adaptation in wish-­prayers of the original vocative “you” in direct prayers. So it ultimately echoes σὺ δέ (‫ )ואתה‬of the synagogal liturgy and the language of the Psalter, σὺ δὲ κύριε (‫)ואתה יהוה‬, “But thou, O Lord” (e.g., Ps 22:19 [LXX 21:20]). It is striking that Paul adds “and our Lord Jesus” to “our God and Father.” This raises the related questions: (1) Does the αὐτός adhere only to “our God and Father” or to the whole phrase “our God and Father and our Lord Jesus”?; and (2) Is the singular verb κατευθύναι used here because, in Greek construction with two subjects, a singular verb is often used to agree with the nearer of the two (e.g., Matt 5:18; 6:19; John 12:22) (so FFB), or because Paul is consciously trying to express God the Father and the Lord Jesus as one, as John the Divine does (Rev 11:15; cf. also 6:16–17; 22:3–4)?112 According to Marshall, here the combination of αὐτός and the singular verb, as well as the use of singular verbs with the same two subjects appearing in reverse order in the prayer of 2 Thess 2:16–17 (see comment ad loc), suggest that Paul deliberately joins God the Father and the Lord Jesus as a unity.113 We may add that a comparison with the synagogal and Psalter liturgies strengthens this view: what he as a Jew used to think of God’s act he now understands as what God the Father and Jesus the Lord do together in unity. This implies that Paul has already worked out a binitarian understanding of divine operation. Jesus has been exalted as God’s Son to exercise God’s lordship on his behalf, so that what God the Father wills the Lord Jesus executes, and what the Lord

111 So Malherbe, 211. 112 So Holtz, 142. 113 Marshall, 100. Similarly also Fee, 16, 130–31, with the stress, though, that αὐτός refers to God the Father alone; cf. also Witherington, 102–03; Beale, 108, 111; Green, 176.

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 297

7/12/23 11:28 AM

298

1 Thessalonians 3:11–13

Jesus does is what God the Father does (cf. Rom 1:3–4; 1 Cor 15:23–28).114 In 1 Thess 1:1 as well as in our verse, where Paul joins God the Father and the Lord Jesus Christ in unity, Fee sees implicitly suggested Paul’s recognition of both the Father and the Son in the Shema of Deut 6:4, which he expresses through a neat formula in his next epistle (1 Cor 8:6).115 The matter-­of-­fact way of offering the prayer jointly to God the Father and the Lord Jesus here suggests that he already taught the Thessalonians who the Lord Jesus, God’s Son, is and how he is related to the (one) “living and true God” (1 Thess 1:9–10).116 The verb κατευθύνειν means “to make right” (“to correct”) or “to make straight” (cf. Ps 37:23 [36:23 LXX], παρὰ κυρίου τὰ διαβήματα ἀνθρώπου κατευθύνεται, “by the Lord a person’s steps are made straight”; 40:2 [39:3 LXX], καὶ κατηύθυνεν τὰ διαβήματά μου, “and he gave me a secure footing”; Prov 4:26, τὰς ὁδούς σου κατεύθυνε, “make your ways straight”). It occurs in two other NT passages: Luke 1:79 (τοῦ κατευθῦναι τοὺς πόδας ἡμῶν εἰς ὁδὸν εἰρήνης, “to direct our feet into the way of peace”) and 2 Thess 3:5 (see comment ad loc). Interpreting this petition in reference to Paul’s mention of Satan’s hindrance of his attempts to come to the readers (2:18), Fee renders it thus: God and the Lord will “clear the way for us to come to you.”117 Acts 20:1 shows that the prayer was eventually answered. 12 ὑμᾶς δὲ ὁ κύριος πλεονάσαι καὶ περισσεύσαι τῇ ἀγάπῃ, “and as for you, may the Lord make you increase and abound in love.” The emphatic position of ὑμᾶς forms an implicit contrast to himself: having prayed for himself that God direct his way to them, now he prays for his readers. If the following δέ has the full adversative force,118 the contrast may also imply Paul’s wish that, even if his petition for himself should not be fulfilled, his petition for his readers be fulfilled. In view of the references to the “Lord Jesus” in vv. 11 and 13, the absolute κύριος here must refer to Jesus rather than God, who is referred to as “Father” in both vv. 11 and 13 (cf. 1 Cor 8:6).119 Elsewhere also Paul directs prayer to the Lord Jesus: 1 Cor 16:22; 2 Cor 12:8; 2 Thess 3:5, 16. Here, having opened his prayer with a petition directed jointly to God the Father and the Lord Jesus (v. 11), he goes on directing the rest of his petitions solely to the Lord Jesus (vv. 12–13), but he does so for the ultimate purpose of making God’s will (namely, their perfect sanctification, cf. 4:3, 9) fulfilled in the readers’ lives. This structuring of his prayer appears to imply his understanding of the Lord Jesus as the executor of the will of God the Father. This part that the 114 See Kim, “Jesus the Son of God as the Gospel,” in PGTO, 64–66; also Holtz, 142. 115 Fee, 16. Contra Malherbe, 212; Schreiber, I:195–96; Hoppe, I:219; etc. who object to reading here more than just functional unity of the two persons. 116 Cf. Fee, 130–31. 117 Fee, 130. Cf. also Marshall, 100; Weima, 237. 118 Cf. Weima, 237. 119 Contra Holtz, 143; Müller, 164.

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 298

7/12/23 11:28 AM

Comment 299 Lord Jesus, the second person in the triune Godhead, fulfills in God’s total work of sanctification and judgment is omitted in the abbreviated version of the same prayer in 5:23, which petitions simply for God to make the readers totally sanctified and blameless at the last judgment (see comment ad loc). The two verbs πλεονάζειν and περισσεύειν are more or less synonymous and are coupled here for emphasis (cf. Rom 5:20; 2 Cor 4:15). The believers should be made super-­r ich in “love.” εἰς ἀλλήλους καὶ εἰς πάντας, “to one another and to all.” This expression recurs in 5:15. They are to love “one another” in the church. The Thessalonian Christians are already rich in love for one another (1:3; 4:9). Yet Paul prays for the Lord to give them an even greater capacity to love. Here, love is clearly understood as a gift of the Lord, as something that is performed by human beings through the enabling grace of the Lord. Paul usually emphasizes love for fellow believers (Rom 12:10; 13:8; Gal 5:13; Col 1:4; 3:14; 1 Thess 4:9–10; 5:13; 2 Thess 1:3). This was necessary not just because it is a timeless requirement for all Christians everywhere, but specifically because, in his newly forming churches, he had to forge a new community out of the people drawn from different social and economic classes as well as different ethnic groups, and he had to do it amid a hostile environment (cf. further 1 Thess 5:26–27).120 But note his extension of love “to all people” here and in 5:15 (cf. also Gal 6:10). The love of God poured into the believers’ hearts by the Holy Spirit (Rom 5:5) could not be reserved for members of their own fellowship; it must overflow to others without restriction. The church must, even under the pressure of a heathen environment, show its love to the outside world and maintain its missionary stance to it. According to Malherbe, the πάντας here refers only to pagans who are present in Christian assemblies.121 But there is no reason to restrict the universal language thus. Rather, both 4:12 and 5:15 (see comments ad loc) suggest that Paul here exhorts the readers to extend their love to their pagan neighbors as well (cf. also Gal 6:10). Seen against the background that they are being persecuted by their “compatriots” (1 Thess 2:14), this exhortation is remarkable. Since he echoes Jesus’s command to love one’s enemy (Matt 5:43–48//Luke 6:32–36) in 5:15 (cf. also Rom 12:20–21), we may presume that he is reflecting that command here also (see comment on 5:15 for further discussion). Compare this verse with Gal 5:16–26 (also Rom 8:1–17): in the Galatians and Romans passages it is the Spirit that enables us to bear the fruit of righteousness (cf. also 1 Thess 4:8 with comment ad loc), whereas our text and Phil 1:11 (also Rom 7:4–5) suggest that it is the Lord Jesus Christ who does it. This comparison shows that an understanding of the Holy Spirit as the Spirit of Christ Jesus, God’s Son, as well as of God the Father within the Trinitarian 120 Cf. Wanamaker, 142–43. 121 Malherbe, 212.

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 299

7/12/23 11:28 AM

300

1 Thessalonians 3:11–13

framework, is assumed (cf. Rom 8:9–11). So the work of the Holy Spirit is really the work of the exalted Lord Jesus Christ, who executes God’s will and does it through the Spirit. καθάπερ καὶ ἡμεῖς εἰς ὑμᾶς (sc. περισσεύομεν τῇ ἀγάπῃ) “ just as we (abound in love) toward you.” Compare the καθάπερ clause (similarly with a verb to be supplied from the preceding clause) at the end of 3:6. Since it cannot be imagined that Paul is here holding out to the Lord his love for the church as the model, this clause must be understood as addressed to his readers. This shows that his wish-­prayer is addressed to his readers as much as to God and includes a paraenetic purpose.122 Weima sees Paul here intending to recall his love for the readers, which he has spoken about in 2:17–3:10, and to reassure them thereby.123 But still it is clear that Paul is setting his love for them as an example for them to emulate. However, this elliptical clause does not convey quite the same force as other Pauline passages in which Paul explicitly calls his converts to imitate him (2 Thess 3:7–9; also 1 Cor 4:16; 11:1; Phil 3:17; 4:9). 13 εἰς τὸ στηρίξαι ὑμῶν τὰς καρδίας, “so that he may support your hearts to stand securely as blameless in holiness” (cf. v. 2, εἰς τὸ στηρίξαι ὑμᾶς). This final infinitive phrase expresses the purpose of the Lord’s making them abound in love. But the use of the verb στηρίξαι (see comment on v. 2 above for its meaning) complicates our interpretation here. Fee puts the problem well: “Indeed, had Paul used a form of the verb ‘to be’ or ‘to become,’ the whole clause would have made immediately good sense: ‘so that your hearts might be blameless . . . ,’ as a result of their abounding in love.”124 But Paul uses the verb στηρίξαι instead. What is the exact meaning of it, or what does he intend with it? That question, as well as the exact relationship between the main clause (v. 12) and this infinitive phrase (v. 13), can be determined only after the latter is examined in detail (see Explanation below). ὑμῶν τὰς καρδίας, “your hearts.” The language of “establishing or strengthening” the heart is OT parlance (e.g., Pss 104:15 [103:15 LXX]; 112:8 [111:8 LXX]; Dan 7:28 LXX; Sir 6:37; 22:16). As in 2:4, the heart is not only the seat of feeling, understanding, and will, but the place where the hidden motives of life and conduct take shape. Thus, with his reference to “your hearts” instead of a simple “you,” Paul apparently alludes to the fact that, at the last judgment, the hidden motives of the inner person will be disclosed (cf. 1 Cor 4:5). ἀμέμπτους ἐν ἁγιωσύνῃ, “blameless in holiness.” Whereas in the parallel wish-­prayer of 5:23 Paul uses the adverb ἀμέμπτως to modify the adjective ὁλόκληρον (“unblameably whole”), here he uses the adjectival form ἀμέμπτους, apparently in order to convey more the sense of the state in which he wishes the readers to be found at the last judgment than the sense of how they would 122 Cf. Holtz, 145. 123 Weima, 239. 124 Fee, 133.

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 300

7/12/23 11:28 AM

Comment 301 reach that state. Paul uses the noun ἁγιωσύνη only two other times (Rom 1:4; 2 Cor 7:1), but he uses the verb ἁγιάζειν (“to sanctify,” Rom 15:16; 1 Cor 1:2; 6:11; 7:14; 1 Thess 5:23) and the noun ἁγιασμός (“sanctification,” Rom 6:19, 22; 1 Cor 1:30; 1 Thess 4:3, 4, 7; 2 Thess 2:13) several times, as well as referring to the believers as οἱ ἅγιοι (“the saints” or “the holy ones”) frequently. As the references show, holiness or sanctification is a major theme in 1 Thessalonians. It refers to a quality of persons or objects that are set apart or consecrated for the service of God; when applied to persons, it refers often to the moral perfection (purity and righteousness) that corresponds to God’s character and purpose. As God’s people called by God into his kingdom, believers, as the “sanctified” (the “saints”), are to live in a manner “worthy of God” by obeying his kingly rule (1 Thess 2:12). As those chosen by God to be his children (1:4), they are to live as the “children of day and light,” shunning the deeds of night and darkness (5:4–8). Compare Phil 2:15, where Paul urges the Christians of Philippi to live among their pagan neighbors as the “blameless” (ἄμεμπτοι) or “blemish-­free” (ἄμωμα) children of God. Paul has already pointed out that he and his colleagues behaved “blamelessly in holiness and righteousness” (ὁσίως καὶ δικαίως καὶ ἀμέμπτως) toward the Thessalonians (2:10). Such a life is the holy or sanctified life, and in the subsequent chs. 4–5 he will spell out some concrete exhortations for it. But in this prayer of vv. 12–13 he highlights love, abundant love, as that which would enable the readers to stand “blameless in holiness” at the last judgment. ἔμπροσθεν τοῦ θεοῦ καὶ πατρὸς ἡμῶν, “before our God and Father.” No matter how we may interpret the verb στηρίξαι in this verse, there is no question that Paul’s prayer is ultimately aimed at having the readers stand before the judgment seat of God “blameless in holiness” or as perfectly holy (so “unblameable,” with nothing to be condemned for).125 This will be the consummation of their sanctification, but since this is set in the context of the last judgment,126 it may also be seen as the consummation of their justification (see comment on 5:23 below for the use of the holiness or cult language within the setting of the last judgment, i.e., the combination of the cultic [sanctification] and judicial [justification] categories, here and in 5:23).127 With the consummation of their sanctification/justification, they will enter into the glory of the consummated kingdom of God (2:12). Whereas in 2:19 Paul speaks of his converts as his “crown of boasting before

125 Contra Konradt, Gericht und Gemeinde, 193–94, who, treating our verse and 5:23 cursorily, claims that in 1 Thessalonians there is only the idea of God’s judgment of condemnation (Zorngericht) of unbelievers but not that of a judgment of evaluation (Beurteilungsgericht) of believers. 126 So most commentators; contra Schreiber, I:198–99, who, following Konradt (183–85), denies this context and stresses only the concern for Christian eschatological existence coram deo in the present; cf. also Hoppe, I:223. 127 See Explanation below for the relationship between justification and sanctification.

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 301

7/12/23 11:28 AM

302

1 Thessalonians 3:11–13

our Lord Jesus at his parousia,” here he speaks of their appearance then “before our God and Father.” Similarly, the tribunal (βῆμα) before which believers are to stand is variously called “the tribunal of Christ” (2 Cor 5:10) and “the tribunal of God” (Rom 14:10)—­so completely are the functions of the Father shared by the Son. Nevertheless, when Paul refers to both God and the Lord Jesus Christ in connection with the last judgment as here, he seems to be conscious of their different roles: God the judge and the Lord Jesus Christ the counsel—­the prosecutor for unbelievers and the defense attorney (intercessor) for believers (cf. Rom 8:33–34).128 Some commentators129 think that by designating God as “our Father” here Paul is trying to highlight the loving fatherhood of God the judge at the last judgment in order to reassure the readers. Other commentators reject this interpretation, seeing the epithet here as merely formulaic, as in the previous v. 11 and many other liturgical passages.130 The former possibility appears to gain some support from a comparison of our verse with Rom 14:10, where Paul simply refers to God without that epithet as he seeks to warn the Roman Christians with the sternness of his judgeship at the last judgment (cf. also 2 Cor 5:10). However, as in this prayer with a reference to the last judgment Paul stresses there the need for a perfect sanctification of the readers rather than seeking to reassure them (cf. Rom 8:31–39),131 it appears unnecessary, if not unnatural, to see Paul’s intent to highlight God’s loving fatherhood here. ἐν τῇ παρουσίᾳ τοῦ κυρίου ἡμῶν Ἰησοῦ μετὰ πάντων τῶν ἁγίων αὐτοῦ, “at the advent of our Lord Jesus with all his holy ones.” The last judgment takes place at the parousia of the Lord Jesus (see comment on παρουσία in 2:19 and 4:15). But who are “all his holy ones” that will accompany the Lord in his parousia? In Paul, as in the rest of the NT, οἱ ἅγιοι usually refers to Christians as God’s people. However, here it is part of a liturgical formulation that clearly echoes Zech 14:5: “The Lord, my God, will come and all his holy ones with him,” in which “his holy ones” refers to angels. This is in keeping with the fact that the descriptions of the parousia of the Lord Jesus in the NT are generally based on those of earlier theophanies in the OT and that in the OT, when God reveals himself for deliverance or for judgment, he is regularly attended by his angels (e.g., Ps 68:17 [67:18 LXX]; Dan 7:10; 1 En. 1.6–9). So also in 1 Thess 4:13–18 Paul depicts the Lord Jesus descending from heaven accompanied by angels (cf. comment on 4:16 below), while speaking of Christians not as coming with the Lord but rather as ascending to meet the descending Lord in the air.

128 See Kim, “Jesus the Son of God as the Gospel,” in PGTO, 52–54. 129 E.g., Rigaux, 490; Richard, 166; Weima, 242. 130 Best, 151–52; Malherbe, 213–14; cf. Marshall, 102, who takes the epithet as conveying the contrary sense “that as God’s children believers are under obligation to obey him and do his will.” 131 Pace Weima, 242, who points to the affliction of the readers for this need.

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 302

7/12/23 11:28 AM

Explanation 303 Weima argues that in 4:13–18 all the believers, the living and the resurrected, are supposed to ascend to meet the Lord in the air and escort him down to the earth in the pattern of the parousia of a Greco-­Roman dignitary in a city (see comment on 4:13–18 below) and that therefore “the holy ones” here in 3:13 refer to those believers.132 But then does Paul envision here all Christians ascending to meet the descending Lord in the air, accompanying him down to the earth at his parousia, and then standing before the judgment seat of God? Why is it necessary for Paul to refer here to the accompaniment of “all his holy ones” with that sort of complicated picture in mind? When the main point of the prayer is that the readers (along with other believers) stand blameless before the judgment seat of God at the parousia of the Lord Jesus Christ, what purpose does it serve to affirm that they and other believers will accompany him at his parousia? We cannot see any reason for this. Therefore, it is much simpler to take “all his holy ones” here as referring to angels (so most commentators). The accompaniment of “all his angels” signifies the parousia of the Lord as a glorious or majestic theophany. In the Jesus tradition, echoing Dan 7:9–14, the Son of Man is to come accompanied by the angels (Mark 8:38parr.; 13:26–27//Matt 24:30–31; Matt 13:41; 25:31). Since many sayings of Jesus about the coming of the Son of Man (e.g., Mark 13:26–27//Matt 24:30–31; Luke 12:39–40//Matt 24:43–44; Luke 21:34–36) may be discerned as echoed in Paul’s statements about the “coming” (parousia) of the Lord in 1 Thess 4:13–5:11 (see comment ad loc), it is reasonable to presume that here also, with the reference to the parousia of the Lord Jesus, he reflects his consciousness of those Son of Man sayings.133 [ἀμήν], “amen.” If the “amen” is part of the original text (see note e above under Notes), it illustrates the primitive Christian response to the mention of the advent of Christ (more fully in Rev 22:20, ἀμήν, ἔρχου κύριε Ἰησοῦ, “Amen, come Lord Jesus”).

Explanation Paul here with this prayer closes part 1 of his letter and transitions to part 2. He prays for God and the Lord Jesus to pave the way for him to come to the Thessalonian believers (v. 11) and for the Lord Jesus to enable them to stand as blamelessly holy before the judgment seat of God at his parousia (vv. 12–13). How does he, then, think the Lord Jesus would enable them so to stand? We can answer this question by determining the exact meaning of the verb στηρίξαι as well as the relationship between the main clause (v. 12) and the final phrase (v. 13).

132 Weima, 243. Cf. also Rigaux, 491–92. 133 Cf. Kim, “Jesus’ Son of Man Sayings,” in PGTO, 134–49.

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 303

7/12/23 11:28 AM

304

1 Thessalonians 3:11–13

Having clearly stated the problem involved in understanding their relationship (see above), Fee proposes to take the final phrase not as indicating the immediate result of their increased love (v. 12) but rather as adding a second petition “that the Lord will do for them in the context of their increased love for one another.”134 So apparently he follows the NIV, rendering it as: “May the Lord make your love increase and overflow for each other and for everyone else. . . . May he strengthen your hearts so that you will be blameless and holy in the presence of God.”135 But it is unclear what Fee means exactly with his clause “that the Lord will do [the second petition] for them in the context of their increased love for one another.” Anyway, it is not right to take the final phrase as a virtual second petition, despite the popularity of taking it thus.136 The relationship between the main clause (v. 12) and the final phrase (v. 13) must be closer than this line of interpretation projects. An even more popular line of interpretation is to take the verb στηρίξαι in the sense of “strengthening” and to insert “to be” between “your hearts” and “blameless in holiness”: “so that he [the Lord] may strengthen your hearts to be blameless in holiness” (or, “so that they may be blameless in holiness”).137 But if that is what Paul means, would he not insert another infinitival phrase such as εἰς τὸ εἶναι αὐτάς (“for them to be”) before ἀμέμπτους ἐν ἁγιωσύνῃ (“blameless in holiness”)?138 Furthermore, this line of interpretation takes the aorist infinitive στηρίξαι as bearing the meaning of a process of strengthening, rather than a punctiliar event. Then, we must see that with “blameless in holiness” Paul has in view the result reached at the end of that process rather than simply the state itself, which the believers will be presented as having at the last judgment. But since Paul has already indicated the process of sanctification in the main clause (v. 12), is it not more likely that in the final phrase he has in view only the state of blameless sanctification itself, with no further thought about the process whereby the believers are to reach it? Or else is it reasonable to imagine that in vv. 12–13 Paul is praying in effect thus: “May the Lord make you grow in love, so that he may strengthen your hearts (to continue on this path to holiness) so as to be blameless at the last judgment”? Is, then, the Lord’s making the readers grow in love the basis on which he can strengthen them to make progress in sanctification so as to become blameless? What a tortuous thought! Wanamaker properly respects the grammatical connection between the main clause in v. 12 and the final phrase in v. 13 and explains the two verses thus: 134 135 136 137

Fee, 133 (emphasis original). Fee, 122. See also NJB; NRSV; CEB. E.g., Frame, 138; Best, 150–51; Beale, 110; Witherington, 103; Green, 179–80; cf. also Lightfoot, 49; Marshall, 101; NAB; NEB; NET; NIV. 138 Cf. Holtz, 145, who endorses such an insertion by Dobschütz, 151; also Rigaux, 490.

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 304

7/12/23 11:28 AM

Explanation 305 [Paul] desires that his converts be blameless when they stand in the presence of God at the [last] judgment. Paul’s hope that his readers would love one another as well as those outside their community has as its intention that their hearts should be established as blameless ἐν ἁγιωσύνῃ (“in holiness”). The verb στηρίξαι suggests that the Thessalonians will feel secure on the day of judgment if they love as Paul wants them to (cf. Findlay, 76f.).139

However, Wanamaker does not also pay attention to the fact that Paul has not set the verb στηρίξαι in the passive voice (“their hearts may be supported to feel secure”) but in the active voice, with “the Lord” (carried on from v. 12) as the subject.140 Indeed, the verb στηρίξαι has ultimately to do with the readers feeling secure on the day of judgment, but the point is that the Lord Jesus will help them feel that way. We need also to note the fact that the verb does not describe what the Lord will make happen with the readers during the period leading up to the last judgment (since the main clause of v. 12 has already done it), but rather what he will do for them at the last judgment. If we properly take note of these facts, we can see that Paul is using the verb more in its original sense here as in 3:2 and is praying: “May the Lord make you grow in loving one another and all people fully, so that he may support your hearts [i.e., your whole beings, including hidden motives and inclinations] to stand firmly or securely, that is, as blameless in holiness, before God at the last judgment at the parousia of the Lord Jesus with all his holy ones.”141 Thus the final clause, εἰς τὸ στηρίξαι ὑμῶν τὰς καρδίας ἀμέμπτους ἐν ἁγιωσύνῃ . . . , has in view the vindicatory or intercessory role of the Lord Jesus for believers at the last judgment. If the readers follow the leading of the Lord Jesus or obey his rule to love one another and all people, appropriating his enabling grace, he will establish them or help them securely stand (στηρίξαι) as blameless or unblameable in holiness before God at the last judgment. In Rom 8:31–34 Paul explicitly refers to such an intercessory role of Christ at the last judgment, and in 1 Cor 1:6–8 also he suggests it: “even as the testimony of Christ was confirmed [ἐβεβαιώθη] . . . as you wait for the revealing of our Lord Jesus Christ, who will also confirm [βεβαιώσει] you completely [ἕως τέλους] as irreproachable [ἀνεγκλήτους] in the day of our Lord Jesus Christ.”142 Thus, 1 Cor 1:8 builds a rather close parallel to our 1 Thess 3:13, the verb βεβαιώσει functioning like στηρίξαι in our verse. So, together with Rom 8:31–34, it supports our interpretation of the Lord Jesus Christ’s intercessory role at the last 139 140 141 142

Wanamaker, 144. Cf. Best, 150; also Frame, 138; Holtz, 145. Similarly RSV; NASB. For taking ἕως τέλους in the qualitative sense of “fully, completely” as in 2 Cor 1:13 (cf. the variant reading 46 τελείους) rather than the temporal sense of “to the end,” see Delling, TDNT 8:56; cf. Schlatter, Paulus, 65; Barrett, First Corinthians, 39, and O’Brien, Thanksgivings, 129, who see both senses.

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 305

7/12/23 11:28 AM

306

1 Thessalonians 3:11–13

judgment in our verse. Then we can also presume that Paul implies that role of Christ in 1 Thess 1:10: God’s Son Jesus will deliver us from God’s wrath at the last judgment through his intercession (as well as through his atonement). In view of the fact that in 1 Thess 4:13–5:11 Paul echoes several sayings of Jesus about the coming of the Son of Man (cf. also 1:10; see comments on these passages), it is likely that his reference to “the parousia of our Lord Jesus with all his holy ones” here also reflects those Son of Man sayings (cf. also the echoes of the Son of Man saying of Mark 10:45par. in 2:6–8; see Explanation there). So it is also likely that his idea of the Lord Jesus’s interceding for believers before the judgment seat of God at his parousia echoes especially the saying of the Son of Man’s coming in Mark 8:38parr. and Luke 12:8–9// Matt 10:32–33. If the readers are not ashamed of the Son of Man (the Lord Jesus) and his word even when under persecution (1 Thess 1:5–6; 2:13–14; 3:3–6) but rather remain faithful to him (3:6–8), keeping his command to love (v. 12), he will recognize them as his own disciples, supporting them to stand securely, indeed to stand as God’s blamelessly sanctified people (2:12; 3:12) before God’s judgment seat, when he comes with the angels (note well that Mark 8:38parr. and Luke 12:8–9 contain a reference to the accompanying angels). Thus the Lord Jesus or God’s Son (the “Son of Man” to whom God’s kingship is delegated according to Dan 7:9–14)143 would intercede for them before God the judge, so that they may obtain redemption from God’s wrath (1:10). In the correspondence, The testimony of Christ was confirmed (ἐβεβαιώθη) among you . . . our Lord Jesus Christ . . . will confirm (βεβαιώσει) you (1 Cor 1:6–8), we may also hear an echo of that Jesus tradition (cf. also 2 Tim 2:12; 1 John 2:22–28). So it appears that Paul developed the idea of the Lord Jesus’s intercession for or vindication of believers at the last judgment from that Son of Man saying and expresses that idea here in 1 Thess 3:12–13 (and in 1:6 + 10), echoing that saying of Jesus.144 In Phil 1:9–11 Paul prays for the Philippians in basically the same way as he does for the Thessalonians here. Pointing to Phil 1:6 and 2:16, Lightfoot correctly interprets the phrase εἰς ἡμέραν Χριστοῦ in Phil 1:10b as meaning “not ‘until,’ but ‘for the day of Christ.’ ”145 Paul uses the same phrase in that sense in Phil 2:16, while using in Phil 1:6 the preposition ἄχρι to indicate the period leading up to “the day of Christ Jesus.” There is a question whether ἀπρόσκοποι in Phil 1:10b is to be taken in an intransitive sense (“not stumbling,” cf. Acts 143 Cf. Kim, “Son of Man” as the Son of God. 144 For more details, see Kim, “Jesus’ Son of Man Sayings,” in PGTO, 137–42. There it is further argued that the Jesus tradition of Mark 8:38parr.; Luke 12:8–9//Matt 10:32–33 is reflected also in Rom 1:16 + 8:34 and Phil 1:19–20. 145 Lightfoot, Philippians, 87 (italics original).

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 306

7/12/23 11:28 AM

Explanation 307 24:16) or a transitive sense (“not causing anyone to stumble”). But since at the last judgment it would appear “blameworthy” if one “stumbles” oneself or “causes someone to stumble,” we may render the word with “blameless.”146 In any case, the phrase εἰλικρινεῖς (“pure”) καὶ ἀπρόσκοποι in Phil 1:10 as a whole may be seen as corresponding to ἄμεμπτος in our 1 Thess 3:13. So Phil 1:10–11 has the concern that the Philippians appear at the last judgment as “blameless” in righteousness (abounding in love or “filled with the fruit of righteousness”), just as our verse is concerned that the Thessalonians appear at the last judgment as “blameless in holiness” (“abounding in love,” v. 12). Staying in Phil 1:9–11, it is obvious that the clause εἰς τὸ δοκιμάζειν ὑμᾶς τὰ διαφέροντα (“so that you may approve what is excellent,” Phil 1:10a) goes with the preceding phrase, ἐν ἐπιγνώσειν καὶ πάσῃ αἰσθήσει (“with knowledge and all discernment,” Phil 1:9b). But the whole clause ἐν ἐπιγνώσει καὶ πάσῃ αἰσθήσει εἰς τὸ δοκιμάζειν ὑμᾶς τὰ διαφέροντα (Phil 1:9b–10a) is awkwardly attached to the preceding main clause that introduces the content of Paul’s prayer, καὶ τοῦτο προσεύχομαι, ἵνα ἡ ἀγάπη ὑμῶν ἔτι μᾶλλον καὶ μᾶλλον περισσεύῃ (“And this is my prayer that your love may abound more and more,” v. 9a). For it is not clear how the Philippians’ abounding love “with knowledge and all discernment” would lead them to “approve what is excellent” (while it is natural to understand simply “knowledge and all discernment” leading them to “approve what is excellent”). But then the whole clause of vv. 9b–10a creates a poor link also with the following final clause (vv. 10b–11), ἵνα ἦτε εἰλικρινεῖς καὶ ἀπρόσκοποι εἰς ἡμέραν Χριστοῦ (“so that you may be pure and blameless for the day of Christ”). Some versions147 try to smooth out the link by inserting the conjunction “and” between the two final clauses, εἰς τὸ δοκιμάζειν ὑμᾶς τὰ διαφέροντα and ἵνα ἦτε εἰλικρινεῖς καὶ ἀπρόσκοποι εἰς ἡμέραν Χριστοῦ.148 Other versions149 make the final clause of vv. 10b–11 dependent on the preceding final clause of vv. 9b–10a. But it appears much more natural to see the final clause of vv. 10b–11 connected with the main clause of v. 9a than with the final clause of vv. 9b–10, as those who insert “and” between the two final clauses implicitly assume. All these unsatisfactory attempts reflect the poor connection of the clause ἐν ἐπιγνώσει καὶ πάσῃ αἰσθήσει εἰς τὸ δοκιμάζειν ὑμᾶς τὰ διαφέροντα (vv. 9b–10a), both with the preceding main clause and with the following final clause. Therefore, it appears best to treat the whole clause ἐν ἐπιγνώσει καὶ πάσῃ αἰσθήσει εἰς τὸ δοκιμάζειν ὑμᾶς τὰ διαφέροντα as a subsidiary petition in parentheses, and see the main prayer as the main clause of v. 9a and the final clause of vv. 10b–11. Then, the whole passage of Phil 1:9–11 may be rendered thus: 146 147 148 149

So most English versions; cf. NJB: “free of any trace of guilt.” E.g., RSV; NIV; CEB. Cf. Hawthorne and Martin, Philippians, 16, who even combine them into one final clause. E.g., NRSV; NAB; NASB; NKJ; also O’Brien, Philippians, 72. Cf. Gnilka, Philipperbrief, 51, who even makes the prayer end with the final clause of vv. 9b–10a and treats the final clause of vv. 10b–11 as a new sentence.

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 307

7/12/23 11:28 AM

308

1 Thessalonians 3:11–13

This is my prayer that your love may abound more and more (with knowledge and all discernment, so that you may approve what is excellent), so that you may be pure and blameless for the day of Christ, filled with the fruit of righteousness that comes through Jesus Christ, to the glory and praise of God.

When Phil 1:9–11 is so analyzed, it turns out to be a close parallel to our passage, with Paul praying in both passages for the readers’ love to abound with the help of the Lord Jesus Christ, so that they may appear or stand “blameless” before God at the parousia of Christ. In Phil 1:9 he prays for the Philippians’ love to increase, using the same verb περισσεύειν as in our passage (1 Thess 3:12), but by using the verb as intransitive he does not explicitly refer to the Lord Jesus Christ as making them increase their love, unlike in our passage. However, his elaborative phrase in Phil 1:11, “filled with the fruit of righteousness τὸν διὰ Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ (‘that comes through Jesus Christ’),” makes it clear enough that it is Jesus Christ who makes the Philippians increase their love. Therefore, we can say that in Phil 1:9–11 Paul is, in effect, praying that [the Lord Jesus Christ make the Philippians] “increase [their] love more and more, so that [they] may be pure and blameless for the day of Christ, filled with the fruit of righteousness.” Thus, he offers essentially the same prayer for the Philippians as he does for the Thessalonians. The only significant difference for our purpose is that, unlike the final clause in our 1 Thess 3:13, the final clause in Phil 1:10b–11 does not make explicit Christ’s intercessory role at the last judgment, that is, the idea of Christ supporting the Philippians to stand securely as blameless before God (cf. Col 1:21–23, where God is seen as “presenting [believers] holy [ἁγίους] and unblemished [ἀμώμους] and irreproachable [ἀνεγκλήτους] before his presence [or judgment seat]”). However, a few verses later in Phil 1:19–20, echoing the Jesus tradition of Mark 8:38parr. and Luke 12:8–9//Matt 10:32–33, Paul expresses his resolution “not to be ashamed” (αἰσχυνθήσομαι) of the gospel but to “magnify” (μεγαλυνθήσεται) Christ “with all frank speech” (ἐν πάσῃ παρρησίᾳ) at his impending trial (before Caesar?), in full “knowledge” that there he will receive the “support [ἐπιχορηγία] of the Spirit of Jesus Christ” in answer to the prayers of the Philippians and will be vindicated and have his “deliverance” (σωτηρία).150 So Paul, expecting to use the idea of Christ’s intercession in terms of the help of Christ’s Spirit at his impending trial in Phil 1:19–20, may be omitting that idea here in Phil 1:9–11 in connection with the Philippian Christians’ justification at the last judgment. Even so, the overall parallelism between Paul’s prayers for the Philippians

150 For a more detailed exegesis of Phil 1:19–20, see Kim, “Jesus’ Son of Man Sayings,” in PGTO, 139.

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 308

7/12/23 11:28 AM

Explanation 309 and the Thessalonians confirms that the thought of making progress in justification or sanctification through Jesus Christ is all contained in the main clauses of the two prayers (Phil 1:9a//1 Thess 3:12) and that in their final clauses (Phil 1:10b–11//1 Thess 3:13) only the result of it is in view, not the process toward it. In the prayer for the Philippians, Paul marks “love” (Phil 1:9) as the inclusive representative of the whole “fruit of righteousness” (v. 11). He does the same in his prayer for the Thessalonians here, as he makes the Thessalonians’ abounding “love” as that which will lead the Lord Jesus to help them stand “blameless in holiness” at the last judgment, while preparing to expound the more specific requirements of holiness in the two remaining chapters of our epistle. This reflects the teaching that he imparts in Rom 13:8 (“he who loves the other has fulfilled the law”) and Gal 5:14 (“for the whole law has been fulfilled in the one command, ‘Love your neighbor as yourself’ ”), in both of which Paul probably alludes to Jesus’s double love command (Mark 12:28–34parr.).151 We have already observed that here, by teaching the readers to love “all people” as well as the members of their Christian community, he is probably also echoing Jesus’s command for enemy love (Matt 5:43–48//Luke 6:32–36; cf. 1 Thess 5:15; also Rom 12:20–21). However, here, besides Jesus’s teachings about love, Paul is probably also alluding to Lev 19:18, the OT basis of Jesus’s love command. This is made likely not only by his actual citation of the Levitical command “love your neighbor as yourself” in Rom 13:8–9 and Gal 5:14, but also by the fact that the laws for holiness in Lev 19 mark love of neighbor as central for a holy life of God’s people, thus establishing a vital connection between love and holiness, as in this prayer of Paul’s.152 Paul’s teaching here about the life of holiness according to Lev 19 suggests that sanctification is to be understood in the active terms of loving fellow human beings rather than merely avoiding the pollutions of this world and maintaining personal piety.153 The close parallelism between our passage, 1 Thess 3:12–13, and Phil 1:9–11 helps us also see the synonymity of “blameless in holiness” in 1 Thess 3:13 and “blameless” in righteousness in Phil 1:10b–11, which are both obtained through growth in loving and lead to acquittal at the last judgment. This fact has implications both for our understanding of the relationship between justification and sanctification and for our arguments for the implicit presence of the justification doctrine and its contextualization in the category of sanctification in 1 Thessalonians.154

151 152 153 154

Cf. Wanamaker, 144. Cf. Stettler, Heiligung, 221–22. Cf. Best, 151; Witherington, 103–4. See also Kim, “Gospel that Paul Preached,” in PGTO, 95–96, 122–28.

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 309

7/12/23 11:28 AM

310

1 Thessalonians 3:11–13

Justification and Sanctification Observe the following six facts: 1. Paul uses the language of blame/blamelessness or the language of accusation usually for righteousness/justification at the last judgment (Rom 8:31–38; 1 Cor 1:6–8 [ἀνέγκλητος]; Phil 1:10–11 [ἀπρόσκοπος]; 2:15 and 3:6 [ἄμεμπτος]), but here he uses it (ἄμεμπτος) for holiness/sanctification (cf. 5:23). In Col 1:22 he intermixes the judicial and cultic terms: ἅγιος καὶ ἄμωμος καὶ ἀνέγκλητος (cf. also Phil 2:15: ἄμεμπτος . . . ἄμωμος).155 Thus, he uses the same language of acquittal for the eschatological consummation of both justification (cf. Gal 5:5) and sanctification (cf. Rom 6:22). 2. Besides using the holiness/sanctification language in the context of the last judgment ([1.] above), Paul uses it in two more contexts: a. for the event of believers becoming consecrated to God as members of his holy people (“holy ones” or “saints”) through faith at baptism (e.g., Rom 1:7; 15:25, 31; 1 Cor 1:2; 6:11; 16:1; 2 Cor 1:1; 9:1; Phil 1:1; 1 Thess 4:7; 2 Thess 1:10; 2:13). b. for the process of living as God’s holy people in the present (e.g., Rom 6:19–22; 12:1; 1 Cor 3:17; 6:1–11, 19, 22; 7:34; 2 Cor 1:12; 1 Thess 2:12; 3:12–13; 4:3–8; 5:23). 3. Besides using the righteousness/justification language in the context of the last judgment ([1.] above), Paul uses it also in two more contexts: a. for the event of our being acquitted of sins and restored to a right relationship with God (i.e., becoming God’s people or children) through faith at baptism (e.g., Rom 5:1–2, 9; 6:7, 17–18; 8:1–2; 10:9–10; 1 Cor 6:11). b. for the process of living a righteous life in obedience to God in the present (e.g., Rom 6:13, 16–22; 8:4; 1 Cor 6:9; Phil 1:11). 4. So, the triple usage of the holiness/sanctification language corresponds to the triple usage of the righteousness/justification language; thus both justification and sanctification are spoken of as a past event at baptism (“already”), a present process, and the eschatological consummation at the last judgment (“not yet”). 5. Note the parallelism of sanctification and justification as the descriptions of what happens at baptism: “But you were washed, but you were sanctified, but you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and in the Spirit of our God” (1 Cor 6:11; cf. 1:30). 6. Paul uses the righteousness/justification language mainly in connection with “sin” and the law, while using the holiness/sanctification 155 Cf. F. Hauck, TDNT 4:829–31.

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 310

7/12/23 11:28 AM

Explanation 311 language mainly in connection with “idolatry,” “impurity,” or “shameful acts,” or when the acts of unrighteousness (ἀδικία) or sins are seen in terms of “impurity” or “shameful acts” (Rom 6:19–22; 1 Cor 6:9–11; 1 Thess 4:1–8). These six facts suggest that justification and sanctification are not to be understood in terms of ordo salutis—­the logical or temporal order of salvation, in which God’s justification obtained at baptism is to be followed by or issues in sanctified living in the present for ultimate salvation at the eschaton, as traditionally worked out in Protestant dogmatics—­but as two different but parallel metaphors for salvation, referring basically to the same reality of God making us his people. Justification expresses God’s salvation in Christ in terms of his forgiving/acquitting us of our sins (of having obeyed the god of this age/world, namely, Satan [cf. 2 Cor 4:4], and having transgressed God’s law) and making us his righteous people (i.e., the people restored to a right relationship with him, to his kingdom), while sanctification expresses God’s salvation in terms of his washing us of our pollution (of this world ruled by Satan) and making us his holy people (i.e., the people consecrated to him). Hence, both justification and sanctification are presented as having already taken place at our baptism when we confessed our faith in the gospel, as still needing to be consummated at the last judgment at the parousia of the Lord Jesus Christ, and therefore as structurally requiring us at present to go on living a righteous life, obeying God’s rule, worshiping God and conforming to his character (which involves both cultic and ethical purity, especially love of neighbor; cf. Lev 19).156 Note in Romans how Paul starts by declaring that God’s wrath is revealed for the gentiles for their idolatry, impurity, and shameful acts, as well as other acts of ἀδικία (1:18–32), but how in the ensuing chapters of the letter he presents salvation in Christ mainly in the category of justification, referring to sanctification only in Rom 6:19–22 (cf. 12:1–2). This fact (as well as the relative paucity of reference to sanctification in the Pauline corpus) seems to suggest that he thinks of salvation in Christ mainly in terms of justification because he perceives it fundamentally as redemption from God’s wrath at the last judgment (cf. also Rom 5:6–8; 8:1–4; 1 Thess 1:10; 5:9–10). For all these reasons, it is suggested that Paul’s presentation, in our verse 3:13, of the consummation of salvation at the last judgment in terms of “blamelessness in holiness” supports our argument presented above that in 1 Thessalonians Paul contextualizes in terms of sanctification his doctrine of salvation that he fundamentally thinks of in terms of justification, that is, acquittal and deliverance from God’s wrath at the last judgment (1:10; 5:9–10). In 1 Thessalonians, he makes this contextualization because his 156 Cf. Kim, Justification, 74–91; also H. Stettler, Heiligung, esp. 380–82, 515, 638–40.

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 311

7/12/23 11:28 AM

312

1 Thessalonians 3:11–13

gentile converts in Thessalonica are facing the danger of idolatry and moral impurities in their pagan environment rather than the Judaizers’ demand to keep the law of Moses (note well the absence both of the word “sin” and of reference to the law in 1 Thessalonians).157 Regarding the relationship between justification and sanctification, we need to note also that Rom 6:19–22 gives not only the impression that justification and sanctification are parallel concepts, but also the impression that justification leads to sanctification. For we are told to “present [our] members as slaves to righteousness” (i.e., “to God”) and bear the “fruit [of righteousness, cf. Phil 1:11] for/unto [εἰς] sanctification.” Perhaps this latter impression has led theologians to understand sanctification as a stage following justification in the ordo salutis. But this impression created by the two verses, Rom 6:19 and 22, does not outweigh the evidence that has been observed above as pointing to their parallelism.

The Trinitarian Structure of Sanctification Finally, we may note that here Paul indicates that the Lord Jesus is he who helps the readers abound in love for their sanctification. In the immediately following section, namely, 4:1–8, he will teach that their sanctification is God’s will and that God gives them the Holy Spirit for their sanctification. Then, at the letter closing (5:23–24), offering an abbreviated form of the present wish-­prayer (3:12–13), he attributes their sanctification directly to God himself. In this way, Paul implicitly suggests the Trinitarian structure of their sanctification: God works out his will (our sanctification) through his agent (the Lord Jesus) by the power of his Holy Spirit. The unobtrusive spontaneity with which all these are laid out by Paul and other NT writers is more eloquent than any formal creedal formula of the Trinity could be. We cannot miss the startling implications of the use of such language by one with Paul’s Pharisaic background. His reassessment of Christ, in contrast to his former estimate of him before his Damascus road encounter with him, had been revolutionary indeed (cf. 2 Cor 5:16).158 *** In sum, through Paul’s preaching of the gospel God elected the readers to be his people (1:4) and called them into his kingdom to share his glory (2:12). This was his call for them to be his holy people (4:3, 7). Hence, they must 157 Cf. Kim, “Gospel That Paul Preached,” in PGTO, esp. 122–28 (section 20, “Contextualization of the Justification Doctrine in 1 Thessalonians and 1 & 2 Corinthians, the Post-­Jerusalem Council and Post-­A ntiochian Controversy Epistles”). 158 For a more detailed discussion, see Kim, “Gospel That Paul Preached,” in PGTO, 85–87 (section 11, “The Lord’s Present Work of Salvation through the Power of the Holy Spirit”); cf. also Kim, Justification, 94–101, with footnotes there.

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 312

7/12/23 11:28 AM

Explanation 313 go on living a holy life and grow in sanctification for its consummation at the last judgment. For this ultimate salvation they are “to lead a life in a manner worthy of God” here and now (2:12). They live such a life by loving one another, and even outsiders, by the power of the Holy Spirit according to the commandment of God (4:8–12) or the “law of Christ” (1 Cor 9:21; Gal 6:2), which is summarized in the double command of love—­love for God and for neighbor (1 Cor 8:1–3; 10:31–33). To the Lord Jesus Christ, who has commanded believers to love God with their whole being and their neighbor as themselves (Mark 12:28–34parr.), Paul prays, to help the readers live a holy life of dedication to God and of love of fellow human beings from the bottom of their hearts here and now, so that he may support them to stand “blameless in holiness” before God’s judgment seat at his parousia, and, thus justified, may be delivered from God’s wrath (1 Thess 1:10; 5:9) and enter into the glory of the consummated kingdom of God (2:12). So the Lord Jesus commands them to love all people (as well as God), enables them (through his Spirit, the Holy Spirit, cf. 4:8; Rom 8:1–17; Gal 5:16–24) to do the actual loving (1 Thess 3:12), and intercedes for the consummation of their sanctification/ justification at the last judgment (1:10; 3:13). Thus, 3:12–13 and the related passages in 1 Thessalonians contain all the main elements of Paul’s doctrine of justification properly understood (i.e., understood not only anthropocentrically or soteriologically, as done traditionally, but also theocentrically or christologically) within the eschatological framework of “already” (the firstfruits at baptism) but “not yet” (the consummation at the last judgment)—­minus the initial stage of the proleptic justification at baptism, which is implied in 2 Thess 1:5–12 and 2:9–17 and clearly explained in Galatians and Romans.159 Here in our 3:12–13 (as in Phil 1:9–11), Paul is concerned with the Thessalonian Christians’ present process of justification/sanctification, which will lead to their obtaining the ultimate verdict of “blamelessness.” So he prays that the Lord Jesus make them abound in love for all (i.e., bear the fruit of righteousness) in the present process of their justification/sanctification, so that he may intercede for them before the judgment seat of God the Father and they may obtain the verdict of being perfectly righteous or holy (cf. 5:23) to participate in God’s glory. Just as the baptismal justification/sanctification is by the grace of the triune God and through our faith, so also the present process of justification/sanctification is carried through by the Lord Jesus’s (or his Spirit’s) grace (2 Thess 1:11–12; 2:16–17, with comment ad loc) that enables our “obedience of faith” (Rom 1:5; 2 Cor 9:13; 2 Thess 1:8 with comment ad loc) or “work of faith” (1:3; 2 Thess 1:11), and the end-­time justification (the consummation of justification) is also by the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ’s intercession. So justification or sanctification is sola gratia and sola fide.160 159 See Kim, “Paul’s Doctrine of Justification in 2 Thessalonians 1–2,” in PGTO, 279–93. 160 For all these points, see Kim, Justification.

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 313

7/12/23 11:28 AM

9780785250210_01_00i-314_WBC_Thess_int.indd 314

7/12/23 11:28 AM

III. Part 2: The Exhortations (4:1–5:24) Bibliography Bjerkelund, C. J. Parakalô: Form, Funktion und Sinn der Parakalô-­Sätze in den paulinischen Briefen. Bibliotheca Theologica Norvegica 1. Oslo: Universitetsforlaget, 1967. Boers, H. “The Form-­Critical Study of Paul’s Letters: 1 Thessalonians as a Case Study.” NTS 22 (1976): 140–58. Hughes, F. W. “The Rhetoric of 1 Thessalonians.” Pages 94–116 in The Thessalonian Correspondence. Edited by R. J. Collins. BETL 87. Leuven: Leuven University Press, 1990. —­—­— ­. “The Rhetoric of Letters.” Pages 194–240 in The Thessalonians Debate: Methodological Discord or Methodological Synthesis? Edited by K. P. Donfried and J. Beutler. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2000.

According to the rhetorical analysis of Wanamaker, this second main division of the letter is the probatio built upon the narratio of the first division (2:1–3:10).1 He views 4:1–2 as the proposition, and the remaining section (4:3–5:22) is said to consist of a set of proofs demonstrating the proposition. Wanamaker claims that since in this section Paul affirms his readers’ current behavior rather than correcting it, the paraenesis is epideictic rhetoric. In 4:1–2 Paul certainly introduces, in a summary form, his paraenetic concerns to be unfolded in the following. But what follows contains not only affirmative material but also deliberative or corrective material, so that they can hardly be called “proofs” or arguments for an epideictic rhetorical thesis. Therefore, it appears strange to describe the opening verses as the proposition. Here it is noteworthy that Witherington, while assuming our epistle to have been written according to the canons of ancient rhetorical handbooks, avoids calling the section of 4:1–5:15 probatio but calls it merely exhortatio.2 Since Wanamaker sees our section as the probatio, it appears logical for him to take it as the main body of the letter.3 However, Wanamaker criticizes H. Boers for doing that, saying that that view which Boers presents through his epistolary form-­criticism “represents a failure to fully appreciate the importance of the narratio section of the letter as implicit parenesis through philophronesis.”4 But this appears incongruous with his own earlier statement

1 2 3

4

Wanamaker, 146–47. Witherington, 106. Cf. F. W. Hughes, “The Rhetoric of Letters,” 227, who writes that in the Greco-­Roman rhetorical handbooks “the proof (probatio) is considered the most important part of the rhetorical discourse, truly its sine qua non. The proof is the core of the discourse; everything that goes before it leads up to it, and the peroratio (conclusion or epilogue) serves to underscore it.” Wanamaker, 147, criticizing Boers, “Form-­Critical Study,” 156. Cf. also Bjerkelund, Parakalô, 134–35.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 315

7/12/23 11:29 AM

316

1 Thessalonians 4:1–5:24

that the narratio (2:1–3:10) has “the philophronetic intention of reestablishing Paul’s relationship with his converts” and that “his friendship with his readers then becomes the basis for his exhortation in 4:1–5:22.”5 If this view of the relationship between the two sections is right, then 4:1–5:22 must indeed be the main body of the letter. So Malherbe is more consistent with his explicit statement that chs. 1–3 are an introduction to chs. 4–5 and the latter represent Paul’s “main purpose in writing the letter.”6 Yet then would Paul have started the main body with λοιπὸν οὖν rather than with just οὖν (“therefore, then”)? Here, λοιπόν may not have the temporal sense of “finally,” which signals that what follows it is a mere appendix (cf. λοιπόν in 2 Cor 13:11 or τὸ λοιπόν in Phil 4:8; 2 Thess 3:1), but at least with its nuance of adding some “remaining” concerns, it certainly doesn’t signal that it is the main body of the letter, either (see comment on 4:1). As we have argued above (II.3.H. of the Introduction), the fact that the main themes of chs. 4–5 (love, holiness, the eschatological hope) are announced at the end of the thanksgiving section (3:11–13), as well as the fact that Paul gives those themes a careful treatment in great length, leads us to see chs. 4–5 not as a mere appendix but as constituting the second part of the main body of the epistle, along with its first part in chs. 1–3. However, not only the opening phrase of the second part, λοιπὸν οὖν, but also a comparison of the nature of the subject matters of the two parts and Paul’s manner of dealing with them clearly suggest that chs. 1–3 are the primary part and chs. 4–5 the secondary.7 Witherington, following F. W. Hughes, who offers a rhetorical analysis of our epistle that is quite similar to that of Wanamaker, seeks to understand not only Paul’s ethical exhortations in our section but also the two eschatological teachings (4:13–18 and 5:1–11) in terms of the consolatory speeches usually contained in epideictic rhetoric.8 Witherington asserts, “Epideictic rhetoric by its very nature often involved pertinent general instructions and reflections and wishes about fundamental matters rather than engaging in solving some particular problem.”9 However, it is difficult to believe that some of the ethical problems that Paul treats in our section, especially the readers’ despairing grief about their fellows who died before the Lord’s parousia (4:13–18) and their anxiety about the date of the day of the Lord (5:1–11), are not “particular problems” of the Thessalonians that Paul had to correct but merely

5 6 7 8

9

Wanamaker, 146; cf. also 49–50. Malherbe, 216. Cf. also Schubert, Form and Function, 26; Fee, 139. Witherington, 107 (following Hughes, “The Rhetoric of 1 Thessalonians,” 107). Cf. the recent essay by D. Luckensmeyer and N. Neil, “Reading First Thessalonians as a Consolatory Letter,” 31–48, which attempts to read the whole letter as a consolatory letter—­not very convincingly in our judgment. Witherington, 107.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 316

7/12/23 11:29 AM

Bibliography 317 parts of “general instructions and reflections and wishes” or “funeral speech” and “consolatory speech” that Paul offers as required in epideictic rhetoric.10 With his adherence to the canons of ancient epideictic rhetoric, Witherington weakens the specificity of Paul’s exhortations and instructions here, and in the case of the eschatological instructions, he even robs their urgency. It will be shown below that in chs. 4–5 Paul gives some instructions specific for the Thessalonian church, and that even while imparting many common exhortations that he imparts to other churches as well, he adapts them to the specific needs of the Thessalonian church. Thus, despite some of the helpful insights of rhetorical criticism (e.g., a better appreciation of the strong affirmative elements in the epistle) and form criticism (e.g., a proper appreciation of the typical form and function of the thanksgiving section and the paraenetic section), it seems unwise to force our epistle as a whole into the procrustean bed of ancient rhetorical handbooks (e.g., understanding 2:1–3:10 as narratio and thus the preparatory part and 4:3–5:24 as probatio and thus the main part) or epistolary form criticism (e.g., failing to recognize the unique structure of our epistle, in which the thanksgiving section is extended to form the whole first and primary part of 1:2–3:10, and mistakenly designating part of it, namely, 2:17–3:10, as “apostolic parousia.” See p. 81n84 and p. 101n128 above; also Form/Structure/Setting to 2:17–3:13 above). Hence, unfettered from the schemes of those methods, we simply observe in the letter that, having expressed in the first part (1:2–3:10) his most urgent pastoral concerns for his readers—­that they remain firm in their faith with their positive appreciation of his eisodos despite the opponents’ slander campaign against him and the gospel, Paul now goes on in the second part (4:1–5:24) to build up their faith. He does this by imparting in writing the encouragement and instructions that he would deliver orally, were it possible for him to come to them (3:10). Their themes are holiness (4:1–8), love (4:9– 12), and the parousia of the Lord Jesus Christ (4:13–5:11), as he adumbrated in the transitional prayer of 3:12–13. He then concludes the letter by delivering further instructions for an orderly communal life of worship and fellowship within the church (5:12–22) and a wish-­prayer (5:23–24), which forms an inclusio with the transitional prayer of 3:12–13.

10 Pace Hughes, “The Rhetoric of 1 Thessalonians,” 107; cf. also Wanamaker, 146, rejecting a similar view of H. Koester, “1 Thessalonians,” 38–40; cf. further Weima, 248.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 317

7/12/23 11:29 AM

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 318

7/12/23 11:29 AM

1. Life That Pleases God (4:1–12) A. Introduction (4:1–2) Bibliography Bjerkelund, C. J. Parakalô: Form, Funktion und Sinn der Parakalô-­Sätze in den paulinischen Briefen. Bibliotheca Theologica Norvegica 1. Oslo: Universitetsforlaget, 1967. Dibelius, M. From Tradition to Gospel. New York: Scribner’s, 1935. Kim, S. “Paul’s Common Paraenesis (1 Thess. 4–5; Phil. 2–4; and Rom. 12–13): The Correspondence between Romans 1:18–32 and 12:1–2, and the Unity of Romans 12–13.” TynBul 62 (2011): 109–39. Reprint in pages 254–77 in PGTO.

Translation For the rest, then,a brothers and sisters, we request and appeal to you in the Lord Jesus that,b as you have received from us the way to conduct yourselves so as to please God, even as you do conduct yourselves,c you may abound more and more (in this kind of conduct). 2For you know what commands we gave you through the Lord Jesus. 1

Notes a. οὖν is omitted by B* 33 629 1739* lat vg. codd syr pesh copbo. b. ἵνα is omitted by ‫ א‬A D2 Ψ byz syrhcl. c. The clause καθὼς καὶ περιπατεῖτε is omitted by D2 Ψ byz syr pesh.

Form/Structure/Setting The paraenetic division of the letter now begins. In these two verses (4:1–2), Paul exhorts the readers to live in a way that pleases God, stressing that they should do this in accordance with the instructions that he gave them during his founding mission in their city. It is easily recognizable that these two verses, placed at the head of the second main part of the letter, are meant to provide the introduction to what follows. However, it is a question whether they introduce (1) only 4:3–8, (2) 4:3–12, or (3) the whole paraenetic division of chs. 4–5. Pointing to the fact that the exhortation “to live in a way pleasing to God” is the overall summary statement, Weima argues for the second option, taking the exhortations of the two sections 4:3–8 (to maintain sexual holiness within marriage) and 4:9–12 (to love fellow believers and be considerate to outsiders) as subsumed under that summary statement.1 But by the same token, the exhortations in 4:13–5:11 (to comfort one another and live a sober life in the assurance of salvation at the parousia) and the exhortations in 5:12–22 (to maintain a disciplined and harmonious life of worship and fellowship in the church) should be seen as subsumed under it. 1

Weima, 250–51.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 319

7/12/23 11:29 AM

320

1 Thessalonians 4:1–2

Hence, 4:1–2 is an introduction not just to 4:3–12 but to the whole paraenetic division of chs. 4–5, as most commentators recognize.2 Therefore, the two verses (4:1–2) are to be taken as a summary heading like Rom 12:1–2, which introduces the whole paraenetic division of Rom 12:1–15:13. This view is confirmed by the parallelism between Paul’s summary representations of his exhortations here in 1 Thess 4:1 and in Rom 12:1, respectively, in terms of “living in the way pleasing [ἀρέσκειν] to God” and “presenting your bodies as a living sacrifice holy and well-­pleasing [εὐάρεστον] to God.”3 It is further supported by the close parallels among 1 Thess 5:12–24; Rom 12:9–21; and Phil 4:2–9 as well as among their wider contexts, 1 Thess 4–5; Rom 12–15; and Phil 3:17–4:9, which I have shown in my essay, “Paul’s Common Paraenesis” (see Bibliography above). That study led me to conclude that Paul had a set of spiritual and moral exhortations for all the churches, and it also helped me better appreciate his adaptations of the common paraenesis to the varying needs of different churches. For example, note his expansion of the parousia theme and its moral implications in 1 Thess 4:13–5:11 (cf. Rom 13:11–14; Phil 3:20–21; 4:5b), his exhortation concerning prophecy in 1 Thess 5:19–22 (absent in both Romans and Philippians), and his lengthy expansion of the theme of non-­retaliation and “living peaceably with all” in Rom 12:14–13:10 (and further in Rom 14–15; cf. 1 Thess 5:15; Phil 4:5). In 1 Cor 4:17 (cf. also 1 Cor 11:2; Phil 4:9; 2 Thess 2:15; 3:6), Paul explicitly refers to his common paraenesis, his common teaching for a proper Christian way of life (“my ways in Christ [which] I teach everywhere in every church”), and, by saying that he sent Timothy to “remind” his erring converts of it, he implies that he had taught it to the Corinthians during his founding mission in their city (cf. 1 Cor 4:14–16). So just as he had the common gospel that he preached everywhere (1 Cor 15:1–11), so also he had the common paraenesis that he taught everywhere. Therefore, in Thessalonica also he preached the common gospel (cf. 1:9–10; 4:14; 5:10; also 2 Thess 2:15) and taught the common paraenesis when he founded their church (1 Thess 2:11–12; 4:1b, 2, 6, 11). And he sent Timothy to the Thessalonian believers, just as he would later do to the Corinthian believers, to establish their faith firmly, no doubt by reminding them of his paraenesis as well as his gospel (3:2–3). Timothy had returned to Paul with the good report that, despite the non-­Christian opponents’ persecution, they “are [still] walking” along Paul’s “way(s)” (4:1c, 10a; for correspondence between 1 Cor 4:17 and 1 Thess 4:1, see also comment on the latter below). Yet Timothy also reported that they needed improvement overall (3:10; 4:1d, 10b) and required more clarification, encouragement, and exhortation in such areas as sexual holiness, relating to outsiders, order and discipline 2 3

E.g., Marshall, 103; Malherbe, 217; Green, 182; Fee, 138. Cf. W. Foerster, TDNT 1:455–57.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 320

7/12/23 11:29 AM

Comment 321 within the church, practice of prophecy, and especially regarding the hope of the parousia of the Lord. Hence, in the second part of this epistle Paul addresses these issues, reminding them of his original teaching. Therefore, his paraenetic teachings in chs. 4–5 of our epistle, while sharing many essential parallels with those in Rom 12–15 and Phil 3:17–4:9 (no doubt also with those scattered throughout the Corinthian correspondence; cf. also the “fruit of the Spirit” in Gal 5:22–23), still have distinctive characteristics specifically related to the situation of the Thessalonian Christians.4

Comment 4:1 Λοιπὸν οὖν, ἀδελφοί, “For the rest, then, brothers and sisters.” With the adverbial phrase and the vocative, Paul makes a transition to the second part of the letter (cf. Phil 3:1; 2 Thess 3:1). In several Pauline letters, paraenetic division (teaching about a life worthy of God or his gospel) follows, and is logically dependent on, a preceding doctrinal division (exposition of the gospel; see Rom 12:1–15:13; Gal 5:1–6:10; Eph 4:1–6:20; Col 3:1–4:6). It is therefore appropriately introduced with οὖν, “therefore” (cf. Rom 12:1; Gal 5:1; Eph 4:1; Col 3:1, 5). However, in this epistle the preceding part (chs. 1–3) is not a doctrinal part, and οὖν appears not alone but accompanied by λοιπόν, something unique in the Pauline epistles. Most English versions render the adverbially used adjective λοιπόν with “finally.” However, some commentators, finding that temporal sense inappropriate because chs. 4–5 introduced by that word are long and the concerns contained in them substantial, take it in the inferential sense (“therefore”) like οὖν. Some of them explain the transitional phrase λοιπὸν οὖν as drawing an inference from the immediately preceding 3:10–13. The readers still have some deficiencies in their faith to fill up in order to appear “blameless in holiness” at the last judgment; therefore, Paul decides to deliver his exhortations in the following section.5 But if Paul means this, he would use οὖν alone, as usual. Actually, even the inferential οὖν alone would have made a very awkward connection with the prayer of 3:10–13: “May the Lord make you increase and abound in love to one another and to all human beings . . . so that he may support your hearts to stand securely, as blameless in holiness, before our God and Father. . . . Therefore, we beseech you and exhort you in the Lord Jesus . . .” Hence, it appears best to take λοιπόν in the sense of “for what remains” or “for the rest,” οὖν in the weak inferential sense (“then”), and λοιπὸν οὖν as

4

5

Cf. Malherbe, 81–82, 222–23, against M. Dibelius, From Tradition to Gospel, 238–39, who sees Paul’s paraenesis as reflecting the common, general teaching of the early church, little related to the distinctive features of Paul’s theology or to the situations of his local churches. Cf. Weima, 254; cf. also Malherbe, 218, although he extends the reference of the phrase to the whole of 3:6–13.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 321

7/12/23 11:29 AM

322

1 Thessalonians 4:1–2

linked to the whole first part of the epistle, as most commentators do.6 Paul has completed, in the first part of the letter (chs. 1–3), his consolidation of the readers’ faith, which is his primary concern in this epistle, and so now moves on to provide them with some exhortations for a proper practice of that faith in the second part (chs. 4–5). So it is quite appropriate to begin the second part of the epistle with the transitional phrase that combines the sequential adverb λοιπόν with an inferential οὖν. In λοιπόν here we may feel Paul’s sense of relief that he has completed dealing with the subject matter of chs. 1–3, the most urgent and anxious concern for him, fully and satisfactorily. The vocative ἀδελφοί (“brothers and sisters”) is used often in this letter to mark a transition and/or to convey affection (1:4; 2:1, 9, 14, 17; 3:7; 4:1, 10b, 13; 5:1, 12, 14, 25; cf. also 3:2; 4:6, 10a; 5:26, 27). On Paul’s intent to create community cohesion among his new converts in Thessalonica through this family language, see comment on 1:4.7 ἐρωτῶμεν, “we request” (cf. 5:12). The verb ἐρωτᾶν, used in classical Greek only of asking a question, has the additional sense of making a request in Hellenistic Greek. (With the doublet ἐρωτῶμεν . . . καὶ παρακαλοῦμεν, cf. Latin oramus atque obsecramus.) παρακαλοῦμεν, “we appeal” (cf. v. 10; 5:14; 2 Thess 3:12). This verb is somewhat more emphatic or formal than ἐρωτῶμεν. Paul tends to use παρακαλῶ at turning points in his argument, especially when he is launching into a paraenetic phase in his correspondence (e.g., Rom 12:1; 1 Cor 1:10; 2 Cor 6:1; 10:1; Eph 4:1). Bjerkelund finds a recurrent epistolary formula in Hellenistic Greek, where παρακαλῶ or παρακαλοῦμεν is followed by a vocative (like ἀδελφοί here), a prepositional phrase (in official letters to indicate the source of authority, though not in private letters; here, ἐν κυρίῳ Ἰησοῦ), and a request or command expressed in the infinitive (like περισσεύειν κτλ. in vv. 10, 11) or by means of ἵνα with the subjunctive (as here).8 Paul seems to have adopted the formula as it was mediated through Hellenistic Judaism (e.g., 2 Macc 9:26; Josephus, Ant. 8.51–52). Pointing out that the “appeal formula” with this verb παρακαλεῖν softens the impression of authoritarian “command” that exhortations could have and that Paul’s combined use of ἐρωτᾶν and παρακαλεῖν (only here in the Pauline corpus) strengthens the friendlier tone further, Weima comments well: “Paul is not commanding his readers in a domineering manner but asking and appealing to them. Nevertheless, the use of both verbs in the same formula adds a certain emphasis to the appeal that is being made.”9 ἐν κυρίῳ Ἰησοῦ, “in the Lord Jesus.” Having been transferred from the kingdom of Satan to the kingdom of the Lord Jesus, God’s Son (Col 1:13–14), 6

E.g., Lightfoot, 51; Best, 154; Holtz, 151; Morris, 113–14; Witherington, 110; Fee, 139; Schreiber, I:210. 7 Cf. also Wanamaker, 147–48; Weima, 256. 8 Bjerkelund, Parakalô, 34–58. 9 Weima, 255–56.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 322

7/12/23 11:29 AM

Comment 323 by their confession of Jesus as Lord at their baptism (Rom 10:9–10), both Paul and the readers are now “in the Lord Jesus,” in the sphere of and under the lordship of Jesus. In that realm, Paul has been called to be an apostle, an agent entrusted with the authority of the Lord Jesus to exercise it on his behalf (cf. 1 Thess 2:4, 6) and bring about the “obedience of faith” to him, the Lord Jesus, among all the nations (Rom 1:1–5). Hence, “in the Lord,” Paul the apostle exercises the authority of the Lord Jesus to exhort the readers to render their “obedience of faith” to the Lord, and “in the Lord” they must heed the exhortations that Paul issues on the Lord’s behalf (cf. Phil 4:2). It appears that Paul uses the prepositional formula “in the Lord Jesus” here with this dual reference in mind, while he uses in the following v. 2 the formula διὰ τοῦ κυρίου Ἰησοῦ (“through the Lord Jesus”), as there he needs to refer only to the authority of the Lord Jesus that has been entrusted to him.10 The conjunction ἵνα, left hanging for a moment, is repeated and completed at the end of the sentence (ἵνα . . . περισσεύητε μᾶλλον, “that you may abound more and more”). Paul starts to state the content of his exhortation with ἵνα, but, eager to affirm that it is the renewal of what his readers have already received from him and that they are already living in accordance with it, he first puts these matters in the two parenthetical καθώς clauses. But then the content of his exhortation (“to walk so as to please God”) is already named in the first of the καθώς clauses. So when he comes to state it by resuming the ἵνα, he gives up repeating it but just underlines it: “you may abound the more.” καθὼς παρελάβετε, “as you received.” Often forming a pair with “deliver” (παραδιδόναι; cf. 1 Cor 11:23; 15:3; 2 Thess 2:15; note well ἐδώκαμεν in v. 2), “receive” (παραλαμβάνειν) is a technical term for receiving a tradition (see comment on 2:13 and 2 Thess 3:6–9). Paul delivered to the Thessalonians the gospel of God’s kingdom and its corollary, a teaching how they ought “to walk worthily of God who calls [them] into his own kingdom and glory” (1 Thess 2:11–12 with comment ad loc). They accepted the gospel and the accompanying teaching as God’s word (v. 13). Here, Paul focuses on the latter, the teaching on the life that befits the people of God. τὸ πῶς δεῖ ὑμᾶς περιπατεῖν, “how you ought to walk.” The τό introduces a noun clause (more precisely, an indirect question; cf. Acts 4:21, τὸ πῶς κολάσωνται αὐτούς) as the object of the verb παρελάβετε (“you received”); however, its presence or absence makes no difference to the sense. For the metaphorical and ethical use of περιπατεῖν (“walk”), note 2:12, with comment there. For non-­Pauline instances in the NT, compare Acts 21:21 (τοῖς ἔθεσιν περιπατεῖν, “to observe the customs”); 1 John 2:6 (ὁ λέγων ἐν αὐτῷ μένειν ὀφείλει καθὼς ἐκεῖνος περιπάτησεν καὶ αὐτὸς οὕτως περιπατεῖν, “he who says he abides in him ought to walk in the same way in which he walked”). 10 Cf. Marshall, 104; Wanamaker, 148; Fee, 140; Weima, 256.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 323

7/12/23 11:29 AM

324

1 Thessalonians 4:1–2

περιπατεῖν καὶ ἀρέσκειν θεῷ, a hendiadys, “to walk and to please God” meaning “to walk so as to please God.” This flows from the fundamental OT idea that human conduct should please God, which is, in the LXX, frequently expressed in terms of ἀρέσκειν and its cognates (e.g., εὐάρεστος, εὐαρεστεῖν; see, e.g., Gen 5:22, 24; 6:9; 17:1; 24:40; 48:15; Pss 35:14 [34:14 LXX]; 56:13 [55:14 LXX]; 116:9 [114:9 LXX]).11 Paul frequently uses ἀρέσκειν for human duty to God (besides our verse, already in 2:4, 15 of this letter, and further Rom 8:8; 1 Cor 7:32–34; Gal 1:10; also Rom 12:2; 2 Cor 5:9). See comment on 2:4, 15. The present τὸ πῶς clause is a paraphrase of the earlier phrase in 2:12, “to walk [περιπατεῖν, as here] worthily of God . . . ,” and a summary of the exhortations to be unfolded in the following paraenetic section of chs. 4–5 (cf. Rom 12:1–2). It could also be seen as an unfolding of what Paul refers to as his “ways [ὁδοί] in Christ” that he “teaches everywhere in every church” (1 Cor 4:17), the noun “way” (ὁδός) there corresponding to the verb “walk” (περιπατεῖν) here, as both were often used in the LXX and later Jewish literature metaphorically for life conduct.12 Thus, what Paul says in our verse and in 1 Cor 4:17 suggests that he had a common paraenesis for all his churches, which we have attempted to verify by examining the parallels that exist in his exhortations in Romans, Philippians, and 1 Thessalonians (see Form/Structure/Setting above).13 καθὼς καὶ περιπατεῖτε, “even as you do walk.” Paul affirms that the Thessalonians are already fulfilling his prayers or exhortations (cf. v. 10; 5:11). ἵνα περισσεύητε μᾶλλον, “that you may abound the more.” This repeats the earlier ἵνα and completes the ἵνα clause: “that you may abound the more (in the kind of conduct that pleases God).” Paul already taught his readers “how” they “ought to conduct themselves so as to please God” during his ministry in Thessalonica, and they “received” it from him as a piece of tradition. From Timothy’s report he knows that they are maintaining their Christian walk of life according to his teaching (3:6). By affirming them in this, he tries to encourage them to accept his following exhortations more readily (see further 4:10; 5:11).14 Since they are conducting themselves so as to please God, he needs only to underline it: “that you may abound the more.” Paul interrupts his exhortation (the ἵνα clause) with two καθώς clauses. He does this first because he wants to state that the exhortations in chs. 4–5 are not new but essentially those that he already delivered to the readers. Second, he does this because he wants to summarize the exhortations in one word as a thesis (as in Rom 12:1–2) before actually reissuing them with elaboration. 11 Cf. W. Foerster, TDNT 1:455–57. 12 Cf. W. Michaelis, TDNT 5:48–65; esp. 58–59n48; G. Bertram, TDNT 5:941–43; H. Seesemann, TDNT 5:943–45. 13 Cf. also Kim, “Paul’s Common Paraenesis.” 14 Cf. Malherbe, 220.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 324

7/12/23 11:29 AM

Explanation 325 Finally, he does this because he wants to compliment the readers for their compliance with his exhortations and motivate them to do it further. 2 οἴδατε γάρ, “for you know.” Once again (cf. 1:5; 2:1, 2, 5, 11; 3:3, 4; 5:2) the readers are reminded of what they already know. Before setting out his instructions, Paul often emphasizes that he has already delivered the instructions and that the readers therefore already know them (4:6; cf. 1 Cor 3:16; 6:9, 15; Gal 5:21).15 Contrast the affirmative tone of this “you know” formula here with the rebuking tone of the recurring “do you not know that . . . ?” formula in 1 Cor 3:16; 5:6; 6:2, 3, 9, 15, 16, 19 (cf. also 9:13, 24; see above the comments on 1:5). τίνας παραγγελίας ἐδώκαμεν ὑμῖν διὰ τοῦ κυρίου Ἰησοῦ, “what commands we gave you through the Lord Jesus.” These commands are the paraenetic instructions that Paul said he had given the readers “to walk worthily of God” in 2:11–12 (see comment ad loc), and he will expound them again below (4:6, 11, and implicitly also in the rest of chs. 4–5). There is an authoritative note about the word παραγγελία (“command”), originally a military term, and its verbal form παραγγέλλειν (v. 11; 1 Cor 7:10; 11:17; 2 Thess 3:4, 6, 10, 12).16 Malherbe’s attempt to weaken the sense of παραγγελία to “precept” here is determined more by his assumption about Hellenistic letters of cordial friendship than by a fair exegesis of this verse.17 For the authoritative note of παραγγελία is still further enhanced by the following phrase, διὰ τοῦ κυρίου Ἰησοῦ. This phrase, “through the Lord Jesus,” probably means “with the authority of the Lord Jesus” and refers both to the fact that he has been commissioned as his apostle (cf. 1 Cor 7:25) and that the commands originate from the Lord Jesus (cf. 1 Cor 7:10). Paul can impart the commands with the authority of the Lord Jesus because they are in fact the Lord’s commands that he as his apostle represents (for similar Pauline expressions with διά especially strengthening παρακαλῶ, cf. Rom 12:1; 15:30; 1 Cor 1:10; 2 Cor 10:1). The apostolic command does not derive from the apostle himself; it is “the command [ἐντολή] of the Lord” (1 Cor 14:37), and therefore it is to be obeyed as such.18 Note the change in tone between ἐρωτῶμεν . . . καὶ παρακαλοῦμεν in v. 1 and παραγγελίας ἐδώκαμεν here: during his mission to Thessalonica, he delivered the “commands” of the Lord to the converts there (cf. also v. 11), and he now “requests and exhorts” them to live in accordance with them to “please God.”

Explanation In this summary introduction of the exhortations that he is to impart in the whole of chs. 4–5, Paul uses several ways to build up a strong stress on the 15 Cf. Dobschütz, 158; Marshall, 105. 16 So Schmitz, TDNT 5:764, and most commentators. See Explanation of 2 Thess 3:6–13 below for the significance of Paul’s use of the term. 17 Malherbe, 222. 18 Cf. Holtz, 154.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 325

7/12/23 11:29 AM

326

1 Thessalonians 4:3–8

need for the readers to heed his exhortations: the double form of “requesting and exhorting” (v. 1a), the repeated reference to his previous instruction (vv. 1b, 2), the strong term (“command”) for it, and the repeated appeal to the Lord Jesus. This great stress appears to reflect his strong concern about the readers staying on the right path of Christian living and not erring under the pressure of the pagan environment from the Christian way of life that he taught, as the Corinthian Christians would eventually do (cf. 1 Cor 4:14–21). Apparently, even after his sigh of relief at Timothy’s good news about the Thessalonian Christians maintaining their faith (3:6–9), Paul cannot shirk this anxiety, which is already intimated in the prayer report (3:10) attached to his sigh of relief.

B. Holiness in Sexual Conduct (4:3–8) Bibliography Brocke, C. vom. Thessaloniki—­Stadt des Kassander und Gemeinde des Paulus. WUNT 2/125. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2001. Donfried, K. P. “The Cults of Thessalonica and the Thessalonian Correspondence.” NTS 31 (1985): 336–56. Reprint in pages 21–48 of Paul, Thessalonians and Early Christianity. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2002. Elgvin, T. “ ‘To Master His Own Vessel’: 1 Thess 4.4 in Light of New Qumran Evidence.” NTS 43 (1997): 604–19. Hock, R. F. “God’s Will at Thessalonica and Greco-­Roman Asceticism.” Pages 159–70 in Asceticism and the New Testament. Edited by L. E. Vaage and V. L. Wimbush. New York: Routledge, 1999. Jensen, J. “Does Porneia Mean Fornication?” NovT 20 (1978): 161–84. Kim, S. “The Gospel that Paul Preached to the Thessalonians—­Continuity and Unity of Paul’s Gospel in 1 Thessalonians and in His Later Epistles.” Pages 67–131 in PGTO. —­—­—­. Paul and the New Perspective: Second Thoughts on the Origin of Paul’s Gospel. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans; WUNT 140; Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2002. —­—­— .­ “Paul’s Common Paraenesis (1 Thess. 4–5; Phil. 2–4; and Rom. 12–13): The Correspondence between Romans 1:18–32 and 12:1–2, and the Unity of Romans 12–13.” TynBul 62 (2011): 109–39. Reprint in pages 253–77 in PGTO. Konradt, M. “Εἰδέναι ἕκαστον ὑμῶν τὸ ἑαυτοῦ σκεῦος κτᾶσθαι . . . : Zu Paulus’ sexuelethischer Weisung in 1Thess 4,4f.” ZNW 92 (2001): 128–35. Maurer, C. “πρᾶγμα,” TDNT 6:639–40. —­—­— ­. “σκεῦος.” TDNT 7:358–67. Rabens, V. “The Development of Pauline Pneumatology.” BZ 43 (1999): 178–79. Smith, J. E. “1 Thessalonians 4:4: Breaking the Impasse.” BBR 11 (2001): 65–105. Stettler, H. Heiligung bei Paulus: Ein Beitrag aus biblisch-­theologischer Sicht. WUNT 2/368. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2014. Yarbrough, O. L. Not Like the Gentiles: Marriage Rules in the Letters of Paul. SBLDS 80. Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1986.

Translation For this is God’s will—­your sanctification: that you should abstain from a fornication, 4 that each of you should learn to gain control over his vessel in sanctification and honor, 5 not in lustful passion, like the gentiles, who have no knowledge b of God, 6in order not to trespass c against and fraudulently exploit his brother in this matter,d because the Lord is an avenger in all these things, as indeed we warned you insistently. 7For God has not called us for impurity but in sanctification. 8Therefore, anyone who disregards 3

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 326

7/12/23 11:29 AM

Notes 327 (this charge) does not disregard human beings but God, who indeed e givesf you g his Holy Spirit.

Notes a. πάσης (“all”) is inserted before πορνείας (“fornication”) by ‫א‬2 Ψ pc; πάσης τῆς by F G c. b. τὰ μὴ εἰδότα. In Hellenistic Greek μή is the negative regularly used with the participle (cf. 2:15, τῶν . . . θεῷ μὴ ἀρεσκόντων), although even in classical Greek it might be expected here; it is a characteristic of gentiles that they do not know (the living and true) God. c. τὸ μὴ ὑπερβαίνειν, the same construction as in 3:3, τὸ μηδένα σαίνεσθαι: “in order not to trespass.” d. KJV’s “in any matter” may presuppose the non-­accentuation of τῷ in ἐν τῷ πράγματι as τῳ, the equivalent of τινι. e. καί (“indeed”) between the article and διδόντα is omitted by A B D1 I 33 614 1739* et al. latb syr pesh copbo Ambst Spec. f. For διδόντα (present participle), δόντα (aorist participle) is read by ‫א‬2 A Ψ byz syr cop Clem. g. For ὑμᾶς (“you”), ἡμᾶς (“us”) is read by A 6 365 1739 1881 pc lat a f m t vg.cl syrhcl.

Form/Structure/Setting Here now Paul begins to address the areas or deficiencies in the readers’ faith that he needs to make up (3:10), and to issue his specific exhortations for a life that is pleasing to God. The first area concerns sexual conduct. With the exhortation to sanctification in sexual conduct here, he expounds one of the themes (“blameless in holiness”) that he adumbrated in the transitional prayer at the end of the thanksgiving section (3:12–13). The whole passage of vv. 3–8 is composed of three sentences. The first one is long and complex, running from v. 3 to v. 6, in which Paul first states the thesis (v. 3a): This is the will of God—­your sanctification.

He then elaborates on sanctification with two appositional infinitival clauses (vv. 3b–5) and a final clause (v. 6a): that you should abstain from fornication; that each of you should learn to gain control over his vessel in sanctification and honor, not in lustful passion, like the gentiles who have no knowledge of God; in order not to trespass against and exploit his brother fraudulently in this matter. Paul then adds two clauses to provide the reason for the exhortations and to recall a previous warning (v. 6b–­c):

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 327

7/12/23 11:29 AM

328

1 Thessalonians 4:3–8 because the Lord is an avenger in all these things, as indeed we warned you insistently.

Then, in the second sentence (v. 7), Paul elaborates on the thesis in v. 3a by way of providing the ground for the above exhortations: For God has not called us for impurity but in sanctification.

And finally, in the third sentence (v. 8), Paul states the conclusion: Therefore anyone who disregards (this charge) does not disregard human beings, but God, who indeed gives you his Holy Spirit.

Thus, v. 3a (God’s will/sanctification) and v. 7 (God’s call/sanctification) form an inclusio, and v. 8 (God’s will/charges and his gift of the Holy Spirit) reinforces it. Obviously the general sexual laxity of the contemporary Greco-­Roman world forms the setting of this passage. There, various forms of extramarital sexual union were tolerated, and some were even encouraged. A man might have a mistress (ἑταίρα) who could provide him also with intellectual companionship; the institution of slavery made it easy for him to have a concubine (παλλακή), while casual gratification was readily available from a harlot (πόρνη). The function of his wife was to manage his household and be the mother of his legitimate children and heirs.19 Certain forms of public religion, indeed, involved ritual πορνεία. Apparently in Thessalonica the popular Dionysus cult and Cabirus cult had some rituals involving their symbol, the phallus.20 For Jews and Christians sexual immorality and idolatry were the most heinous sins of the gentiles, so that they were often lumped together to characterize the gentiles (e.g., Wis 14:12, 21–27; T. Naph. 3.2–5; 4.1; Sib. Or. 3.29–45; Acts 15:20, 29 [“the apostolic decree”]; Rom 1:18–32; 1 Cor 10:7–8; Rev 2:14, 20). In such an environment of sexual promiscuity, the new converts to the Christian faith would naturally have found it difficult to part with their hitherto heathen practices. They would have found it even more difficult if there was, as evidently was the case in Thessalonica, much pressure from their pagan neighbors for them to conform to the prevailing lifestyle and participate in their traditional cults.21 For this reason, as Fee points out, “the issue of ‘sexual immorality’ has a consistent place in Pauline ethics,” and it comes up as the first matter in this section dealing with sanctification.22 The sense of its

19 20 21 22

Cf. Demosthenes, Or. 59.122. Cf. Donfried, “Cults of Thessalonica,” 22–31. Cf. Weima, 263. Fee, 143.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 328

7/12/23 11:29 AM

Comment 329 earnestness is also conveyed by the fact that the specific directions for sexual purity are outnumbered by the words that are employed to effect maximum pressure for the readers to comply with those directions: “commands [given] through the Lord Jesus” (v. 2), “the will of God,” “[not] like the gentiles who do not know God,” “because the Lord is an avenger in all these things, as we forewarned you,” and the whole two concluding vv. 7–8. See the Explanation below for a further discussion on this matter.

Comment 4:3 Τοῦτο γάρ ἐστιν θέλημα τοῦ θεοῦ, ὁ ἁγιασμὸς ὑμῶν, “For this is God’s will, your sanctification.” The γάρ (“for”) explains why the readers should live in such a way as to please God (v. 1). The τοῦτο (“this”) points forward to the ethical instructions that are given in the infinitive phrases in vv. 4–6. So Paul begins to unfold the instructions announced in vv. 1–2. For the omission of the article before θέλημα, compare 1 Cor 16:12 (οὐκ ἦν θέλημα); 1 Macc 3:60 (ὡς δ’ ἂν ᾖ θέλημα ἐν οὐρανῷ); but here the noun is explicitly defined by τοῦ θεοῦ, “of God.” Lightfoot suggests that the article is omitted because the will of God is wider than “your sanctification,” and he quotes J. A. Bengel: “multae sunt voluntates.”23 Bengel appeals to the plural θελήματα in Acts 13:22. Paul’s references to God’s will in various places of his epistles support this view, as “the will of God” in those places refers to God’s saving will in Christ (Gal 1:4; Eph 1:5, 9, 11), to the readers’ rejoicing, praying, and thanksgiving (1 Thess 5:18), to God’s apostolic call of Paul himself (1 Cor 1:1; 2 Cor 1:1; Col 1:1), to God’s direction in Paul’s mission (Rom 1:10; 15:32), as well as to the holy and righteous life of God’s people as here (further Rom 12:2; Col 1:9–10; 4:12). The same sentence in 5:18 (τοῦτο γὰρ θέλημα θεοῦ, see comment ad loc) supports taking τοῦτο as the subject and θέλημα τοῦ θεοῦ as the predicate. ὁ ἁγιασμὸς ὑμῶν, “your sanctification.” This appositional phrase explains the “will of God.” If ἁγιωσύνη (3:13) is the state of being holy, ἁγιασμός (nomen actionis) is the process of making holy. This is the earliest Christian occurrence of ἁγιασμός (for ἁγιάζειν, the verb from which it is derived, see 5:23). In Scripture the fundamental meaning of “holiness” is separation from what is common or profane. So the concept is primarily applied to God: he is holy, as he as the creator is strictly separate and distinguished from his creation. Then it is also applied to people (Israel) or objects (such as the temple and the vessels and rituals in it) that are separated from the common people or things and transferred to the sphere of God.24 Thus, separation from what is common or profane and dedication to God compose together the fundamental meaning of holiness when the concept is applied to people or objects. Therefore, holiness entails a sense of purity over against impurity. 23 Lightfoot, 53. 24 Hence “sanctification” can be used as a “transfer concept” (so Stettler, Heiligung, 56).

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 329

7/12/23 11:29 AM

330

1 Thessalonians 4:3–8

By his election at Sinai, God made Israel holy, that is, “sanctified” or separated Israel from the nations to be the people of his possession (Exod 19:5–6). This ontological determination by God’s dispensation entails that they should live a holy life by keeping his statutes and ordinances and by separating themselves from profane and impure or unclean peoples or things (Lev 20:22–26; cf. also 11:44–45; 19:2–4; 20:7–8, where the formula “be holy, for I am holy” also recurs). Living such a holy life “can also be called ‘sanctification.’ Therefore, in the concept of ‘sanctification’ belongingness to God and the correspondence to his will are connected, ethics is coordinated with the cult. . . . [Thus] in Israel sanctification has [both] cultic and ethical connotation; it embraces [both] cultic and ethical purity.”25 Christians “were washed, sanctified, and justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and in the Spirit of God” at their baptism (1 Cor 6:11), so that they are the ἡγιάσμενοι (“sanctified ones”) or ἅγιοι (“holy ones” or “saints”; 1 Cor 1:2). They belong to the holy God as his people, and therefore the Leviticus formula applies to them: they are to be holy, as God is holy. Thus, their sanctification is the will of God who sanctified them (so our v. 3a may be seen as reflecting the Leviticus formula). The Thessalonian believers were also sanctified at their baptism as they “turned to God from idols to serve a living and true God” (1:9). Therefore, Paul is exhorting them here to live a holy life, that is, to sanctify themselves, by keeping God’s statutes that (or whose spirit) Paul expresses afresh in vv. 4–6, with the aid of the Holy Spirit that God gave them at their baptismal sanctification (v. 8). Thus, Paul is applying to the gentile Christians in Thessalonica the OT notion of sanctification that was meant for Israel, urging them to be separate or different from “the gentiles who do not know God” (v. 5; cf. 1 Pet 1:15–16). So here again as in 1:1 (“ἐκκλησία of the Thessalonians in God,” see comment ad loc), 1:4 (“brothers and sisters beloved by God, your election,” see comment ad loc), and 2:12 (“God . . . calls you into his own kingdom and glory”; note that Paul’s exhortation there to “live worthily of God” may be seen as another expression of the Leviticus formula), Paul is expressing his view of the gentile Christians in Thessalonica “as the renewed Israel—­a s those who, together with Jewish Christians, are now full members of God’s covenant people.”26 With the appeal to God’s will for the readers’ sanctification, Paul proceeds to define the sanctification that is necessary in their lives (hence the focus first on sexual purity here, see above) with two appositional infinitival clauses (vv. 3b, 4–5) and a final clause (v. 6a, containing two infinitives), thereby telling the readers how they are to implement it specifically. So the infinitives function like imperatives.27 25 Stettler, Heiligung, 57. 26 Weima, 266. 27 Marshall, 106.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 330

7/12/23 11:29 AM

Comment 331 ἀπέχεσθαι ὑμᾶς ἀπὸ τῆς πορνείας, “that you abstain from fornication.” The language is similar to that of the Jerusalem decree, ἀπέχεσθαι . . . (τῆς) πορνείας (Acts 15:20, 29); it might not be irrelevant to recall that Silvanus (Silas) was one of the two commissioners appointed by the leaders of the Jerusalem church to carry the letter embodying the decree to the church of Antioch and her daughter churches (Acts 15:22, 27). Following Lightfoot, Witherington sees here an allusion to the decree and takes this allusion, together with the reference in 1:9 to conversion as a turning from idols, as evidence that Paul wrote 1 Thessalonians, as well as 1 Corinthians, with the intention to reinforce the decree.28 If so, 1 Cor 8–10 shows how, freed from legalism with his sharp theological mind, Paul was able to develop a carefully nuanced attitude to idolatry and make a realistic and effective application of the decree.29 While πορνεία means primarily traffic with harlots (πόρναι), like Hebrew ‫( זנות‬traffic with ‫)זונות‬, it may denote any form of illicit (i.e., nonmarital) sexual relationship.30 That Paul has in mind here this broad sense of sexual immorality is indicated by the fact that, after this brief summary exhortation to avoid πορνεία (v. 3b), he elaborates on it with two following exhortations (vv. 4–5, 6a), which have to do with general sexual immorality rather than any specific form of it.31 This view is further strengthened by the fact that in providing in v. 7 the reason why the things mentioned in the three infinitival clauses (vv. 3b–6a) should be avoided, he refers to those things summarily with a general term ἀκαθαρσία (“impurity”), setting it in contrast to ἁγιασμός.32 4 εἰδέναι ἕκαστον ὑμῶν τὸ ἑαυτοῦ σκεῦος κτᾶσθαι ἐν ἁγιασμῷ καὶ τιμῇ, “that each of you learn to gain mastery of his vessel in sanctification and honor.” This infinitival clause (vv. 4–5a), along with the next one (v. 6a), “spells out the nature of ‘sexual immorality’ to be avoided,” the exhortation of the preceding infinitival clause in v. 3b.33 But it is a much-­disputed verse, and the debate centers on the metaphorical reference of σκεῦος, whose literal meaning is “vessel,” a container like a dish or jar. Since the early church, translators and commentators have been broadly divided into two camps, one camp taking it as a metaphor for “wife” and the other camp for “body.” Then each of the two camps is further subdivided into two groups. The first camp is divided over the question of whether to take the infinitive κτᾶσθαι in the ingressive sense (“to acquire a wife”; option 1)34 or the durative sense (“to possess, or live

28 29 30 31 32 33 34

Witherington, 112, citing Lightfoot, 53. Cf. Kim, “Imitatio Christi,” in PGTO, 324–53. Cf. Jensen, “Does Porneia Mean Fornication?” Cf. Weima, 267. Cf. Malherbe, 226. Fee, 145. E.g., RSV; Theodore of Mopsuestia; Augustine; Dobschütz, 163; Marxsen, 60–61; Malherbe, 227–28; Yarbrough, Not Like the Gentiles, 68–73; Burke, Family, 185–93.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 331

7/12/23 11:29 AM

332

1 Thessalonians 4:3–8

with, a wife”; option 2).35 The second camp divides over the question of whether to take σκεῦος more generally as a metaphor for “body” (in its sexual aspect; option 3)36 or more specifically as a euphemism for genitalia (option 4).37 Weima neatly presents a full summary of the pros and cons of each of these positions.38 Here we shall just refer to a few of the more essential ones and seek to gain some insights from considering our verse in the light of Paul’s common paraenesis in his letters. The strongest argument for option 1 (“to acquire a wife”) is that it agrees well with the normal sense of the present infinitive κτᾶσθαι.39 Sometimes 1 Cor 7:2 is appealed to as a parallel. But this is impermissible, because whereas according to option 1 Paul is advising here Thessalonian single male Christians to get married, there he is speaking to married couples to “hold to” (ἔχειν) each other to avoid sexual immorality.40 More seriously, this option makes the infinitive εἰδέναι quite awkward (“learn to acquire a wife”) and fits ill also with the following prepositional phrases, “in sanctification and honor, not in lustful passion.” Therefore, some interpreters give the infinitive κτᾶσθαι the durative sense and argue for option 2 (“to possess, or live with, a wife”), pointing out that although in classical Greek the verb had that sense only in the perfect or pluperfect tenses, papyri and other texts show that in Hellenistic Greek that sense was sometimes extended to the present and other tenses.41 This option eases the above problems of option 1. However, still for this option 2 as well as for option 1, there remains the fundamental question whether σκεῦος here can really mean “wife.” Those42 who take σκεῦος this way appeal to some late rabbinic sources43 where the Hebrew word ‫“( כלי‬vessel”) is used metaphorically for “woman,” as well as to the Hebrew idiom ‫“( בעל אׁשה‬to acquire/possess a wife,” Deut 21:13; 24:1; Isa 62:5; Mal 2:11; cf. 1 Chr 4:22). But in none of these OT passages is the verb‫ בעל‬rendered κτᾶσθαι in the LXX.44 So why would Paul here render the verb ‫ בעל‬unusually with κτᾶσθαι and go through the further complicated process of first replacing ‫ אׁשה‬with the metaphor ‫ כלי‬in his mind and then rendering ‫ אׁשה‬with σκεῦος? When he could make his point perfectly

35 E.g., TEV; CEV; Maurer, “σκεῦος,” TDNT 7:366; Best, 162; Holtz, 158; Witherington, 113–16. 36 E.g., NIV; NRSV; NJB; NEB; REB; ESV; Tertullian; John Chrysostom; Theodoret; Rigaux, 505; Morris, 121; Richard, 198; Green, 191–94; Beale, 116–19; Schreiber, I:217. 37 E.g., Bruce, 83; Marshall, 108–9; Wanamaker, 152; Fee, 149–50; Weima, 271–72. 38 Weima, 268–72. See also Fee, 145–50. 39 BDAG 572. 40 Cf. Thiselton, 1 Corinthians, 502. 41 Cf. Smith, “1 Thessalonians 4:4,” 83–85, for examples. 42 E.g., Maurer, TDNT 7:361–62, 366. 43 E.g., b. Meg. 12b; b. Sanh. 22b. Cf. Smith, “1 Thessalonians 4:4,” 68–69, 71–72, who cites more biblical and rabbinic texts, including Prov 5:15–18, only to discount them as invalid for our verse. 44 Cf. Elgvin, “ ‘To Master His Own Vessel,’ ” 612.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 332

7/12/23 11:29 AM

Comment 333 by using the simple Greek word γυνή, why would he use σκεῦος, whose alleged Hebraic metaphorical sense the Greek-­speaking Thessalonians would hardly understand? Sometimes 1 Pet 3:7 is appealed to for taking σκεῦος as “wife.” But that is impermissible, as there both man and woman are σκεύη as creatures of God, the woman being the ἀσθενέστερον σκεῦος (“weaker vessel”) of the two. And she is certainly not her husband’s σκεῦος—­indeed, although she herself is called a σκεῦος, the expression “weaker vessel” refers more particularly to her body (this fact can therefore be drawn to support, on the contrary, the interpretation of σκεῦος here in terms of “body”). Therefore, the chance of σκεῦος meaning “wife” here is not strong. Hence, recently more interpreters take it as a metaphor for “body” (in its sexual aspect) or, more specifically, as a euphemism for genitalia and interpret our verse in the sense of “that each of you learn to gain control over his own body or genitals.”45 For this view, we can point, first of all, to 2 Cor 4:7, where Paul actually uses σκεῦος to refer to the body metaphorically: “we have this treasure in earthen vessels [ἐν ὀστρακίνοις σκεύεσιν].” Then there is 1 Sam 21:5–6, which provides a rather close parallel to our verse. There the priest of Nob tells David that he and his companions may eat the holy bread “if only the young men have kept themselves from women.” David replies, “The young men’s vessels [‫ ]כלי‬are holy” (the sense is obscured in the LXX, but ‫ כלי‬is rendered σκεύη). Thus, this passage concerns men keeping their “vessel” “holy” with regard to sexual relations. So with such parallelism, the OT passage supports taking σκεῦος (“vessel”) in our verse as a euphemism for genitalia and interpreting the verse in the sense of “that each of you learn to gain control over his own genitals.” Even if, unlike Paul, the Thessalonian Christians did not know the OT passage or the Hebrew euphemism ‫ כלי‬for genitalia, they would have easily understood σκεῦος here as such a euphemism, as it was apparently also current in contemporary Greek language.46 This line of interpretation of our verse is supported by Paul’s warnings about the fallen humanity’s misuse of the “body” or its “members” and his exhortations for believers to offer them for God’s glory in various places of his epistles. So in Rom 1:24–27 Paul condemns pagan “dishonoring” of their “bodies” in sexual immorality. In Colossians, he speaks of “the body of the flesh” (Col 2:11; cf. “the body of sin” or “the mortal body” in Rom 6:6, 12) and its limbs, “the members that are earthly” (τὰ μέλη τὰ ἐπὶ τῆς γῆς), which are involved in committing “fornication, impurity, passion, evil desire, and covetousness” (πορνεία, ἀκαθαρσία, πάθος, ἐπιθυμία κακή, πλεονεξία), on account of 45 Cf. Smith, “1 Thessalonians 4:4,” 90–91; also Weima, 270–72, who shows that we can interpret the verb κτᾶσθαι in the sense of “to take possession of” or “to control” either ingressively or duratively. 46 Cf. Maurer, “σκεῦος,” TDNT 7:359, who cites two examples of σκεῦος referring to “the reproductive organ” in the profane Greek literature: Antistios (first century AD) and Claudius Aelianus (second or third century AD).

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 333

7/12/23 11:29 AM

334

1 Thessalonians 4:3–8

which “the wrath of God” is coming” (Col 3:5–6).47 Note the close parallelism in both vocabulary and ideas between this passage and our passage 4:3–7 (including the threat of God’s wrath): The whole phrase τὸ ἑαυτοῦ σκεῦος κτᾶσθαι ἐν ἁγιασμῷ καὶ τιμῇ, μὴ ἐν πάθει ἐπιθυμίας (“gain control of his vessel [body/genitals] in sanctification and honor, not in lustful passion”) in our verse appears to be only a mild expression of what is said in Col 3:5: νεκρώσατε . . . τὰ μέλη τὰ ἐπὶ τῆς γῆς (“put to death . . . the members [limbs] that are earthly”), through which “fornication, impurity, passion, evil desire, and covetousness” are committed. Our whole verse is also to be understood in parallelism to Paul’s demand in Rom 12:1 (“present your bodies as a living sacrifice, holy and well-­pleasing to God”), which is issued against the pagan “dishonoring” (ἀτιμάζεσθαι/ἀτιμίας) of their bodies in sexual immorality (Rom 1:24–27).48 Note especially the many parallels between our passage (vv. 3–7) and Rom 1:24–27 and 12:1: πάθος, ἐπιθυμία, ἀκαθαρσία, τιμή/ἀτιμάζεσθαι/ἀτιμίας, ἁγιασμός/ἁγία, σῶμα/ σκεῦος (= “body”); note further ἀρέσκειν θεῷ (1 Thess 4:1)/εὐάρεστον τῷ θεῷ (Rom 12:1–2). Again, our whole passage is to be understood in parallelism to Paul’s demand in Rom 6:12–13, 19: Let not sin therefore reign in your mortal body [σῶμα], to make you obey its desires [ἐπιθυμίαις]. Do not present your members [τὰ μέλη ὑμῶν] to sin as instruments of wickedness, but present yourselves to God . . . and your members [τὰ μέλη ὑμῶν] to God as instruments of righteousness. . . . For just as you once presented your members [τὰ μέλη ὑμῶν] as slaves to impurity [ἀκαθαρσίᾳ] . . . so now present your members [τὰ μέλη ὑμῶν] as slaves to righteousness for sanctification [ἁγιασμόν].49

Thus, clearly showing how anxious Paul is to exhort gentile Christians to stop with the pagan practices of “dishonoring” their “body” or its “members” in sexual immorality, these parallel passages (Rom 1:24–28; 6:12–19; 12:1–2; 1 Cor 6:12–20; Col 3:5–6) strongly support the interpretation of σκεῦος in our verse as a metaphor for “body” or a euphemism for its sexual limb (genitalia), as well as the interpretation of our verse as “learn to gain mastery of his body or genitals.”50 These passages suggest that, in the contexts of exhorting against participation in pagan immorality, Paul usually thinks of the body as a whole

47 Cf. Bruce, Colossians, 268. 48 For the correspondence between Rom 12:1–2 and Rom 1:18–32, the parallelism between 1 Thess 4–5 and Rom 12–13, and the parallelism between 1 Thess 4:1 and Rom 12:1, see above and my essay, “Paul’s Common Paraenesis”; cf. also 1 Cor 6:12–20. 49 See Kim, “Paul’s Common Paraenesis,” 124n26 (in PGTO, 265n26) for the view that Rom 6 (esp. vv. 11–23) forms a bridge between Rom 1:18–32 and 12:1–2. 50 Cf. Smith, “1 Thessalonians 4:4,” 96–100, who arrives at the same conclusion after reviewing some of the same parallel materials.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 334

7/12/23 11:29 AM

Comment 335 that is abused in immoral acts, but sometimes he sharpens his exhortations by focusing on its certain “members” (limbs) that are used as instruments for immoral acts. So, for example, in Rom 6:12–19, after making a summary statement in terms of the “body” (v. 12), he goes on, in the following verses, to unfold that statement by referring to its “members” as the instruments for actual immoral (or moral) acts. A similar observation can be made between the “body of flesh” in Col 2:11 and the “members” in Col 3:5–6. In Col 3:5–6, as Paul has chiefly sexual immorality in view, he seems to have primarily in mind the “members” (limbs) of the body that are sexual organs. This may be the case in our verse too. Thus, in view of Paul’s actual use of σκεῦος as a metaphor for the body (2 Cor 4:7), as well as his warnings not to “dishonor” the body in sexual immorality and his exhortations to keep the body holy (Rom 1:24–28; 6:12–19; 12:1–2; 1 Cor 6:12–20; Col 3:5–6), it appears quite natural to take σκεῦος in our verse as a metaphor for the body. However, precisely those similar or parallel texts make us also wonder why Paul does not use here simply the word “body” (σῶμα) as in them, but employs a metaphor, “vessel” (σκεῦος). Therefore, it seems reasonable to conjecture that here Paul is not thinking of the “body” as a whole but focusing on a specific “member” (μέλος) of it, namely, the genitalia, which is involved in sexual immorality, and that, being shy of referring to it directly as φαλλός, he resorts to a euphemism for it, namely, σκεῦος (cf. 1 Cor 12:23, where Paul refers apparently to the sexual organs as τὰ ἀσχήμονα, “the unpresentable parts” of body). This would have been easily understandable to the readers as they were living in a culture where the phallus served as a symbol of some cults.51 If this is the case, Paul is using σκεῦος here just as David uses ‫ כלי‬in 1 Sam 21:5–6. For these reasons, it appears best to render σκεῦος in our verse literally with “vessel,” like ‫ כלי‬in 1 Sam 21:5–6, though not because of the “body” or “genitalia” ambiguity,52 but because of the need to honor Paul’s intent in using the euphemism—­the intent to avoid the vulgarity involved in referring to genitalia directly. 4 (end)–5 ἐν ἁγιασμῷ καὶ τιμῇ, “in sanctification and honor.” This prepositional phrase forms an antithetical pair with the following prepositional phrase in v. 5, μὴ ἐν πάθει ἐπιθυμίας, “not in lustful passion,” and the latter is then qualified by the comparative clause καθάπερ καὶ τὰ ἔθνη τὰ μὴ εἰδότα τὸν θεόν, “like the gentiles who do not know God.” These three parts need to be taken together (so the verse division is unfortunate), and, as suggested above, to be interpreted in the light of the close parallels in Rom 1:24–28; 6:12–19; 12:1–2; 1 Cor 6:12–20; Col 3:5–6. In view of these parallels, it appears more convenient to treat the three parts in the reverse order.

51 Cf. Donfried, “Cults of Thessalonica,” 31; Weima, 271; Brocke, Thessaloniki, 130–31. 52 Pace Weima, 272.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 335

7/12/23 11:29 AM

336

1 Thessalonians 4:3–8

καθάπερ καὶ τὰ ἔθνη τὰ μὴ εἰδότα τὸν θεόν, “like the gentiles, who do not know God.” The articular participle phrase τὰ μὴ εἰδότα τὸν θεόν is to be taken as functioning like an unrestrictive relative clause (cf. οἱ λοιποὶ οἱ μὴ ἔχοντες ἐλπίδα, “the rest, who have no hope,” in 4:13, and comment there). This description of the gentiles is drawn from the OT (Job 18:21; Ps 79:6 [78:6 LXX]; Jer 10:25) and is used also in Gal 4:8 and 2 Thess 1:8 (cf. 1 Cor 1:21). It carries with it the judgment that what they worship as gods are just unreal idols (cf. 1 Cor 8:6). They are those whom Paul describes in Rom 1:18–32. There, he affirms that through God’s self-­revelation in creation they could know God and did know him (vv. 19–21), but that “they did not see fit to acknowledge God” (v. 28) and “did not honor him or give thanks to him” (v. 21). So when Paul says here that the gentiles do not know God, he has in mind not the intellectual knowledge of God’s being but knowledge in the OT-­Jewish sense,53 the knowledge that comes from communion with God, from the experienced personal relationship of worshiping, trusting, and obeying him. Refusing to have this kind of true knowledge of God, fallen humanity chose with their senseless heart instead to worship idols (vv. 21–23). The consequence was their degeneration into “dishonorable passions” (πάθη ἀτιμίας) with which they commit all sorts of wickedness (vv. 25–32), especially various forms of sexual immorality (vv. 26–27). Thus, in Rom 1:18–32, following Jewish tradition (e.g., Wis 14:12, 21–27; Sib. Or. 3.29–45; T. Naph. 3.2–5; 4.1), Paul attributes the gentiles’ sexual immorality to their idolatry that arises from their lack of knowledge of the true God. Likewise, in our passage (v. 5), Paul suggests that the gentiles indulge in “the passion of desire” (πάθη ἐπιθυμίας) or “lustful passion” because of their lack of knowledge of the true God (i.e., because of their idolatry). In speaking thus of “the gentiles, who do not know God,” Paul may have especially in view the worshipers of Cabirus and Dionysus, the two most important gods in Thessalonica, whose worship involved orgiastic practices.54 Pointing to an inscription (IG 10.2.1.199) that refers to Cabirus as ἁγιώτατος πάτριος θεός, Brocke wonders whether Paul strongly stresses sanctification in our epistle in reaction to the sexual immorality of the gentile Thessalonians who worshiped Cabirus, who was supposed to be “the most holy and ancestral god.”55 (Note ἁγιασμός in 1 Thess 4:3, 4, 7; 2 Thess 2:13; cf. Rom 6:19, 22; 1 Cor 1:30; ἁγιωσύνη in 1 Thess 3:13; cf. Rom 1:4; 2 Cor 7:1; ἁγιάζειν in 1 Thess 5:23; cf. Rom 15:16; 1 Cor 1:2; 6:11; 7:14; Eph 5:26.) The inscription is dated to the middle of the third century AD,56 so it is questionable whether such a late inscription can be drawn into interpretation of our epistle. Anyway, the

53 Cf. R. Bultmann, TDNT, 1:698. 54 Cf. Riesner, Early Period, 374–75; Brocke, Thessaloniki, 117–31. 55 Brocke, Thessaloniki, 120–21. 56 Brocke, Thessaloniki, 119.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 336

7/12/23 11:29 AM

Comment 337 word ἅγιος was applied not only to Cabirus but also to other gods such as Isis, Serapis, and Baal, and to their sanctuaries.57 So here we may see Paul teaching the Thessalonian Christians, who abandoned worship of Cabirus and other gods and turned to worship the truly holy God (cf. 1:9), the true, biblical meaning of holiness: that it involves not just some sense of numinosity but entails moral purity, and that therefore they have to cut themselves completely free from their former lifestyle and live in accordance with God’s will as those who were made “holy ones” (ἅγιοι), the people consecrated to the holy God at their baptism (4:3; cf. Lev 20:22–26). ἐν ἁγιασμῷ καὶ τιμῇ, μὴ ἐν πάθει ἐπιθυμίας, “in sanctification and honor, not in lustful passion.” The neutral sense of πάθος (“experience,” “emotion”) is not found in the NT, where it is invariably used in malam partem (“in an evil sense”); in Rom 1:26 it is explicitly used to signify “dishonorable passions” (πάθη ἀτιμίας). Similarly ἐπιθυμία (“desire”) is most often used of evil desires in the NT (for exceptions see 1 Thess 2:17 above; also Luke 22:15; Phil 1:23). In Col 3:5, where passion (πάθος) is included in the list of vices, ἐπιθυμία is explicitly used to denote “evil desire” (ἐπιθυμία κακή). Compare Gal 5:24, “Those who belong to Christ Jesus have crucified the flesh with its passions and desires” (σὺν τοῖς παθήμασιν καὶ ταῖς ἐπιθυμίαις). Since the readers “turned to God from idols, to serve the living and true God” (1 Thess 1:9), they have been sanctified, that is, separated unto God to belong to him. Therefore, seeing that their whole body belongs to God, they are to offer it as a holy sacrifice to him (Rom 12:1) and to “glorify God in [their] body” (1 Cor 6:19–20). To do this, they must not allow their body to be controlled by “desires” (ἐπιθυμίαι) and “dishonorable passions” (πάθη ἀτιμίας) and so to be “dishonored” (ἀτιμάζεσθαι) with acts of “impurity” (ἀκαθαρσία), as “the gentiles who do not know God” do (Rom 1:24, 26). Especially, they are not to allow a member (limb) of their body, their genitalia, to be controlled by “the passion of desire” so as to commit “fornication” or sexual immorality (1 Thess 4:3) as “the gentiles who do not know God” do. Instead, they are to learn to control their genitalia ἐν ἁγιασμῷ καὶ τιμῇ. That is, as sanctified people of God, they are to learn to control themselves in a manner worthy of the holy God and in a way that serves him (cf. Rom 6:19). This is a way of “honor” (τιμή), a way that brings “honor” or good reputation to them and so eventually to God as well (cf. 1 Cor 6:20), whereas the way that is controlled by lustful passion is a way that brings “dishonor” (ἀτιμία), a way of “indecency” (ἀσχημοσύνη) that brings shame to them and so eventually to God as well (Rom 1:24, 26–27; cf. Rom 2:23–24; 1 Cor 12:23). 6 τὸ μὴ ὑπερβαίνειν καὶ πλεονεκτεῖν ἐν τῷ πράγματι τὸν ἀδελφὸν αὐτοῦ, “in order not to trespass against and fraudulently exploit his brother in this matter.” 57 Cf. Procksch, TDNT 1:88–96; note his statement (89) that “in pure Greek” it was never applied to human beings in connection with their cults.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 337

7/12/23 11:29 AM

338

1 Thessalonians 4:3–8

The force of ὑπερβαίνειν (only here in the NT) is of crossing a boundary—­here of crossing a forbidden boundary and hence trespassing on territory that is not one’s own. The noun πλεονεξία means “the state of desiring to have more than one’s due,” that is, “greediness, insatiableness, avarice, covetousness”; its cognate verb πλεονεκτεῖν means “to take advantage of,” that is, to “exploit, outwit, defraud, cheat.”58 So the two infinitives together refer to exploitative and fraudulent behavior. Some commentators view Paul here moving to a new subject, business ethics.59 They base this view on the following grounds. First, unlike the preceding two infinitive clauses (vv. 3b, 4–5), Paul introduces this infinitive clause with the article τό, making the clause appositional to ὁ ἁγιασμός in v. 3a, so that this clause deals with another issue in sanctification in parallelism to the issue of sexual immorality dealt with in the parallel clauses of vv. 3b–5. Second, ἐν τῷ πράγματι has no real antecedent, so that the article is not to be taken as anaphoric (“in this matter”), referring to the subject matter of the preceding vv. 3b–5, but rather generically (“in business”). Third, the verbs ὑπερβαίνειν καὶ πλεονεκτεῖν are better interpreted in the sense of business ethics than sexual ethics. Fourth, as in Judaism (e.g., T. Levi 14.5–6; T. Jud. 18.2; 1QS 4.9–10; CD 4.17–18; cf. also Lev 18:1–19:22), so also in Paul, sexual immorality and avarice often appear together in lists of heinous sins (Rom 1:24–27, 29; 1 Cor 5:9–11; 6:9–10; Eph 4:19; 5:3, 5; Col 3:5), so that it is unsurprising to see Paul here dealing with those two sins together in connection with sanctification. Finally, the phrase περὶ πάντων τούτων (“in all these things”) suggests that Paul is here dealing with the plural number of sins rather than one single sin of sexual immorality. However, with most recent commentators,60 we may counter these arguments as follows. First, the phrase ἐν τῷ πράγματι does not in itself have a sense of business, and it can well be understood in the context as meaning “in the matter under discussion” (i.e., the article can be taken as referring to the whole content of vv. 3b–5).61 Second, in fact it and the phrase περὶ πάντων τούτων and the word ἀκαθαρσία (v. 7) may all be regarded as various ways of “euphemistic generalization of all sorts of (sexual) uncleanness,”62 ἐν τῷ πράγματι and ἀκαθαρσία referring to them collectively and περὶ πάντων τούτων doing so individually (allowing one’s “vessel” to be controlled by lustful passion, sexually trespassing a brother’s territory and defrauding him, etc.). Third, ὑπερβαίνειν καὶ πλεονεκτεῖν can be used also in connection with sexual 58 BDAG 824. 59 E.g., Dobschütz, 161–63, 167–69; Dibelius, 21–22; Beauvery, “Πλεονεκτεῖν,” 278–85; Holtz, 155–56, 161–63; Richard, 200–202; Tomson, “Practical Instruction,” 111–13. 60 E.g., Best, 165–67; Marshall, 110–12; Wanamaker, 154–55; Malherbe, 231–33; Green, 195–97; Fee, 150–51; Weima, 274–76; Yarbrough, Not Like the Gentiles, 73–76. 61 Cf. Weima, 275. 62 Frame, 152; cf. also BDAG 859; Maurer, TDNT 6:639–40; Best, 166.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 338

7/12/23 11:29 AM

Comment 339 ethics. So Malherbe appropriately cites Hellenistic examples of it or its synonym λιχνεύειν used for greedy men snatching away others’ women.63 He goes on to cite examples of the adulterer being criticized for wronging (ἀδικεῖν) the husband of the woman he corrupts, and those examples appear to explain well how Paul could use the verb ὑπερβαίνειν together with πλεονεκτεῖν here in connection with sexual ethics.64 Fourth, it may be granted that the exploitative and fraudulent behavior in business could be treated along with sexual sins in exhortations for “sanctification,” and, in view of 2:3 above (see comment ad loc), it could even be regarded as an act of ἀκαθαρσία (“impurity”) along with sexual sins. However, it is evident that Paul uses the word ἀκαθαρσία especially in close association with sexual immorality (Rom 1:24–28; 2 Cor 12:21; Gal 5:19; Eph 4:19; 5:3, 5; Col 3:5). Note how Paul makes ἀκαθαρσία the summary concept for various kinds of sexual immorality in Rom 1:24–27 and then refers to πλεονεξία in a separate list of other kinds of sins in Rom 1:28–31. In Eph 4:19; 5:3, 5; Col 3:5 also he appears to associate ἀκαθαρσία closely with sexual sins (ἀσελγεία and πορνεία) but treats πλεονεξία somewhat separately, even while listing it together with the sexual sins. Lincoln does take πλεονεξία in those Ephesians passages as referring to sexual greed, referring to our verse, as well as the fact that the tenth commandment includes the prohibition of coveting the wife of a neighbor.65 But this view is rejected by Best.66 Indeed, since Eph 5:5 and Col 3:5 explain πλεονεξία as idolatry, it is more likely that in those passages it refers to financial greed. However, Lincoln’s reference to the tenth commandment is valuable. In our present v. 6, unlike the Ephesians and Colossians passages, Paul could be speaking of ὑπερβαίνειν καὶ πλεονεκτεῖν . . . τὸν ἀδελφὸν with the prohibition of coveting a neighbor’s wife in the tenth commandment in mind. His summary in v. 7 of all the sins treated in vv. 3b–6 as ἀκαθαρσία (“impurity”), in opposition to ἀγιασμός (“sanctification”), appears to support this view (see below comment on v. 7). Fifth, the article τό in τὸ μὴ ὑπερβαίνειν κτλ. need not be taken as marking a shift to a new subject. In fact, Paul used the τὸ μή + infinitive construction in 3:3 above in the final sense (using τό in the sense of ὥστε), and he does the same in Rom 14:13; 2 Cor 2:1; Phil 4:10. Therefore, our clause is best taken likewise in the final sense: “in order not to trespass . . .”67 The genitive pronoun αὐτοῦ (“his brother”) harks back to ἕκαστον ὑμῶν (“each of you”) and ἑαυτοῦ (“his own”) in v. 4 and so also indicates that our clause is dependent on the preceding clause of vv. 4–5. Thus, our clause provides the purpose of 63 Malherbe, 232. 64 Malherbe, 233. 65 Lincoln, Ephesians, 271, 322, 324. Cf. also Jerome on Eph 5:3: “transgredi concessos fines nuptiarum” (“to transgress the permitted bounds of marriage”). 66 Best, Ephesians, 476. 67 Lightfoot, 56.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 339

7/12/23 11:29 AM

340

1 Thessalonians 4:3–8

the exhortation in the latter: each of the readers is to “learn to control his genitalia in holiness and honor, not in lustful passion like the gentiles . . .  in order not to trespass against his brother and fraudulently exploit him in this (sexual) affair.” So the infinitive clause of vv. 4–5 and its dependent final clause in v. 6a together explain how the readers are to “abstain from fornication” (v. 3b), which is their “sanctification” that God wills for them (v. 3a). “Brother” here refers to a fellow Christian, and with it our clause suggests that in our passage (vv. 3–8), although Paul imparts a general exhortation to avoid sexual immorality and thus work toward sanctification, he is focusing especially on a member of the Thessalonian church “trespassing” on another member’s territory and sexually “taking advantage of” him. So Paul seems to have in mind one of the readers committing adultery with another man’s wife or household slave.68 Apparently Timothy reported about this situation, and Paul has decided that this is an area where the readers’ faith urgently needs improvement (3:6–10). Although that sort of practice may be condoned among many “gentiles, who do not know God,” it cannot be among the holy people of God. It is a flagrant violation of the tenth commandment. Therefore, Paul addresses the issue as a matter of priority in the beginning of his paraenesis, with a stern warning of God’s judgment (v. 6b). So Green appears right to suggest that this issue “motivated [Paul] to write this section.”69 It is apparently for this reason, rather than the sometimes alleged introvert character of the early church, that Paul foregoes extending his exhortation concerning sexual immorality also to the readers’ dealing with the non-­Christian members of the wider community, unlike with the case of love (4:9–12).70 διότι ἔκδικος κύριος περὶ πάντων τούτων, “because the Lord is an avenger in all these things.” The plural “in all these things” refers to the various forms of sexual immorality or their causes that have been suggested in vv. 3–6a, so that this causal clause is to be taken as providing the reason for all the exhortations in those verses, rather than just the exhortation in the immediately preceding v. 6a (for the construction with περί, cf. 1 Macc 13:6, ἐκδικήσω περὶ τοῦ ἔθνους μου, “I will take vengeance for my nation”). By placing the word ἔκδικος in the emphatic position at the head of the clause (“an avenger is the Lord”), Paul heightens the threatening tone of the term itself.71 The only other NT instance of ἔκδικος uses the word of the civil magistrate for serving God as an “ἔκδικος of wrath upon the wrongdoer” (Rom 13:4). A Greek adjective, ἔκδικος used as a noun means “[one] who executes a judicial sentence,”72 and so, just as Rom in 13:4, so also here it means “one who punishes evildoers (and so establishes

68 69 70 71 72

Cf. Fee, 150; also Hock, “God’s Will at Thessalonica,” 161. Green, 195. Cf. Malherbe, 232; also Holtz, 163. So Weima, 276. G. Schrenk, TDNT 2:444.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 340

7/12/23 11:29 AM

Comment 341 justice).” Therefore, the punishment connotes the avenging of an evil act—­on behalf of the victim of that act. In numerous places in the OT and Jewish literature God is repeatedly represented as avenging evil acts in this sense (e.g., Exod 7:4; 12:12; Deut 32:35; Ps 18:47; Jer 11:20; Amos 3:2, 14; Mic 5:15; Nah 1:2; T. Reu. 6.6; T. Gad 6.7; T. Jos. 20.1; T. Benj. 10.8–10). Among them Ps 94:1 (‫ ;אל נקמות יהוה‬93:1 LXX ὁ θεὸς ἐκδικήσεων κύριος) is particularly close to Paul’s formulation here, so that some commentators think that Paul is echoing it.73 So some commentators think that by “the Lord” here Paul is referring to Yahweh.74 This view may be supported by Rom 12:19, where Paul seems to be identifying God as “the Lord” when he cites Deut 32:35 to urge the Roman Christians not to avenge themselves: “but leave it to the wrath; for it is written, ‘Vengeance is mine, I will repay,’ says the Lord.” Here, at first, Paul does not make clear whose “wrath” he is talking about; but then by adding “says the Lord” to the citation from Deut 32:35 he appears to indicate that it is the wrath of God, the Lord (note well that Paul usually talks about “the wrath of God” but never “of the Lord” Jesus Christ). Yet in 2 Thess 1:7–8 it is made clear that it is “the Lord Jesus” who will mete out ἐκδίκησις (“retribution, punishment”) on those who do not know God. Furthermore, if in our verse Paul refers to God by “the Lord,” in the following v. 7 he would not see it necessary to refer to God (ὁ θεός) explicitly as the subject. For Paul, it is an essential element of the gospel that God exalted the risen Christ Jesus to his right hand so that Christ may exercise rule on his behalf (Ps 110:1; Rom 1:3–4; 1 Cor 15:23–28; Phil 2:6–11; Col 1:13–14; etc.) and therefore that “Jesus is the Lord” (Rom 10:9). Therefore, it is Paul’s normal practice to refer to Jesus as the Lord and even to cite the Yahweh-­kyrios texts in the OT as referring to Jesus-­kyrios.75 So, in this letter also, having clearly distinguished God as “the Father” and Jesus Christ as “the Lord” at the outset (1:1), he consistently refers to Jesus as the Lord (1:3, 6, 8; 2:15, 19; 3:8, 11, 12, 13; 4:1, 2, 6, 15, 16, 17; 5:2, 9, 12, 23, 27, 28). Therefore, it would be strange if in our verse he refers to God as the Lord. Thus, the Lord Jesus is to be the judge at the last judgment, and he will punish evildoers as well as help believers to receive God’s salvation (1 Cor 4:4–5; 2 Cor 5:10). Of course, he will be doing this on behalf of God the Father (see comment on 3:13 above; cf. also Rom 14:10). In Eph 5:6 and Col 3:5–6 “the wrath [ὀργή] of God” falls on those guilty of fornication, impurity, covetousness, and associated vices. The readers must live a sanctified life that shuns such evils in order to be delivered from God’s wrath that the Lord Jesus will inflict on the heathen perpetrators of those

73 E.g., Marshall, 112; Wanamaker, 156; Beale, 122; Fee, 151. 74 E.g., Holtz, 164; Morris, 124; Richard, 203–4; Malherbe, 233. 75 Cf. Fee, Pauline Christology, passim; see pp. 637–38 for exceptions.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 341

7/12/23 11:29 AM

342

1 Thessalonians 4:3–8

evils (1 Thess 1:10; cf. Rom 1:18, 32). This warning is the negative expression of his wish-­prayer in 3:13 that the readers stand blameless at the last judgment. καθὼς καὶ προείπαμεν ὑμῖν καὶ διεμαρτυράμεθα, “as we forewarned you and insisted.” Just as in v. 1, where Paul couples two verbs of similar meaning (ἐρωτῶμεν . . . καὶ παρακαλοῦμεν) to renew his exhortation emphatically, so here also he couples προείπαμεν and διεμαρτυράμεθα for emphasis, in reference to the original exhortations that he delivered (v. 2) and he delivers anew here. Since the subject matter of “telling beforehand” is the Lord’s vengeance, προείπαμεν conveys the nuance of warning beyond mere foretelling (cf. 3:4). This nuance is further strengthened by the following διεμαρτυράμεθα.76 Ethical guidance in this field of conduct had formed part of the oral instruction that Paul gave to the Thessalonian church before his departure (4:1–2); it was a necessary part of the charge “to lead a life worthy of God” as a people of God’s kingdom (2:11–12). Clearly Paul accompanied such teaching with a warning of God’s judgment on evil conduct, as well as assurance about the Lord’s deliverance of faithful believers (1:10; 5:9). It was probably Timothy’s report that indicated that further admonition was necessary on this subject. Compare also 2 Cor 12:20–13:2 for a similar necessity at Corinth, as well as Rom 1:18–32 (and 2:1–11) for the warning that Paul delivered to the Roman church in writing, as he had not yet had an occasion to deliver it to the church orally in person (cf. the discussion about Paul’s “common paraenesis” above). 7 οὐ γὰρ ἐκάλεσεν ἡμᾶς ὁ θεὸς ἐπ’ ἀκαθαρσίᾳ ἀλλ’ ἐν ἁγιασμῷ, “For God did not call us for impurity but in sanctification.” The conjunction γάρ (“for”) refers back to vv. 3–6a and so makes this verse parallel to the διότι clause in v. 6b. Yet whereas that clause gives the reason only for the need to avoid sexual immorality that is warned against in vv. 3b–6a, this new sentence goes beyond it and provides the ground for the thesis statement on sanctification in v. 3a more comprehensively. To put it another way, by saying that “God has not called us for impurity,” Paul reinforces the reason why the readers must avoid sexual immorality (the concern of v. 6b), and then by adding the positive part of the sentence, “(but God has called us) in sanctification,” he goes on to provide the reason why they ought to work for their sanctification (the imperative implied in v. 3a). Thus, Paul wraps up the whole exhortation that has started with v. 3 (of course, he goes on to reinforce v. 7 further with v. 8; see below). Here, God’s call of believers in sanctification corresponds to God’s will for their sanctification in v. 3. So there is an inclusio between vv. 3 and 7 (or 8), marked not only by the word ἁγιασμός, common in the two verses, but also by this correspondence between God’s will in v. 3 and God’s call in v. 7. Therefore, we should see also a correspondence between ἀκαθαρσία in v. 7 and πορνεία in v. 3b. This confirms that ἀκαθαρσία here in v. 7 should be seen 76

BDAG 233 (2): “to exhort with authority in matters of extraordinary importance, frequently with reference to higher powers and/or suggestion of peril.” So Fee, 152.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 342

7/12/23 11:29 AM

Comment 343 as a summary reference to the various forms or causes of πορνεία or sexual impurity mentioned in vv. 3b–6a and that it does not include financial greed and defrauding. The use of ἐπί with the dative to express purpose is classical; in the NT compare Gal 5:13 (ἐπ’ ἐλευθερίᾳ ἐκλήθητε, “you were called to freedom”); Eph 2:10 (ἐπὶ ἔργοις ἀγαθοῖς, “for good works”); 2 Tim 2:14 (ἐπὶ καταστροφῇ, “for destruction”). So far, Paul has specifically addressed “you,” the Thessalonian believers, but now, with “us” as the object, he places his hitherto exhortations for them in God’s common will for all believers, including himself and his colleagues. God did not call Christians to commit acts of impurity. That is clear. But here it is noteworthy that Paul does not balance the negative ἐπ’ ἀκαθαρσίᾳ with the positive ἐπ’ ἁγιασμῷ, “for sanctification.” Nor does he say εἰς ἁγιασμόν, which can also convey the sense of purpose. But he states the positive part with the preposition ἐν: ἀλλ’ ἐν ἁγιασμῷ. As Weima notes well, when Paul combines ἐν with the verb καλεῖν (to “call”), he usually refers to the state or condition (1 Cor 7:15, 18, 24; Gal 1:6; Eph 4:4; Col 3:15).77 So with the change of preposition, Paul apparently tries to avoid the impression that God has called us to achieve our own sanctification and instead affirm that, with his call, God has made us be in the state of holiness. However, here it is also noteworthy that he does not balance ἀκαθαρσία in the negative part with ἁγιωσύνη (“holiness”) in the positive part (cf. 3:13), but rather with the nomen actionis ἁγιασμός (“sanctification”). Apparently he is trying to make it clear that the state of holiness in which God has placed believers is not just a static state but a state that includes a process or requirement of living a holy life. When God elected his people and called them, he “sanctified” them, that is, separated them from the nations to belong to him, so that they became κλητοὶ ἅγιοι, “saints by calling” (Rom 1:7; 1 Cor 1:2). As we have seen above, God’s election and sanctification of Israel as his people entailed the command, “Be holy, as I am holy” (Lev 19:2–4). The Thessalonian believers responded to God’s election and call by “turning from idols to the living and true God” (1 Thess 1:4, 9), so that they were made God’s people and came to be in his kingdom, that is, they were “sanctified,” came to be in a state of holiness, at their baptism. But God’s kingdom makes them not just enjoy his benefits but also “serve” him or obey his rule (v. 9: “you turned to God . . . to serve a living and true God”). Likewise, the state of holiness in which they have been placed requires them to live a holy life that conforms to his holy character, by observing his commandments. Just as Paul stressed the requirement of “living in a manner worthy of God” at present by unusually using the present tense of the verb καλεῖν (to “call”) in connection with God’s kingdom in 2:12 (see comment ad loc), so here Paul wants to stress the requirement of holy living by using ἁγιασμός instead of 77 Weima, 280.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 343

7/12/23 11:29 AM

344

1 Thessalonians 4:3–8

ἁγιωσύνη, which formally would be a more appropriate contrast to ἀκαθαρσία. So with the formulation (ἐκάλεσεν ἡμᾶς ὁ θεὸς ἐπ’ ἀκαθαρσίᾳ ἀλλ’ ἐν ἁγιασμῷ) here Paul effectively expresses both the priority of God’s grace in sanctification and the requirement or task that God’s grace entails for the present.78 The climax of sanctification at the eschaton appears in 3:13; 5:23–24. About the possibility that the contrasting concepts of ἀκαθαρσία and ἁγιασμός in this verse echo Ezek 36:22–32, see the comment on the next verse. 8 τοιγαροῦν, “therefore,” a compound particle as emphatic in Hellenistic Greek as it was in classical Greek. Its only other NT occurrence is Heb 12:1. ὁ ἀθετῶν, “he who disregards.” The implied object must be the instructions imparted here in vv. 3–7, which are the renewal of the charges (παραγγελία, v. 2) that Paul gave during his mission in Thessalonica. The verb ἀθετεῖν is used in a formal or legal sense of “annulling” a will (Gal 3:15) or similar document; in the present nontechnical context, it means “disregard” or “reject.” οὐκ ἄνθρωπον ἀθετεῖ ἀλλὰ τὸν θεόν, “does not disregard a human being, but God.” Here Paul reinforces the emphatic conclusion in v. 7 and thereby all the exhortations in vv. 3–6: God has called the Thessalonian Christians in sanctification, and so their sanctification is his will; “consequently, he who disregards [the commands for their sanctification given in vv. 3–7] does not disregard a human being, but God.” There is no article with ἄνθρωπον while there is one with θεόν, apparently because Paul wants to convey the sense that he, the deliverer of the commands, is not a mere human being who can be disregarded but a fully empowered agent of the one God who issues the commands through him. This is therefore another sanctioning word added to those that have already been issued in vv. 6b and 7, and these multiple warnings betray how anxious Paul is about the issue of sexual immorality among his young Thessalonian converts in their heathen environment. Already in 2:4 he indicated his apostolic consciousness of his message being really God’s message, and in 2:13 he affirmed that the Thessalonian believers had accepted his message as God’s message. So here he appears to be demanding that they do the same with his instructions on sexual morality, although it is put in the negative form in order to issue a serious warning for them not to fail with it. As an apostle of God and with the authority of the Lord Jesus Christ, God’s viceroy, Paul has declared that sanctification is God’s will for the Thessalonians and that they have been made his holy people to live as such (4:1–7). Therefore, those who disregard his instructions do not just disregard him as a human being, but they disregard God who has sent him as his agent and mouthpiece. Here Paul may be echoing the saying of Jesus in Luke 10:16 (cf. the parallel in 78

For the parallelism in this structure between Paul’s doctrines of justification and sanctification, see Explanation at the end of 3:11–13 above. Cf. also Kim, “Gospel that Paul Preached,” in PGTO, 85–87, 126–28.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 344

7/12/23 11:29 AM

Comment 345 Matt 10:40): one who accepts Jesus’s disciples accepts Jesus, and one who rejects them rejects Jesus who sent them, and ultimately God who sent Jesus (cf. its positive variant in Mark 9:37parr.; also John 5:23; 12:44, 48; 13:20). Or Paul may be formulating it himself based on the OT-­Jewish shaliach,79 which also lies behind Jesus’s saying. Paul may be formulating it also under the influence of LXX 1 Sam 8:7 or Isa 21:2.80 However, the following clause, τὸν [καὶ] διδόντα τὸ πνεῦμα αὐτοῦ τὸ ἅγιον εἰς ὑμᾶς, with which Paul defines God, here indicates that emphasis lies elsewhere than on his apostolic claim. τὸν [καὶ] διδόντα τὸ πνεῦμα αὐτοῦ τὸ ἅγιον εἰς ὑμᾶς, “who indeed gives his Holy Spirit to you.” The formula τὸ πνεῦμα αὐτοῦ τὸ ἅγιον (“his Spirit, the Holy One”) is unusual in Paul. He seems to be adding τὸ ἅγιον to “his Spirit” to stress that the Spirit of God is holy. Thus, by forming with the emphatic τὸ ἅγιον here an inclusio with ἁγιασμός in v. 3 above, Paul wraps up his renewed instruction on sanctification. By describing God as the dispenser of the Holy Spirit, he enhances the seriousness of the warning in v. 8a. However, it is a question of how that description exactly does it. Is he meaning here something similar to what he says in 1 Cor 6:19 that since “God gives his Holy Spirit into you,” “your body is a temple of the Holy Spirit within you” and therefore you cannot possibly defile it with sexual immorality? (Although note here in our verse that Paul does not have in mind the Thessalonian believers’ uniting their “body” with a prostitute like the Corinthian believers [cf. 1 Cor 6:12–20], but more generally the defilement of their “body” by engaging in various acts of sexual immorality.) In view of his use in v. 4 above of σκεῦος for “body” or, more specifically, a member of it, namely, the genitals, this possibility appears at least worthy of serious consideration. However, the strong likelihood of an echo of Ezek 36:27; 37:14 here suggests that, with the formulation “God, who gives his Spirit, the Holy One, into you,” Paul is more interested in making the readers conscious of the Spirit’s work of leading and enabling them in their sanctification (see below). The present-­tense participle διδόντα (“gives”) here is parallel to the present-­tense participle καλοῦντος in 2:12 (cf. also 5:24, see comment ad loc). Just as God called believers at baptism or even before it, so did God endow them with the Holy Spirit at baptism. But, as noted in 2:12, Paul uses the present tense (“God, who calls you into his kingdom”) to stress God’s ongoing call for believers to obey God’s reign in the present (and thus to “live in the manner worthy of God”), so as to obtain the glory of his consummated kingdom at the eschaton. Likewise, here he uses the present tense (“God, who gives into you his Holy Spirit”) to stress God’s ongoing giving of the Holy Spirit (or the ongoing

79 Cf. K. H. Rengstorf, TDNT 1:413–20. See esp. m. Ber. 5:5, which stipulates that one’s shaliach [messenger; agent] is as oneself. 80 Cf. Best, 168–69; pace Holtz, 169.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 345

7/12/23 11:29 AM

346

1 Thessalonians 4:3–8

operation of the Holy Spirit)81 in the lives of believers to guide and enable them to progress in sanctification, so as to be “blameless in sanctification” at the last judgment at the parousia of the Lord Jesus Christ (3:13; 5:23–24). Thus, using the present-­tense διδόντα here is in line with writing ἐν ἁγιασμῷ instead of ἐπὶ ἁγιωσύνῃ in the preceding verse. Because the readers’ sanctification is God’s will (v. 3) and because accordingly God has called them to be in the state of sanctification and grow in it (v. 7; see comment above), to disregard Paul’s apostolic commands for their growth in sanctification is to disregard not him but God himself, who sent him as his messenger. In the context of explaining this fact, Paul adds our relative clause, stressing God’s ongoing supply of his Holy Spirit to aid their (growth in) sanctification. So with the clause, he further stresses that to disregard his instructions for sanctification is to disregard God—­not just his will and call but his present activity of aiding them through his Spirit to live a sanctified life. To disregard God in this way, that is, to refuse to avail themselves of God’s leading and enabling grace for their sanctification, would make them practically “like the gentiles, who do not know God” (v. 5) and so make them liable to God’s judgment (v. 6). It is quite likely that Paul here echoes Ezek 36:27; 37:6, 14.82 With τὸν θεὸν τὸν [καὶ] διδόντα τὸ πνεῦμα αὐτοῦ here, he represents God’s promise καὶ τὸ πνεῦμά μου δώσω in Ezek 36:27 (see similarly in 37:6, 14). He seems to take εἰς ὑμᾶς of Ezek 37:6, 14, instead of ἐν ὑμῖν of Ezek 36:27, in order to emphasize that God does not just “give” his Holy Spirit “to you,” but rather “gives” his Holy Spirit “into you” in order to indwell them (cf. Gal 4:6: “into [εἰς] our hearts”; also 2 Cor 1:22: “in [ἐν] our hearts”). He changes from the general reference “us” in v. 7 back to the specific reference “you” in v. 8 (cf. vv. 1–7), clearly to make his readers take the warning of v. 8 (and the exhortations in vv. 3–7) seriously, but it may also reflect the influence of the Ezekiel passages. God does not only call and make “you” the sanctified ones, nor just demand “you” to live a sanctified life or give the instructions for it through his mouthpiece Paul. He also sets his Holy Spirit within “you” to cause “you” to live a holy life in fulfilment of the prophecy of Ezekiel. How serious would it be then for “you” to disregard such a God? See Explanation below on the significance of the echoes of Ezek 36:27; 37:6, 14 here.

Explanation In what follows we wish to highlight a few noteworthy items for further elaboration. In v. 6, note Paul’s statement that the Lord is the ἔκδικος of evil deeds at the last judgment, together with the statements that he makes in 81 So Fee, 154; Weima, 283. 82 Cf. Marshall, 114; Holtz, 167; Fee, 154; Weima, 282–83; also Horn, Angeld, 125–27; Turner, Holy Spirit, 109; Rabens, “Pauline Pneumatology,” 178–79; Kim, PNP, 158–63.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 346

7/12/23 11:29 AM

Explanation 347 1:10; 3:12–13; and 5:9–10. These statements and the emphasis on faith as the means of salvation in this epistle clearly suggest that in Thessalonica Paul taught salvation in Christ in the category of justification, expressing it in the contextualized terms of sanctification (see above). Thus, in this epistle, the doctrine of justification by faith that requires a life of bearing fruit of righteousness (or sanctification) is implicitly present, though not unfolded or expounded.83 In vv. 3–6 Paul addresses only male believers, reflecting the male-­dominant environment of the day. But when he reflects on the male-­female relationship critically, he affirms their complete equality (see 1 Cor 7:2–16; Gal 3:28). So his teaching here can also apply to female believers. Regarding vv. 3–7, Malherbe cites several Stoic texts that counsel against sexual passion and indulgence and claims that here Paul reflects his familiarity with their language and his indebtedness to their thoughts.84 This view leads Malherbe to be somewhat ambivalent about Paul’s attitude to paganism here. However, faced with our phrase “like the gentiles, who do not know God,” Malherbe cannot help but recognize that Paul is showing the standard Jewish view regarding pagan idolatry and immorality. However, R. F. Hock is undeterred.85 He cites many Greco-­Roman philosophic texts that urge self-­control (so¯ phrosyneˉ ) against the prevalent sexual licentiousness created by sexual desire (epithymia) and the lack of self-­control (akrasia), as well as justice (dikaiosyneˉ ) against one doing injustice (adikia) to a husband by developing an adulterous relationship with his wife. Hock suggests that in 4:3–8 Paul also basically urges these two virtues: so¯ phrosyneˉ , with the first two admonitions (“to abstain from porneia” [v. 3] and “to acquire a wife in holiness and honor” [v. 4]), and dikaiosyneˉ , with the third admonition, “let no one wrong his brother in an adulterous affair” (v. 6).86 Hock may be right to protest against the one-­sided condemnation of pagan sexual morality of the first-­century Hellenistic world that is found in some Christian works.87 It is good to be reminded by him (as well as by Malherbe) of the fact that some Cynic and Stoic philosophers did also cultivate the virtues of so¯ phrosyneˉ and dikaiosyneˉ against epithymia, akrasia, and adikia in sexuality, and that those virtues are similar to those that Paul seeks to cultivate in our text. However, Hock seems to go too far with the following conclusion: In other words, Paul’s admonishments regarding sexual morality, which may well have paralleled Jewish views on the subject, matched the Thessalonians’ own earlier values as well. Indeed, they had probably 83 84 85 86 87

Cf. Kim, “Gospel That Paul Preached,” in PGTO, 122–28. Malherbe, 229–31. Hock, “God’s Will at Thessalonica,” esp. 163–70. Hock, “God’s Will at Thessalonica,” 166. Hock, “God’s Will at Thessalonica,” 162–63.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 347

7/12/23 11:29 AM

348

1 Thessalonians 4:3–8

accepted Paul’s missionary appeal and turned toward the living and true God because Paul addressed their concerns about sexual morality and affirmed their values of sophrosyne and dikaiosyne as being nothing less than the will of God.88

This conclusion does not fit well with Paul’s emphatic exhortations and strong warnings in our passage. Had so¯phrosyneˉ and dikaiosyneˉ in sexuality been the readers’ “earlier values” and “concerns,” why would Paul have imparted his instructions about sexual morality with the authority of the Lord Jesus Christ, and why would he strongly exhort them to live a chaste life, declaring that it is “the will of God” for them and reminding them of God’s calling for them (vv. 1–3, 7–8)? Why would he warn the readers not to follow the “lustful passion [of] the gentiles, who do not know God” (v. 5)? Why would he have “forewarned” them of the Lord’s “vengeance” regarding sexual immorality during his founding mission in Thessalonica, and why would he be repeating that stern warning again in this letter (v. 6)? These repeated exhortations and warnings in our text against sexual immorality seem to suggest that the readers were usual participants in their sexually licentious environment before their conversion and that they were still under the pressure of that environment. Wanamaker seems to come nearer to the truth when he writes, “The serious and even threatening tone of vv. 6–8 suggests very strongly that Paul was dealing with a problem that had actually emerged in the community at Thessalonica and that he viewed with considerable concern.”89 Turning in topic to v. 8, an echo of Ezek 36:27; 37:6, 14 here makes this verse theologically significant. In Ezek 36:27 God promises to put his Spirit within his restored people to cause them to observe his “statutes and ordinances.” This promise is part of his larger promise to cleanse them from idolatry, impurity (ἀκαθαρσία), and lawlessness (ἀνομία) and to vindicate his holiness (ἁγιασθῆναι; 36:22–32). So the presence of an echo of Ezek 36:27 in our verse suggests that the preceding verse (v. 7), with its contrasting concepts of ἀκαθαρσία and ἁγιασμός, may also be an echo of Ezek 36:22–32. It is noteworthy that in our verse the indwelling Holy Spirit is suggested as the agent of sanctification and no reference is made to God’s “statutes and ordinances” mentioned in Ezek 36:27. Their omission is especially striking because the moral injunctions issued in 1 Thess 4:3–6a are actually what the law contains in its statutes. Although Paul knows well the Jewish understanding that the will of God is fixed in the Torah (Rom 2:18; cf. Ps 40:8),90 in our passage he lays out 88 Hock, “God’s Will at Thessalonica,” 166 (italics original). 89 Wanamaker, 158–59. Pace Yarbrough, Not Like the Gentiles, 66–87, who stresses only the traditional character of the exhortations within Judaism and Paul’s (situation-­independent) purpose of “distinguish[ing] believers from non-­believers” and encouragement to lead a life that is pleasing to God (86–87). 90 Holtz, 155; Malherbe, 225.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 348

7/12/23 11:29 AM

Explanation 349 the requirements of the will of God (v. 3) only in reference to the Lord Jesus Christ (vv. 1–2) and the Holy Spirit of God (v. 8), but not at all to the law. This seems to reflect Paul’s understanding that Christ has superseded the Torah as the means of the revelation of the will of God (cf. Rom 10:4; Gal 3:21–4:7) and that it is not observance of the statutes of the law but rather obedience to the Lord Jesus Christ (observing “the law of Christ” or following his teaching and example—­focused on the double command of love)91 according to the inner urging of the Holy Spirit that effects believers’ sanctification. Thus, 4:1–8 implicitly contains the Pauline theses fully expounded in Galatians and Romans: Christ is the end (fulfilment and therefore supersession) of the Torah, and the Christian life of pleasing God is not Torah observance or doing the “works of the law” but obeying “the law of Christ” (Gal 6:2; cf. 1 Cor 9:21) through the power of the Holy Spirit (Rom 8:1–17; the Spirit-­law antithesis). Rabens appreciates the significance of Ezek 36:27 and 37:14 in our passage and, noting that fornication, lustful passion, defrauding, and impurity are in fact “works of the flesh” according to Gal 5:19–21, thinks that here we have a prefigurement of Paul’s doctrine of the Spirit-­f lesh antithesis.92 Thus, with its implicit witness to the Pauline double antithesis (the Spirit-­law/the Spirit-­f lesh) and its echoes of Ezek 36–37, our passage helps us understand that that Pauline double antithesis developed independently of his struggle with the Judaizers in Galatia and that Ezek 36–37 (and its related passages such as Ezek 11:19–20 and Jer 31:31–34) was part of the biblical basis for the doctrine.93 (See further the comment on v. 9 below.) It is therefore unfortunate that Tomson stresses the Jewish character of the instructions in our passage, vv. 1–12, but fails to appreciate that Paul imparts such instructions as contained in the Torah only by appealing to the authority of the Lord Jesus (vv. 1–2) and the work of the Spirit (v. 8), without any reference to the Torah.94 It is even more unfortunate that M. Hooker extends Tomson’s view and writes, “[In view of the appeal to the Lord Jesus in vv. 1–2] it is clear that this teaching comes with a Christian label. But it is difficult to see anything specifically Christian in the content of the teaching. We may need to turn to other epistles to find that—­which suggests that it may perhaps have taken time for Paul to develop a distinctively ‘Christian’ ethic.”95 This statement of Hooker is based on a wrong assumption. In fact, in his “other epistles” (Romans, 1 and 2 Corinthians; Galatians), which he wrote three to seven years after our epistle (if Galatians is indeed not the first surviving epistle of Paul), Paul does not “develop” any “distinctively ‘Christian’ ethic”—­an ethic that is different in content from the Jewish teaching—­a s far 91 92 93 94 95

Cf. Kim, “Imitatio Christi,” in PGTO, esp. 326–45. Rabens, “Pauline Pneumatology,” 178–79; idem, Holy Spirit, 298. Cf. Kim, PNP, 157–63. Tomson, “Practical Instruction,” 89–130. “Concluding Reflections,” 162 (italics original).

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 349

7/12/23 11:29 AM

350

1 Thessalonians 4:3–8

as calling for a sanctified life against sexual immorality is concerned. At least on that topic, it is not in the change of the content but in understanding the sanctioning authority and the enabling power that the Christian ethic is distinct from the Jewish. So when Hooker fails to appreciate Paul’s imparting of his ethical instructions in terms of the Lord Jesus and the Holy Spirit instead of the law, as a distinctively “Christian” ethic in our passage, it is unclear what Hooker is actually looking for. The majority view that our epistle is the earliest of Paul’s surviving epistles seems to create in the minds of many scholars the strong assumption that our epistle represents an early and somewhat primitive stage of Paul’s theology. The brevity and apparent simplicity of the epistle, devoid of critical discussions about weighty subjects such as justification and the law, wisdom and knowledge, spiritual gifts and experiences, and the like appears to strengthen this assumption even further. So it is fashionable in scholarship to speak of development in Paul’s theology between our epistle and his other epistles. However, as far as the development of a distinctive “Christian” ethic is concerned, our passage shows that Paul had already crafted it during his fifteen-­year plus career as a Christian theologian by the time he wrote our epistle, rather than later during the subsequent three to seven years in which he wrote his other, major epistles. How much “development” is to be seen between our passage and Rom 8:3–4? As far as the content of the righteous or holy life required of Christians is concerned, there is a change in that Paul makes it explicit in Rom 8:4 that the ethical exhortations that he imparts in places like our passage are in fact “the righteous requirement of the law” (τὸ δικαίωμα τοῦ νόμου). Does this change amount to a substantial “development”? At any rate, as far as the sanctioning authority and the enabling power for a righteous life is concerned, there hardly seems to be any difference between 1 Thess 4:1–8 and Rom 8:1–17. On this question again we may at most speak of Paul making more explicit in the Romans passage what he implicitly says in our present passage. Our new observations on the parallelism between our passage and Rom 1:18–32 + 12:1–2 (over the bridge of Rom 6:12–19)96 also make it more difficult to posit a substantial development in Paul’s teaching between our epistle and Romans.97 See Explanation at the end of 3:11–13 above for the Trinitarian framework of the doctrine of sanctification in this epistle.98

96 Cf. Kim, “Paul’s Common Paraenesis,” in PGTO, 253–77. 97 See also Kim, “Gospel That Paul Preached,” in PGTO, 67–131. 98 See also Kim, “Gospel That Paul Preached,” in PGTO, 85–87, for the continuity between this epistle and the later Pauline epistles in affirming the christological understanding of the work of Spirit, which is argued against the contrary claim of Söding (“Der Erste Thessalonicherbrief,” 191).

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 350

7/12/23 11:29 AM

Bibliography 351

C. Sibling Love and a Becoming Life (4:9–12) Bibliography Barclay, J. M. G. “Conflict in Thessalonica.” CBQ 55 (1993): 512–30. Burke, T. J. Family Matters: A Socio-­Historical Study of Fictive Kinship Metaphors in 1 Thessalonians. LNTS. London: T&T Clark, 2003. Deidun, T. J. New Covenant Morality in Paul. Analecta Biblica 89. Rome: Biblical Institute Press, 1981. Evans, R. M. “Eschatology and Ethics: A Study of Thessalonica and Paul’s Letters to the Thessalonians.” PhD diss., University of Basel. Princeton, NJ: McMahon, 1968. Heininger, B. “Die Inkulturation der Nächstenliebe: Zur Semantik der ‘Bruderliebe’ im 1 Thessalonicherbrief.” Pages 65–88 in Die Inkulturation des Christentums. WUNT 255. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2010. Hock, R. F. The Social Context of Paul’s Ministry: Tentmaking and Apostleship. Philadelphia: Fortress, 1980. Hurd, J. C. “Concerning the Structure of 1 Thessalonians.” Pages 47–83 in The Earlier Letters of Paul—­and Other Studies. Bern: Lang, 1998. Kim, S. “The Gospel That Paul Preached to the Thessalonians—­Continuity and Unity of Paul’s Gospel in 1 Thessalonians and in His Later Epistles.” Pages 67–131 in PGTO. Kloppenborg, J. S. “φιλαδελφία, θεοδίδακτος, and the Dioscuri: Rhetorical Engagement in 1 Thessalonians.” NTS 39 (1993): 265–89. Pilhofer, P. “Περὶ δὲ τῆς φιλαδελφίας . . . (1 Thess 4,9): Ekklesiologische Überlegungen zu einem Proprium früher christlicher Gemeinden.” Pages 139–53 in Die frühen Christen und ihre Welt. WUNT 145. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2002. Still, T. D. Conflict in Thessalonica. JSNTSup 183. Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1999. Tellbe, M. Paul between Synagogue and State: Christians, Jews, and Civic Authorities in 1 Thessalonians, Romans, and Philippians. ConBNT 34. Stockholm: Almqvist & Wiksell, 2001. Vos, C. S. de. Church and Community Conflicts: The Relationships of the Thessalonian, Corinthian, and Philippian Churches with Their Wider Civic Communities. SBLDS 168. Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1999. Witmer, S. E. Divine Instruction in Early Christianity. WUNT 2/246. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2008. —­—­— .­ “θεοδίδακτος in 1 Thessalonians 4.9: A Pauline Neologism.” NTS 52 (2006): 239–50.

Translation With regard to sibling love you have no need (for us) to write to you,a for you yourselves are divinely taught to love b one another—­10indeed, you do it c to all the brothers and sisters d in the whole of Macedonia. But we appeal to you, brothers and sisters, to abound (in this) more and more; 11to aspire to live a quiet life, to mind your own affairs and to work with your own e hands, as we charged you, 12so that you may conduct yourselves becomingly toward those who are outside (your ranks), and may have need of nobody[’s help]. 9

Notes a. ἔχομεν (“we have”) is read for ἔχετε (“you have”) by ‫א‬2 D* F G Ψ 1739 1881 pc lat syr ; εἴχομεν (“we had”) is read by B I latt vg.codd. “We have no need to write to you” gives excellent sense and construction; it is possible that the reading “you have” is due to the influence of 5:1, as is the reading γράφεσθαι (H 81 pc Aug) for γράφειν (“you have no need to be written to”). b. εἰς τὸ ἀγαπᾶν, where εἰς τό is best seen as “acting for the epexegetic inf” (MHT 1:219). c. καί (“even”) is inserted by B before εἰς πάντας τοὺς ἀδελφούς. hcl

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 351

7/12/23 11:29 AM

352

1 Thessalonians 4:9–12

d. τούς (emphasizing the attributive relationship of the following ἐν ὅλῃ τῇ Μακεδονίᾳ to τοὺς ἀδελφούς) is read in ‫א‬2 B D1 H 1739 1881 byz lat vg.cod; it is omitted by ‫ *א‬A D* F G 629 lat. e. ἰδίαις (“own”) is read in ‫ *א‬A* A D2 byz; it is omitted by ‫א‬2 B D* F G Ψ 1739 1881 pc syrhcl.

Form/Structure/Setting Having exhorted the readers on how they ought to grow in sanctification by maintaining sexual purity, Paul now takes up another theme adumbrated in his transitional prayer, namely, how they ought to “increase and abound in love to one another and to all human beings” (3:12–13). Like maintaining sexual purity, loving neighbor both inside and outside the church is also part of a life that pleases God, which is required of God’s holy people (4:1–2; see the explanation in Form/Structure/Setting of 4:1–2 and the comments on 3:12–13 above). The opening words of this paragraph (περὶ δέ, “now concerning,” “with respect to”) and at 4:13 and 5:1 have led some commentators to see that in 4:9–5:11 Paul is replying to questions raised in a letter sent to him by the Thessalonian church, as he does in 1 Cor 7–16 with the same περὶ δέ formula.99 In 1 Cor 7:1, 25; 8:1; 12:1; 16:1, 12, Paul invariably introduces his topics by opening the sections with the περὶ δέ formula. It is widely recognized that they are references to the questions raised by the Corinthians in their letter to him. Paul himself suggests this with his reference to what the Corinthians wrote to him (1 Cor 7:1). In our epistle, however, he makes no reference to the Thessalonians writing a letter to him. In 4:9 and 5:1 of our epistle, as in those Corinthians passages, he does begin his teachings by introducing his topics with the περὶ δέ formula, and in 4:13 also he introduces his topic in the form of περὶ τῶν κοιμωμένων. However, in 4:13 he has placed the phrase later in the sentence and formulates it without δέ after περί. In 4:9 and 5:1, he lets the opening περὶ δέ formula be followed by the parallel formula οὐ χρείαν ἔχετε γράφειν ὑμῖν, αὐτοὶ γὰρ ὑμεῖς . . . ἐστε . . . (“you have no need to have any one write to you, for you yourselves are . . .”) and οὐ χρείαν ἔχετε ὑμῖν γράφεσθαι, αὐτοὶ γὰρ ἀκριβῶς οἴδατε . . . (“you have no need to have anything written to you, for you yourselves accurately know . . .”), respectively. These differences between the three occurrences of the περί formula in our epistle and those in 1 Cor 7–16 make us hesitate to see the former like the latter, that is, as references to questions raised by the Thessalonians in a letter to Paul. If with the three περί formulae in 1 Thess 4:9–5:11 he is responding to three formal questions that have been put to him by the readers, would he 99 E.g., Frame, 140; see also Faw, “On the Writing”; among recent commentators, e.g., Malherbe, 209–10, 243; Green, 202; cf. also Hurd, “Structure of 1 Thessalonians,” 59–62, 74–79.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 352

7/12/23 11:29 AM

Form/Structure/Setting 353 not put those formulae (περὶ δὲ τῆς φιλαδελφίας, περὶ δὲ τῶν κοιμωμένων, and περὶ δὲ τῶν χρόνων καὶ τῶν καιρῶν) in parallelism at the heads of his answers, as in 1 Cor 7–16? Is it easy to imagine him responding to the requests of the readers for more teaching by saying that they really do not need more teaching—­this not just once, but two of the three times, at that? If the lot of the dead believers was a specific question on which the readers sought a teaching, why does he start with οὐ θέλομεν δὲ ὑμᾶς ἀγνοεῖν, ἀδελφοί (“but we do not wish you to be ignorant, brothers and sisters”)? If the readers wrote to him, asking for a teaching on the lot of dead believers, they did so because they did not want to be ignorant about it. To such people, would he respond emphatically stating that he does not wish them to be ignorant? Would it not be much more natural if he wrote: “περὶ δὲ τῶν κοιμωμένων, I would not have you grieve as others do who have no hope”? Furthermore, is it easy to imagine the readers writing to Paul, “Please teach us how to practice sibling love”? If they did so with the abuse of sibling love by the “idlers” in view (the problem hinted at in vv. 11–12, see below), would he say that they do not need him to write to them on the subject as they are practicing sibling love so well (see 4:10a)? And would he start his exhortation by saying “do [it] more and more” in v. 10b? (see below). Note well the connection between the two infinitives in the exhortation in 10b and 11a. Therefore, it appears better to suppose, together with most commentators, that, like sanctification (4:3–8) and internal order and harmony (5:12–22), the three topics dealt with in 4:9–5:11 also belong to the issues that Timothy orally reported concerning the Thessalonians’ faith and conduct (3:6). For all their staunch faith, exemplary practice of love, and fervent hope (1:3), their faith was not properly expressing itself in a sanctified life, their sibling love was partially abused, and their eschatological hope lacked a proper understanding. So Paul wishes very much that he could come to the readers and make up these deficiencies of their faith and conduct (3:10). As his visit with them remains only a prayer topic for the time being, he imparts his instructions in this letter to remedy these deficiencies, taking them one by one. After providing in 4:1–2, as in Rom 12:1–2, the introduction to the whole paraenetic division of the epistle (see Form/Structure/Setting of 4:1–2), Paul starts with sexual morality (4:3–8) and then takes up the next topic, “sibling love” (4:9–12). So, the περὶ δὲ τῆς φιλαδελφίας of 4:9 should be understood only as a sign of introducing a new topic. In 4:13 Paul switches to a new topic, to provide a proper understanding of Christian hope. As Timothy’s report about the readers’ grief about their dead fellows has made it most serious and urgent, he starts the introduction not with a cool, business-­like formula, περὶ δὲ τῶν κοιμωμένων (“now concerning those who are asleep”), but with the emphatic οὐ θέλομεν δὲ ὑμᾶς ἀγνοεῖν, ἀδελφοί (“but we do not wish you to be ignorant, brothers and sisters”). Then, in 5:1 he turns to deal with another issue within the same eschatological hope and

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 353

7/12/23 11:29 AM

354

1 Thessalonians 4:9–12

starts with περὶ δὲ τῶν χρόνων καὶ τῶν καιρῶν (“now concerning the times and the seasons”). On the topic of sibling love, he had taught the readers during his mission in their city; on the parousia of the Lord Jesus Christ, he did the same, probably referring to some sayings of Jesus (see below). Hence, they already practice sibling love in an exemplary way, and they speculate about the date of the Lord’s coming. However, he did not teach about the lot of believers who die before the Lord’s parousia. Hence, they are grieving about their dead fellows. Therefore in 4:13 he starts with “we do not wish you to be ignorant . . .” Sometimes vv. 10b–12 is seen as a separate unit,100 but most commentators affirm the unity of the whole section of vv. 9–12, as there is no real problem in the grammatical and material connection between the two parts, vv. 9–10a and vv. 10b–12.101 Actually, the attempt to separate the two parts would make vv. 9–10a quite pointless, as well as make v. 10b incomprehensible. When vv. 9–12 is viewed as a unit, we can see that the second half, vv. 10b–12, constitutes the main point of Paul’s paraenetical teaching, and the first half, vv. 9–10a, with its strong compliments for the readers, is preparatory for it. With the high praises for their practice of “sibling love” in vv. 9–10a, Paul seeks to encourage them to attend to a particular problem that affects their sibling love.102 The παρακαλοῦμεν δὲ ὑμᾶς, ἀδελφοί, περισσεύειν μᾶλλον in v. 10b with the weak adversative δέ is well understandable as marking a transition from the preparatory compliment to the main exhortation. We may also note the construction of vv. 11–12 in the following parallelism: καὶ φιλοτιμεῖσθαι (a) ἡσυχάζειν καὶ πράσσειν τὰ ἴδια (b) καὶ ἐργάζεσθαι ταῖς [ἰδίαις] χερσὶν ὑμῶν (a´) ἵνα περιπατῆτε εὐσχημόνως πρὸς τοὺς ἔξω (b´) καὶ μηδενὸς χρείαν ἔχητε (a-­a´/ b-­b ´ structure; see comment below)

Comment 4:9 Περὶ δὲ τῆς φιλαδελφίας, “But concerning sibling love.” As we have just seen, with the phrase περὶ δέ, Paul is introducing a new topic himself, rather than responding to a question raised by the Thessalonian believers. The noun φιλαδελφία (“brotherly love” or “sibling love”) is more restricted than ἀγάπη, which is to be extended “to all” (3:12). The noun appears only in one other place in the Pauline corpus (Rom 12:10; cf. also Heb 13:1; 1 Pet 1:22; 2 Pet 1:7 [twice]). It is derived from the adjective φιλάδελφος, “loving one’s brother/sister,” which appears occasionally in Attic Greek (and only at 100 E.g., Dibelius, 23; Morris, 130. 101 E.g., Frame, 157; Malherbe, 242; Holtz, 172; Fee, 157–58; Weima, 283–84. 102 Fee, 157.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 354

7/12/23 11:29 AM

Comment 355 1 Pet 3:8 in the NT).103 The noun φιλαδελφία itself appears also occasionally in the works of the Hellenistic period.104 In the LXX it appears in a later book that was not translated from Hebrew (4 Macc 13.23, 26; 14.1), and it is also employed in the writings of Philo (e.g., Embassy 86; Joseph 218) and Josephus (e.g., Ant. 2.161). However, Pilhofer notes that our verse is the first evidence in all of Greek literature of its use for love between people who are not blood related.105 He also points out that Plutarch writes his tract with a similar title (Περὶ φιλαδελφίας) in about AD 100 (i.e., about fifty years after Paul in our verse), and he never applies that word to a relationship between biologically unrelated people.106 Thus, Pilhofer stresses the uniqueness and significance of Paul’s use of the word and explains that this new usage grew necessarily out of Christians’ common practice of addressing one another as ἀδελφοί or ἀδελφαί (see comment on 1:4 above). So it is clear that by using the word φιλαδελφία here, as well as the word ἀδελφοί in 1 Thessalonians in reference to the readers and other Christians (eighteen times besides our verse: 1:4; 2:1, 9, 14, 17; 3:2, 7; 4:1, 6, 10 [2x], 13; 5:1, 4, 14, 25, 26, 27),107 Paul is trying to forge a strong familial solidarity among the members of the Thessalonian church, who are rejected and persecuted by their families and neighbors because of their faith and also have some squabbling among themselves (cf. 5:12–22).108 οὐ χρείαν ἔχετε γράφειν ὑμῖν, “you have no need to write to you.” As it stands, this is clearly an awkward sentence. As mentioned above (see Notes), some manuscripts smooth it out by having ἔχομεν (“we have”) instead of ἔχετε (“you have”) and others by turning γράφειν (“to write”) into its passive form γράφεσθαι (“to be written”), in order to obtain respectively the meanings “we have no need to write to you” and “you have no need to be written to.” No copyist would have changed one of these smooth readings into the awkward reading that is printed here. Therefore, the critical editions of the Greek text take the difficult reading as the original, and translations and commentators usually render it as if the pronoun ἡμᾶς stood in front of the infinitive γράφειν: “you have no need [for us] to write to you.” Some commentators take this statement as an example of paraleipsis,109 a rhetorical device whereby a writer introduces a subject by saying that he does not need to deal with it (see 1:8; 5:1; cf. 2 Cor 9:1; Phlm 19). However, the two reasons emphatically provided in vv. 9b and 10a for the statement suggest that

103 Cf. Sophocles, Ant. 527; Xenophon, Mem. 2.3.17. 104 See references in Burke, Family, 98–117, who provides an extended summary of Plutarch’s tract and Hierocles’s writing, which are both entitled Περὶ φιλαδελφίας; cf. also Heininger, “Inkulturation,” 73–77. 105 Pilhofer, “Περὶ δὲ τῆς φιλαδελφίας,” 140–43. 106 Cf. Klauck, “Bruderliebe,” 84–91. 107 See Burke, Family, 165–67, for a comparative chart of its usage in Pauline letters. 108 Cf., e.g., Malherbe, 243; Green, 203; Witherington, 119; Kloppenborg, “φιλαδελφία,” 272–73. 109 E.g., Holtz, 172; Wanamaker, 159; Malherbe, 243; Weima, 286.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 355

7/12/23 11:29 AM

356

1 Thessalonians 4:9–12

the statement is not merely rhetorical but genuinely meant, at least for most of the Thessalonian believers, and certainly not as a rebuke but as a praise. αὐτοὶ γὰρ ὑμεῖς θεοδίδακτοί ἐστε εἰς τὸ ἀγαπᾶν ἀλλήλους, “for you yourselves are divinely taught to love one another.” This is the first reason why the readers do not need anybody to write to them about sibling love. Wanamaker appreciates the rhetorical force of this formulation and writes, “By putting the matter in this way Paul actually introduced the highest possible warrant for mutual love among the Thessalonians, namely, that it was God-­ordained. Thus, the expression ‘you yourselves are taught by God’ has the same function as the words ‘this is the will of God’ in 4:3.”110 This is the only occurrence of θεοδίδακτος in the NT and is its earliest extant occurrence in Greek literature. So commentators usually take it as Paul’s own formulation (further occurrence only in Barn. 21.6 and in places that are dependent on Paul’s use here). While granting that the formulation of the word θεοδίδακτοι may come from Isa 54:13, Best thinks that Paul means nothing beyond the general idea “that the command to brotherly love is divine in origin” (cf. Lev 19:18).111 But this explanation is too banal. Since the formulation is not only unique in form but also striking in content, it is proper to consider more seriously how Paul came to formulate it and what exactly he means by it. Kloppenborg argues that with the use of φιλαδελφία Paul reminded the readers of the well-­k nown legend of the exemplary “brotherly love” of the Dioscuri, the divine twins, Castor and Polydeuces. Paul coins θεοδίδακτος to mean that the readers are taught about φιλαδελφία by these “gods.”112 But for Paul, who celebrates the readers’ having turned from idols to the one “living and true God” (1:9–10), this is a most implausible speculation. According to Malherbe, Paul formulates θεοδίδακτος against the Epicurean claim to possess an innate knowledge as ἀδίδακτος (“untaught”), and, together with his exhortation in vv. 11–12, forms part of his anti-­Epicurean polemic. But it is far-­fetched to see our passage of vv. 9–12 in the light of Epicureanism (see below). As far as the meaning of the word is concerned, Malherbe tries to understand it in light of Paul’s apostolic self-­understanding as God’s fully empowered agent (2:4) and his identification of his own teaching with God’s word (2:2, 8, 9, 13). So Malherbe thinks that with the word θεοδίδακτος Paul really refers to his own teaching that he delivers under the inspiration of God’s Spirit.113 But this interpretation is to ignore the fact that the word θεοδίδακτος in v. 9b is used, at least formally or rhetorically, to negate the need of his own teaching (v. 9a), so that God’s teaching is contrasted with

110 111 112 113

Wanamaker, 161. Best, 173. Kloppenborg, “φιλαδελφία,” 281–89. Malherbe, 244–45.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 356

7/12/23 11:29 AM

Comment 357 his own teaching. Koester and Roetzel try to explain it in analogy to Philo’s concept of αὐτοδίδακτος for a sage who receives his wisdom directly from God rather than through the mediatorship of a human teacher.114 But Paul does not write here αὐτοδίδακτοι but θεοδίδακτοι, and in doing this he must hardly be trying to improve on Philonian or Hellenistic-­Jewish usage of language in the eyes of his Thessalonian converts. So it seems best to see Paul as coining the new word θεοδίδακτοι spontaneously here out of Isa 54:13, echoing also Jer 31:33–34 and Ezek 36–37.115 The prophecy in Isa 54:13 that in the new age all children of Zion will be taught of God (‫למודי יהוה‬/διδακτοὺς θεοῦ; cf. 1QH 7.10) is cited in John 6:45 and seems to be echoed also in 1 Cor 2:13 and 1 John 2:27. This reflects the early Christian conviction that they are the eschatological community in which the prophetic promises are being fulfilled. Recently Witmer has supported the view that Paul coined the new word θεοδίδακτοι out of Isa 54:13 by showing that it follows the LXX pattern of translating two or three words in the Hebrew text with one Greek compound word.116 Since for Paul the prophecy of the new covenant in Jer 31:31–34 is very important (cf. Rom 11:27; 1 Cor 11:25; 2 Cor 3), it is likely that, while echoing Isa 54:13 here, he also has in mind the similar passage of Jer 31:33–34: “I will put my law within them, and I will write it upon their hearts. . . . And no longer shall each man teach his neighbor and each his brother, saying, ‘Know the Lord,’ for they shall all know me.” Further, in view of Paul’s echo of Ezek 36–37 in the preceding vv. 7–8, it is quite probable that in our verse he retains the influence of that prophecy, which is closely related to Jer 31:31–34.117 In 2 Cor 3:3–9 he uses Ezek 36–37 in combination with Jer 31:31–34 to affirm Christian existence under the dispensation of the new covenant, whose terms are written in their hearts by the Spirit of God. Likewise, in our verse also Paul seems to be echoing Jeremiah’s and Ezekiel’s prophecies in combination. This view is supported by 1 Cor 2:13 (ἐν διδακτοῖς πνεύματος) and 1 John 2:20, 27. For in both passages, where divine teaching and human teaching are contrasted in allusion to Jer 31:33–34, the Spirit of God is specifically mentioned as the agent of the divine teaching, and this suggests that in both passages Jer 31:33–34 is alluded to in association with its related prophecy in Ezek 36–37. This means that in speaking of θεοδίδακτος in contrast to his own teaching in our verse, Paul envisions God’s own teaching of his people (as Isa 54:13 prophesied) done inwardly (as Jer 31:33–34 and Ezek 36–37 prophesied) through his indwelling Spirit (as Ezek 36:26–27 and 37:14 prophesied).

114 Koester, “1 Thessalonians,” 39, and Roetzel, “Theodidaktoi,” 330. 115 Cf. Deidun, New Covenant Morality, 20–21; Witmer, “θεοδίδακτος,” 243–50; idem, Divine Instruction, 157–61; Weima, 288–89. 116 Witmer, “θεοδίδακτος,” 245–48. 117 Cf. Deidun, New Covenant Morality, 20–21.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 357

7/12/23 11:29 AM

358

1 Thessalonians 4:9–12

So θεοδίδακτοι in our verse may be an abbreviation of the thought that underlies v. 8. That is to say, with θεοδίδακτος in our verse, Paul refers to God’s directing of the readers through his indwelling Spirit for sanctification and righteousness (Ezek 36–37) and for obedience to God’s will, so that they may not need any teaching from a human being (Jer 31:31–34). If so, not just v. 8 but the whole of vv. 7–9 echoes Ezek 36–37, and v. 9, with its further echo of Jer 31:31–34, shows that the idea of the new covenant that Paul later unfolds in 2 Cor 3:3–9 is already present implicitly in our passage. This should not be surprising in view of his reminder of the fact that he transmitted to the Corinthians the institution of the Lord’s Supper, including the cup saying of “the new covenant,” when he came to them to preach the gospel shortly after preaching it to the Thessalonians (1 Cor 11:23–26). So, being God’s new-­covenant people, the readers have been provided with the Spirit of God, and this Spirit of God teaches them in their hearts to do the will of God so that they do not need any human teacher teaching them. This interpretation of θεοδίδακτοι in the light of Jer 31:31–34 and Ezek 36–37, as well as Isa 54:13, suggests that οὐ χρείαν ἔχετε γράφειν ὑμῖν partly echoes Jer 31:34 (“No longer will a man teach his neighbor or a man his brother, saying ‘Know the Lord,’ because they will all know me from the least of them to the greatest”). The reason the readers “have no need to have anyone write to” them concerning sibling love is twofold. First is because they are taught by God himself through his Spirit in their hearts (Isa 54:13; Jer 31:33; Ezek 36:27; 37:14) so as to need no human teacher (Jer 31:34). The other is because they are already practicing sibling love exceedingly well (1 Thess 4:10a). Here again the absence of any reference to the law is remarkable. Just as from Ezek 36:27 Paul takes only the idea of God putting the Spirit in the hearts of his people for sanctification and righteousness, without referring to God’s “statutes and ordinances” contained in that verse, so also from Jer 31:33–34 he takes only the idea of God teaching his people in their hearts, without referring to God’s “writing the law upon the hearts” of his people, which is contained in that passage. The idea that Paul produces here by using Ezek 36–37 and Jer 31:33–34 is very close to that which he produces in Rom 8:4 by using Ezek 36:26–27: “in order that the just requirement of the law [δικαίωμα τοῦ νόμου] might be fulfilled in us, who walk not according to the flesh(/the law) but according to the Spirit.”118 By following God’s inner teaching through his Spirit, the readers (can) fulfill the just requirement of the law—­sanctification and sibling love, though they do not take up the yoke of the law of Moses (cf. also 1 Cor 9:21). Thus, along with our observation above on Paul’s use in our vv. 7–8 of Ezek 36–37 without reference to the law, this present observation helps us see a stronger continuity between Paul’s “early” theology in our epistle and his 118 For the view that Rom 8:4 is a rephrasing of Ezek 36:26–27, see Kim, PNP, 159–61.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 358

7/12/23 11:29 AM

Comment 359 “later” theology in 2 Corinthians and Romans than what is usually allowed in critical scholarship. It warns against the attempts to construct a developmental or evolutionary scheme of Paul’s theology from this epistle to the later epistles, as well as against the attempts to see Paul’s critical doctrine of the law as having developed later only in reaction to the Judaizers in Galatia and elsewhere.119 10 καὶ γὰρ ποιεῖτε αὐτό, “for indeed you are doing it.” This is the second reason the readers do not need anybody to write to them about “sibling love.” For this confidence that they are already doing what their Christian commitment requires them to do, compare 4:1 (καθὼς καὶ περιπατεῖτε); 5:11 (καθὼς καὶ ποιεῖτε). This repeated affirmation, of course, has a paraenetic purpose; hence Malherbe appropriately calls it a “paraenetic compliment.”120 It seems to be designed to encourage especially the majority who are active in giving charity to go on sharing their resources with their fellow believers. εἰς πάντας τοὺς ἀδελφοὺς [τοὺς] ἐν ὅλῃ τῇ Μακεδονίᾳ, “to all the brothers and sisters in the whole of Macedonia.” The readers (or most of them) are extending their sibling love not only to one another within their own church but also to fellow Christians in other places in Macedonia. Paul may be referring especially to the hospitality his readers provide to the Christians from other cities visiting Thessalonica, the leading commercial center and port. However, in view of his reference to their evangelistic enterprises in Macedonia and Achaia (1:7–8), the present formulation, “to all the brothers and sisters in the whole of Macedonia,” even if admittedly hyperbolic, seems to have in view more their act of love being done in various districts of Macedonia (if τούς before ἐν ὅλῃ τῇ Μακεδονίᾳ is read, this sense would be conveyed even clearer—­see Notes above). Certainly their gospel preaching is motivated by love (cf. 1:3),121 but since here Paul is speaking of love with the focus on financial sharing, it is unlikely that he is referring just to their evangelistic work. Therefore, it appears that he refers to their charity work, which accompanies their missionary endeavors. Having seen the need, both theological and material, to establish a charity fund for the poor brothers and sisters within their church at Thessalonica and having found the means to do it, they have naturally decided to extend their economic aid also to the poor among the new brothers and sisters whom they have won in other parts of Macedonia through their active evangelism.122 παρακαλοῦμεν δὲ ὑμᾶς, ἀδελφοί, περισσεύειν μᾶλλον, “But we appeal to you, brothers and sisters, to abound more and more.” The weak adversative δέ (“but”) is used in relation to the negative form of the preceding sentence: Paul has “no need to write” to the readers on sibling love because they are taught by God and are practicing it well, “but” still he would exhort the following. 119 120 121 122

See Kim, “Gospel That Paul Preached,” in PGTO, 67–131. Malherbe, 245. Malherbe, 245. Cf. Weima, 290–91, who points to Paul’s reference to the “extreme poverty” of the Macedonian churches in 2 Cor 8:1.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 359

7/12/23 11:29 AM

360

1 Thessalonians 4:9–12

The contents of his exhortation are expressed in the following five infinitives. The first one, περισσεύειν μᾶλλον, “that (you) abound more and more,” is identical with ἵνα περισσεύητε μᾶλλον in v. 1, except that the ἵνα clause has been replaced by the synonymous infinitive phrase here. In context, this could only be an exhortation for them to “abound more and more” in “sibling love.” So with the first infinitive, Paul summarizes and strengthens the paraenesis that he has implicitly imparted through his positive affirmations of the readers in vv. 9–10a. This means that with the first infinitive, περισσεύειν μᾶλλον, he picks up one of the items in his wish prayer in 3:12 (ὑμᾶς δὲ ὁ κύριος πλεονάσαι καὶ περισσεύσαι τῇ ἀγάπῃ εἰς ἀλλήλους καὶ εἰς πάντας). So we can see that in vv. 9–12 he is spelling out his wish for ever-­growing mutual love among the readers that he introduced in the wish-­prayer, just as in vv. 3–8 he spelled out his concern for their sanctification that he introduced in the wish-­prayer (3:13). The readers are taught and enabled by the Spirit of God (θεοδίδακτος) to love one another, so that it is unnecessary for Paul to give them instruction on sibling love in general. Yet on one aspect or application of it he feels the need to instruct them, hence vv. 10b–12. He does not see any self-­contradiction here, because he understands himself not as bringing any new human teaching but as expounding the teaching of the Spirit (cf. 1 Cor 2:13) as one who has “the mind of Christ” (1 Cor 2:16). At this point, Fee makes some fine observations. He sees that here, with the vocative “brothers and sisters,” Paul makes a transition from addressing the whole church (vv. 9–10a) to targeting in on some members who are not working but living off the charity of other members (vv. 10b–12).123 But Paul goes about admonishing them with great gentleness and care. Having started with a captatio benevolentiae (vv. 9–10a), he makes an almost unnoticeable transition here and then “sneaks up” admonitions with a “gradual succession of verbs”124 to reach the climax, “work with your own hands,” in v. 11. He then concludes with the purpose clause “so that you may . . . be dependent on nobody” in v. 12. Throughout, he avoids referring to the target audience as ἄτακτοι (the “disorderly idlers”), although the problem that they create in the church is serious enough for him to do so later in 5:14 and 2 Thess 3:6–15 (in the latter with stern language and at great length). Clearly Fee is impressed by Paul’s way of placing the problem of disruptive-­idlers within the general framework of “sibling love” as well as by his admonishing them in such a gentle way. No doubt thereby Paul tries to help them not only accept his admonition better but also understand that the specific exhortations that he imparts to them here are part of what the common Christian duty of “sibling love” requires of them.

123 Fee, 158–59, 161. 124 Fee, 161.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 360

7/12/23 11:29 AM

Comment 361 11 καὶ φιλοτιμεῖσθαι ἡσυχάζειν καὶ πράσσειν τὰ ἴδια ἐργάζεσθαι ταῖς [ἰδίαις] χερσὶν ὑμῶν, “and to aspire to live a quiet life and to mind [your] own affairs and to work with your [own] hands.” The infinitive φιλοτιμεῖσθαι (BDAG: “to have as one’s ambition, consider it an honor, aspire”) depends on the main clause “but we appeal to you” of v. 10b, like the preceding περισσεύειν, but—­the καί before it being explicative (“namely,” “that is”)—­it begins to explain the preceding περισσεύειν μᾶλλον, how they are to abound in love.125 The following three infinitives, ἡσυχάζειν (BDAG: [2] “to live a quiet life”), πράσσειν (“to do”), and ἐργάζεσθαι (“to work”), are dependent on φιλοτιμεῖσθαι. Having started his exhortation in v. 10b in such a way that the readers could still take it as a general exhortation for all of them, with the three infinitives headed by καὶ φιλοτιμεῖσθαι Paul gradually makes it clear that his exhortation is directed especially toward the idle members (apparently a minority) of the church. These are to abound in love by striving to do the things indicated by the three infinitives (while it is assumed that the charity-­g ivers are to abound in love by continuing with their sharing of their wealth [cf. 2 Thess 3:6–15]). It is often observed that Paul’s demand in vv. 11–12, for the readers to work with their own hands and achieve self-­sufficiency, indicates that the Thessalonian church was mostly composed of low-­class artisans and laborers (cf. 1 Cor 1:26).126 Vos defines them more closely as free-­born artisans.127 For that demand would have applied only to them, but not to slaves nor even to freed persons who had to work for their former masters and remained financially liable to them. In the light of the fact that in the Hellenistic world manual labor was deemed below the dignity of the elite, Vos also views the demand in v. 12a as confirming this view. For only artisans would earn respect from outsiders by not neglecting manual labor, which was appropriately expected of them. It is something of an oxymoron for φιλοτιμεῖσθαι to be associated with ἡσυχάζειν.128 Ambition usually involves more energetic action (cf. Paul’s use of φιλοτιμεῖσθαι to describe his “ambition” to preach the gospel [Rom 15:20] and to please the Lord [2 Cor 5:9]). Why does Paul nevertheless use this emphatic word here? Pointing out that ἡσυχάζειν was frequently used in Hellenism to describe withdrawal from participation in political and social affairs, Malherbe thinks that, together with the following infinitive πράσσειν τὰ ἴδια (“to mind [your] own affairs”), it means “retire from public life” (i.e., from minding civic affairs).129 Thus he sees Paul here teaching the Hellenistic moral philosopher’s ideal of maintaining a quiet life by withdrawing from political and social 125 Malherbe, 246. 126 E.g., Jewett, Correspondence, 120–23; Hock, Social Context, 45; Riesner, Early Period, 377. 127 Vos, Church, 150–54. Cf. also Tellbe, Paul, 92. 128 Dobschütz, 179. 129 Malherbe, 247–49.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 361

7/12/23 11:29 AM

362

1 Thessalonians 4:9–12

engagements. Some of the parallels to the phrases and sentiment of v. 11 that Malherbe cites from several Greek and Hellenistic moral philosophers who propound that ideal are impressive. As far as the fourth infinitive is concerned, following the traditional interpretation (see below), Malherbe thinks that it addresses the problem caused by some “disorderly idlers” (οἱ ἄτακτοι, 5:14) who abuse the philadelphia and agapeˉ that are expressed in the form of the financial sharing by the better-­off members of the church.130 So Paul is exhorting them that the duty of mutual love requires them to work with their own hands and be self-­sufficient rather than being dependent on and burdensome to others. However, later on, driven by his desire to read our whole verse in terms of Hellenistic moral philosophy, Malherbe detects in the “idlers” an Epicurean tendency: they style themselves as living “a quiet life and mind[ing] [their] own affairs” (ἡσυχάζειν καὶ πράσσειν τὰ ἴδια ), but they abuse the love and charity of the church to support such a lifestyle.131 So Paul exhorts them that they “must, ironically, make it their ambition to be quiet and tend to their own affairs” by working to earn their own living.132 Paul does this lest the Thessalonian Christians should suffer a bad reputation among their non-­Christian neighbors (cf. v. 12) as “Epicureans who withdrew from social involvement to pursue the ideal of a quietistic and private life.”133 But this is a quite implausible, if not self-­contradictory, explanation. When “the idlers” are already pursuing that Epicurean, quietistic lifestyle, why does Paul emphatically urge them “to be ambitious to live a quiet life and mind your own affairs”? With his fundamental belief that in this epistle Paul presents himself as an ideal Hellenistic philosopher,134 Malherbe gives the impression that Paul himself teaches (or at least approves his readers holding) the Hellenistic philosophic ideal of “living a quiet life and minding [one’s] own affairs” in the sense of withdrawal from political and social activities, as long as such a life is accompanied by the effort to work with one’s own hands for one’s living.135 However, quite apart from the question of whether Malherbe’s view that Paul styles himself as an ideal Hellenistic philosopher is tenable (see comment on 2:1–12 above), there is also a real question as to whether such a teaching would be appropriate or necessary for the Thessalonian Christians, who probably are mostly low-­class workers rather than philosophers or political and social leaders who can afford to contemplate such an ideal.136 Hock interprets the last infinitive (“to work with your own hands”) in our v. 11 and the following purpose clauses in v. 12 in reference to Dio 130 131 132 133 134 135 136

Malherbe, 255–56. Malherbe, 258–60. Malherbe, 258. Malherbe, 259. Malherbe, 143–49, 256. Malherbe, 246–60. Frame, 161; Marshall, 116.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 362

7/12/23 11:29 AM

Comment 363 Chrysostom’s seventh oration (Euboicus 7.103–53), in which he exhorts the urban poor to work with their hands, as it would meet their “needs” (χρεῖαι, 7.124) and as there are occupations that are not “unseemly” (ἀσχήμων, 7.125).137 So Hock argues that, like Dio, Paul is here imparting advice “on suitable occupations and trades” to his Thessalonian converts who are mostly urban poor (cf. 1 Cor 1:26–29), rather than addressing the issue of some of them who have stopped working in the belief that the Lord’s parousia is imminent. Hock interprets the two infinitives ἡσυχάζειν and πράσσειν (τὰ ἴδια) like Malherbe in terms of Hellenistic moral philosophers’ teachings for withdrawal from public activities, such as “paying special levies, going on embassies to Rome, entertaining the governor, and undertaking public services.”138 But it is unrealistic to believe that Paul would find it necessary to exhort his mostly low-­class poor converts in Thessalonica to withdraw from such public activities.139 It is also difficult to understand why then Paul simply exhorts them “to work with their own hands” and does not specifically teach them which occupations are “seemly” and which are not, as Dio does.140 Furthermore, since Hock does not consider that an issue with the idleness of some members of the Thessalonian church is their abuse of the charity of other members of the church, he is unable to connect this infinitive (“to work with your own hands”) and the preceding infinitives with the main clause of v. 10b.141 Such an interpretation that fails to consider vv. 11–12 within the context of the larger passage of vv. 9–12 and in connection with its overall exhortation for mutual love among the Thessalonian believers can hardly be convincing. The problem of a political interpretation of the infinitives in v. 11 is not lessened even if some political activities on the level of the artisan class of people are projected. So, for example, Vos argues that the Thessalonian Christians, who are mostly free-­born artisans, are involved in a civic disturbance or political agitation by stopping their work or protesting in the deˉmos (the assembly of the city) against the civic community’s persecution of them for their conversion to “another king Jesus” (cf. Acts 17:7).142 So Paul is exhorting them in our passage (vv. 11–12) “to withdraw from public/political life . . . forgoing their right to participate in the meetings of the deˉmos,” as well as admonishing in 5:14–15 the “disobedient” (οἱ ἄτακτοι) among them not to retaliate.143 Thus Vos tries to understand the infinitives in v. 11 by postulating a sort of industrial strike by the Thessalonian Christians. However, if Paul’s whole purpose is here to admonish the striking artisans to return to work and 137 Hock, Social Context, 42–47. 138 Hock, Social Context, 46. 139 Cf. Dobschütz, 180, who, with a similar “political” interpretation, presents the same weakness. 140 See Hock, Social Context, 45. 141 Cf. also Dobschütz, 180. 142 Vos, Church, 150–75. 143 Vos, Church, 175. Cf. also Tellbe, Paul, 130, 133.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 363

7/12/23 11:29 AM

364

1 Thessalonians 4:9–12

stay calm, would he not compose his admonition to that effect clearly, instead of making his admonition unnecessarily complicated and even strange with the third and fourth infinitives, “to mind [your] own affairs and to work with your [own] hands”? (Artisans need not be told to work with their own hands!) Vos’s interpretation also fails to explain adequately the connection of the four infinitives in our v. 11 with the overall theme of sibling love (φιλαδελφία) of the passage (vv. 9–12) and with the exhortation to abound in mutual love in the main clause of v. 10b. Winter also interprets our passage in the sense of political quietism in light of the same kind of Hellenistic parallels as Malherbe and Hock. However, unlike them, Winter thinks that here Paul is prohibiting some Thessalonian Christians who are in patron-­client relationships from activity in the ἐκκλησία of the city in support of their patrons’ causes and admonishing them instead “to do [their] own business and work with their own hands” to earn their own living.144 Green presents basically the same interpretation.145 However, while Winter thinks that Paul is giving these admonitions because such a lifestyle of a client is not always admired by outsiders, Green thinks that he does it because he is worried that such involvement in public disputes for their or their patron’s rights might court persecution of the church from non-­ Christian opponents.146 Similarly, J. R. Harrison and K. P. Donfried also think that Paul is exhorting the readers to abandon their relationships of reliance on and obligation to the wealthy, pro-­imperial patrons of the province.147 But all these “political” views also face the same fundamental problem as those views examined above, namely, how the thus explained four infinitive phrases are related to the overall theme of “sibling love” of our vv. 9–12 and the main clause in v. 10b, “we exhort you to abound (in mutual love) more and more.” Wanamaker follows Hock and Malherbe to interpret the exhortations “to aspire to live a quiet life and to mind [your] own affairs” in terms of the ideal of political quietism.148 However, Wanamaker apparently realizes the inappropriateness of applying this ideal to the Thessalonian believers who are apparently low-­class workers. Therefore, he points to the public outcry and persecution that arose in the wake of the readers’ conversion to the Christian faith and suggests that here Paul advises them to just maintain “a low profile” in order to avoid further trouble for themselves.149 But it is difficult to believe that for such simple advice Paul would employ such strong language as “make it [your] ambition to live a quiet life” and such allegedly well-­k nown idioms for withdrawal from public affairs. 144 Winter, Seek the Welfare, 48–51. 145 Green, 210–11. 146 Green, 210–11. 147 Harrison, Paul and the Imperial Authorities, 330; Donfried, “Issues of Authorship,” 95–96. 148 Wanamaker, 162–63. 149 Cf. also Weima, 295.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 364

7/12/23 11:29 AM

Comment 365 J. M. G. Barclay avoids a “political” interpretation of the infinitives in v. 11. Yet he also finds the traditional explanation (see below) unsatisfactory. So he proposes to reconstruct the background of Paul’s exhortations here as follows. Out of their belief in the imminent outpouring of God’s wrath, some enthusiastic members of the Thessalonian church spent all their time in aggressive evangelism in their city and even in other parts of Macedonia and Achaia, neglecting to work and living off the material support of other members. Their aggressive evangelism involved behaving disgracefully toward nonbelievers—­interfering in their business, treating them as children of darkness, and attacking their idolatry and immorality. Therefore, Paul, fearing that such evangelistic activity would earn the church a bad reputation and increase resentment among nonbelievers, had to restrain them (4:11–12; 5:14–15) and admonish them with his own example of doing gentle evangelism while supporting himself with his own work (2:1–12).150 Barclay’s interpretation may be seen as an improvement upon Wanamaker’s implausible explanation. However, Barclay’s view contradicts the fact that in this brief letter Paul himself repeatedly uses very provocative language about nonbelievers, regarding them as children of darkness (5:4–5), heathen idolators and fornicators (1:9; 4:5–7), doomed to destruction (5:3), hopeless (4:13), and so on. It also fits ill with Paul’s unreserved commendation of the readers’ zeal for evangelism (1:7–8; 4:10): having praised them so highly for their evangelistic work in Macedonia, Achaia, and elsewhere, as well as for their love of brothers and sisters in the whole of Macedonia, would Paul have tried to dampen their evangelistic activities? If, as Barclay claims, “he is happy for the word to spread, but he is anxious about the means used to spread it,”151 would he have not given them specific advice to that effect rather than admonishing them to “aspire to live a quiet life and to mind [your] own affairs,” which, on Barclay’s interpretation, would have conveyed only a total rejection of their entire evangelistic activity? Thus it appears that Barclay’s interpretation is contrary to the whole sentiment of Paul in this letter. Furthermore, it is not easy to imagine that Paul would interrupt his overall exhortation of mutual love in our vv. 9–12 to insert three infinitives (“to aspire to live a quiet life and to mind [your] own affairs”) to correct the readers’ aggressive evangelism. If Paul had been concerned about it as seriously as Barclay imagines, surely he would have treated it separately and given clear instructions about it instead of inserting such ambiguous infinitives in the middle of his exhortation about mutual love among Christian “brothers and sisters” (philadelphia). As these new proposals of interpretation of our passage thus prove to be unsatisfactory, there is no reason to deviate from the more traditional 150 Barclay, “Conflict,” 520–25. This view is followed by Barclay’s pupils Still (Conflict, 246–50) and Burke (Family, 207, 221–22, 229–30). 151 Barclay, “Conflict,” 523.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 365

7/12/23 11:29 AM

366

1 Thessalonians 4:9–12

line of interpretation represented by various commentators, albeit with slight variances among them.152 The traditional interpretation has a clear advantage over the new proposals in holding the four infinitives in v. 11 together, as well as explaining them and the two purpose clauses in v. 12 in the context of the overall theme of “sibling love” of vv. 9–12 and in close connection with the main clause in v. 10b. Drawing help from Paul’s own words in this epistle and its sequel, 2 Thessalonians (esp. 3:6–15), which is certainly more legitimate than drawing help from far-­fetched Hellenistic philosophical texts, we may reconstruct the situation as follows. Forced, to some extent, by ostracism from families and employers (see Explanation on 2:13–16 above), and in their excited expectation of the imminent parousia of the Lord (1:9–10; 4:13–5:11), some Thessalonian Christians (apparently a minority) have stopped working to earn their living (cf. 2 Thess 3:6–15) or even looking for new jobs, which were scarce anyway and paid so little.153 Rather, they spent their time in meddling in the lives of others as well as in the affairs of the church, arousing resentment and furor in the church (perhaps by trying to persuade them to adopt their eschatological views and shape the communal church life according to those views). The Hellenistic and Roman practice of the urban poor living on the distribution of grain by the city or some rich citizens could have also contributed.154 In a city where such a practice was well established,155 Paul’s teaching on “sibling love” could have persuaded some rich members of the church in Thessalonica to share their wealth with their poor Christian siblings, and some of the latter may have taken the charity of the former for granted.156 Evans says generally of the urban poor in the Roman Empire that “in a situation where the remuneration from one’s labor hardly justified the effort, where the possibility existed either through a dole or through participating as part of a clientele to receive necessary sustenance, and where ethical evaluations supported idleness, it is hardly surprising to find a high degree of unemployment.”157 This observation could have applied especially well to some poor members of the church. While living off the common fund of the church that some better-­off members had provided, they showed little regard to those who serve the church with their wealth, and displayed unruly behavior (5:12–13). Thus they are destroying the harmony of the church, 152 E.g., Frame, 159–63; Rigaux, 519–21; Best, 174–78; Marshall, 116–17; Morris, 130–34; Fee, 161–63; Weima, 291–300; cf. also Heininger, “Inkulturation,” 68. 153 Cf. Evans, “Eschatology and Ethics,” 55, 172–77; also Russell, “The Idle,” 109–13. 154 Cf. Riesner, Early Period, 376; Russell, “The Idle,” 112–13. 155 Cf. Evans, “Eschatology and Ethics,” 42–46. 156 Cf. Kim, “The Idleness of Some Thessalonians,” in PGTO, 189–91, for the suggestion that the idlers could have been encouraged by such Jesus tradition as Luke 12:22–34//Matt 6:25–34 + 19–21 (cf. also Luke 12:13–21) to take the provisions of the church’s common fund as a form of provision of God about which Jesus taught. 157 Evans, “Eschatology and Ethics,” 55–56.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 366

7/12/23 11:29 AM

Comment 367 as well as exposing the church to be known to outsiders more for disputes and disorder than mutual love and communal peace. Therefore Paul eventually comes to call them οἱ ἄτακτοι (5:14; cf. also 2 Thess 3:11) in both the sense of “the disorderly” and “the idlers,” as well as the “busybodies” (see comment on 5:14 and 2 Thess 3:11). These people are in effect abusing the sibling love of others instead of practicing it. During his mission in Thessalonica, Paul taught not only the rich to share their wealth with their poor brothers and sisters out of sibling love but also the poor to work with their own hands and earn their living (1 Thess 4:11). He enforced this teaching by showing his own personal example of working hard (“labor and toil”) with his own hands by night and by day to earn his living in order not to lay a financial burden on anyone (2:9; 2 Thess 3:7–10). He is very much concerned that nevertheless the aberration has arisen. Hence, in our passage Paul exhorts the disorderly idlers to pursue a quiet life, to work with their own hands, and to earn their own living rather than meddling in others’ lives. Then they would be able to avoid becoming a financial burden on their brothers and sisters and destroying the peace and harmony of the church. Thus Paul is urging the disorderly idlers to practice sibling love rather than abusing that of others (1 Thess 4:10b). However, what worries Paul even more than their idle and disorderly life itself is its ill-­effects upon Christian fellowship (resentment and quarrels) within the church and the bad reputation it is creating for the church in the eyes of outsiders. Hence, in v. 11 he puts the two infinitives, ἡσυχάζειν καὶ πράσσειν τὰ ἴδια (“to live a quiet life and mind [your] own affairs”), before καὶ ἐργάζεσθαι ταῖς [ἰδίαις] χερσὶν ὑμῶν (“and to work with your own hands”), and correspondingly in v. 12 he puts the purpose clause, ἵνα περιπατῆτε εὐσχημόνως πρὸς τοὺς ἔξω (“that you may conduct yourselves becomingly toward outsiders”) before καὶ μηδενὸς χρείαν ἔχητε (“and have need of nobody[’s help]”; see Form/Structure/Setting above for the a-­a´/ b-­b ´ structure here). This overwhelming anxiety about the internal harmony and the external reputation of the church also explains why in v. 11 he employs the emphatic φιλοτιμεῖσθαι (“strive eagerly”) before the apparently incongruous infinitives. In 5:12–15 he imparts even stronger admonitions for the disorderly loafers and for the church as a whole—­there, for internal peace rather than for external reputation. But despite such admonitions, their problem persists, and so Paul has to renew them in the strongest terms later in 2 Thess 3:6–15. Malherbe objects to this line of interpretation, arguing that idleness and eschatology are not connected anywhere in the Thessalonian epistles and that the Thessalonian Christians did not expect an imminent parousia of the Lord.158 But it will be shown in our comment on 4:13–18; 5:1–11 that the second point of this argument is not valid. On the first point, Marshall counters and writes, “Although the connection between expectation of the parousia and idleness is 158 Malherbe, 253. Cf. also Green, 209.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 367

7/12/23 11:29 AM

368

1 Thessalonians 4:9–12

not made in so many words, the way in which instruction about the parousia follows this section (4:13–5:11) and is then itself followed by a further comment about the idle (5:14) may suggest that the two themes are connected.”159 However, Russell points to the facts that the issue of immorality of 4:2–8 is unrelated to any eschatological view and that not all but only a minority of the Thessalonian Christians became idle. So he seeks to attribute the problem of idleness one-­sidedly to their poor socioeconomic condition.160 But it is not at all unusual, even in a community that is, as a whole, expecting an imminent parousia of the Lord Jesus, that only those members who are extreme in that view go so far as to give up their jobs and properties—­especially when they are affected by other socioeconomical problems. In part 2 of this letter, the paraenetic part, Paul first deals with what is, in his Jewish-­Christian eyes, the most serious ethical problem in the Hellenistic environment of Thessalonica, namely, the sexual immorality, and then goes on to address the problem of idleness as part of his exhortation about sibling love (4:9–12). In writing our epistle, Paul planned to deal with the two serious eschatological concerns of the Thessalonian Christians (4:13–18 and 5:1–11) and impart summary instruction for an orderly communal life and worship (5:12–22) as parts of his necessary supplementary teachings for them (cf. 3:10). Seeing that the problem of the idlers had arisen in part out of an overzealous expectation of the imminent parousia of the Lord, he finds it suitable to proceed from imparting the exhortations for the idlers (4:1–12) to delivering his eschatological teachings (4:13–5:11)—­w ith the hope that the assurances he provides about the fate of the dead and about the day of the Lord would also result in cooling down the high fever of their expectation of an imminent parousia.161 However, since the primary point of the eschatological teachings is not to relax the high tension and the teachings are meant not just for the idlers but for the church as a whole, Paul does not connect his exhortation for the idlers directly to the eschatological teachings. But, having concluded those teachings for the whole church with the exhortation to “encourage one another and build up one another” (5:11; cf. also 4:18), he rather proceeds with another important section of his teaching, namely, imparting concrete instructions for building up one another for an orderly communal life (5:12–15). And only in that context does he resume addressing the problem of the idlers—­not in the form of directly addressing them as in 4:11–12, but rather in exhorting the majority who are reassured by his eschatological explanations to help those who are still having trouble, that 159 Marshall, 117. Cf. also Dobschütz, 182–83. 160 Russell, “The Idle,” 109–10. 161 See the introduction to 2 Thess 3:6–15 below. There it is noted that in 2 Thessalonians also Paul imparts his exhortations for the idlers after explaining that the day of the Lord would not come until certain events have taken place. This fact is seen likewise as supporting the view that the eschatological fever was a factor for the rise of some idlers in the church.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 368

7/12/23 11:29 AM

Comment 369 is, to “comfort” the fainthearted, to “admonish” the idlers, and to “support” the weak (5:14, see comments below).162 It is difficult to deny, quite apart from 4:13–5:11 (and 2 Thess 2:1–12), that 1:9–10, 2:12, and 4:6 also suggest that Paul’s original preaching in Thessalonica engendered a fervent eschatological expectation among the converts.163 The numerous examples of apocalyptic sects in history, in which many fervent believers in the imminent end of this world tend to abandon occupation as they await an impending deliverance into paradise, support the view that the abandonment of occupation by the Thessalonian idlers was also caused at least in part by their expectation of the Lord’s imminent parousia.164 καθῶς ὑμῖν παρηγγείλαμεν, “as we commanded you.” This clause needs to be seen as applying to all three preceding infinitival phrases rather than just the last one (“to work with your own hands”). For although in both 2:9–12 and 2 Thess 3:6–13 Paul recounts only his having charged the readers to earn their own living,165 in 2 Thess 3:6–13 he characterizes the idlers also as rebels to the tradition (v. 6) and as “busybodies” (v. 11) who apparently are meddlesome in the affairs of others and thereby have created controversy within the community, as we have seen above. So the three infinitive phrases in our v. 11 are to be taken together as applying to the idlers. The strong word παραγγέλλειν (“to command, charge”) stresses the seriousness of the instruction just imparted (see also comments on 2 Thess 3:6 and Explanation of 2 Thess 3:6–13 for the significance of Paul’s use of this word in connection with the problem of the disorderly idlers). 12 ἵνα περιπατῆτε εὐσχημόνως πρὸς τοὺς ἔξω καὶ μηδενὸς χρείαν ἔχητε, “so that you may conduct yourselves becomingly toward outsiders and have need of nobody[’s help].” The purpose of the exhortation in v. 11 is stated in a twofold way. The first is that the readers may “conduct [themselves] becomingly” so as to command the respect of “outsiders.” The language of οἱ ἔξω (“the outsiders”) for unbelievers and οἱ ἔσω (“the insiders”) for Christians (1 Cor 5:12, 13; Col 4:5; 1 Tim 3:7; Titus 2:8; cf. Mark 4:11) expresses the early Christians’ clear sense of their community as separate from their environment (see 1:1 with comment there). As we have just observed (and in the Form/Structure/Setting section above), the first purpose here corresponds to Paul’s exhortations 162 In view of the seriousness of the problem that the idlers were causing to the communal life of the church, it is not strange that Paul first exhorted the church to admonish the idlers and then to “comfort” the fainthearted and help the weak. 163 Cf. Hock, Social Context, 43. 164 Cf. Jewett, Correspondence, 172–76. Cf. also the account of Hippolytus of Rome (Commentary on Daniel 4.19) about the Christians in Pontus who sold their property, abandoned their work, and became destitute at the announcement of the bishop about the day of the Lord coming by the end of a particular year. 165 See Explanation of 2:9–12 for the view that we can infer from 4:11–12 here that during his mission in Thessalonica Paul issued the command for his converts there to work with their hands to earn their own living, pointing to his own example of such a life.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 369

7/12/23 11:29 AM

370

1 Thessalonians 4:9–12

“to live a quiet life and to mind [their] own affairs” in v. 11. The readers are to stop meddling in one another’s lives and disrupting their common life. They are instead to conduct themselves “becomingly,” so that they may earn outsiders’ respect for their church. Elsewhere also Paul stresses that Christian conduct should be decent and orderly (cf. Rom 13:13; 1 Cor 14:40), and he makes it an important motive for good Christian conduct not to give offence to outsiders or a bad reputation to the church (cf. 1 Cor 5:12–13; 10:32; Col 4:5; 1 Tim 3:7). It is a question whether, admonishing his converts thus, Paul would at the same time seek to inspire them with a counter-­imperial message that inevitably would create conflict with non-­Christian Thessalonians, who were generally very loyal to the Roman Empire.166 If the infinitives “to live a quiet life and to mind [their] own affairs” in v. 11 are to be taken as an admonition for political quietism, then of course this question becomes even more difficult to contemplate. The second purpose of the exhortation in v. 11 is stated as “so that you may have need of μηδενός.” It corresponds especially to the exhortation “to work with your own hands” in v. 11. Is μηδενός, the pronoun in the genitive case, masculine (“nobody”) or neuter (“nothing”)? It comes to mean essentially the same thing, no matter whether Paul is taken to be saying that by working with their own hands the readers should be free from needing anybody (to help) or any help (of somebody). But still most commentators think that the masculine pronoun fits the context better. Fee writes: “At issue is not the ‘needs’ of the slackers the[m]selves, but their quite unnecessary imposition on the generosity of others.”167 Taking this second purpose clause closely with the first one, some commentators suggest that Paul has in view here a believer relying on the help not just of a fellow believer or the church community but also of an “outsider” or an “outside” community.168 As they suggest, Paul may be trying to prevent the latter sort of situation, as it would harm the reputation of the church all the more. But since our purpose clause concludes the passage in which Paul teaches about sibling love among believers, it is more likely that he has only the former situation in view. It was taken for granted that those who were destitute through no fault of their own would be supported by the church (cf. Rom 12:8, 13; 2 Cor 8:13–15; Eph 4:28; 1 Tim 5:8); this was a natural function of sibling love (φιλαδελφία), for which Paul praises the readers so profusely and exhorts them “to abound more and more” (vv. 9–10). Best summarizes the moral of our passage well, writing that “the whole thought here is illuminated by Gal 6:2, 5: the believer never lets himself be a burden

166 Cf. Kim, Christ and Caesar, 3–10, 55–58. 167 Fee, 163. 168 E.g., Best, 178; Marshall, 117.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 370

7/12/23 11:29 AM

Explanation 371 to others; he always seeks to help others with their burdens.”169 The same moral appears also in 2 Thess 3:6–13, where Paul commands the Thessalonian believers to work to earn their own living without burdening others (vv. 6–12), but not to be weary in showing charity to the needy (v. 13; cf. also Eph 4:28).

Explanation The church should always seek to maintain a good reputation in the world. This is inherently required of it as the community of the citizens of the kingdom of God, the community of the justified and sanctified. It is also required by its missionary nature. It must let its “light so shine before all people, that they may see [their] good works and give glory to [their] Father who is in heaven” (Matt 5:16; cf. Phil 2:14–15; 1 Pet 2:9, 12). For the fledgling Thessalonian church, which was surrounded by a hostile environment, it was even more urgent as an effective means of reducing the suspicion and hostility of society at large. Hence Paul exhorts the Thessalonian believers to build up a community of genuine sibling love in which they take care of their weak members (cf. 5:14), living a disciplined and self-­reliant life, and thus display good citizenship toward outsiders.170

169 Best, 178. 170 Cf. Malherbe, 260, who cites some ancient pagan sources that praise Christians’ sibling love and introduces the view of E. R. Dodds (Pagan and Christian, 136–38) that that virtue “was perhaps the strongest single cause for the spread of Christianity.”

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 371

7/12/23 11:29 AM

2. Assurance about Christ’s Advent (4:13–5:11) A. The Faithful Departed (4:13–18) Bibliography Barclay, J. M. G. “Conflict in Thessalonica.” CBQ 55 (1993): 512–530. —­—­— ­. “ ‘That You May Not Grieve, Like the Rest Who Have No Hope’ (1 Thess 4:13): Death and Early Christian Identity.” Pages 131–53 in Not in the Word Alone: The First Epistle to the Thessalonians. Edited by M. D. Hooker. SMBen 15. Rome: Benedictina, 2003. Bauckham, R. “Synoptic Parousia Parables and the Apocalypse.” NTS 23 (1976/77): 162–76. Betz, O. Jesus und das Danielbuch: Die Menschensohnworte Jesu und die Zukunftserwartung des Paulus (Daniel 7,13–14). Vol. 2. Frankfurt: Peter Lang, 1985. Cosby, M. R. “Hellenistic Formal Reception and Paul’s Use of ΑΠΑΝΤΗΣΙΣ in 1 Thessalonians 4:17.” BBR 4 (1994): 15–34. Donfried, K. P. “The Cults of Thessalonica and the Thessalonian Correspondence.” NTS 31 (1985): 336–56. Reprint in pages 21–48 of Paul, Thessalonians and Early Christianity. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2002. Dupont, J. “ ‘Avec le Seigneur’ à la Parousie.” Pages 39–79 in ΣΥΝ ΧΡΙΣΤΩΙ: L’union avec le Christ suivant Saint Paul. Paris: Desclee de Brouwer, 1952. Gundry, R. H. “The Hellenization of Dominical Tradition and Christianization of Jewish Tradition in the Eschatology of 1–2 Thessalonians.” NTS 33 (1978): 161–78. Harrison, J. R. “Paul and the Imperial Gospel at Thessaloniki.” JSNT 25 (2002): 71–96. Hartman, L. Prophecy Interpreted: The Formation of Some Jewish Apocalyptic Texts and of the Eschatological Discourse Mark 13par. ConBNT 1. Lund: Gleerup, 1966. Hyldahl, N. “Auferstehung Christi—­ Auferstehung der Toten (1 Thess. 4,13–18).” Pages 119–35 in Die paulinsche Literatur und Theologie. Edited by S. Pedersen. Teologiske Studien 7. Aarhus: Forlaget Aros, 1980. Kim, S. “Jesus’ Son of Man Sayings as a Basis for Paul’s Gospel of Jesus the Son of God (1 Thess 1:9–10 and Rom 1:3–4).” Pages 133–49 in PGTO. —­—­—­. “The Jesus Tradition in 1 Thess 4:13–5:11.” NTS 48 (2002): 225–42. Reprint in pages 171–88 in PGTO. —­—­—.­ “Paul and the Roman Empire.” Pages 277–308 in God and the Faithfulness of Paul: A Critical Examination of the Pauline Theology of N. T. Wright. Edited by C. Heilig, J. T. Hewitt, and M. F. Bird. WUNT 2/413. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2016. Reprint in pages 223–51 in PGTO. Koester, H. “Imperial Ideology and Paul’s Eschatology in 1 Thessalonians.” Pages 158–66 in Paul and Empire: Religion and Power in Roman Imperial Society. Edited by R. A. Horsley. Harrisburg, PA: Trinity Press International, 1997. Luckensmeyer, D. The Eschatology of First Thessalonians. NTOA 71. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2009. Luz, U. Das Geschichtsverständnis des Paulus. BEvT 49. München: Evangelischer Verlag, 1968. Neirynck, F. “Paul and the Sayings of Jesus.” Pages 511–67 in L’Apoˆtre Paul: Personnalité, style et conception du ministère. Edited by A. Vanhoye. BETL 73. Leuven: Leuven University Press, 1986. Nepper- ­C hristensen, P. “Das verborgene Herrenwort: Eine Untersuchung über 1 Thess 4,13–18.” ST 19 (1965): 136–65. Nicholl, C. R. From Hope to Despair in Thessalonica: Study in 1 & 2 Thessalonians. SNTSMS 126. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2004. Oakes, P. “Re-­Mapping the Universe: Paul and the Emperor in 1 Thessalonians and Philippians.” JSNT 27 (2001): 301–22. Park, J. S. Conceptions of Afterlife in Jewish Inscriptions. WUNT 2/121. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2000. Peterson, E. “Die Einholung des Kyrios.” ZST 1 (1930): 682–702. Plevnik, J. Paul and the Parousia: An Exegetical and Theological Investigation. Peabody: Hendrickson, 1997. —­—­—­. “The Taking Up of the Faithful and

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 372

7/12/23 11:29 AM

Translation 373 the Resurrection of the Dead in 1 Thessalonians 4:16–18.” CBQ 46 (1984): 274–83. Röcker, F. W. Belial und Katechon: Eine Untersuchung zu 2Thess 2,1–12 und 1Thess 4,13– 5:11. WUNT 2/262. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2009. Siber, P. Mit Christus leben: Eine Studie zur paulinischen Auferstehungshoffnung. ATANT 61. Zürich: Theologischer, 1971. Stuhlmacher, P. “Jesustradition im Römerbrief?” TBei 14 (1983): 240–50. Tellbe, M. Paul between Synagogue and State: Christians, Jews, and Civic Authorities in 1 Thessalonians, Romans, and Philippians. ConBNT 34. Stockholm: Almqvist & Wiksell, 2001. Tuckett, C. M. “Synoptic Tradition in 1 Thessalonians?” Pages 160–82 in The Thessalonian Correspondence. Edited by R. F. Collins. BETL 87. Leuven: Peeters, 1990. Walter, N. “Paul and the Early Christian Jesus-­Tradition.” Pages 51–80 in Paul and Jesus. Edited by A. J. M. Wedderburn and C. Wolff. JSNTSup 37. Sheffield: JSOT, 1989. Wenham, D. Paul: Follower of Jesus or Founder of Christianity? Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1995. Wright, N. T. Paul and the Faithfulness of God. Vol. 2. Christian Origins and the Question of God 4. Minneapolis: Fortress, 2013.

Translation Now, brothers and sisters, we do not wish a you to be ignorant with regard to those who are asleep,b in order that you may not grieve like the rest, who have no hope.c 14 For if we believe that Jesus died and rose, so also God d will bring (back) through Jesus those who have fallen asleep, to be with him. 15For we tell you this by the word of the Lord,e we who are alive, who are left to the advent of the Lord,f shall have no precedence g over those who have fallen asleep, 16because the Lord himself will descend from heaven with a shout of command, with an archangel’s voice and with the trumpet of God. The dead in Christ h will rise first,i 17then we who are alive, who survive,j shall be caught away in clouds together with them to meet k the Lord in the air. Thus we shall be forever with l the Lord. 18So, comfort one another with these words.m 13

Notes a. For οὐ θέλομεν (“we do not wish”), οὐ θέλω (“I do not wish”) is read by 104 614 630 pc lat vg.codd syr (under the influence of Rom 1:13, etc.). b. κοιμωμένων, for which the perfect κεκοιμημένων (“have fallen asleep”) is read by D (F G which exhibit the corrupt form κεκοιμήνων) Ψ byz. c. οἱ μὴ ἔχοντες ἐλπίδα (οἱ is omitted by F G). For μή with the participle, cf. 2:15; 4:5. Apart from Hellenistic usage, μή could be explained here as generic; it is characteristic of pagans that they have no hope in face of death. d. καὶ ὁ θεός, for which B 1739 pc read ὁ θεὸς καί. e. ἐν λόγῳ κυρίου. Since both nouns are anarthrous, “the word of the Lord” (rather than “a word . . .”) is probably the appropriate rendering. f. For κυρίου, B reads Ἰησοῦ. g. οὐ μὴ φθάσωμεν. The οὐ μή with the aorist subjunctive is the most definite form of negative statement regarding the future. h. οἱ νεκροὶ ἐν Χριστῷ, for which F G* have the more classical construction οἱ νεκροὶ οἱ ἐν Χριστῷ. i. For πρῶτον (adverb), πρῶτοι (in agreement with νεκροί) is read by D* F G lat. j. οἱ περιλειπόμενοι, omitted by F G lat a b Tert Ambst Spec. k. εἰς ἀπάντησιν, for which D* F G read εἰς ὑπάντησιν (cf. Matt 25:1). l. For σύν (“with”), B reads ἐν (“in”). m. τοῦ πνεύματος (“of the Spirit”) is added in 1739c pc.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 373

7/12/23 11:29 AM

374

1 Thessalonians 4:13–18

Form/Structure/Setting It appears that Timothy reported to Paul that the Thessalonians were grieving over their fellow believers who had died before the parousia (“advent” or “coming”) of the Lord Jesus Christ, as well as very excited about the timing of that parousia. So Paul deals with these matters in turn in the following two sections: 4:13–18 (περὶ τῶν κοιμωμένων) and 5:1–11 (περὶ δὲ τῶν χρόνων καὶ τῶν καιρῶν). The structure of our passage may be analyzed as follows: v. 13: the problem stated v. 14: the summary answer (or thesis) provided on the basis of the gospel of Jesus’s death and resurrection vv. 15–17: demonstration and substantiation of the thesis v. 18: the concluding call

Comment 4:13 Οὐ θέλομεν δὲ ὑμᾶς ἀγνοεῖν, ἀδελφοί, “But we do not wish you to be ignorant, brothers and sisters.” This is a variety of the “disclosure formula”1 that Paul often employs to say emphatically, “we wish you to know” (cf. 1 Cor 11:3; Col 2:1; also Phil 1:12), whether with reference to apostolic experiences (2 Cor 1:8) and travel plans (Rom 1:13) or with reference to disclosures of the divine purpose (Rom 11:25) or principles of personal conduct (1 Cor 10:1) and church practice (12:1). Whatever the subject matter in question, it is evidently considered important that the readers should be aware of it. With the disclosure formula here, Paul is announcing he plans to teach the readers something new. That is clear especially when the particular form of the formula here is contrasted with the repeated formula “you know that . . .” in this letter (2:1; 4:2; 5:1–2; cf. also 4:9) and the repeated references to the teachings that he imparted to the readers (2:11–12; 3:3–4; 4:2, 6, 11). Yet it is debated whether he is to be taken as meaning to teach what he did not previously teach about at all,2 or to clarify what he did teach about but not adequately or specifically enough so that the readers did not properly understand.3 While Green is open to both possibilities,4 Malherbe leans toward the latter, but prudently concludes: “Exegesis will have to determine which possibility is correct in any particular text.”5 περὶ τῶν κοιμωμένων, “with regard to those who are asleep.” The use of “sleep” as a euphemism for death was commonplace in antiquity (cf. the OT 1 2 3 4 5

Cf. T. Y. Mullins, “Disclosure: A Literary Form in the New Testament.” NovT 7 (1964): 44–50. E.g., Best, 184; Lüdemann, Paul, 214–15; Nicholl, Hope, 20–22; Fee, 164–65; Weima, 304, 307–8. E.g., Richard, 232–33; Luckensmeyer, Eschatology, 212–13. Green, 216–17. Malherbe, 262.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 374

7/12/23 11:29 AM

Comment 375 idiom “to sleep with one’s fathers,” e.g., of David, 1 Kgs 2:10 LXX, ἐκοιμήθη μετὰ τῶν πατέρων). In Greek it is attested from Homer onward, even of death in battle (κοιμήσατο κάλκεον ὕπνον, “he slept the sleep of bronze,” Iliad 11.241). Not only κοιμᾶσθαι, but εὕδειν and its compound καθεύδειν are found in this sense (cf. 1 Thess 5:10). Christians took it up as a congenial mode of expression, death being viewed by them as a sleep from which one would awake to resurrection life. (It is probably from the “optimistic” nuance of κοιμᾶσθαι that the Jewish and Christian term κοιμητήριον, “cemetery,” was derived.) In contemporary paganism it was often viewed as a sleep from which there would be no awaking; cf. Catullus (5.4–6): soles occidere et redire possunt: nobis, cure semel occidit breuis lux, nox est perpetua una dormienda. The sun can set and rise again, but once our brief light sets there is one unending night to be slept through.

The participle κοιμώμενοι in the present tense in our verse refers to those who are in the state of “sleep,” “the sleeping ones,” that is, the dead (cf. the participle appearing in the aorist tense in v. 14; see comment there). The context makes it clear that it refers specifically to deceased Christians, presumably members of the Thessalonian church. Some scholars think that martyrdom of some believers is in view here.6 For this view, they point to the references to afflictions of the Thessalonian believers (1:5; 2:2, 14–16; 3:3–4), especially highlighting Paul’s statement that they suffered “the same things” from their compatriots as the churches in Judea suffered from the Jews, “who killed both the Lord Jesus and the prophets” (2:14–16). Some of them also point to Luke’s account of Paul’s mission in Thessalonica as having faced the opposition of the populace with the political charge of preaching an anti-­imperial message (Acts 17:1–9). Donfried is especially keen to use this view of martyrdom as a basis for an anti-­imperial interpretation of our epistle.7 For this view Donfried appeals to F. F. Bruce, who expressed a similar view in his commentary on Acts,8 although later in his WBC commentary 1 and 2 Thessalonians Bruce explicitly denies the references to the afflictions of the Thessalonian believers as amounting to 6 7 8

E.g., Lake, 88; Pobee, Persecution, 113–14; Donfried, “Cults of Thessalonica,” 39–42; Riesner, Early Period, 386–87; Still, Conflict, 215–17; Witherington, 139. Cf. his repetition of the view in his “The Theology of 1 Thessalonians,” 21–23; “The Imperial Cults,” 221; “Issues of Authorship,” 90–95. F. F. Bruce, The Acts of the Apostles: The Greek Text with Introduction and Commentary (London: Tyndale, 1951), 327–28.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 375

7/12/23 11:29 AM

376

1 Thessalonians 4:13–18

sufficient evidence for the view.9 Weima, referring to Barclay, makes a good counterpoint: “If some Thessalonians had actually been martyred, Paul would surely have praised them for this act, just as he elsewhere (Rom. 16:4; Phil. 2:25–30) pays tribute to those who risk their lives for the Christian faith.”10 ἵνα μὴ λυπῆσθε καθὼς καὶ οἱ λοιποὶ οἱ μὴ ἔχοντες ἐλπίδα, “that you should not grieve as do the rest, who have no hope.” The words οἱ λοιποί may refer only to the pagan world (cf. Eph 2:3, “we were by nature children of wrath, like the rest of humankind” [ὡς καὶ οἱ λοιποί]; note also v. 5 above: “like the gentiles, who do not know God” [καθάπερ καὶ τὰ ἔθνη τὰ μὴ εἰδότα τὸν θεόν]). To be without God is to be without hope (cf. Eph 2:12). Luckensmeyer takes the articular participle phrase οἱ μὴ ἔχοντες ἐλπίδα as well as that in v. 5 (τὰ μὴ εἰδότα τὸν θεόν) as functioning as a restrictive relative clause and thinks that by οἱ λοιποί Paul refers to “a sub-­set of non-­followers of Jesus, namely those who have no hope, including Jews.”11 But there is hardly any commentator who thinks that the articular participle phrase in v. 5 is restrictive and that there Paul is talking only about a sub-­set of the gentiles “who do not know God” (as if he ever acknowledged some gentiles “who know God” in the positive sense). Similarly, there are few commentators who take the articular participle phrase here as restrictive.12 So in parallelism to the phrase “the gentiles, who do not know God” in v. 5, the phrase “the rest, who have no hope” here is to be seen as “a typical Pauline blanket thrown over the whole Gentile world.”13 Nevertheless, some commentators argue that οἱ λοιποί here includes the Jews as well.14 At any rate, the phrase οἱ λοιποί here may carry a contemptuous connotation,15 and like οἱ ἔξω (“the outsiders”) in 4:12, it serves to strengthen Christian identity and solidarity.16 Considering the fact that the Christian population was so tiny at the time, Paul’s use of these words to set it apart over against the rest of humanity implies his confidence in its reality and his appreciation of its particular identity. The hopelessness of much of the pagan world of that day in the face of death is well illustrated by contemporary literary and epigraphic material. According to Theocritus (Idylls 4.42), “hopes are for the living; the dead are without hope” (ἐλπίδες ἐν ζῴοισιν, ἀνέλπιστοι δὲ θανόντες), and the lines of Catullus have been quoted already. A letter of condolence from the second century AD (P.Oxy. 115), addressed to a couple who had lost a son, written by a friend of theirs who had suffered a similar bereavement herself, says,

9 Bruce, 98. Cf. also Vos, Church, 159–60. 10 Weima, 310, citing Barclay, “Conflict,” 514. 11 Luckensmeyer, Eschatology, 216. 12 Not even Fee, 168n17, who insists on the restrictive sense in 2:15. 13 Fee, 168n17. 14 So Holtz, 189; Malherbe, 265; also Barclay, “That You May Not Grieve,” 138–39. 15 So Malherbe, 265. 16 Cf. Barton, “Eschatology,” 589.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 376

7/12/23 11:29 AM

Comment 377 “I sorrowed and wept over your dear departed one as I wept over Didymas, . . . but really, there is nothing one can do in the face of such things. So, please comfort each other.” However, Plato and some other philosophers taught the immortality of the soul, and various mystery religions held out a hope for an afterlife. But with the designation “the rest [of humankind], who have no hope,” Paul writes off such pagan “hope” as nothing, just as in 4:5 he wrote off the pagan deities as nothing with the phrase “the gentiles, who do not know God” (cf. Eph 2:12). If Paul also has the Jews in view, he is also nullifying the belief of some Jews, such as the Pharisees, in an afterlife.17 These statements of course reflect his Christian conviction that God the Father of Jesus Christ is the only God, and the Christian hope for the resurrection life is the only real hope. Non-­ Christians, who do not have this real hope for life beyond death, are bound to grieve over death. But Christians have the real hope and therefore should not grieve as they do. Some commentators take καθὼς καὶ οἱ λοιποί in strict analogy to καθάπερ καὶ τὰ ἔθνη found in v. 5 above and explain that Paul is here absolutely prohibiting the readers to grieve, as grieving over death is something that only non-­Christians do.18 Barclay also insists on this point, rejecting some such sense as “that you should not grieve as much, or in the same way, or for the same reasons, as the rest,” which is the majority view.19 However, as Barclay himself notes, Paul does recognize λύπη as necessary sometimes (Rom 9:2; 2 Cor 2:2–5; 6:10; 7:8–11) and even κλαίειν (“weeping”) as permissible (Rom 12:15; 1 Cor 7:30), and with his remark that Epaphroditus’s recovery from deadly illness has spared him λύπη ἐπὶ λύπην (Phil 2:27), Paul seems to think Christian grieving by the bereaved at least on their own behalf is natural. So when he prohibits the readers to grieve here, he is not prohibiting them from feeling sad on account of no longer having their loved ones around. Therefore, it seems necessary to see the stress falling on the phrase οἱ μὴ ἔχοντες ἐλπίδα. He has not written simply “that you should not grieve as do the rest,” but “that you should not grieve as do the rest, who have no hope.” This qualifying clause suggests that he has in mind grieving because of hopelessness for the dead. This is confirmed by the fact that in his summary response to their grief in v. 14, he simply states that the dead believers will be brought to life with Christ. He reinforces this by concluding his treatment of the readers’ problem(s) with his repeated affirmation that the dead believers, as well as the living believers, will “be/live with the Lord” (4:17; 5:10).20 Thus, he is concerned that the readers are grieving out of a total despair about the 17

Cf. Park, Conceptions of Afterlife. Many Jewish inscriptions also bear witness that many Jews had no hope for afterlife. 18 E.g., Frame, 167; Best, 186; Malherbe, 264. 19 Barclay, “That You May Not Grieve,” 139–40. 20 Cf. Kim, “Jesus Tradition,” in PGTO, 228–29.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 377

7/12/23 11:29 AM

378

1 Thessalonians 4:13–18

ultimate loss of their dead.21 Therefore, he proposes to correct this deficiency in their faith (3:13). Why did the readers hold no hope for their members who died and thus grieve for them? For various proposals, see the commentaries.22 For us, the Thessalonians’ grief being like that of those “who have no hope” serves as a touchstone for a satisfactory explanation about the reason for their grief. Therefore, among the various proposals, the first one to set aside is that which explains that they grieved about some disadvantage in the timing or order of rapture that deceased believers would suffer over against living ones at the Lord’s parousia.23 This popular view has a strong basis in the impression created by Paul’s stress that those who survive until the Lord’s parousia “will not precede those who have fallen asleep” (v. 15), that “the dead in Christ will rise first” (v. 16), and that the resurrected “sleeping ones” and the “surviving ones” shall together meet the returning Lord in the air (v. 17). But it is to be questioned whether Paul would consider a grief about some misconceived disadvantage of deceased believers over against surviving believers at the parousia as being like a grief of those “who have no hope.”24 So it appears that in the end the interpreter has to choose one’s touchstone between the two alternatives, Paul’s initial definition of the readers’ grief in v. 13 and his subsequent stress on the participation of resurrected believers and surviving believers together in the parousia (vv. 15–17). It is to be admitted that neither way yields a perfectly smooth interpretation of the whole passage. However, we believe that it is easier to take the former as the touchstone and explain the latter in the light of it than the other way around. Also to be set aside is Joseph Plevnik’s proposal.25 Building on the argument of G. Lohfink26 that in the OT and Jewish apocalyptic literature only living persons are assumed into heaven, Plevnik argues that the readers’ worry was not that dead Christians would not share in the resurrection but rather that they would not participate in the assumption into heaven at the parousia. But this is a strange argument. If the readers had known that at the parousia dead Christians would be raised to life, then on the assumption of Lohfink and Plevnik they should have had no fear. For the dead Christians who are resurrected would immediately stand ready as living persons to be assumed into heaven! So if the readers were worried that dead Christians would not be assumed into heaven, this worry was based on their inability to understand the resurrection of dead Christians at the parousia. 21 Cf. Nicholl, Hope, 23–26. 22 E.g., Marshall, 120–22; Wanamaker, 156–66; Richard, 231–32; Malherbe, 283–84; Green, 213–15; Weima, 310–13. 23 E.g., Richard, 232; Malherbe, 284; Weima, 312–13. 24 Cf. Hyldahl, “Auferstehung,” 129; Marshall, 121; also Luz, Geschichtsverständnis, 319. 25 Plevnik, “Taking Up,” 274–83; also idem, Paul and the Parousia, 69–71, 83, 94–96. 26 Lohfink, Himmelfahrt Jesu, 37–71.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 378

7/12/23 11:29 AM

Comment 379 In fact, Paul’s definition of the readers’ grief as that of those “who have no hope” and his fundamental answer to it in the following v. 14 clearly indicate that the cause for their grief was related to the doctrine of the resurrection. Precisely for this reason Paul begins to allay their fear by appealing to the fundamental kerygma of Jesus’s death and resurrection and its corollary of believers’ resurrection in v. 14. Did, then, the Thessalonians have no knowledge of the resurrection of the dead at the end-­time? Schnelle renews the view that was often put forward especially by scholars who operated on the hypothesis that our epistle represents an early stage of Paul’s theology that then gradually developed to the maturer stages represented in the later epistles.27 He suggests that during his mission in Thessalonica Paul did not teach about the resurrection of dead Christians because he expected an imminent parousia and that it was only the unanticipated situation of some believers dying before the parousia that first forced him to face the delay of the parousia and introduce the resurrection of dead believers.28 Schnelle argues that “this assumption is [supported by] the observation that also in 4:13–18 the resurrection of dead Christians has only an auxiliary function and Paul still holds fast to his original conception of all believers being caught up to meet the returning Lord at the parousia.”29 But it is difficult to believe that during his sixteen or more years of apostolic ministry before his mission in Thessalonica Paul had not encountered cases of Christians dying. Furthermore, Schnelle’s argument actually supports the contrary assumption. For, on his assumption, we should expect Paul to make the new idea of resurrection of dead believers central rather than “auxiliary” in our passage. Surely he would explain it in detail, rather than referring to it in an oblique manner in our v. 14b and only briefly in a matter-­of-­fact way in the phrase “and the dead in Christ will rise first” in v. 16b.30 Like 1 Cor 15, our v. 14 shows Paul quite naturally drawing out the doctrine of dead believers’ resurrection from the fundamental gospel of Jesus Christ’s death and resurrection. It is greatly to underestimate Paul’s intelligence to claim that he began to do this only after encountering cases of believers dying. It is easier to believe that, as a former Pharisee who had expected the resurrection of the dead at the end-­time, he came to see at his conversion and call that the eschatological event of Christ’s death and resurrection was a gospel that spelled hope for the resurrection of the dead. So it would be inconceivable that during his mission in Thessalonica he preached the gospel of Christ’s death, resurrection, and parousia (1:10; 4:14; 5:9–10) without referring to that hope. 27

Cf. e.g., Marxsen, 65; Lüdemann, Paul, 212–38; Mearns, “Early Eschatological Development,” 20; Becker, Paul, 140–45; Nicholl, Hope, 35–38. 28 Schnelle, Apostle Paul, 183. 29 Schnelle, Apostle Paul, 183. 30 Cf. Luz, Geschichtsverständnis, 320.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 379

7/12/23 11:29 AM

380

1 Thessalonians 4:13–18

Therefore, it is likely that the fundamental reason that caused the Thessalonians to grieve did not have to do with Paul’s failure to teach the Thessalonians about the resurrection of dead believers at the Lord’s parousia but rather with the Thessalonians’ failure to understand the doctrine of resurrection adequately and their inability to connect it with the hope of participation in the parousia of Christ.31 Why this inadequate understanding and this inability? Various factors for these may be considered. The most fundamental would be the readers’ Hellenistic background, which made them slow to take in the doctrine of resurrection and apprehend its full implications. Both 1 Cor 15 (esp. vv. 12, 35) and Acts 17:18–20, 31–32 show how difficult it was for Greeks to accept the idea of resurrection.32 Acts 26:6–8 suggests that it was difficult even for some Jews.33 If the Corinthian Christians found it difficult to accept the doctrine even after Paul had taught them over a much longer period (perhaps more than one and half years, cf. Acts 18:11, 18), so that in 1 Cor 15 Paul had to make such great efforts to convince them of it and to expound its meaning in such great length, we can well imagine how little of it the Thessalonians would have grasped when Paul taught them during his brief stay in their city (probably only three months or so). So it is quite understandable that when some of their number died, they were struck by grief without being able to moderate or overcome it in the light of the gospel that they had recently received from Paul.34 Furthermore, 5:1–11 indicates that they were excited about the imminent parousia of the Lord and engrossed about its exact date. In such a feverish atmosphere of eschatological expectation, they would not have thought of death before the parousia, let alone of relating it to the doctrine of resurrection and theologically preparing themselves for death occurring in their midst. Therefore, Luz appears quite right when he points to their intense expectation for the imminent parousia, as well as to their Greek mindset, as the factors that hindered them to connect the belief in resurrection with the expectation of the parousia in an apocalyptic system of thought.35 According to Weima, the readers’ excited expectation for the parousia of the Lord Jesus and their apanteˉsis (meeting) of him in terms of a Hellenistic or Roman ruler’s visit in pomp and circumstance (see comment on vv. 15–17 below) led them to grieve that deceased believers would not be able to participate in the glorious and joyous event so immediately as they, the living ones, would.36 We have already suggested that such a view, which projects as the 31 So Marshall, 120–22; Malherbe, 284. 32 Cf. MacMullen, Paganism, 55. 33 Cf. Park, Conceptions of Afterlife, for lack of any hope for afterlife among many Jewish inscriptions as well as the often vague nature of the hope where it is present. 34 Cf. Marshall, 120–21; also Green, 215. 35 Luz, Geschichtsverständnis, 321–22. Cf. also Malherbe, 284; Siber, Mit Christus, 20–22. 36 Weima, 313.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 380

7/12/23 11:29 AM

Comment 381 reason for their grief merely some perceived disadvantage of dead believers vis-­à-­v is living ones, is incompatible with the definition of the readers’ grief as those “who do not have hope.” It is better to relate the likely excitement of the readers about their hope of participating in the imminent and glorious event of the Lord’s parousia to the aforementioned lack of an adequate understanding of resurrection and its implication for Christians who die before the parousia. However, we would suggest that the readers’ inadequate understanding of the Jesus tradition that Paul had employed in teaching about the Lord’s parousia was a more important cause for their poor preparation for facing the death of some of their number than their Greek background and their fascination about the pomp and circumstance of the parousia. Especially note the echoes in 5:2–7 of the parables of the watchmen (Luke 12:36–38; cf. Mark 13:34–37), the thief (Luke 12:39–40//Matt 24:43–44), and the steward (Luke 12:41–48//Matt 24:45–51), which all appear linked together in Luke 12:35–48. Below we would argue that, in allaying the readers’ anxiety about the date of the parousia, Paul echoes those parables in 5:1–11 because that anxiety has been caused by their inadequate understanding of them, which he employed to teach about the Lord’s parousia. These parables have led the readers to expect to meet the Lord returning very shortly while they were living and to be so much concerned about their readiness to meet him that they had little room or reason to think about death or the implications of the doctrine of resurrection for dead believers. Hence, they grieved over the death of some of their number like those “who have no hope,” even while believing in the gospel of Christ Jesus’s death, resurrection, and parousia. Therefore, in our passage Paul first affirms the resurrection of dead believers as a corollary to the gospel of Jesus’s death and resurrection (v. 14). Dead believers will rise first at the parousia of the Lord (v. 16) to meet him as living persons. Paul affirms here that “the dead in Christ will rise first” not so much because it is necessary to counter the readers’ mistaken notion about dead Christians’ disadvantage as because it is a logical necessity for his vision of all the saints meeting the Lord in the air (v. 17; see comment on v. 15). For dead Christians to join living Christians in a rapture to meet the Lord in the air, they will have to rise first! 14 εἰ γὰρ πιστεύομεν ὅτι Ἰησοῦς ἀπέθανεν καὶ ἀνέστη, “for if we believe that Jesus died and rose.” Paul now begins to state the reason why the readers should not grieve like those who have no hope. Note the grammatical anomaly: this protasis is a conditional clause, but the apodosis starts with a comparative and inferential conjunction (οὕτως καί). The grammatical anomaly seems to result from many thoughts compressed. So it is difficult to exegete the verse accurately. The protasis with εἰ with the indicative states a reality rather than a hypothetical condition, so that it comes close to the causal “since . . .”37 Yet it is formulated as a conditional clause to invite the readers to reaffirm (together 37 Cf. BDF §372.1.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 381

7/12/23 11:29 AM

382

1 Thessalonians 4:13–18

with him and his missionary colleagues, “we”) the confession once more:38 “If we believe (Don’t we?) that Jesus died and rose again.” The words ὅτι Ἰησοῦς ἀπέθανεν καὶ ἀνέστη, “that Jesus died and rose,” contain the irreducible basis of the gospel. That this is a pre-­Pauline confessional formula is suggested by (1) its similarity to 1 Cor 15:3–5 (cf. also Rom 10:9), which is explicitly identified as pre-­Pauline (1 Cor 15:1–2, 11), and (2) ἀνιστάναι, the characteristic verb used in the passion announcements of Mark 8:31; 9:31; 10:34 and in the preaching in Acts 2:24, 32; 10:41; 13:33–34; 17:3, 31, which Paul never uses elsewhere for Christ’s resurrection (cf. its use in v. 16 below for resurrection of Christians apparently under the influence of our present verse; cf. also Eph 5:14). For resurrection, he normally uses ἐγείρειν (thirty-­seven times) and emphasizes that it was God who raised Jesus from the dead (Rom 4:24; 8:11; 10:9; 1 Cor 15:15; 2 Cor 4:14; Gal 1:1; Col 2:12; 1 Thess 1:10). Although in 2 Cor 4:10–15 as well as here Paul uses the name “Jesus” in connection with the saving event of his death and resurrection (see also 1:10 with comments there on the use of the name “Jesus” unaccompanied by a title; cf. Rom 4:24–25; 10:9), he normally uses “Christ” to indicate that his death and resurrection was his Christ act, that is, the act of salvation he wrought as the Messiah, God’s eschatological agent for salvation (e.g., 1 Thess 5:9–10; cf. Rom 5:6, 8; 6:9–10; 8:34; 14:9; 2 Cor 5:14–15; Gal 2:21). This is made clear in the tradition cited in 1 Cor 15:3–5: ὅτι Χριστὸς ἀπέθανεν ὑπὲρ τῶν ἁμαρτιῶν ἡμῶν . . .  ὅτι ἐγήγερται . . . Both the name “Jesus” instead of “Christ” and the verb ἀνέστη instead of ἐγήγερται seem to suggest that in our verse Paul is citing a creedal formula older than 1 Cor 15:3–5 (cf. Rom 4:24–25; 10:9). Even so, 1 Thess 1:10 and 5:9–10 make it clear that the older formula that Paul delivered to the Thessalonians also contained a phrase expressing the saving, indeed, atoning effect of Jesus’s death, like 1 Cor 5:3b. So Paul must be citing the old confession here in an abbreviated form (cf. Rom 10:9). He probably reduced it here to the bare facts of Jesus’s death and resurrection in order to make it directly relevant to his subject: the death and resurrection of believers.39 The words ὅτι Ἰησοῦς ἀπέθανεν καὶ ἀνέστη, “that Jesus died and rose,” or its fuller version in 1 Cor 15:3b–5, is the essence of the “gospel” (1 Cor 15:1, 3a, 11a). Acceptance of this gospel preached is “faith,” and “faith” makes the saving event proclaimed in the gospel take effect for the believer (1 Cor 15:1–2). That is, by “believing” the gospel preached, the believer appropriates the salvation wrought through the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ. Hence, πιστεύειν is used in connection with the gospel both here and in 1 Cor 15:1–5, 11 (cf. also Rom 10:9; 1 Thess 1:8, 10, with comments there).40 Paul must 38 Cf. Holtz, 189–90. 39 Cf. Wanamaker, 168. 40 Cf. Kramer, Christ, 19–44, who designates such a formula “pistis-­formula.” Cf. Bultmann, TDNT 6:203–19. See “Faith and ‘the Work of Faith’ ” in Explanation at the end of comment on 1:3–10 above.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 382

7/12/23 11:29 AM

Comment 383 have “delivered” the gospel of Jesus’s saving death and resurrection to the Thessalonians, inviting them to “accept” and “believe” it for their salvation (cf. 1:6–7; 2:13), as he would do the same to the Corinthians a few months later (1 Cor 15:1–5, 11). In Thessalonica, did Paul preach the gospel in the older form, whereas in Corinth he did it in the newer form? First Thessalonians 5:9–10 appears to suggest that he used both forms. At any rate, the readers accepted and believed the gospel of Jesus’s saving death and resurrection and so became Christians. Now he is inviting them to reaffirm this faith to appreciate the hope that is inherent in the gospel for resurrection at the parousia of the Lord Jesus Christ. While Paul prefers to use κοιμᾶσθαι for the death of believers, neither he nor any other NT writer uses it for the death of Christ himself. In 1 Cor 15:20 Christ, being raised from the dead, is “the firstfruits of those who have fallen asleep” (τῶν κεκοιμημένων), but he is nowhere said to have “fallen asleep” in this sense himself. This is not because the figure would have been thought inappropriate for death by crucifixion; it was no more inappropriate for death by crucifixion than for death by stoning, yet it is used of Stephen (Acts 7:60, ἐκοιμήθη). Chrysostom (Hom. on 1 Thess 7, ad loc) says that, whereas departed believers are called “those who are asleep,” it is said of Christ that “he died,” because the mention of resurrection immediately follows. But the use of the straightforward verb ἀποθνῄσκειν (“to die”) of Christ is probably intended to stress the reality of his death, as something not to be alleviated by any euphemism. The reality of his death points to the divine miracle accomplished in his resurrection. His people’s resurrection is a corollary of his, and therefore their death can be described as “falling asleep” in the new Christian sense of that figure, but there was no precedent for his resurrection. “If we believe that Jesus died and rose again,” the fullness of Christian hope follows. The continuing life of his people depends on, and is indeed an extension of, his own risen life (cf. Rom 8:11; also John 14:19, “because I live, you also will live”). οὕτως καὶ ὁ θεὸς τοὺς κοιμηθέντας διὰ τοῦ Ἰησοῦ ἄξει σὺν αὐτῷ, “so also God will bring through Jesus those who have fallen asleep, to be with him.” The aorist κοιμηθέντας relates to the moment of their falling asleep (dying); in consequence of that the dead are the sleeping ones as referred to by the present κοιμωμένων in the immediately preceding v. 13. (In the NT the present tense of κοιμᾶσθαι in the sense of death appears only in our v. 13 and in 1 Cor 11:30.) The words οὕτως καί are inferential and comparative: “even so” or “so also.” By having God as the subject in the inferential and comparative apodosis, Paul gives away his unexpressed assumption in the protasis that Jesus’s death and resurrection was God’s work: God delivered him to death and raised him from the dead (cf., e.g., Rom 3:24–25; 4:25; 8:31, 34). So our verse has the usual Pauline thought implicit: “God who raised the Lord will also raise us up” (1 Cor 6:14); “he who raised the Lord Jesus will raise us also with Jesus” (2 Cor 4:14; σὺν Ἰησοῦ, which has the same force as σὺν αὐτῷ here). The words

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 383

7/12/23 11:29 AM

384

1 Thessalonians 4:13–18

οὕτως καί do not refer to πιστεύομεν, and the phrase does not mean “(since we believe that Jesus died and rose again), even so (we also believe that) God will bring with him those who have fallen asleep.” Rather, οὕτως καί refers to the unexpressed assumption: “(we believe, don’t we, that God raised Jesus from the dead), even so God will bring those who have fallen asleep.” But why does Paul speak about God “bringing” (ἄξει) the dead rather than raising (ἐγειρεῖ) them? According to Plevnik,41 whom Wanamaker follows,42 it is because the Thessalonians’ fear was not about the resurrection of the dead believers as such, but rather about the impossibility of their assumption into heaven. But for the view of Plevnik and Wanamaker to be correct, Paul should have written in v. 17 that “then they [i.e., those raised from the dead] will be snatched up in the clouds together with us who are alive,” instead of what he has actually written there: “then we who are alive, who are left, will be snatched up together with them.” Our view is that Paul chose ἄξει here to combine in one word both the ideas of God’s raising the dead through Jesus Christ and of his making them be with him.43 This view is to be substantiated with further exegesis. However, it may also be noted here that Paul chooses the verb ἄξει also to include the sense of bringing the dead believers back to “us,” the writers and the readers, as it would comfort the readers who are grieving their bereavement. Is διὰ τοῦ Ἰησοῦ connected to the preceding participle τοὺς κοιμηθέντας or to the following verb ἄξει? In view of σὺν αὐτῷ, the balance of the sentence seems to require the former: “those who have fallen asleep through Jesus.” But what can it possibly mean? Best and Nicholl list various attempts to explain it and appropriately reject them all.44 Two of the more popular attempts are (1) to take the phrase as causal and interpret it in the sense of martyrdom (those who died “on account of Jesus”),45 and (2) to take it as equivalent to the frequent Pauline phrase “in Christ” (those who died in relationship with Jesus, who died as Christians).46 But, against the former, along with the fact that there is little evidence for concern for martyrdom in this letter, it is often pointed out that, in order to convey such a causal sense, Paul would associate the preposition διά with the accusative (τὸν Ἰησοῦν) here rather than the genitive (τοῦ Ἰησοῦ), which normally expresses agent or means. And against the latter attempt, the obvious question is raised: Why, then, does Paul use such an unusual phrase instead of his favorite phrase ἐν Χριστῷ (cf. “the dead in Christ” in v. 16)? So most commentators take our phrase διὰ τοῦ Ἰησοῦ with the following verb ἄξει. Holtz explains the overloading of the verb ἄξει 41 42 43 44 45 46

Plevnik, “Taking Up,” 274–83. Wanamaker, 166. Cf. Nicholl, Hope, 31–32; also Weima, 319. Best, 188–89, and Nicholl, Hope, 27–28. E.g., Nepper-­Christensen, “Das verborgene Herrenwort,” 138; Pobee, Persecution, 113–14. E.g., NIV; REB; NKJV; Richard, 226; Wanamaker, 169.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 384

7/12/23 11:29 AM

Comment 385 with the two prepositional phrases διὰ τοῦ Ἰησοῦ and σὺν αὐτῷ as caused by Paul’s compression of two thoughts into the verb ἄξει: God’s resurrection of the dead believers “through Jesus” and God’s “bringing” them (to be) “with him” (= Jesus).47 Following Theodore of Mopsuestia, Malherbe states that “the meaning of syn auto¯ is equivalent to eis to einai autous syn auto¯ ” (“so that they may be with him”).48 This view is confirmed by a consideration of the relationship between our v. 14 and the following vv. 15–17. In our verse Paul begins his answer to the readers’ grief by inviting them to reaffirm their faith in the gospel of Jesus’s death and resurrection. It is because, as said above, their grief has been caused fundamentally by their inadequate understanding of the full implications of this gospel, and therefore the solution to their problem is contained in that gospel. So in this verse he gives his answer in a nutshell (or a thesis form) to their grief about the dead. Then he unfolds and substantiates it in vv. 15–17.49 Once we understand the relationship between v. 14 and vv. 15–17 in terms of the thesis and its unfolding and substantiation, it becomes clear that the phrase διὰ τοῦ Ἰησοῦ is to be construed with the verb ἄξει and the clause ὁ θεὸς τοὺς κοιμηθέντας διὰ τοῦ Ἰησοῦ ἄξει . . . is to be interpreted as “God will through Jesus [raise the deceased believers and] bring them . . .” Likewise, it becomes clear that the phrase (ἄξει) σὺν αὐτῷ of our verse is to be interpreted in light of its elaboration in 4:17 (and 5:10): “(to bring them) to be with him (the Lord).” Thus, we are to see an inclusio between the ἄξει σὺν αὐτῷ of our verse and the σὺν κυρίῳ ἐσόμεθα of v. 17b. This conclusion is to be confirmed by an observation of a further inclusio between our verse and 5:9–10 (“so that whether we wake or sleep we might together live with him [i.e., the Lord Jesus Christ]”), between an affirmation of the fundamental truth at the outset of the discussion of salvation at the parousia of Christ (4:14) and its reaffirmation at the final conclusion of it (5:9–10; see comments below on 4:17 and 5:9–10). 15 Τοῦτο γὰρ ὑμῖν λέγομεν ἐν λόγῳ κυρίου, “for we tell you this by the word of the Lord.” Weima takes the explanatory γάρ here as parallel to the γάρ of v. 14 and as providing “the second reason” for the statement in v. 13, why the readers should not grieve as those “who have no hope.”50 But the γάρ here substantiates the immediately preceding statement in v. 14,51 and it governs not just v. 15 but the whole vv. 15–17.52 That is, with all the statements in

47 Holtz, 193. Cf. Luckensmeyer, Eschatology, 224; also Schreiber, I:253. 48 Malherbe, 267. Cf. also Siber, Mit Christus, 30. 49 So Marshall, 125; Malherbe, 267; Fee, 173; also Siber, Mit Christus, 35–36; cf. also Hartman, Prophecy, 186–90, who sees the connection between v. 14b and vv. 16–17 in terms of echoes of Dan 7:13, 27; 12:2–3. 50 Weima, 320. Cf. also Holtz, 194; Schreiber, I:239, 253. 51 Frame, 171; Wanamaker, 170; Malherbe, 267; Beale, 135; Fee, 173; Nicholl, Hope, 35; Luckensmeyer, Eschatology, 177. 52 Cf. Fee, 173.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 385

7/12/23 11:29 AM

386

1 Thessalonians 4:13–18

vv. 15–17 about the resurrection of deceased believers, their rapture together with the surviving believers, and their eventual being with the Lord, Paul substantiates the thesis statement in v. 14b.53 “This” (τοῦτο) refers forward to the ὅτι clause.54 Holtz sees this clause (v. 15b) as containing “the word of the Lord,” and vv. 16–17 as a further elaboration with the material drawn from “an apocalyptic tradition which depicts the event of the parousia.”55 But in view of some close parallelism that vv. 16–17a shows with the words of Jesus in the Gospels, it is easier to see “the word of the Lord” as referring to that “apocalyptic tradition” than to the ὅτι clause in v. 15b, which is made up with familiar Pauline vocabulary and concepts of the present context and elsewhere (e.g., 1 Cor 15:51).56 For the same reason, the view of Fee that “the word of the Lord” refers to the whole vv. 15b–17 is to be rejected.57 Thus it appears most natural to see vv. 16–17a as “the word of the Lord” and v. 15b as Paul’s summary conclusion drawn from “the word of the Lord.”58 The reason why he states his summary conclusion before presenting the content of “the word of the Lord” itself is because he wants immediately to address the Thessalonians’ concern (v. 13) and substantiate his thesis (v. 14b). It is popular to interpret the phrase λέγομεν ἐν λόγῳ κυρίου here as a biblical idiom for prophetic inspiration and commission by the Lord (cf. 1 Kgs 13:1, 2, 5, 32; 21:35; 1 Chr 15:15; Sir 48:3, 5) and consequently to understand Paul here as referring to a prophetic oracle that a Christian prophet or even he himself as a prophet received from the exalted Lord.59 For this view, the “mystery” in 1 Cor 15:51–52 is often brought in for comparison, as it shows some similarities to our passage. However, the concept of “mystery” itself does not suggest any particular mode of inspiration. In Rom 11:25–26, by “mystery” Paul probably does not refer to an oracle he actually heard from the Lord, but rather to a new understanding of God’s saving plan that he obtained by interpreting a new revelation in the light of Scripture (Deut 32; Isa 6; 42; 49) and the Jesus tradition (Matt 8:11–12//Luke 13:28–29; Luke 21:23–24; etc.).60 So it is likely that by the “mystery” of 1 Cor 15:51–52 also Paul does not refer to an oracle he or another Christian prophet actually heard from the Lord, but rather to a new insight he obtained by interpreting the revelation of the risen Christ 53 54 55 56 57 58

Cf. Hoppe, I:258. So most commentators; pace Richard, 240, who takes it as referring to what precedes, v. 14. Holtz, 185–86. Cf. Nicholl, Hope, 33; Weima, 321. Fee, 173–74. So also Luckensmeyer, Eschatology, 226–27. So Marshall, 126; Nicholl, Hope, 33; Weima, 320; Schreiber, I:253–54; cf. also Wanamaker, 171. 59 E.g., Best, 191–93; Malherbe, 268–69; F. Neirynck, “Paul and the Sayings of Jesus,” 311; cf. Luckensmeyer, Eschatology, 186–90, for a thorough survey of various scholarly proposals on “the word of the Lord”; also Nicholl, Hope, 38–41. 60 See Kim, “The ‘Mystery’ of Rom 11:25–26 Once More,” PNP, 239–57; cf. Wenham, Paul, 319–26.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 386

7/12/23 11:29 AM

Comment 387 (resurrection; the εἰκών language; change/transformation)61 in light of the Jesus tradition (trumpet; sudden coming) and Scripture (Dan 12:2–3). Therefore, even if the phrase λέγομεν ἐν λόγῳ κυρίου in our passage is to be taken as indicating only a prophetic inspiration, it is not excluded that in vv. 16–17a Paul reproduces the (prophetic) “word of the Lord” not as he heard, but rather as he interpreted it in light of the Jesus tradition and Scripture (e.g., Dan 7; 12:2–3). Note how in Rev 3:3 and 16:15 the prophetic words of the risen Lord make use of the word of the earthly Jesus (the thief parable!).62 Similarly, the undeniable affinities of our vv. 16–17a with Jesus’s logion in Matt 24:30–31//Mark 13:26–27 may be seen as indicating that vv. 16–17a is a prophetic word that contains that logion. So Stuhlmacher recognizes that the prophetic word is really a paraphrase of the Jesus tradition made to apply to the Thessalonian situation.63 Walter, despite his minimalist view about Paul’s use of Jesus-­tradition, similarly sees here a “fluid blending of Jesus-­ tradition . . . with its prophetic application” by Paul.64 So there is little material difference whether the phrase λέγομεν ἐν λόγῳ κυρίου is taken as referring to a prophetic word of the exalted Lord or to a word of the earthly Jesus. However, at this point we need also to note the fact that, in 1 Cor 7:10–11 and 9:14 (cf. 1 Cor 11:23–25), Paul cites Jesus’s words as the “command” of the “Lord” in his own reformulation—­yet without any suggestion of a particular prophetic inspiration.65 Further, in 1 Cor 7:12, 25 Paul, regretting that he does not have a word of the Lord on the questions arising out of marriage between a believer and a nonbeliever and on the question of marriage of “virgins,” does not show any awareness of the possibility of soliciting a prophetic word of the Lord for those questions. He simply gives his apostolic opinion “as one who has received mercy from the Lord to be trustworthy” (1 Cor 7:25; cf. 2:16). Thus, we have at least three cases in which Paul cites the words of (the earthly) Jesus as the word or command of the Lord (1 Cor 7:10–11; 9:14; 11:23–25), but we have no evidence, except the present disputed passage, that he imparts a teaching in reference to a “word of the Lord” that he suggests he received from the Lord through prophetic inspiration. In fact, once he does refer to a word he received directly from the exalted Lord (2 Cor 12:9), but that word is of a different kind in that it is not a teaching that Paul is to impart to the church but is a personal word directed only to Paul himself, which he only most reluctantly shares, and it does not contain anything that is comparable with the sayings of Jesus transmitted in the Gospel tradition. For these reasons, for us, it appears better to take the phrase “the word of 61 62 63 64

Cf. Kim, “Christ, the Image of God,” PNP, 165–213. Cf. Bauckham, “Synoptic Parousia Parables,” 162–76. Stuhlmacher, “Jesustradition,” 243. Walter, “Paul and the Early Christian Jesus-­Tradition,” 67. Cf. also McNicol, Jesus’ Directions, 30–31. 65 Cf. Holtz, 183–84.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 387

7/12/23 11:29 AM

388

1 Thessalonians 4:13–18

the Lord” in our verse as a direct reference to a word (or words) of the earthly Jesus,66 than to take it as a reference to a prophetic word that reflects it. This conclusion is supported by the fact that in the subsequent verses (i.e., 5:2–7) Paul cites a word of the earthly Jesus and echoes a couple more (see below), thus clearly suggesting that in the context of discussing the parousia of the Lord in 4:13–5:11 he is clearly conscious of the eschatological sayings of the earthly Jesus. It is true that although parallels to several elements of vv. 16–17a can be adduced from various sayings of Jesus in the Gospel tradition, there is no saying in the latter that exactly matches the statement in our passage. Hence, some think that here Paul is citing an agraphon—­a saying of Jesus that has not entered into our four Gospels.67 But this view by its very nature cannot be proved. Not only in places where Paul alludes to or echoes Jesus’s sayings (e.g., Rom 12:14–21; 13:8–10; 1 Cor 4:11–13; Gal 5:14) but also in places where he explicitly cites them (1 Cor 7:10–11; 9:14; cf. Rom 14:14), he does not reproduce them exactly but rather adapts them to his situation and his purpose. So he may be adapting one or more apocalyptic sayings of Jesus or making a midrash on them with interpretive comments for his purpose here. ὅτι ἡμεῖς οἱ ζῶντες οἱ περιλειπόμενοι εἰς τὴν παρουσίαν τοῦ κυρίου, “that we who are alive, who are left until the advent of the Lord.” “Lord” is the christological title that Paul normally uses in connection with the parousia as well as the theme of the resurrection and exaltation, to indicate Christ’s status and function as the glorious executor of God’s universal reign (cf. Rom 1:3–4; Phil 2:9–11). As in Greek literature,68 so also in the Pauline epistles the word παρουσία is sometimes used in the mundane sense either of “presence” (e.g., of Paul himself, 2 Cor 10:10; Phil 2:12) or “coming, arrival” (e.g., of Stephanas, etc., 1 Cor 16:17; of Titus, 2 Cor 7:6–7; of Paul himself, Phil 1:26; cf. also Paul’s use of the cognate participle παρών in the mundane sense of “to [have] come” [e.g., 2 Cor 13:10; Col 1:6] or “to be present” [e.g., 1 Cor 5:3]). But in our epistle (2:19; 3:13; 4:15; 5:23), Paul uses the word παρουσία as a designation of the end-­t ime advent of the Lord—­for the first time in the NT. He uses the term likewise in 2 Thess 2:1, 8, where he gives a resume and elaboration of our text (i.e., 1 Thess 4:13–18; see comments below; cf. also 2 Thess 2:9, where the term is also used of “the lawless man”). First Corinthians 15:23 is the only other place in which he makes the same use of the term. Elsewhere he refers to Christ’s end-­t ime coming more frequently with the more traditional term “the day of the Lord/Christ” (1 Cor 1:8; 5:5; 2 Cor 1:14; Phil 1:6, 10; 2:16; cf. also Rom 2:5; 13:12; 1 Cor 3:13; 1 Thess 5:4; 2 Thess 1:10), which originates

66 So, e.g., Marshall, 125; Holtz, 183; Weima, 321–22; Schreiber, I:240–41; Wenham, Paul, 305–6. 67 Frame, 171; Morris, 141; Jeremias, Unknown Sayings; cf. also Holtz, 184; Nicholl, Hope, 41. 68 Cf. Oepke, TDNT 5:858.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 388

7/12/23 11:29 AM

Comment 389 from the OT-­Jewish concept of “the day of Yahweh,” the day on which God would come for judgment and salvation (cf. comments on 2:19 above). In 1 Thess 5:2 and 2 Thess 2:2, he identifies the παρουσία of the Lord with the day of the Lord (cf. also 1 Thess 2:19 with Phil 2:16). This suggests that with the Hellenistic concept of παρουσία, he reflects the OT-­Jewish concept of the coming of God, the Messiah, or an eschatological savior figure.69 Outside the Pauline epistles, the παρουσία of the Lord or its equivalents appear only in 2 Peter (1:16; 3:4, 12) and 1 John (2:28), which are generally recognized as late writings, as well as in James (5:7, 8), whose provenance and date are debated. In the Gospels, the term παρουσία is used for the coming of an eschatological figure only in Matt 24:3, 27, 37, 39, which are all summary references to the scene of the Son of Man coming (ἐρχόμενον) from heaven (Matt 24:30–31), which is depicted with a citation of Dan 7:13–14. It is suggested below that this Matt 24:30–31 (or a pre-­Matthean form of it) is precisely the text referred to in our verse (v. 15a) and cited in our vv. 16–17a as “the word of the Lord.” However, since the Lukan parallels (17:24, 26, 30) to Matt 24:27, 37, 39 have “the day of the Son of Man” instead of the Matthean “the παρουσία of the Son of Man,” and since the Lukan parallel (21:7) to Matt 24:3 does not have the Matthean “your παρουσία” or anything equivalent to it, the word παρουσία in those Matthean texts appears to be a later Matthean redaction. Therefore, it is unlikely that Paul is influenced by Matthew. Nevertheless, the Matthean example of referring to the Danielic scene of the Son of Man coming (ἐρχόμενον) in terms of the παρουσία of the Son of Man is suggestive for our consideration here. Note, first, that in our text, in a manner paralleling that of Matt 24, Paul first makes a summary designation of the Lord’s παρουσία (v. 15b) and then depicts the scene of the Lord’s coming [καταβήσεται] with the language partially drawn from Dan 7:13–14 (our vv. 16–17, see below). In 2 Thess 2:1–12 also Paul first announces the topic of the παρουσία of Christ (v. 1) and then describes his activities at his coming (v. 8), echoing Dan 7:8; 11:36–45; 12:11; and so on (see below). As noted above, outside the Thessalonian correspondence 1 Cor 15:23–28 is the only place where Paul uses the word παρουσία for Christ’s end-­t ime coming. In that Corinthian passage, as in our text vv. 13–18 and 2 Thess 2:1–12 (and like Matt 24), Paul first makes a summary designation of Christ’s end-­t ime coming in terms of his παρουσία (1 Cor 15:23) and then goes on to describe his activities, echoing Dan 7:13–14 (esp. cf. 1 Cor 15:24 with Dan 7:13–14) as well as Pss 8:6 and 110:1.70 So it is quite agreeable that, seeing 1 Cor 15:23–28 as a virtual running commentary on Dan 7:13–14, Betz argues that Paul developed his concept of the παρουσία of the Lord Jesus 69 Cf. Oepke, TDNT 5:861–64. 70 Cf. Betz, Danielbuch, 130–43; Hengel, “Sit at My Right Hand,” 164, 166; Wright, Resurrection of the Son of God, 334–36.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 389

7/12/23 11:29 AM

390

1 Thessalonians 4:13–18

Christ from the cognate verb παρῆν that appears alongside ἤρχετο for the coming of “one like a son of man” in LXX Dan 7:13.71 However, since in our passage and the following passage (5:1–11; cf. also 1:10, see comment ad loc) Paul cites or echoes sayings of Jesus that speak of the Son of Man coming, we may clarify Betz’s thesis: by seeing such Son of Man sayings in the light of their Danielic background, Paul started to use the παρουσία language for Christ’s end-­t ime coming and to develop his παρουσία eschatology. It is most likely that the pre-­Pauline church had already developed, by a similar process, the expectation of the exalted Lord Jesus Christ’s return.72 Paul inherited from his Christian predecessors this tradition of interpreting Jesus’s Son of Man sayings in the light of Dan 7 and expecting the end-­t ime coming of the Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of Man/Son of God. However, it was Paul who for the first time developed the παρουσία term for a summary reference to Christ’s end-­t ime coming from the language of ἔρχεσθαι and παρεῖναι of the “one like the son of man” in Dan 7.73 In this letter, he expresses this eschatological hope especially strongly by repeating the summary designation of it in terms of the παρουσία of the Lord (2:19; 3:13; 4:15; 5:23) and defining the readers’ faith in terms of waiting for the Son of Man/Son of God, the eschatological redeemer, from heaven (1:10, see comment ad loc). In developing the concept of the παρουσία of Christ from Jesus’s Son of Man sayings and their Dan 7 background, Paul appears to have been helped by two contemporary uses of παρουσία.74 One denoted the manifestation of a hidden divinity by some evidence of his power or in cultic action,75 and the other denoted the official visit of a high-­ranking personage to a province or city when he was met on his approach by a deputation of leading citizens who escorted him formally for the remainder of his journey (for this meeting, see comment on v. 17 below, εἰς ἀπάντησιν). In view of the near-­divinization of some rulers, there can be no hard-­and-­fast distinction drawn between these two uses of παρουσία in the Hellenistic-­Roman world. The παρουσία (Latin aduentus) of a very important person might inaugurate a new era, as happened with the visit of Hadrian to Athens and other Greek cities in AD 124—an 71 Betz, Danielbuch, 130–43. A view endorsed by Lang, Korinther, 228. Concerning the “one like a son of man” (ὡς υἱὸς ἀνθρώπου) appearing also “like the ancient of days” (ὡς παλαιὸς ἡμερῶν) in LXX Dan 7:13, cf. Kim, “Son of Man,” 23. 72 Cf. esp. 1 Cor 16:22: μαράνα θά, which probably started as a prayer at the Lord’s Supper (cf. Did. 10.6), whose words of institution were, as a whole, a Son of Man saying (Matt 26:24–29; Mark 14:21–25; Luke 22:17–23; cf. John 6:51–58). Cf. Kim, “Son of Man,” 45–49; see also comment below on v. 16 about the eucharistic words in 1 Cor 11:23–26, which Paul cites with a concluding word of hope for the coming of Jesus the Son of Man/the Lord, ἄχρι οὗ ἔλθῃ, “until he comes” (v. 26). 73 Cf. Oepke, TDNT 5:865: “ ‘παρουσία’ as a t[erminus] t[echnicus] for the ‘coming’ of Christ in Messianic glory seems to have made its way into primitive Christianity with Paul.” 74 Cf. Oepke, TDNT 5:859–61. 75 This use is borrowed by Josephus to describe the coming of the God of Israel at various epochs in OT history; cf. Ant. 3.80, 203; 9.55.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 390

7/12/23 11:29 AM

Comment 391 inscription of AD 192/3 at Tegea is dated “in the year 69 of the first παρουσία of the god Hadrian in Greece.”76 Not long after 1 Thessalonians was written, coins bearing some such legend as aduentus Augusti were struck at Corinth and Patras to commemorate an official visit of Nero. It may be assumed that Paul was familiar with this elevated usage of the term παρουσία for the coming of a divine or royal figure. He would have found that term eminently suited for designation of the eschatological coming of Jesus the Lord. For Jesus, who on earth called himself the Son of Man, was for Paul the Davidic Messiah who had been exalted through his death and resurrection to the right hand of God as God’s Son and the Lord—­exalted in order to exercise God’s universal kingship on his behalf in fulfillment of OT prophecies like 2 Sam 7:12–14; Pss 2:7; 8:6; 110:1; Dan 7:13–14 (Rom 1:3–4; 1 Cor 15:23–28; Phil 2:6–11; Col 1:13; etc.). And he was now in heaven and from there was to come as God’s Son, bearing the name of God himself, kyrios (“the Lord”), to redeem his people as the Savior who has the power to subject all things to himself (1 Cor 15:23–28; Phil 3:20; 1 Thess 1:10). This would be in fulfillment of the promise that Jesus made as the Son of Man (Matt 24:30–31; etc.), as well as the prophecy of Dan 7:13–14, on the basis of which Jesus made that promise. So, encouraged by the language of ἔρχεσθαι and παρεῖναι of the “one like a son of man” in Dan 7, Paul applied the Hellenistic term παρουσία especially to the coming of the messianic King Jesus, God’s Son, the universal Lord and Savior, and presented his coming in the glorious language of the Hellenistic ceremony of a royal appearance (παρουσία; ἀπάντησις), as well as in language that echoes the theophanies of Sinai and of Dan 7 (see comments below on vv. 16–17). Since in our passage Paul speaks of the παρουσία of Christ, echoing Dan 7:13–14 (and in 2 Thess 2:1–12 and 1 Cor 15:23–28 he explicitly speaks of the Lord Jesus subjecting or destroying anti-­G od powers), it appears reasonable to think that Paul, in presenting the παρουσία of the Lord Jesus Christ under the inspiration of both the parousia of the “one like a son of man” in Dan 7 and that of the Hellenistic-­Roman rulers, is quite conscious of the message of Dan 7: the parousia of God’s Son will end the tyranny of the beastly rules of the heathen empires and bring salvation to God’s holy people (“the saints of the Most High,” v. 27). We may then conjecture further that in speaking of the παρουσία of the Lord Jesus Christ, Paul perhaps intended to convey to his readers the message that Jesus is the true Lord and the earthly rulers like Caesar are mere parodies of him, or that the “salvation,” “peace,” and new era that they were supposed to bring by their parousia was a mere parody of that which the true Lord will bring by his parousia. To discern whether Paul does really have this intent in our passage and the following passage (5:1–11; cf. also 1:10; 3:13), we will need to examine carefully what Paul aims at with 76 Deissmann, Light from the Ancient East, 372.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 391

7/12/23 11:29 AM

392

1 Thessalonians 4:13–18

his presentation of the Lord Jesus’s parousia here in the way we have just observed. οἱ ζῶντες οἱ περιλειπόμενοι. “We who are alive” are further defined as “who are left” from the perspective of “those who have fallen asleep” (τοὺς κοιμηθέντας). It is obvious that the phrase “we who are alive” here refers to the writer(s), namely, Paul (and Silvanus and Timothy), and the readers. So sometimes it is taken to imply that Paul counts himself along with his readers among those who would survive until the Lord’s parousia (cf. 1 Cor 15:52). But in later writings (2 Cor 4:14; 5:1–10; Phil 1:20–24), he is seen as reckoning with the possibility of his death before the parousia. So some think that, about the time of his writing 2 Corinthians, he changed the expectation that he had maintained until the time of writing 1 Corinthians (15:52), namely, the expectation of his own survival until the parousia. Thus they think that Paul’s eschatology developed. However, Marshall suggests taking the “we” here as a “preacher’s ‘we’ ” in the sense of “those of us who are alive” and so refraining from pressing it to yield the clearly conscious meaning that Paul definitely expected his own survival until the parousia.77 This suggestion is supported by 1 Cor 6:14: “And God raised the Lord and will also raise us up by his power.” Those who would press the “we” in our verse will have to press the “us” in that verse also and conclude that Paul, presupposing his and his readers’ death before the parousia, expected his and their resurrection at the parousia. This, then, will contradict 1 Cor 15:52 interpreted in the same way, as well as our present verse. In fact, in 5:10 of our letter, when he comes to conclude his teaching on the eschatological hope that began in 4:13, Paul speaks of both cases as possible: “we” (he himself and his readers) may be “awake” or “asleep” at the time of the parousia (cf. 2 Cor 5:6–9). Thus, the “preacher’s ‘we’ ” in our verse is too weak a basis for holding that Paul expected his own survival until the parousia. οὐ μὴ φθάσωμεν τοὺς κοιμηθέντας, “shall by no means precede those who have fallen asleep.” With the construction οὐ μή + the aorist subjunctive φθάσωμεν, Paul emphatically denies that the living believers will precede the deceased believers. Malherbe observes that this negative clause “is so strong that it sounds like a denial of an opinion actually held by some people in Thessalonica” and supports this view with the parallel expression in 5:3, οὐ μὴ ἐκφύγωσιν (“they will by no means escape”), which is said about those who hold the Roman belief in “peace and security.”78 That impression is strengthened by the subsequent substantiation of this negative statement with the affirmation that the deceased believers “will rise first” and “then” the living believers “will be snatched up” in vv. 16–17. At the same time, this substantiation makes it 77 Marshall, 127. 78 Malherbe, 272.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 392

7/12/23 11:29 AM

Comment 393 clear that Paul has temporal precedence in mind. However, would Paul make such a solemn declaration “by the word of the Lord” with such an emphatic negative here for the mere question of temporal precedence? Rather, if the readers grieve over their deceased fellow believers because they think the latter will be able to participate in the parousia only after the living believers, they must be doing so because they believe there is some advantage associated with temporal precedence. Do they hold a view similar to that “which was current in Judaism that those who were alive at the end of the world would fare better than the dead (Dan 12:12; Ps. Sol. 17.50; 2 Esd. 13.24)”?79 At any rate, it is understandable that some commentators take the emphatic statement in our verse, the “first” and “then” language in vv. 16–17, and the emphasis on the ἅμα (“together”) in 4:17 (and 5:10) as suggesting that the grief has arisen from an understanding that deceased Christians would not participate so immediately in salvation at the parousia of Christ as the Christians who survive until the parousia. However, as we have seen above, Paul’s definition of the readers’ grief as being like that of those “who have no hope” (v. 13) presents a serious obstacle to such a view. Unless we believe that Paul is inappropriately exaggerating and misrepresenting the readers’ grief, we must interpret this statement in our v. 15, the affirmation in v. 16 of the resurrection of deceased believers “first” at the parousia, and the twice repeated ἅμα in 4:17 and 5:10 in some sort of harmony with that fundamental definition. So it is proposed here that with all those points Paul is seeking to stress the certainty of dead believers’ salvation at the Lord’s parousia rather than correcting a mistaken notion about their relative disadvantage vis-­à-­v is living believers. The stress is necessitated by the readers’ fear that dead believers would miss out on final salvation at the parousia of the Lord. Against this mistaken notion Paul is saying: “No! Dead Christians most certainly will also be saved (“enraptured . . . to meet the Lord in the air”) together with us, the living believers. In fact, they will begin to experience the saving power of the returning Lord even before us as they will be raised ‘first’ to join us in the rapture!” 16–17 Having stated in v. 15b the summary conclusion drawn from the “word of the Lord,” in vv. 16–17a Paul now goes on to cite that “word of the Lord” itself. Many commentators80 see here a reference to a form of Jesus’s saying transmitted in Matt 24:30–31//Mark 13:26–27, which speaks of the Son of Man coming on clouds and sending out his angels with a loud trumpet call to gather the elect. The high probability that in 1 Thess 5:1–11 Paul cites the “thief” saying (Matt 24:43–44//Luke 12:39–40), which is also a Son of Man 79 Marshall, 127. 80 E.g., Hartman, Prophecy, 189–90; Hyldahl, “Auferstehung,” 130–31; Stuhlmacher, “Jesustradition,” 243; Marshall, 126, 129–30; Aejmelaeus, Wachen, 84–85; Wanamaker, 171; Wenham, Paul, 306; McNicol, Jesus’ Directions, 55–63; Röcker, Belial, 278–82; cf. Collins, “Composition,” 548–50.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 393

7/12/23 11:29 AM

394

1 Thessalonians 4:13–18

saying, as well as echoing a couple more sayings of Jesus (see below) strengthens this view.81 So does the likelihood of Paul’s echoing of various Son of Man sayings in 1:10; 2:1–12; 3:12–13; 5:10 (see comments ad loc).82 This view is also supported by 2 Thess 2:1. For there, with his talk about believers’ “ingathering” (ἐπισυναγωγή) unto the Lord Jesus Christ at his parousia, Paul appears to make a summary reference to the teaching that he already delivered to the Thessalonians here in vv. 16–17a, echoing the Son of Man “ingathering” (ἐπισυνάγειν) of the elect in Matt 24:30–31//Mark 13:26–27. In our vv. 16–17a Paul cites in midrashic form a saying represented by Matt 24:30–31 and Mark 13:26–27. So vv. 16a and 17a represent, with slight adaptations, the two parts of Jesus’s saying transmitted in Matt 24:30b–31a//Mark 13:26–27a and Matt 24:31b//Mark 13:27b, while v. 16b represents the implication that Paul draws from the those parts of the dominical saying (see below). Here we need to ask why Paul refers to a “word of the Lord” in v. 15 and cites it in a midrashic form in vv. 16–17a.83 Scholars have intensely discussed the source of the “word of the Lord” but seldom asked this question properly. Within our present context, as observed above, it is obviously to substantiate or confirm the thesis of v. 14b that Paul derived it from the fundamental gospel of Jesus’s death and resurrection (v. 14a) and thereby provides the readers with assurance and comfort (vv. 17b–18). Nevertheless, our question arises because substantiating the hope of the resurrection of dead believers by citing the “word of the Lord” is most unusual in Paul. It is unusual for three reasons: (1) he normally lays out that hope by expounding the implications of the fundamental kerygma of Christ’s death and resurrection (1 Cor 15!; further, e.g., Rom 6:4–9; 8:11; 1 Cor 6:14; 2 Cor 4:14; Phil 3:10–11; Col 3:1–4); (2) he rarely cites a word of the Lord Jesus explicitly to support his teaching or argument (1 Cor 7:10 and 9:14 are the only exceptions); and (3) the saying of Matt 24:30–32//Mark 13:26–27 that comes closest to the “word of the Lord” cited in our vv. 16–17a does not mention the resurrection of the dead, so that Paul has to expound it as an implication of that word (v. 16b, see below). Why does he not just elaborate on what he has said in 4:14 in a way similar to 1 Cor 15:12–28? Why does he depart from his usual practice and appeal to the “word of the Lord” here (4:15), especially when it does not contain any reference to resurrection? Or does Paul cite here not the saying of Matt 24:30–32//Mark 13:26–27 but a different dominical saying that contains a reference to resurrection? Nepper-­Christensen suggested that John 11:25–26 was the word that Paul was citing,84 but he has found few supporters. However, R. H. Gundry has sought

81 82 83 84

See Kim, “Jesus Tradition,” 231–33 (PGTO, 177–79). See also Kim, “Jesus’ Son of Man Sayings,” in PGTO, 133–49. For a fuller treatment of this question, see Kim, “Jesus Tradition,” 235–41 (PGTO, 183–87). Nepper-­Christensen, “Das verborgene Herrenwort,” 151–54.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 394

7/12/23 11:29 AM

Comment 395 to revitalize that view by arguing that the “word of the Lord” here refers to what may be reconstructed as the original form of John 11:25–26 (“the one who has died will rise, and the one who is alive will never die”) and that Paul cites it in vv. 16–17 in the recast form of a Hellenistic ceremony of a king’s parousia to a city and the citizen’s apanteˉ sis of him.85 But this view raises the question why Paul then does not just cite such a clear and directly relevant saying immediately after v. 14 but recasts the non-­parousia “word” (i.e., the word that contains nothing about the Lord’s coming) into such a complex form as the Hellenistic ceremony of a royal visit. Gundry acknowledges the difference between “citizens of a Hellenistic city [taking] the initiative in going out to meet a visiting emperor” and the picture here of God raising dead believers and snatching them up to meet the Lord in the air. But he explains: “in the very nature of the case, God has to take the initiative in bringing believers with Jesus. They cannot raise themselves from the dead, nor can they levitate by pulling up on their own bootstraps.”86 But when Paul needs only to reassure the readers that their deceased fellow-­believers would receive eternal life at the Lord’s parousia, why doesn’t he just state the thesis of v. 14, cite for support the alleged “word of the Lord” (the reconstructed original form of John 11:25–26) as it is, affirm the key statement of v. 16b, and conclude with the words of assurance and comfort in vv. 17b–18? This would be a simple, neat, and effective argument with the “word of the Lord” for Paul’s purpose here. But Gundry’s thesis not only makes Paul give the “word of the Lord” unnecessarily complex twists but also takes such a key statement as v. 16b as a Pauline creation necessitated by his “Hellenized” presentation of the Lord’s parousia.87 However, Gundry does not propound the view that is popular today among the counter-­imperial interpreters that Paul is here seeking to teach the readers that Jesus is the true Lord and Caesar is a mere parody. Instead, Gundry says that Paul “Hellenizes” the “word of the Lord” in order to “enhance the consolation he seeks to bring the grief-­stricken Thessalonians” with the “festive connotations” of a Hellenistic ceremony of a royal visit.88 But it is difficult to believe that for such a simple purpose Paul unusually cites a “word of the Lord,” taking such trouble of “Hellenizing” it into the form of the parousia-­apanteˉ sis ceremony—­and into a form that happens to be so similar to Matt 24:30–31//Mark 13:26–27 (and Matt 25:1–13)!—­when the (reconstructed) non-­parousia “word” itself does not provide any hint or impetus for him to do it. Below in 5:1–11 we shall observe that Paul cites Jesus’s thief parable (Matt 24:43–44//Luke 12:39–40) and other sayings there to allay the readers’

85 86 87 88

Gundry, “Hellenization of Dominical Tradition,” 161–78. Gundry, “Hellenization of Dominical Tradition,” 166–67. Cf. Tuckett, “Synoptic Tradition,” 181. Gundry, “Hellenization of Dominical Tradition,” 167, 169.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 395

7/12/23 11:29 AM

396

1 Thessalonians 4:13–18

anxiety about “the times and seasons” of the parousia of the Lord. We shall then argue that Paul, having taught the Thessalonians about the parousia with those sayings and now seeing that precisely those sayings are raising that anxiety among them, cites them there to allay their anxiety by helping them understand those sayings properly in the light of the gospel (5:9–10). Paul’s reference to the “word of the Lord” here in 4:15–17a is to be understood in the same way. As we shall see below, it is fairly certain that the readers know accurately that the day of the Lord will come like a thief in the night (5:2) because Paul taught them about the parousia by referring to the “thief” saying of Jesus (Matt 24:43–44//Luke 12:39–40). Only because Paul had taught them about the parousia could they have expected that the Lord Jesus would come back from heaven for their salvation (cf. 1:10) and become anxious about the exact date of the parousia (5:1–2, see comment ad loc). So we suggest that Paul taught the readers about the Lord’s parousia and his ingathering of believers by referring to Jesus’s Son of Man sayings like Matt 24:30–31//Mark 13:26–27, as well as the thief saying. This was only natural, as he himself came to believe in the parousia of the Lord by interpreting such Son of Man sayings of Jesus in the light of their Dan 7 background (as we have suggested above). But since those sayings did not contain any reference to the resurrection of the dead, the readers took them as meaning that only the living would be gathered for salvation at the parousia and began to grieve that the dead among them were lost without any chance of salvation. Therefore, Paul refers to the “word of the Lord” that has inadequately been grasped so as to cause their grief and expounds its implications, stressing that one of them is the resurrection of the dead prior to ingathering. Thus he helps the readers understand the “word of the Lord” properly in light of the fundamental gospel of Christ’s death and resurrection (v. 14a) and realize that the “word of the Lord” confirms the corollary of the gospel (v. 14b). Among the several sayings of the coming of the Son of Man that Paul might have delivered to the readers, he refers chiefly to the saying of Matt 24:30–31//Mark 13:26–27 because he finds it the most responsible for the Thessalonians’ grief. At the same time, he finds it the most suitable for his explanation of the resurrection of the dead and the ingathering of both the living and dead saints.89 ὅτι αὐτὸς ὁ κύριος . . . καταβήσεται ἀπ’ οὐρανοῦ, “because the Lord himself . . . will descend from heaven.” In this causal ὅτι clause, Paul introduces the actual “word of the Lord” (in the form adapted to his present purpose) to substantiate the summary conclusion of it that he has just declared (v. 15b) and thereby to substantiate ultimately the thesis statement in v. 14b. With the emphatic phrase αὐτὸς ὁ κύριος, he affirms that the Lord himself and no

89 Cf. Wenham, Paul, 309–11.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 396

7/12/23 11:29 AM

Comment 397 deputy will descend: “αὐτός Ipse, grandis sermo.”90 For the emphasis, compare Acts 1:11 (οὗτος ὁ Ἰησοῦς . . . ἐλεύσεται, “this Jesus . . . will come”); also (more generally) Isa 63:9 LXX (οὐ πρέσβυς οὐδὲ ἄγγελος ἀλλ’ αὐτὸς κύριος ἔσωσεν αὐτούς, “no ambassador nor messenger, but the Lord himself saved them”); note also the divine assertion quoted in the Passover Haggadah: ‫אני הוא ולא אחר‬, “I myself and no other (will act to deliver Israel from Egypt).” In the following (vv. 16–17a), Paul describes the saving acts of “the Lord (Jesus Christ)” both for deceased and living believers. They are actually God’s saving acts wrought “through Jesus,” his representative (v. 14b), and so what follows is an unfolding and substantiation of the thesis statement in v. 14b: “Even so, through Jesus, God will bring (to be) with him those who have fallen asleep (together with those who are living).” ἀπ’ οὐρανοῦ, “from heaven.” Concerning the use of the singular here in contrast to the plural (ἐκ τῶν οὐρανῶν) in 1:10, as well as the implication that the exalted Lord Jesus Christ is in heaven at present, see comment on 1:10 above. With “the Lord” here, Paul replaces “the Son of Man” in Jesus’s original saying transmitted in Matt 24:30–31//Mark 13:26–27. Paul does the same in his citation of the eucharistic words in 1 Cor 11:23–26. In the Synoptic Gospels, Jesus speaks the eucharistic words as “the Son of Man” who is about to be “delivered up” (παραδίδοται): “For the Son of Man goes as it is written of him, but woe to that man by whom the Son of Man is delivered up” (Mark 14:21// Matt 26:24//Luke 22:22).91 Further, Jesus speaks elsewhere also of the Son of Man being delivered up (παραδιδόναι; Mark 9:31parr.; 10:33parr.; Mark 14:41// Matt 26:45; Luke 22:48; 24:7), just as he speaks of the Son of Man “coming” (ἔρχεσθαι/παρουσία; cf. Dan 7:13: ἤρχετο/παρῆν) in the future (Matt 25:31; Matt 24:44//Luke 12:40; Mark 8:38//Luke 9:26; Mark 13:26parr.; Mark 14:62//Matt 26:64; Luke 17:22; 18:8; cf. also Matt 24:27//Luke 17:24; Matt 24:37//Luke 17:26; Matt 24:39//Luke 17:30). So when Paul frames the eucharistic words with “the Lord Jesus on the night when he was delivered up [παρεδίδετο]” (1 Cor 11:23) and “you proclaim the Lord’s death until he comes [ἔλθῃ]” (1 Cor 11:26), it is highly likely that he replaces “the Son of Man” in the eucharistic tradition with “the Lord.”92 In our verse he makes this replacement not only because “the Son of Man” is quite incomprehensible to his Greek audience, but more fundamentally because with his resurrection, Jesus, “the Son of Man,” has now been exalted to the throne next to the throne of God, “the Ancient of Days,” and given “the dominion, glory, and kingship” (Dan 7:9–14; cf. 1 Cor 15:24–25; Phil 3:21). That is to say, he has been installed as the universal Lord (Ps 110:1; cf. Rom 1:4; 10:9; Phil 2:9–11). So “Lord” is the title Paul usually uses in connection with the exaltation (including his present reign over God’s 90 Bengel, ad loc. 91 Cf. Kim, “Son of Man,” 45–49. 92 Cf. Kim, PNP, 204–5.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 397

7/12/23 11:29 AM

398

1 Thessalonians 4:13–18

people and the world on God’s behalf) and parousia (including his future execution of God’s judgment and salvation).93 Therefore, Jesus’s coming as “the Lord” for salvation and judgment will fulfill the OT prophetic vision of the coming of the Lord at the end-­t ime. ἐν κελεύσματι, ἐν φωνῇ ἀρχαγγέλου καὶ ἐν σάλπιγγι θεοῦ, “with a shout of command, with an archangel’s voice, with the trumpet of God.” The three ἐν phrases signify the attendant circumstances of the Lord’s descent from heaven. The last two are modified by a genitive and joined together by καί. Most commentators take this to mean that the last two phrases explain the first. But Weima argues to take the three phrases as referring to three parallel events, pointing to the repetition of ἐν in the last phrase, as well as criticizing the alternative interpretation for making the archangel issue the command.94 Indeed, our v. 16 as a whole appears to make it reasonably clear that it is “the Lord himself” who issues the command: note especially the direct connection of the emphatic subject “the Lord himself” with the first phrase that appears without a genitive qualifier, in contrast to the following two phrases qualified respectively with “of an archangel” and “of God” (see also comment on v. 16c below). Either way, however, it seems that in depicting this apocalyptic scene Paul wants the readers to imagine that the Lord descends, issuing a powerful command, and an archangel (or angels, see below) conveys that command to the living and the dead amid a loud blast of God’s trumpet. ἐν κελεύσματι, “with a shout of command.” This military noun occurs once in the LXX at Prov 30:27: “the locust marches at one word of command” (ἀφ’ ἑνὸς κελεύσματος). In Aeschylus, Persians 397, the earlier form κέλευμα is used of the encouragement of oarsmen by the boatswain (κελευατής) at the battle of Salamis (ἐκ κελεύματος); in Thucydides, Hist. 2.92, κέλευσμα is used of the cheer with which the Athenian fighters encouraged one another at the battle of Naupactus (ἀπὸ ἑνὸς κελεύσματος). Philo (Rewards 117) speaks of God as gathering people together from the ends of the earth with one shout of command (ἑνὶ κελεύσματι). Here, it is the Lord himself who shouts the quickening word, which commands a ready and obedient response (cf. John 5:25, “the dead shall hear the voice of the Son of God [i.e., the Son of Man, v. 27], and those who hear shall live”). ἐν φωνῇ ἀρχαγγέλου, “with an archangel’s voice.” It is doubtful if we should think of one individual archangel here, whether Michael or another. The only other place in the Greek Bible where ἀρχάγγελος occurs is Jude 9 (Μιχαὴλ ὁ ἀρχάγγελος). Jewish tradition knew of seven archangels, “the seven holy angels who present the prayers of the saints and stand before the presence of the glory of the Holy One” (Tob 12:15; cf. Rev 8:2). In 1 En. 20.1–7 (Greek) they are called ἀρχάγγελοι, and their names are listed as Uriel, Raphael, Raguel, 93 Cf. Kramer, Christ, 65–71, 169–76. 94 Weima, 326.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 398

7/12/23 11:29 AM

Comment 399 Michael, Sariel, Gabriel, and Remiel. (The archangel Jeremiel in 4 Ezra 4.36 is probably to be identified with Remiel.) The angels who attend to God in his heavenly court are usually thought to accompany him when he comes (cf. Mark 8:38; Jude 14; 1 En. 1.9). They are not mentioned here, but in view of 1 Thess 3:13, as well as the mention of an “archangel” here, it is to be seen that their presence is assumed (cf. 2 Thess 1:7–8). Perhaps here it is meant to imagine that an archangel conveys the Lord’s command to the angelic host accompanying the Lord, and then the angels carry that message into all directions with a loud trumpet call (cf. Matt 24:31; see below). ἐν σάλπιγγι θεοῦ, “with the trumpet of God.” A “trumpet” features frequently in the theophany scenes in the OT (Exod 19:16; Isa 27:13; Joel 2:1; Zech 1:14–16; 9:14). In Isa 27:13, the “great trumpet” summons the Jewish exiles home from Assyria and Egypt (the words are echoed to this day in synagogue worship in the tenth of the Eighteen Benedictions: “Sound the great trumpet for our liberation; lift up the ensign to gather our exiles”). New Testament parallels include 1 Cor 15:52 (at the end-­t ime, the “trumpet” will “sound” similarly to summon the dead to rise); Rev 11:15 (the seventh of the angels “who stand before God” blows his trumpet as a signal that secular world dominion has been superseded by the eternal “kingdom of our Lord and of his Christ” and that the time has come “for the dead to be judged”); and, of course, Matt 24:31 (the Son of Man at his coming “will send out his angels with a loud trumpet call” to “gather his elect”), which is understood here as being cited by Paul in the present text. In view of these parallels, it is unnecessary to take the genitive qualifier “of God” here as meaning that God himself blows the trumpet; it may be thought that an angel blows the trumpet that belongs to God.95 καὶ οἱ νεκροὶ ἐν Χριστῷ ἀναστήσονται πρῶτον, “and the dead in Christ will rise first.” This v. 16b is not part of the dominical saying itself but an implication of it that Paul has just cited in v. 16a and will resume to do so in v. 17a (i.e., Matt 24:30–31//Mark 13:26–27; see above), which he draws out immediately to address the need of the readers (see below).96 He now designates “those who have fallen asleep” (vv. 13–14) plainly as “the dead” and adds the modifying phrase “in Christ” to define them more clearly.97 The words ἐν Χριστῷ comprise a distinctive, frequent, and important Pauline phrase, which has been variously interpreted in the history of Pauline scholarship.98 Although Paul may use the phrase for various meanings in diverse contexts, at least in the present kind of context where he speaks of “the dead in Christ,” he seems 95 Cf. Best, 197. 96 Cf. Marxsen, 67–68; McNicol, Jesus’ Directions, 36–37; pace Nicholl, Hope, 42. 97 Contra D. Konstant and I. Ramelli, “Syntax of ἐν Χριστῷ in 1 Thessalonians 4:16,” 579–93, who take the phrase with the following ἀναστήσονται, denying unconvincingly the parallelism of our phrase with οἱ κοιμηθέντες ἐν Χριστῷ in 1 Cor 15:18. 98 For a concise survey and discussion, see Seifrid, “In Christ,” 433–36.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 399

7/12/23 11:29 AM

400

1 Thessalonians 4:13–18

to use it for the sense of “(having been) determined/defined by the Christ-­ event and incorporated into it [ein Bestimmtsein vom Christusgeschehen und Einbezogensein in dieses].”99 So the phrase “the dead in Christ” here means “those who died, having been united with or incorporated into Christ, the inclusive substitute, in his death and resurrection by accepting (i.e., believing) the gospel of Christ’s death and resurrection ‘for us’ ” (cf. esp. Rom 6:2–11; 7:4; 2 Cor 5:14–17).100 Paul believes that such people continue to be σὺν Χριστῷ (“with Christ,” Phil 1:23), even while waiting to be raised to be “with the Lord always” (our v. 17 here). But here he does not include that connotation of the intermediate state in the phrase “the dead in Christ.”101 In 1 Cor 15 “the dead in Christ” are designated not only as “those who have fallen asleep in Christ” (v. 18), but also as “those who belong to Christ” (οἱ τοῦ Χριστοῦ, v. 23). The verb ἀναστήσονται (future middle indicative of ἀνίστημι: “they will rise”) appears here instead of a passive form of ἐγείρω, which Paul normally uses for resurrection to indicate that resurrection is a divine act (a divine passive; e.g., future passive ἐγερθήσονται, “will be raised,” in the parallel passage 1 Cor 15:52). This probably indicates that Paul formulates the present sentence under the influence of the pre-­Pauline creedal formula cited in v. 14 as well as LXX Dan 12:2 (see below). But, connected with the Lord’s “command,” ἀναστήσονται still conveys the same meaning as ἐγερθήσονται. When Paul says “the dead in Christ will rise” at the command of the Lord, in effect he means that they “will be raised” by the Lord (Jesus)—­a s he intimated already with the phrase “through Jesus” in v. 14. The adverb πρῶτον, “first,” here is used in the sense of the “first order of business” that is carried out.102 Paul affirms that “the dead in Christ will rise first,” as it is necessary for the conclusion that he wants to draw, namely, that they and living Christians together will be caught up to meet the Lord in the air.103 In Jesus’s saying in Matt 24:30–31//Mark 13:26–27 (“the Son of Man coming on the clouds of heaven . . . and he will send out his angels with a loud trumpet call, and they will gather his elect”), there is no reference to the dead rising. For this reason, Tuckett objects to the view that our vv. 16–17 echoes the dominical logion.104 However, in John 5:25–29 the dead are said to hear the voice (φωνή) of the Son of Man/Son of God and come out of their tombs to the resurrection (ἀνάστασιν) of life or of judgment. It is probable that the

99 Neugebauer, “ ‘In Christo,’ ” 132. 100 For the concept of “inclusive substitute,” cf. Gese, “Die Sühne,” 85–106; Hofius, “Sühne und Versöhnung,” 33–49; also Stuhlmacher, Biblical Theology, 324–25. 101 Cf. Best, 197, who suggests that for the intermediate state Paul would write οἱ νεκροὶ οἱ ἐν Χριστῷ; so also Malherbe, 275. 102 Fee, 178. 103 Cf. Fee, 178. 104 Tuckett, “Synoptic Tradition,” 177–80.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 400

7/12/23 11:29 AM

Comment 401 Johannine saying is an interpreted and elaborated version of Jesus’s saying in Matt 24:30–31//Mark 13:26–27 or one similar to it, just as John 6:53–58 is an interpreted version of Jesus’s eucharistic saying (Mark 14:21–25parr.). So it is likely that, faced with the Thessalonians’ grief arising from their inadequate understanding of this saying of Matt 24:30–31//Mark 13:26–27 (see above), Paul, like John, makes explicit here what he sees implied in that saying of Jesus. He is saying that “the word of the Lord” about his calling and ingathering of his people at his parousia presupposes his raising “the dead in Christ” first, to gather them together with surviving believers to himself.105 For Paul, this is a natural interpretation of the dominical logion for those who believe in the gospel of Christ’s death and resurrection (v. 14). For he thinks that those who believe in that gospel have been incorporated in Christ through appropriation of his representative death and resurrection by faith-­baptism, so that even if they die, they “will be united with him in a resurrection like his” (Rom 6:5). Furthermore, if in citing the Son of Man saying of Matt 24:30–31//Mark 13:26–27 here Paul was conscious of its Danielic background (see comment on v. 17 below), Dan 12:2 (“Multitudes who sleep [καθευδόντων] in the dust of the earth shall rise [ἀναστήσονται], some to everlasting life”) along with Dan 7:27 (“the saints of the Most High” identified or associated with the “one like a son of man” of Dan 7:13–14) could also have helped him make that midrash to that dominical logion.106 (For the synonymity of καθεύδειν/οἱ καθεύδοντες and κοιμᾶσθαι/οἱ κοιμώμενοι, see comment on 5:10 below.) ἔπειτα, “then,” “next in order” (v. 17). The word indicates what will follow the resurrection of dead believers, the “first order of business.” Note a similar sequencing in 1 Cor 15:23: “Christ the firstfruits [ἀπαρχή], then [ἔπειτα] those who belong to Christ at his parousia.” ἡμεῖς οἱ ζῶντες οἱ περιλειπόμενοι, “we who are alive, who are left.” The phrase is repeated from v. 15. ἅμα σὺν αὐτοῖς ἁρπαγησόμεθα, “shall be snatched away together with them.” Paul presents an adapted version of the Son of Man “gathering the elect” through his angels in the dominical logion of Matt 24:30–31//Mark 13:26–27. After the dead in Christ have been raised, “we . . . shall be snatched away together with them” (ἡμεῖς . . . ἅμα σὺν αὐτοῖς ἁρπαγησόμεθα). Since vv. 15–17a is an unfolding of the thesis in v. 14b, the logical subject of the passive ἁρπαγησόμεθα is God.107 God will snatch them up in the clouds. The force of the preposition σύν is strengthened by the preceding ἅμα, “together” (again in 5:10).108 As we have seen, this emphasis on simultaneousness does not betray

105 106 107 108

So also Aejmelaeus, Wachen, 84–85; Marshall, 126, 130. So Hartman, Prophecy, 189–90; Hyldahl, “Auferstehung,” 130–31. Best, 198; Malherbe, 276. Cf. Malherbe, 275.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 401

7/12/23 11:29 AM

402

1 Thessalonians 4:13–18

that the readers’ grief was about dead believers’ inability to enter into life with the Lord immediately at the parousia, but it rather reflects Paul’s desire to stress the certainty of dead believers’ participation in salvation at the parousia. From the Latin equivalent of ἁρπάζειν (rapere), this incident in the parousia is sometimes called the “rapture” (snatching away) of believers. The verb ἁρπάζειν (BDAG: “ ‘snatch, seize,’ i.e., take suddenly and vehemently”) implies violent action, sometimes indeed to the benefit of its object, as when the Roman soldiers snatched (ἁρπάσαι) Paul from the rioters in the Jerusalem council-­chamber (Acts 23:10) or when the male child in the apocalyptic vision was snatched up (ἡρπάσθη) to God to preserve him from the great red dragon (Rev 12:5). It is used in Acts 8:39 for the Spirit’s snatching (ἥρπασεν) Philip away after his interview with the Ethiopian chamberlain and (more germanely to the present passage) of Paul’s being snatched up (ἁρπαγέντα) to the third heaven or paradise (2 Cor 12:2–4). The OT account of Enoch having been snatched up (ἡρπάγη) to be with God (Wis 4:11; see Gen 5:24) provides a close parallel to our verse. In 4 Ezra 6.26 and 14.9, similar language is used for Moses and other righteous people.109 These examples from apocalyptic literature make Paul’s use of the verb for God’s sudden and forceful act in our apocalyptic context quite natural. But Malherbe sees here Paul making a “neat twist” of the Hellenistic consolation tradition’s language of the dead as having been “snatched away” from their loved ones by death.110 It is possible that Paul is aware of the usefulness of the “natural” term in the apocalyptic context in countering that notion. By depicting the opposite picture of God “snatching” believers to eternal life with the Lord, he intends to comfort the readers who grieve over their deceased members with such a pagan notion. Nothing is said here of the transformation of οἱ ζῶντες οἱ περιλειπόμενοι to fit them for the conditions of their new existence; Paul deals with this question later, in 1 Cor 15:50–52. ἐν νεφέλαις, “in clouds.” This reference to clouds is not simply because clouds suggested themselves as convenient vehicles for transportation through space but because clouds are a regular feature of biblical theophanies. The divine glory is veiled in clouds, shines forth from them, and retreats into them. There was a thick cloud over Sinai (and trumpet blast) when Yahweh came down (LXX: καταβεβηκέναι) to impart the law to his people (Exod 19:16–18) and when Moses went up to receive the revelation (Exod 24:15–18). Note also the cloud that enveloped the divine presence in the wilderness tabernacle (Exod 40:34) and in Solomon’s temple (1 Kgs 8:10–11; cf. Ps 97:2). Specially relevant to the NT background is Dan 7, where “one like a son of man” came on the “clouds of heaven” to be enthroned on the throne next to that of 109 Cf. Malherbe, 276. 110 Malherbe, 276. So also Holmes, 151; Gaventa, 66–67; Luckensmeyer, Eschatology, 257; Weima, 331–32.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 402

7/12/23 11:29 AM

Comment 403 the Ancient of Days and to be endowed with “authority, glory, and kingship” (vv. 13–14), which means or results in “the saints of the Most High,” God’s people, participating in God’s glory and sovereign rule (vv. 18, 22, 27–28). Jesus’s word at the Sanhedrin trial (Mark 14:62//Matt 26:64: “you will see the Son of Man seated at the right hand of Power, and coming with/on the clouds of heaven”) alludes to this passage, and so does also the saying of Jesus that is seen here cited, namely, Matt 24:30–31//Mark 13:26–27: “the Son of Man” is to “come on/in the clouds” to gather the elect through the angels. Similar theophanic imagery appears in the narratives of the transfiguration (Mark 9:7parr.) and ascension of Jesus (Acts 1:9). The “cloud” that received Jesus out of the disciples’ sight on the latter occasion has a bearing on the angelic assurance that he would come “in the same way” as they had seen him go (Acts 1:11). In Jewish tradition, “clouds” are also thought to be the vehicle that transports the saved to God’s throne.111 Similarly, here, the “clouds” are not only assumed as transporting the Lord in his descent from heaven, but also affirmed as transporting believers in their ascent (“being snatched up”) from the earth. εἰς ἀπάντησιν τοῦ κυρίου εἰς ἀέρα, “to meet the Lord in the air.” Many commentators take the common noun ἀπάντησις (“meeting”) here as a quasi-­technical term. In this, they follow E. Peterson, who argued that in the Hellenistic world the word (and its cognates) was used as a technical term for an official reception of a visiting dignitary.112 When a dignitary such as a ruler paid an official visit (παρουσία) to a city, the leading citizens came out to meet him and escort him back on the final leg of his journey. This act was called ἀπάντησις. So Cicero, describing Julius Caesar’s progress through Italy in 49 BC, says, “Just imagine what [ἀπαντήσεις] he is receiving from the towns, what honors are paid to him!” (Att. 8.16.2), and five years later he says much the same about Caesar’s adopted son Octavian: “The municipalities are showing the boy remarkable favor. . . . Wonderful [ἀπαντήσεις] and encouragement!” (Att. 16.11.6). There is undoubtedly a broad correspondence between this Hellenistic picture of ceremonial reception of a visiting dignitary and Paul’s picture of believers caught up to meet the descending Lord in the air here. However, J. Dupont points out many examples in the LXX of the phrase εἰς ἀπάντησιν and similar phrases used in descriptions of receptions of a dignitary in a form similar to that of Hellenistic ceremony (e.g., Gen 14:17; 2 Sam 19:16, 21), as well as some parallels between our text and the Sinai theophany of Exod 19:10–18 (the descent of the Lord, meeting, clouds, trumpet). He challenges Peterson’s treatment of the word ἀπάντησις here as a Hellenistic terminus technicus and

111 Billerbeck, 3:635–36; 4:1150. 112 Peterson, “Einholung des Kyrios,” 682–702.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 403

7/12/23 11:29 AM

404

1 Thessalonians 4:13–18

suggests to interpret our text rather against the background of the Sinai theophany.113 Recently, M. R. Cosby also argues against taking ἀπάντησις (and its cognates), a common word used for various kinds of meetings in the ancient texts, as a technical term for formal reception of a visiting dignitary and objects to interpreting our text in terms of the Hellenistic reception ceremony.114 He points especially to the absence in our text (vv. 14–17) of the elements usually associated with that ceremony, as well as to the reversal of some of them. For example, whereas in the Hellenistic reception the city receiving a dignitary’s visit carefully plans the welcoming ceremony and dispatches a delegation to go out of the city for some distance to meet and escort the visiting dignitary back to the city, in our text believers are abruptly (cf. 5:1–11) and passively snatched up to meet the Lord in the air.115 Gundry counters Cosby’s arguments point by point.116 Cosby may not be entirely persuaded by Gundry’s rebuttal, and he may still insist on the differences in details between our text and the Hellenistic reception ceremony as depicted by Peterson. Even so, since the word ἀπάντησις appears here in association with κύριος and παρουσία, which both had political connotations (on παρουσία, see comment on v. 15 above), that is, since it appears in the context of depicting the majestic “appearance [παρουσία] of the Lord [κύριος],” in the minds of the Thessalonian readers the language of believers’ ἀπάντησις with the coming Lord would certainly evoke the pomp and ceremony involved in the visit to their city of a Hellenistic ruler or Roman emperor, who is addressed as κύριος, “Lord.” As we have suggested in commenting on παρουσία in v. 15 above, it is likely that Paul intends this.117 Recently, counter-­imperial interpreters have championed this view and made our text—­along with the following passage (5:1–11, “peace and security”) as well as 2 Thess 2:1–12—one of their strongest proof texts for their general presentation of Paul’s gospel as a counter-­imperial message, a message that seeks to subvert Roman imperial rule.118 In presenting the parousia of the Lord ( Jesus) in terms that evoke Hellenistic rulers’ parousia, as well as the Sinai and Danielic theophanies (Exod 19:10–18; 24:15–18; Dan 7:9–14), Paul’s immediate purpose is clearly 113 DuPont, “ ‘Avec le Seigneur’ à la Parousie,” 39–79. 114 Cosby, “Hellenistic Formal Reception,” 15–34. 115 Cf. Plevnik, Paul and Parousia, 89: “the entire scene deals with the bringing (Einholung) of the faithful, not with the bringing of the Lord” (contrary to Peterson’s “Einholung des Kyrios”; emphasis original). 116 Gundry, “Hellenistic Formal Receptions,” 39–41. Cf. also Röcker, Belial, 300–304. 117 So most recent commentators; see esp. Tellbe, Paul, 126–30; Luckensmeyer, Eschatology, 260–66; Weima, 333–35; but Fee, 180, flatly rejects this view. 118 E.g., Donfried, “Cults of Thessalonica,” 31–38; Koester, “Imperial Ideology,” 160; Smith, “ ‘Unmasking the Powers,’ ” 48; cf. also Horsley and Silberman, Message and the Kingdom, 156–57; Harrison, “Paul and the Imperial Gospel”; Wright, Paul and the Faithfulness of God, 2:1082–85, 1291–2; cf. also Tellbe, Paul, 123–40.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 404

7/12/23 11:29 AM

Comment 405 to impress upon the readers its glorious majesty and strengthen their hope for eschatological salvation. But by combining the languages of the two traditions, the OT and the Hellenistic, and depicting the parousia of the Lord as taking place through a “descent from heaven” and believers’ apanteˉ sis of the Lord “in the air,” is Paul also trying to convey to the readers the message that the parousia of earthly “lords” is only a parody of the truly glorious parousia of the heavenly Lord? Is he thereby suggesting still further for them to defy the cult of worshiping or honoring the Roman emperor, a mere parody of the true heavenly Lord, and to reject the Roman imperial order, a mere parody of the kingdom of God? We can obtain answers to these questions only by completing the examination of our whole verse. In the meantime, we may note that Paul’s picture of believers’ ἀπάντησις with the coming Lord may echo Jesus’s parable of the ten virgins (Matt 25:1– 13), which has the virgins summoned to go out and meet the bridegroom—­εἰς ἀπάντησιν αὐτοῦ. Having represented the part of the “word of the Lord” about the Son of Man coming on the clouds and gathering his elect (Matt 24:30–31// Mark 13:26–27) in terms of resurrected believers and surviving believers being snatched up (or God snatching them up) in the clouds, Paul adds the present phrase, apparently echoing the parable of the ten virgins, to clarify the purpose of the gathering or snatching up: for believers “to meet the Lord in the air.” Below it will be observed that in 5:2, 4 Paul echoes Jesus’s thief saying (Matt 24:43–44//Luke 12:39–40) and in 5:6 probably also Jesus’s parables of the watchmen (Luke 12:36–38; cf. Mark 13:34–37) and the steward (Luke 12:41–48//Matt 24:45–51). Since all these parables (including the parable of the ten virgins) are similar in character, concern reception of the Son of Man or the eschatological savior/master figure in his coming, and appear partly clustered together in the Synoptic tradition, it is possible that, along with Jesus’s Son of Man saying in Matt 24:30–31//Mark 13:26–27, the parable of the ten virgins is also echoed in our vv. 16–17.119 If so, we may see that the two dominical sayings, Matt 24:30–31//Mark 13:26–27 and Matt 25:1–13 (and Dan 7 and 12:2–3 that stand behind them), as well as the Hellenistic custom of formal reception, have led Paul to present the picture of the Lord’s παρουσία and believers’ ἀπάντησις with him in the form of our passage. For Luke’s use of the Hellenistic custom, compare Acts 28:15, where Christians from Rome walk south along the Appian Way to meet Paul and his company (εἰς ἀπάντησιν ἡμῖν) and escort them on the remainder of their journey to Rome. εἰς ἀέρα, “in the air.” As often elsewhere in the NT, here also εἰς is used like ἐν for location (“in”) rather than direction (“into”).120 We should not overpress the classical distinction between the lower air (ἀήρ) and the upper air (αἰθήρ, not found in the NT), although the mention of clouds would in 119 So Wenham, Paul, 309–11. 120 Cf. BDF §205.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 405

7/12/23 11:29 AM

406

1 Thessalonians 4:13–18

any case suggest the lower air. The “air,” often thought to be the dwelling place of evil spirits (Eph 2:2; T. Benj. 3.4),121 cannot be the place where the Lord and his people would live. Hence, Paul may be thinking of the Lord descending from heaven and of Christians being caught up to meet him in the air—­the space between earth and heaven—­and to escort him back to earth in the pattern of a Hellenistic formal reception.122 If so, his thought here is to be compared with the vision in Rev 21 of God’s “holy city, new Jerusalem” descending from heaven and God dwelling with his people on the renewed earth (cf. Rom 8:18–25 for the vision of the eschatological renewal of the whole creation with the revelation of the children of God).123 On the other hand, ἁρπαγησόμεθα implies a “forced” rapture and not a voluntary going out to meet the Lord. Hence, Paul is not using the model of the Hellenistic formal reception exactly but rather may be modifying it in light of Dan 7. Believers are raptured upward to be enthroned at God’s side in heaven together with the Lord Jesus Christ (the Son of Man).124 Recently, C. R. Moss and J. S. Baden have sought to elucidate the idea of believers transported by the clouds into the air at the parousia of the Lord with some rabbinic traditions on Isa 60:8 (and Num 16:32–33) that on the day of the Lord the righteous will fly in the clouds to the Jerusalem lifted high in the air.125 If Paul is familiar with the traditions, here he may be thinking of believers lifted to the heavenly Jerusalem. Certainly 2 Cor 5:1 suggests that he thinks of heaven as the eventual dwelling place of believers (cf. also Gal 4:26; Phil 3:14, 20; contrast Rom 8:18–22, where he expresses his vision of the present creation redeemed and renewed at the eschaton). However, from our passage itself we cannot be certain whether he thinks of his people going up to the air to stay there or to come down from there with the Lord to earth. As Malherbe observes, he “retains his focus on the problem at hand,” without elaborating on “what will transpire when they meet.”126 καὶ οὕτως πάντοτε σὺν κυρίῳ ἐσόμεθα, “and (having) thus (joined him) we shall be continually with the Lord.” As for the consequence of the meeting, however, Paul leaves no uncertainty. For “being with the Lord always” is all that ultimately matters. Now “we” covers both the living and the dead. The eschatological salvation is referred to simply as “being with the Lord” (cf. 2 Cor 5:8; Phil 1:23). Whereas μετά is often used in the NT outside the Pauline corpus for eschatological existence with the Lord, Paul always uses σύν for 121 Cf. Billerbeck, 4:516. 122 Marshall, 131; Holtz, 203; Nicholl, Hope, 43–44; Weima, 320, 335. 123 Cf. Röcker, Belial, 304–5, 321, who thinks that like 1 En. 91.12–13; Sib. Or. 3.652–760; 4 Ezra 7.28–29; 2 Bar. 29.3–30.5, here the Lord Jesus is seen to be coming to establish the messianic kingdom of the purified Israel on earth (cf. Rom 11:26). 124 Wanamaker, 175. 125 Moss and Baden, “1 Thessalonians 4.13–18.” 126 Malherbe, 277. Cf. also Best, 201; Holtz, 203–4; Fee, 181–82.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 406

7/12/23 11:29 AM

Explanation 407 it (e.g., Rom 6:8; 8:32; 2 Cor 4:14; 13:4; Phil 1:23; Col 3:3–4; 1 Thess 4:14, 17; 5:10). He sees eschatological life with the Lord as the consummation of the believers’ life ἐν/σὺν Χριστῷ here and now, the life that began with their union σὺν Χριστῷ in his death and resurrection or with their participation in the death and resurrection of Christ, the inclusive substitute, through faith-­ baptism (Rom 6:3–11; 8:17; Gal 2:19; Col 2:12–3:4).127 So eschatological life with the Lord is participation in his glory and reign (Rom 5:17; 1 Cor 4:8; cf. Matt 13:43; Rom 8:17; Rev 5:10; 22:5). This conclusion derived from “the word of the Lord” (our vv. 15–17a; see comments above) confirms the thesis based on the fundamental gospel in v. 14, and so this conclusion forms an inclusio with the thesis in v. 14 above. Having stated the thesis in v. 14 on the basis of the fundamental gospel of Jesus’s death and resurrection, Paul has now substantiated it by means of “the word of the Lord” in vv. 15–17a (N.B. the γάρ in v. 15). So the description of the actual process of the Lord Jesus coming to raise dead believers and summoning them, as well as surviving believers, to be with him in vv. 16–17a is an explication of the phrase “through Jesus” in the thesis statement in v. 14. God will bring dead believers to be with the Lord Jesus (“with him,” v. 14), and this he will do “through Jesus” (v. 14)—­by sending down the Lord Jesus from heaven to raise them up and summon them to meet him in the air (vv. 15–17). 18 Ὥστε παρακαλεῖτε ἀλλήλους, “so encourage one another.” The same expression occurs of general Christian duty in 5:11 below, but in the present context the sense of “comfort” or “consolation” is uppermost. P.Oxy. 115 (the letter of condolence mentioned in the comments on v. 13 above) ends with the admonition to the bereaved parents παρηγορεῖτε οὖν ἀλλήλους (“so comfort each other”), but the Thessalonian Christians are given solid grounds for comfort and hope. ἐν τοῖς λόγοις τούτοις, “with these words” (instrumental ἐν). “These words,” which are based both on the gospel (v. 14) and “the word of the Lord” himself (vv. 15–17), give full assurance about the salvation of dead believers, as well as providing the living ones with a sure hope. Therefore, in conclusion, Paul is urging the readers to go on sharing “these words” with one another in order to dispel the sense of hopelessness and grief among them.

Explanation During his founding mission in Thessalonica, Paul taught the readers the gospel of Jesus’s death and resurrection (the saving event already wrought) and his coming (the saving event yet to be wrought; cf. 1:10). He taught the former on the basis of the common apostolic kerygma (4:14; 5:9–10; cf. 1 Cor 15:3–5, 11) and the latter on the basis of sayings of Jesus about the future coming of the Son of Man, such as the one transmitted in Matt 24:30–31// 127 See Best, 200–202, for more reflection; cf. Marshall, 131.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 407

7/12/23 11:29 AM

408

1 Thessalonians 4:13–18

Mark 13:26–27 (our vv. 16–17; 5:1–4; cf. 1:10). However, due to their Hellenistic background and the brief period of their Christian instruction, the readers understandably were not able to grasp adequately the implications of both the gospel and Jesus’s Son of Man sayings. Paul’s audience, seeing those words of Jesus about the ingathering of God’s people at the coming of the Son of Man making no reference to dead believers, simply thought that the dead among their number would not participate in the eschatological salvation at the Lord’s parousia. Thus they were grieving over them like those who had no hope for life after death. Therefore, Paul seeks to reassure and comfort the readers precisely by helping them understand properly the implications of the gospel and “the word of the Lord.” He explains that the gospel of Jesus’s death and resurrection implicitly contains in itself the promise that its believers would be raised from the dead to live with the risen Lord Jesus (v. 14). Moreover, he explains that, when “the word of the Lord” is properly seen in the light of the gospel, it definitely presupposes the resurrection of dead believers first at the Lord’s parousia so that he may gather together all his people, the dead and the living, to live with him (vv. 15–17). In the next passage, 5:1–11, we shall observe the same pattern of the problem and its resolution as here: the readers’ anxiety arose out of their inadequate understanding of Jesus’s Son of Man sayings with which Paul had taught about the parousia of the Lord Jesus Christ, and so he writes to help them resolve it by understanding the sayings properly in light of the gospel of Christ’s death and resurrection. So in the apocalyptic section of 4:13–5:11, we learn both that Paul taught the Thessalonians about the future coming of the Lord Jesus, referring to Jesus’s Son of Man sayings, and that he helped them resolve their questions about the parousia by making them understand those sayings properly in light of the fundamental gospel of Christ’s death and resurrection. Both points are important for our understanding of Paul’s missionary preaching and pastoral instruction. Here we have observed how Jesus’s sayings of the future coming of the Son of Man form a basis for Paul’s eschatology (including the new “parousia” terminology). This observation needs to be held together with the observations that elsewhere in this letter Paul also echoes Son of Man sayings of Jesus. In 1:10 and 5:9–10 he echoes the ransom saying of Mark 10:45//Matt 20:28 and the eucharistic saying of Mark 14:21–25parr. to present Jesus’s death as an atoning death, and in 2:6–8 he echoes the ransom saying again, but there to explain his apostolic ministry. Thus, we can see how crucial Jesus’s Son of Man sayings were for Paul’s formulation of his gospel as a whole and for his shaping of his apostolic conduct (his entry or eisodos).128 128 See Kim, “Jesus’ Son of Man Sayings” and “Jesus’ Ransom Saying” (both in PGTO, respectively 133–49, 151–70).

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 408

7/12/23 11:29 AM

Explanation 409 In our passage 4:13–18, Paul does not just state in the manner of a theological essay that the gospel contains in itself the promise of the resurrection of dead believers and that “the word of the Lord,” when properly understood, does the same. But he makes those two points by means of re-­presenting “the word of the Lord” (Matt 24:30–31//Mark 13:26–27) with heightened echoes of the Sinai and Danielic theophanies (Exod 19; 24; Dan 7) and clear allusions to formal reception ceremonies of Greco-­Roman rulers. This is, of course, designed to strengthen the assurance about and hope for the glorious salvation at the Lord’s parousia and thereby to comfort the readers. Nevertheless, here Paul is uninterested in depicting a full scenario of what will transpire at the Lord’s parousia or in describing the blessed state of the post-­parousia or post-­rapture life of believers. Rather, he concentrates only on dealing with the presenting problem, namely, the Thessalonian Christians’ grief about their dead fellows that has arisen out of their mistaken notion that dead believers are forever lost. He only focuses on affirming the resurrection of dead believers first at the parousia of the Lord Jesus, so that they together with surviving believers will “meet” the Lord together and “be with the Lord always.” Therefore, we are not to pose questions to the text that it does not intend to answer, and we are not to be led astray with unwarranted speculations about the parousia. Nor should we take too literally the pictorial language used here to describe the Lord’s parousia and believers’ rapture. In Paul’s description here of the advent of the Lord in terms that evoke the theophanic scenes of the OT, we are to focus on his intent of presenting it as a divine event, as the fulfillment of the long-­awaited end-­time coming of the Lord. We are not to take the words like “clouds,” “command,” “the archangelic voice,” and “trumpet call” literally but as metaphors employed to enhance the sense of the divine majesty and glory of the Lord.129 There is no need to be overly concerned because the imagery of the Lord “coming down” and believers “being snatched up into the air” is constructed upon the ancient trilevel worldview. For such “up” and “down” terminology is used in biblical tradition essentially to express divine transcendence and condescension.130 It is even a question whether we in the modern scientific age can or need to dispense with such imagery when we want to express, in poetic and liturgical language, our reverence for God’s transcendence and grace and our hope for participating in them. How comfortless would many believers today find themselves in this world if they are discouraged from praying in the “primitive” language of “O that thou wouldest rend the heavens, that thou wouldest come down!” (Isa 64:1 KJV) and from holding on to the hope in “mythological” terms that such a prayer 129 Cf. Marshall, 128, citing Calvin, 365, and Whiteley, 72. 130 For a proper interpretation of biblical imagery and metaphors, cf. Caird, Language and Imagery of the Bible, esp. 183–97.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 409

7/12/23 11:29 AM

410

1 Thessalonians 4:13–18

would be answered in the Lord’s actual descent from heaven? Nevertheless, it would be a mistake if we miss the essential point of the imagery and develop a speculation about “heaven” as the literal dwelling place of God and his redeemed people. Paul’s sharp focus on the presenting problem, namely, the readers’ grief over their dead fellow-­believers, also discourages us from reading a counter-­ imperial intent out of our passage. For even with his presentation of the Lord’s parousia in a form analogous to that of a Greco-­Roman formal reception for a ruler, together with echoes of Dan 7 (four beastly heathen kingdoms vs. the kingdom of God and his people), he makes no hint about the Lord Jesus coming to replace the Roman Empire with his own kingdom on earth or to liberate his people from Roman oppression; rather he only aims at demonstrating that the Lord’s parousia would bring about the resurrection of dead believers and grant them, as well as living believers, eternal life with him. Therefore, when it is difficult to know in what sense this message is counter-­imperial and subversive to the Roman rule, it does not appear right to read a counter-­imperial or anti-­Roman meaning into Paul’s manner of presenting the Lord’s parousia here. Oakes argues that to speak of Paul’s gospel as counter-­imperial or anti-­Roman “we would need arguments that suggested that Paul specifically had Rome in view when expressing his [Christology and] eschatology.”131 He concludes his examination of 1 Thess 4:13–18 thus: “the language παρουσία and ἀπάντησις [there] does seem to be drawn from experience of Roman practice, but the passage does not seem to be a conscious challenge to Roman eschatology.”132 The difficulty of reading a counter-­imperial meaning out of 1 Thess 4:13–5:11 is well illustrated by Tellbe.133 He repeatedly emphasizes that, in the eschatological sections of this letter, we must pay attention to the political connotations of Paul’s teachings, that is, how he deliberately contrasts his eschatology with the Roman imperial ideology in order to encourage the Thessalonian believers not to put their trust in the political salvation of Rome (“peace and security,” 5:3) but in the parousia of Christ, the heavenly Lord.134 Paul encourages them “[not] to put their trust . . . in being citizens of a Greek civitas libera or members of the city’s ἐκκλησία but in belonging to God’s own ἐκκλησία (1:1)” or in “another βασιλεία from which they are to expect their saving κύριος (1:1; 1:10; 2:12; 4:15–17; 5:9, 23).”135 Even so, Tellbe avoids designating this contrast or purpose of Paul’s as “counter-­imperial” or “anti-­Roman” but stresses only that thereby Paul seeks to reinforce the independent identity and integrity of the Thessalonian believers as a new 131 Oakes, “Re-­Mapping,” 315. 132 Oakes, “Re-­Mapping,” 317. Cf. Malherbe, 304. 133 Tellbe, Paul, 123–40. 134 Tellbe, Paul, 125–26, 127, 129–30. 135 Tellbe, Paul, 131–32.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 410

7/12/23 11:29 AM

Explanation 411 religious association.136 However, for several other scholars, the above elements in Paul’s teachings that Tellbe points out characterize Paul’s teachings as “counter-­imperial.” At any rate, what Tellbe is attributing to Paul is clearly not the explicit or immediate purpose of his eschatological teachings in our 4:13–5:11. We may grant that no matter whether Paul intended or not, the Thessalonian believers could have heard political connotations in such terms as kyrios, parousia, apanteˉsis, ekkleˉ sia, euangelion, so¯teria, and so on as well as in warning against a blind trust in “peace and security” of the Roman Empire or a Greek city (5:3, see comment ad loc). We may also grant that Paul’s gospel (euangelion) of Christ Jesus as the true kyrios whose parousia will bring the true salvation (so¯teria) could well have led some Thessalonians to see the Roman ideology and propaganda as a mere parody of the true gospel or even as a distortion of it. They would then probably have avoided any form of imperial cult or honoring Roman rulers excessively and would no longer trust in the Roman ideology and propaganda as much as they used to do before their conversion. But what more “subversive” anti-­Roman things could they have been inspired to do? Or, apart from avoidance of participation in any civic or religious activity in which imperial cult is involved, what of their new Christian ecclesial life could be construed as “subversive” to the Roman Empire? Or is that avoidance all that counter-­imperial interpreters have in mind by Paul’s alleged “counter-­imperial” gospel? Here note how Tellbe himself adds immediately to the statement cited above: in our letter “Paul does not speak directly of the state per se, nor does he explicitly criticize the state or incite his readers to revolutionary attitudes or activities. Instead, he requires political quietism and urges them to live as peaceful citizens.”137 Thus, interpreting 4:11 in the political sense, Tellbe says that there Paul is “aim[ing] at curtailing tendencies among some of the Thessalonian believers to aggravate the conflict with ‘the outsiders’ [οἱ ἔξω], in particular the civic authorities and leaders.”138 Even if we do not adopt Tellbe’s “political” interpretation of 4:11 (see comment ad loc), the overall tenor of Paul’s exhortation in 4:10b–12 is clearly a far cry from any sort of “subversive” stance or activity. It is significant that Tellbe recognizes this even while stressing the importance of acknowledging political connotations in Paul’s teachings in our letter. So the question remains: In what sense can Paul’s teachings in our letter be seen specifically as counter-­imperial or anti-­Roman beyond being generally “counter-­worldly,” which the gospel of the kingdom of God and his Son, Jesus Christ the Lord, is bound to be anywhere and anytime in this world and present age? Or is this question obviated by the thesis of Tellbe, that Paul 136 Tellbe, Paul, 136–40. 137 Tellbe, Paul, 133. 138 Tellbe, Paul, 133; cf. also 139–40.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 411

7/12/23 11:29 AM

412

1 Thessalonians 5:1–11

makes the political connotations of his gospel so clearly apparent in our letter only to reinforce the Thessalonian church’s distinctive sense of identity, which is different from that of the wider civic community under Roman rule as well as from traditional Jewish identity, so that they may embrace their social alienation as “normal”?139

B. The Day of the Lord (5:1–11) Bibliography Aejmelaeus, L. Wachen vor dem Ende: Die Traditionsgeschichtlichen Wurzeln von 1. Thess 5:1–11 und Luk 21:34–36. SESJ 44. Helsinki: Kirjapaio Raamattualo, 1985. Bauckham, R. “Synoptic Parousia Parables and the Apocalypse.” NTS 23 (1977/78): 162–76. deSilva, D. A. “ ‘Worthy of His Kingdom’: Honor Discourse and Social Engineering in 1 Thessalonians.” JSNT 19 (1996): 49–79. Harrison, J. R. “Paul and the Imperial Gospel at Thessaloniki.” JSNT 25 (2002): 71–96. Hartman, L. Prophecy Interpreted: The Formation of Some Jewish Apocalyptic Texts and of the Eschatological Discourse Mark 13par. ConBNT 1. Lund: Gleerup, 1966. Heil, J. P. “Those Now ‘Asleep’ (Not Dead) Must Be ‘Awakened’ for the Day of the Lord in 1 Thess 5.9–10.” NTS 46 (2000): 464–71. Kim, S. “Paul and the Roman Empire.” Pages 277–308 in God and the Faithfulness of Paul: A Critical Examination of the Pauline Theology of N. T. Wright. Edited by Michael F. Bird, Christoph Heilig, and J. Thomas Hewitt. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2016. Reprint in pages 223–51 of PGTO. Lautenschlager, M. “εἴτε γρηγορῶμεν εἴτε καθεύδωμεν: Zum Verhältnis von Heiligung und Heil in 1 Thess 5,10.” ZNW 81 (1990): 39–59. Luckensmeyer, D. The Eschatology of First Thessalonians. NTOA 71. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2009. März, C.-­P. “Das Gleichnis vom Dieb: Überlegungen zur Verbindung von Lk 12,39 par Mt 24,43 und 1 Thess 5,2.4.” Pages 633–48 in The Four Gospels 1992: Festschrift Frans Neirynck. Edited by F. van Segbroeck et al. Leuven: Leuven University Press, 1992. Nicholl, C. R. From Hope to Despair in Thessalonica: Situating 1 and 2 Thessalonians. SNTSMS 126. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2004. Tuckett, C. M. “Synoptic Tradition in 1 Thessalonians?” Pages 160–82 in The Thessalonian Correspondence. Edited by R. F. Collins. BETL 87. Leuven: Peeters, 1990. Weima, J. A. D. “ ‘Peace and Security’ (1 Thess 5.3): Prophetic Warning or Political Propaganda?” NTS 58 (2012): 331–59. Wengst, K. Pax Romana and the Peace of Jesus Christ. Translated by John Bowden. Philadelphia: Fortress, 1987. White, J. R. “ ‘Peace and Security’ (1 Thessalonians 5.3): Is It Really a Roman Slogan?” NTS 59 (2013): 382–95. —­—­— .­ “ ‘Peace’ and ‘Security’ (1 Thess 5.3): Roman Ideology and Greek Aspiration.” NTS 60.4 (2014): 499–510. Wright, N. T. Paul and the Faithfulness of God. Vol. 2. Christian Origins and the Question of God 4. Minneapolis: Fortress, 2013.

Translation But with regard to the times and seasons, brothers and sisters, you have no need to be written to: 2you yourselves know perfectly well that the day of the Lord a is coming like a thief by night. 3When b they are saying, “Peace and security,” it is then that 1

139 Tellbe, Paul, 136, 140. See also Kim, “Is Paul Preaching” and “Paul and the Roman Empire” (both in PGTO, respectively 217–22, 223–51).

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 412

7/12/23 11:29 AM

Notes 413 sudden destruction comes on c them, like birth pangsd on a woman with child, and they will not escape.e 4But you are not in darkness, brothers and sisters, for that day to overtake f you like a thief.g 5You are all children of light, children of day; we do not belong h to night or darkness. 6So then, let us not sleep as i the others do; let us keep awake j and be sober. 7For those who sleep sleep by night and those who get drunk k are drunk by night; 8but as for us, since we belong to day, let us keep sober, putting on the breastplate of faith and love, and the hope of salvation for a helmet, 9because God has not appointed l us for wrath, but for the obtaining of salvation through our Lord Jesus Christ,m 10who died for n us, so that, whether we are awake or asleep,o we might live p together with him. 11Therefore, encourage one another and build one another up,q as indeed you are doing.

Notes a. ἡμέρα κυρίου, both nouns are anarthrous, but ἡ is placed before ἡμέρα by A Ψ 0226 byz. In the LXX and the NT either both nouns are anarthrous or (as in 2 Thess 2:2) both have the article; no difference in meaning is discernible between the two constructions. b. ὅταν, to which δέ is added by ‫א‬2 B D 0226 1739 1881 pc syrhcl and γάρ by Ψ byz lat a vg. c. For αὐτοῖς ἐφίσταται B reads ἐπίσταται αὐτοῖς, while some Western witnesses (F G latb d Aug pt) read αὐτοῖς φανήσεται (“will be manifested to them”). d. ὠδίν, Hellenistic nominative for classical ὠδίς, more commonly used in the plural. e. For οὐ μή with the aorist subjunctive see note g (on 4:15). D* F G read the future indicative ἐκφεύξονται. f. ἵνα . . . καταλάβῃ, here expressing result, not (as in classical usage) purpose; cf. BDF §391 (5). g. For ὡς κλέπτης (“as a thief ”), ὡς κλέπτας (“as thieves”), referring to those overtaken, not to the day of the Lord, is read by A B copbo (pt). Lightfoot was disposed to accept κλέπτας, mainly because it was more likely to be changed to κλέπτης (in the light of v. 2) than vice versa. h. οὐκ ἐσμέν, for which οὐκ ἐστέ (“you are not” or “you do not belong”) is read by D* F G lat vet vg.codd syr pesh copsa Ambst. For oscillation between first and second plural, cf. Gal 3:23–27; Col 2:13. i. Between ὡς and οἱ λοιποί, ‫א‬2 D F G byz et al. insert καί (by assimilation to 4:13). j. The late present γρηγορέω is a back-­formation from ἐγρήγορα, the classical perfect (intransitive) of ἐγείρω (“waken”); cf. στήκω from ἕστηκα (see note c, on 3:8). k. μεθυσκόμενοι, for which B reads μεθύοντες. While μεθύσκεσθαι originally means “get drunk” and μεθύειν “be drunk,” the distinction is difficult to maintain here. l. ἔθετο, aorist middle. The use of the middle voice of τιθέναι in a sense hardly distinguishable from the active has classical antecedents; cf. BDF §316 (1). m. Χριστοῦ is omitted by P30 (vid) B latb m* vg.codd copsa. n. For ὑπέρ, ‫ *א‬B 33 read περί. o. εἴτε γρηγορῶμεν εἴτε καθεύδωμεν (cf. Phil 1:27). The construction εἴτε . . . εἴτε followed by the subjunctive without ἄν is not Attic but is found in Ionic (epic and Herodotus). p. For ζήσωμεν the future indicative ζήσομεν is read by A pc. q. εἷς τὸν ἕνα in the sense of ἀλλήλους, perhaps to be explained as a Semitism; cf., however, Theocritus, Id. 22.65, εἷς ἑνὶ χεῖρας ἄειρον (“they raised their hands one to another”).

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 413

7/12/23 11:29 AM

414

1 Thessalonians 5:1–11

Form/Structure/Setting Having dealt in 4:13–18 with one of the two questions concerning the parousia of the Lord Jesus that Timothy apparently reported (cf. 3:6) as troubling the readers, namely, the fate of dead believers at his parousia (περὶ τῶν κοιμωμένων), now Paul moves on to deal with the other question, namely, the date of the Lord’s parousia (περὶ δὲ τῶν χρόνων καὶ τῶν καιρῶν). Paul reminds the readers of his original teaching that the exact date of the parousia cannot be known in advance (vv. 1–3). He then concentrates on reassuring them in light of the gospel that they have already been made the “children of light” and so are destined to obtain the consummation of salvation at the Lord’s parousia (vv. 4–5). He next focuses on exhorting them that they are to maintain a spiritually and morally sober and vigilant life of faith, love, and hope (vv. 6–8). He then refers again to the gospel that he first cited in 4:14, stresses especially the saving purpose of God (5:9–10), and states concluding words of assurance and exhortation (v. 11), intending to round off not only this subsection of 5:1–11 but the whole eschatological section of 4:13–5:11 (note the inclusio between 4:14 and 5:10, as well as the parallelism between 4:17 and 5:10b and between 4:18 and 5:11). So, the structure may be summarized as follows: vv. 1–3: the date of the day of the Lord; it comes at an unknown hour like a thief, bringing disaster to the complacent people of this world vv. 4–5: but it will not overtake the readers as they are already the children of the day/light vv. 6–8: exhortation: maintain a sober and vigilant life of faith, love, and hope vv. 9–10: assurance: God has destined us not to wrath, but to obtaining salvation through the Lord Jesus Christ who died for us. v. 11: the concluding call: comfort one another and build one another up.140 To understand the setting of our passage, we may ask about the nature of the readers’ concern about the day of the Lord that required Paul’s instruction here. Malherbe suggests that here Paul responds to Timothy’s news about the misleading “promises of some Christian prophets of peace and security (v. 3).”141 But this suggestion fits ill with Paul’s manner of raising the topic in v. 1. Furthermore, our passage (or indeed our whole letter—­despite 5:21) does not show the usual signs of Paul countering false teachers or false teachings that we see in his other epistles. Holtz conjectures that Paul voluntarily decides 140 Similarly Weima, 340–42. 141 Malherbe, 287.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 414

7/12/23 11:29 AM

Form/Structure/Setting 415 to add our passage to 4:13–18, lest the readers should develop from the latter a false sense of security out of the conviction about the imminent coming of the Lord, as well as a wrong attitude of neglecting the duties of the present (cf. 4:10b–12).142 But this suggestion also does not fit well with the wording of v. 1b or with Paul’s efforts to provide the readers with assurance of their salvation in vv. 4–5, 9–11. Therefore, it appears more natural to see the manner of Paul’s introducing the topic of our passage in vv. 1–2 as reflecting the readers’ concern for the exact date of the day of the Lord. But why were they so concerned about it? Best believes that Timothy conveyed to Paul that the Thessalonians were perturbed by the delay of the parousia, that “they were afraid that if it was long delayed they might be dead and not participate in it (4.13–18).”143 But this is unlikely in view of the fact that here Paul does not deal with the question of delay but rather calls for an alert and disciplined life in preparation for the parousia, which may break at any moment. Marshall thinks the Thessalonians were worried that “they might be morally and spiritually unworthy to be summoned to meet the Lord” and so they were anxious “to know when [the parousia] would happen so that they could adequately prepare themselves.”144 In view of Paul’s efforts to reassure the readers (vv. 4–5, 9–11), it seems clear that they had such anxiety.145 However, that reason alone cannot explain Paul’s response in our passage as a whole. It cannot explain why Paul then echoes the anxiety-­arousing saying(s) of Jesus (vv. 2–3) and makes a strong call for an alert and disciplined life (vv. 6–8), both of which would only increase their anxiety further. Here we must note three salient facts of the passage: (1) Paul refers to the readers’ knowledge of what appears to be sayings of Jesus that arouse anxiety about the parousia (vv. 2–3); (2) he allays their anxiety by reminding them that they already stand in salvation (vv. 4–5) and by assuring them with God’s predestination of them for salvation on the basis of Christ’s atonement (vv. 9–10); and (3) he calls them to a sober and disciplined life (vv. 6–8). They must have come to know of the parousia of the Lord only because Paul had taught them about it.146 Since Paul says that they already know a parousia saying of Jesus (the “thief” saying, v. 2), which certainly arouses anxiety, we can presume that this saying (and other similar sayings of Jesus—­see below) has made them both excited and anxious about the parousia, as it does many believers even today. Above, in our comments on 4:13–18, we suggested that one of the reasons why the readers grieved over their dead was because their excited expectation of an imminent parousia had not prepared them to think 142 143 144 145 146

Holtz, 210–11. Best, 203. Marshall, 132. Cf. also Frame, 178; Green, 230; Weima, 344; contra Fee, 183. Cf. Holtz, 212.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 415

7/12/23 11:29 AM

416

1 Thessalonians 5:1–11

over the fate of dead believers in light of the gospel of Jesus’s death and resurrection. It is easy to surmise that such a feverish expectation of the Lord’s imminent parousia made the readers more prone to be anxious about their adequacy before the last judgment that would take place on that day. So the readers were both excited and anxious to know when the day of the Lord would take place, discussing those sayings of Jesus and the proper way of preparing for it. Hearing from Timothy about these concerns, Paul feels it necessary to help them understand those sayings properly in light of the gospel and both to reassure and exhort them. Being overly excited and anxious about the parousia, they fail to appreciate that the gospel assures them of their salvation, that their acceptance of it has already secured their standing in it, and that the gospel of Christ’s death and resurrection means that dead believers will be raised like Jesus and join in the final salvation. So Paul, having resolved their grief about dead believers by helping them understand the gospel properly (4:14)—­this had to be dealt with first because it was the most serious—­now seeks to allay their anxiety about how they themselves might stand before God’s judgment seat on the day of the Lord, and he does so likewise by helping them understand what they already have in the gospel (vv. 4–5, 9–10). Since the anxiety has been caused by a saying (or sayings) of Jesus that Paul had delivered to them, he refers to them and helps the readers understand them properly in light of the gospel. In doing this, however, he does not forget to underline the original intent of those sayings of Jesus—­their duty to maintain a sober and disciplined life while waiting for the Lord (vv. 6–8).

Comment 5:1 Περὶ δὲ τῶν χρόνων καὶ τῶν καιρῶν, “But with regard to the times and seasons” (NEB: “About dates and times”). The opening περὶ δέ . . . ἀδελφοί announces a new topic in much the same way as in 4:9 (cf. also 4:13; see comment ad loc). However, it is not a totally new topic; it is still concerned with the parousia of the Lord Jesus Christ, which has been described in the preceding passage (4:13–18). Hence Paul announces the new topic simply as χρόνοι καὶ καιροί without an accompanying genitive word or phrase that defines whose or what “times and seasons” he is going to discuss. Then in v. 2 he indicates that he means the χρόνοι καὶ καιροί of the day of the Lord. Thus he implicitly identifies the parousia of the Lord with the day of the Lord: the Lord Jesus Christ will come on the day of the Lord (2 Thess 1:10; cf. 2 Thess 2:1–12; see comment ad loc). Having dealt with the fate of dead believers at the parousia of the Lord in 4:13–18, Paul here turns to deal with the question of the date of the parousia or day of the Lord. The collocation of χρόνοι and καιροί appears also in Acts 1:7; the phrase may have been a conventional doublet, like our own “times and seasons,” with no particular emphasis on a difference between the two nouns. Such a difference was pointed out by Augustine (Epistles 197.2),

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 416

7/12/23 11:29 AM

Comment 417 who distinguishes καιροί in the sense of opportune moments from χρόνοι in the sense of stretches of time—­a distinction taken over by Lightfoot and other commentators.147 The distinction holds good generally in classical Greek but had become largely otiose by Hellenistic times. Both words are used in the eschatological sense (e.g., χρόνος: Acts 3:21; 1 Pet 1:20; καιρός: Luke 19:44; 1 Pet 1:5; cf. also ἡμέρα, “day,” and ὥρα, “hour” in Mark 13:32). Their usage reflects the Jewish apocalyptic notion that God has fixed the times for the eschatological events (cf., e.g., 2 Bar. 14.1; 20.6; 1QS 9.13–15; 1QpHab 7.1–14). As in our verse, so also in Dan 2:21 and Acts 1:7, they appear joined together (in the former, in the reverse order: καιρὸς καὶ χρόνος; cf. also Dan 7:12 Sym.; Wis 8:8). So they are a hendiadys (the two words joined together to express a single idea),148 and, accompanied by two articles, they convey the sense of an eschatological technical term149 that is well-­k nown to the readers as well as to Paul.150 Holtz thinks that the plural forms here suggest not the point of the end-­t ime but the periods in which a course of events are to take place before the end.151 However, he also recognizes Paul here concentrating his interest on the day of the Lord itself. So with “the times and seasons” Paul effectively refers to the day of the Lord or the time at which the day of the Lord will take place. οὐ χρείαν ἔχετε ὑμῖν γράφεσθαι, “you have no need to be written to” (cf. 4:9, where the active γράφειν is used). Once more Paul employs paraleipsis, the rhetorical device of introducing a subject by denying its necessity (cf. 1:8–10 [or 1:8–2:16]; 4:9–12).152 2 αὐτοὶ γὰρ ἀκριβῶς οἴδατε, “for you yourselves know accurately.” Paul states emphatically (αὐτοί, cf. 1:5; 2:1, with comment ad loc) the reason why the readers do not need to be written to. Whatever they know about the end-­t ime or the day of the Lord, they must have learned from the teaching of Paul and his missionary colleagues. Hence this clause suggests that he and his companions taught them about the time of the Lord’s parousia while they were in Thessalonica. Whereas in 4:9 there is no need for Paul to write to them about φιλαδελφία because they are taught by the Spirit of God implanted in them to love one another, here there is no need to write to them about χρόνοι καὶ καιροί because they have already been taught by him and his colleagues about them (cf. 2 Thess 2:5). The adverb ἀκριβῶς is used in various literary contexts in the sense of “accurately, carefully, well” (cf. BDAG). But Malherbe pays special attention to the use of that word in apocalyptic contexts, including Dan 2:45 Symmachus for 147 148 149 150 151 152

Lightfoot, 70–71. E.g., Milligan, 63; Morris, 148; Witherington, 144. Cf. Malherbe, 288–89; Fee, 186. Cf. Holtz, 210–11; Fee, 186. Cf. Best, 204; Malherbe, 288; Weima, 344. Holtz, 212, citing G. Delling, TDNT 9:592n66. Cf. Weima, 345.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 417

7/12/23 11:29 AM

418

1 Thessalonians 5:1–11

the accurate interpretation of Nebuchadnezzar’s dream vision, and Dan 7:16 Symmachus for the accurate interpretation of Daniel’s vision of the coming of the one like a son of man. He also notes the use of the verb (ἀκριβοῦν) in Matt 2:7, 16 (cf. the use of the adverb in v. 8) for ascertaining the time of the Messiah’s birth. Malherbe concludes that ἀκριβῶς is used here in this apocalyptic sense.153 As the word appears only here and in Eph 5:15 in the Pauline corpus, Best conjectures that “know accurately” is a phrase Paul picks up from Timothy’s report of his readers’ wish: “We want to ‘know accurately’ when the parousia will be.”154 Best further thinks that with “not a little irony” Paul answers: “the parousia’s time can be known as ‘accurately’ as the arrival of a ‘thief,’ i.e., accuracy is impossible.”155 To us, Paul’s answer certainly appears ironic. However, it is questionable whether he intends it, as it verges on sarcasm. Richard thinks that Paul “stresses ironically the accuracy of the teaching they have received as opposed to the inaccuracy of temporal speculation regarding the Lord’s day.”156 But if Paul’s concern here is to express his disapproval of the readers’ unhelpful temporal speculation about the date of the day of the Lord, surely he knows a better way of doing it than resorting to such an ironic contrast. Weima believes that ἀκριβῶς is Paul’s own term, with which he means to contrast “the accurate knowledge” of the readers with “the false knowledge” of the advocates of the Roman propaganda of “peace and security” (v. 3).157 But this appears somewhat far-­fetched. It seems simpler to think that, taking up the word ἀκριβῶς from the readers’ inquiry, Paul seeks to stress (note the emphatic position of the word) merely the fact that they already received from him the requested teaching about the parousia. ὅτι ἡμέρα κυρίου ὡς κλέπτης ἐν νυκτὶ οὕτως ἔρχεται, “that the day of the Lord comes like a thief by night.” This is the content of their accurate knowledge. The phrase “the day of the Lord” appears here in Greek without the article on both nouns, suggesting that it is well-­k nown to the readers.158 The day of the Lord (‫ )יום יהוה‬is an OT concept: it was the day when Yahweh would come to vindicate his righteous cause and execute impartial judgment (cf. Isa 13:6–16; Joel 1:15; 2:31; Amos 5:18–20; Obad 15–21; Zech 14; Mal 4:5). Jesus referred to it as the day of the Son of Man (Luke 17:24, 30), which Matthew redacts as “the coming [παρουσία] of the Son of Man” (Matt 24:27, 37, 39). In early Christian usage, with the acknowledgment of Jesus as Lord, Jesus was viewed as the κύριος whose day it was; hence, in addition to being called “the day of the Lord” (2 Thess 2:2; cf. 1 Cor 5:5; 2 Pet 3:10), it is called “the day of Christ” (Phil 1:10; 2:16), “the day of Jesus Christ” (Phil 1:6), “the 153 154 155 156 157 158

Malherbe, 289. Best, 204–5, following Findlay, 113. Cf. also Marshall, 132; Malherbe, 289; Fee, 187. Best, 205. Cf. also Fee, 187. Richard, 250. Weima, 345. Fee, 187; Weima, 346.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 418

7/12/23 11:29 AM

Comment 419 day of our Lord Jesus” (2 Cor 1:14), and “the day of our Lord Jesus Christ” (1 Cor 1:8). Where the context is sufficient, it is sometimes referred to simply as “the day” (1 Thess 5:4; also Rom 13:12; 1 Cor 3:13; Heb 10:25) or “that day” (2 Thess 1:10). It is, in other words, the day of Christ’s revelation in glory, when he comes to vindicate his people and judge the world in righteousness (cf. Acts 17:31). In the NT, when the parousia is spoken of in terms of “the day of the Lord (Jesus Christ),” the idea of judgment is prominent. His day is contrasted in 1 Cor 4:3 with ἀνθρωπίνη ἡμέρα, the day of merely human judgment. In Thessalonica Paul seems to have taught that on the day of the Lord there would be God’s judgment and the unrighteous would be delivered to God’s wrath while righteous believers would be delivered from it (cf. 1:10; 4:6; 5:9). The switch from the language of the parousia of the Lord in 4:13–18 to that of the day of the Lord in 5:1–11 may reflect the readers’ anxiety that the day of the Lord’s parousia is the day of judgment.159 The figure of the thief by night occurs in Jesus’s teaching about the “day” or “hour” when “the Lord” or “the Son of Man” will “come” (Matt 24:42–43// Luke 12:39, a Q logion). Since in the OT and Judaism the figure is not applied in an eschatological context and it is difficult to imagine that the early Christians on their own would have used such a “blasphemous” figure as a “thief” for their Lord, it is almost universally recognized that in our verse and in v. 4 Paul alludes to Jesus’s parable of the coming of the Son of Man in Matt 24:43//Luke 12:39 (//Gosp. Thom. 21; 103). Apparently the saying was widely used in the various quarters of the early church for their eschatological expectation, as it is echoed also in 2 Pet 3:10; Rev 3:3; 16:15. Clearly, Paul and Silas/Silvanus, a former leader of the Jerusalem church (Acts 15:22) and therefore a probable bearer of the Jesus tradition, also regarded it as important, and so they used it in teaching the readers about the parousia of the Lord. Hence, the readers have come to have the eschatological expectation of the parousia of the Lord and “know accurately that the day of the Lord will come like a thief in the night.” It is to be noted that Paul again replaces “the Son of Man” in Jesus’s saying (Matt 24:43//Luke 12:39) with “the Lord” (see the comment on 4:16). Note also that whereas the thief saying has “what watch” in Matt 24:43 and “what hour” in Luke 12:39 (so also Rev 3:3; cf. “what part” in Gosp. Thom. 21; 103), Paul’s version has “in the night.” The more specific phrase “what watch” or “what hour,” while conjuring up automatically in the mind of the hearer/reader the image of “night,” more effectively conveys the sense of the unpredictability of the time of the thief’s coming than the more general phrase “in the night.” Of course, the latter phrase could have stood in the version of Jesus’s saying that Paul received. However, in view of his play on the day/light and night/darkness contrast in our vv. 4–8, it appears more likely that Paul changed the original “what watch” or “what hour” into “in the 159 Cf. Weima, 346.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 419

7/12/23 11:29 AM

420

1 Thessalonians 5:1–11

night” to highlight the contrast that “the day of the Lord comes like a thief in the night” and thus prepares for that day/light and night/darkness contrast.160 Here we should compare the introductory formula αὐτοὶ γὰρ ἀκριβῶς οἴδατε ὅτι . . . in our verse with the repeated formula οὐκ οἴδατε ὅτι . . . ; (“Do you not know that . . . ?”) in 1 Cor 3:16; 5:6; 6:2, 3, 9, 15, 16, 19, where Paul alludes to the various sayings of Jesus:161 5:6—Mark 8:15–16parr. 6:2 and 3—Matt 19:28 (//Luke 22:29–30) 6:9—Matt 5:20 6:15—the eucharistic word of Jesus (Mark 14:22parr.; cf. 1 Cor 10:16; 11:24) 6:16—Gen 2:24 echoed in Jesus’s divorce saying (Mark 10:2–12//Matt 19:3–12), which is cited in 1 Cor 7:10–11 3:16; 6:19 (and 2 Cor 5:1)—­Jesus’s temple sayings (Mark 14:58//Matt 26:61; Mark 11:27–12:11parr.) Thus, the eight occurrences of the formula “Do you not know that . . . ?” in 1 Corinthians indicate that Paul delivered those sayings of Jesus to the Corinthians at his founding mission to Corinth. Like οἴδαμεν γὰρ ὅτι . . . in 2 Cor 5:1, the introductory formula αὐτοὶ γὰρ ἀκριβῶς οἴδατε ὅτι . . . in our verse may be regarded as a variant of the formula οὐκ οἴδατε ὅτι . . . . Of course, Paul uses the formula “you know that . . .” or its variants to recall the readers’ knowledge of various sorts (cf. 1:5; 2:1, 2, 5, 11; 3:3, 4; 4:2 in this letter alone). But the above comparison shows at least that one of the things that Paul uses the formula for is to remind his readers of Jesus tradition. This strengthens the view that he delivered Jesus’s thief parable to the Thessalonians during his mission to them. Thus, the formula “Do you not know that . . . ?” in the eight verses of 1 Corinthians mentioned above and its variants in 2 Cor 5:1 and 1 Thess 5:2 (cf. 1 Cor 10:16) together suggest that at his founding mission for various churches he regularly delivered the teachings of Jesus as part of his preaching of the gospel of God’s salvation (cf. also numerous echoes of Jesus’s sayings in this letter, 1:10; 2:6–8; 4:15–16; 5:3, 9–10; see comments ad loc). During his mission to Thessalonica, Paul must have been aided in this significantly by his colleague Silas/Silvanus (1:1 with comment ad loc). The point of comparison between the coming of the Lord and the coming of the thief in the thief parable is primarily the sudden and unpredictable coming. However, together with “the day of the Lord,” whose traditional connotation of judgment Paul seems to have strengthened with the threat of God’s wrath (cf. 1:10; 4:6; 5:10), the metaphor of a thief conveys also the 160 Cf. Nicholl, Hope, 53; Weima, 347. 161 See Kim, “Jesus, Sayings of,” DPL 481–82; reprint in Kim, PNP, 271–74.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 420

7/12/23 11:29 AM

Comment 421 sense of unpleasantness.162 Since the day of the Lord will come suddenly at an unexpected time and the Lord will hold an unpleasant judgment, delivering the unrighteous to God’s wrath, vigilance and discipline are the necessary preparation. This is the moral that Paul derives from it in vv. 6–7. He must have underscored it also in his original teaching. But it is easy to imagine how for those reasons this thief saying could have aroused a great deal of anxiety among the readers about the parousia of the Lord. 3 ὅταν λέγωσιν· εἰρήνη καὶ ἀσφάλεια, τότε αἰφνίδιος αὐτοῖς ἐφίσταται ὄλεθρος, “when they are saying, ‘Peace and security,’ it is then that sudden destruction comes on them.” The uncertainty of the time of the parousia and the need for watchfulness are further emphasized. Best takes ὅταν λέγωσιν (present subjunctive, instead of ὅτε plus future indicative) in the iterative sense: “as often as people say,” or “whenever they say.”163 Yet Nicholl, observing that ὅταν is here paired with τότε—­t he construction that Paul uses elsewhere also for specific eschatological (1 Cor 15:28, 54; cf. Col 3:4) or non-­eschatological (1 Cor 16:2) events—­a s well as pointing to the examples of Mark 13:4; John 7:27, 31, rejects that interpretation and instead takes ὅταν λέγωσιν as referring to the specific time when the day of the Lord is to come.164 Malherbe takes the impersonal and general λέγωσιν in analogy to 1 Cor 10:10 as reference to people whom he disapproves of and does not want to identify.165 In view of Paul’s injunction to test the messages of prophets (1 Thess 5:20–21), Malherbe thinks that the preachers of the message of “peace and security” are the false prophets in the Thessalonian church.166 But he also says that the false prophets “were seeking more precise knowledge about the eschatological plan and indulged their curiosity about ‘the times and the seasons.’ ”167 And Paul himself, in order to criticize their message, formulates a hendiadys by combining the two words “peace” and “security.”168 But these statements of Malherbe are quite confusing, if not self-­contradictory. For it is difficult to imagine some prophets proclaiming peace and promoting a sense of security while being anxious to know accurately about the date of the Lord’s parousia. It would also be unusual that Paul does not warn his readers of the menace of the false prophets more explicitly. Paul is not referring here to some false prophets or some members within the Thessalonian church but the general population of the world.169 The contrast that Paul sets up in the subsequent verses between “you”/“we” and those who are referred to in

162 Cf. Marshall, 133. 163 Best, 207. Cf. Weima, 348. 164 Nicholl, Hope, 54–55. Cf. Marshall, 134. 165 Malherbe, 291. 166 Malherbe, 302. 167 Malherbe, 302. 168 Malherbe, 292. 169 So Rigaux, 557.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 421

7/12/23 11:29 AM

422

1 Thessalonians 5:1–11

the impersonal way (“the rest,” “those who sleep,” “those who get drunk”) makes this clear. In recent years it has become almost a scholarly consensus to take the phrase “peace and security” here as a slogan of Roman imperial propaganda. It is not only because it appears to be a specification of “pax romana,” the key slogan in that propaganda, but also because in various literature, monuments, inscriptions, and coins of the Roman Empire “peace” (εἰρήνη/pax) and “security” (ἀσφάλεια/securitas) appear as the blessings that Roman rule is praised to have brought to the world.170 Many scholars therefore see Paul here countering this imperial propaganda and warning that those pro-­Roman inhabitants of Thessalonica, a city loyal to Rome for its benefaction, will meet sudden destruction while being complacent with the illusion of the “peace and security” provided by Roman rule. Some of these scholars think that here Paul is not just pointing out the illusion of the Roman imperial propaganda and warning his readers not to fall victim to it but is trying actively to subvert Roman imperial rule.171 So they take Paul’s criticism of the slogan here as the most direct evidence of his general anti-­Roman stance and use it as the basis in support of their counter-­imperial interpretation of less explicit or more questionable statements in the Pauline letters. However, J. R. White disputes taking “peace and security” as a Roman imperial slogan, discounting the evidence that those scholars advance for the view.172 White first points out that, in Roman documents of the period before the time of the writing of 1 Thessalonians (i.e., AD 50), “peace” and “security” often appear not paired but separately from each other, or along with “ justice,” “well-­being,” and so on, as the blessings that Roman rule has brought. So White argues that the phrase “peace and security” does not appear as a well-­established summary of the benefits of Roman imperial rule. Furthermore, he points out that “while the pax-­ideology was standard fare under the Julio-­Claudian emperors beginning with Augustus, the securitas component seems to have taken on importance only later,” starting only at the later years of Nero’s reign (AD 54–68), which means that at the time of the writing of 1 Thessalonians Paul could not have known the phrase “peace and security” as a well-­known slogan of Roman imperial propaganda.173 Later, in a follow-­up essay, White argues that while “peace” (pax) was a summation

170 See J. A. D. Weima, “Peace and Security,” 331–59, for a most recent and comprehensive demonstration of this view; also his commentary, 349–51; cf. Brocke, Thessaloniki, 171–84. 171 E.g., Donfried, “Cults of Thessalonica,” 38–43; idem, “Issues of Authorship,” 85–90; Horsley, “General Introduction,” 5–7; Still, Conflict, 261–62; Tellbe, Paul, 123–30; Harrison, “Paul and the Imperial Gospel”; Smith, “ ‘Unmasking the Powers,’ ” 47–66; Wright, Paul and the Faithfulness of God, 1291–92; cf. also Wengst, Pax Romana, 19–21, 37–38, 77–78; Schreiber, I:275–76. 172 White, “Peace and Security,” 382–95. 173 White, “Peace and Security,” 393.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 422

7/12/23 11:29 AM

Comment 423 of the benefits promised by the Roman Empire to their subjects, “security” (ἀσφάλεια) was in fact a summation of the benefits promised by Greek cities (poleis) to their inhabitants, and that Paul himself coined the phrase “peace and security” by joining the two concepts in order “to describe the greatest common good that both Greek and Roman civilizations claimed to offer.”174 So, according to White, with the phrase in our verse Paul is warning the Thessalonians “to put their trust neither in Roman imperial administration nor in Hellenistic civic virtues, for sudden destruction is bound to come.”175 White concludes that many of the recent counter-­imperial interpreters who have taken the phrase “peace and security” as a Roman imperial slogan and our verse as a direct attack on the Roman Empire have “overplayed” their evidence and also circumscribed Paul’s theological vision too narrowly to a mere political dimension of human existence.176 Malherbe also objects to the counter-­Roman political interpretation here and explains that Paul himself formulates the slogan “peace and security,” combining “peace” from the messages of the OT false prophets and “security” from the ideal of the Epicureans, in order to “characteriz[e] the existence proclaimed by the false prophets in Epicurean categories.”177 Malherbe supports this view by alleging that in 4:11, 13 Paul also uses Epicurean terms to describe the readers’ conduct. We have already seen that Malherbe’s attempt to interpret the phrases, “to aspire to live quietly, to mind your own affairs” in 4:11 in terms of the Epicurean ideal is unpersuasive. However, if Malherbe were right with his interpretation there, then he is creating a rather awkward situation here: having encouraged the readers to adopt the Epicurean ideal in 4:11, Paul now encourages them to shun the Epicurean ideal of “security”! In their enthusiasm for a counter-­Roman interpretation, many of the aforementioned political interpreters reject the traditional interpretation that sees here an echo of the slogan, “peace, peace,” that false prophets proclaim in the OT, promoting a false sense of security among the people before God’s impending judgment (Jer 6:14; 8:11; Ezek 13:10, 16).178 They point to the fact that in the biblical references the word “security” does not occur.179 Weima adds to this further reasons that in 1 and 2 Thessalonians Paul never cites the OT explicitly, that he never refers to an OT text “with the ambiguous expression ‘whenever they say,’ ” and that the Thessalonian church was “a predominantly gentile church, for whom the OT was a foreign and unknown

174 White, “ ‘Peace’ and ‘Security’ (1 Thess 5.3): Roman Ideology and Greek Aspiration,” 507. 175 White, “ ‘Peace’ and ‘Security’ (1 Thess 5.3): Roman Ideology and Greek Aspiration,” 508. 176 White, “ ‘Peace’ and ‘Security’ (1 Thess 5.3): Roman Ideology and Greek Aspiration,” 509–10. Cf. Oakes, “Re-­Mapping,” 318; Luckensmeyer, Eschatology, 291. 177 Malherbe, 304. 178 Cf. also Jer 14:13; Mic 3:5; see, e.g., Rigaux, 558; Best, 207; Marshall, 134; Holtz, 215; Fee, 189; Nicholl, Hope, 54; Hoppe, I:296–97. 179 Cf. Koester, “Imperial Ideology,” 161–62.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 423

7/12/23 11:29 AM

424

1 Thessalonians 5:1–11

text.”180 But if nothing else, at least Paul’s reference to the day of the Lord in 5:2 here already suggests that he assumes the readers are not so totally ignorant of the OT. And we are not talking about an explicit, formal citation of an OT text here but an echo of the well-­k nown slogan of false prophets in the OT. In view of what we have seen Paul doing in 4:8–9 (cf. also 2 Thess 2:1–11 with comment ad loc), it is not at all difficult to see Paul making such an echo here. Furthermore, in 2:3–6 (see comment on 2:3 above) we have seen how Paul presents his apostolic message and conduct in contrast to those of Hellenistic charlatan philosophers, characterizing them in terms of the false prophets of the OT. So it is reasonable to suppose that, as one soaked in the biblical tradition, Paul sees the Greco-­Roman propagandists likewise in terms of OT false prophets and their message of “peace,” “security,” or “peace and security” in terms of the false prophecy of “peace” in the biblical tradition.181 When the people at large are misled by Roman or Greek false prophecy or a message of “peace and security” and become complacent about their moral corruption, “the day of the Lord will come” suddenly and unexpectedly “like a thief in the night” with judgment. Then sudden destruction will come upon them: the judgment of the Lord will be destruction, the ultimate due for sinners in contrast to salvation for believers (cf. 1 Cor 5:5; 2 Thess 1:9; 1 Tim 6:9). This threat of “sudden destruction” (αἰφνίδιος ὄλεθρος) to come upon complacent sinners also appears to suggest that here Paul has in view those OT prophetic texts about the false prophecy of “peace,” which invariably have a similar threat follow the warning about the false prophecy (cf. esp. Jer 6:26: “For suddenly [ἐξαίφνης] the destroyer/distress [‫ׁשדד‬/ταλαιπωρία] will come upon us”). So there is no question that here Paul discounts the Roman Empire’s or Greek cities’ propaganda and warns the readers not to be misled by them.182 However, it is a question whether we can read more active counter-­ imperial meaning into his critique of their slogans here.183 τότε αἰφνίδιος αὐτοῖς ἐφίσταται ὄλεθρος ὥσπερ ἡ ὠδὶν τῇ ἐν γαστρὶ ἐχούσῃ, καὶ οὐ μὴ ἐκφύγωσιν, “then sudden destruction comes upon them like birth pangs on a woman with child, and they will by no means escape.” For the suddenness and unpredictability of the coming of the day of the Lord, Paul draws another metaphor: birth pangs coming upon a pregnant woman. The metaphor is frequently used in the OT (Ps 48:6; Isa 13:8; 26:7–8; Jer 6:24; 22:23; Mic 4:9; cf. 1 En. 62.4) for agonizing experiences. In Judaism it is used of the birth pangs of the messiah (‫)חבלו ׁשל מׁשיח‬, the messianic woes, expected to befall the world before the messiah comes to inaugurate the new age.184 This idea is 180 181 182 183

Weima, 349. Cf. Tellbe, Paul, 125. Cf. Brocke, Thessaloniki, 184–85. See comments and Explanation on 4:13–18 above, and also Kim, “Is Paul Preaching” and “Paul and the Roman Empire” (both in PGTO, respectively 217–22, 223–51). 184 Cf. G. Bertram, TDNT 9:671–72.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 424

7/12/23 11:29 AM

Comment 425 reflected in Mark 13:8//Matt 24:8. However, it is not certain whether Paul is here thinking specifically of the messianic woes. But what he has in view is the suddenness and unexpectedness (it comes without warning) of the day of the Lord and the pain and inescapability of the judgment it will bring. There will be no escape from the sudden destruction for the unbelieving general public who live carefree in their false sense of peace and security. In this verse, note that ἀσφάλεια, αἰφνίδιος, and ἐφίστημι (cf. 2 Tim 4:2, 6) are hapax in Paul. Note further how closely this verse resembles Luke 21:34–36, which concludes Jesus’s eschatological discourse: the “day” coming suddenly and unexpectedly; the rare occurrence of the classical adjective αἰφνίδιος (only in Luke 21:34 and here in the NT; in the LXX it is found, as is the adverb αἰφνιδίως [2 Macc 5:5; 14:22], only in books not translated from a Hebrew original [Wis 17:14; 2 Macc 14:17]); the common appearance of the two verbs ἐφίστημι and ἐκφεύγω; and the exhortation for sobriety and wakefulness. Also consider the fact that our verse is joined to Paul’s clear allusion to a dominical logion (the thief saying) that has basically the same meaning. These observations suggest that Paul is here drawing on the Jesus tradition preserved in Luke 21:34–36. There Jesus warns about the coming of the Son of Man by reminding his hearers how the people of Noah’s day, and later the inhabitants of Sodom and the neighboring cities, were engaged in ordinary pursuits out of a false sense of peace, without any suspicion of danger, when sudden disaster overtook them. However, there is a difference: Luke 21:35 speaks of the day coming like a “trap” (παγίς), whereas here Paul speaks of it coming as “birth pangs” (ὠδίν). But Hartman, Holtz, and Wenham explain this difference as due to two divergent translations of the underlying Hebrew/Aramaic ‫חבלא‬/‫חבל‬, which can mean “rope” (hence, “trap”) or “birth pangs,” depending on different vowel pointing.185 Aejmelaeus and Tuckett have argued that Luke 21:34–36 is dependent on our verse.186 But it is simpler to suppose, with Wenham, that our verse and Luke 21:34–36 are dependent on a common Jesus tradition.187 Unlike the thief saying, this verse is not grammatically connected to the verb “you know” of v. 2 as its object. However, in view of the similarity of the content of the two logia, it is probable that Paul originally taught the readers with this logion of Jesus, as well as with the thief logion. Like the latter, it also has the character to arouse much anxiety and so drive people to speculate on the timing of the day of the Lord. So it appears reasonable to infer that only because Paul delivered this saying, as well as the thief saying, in his founding mission to Thessalonica—­and they together have been responsible for the readers’ anxiety—­does he allude to them together here. Otherwise, 185 Hartman, Prophecy Interpreted, 192–93, Holtz, 216, and Wenham, Paul, 314–15. 186 Aejmelaeus, Wachen, 99–136, and Tuckett, “Synoptic Tradition,” 175–76. 187 Wenham, Paul, 334–36. Cf. Hoppe, I:298–99.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 425

7/12/23 11:29 AM

426

1 Thessalonians 5:1–11

why would he add this anxiety-­increasing statement here, making explicit the threat of judgment (“sudden destruction”) that is only implicit in the thief saying, when his chief purpose in our passage is to reassure the readers, dispelling their anxiety that has been caused by the thief saying, and especially when in the immediately following verses (vv. 4–5) he is going to stress that the destruction mentioned here would not befall them? Some commentators188 think that Paul adds our v. 3 in order to comfort the Thessalonian believers by telling them that the judgment would strike their hostile opponents while they themselves would be saved from it. But this explanation is inadequate. For the following question still remains: When his main purpose is to reassure the readers about the day of the Lord, why would Paul stress the destruction of the opponents of the faith with such strong language and at such great length as our v. 3b, and do so right in the opening section of our passage, at that? DeSilva suggests that in our passage, as elsewhere in our letter, Paul seeks to reinforce the despised and rejected Christian group’s boundaries and affirm their honor, in contrast with the outsiders who would suffer wrath and disgrace on the day of the Lord. This is so that the believers may persevere through their present humiliation and marginalization for greater honor and security on that day.189 But this interpretation takes no account of the fact that it is the readers’ anxiety to know about the timing of the day that gives rise to Paul’s efforts here, both to reassure them of their salvation and to exhort them for a sober and disciplined life. So what deSilva says cannot be viewed as Paul’s main purpose but at most as his secondary purpose or as a by-­product of the main purpose. We suggest that the question why Paul adds the birth-­pangs logion to the thief logion gets more satisfactorily resolved on our assumption that Paul delivered both sayings together to the readers during his founding mission in their city. Intending to exhort the Thessalonians to live a sober and disciplined life in anticipation of the parousia of the Lord at an unpredictable date, he delivered to them those sayings. But the sayings have led them more to anxious speculation about the date of the Lord’s return than to a mature understanding of the gospel and a disciplined life with a balanced eschatological hope. Therefore, in our passage, immediately after stating their anxious concern for the timing of the day as his topic to address, he cites the two anxiety-­raising sayings together to help the readers understand them properly, that is, to remove the unintended sting of anxiety out of those sayings and reinforce the real intent that he had in delivering them to the readers during his founding mission. So he first affirms, briefly but strikingly (v. 3a), that the threat of judgment contained in those sayings applies to those who, like the pagan Thessalonians, live a complacent and loose life under the 188 E.g., Nicholl, Hope, 58; Fee, 190; Weima, 353–54. 189 DeSilva, “ ‘Worthy of His Kingdom,’ ” 65–73.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 426

7/12/23 11:29 AM

Comment 427 illusion of “peace and security”—­only to them (note well the strong contrast with “but you, brothers and sisters” in v. 4 and also the emphatic “you all” in v. 5). He then concentrates on reassuring and exhorting the readers. They, the believers, therefore need not fear the day of the Lord but should live, unlike unbelievers, a sober and disciplined life in full assurance and hope of their certain salvation on that day. 4 ὑμεῖς δέ, ἀδελφοί, οὐκ ἐστὲ ἐν σκότει, “But you, brothers and sisters, are not in darkness.” The emphatic “you” (ὑμεῖς) together with the adversative “but” (δέ) contrasts the readers with the “they/them” of v. 3 (cf. ἡμεῖς δέ in v. 8). The address “brothers and sisters” further strengthens this note of contrast as well as provides a sense of assurance to the readers. Certainly, “they,” the unbelievers who live under the illusion of “peace and security,” will face the day of the Lord unawares and unprepared. It will come suddenly at an unexpected hour like a thief in the night or like birth pangs to a pregnant woman, and they will meet their destruction then. “But you, brothers and sisters,” will not share the same fate. In line with the OT-­Jewish tradition, especially the apocalyptic literature,190 Paul and other NT writers (e.g., Rom 2:19; 13:12; 2 Cor 4:6; 6:14; cf. Matt 5:14–16; Luke 2:32; John 1:4–9; 3:19–21; 8:12; 1 Pet 2:9) frequently use the metaphors of light and darkness respectively for divine revelation, righteousness, and salvation and for ignorance of God, sinfulness, and judgment.191 Being “in darkness” (ἐν σκότει) here is illuminated by the following ἵνα clause as having the sense of being in ignorance. However, as it implicitly characterizes the unbelievers in the preceding verse 3, it has the sense of moral laxity as well as spiritual ignorance. Later in vv. 5b–8 this moral sense comes to the fore. In contrast to the unbelieving general public who are “in darkness,” that is, who are ignorant of the day of the Lord and so live a lax life carefree (v. 3), the readers are “not in darkness,” as they know about the day of the Lord and are living a holy life in anticipation of it. In vv. 3–8, Paul contrasts believers to unbelievers by extending the metaphors used in the paradoxical affirmation of the day of the Lord coming like a thief in the night: as unbelievers do not belong to the day of the Lord, they are children of night and darkness, so that they are in the dark about the coming of the day and sleep and get drunk. But as believers belong to the day of the Lord, they are children of day and light, so that they are in the know (not in darkness) about coming of the day and are awake and sober.192 ἵνα ἡ ἡμέρα ὑμᾶς ὡς κλέπτης καταλάβῃ, “so that the day should surprise you like a thief.” The “day” is the day of the Lord, but the antithesis with σκότος (“darkness”) imparts to the word something of the sense of daylight 190 See the references in Weima, 354. 191 Marshall, 135. 192 Cf. Holtz, 219.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 427

7/12/23 11:29 AM

428

1 Thessalonians 5:1–11

(cf. Rom 13:12, “the night is far gone, the day is at hand”). The simile ὡς κλέπτης harks back to v. 2. Because the readers received Paul’s teaching about the day of the Lord coming like a thief, they know about it and live in anticipation of it. Therefore, when it comes it should not come as a dreadful surprise to them, as it will to those who live “in darkness,” those who in ignorance of it live a morally lax life. Some manuscripts read κλέπτας (acc. pl.) instead of κλέπτης (nom. sg.)—­ see Notes above. Then the thought would be that the day(light) should not surprise them, as it would surprise “thieves” (who work in darkness). This reading is not to be accepted because it is unlikely that Paul would change the metaphor of a thief this way here. 5 πάντες γὰρ ὑμεῖς υἱοὶ φωτός ἐστε καὶ υἱοὶ ἡμέρας, “for you are all children [lit. ‘sons’] of light and children [lit. ‘sons’] of day.” With γάρ Paul substantiates the statement in v. 4. “You all” is one of Paul’s habitual references to his readers (1:2; 2 Thess 1:3; see also Rom 1:8; 15:33; 1 Cor 14:5; 16:24; Gal 3:26, 28; Phil 1:4).193 Nevertheless, the “you” in the emphatic opening phrase “you all” (πάντες . . . ὑμεῖς) here needs to be appreciated as the resumption of the emphatic “you” (ὑμεῖς) of v. 4 and therefore as continuing the contrast of the readers with the “they” who will face the destruction on the day of the Lord (v. 3). Paul seems to be adding the emphatic “all” (πάντες) here to reassure especially those fainthearted in the Thessalonian church (cf. 4:18; 5:11, 14).194 “Sons of light” in contrast to “sons of darkness” appears frequently in the DSS (e.g., 1QS 1.9–10; 3.13–4.26; 1QM 1.1, 3) and once in T. Job 43.6, but otherwise nowhere else in the OT, the Second Temple Jewish literature, or the rabbinic literature.195 So it is interesting to note that it appears, besides here, three more times in the NT (Luke 16:8; John 12:36; Eph 5:8). The Semitic construction “son” plus a noun in the genitive qualifies a person as belonging to a certain sphere or having a certain quality. Paul designates the readers as “children of light” because they have received divine revelation (cf. 1:9–10; 2 Cor 4:4, 8: “the light of the gospel of the glory of Christ, who is the image of God” / “the light of the knowledge of the glory of God in the face of Christ”) and seek to live a righteous and holy life in the assurance of eschatological salvation (1 Thess 4:1–8; cf. Eph 5:8), in contrast to unbelieving outsiders who “belong to night or darkness” (1 Thess 5:5) as their minds are blinded by Satan (cf. 1 Thess 3:5; 2 Cor 4:4). The parallel phrase “children of day” is unique here. Probably Paul formulates it ad hoc.196 The “day” refers to the “day of the Lord” that has been under discussion so far, but appearing as an interpretative parallel to the preceding “(children of) light,” it carries also the sense of “daylight.”197 193 194 195 196 197

Best, 210; Malherbe, 294. Cf. Frame, 184; Marshall, 136; Weima, 355. Cf. H.-­W. Kuhn, “Die Bedeutung der Qumrantexte,” 350; Fitzmyer, Aramaean, 156n11. Best, 210; Holtz, 221; Malherbe, 294. Best, 210; Holtz, 221; Marshall, 136; Malherbe, 294.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 428

7/12/23 11:29 AM

Comment 429 The day of the Lord has not yet arrived, but Paul calls the readers “children of [the] day.” This clearly implies the sort of realized eschatology that is suggested by such passages as 2 Cor 4:4, 8 cited above. Believers in Christ are already “children of [the] day,” as they already have the salvation of the day of the Lord in anticipation and live in consciousness of that coming day. Thus, this sentence with γάρ here indicates that the reason the readers “are not in darkness for the day [of the Lord] to surprise [them] like a thief” (v. 4) is not simply because they have been taught by Paul about the day, but more because they have already received a foretaste of the salvation of the day and have become “children of the day,” so that they may live as “children of light.” Thus, he is trying to dispel the anxiety of the readers about the day of the Lord by reminding them of the gospel and their salvation through it. In other words, he is correcting their unbalanced understanding of the day of the Lord through the gospel. Οὐκ ἐσμὲν νυκτὸς οὐδὲ σκότους, “we do not belong to night or darkness.” In vv. 4–5a Paul has employed the emphatic “you” (ὑμεῖς) as the subject to reassure the readers that, in contrast to the pagan outsiders (“they” of v. 3), they (“you”) would not face unawares the day of the Lord and the destruction it will bring. With completion of this urgent task, Paul now makes with the subject “we” a generalized statement about all believers in Christ, including the readers and himself and his colleagues. But he does this without specifying the subject with the personal pronoun ἡμεῖς, which would correspond to the emphatic “you” (ὑμεῖς) in vv. 4–5a. He seems to omit the personal pronoun “we” because he does not need to stress it, as he is now turning from reassuring the readers to issuing exhortation (vv. 5b–8). Even so, in v. 8 he does add the emphatic ἡμεῖς (δέ) because he wants to strongly contrast believers (“we”) with unbelievers—­those who sleep and get drunk, mentioned in the preceding vv. 6–7, just as he did with the emphatic “you,” ὑμεῖς (δέ), in vv. 4–5a. In this v. 5b, using the genitive of belonging instead of the Semitic construction, Paul emphatically restates the idea of the preceding sentence in v. 5a (“you are all children of light and children of day”) in a negative form. By putting it in the negative, he develops from “the day of the Lord” an effective contrast between “day/light” and “night/darkness.” Note the chiastic structure in v. 5a–­b:198 A: You are all children of light B: and children of day B´: We do not belong to night A´: nor to darkness

198 Wanamaker, 183; Weima, 357.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 429

7/12/23 11:29 AM

430

1 Thessalonians 5:1–11

The present negative formula (“we do not belong to night or darkness”) is also a restatement of v. 4a (“but you are not in darkness”), and so like v. 4a it forms a contrast to the unbelievers of v. 3. 6 ἄρα οὖν, “so therefore,” a common collocation in Paul, introducing a further stage in an argument or a summing up. Here, it marks the transition to direct exhortation, and the exhortation is drawn from the affirmation in vv. 4–5: our status is that of “children of light,” so therefore let us be watchful—­ “the typically Pauline shift from the indicative (who the readers are) to the imperative (what the readers must now do).”199 Compare 2 Thess 2:15. μὴ καθεύδωμεν ὡς οἱ λοιποί, “let us not sleep like the others.” The first of the three hortatory subjunctives in this verse appears in the negative half of the antithetical sentence. Paul uses καθεύδειν (“sleep”) only in this passage, and he does it three times in three different ways: metaphorically (v. 6), literally (v. 7), and as a euphemism for death (v. 10, like κοιμᾶσθαι in 4:13–15; cf. Eph 5:14). Here, it is used in contrast to watchfulness. It is the attitude that is expressed in the slogan “peace and security,” the attitude of false security out of ignorance of what is really happening. This attitude is typical of οἱ λοιποί, “the rest” (of humankind) besides “us,” the believers in Christ (cf. 4:13: “like the rest [καθὼς καὶ οἱ λοιποί], who have no hope”; also 4:5: “like the gentiles, who do not know God”). They “sleep” with their false security (v. 3). However, “we,” the believers, should not do that. ἀλλὰ γρηγορῶμεν καὶ νήφωμεν, “but let us keep awake and be sober.” These two hortatory subjunctives make up the positive half of the antithetical sentence. The word γρηγορεῖν (“to keep awake”) is used here metaphorically for spiritual vigilance in expectation of the Lord’s parousia (cf. 1 Cor 16:13; Col 4:2). With it Paul seems to be echoing the parables of the watchmen (Luke 12:36–38; cf. Mark 13:34–37) and the steward (Luke 12:41–48//Matt 24:45–51), which are related with the thief parable (Luke 12:39–40//Matt 24:43–44) and appear linked with it in Luke 12:36–40.200 R. Bauckham demonstrates that “parousia parables were widely used . . . in the primitive church” and “were collected and associated from a very early stage” and that this is especially well attested for the parables of the thief and the watchmen and, to a lesser extent, also for the parable of the steward.201 C.-­P. März also concludes that Paul knew the parable of the thief as already connected to the parable of the watchmen and probably also to the parable of the steward.202 Davies and Allison confirm this view, with a further reference to Gosp. Thom. 21 and 103.203 Since believers know that (the day of) the Lord will come like a thief in the night, we should not “sleep but keep awake.” Compare Mark 13:35–37, 199 200 201 202 203

Weima, 357. See Wenham, Paul, 308–12; cf. Wanamaker, 184; Malherbe, 295. Bauckham, “Synoptic Parousia Parables,” 163–70. März, “Das Gleichnis vom Dieb,” esp. 646–48. Davies and Allison, Gospel according to Saint Matthew, 385–86.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 430

7/12/23 11:29 AM

Comment 431 where the servants left in charge by their master are warned to stay awake, “lest he come suddenly and find you asleep [καθεύδοντας].” Note also Rev 16:15, where the dominical announcement “behold, I come as a thief” is followed immediately by the beatitude μακάριος ὁ γρηγορῶν, “blessed is the one who keeps awake.” Paul combines γρηγορεῖν with νήφειν (“to be sober”; cf. 1 Pet 5:8: νήψατε, γρηγορήσατε). Some commentators take them as synonyms204 or a hendiadys205 meant for a further emphasis on spiritual watchfulness and alertness. They are certainly related, but still they seem to refer to different aspects of the proper way of waiting for the day of the Lord. While to “keep awake” is to maintain an attitude of trying to actively discern the temptations of the world or its ruler, Satan (cf. 2 Cor 4:4), and to look for the signs of the present activity and future coming of the Lord Jesus, to “be sober” is to make the right interpretations of or sound judgments about these signs and choose the right course of response to them. Weima suggests that while the exhortation “keep awake” enjoins alertness, “be sober” “warns against any excessive concern or rash conduct in light of that eschatological event.”206 Later, commenting on v. 8a, Weima further explains that the exhortation for sobriety here is directed against the readers’ fearful engrossment about the day of the Lord.207 But since the exhortations for vigilance and sobriety are given to the readers so that as the people of “day/light” they may not live like the people of “night/ darkness,” the exhortation for sobriety cannot mean a warning against their being engrossed or excessively excited208 about the Lord’s parousia, something that unbelievers hardly do. Instead, both exhortations for vigilance and sobriety need to be seen as warnings against the readers’ following the ethos and lifestyle of the people of “night/darkness,” who, with a false sense of security (“peace and security”), indulge in a carefree, wanton life (v. 3).209 Therefore, it seems that Paul’s exhortation for sobriety here has a dimension of moral discipline.210 The explanatory v. 7 supports this interpretation, as there he contrasts γρηγορεῖν and νήφειν with the “night” people’s sleeping and getting drunk, which are parables for unconsciousness and insensitivity, and muzziness, recklessness, and disorderliness respectively.211 Christians are those who have been awakened out of “sleep,” out of the state of ignorance and false security, and

204 205 206 207 208 209

E.g., Morris, 157. So Malherbe, 296. Weima, 359. Weima, 361. Cf. Best, 212; Fee, 194. Cf. Riesner, Early Period, 375, and Brocke, Thessaloniki, 128–29, for the possibility that this description reflects the practices of the Dionysus cult. 210 Cf. Wanamaker, 184: “ethical restraint” or “self-­control”; NIV: “let us be self-­controlled.” 211 Cf. Lightfoot, 74–75.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 431

7/12/23 11:29 AM

432

1 Thessalonians 5:1–11

are waiting for the parousia of God’s Son, Jesus the Lord, who will both judge (v. 3; 3:13) and redeem them (1:10). So they are not to relapse into “sleep” or living a complacent life unconscious of the coming day of the Lord, and they are not to live recklessly and disorderly like drunkards. They are to maintain spiritual vigilance and moral discipline in preparation for the day, which would break at an unexpected time. Having assured the anxious readers about the day of the Lord in vv. 4–5a by reminding them of their present standing in Christ’s salvation (their being already “children of light,” “children of the day”), in vv. 5b–8a Paul underscores the call for a vigilant and disciplined life in preparation for the Lord’s parousia, which he originally made when he delivered to them Jesus’s sayings, such as the thief parable and other related parables. 7 Οἱ γὰρ καθεύδοντες νυκτὸς καθεύδουσιν καὶ οἱ μεθυσκόμενοι νυκτὸς μεθύουσιν, “For those who sleep sleep by night and those who get drunk are drunk by night.” The exhortation of v. 6 is further elaborated on in vv. 7–8. The language here is not figurative but factual: night is the time when people usually sleep; night is the time when people usually get drunk. However, this common experience is used as a parable to reinforce an exhortation for spiritual life (v. 6): spiritual sleep and drunkenness (see comment on v. 6 above for their parabolic meanings) characterize the lifestyle of the children of night and darkness. Note that in the parable of the steward (Matt 24:48–51//Luke 12:45–46) in association with Jesus’s words about the thief coming by night come warnings against getting drunk and therefore being unprepared. 8 ἡμεῖς δὲ ἡμέρας ὄντες νήφωμεν, “but as for us, since we belong to the day, let us be sober.” This is the beginning of a long sentence (vv. 8–10), with which Paul draws to a conclusion his response to the readers’ anxious question about the date of the Lord’s parousia. With the adversative δέ and emphatic ἡμεῖς (“but as for us”),212 he contrasts “us,” the believers, with “the rest,” who “sleep” and “get drunk” (vv. 6–7; cf. ὑμεῖς δέ in v. 4 in contrast to “they” in v. 3), and thus develops the exhortation of v. 6 further. The participle phrase ἡμέρας ὄντες summarizes v. 5 and is causal,213 serving as the basis for the exhortation νήφωμεν, which summarizes v. 6. As in v. 5, “day” has both the primary sense of the day of the Lord and the secondary sense of daylight. “The others,” the rest of humanity (οἱ λοιποί, v. 6), may sleep and get drunk at the “night” of this age, because they belong to “night,” “but” (δέ) Christians are the people of “day,” that is, the people who will be saved on the day of the Lord and are already living in the clear “light” (knowledge) and anticipatory benefits of that day. So they should “be sober”—­w ith confidence rather than anxiety. In vv. 4–7, with the concept of the “day,” Paul gives the readers the assurance of salvation (the 212 Malherbe, 296. 213 Cf. Weima, 361.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 432

7/12/23 11:29 AM

Comment 433 “indicative” of the gospel, vv. 4–5) and spells out the duty (the “imperative” of ethics, vv. 6–7) on the basis of the former, and now in v. 8 he summarizes them together. Within this verse itself, he makes the summary with emphasis on the latter, but then he goes on to provide the readers with the strongest possible assurance, directly appealing to the gospel and God’s predestination (vv. 9–10). Here, the exhortation “be sober” appears alone without the accompaniment of the exhortation “keep awake” (cf. v. 6). However, since v. 8a is a summary of the preceding, the exhortation for sobriety is to be seen as standing for both exhortations or as including in itself the exhortation for wakefulness, the basic mental state necessary for sobriety. The following military metaphor of a soldier on sentry duty confirms this.214 ἐνδυσάμενοι θώρακα πίστεως καὶ ἀγάπης καὶ περικεφαλαίαν ἐλπίδα σωτηρίας, “putting on the breastplate of faith and love and, as a helmet, the hope of salvation” (cf. Rom 13:12, ἐνδυσώμεθα δὲ τὰ ὅπλα τοῦ φωτός, “let us put on the armor of light”). Christians come to have the three graces of faith, love, and hope at their conversion, and Paul has already affirmed the readers’ good progress in them (1:3). Therefore, one may wonder whether the aorist participle ἐνδυσάμενοι may be taken as indicating an action antecedent to the main verb νήφωμεν (pres. subj.). Then Paul would be urging that since they have been so well “armed” with faith, love, and hope, they ought to be vigilant against Satan’s attacks and in preparation for the day of the Lord.215 But the hortatory aorist subjunctive ἐνδυσώμεθα and the aorist imperative ἐνδύσασθε in the parallel passage of Rom 13:12, 14 (cf. also Col 3:12) lead us to take the aorist participle ἐνδυσάμενοι here as an act concurrent with the main verb νήφωμεν.216 However, since the readers came to have the graces of faith, love, and hope at their faith-­baptism, it is to be understood that with the metaphor of “putting on” Paul is trying to stress that they should constantly exercise those graces that they already have. It might be said that our present passage gives us an inventory of the “armor of light” (cf. Eph 6:11–18). Christians must be vigilant like a soldier on sentry duty. Paul likes to use the image of a warrior for the Christian and the image of armament for Christian discipline (e.g., Rom 6:13; 13:12; 2 Cor 6:7; 10:3–5; Eph 6:11–18; Phil 2:25; 2 Tim 2:3–5; Phlm 2). He does so, of course, because he views the kingdom of God as engaged in battle against the kingdom of Satan, the god of this age (e.g., 2 Cor 4:4; Gal 1:4). He understands that God’s Son, Jesus Christ, is in the process of destroying the kingdom of Satan with God-­g iven kingly power in order to redeem humanity and the whole world from Satan’s kingdom of sin and death and to restore them to God the creator (e.g., 1 Cor 15:23–28; Gal 1:4; Col 1:13–14; 2:13–15; Rom 214 Cf. Rom 13:11–14; cf. also Best, 213; Marshall, 138. 215 Cf. Schreiber, I:281–82. 216 Best, 215; Marshall, 138; Weima, 362, citing BDF §339; Porter, Verbal Aspect, 381.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 433

7/12/23 11:29 AM

434

1 Thessalonians 5:1–11

8:18–39; 16:20). And he believes that Christians are Christ’s soldiers, enlisted in his holy war for God’s kingdom (Rom 6:12–23).217 To be vigilant against Satan’s attacks and temptations (1 Thess 3:5), Christians must be “armed” with the triad of Christian graces—­faith, love, and hope (for this triad cf. 1:3 with comment ad loc). The imagery of the armor in this verse is drawn from Isa 59:17, where Yahweh “put on righteousness as his breastplate [LXX θώραξ], and the helmet [περικεφαλαία] of salvation on his head” (cf. Wis 5:17–20). As he has to relate the triad of Christian graces to only the two pieces of armor from Isa 59:17, Paul combines faith and love (for the closer collocation of faith and love, cf. 3:6 above; also Gal 5:6, πίστις δι’ ἀγάπης ἐνεργουμένη, “faith which works through love”). In the more elaborate presentation of the panoply of God in Eph 6:11–18, which, unlike our verse, includes one offensive weapon (“the sword of the Spirit”), the “breastplate” is righteousness and the “helmet” salvation. In Gal 5:5, Paul speaks of our “waiting for the hope of righteousness [ἐλπίδα δικαιοσύνης] through the Spirit, by faith.” Thus there is no intrinsic relation of faith and love to “breastplate” and of hope to “helmet” here, and so the picture as a whole, not its individual parts, is to be seen as carrying the meaning. Of course, the real meaning is carried by the genitive phrase (“of faith and love”) and the accusative phrase (“the hope of salvation”) that define the two defensive pieces of armor, breastplate and helmet, respectively (cf. Eph 6:13–17). The figurative use of these pieces of armor here is designed only to strengthen the rhetorical force in exhorting the readers to stand firm in faith and active love in the strong hope for salvation. This obvious comment would be unnecessary but for the fact that there are people who attach undue weight to the “armor.” This includes not only (1) some traditional shamanistic interpreters who appeal to the passages like ours and Eph 6:11–18 for their literal conception of “spiritual warfare” with the demonic forces that are supposed to possess individuals and control social systems; but also recently (2) some political interpreters who try to see Paul here as summoning the readers to fight the Roman Empire;218 and likewise lately (3) some interpreters who regard the martial metaphors in the Scriptures as inciting violence and condemn them as such.219 All these interpretations are superficial in that they fail to appreciate the real intent in employing the martial metaphors. Here, Paul has in view neither the Roman government nor demons but rather the flesh, the ethos of the world, and the opponents of the Christian faith, although these forces may ultimately be attributed to 217 Cf. Kim, Justification, 21–52. 218 E.g., Smith, “Unmasking the Powers,” 63–65. 219 Cf. Yoder Neufeld, Killing Enmity, 122–49, for an examination of such interpretations; cf. also Kim, “Paul and Violence,” 72–77 (reprint in PGTO, 399–421), for a discussion whether martial metaphors or language can be avoided in promoting virtues such as truth, righteousness/justice, love, and peace over against vices such as falsehood, injustice, hatred, and conflict.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 434

7/12/23 11:29 AM

Comment 435 Satan (cf. 1 Thess 2:18; 3:2–8). These forces “attack” Christians by shaking their faith in the Lord Jesus Christ and their hope for his salvation and by preventing them from loving their neighbors. If they are not sensitive to such “attacks” in their daily living, they would be like “the others” who “sleep” or “get drunk” in a false sense of peace and security and so would meet with sudden destruction on the day of the Lord (vv. 3–7). Therefore, while waiting for the consummation of salvation on that day, Christians must be (vigilant and) “sober” against such “attacks” by constantly putting “faith” in the Lord Jesus Christ/God, practicing “love” to their neighbors, and maintaining “hope for salvation” on that day.220 Here Paul puts special stress on “hope” by isolating and placing it at the end of the list of the three Christian graces, as in 1:3.221 Clearly, he does this in view of the topic, or the particular need of the readers, currently under discussion. This is to be compared with Paul’s arrangement in 1 Cor 13:13 of the three graces in the order of faith, hope, and love and his special stress on love there for the need of the Corinthians. 9 ὅτι οὐκ ἔθετο ἡμᾶς ὁ θεὸς εἰς ὀργὴν ἀλλὰ εἰς περιποίησιν σωτηρίας, “because God has not destined us for wrath but for the obtaining of salvation.” The causal ὅτι clause provides the ground not just for “the hope of salvation” in v. 8,222 but for the whole affirmation and exhortation in v. 8.223 Paul is not saying that Christians have “the hope of salvation because God has destined us . . . for the obtaining of salvation,” but that Christians should “be sober” (though not anxious), exercising “faith, love, and hope because God has destined us . . . for the obtaining of salvation.” This interpretation is suggested by the contrast between “wrath” and “the obtaining of salvation” that corresponds to the contrast in the context between Christians, who are children of the day/light and are (or should be) sober and are on the way to salvation, and non-­Christians, who are children of the night/darkness and are drunk and are on the way to God’s wrath and destruction (v. 3). Non-­Christians may remain “drunk,” that is, undiscerning of God’s will now and insensitive to his judgment and salvation on the day of the Lord, but then they will end up with God’s “wrath” on that day (for “wrath,” see comment on 1:10). But Christians are not destined to go down with them to God’s “wrath” but rather to come to “the obtaining of salvation.” Hence, they may not be “drunk” like them but must be “sober,” maintaining proper Christian discipline. Thus, our

220 In our verse as well as in Eph 6:10–18, the “weapons” are thus mostly defensive; however, in Rom 6:13 Paul exhorts Christians to present their “members” to God as “weapons [ὅπλα] of righteousness” rather than to sin (a metonym for Satan) as “weapons [ὅπλα] of wickedness.” This more general and positive exhortation may be capable of a wider application for Christian social ethics as well as personal ethics. 221 Cf. esp. Weima, 364. 222 Pace Nicholl, Hope, 64; Fee, 196; Weima, 364–65. 223 Wanamaker, 186; Malherbe, 298.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 435

7/12/23 11:29 AM

436

1 Thessalonians 5:1–11

verse should be seen as a summary statement made to provide the basis for the whole exhortation of the preceding verses.224 It is generally agreed that the construction ἔθετο . . . εἰς denotes God’s predestination (cf. Rom 8:29–30; 2 Thess 2:13). However, Schreiber objects to this, arguing that although “for [Christians] redemption is already destined by God and mediated through Christ,” “they must still accept the gift of God, i.e., live in relationship to God.”225 But Paul does not exactly say that “for [Christians] redemption is already destined by God,” but that “God has destined [Christians] for the obtaining [περιποίησιν] of salvation.” So he sees human beings’ action of availing themselves of God’s grace as part of God’s “destination,” that is, predestination. However, it is debated whether the verbal noun περιποίησις should be taken in the active sense of “obtaining”226 or the passive sense of “possessing.”227 The latter sense is supposed to highlight the pure gift character of divine salvation, while the former is seen as expressing the role that human beings need to play in receiving it. In our passage of 5:1–11, Paul seeks to exhort the readers to be spiritually sober and morally vigilant as well as to reassure them of their salvation. If in our verse he has only the latter, reassuring purpose in mind, he could simply write “(God has destined us) for salvation,” rather than inserting the infrequent verbal noun (cf. its different usage in Eph 1:14; 1 Pet 2:9 for Christians being God’s “possession,” God’s own people) and breaking the symmetry of the contrast with “not for wrath.”228 So περιποίησις here should be taken in the sense of “obtaining,” as in 2 Thess 2:14.229 This interpretation is also supported by the fact that by “salvation” here Paul has in view not the firstfruits of it, which is granted at baptism, but the consummation of it, which is yet to be granted at the last judgment on the day of the Lord. Nevertheless, as Best notes well, the main sentence “God has destined” prevents any misunderstanding that human beings obtain their salvation by their own efforts; rather, Paul means here that “watchfulness is necessary so that Christians do not miss what is offered [by God’s grace]”; for “salvation [can] be lost through lack of vigilance [although] it will not be gained by its exercise alone.”230 In this way, the whole clause “God has not destined us for wrath, but to obtain salvation through our Lord Jesus Christ” appears as a perfectly balanced summary statement of his dual purpose in our passage: both to 224 225 226 227 228 229 230

Cf. Holtz, 228. Schreiber, I:284. E.g., Best, 217; Marshall, 139; Weima, 367; Richard, 256. E.g., Rigaux, 570–71; Gundry Volf, Perseverance, 23–27; Nicholl, Hope, 64–65; Holtz, 228. Cf. Fee, 197. So, e.g., Marshall, 139; Malherbe, 299. Best, 217. Cf. Schreiber, I:284, who proposes to take περιποίησις here in the sense of “Erlangung” (attaining) rather than “Erwerben” (earning), arguing that the latter conveys too strongly the nuance of human activity over against God’s grace; cf. also Dobschütz, 212.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 436

7/12/23 11:29 AM

Comment 437 reassure the readers of the eschatological salvation of God, and to exhort them to maintain spiritual sobriety and moral discipline in order to obtain that divine salvation. When the concluding statement is seen thus, the contrasting phrase “not for wrath” also appears to be inserted not just to enhance the assurance of salvation, but to express summarily the warning implicit in the exhortation in vv. 4–8 against the readers falling into the fate to which pagan complacency and immoral lifestyle would lead (cf. vv. 2–3).231 This view of the formulation of our verse is supported by the parallel formulation in 4:7, οὐ γὰρ ἐκάλεσεν ἡμᾶς ὁ θεὸς ἐπὶ ἀκαθαρσίᾳ ἀλλ’ ἐν ἁγιασμῷ (“God has not called us for uncleanness, but in sanctification”), with which Paul concludes his exhortations for the readers to lead a sanctified life rather than risking God’s “vengeance” by following an unholy and unrighteous pagan lifestyle (4:3–6, see comment ad loc), just as he formulates our verse in conclusion of his similar exhortations in 5:2–8.232 The phrase “through our Lord Jesus Christ” is connected to “obtaining” rather than “destined”:233 God has destined us to “obtain salvation through our Lord Jesus Christ, who died for us.” By formulating it this way, Paul suggests that the “Lord Jesus Christ” is God’s agent of salvation, the one who has wrought divine salvation for his people, and that his death was the saving event for them (cf. 4:14). Beyond this, we may pay attention to Paul’s employment of the title “Lord” in the antecedent of the participial phrase “who died for us” (which is functioning like a relative clause). It appears that thereby Paul implicitly indicates that Jesus Christ who died for us is the risen and exalted Lord. When the whole phrase “to obtain salvation through our Lord Jesus Christ, who died for us” is then read with what Paul implicitly said in 1:10 and 3:13 in mind (see comments ad loc), there seems to be an implicit suggestion that the eschatological “obtaining of salvation” will be through the intercession of “the Lord Jesus Christ” as well as on the basis of his atoning death (cf. Rom 8:31–34; also Rom 4:25; 5:10). Note here how as in 1:10 Paul understands “salvation” as the opposite of (or as the deliverance from) God’s “wrath” at the last judgment (see also 4:6; 2 Thess 1:7–10; cf. Rom 9–10), how he bases this salvation on the vicarious death of “our Lord Jesus Christ” and his intercession, and how he attributes this salvation to the predestinating will of God. Clearly we have here all the essential elements of Paul’s doctrine of justification by God’s grace in Christ’s vicarious death, including faith (v. 8, and implicitly in “obtaining”; see 4:14 and comment there on faith as the means of obtaining salvation; see further 1:3, 7, 8; 2:10, 13; 3:2, 5, 6, 7, 10 for the references to faith/believing). This is

231 Pace Holtz, 228; Nicholl, Hope, 67. 232 See Explanation below for a reflection on God’s predestination and human responsibility. 233 Dobschütz, 212; Best, 217; Malherbe, 299; Fee, 198; Weima, 367; contra Holtz, 229; Schreiber, I:285.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 437

7/12/23 11:29 AM

438

1 Thessalonians 5:1–11

not a new doctrine to the readers because 1:10 and 4:6 indicate that Paul already taught them of salvation in terms of justification at his founding mission (cf. also the reference to the last judgment in 3:12–13, albeit in terms of “unblameable sanctification”; see comment ad loc). Nevertheless, most scholars deny the presence of the doctrine of justification in this epistle, and they do so, highlighting only the absence in it of the specific noun δικαιοσύνη (“righteousness”) or the verb δικαιοῦν (“to declare righteous”) and a reference to the law and the Jew-­gentile relationship.234 But they ignore the presence of the δικ-­terminology (ἔκδικος, “avenger,” 4:6; cf. ἐκδίκησις, “vengeance,” 2 Thess 1:8) and the terminology of ἄμεμπτος (“blameless,” 3:13; 5:23) as well as ὀργή (“wrath,” here, 1:10, and 2:16) in this letter, where the theme of God’s last judgment is prominent throughout (1:10; 2:16, 19–20; 3:12–13; 5:1–11, 23). J. Becker recognizes these points as part of the Antiochian theology that evidences the presence of the “roots” of the Pauline doctrine of justification in 1 Thessalonians and elsewhere. But he strictly distinguishes them from the properly formulated doctrine of justification visible in Galatians, Philippians 3, and Romans.235 But it is a question whether exegesis should be so literalistic or minimalistic that only the explicit presence of such words as δικαιοσύνη/ δικαιοῦν and such references to the law and the Jew-­gentile relationship is counted as evidence for the presence of that doctrine. It is not to be forgotten that Paul writes this letter (AD 50) after, but not long after, wrestling so hard with the issues of the justification doctrine in the Jerusalem Council and the Antioch controversy (AD 48; cf. Gal 2:1–16), in the wake of which, according to many advocates of the view of a late development of the justification doctrine, Paul developed or formulated the doctrine of justification by grace and through faith without the works of the law. In this post-­Jerusalem Council or post-­A ntiochian controversy letter, Paul imparts a teaching about salvation at the last judgment that is in substance the same as the teachings that he imparts in Romans and Galatians. Nevertheless, are we to judge that in our letter there is no doctrine of justification simply because in it δικαιοσύνη/ δικαιοῦν and a reference to the works of the law are absent, whereas they are present in those later epistles?236 10 τοῦ ἀποθανόντος ὑπὲρ ἡμῶν, “who died for us.” In 4:14 Paul presented the common apostolic gospel of Christ’s death and resurrection (cf. 1 Cor 15:3–5, 11), omitting a prepositional phrase (“for us” or “for our sins”) that signifies the saving nature of Christ’s death. He omitted it there in order to focus on Christ’s resurrection, as there he needed to reassure the readers of the

234 E.g., Schnelle, Apostle Paul, 188–90. 235 Becker, Paul, 279–88. 236 See Kim, “Gospel That Paul Preached,” in PGTO, 67–131, and idem, “Paul’s Doctrine of Justification in 2 Thessalonians 1–2,” in PGTO, 279–95.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 438

7/12/23 11:29 AM

Comment 439 resurrection of their deceased fellow believers. Here he presents the gospel, omitting a reference to Christ’s resurrection. He omits it to focus on Christ’s death and its significance of vicarious atonement, as he wants to reassure the readers of their salvation from God’s wrath at the last judgment. Note how in the earlier summary presentation of the gospel in 1:10 he referred to all three moments of Christ’s saving event but focused on his parousia. He did that, as there he wanted to set the course for the whole letter that the readers should maintain a vigilant and holy life with a firm faith and an assured hope for the consummation of their salvation amid temptations and afflictions. This comparison of the three summary presentations of the gospel in this letter helps us appreciate how concisely Paul writes this letter with a sharp focus on the need or purpose of each moment of his argument. So we can understand why he omits referring to Christ’s resurrection here. However, by adding the title “Lord” to “Jesus Christ” (cf. Ps 110:1; Rom 1:4; 10:9–10; Phil 2:9–11; etc.) in the antecedent of our relative clause and with the following ἵνα clause (“so that . . . we may live with him”), Paul implicitly affirms Jesus’s resurrection as well. The preposition most commonly used to express the saving efficacy of Christ’s death for his people is ὑπέρ (e.g., Rom 5:6, 8; 8:32; 14:15; 1 Cor 15:3; 2 Cor 5:15, 21; Gal 1:4). In our verse (cf. also Gal 1:4), περί is read in some manuscripts (‫ *א‬B 33) instead of ὑπέρ, but the variance does not result in any difference in meaning. Paul never uses ἀντί in this soteriological sense (its one such occurrence in the NT is in the ransom saying of Mark 10:45//Matt 20:28, λύτρον ἀντὶ πολλῶν, but see how the Grecized version of that saying in 1 Tim 2:6 changes it into ἀντίλυτρον ὑπὲρ πάντων).237 Nevertheless, the preposition ὑπέρ has the connotation not only of “for the benefit of” but more fundamentally “in the stead of/on behalf of.”238 In view of the concept of God’s wrath in v. 9, we are to see implicit here the idea of Christ bearing our sins in his death. So here “for us” (ὑπὲρ ἡμῶν) is equivalent to “for our sins” (ὑπὲρ τῶν ἁμαρτιῶν ἡμῶν) of 1 Cor 15:3 and Gal 1:4, and Christ’s death is affirmed as having been a vicarious atonement for sins—­atonement for salvation from God’s wrath (cf. also Rom 5:6–11).239 His atonement was for the purpose of delivering his people from God’s wrath (cf. 1:10) and enabling them to participate in his resurrection life (“so that we might live with him”), which is “salvation” (v. 9). ἵνα . . . ἅμα σὺν αὐτῷ ζήσωμεν, “in order that . . . we might live together with him.” As observed above, this clause implicitly affirms Christ’s resurrection. These closing words of v. 10 echo those at the end of 4:17, “and thus we shall 237 Cf. E. K. Simpson’s comment ad loc in Pastoral Epistles, 43, 44, and his “Note on the Meaning of ΥΠΕΡ,” 110–12. 238 Cf. Holtz, 230; Fee, 198; Weima, 368; also Schreiber, I:285–86. 239 See Kim, “Jesus’ Ransom Saying,” in PGTO, 151–70, for the view that the apostolic kerygma “Christ died for us/our sins” is based on Jesus’s ransom saying (Mark 10:45par.) and eucharistic saying (Mark 14:21–25parr.).

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 439

7/12/23 11:29 AM

440

1 Thessalonians 5:1–11

be always with the Lord.” Like 2 Cor 5:15, 21, our v. 10 strikes the note of interchange: Christ died that his people might live. Hooker, who finds in these and other passages illustrations of Irenaeus’s dictum that “Christ became what we are, in order that we might become what he is” (Haer. 5, preface), concludes that “the idea of interchange of experience in Christ is a vital clue to Paul’s understanding of atonement.”240 In view of the parallelism to 4:17, the aorist subjunctive verb ζήσωμεν is to be taken in the futuristic sense241 and therefore as meaning the future eschatological life.242 Therefore, it appears reasonable to take the verb as an ingressive aorist, “begin to live.”243 So we may see here Paul meaning that through the surrender of Christ’s life his people will begin to share resurrection life with him at his parousia. Even those who survive until the parousia (4:17) enter into a new order of life then (cf. 1 Cor 15:50–54; Phil 3:20–21). In biblical idiom, it is “eternal life,” that is, the life of the age to come (cf. Dan 12:2). So it is the ultimate “salvation” that is referred to in v. 9. εἴτε γρηγορῶμεν εἴτε καθεύδωμεν, “whether we are awake or asleep,” that is, whether we are alive or dead at the parousia. The verbs γρηγορεῖν and καθεύδειν are those used in v. 6 for moral watchfulness and carelessness respectively, but most commentators take the pair here not in that sense but as referring respectively to οἱ ζῶντες (the believers who are alive at the time of the parousia of the Lord Jesus) in 4:15 and οἱ κοιμωμένοι (the believers who died before the parousia) in 4:13–15. However, this traditional view has been challenged by some recent interpreters. Lautenschlager, the most thorough critic among them, insists that γρηγορεῖν is never used as a metaphor for being alive and that καθεύδειν is used as a metaphor for spiritual/moral negligence but never for death.244 So Lautenschlager renders our clause with “whether we live a holy life in expectation of the parousia, or whether we are negligent,” and goes on to argue that here Paul is reassuring the readers of their ultimate salvation regardless of their moral success or failure because God has so predestined them and they have already become the “children of light” by faith.245 But besides his questionable exegesis of some of the texts where (καθ)εύδειν appears (e.g., esp. Ps 88:5 [87:5 LXX]; Dan 12:2),246 his interpretation makes Paul negate here all the emphatic exhortation and warning that he has just issued in the preceding verses (vv. 2–8) and elsewhere (2:11–12; 3:12–13; 4:1–12; 5:23).

240 241 242 243

Hooker, “Interchange and Atonement,” 481. E.g., Holtz, 232; Malherbe, 300. Cf. Nicholl, Hope, 66–67. Best, 219; Richard, 256; Witherington, 151; pace Holtz, 232n493, who rejects this with an implausible argument: “ἅμα makes the aorist appear ingressive, but in fact σὺν αὐτῷ excludes it.” 244 Lautenschlager, “εἴτε γρηγορῶμεν εἴτε καθεύδωμεν,” 42–49. 245 Lautenschlager, “εἴτε γρηγορῶμεν εἴτε καθεύδωμεν,” 50–59. 246 Lautenschlager, “εἴτε γρηγορῶμεν εἴτε καθεύδωμεν,” 46–49. Cf. Malherbe, 300.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 440

7/12/23 11:29 AM

Comment 441 Standing on Lautenschlager’s linguistic argument but realizing the problem here pointed out, John P. Heil seeks to improve Lautenschlager’s thesis by saying that in our verse Paul means that those Thessalonian Christians who “may presently be ‘asleep’ [i.e., in the moral-­spiritual sense] . . . must be ‘awakened’ to a life of holiness before living with the Lord Jesus Christ” at his parousia.247 But this is an unwarranted importation of an alien thought into the text. Furthermore, it does not really improve on Lautenschlager’s thesis. For, according to Heil’s interpretation, having stressed that the Thessalonians should not be asleep but keep awake at present (vv. 6, 8, N.B. the three present subjunctives here, as Heil248 himself points out!), Paul is now seen to be allowing their spiritual-­moral lapse so long as they are “awakened” before the parousia. This is clearly contrary to Paul’s intent in the passage. While καθεύδειν may not be so frequently attested as κοιμᾶσθαι in the sense of death, it does occur in that sense often enough to establish that (like the uncompounded εὕδειν) it was indeed so used. In the NT Jesus’s words about Jairus’s daughter, οὐκ ἀπέθανεν ἀλλὰ καθεύδει, “she is not dead but sleeping” (Mark 5:39parr.), while capable of more than one interpretation, probably have the same sense as his words about Lazarus: ὁ φίλος ἡμῶν κεκοίμηται, “our friend has fallen asleep” (John 11:11). In Eph 5:14 the parallel commands ἔγειρε ὁ καθεύδων (“awake, O sleeper”) and ἀνάστα ἐκ τῶν νεκρῶν (“arise from the dead”) are synonymous. In Dan 12:2 (LXX and Theodotion) καθεύδειν is used of those “who sleep in the dust of the earth,” and in Ps 88:5 (LXX 87:6) of those who “lie in the grave.” For εὕδειν, in the same sense, note Homer, Il. 14.482, Πρόμαχος δεδμημένος εὕδει ἔγχει ἐμῷ (“Promachus sleeps, having been mastered by my spear”); Sophocles, Oed. col. 621, οὑμὸς εὕδων καὶ κεκρυμμένος νέκυς ψυχρός (“my cold corpse, asleep and concealed”). For more, see Aeschylus, Cho. 906; Plato, Apol. 40c–­d; Plutarch, Moralia 107d.249 Reviewing these and other material, Luckensmeyer categorically states: “the ridiculous claim that καθεύδειν is rarely or never used to refer to death, needs to be put away once and for all.”250 Nevertheless, dismissing Philo, Dreams 1.150 (ἄλλοτε μὲν ζῶν καὶ ἐγρηγορώς, ἄλλοτε δὲ τεθνεὼς ἢ κοιμώμενος, “sometimes alive and wakeful, sometimes dead or asleep”) as inconclusive251 and agreeing with Lautenschlager that in ancient Greek literature γρηγορεῖν is never used for “being alive,” Luckensmeyer comes down to adopt Lautenschlager’s view that γρηγορεῖν and καθεύδειν here refer to spiritual vigilance and indolence.252 But Lautenschlager, Heil, and Luckensmeyer have failed to understand that, by building here an inclusio with 4:14, Paul concludes his entire eschatological 247 Heil, “Those Now ‘Asleep,’ ” 471. 248 Heil, “Those Now ‘Asleep,’ ” 468. 249 Weima, 370, and Schreiber, I:287. 250 Luckensmeyer, Eschatology, 306. 251 Otherwise, cf. Weima, 370. 252 Luckensmeyer, Eschatology, 308, 312–13.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 441

7/12/23 11:29 AM

442

1 Thessalonians 5:1–11

teaching of the section from 4:13 to 5:10 and that, for that purpose, he carries over the metaphor καθεύδειν of 5:6–7 to stand for οἱ κοιμῶμενοι of 4:13–15 and its pair metaphor γρηγορεῖν of 5:6 for οἱ ζῶντες in 4:15.253 If it be asked whether it is likely that the same verbs would be used in two different senses within such a brief space, it must be said in reply that there is nothing unusual or improbable in this. It is a well-­attested feature of less formal literature, both ancient and modern, that “a single word or phrase persists in the writer’s mind by its own force, independently of any sense-­recurrence.”254 Observing that Paul uses the verb καθεύδειν for the metaphorical sense of spiritual indifference in v. 6 and then for the literal sense of sleep in v. 7, Weima argues that it is not unusual for Paul to use it for a third sense, namely, another metaphorical meaning of death in our verse.255 See also Paul’s use of “day” both for the day of the Lord and daylight in vv. 4–8 above. We should note an inclusio between 4:14 and 5:9–10,256 and understand that with it Paul affirms at its outset the fundamental truth of salvation at the parousia of Christ (4:14) and reaffirms it at its conclusion (5:9–10). This is shown not only by the parallelism between the two passages but also by the flow of Paul’s logic in 5:1–11; with the exhortation in v. 8 he concludes his argument of vv. 1–7: “since we belong to the day, let us be sober and put on the breastplate of faith and love, and for a helmet the hope of salvation.” Then, in vv. 9–10a he provides the basis for his exhortation in v. 8: “for God has not destined us for wrath, but to obtain salvation through our Lord Jesus Christ who died for us.” Thus he grounds the imperative (exhortation) upon God’s indicative (the saving event). With this his argument for a watchful and disciplined life in view of the unknown date of the parousia is complete. Yet he goes on to draw out the purpose of God’s indicative stated in vv. 9–10a: “so that whether we wake or sleep we might together live with him [i.e., the Lord Jesus Christ]” (v. 10b). Within the context of the argument of 5:1–10 this ἵνα-­clause is not really necessary, and it makes itself liable to be misinterpreted in the manner of Lautenschlager, Heil, and Luckensmeyer. So the ἵνα- ­clause can be understood only under the assumption that with it Paul seeks to stress the salvation of both living and dead believers by way of a grand conclusion of his arguments in the whole eschatological section from 4:13 to 5:10. His formulation of final salvation in terms of ἵνα . . . ἅμα σὺν αὐτῷ ζήσωμεν, deliberately echoing ἄξει σὺν αὐτῷ of 4:14, ἅμα σύν . . . of 4:17a, and σὺν κυρίῳ ἐσόμεθα of 4:17b, also clearly suggests that here he is making a conclusion not just for the subunit of his teaching in 5:1–11 but rather for the whole section of his eschatological teaching in 4:13–5:11. Therefore, with εἴτε γρηγορῶμεν εἴτε

253 254 255 256

For their link, cf. Philo, Dreams 1.150: ἄλλοτε μὲν ζῶν καὶ ἐγρηγορώς. Cf. Schreiber, I:287–88. Laughton, “Subconscious Repetition,” 75. Weima, 370. Cf. Malherbe, 300.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 442

7/12/23 11:29 AM

Comment 443 καθεύδωμεν in 5:10b, he is referring back to the living and dead believers of 4:13–18. It is quite fitting for Paul to draw the grand conclusion of his whole eschatological teaching here by specifying with σὺν αὐτῷ ζήσωμεν (to “live with him”) more clearly the eschatological hope for all believers that he has already expressed with ἄξει σὺν αὐτῷ (to “bring them [to be] with him” [as well as with us]) and σὺν κυρίῳ ἐσόμεθα (to “be with the Lord”) respectively in 4:14 and 17 (see comment on 4:14 above). 11 Διὸ παρακαλεῖτε ἀλλήλους, “Therefore, encourage one another.” As in 4:18, Paul closes the section with a call to mutual encouragement. In 4:18 he called the readers to encourage (or comfort) one another in the certainty of being with the Lord always (4:17). Likewise here, having reassured his readers again with the thought of 4:17 in 5:10, he exhorts them to “encourage one another” on the basis of the certainty of life with the Lord. They are not to be anxious about the date of the parousia. Whenever it may take place, they will enter into eternal life with the Lord on that day because God has destined them to obtain salvation in Christ. So they are to “encourage one another” to overcome any anxiety with this certainty. καὶ οἰκοδομεῖτε εἷς τὸν ἕνα, “and build one another up.” The Thessalonian believers are to help one another grow spiritually. “Building up” (οἰκοδομεῖν) is a favorite metaphor of Paul for ministry for the church. It is connected to the concept of the church as God’s house or temple (i.e., building, 1 Cor 3:9, 17; Eph 2:21), which goes back to the OT concept of Israel as God’s house/ temple. Jeremiah speaks of God building up Israel through his prophetic ministry (Jer 12:16–17; 24:6; 31:4; 33:7; 42:10; cf. 1:10). Paul follows Jeremiah’s conception and sees his apostolic ministry in terms of building up the church (1 Cor 3:10–17; 2 Cor 10:8; 12:19; 13:10; cf. Rom 15:20).257 “Building up” refers to serving the church as a whole and its members individually, in order that they might grow spiritually in faith, love, and hope. But this “building up” or edification is the task not just of apostles but of all members of the church. With the gifts given by the Lord, especially with love, Christians must build one another up (1 Cor 8:1; 10:23; 14:3–5, 12, 17, 26; Eph 4:12, 16, 19; cf. Rom 15:20). By varying the general object ἀλλήλους of the preceding exhortation with the more individualizing object εἷς τὸν ἕνα (lit. “one the other”) here, Paul is perhaps trying to call every member of the church to participate in the work of mutual encouragement and edification (cf. 2:11).258 Some commentators259 think that with this exhortation Paul not only concludes the section of 5:1–10 but also introduces the theme of the following 257 So Best, 220; Wanamaker, 190; Weima, 372. 258 Cf. Richard, 275; Malherbe, 301; Weima, 372–73. For further significance of the repeated “one another” language in our epistle (3:12; 4:9–10, 18; 5:10–11, 15) against the background of their ostracism and persecution from their families and society at large, cf. deSilva, “ ‘Worthy of His Kingdom,’ ” 68–69. 259 E.g., Best, 220; Marshall, 142; Malherbe, 300; Fee, 184; Weima, 373.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 443

7/12/23 11:29 AM

444

1 Thessalonians 5:1–11

section of 5:12–22, as at least some parts of the exhortations in 5:12–22 are concerned with building up the individual members’ faith (cf. 1 Cor 8:1; 10:23; 14:17, 26) and the church community (cf. 1 Cor 3:10–17; 14:4; Eph 4:12, 16) as a harmonious whole. Paul may indeed include that intent in his choosing the verb οἰκοδομεῖτε here. However, it appears necessary to understand his intent with the verb first within the section 5:1–11 itself. Concerning the fate of the dead believers (4:13–18), the readers needed only comfort or encouragement from the certainty of their full participation in salvation at the parousia (4:18). But on the question of the date of the parousia (5:1–11), they needed not only full assurance of salvation to overcome the anxiety about it but also the exhortation to remain wakeful and sober in preparation for it. Therefore, in our verse, the exhortation “build one another up” seems to be added. While “encouraging” or “comforting” one another with the certainty of salvation, the readers are to “build one another up” by exhorting one another to remain sober, exercising Christian discipline in faith, love, and hope. καθὼς καὶ ποιεῖτε, “as indeed you are doing” (cf. 4:1, 10). Some of the readers might have yielded to the temptation to grow slack, but they were only a few; the conduct of the majority calls forth approval. By this affirmation Paul provides an additional impetus to his exhortation.

Explanation Having dealt with the Thessalonians’ grief over their dead fellow believers (4:13–18), one of the two issues concerning the Lord’s parousia that Timothy reported to Paul, Paul here deals with the other issue, namely, their anxious concern to know exactly when the parousia would take place. In 4:13–18 and elsewhere in his other epistles (e.g., Rom 8:31–39; 1 Cor 15:23–28, 45–56; Phil 3:20–21), Paul does describe in detail what will happen at the Lord’s parousia. But all his descriptions in those places are focused on presenting the glory of the consummated salvation of believers in simple terms, rather than presenting a scenario of the events that would literally take place at the end-­time or of depicting the state of glory in detail (as we have seen above in the Explanation of 4:13–18; on 2 Thess 2:1–12, see comments below). Nor does he speak about the exact date of the Lord’s parousia. Even when he is specifically asked by the anxious Thessalonians to give them a clearer teaching about it, he responds only by repeating Jesus’s thief parable that he had already delivered to them during his founding mission among them, thus stressing that no one can know in advance the exact date of the Lord’s parousia. So, discouraging the readers from being overly concerned about guessing the date of the parousia, Paul seeks to help the readers instead to find full assurance in the gospel about the certainty of their salvation and to live a sober and disciplined life of faith and love in the certain hope of that salvation on the day of the Lord. Even today, many Christians are engrossed about the question of the date of Christ’s second coming and develop all sorts

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 444

7/12/23 11:29 AM

Explanation 445 of speculation about the scenario of the events that will unfold at that time. Our passage should offer a specially liberating message for them.260 We add below some further, detailed explanation on the issues arising out of some of the verses of our passage.

Development in Paul’s Eschatology? (v. 8) Wanamaker takes the phrase “hope of salvation” in v. 8 as evidence for the view that, at the time of writing 1 Thessalonians, Paul thought of salvation exclusively as a future blessing, and only in the later letters did he develop a more realized eschatology.261 It is true that in our epistle as a whole Paul focuses on future eschatological salvation (besides our verse, 1:9–10; 2:12; 3:13; 4:14, 16–17; 5:23–24). But we should not fail to note either the fact that in our epistle there is also an element of realized eschatology or the fact that in later letters like Romans (e.g., Rom 5:1–11; 8:18–39; 13:11–12) and Philippians (e.g., Phil 1:10; 3:12–14, 20–21) Paul also expresses the hope of “salvation” (σωτηρία/σωθησόμεθα) at the parousia of the Lord Jesus Christ. In fact, there is rather close parallelism between our epistle and Rom 5 and 8. In these chapters of Romans, Paul affirms that believers have already been justified (5:1, 9a; 8:1–3) and reconciled to God (5:10a–­b, 11) through the atoning death of Christ, God’s Son (5:6, 8, 9, 10; 8:3, 32, 34b), so that they now stand in right relationship to God (5:2), and have already been endowed with the Holy Spirit (5:5), the “firstfruits” (8:23) of ultimate salvation, so that they are sustained and directed by the Spirit (5:5; 8:4–17a, 26–27). Yet, in both chapters in Romans, he emphasizes that believers’ present justification and reconciliation are the basis for their future salvation from God’s wrath (5:2b, 9b, 10c; 8:34b), which will be brought about by the intercession of the risen and exalted Christ, God’s Son (5:9b, 10c; 8:34c–­d).262 Accordingly, affirming that believers “have been saved for the hope” of adoption as God’s children and the redemption of their bodies (8:23–24) and that therefore they now “rejoice in [the] hope of sharing the glory of God” (5:2), Paul stresses that they must persevere through the sufferings of the present in that hope of the consummation of their salvation (5:3–5; 8:17b–27), drawing on the sustaining power of the Spirit and walking according to his direction (5:5; 8:4–17a, 26–27). The phrase “hope of salvation” in our 1 Thess 5:8 is matched by the similar phrases in Rom 5:2 and 8:24. The vision of future “salvation” from the wrath of God on the basis of Christ’s atoning death and through his intercession as the Lord and God’s Son (our vv. 9–10; also 1:10; 3:13, see comment ad loc) is the same as the vision expressed in Rom 5:8–10 and 8:31–34. The hope of 260 Cf. Marshall, 132. 261 Wanamaker, 186. 262 Cf. Kim, Justification, 34–52.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 445

7/12/23 11:29 AM

446

1 Thessalonians 5:1–11

sharing Jesus Christ’s risen life at the parousia, which is variously expressed in our epistle (1 Thess 4:14, 17; 5:10), is expressed in Rom 5:10d simply: “we shall be saved by his life” (i.e., his resurrection life). Note then also how Paul affirms believers as the “children of light” and “children of the day” in our passage,263 as well as the present recipients of the Holy Spirit, the eschatological gift of God, in our letter at 4:8–9. By designating them thus, Paul means to indicate that they are those who have already received divine revelation (which can hardly be separated from salvation—­cf. 2 Cor 4:3–4) and are already (to say the least) “affected” by the day of the Lord and its salvation, unlike unbelievers, who do not know God (1 Thess 4:5) and so belong to “night” and “darkness.” So, by describing believers as the “children of light” who “belong to the day” and are waiting in the “hope of salvation” in our passage, Paul is describing none other than those who “have been justified . . . have obtained access to this grace in which [they] stand and rejoice in the hope for the glory of God” (Rom 5:1–2), or those who “have been saved for the hope” of ultimate redemption (Rom 8:23–25). Likewise, when he affirms the Spirit’s endowment and teaching in 1 Thess 4:8–9 in connection with his exhortations for a life of sanctification and mutual love (4:1–9), he does nothing other than exhort the Thessalonian believers to “walk according to the Spirit” as he likewise exhorts the Roman Christians (“the children of God”) in Rom 8:5–17 (cf. Gal 5:16–24), who have already been justified (Rom 8:1–4) and endowed with the Spirit (Rom 5:5; 8:23). More fundamentally, it is not to be forgotten that the whole point of Paul’s teaching in the apocalyptic sections of our 4:13–18 and 5:1–11 is that the eschatological saving event of Christ’s death and resurrection has already taken place (4:14; 5:9–10), and believers have already been “affected” by it, so that even dead believers in Christ are not lost; therefore, believers alive now can confidently look forward to participating together with them in eternal life with the Lord, who will come at the eschaton. Thus, like Rom 5 and 8, our epistle affirms the present or realized dimension of eschatological salvation as well as the future consummation of it at the parousia of the Lord. As in our epistle, so also in Rom 5 and 8, the focus is more on the latter. The only difference that our epistle shows from those two chapters of Romans in this regard is that it focuses on the future consummation of salvation to a greater degree, so that it merely intimates the realized dimension of salvation and does not expound it as much as Rom 5 and 8 do. Of course, Paul writes our epistle briefly and hurriedly for the main purpose of consolidating the readers’ positive evaluation of his missionary conduct and thereby protecting them from the slander of their unbelieving neighbors, together with the subsidiary purposes of dealing with the readers’ mistaken notions concerning the Lord’s parousia and imparting a brief paraenesis 263 Cf. Wright, Resurrection, 217.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 446

7/12/23 11:29 AM

Explanation 447 (see II.3 in the Introduction above). He does not mean to expound his gospel in all its aspects as he does in Romans, the long epistle that he writes with a careful exposition of his gospel. It is easy for a reader of this brief letter to form a dominant impression of a futuristic eschatology from Paul’s lengthy and emphatic discussion about the parousia of the Lord Jesus in 4:13–5:11. But we are not to overlook the fact that the Thessalonians’ questions about the fate of deceased believers at the parousia of the Lord and the exact date of that parousia (4:13–5:11) have naturally led Paul to focus on the future consummation of salvation in his response. Therefore, it would be a superficial reading of the letter if from that fact we conclude that the eschatology of 1 Thessalonians is only futuristic, ignoring that even in 5:1–11 there are sufficient indications of a realized eschatology.264 Philippians, another brief epistle, is quite similar to our epistle in this regard. There also Paul focuses on the future consummation of salvation at the parousia of the Lord Jesus Christ (Phil 1:10, 28; 2:16; 3:11–14, 20–21; 4:5), while implicitly affirming that believers have already been justified (e.g., 2:15: “children of God” who “shine as lights in the [evil or dark] world”) and are endowed with the Holy Spirit to walk according to his leading (2:1–18). So those scholars who argue for a late development of Paul’s conception of realized eschatology on the basis of his focus on futuristic eschatology in our epistle will have to date Philippians as an early letter of Paul against the more usual view. It seems much more prudent to recognize the fundamental “already-­not yet” structure of Pauline eschatology as evident throughout his surviving epistles and to see that, for the specific reasons obtaining in 1 and 2 Thessalonians and Philippians, Paul focuses on the futuristic dimension of salvation in those epistles. The view that Paul’s relative stress on futuristic eschatology or realized eschatology in any given letter depends on the situation and needs of its recipients rather than the early or later date of its origin is also supported by Galatians, which presents the opposite picture of Philippians and 1 and 2 Thessalonians. In Galatians Paul affirms that “when the time had fully come, God sent forth his Son . . . to redeem those who were under the law, so that we might receive adoption as children” (Gal 4:4–5); that Christ “gave himself for our sins to deliver us from the present evil age” (1:4); and that “Christ has redeemed us from the curse of the law, having become a curse for us . . . , in order that in Christ Jesus the blessing of Abraham might come upon the gentiles, in order that we might receive the promise of the Spirit through faith” (3:13–14). So by faith in Christ believers have already received

264 See also the Excursus below titled, “The ‘Restraining Thing’ (τὸ κατέχον) and the ‘Restraining Person’ (ὁ κατέχων) of the ‘Lawless Man’ ” (esp. its conclusion) on pp. 589–93 below for the suggestion that in Rom 11:25–26 Paul has in mind the same vision of God’s eschatological plan concerning the parousia of the Lord Jesus Christ as in 2 Thess 2:1–8.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 447

7/12/23 11:29 AM

448

1 Thessalonians 5:1–11

the promised eschatological Spirit and experienced his miracles (3:2–5); and they have already been redeemed from the enslaving powers, including the law, and made God’s children, his heirs, in whom the risen Christ, God’s Son, or his Spirit dwells, so that they can already draw on God’s fatherly care by praying “Abba, Father,” through the indwelling Spirit of God’s Son (2:20; 4:1–7). So believers are not to revert to the slavery of the law and other enslaving powers (4:8–11; 5:1, 13). Yet believers are waiting to receive what they hope for, namely, the ultimate justification, by faith that “works through love,” but they can be assured of obtaining it because they are aided by the Spirit (Gal 5:5–6).265 What is required of them at present is not to revert to the law, to the yoke of its slavery, and to walk according to the dictates of the flesh and produce the evil “works of the flesh” that would make them fail to inherit God’s kingdom (at the last judgment; cf. 6:7–10). Rather, they are to walk according to the Spirit, that is, to live, availing themselves of the grace of the Spirit’s guiding and empowering, and to bear the good or righteous fruit of the Spirit (which would help them inherit the consummated kingdom of God at the last judgment—­this is implied in the contrast between “walking according to the flesh” and “walking according to the Spirit”; 5:13–26). Thus, in Galatians also Paul basically maintains the “already-­not yet” scheme of eschatology. Yet there he stresses more the redemption already realized in the Christ-­event and the endowment of the Spirit upon believers, who have already been redeemed from the evil forces and adopted as God’s children (note in Galatians there is no reference or allusion to the parousia of the Lord Jesus Christ). Clearly he does this in order to admonish his converts not to take up the law for their ultimate justification but to stay on through the help of the Spirit in the state of justification or right relationship with God that they have already obtained by faith in Christ.266 Thus, Galatians supports our view that Paul’s relative stress on realized eschatology or futuristic eschatology in a letter depends on the situation and needs of its recipients. If the early dating of Galatians (AD 48) is sustained, this view would be further strengthened.267

Predestination and Human Responsibility (v. 9) If our reading of v. 9 is right (see above), we can observe here the interesting phenomenon that, within the framework of divine predestination for human salvation, Paul includes both human responsibility and a warning for a fall from salvation. “God has destined us . . . for the obtaining of salvation”:

265 Cf. Moo, Galatians, 327–31. 266 Cf. Moo, Galatians, 60–62, 328–29. 267 For a similar discussion about the question of development in Paul’s theology with regard to the doctrine of justification, see Kim, “Gospel That Paul Preached,” in PGTO, 67–131.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 448

7/12/23 11:29 AM

Explanation 449 salvation is God’s work of grace from start to finish. It is God who provides the means of salvation, namely, the atoning death and resurrection of Christ Jesus the Lord. It is also God who enables us to avail ourselves of this salvation in Christ. For our salvation to be a genuine salvation, it has to be wholly God’s work. For anything less than divine or anything that contains an element of human work cannot be perfect and so cannot accomplish salvation. Therefore, salvation is by the grace of God, who is transcendent and infinite. And precisely for that reason, it is secure, and believers can trust that the almighty, loving, and faithful God will preserve them to receive his consummated salvation at the parousia of the Lord Jesus Christ. The language of predestination expresses this truth. Having already spoken of God’s election of the readers (1:4; 4:7; cf. also 2:12; 5:24), Paul reminds them of it here (v. 9) to reassure them again of their salvation on the day of the Lord. Nevertheless, throughout his letters Paul calls for faith on the part of human beings to appropriate God’s salvation in Christ and to stand in the Lord, rendering the “obedience of faith” to the Lord Jesus Christ (Rom 1:5; 10:16; 16:26; 2 Cor 9:13; cf. also 2 Thess 1:8; all the paraenetical sections of his letters; in our 1 Thessalonians, e.g., 2:11–12; 3:2, 8, 12–13; 4:1–12). But then he regards faith itself as the result of God’s predestination and as a gift of God’s grace (e.g., Rom 8:29–30; Eph 2:8; Phil 1:29; 2:13–14); he also regards the life of obedience to the Lord as a process of being led and enabled by the Spirit, the Spirit of God the Father and of his Son, Christ Jesus the Lord (Rom 8:1–17; Gal 5:16–24; Phil 2:12–13; 1 Thess 3:12–13; 4:1–8, see the comments ad loc). Paul tends to speak of God’s predestination when he wants to assure his readers of their salvation by reminding them that it is secure because it depends on God’s grace alone and not on human merit, or when he wants to encourage them to persevere in faith and hope by reminding them of the divine plan for their salvation (e.g., Rom 8:28–39; 1 Thess 5:23–24).268 In our passage, he speaks of God’s predestination, both to assure the readers with God’s will for their salvation and to exhort them to live a life of vigilance in faith, love, and hope in order to obtain it (cf. 2 Thess 2:13–15). Just as God’s predestination does not make humans mere robots, so also it does not deny the possibility of Christians losing salvation through lack of vigilance (cf., e.g., Rom 11:17–22; 1 Cor 6:9–10; 10:12; Gal 5:21). “All the paraeneses would be fundamentally meaningless, if human beings had no possibility of depravation, the possibility to reject the destination that God has set for them.”269 And if there is no possibility of apostatizing believers ending up with God’s wrath at the last judgment, Paul would not warn of it in our passage of 1 Thess 5:2–9 or worry about the readers being tempted away from the faith by the satanic forces, making his apostolic labor in vain (3:1–5). 268 Cf. Marshall, 140. 269 Holtz, 229.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 449

7/12/23 11:29 AM

450

1 Thessalonians 5:1–11

Compare, for example, 1 Cor 1:7–9 with 3:16–17; 6:9–10; 9:24–27; and 10:12 to see how within one and the same letter Paul speaks of God’s election of the Corinthian believers and his faithful preservation of them to the end (the perseverance of the saints), only to warn them sternly of their fall from salvation through their failure to live a holy and righteous life. Note again how within the one and same chapter of Rom 8 Paul warns the Roman Christians of their fall from eternal life if they live according to the flesh, shunning the leading of the Spirit (v. 13), only to speak of God’s predestination and preservation of them for eschatological salvation (vv. 28–39). In 1 Cor 10:12–13, a similar combination of warning of a possible fall and assurance of God’s faithful preservation are expressed with two sentences (cf. Phil 2:12–13; 1 Thess 5:21–22). Our verse (1 Thess 5:9) is the same as these examples, the only distinction being that it is within one verse or one sentence that both truths of divine predestination/preservation of saints and of warning of fall are so compactly stated, or, to be more precise, the latter is stated within the structure of the former (see comment ad loc). These examples show that it is a regular feature of Pauline soteriology to state both truths together, balancing one with the other. As it is difficult to imagine that Paul was unaware of the logical tension between them, it appears that we have to regard that feature as representing a carefully thought-­out theological formulation with the clear dual purpose that he wants or needs to affirm despite the logical tension. If this is the case, we should not try to harmonize the two truths into a more rationally consistent system, weakening one side in favor of the other, but we must rather hold them together, appreciating the intent of each of the statements. In our passage, Paul’s reference to God’s predestination intends both to reassure the Thessalonian believers of God’s will for their ultimate salvation and to spur them to spiritual and moral vigilance, so that they may not miss but “obtain” or attain that predestined salvation.

Paul’s Common Paraenesis In two extended essays on 1:9–10,270 I examine how the doctrine of justification on the basis of the atoning death of Christ Jesus, God’s Son, and through his intercession is implicitly affirmed in 1:10, and how therefore the summary in that verse of the gospel he preached to the Thessalonians during his founding mission may be seen as a summary of the gospel that he unfolds in Romans. Here, we can also affirm a continuity in his paraenetical teaching between our epistle and Romans, as there is extensive parallelism between 1 Thess 4–5 and Rom 12–13. Below, we shall examine the numerous parallels between 1 Thess 5:12–24 and Rom 12:9–21, as well as Phil 4 (cf. also the many 270 Kim, “Jesus the Son of God as the Gospel” and “Gospel That Paul Preached,” in PGTO, 45–66, 67–131.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 450

7/12/23 11:29 AM

Explanation 451 parallels between 1 Thess 4:1–8 and Rom 1:18–32/12:1–2).271 But here we may just list the parallels between our passage 5:1–11 and Rom 13:11–14: • you know what hour (καιρός) it is (Rom 13:11//1 Thess 5:1–2) • the day is at hand (Rom 13:12//1 Thess 5:2) • the night is far gone, the day is at hand (Rom 13:12; cf. 1 Thess 5:5, 7–8) • wake up from sleep (Rom 13:11//1 Thess 5:6–8) • conduct ourselves becomingly (εὐσχημόνως) as in the day (Rom 13:13//1 Thess 4:12; 5:5) • put off the works of darkness and put on the armor of light (Rom 13:12//1 Thess 5:5) • no drunkenness (μέθη/μεθύειν) (Rom 13:13b//1 Thess 5:7) • put on the armor of light and the Lord Jesus Christ (Rom 13:12, 14//1 Thess 5:8) • the reference to the imminent or certain salvation (σωτηρία) for motivation for a wakeful life (Rom 13:11b//1 Thess 5:9–10)272 See the introduction of the following section, 5:12–22, for the parallelism between 5:12–22 and Rom 12:3–21 and Phil 4:2–9.

A Counter-­Roman Gospel Here? (See Explanation in the preceding section on 4:13–18.)

271 For a full examination of all these parallels and their significances, see Kim, “Paul’s Common Paraenesis,” 109–39 (reprint in PGTO, 253–77). 272 Some of these parallels are also observed by A. Vögtle, “Paraklese,” 185; Thompson, Clothed, 143; Malherbe, 289, 295; Witherington, 144; Holtz, 238.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 451

7/12/23 11:29 AM

3. Life Together in the Church (5:12–22) Bibliography Kim, S. “Paul’s Common Paraenesis (1 Thess 4–5; Phil 2–4; and Rom 12–13): The Correspondence between Romans 1:18–32 and 12:1–2, and the Unity of Romans 12–13.” TynBul 62 (2011): 109–39. Reprint in pages 253–77 in PGTO. Roetzel, C. J. The Letters of Paul: Conversations in Context. Atlanta: John Knox, 1975.

Form/Structure/Setting: General Introduction of the Whole Passage With the instructions on sanctification (4:3–8), love (4:9–12), and the parousia of the Lord Jesus (4:13–5:11), Paul has completed addressing the three subjects that he adumbrated in the wish-­prayer (3:12–13) by which he had made the transition from part 1 of the letter to part 2. They are the main areas in which the readers needed Paul’s further instructions to make up shortcomings in their faith (cf. 3:10). However, as there still remain some issues in their faith, in our passage he imparts exhortations on them in a summary form before concluding the letter. Our passage is marked by two striking features. One is that Paul issues his exhortations mostly with short imperatival sentences (fifteen of them plus two infinitival phrases with an imperatival force),1 in a staccato or shotgun style without connecting particles.2 The other is that, both in form and content, our passage shares numerous parallels with Phil 4:2–93 and Rom 12:9–214 (on which, see below). Parallelism with Phil 4:2–9 1 Thess 5:12–24

Phil 4:2–9

Rejoice always (πάντοτε χαίρετε) (v. 16)

Rejoice in the Lord always (χαίρετε . . . πάντοτε) (v. 4)

Pray incessantly (v. 17)

“In everything by prayer and supplication . . .” (v. 6)

1 2 3

4

Cf. Weima, 377. Cf. Fee, 201; Roetzel, Letters of Paul, 41. For more detailed explanations about these parallels, see Kim, “Paul’s Common Paraenesis.” The first four of the parallels here listed have also been observed by Piper, Love Your Enemies, 11; cf. also Fee, 202n4. Parallelism between our passage and Rom 12:9–21 is widely recognized; see, e.g., Best, 241; Marshall, 145–46; Wanamaker, 191; Holtz, 266; Richard, 273; Weima, 377.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 452

7/12/23 11:29 AM

Form/Structure/Setting 453 1 Thess 5:12–24

Phil 4:2–9

Give thanks in everything (ἐν παντὶ . . . εὐχαριστεῖτε) (v. 18)

“In everything by prayer and supplication with thanksgiving” (ἐν παντὶ . . . μετὰ εὐχαριστίας) (v. 6)

Be long-­suffering/patient with all (μακροθυμεῖτε πρὸς πάντας) (vv. 14e–15)

Let all people know your forbearance (τὸ ἐπιεικὲς ὑμῶν γνωσθήτω πᾶσιν ἀνθρώποις) (v. 5a)

The parousia/day of the Lord Jesus (in a form greatly expanded) (4:13–5:11)

The Lord is at hand (ἐγγύς) (v. 5b)

The God of peace (v. 23)

The peace of God; the God of peace (vv. 7, 9b)

Keep your spirit and soul and body (v. 23)

Guard your hearts and your minds (v. 7)

Comfort the fainthearted (v. 14)

Have no anxiety (v. 6)

“See that none of you repays evil for evil, but always seek to do the good [τὸ ἀγαθόν] for one another and to all” (v. 15)

Think about these things: “whatever is true, whatever is lovely, whatever is gracious, . . . any excellence, anything worthy of praise (v. 8)

Respect the leaders and have peace among yourselves (vv. 12–13)

Two leaders (Euodia and Syntyche) are to have unity in mind (vv. 2–3)

Parallelism with Rom 12:9–21 1 Thess 5:12–22

Rom 12:9–21

“Be at peace [εἰρηνεύετε] among yourselves” (v. 13b)

“Be at peace [εἰρηνεύοντες] with all” (v. 18)

Do not repay evil for evil (ὁρᾶτε μή τις κακὸν ἀντὶ κακοῦ ἀποδῷ, v. 15a)

Do not repay evil for evil (μηδενὶ κακὸν ἀντὶ κακοῦ ἀποδιδόντες, v. 17a)

“But seek to do the good [ἀλλὰ πάντοτε τὸ ἀγαθὸν διώκετε τὸ ἀγαθόν] to one another and to all” (v. 15b)

“But overcome evil with good” (ἀλλὰ νίκα ἐν τῷ ἀγαθῷ τὸ κακόν, v. 21)

“Rejoice always” (v. 16)

“Rejoice in hope” (v. 12a)

“Pray continually” (v. 17)

“Be constant in prayer” (v. 12c)

“Do not quench the Spirit” (v. 19)

“Be fervent in the Spirit” (v. 11b) (continued)

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 453

7/12/23 11:29 AM

454

1 Thessalonians 5:12–22

1 Thess 5:12–22

Rom 12:9–21

“Hold fast what is good” (τὸ καλόν, v. 21b)

“Hold fast to what is good” (τῷ ἀγαθῷ, v. 9c); “Take thought for what is good” (καλά, v. 17b)

“Keep away from everything that appears evil” (πονηροῦ, v. 22)

“Hate what is evil” (τὸ πονηρόν, v. 9b)

Besides these, consider also the following: 1. Some commentators also see a material parallelism between 1 Thess 5:12–13 and Rom 12:3–8.5 2. The exhortation, “Love one another with sibling love [φιλαδελφία]” (Rom 12:10a) finds its parallel in 1 Thess 4:9–12 (φιλαδελφία) and materially also in Phil 2:1–4. Apparently, having imparted this exhortation with a special emphasis in 1 Thess 4:9–12 and Phil 2, Paul omits it in his compact lists of commands in 1 Thess 5:12–22 and Phil 4:4–9. In the list in Phil 4:2–9, Paul includes a reference to the imminent parousia of the Lord (“the Lord is at hand,” v. 5b) to provide the readers with both assurance and motivation for complying with the exhortations. He omits it in the parallel list of 1 Thess 5:12–22, because he has just dealt with the topic in great length in the preceding 5:1–11 for the same purpose. In Rom 12:3–22, he also omits it because in 13:11–14 he is going to treat the topic at length, as in 1 Thess 5:1–11 (see above for their parallelism). While in 1 Thess 5:1–11 the topic of the parousia or day of the Lord gets a separate and extended treatment because it is an anxious concern of the Thessalonian believers, in Rom 13:11–14 it is separated from the list of exhortations in Rom 12:9–21 because Paul needs to expand on the theme of “living peaceably with all” (Rom 12:18) and apply that theme especially to the urgent question of the Roman believers’ attitude toward the Roman rulers (13:1–7). So Paul first issues many exhortations on that theme from Rom 12:14 to 13:7 and then rounds them off in 13:8–10 with a stress on the commandment for neighbor love that underlies them all. Only then does he come to refer to the day of the Lord (Rom 13:11–14) in a way similar to 1 Thess 5:1–11, but with an additional dimension of making his exhortations more concrete through a partial inclusio with the thesis statement on the life of the redeemed humanity in Rom 12:1–2 in antithesis to that of the fallen humanity (Rom 1:18–32)—­an inclusio

5

E.g., Marshall, 145; Best, 223; Holtz, 266.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 454

7/12/23 11:29 AM

Form/Structure/Setting 455 that befits the conclusion of the general first part of his paraenesis (Rom 12–13) before proceeding with the more specific second part (Rom 14–15).6 The parallelism among 1 Thess 5, Phil 4:2–9, and Rom 12–13 suggests that Paul has a set of moral exhortations common for all his churches (cf. 1 Cor 4:17; also Gal 5:19–25). It shows that he maintains a common paraenesis from his early epistle 1 Thessalonians to his later epistles, Romans and Philippians. However, he does not just provide the common paraenesis to his churches, regardless of their particular situations. The above brief comparison of the parallel material in the three letters already shows how, as a seasoned pastor,7 he adapts his common paraenesis to the varying needs of the recipients of these letters. This fact appears clearer when the distinctive elements in the list of 1 Thess 5 are considered. To begin with, it is obvious that the exhortation “admonish the disorderly idlers [ἀτάκτους]” in 1 Thess 5:14 reflects the unique situation of the Thessalonian church, as Paul gives a similar exhortation in 4:10 and expands on it in 2 Thess 3:6–13, while not mentioning it in the parallel lists of Rom 12–13 and Phil 4 or anywhere else in his known letters. The admonitions “do not despise prophesying, but test everything” in 1 Thess 5:20–21 also do not appear in the parallel lists in Rom 12–13 and Phil 4, so that it is likely that the Thessalonian situation has necessitated their inclusion in 1 Thessalonians (cf. 1 Cor 14:29). Furthermore, a comparison of the exhortations to respect the leaders in 1 Thess 5:12–13 with the exhortations in Rom 12:3–8 seems to suggest that Paul adapts his common paraenesis about the harmonious use of diverse spiritual gifts for fulfilling diverse forms of ministry in the church (cf. 1 Cor 12:4–31; Eph 4:1–16) to the specific needs of the Thessalonian church. All this means that we need to exegete the exhortations in our passage, keeping an eye on both their general character and their possible adaptation to the Thessalonian situation.8 Another distinct feature of the section of 1 Thess 5:14–22 is the triple series of short cola (each colon comprising verbs in the imperative with an object or an adverbial amplification). Colon 1 (v. 14) consists of four pastoral injunctions; colon 2 (vv. 16–18a) of three directions for fulfilling the will of God in one’s spiritual life; and colon 3 (vv. 19–22) of five exhortations relating to the prophetic ministry. This feature produces the effect of a staccato or shotgun style of paraenesis. Similar series of short cola are found elsewhere in the OT and NT (cf. Isa 1:16, 17; Matt 10:8; Luke 6:27, 28; Rom 12:9–16; Phil 4:4–7; 1 Pet 2:17). Possibly instruction was given in this form to serve as an easily memorizable catechesis. 6 7 8

For more details, see Kim, “Paul’s Common Paraenesis,” 113–18, 126–33 (reprint in PGTO, 256–60, 266–72); cf. Holtz, 238n528. Cf. Marshall, 146. Cf. Marshall, 146; Holtz, 241; Richard, 273–74; Fee, 202; Weima, 377–78; pace Best, 223, who one-­sidedly stresses the general character of the exhortations; cf. also Wanamaker, 191.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 455

7/12/23 11:29 AM

456

1 Thessalonians 5:12–22

Yet a third interesting feature may be observed: in colon 1 (v. 14) the exhortations are issued with the imperatives in the normal first position, while in cola 2 (vv. 16–18a) and 3 (vv. 19–22) the imperatives are in the second place, either after adverbs (vv. 16–18a) or nouns or pronouns (vv. 19–22).9 Malherbe suspects that this stylistic switch from v. 14 to the rest of the passage is for the sake of variety.10 Verse 15 is somewhat special in that it does not share these features. This fact, as well as the content of the exhortations there, appears to demand that we treat it separately rather than lumping it together with the preceding vv. 12–1411 or v. 14,12 or with the following verses.13 In fact, it is to be seen as the exhortation that sums up the whole part 1 of the paraenesis (vv. 12–15), which concerns a peaceful and harmonious communal life of the Thessalonian church. The series of exhortations in our passage may be divided into five units: a. vv. 12–13: recognition of the leaders and maintaining community peace b. v. 14: ministering to the weak members c. v. 15: the basic Christian principle of personal relationships d. vv. 16–18: basic Christian piety e. vv. 19–22: prophesying in congregational worship These five units make up two parts: part 1 (vv. 12–15) contains exhortations for a peaceful and harmonious communal life of the church, while part 2 (vv. 16–22) contains exhortations for personal piety and congregational worship. Each of these units except (c.) (v. 15) is marked by a summing-­up imperative or, in the case of (d.), vv. 16–18, a word of sanction: v. 13b (the imperative “Be at peace among yourselves”) summing up the two exhortations in vv. 12–13a; v. 14e (“Be long-­suffering with all”) summing up the three exhortations in v. 14b–­d; v. 18b (“This is the will of God in Christ Jesus for you”) providing a sanction for fulfilling the three injunctions in vv. 16–18a; vv. 21b–22 (“Hold fast what is good, abstain from every form of evil”) summing up the three injunctions in vv. 19–21a.

9 10 11 12 13

Cf. Fee, 209, 213. Malherbe, 328. Malherbe, 309. Beale, 163; Fee, 208; Weima, 390. Richard, 277–78.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 456

7/12/23 11:29 AM

Bibliography 457 Verse 15 is a general statement that, developing the injunction in v. 14e, sums up the whole part 1 of the exhortations (vv. 12–15). This analysis shows how carefully this whole section of the letter is organized.

A. Recognition of Leadersand Maintaining the Community Peace (5:12–13) Bibliography Bjerkelund, C. J. Parakalô: Form, Funktion und Sinn der Parakalô-­Sätze in den paulinischen Briefen. Bibliotheca Theologica Norvegica 1. Oslo: Universitetsforlaget, 1967. Chow, J. K. Patronage and Power: A Study of Social Networks in Corinth. JSNTSup 75. Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1992. Holmberg, B. Paul and Power: The Structure of Authority in the Primitive Church as Reflected in the Pauline Epistles. ConBNT 11. Lund: Gleerup, 1978. Jewett, R. The Thessalonian Correspondence: Pauline Rhetoric and Millenarian Piety. Philadelphia: Fortress, 1986. Meeks, W. First Urban Christians: The Social World of the Apostle Paul. 2nd edition. New Haven: Yale University Press, 2003.

Translation Now we beseech you, brothers and sisters, to acknowledge those who work hard among you and care fora you in the Lord and admonish you, 13and to esteem b them very highly c in love because of their work. Be at peace among yourselves.d 12

Notes a. For προϊσταμένους, the Hellenistic προϊστανομένους is read by ‫ א‬A. b. For the infinitive ἡγεῖσθαι, the imperative ἡγεῖσθε is read by B Ψ 6 81 1739 et al. c. For ὑπερεκπερισσοῦ, B D* F G pc read ὑπερεκπερισσῶς, while 30(vid) reads ἐκπερισσοῦ. d. The original classical plural of the reflexive ἑαυτόν is σφᾶς αὐτούς, but from an early date the form ἑαυτούς occurs; in addition, this third-­person form encroached on the province of the first and second persons: here ἐν ἑαυτοῖς means “among yourselves.” For ἑαυτοῖς, many witnesses (including 30 ‫ א‬D* F G P Ψ 81 1881*; cf. Vulgate’s cum eis) read αυτοις, which could be understood either as αὐτοῖς (“be at peace with them,” i.e., with the προϊστάμενοι) or as αὑτοῖς (equivalent to ἑαυτοῖς). But for the former, μετ’ αὐτῶν rather than ἐν αὐτοῖς would be expected. Hence, ἑαυτοῖς is to be read with A B and the majority of MSS.

Form/Structure/Setting The construction with ἐρωτῶμεν in v. 12 is comparable to that with παρακαλοῦμεν (see 4:1, ἐρωτῶμεν . . . καὶ παρακαλοῦμεν . . . with comment ad loc).14 But the ἐρωτῶμεν construction here, like the παρακαλοῦμεν construction in v. 14, lacks the prepositional phrase ἐν κυρίῳ Ἰησοῦ as found in 4:1 and is concerned with relations between the community addressed and specific groups

14

Cf. Bjerkelund, Parakalô, 28–29, 39–40.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 457

7/12/23 11:29 AM

458

1 Thessalonians 5:12–13

or individuals15—­a form found repeatedly in concluding requests or appeals (cf. Rom 16:17–20; 1 Cor 16:15–18; Phil 4:2, 3). The last clause of this subsection, εἰρηνεύετε ἐν ἑαυτοῖς, expressing a common Christian exhortation, probably goes back to Jesus’s admonition to his disciples, εἰρηνεύετε ἐν ἀλλήλοις, “be at peace among one another” (preserved in Mark 9:50), which in turn has no lack of OT antecedents; cf. Ps 34:14 (33:15 LXX), ζήτησον εἰρήνην καὶ δίωξον αὐτήν, “seek peace and pursue it.”

Comment 5:12 Ἐρωτῶμεν δὲ ὑμᾶς, ἀδελφοί, “Now we beseech you, brothers and sisters.” Since this exhortation is not made in contrast to the preceding exhortation (v. 11), δέ is to be taken as resumptive (“now”) rather than adversative (“but”), and with the vocative ἀδελφοί (“brothers and sisters”), it is to be seen as signaling a transition to a new subject (cf. 2:17; 4:13; 5:1, 14; on the repeated employment of the family term “brothers and sisters” in reference to the readers in this letter, see comment on 1:4). Paul employs the formal-­appeal formula with the main verb of appeal and the two infinitives (εἰδέναι and ἡγεῖσθαι; see comment on 4:1) here, instead of simple imperatives, because he is now embarking on a new topic unrelated to that of the preceding section.16 In 4:1 Paul introduced his paraenetic section with the double formula ἐρωτῶμεν . . . καὶ παρακαλοῦμεν. Here he breaks the pair, using them to lead the first and the second part in v. 12 and v. 14, respectively. Although he normally uses παρακαλεῖν for his exhortation, he starts here with ἐρωτᾶν (elsewhere only in 4:1; 2 Thess 2:1; Phil 4:3) because he has just used the former in v. 11 in a different sense, to “comfort” or “encourage” (for ἐρωτᾶν in the postclassical sense of making a request, cf. 4:1). εἰδέναι τοὺς κοπιῶντας ἐν ὑμῖν καὶ προϊσταμένους ὑμῶν ἐν κυρίῳ καὶ νουθετοῦντας ὑμᾶς, “to acknowledge those who work hard among you and care for you in the Lord and admonish you.” Some commentators17 take εἰδέναι (“to know”) here in the sense of “respect, honor,” but, in view of the following parallel infinitive ἡγεῖσθαι (“to esteem,” v. 13), it appears better to take it in the sense of “to acknowledge.”18 The object is described by the three present participle phrases. Since they are governed by a single article, the reference is to one group of people who perform the three specified services in the church. The first participle (κοπιῶντας) seems to be the comprehensive predicate, and the latter two (προϊσταμένους and νουθετοῦντας) specify the especially important aspects of it.19

15 16 17 18 19

Cf. Bjerkelund, Parakalô, 128. Cf. Weima, 382. E.g., Best, 224; Marshall, 146–47; Malherbe, 310; Weima, 383. So, e.g., Wanamaker, 191–93; Richard, 267–78; Holtz, 241; Fee, 204; Schreiber, I:297. Cf. Richard, 268; Schreiber, I:298.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 458

7/12/23 11:29 AM

Comment 459 κοπιῶντας. The verb κοπιᾶν has the sense of “to labor hard,” making great exertions to the extent of being tired. Paul uses the verb and its related noun (κόπος) both for his own hard physical labor (1 Cor 4:12; 2 Cor 6:5; 11:23, 27; 1 Thess 2:9; 2 Thess 3:8) and for ministry for the gospel and the church, his own (1 Cor 15:10, 58; 2 Cor 10:15; Gal 4:11; Phil 2:16; Col 1:29; 1 Thess 1:3; 3:5) and others’ (also Rom 16:6; 12; 1 Cor 16:16). προϊσταμένους. The verb προΐστασθαι means “to preside, rule over” and also “to protect, care for.” Both senses are well-­attested in Greek.20 Apart from Rom 12:8, 16:2, and our verse, the verb and its cognates are used in the NT only in the Pastoral Epistles: three times of looking after one’s own household (1 Tim 3:4, 5, 12), twice of caring for (promoting) good works (Titus 3:8, 14), and once of elders in the church (1 Tim 5:17, where οἱ καλῶς προεστῶτες πρεσβύτεροι, “the elders who rule well,” are to be held worthy of double honor or honorarium).21 The participle νουθετοῦντας that follows προϊσταμένους in our verse seems to suggest that the participle προϊσταμένους here carries a connotation of authority, as in 1 Tim 5:17. The phrase ἐν κυρίῳ attached to the participle is seen by some commentators22 as strengthening this connotation still further. But with the phrase Paul connects all sorts of Christian activities, so that it can convey not only the sense of “with the authority given by the Lord” (e.g., 1 Thess 4:1), but also the sense of “in obedience to the Lord’s will” (e.g., Phil 4:2). See comment on 3:8; 4:1 above. If the former sense supports interpreting the participle προϊσταμένους as “ruling,” the latter sense supports interpreting it as “caring for.” Furthermore, if Paul has the connotation of authority in the participle chiefly in view, he would more naturally place that participle at the head of the list in some such way as “respect the rulers who work hard for you and admonish you.” Pointing this out, Best and Wanamaker take it in the sense of “caring for” on analogy to Rom 12:8, where, placed between “he who shares [ὁ μεταδιδούς] liberally” and “he who does acts of mercy [ὁ ἐλεῶν] cheerfully,” ὁ προϊστάμενος ἐν σπουδῇ is to be taken in the sense of “he who provides care with eagerness,” as the alternative sense of “he who rules with eagerness” would be quite awkward.23 However, an observation of the word from a sociological perspective leads us to take it in both senses. As Wayne Meeks points out, “a position of authority grows out of the benefits that persons of relatively higher wealth and status could confer on the community.”24 So we may understand τούς . . . προϊσταμένους here in our 5:12 as those who act effectively as benefactors or patrons in the Thessalonian church, who care for the members of the church with their material resources and so have acquired 20 Reicke, TDNT 6:700–703. 21 Cf. also Herm. Vis. 2.4.3, τῶν πρεσβυτέρων τῶν προϊσταμένων τῆς ἐκκλησίας, “the elders who are in charge of the [Roman] church.” 22 E.g., Marshall, 148; Weima, 385. 23 Best, 225, and Wanamaker, 192. So also Holtz, 243; Richard, 268; Malherbe, 313; Fee, 205. 24 Meeks, First Urban Christians, 134.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 459

7/12/23 11:29 AM

460

1 Thessalonians 5:12–13

a position of some authority in the church.25 Thus, Paul may be using the word here, understanding their exercise of authority as well as their sharing of their material resources as caring for the church. This understanding is well illustrated by Phoebe in Rom 16:1–2, who as a προστάτις (“benefactor, patron”) of “many,” as well as of Paul himself, is clearly a leader of the church in Cenchreae but is designated as a “deaconess” (διάκονος, “servant”), which highlights her service for the church. The household of Stephanas at Corinth (1 Cor 16:15–18) also provides a good illustration, and Paul’s exhortation in the Corinthians passage provides a good parallel to ours: the household of Stephanas “devoted themselves to the service [διακονία] of the saints” and thereby apparently acquired leadership within the Corinthian church, so that Paul exhorts the Corinthians to “submit to such people and to every fellow worker and laborer [κοπιῶντι],” properly “recognizing” (ἐπιγινώσκετε) them as leaders (cf. also the couple Prisca and Aquila, who had a church in their house: Rom 16:3–5; 1 Cor 16:19).26 νουθετοῦντας. The verb νουθετεῖν could mean “to instruct” generally or, where wrong tendencies had to be corrected, to “admonish” or “warn.” But in view of its use in v. 14 (cf. 2 Thess 3:15), most commentators take it here in the latter sense. Part of the benefactor-­leaders’ caring for the members of the church is to admonish them pastorally. 13 καὶ ἡγεῖσθαι αὐτοὺς ὑπερεκπερισσοῦ ἐν ἀγάπῃ διὰ τὸ ἔργον αὐτῶν, “and to hold them in very high esteem and love because of their work” (for ὑπερεκπερισσοῦ, “exceedingly highly,” cf. 3:10). The verb ἡγεῖσθαι simply means “consider, regard.” But both the following ὑπερεκπερισσοῦ and the preceding εἰδέναι in v. 12 suggest that Paul means with it “to esteem.” So he is stressing once more what he said in v. 12: the readers are to acknowledge and esteem their benefactor-­leaders. They are to do so not grudgingly (just for their material benefits), nor from fear (perhaps of possible discriminatory treatment),27 but “in love,” in genuine appreciation and with goodwill. The highest possible regard is due to such people, not because of their status or power but because of their work for the church, the work of caring for fellow believers and admonishing them, which they are carrying out tirelessly as a way of serving the Lord Jesus (v. 12). In Christian ministry generally, status depends on function and not vice versa. It was not important that those who served the church in various ways should be given distinctive titles, and even when they were given titles (like the ἐπίσκοποι and διάκονοι of Phil 1:1), these might differ from one place

25 So Wanamaker, 193; Richard, 268; also Jewett, Thessalonian Correspondence, 103; cf. Schreiber, I:299–301. 26 Cf. Meeks, First Urban Christians, 134; Chow, Patronage, 101; also Holmberg, Paul and Power, 99–102. 27 Cf. Chow, Patronage, 68–75, 110–11.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 460

7/12/23 11:29 AM

Explanation 461 to another. What was important was that the service should be rendered, and that those who rendered it should receive affectionate recognition and gratitude, in the spirit of Jesus’s teaching that, in his kingdom, the lowliest service carries with it the highest honor (Mark 10:42–45par.; Luke 22:24–27). εἰρηνεύετε ἐν ἑαυτοῖς, “Be at peace among yourselves.” The exhortation to live in peace is part of Paul’s common paraenesis (Rom 12:18; Phil 4:2–9; also Rom 14:19; 2 Cor 13:11; Eph 4:3; Col 3:15; cf. Mark 9:50; Heb 12:14). But he is not just imparting the general exhortation here. Just as in Rom 12:18 where he exhorts the Roman Christians to “live peaceably with all,” he adapts it to their relationship with hostile outsiders (12:14–21, plus 13:1–7), so also here with “be at peace among yourselves,” he adapts it to a specific need in the communal life of the Thessalonian Christians (cf. Rom 14:19: peace between “the weak” and “the strong” on the question of food; cf. also Phil 4:2–9). The need is indirectly hinted at by the location of our exhortation, between the call to recognize and esteem the patron-­leaders (vv. 12–13a) and the admonition for the ἄτακτοι, the “disorderly idlers” (v. 14b).28 Apparently, not working to make a living themselves but living off the church’s common fund, the ἄτακτοι (see v. 14 below, and comment on 4:11–12 above) spend their idle time meddling in the lives of others and the affairs of the church and thus create disputes and disharmony in the church. They resent the admonition of the benefactor-­leaders and resist their leadership. This seems to be the situation that has prompted Paul to urge the readers to acknowledge and esteem the patron-­leaders. He is thus trying to establish peace among those in the Thessalonian church by strengthening the authority of the patron-­ leaders and making the quarreling parties, especially the “disorderly idlers,” submit to their admonition.29 So this exhortation sums up the preceding two exhortations, expressing their intent (cf. v. 14e).30

Explanation It will make for an effective life and witness and for peaceful relations among its members if a church’s leaders are recognized and honored and their directions followed. The corollary of this is that the leaders should be the kind of people who deserve to be recognized and honored by their fellow Christians. No fixed pattern of rule appears to have been imposed on the Pauline churches. The precedent of the church of Jerusalem, which by this time was governed by a body of elders under the chairmanship of James the Just, was not followed as a matter of course. The policy of Paul and his colleagues

28 Cf. Weima, 390, who additionally points to Paul’s conclusion of his treatment of the ἄτακτοι in 2 Thess 3:6–15 with an unusually emphatic “peace benediction.” 29 Cf., e.g., Frame, 195; Marshall, 149–50; Green, 252; Weima, 389–90. 30 Cf. Lightfoot, 80; Weima, 380, 389.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 461

7/12/23 11:29 AM

462

1 Thessalonians 5:12–13

seems to have been to wait until qualities of spiritual leadership displayed themselves in certain members of a church and then to urge the others to acknowledge and respect those as leaders. One of the most obvious qualities of leadership was a readiness to serve the church and care for its needs. Such leaders did not do the appropriate work because they had been appointed as leaders; they were recognized as leaders because they were seen to be doing the work. Some men and women were in an especially suitable position to care for the church—­those, for example, whose homes served as meeting places, like Gaius at Corinth (Rom 16:23) or Nympha in the Lycus valley (Col 4:15). Compare also Philemon (Phlm 2). According to Luke, during Paul’s mission in Thessalonica, Jason hosted Paul’s missionary team at his home and even posted bond for their release (Acts 17:1–9). But Paul does not mention Jason in our letter or in 2 Thessalonians. He mentions Gaius once within the Corinthian correspondence in the course of naming a few first converts of his in Corinth whom he baptized (1 Cor 1:14–16). However, Paul nowhere mentions Gaius’s offer of his home to the Corinthian church for a meeting place in the Corinthian correspondence (while mentioning it at Rom 16:23). Nor does he refer to Gaius’s caring leadership within the church. So we can see that, even if the Lukan account of Paul’s mission in Thessalonica is trustworthy, Paul’s silence about Jason in the Thessalonian correspondence is not surprising. Perhaps Jason is one of the οἱ προϊστάμενοι, “those who care for” the Thessalonian church. Apparently Paul does not want to single him out from among the patron-­leaders in the Thessalonian church. In fact, in our letter, unlike Rom 16:2–3 and 1 Cor 16:15–18, he does not name any of the patron-­leaders personally (cf. “the Thessalonians, Aristarchus and Secundus” mentioned in Acts 20:4 among the party of the representatives of the churches of Asia, Macedonia, etc. who accompanied Paul on his last trip to Jerusalem to deliver their churches’ collection for the Jerusalem church; cf. also Acts 19:29; 27:2; Col 4:10; Phlm 24). Nor does he give them any title but designates them only by the functional terms that indicate their service. For in our passage, as well as in Rom 12:8, the participle ὁ προϊστάμενος is no official designation or title. The corresponding noun προστάτης might be regarded as a title, but it does not occur in the NT. The feminine προστάτις is used of Phoebe in Rom 16:2 (προστάτις πολλῶν, “a helper or patron of many”), but even there it is not her official title. In so far as she has an official title, it is διάκονος, “minister” or “servant” or “deacon” of the church in Cenchreae. (It is noteworthy that the only person named in the NT as διάκονος of a local church is a woman.) So it appears that Paul is happy to see some patron-­leaders emerging in the Thessalonian church and to support their leadership, but he has not yet appointed them “officially” with titles and does not want to create any kind of rivalry among them.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 462

7/12/23 11:29 AM

Bibliography 463

B. Ministering to the Weak Members (5:14) Bibliography Hill, D. New Testament Prophecy. London: Marshall, Morgan & Scott, 1979. Martin, R. P. Worship in the Early Church. London: Marshall, Morgan & Scott, 1964.

Translation 14

Now we appeal to you, brothers and sisters: admonish the disorderly, comfort the fainthearted, help the weak, be patient toward all.

Form/Structure/Setting See Form/Structure/Setting: General Introduction of the Whole Passage above concerning “3. Life Together in the Church (5:12–22).”

Comment 5:14 Παρακαλοῦμεν δὲ ὑμᾶς, ἀδελφοί, “And we appeal to you, brothers and sisters.” With this new appeal formula (cf. vv. 12–13; also 4:1, 10), Paul transitions to a new subject. But, unlike elsewhere, here he expresses the content of his appeal with four independent imperatival clauses rather than a final (ἵνα) clause or infinitival phrase. He then proceeds further with piling up imperatival clauses from v. 15 to v. 22. Therefore, the appeal formula here is to be seen as covering all the exhortations from this verse to v. 22. It might be argued, with Chrysostom and other Greek commentators, that this appeal is addressed to the προϊστάμενοι, whose responsibility it was to administer admonishment (νουθετεῖν in v. 12) where necessary and to exercise care for those who needed it. In that case, ὑμᾶς would be emphatic (“you for your part”). But there is nothing in the text to indicate this. It could be indicated in speech by a change of intonation, by a significant look or gesture. In a written letter, however, the change of address and emphasis would have to be indicated verbally, and Greek is not lacking in means to give expression to such a change. As it is, the exhortations in vv. 15–22 follow on those of v. 14 without any break, and παρακαλοῦμεν δὲ ὑμᾶς, ἀδελφοί here is exactly parallel to ἐρωτῶμεν δὲ ὑμᾶς, ἀδελφοί at the beginning of v. 12, corresponding to ἐρωτῶμεν . . . καὶ παρακαλοῦμεν in 4:1. So it is natural to suppose that the same ἀδελφοί are addressed in both places and that the exhortations of vv. 14–22 are addressed to the whole church, as are those in vv. 12–13 (so most commentators). The various forms of service enjoined in the words that follow are certainly a special responsibility of leaders, but not their exclusive

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 463

7/12/23 11:29 AM

464

1 Thessalonians 5:14

responsibility: they are ways in which all the members of the community can fulfill the direction of v. 11 to encourage and build one another up. It is significant that Paul then exhorts the whole church to exercise the ministry of νουθετεῖν, having in v. 12 referred to it as a function of the leaders. Clearly Paul is not making a rigid distinction between the “ministers” and the passive “congregation,” but rather views the whole congregation as sharing in ministry to one another. Three groups of people are mentioned as needing special care. νουθετεῖτε τοὺς ἀτάκτους, “admonish the disorderly idlers.” The ἄτακτοι are those who deviate from proper order (τάξις) or resist the accepted norms of behavior. So they are the “undisciplined,” “disorderly,” or “insubordinate.”31 There is some evidence that the word ἀτακτεῖν was also used interchangeably with ἀργεῖν (“to be idle”) in some papyri of the Hellenistic period.32 Second Thessalonians 3:6–13 together with 1 Thess 4:11–12 clearly indicates that Paul includes in the ἄτακτοι the sense of the idlers or loafers within the basic sense of the disorderly. In 2 Thess 3:6–13, he first identifies those who are living ἀτάκτως as those who are living “not in accord with the tradition” that he imparted to the Thessalonians (v. 6). He commands them to work to earn their living (v. 10) and provides his own example of not living ἀτάκτως (ἠτακτήσαμεν, v. 7) but of doing hard labor for his own bread during his mission among them (vv. 7–9; cf. 1 Thess 4:11–12, where their defiance of Paul’s command or tradition is possibly also a defiance of the conventions of the society at large). He then speaks of hearing some Thessalonians “living ἀτάκτως, not working but meddling” (2 Thess 3:11), and commands such people “to work in quietness to earn their own living” (v. 12). Thus, from 2 Thess 3:6–13 it emerges clearly that for Paul the ἄτακτοι are those who live idle in defiance of his teaching (as well as of social convention) and, while living off the charities of others (as implied in v. 8), meddle in the affairs of others and the church and thus disturb the peace and quiet of the church. So the ἄτακτοι here may be best rendered as the “disorderly or unruly idlers.”33 In 1 Thess 4:11–12, Paul has already admonished them to “work with [their] hands” and earn their own living instead of burdening the church with financial support, as he had “commanded” them, and to live a “quiet life,” “pursuing [their] own business” instead of being busybodies and creating disputes in the church that embarrass the church before outsiders. Apparently he is aware that they are resistant to the patron-­leaders’ admonishment about these problems. Hence he fortifies the leaders’ authority (5:12–13) and urges the whole congregation to join them in admonishing these “disorderly idlers.” 31 Cf. BDAG 148. 32 Milligan, 152–54. 33 Cf. Fee, 209–10; Weima, 391–93; also Russell, “The Idle,” 107–9.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 464

7/12/23 11:29 AM

Comment 465 Malherbe notes that to “admonish” (νουθετεῖν) is “the harshest form of exhortation Paul mentions in the letter.”34 It would certainly include a strong note of disapproval of their present conduct and a clear charge for them to mend their ways. Apparently Paul, the “gentle” pastor (cf. 2:6, 11–12), feels the need to use a stern word here because the community’s health and well-­being are at stake. Second Thessalonians 3:6–13 shows that the situation further deteriorated later, so that Paul had to impart an even sterner admonition. παραμυθεῖσθε τοὺς ὀλιγοψύχους, “comfort the fainthearted.” (For παραμυθεῖσθαι, cf. 2:12.) The ὀλιγόψυχος (only here in the NT) stands at the opposite pole to the μεγαλόψυχος, the high-­souled person (exactly equivalent to Sanskrit mahaˉ tmaˉ , from maha-­aˉ tmaˉ ), Aristotle’s ideal human being, “who claims much and deserves much” (Eth. nic. 4.3.3, 1123b). Whereas the μεγαλόψυχος (not found in the NT) is self-­sufficient and self-­confident, the ὀλιγόψυχος is inadequate and diffident. Aristotle calls him the μικρόψυχος and does not regard him as an exemplary character: the most μικρόψυχος of all is he “who claims less than he deserves when his deserts are great” (Eth. nic. 4.3.7). How would he have rated Paul, not to speak of Jesus? In the Christian community the ὀλιγόψυχος, for all his conscious inadequacy and diffidence, is to be encouraged and made to feel as someone who counts: his gifts may not be great but, with encouragement, they can be developed and make a valuable contribution to communal well-­being. In the LXX, the words ὀλιγόψυχος, ὀλιγοψυχία, and ὀλιγοψυχεῖν occur several times, rendering a variety of Hebrew words and phrases (e.g., ‫“ קצר רוח‬short of temper” in Prov 14:29; ‫“ רוח נכאה‬a broken spirit” in Prov 18:14). BDAG defines ὀλιγόψυχος as “faint-­hearted, discouraged.”35 Who may be designated as ὀλιγόψυχοι here in 1 Thess 5:14? They may be those who have lost initial joy in and enthusiasm for their faith and become despondent because of continuing persecution (1:6; 2:14; 3:3–4).36 They may be those who are grieving about their relatives and friends who died before the parousia of the Lord (4:13–18), and/or those who are anxious about the date of the parousia (5:1–11).37 The church is to “comfort” or “encourage” such people (cf. 4:18; 5:11; see comment on 4:11 above, as well as Paul’s efforts to comfort the suffering readers in the passages around 1:6; 2:14; 3:3–4). ἀντέχεσθε τῶν ἀσθενῶν, “help the weak.” In its other NT occurrences (Matt 6:24; Luke 16:13; Titus 1:9), ἀντέχεσθαι (in the middle voice) means “hold fast to”; here it implies holding in the sense of holding up or supporting. See also Rom 15:1, “we who are strong ought to bear [βαστάζειν] the infirmities of the weak [τὰ ἀσθενήματα τῶν ἀδυνάτων].”

34 35 36 37

Malherbe, 316. BDAG 703. Cf. Schreiber, I:305. Cf. Wanamaker, 197; also Frame, 198; Green, 253.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 465

7/12/23 11:29 AM

466

1 Thessalonians 5:14

Whom does Paul refer to as “the weak” here in our verse? Various suggestions have been made: the physically sick or the materially poor (cf. 1 Cor 11:30);38 the people with no social status or power (cf. 1 Cor 1:26–29);39 those who are immature in spiritual insight and inhibited in the exercise of Christian freedom, like those addressed in 1 Cor 8–10 and Rom 14–15;40 those who are susceptible to temptations and sins (cf. Rom 4:19; 5:6; 8:3, 26; 1 Cor 2:3; 2 Cor 11:30; 12:5, 9–10),41 especially to sexual impurity (1 Thess 4:3–8),42 and so on. Supposing that “disorderly idlers” looks back to 4:9–12 and “the fainthearted” to 4:13–18, Weima suggests that “the weak” here refers to those who are anxious about the day of the Lord (5:1–11).43 But it is not clear why “the fainthearted” should only refer to those who grieve over the dead before the Lord’s parousia but not include others, such as those who are anxious about the day of the Lord, nor is it plausible to think that the designation “the weak” befit such anxious people. For us, it is more plausible to see the exhortation about “the weak” as looking back to 3:1–10, where Paul expresses his worry that during his absence the Thessalonians might be shaken (σαίνεσθαι, v. 3) in their faith because of temptation and persecution, so as to need firm support or strengthening (στηρίζειν, v. 2) in faith. Paul rejoices that, contrary to his worry, the Thessalonian believers have not been shaken in their faith but are standing firm in the Lord. But it is quite imaginable that, while that is the happy situation with the Thessalonian church as a whole or with most of its members, there could still be some individuals who need support to stand firm in the Lord. It is therefore possible to understand that in 5:14 Paul is exhorting the majority of the strong believers in Thessalonica to provide support to those whose faith has been “shaken” and become “weak” (cf. Rom 4:19). This interpretation coheres well with the verb ἀντέχεσθαι, which may be seen as synonymous with στηρίζειν in 3:2. μακροθυμεῖτε πρὸς πάντας, “be patient toward all.” μακροθυμία, “patience or long-­suffering,” is rare in Greek literature, but it is a significant theological term in the LXX and later Jewish writings. God is repeatedly affirmed as “patient and full of mercy,” μακρόθυμος καὶ πολυέλεος, and thus his character of forgiving and saving his people is stressed (Exod 34:6; Num 14:18; Ps 103:8 [102:8 LXX]; Joel 2:13; etc.); and in the Wisdom literature human beings are required to be μακρόθυμος (Eccl 7:8–9), as it is a quality of wise people (Prov 14:29; 15:18; 16:32; 17:27; cf. Sir 5:11).44 For Paul also God is “long-­suffering” or “patient” (μακροθυμία; Rom 2:4; 9:22), and Christians should have this quality 38 39 40 41 42 43 44

Wanamaker, 198; Beale, 166; Witherington, 163. Green, 254. Best, 230; Holtz, 253. Marshall, 151. Frame, 198. Weima, 395. Cf. J. Horst, TDNT 4:374–79.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 466

7/12/23 11:29 AM

Explanation 467 or character as a fruit of the Spirit (Gal 5:22) and the first property of love (1 Cor 13:4 [using the verb]), and display it to one another and to all (cf. Eph 4:2; Col 1:11; 3:12–13; also Phil 4:5 [ἐπιεικές, “forbearance”]). Thus μακροθυμία is an essential Christian virtue. Fee compares μακροθυμία and ὑπομονή, which both are often translated “patience,” and appropriately remarks that while the latter has the sense of “endurance” in difficult situations, the former has the nuance of “forbearance” in difficult interpersonal relationships.45 Just as Paul summed up the two charges in vv. 12–13a with the charge “be at peace among yourselves” in v. 13b, so also he sums up the preceding three charges in this verse 14 with the charge “be patient toward all,”46 providing an instruction on the basic attitude with which the three preceding charges are to be carried out.47 However, it appears that Paul includes in “all” here all the members of the church beyond the three groups of people here named.48 The context (esp. vv. 19–20) suggests that the fellowship of the Thessalonian church is strained not only by the disorderly idleness of some members but also by divided opinions about such issues as charismatic manifestations and prophecy. So it is likely that Paul exhorts the readers to show μακροθυμία toward fellow believers with different opinions about some issues, as well as toward those whose problems and needs are specifically named.

Explanation See Explanation section below at end of commentary on 5:19–22.

C. A Basic Christian Principle of Interpersonal Relationships (5:15) Bibliography Engberg-­Pedersen, T. Paul and the Stoics. Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 2000. Hubbard, M. V. “Enemy Love in Paul: Probing the Engberg-­Pedersen and Thorsteinsson Thesis.” JSPL 6 (2016): 115–35. Kim, S. “ ‘Beloved, Never Avenge Yourselves, but Leave It to the Wrath of God’ (Rom 12:19; cf. 2 Thess 1:5–7): The Apostle Paul and lex talionis.” Pages 313–21 in PGTO. Piper, J. “Love Your Enemies”: Jesus’ Love Command in the Synoptic Gospels and the Early Christian Paraenesis. SNTSMS. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1979. Reiser, M. “Love of Enemies in the Context of Antiquity.” NTS 47 (2001): 411–27. Thompson, M. Clothed with Christ: The Example and Teaching of Jesus in Romans 12.1–15.13. JSNTSup 59. Sheffield: JSOT, 1991. Thorsteinsson, R. “Paul and Roman Stoicism: Romans 12 and Contemporary Stoic Ethics.” JSNT 29 (2006): 139–61. Wilson, W. T. Love without Pretense: Rom 12:9–21 and Hellenistic and Jewish Literature. WUNT 2/46. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1991. Yinger, K. L. “Romans 12:14–21 and Nonretaliation in Second Temple Judaism: Addressing Persecution within the Community.” CBQ 60

45 46 47 48

Fee, 211–12. Cf. Lightfoot, 80; Weima, 380, 389, 396. Cf. Fee, 211. Cf. Best, 232; Holtz, 254; Malherbe, 320; Weima, 396.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 467

7/12/23 11:29 AM

468

1 Thessalonians 5:15

(1998): 74–96. Zerbe, G. Non-­R etaliation in Early Church and New Testament Texts: Ethical Themes in Social Contexts. JSPSup 13. Sheffield: JSOT Press, 1993.

Translation See to it a that no one repays evil for evil to anyone, but at all times pursue what is good, both b for one another and for all.

15

Notes a. ὁρᾶτε μή τις . . . ἀποδῷ (v.l. ἀποδοῖ): μή with subjunctive would be sufficient to express the prohibition (cf. 2 Thess 2:3, μή τις ὑμᾶς ἐξαπατήσῃ, “let no one deceive you”); the preceding ὁρᾶτε (“see to it”) adds emphasis (cf. Matt 9:30). See BDF §§364.3; 370.4; 461.1. b. καί before εἰς ἀλλήλους is read by 30 ‫א‬2 B Ψ byz lat vg.st syrhcl; it is omitted by ‫ *א‬A D F G 1739 1881 pc lat vet vgcl syr pesh Ambst Spec.

Form/Structure/Setting See Form/Structure/Setting: General Introduction of the Whole Passage above concerning “3. Life Together in the Church (5:12–22).”

Comment 5:15 ὁρᾶτε μή τις κακὸν ἀντὶ κακοῦ τινι ἀποδῷ, ἀλλὰ πάντοτε τὸ ἀγαθὸν διώκετε, “See to it that no one repays to anyone evil for evil, but always pursue what is good.” Paul sometimes uses the formula βλέπετε μή + the aorist subjunctive to warn of committing a certain feared act (cf. BDF §364.3; §370.1; 1 Cor 8:9; 10:12; Gal 5:15; Col 2:8 [indicative]), but here he replaces βλέπετε with the synonymous ὁρᾶτε. This injunction presents the concrete way of carrying out the preceding exhortation (v. 14e): long-­suffering with all people means suppressing the natural urge to retaliate when wronged. But that is insufficient for Christians. So Paul adds the positive part of the verse: they are to make positive efforts to show acts of love “always,” even to adversaries. With this injunction Paul completes the ways of securing peace in the community (v. 13b). This command appears also in Rom 12:17 and 1 Pet 3:9 in almost identical wording, and in the context of Romans it is also presented for “liv[ing] peaceably with all” (Rom 12:18; cf. 1 Pet 3:11). So with both the negative and positive parts of the command Paul presents a basic Christian principle of interpersonal relationships for a peaceful community life,49 though still with its application to the concrete situation of the readers in view. ἀλλὰ πάντοτε τὸ ἀγαθὸν διώκετε [καὶ] εἰς ἀλλήλους καὶ εἰς πάντας, “but always pursue what is good both to one another and to all” (cf. Rom 12:17b, προνοούμενοι καλὰ ἐνώπιον πάντων ἀνθρώπων, “taking thought for what is good in the sight of all”). As the content of the exhortation is most noble, so is its 49 Cf. Best, 233; Marshall, 152; Fee, 212; Weima, 396.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 468

7/12/23 11:29 AM

Comment 469 language (“always,” “pursue,” and “both to one another and to all”) most emphatic and universal. Lightfoot suggests that τὸ ἀγαθόν is what is beneficial, whereas τὸ καλόν in v. 21 is that which is morally good, but it is doubtful if the distinction can be pressed.50 Here, it is not τὸ ἀγαθόν in the abstract that is meant, but that which is good and helpful to others (good deeds), even to enemies (as opposed to κακόν in the preceding clause); cf. Luke 6:27, καλῶς ποιεῖτε τοῖς μισοῦσιν ὑμᾶς, “do good to those who hate you” (cf. also Rom 2:10; 12:20). The command in this verse is formulated in terms of rejecting or reversing the ius talionis, the law of appropriate retaliation (“an eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth,” Exod 21:23–25; Lev 24:17–21; Deut 19:21; see comment on 2 Thess 1:6, where Paul applies that law to God’s last judgment). In the wisdom tradition of the OT and Judaism, there are commands that forbid retaliation (e.g., Lev 19:18; Prov 20:22; 24:29; cf. 25:21–22; Sir 28:1–7; 1QS 10.17–18; Jos. Asen. 23.9; 28.4; 29.3). Malherbe cites some of the Greco-­Roman texts in which philosophers also reject retaliation.51 Green also cites similar texts, and yet goes on to cite some other texts that sanction or even encourage vengeance.52 In the OT-­Jewish tradition (e.g., Prov 25:21–22 cited in Rom 12:20; T. Benj. 4.2–3; T. Gad 6.1–7; 1QS 10.17–18) and the Greco-­Roman tradition,53 there is also expressed the thought of returning evil with good.54 However, it seems unlikely that Paul, the former Jewish rabbinic student of “zeal” who violently persecuted Christians as transgressors of the law (Gal 1:13–14; Phil 3:5–6), developed only from those traditions his teachings of prohibiting retaliation and meeting evil with good—­even in relationship with those who are outside the Christian community.55 It is much easier to think that after his conversion, in light of the revelation of Christ as an event of God’s saving grace and of his personal experience of appropriation of that saving event (cf. his striking formulations about God’s love for sinners, his “enemies,” on the cross of Christ in, e.g., Rom 4:25; 5:6–11; 2 Cor 5:18–21; Gal 2:20; also 1 Cor 15:8–10)56 and probably also under the inspiration of Jesus’s teachings collected in the Sermon on the Mount/Plain (Matt 5:38–42, 43–48; Luke 6:27–36), he reflected on the OT-­Jewish tradition anew and developed 50 51 52 53

Lightfoot, 81, 86. Malherbe, 321. Green, 255–56. See the texts cited by Wolter, Römer, 302–3; cf. also Thorsteinsson, “Paul and Roman Stoicism,” 157. 54 But cf. also Reiser, “Love of Enemies,” 412–22, who argues that both in Hellenism and Judaism “Help one’s friends and harm one’s enemies” is actually the standard teaching, and that the texts that prohibit vengeance against enemies are rather limited, especially in the Greco-­Roman tradition, only to those of Socrates and some Roman Stoics, such as Musonius, Epictetus, Seneca, and Aurelius. 55 Pace Yinger, “Romans 12:14–21,” 95, and Wolter, Römer, 296. 56 Cf. Hubbard, “Enemy Love,” 130.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 469

7/12/23 11:29 AM

470

1 Thessalonians 5:15

his teachings for practice not only among fellow believers but also toward outsiders.57 [καὶ] εἰς ἀλλήλους καὶ εἰς πάντας, “both to one another and to all.” Christians’ love for one another is essential for the cohesion and peace of the church (the phrase εἰς ἀλλήλους seems to hark back to ἐν ἑαυτοῖς of v. 13b). From the preceding exhortations in vv. 12–14, we can infer that Paul has especially in view the interpersonal grievances that occur between the benefactor-­leaders and some members of the church, and even more critically between the disorderly idlers on the one hand and the leaders and other members of the church on the other, who have to admonish them. In such situations, not only those who stand on the receiving end of the admonitions but also those who stand on the giving end can feel hurt. In this difficult situation, they are to overcome the urge to retaliate and seek to show practical acts of love to those who have caused personal grievances. By adding the phrase καὶ εἰς πάντας to εἰς ἀλλήλους here, Paul extends the application of that command also to all humanity beyond the church community, and thereby he repeats the advice that he already gave in 3:12 (see comment ad loc). Clearly he has in view here the readers suffering from the harassment of the hostile unbelievers in Thessalonica (cf. 1:6; 2:2, 14–15, 3:1–5; 2 Thess 1:4–7). Vos thinks that here Paul is forbidding the readers staging retaliation against them through “some form of civic disturbance or political agitation,” such as an industrial strike and the preaching of the gospel in the deˉ mos of the city.58 But it is difficult to believe that with such retaliatory activities a small group of the recent converts in Thessalonica would risk the city authorities’ hostile intervention, which could threaten the very existence of their church.59 It seems more realistic to think that Paul has in view some Christians’ personal retaliatory acts against their non-­ Christian relatives or neighbors who are giving them a hard time for their new faith, retaliatory acts that do not amount to such a scale and gravity as Vos imagines. Paul is enjoining the readers not to retaliate but even to love such opponents. Yinger cites a series of Jewish texts that forbid retaliation and sometimes urge doing good to one’s adversary (only) among fellow Jews or within a sectarian community and then also claims that, in Rom 12:14–21, there is no allusion to Jesus’s teaching to “love your enemies.” He argues that in Rom 12:14–21, which contains parallels to our verse, Paul likewise exhorts

57

Cf. Marshall, 153; Holtz, 255; Fee, 212; Weima, 39; Schreiber, I:296; Piper, Love Your Enemies, 5–18, 63–64; Thompson, Clothed with Christ, 90–110; Wenham, Paul, 250–52, 260, who see echoes or influence of the Jesus tradition in Rom 12:14–21 and here; cf. also 1 Cor 4:12–13; 1 Pet 2:23; 3:9. But cf. Wilson, Love without Pretense, 165–71, who argues against this. 58 Vos, Church, 164. 59 Cf. Schreiber, I:307.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 470

7/12/23 11:29 AM

Explanation 471 the Roman Christians not to retaliate against adversaries but to love them, with a view only to the conflicts within the Christian community.60 Engberg-­ Pedersen and Thorsteinsson similarly insist that in Rom 12, unlike some Stoic moral philosophers, Paul does not actually issue the exhortation, “Love your enemies,” but limits application of neighbor love to fellow believers only.61 However, Hubbard counters them, asking what “love” is if the things exhorted to do for enemies in Rom 12:14, 17, and 20 are not “love” for them.62 Curiously, Engberg-­Pedersen himself seems to think that the things exhorted to be done within the community in Rom 12:3–8 (or in v. 8b) are summarily represented in terms of agape in Rom 12:9a.63 Similarly, Thorsteinsson also summarizes the things exhorted to do for enemies in Rom 12:19–21 in terms of “showing charity to (the) enemies.”64 Yinger also admits that in our verse, as well as in other places (1 Cor 4:12; Gal 6:10; 1 Thess 3:12), Paul does command Christians to love all people and to do good to them. But then he immediately adds a remark that marginalizes within Pauline ethics the place of love and nonretaliation toward outsiders of Christian community.65 He can do this only by reading Rom 12:14–21 unusually as concerning only inner-­ecclesial relationships and interpreting the “persecutors” and “enemies” there as referring only to persons within the Christian fellowship. However, even if Paul does not expound the themes of nonretaliation and love for all (including non-­Christian enemies) at length anywhere except Rom 12:14–21, they correspond closely to his understanding of the gospel (e.g., Rom 4:25; 5:6–11; 2 Cor 5:18–21; Gal 2:20) and also to the experiences of his conversion from a Judaism of “zeal” and his call to apostleship to the gentiles, whom the “zealous” Jews regarded as enemies (understandably in view of their centuries of suffering at the hands of gentiles). Therefore, the exhortations to practice nonretaliation and enemy love toward both insiders and outsiders of Christian fellowship are not to be marginalized within Pauline ethics.66

Explanation See Explanation section below at end of commentary on 5:19–22.

60 Yinger, “Romans 12:14–21,” 77–96. 61 Engberg- ­Pedersen, Paul and the Stoics, 269, 276, and Thorsteinsson, “Paul and Roman Stoicism,” 145–47. 62 Hubbard, “Enemy Love,” 128–29. 63 Engberg-­Pedersen, Paul and the Stoics, 268. Note also that he views v. 9a only in connection with vv. 3–8, but not also with vv. 9b–21 (265–66). 64 Thorsteinsson, “Paul and Roman Stoicism,” 147 (emphasis added). 65 Yinger, “Romans 12:14–21,” 95. 66 For a more detailed discussion, see Kim, “ ‘Beloved, Never Avenge Yourselves,’ ” in PGTO, 313–21.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 471

7/12/23 11:29 AM

472

1 Thessalonians 5:16–18

D. Basic Christian Piety (5:16–18) Bibliography Kim, S. “Paul’s Common Paraenesis (1 Thess 4–5; Phil 2–4; and Rom 12–13): The Correspondence between Romans 1:18–32 and 12:1–2, and the Unity of Romans 12–13.” TynBul 62 (2011): 109–39 (now pages 253–77 in PGTO). Martin, R. P. Worship in the Early Church. London: Marshall, Morgan & Scott, 1964.

Translation Rejoice at all times, pray constantly, 18 give thanks in everything, 16 17

for this is God’s will for you in Christ Jesus.

Form/Structure/Setting See Form/Structure/Setting: General Introduction of the Whole Passage above concerning “3. Life Together in the Church (5:12–22).” In 5:16–18 Paul gives a series of three brief commands for basic Christian piety, rounding off the series with a substantiating comment (v. 18b). Some commentators67 interpret these exhortations, as well as those in the following section (vv. 19–22), in the context of congregational worship. However, at least the first two of the three adverbs “always,” “incessantly,” and “in everything” accompanying the three commands respectively do not comport well with that interpretation. Rather, they strengthen the view that Paul regards the three activities commanded as belonging to the essence of a Christian’s personal piety,68 which they need to maintain and strengthen always, especially in situations of affliction.69 This impression is further confirmed by the fact that the exhortations here are rather similar to those in Rom 12:9–21 and Phil 4:4–6 (see the chart of parallels above on pp. 459–60), which hardly evoke a worship setting. Some commentators70 are impressed by the fact that all the imperatives in vv. 16–22 (that is, except the indicative sentence in v. 18b) contain a word that begins with π (cf. 1:2), as well as the fact that in each exhortation the verb stands at the end. But its suggested significance (e.g., order of church worship service) does not appear obvious. Verses 19–22 do appear to reflect the situation of the early church’s worship (see below),

67 68 69 70

E.g., Malherbe, 328; Fee, 214; Weima, 398; cf. Martin, Worship, 135–36. Cf. Best, 234. Cf. Marshall, 154. E.g., Martin, Worship, 135–36; Gaventa, 84; Malherbe, 328; Fee, 213.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 472

7/12/23 11:29 AM

Comment 473 but even the exhortations there (not to mention those in vv. 16–18) can hardly be regarded as “headings of a church service.”71

Comment 16 Πάντοτε χαίρετε, “rejoice at all times.” Together with righteousness and peace, “ joy” (χαρά) is a constitutive element of the blessings of the kingdom of God (Rom 14:17), and faithful believers will receive it when the kingdom of God fully comes at the parousia of the Lord Jesus Christ (cf. Matt 25:21, 23). Since that is promised in the gospel, we can already “rejoice” in the present, even amid afflictions, in the assured hope of obtaining it at the end-­time (Rom 12:12; 15:13; cf. also Rom 5:2–3: “we joyfully boast [καυχώμεθα] in the hope of [obtaining] the glory of God . . . in our afflictions”). Furthermore, we can actually enjoy the eschatological blessing of joy as it is proleptically made available by the Holy Spirit (Rom 14:17), albeit in the form of firstfruits (Rom 8:23). For the Lord Jesus Christ has already inaugurated God’s kingdom through his ministry, death, and resurrection (Rom 1:3–4; 1 Cor 15:23–28; Col 1:13–14; etc.). Therefore, joy is a fruit of the Spirit (Gal 5:22). The readers experienced this joy provided by the Spirit when they accepted the gospel in much affliction (1:6). Teaching thus that joy is a fruit (therefore a gift, Gabe) of the Spirit, Paul makes it also a “task” (Aufgabe) for Christians to have or enjoy it: “rejoice!” (Rom 12:12; Phil 2:18; 3:1; 4:4).72 Therefore, the exhortation is to be understood in terms of an urge for them to avail themselves of the saving grace of the Holy Spirit—­his protection, guidance, and empowering that would give them “ joy.” That Paul means this is suggested by the formula “in the Lord” added to the exhortation to “rejoice” in the Philippians parallel (Phil 4:4). Christians can and should rejoice “in the Lord” (Phil 3:1; 4:4, 10), that is, by drawing on the help of the Lord Jesus Christ who has overcome the power of evil and suffering—­the help that the Lord provides through his Spirit. Believers can draw on this help by praying for the Spirit of the Lord to work in and for them. Hence, this exhortation to “rejoice always” is accompanied by the one for constant prayer here and in the parallel Phil 4:4, 6. Paul enjoins the readers to maintain their rejoicing “at all times.” He does not mean that they should be cheerful and exuberant like a bubbling soda drink all the time but that they should maintain an affirmative and hopeful attitude under all circumstances, instead of succumbing to despondency, depression, or anxiety when facing adversity. Even when troubles continue despite fervent prayer, Paul means they can and should rejoice with the confident hope that the Lord Jesus Christ will consummate their salvation soon at his parousia (Rom 12:12;

71 Pace Martin, Worship, 136. 72 Cf. Holtz, 257.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 473

7/12/23 11:29 AM

474

1 Thessalonians 5:16–18

15:13; cf. Rom 5:2–3). This is no mere pious cliché, for Paul himself practices it (1 Thess 2:17–20; 3:1–10; cf. 2 Cor 6:10; Phil 2:17). 17 ἀδιαλείπτως προσεύχεσθε, “pray incessantly.” In view of the separate command for thanksgiving, petitionary prayer is intended here (cf. the fuller wording in Phil 4:6 and Eph 6:18). In the Philippians parallel, petitionary prayer is set as an antidote to “worrying” (Phil 4:6). Here also Paul probably has in view the anxiety that the readers have because of the persecution (1:6; 2:14–16; 3:3–5) and/or the eschatological concerns (4:1–18; 5:1–11). As their situation is such that they cannot help but worry, they are to turn to God in prayer and supplication. The parallel in Philippians seems to help us also understand the adverb ἀδιαλείπτως (“incessantly”) in the sense of praying for “everything” whenever “anything” causes anxiety. Paul does not mean that the readers are to pray nonstop through the whole day and through their whole life. Rather, just as he mentions the readers “unceasingly” (i.e., without fail) and gives thanks to God for them “unceasingly” (i.e., without fail) whenever he comes to pray in all his set prayer times (1:2; 2:13; see comment ad loc), they are to pray “unceasingly” (i.e., without fail) whenever anything causes anxiety in their heart. Of course, such a prayer life presupposes an attitude of persistence in praying as long as the anxious situation persists. Note the parallel exhortation in Rom 12:12: “persevere in prayer” (τῇ προσευχῇ προσκαρτεροῦντες); compare also Jesus’s teaching that his disciples “ought always to pray and never lose heart” (Luke 18:1). 18 ἐν παντὶ εὐχαριστεῖτε, “give thanks in everything.” As in the Philippians parallel (Phil 4:6), so here also Paul associates prayer with thanksgiving (cf. Col 4:2). The failure or refusal to give thanks to God the creator is a fundamental sin of fallen humanity (Rom 1:21). Therefore, Paul repeatedly urges believers, the redeemed children of God, to give thanks to God the creator and redeemer (Eph 5:4, 20; Phil 4:6; Col 1:12; 2:7; 3:15, 17; 4:2; cf. Rom 14:6; 1 Cor 14:16; 2 Cor 1:11; 4:15; 9:11–12).73 He gives his own example of thanksgiving while praying (1:2; 2:13; 3:9–10; cf. Rom 1:8; 1 Cor 1:4; etc.). Here, he urges the readers to give thanks to God ἐν παντί, “in everything,” which is to be taken in the sense of “in every circumstance” (cf. 2 Cor 9:8; Phil 4:12). Such a thanksgiving expresses belief in the sovereign God who in his perfect wisdom, love, and power lets “all things work together for good for those who love him” (Rom 8:28). τοῦτο γὰρ θέλημα θεοῦ ἐν Χριστῷ Ἰησοῦ εἰς ὑμᾶς, “for this is God’s will in Christ Jesus for you.” The phrase τοῦτο γὰρ θέλημα θεοῦ is a coda to all three foregoing commands (so most commentators), rather than to the last one only.74

73 See Kim, “Paul’s Common Paraenesis,” 124–25 (reprint in PGTO, 266), for the view that in Rom 12:1 Paul is exhorting his audience to offer their bodies as a thanksgiving sacrifice (‫)תודה‬. 74 So Malherbe, 330.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 474

7/12/23 11:29 AM

Explanation 475 Paul wraps those commands up with this indicative statement, providing a strong sanction for the readers’ fulfillment of them. The word order indicates that ἐν Χριστῷ Ἰησοῦ modifies θεοῦ rather than ὑμᾶς. Fulfillment of the commands is what God in Christ intends for his people.75 (See 4:3 with comment ad loc for the anarthrous θέλημα.) In 4:3 Paul has declared that the will of God is Christians’ sanctification. Now here he means that it is as much “God’s purpose and intention that Christians should live a life of joyfulness and thankfulness, expressed in prayer,” as that they should realize in their actual lives what they have been made by God, i.e., sanctification.76

Explanation See Explanation section below at end of commentary on 5:19–22.

E. Prophesying in Congregational Worship (5:19–22) Bibliography Breneman, J. E. “True and False Prophecy.” Pages 781–88 in DOTP. Robeck, C. M., Jr. “Prophecy, Prophesying.” Pages 755–62 in DPL.

Translation Do not quench the Spirit, do not despise prophetic utterances, 21 but a test everything, hold fast what is good, 22 keep away from everything that appears evil. 19

20

Notes a. δέ after πάντα is omitted by ‫ *א‬A 81 614 pm lat f* syr pesh Tert Did.

Form/Structure/Setting See Form/Structure/Setting: General Introduction of the Whole Passage above concerning “3. Life Together in the Church (5:12–22).” Like Fee,77 Weima thinks that this unit of five imperatives falls into two parts: “first, two negative commands (vv. 19–20), which warn against an outright rejection of Spirit-­inspired prophecy, and then three positive commands (vv. 21–22), which warn against an outright acceptance of prophecy.”78 Both Fee and Weima justify this analysis by pointing to the parallelism between the two parts: just as the meaning of the general injunction (v. 19: “do not quench

75 76 77 78

Marshall, 156. Cf. Marshall, 156 (The quoted sentence is Marshall’s). Fee, 217–18. Cf. Best, 237. Weima, 403.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 475

7/12/23 11:29 AM

476

1 Thessalonians 5:19–22

the Spirit”) is spelled out by a specific one (v. 20: “do not despise prophecies”), so also the meaning of the general injunction (v. 21a: “test all things”) is spelled out by two specific ones (vv. 21b, 22: “hold fast to the good; keep away from every form of evil”). But it is questionable whether the parallelism is really exact. It is also questionable whether Paul would find it necessary to explain the obvious meaning of the injunction of v. 21a by adding the two cola of vv. 21b, 22 (cf. 1 Cor 14:29, where he does not add such an explanation to the similar exhortation, “let the others distinguish/judge [διακρινέτωσαν] [the prophecies]”). It appears better to see that the first three injunctions (vv. 19–21a) form a triad with a μή . . . δέ (“not . . . but”) structure and that the two cola (vv. 21b, 22) are added in order to round off the whole unit by providing the basic principle of evaluating all the spiritual gifts, including prophecy. This analysis is supported by Paul’s practice of rounding off each unit of exhortations in our paraenetical section of 5:12–22 with a summary injunction or statement (cf. vv. 13b; 14e; 18b; see above the discussion on the structure of 5:12–22). Best sees the exhortations in this unit more as traditional and general than specifically relevant to the Thessalonian church.79 But from the fact that Paul discusses the problem of the gifts of the Spirit only in 1 Cor 12–14 and here, Marshall argues that Paul must have found a special reason in the Thessalonian church for issuing the commands.80 This view is borne out by a comparison of the list of the paraenesis in our passage with the parallel lists in Rom 12–13 and Phil 4, as we have seen (see Form/Structure/Setting: General Introduction of 5:12–22 above). Apparently the Thessalonian church was experiencing active manifestations of charismatic gifts, and some members were disdainful about them. In this situation, Paul wants neither to dampen the charismatic manifestations nor to see a serious situation of chaos and dispute developing. The fact that he does not discuss the question about charismatic activities here as extensively as in 1 Cor 12–14 suggests that he does not see the disturbance created by them as so serious.81 So his injunctions here may be seen more as an effort to prevent any disturbance by giving guidance for an orderly exercise of the spiritual gifts than to resolve one that is already taking place.82

Comment 19 τὸ πνεῦμα μὴ σβέννυτε, “Do not quench the Spirit.” It is doubtful if we should press the use of the present imperative with μή here and in v. 20 to mean that the recipients are being told to stop doing something they have

79 80 81 82

Best, 237. Marshall, 157. So also Wanamaker, 201–2; Fee, 217. Cf. Marshall, 157. Cf. Fee, 218–19.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 476

7/12/23 11:29 AM

Comment 477 already begun to do. Like the positive imperatives in vv. 16–18 and 21–22, the negative imperatives in vv. 19 and 20 indicate what they must habitually do (or refrain from doing). With the striking verb “quench,” Paul carries on the metaphor of fire for the Spirit or his activity (Matt 3:11//Luke 3:16; 12:49; Acts 2:3; Rom 12:11; 2 Tim 1:6). In Rom 12:11 (cf. 2 Tim 1:6), he gives the command in the positive form: “be aglow with the Spirit.” It is probable that with this general injunction here he refers to various manifestations or gifts of the Spirit (as in 1 Cor 12:4–11),83 although the following injunction makes it clear that he is focusing especially on prophesying.84 Perhaps there is some disagreement in the Thessalonian church between those who exercise prophecy and other gifts of the Spirit, and those who try to suppress them. The Spirit may be quenched when a person refuses to use the gift that he or she has received, or when others try to prevent him or her from using it. A good example of the former is Jeremiah’s attempt to speak no more in Yahweh’s name, when the word held back became, as he said, “a burning fire shut up in my bones” (Jer 20:9) that could not be quenched or controlled. An example of the latter is found in Amos 2:12, where the people of Israel are condemned because they “commanded the prophets, saying, ‘You shall not prophesy.’ ” Cf. Mic 2:6; also Tg. Neof. Num 11:28, where Joshua says to Moses regarding Eldad and Medad, “Take the Holy Spirit from them” (‫)מנע מנהון רוח קודׁשה‬. 20 προφητείας μὴ ἐξουθενεῖτε, “do not despise prophetic utterances.” Prophecy is a declaration of the word of the Lord through the inspiration of the Holy Spirit (cf. 1 Cor 14:29–33, 36).85 Therefore, it must be received seriously and not be ignored. Among the various gifts of the Spirit, Paul singles out prophetic utterances (note here the plural form προφητείας)86 because he especially values that gift as useful for “upbuilding and encouragement and consolation” of believers and thus for “upbuilding” of the church as a whole (1 Cor 14:1–4). Yet some members of the Thessalonian church are disputing about it. Paul’s strong word “despise” or “treat with contempt,” which matches the equally strong word “quench” in the preceding injunction, betrays his anxiety about their disdain of that spiritual gift. But what may be leading some members of the church to disdain it? Wanamaker conjectures that the patrons mentioned in vv. 12–13 are suppressing prophesying to prevent prophets from emerging as leaders in the church, rivaling their leadership.87 A less political conjecture may be that the patrons are concerned about the confusion that 83 E.g., Best, 238; Marshall, 157; Wanamaker, 202; Holtz, 259. 84 Cf. Malherbe, 331; Fee, 219; Weima, 405, who think that he has only prophesying in mind already here. 85 Cf. Robeck Jr., “Prophecy,” 755. 86 Cf. Wanamaker, 202; Malherbe, 332; Holtz, 259n665. 87 Wanamaker, 203.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 477

7/12/23 11:29 AM

478

1 Thessalonians 5:19–22

diverse prophetic utterances, including some questionable ones (hence the next injunction), are creating in the church. Since the eschatological sections of 4:13–18 and 5:1–11 show that the Thessalonians are intensely concerned about the parousia of the Lord, it appears a reasonable conjecture that the confusion and dispute have arisen mainly about prophecies concerning the day of the Lord, its timing, its effects, and so forth. Paul’s warning in 2 Thess 2:2 for the Thessalonians “not to be quickly shaken . . . or disturbed by a spirit-­ inspired utterance or a word” about the day of the Lord seems to confirm this conjecture.88 21 πάντα δὲ δοκιμάζετε, “but test everything” (neuter plural accusative rather than masculine singular accusative, “every person”). As this injunction is the positive counterpart to the two preceding negative injunctions, the πάντα must be understood within this context. Therefore, it cannot be seen as referring generally to all things concerning Christian life,89 but specifically to the manifestations or gifts of the Spirit, the subject matter of the two preceding negative injunctions. Some commentators see it as referring only to prophetic utterances.90 There is no doubt that Paul is here chiefly concerned with the testing of prophecies, although in view of the comprehensive command in v. 19, it appears more natural to think that in the comprehensive word πάντα he includes other manifestations or gifts of the Spirit as well.91 The apparently extraordinary phenomena that are perceived or claimed as miracles and visions need to be tested as much as prophecies, to see whether they really are of the Holy Spirit. For when they are false ones, they lead God’s people astray and harm them (cf. 1 Cor 14:29 for testing [διακρίνειν] prophetic utterances, and 1 Cor 12:10 for the gift of distinguishing [διάκρισις] the spirits behind apparently charismatic phenomena; cf. also 1 John 4:1 [δοκιμάζειν]). See Explanation below for the criteria for distinguishing genuine prophecy and other gifts of the Holy Spirit from false ones. τὸ καλὸν κατέχετε, “hold fast what is good.” This clause and the following one (v. 22) form a couplet affirming the two sides of a principle formulated in parallelism (κατέχετε . . . ἀπέχεσθε), just like the parallel injunctions in Rom 12:9b, c (ἀποστυγοῦντες τὸ πονηρόν, κολλώμενοι τῷ ἀγαθῷ; note that just like our couplet, this one from Romans also appears without the adversative particle δέ [“but”] in the second clause). As suggested above, the common paraenesis of general application (cf. Isa 1:16b–17a, “Cease to do evil, learn to do good” [LXX: παύσασθε ἀπὸ τῶν πονηριῶν ὐμῶν, μάθετε καλὸν ποιεῖν]) is here employed to round off the exhortations about the spiritual gifts in order to provide the basic principle of evaluating all the spiritual gifts, especially prophetic

88 89 90 91

Cf. Fee, 221; also Malherbe, 332. Pace Lightfoot, 84; Morris, 178. E.g, Marshall, 159; Malherbe, 333; Green, 264; Fee, 221; Weima, 408. Cf., e.g., Rigaux, 592; Best, 240; Wanamaker, 203.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 478

7/12/23 11:29 AM

Comment 479 utterances.92 Those that through the test are proved to be “good” (i.e., as genuinely of divine origin or inspiration and edifying believers and church community as a whole) should receive careful attention. 22 ἀπὸ παντὸς εἴδους πονηροῦ ἀπέχεσθε, “keep away from everything that appears evil.” Since ἀπέχεσθε is used as a “natural rhyming antonym” to κατέχετε in the preceding clause, rendering it with “keep away” brings out the contrast to the latter (“hold fast”) well in English.93 The noun εἶδος means “form, outward appearance,” but the sense of “species” or “kind” is also quite classical (cf. Thucydides, Hist. 2.50, τὸ εἶδος τῆς νόσου, “the nature of the disease”) and is attested far beyond the classical period (cf. Eusebius, Hist. eccl. 5.1.6, πᾶν εἶδος ὀνειδισμοῦ, “every kind of abuse”). So, taking the adjective πονηρός as a substantive corresponding to the καλός in the preceding clause, English versions have traditionally rendered our phrase παντὸς εἴδους πονηροῦ as “every form of evil”94 or “every kind of evil.”95 But it is also possible to treat the adjective πονηροῦ as attributive to εἴδους (rather than as a genitive dependent on it) and translate “keep away from every evil form/kind.” Fee argues for this construction, pointing to the absence of the article before πονηροῦ unlike the parallel τὸ καλόν, as well as to the fact that the word order of πᾶς + noun + adjective is frequent in the Pauline corpus, with the adjective always used attributively but never substantively (see esp. πᾶν ἔργον ἀγαθόν, “every good work”: 2 Cor 9:8; Col 1:10; 2 Thess 2:17; cf. Eph 4:29 [πᾶς λόγος σαπρός, “every evil talk”]; 2 Tim 4:18 [παντὸς ἔργου πονηροῦ, “every evil work”]).96 Now the question is why Paul does not neatly balance the preceding positive injunction (τὸ καλὸν κατέχετε) with the simple command ἀπὸ τοῦ πονηροῦ ἀπέχεσθε (“keep away from the evil”), but makes the contrast more complex by inserting παντὸς εἴδους. Malherbe and Weima consider the possibility that Paul is using the word εἶδος in the sense of “appearance” (cf. 2 Cor 5:7; see also Luke 3:22; 9:29; John 5:37) and commanding the readers to shun not only the things that are actually evil, but even things that appear to be evil.97 But saying that this interpretation makes the injunction a general ethical one rather than one that specifically addresses the issue of prophecy, which is the proper concern of the context, they prefer to take εἶδος in the sense of “form or kind” (Malherbe) or “kind” (Weima). Yet then how can we explain Paul’s use of the general or absolute form τὸ καλόν in the positive injunction? Weima explains the variation in the objects of the two injunctions in terms of Paul’s view of “ ‘the good’ as a singular entity” in contrast to “evil com[ing] in

92 93 94 95 96 97

Cf. Marshall, 159. Fee, 223; cf. Weima, 410. NASB; NET; NJB; NKJV; RSV; NRSV; cf. KJV: “all appearance of evil.” CEB; NAB; NIV. Fee, 223. Malherbe, 334; Weima, 410.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 479

7/12/23 11:29 AM

480

1 Thessalonians 5:19–22

a variety of different forms.”98 But it is not clear whether this explanation comports well with the insistence of Weima and some other commentators that the two injunctions of vv. 21b and 22 should be seen specifically in relation to testing prophetic utterances (v. 21a). What does it mean that Paul views “ ‘the good’ as a singular entity” in relation to testing prophetic utterances? If he means to exhort the readers to “keep away from every evil kind [of prophetic utterance],” would he not start exhorting them to “hold fast to the good kind [of prophetic utterance]” rather than simply and absolutely to “hold fast to the good” (cf. Phil 4:8, where Paul thinks of goodness appearing in various forms)? Would he not rather write this way: “hold fast to every good kind [of prophetic utterance], keep away from every evil [one]”? For us, it appears better to see that Paul rounds off the triad of vv. 19–21a with the two cola (vv. 21b, 22; see above) and applies his common paraenesis (see the comparison of the two cola with Rom 12:9b–­c above; cf. Rom 16:19) as the basic principle of evaluating prophetic utterances and other manifestations or gifts of the Spirit. This explains the use of the absolute τὸ καλόν in v. 21b (cf. τὸ ἀγαθόν, “what is good,” in Rom 12:9c; 16:19). The phrase πᾶν εἶδος πονηρόν in our v. 22 is to be seen as an elaboration on the absolute τὸ πονηρόν (“what is evil”), the normal counterpart to τὸ καλόν/ἀγαθόν (Rom 12:9b; cf. τὸ κακόν in Rom 16:19), and so to be rendered as “every evil appearance,” “everything that appears evil,” or “whatever appears evil.” Elaborating thus on τὸ πονηρόν of the common paraenesis while keeping τὸ καλόν intact, Paul seeks to stress that, in examining prophetic utterances and other manifestations or gifts of the Spirit, the readers are to hold fast to what is proved to be good but to keep away from “everything that appears evil,” even if it has not definitely been proved to be evil. Thus, with this elaboration Paul is urging the readers to be extra cautious in testing and accepting genuine prophecies and other spiritual manifestations or gifts.

Explanation (on 5:14–22) The Christian community is to be a society practicing mutual aid among its members in spiritual and material respects alike. Within its fellowship, those who need help should be given the help they need. A special responsibility in this regard rests on the leaders of the community, but it is a ministry in which all can have some share. The timid must be encouraged, the weak must be strengthened, those who stray must be led back to the right path, and all must be treated with patience—­especially those who make the greatest demands on the patience of their fellow Christians. Christian life is to be lived in an atmosphere of continuous joy, prayer, and thanksgiving. In the eyes of their neighbors, some early Christians had little enough ground for joy, especially when they were exposed to harassment 98 Weima, 411, citing Lightfoot, 86. Similarly Fee, 224; Best, 240; Weatherly, 188.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 480

7/12/23 11:29 AM



Explanation (on 5:14–22) 481

and social ostracism because of their faith. But they had inner resources that enabled them to rejoice, not merely despite those afflictions but because of them, like the Jerusalem apostles who, after a judicial flogging, left the council chamber “rejoicing that they were counted worthy to suffer dishonor for the name” (Acts 5:41). To “pray without ceasing” does not mean that every other activity must be dropped for the sake of prayer but that every activity must be carried on in a spirit of prayer, which is the spontaneous outcome of a sense of God’s presence. As for thanksgiving, that is the natural response of a heart conscious of the greatness of God’s grace. Members of such a fellowship will not be content to care for one another only; as the God whom they call Father is good to all, irrespective of their deserts, so must they be. The gift of prophecy—­the declaration of the mind of God in the power of the Spirit—­made an indispensable contribution to the church of NT days. The prophets in the local congregations may not have risen to the heights of the great OT prophets, but what they said was to be accepted as the will of God. This did not mean that all who called themselves prophets were to be acknowledged as such. The prophets and their prophecies were to be tested. In the OT, a prophecy that did not come true (Deut 18:21–22) or led God’s people astray from their allegiance and obedience to the living God (Deut 13:1–5) was a false prophecy (cf. Jer 23). In our passage, Paul does not provide any criterion for distinguishing genuine prophecy and other gifts of the Spirit from false ones or the “good” ones from the “evil” ones (vv. 21b–22). However, from his teachings in this letter and other letters, we may draw up some concrete criteria, which are broadly in line with the above OT criteria.99 (1) Bearing the “fruit of the Holy Spirit.” Since prophecy and other spiritual gifts are the gifts of the Holy Spirit and they are given by the Holy Spirit for us to serve God and his church, it is obvious that the first criterion for discerning their genuineness is whether they lead or enable us to bear the “fruit of the Holy Spirit,” that is, whether they strengthen our faith/faithfulness in/to God and help us to live a holy and righteous life and to love and serve others, etc. (cf. Gal 5:22–23), or whether they instead lead us to produce the “works of the flesh” (Gal 5:19–21). (2) Conformity to the lordship of Jesus Christ. In 1 Cor 12:3, Paul sets forth confession of Jesus’s lordship (κύριος Ἰησοῦς, “Jesus is Lord”) as the fundamental criterion for testing all the manifestations of the Spirit.100 This is so because the Holy Spirit inspiring prophecy and dispensing other gifts is the Spirit of the Lord Jesus Christ, God’s Son, as well as the Spirit of God the Father (Rom 8:9–10, 14–17; Gal 4:6). However, when Paul sets forth this criterion, he would not have in view just the formal act of a prophet or miracle worker calling 99 Cf. Weima, 407, for a similar discussion; also Fee, 221–22. 100 Pace Fee, 222n64.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 481

7/12/23 11:29 AM

482

1 Thessalonians 5:19–22

upon the name of the Lord Jesus for their performance. For surely he is familiar with the criticism of false prophets in the OT who, speaking in the Lord’s name (“Thus says the Lord”), declared their own message, which the Lord had not put into their mouth (e.g., Deut 18:20; Jer 23:16–39). The very fact that Paul commands here in our passage and in 1 Cor 14:29 to test all prophecies proves that he is well aware of some believers uttering false prophecies even while speaking in the Lord’s name (cf. also Matt 7:15–23). Therefore, we need to understand his criterion of confession of Jesus’s lordship not merely in the formal sense of appealing to the Lord Jesus’s name but more in the substantial sense of conformity to or manifestation of Jesus’s lordship or rule. It is to be understood in terms of whether a purported prophecy promotes our “obedience of faith” to the lordship of Jesus Christ and leads us to bear the “fruit of righteousness” (Phil 1:10) or the “fruit of the Holy Spirit,” or whether it instead weakens our “obedience of faith” to the Lord Jesus and leads us to bear the “works of the flesh” that is controlled by Satan (Gal 5:16–24). So this criterion is not different from the first one but is only the christological version of the first pneumatological criterion. Practically what this means is conformity to the gospel that Jesus and his apostles preached, to the various ethical teachings that Jesus taught in terms of God’s kingdom and that his apostles imparted “in the Lord” as his fully empowered agents (e.g., 1 Thess 4:1–12; 5:18), and to Scripture (the Old Testament), which provides a basis for their preaching and teaching. (For today’s believers, this criterion means conformity to the whole New Testament, which proclaims the gospel of the Lord Jesus Christ and imparts the demands of his lordship, and to its basis, the Old Testament.) (3) Edification of the church. Conforming to the lordship of Jesus Christ in the above sense, true prophecies naturally represent the values and ways that the Lord Jesus Christ requires of his people and thereby bring “edification and encouragement and consolation” to believers and build up the church (1 Cor 14:1–5), even leading unbelievers to confess their sins and worship God (1 Cor 14:24–25). Thus, true prophecies and other genuine gifts of the Spirit serve the “common good” of the church community (1 Cor 12:7) and build it up. So the question of edification of believers’ faith and the church as a holy and righteous community is a criterion for testing the genuineness of prophetic utterances. (4) Integrity. Commenting on 2:1–12 (esp. vv. 2–6) above, we saw Paul explaining his mission in Thessalonica in terms of a true prophet in contrast to the itinerant charlatan philosophers, whom he understands to fall in the category of false prophets (cf. 2 Cor 4:1–6). There he lists the marks of false prophets: their message originates from false doctrine and impure motives; they use deceptive methods; they seek to please human beings by flattering them with what they like to hear; they do all these to gain popularity and material benefits; and so on. Paul denounces all these evil motives and

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 482

7/12/23 11:29 AM



Explanation (on 5:14–22) 483

practices of the false prophets and lists the marks of his true apostleship or true prophethood. He is as one who was tested and approved (δεδοκιμάσμεθα, 2:4) by God to be entrusted with the gospel; he seeks to please God, his commissioner, constantly being conscious of his continuing test (δοκιμάζειν) of his heart (note well the repeated use of δοκιμάζειν in 2:4, the very verb used for “testing” prophecies in our present injunction); so he preaches the gospel with truthfulness, transparency, and courage even in afflictions; and he serves the Thessalonians humbly and affectionately after the example of the Lord Jesus’s self-­g iving service (Mark 10:45//Matt 20:28) rather than lording it over or exploiting them. In sum, he conducts himself in a holy, righteous, and blameless way toward them.101 Therefore, it appears reasonable to presume that, in commanding to “test” all prophecies, in our passage Paul bears in mind the contrast he made in 2:1–12 about his marks as a true prophet with those of a false prophet, stressing the divine “test” (δοκιμάζειν) about them. Of course, in our passage he is not talking about testing “professional” prophets but the prophetic utterances of some gifted Thessalonian believers. Even so, this criterion of integrity in motive, character, and conduct applies to the latter as well as to the former. It is desirable that all who are exposed to prophetic utterances should be able to recognize the truth when they hear it (note the direction in 1 Cor 14:29, “let two or three prophets speak, and let the others weigh [διακρινέτωσαν] what is said,” which suggests that the whole congregation takes part in the “testing”). However, even if the above (mutually related) criteria are applied to specific prophetic utterances, there can be disagreement among the Thessalonians as to their genuineness. In 1 Cor 12:10 Paul says that some believers are endowed with the spiritual gift of “the ability to distinguish between spirits” (διακρίσεις πνευμάτων). If there are some such people in the Thessalonian church, they naturally would take the lead in the communal evaluation of prophetic utterances to distinguish the true prophecy inspired by the Holy Spirit from the false one by a false or evil spirit. The patron-­leaders (προϊστάμενοι, 5:12) would also exercise leadership toward proper discernment and unity of mind. Of course, human reason is the means of testing all the prophecies and other manifestations of the Spirit according to the criteria here suggested. So the proper use of God’s gift of reason is a corrective to unrestrained enthusiasm.

101 Cf. also Breneman, “True and False Prophecy,” esp. 783–85.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 483

7/12/23 11:29 AM

4. Concluding Wish-­Prayer (5:23–24) Bibliography Lightfoot, J. B. Saint Paul’s Epistles to the Colossians and to Philemon. London: Macmillan, 1904. Weima, J. A. D. Neglected Endings: The Significance of the Pauline Letter Closings. JSNTSup 101. Sheffield: JSOT Press, 1994. —­—­— ­. Paul the Ancient Letter Writer: An Introduction to Epistolary Analysis. Grand Rapids: Baker, 2016. Wiles, G. P. Paul’s Intercessory Prayers. SNTSMS 24. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1974.

Translation Now may the God of peace himself sanctify you to be perfect, and may your spirit and soul and body be preserved a unblameably whole at the advent of our Lord b Jesus Christ. 24 He who calls you is faithful; he will do it. 23

Notes a. For τηρηθείη, D* reads τηρηθείην, plainly a scribal slip. b. Marcion reads καὶ σωτῆρος between κυρίου and ἡμῶν (“our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ”).

Form/Structure/Setting It is obvious that Paul is moving to the close of this letter. However, it is debated whether the wish-­prayer should be taken as the conclusion of the preceding paraenetic section1 or the beginning of the letter closing.2 Calling our wish-­prayer a “peace benediction,” Weima strongly argues for the latter view. He appeals to the epistolary conventions of Paul’s day that end a letter with a wish for peace for the recipient, as well as Paul’s practice of wishing peace and grace for his readers at the end of his letters (Rom 15:33; 16:20a; 2 Cor 13:11; Phil 4:9b; Gal 6:16; 2 Thess 3:16).3 Weima supplements this argument by claiming that this “peace benediction” and the following “grace benediction” (v. 28) form “an inverted, or chiastic, inclusio” with “grace and peace” of the letter opening (1:1).4 Certainly, this last element of the argument is quite attractive. However, of the letter-­closing passages where Weima claims to see a “peace benediction,”

1 2 3 4

E.g., Rigaux, 602; Holtz, 275; Fee, 225–26. Best, 242; Wanamaker, 205; Malherbe, 337; Richard, 284. Weima, 378–79, 415–16. Weima, 416. Cf. Malherbe, 337.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 484

7/12/23 11:29 AM

Form/Structure/Setting 485 Rom 16:20a, 2 Cor 13:11, and Phil 4:9b (cf. 4:7) are no benedictions but statements of assurance (with verbs in the indicative mood rather than the optative), and Phil 4:9b is not part of the letter closing (there is also a question whether Rom 15:33 should be seen as part of its letter closing; cf. Rom 15:13). In fact, Paul closes Philippians as well as 1 Corinthians, Colossians, and Philemon without a “peace benediction.” This uneven or unstable state of affairs with a “peace benediction” as part of the letter closing is contrasted with the “grace benediction,” which appears at the end of every letter of Paul in a fairly constant form (“the grace of our Lord Jesus Christ be with you”). Therefore, it is not right to assume a “peace benediction” form-­critically as a constant element of Paul’s letter closings like the “grace benediction.”5 We can say at most that “frequently near the end” in his letters Paul expresses his wish “in the form of a wish-­prayer or an assurance” for God’s peace to be granted to the recipients of the letters.6 Furthermore, unlike “peace benedictions” elsewhere, what Paul explicitly wishes for in our wish-­prayer is not peace but the perfect sanctification of the readers at the parousia of the Lord Jesus Christ, and the wish for peace is to be seen only implicitly in the opening designation of God as “the God of peace” (see below; contrast with 2 Thess 3:16: “may the Lord of peace himself give you peace at all times in all ways”). Therefore, it is more appropriate to call our wish-­prayer a “sanctification benediction” than a “peace benediction.” Surveying extensively how the themes of sanctification and assurance about the parousia of the Lord Jesus Christ in our wish-­prayer summarize the two major concerns expressed throughout our letter, Weima himself acknowledges that this feature makes our wish-­prayer “unique” as a “peace benediction,” and even notes that the “reference to Christ’s second coming is all the more striking because it does not occur in any other peace benediction.”7 Yet he explains away the differences of our wish-­prayer from a “peace benediction” just in terms of Paul “adapt[ing] and expand[ing] his typical closing peace benediction.”8 For us, it is tantamount to admitting that our wish-­prayer can be forced into the straitjacket of a “peace benediction” only with difficulty. So it appears rather far-­fetched to take our wish-­prayer together with the “grace benediction” (v. 28) and see them as forming an inclusio with “grace and peace” of 1:1. In fact, precisely the same main themes (perfect sanctification and Christ’s second coming), the same form (prayer beginning with the emphatic αὐτός and expressed by means of aorist optatives), and the same role played in their respective locations lead us to see our wish-­prayer in parallelism to the 5 6 7 8

Contra Weima, 415n4, pointing to his previous works, Neglected Endings, 77–155, and “Sincerely, Paul,” 307–45. See also his recent work, Ancient Letter Writer, 166–68. Bruce, 212. Weima, 418, 420; also idem, Ancient Letter Writer, 168–71. Weima, 421.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 485

7/12/23 11:29 AM

486

1 Thessalonians 5:23–24

wish-­prayer of 3:11–13. As the latter concludes the first part of the letter, the thanksgiving section (chs. 1–3), and opens up the second part, the paraenesis section (chs. 4–5), by summarily setting out the themes for it (see comment ad loc), our wish-­prayer here concludes the paraenesis section (chs. 4–5) by summarizing the themes that have been addressed in it and thereby concludes the whole letter. Thus, our wish-­prayer forms a pair or inclusio with the wish-­ prayer of 3:11–13. Hopefully, the exegesis below will substantiate this view. Verse 23 contains a chiasmus around two synonymous adjectives alliterated: A: ἁγιάσαι B: ὑμᾶς C: ὁλοτελεῖς C´: ὁλόκληρον B´: ὑμῶν τὸ πνεῦμα καὶ ἡ ψυχὴ καὶ τὸ σῶμα . . . A´: τηρηθείη.

Comment 23 Αὐτὸς δὲ ὁ θεός, “Now God himself.” The wish-­prayer is theologically quite significant but fraught with several exegetical problems. It opens with the same formula as the first wish-­prayer (3:11). For this formula, see comment on 3:11. Here prayer is directed to God alone, whereas in 3:11 it is directed to God the Father and the Lord Jesus. In 2 Thess 3:16 it is directed to “the Lord [Jesus Christ] himself.”9 For a discussion on the rationale for this variation, note the comments on 3:11 and its summary below. ὁ θεὸς τῆς εἰρήνης, “the God of peace,” as in Rom 15:33; 16:20; 1 Cor 14:33; 2 Cor 13:11; Phil 4:9 (cf. 2 Thess 3:16). A similar wish-­prayer in Rom 15:13 is introduced by ὁ . . . θεὸς τῆς ἐλπίδος (“the God of hope”). “Peace” is a comprehensive term for salvation (shalom), and as such it is the sum total of gospel blessings (cf. 1:1 with comment ad loc). The designation ὁ θεὸς τῆς εἰρήνης points to God as the source of them all. Since with all the wish-­prayers that contain this designation (Rom 15:33; 16:20; 2 Cor 13:11; cf. also 2 Thess 3:16) Paul prays for God to grant peace to the recipients of his letters, we may assume that with that designation he implicitly does that here too, although in our wish-­prayer he prays for God to perfect the sanctification of the Thessalonians rather than to grant them peace. This view is supported by 1 Cor 14:33 and Phil 4:9 as well as our v. 13b above. In Phil 4:2–9, Paul imparts several injunctions to the Philippian church that is apparently divided through a conflict between two women leaders, Euodia and Syntyche, while being exposed to persecution of the hostile forces in their city. He then issues the reassuring word that “[καί, consecutive: if you carry out my injunctions] 9

Cf. Fee, 226.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 486

7/12/23 11:29 AM

Comment 487 the God of peace will be with you” (Phil 4:9). In our comments on 1 Thess 5:12–15 above, we detected communal conflict in the Thessalonian church from Paul’s exhortations for the readers to respect the patron-­leaders, to admonish the disorderly idlers (cf. 4:11–12), and to not repay evil for evil but to do good to one another. With those conflicts in mind, Paul issues the injunction, “be at peace among yourselves” (5:13b), as well as other injunctions that are similar to those of Phil 4:2–9 (see the comparison chart above), and he comes to invoke “the God of peace” in our wish-­prayer as he does in the reassuring statement of Phil 4:9. So in view of these similarities between our text and Phil 4:2–9 both in context and content, it is reasonable to see that the designation “the God of peace” in our wish-­prayer implies Paul’s wish for God to grant the Thessalonian church peace, although he does not verbalize that wish as in Phil 4:9 and in the peace benedictions in his other letters. First Corinthians 14:33 further supports this view. There Paul directs the prophets in the Corinthian church to carry out their ministry in an orderly manner, grounding his directive on God being “not a God of confusion but of peace.” Since he does this in the context of imparting exhortations about prophecies, which are comparable to those of our vv. 19–22, it is reasonable to see that, with the designation “the God of peace” in our wish-­prayer, he expresses his wish for communal peace rather than confusion and dispute to result from prophetic utterances in the Thessalonian church as well as the other issues mentioned above. So far our interpretation of the designation “the God of peace” in our wish-­prayer in the light of our v. 13b, Phil 4:9, and 1 Cor 14:33 has led us to affirm an implicit wish for communal peace in the wish-­prayer. However, in Phil 4:2–9 Paul has in view not only the division and conflicts within the Philippian church but also the anxiety of the believers because of persecution (note esp. 4:6; cf. 1:27–30), and therefore he sees the need for the individual believers’ inner peace as well as communal peace among them. Hence, he says in Phil 4:7: “[καί, consecutive: if you carry out my injunctions] the peace of God that passes all understanding will guard your hearts and your minds.” Since in our 5:12–14 also Paul speaks about “the fainthearted” (probably referring to those who grieve about their relatives and friends who died before the Lord’s parousia [4:13–18] and those who are anxious about the date of the parousia [5:1–11]), as well as “the weak” (probably referring to those whose faith is shaken by persecutions [3:2–5]—­see comment on 5:14 above), the designation “the God of peace” in our wish-­prayer may implicitly include not only a wish for communal peace for the Thessalonian church but also one for its members’ inner peace. Paul’s individualizing in v. 23b seems to support this view. ἁγιάσαι ὑμᾶς ὁλοτελεῖς, καὶ ὁλόκληρον ὑμῶν τὸ πνεῦμα καὶ ἡ ψυχὴ καὶ τὸ σῶμα ἀμέμπτως . . . τηρηθείη, “may [God] sanctify you to be perfect, and may your spirit and soul and body be preserved unblameably whole.” The two phrases

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 487

7/12/23 11:29 AM

488

1 Thessalonians 5:23–24

need to be taken together, as they form a chiasmus (see Structure/Form/Setting above) and together re-­present the wish-­prayer of 3:12–13. Here, as there, the optatives (ἁγιάσαι, τηρηθείη) are in the aorist tense. The “complexive” aorist is regularly used in prayers.10 In direct prayers the aorist imperative is used; in a wish-­prayer the imperative is replaced by the optative, but the aorist remains. That is sufficient explanation of the aorist ἁγιάσαι, but it is clear from the context that, if ἁγιάζειν is a process, it is the completion of the process that is in view here, as in 3:13. The logical subject of the passive τηρηθείη is, of course, God: Paul is praying to God both to sanctify and preserve the readers. BDAG defines the two adjectives ὁλοτελής (here plural form ὁλοτελεῖς agreeing with the plural ὑμᾶς, “you”) and ὁλόκληρος (here neuter singular form ὁλόκληρον agreeing with τὸ πνεῦμα, but modifying the whole tripartite human person, “the spirit and the soul and the body,” seen as a unity) more or less synonymously as “pertaining to being complete” and “meeting a high standard” or “all expectations,” so that BDAG offers “in every way complete, quite perfect” for the former and “with integrity, whole, complete, undamaged, intact, blameless” for the latter.11 But like some English versions12 and commentators,13 BDAG takes ὁλοτελεῖς in our v. 23a adverbially (“may God make you completely holy in every way”), while taking ὁλόκληρον in v. 23b adjectivally (“may your spirit . . . be preserved complete or sound”). Other versions and commentators14 also take ὁλοτελεῖς adverbially and ὁλόκληρον as an adjective, but not properly as a predicative adjective but as an attributive adjective (“your whole spirit”). Most of the versions15 treat the adverb ἀμέμπτως as a predicative adjective (“your spirit . . . be preserved blameless”). Fee takes both adjectives adverbially, ὁλοτελεῖς in the sense of “totally (with emphasis on the wholeness)” and ὁλόκληρον in the sense of “in every possible expression of your humanity.”16 Thus there is a great deal of confusion in handling the two adjectives and the adverb ἀμέμπτως. However, both the mutual correspondence of the two adjectives within the chiastic structure of the two clauses and their synonymous character appear to demand that both words be taken in the same way and as they are, namely, as predicative adjectives, and that the adverb ἀμέμπτως should also be taken properly adverbially, as modifying the adjective ὁλόκληρον. In this connection, Lightfoot appears to point to the right direction.17 He notes first that ὁλοτελεῖς combines the senses of entirety and completion, so that here it is to be taken “as proleptic, in the sense of ὥστε ὁλοτελεῖς εἶναι, ‘may 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17

BDF §337. BDAG 703, 704. CEB; NASB; NET; RSV; NRSV. E.g., Holtz, 264; Wanamaker, 205–6. KJV; NIV; NKJV; cf. Best, 242; Malherbe, 337–38; Green, 266; Richard, 285; Weima, 418. CEB; KJV; NAB; NASB; NET; NIV; NJB; NKJV; NRSV; RSV. Fee, 227, 229. Lightfoot, 87–89.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 488

7/12/23 11:29 AM

Comment 489 [God] sanctify you so that ye be entire,’ in a qualitative rather than a quantitative sense.”18 He then says, “While ὁλόκληρος denotes the presence of all the parts, τέλειος signifies the full development, perfect growth of the whole.”19 Treating ὁλοτελεῖς and ὁλόκληρον in our passage as synonyms, this fine difference notwithstanding, Lightfoot interprets our v. 23b as “[may your spirit . . . ] be preserved entire” and understands the connection of the two clauses of our verse thus: “May God not only make you perfect, but keep you so.”20 Being consistent with this understanding of the two predicative adjectives, Lightfoot then properly takes the adverb ἀμέμπτως as defining ὁλόκληρον and strengthening ὁλόκληρον τηρηθείη, “be preserved entire beyond the reach of complaint”—­which we may rephrase as “be preserved unblameably whole or perfect” (see comment above on 3:13 for the adjectival form ἀμέμπτους there).21 Fee objects to Lightfoot’s interpretation, saying that “being entire” ill fits with “the ethical intent of ἁγιάσαι.”22 But this is to overlook the fact that ἁγιάσαι has not just an ethical meaning but also, even more fundamentally, a cultic meaning (see the next paragraph).23 Our translation of our verse above is in agreement with these insights of Lightfoot.24 But what is even more helpful of his exegesis of our verse is his note that both τέλειος and ὁλόκληρος are “applied especially to sacrifices”—­ unblemished, perfect sacrifices.25 To this note, Lightfoot simply adds a suggestion for comparison with Rom 12:1 but does not go on to consider the possible significance of Paul’s language here for understanding his doctrine of sanctification.26 However, in view of Paul’s use of the sacrificial terms for Christian life, as well as the cultic language for his ministry elsewhere (Rom 12:1; 15:15–16; Phil 2:14–17; Col 1:21–23, 28), it is highly likely that here he uses ὁλοτελής and ὁλόκληρος in a cultic sense. In Rom 15:16 Paul explains his apostleship in terms of being “a minister [λειτουργός] of Christ Jesus in the priestly service [ἱερουγοῦντα] of the gospel of God” and “offering the gentiles to God as a well-­pleasing sacrifice sanctified by the Holy Spirit” (ἡ προσφορὰ τῶν ἐθνῶν εὐπρόσδεκτος, ἡγιασμένη ἐν πνεύματι ἁγίῳ). This priestly service starts with his proclamation of the gospel and gentiles accepting it and confessing Jesus as Lord (Rom 10:9–10, 13), whereby they are “sanctified,” set apart from the 18 19 20 21 22 23

Lightfoot, 87. Cf. Marshall, 16. Lightfoot, 87, citing Trench, Synonyms, 74–77. Lightfoot, 87–88. Lightfoot, 89. Fee, 227n75. Cf. also Best, 244, and Marshall, 162, who consider a possible cultic connotation here (pace Holtz, 265). 24 Cf. also Marshall, 161–62. 25 Lightfoot, 87–88; note the examples he cites where ὁλόκληρος and παντελής are used together for sacrifice: Philo, Agriculture 130; Cherubim, 96; Plato, Tim. 44. Cf. Trench, Synonyms, 74–75. 26 Lightfoot, 88.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 489

7/12/23 11:29 AM

490

1 Thessalonians 5:23–24

world and consecrated to God, that is, made “saints,” at baptism (cf. 1 Cor 1:2; 6:11). Paul’s priestly service continues with teaching and exhorting them to grow in their sanctification by drawing on the sanctifying grace of the Holy Spirit (1 Thess 4:8) or by walking according to the Holy Spirit (Rom 8:1–17; Gal 5:16–25), and to “offer [παραστῆσαι] [their] bodies as a sacrifice [θυσία] living, holy, and well-­pleasing to God” by ceasing to be conformed to this world but by being transformed into the image of the Lord Jesus Christ (Rom 12:1–2; cf. 2 Cor 3:18; also Rom 8:29; 13:14; Col 3:9–10). The ultimate goal of Paul’s apostleship or priestly service is to see gentiles offered as perfect sacrifices to God at the parousia of the Lord Jesus Christ (cf. Phil 2:14–17: ἄμωμα; σπένδομαι ἐπὶ τῇ θυσίᾳ καὶ λειτουργίᾳ τῆς πίστεως ὑμῶν; esp. Col 1:21–23, 28, with cultic terms in v. 22 [and v. 28] that partly parallel those of Rom 12:1: παραστῆσαι ὑμᾶς ἁγίους καὶ ἀμώμους καὶ ἀνεγκλήτους κατενώπιον αὐτοῦ; cf., e.g., Exod 29:37–38; Lev 16:7).27 But this cannot be achieved merely by his teaching and exhortation and his converts’ efforts to obey them, but only with God’s aid. Hence both in 3:11–13 and here Paul prays for God to sanctify them so that they may be perfect sacrifices at the parousia of the Lord Jesus Christ.28 In our wish-­prayer, Paul simply prays for God to sanctify the readers so as to be perfect sacrifices and to preserve them as such at the parousia of the Lord Jesus Christ. But in the parallel wish-­prayer in 3:11–13, he addresses God the Father and the Lord Jesus together and petitions the Lord (Jesus) to do the actual work of sanctifying the readers (i.e., making them increase and abound in love) and supporting them to stand blameless in holiness at the last judgment before God at the parousia of the Lord Jesus. Then in 4:8 he indicates that God gives believers the Holy Spirit so that he may lead and enable them to live a holy life. Thus, Paul understands God’s sanctifying work within a Trinitarian framework (for more details, see Explanation on 3:11–13). If the sanctification of the Thessalonian believers started with the apostle Paul’s proclamation of “the gospel of God” (2:2) and their acceptance of it as “the word of God” (2:13), it was so only because God had predestined them to obtain salvation (5:9), elected them to be his people (1:4), and powerfully endorsed the preached gospel with his Holy Spirit (1:5). Paul’s apostolic gospel proclamation was God’s effective call conveyed through his fully empowered agent or mouthpiece (cf. Rom 15:18; 2 Cor 13:3) for the readers to come out of the world of Satan, idols, sin, and impurity and to enter into the kingdom

27 Cf. Lightfoot, Colossians, 160. 28 Note the use of the holiness or cultic language within the setting of the last judgment, i.e., the combination of the cultic (sanctification) and judicial (justification) categories, both in 3:11–13 and here; cf. also the combination of the cultic concept ἄμωμος/ἄμωμα and the judicial concept ἀνέγκλητος/ἄμεμπτος in Phil 2:15 and Col 1:22; hence the verb παρίστημι in Col 1:22, 28 could carry the cultic sense (see, e.g., Rom 12:1; Eph 5:26–27; cf. Lev 16:17; Deut 10:8; 18:5, 7; 21:5) as well as the judicial sense (e.g., Rom 14:10; 1 Cor 8:8; 2 Cor 4:14; 11:2); pace Lohse, Kolosser, 107–8.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 490

7/12/23 11:29 AM

Comment 491 of God and his holiness (1 Thess 2:12; 4:7; cf. Col 1:13–14). So they “turned to God from idols, to serve a living and true God” and have come to believe in his Son, who had died for their sins, has been raised to exercise God’s lordship, and is to come to consummate his redemption for them (1 Thess 1:9–10; cf. Rom 1:3–4; 1 Cor 15:23–28). Thus began God’s work of sanctification of the readers, their separation from the world, and their dedication to God. Then, through the commands of his apostle Paul, God continues to call them into “his own kingdom” (2:12), that is, continues to command them to obey his rule. Living in obedience to the rule of God is to follow or carry out his will, that they live a holy life (4:3), a life that conforms to the holy God’s character and purpose (cf. Lev 11:44–45; 19:2; 20:7–8, 26). It is to “walk in a manner worthy of God” (1 Thess 2:12). It includes maintaining sexual purity (4:3–7), loving fellow believers and others and doing good to all people (3:12; 4:9–12; 5:15), living a sober and disciplined life in faith and hope as “children of light” in contrast to “children of darkness” who are swayed by the spirit of this world (5:2–8), and so forth. This is the life that “pleases God” (4:1), which those who have been set apart from the world and consecrated to God should live. God helps them live such a life through the actual rule of his Son Jesus, the Lord (3:12–13), and the enabling power of his Holy Spirit (4:8). So Paul prays in 3:12–13 for the Lord Jesus to go on completing his work of sanctifying the readers by increasing their capacity to love others, “so that he may support (their) hearts to stand securely as blameless in holiness” at the last judgment before God at the parousia of the Lord Jesus. Here again he prays for God to complete his work of sanctifying their whole being and to preserve them as a perfectly sanctified sacrifice at the parousia of the Lord Jesus Christ. ὑμῶν τὸ πνεῦμα καὶ ἡ ψυχὴ καὶ τὸ σῶμα, “your spirit and soul and body.” This phrase in the second part of the prayer is an elaboration on ὑμᾶς of the first part, and they both correspond to “your heart” in 3:13. It is precarious to try to construct a tripartite doctrine of human nature on the juxtaposition of the three nouns, πνεῦμα, ψυχή, and σῶμα. The distinction between the bodily and spiritual aspects of human nature is easily made, but to make a comparable distinction between “spirit” and “soul” is forced. The distinction made by Paul between ψυχή and πνεῦμα in 1 Cor 15:45 has no bearing on the present passage: there the distinction lies between the “living person” (ψυχὴ ζῶσα) that the first Adam became at his creation (Gen 2:7), and the “life-­g iving spirit” (πνεῦμα ζῳοποιοῦν) that the second Adam has become in resurrection. It is the contrast between the two nouns in that sense that constitutes the contrast between the adjectives ψυχικός and πνευματικός in 1 Cor 15:44, 46 (ψυχικός means χοϊκός while πνευματικός means ἐπουράνιος). The contrast between ψυχικός and πνευματικός in 1 Cor 2:14–15 depends on the contrast between the soul of a human being and the Spirit of God: the understanding of the ψυχικὸς ἄνθρωπος is confined to the capacity of “the spirit of man [τὸ πνεῦμα

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 491

7/12/23 11:29 AM

492

1 Thessalonians 5:23–24

τοῦ ἀνθρώπου] within him” (l Cor 2:11), and without the indwelling Spirit of God he cannot appreciate the πνευματικά, the “things of God” (1 Cor 2:11, 13). In that context, πνεῦμα is practically synonymous with νοῦς (cf. 1 Cor 2:16). But the πνευματικὸς [ἄνθρωπος] can examine “all things,” including “spiritual things,” with the Spirit of God indwelling in him or her. Plato speaks of the mind as being in the soul, and the soul in the body (νοῦν μὲν ἐν ψυχῇ, ψυχὴν δὲ ἐν σώματι, Tim. 30B), but for him the νοῦς was part of the ψυχή. Marcus Aurelius distinguishes σῶμα, ψυχή, and νοῦς by saying that sensations belong to the body, impulses to the soul, and opinions to the mind (σώματος αἰσθήσεις, ψυχῆς ὁρμαί, νοῦ δόγματα, Med. 3.16). MM (s.v. ὀλόκληρος) quotes from the third-­century magic text P.Lond. 121, line 590, διαφύλασσέ μου τὸ σῶμα τὴν ψυχὴν ὁλόκληρον, “keep my body [and] my soul in sound health.” These are partial parallels to the present terminology, but throw little light on its details. Hence, against the interpretation for a trichotomic anthropology that is entertained in some Christian traditions, many recent commentators29 take the threefold formulation as a liturgical or rhetorical formula for the totality of a human being, rather like the fourfold formulation of “heart” (καρδία), “soul” (ψυχή), “mind” (διάνοια), and “strength” (ἰσχύς) of Mark 12:30 (amplifying the threefold “heart . . . soul, and . . . might” of Deut 6:5). So we may understand that by elaborating on “you” (ὑμᾶς) with the tripartite formula in our verse, Paul expresses his wish for a complete sanctification of the readers’ whole being and their preservation as an unblemished and unblameable whole (ὁλόκληρος) that is meet as a “holy well-­pleasing sacrifice” to God at the parousia of the Lord Jesus (cf. Rom 12:1). Fee and Weima think that Paul’s tripartite description has a specific, context-­determined purpose alongside the general intent to affirm the complete sanctification of believers. Weima thinks that with the tripartite formula Paul could be once more responding to the Thessalonians’ fears about the fate of the deceased fellow believers (4:13–18) and assuring them that the consummation of sanctification or salvation at the parousia of the Lord will involve the whole person and that therefore they will not suffer any disadvantage compared to those who will meet the Lord’s parousia while living.30 Fee considers Paul’s inclusion of the body in his vision of believers’ total sanctification in connection with his exhortations in 4:3–8 and sees Paul seeking here to teach the readers that “salvation in Christ includes sanctification of the body” and urging them to live therefore a holy life in the bodily sphere of life too.31 See Explanation below.

29 E.g., Best, 243–44; Marshall, 163; Malherbe, 339; Fee, 229–30; Weima, 422. 30 Weima, 422. 31 Fee, 230.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 492

7/12/23 11:29 AM

Comment 493 ἐν τῇ παρουσίᾳ τοῦ κυρίου ἡμῶν Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ, “at the advent of our Lord Jesus Christ,” as in the parallel wish-­prayer in 3:13 (except that Χριστοῦ is missing there and “with all his holy ones” is not added here). Paul’s prayer is that the Thessalonian believers may be preserved as a perfectly sanctified sacrifice until the parousia and be so presented to God at the parousia. Since in our prayer he addresses God to sanctify the readers, whereas in the prayer of 3:12–13 he addressed the Lord (Jesus) to do it, he does not repeat here the phrase “before God” of 3:13 and thereby weakens the motif of the last judgment; for the same reason he does not add the phrase “to God,” either, although he envisions the perfectly sanctified readers as an unblemished sacrifice offered to God. However, by employing ὁλοτελής, which further strengthens the more usual and already superlative word τέλειος with the prefix ὅλος, to pair with ὁλόκληρος (cf. τέλειοι καὶ ὁλόκληροι in Jas 1:4) and by strengthening ὁλόκληρος further with the modifying adverb ἀμέμπτως (a judicial concept, cf. Phil 3:6; 1 Thess 3:13; Heb 8:7; 1 Clem. 17.3), Paul not only stresses their being a perfectly sanctified sacrifice but also conveys the sense of their vindication as such at the last judgment (contrast 1 Thess 4:6; cf. Phil 2:14–17 for the combination of the cultic concept ἄμωμος with the judicial ἄμεμπτος; see the comment and explanation on 3:13 above for the combination of the categories of sanctification and justification).32 24 πιστὸς ὁ καλῶν ὑμᾶς, ὅς καὶ ποιήσει, “he who calls you is faithful, who indeed will do it.” As we have seen above, it is God who elected (1:4) and called the Thessalonian Christians into his kingdom and glory (2:12) and to sanctification (4:7) through the gospel preaching of his apostle, and who is still calling them constantly to obey his rule and live a holy life through his apostle’s teaching and exhortation (2:12, see comment ad loc). God also endowed them with the Holy Spirit at their baptism and is still giving them the Spirit to guide and enable them to live a holy life. (See comment on 4:8 above for use of the present participle διδόντα for God giving the Spirit, which is parallel to the use of the present participle καλῶν here and καλοῦντος in 2:12. By using these three present participles, Paul stresses the ongoing nature of both God’s demand and enabling for their sanctification; cf. the parallel passage 1 Cor 1:8–9.) This God is “faithful.” In order to emphasize this truth, Paul starts the sentence with the adjective πιστός at the head: “faithful is he who calls you.” It belongs to the fundamental affirmation of faith in the OT that God faithfully carries out his covenant commitments toward those whom he elected to be his holy people (cf. Deut 7:6–9; Isa 49:7). Therefore, Paul is confident that God will consummate his sanctifying work for the readers and preserve them blameless at the eschaton, as he prays. With this confession

32 Pace Schreiber, I:318, who denies here the context of the last judgment just as he denies it in the parallel passage 3:13.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 493

7/12/23 11:29 AM

494

1 Thessalonians 5:23–24

of faith, he assures both his readers (cf. esp. 4:13–5:11) and himself (cf. esp. 3:1–10), as he does in 1 Cor 1:8–9 (cf. 10:13). Compare also Phil 1:6, “he who began a good work in you will bring it to completion at [ἄχρι] the day of Jesus Christ,” and also Rom 8:30, “whom he called . . . them he also glorified,” where conformity to the image of Christ is the goal and climax of God’s faithful work of salvation—­predestination, call, justification, and glorification. So, having started our epistle with an affirmation of God’s election of the Thessalonian believers (1:4), Paul ends it with this strong note of assurance about God’s faithful preservation of them as his elect people to the eschaton.

Explanation The series of exhortations which began in 4:1 is rounded off with a prayer for the readers’ entire and final sanctification and preservation. It has been indicated already (4:8) that the Spirit of God, who is himself holy, is the sanctifier of those in whose lives he dwells. This sanctifying work, as is stated explicitly elsewhere in Paul’s letters, results in their being increasingly transformed into the likeness of Christ, “from one degree of glory to another,” until they are perfectly glorified with him at his advent (Rom 8:29–30; 2 Cor 3:18; Phil 3:20–21; Col 3:4). This attainment of perfect glory, which will make them perfect sacrifices offered to God, is the completion of their sanctification, which is prayed for here; it marks the climax of God’s purpose for his people, and he can be counted upon to accomplish his own purpose. Perhaps the most important point to observe in the much debated reference to the tripartite “spirit and soul and body” is the inclusion of the body in God’s saving and sanctifying purpose. This may have been difficult for Greeks to accept, in view of the depreciation of the body in several of their philosophical schools of thought, but Paul insists on it. Earlier in this letter, the Thessalonians have been taught to gain control over their bodies “in sanctification and honor” (4:4). So also the Corinthians are told that “the body is for the Lord,” it will be raised up by his power to a new order of existence, and here and now it is “a temple of the Holy Spirit.” So, says Paul, “glorify God in your body” (1 Cor 6:13–20).

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 494

7/12/23 11:29 AM

IV. Letter Closing (5:25–28) Bibliography Ellis, E. E. “Paul and His Co-­Workers.” NTS 17 (1970–71): 437–52. Harnack, A. von. “Das Problem des zweiten Thessalonicherbriefs.” SAB 31 (1910): 560–78.

Translation Pray also a for us, brothers and sisters. Greet all the brothers and sisters with a holy kiss. 27 I adjure b you by the Lord that this letter be read to all the c brothers and sisters. 28 The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ be with you.d 25 26

Notes a. καί (“also”) before περὶ ἡμῶν is omitted by ‫ א‬A D1 F G Ψ byz lat syr pesh copbo. b. For ἐνορκίζω, ‫ א‬D1 F G Ψ byz read ὁρκίζω. c. ἁγίοις (“holy”) is inserted before ἀδελφοῖς by 46(vid) ‫א‬2 A Ψ byz lat a vg syr copbo. d. ἀμήν is added by ‫ א‬A D1 Ψ byz lat a m vg syr copbo. It was the congregational response made when the letter closing was read in church services.

Form/Structure/Setting Paul now comes to close the letter with (a) a request for prayer, (b) the charge to greet all, (c) the charge that this letter be read to all members, and (d) a benediction. Among these, (d) is common in all Pauline letter closings; (b) is common to four other letters (Rom 16:16; 1 Cor 16:20; 2 Cor 13:12; Phil 4:21); and (c) is comparable to Col 4:16. Element (a) is also comparable to Rom 15:30, if the latter may be treated as part of the letter closing. The autograph certifying Pauline authorship, which is common in other letters (1 Cor 16:21; Gal 6:11; Col 4:18; 2 Thess 3:17; Phlm 19), is formally missing here, but it is implied in (c) (see comment below). If Tertius’s identification of himself as the amanuensis for Romans (16:22) makes Paul dispense with a certifying autograph in that letter, the cosending of our letter with his colleagues apparently makes him indicate his authorship of this letter in such an indirect way (see further comment on 2 Thess 3:17). For the same reason, Paul does not convey the separate greetings of Silvanus and Timothy to the Thessalonians. In the letter closing that Paul usually appends, along with the greetings of his coworkers he also provides greetings from the church of the place from where he writes the particular letter (Rom 16:21–23; 1 Cor 16:19–20; 2 Cor 13:13; Phil 4:21–22; Col 4:14). But here he does not do that. This suggests that

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 495

7/12/23 11:29 AM

496

1 Thessalonians 5:25–28

Paul wrote this letter soon after he and his colleagues arrived at Corinth and before they founded a proper church there that could send greetings to the Thessalonian church.1

Comment 25 Ἀδελφοί, προσεύχεσθε [καὶ] περὶ ἡμῶν, “Pray also for us, brothers and sisters.” Addressing the readers once more with this kinship term (for the fourteenth time in this letter), Paul now turns to closing the letter. Having prayed for the readers, he now invites them in their turn (καί) to pray for him and his coworkers. Such requests for prayer appear in a number of Pauline letters (though not always in letter closings): cf. Rom 15:30–32; 2 Cor 1:11; Eph 6:19–20; Col 4:3, 18; 2 Thess 3:1; see also Phil 1:19; Phlm 22). 26 Ἀσπάσασθε τοὺς ἀδελφοὺς πάντας ἐν φιλήματι ἁγίῳ, “Greet all the brothers and sisters with a holy kiss.” The formulation may give the impression that this charge is for a select group of the members of the church to greet the rest with a holy kiss (cf. Phil 4:21). But as in v. 14, this formulation reflects the understanding of the church as a whole as a superior entity standing over against its individual members.2 The practice of kissing to express love and respect was widespread in the ancient Near East and the Greco-­Roman world, and it is frequently attested in the OT and Second Temple Judaism and also in the NT (outside of the Pauline letters, see Mark 14:45; Luke 7:45; 15:20; 22:47; Acts 20:37).3 Hence Paul repeatedly issues the simple formulaic charge in Rom 16:16, 1 Cor 16:20, and 2 Cor 13:12, as well as in our verse, without any accompanying explanation. However, he makes his charges distinctive by asking Christians to greet one another with a “holy” kiss. Thereby he stresses the bond that unites Christians in a holy fellowship as the holy people of God, beyond mere friendship and goodwill that a kiss greeting signifies among the people outside the church. In 1 Pet 5:14 the same kiss is called the “kiss of love” (φίλημα ἀγάπης); later it was generally called the “kiss of peace” (cf. Hippolytus, Trad. ap. 4.1; 18.3; 22.6). The exchange of a kiss in the eucharistic setting as a sign of reconciliation is attested by Justin Martyr (ca. AD 150); it came after the prayers and before the bringing in of the bread and wine (1 Apol. 65.2). The work titled Apostolic Constitutions (early fourth century) lays it down that at the eucharist “the men are to give one another the kiss in the Lord [τὸ ἐν κυρίῳ φίλημα] and the women likewise to one another” (2.57.17 FFB). The direction that “all the brothers” (and sisters) should share in this greeting may be intentionally emphatic (more emphatic than the ἀλλήλους of Rom 16:16, 1 Cor 16:20, and 2 Cor 13:12; cf. the following charge with the same phrase 1 2 3

So Holtz, 270–71; Riesner, Early Period, 365. So Holtz, 271. Cf. G. Stählin, “φιλέω,” TDNT 9:118–46.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 496

7/12/23 11:29 AM

Comment 497 “all the brothers and sisters” [ἀδελφοί] in our v. 27); if there are tensions within the church—­tensions, say, between the patron-­leaders and the disorderly idlers or between the charismatics and their critics (cf. vv. 12–22)—­these should be resolved by the “holy kiss,” from which none was to be excluded. 27 Ἐνορκίζω ὑμᾶς τὸν κύριον ἀναγνωσθῆναι τὴν ἐπιστολὴν πᾶσιν τοῖς ἀδελφοῖς, “I adjure you by the Lord that the letter be read to all the brothers and sisters.” The sudden switch from the plural to the singular of the first person is significant; the most probable explanation is that Paul took over the pen at this point and added the adjuration and the concluding benediction with his own hand (cf. 2 Thess 3:17; also 1 Cor 16:21; Gal 6:11–18; Col 4:18). This is the opinion of most recent commentators. However, since in all these passages except Gal 6:11–18 Paul indicates that he writes the greeting [ἀσπασμός] in his own hand, it seems possible to think that Paul took over the pen already at v. 26 or even at v. 25.4 Earlier instances of Paul’s interposing something on his own account have come at 2:18 and 3:5 (see also 2 Thess 2:5 and especially 3:17, with comments ad loc). The “reading” implied here is public reading at a meeting of the whole church. Of all the Pauline letters, besides our verse, only Col 4:16 contains such an explicit charge for it. But in solemnity and insistence, the latter cannot be compared with the one here. The compound ἐνορκίζειν (BDAG 338: “to put someone under oath, adjure”), otherwise known only from a few inscriptions and from Josephus (Ant. 8.404), is a strengthened form of ὁρκίζειν (cf. Mark 5:7; Acts 19:13), bearing the same formal relation to it as the adjective ἔνορκος (“under oath”) bears to ὅρκος (“oath”); cf. also ἐξορκίζειν (Matt 26:63). The accusative τὸν κύριον is the person invoked in the oath (cf. τὸν θεόν, Mark 5:7; τὸν Ἰησοῦν, Acts 19:13; contrast κατὰ τοῦ θεοῦ τοῦ ζῶντος, Matt 26:63). Paul’s use of the adjuration need not imply that he was unaware of Jesus’s ban on the use of oaths by his followers (μὴ ὀμόσαι ὅλως, Matt 5:34); this is not a strengthening of a statement of his own by the invocation of the divine name (for which cf. 1 Thess 2:5; see also Rom 9:1; Gal 1:20; Phil 1:8) but an appeal to those addressed to act in this matter as responsible to the Lord himself. But why should Paul insist so solemnly that “the letter” (i.e., the letter now being concluded) should be read to “all the brothers and sisters”? It sounds very much as though he feared that some Thessalonian Christians might not have it communicated to them. It is difficult to accept von Harnack’s theory that the gentile and Jewish Christians of Thessalonica met separately and that, while the letter was sent to the gentile group, Paul wished to make sure that the Jewish group should read it too (see II.6 in the Introduction). Ellis suggests that the “brothers” here may be Paul’s coworkers, “especially those evangelizing a neighboring area,” who “might not hear a letter sent to the congregation and yet might have need of its 4

Cf. Dobschütz, 232.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 497

7/12/23 11:29 AM

498

1 Thessalonians 5:25–28

teachings for their own work.”5 It is more likely that such coworkers would be the first to receive the letter and that it would be their responsibility to make sure that it was read to “all the brothers and sisters.”6 For more suggestions for the possible reason, see the list in Malherbe,7 with his own suggestion that there were a number of house churches in Thessalonica and that Paul wanted to have this letter read to all of them. It is best, on the whole, to conclude that Paul wished to make sure that the ἄτακτοι (the disorderly idlers) heard the letter.8 There was much in it that would be especially beneficial for them, but if their ἀταξία included a tendency to absent themselves from meetings of the church (cf. Heb 10:25), they might not be present when the letter was read; the responsible leaders of the church should therefore see to it that they were made acquainted with its contents. Weima goes on to explicate how Paul’s fears are reflected in this strong charge, namely, that the unruly idlers, who defied his earlier admonition (4:11), might fail to heed the admonitions contained in this letter, and how in 2 Thess 3:6–15 he therefore deals with this problem at length yet again, with the conclusion: “If anyone does not obey our instruction in this letter, identify that person and have nothing to do with them.”9 28 Ἡ χάρις τοῦ κυρίου ἡμῶν Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ μεθ’ ὑμῶν, “The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ be with you.” The “grace” of the opening salutation (1:1) is caught up and repeated in this closing benediction. This is the basic epistolary benediction in the Pauline corpus, with which Paul commits his church to the Lord’s grace. It is variously expanded in one letter and another (in Col 4:18 it is abridged to ἡ χάρις μεθ’ ὑμῶν, “grace be with you”; cf. 2 Thess 3:18, where πάντων is added before ὑμῶν).

Explanation As Paul has prayed for the readers’ supreme and final blessing, so he requests them, on their part, to pray for him and his coworkers. The apostle and his companions were exposed to special dangers and trials and realized their constant need of prayer support. He invites the readers to kiss one another in token of their unity and love in the Lord Jesus Christ, taking care that no one be omitted. He urges them also to take care that no one be missed when this letter is read: all must hear its contents, not least those who are disposed to play truant (particularly the disorderly idlers). The letter would fail to achieve its purpose if such people did not get the message especially meant for them. Then, with a final benediction, the letter closes. 5 6 7 8 9

Ellis, “Paul and His Co-­Workers,” 451n1. Cf. Masson, ad loc, for the view that the primary recipients were the προϊστάμενοι. Malherbe, 344–45. Cf. also Richard, 291. So also Frame, 217; Weatherly, 194; Beale, 177; Green, 271–72; Fee, 233; Weima, 430. Weima, 430.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 498

7/12/23 11:29 AM

2 Thessalonians

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 499

7/12/23 11:29 AM

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 500

7/12/23 11:29 AM

I. Prescript (1:1–2) Translation Paul, Silvanus, and Timothy to the church of the Thessalonians a in God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ: 2grace to you and peace from God our b Father and the Lord Jesus Christ.

1

Notes a. After τῇ ἐκκλησίᾳ Θεσσαλονικέων, Harnack tentatively conjectured (on no textual evidence) that τῶν ἐκ τῆς περιτομῆς (“who are of the circumcision”) had fallen out (in line with his theory of the destination of 2 Thess; see Introduction). b. ἡμῶν is omitted after ἀπὸ θεοῦ πατρός by B D P 0111vid 33 1739 1881 pc. It is exhibited by the great majority of witnesses. It could have been added by assimilation to the other Pauline prescripts where the phrase occurs, but its omission might be accounted for by the wish not to repeat it after ἐν θεῷ πατρὶ ἡμῶν earlier in v. 1.

Form/Structure/Setting See comments on 1 Thess 1:1. The prescript of 2 Thessalonians differs from that of 1 Thessalonians by the addition of ἡμῶν after ἐν θεῷ πατρί and the addition of ἀπὸ θεοῦ πατρὸς [ἡμῶν] καὶ κυρίου Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ after χάρις ὑμῖν καὶ εἰρήνη. The latter addition brings the prescript into line with that of most other Pauline letters.

Comment 1 Παῦλος καὶ Σιλουανὸς καὶ Τιμόθεος, “Paul, Silvanus, and Timothy,” precisely as in 1 Thess 1:1 (see comment ad loc). Paul, Silvanus, and Timothy are the cosenders of this letter as well as of 1 Thessalonians. So throughout the letter, the first-­person plural pronoun (“we/our/us”) is used to indicate that fact, except at two places (2:5 and 3:17) where the first-­person singular pronoun (“I/my”) breaks in. We have observed the same pattern in the first letter, where within the overall “we” narrative the “I” narrative breaks in at 1 Thess 2:18; 3:5; 5:27. This phenomenon indicates that Paul is the chief author of both letters, and that writing them in the name of his missionary team, he switches to the first-­person singular when he has a special need to stress his own personal involvement in the contents of those few verses. τῇ ἐκκλησίᾳ Θεσσαλονικέων ἐν θεῷ πατρὶ ἡμῶν καὶ κυρίῳ Ἰησοῦ Χριστῷ, “to the church of the Thessalonians in God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ,” as in 1 Thess 1:1 (see comment ad loc), except that ἡμῶν, “our,” after πατρί, “Father,” present here, is lacking there. See comment on 1 Thess 1:1 for an

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 501

7/12/23 11:29 AM

502

2 Thessalonians 1:1–2

appreciation of this unusual formula about the Thessalonian church. With the addition of ἡμῶν after πατρί, Paul makes the fatherhood of God for the Thessalonian believers as well as for himself and his cosenders more personal than in 1 Thess 1:1.1 2 χάρις ὑμῖν καὶ εἰρήνη, “grace to you and peace,” as in 1 Thess 1:1 (see comment ad loc). The fuller χάρις ἔλεος εἰρήνη, “grace, mercy, peace” appears in 1 Tim 1:2; 2 Tim 1:2. ἀπὸ θεοῦ πατρὸς [ἡμῶν] καὶ κυρίου Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ, “from God [our] Father and the Lord Jesus Christ.” These words, habitually appended to χάρις ὑμῖν καὶ εἰρήνη in the Pauline letters (cf. Rom 1:7; 1 Cor 1:3; 2 Cor 1:2; Gal 1:3; Eph 1:2; Phil 1:2; Col 1:2, with the omission of καὶ κυρίου Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ; Phlm 3; also, with minor variations, 1 Tim 1:2; 2 Tim 1:2; Titus 1:4), are missing from 1 Thess 1:1 (for a possible stylistic reason, see comment ad loc). Some commentators2 see in the repetition or addition of the phrase “(from) God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ” in v. 2 a sign of 2 Thessalonians being a letter forged in imitation of 1 Thessalonians. But this is a strange view: Why would a forger seek to be accepted as Paul by writing differently in our verse from 1 Thess 1:1b, while imitating more or less exactly 1 Thess 1:1a in 2 Thess 1:1?3 In view of 2 Cor 1:1–2, Gal 1:1–4, Eph 1:2–3, and Col 1:1–3, it is more natural to take the repetition as part of Paul’s usual style.4 “God [our] Father and the Lord Jesus Christ” are named together as the source of “grace and peace,” but, with the binitarian formula, Paul no doubt means that God the Father is the origin or source of those blessings and the Lord Jesus Christ is the agent through whom he provides them (cf. 1 Cor 1:4; Gal 1:3–4).

Explanation Paul, Silvanus (Silas), and Timothy, the three missionaries who had first brought the gospel to Thessalonica and planted the church in that city, address the church a second time, in terms not unlike those in which they had greeted it at the beginning of their earlier letter. Along with the fact that this letter also deals with the three main issues—­the Thessalonian Christians’ suffering from the persecution of their non-­Christian environment, the question of the day of the Lord, and the problem of unruly idlers—­the fact that the three coauthors send this letter as they did 1 Thessalonians suggests that this letter was sent not so long after the first letter.5

1 2 3 4 5

Cf. Weima, 437–38. E.g., Trilling, 35; Richard, 297; Nicklas, 69. Cf. Fee, 245n7. Cf. Marshall, 168–69; Weima, 438–39. Cf. Fee, 243.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 502

7/12/23 11:29 AM

II. Part 1: Thanksgiving, Assurance, and Prayer (1:3–3:5) For an outline of this thanksgiving section, as well as its similarities and differences with the thanksgiving section of 1 Thess 1–3, see II.4.B of the Introduction. This part 1 falls into the following seven subsections, to which a transitional section is attached: 1:3–4: Thanksgiving for the readers’ steadfast faith despite persecution 1:5–10: Discourse: Assurance of salvation for the readers in contrast to the destruction of their persecutors at the parousia of the Lord Jesus Christ 1:11–12: Paul’s prayer report (cf. 1 Thess 3:11–13) 2:1–12: Discourse: Explanation about the coming of the day of the Lord and the fate of unbelievers 2:13–14: T hanksgiving renewed, giving the readers assurance of salvation 2:15: Summary exhortation—­the moral of 2:1–12 2:16–17: Paul’s wish-­prayer (cf. 1 Thess 3:11–13)—­begins transition to part 2 [3:1–5: Transition to part 2 extended with second wish-­prayer]

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 503

7/12/23 11:29 AM

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 504

7/12/23 11:29 AM

1. Thanksgiving (1:3–12) A. Thanksgiving (1:3–4) Bibliography Aus, R. D. “The Liturgical Background of the Necessity and Propriety of Giving Thanks according to 2 Thess 1:3.” JBL 92 (1973): 432–38. O’Brien, P. T. Introductory Thanksgivings in the Letters of Paul. NovTSup 49. Leiden: Brill, 1977. Schubert, P. Form and Function of the Pauline Thanksgivings. BZNW 20. Berlin: Töpelmann, 1939.

Translation We are bound to give thanks to God for you always, brothers and sisters, as is fitting, because your faith is growing abundantly and the mutual love of each one of you all for one another is increasing, 4so that we ourselves boast a of you in the churches of God for your endurance and faith in all your persecutions and the afflictions which b you are enduring.c 3

Notes a. For the compound ἐγκαυχᾶσθαι the simple καυχᾶσθαι is read by D Ψ byz, καυχήσασθαι by F G. b. αἷς is an instance of Attic attraction; it is attracted from the accusative ἅς (object of ἀνέχεσθε) into the dative case of its antecedent θλίψεσιν. c. For ἀνέχεσθε, B reads ἐνέχεσθε (“you are involved”).

Form/Structure/Setting The first two chapters of this letter are to be taken together, both as the thanksgiving section1 and the main part of this letter, like the first three chapters of 1 Thessalonians (see II.4.B of the Introduction). For the whole section of 1:3–2:15 is enclosed with the initial thanksgiving of 1:3–4 and its renewal at the close of the section, 2:13–15, and the accompanying discourse on God’s judgment at the parousia of the Lord Jesus (the main concern of this letter) in 1:5–10 is expanded in 2:1–12. As in the thanksgiving sections of Phil 1:3–11 and Col 1:3–14, Paul closes the initial thanksgiving of 1:3–10 here with a prayer report (vv. 11–12). The thanksgiving section preceding this prayer report (vv. 3–10) is composed of a long single sentence in Greek (cf. 1 Thess 1:2–5). But it is not difficult to recognize a transition from thanksgiving to a consoling discourse on God’s judgment at v. 5, which extends to v. 10.

1

Cf. Malherbe, 381.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 505

7/12/23 11:29 AM

506

2 Thessalonians 1:3–4

Comment 1:3 Εὐχαριστεῖν ὀφείλομεν τῷ θεῷ πάντοτε περὶ ὑμῶν, ἀδελφοί, καθὼς ἄξιόν ἐστιν, “We are bound to give thanks to God for you always, brothers and sisters, as is fitting.” This introductory thanksgiving (1:3–4) is generally similar to that of 1 Thess 1:2–3, though it has distinctive features, such as εὐχαριστεῖν ὀφείλομεν, “we are bound to give thanks,” instead of εὐχαριστοῦμεν, “we give thanks,” and the added clause καθὼς ἄξιόν ἐστιν, “as it is fitting.” A certain formality has been detected in this language, by contrast with the simpler form of thanksgiving in 1 Thess 1:2 (εὐχαριστοῦμεν τῷ θεῷ πάντοτε περὶ πάντων ὑμῶν, “we give thanks to God always for all of you”), which is usual in Pauline letters (cf. Rom 1:8; 1 Cor 1:4; Phil 1:3; Col 1:3; Phlm 4). And, sensing also less warmth in this form than in Paul’s usual form, some commentators see this unusual form of thanksgiving here and in 2:13 as an indication of the inauthenticity of 2 Thessalonians.2 However, showing that the same or similar phrases expressing “the necessity and propriety of giving thanks” were common in Jewish and Christian liturgical formulae (e.g., m. Pesahim 10:5; m. Berakhot 9:5; 1 Clem. 38.4; Barn. 5.3; 7.1), Aus suggests that with the ὀφείλομεν construction and the καθώς clause Paul reflects such liturgical turns of speech, as he does also in Phil 1:7 (καθώς ἐστιν δίκαιον . . . ; cf. also the words in the Anglican communion service: “It is very meet, right, and our bounden duty, that we should at all times, and in all places, give thanks unto thee, O Lord”).3 While recognizing in view of Phil 1:7 that Paul himself could have formulated the thanksgiving here in the common liturgical fashion, may we also entertain the possibility that for our letter Paul used Silvanus as the amanuensis, and Silvanus, one of the former leaders of the Jerusalem church (cf. Acts 15:22), turned the usual, simple thanksgiving formula dictated by Paul into the more liturgically sounding one?4 Anyway, if the thanksgiving formula here is recognized as reflecting a liturgical turn of speech, in it we need to sense not relative coolness but rather an emphatic force. The suggestion of coolness is sufficiently removed by the affectionate vocative ἀδελφοί here, which is employed right at the beginning of our letter, in the thanksgiving sentence itself (again in 2:13; cf. 1 Thess 1:4; 2:14; 3:7), unlike in other Pauline letters.5 The thanksgiving report is recalled in very similar words in 2:13. The ground of the thanksgiving is indicated by the causal ὅτι clause. The ὥστε clause of v. 4 points to the consequence of the apostles’ thankful joy; they boast about the Thessalonians’ faith and endurance under tribulation to all the churches with which they are currently in contact. Paul’s or his missionary 2 3 4 5

E.g., Dibelius, 40; Trilling, 43–44; Furnish, 132; Hoppe, II:70–71; Bailey, “Who,” 137. Aus, “Liturgical Background.” So also Dobschütz, 235; Marshall, 170; Richard, 301; Malherbe, 382–83. Cf. Best, 53, 58. Cf. Marshall, 170; Fee, 246.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 506

7/12/23 11:29 AM

Comment 507 team’s appreciation of the readers’ faith and love expressed here appears to be greater or more profuse than those that he expresses in his other letters (cf. Rom 1:8b; 1 Cor 1:5; Phil 1:5–6; Col 1:4–5; Phlm 5). So we may wonder whether that heightened appreciation is related to the heightening of their thanksgiving with the liturgical expressions here. ὅτι ὑπεραυξάνει ἡ πίστις ὑμῶν καὶ πλεονάζει ἡ ἀγάπη ἑνὸς ἑκάστου πάντων ὑμῶν εἰς ἀλλήλους, “because your faith is growing abundantly and the mutual love of each one of you all for one another is increasing.” Two of the three graces mentioned in the introductory thanksgiving of 1 Thess 1:3 find renewed mention here (cf. 1 Thess 3:6). As for the companion grace of hope, while the actual word ἐλπίς occurs in this letter only in 2:16, the ground of their hope—­their vindication at the advent of Christ—­is dealt with at length from v. 5 onward (see also comment on τῆς ὑπομονῆς ὑμῶν, v. 4). Note that, in mentioning the growth of the readers’ faith and the increase of their love as the ground for his thanksgiving to God, Paul makes his assumption clear that they are the results of God’s active grace in their lives (cf. v. 11 with comment ad loc). If time had elapsed since the sending of 1 Thessalonians to allow further news to reach the writers about the recipients’ spiritual health, this could account for the superlative language used here. The earlier report was encouraging; the latest news was even more encouraging. Then, their faith had been evident in action but suffered from certain deficiencies which required to be made good (1 Thess 1:3; 3:10); now, it was growing more and more. Then, the writers prayed that the Lord make the Thessalonians “increase” (πλεονάζειν) in love one to another (1 Thess 3:12); now, they thank God that this prayer has been answered. It is certainly more satisfactory to suppose that the same readers are being addressed as in 1 Thessalonians. The classical compound ὑπεραυξάνειν, “grow abundantly,” is not found elsewhere in the NT, but Paul is fond of compounds with ὑπερ-­ (cf. ὑπερεκπερισσοῦ, “superabundantly,” 1 Thess 3:10; 5:13; ὑπερπερισσεύειν, “superabound,” Rom 5:20; 2 Cor 7:4). (For εἰς ἀλλήλους, “for one another,” cf. 1 Thess 3:12; 5:15.) The emphatic ἑνὸς ἑκάστου πάντων ὑμῶν, “each one of all of you” (more emphatic than ἕνα ἕκαστον ὑμῶν, “each one of you,” 1 Thess 2:11), makes one wonder about the τινας . . . ἐν ὑμῖν, “some . . . among you” of 2 Thess 3:11, who were not conspicuous for Christian faith and love; it can probably be assumed that these formed an uncharacteristic minority, whose waywardness, though regrettable, did not detract from the satisfaction with which the community as a whole was viewed. Nevertheless, with this emphatic praise Paul means also to discreetly remind the unruly idlers of their duty to do their part in the work of loving one another (as he did with his teaching on “sibling love” in 1 Thess 4:9–12 [see comment ad loc]) and thus implicitly to announce the subject matter of his later strong exhortation in this letter at 3:6–15.6 6

Cf. Fee, 249.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 507

7/12/23 11:29 AM

508

2 Thessalonians 1:3–4

4 ὥστε αὐτοὺς ἡμᾶς ἐν ὑμῖν ἐγκαυχᾶσθαι, “so that we ourselves boast of you.” This is the only NT instance of the late compound ἐγκαυχᾶσθαι (found four times in the Greek OT: Pss 52:1 [51:3 LXX]; 74:4 [73:4]; 97:7 [96:7]; 106:47 [105:47]), but the simple καυχᾶσθαι (the ground of boasting being indicated by ἐν, ὑπέρ, or ἐπί) is common in Pauline letters, not least where the apostle boasts to others about his converts (cf. 2 Cor 7:14; 9:2). Apparently, with the compound form ἐγκαυχᾶσθαι, as well as the third-­person pronoun αὐτούς placed at the top of the sentence, Paul seeks to carry on the emphasis that he started to lay with the two clauses in the preceding v. 3b.7 Some commentators8 take “we ourselves” here simply as an emphatic way of expressing the writer’s strong sentiment. However, we may take it in analogy to the series of “they themselves” (1 Thess 1:9), “you yourselves” (1 Thess 2:1) and “we also” (1 Thess 2:13) found in the earlier letter.9 Having heard earlier that some Christians in (or from) the churches of Macedonia, Achaia, and elsewhere—­ the αὐτοί (“they themselves”) of 1 Thess 1:9—were praising his successful mission and the Thessalonians’ wonderful conversion, Paul here in our verse may be hearing these others now praising the Thessalonians’ progress in Christian life. He and his missionary colleagues (“we ourselves”) not only join in their praise of them for their extraordinary endurance and faith in severe afflictions, but also “boast” of them as a fine example of his successful missionary fruit. ἐν ταῖς ἐκκλησίαις τοῦ θεοῦ, “in the churches of God,” especially here those in Achaia (as Paul is writing this letter in Corinth, but he could also have in mind the churches in other provinces with whose members he has had contact). Reference has been made already to “the churches of God” (1 Thess 2:14), but those were the Judean churches, comprising the mother church of Jerusalem and her daughter churches, formed either by evangelization or by dispersion. It is primarily the Jerusalem church that is meant by “the church of God” that Paul in his earlier days persecuted (1 Cor 15:9; Gal 1:13; cf. Phil 3:6). But now, with the advance of the gospel, other “churches of God” have come into being—­especially, from Paul’s point of view, what he calls “the churches of the gentiles” (Rom 16:4). The believers in Corinth, for example, constitute “the church of God which is at Corinth” (1 Cor 1:2; 2 Cor 1:1; cf. 1 Cor 10:32; 11:22). The sum total of such local churches makes up “the churches of God” in the sense intended here (cf. 1 Cor 11:16); they are also called “the churches of Christ” (Rom 16:16) or “the churches of the saints” (1 Cor 14:33). Mention is made of the church (singular) of a specified city (like Thessalonica) or the churches (plural) of a specified province (like Macedonia, 2 Cor 8:1). ὑπὲρ τῆς ὑπομονῆς ὑμῶν καὶ πίστεως, “for your endurance and faith.” Whereas 7 8 9

Cf. Malherbe, 385; Weima, 454–55. E.g., Green, 281; Weima, 455. See II.3.A. of the Introduction and also the introduction to 1 Thess 2:1–16 (p. 186) above.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 508

7/12/23 11:29 AM

Comment 509 the “faith” of v. 3 is general, here the reference is more particularly to the aspect of faith (so chiefly “trust”) that enables them to remain steadfast under persecution and other forms of trial. The ὑπομονή is the “endurance of hope” mentioned in 1 Thess 1:3; indeed, it might be said that the present mention of ὑπομονή compensates for the lack of reference to hope alongside the faith and love of v. 3. Since faith engenders hope and so enables believers to endure trials and afflictions, and since faith has already been mentioned in the preceding clause (v. 3b), it may have perhaps been more natural for Paul to write the hendiadys as “your faith and endurance” here. But he mentions “endurance” ahead of “faith.” Thereby he apparently reveals where his focus in this verse lies. But if the readers’ “endurance” in persecutions and afflictions is his main concern here, why does he add “faith” in this manner, forming such an unusual pair “endurance and faith” (cf. Rev 13:10) and even breaking the more natural connection of “your endurance” with “in all your persecutions . . .”? It appears that, while with the forward positioning of “endurance” he expresses his main concern here, with the addition (or repetition, v. 3b) of “faith” he reveals his appreciation of faith as foundational for Christian existence. Clearly his stress on faith in vv. 3–4 here is to be taken together with that in the subsequent vv. 10 and 11, where he makes it the decisive factor at the just judgment of God for the different fates of the readers who believe in the gospel on the one hand and their persecutors who reject it on the other (v. 8; cf. 2:11–13). ἐν πᾶσιν τοῖς διωγμοῖς ὑμῶν καὶ ταῖς θλίψεσιν αἷς ἀνέχεσθε, “in all your persecutions and the afflictions which you are enduring.” Compare 1 Thess 1:6 (ἐν θλίψει πολλῇ, “in much affliction”); 2:14 (τὰ αὐτὰ ἐπάθετε, “you suffered the same things”); 3:3–5, 7. Despite the aorist ἐπάθετε (“you suffered”) in 1 Thess 2:14, it is not clear that the afflictions of 1 Thessalonians belong to the (recent) past in contrast to the present afflictions of 2 Thessalonians—­a point sometimes made in favor of dating 2 Thessalonians before 1 Thessalonians (see comment on 1 Thess 2:14). The persecution of the Thessalonian Christians may have been less severe at some times than at others, but it was still going on at the time of Timothy’s visit (1 Thess 3:3) and had not ceased when 2 Thessalonians was written. Wanamaker objects to this line of thought, arguing that, although at the time of his dispatching Timothy to Thessalonica Paul might have believed that the persecution of the believers there was still ongoing, it could have ceased during the period between Timothy’s mission and the writing of 1 Thessalonians on his return.10 But this is no cogent argument for taking the aorist ἐπάθετε in 1 Thess 2:14 as evidence for the view that “1 Thessalonians was written at a later time [than 2 Thessalonians] when the persecutions were

10 Wanamaker, 219.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 509

7/12/23 11:29 AM

510

2 Thessalonians 1:3–4

a thing of the past.”11 To take the ἐπάθετε thus, we need evidence that Paul came to know that after Timothy’s return the persecution of Christians had ceased in Thessalonica. But Wanamaker provides no such evidence. In fact, the overall impression of 1 Thessalonians is definitely against such a speculation. For, had Paul known about the cessation of the persecution of the believers in Thessalonica at the time of writing that letter, surely he would have added at least a word of rejoicing about it in 1 Thess 3. Above, commenting on 1 Thess 2:14, we have already suggested that, even while being very anxious about the ongoing persecution in Thessalonica that may shake the readers’ faith (1 Thess 3:1–4), Paul uses the aorist ἐπάθετε in 1 Thess 2:14 because he is talking about the persecution that they had to suffer at the time of their accepting the gospel, that is, at the time of their conversion (1 Thess 1:6). So it is much more reasonable to think that the persecution of the Thessalonian Christians by their compatriots continued from the time of their conversion, through the period of Timothy’s mission and the writing of 1 Thessalonians, and right up to the time of the writing of this letter. Paul’s concentration in this letter on comforting them with the assured hope of eschatological salvation suggests that the problem has actually become much more serious than at the time of writing 1 Thessalonians. This is already suggested in v. 4 by the emphatic combination of the more or less synonymous διωγμοί (“persecutions”) and θλίψεις (“afflictions,” a broader concept that includes other troubles as well as persecution), the modification of them with the adjective πᾶσιν (“all”) in this verse, and the addition of the relative clause αἷς ἀνέχεσθε (“which you are enduring”) that reinforces the preceding substantive ὑπομονή (“endurance”).12

Explanation In 1 Thess 1–3 Paul gave thanks to God chiefly for the Thessalonians coming to joyfully believe in the gospel despite persecutions and celebrated that fact with the churches of Macedonia and Achaia (1 Thess 1:2–10). Here, he gives thanks to God for their growing faith in God and increasing mutual love within the church, and he celebrates their endurance of the worsening persecutions by their steadfast faith. In 1 Thess 1:6–7 he said that, by “accepting the gospel in much affliction with joy of the Holy Spirit,” the Thessalonians “became an example to all the believers in Macedonia and in Achaia.” Now, here in our v. 4, he is saying that he is boasting of the Thessalonians’ endurance of persecutions by faith among those churches, no doubt in the hope that those churches would emulate them. This comparison of the initial thanksgivings in the two letters already suggests that their canonical order is the order in which they were written. 11 Wanamaker, 219. 12 Cf. Weima, 457.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 510

7/12/23 11:29 AM

Bibliography 511 In these two verses of thanksgiving, we have noted that time and again Paul formulates his words and phrases in an emphatic way so as to heighten the tone of his thanksgiving to God: the liturgical form of “we are bound to give thanks to God . . . as it is fitting”; the unusual placement of the affectionate vocative “brothers and sisters” right within the sentence of thanksgiving; the compound form of ὑπεραυξάνει (“grow abundantly”); the readers’ mutual love exaggerated almost to the degree of redundancy (“the love of each one of all of you for one another”); the emphatic “we ourselves” placed at the fronted position of a sentence; the compound form of boasting, ἐγκαυχᾶσθαι; the emphatic phrase “all your persecutions and afflictions”; and the (almost redundant) addition of the relative clause “which you are enduring.” Behind this emphatic language we may sense Paul’s great anxiety about the possible negative impact of the continuing persecutions on the Thessalonian believers’ faith and communal life (cf. 1 Thess 3:1–10). So in offering thanksgiving to God with such language, he seeks also to encourage them to remain steadfast in their faith and to endure the afflictions, everyone doing his or her part in building up the community of mutual love. Seeing all these, one wonders how one can think that this thanksgiving lacks the warmth of tone that the thanksgiving of 1 Thess 1 has. On the contrary, we should appreciate the extent to which Paul goes here to express his warm appreciation of the readers’ exemplary faith in the most difficult of circumstances.

B. The Just Judgment of God (1:5–10) Bibliography Bassler, J. “The Enigmatic Sign: 2 Thessalonians 1:5.” CBQ 46 (1984): 496–510. Kim, S. Justification and God’s Kingdom. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2018. —­—­—­. “Paul and Violence.” ExAud 34 (2018): 67–89. Reprint in pages 399–421 in PGTO. —­—­—­. “Paul’s Doctrine of Justification in 2 Thessalonians 1–2.” Bib 102 (2021): 78–96. Revised version in pages 279–95 in PGTO. Rainbow, O. A. “Justification according to Paul’s Thessalonian Correspondence.” BBR 19 (2009): 249–74. Travis, S. H. Christ and the Judgement of God: The Limits of Divine Retribution in New Testament Thought. 2nd ed. Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 2009.

Translation This is evidence of God’s just judgment, so that you would be counted worthy of the kingdom of God, for which you too are suffering; 6since it is a just thing in God’s sight to repay 5

with affliction to those who afflict you 7 and with rest with us to you who are afflicted, at the revelation of the Lord Jesus from heaven with his mighty angels,a 8 in flaming fire,b meting out c vengeance to those

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 511

7/12/23 11:29 AM

512

2 Thessalonians 1:5–10 who do not know God, and who do not obey the gospel of our Lord Jesus. 9 They will pay the penalty of eternal destruction d away from the presence of the Lord and from the glory of his power, 10 when he comes to be glorified among his holy ones and to be marveled at by all who have believed e (because you believed our testimony to you),f on that day.

Notes a. After μετ’ ἀγγέλων δυνάμεως αὐτοῦ (qualifying genitive) καί is added by F G latb Iren Tert. b. ἐν πυρὶ φλογός ‫ א‬A 0111 byz latd m syrhcl.mg Ambst; ἐν φλογὶ πυρός is read by B D F G Ψ 2464 pc lat a vg syr cop Iren Tert. c. For διδόντος, the nominative διδούς is read by D* F G Ψ pc latb vg.cod. d. For ὄλεθρον, the adjective ὀλέθριον (agreeing with δίκην) is read by A 33 pc Mcion. The genitive ὀλέθρου is read by latb d Iren (“poenas . . . interitus aeternas”). e. πιστεύσασιν, for which the present πιστεύουσιν is read by Ψ 33 630 2464 pc latt syr pesh copsa bo.pt Irenpt. f. For ἐπιστεύθη, 104 pc read ἐπιστώθη (“was entrusted”).

d

Form/Structure/Setting Nicklas points out that the proem of this letter lacks concrete references to the author’s relationship with the recipients and takes it as pointing to the pseudonymous nature of this letter.13 However, he himself notes that Paul does not make such references in the proems of 1 Corinthians and Galatians either but plunges right into addressing the problems of their recipients. Paul is doing the same here. He sees that the most urgent task is to assure and comfort the readers who are suffering persecution from the opponents of the faith, and so he concentrates on explaining their vindication and salvation at the last judgment at the parousia of the Lord with two discourses (1:5–10; 2:1–12 or 14) built into the extended thanksgiving section of 1:3–2:15, as we have seen. Nicklas himself grants that those who regard our letter as authentic would argue that Paul dispenses with personal references here because he is writing so soon after 1 Thessalonians, where he filled the extended thanksgiving section (chs. 1–3) with references to his relationship with the readers.14 Even so, Nicklas asks why then “in the whole first chapter” of this letter Paul does not justify the need to write this letter by referring to the worsening

13 Nicklas, 76–77. Cf. Trilling, 40. 14 Nicklas, 77.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 512

7/12/23 11:29 AM

Form/Structure/Setting 513 of the readers’ situation.15 But Paul does exactly that in 2:1–2 (and again in 3:6, 11)! Does it make a difference that he does it not “in the first chapter” but in 2:1–2 (according to the much later medieval division of chapters and verses)? Commenting on 1:2, Nicklas argues that the pseudonymous author of this letter added to the simple greeting χάρις ὑμῖν καὶ εἰρήνη of 1 Thess 1:1c the phrase ἀπὸ θεοῦ πατρὸς [ἡμῶν] καὶ κυρίου Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ, taken from other Pauline letters, in order to present himself more Pauline than Paul himself.16 If Nicklas’s arguments in 1:2 and here are to be valid, should we not conclude that the pseudonymous author has carelessly exposed himself as a forger by failing here to imitate Paul’s usual way of following up his thanksgiving with some personal references? For us, the way Paul launches in to address his main concern (namely, to provide a comforting explanation about the last judgment) immediately after the opening thanksgiving in 1:3–4 is quite understandable in view of the aforementioned similar examples in 1 Cor 1 and Gal 1. Rather than raising a suspicion about the authorship of this letter, this way only makes us appreciate how strongly and urgently Paul feels the need to assure and comfort the readers in the crisis of their faith, and it even strengthens the case for his authorship of this letter (cf. II.4 in the Introduction). The encouragement in this subsection is based on the prospect of vindication on the day of the Lord. The day is described in language largely derived from the LXX, with much of the parallelismus membrorum or couplet form, characteristic of OT oracles, being preserved (as has been indicated in the arrangement of the translation; see above). In at least one place, the device of parallelism has been taken over by the Christian composer: in v. 8 the OT locution “those who do not know God” has received a Christian gloss in the parallel clause, “who disobey the gospel of our Lord Jesus.” Confirming the pervasive parallelism, Malherbe further observes the catchword connections between the verses: “ just judgment of God” (τῆς δικαίας κρίσεως τοῦ θεοῦ) in v. 5 is picked up by “ just in God’s sight” (δίκαιον παρὰ θεῷ) in v. 6; “to repay” (ἀνταποδοῦναι) in v. 6 by “repaying with vengeance” (διδόντος ἐκδίκησιν) in v. 8 and “they will pay the penalty” (δίκην τίσουσιν) in v. 9; “glory” (τῆς δόξης) in v. 9 by “to be glorified” (ἐνδοξασθῆναι) in v. 10; “in all who have believed” (ἐν πᾶσιν τοῖς πιστεύσασιν) in v. 10 by “for our testimony to you was believed” (ἐπιστεύθη τὸ μαρτύριον ἡμῶν ἐφ᾽ ὑμᾶς) also in v. 10.17 In the Greek text, the opening neuter noun ἔνδειγμα (“sure token” or “evidence”) in v. 5 appears loosely attached to the preceding text without a verb, so that we may take it as accusative and as standing in apposition to the preceding phrase (cf. Rom 12:1; also Rom 8:3), or we may consider it as 15 Nicklas, 77. 16 Nicklas, 69. 17 Malherbe, 392–93.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 513

7/12/23 11:29 AM

514

2 Thessalonians 1:5–10

nominative and as appearing with the relative clause ὅ ἐστιν (“that is”) elided, which would be equivalent to ἥτις ἐστίν in Phil 1:28, the passage that presents a close parallel to our verse. Either way, it appears to refer to the whole phrase τῆς ὑπομονῆς ὑμῶν καὶ πίστεως ἐν πᾶσιν τοῖς διωγμοῖς ὑμῶν καὶ ταῖς θλίψεσιν αἷς ἀνέχεσθε in v. 4, about which Paul is boasting.18 In view of the cognate synonymity of ἔνδειγμα (the passive form) here and ἔνδειξις (the active form) in Phil 1:28, as well as the close parallelism in thought between our passage and Phil 1:27–30, our verse has been traditionally interpreted in comparison with Phil 1:28. However, there has been much difficulty in explaining exactly why or in what sense Paul designates the Thessalonian Christians’ endurance of persecutions and afflictions by faith as the “evidence of God’s righteous judgment” for their salvation.19 Bassler illustrates this difficulty by citing some commentaries and showing the implausibility of their explanations.20 So she proposes to see ἔνδειγμα as being in apposition only to the immediately preceding clause, “your persecutions and oppressions that you suffer” in v. 4, and to interpret our passage in the light of the “theology of suffering” that some Jewish texts display (e.g., Gen. Rab. 33.1; Pss. Sol. 13.9–10; 2 Macc 6:12–16; 2 Bar. 13.3–10; 78.5), that is, the teaching that the present suffering of the elect is God’s chastising judgment on their few sins for the purpose of making them obtain bliss at the eschaton.21 Thus she interprets Paul as meaning in our v. 5 that the Thessalonian Christians’ suffering of persecutions is the evidence of God’s just judgment meted out to them for their few sins in the present, “so that they may be counted as worthy of God’s kingdom” at the last judgment.22 But the context makes it clear that Paul has in view the readers’ suffering from persecutions by their anti-­Christian opponents for the sake of their faith. Therefore, it is quite strange to think that here Paul views such persecutions as God’s judgment, or such suffering as due to God’s present judgment upon Christians, or as having an atoning effect for their few sins, which would then lead them to their eschatological salvation—­something that he does nowhere else in his letters.23 18 E.g., Lightfoot, 100; Frame, 226; Best, 254; Morris, 197; Malherbe, 394; Travis, Christ, 77; contra those who take it as referring only to the immediately preceding part of the phrase, “persecutions and afflictions”: e.g., Bassler, “Enigmatic Sign,” 500–506; Wanamaker, 221; Schreiber, II:101; Hoppe, II:80–81. 19 Cf. Marshall, 172–73. 20 Bassler, “Enigmatic Sign,” 498–500, citing, e.g., Findlay, 143: “The heroic faith of the Thessalonians shows that God is on their side, since He manifestly inspires it (cf. [1 Thess] i.6); so it gives token of His final judgment in their case and is a kind of ἀπαρχή thereof”; Best, 255: “The ‘sure sign’ is that Paul boasts of their faith and endurance in persecutions and tribulations. . . . Paul says: I have boasted about you; this is a sign that God will count you worthy then.” 21 Bassler, 500–506. 22 Bassler is followed by Wanamaker, 220–23; Furnish, 146–47; Green, 284; Roose, 63; Nicklas, 86–87. 23 Cf. Travis, Christ, 77; Weima, 460–61; also Gaventa, 103; Richard, 317; Schreiber, II:101;

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 514

7/12/23 11:29 AM

Form/Structure/Setting 515 Weima rejects both the traditional interpretation and Bassler’s new proposal and proposes instead, together with Witherington, to see ὅδε ἐστίν (“here is”) elided before ἔνδειγμα here, and to find the “evidence” not retrospectively in v. 4 but prospectively in the following vv. 6–10.24 But this proposal not only makes the putative sentence (“here is the evidence of the just judgment of God so that you may be counted worthy of the kingdom of God”) break the flow of thought from the preceding, but also makes the truism of ius talionis (i.e., God will pay back the afflicters of the Thessalonian Christians with affliction and reward the afflicted Christians with salvation) the “evidence of God’s righteous judgment.” This view then also results in making v. 5 just a pompous or pedantic statement, which is really unnecessary. For if with v. 5 Paul’s concern was to make the point of vv. 6–10, Paul could have made his point effectively (if not more effectively) by writing only vv. 6–10, starting it with an adversative like ἀλλά (“but”) instead of εἴπερ (“since”). So it appears that there is no alternative to interpreting ἔνδειγμα in our v. 5 as referring back to the whole phrase τῆς ὑπομονῆς ὑμῶν καὶ πίστεως ἐν πᾶσιν τοῖς διωγμοῖς ὑμῶν καὶ ταῖς θλίψεσιν αἷς ἀνέχεσθε in v. 4, and to seeing our verse as a parallel to Phil 1:28. As we have seen above, Bassler and her followers object to this, arguing that the ἔνδειγμα in our v. 5 is not an exact parallel to ἔνδειξις in Phil 1:28 because, whereas the latter “refers to the steadfastness of the church,” the former refers only to “persecution and afflictions” in v. 4 or “the suffering [of the church] per se, not to steadfastness in the face of it.”25 Or, because whereas the latter speaks of “evidence” for salvation for Christians and destruction for their opponents, the former speaks of “evidence of God’s righteous judgment.”26 But Bassler’s objection is groundless, because it is only her arbitrary decision that ἔνδειγμα in our v. 5 refers only to “the persecutions and afflictions” in the clause “your endurance and faith in all your persecutions and afflictions that you are bearing” in v. 4. Here it is a question of why then she does not see ἔνδειξις in Phil 1:28 likewise as referring only to the immediately preceding phrase, “not being frightened in anything by the opponents” (v. 28a). When she summarizes the reference point of ἔνδειξις in Phil 1:28 as “the steadfastness of the church,” she clearly has in view not only that participial phrase in Phil 1:28a but the whole clause in Phil 1:27c–28a (“that you are standing firm in one spirit, struggling together with one mind for the faith of the gospel, not being frightened in anything by the opponents”). So it is clearly arbitrary when in 2 Thess 1:4 she decides to take as the reference point of ἔνδειγμα in our v. 5 not its whole preceding clause (“your endurance and faith in all your persecutions and afflictions that you are bearing”) that

Hoppe, II:82. 24 Weima, 461–62; Witherington, 192. 25 Bassler, “Enigmatic Sign,” 499. 26 Wanamaker, 221.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 515

7/12/23 11:29 AM

516

2 Thessalonians 1:5–10

forms one unit of thought, but only a part of that clause (“all your persecutions and afflictions that you are bearing”). Wanamaker’s objection is based on a rather rigid literalism with little regard for normal exegetical practice. He fails to consider the fact that in our v. 5 Paul is not talking simply about “evidence of God’s righteous judgment” but of that judgment that yields the vindication or salvation of the suffering Thessalonian believers. Having thus stressed the consequence of God’s just judgment, in the subsequent vv. 6–10 Paul goes on to elaborate on that judgment in terms of destruction of the persecutors and salvation of the suffering believers. Therefore, it is a quite proper exegesis to see this explanation in our passage forming a close parallel to the talk of the “evidence” of salvation for the suffering believers and of destruction for their adversaries in Phil 1:27–30, and to affirm that in Phil 1:27–30 also Paul clearly has God’s judgment in view (cf. Phil 1:28c: “and this is from God”). In fact, our passage and Phil 1:27–30 form an exact parallelism in their substance concerning the question of the “evidence.” See their correspondence: That the Philippian believers struggle together for the faith of the gospel against their opponents with an unflinching courage is “evidence” (ἔνδειξις) of destruction to their opponents but of the Philippian believers’ salvation (i.e., evidence that the Philippian believers would receive salvation while their persecutors would receive destruction)—­t he judgment that is to be meted out by God (καὶ τοῦτο ἀπὸ θεοῦ, Phil 1:28c). That the Thessalonian believers are enduring persecutions and afflictions by their steadfast faith is “evidence [ἔνδειγμα] of God’s just judgment” (i.e., evidence that they would be counted worthy of the kingdom of God ), “since it is just in God’s sight to repay with affliction to those who afflict you and with rest with us to you who are afflicted at the revelation of the Lord Jesus” (vv. 6–7).

Despite the exact parallelism between our passage and Phil 1:27–30 in their substance concerning the “evidence,” the two passages contain two differences in the forms of presenting that substance. First, in our passage Paul emphatically affirms first the salvation of the Thessalonian believers at the judgment of God before making a balanced explanation about God’s judgment that will mete out due punishment to their persecutors and due salvation to the believers. Second, whereas in Phil 1:28 God’s judgment is only implicit and its different consequences for believers and their persecutors are stated only in a summary form, in our passage (vv. 6–10) both God’s judgment at the parousia of the Lord Jesus and its different outcomes for believers and their persecutors are extensively unfolded (in Phil 1:29–30, Paul instead goes on to stress that suffering is an essential element of Christian life

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 516

7/12/23 11:29 AM

Form/Structure/Setting 517 and that the Philippian believers and Paul himself are engaged in the same conflict). Therefore, in interpreting our passage, besides dealing with the main question of why or in what sense Paul designates the Thessalonian and the Philippian believers’ endurance by faith of the adversaries’ persecutions as the “evidence” of their salvation and of the adversaries’ destruction, we need also to explain why our passage shows these two differences from its parallel passage Phil 1:27–30. What do these differences suggest of Paul’s understanding of the Thessalonian Christians’ needs in distinction from those of the Philippian Christians, despite their common need for assurance and encouragement amid their common lot of suffering from persecution by opponents of their faith? The designation in our passage of the believers’ steadfast endurance of persecution as “evidence of God’s righteous judgment” that results in the verdict of their worthiness of the kingdom of God does appear rather awkward, as it does not seem to conform to a straightforward logic. So also awkward is the designation in Phil 1:28 of the Philippian believers’ struggle together for the faith of the gospel against their opponents as “evidence of [their opponents’] destruction, but of [their] salvation.” Here, it appears best for us to suspect that the apparent logical incongruence that makes both formulations awkward is a result of a severe contraction in Paul’s explanation in both places. So in both Phil 1:27–30 and our 2 Thess 1:5–10, we need to ask why Paul makes such contracted formulations and what sentences are skipped over. Then we can see that in both places he is so anxious to encourage his suffering converts that his mind races to provide the climactic statement of assurance and comfort, skipping all the necessary logical steps that lead up to it—­the steps of stating such facts as: 1. the opponents are committing a grave sin against God by persecuting the believers in Christ, while the believers are proving their genuine faith in Christ by enduring these persecutions; 2. there will be God’s just judgment; 3. at God’s last judgment those who have faith in Christ will be justified, but sinners who do not render the obedience of faith to the gospel of Christ will be condemned; and 4. therefore at the last judgment believers will receive their justification or salvation while their persecutors will be condemned and destroyed. Therefore, the very facts of the opponents’ persecution of the Philippian Christians for their faith and the Christians withstanding it with a united spirit and an unflinching courage already constitute the “evidence” of the opponents’ sure destruction and the Christians’ sure salvation at God’s last judgment. Likewise, the very fact of the Thessalonian Christians’ steadfast

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 517

7/12/23 11:29 AM

518

2 Thessalonians 1:5–10

endurance by faith of their opponents’ persecution already constitutes the “evidence” of God’s just judgment that will yield their salvation in God’s kingdom. Thus, Paul’s use of the term “evidence” here is an expression of his gospel of justification (or salvation) by faith: the Thessalonian Christians’ and the Philippian Christians’ steadfast endurance of their anti-­Christian opponents’ persecutions is a clear demonstration of their faith in Christ; therefore, being so sure of his gospel of justification by faith, Paul declares that such endurance is already an ἔνδειγμα or ἔνδειξις (“sure token” or “evidence”) of their justification (i.e., salvation)27 at the last judgment of God (i.e., the “sign” or “evidence” that they will certainly receive salvation of God’s kingdom at his last judgment). By the same token, the anti-­Christian opponents’ acts of persecuting the believers in Thessalonica and Philippi are a clear demonstration of them being sinners; therefore Paul declares that such acts of persecution are already an ἔνδειγμα or ἔνδειξις (“sure token” or “evidence”) of their condemnation at the last judgment (i.e., the “sign” or “evidence” that they will certainly receive destruction at God’s last judgment). Schreiber takes the afflictions themselves, rather than the Thessalonian believers’ endurance of them by faith, as the ἔνδειγμα, and he writes: “The present afflictions can be conceived of as ‘sign’ of the just judgment of God because they indicate that the churches are standing at present on the side of God’s kingship—­and the afflicters, who are prospering at present, are rejecting God.”28 But this is in itself an inadequate explanation. For if the afflictions “indicate that the churches are standing at present on the side of God’s kingship,” they are the ἔνδειγμα of their present standing on the side of God’s kingship and not of the just judgment of God that is to take place at a future date. In order to make sense of the affirmation that the afflictions are the ἔνδειγμα of the just judgment of God, which will count them as worthy of the eschatological kingdom of God, Schreiber needs to fill in the skipped logical steps that are similar to those that I have just suggested (especially turning my “ justification” language in steps 4 and 5 into his “kingdom” language, as the two amount essentially to the same thing insofar as in Paul’s doctrine of justification, justification signals a lordship-­change, a transfer from the kingdom of Satan into the kingdom of God).29 In his desire to console the suffering Thessalonian and Philippian believers, Paul rushes to affirm this all-­important conclusion, skipping all the logical steps leading up to it. In our passage, he finds it urgent to state the comforting message that there will be God’s just judgment that will vindicate or justify the Thessalonian believers for God’s kingdom. Only after stating that message

27 What is “salvation” (Phil 1:28) at the last judgment of God if it is not justification? 28 Schreiber, II:101. 29 Cf. Kim, “Paul’s Doctrine of Justification in 2 Thessalonians 1–2,” in PGTO, 282–83; also idem, Justification, esp. 59–71.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 518

7/12/23 11:29 AM

Form/Structure/Setting 519 first (which is grammatically an apodosis), does he catch his breath and clearly lay out the supporting argument or ground for it by explaining in detail God’s just judgment, which is to mete out destruction to their persecutors and salvation to them, the believers, at the parousia of the Lord Jesus (vv. 6–10, the εἴπερ protasis).30 It is also to be clearly noted that in our passage, in contrast to the parallel passage of Phil 1:27–30, Paul goes on in detail to explain God’s judgment at the parousia of the Lord because the Thessalonian believers are excited and confused about the parousia and are also concerned about the last judgment, as we can see in the passages (i.e., 2:1–12, 13–14, 16–17) that follow after our present passage.31 Here we can see 1:5–12 and 2:9–17 forming a parallelism.32 Paul’s stress on God’s judgment being “ just,” both in the thesis statement of v. 5 and in its elaboration in v. 6, is apparently intended to allay the anxiety of the readers about the prospect of the last judgment for them (cf. their anxiety about the day of the Lord in 2:2), as well as to console them: because God’s judgment is “ just,” it will most certainly reward them, the believers, with salvation while punishing their persecutors with destruction. Having explained the parallelism (in substance) between our passage and Phil 1:27–30 and some differences (in form) between them as well as the reasons for both, we may also note another parallelism between the two passages to strengthen our explanation of the structure and meaning of our passage in comparison with the Philippians passage. It is that the two passages both present the salvation of believers in terms of obtaining the blessing of God’s kingdom at the parousia of the Lord Jesus Christ. In Phil 1:27–30 Paul exhorts the Philippians to “live your communal life [πολιτεύεσθε, i.e., conduct your life as citizens] in a manner worthy [ἀξίως] of Christ’s gospel [of God’s kingdom],” bearing the persecution of the opponents together in one mind, in order to obtain the eschatological salvation. This salvation he later in Phil 3:20–21 presents as transformation of their lowly body into the glorious body of the Lord Jesus (σύμμορφον τῷ σώματι τῆς δόξης αὐτοῦ) at his parousia, which is due to them as citizens of the heavenly kingdom of God (πολίτευμα ἐν οὐρανοῖς). 30 In Phil 1:28 he abbreviates the supporting argument just with the clause καὶ τοῦτο ἀπὸ θεοῦ. Note well that in the course of explaining God’s judgment in our passage, he explicitly mentions one of the logical steps that we have suggested as skipped over (or just presupposed) in the rush to state the concluding statement of assurance and comfort (v. 5), namely, that God will “inflict vengeance upon those who do not know God and upon those who do not obey the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ” (v. 8). 31 Note how 2:1–12 concludes with the generalized statement that at the parousia of the Lord, God will condemn all unbelievers, which goes beyond the immediate concern of the context (see comment on 2:12 below), and how the immediately following two sections, 2:13–14 and 2:16–17, reaffirm believers’ salvation in the renewed thanksgiving and the concluding wish-­prayer. 32 Their parallelism will be noted at various places in the comments on their verses below. For the view that this parallelism reflects Paul’s doctrine of justification, see my essay “Paul’s Doctrine of Justification in 2 Thessalonians 1–2,” in PGTO, 279–95.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 519

7/12/23 11:29 AM

520

2 Thessalonians 1:5–10

Compare this exhortation in Philippians with the exhortation in 1 Thess 2:12 for the Thessalonians “to lead a life worthy [ἀξίως] of God, who calls [them] into his own kingdom and glory [εἰς τὴν ἑαυτοῦ βασιλείαν καὶ δόξαν],” and with the presentation in our passage of their eschatological salvation in terms of “being judged as worthy [καταξιωθῆναι] of God’s kingdom” (τῆς βασιλείας τοῦ θεοῦ, v. 5) and sharing in the Lord Jesus’s glory (ἐνδοξασθῇ, vv. 10, 12) at the parousia. Thus, this particular element of close parallelism between the two passages also helps us to interpret our passage in the light of Phil 1:27–30. The overall close parallelism between our passage and Phil 1:27–30 in substance but with minor contextual differences in form can hardly be attributed to a forger who produced 2 Thessalonians by imitating 1 Thessalonians. Therefore, it may be taken as a piece of evidence that cements the Pauline authorship of our letter. It also then has the significance of showing constancy in Paul’s theological thinking between this early letter and Philippians, a letter usually counted among the later Pauline letters, the same kind of constancy that we have observed between 1 Thessalonians and Romans especially regarding the doctrine of justification and that we shall observe also between 2 Thessalonians and Romans in commenting on 1:5–10 and 2:9–17.33 Our section may be analyzed as follows: v. 5: the thesis: God’s just judgment will result in the Thessalonian believers being counted as worthy of his kingdom vv. 6–7: the immediate ground for the thesis: God’s just judgment for the Thessalonian believers and for their persecutors vv. 8–10: the fundamental ground for the thesis: the principle of God’s just judgment—­justification (or salvation) for believers and condemnation and destruction for unbelievers (vv. 11–12: Paul’s prayer for the Thessalonian believers’ faithful discipleship during the present phase of justification [or salvation]: to do the work of faith by living in a manner worthy of God’s call, that is, doing good works that please him—­by the aid of his power [i.e., the Holy Spirit]—­for the Lord’s glory and for their participation in it)

Comment 1:5 ἔνδειγμα τῆς δικαίας κρίσεως τοῦ θεοῦ, “(This is) evidence of the just judgment of God.” This phrase appears loosely connected with the preceding clause. So we may understand that ὅ ἐστιν (“which is”) is elided before ἔνδειγμα (nominative), or that ἔνδειγμα (accusative) stands in apposition to the preceding clause (cf. Rom 12:1, where τὴν λογικὴν λατρείαν, “your spiritual worship,” stands in apposition to παραστῆσαι . . . τῷ θεῷ, “to present your

33 See also below for the implications of our passage for the Pauline doctrine of justification.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 520

7/12/23 11:29 AM

Comment 521 bodies . . . to God”).34 Either way, it refers to the whole preceding phrase of “your endurance and faith in all your persecutions and afflictions that you are enduring” (v. 4), rather than just a part of it, “your persecutions and afflictions” (see pp. 515–16 above). This is the only NT occurrence of ἔνδειγμα, but its cognate synonym ἔνδειξις is used by Paul in Rom 3:25–26, 2 Cor 8:24, and especially in the parallel passage of Phil 1:28. With δικαίας κρίσεως, compare the compound δικαιοκρισία (“ just judgment”) in Rom 2:5. This is one of several parallels between our vv. 5–10 and Rom 2:5–11.35 Paul’s elaboration on God’s just judgment in our subsequent vv. 6–10, as well as the parallel in Phil 1:28, suggests that in referring to the readers’ endurance by faith of the opponents’ persecution as the ἔνδειγμα of “God’s just judgment,” Paul has also in mind the opponents who are to be condemned at that judgment. However, in this verse he first focuses only on the readers’ present endurance of their persecutions and their eventual salvation at it. The elaboration on God’s just judgment in the subsequent vv. 6–10, which is provided as the supporting ground (note well εἴπερ, “since,” in v. 6) for this thesis-­like statement in our verse, suggests that here Paul has in view the last judgment of God at the parousia of the Lord Jesus, not God’s present judgment nor even a prolepsis of the eschatological judgment.36 Note especially the following four facts: (1) here, unlike at the parallel passage Phil 1:28, Paul does not say simply and straightforwardly that the Thessalonian believers’ endurance and faith amid the opponents’ persecutions is the ἔνδειγμα of their salvation, but awkwardly that it is the ἔνδειγμα of “God’s just judgment” for their salvation; (2) thereby he stresses the just character of God’s coming judgment, and he goes on to stress it further by repeating the adjective δίκαιον at the following v. 6, which is the beginning of his lengthy explanation of God’s judgment; (3) whereas in Phil 1:28 he just hints at God’s judgment by attaching the clause καὶ τοῦτο ἀπὸ θεοῦ, here he explains it in detail, specifying the punishment for the anti-­Christian opponents and the reward for the Thessalonian believers (vv. 6–10); and (4) whereas in Phil 1:28 he makes a balanced summary statement (“to [the opponents] ἔνδειξις of destruction, but of your salvation”—­thus with greater stress on the former), here he states only the salvation of the Thessalonian believers at the judgment of God as a thesis statement (v. 5) before supporting it with a balanced explanation about God’s judgment, which will mete out destruction to the anti-­Christian opponents and reward the believers with salvation (vv. 6–10). As we have seen in the Form/Structure/Setting section above, these facts clearly suggest that the readers are anxious about God’s judgment on the day of the Lord, and therefore 34 Cf. BDF §480.6. 35 For the parallels and their implications for the presence of the Pauline doctrine of justification in 2 Thessalonians, see Kim, “Paul’s Doctrine of Justification in 2 Thessalonians 1–2,” in PGTO, esp. 286–87, 292–93. 36 So the majority of commentators; contra Marshall, 173; Malherbe, 395; Beale, 185.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 521

7/12/23 11:29 AM

522

2 Thessalonians 1:5–10

Paul is seeking to assure them by emphatically affirming first that God’s just judgment will certainly bring salvation to them. εἰς τὸ καταξιωθῆναι ὑμᾶς τῆς βασιλείας τοῦ θεοῦ, “so that you would be counted worthy of the kingdom of God.” This εἰς plus the articular infinitive is to be taken as expressing result (“with the result that you are counted worthy”) rather than purpose (“so that you may be counted worthy”),37 like 1 Thess 2:16, εἰς τὸ ἀναπληρῶσαι, “so as to fill up.” The infinitive καταξιωθῆναι is an instance of a divine passive, which expresses God’s action without naming him. Since with the verb Paul is talking about the verdict at God’s judgment (cf. Luke 20:35: οἱ δὲ καταξιωθέντες τοῦ αἰῶνος ἐκείνου τυχεῖν καὶ τῆς ἀναστάσεως τῆς ἐκ νεκρῶν; also Acts 5:41), it should be understood as “to be considered or counted worthy” rather than “to be made worthy.”38 So Paul is here talking about “God’s just judgment,” which would yield his verdict that the readers are “worthy of the kingdom of God.” This language reflects Paul’s gospel of justification (καταξιωθῆναι being equivalent to δικαιωθῆναι, “to be regarded/counted as righteous”).39 The readers are those who have believed the gospel that Paul preached (v. 10b) and are persevering in that faith despite persecutions (v. 5), in contrast to their opponents who do not render the “obedience [of faith] to the gospel of our Lord Jesus” (v. 8, see below). Paul is certain that at God’s last judgment the readers will “be counted worthy of God’s kingdom” and granted “rest” and “glory” in it, while their opponents will be condemned and destroyed (vv. 6–10; see below). The phrase “to be counted worthy of God’s kingdom,” along with its implications of “entering” or “inheriting” God’s kingdom and sharing in God’s glory (e.g., Rom 5:2; 8:30; 1 Cor 6:9–10; 15:50–57; Gal 5:21; 1 Thess 2:12; 2 Thess 1:10–12; Col 1:9–14), is a positive way of expressing the ultimate justification at the last judgment, which Paul often puts in the negative terms of “to be found guiltless” (i.e., acquitted) or “to be delivered from God’s wrath” (e.g., Rom 5:9; 8:31–39; 1 Cor 1:8; Gal 5:5; Phil 1:10; 2:14–16; Col 1:21–23; 1 Thess 1:10; 3:12–13; 5:9–10, 23). Note again Luke 20:35: “those who are counted worthy [καταξιωθέντες] to attain to that age and to the resurrection from the dead” (“that age” is identical with “the kingdom of God” here); also Acts 14:22: “[Paul] strengthen[ed] the souls of the disciples [and] exhort[ed] them to persevere in faith, since through many afflictions [διὰ πολλῶν θλίψεων] we must enter the kingdom of God.” Through the gospel of the Lord Jesus Christ, God called the readers into his kingdom (to be his holy people: the baptismal call; cf. 1 Thess 4:3, 7) and is constantly calling them 37 Cf. Malherbe, 395; BDF §402.2. 38 So the majority of the English versions, against NRSV and NET; Malherbe, 396; Weima, 463. 39 Cf. Rainbow, “Justification,” 251. For the significance of speaking of justification in the category of God’s kingdom, see Kim, “Paul’s Doctrine of Justification in 2 Thessalonians 1–2,” in PGTO, 282–83; also idem, Justification, esp. 59–71.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 522

7/12/23 11:29 AM

Comment 523 into it to live under his (inaugurated and so present) kingship or “to lead a life worthy [ἀξίως] of God” (1 Thess 2:12; see comment ad loc). If they go on living in a manner “worthy” (ἀξιώσῃ) of such a “call” of God (2 Thess 1:11), they will “be counted worthy” (καταξιωθῆναι) of his (consummated) kingdom at the last judgment (v. 5). Their endurance of persecution is a clear sign or evidence of their genuine faith in Christ and their faithful living in a manner worthy of God’s call. Therefore, being absolutely sure that “the just judgment of God” will yield the verdict that they are indeed “worthy” of the kingdom of God, Paul already refers to it as an ἔνδειγμα (“sure token” or “evidence”) of such a just judgment (or verdict) of God. ὑπὲρ ἧς καὶ πάσχετε, “for which you too are suffering.” By adding this clause, Paul once more sympathetically acknowledges the reality of the readers’ suffering to which he referred in v. 4. But this is not to say that they are suffering in order to inherit the kingdom of God but that they are suffering for the sake of or on account of the kingdom of God, rather like its parallel τὸ ὑπὲρ αὐτοῦ πάσχειν in Phil 1:29, which refers to the Philippian Christians’ suffering “for the sake of” or “on account of” Christ.40 The kingdom of God is entered through tribulation (Acts 14:22), but the kingdom cannot be said to be the purpose of the tribulation on the part of those who inflict it or even on the part of those who endure it. In view of Paul’s affirmation in our v. 7 of the prospect of his missionary team and the Thessalonian believers sharing in eschatological salvation (“and [God will repay] you who are being afflicted with rest together with us”), καὶ πάσχετε here in our v. 5 is to be taken in the sense of “you too [as well as we] are suffering.”41 Here is then another parallel between our passage and Phil 1:27–30, as in the latter also Paul stresses that he and the Philippian believers share the common struggle and are suffering for the faith (Phil 1:29–30). 6 εἴπερ δίκαιον παρὰ θεῷ ἀνταποδοῦναι τοῖς θλίβουσιν ὑμᾶς θλῖψιν, “since it is a just thing in God’s sight to repay affliction to those who afflict you.” The word εἴπερ here is used in the Attic sense of “if (as is the fact),” “since.”42 Having stated the thesis in v. 5, Paul now begins to provide the ground for it. With δίκαιον (“righteous” or “ just”), which resumes δικαίας in v. 5, as well as with παρὰ θεῷ (“in the sight of God,” “with God”) that conjures up the judgment seat of God, Paul paraphrases “the just judgment of God” (τῆς δικαίας κρίσεως τοῦ θεοῦ) in v. 5. It is a fundamental truth in Scripture that God is righteous and that his judgment is righteous or just. The “ just” judgment of God takes the form of reversing the unjust reality of this fallen or rebellious world: “repaying with affliction those who afflict you” (ἀνταποδοῦναι τοῖς θλίβουσιν

40 Cf. BDAG s.v. ὑπέρ 2; Marshall, 175; pace Malherbe, 396; Fee, 254. 41 Cf. Frame, 227; Richard, 305; Weima, 463; for the suffering of Paul and his coworkers, see 3:2; also 1 Thess 2:1–2, 15–16; 3:4. 42 Cf. also Weima, 464.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 523

7/12/23 11:29 AM

524

2 Thessalonians 1:5–10

ὑμᾶς θλῖψιν), and “[repaying] you, the afflicted, with rest.” This principle is first stated in vv. 6–7, and then it is expanded in vv. 8–10. As suggested above (see Form/Structure/Setting), Paul stresses the just character of God’s judgment here, as well as in v. 5, in order to allay the readers’ anxiety about God’s last judgment and to console them with the prospect of their salvation. When the ἀνταποδοῦναι (“to pay back, repay, recompense”) is predicated of God, it may denote either blessing or judgment: blessing, as of the reward to be bestowed (ἀνταποδοθήσεται . . . σοι) at the resurrection of the righteous (Luke 14:14); judgment, as in the targumic quotation of Deut 32:35, “Vengeance [ἐκδίκησις, as in our v. 8 below] is mine; I will repay [ἀνταποδώσω]” in Rom 12:19; Heb 10:30. Both forms of requital are in view here. In the light of other echoes of Isa 66 in this subsection (vv. 8, 12), Isa 66:6 LXX may be relevant: ἀνταποδιδόντος ἀνταπόδοσιν τοῖς ἀντικειμένοις, “[the voice of the Lord] rendering recompense to his enemies.” Actually, there is no lack of similar OT texts; see, for example, Ps 137:8 (136:8 LXX), μακάριος ὃς ἀνταποδώσει σοι τὸ ἀνταπόδομά σου, ὃ ἀνταπέδωκας ἡμῖν (“Blessed is he who recompenses you with the recompense with which you requited us”). However, it is likely that, along with Isa 66:6, Paul has also in view here Prov 24:12 LXX (“[God] will recompense [ἀποδίδωσιν] every human being according to one’s works”), since he cites it in Rom 2:5–6 in order to affirm “God’s just judgment” (δικαιοκρισίας τοῦ θεοῦ), which therefore is a parallel passage to our vv. 5–6. So, in our verse Paul says that at the eschaton God will repay the afflicters of the readers with affliction, that is, he will judge them according to lex talionis, the law of just or appropriate retribution (“an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth”), which is enshrined in the law of Moses as its fundamental principle (Exod 21:23–25; Lev 24:17–21; Deut 19:21). However, in 1 Thess 5:15 Paul exhorts the Thessalonian Christians not to retaliate against one’s enemies according to this principle, but rather to do good to all people (see comment ad loc). In Rom 12:14–21 he expands on these exhortations with much greater emphasis. Yet there he combines the prohibition of retaliation in interpersonal relationships (Rom 12:19a, note the reflexive pronoun ἑαυτούς) with an exhortation to leave the matter to God’s just judgment, which will be according to lex talionis (12:19b–­c). So, just as between the two parts of Rom 12:19, so also between 1 Thess 5:15 and our verse, there appears a tension, if not a contradiction, in the matter of handling evildoers or punishing opponents. Is Paul aware of this tension, and does he resolve it somehow?43 7 καὶ ὑμῖν τοῖς θλιβομένοις ἄνεσιν μεθ᾽ ἡμῶν, “and [it is a just thing in God’s sight to recompense] to you who are afflicted rest together with us.” The noun ἄνεσις (“relief, rest”) is in itself simply the lifting of the pressure caused by their persecution (cf. 2 Cor 7:5; 8:3). But the following phrase (v. 7b) and the further elaboration (v. 10) make it clear that here it is used for eschatological 43 See Kim, “ ‘Beloved, Never Avenge Yourselves,’ ” in PGTO, 313–21.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 524

7/12/23 11:29 AM

Comment 525 salvation and participation in divine glory (cf. 1 Thess 2:12), which is in line with the expectation of OT and Jewish tradition (e.g., Ps 95:11; T. Dan 5.12; 4 Ezra 7.36, 38, 75, 78, 95; 2 Bar. 73.1; 1 En. 38.10; cf. Matt 11:28–29; Heb 3:18–19 and 4:1, using the term κατάπαυσις).44 “With us” is apposite because Paul and his coworkers, Silvanus and Timothy, had their own share of sufferings to bear (v. 5b; 3:2; also 1 Thess 2:1–2, 15–16; 3:4; cf. 1 Cor 4:9–13) and a corresponding need of glory to look forward to (cf. 2 Cor 4:17, 18). The parousia, then, will be the occasion for equitable retribution and reward. For the reversal of roles in the life to come, note Luke 16:25; the reversal is not arbitrary but ethically appropriate. ἐν τῇ ἀποκαλύψει τοῦ κυρίου Ἰησοῦ ἀπ᾽ οὐρανοῦ, “at the revelation of the Lord Jesus from heaven” (ἐν is temporal here: “at the time of”; for ἀπ᾽ οὐρανοῦ, see also 1 Thess 4:16; for ἐκ τῶν οὐρανῶν, see 1 Thess 1:10; cf. Phil 3:20). From this point to v. 10a, the language is largely a cento of theophanic phrases from the OT, what is said of “the Lord” (Yahweh) in them being applied to “the Lord Jesus” here. This is made possible by the belief that God raised Jesus his Son from the dead and exalted him to his right hand in heaven, giving him his own name (“Lord”), in fulfillment of Ps 110:1, so that he may exercise his lordship over all the nations and the whole universe (Rom 1:3–5; 1 Cor 15:23–28; Phil 2:6–11). The parousia of Christ is called his ἀποκάλυψις in 1 Cor 1:7 (also in 1 Pet 1:7, 13; 4:13, “the revelation of his glory”); cf. ἐπιφάνεια in 2 Thess 2:8 (see comment below). It is the occasion when “the glory is to be revealed” (ἀποκαλυφθῆναι) to those who suffer with Christ at present (Rom 8:18); it is accordingly called the “revealing [ἀποκάλυψις] of the sons of God”—­that is, their being revealed as the children of God, invested with his glory (Rom 8:19). The OT promise that “the glory of the Lord shall be revealed” (‫ונגלה‬/ὀφθήσεται, Isa 40:5; note the same niphal form of the verb ‫ גלה‬is rendered in LXX Isa 53:1 with ἀπεκαλύφθη) takes on fuller significance in the light of the work of Christ. For the future coming of the Lord Jesus, Paul uses the term ἀποκάλυψις (“revelation”) here instead of παρουσία (“advent”), which he repeatedly used in his previous letter (1 Thess 2:19; 3:13; 4:15; 5:23; see comments ad loc). It is difficult to imagine that this change from “parousia” of 1 Thessalonians to “revelation” in this letter (cf. “parousia” in 2 Thess 2:1, 8) was made by one who forged this letter by imitating 1 Thessalonians. Paul’s subject matter in the subsequent section (2:1–12), namely, the “revelation” of “the man of lawlessness,” may have influenced him to use “revelation” for the Lord Jesus’s future coming here.45 However, in view of his use of “revelation” (ἀποκάλυψις/ 44 Cf. Malherbe, 398; Schreiber, II:103; Hoppe, II:85–86. 45 Note the interchangeable use of “revelation” and “parousia” for the coming of “the lawless man” (2:3, 6, 8, 9) as well as for Christ’s coming (1:7; 2:1, 8), perhaps only with a difference in nuance: “revelation” conveying the sense of his coming out into public view from a place of concealment, and “parousia” conveying just the sense of his coming to be present. Cf. Wanamaker, 225.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 525

7/12/23 11:29 AM

526

2 Thessalonians 1:5–10

ἀποκαλύπτειν) in Gal 1:12, 16 for the Christophany that he experienced on the Damascus road (cf. ὤφθη in 1 Cor 15:8 for the same experience), it appears quite natural for him to use that term in speaking of the coming of the Lord Jesus with the language of OT theophany here. The passages cited above suggest that Paul apparently thinks he can console the suffering Thessalonian believers here more effectively by describing the second coming of the Lord Jesus in terms of the theophanic or Christophanic “revelation” and its concomitant “glory” than by describing it with the term “parousia,” which served his purpose well in 1 Thess 4:13–18 with its political connotation obtained from Hellenistic political culture (see comment ad loc).46 μετ᾽ ἀγγέλων δυνάμεως αὐτοῦ, “with angels of his power,” a Hebraism for “his mighty angels”; his angels, according to Ps 103:20 (102:20 LXX), are “mighty in strength” (δυνατοὶ ἰσχύι). For angelic attendance at theophanies, see comment above on 1 Thess 3:13. The same attendance marks the advent of the Son of Man, when he “comes in his glory, and all the angels with him” (Matt 25:31). The angels accompanying the Lord Jesus in his coming will heighten his majesty and assist him as his servants in his work of salvation and judgment (cf. 1 Thess 4:16; also Matt 13:41–42, 49–50). With the particular description of the angels here, Paul strengthens those senses. There are variations in the division between v. 7 and v. 8: in the RSV, v. 7 ends with “in flaming fire”; in the NA 28, v. 8 begins with ἐν πυρὶ φλογός. 8 ἐν πυρὶ φλογός, “in fire of flame,” that is, “in flaming fire.” The variant ἐν φλογὶ πυρός (see Notes b. above) appears (with the variant ἐν πυρὶ φλογός) in Exod 3:2, in the account of the theophany at the burning bush; see also Acts 7:30, “an angel appeared to him [Moses] in a flame of fire [ἐν φλογὶ πυρός, v.l. ἐν πυρὶ φλογός] in a bush.”47 Yahweh descended on Mount Sinai “in fire” at the giving of the law (Exod 19:18; cf. the presence of fire in the theophanies of Deut 33:2; Ps 18:8; Ezek 1:13, 27). Fire figures especially in depictions of divine judgment; in Dan 7:9–10, where the Ancient of Days takes his seat, “his throne was fiery flames [φλὸξ πυρός], its wheels were burning fire [πῦρ φλέγον, Theod.]; a stream of fire [ποταμὸς πυρός] issued and came forth from before him.” Note Isa 66:15–16, where Yahweh comes “like fire [ὡς πῦρ] to execute vengeance [ἐκδίκησις] . . . in flames of fire [ἐν φλογὶ πυρός]”—­perhaps the OT text that more than any other underlies the present wording. Regardless of which variant is read here in our text, the fire motif in the description of the Christophany represents the unapproachable holiness and overwhelming glory of the Lord Jesus as it is commonly found in OT theophany scenes, and 46 Cf. the thanksgiving section of 1 Cor 1:5–9, where also Paul uses the term ἀποκάλυψις for the second coming of the Lord Jesus Christ in the context of reassuring the Corinthian believers about the last judgment on the day of the Lord. Interestingly there he refers also to the gospel as the “testimony” (μαρτύριον) to Christ as in our v. 10 (see comment below). 47 See Justin, 1 Apol. 62; 63; Dial. 60.4, for the argument that it was Christ before his incarnation who appeared to Moses ἐν πυρὶ φλογός from the bush.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 526

7/12/23 11:29 AM

Comment 527 it also indicates the means that the Lord Jesus is to employ for his judgment, again following the OT and early Jewish tradition.48 διδόντος ἐκδίκησιν, “giving (executing) vengeance.” Together with the preceding phrase ἐν πυρὶ φλογός, this phrase also echoes Isa 66:15 (quoted above in the preceding comment). In view of the fact that here “disobedience” is cited as a ground for the Lord’s ἐκδίκησις, which represents the phrase ἀνταποδοῦναι τοῖς θλίβουσιν ὑμᾶς θλῖψιν in v. 6, we may see that Isa 66:4 is also echoed here49 (cf. 1 Thess 4:6, ἔκδικος κύριος). With this word Paul begins to explain the fundamental principle of God’s just judgment (vv. 8–10a). He does this in order to back up his statement about that judgment which he has just made in vv. 6–7a, specifying its contrasting consequences for the readers and those who afflict them. In vv. 8–10a the second-­person pronouns and verbs that are predominant in vv. 3–7a and vv. 11–12 are absent, and the specific references to the Thessalonian believers and those who afflict them give way to the generalized references to those who do not know God and disobey the gospel, as well as to God’s “saints,” “all the believers.” Then, with the parenthetical ὅτι clause in v. 10b, the description of God’s just judgment in vv. 8–10a is personally applied to the readers. These points mark vv. 8–10a out as a generalized explanation about God’s just judgment. Observing these and two other points, Wanamaker thinks that here Paul is inserting pre-­formed material of uncertain origin.50 But actually vv. 8–10a is a generalized explanation about God’s judgment according to his doctrine of justification, which he began to consider in v. 5 and goes on considering in vv. 11–12 (see below). This view is supported by 2:9–17, which echoes this explanation here in its description of the readers and unbelievers (see below; note 2:12, where he makes a similarly generalized statement about God’s judgment according to his doctrine of justification; see comment ad loc). In vv. 8–10a Paul lays out three principles of his doctrine of justification: (a) the Lord Jesus Christ is to execute the last judgment on God’s behalf; (b) it is essentially determined according to whether or not one “knows” God (i.e., has a proper relationship with him) and has believed the gospel of the Lord Jesus; and (c) the result (or verdict) is either participation in divine glory or eternal destruction (see below for a couple more principles suggested in vv. 11–12). The Lord Jesus who comes from heaven with his mighty angels will execute “the just judgment of God.” So he is God’s fully-­empowered agent. This understanding is based on “the gospel of God” concerning “God’s Son, who was born of the seed of David and declared as the fully empowered Son of 48 Cf. F. Lang, TDNT 6:935–37; so Lightfoot, 102; Dobschütz, 247; Best, 259; Malherbe, 400. Cf. 1 Cor 3:10–17 for Paul’s understanding of the last judgment by fire—­f ire that examines the Corinthians’ works and purges or destroys them. 49 Cf. Fee, 257. 50 Wanamaker, 232. Cf. Best, 267.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 527

7/12/23 11:29 AM

528

2 Thessalonians 1:5–10

God through the resurrection from the dead” (Rom 1:1–4). This is generally recognized as the Jerusalem church’s gospel, and it declares that, in fulfillment of God’s promises in the Scriptures (such as 2 Sam 7:12–14; Pss 2:7; 110:1; etc.), God sent his Son to be born as the Davidic Messiah, raised him up from the dead to his right hand, and invested him with his kingly power or lordship. After citing this gospel, Paul names this Jesus, the Messiah and God’s Son, as “the Lord,” that is, as the bearer of the divine name “Lord” (cf. Phil 2:6–11), and defines his own apostleship in terms of bringing all the nations to “the obedience of faith” to this “name” (Rom 1:4b–5). Paul unfolds this gospel in 1 Cor 15:23–27, making clearer the citations of or allusions to the above OT texts and other related texts, such as Dan 7:13–14 and Ps 8:7.51 God’s kingship inherited by his Son Jesus, the Messiah and “Lord,” includes power to execute divine judgment. This is a clear implication of Dan 7:9–14, one of the texts alluded to in 1 Cor 15:23–27, as it is in the theophanic judgment scene that God, “the Ancient of Days,” enthroned on one of the “thrones” (note the plural in v. 9) bestows kingly authority on the “one like a son of man” who came to him (apparently to sit on the throne next to God’s; cf. Ps 110:1). The “Son of Man” saying(s) in Mark 8:38 and Luke 12:8–9 reflect this implication, and John 5:26–27 makes it explicit by having Jesus declare that “the Father . . . has given [the Son of God] authority to execute judgment because he is Son of Man” (ὅτι υἱὸς ἀνθρώπου ἐστίν). Note also Acts 10:42; 17:31. Sometimes Paul speaks of God executing judgment at the last judgment (e.g., Rom 2:1–16; 14:10–12), but at other times he speaks of the Lord Jesus Christ doing so (e.g., 2 Cor 5:10; Col 3:24–25). Since the Lord Jesus Christ is the fully empowered agent of God as God’s Son, obviously Paul sees Christ’s judgment as God’s judgment. However, in Rom 8:31–39 he sees God and Christ working together at the last judgment, God as the presiding judge and God’s Son, Jesus Christ, as the defense counsel interceding for believers (which may be seen as implying that he also functions as the prosecuting counsel for evildoers; cf. Rom 2:16; 1 Cor 4:5). For the sense of punishment here, the word ἐκδίκησις is chosen to represent the earlier phrase ἀνταποδοῦναι τοῖς θλίβουσιν ὑμᾶς θλῖψιν (“to repay with affliction those who afflict you,” v. 6). Since it includes the nuance of “retaliation for harm done, [i.e.,] vengeance” in the more general sense of “meting out of justice, [i.e.,] giving of justice,”52 it is an appropriate word in the context for both stressing the just nature of God’s judgment once more (cf. vv. 5, 6) and consoling the readers who are afflicted by their adversaries. It may be seen as an antonym of δικαίωσις (“acquittal, vindication, justification”), which the believers of the gospel of Christ Jesus would receive (Rom 4:25; 5:18). 51 For all these, see Kim, Justification, 21–30; idem, “Jesus the Son of God as the Gospel,” in PGTO, 45–66; also see comment on 1 Thess 1:10 above. 52 Cf. BDAG 301.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 528

7/12/23 11:29 AM

Comment 529 τοῖς μὴ εἰδόσιν θεόν, “to those who do not know God.” In OT parlance “those who do not know God” are the gentiles; compare Ps 79:6 (78:6 LXX), “Pour out your anger on the nations that do not know you” (ἐπὶ ἔθνη τὰ μὴ γινώσκοντά σε). For the meaning of “not knowing God,” note 1 Thess 4:5 with comment there. It does not mean the intellectual failure to recognize his existence or to know about his attributes, but rather signals the failure to acknowledge, honor, and give thanks to him as the creator, savior, and lord (cf. Rom 1:18–32; see our letter at 2:9–14 [note esp. vv. 11–12], which parallels our present passage 1:5–12; see below). It is the failure to have a personal relationship of worshiping, trusting, and obeying him. So “those who do not know God” are those who, unlike the readers, have not “turned from idols, to serve a living and true God” (1 Thess 1:9). καὶ τοῖς μὴ ὑπακούουσιν τῷ εὐαγγελίῳ τοῦ κυρίου ἡμῶν Ἰησοῦ, “and those who do not obey the gospel of our Lord Jesus.” Some commentators argue that the repetition of the article before μὴ ὑπακούουσιν indicates that the preceding phrase “those who do not know God” and this phrase refer to two distinct groups, the former to the unbelieving gentiles and the latter to the unbelieving Jews.53 If we were dealing with a regular Greek construction, this would be a weighty (but not conclusive) argument; as it is, we are dealing with a passage that follows the parallelistic style of OT prophecy and poetry, so that τοῖς μὴ ὑπακούουσιν τῷ εὐαγγελίῳ κτλ. stands in synonymous parallelism to τοῖς μὴ εἰδόσιν θεόν (cf. Ps 36:10 [35:11 LXX], where τοῖς γινώσκουσίν σε and τοῖς εὐθέσι τῇ καρδίᾳ are similarly synonymous). Furthermore, in the Bible sometimes the unfaithful and disobedient Jews are referred to as those who do not know God (e.g., Isa 1:3; Jer 9:6; Hos 5:4; John 8:55), and in Rom 10:16 and 11:30 Paul accuses both Jews and gentiles for their disobedience to the gospel or God.54 So our phrase, “those who do not obey the gospel,” is to be seen as more precisely defining the preceding phrase, “those who do not know God.” With both phrases Paul has especially in view the Thessalonian persecutors of the readers, although he speaks more generally as he lays out the principles of the just judgment of God. Malherbe cites John Chrysostom (Homilies on 2 Thessalonians 2 [PG 62:470])—­who distinguished the people referred to here from the persecutors of the readers in v. 6, arguing that they are said to be punished for their unbelief in God and in his gospel and not for persecuting believers—­and writes: “In reassuring his readers that justice will prevail Paul moves to a higher level of consideration: the relation of those to be punished to God. Fundamental to their culpability is their rejection of God, which will have dire consequences for them.”55 Malherbe is right to recognize that here Paul moves to a more fundamental question of the culprits’ relationship to 53 Lightfoot, 103; Dobschütz, 248; Frame, 233; Marshall, 177–78. 54 Cf. Malherbe, 401; Weima, 472. 55 Malherbe, 401.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 529

7/12/23 11:29 AM

530

2 Thessalonians 1:5–10

God as the criterion of God’s just judgment. However, he fails to see properly the connection of this fundamental explanation of the just judgment of God (vv. 8–10) with the preceding statements on that judgment (vv. 5–7a). He fails to recognize that here Paul is explaining God’s just judgment on the level of its principles that are really a reflection of his doctrine of justification by faith (see below), and that it is meant to support his preceding pronouncements about the just judgment of God in vv. 5–7a in his continuing efforts to reassure and comfort the readers afflicted by their persecutors. To understand better the run of Paul’s thought as an integral whole in our section (vv. 4–10), we need to follow it in the reverse order of his writing (note the εἴπερ protasis [v. 6] placed after the apodosis of v. 5): at his revelation the Lord Jesus will execute God’s just judgment for all those who do not properly recognize God and render the obedience of faith to the gospel of his Son. Those who afflict the readers prove themselves to be such people by persecuting them for their faith in God and the gospel, while the readers prove themselves to be genuine believers in God and the gospel (cf. 1 Thess 1:9b–10) by enduring their persecution. Hence, at the last judgment God will justly mete out affliction on those who afflict the readers while granting the readers salvation. Therefore, the readers’ endurance by faith of the persecution of those who afflict them is a “sure sign” or “evidence” (ἔνδειγμα) that they will receive the verdict of salvation in God’s kingdom at the just judgment of God (while it is also an ἔνδειγμα that those who afflict them will receive the verdict of eschatological destruction—­this point is only implicit in our v. 5, while it is explicitly stated in its parallel at Phil 1:28). For ὑπακούειν τῷ εὐαγγελίῳ τοῦ κυρίου ἡμῶν Ἰησοῦ, compare Rom 10:16, οὐ πάντες ὑπήκουσαν τῷ εὐαγγελίῳ (“all have not obeyed the gospel”); also 2 Cor 9:13, ἐπὶ τῇ ὑποταγῇ τῆς ὁμολογίας ὑμῶν εἰς τὸ εὐαγγέλιον τοῦ Χριστοῦ (“for the obedience of your confession of the gospel of Christ”). This distinctive parlance of Paul, “to obey the gospel” (ὑπακούειν with dative τῷ εὐαγγελίῳ), reflects his understanding of the gospel cited in Rom 1:3–4 and of all the nations’ duty to render “the obedience of faith” to the “name” of “Jesus Christ our Lord” that the gospel proclaims (Rom 1:4b–5; cf. also 15:18; 16:26; 2 Cor 9:13; also Rom 2:8; Gal 5:7; see the explanation above). In Rom 10:16, after making the charge that “all have not obeyed the gospel,” Paul goes on to cite Isa 53:1 (“Lord, who has believed what he has heard from us?”) in order to substantiate that charge. Thus he makes it clear that “obedience to the gospel” is “obedience of faith to the gospel.” In our passage he does the same by contrasting the damned as those “who do not obey the gospel” with the Thessalonian Christians who “believed” the gospel (v. 10b). Furthermore, in our verse, by modifying “the gospel” with the phrase “of our Lord Jesus” (only here; elsewhere usually “the gospel of Christ”), he indicates not only that he is referring to the gospel cited in Rom 1:3–4 (and preached by him to the Thessalonians—­cf. 1 Thess 1:9–10 with comment ad loc), the gospel concerning God’s Son Jesus who was

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 530

7/12/23 11:29 AM

Comment 531 installed as the Lord over all, but also that he is talking about faith in that gospel and obedience to that Lord Jesus, which that gospel requires.56 God justifies (and so saves) everyone who believes in that gospel and confesses Jesus as Lord, that is, commits oneself to obedience to his lordship (Rom 1:16–17; 10:9–10). But the persecutors of the readers belong to those who do not know God properly and do not render the obedience of faith to the gospel (those who are, from Paul’s point of view, willfully rejecting to avail themselves of God’s saving grace in the gospel), unlike the readers who “believed” the gospel (v. 10b). Therefore, God will mete out to them ἐκδίκησις, the opposite of δικαίωσις (“ justification”). Thus, together with v. 5 and v. 10b, our v. 8 reflects especially clearly the doctrine of justification that Paul introduces in Rom 1:2–5, 16–17. 9 οἵτινες δίκην τίσουσιν ὄλεθρον αἰώνιον, “who will pay the penalty of eternal destruction.” It is difficult to make a distinction in sense here between οἵτινες and οἵ. In fact, for Paul the compound forms are regularly used instead of the simple in the nominative plural of the relative pronoun.57 Noting that δίκην τίσουσιν (“will pay penalty”) is a classical Greek idiom that appears only here in the Bible, Malherbe conjectures that Paul is using it in a context so suffused with OT allusions and Jewish apocalyptic language because he wants to stress the just nature of God’s judgment.58 The phrase ὄλεθρον αἰώνιον, an accusative in apposition to δίκην, we translate as “eternal destruction.” It is the penalty given to those who do not properly recognize God and render the obedience of faith to the gospel when the Lord Jesus executes vengeance upon them at the last judgment. It is the alternative to God’s gift to believers—­“eternal life” (ζωὴ αἰώνιος; cf. Rom 2:7; 5:21; 6:22–23; Gal 6:8). “Eternal life” is the life of the age (αἰών) to come (cf. Dan 12:2: ‫ חיי עולם‬/ ζωὴ αἰώνιος), the resurrection age or the age in which God reigns. So “eternal life” is really life in God’s kingdom—­the life that participates in divine fullness (πλήρωμα) or glory (cf. John 1:14, 16; Col 1:19) and therefore is free from all creaturely limitations, not only its temporariness (therefore, an unending or everlasting life) but also in all other aspects (e.g., wisdom, knowledge, love, power; cf. 1 Cor 13:8–12). Believers will be given this life as they are “counted worthy of God’s kingdom” at the last judgment (2 Thess 1:5; cf. Rom 5:21; 6:22). Hence, “eternal destruction” is to be construed as “the destruction of the age to come” (cf. Matt 12:32; 18:8–9; 25:46; Luke 16:23–25; Rom 2:7–11). On the basis of (1) contemporary Jewish belief (e.g., 1QS 2.15; 5.13; Pss. Sol. 2.35; 15.11; 4 Macc. 10.15), (2) Jesus’s teaching (Matt 5:29–30; 12:32; 56 Cf. BDAG 709 (s.v. ὁμολογία), on the parallel phrase ἐπὶ τῇ ὑποταγῇ τῆς ὁμολογίας ὑμῶν εἰς τὸ εὐαγγέλιον τοῦ Χριστοῦ in 2 Cor 9:13: “your professing of the gospel find[ing] expression in obedient subjection to its requirements.” For a more detailed exposition of 2 Cor 9:13, see Kim, Justification, 68–70. 57 Cf. H. J. Cadbury, “The Relative Pronouns in Acts and Elsewhere,” JBL 42 (1923): 150–57. 58 Malherbe, 402.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 531

7/12/23 11:29 AM

532

2 Thessalonians 1:5–10

18:8–9; 25:41, 46; Luke 16:23–25), and (3) especially the phrase “away from the presence of the Lord and from the glory of his power” that Paul attaches to “eternal destruction” here, which would be meaningless if the punished are not conscious of their separation from the Lord’s presence, Weima argues that with “eternal destruction” here Paul has in view not “destruction of a person that lasts forever” (i.e., their annihilation) but rather their unending punishment.59 Malherbe also grants that here “Paul does not mean annihilation, but everlasting ruin,” but stresses that “Paul does not dwell on the eschatological pains so vividly described in Jewish apocalyptic literature reflected elsewhere in the NT, but describes ruin as separation.”60 However, Best stresses that we should take “eternal” here in the sense not of “everlasting, of infinite duration,” but rather of “characteristic of the age to come.”61 But the implication of “infinite duration” cannot be excluded from “characteristic of the age to come,” as a characteristic of “the age to come” is infinite duration. Even so, following Best’s positive suggestion and taking the following v. 10a as a summary description of the blessings “characteristic of the age to come,” we may interpret “eternal destruction” here as exclusion from those blessings of the age to come. While believers like the readers will enjoy them as part of their “eternal life” (life in the age to come or God’s kingdom), unbelievers like the Thessalonian persecutors will be excluded from them—­for infinite duration, that is, forever.62 Paul does not describe that unhappy state of unbelievers in any detail, but still in vv. 6–7 he summarily represents it as “affliction” (θλῖψις; cf. “affliction and distress,” θλῖψις καὶ στενοχωρία, Rom 2:9) in contrast to the happy state of believers as “rest” (ἄνεσις), which clearly suggests a sense of unbelievers’ suffering in contrast to believers’ bliss. Nevertheless, we are to appreciate his restraint in speculating on the eschatological states of both groups. So it is wise to endorse the cautionary conclusion of Marshall here: “These points [the points enumerated above for taking “eternal destruction” in the sense of “everlasting punishment”] are of varying strength, and several of the texts cited are as uncertain in interpretation as the present one. . . . The simple fact is that Paul does not say sufficient here or anywhere else to enable us to comment in detail on his beliefs.”63 ἀπὸ προσώπου τοῦ κυρίου καὶ ἀπὸ τῆς δόξης τῆς ἰσχύος αὐτοῦ, “away from the presence of the Lord and from the glory of his power,” a phrase markedly similar to the refrain in Isa 2:10, 19, 21, ἀπὸ προσώπου τοῦ φόβου κυρίου καὶ ἀπὸ τῆς δόξης τῆς ἰσχύος αὐτοῦ (“from before the terror of the Lord and from the glory of his power”), which refers to wicked people hiding themselves from God’s presence on the day of Yahweh “when he rises to terrify the earth.” 59 60 61 62 63

Weima, 474. Cf. Trilling, 58; Marshall, 179; Green, 292; Beale, 188–89; Witherington, 196. Malherbe, 402. Best, 262–63. Cf. Schreiber, II:110–11. Marshall, 179.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 532

7/12/23 11:29 AM

Comment 533 In view of this echo of the Isaianic verses, we need to render the double preposition ἀπό here not simply with “from” but with “away from”64 and note in it the connotation of unbelievers’ exclusion or separation from God’s presence.65 Since God has exalted his Son Jesus and given him his name Yahweh-­κύριος to exercise power on his behalf (Rom 1:3–4; 1 Cor 15:23–27; Phil 2:6–11; etc., reflecting Ps 110:1; see above), OT texts that speak of Yahweh are applied to Jesus as the κύριος (cf. 1 Thess 5:2). So here in our v. 9 κύριος refers to Jesus, as the following clause in v. 10 makes plain. Our two parallel phrases evoke theophanic scenes where the Lord is revealed in the radiant light of his glory and majesty (e.g., Ezek 1:25–28; Acts 26:13; 2 Cor 4:6). Here “eternal destruction,” the penalty for unbelievers like the persecutors of the readers, is suggested as consisting in exclusion from the presence of the Lord and from his glory. Contrast this with the destiny of the readers to “be with the Lord always” (1 Thess 4:17; 5:10; cf. Phil 1:23) and to participate in his glory (2 Thess 1:10, 12). It is noteworthy that Paul strictly restrains himself from describing in detail unbelievers’ state of punishment, although he describes believers’ state of salvation a little, both here (vv. 10, 12) and elsewhere (e.g., Rom 8:18–21; 1 Cor 4:8; 6:2–3; 13:8–12; 15:42–57; 2 Cor 4:17; 5:1; Phil 3:20–21), in order to encourage them to persevere in suffering by faith or to grow in faith. Hence, we attempted above to infer the meaning of “eternal destruction” indirectly from the positive description in v. 10 of the salvation that the readers will be granted. 10 ὅταν ἔλθῃ ἐνδοξασθῆναι ἐν τοῖς ἁγίοις αὐτοῦ καὶ θαυμασθῆναι ἐν πᾶσιν τοῖς πιστεύσασιν, “when he comes to be glorified among his holy ones and to be marveled at by all who have believed” (for the attendance of the ἅγιοι at the parousia of Christ, cf. 1 Thess 3:13; see comment ad loc). While the ἅγιοι here might be the angels of v. 7,66 the parallelism between this ἐνδοξασθῆναι clause and the following θαυμασθῆναι clause strongly suggests the identity of the ἅγιοι as πᾶσιν τοῖς πιστεύσαντες. The double description of “holy ones” and “believers” here stands in antithetical parallelism with the double description of “those who do not know God” and “[those who] do not obey the gospel of our Lord Jesus” in v. 8. This fact makes it doubly clear that “holy ones” and “believers” are identical, referring together to Christians, just as the two clauses in v. 8 together refer to the same entity, their non-­Christian persecutors.67 The parallelism of our vv. 10–12 with 2:13–14 (see below) confirms still further that by the “holy ones” Paul here refers to Christians as those whom “God chose for salvation through sanctification [ἐν ἁγιασμῷ] by the Spirit and belief [πίστει] in the truth” (2:13). This clause of 2:13 explains why Paul

64 65 66 67

So CEB; NASB; NET. So NIV; NJB; NRSV. Cf. Weima, 475. So Reinmuth, 172; Roose, 134; Schreiber, II:114. Cf. also Hoppe, II:98.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 533

7/12/23 11:29 AM

534

2 Thessalonians 1:5–10

designates believers in Christ as κλητοὶ ἅγιοι, “holy ones by calling” (Rom 1:7; 1 Cor 1:2): it is because God has called them ἐν ἁγιασμῷ (1 Thess 4:7). The use of ἅγιοι for disciples of Jesus may have originated in the Jerusalem church and was widely accepted, so that Paul can refer to its members as οἱ ἅγιοι without qualification (1 Cor 16:1; 2 Cor 9:1; cf. Acts 9:13; Rom 15:25, 31, etc.). In Eph 2:19 gentile believers are said to have become συμπολῖται τῶν ἁγίων, those who have been naturalized among the people of God (or, in the figure of Rom 11:16–24, those who have been grafted into the good olive tree); hence, members of Pauline churches are also freely referred to as the ἅγιοι (cf. 2 Cor 1:1; Phil 1:1; Col 1:2, 4; Phlm 5, 7). In our verse, Paul builds the two infinitival clauses in synonymous parallelism, echoing OT passages: Ps 89:7 (88:8 LXX), ὁ θεὸς ἐνδοξαζόμενος ἐν βουλῇ ἁγίων, and Ps 68:35 (67:36 LXX), θαυμαστὸς ὁ θεὸς ἐν τοῖς ἁγίοις αὐτοῦ (although in both passages the ἅγιοι are the heavenly members of Yahweh’s council). Here, in our v. 10, “his holy ones” in the first clause are identified as “all those who have believed” in the second clause. Like “every” (πᾶς) in Rom 1:16, “all” (πάντες/πάντας) in Rom 3:22–24 (cf. 3:28–30), and “all/every” (πᾶς) in Rom 10:12–13, “all” (πᾶς) here in our verse is an element of Paul’s doctrine of justification, with which he stresses that God justifies, without any distinction, all human beings who believe in the gospel (cf. also “all” in 2:12; cf. Gal 2:16c [πᾶσα σάρξ]; 3:26, 28 [πάντες]). Paul uses the aorist participle (τοῖς πιστεύσασιν) as he speaks from the viewpoint of the Lord’s parousia. The first two uses of the preposition ἐν here in our v. 10 are taken in various senses, including local (“in the midst of”), instrumental (“by”), and causal (“on the ground of”). To determine its sense correctly, it is necessary to recognize (a) that in v. 10 “his saints”/“all the believers” stands in contrast to those who are to be excluded from the Lord’s presence and his glory (v. 9); and (b) that the following ὅτι clause (“because our testimony to you was believed”), which may, but for emphasis, appear almost redundant after the phrase “in all who believed,” strongly underlines that the cause for the contrast consists in the fact that the readers have believed the gospel, whereas evildoers refuse to recognize God properly and render the obedience of faith to the gospel of the Lord Jesus (v. 8). The first point leads us to take the double ἐν here in the local sense (and as standing in contrast to the double ἀπό in v. 9): at his coming, the Lord Jesus will be present among his saints, the believers, whereas unbelieving evildoers will be banished from his presence and glory. We then consider the second point together with the fact that the passive forms of the infinitives “to be glorified” and “to be marveled at” inherently contain the question about the actors (“by whom?”). We then can see that ἐν here includes the instrumental sense as well (cf. ἐν in v. 12). The Lord Jesus will “be glorified” and “marveled at” (i.e., admired) by his saints, because they are the people who, by believing the gospel, honor the Lord Jesus and render obedience to him, in contrast to the unbelieving evildoers.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 534

7/12/23 11:29 AM

Comment 535 Since Paul sets v. 6 (God’s punishment for those who afflict the readers with affliction) and v. 7a (God’s reward for the afflicted readers with rest) in antithetical parallelism and explains in vv. 8–9 the content of v. 6 on the level of the principle of God’s just judgment, he may be expected to unfold in our v. 10 the content of v. 7a, thus completing the antithetical parallelism. Yet, in v. 10, instead of writing to the effect, “but you the believers will receive the rest [v. 7a] and share in the Lord’s glory in the kingdom of God [v. 5],” he writes of the Lord coming “to be glorified . . . and marveled at.” Marshall notices this apparent oddity here and tries to explain the Lord-­centered statement instead of a believers-­centered statement in terms of Paul’s desire to avoid “any suggestion of a selfish, self-­centered, self-­congratulation on the part of the saved over against the lost; their attention is to be centered on the One who has saved them.”68 But this explanation is contrary to the tenor of the preceding vv. 5–9 and the purpose of the whole section to console the suffering readers. To understand our v. 10 properly, we should rather pay attention to the fact that it is closely attached to the preceding v. 9, that it explains the eschatological revelation of the Lord’s πρόσωπον (“face,” so “presence”) and glory mentioned in v. 9. We can then see that Paul’s primary purpose in v. 10 is to confirm that the great glory of the Lord Jesus will be revealed at his coming, and further to convey the sense of what great blessings unbelievers will forfeit because of their refusal to believe in the gospel and render obedience to his lordship (vv. 8–9). That is why in v. 10 he talks about the Lord’s glory and formulates the statement in a Lord-­centered way, rather than a believer-­centered way. However, instead of simply stating in some such way as “when he comes in his great glory,” he refers to the saints of the Lord and formulates the Lord-­centered statement in the passive form, “when he comes to be glorified among his saints and marveled at by all who have believed.” He does this to include, albeit without stress, the thought of salvation that believers will receive (thus he does complete the antithetical parallelism of vv. 6–10) and thereby to heighten the sense of unbelieving evildoers’ loss in contrast to believers’ gain. When the Lord comes, revealing his glory, he will be in the midst of his saints, all the believers, and they will glorify him and marvel at him. (The content of v. 10 is summarily referred to as “the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ and our assembling to meet him” in 2:1.) Thus believers will be granted audience or communion by the Lord and made to participate in his glory, whereas unbelieving evildoers will be banished from his presence and glory. Thus, this idea of believers’ sharing in the Lord’s glory is implicit here.69 Paul confirms this by making the idea explicit in v. 12 (ἐνδοξασθῇ . . . καὶ ὑμεῖς

68 Marshall, 181. 69 Cf. Marshall, 181.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 535

7/12/23 11:29 AM

536

2 Thessalonians 1:5–10

ἐν αὐτῷ) alongside the primary theme of the glorification of the Lord Jesus by believers. ὅτι ἐπιστεύθη τὸ μαρτύριον ἡμῶν ἐφ᾽ ὑμᾶς, “because you believed our testimony to you” (lit. “because our testimony to you was believed”). The phrase τὸ μαρτύριον ἡμῶν means “the testimony borne by us” (and so it has the same structure and meaning as τὸ κήρυγμα ἡμῶν, “the message preached by us,” 1 Cor 15:14). Christ is the content of the “testimony,” so that Paul also speaks about τὸ μαρτύριον τοῦ Χριστοῦ, “the testimony of/about Christ” (1 Cor 1:6). Therefore, τὸ μαρτύριον ἡμῶν is synonymous with τὸ εὐαγγέλιον ἡμῶν (“our gospel,” 2 Thess 2:14; cf. 2 Cor 4:3; 1 Thess 1:5). By speaking of the readers as having “believed” his “testimony” (meaning his gospel) here, Paul means the same thing as in 1 Thess 2:13, their acceptance of his “word” about the Lord Jesus Christ as “the word of God.” 70 Malherbe acknowledges that ἐφ᾽ ὑμᾶς is awkward here and that it can go either with ἐπιστεύθη (“was believed”) or τὸ μαρτύριον ἡμῶν (“our testimony”). But he decides for the latter with the majority of the commentators, saying that the preposition “ἐπί with the accusative normally describes motion towards an object.”71 Even if the majority view is adopted, it is clear in the context that with the passive-­voice clause (“because our testimony to you was believed”) Paul means to stress that the readers believed the gospel in contrast to their persecutors, who “did not render the obedience [of faith] to the gospel of the Lord Jesus Christ” (v. 8). Hence, it is quite appropriate to render the ὅτι clause here thus: “because you believed our testimony to you.”72 The causal ὅτι clause appears to be awkwardly connected with the preceding ὅταν clause. Observing this fact, Marshall comments that “its inclusion must have had a special force.”73 Most commentators think that with the clause Paul seeks to make it clear that the preceding phrase, “all those who have believed,” includes the readers. So, for example, Lightfoot treats the clause as elliptical; according to him, the full sense is “in all them that believed, and therefore in you, for our testimony was believed by you.”74 Fee thinks that “with [the] apparently deliberate appropriation of texts from the Psalter [89:7/LXX 88:8 and 68:35/LXX 67:36 in v. 10a] Paul’s sentence has gotten away from him a bit; so to make sure that the Thessalonians do not miss the fact that all of this still has them in view, he adds, ‘This includes you, because you believed our testimony to you.’ ”75 But it is not the appropriation of the Psalm texts in v. 10a but Paul’s insertion in vv. 8–10a of his explanation of God’s just judgment in accordance with 70 71 72 73 74 75

Cf. Findlay, 152; Malherbe, 405. Malherbe, 405. Cf. Marshall, 181; Weima, 477. So Fee, 252, 262. Marshall, 181. Lightfoot, 105. Fee, 262.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 536

7/12/23 11:29 AM

Explanation 537 his doctrine of justification that makes the connection of the ὅτι clause here appear awkward. Having made that generalized explanation in support of his statement about God’s just judgment (vv. 6–7), Paul adds the ὅτι clause here to indicate that the just judgment of God so explained applies to the readers in the positive way. So, the causal ὅτι clause in v. 10b is best understood with the missing main clause to be filled in from the context, the positive outcome of God’s just judgment for believers in v. 10a: “(Therefore you will also receive this blessing of participation in the Lord’s glory) because you have believed the gospel that we preached to you.” The truth that the readers will share in the reward given to all believers is already implicit in the generalized explanation of God’s just judgment itself (v. 10a). But Paul adds the ὅτι clause to affirm that truth emphatically, highlighting their faith in the gospel, the criterion of that judgment. Thus he completes the theme of vv. 6–7 (and thereby supports the thesis statement of v. 5). ἐν τῇ ἡμέρᾳ ἐκείνῃ, “on that day.” “That day” is the day of the Lord (cf. 2:2; 1 Thess 5:2; cf. ἐν τῇ ἡμέρᾳ ἐκείνῃ, Isa 2:11, 17, from a context echoed in v. 9 above). After the long and solemn reference to the parousia of the Lord Jesus in our vv. 7b–8a, the second reference to it in the beginning of v. 10 (“when he comes”) already appears somewhat redundant. But Paul adds yet another reference to it, here at the end of v. 10 after the ὅτι clause (note that many modern translations smooth out its awkward position by combining the second and third references together, “when he comes on that day”). So with this third reference to the day of the Lord, Paul completes his long sentence of thanksgiving that began in v. 3. All this clearly suggests that he is responding to the readers’ continuing confusion and anxiety about the day of the Lord (cf. 1 Thess 4:13–5:11). In a moment, he will deal with a new issue that has arisen among them about the day of the Lord (2 Thess 2), but before that, in this section of 1:5–10, he seeks to allay their anxiety about the last judgment by reassuring them of their certain salvation on that day, as well as consoling and encouraging them to persevere in faith amid persecution by the opponents to the Christian faith.76

Explanation In our passage vv. 5–10, Paul pursues two aims together: to comfort the Thessalonian believers suffering severe persecution from anti-­C hristian adversaries and to allay their anxiety about the last judgment at the parousia of the Lord Jesus Christ. He does this by way of explaining “the just judgment of God,” which will result in their vindication and glorification in God’s kingdom but condemnation and exclusion of their persecutors. As we have seen above (Form/Structure/Setting, and comment on v. 5), Paul could have simply summarized the content of our passage, vv. 5–10, by 76 Cf. Fee, 260; Weima, 478–79.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 537

7/12/23 11:29 AM

538

2 Thessalonians 1:5–10

affirming only that the Thessalonian Christians’ endurance of persecution by their anti-­Christian adversaries for the sake of their faith is an ἔνδειγμα of salvation for them and of destruction for their adversaries, just as in the parallel passage Phil 1:27–30. But here he prominently refers to “the just judgment of God,” making the formulation of v. 5 somewhat awkward, and explains it at length as the main subject of the whole subsequent section (vv. 6–10), stressing its “ just” character twice over (vv. 5–6). Above, we have inferred, from these and other related differences of our passage from its parallel Phil 1:27–30, that the Thessalonian believers were not only excited and confused about the day of the Lord or the parousia of the Lord Jesus Christ, but also were seriously anxious about God’s judgment, which is to take place on that day. In 1 Thess 4:13–18 and 5:1–11, we saw them grieving about their dead fellow believers before the parousia of the Lord Jesus, as well as being anxious about the day of the Lord coming at an unknown hour like a thief. We saw how Paul therefore had to assure them by teaching about the resurrection of dead believers at the time of the parousia, as well as by convincing them that they, as those who are destined to salvation through Christ’s death of vicarious atonement, are already children of the day as the bearers of the firstfruits of that salvation, so that the day of the Lord would not overtake them by surprise. Apparently, even those teachings have not cleared all their confusion and anxiety. The severe persecutions by their non-­Christian adversaries seem to have driven them to cling to their intense hope for their deliverance at the parousia of the Lord Jesus. Perhaps marana tha! (“our Lord, come!”) was their constant and fervent prayer (cf. 1 Cor 16:23; Rev 22:20). But that intense or even feverish hope apparently has also made them susceptible to a false prophecy that the day of the Lord has already come (2 Thess 2:2). So they have become more confused and anxious about the day and the last judgment of God that is to take place on that day (cf. 2 Cor 5:10). Their great anxiety about that judgment has lingered on in their minds because, even while preaching the gospel that they would be delivered from God’s wrath (1 Thess 1:10; 5:9–10), Paul taught them to live a perfectly holy and righteous life through the Lord’s help “with fear and trembling,” so as to stand “blameless” before the judgment seat of God on that day (1 Thess 3:12–13; 5:23; cf. 1 Cor 1:8; 4:5; Phil 1:6, 9–11; 2:12–16; Col 1:21–23; note esp. 2 Cor 5:10–11: Paul himself has the “fear of the Lord” in view of the last judgment on the day of the Lord!; cf. 1 Cor 4:4; 9:27; Phil 3:12–14). So, in this letter Paul deals with these issues about the day of the Lord. He deals with the question of God’s last judgment first, stressing that it is a just or righteous one and that therefore it will most certainly render the verdict of salvation for the Thessalonian believers, while rendering the verdict of condemnation and destruction for their unbelieving persecutors. In this context, he stresses that the criterion for God’s judgment is faith in the apostolic gospel of the Lord Jesus, and thereby he clearly reflects his doctrine of justification. Thus he

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 538

7/12/23 11:29 AM

Bibliography 539 both assures the readers of their salvation and encourages them to persevere in that faith despite their afflictions. Having thus allayed in 1:5–10 the readers’ fear of the last judgment and comforted them, Paul goes on to address the false prophecy (2:1–12). But there again he comes back to the theme of the contrasting outcomes of the last judgment of God, the destruction of unbelieving evildoers and the consummated salvation of the readers, the believers (2:9–12, 13–14).77

C. Prayer Report (1:11–12) Bibliography Kim, S. Justification and God’s Kingdom. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2018. —­—­—.­ “Paul’s Doctrine of Justification in 2 Thessalonians 1–2.” Bib 102 (2021): 78–96. Revised version in pages 279–95 in PGTO. O’Brien, P. T. Introductory Thanksgivings in the Letters of Paul. NovTSup 49. Leiden: Brill, 1977. Rainbow, O. A. “Justification according to Paul’s Thessalonian Correspondence,” BBR 19 (2009): 249–74. Wiles, G. P. Paul’s Intercessory Prayers. SNTSMS 24. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1974.

Translation With this end in view we also pray for you always, that our God may make you worthy of his call and fulfill a every desire of goodness and work of faith in power, 12so that b the name of our Lord Jesus c may be glorified in you, and you in him, according to the grace of our God and the Lord Jesus Christ. 11

Notes a. For the aorist subjunctive πληρώσῃ, the future indicative πληρώσει is read by A K P Ψ 6 2464 et al. b. ὅπως with the subjunctive, expressing purpose, is perhaps used for the sake of variation after the preceding ἵνα clause; cf. 1 Cor 1:29; 2 Cor 8:14. See BDF §369.4. c. Χριστοῦ is inserted after Ἰησοῦ by A F G P 33 81 1739 1881 pm lat syr copbo.pt Ambst.

Form/Structure/Setting This prayer report78 performs the same kind of function as the wish-­prayer of l Thess 3:11–13 in closing a section of the letter (here the thanksgiving section that began in v. 3). So it is a de facto wish-­prayer, which is parallel to the wish-­prayer of 2:16–17 (see below). Two petitions are indicated by the subjunctives ἀξιώσῃ (“may make you worthy”) and πληρώσῃ (“may fulfill”) after ἵνα, and the purpose of the petitions is indicated by the further subjunctive ἐνδοξασθῇ (“may be glorified”) after ὅπως, which is an elaboration on the opening phrase εἰς ὅ. 77 For more on this, see my essay, “Paul’s Doctrine of Justification in 2 Thessalonians 1–2,” Bib 102 (2021): 78–96. A revised version in PGTO, 279–95. 78 So called because it is not a direct prayer in the imperative or a wish-­prayer in the optative but a statement that prayer is being offered for a particular object or with a particular purpose.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 539

7/12/23 11:29 AM

540

2 Thessalonians 1:11–12

Comment 1:11 Εἰς ὃ καὶ προσευχόμεθα πάντοτε περὶ ὑμῶν, “With this end in view we also pray for you always.” In the opening prepositional phrase εἰς ὅ (lit. “for which”), what is the antecedent of the relative pronoun ὅ? It appears the simplest to take it to refer to the immediately preceding v. 10, the content of v. 10a that is applied to the readers through the ὅτι clause of v. 10b.79 That is, Paul prays for the readers so that at the parousia, the Lord Jesus may be glorified among and by the readers, and they may share in his glory. This view is confirmed by the concluding ὅπως purpose clause in v. 12. The καί (“also”) qualifies προσευχόμεθα, and with the expression Paul looks back at v. 3 and indicates that he prays for the readers as well as gives thanks for them.80 As he gives thanks to God for them “always” (v. 3), so also he prays for them “always.” ἵνα ὑμᾶς ἀξιώσῃ τῆς κλήσεως ὁ θεὸς ἡμῶν, “that our God may make you worthy of his call.” Paul states the content of his prayer in the purpose clause of ἵνα plus subjunctive verbs (ἀξιώσῃ and πληρώσῃ), since he prays in order to have the content of the prayer realized.81 The content consists of two petitions. The first is that God “make [the readers] worthy of his call.” Having taken καταξιωθῆναι in v. 5 above in the sense of “to consider or count worthy,” some commentators82 take ἀξιώσῃ here also in that sense; and then interpreting ἡ κλῆσις (“the call,” clearly meaning God’s call, hence rendered with “his call” in most of modern translations) in the sense of God’s future eschatological “call” to receive the prize of salvation (in heaven; Phil 3:14 [N.B. ἄνω]; cf. Matt 22:3, 8), they think that here Paul is praying that God make the readers worthy to receive his eschatological call unto salvation in God’s kingdom. Interpreting this way, Trilling regards our phrase as a sign of a forger of this letter producing here an un-­Pauline idea.83 However, this line of interpretation is made impossible by the following clause, καὶ πληρώσῃ πᾶσαν εὐδοκίαν ἀγαθωσύνης καὶ ἔργον πίστεως ἐν δυνάμει, which forms a synonymous parallelism with our clause.84 This is a petition for God to enable the readers to produce good fruits of faith at present. If this clause stood ahead of our clause, that line of interpretation might be possible. But the actual ordering of the two clauses makes that interpretation very unnatural. Furthermore, with the one exception in Phil 3:14, Paul always speaks of God’s calling of believers as having happened when they believed the gospel and were baptized as “saints” or God’s people (e.g., Rom 1:7; 8:28, 30; 1 Cor 1:2, 9; 7:17–24; Gal 1:6; 5:13; 1 Thess 4:7; 5:24; 2 Thess 2:14), or as 79 80 81 82 83 84

Marshall, 181; Fee, 264; cf. Malherbe, 409. Dobschütz, 254; Marshall, 182; Malherbe, 410; Weima, 480. Cf. Marshall, 182; Malherbe, 410; Weima, 481. E.g., Lightfoot, 105; Wanamaker, 233; cf. Green, 296; Rainbow, “Justification,” 251. Trilling, 62–63. So also Müller, 256–57; Nicklas, 105–6. Cf. Dobschütz, 255.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 540

7/12/23 11:29 AM

Comment 541 continuing in the present (1 Thess 2:12; see comment ad loc). Actually, in 1 Thess 2:12 Paul brings the language of God’s “call” and “worthiness” closely together in his exhortation for the Thessalonian believers’ present lifestyle: “to walk worthily [ἀξίως] of God who calls [καλοῦντος] you into his kingdom and glory” (see comment at 1 Thess 2:12). In Eph 4:1, Paul or a Paulinist exhorts the readers “to walk worthily of the call to which you have been called” (ἀξίως περιπατῆσαι τῆς κλήσεως ἧς ἐκλήθητε). These examples suggest that we should interpret our clause here as a petition that pleads for God to help or make the readers carry out such an exhortation.85 So we should take our ἀξιώσῃ here in the sense of “to make [the readers] worthy” of God’s call at their baptism.86 We had to take the cognate verb καταξιωθῆναι in v. 5 in the sense of “to consider or count worthy,” because there the context was concerned with God’s verdict for believers at his just judgment. But here the context is concerned with God’s help for believers’ right living in preparation for the last judgment, so that the verb ἀξιοῦν needs to be interpreted in the sense of “to make worthy.” Schreiber objects to this and insists on interpreting ἀξιοῦν in the sense of “to consider or count worthy,”87 but somehow still comes up with the following explanation: “The petition here, that God ‘consider [the readers] worthy’ . . . of their call, is based on the insight that only God’s grace makes a life according to the gospel possible.” But then isn’t Schreiber actually taking the Greek verb in the sense of “to make worthy”? καὶ πληρώσῃ πᾶσαν εὐδοκίαν ἀγαθωσύνης καὶ ἔργον πίστεως ἐν δυνάμει, “and (that) he may fulfill every desire of goodness and work of faith in power.” With this parallel petition, Paul concretizes the preceding petition: to make the readers worthy of God’s call is to enable them to complete their good work of faith. To interpret the phrase πᾶσαν εὐδοκίαν ἀγαθωσύνης properly, we have to determine whether εὐδοκία (“goodwill, desire”) is of God or of the readers and whether ἀγαθωσύνης (“goodness”) is objective genitive (“the desire to do good”) or subjective genitive (“desire originating from goodness”). Paul uses εὐδοκία in reference both to God (Eph 1:5, 9; cf. Phil 2:13—see below) and to human beings (Rom 10:1; Phil 1:15; cf. use of the cognate verb εὐδοκεῖν for his own decision in 1 Thess 2:8; 3:1). Here, the following parallel phrase ἔργον πίστεως (“work of faith”) leads us to take εὐδοκία as human “desire,” that is, the readers’ “desire.”88 Weima thinks the parallel phrase leads us also to take ἀγαθωσύνης as a subjective genitive like πίστεως and so to interpret the phrase εὐδοκίαν ἀγαθωσύνης as the readers’ “ ‘desire’ originating from their ‘goodness.’ ”89 But this would be a most unusual concept in Paul (cf. Rom 7:18–19!). 85 86 87 88 89

Dobschütz, 255. So Marshall, 182; Malherbe, 410; Fee, 264; Richard, 310; Roose, 136; Weima, 481–82. Schreiber, II:117. Cf. also Hoppe, II:103. So the majority of commentators. Weima, 483. So also Trilling, 63; Schreiber, II:118.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 541

7/12/23 11:29 AM

542

2 Thessalonians 1:11–12

The majority of commentators take ἀγαθωσύνης as an objective genitive and interpret the phrase εὐδοκίαν ἀγαθωσύνης as the readers’ “desire to do good.” On the phrase ἔργον πίστεως (“work originating from faith”), see comment on 1 Thess 1:3. But, then, what does Paul mean exactly when he prays that God πληρώσῃ the readers’ “every desire to do good” and their “work of faith”? Surely he does not mean that God fulfill those things for their sake and in their stead while they do not work. Does he mean then that God “bring to completion” the good work that “was already begun” by them90—­that God make up their incomplete or inadequate work of faith so that it may become complete? Surely this idea also is foreign to the Paul known from his other letters. So Paul’s prayer here is to be understood in the sense that God enable the readers to fulfill their resolve to do good and their good work of faith. Here we may take the phrase ἐν δυνάμει (clearly meaning God’s power—­the power of his Holy Spirit) in both ways: God enables them “by his power,” and the readers do the good work, availing themselves of “his power” by faith. Here is then reflected Paul’s belief that believers need God’s grace to carry out their intent to do good and their “work of faith” and so live in a manner worthy of his call. This conviction is the most clearly expressed in Rom 7–8 where he teaches that, enslaved to the powers of the law, sin, and the flesh, Adamic human beings in general and even the Israelites cannot carry out their goodwill in action, even if they have it inside (esp. Rom 7:14–25), and that only when they are redeemed through faith in the gospel of the atonement of Christ Jesus, God’s Son, and are enabled by the continuing grace of God’s Spirit can they really do the good works required by the law (8:1–13) and live in a manner worthy of their call. So, with this belief, Paul prays here that God help the redeemed Thessalonian believers walk by his Holy Spirit and bear “the fruit of righteousness” (Phil 1:11; cf. Rom 6:22), “the fruit of the Spirit” (Gal 5:22–23). In his previous letter, Paul already prayed that “the Lord Jesus make [the Thessalonian believers] increase and abound in love” (1 Thess 3:12) and that “the God of peace sanctify [them] to be perfect” (1 Thess 5:23), with the understanding, of course, that God and his executive agent, his Son, the Lord Jesus Christ, do these things in them by the Spirit (cf. Rom 8:9–11; 1 Thess 4:8). Paul’s exhortative prayer here is in line with those prayers. However, it is formulated in a much milder form than those in 1 Thess 3:12–13 and 5:23 (cf. 1 Cor 1:8; Phil 1:10), with the sting of the requirement to stand “blameless” before God’s judgment seat removed (see Explanation for 2:16–17 below for the reason for this difference). During the interim period before the consummation of God’s kingdom at the parousia of the Lord Jesus, at every moment of ethical choice believers stand at the crossroads of whether to follow the (righteous) way the Lord 90 Cf. BDAG s.v. πληρόω 3; Weima, 482; Schreiber, II:118.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 542

7/12/23 11:29 AM

Comment 543 Jesus directs or the (evil) way the still-­active Satan tempts their flesh to follow. There the Holy Spirit clarifies for them the moral issues involved in the murky existential situation and reminds them of “the law of Christ” (chiefly, the double command of love—­for God and for neighbor; 1 Cor 9:21; Gal 6:2; cf. John 14:26; 15:26; 16:13–15). He gives them faith to renew their baptismal confession “Jesus is Lord” (Rom 10:9–10; 1 Cor 12:3), by which they have been transferred into the kingdom of the Lord Jesus, God’s Son (cf. Col 1:13–14), and to obey him (“the obedience of faith,” Rom 1:3–5). Thus, they bear “the fruit of righteousness,” “the fruit of the Spirit,” by “walking according to the Spirit” by faith (Rom 8:4–15; Gal 5:16–26; cf. 1 Thess 4:8 with comment and Explanation ad loc). So that “fruit” is “the work of faith,” their “work” (i.e., response) of trust in and obedience to the Lord Jesus that is enabled by his Spirit. This is the present process of justification for those who were justified by God’s grace through faith in the gospel (the baptismal justification) on the way to its consummation at the last judgment at the parousia of the Lord Jesus (the end-­t ime justification).91 Thus, their “desire to do good” is turned into action by their faith. And the Spirit of God works both to arouse their “desire to do good” (or to follow the righteous way of the Lord Jesus) and to enable them to carry that desire out by faith—­to do their “work of faith” (their rendering “the obedience of faith” to the Lord). Therefore, Paul formulates this truth in Phil 2:13 thus: “God is at work in you both to will [equivalent to εὐδοκίαν ἀγαθωσύνης in our verse] and to work [equivalent to ἔργον πίστεως in our verse] for the goodwill [εὐδοκία].”92 So, believers’ good works are done only by the grace of the triune God and through their faith. That is, their present process of justification is also by God’s grace alone and through their faith alone. Here there is no room for any idea of human merit (cf. also 1 Cor 15:10 and Col 1:29 for more evidence that believers do good work only through the energizing grace of God that operates in them). In Phil 2:12–13, Paul gives the Philippian believers the assurance that God works in them to arouse their will to do good and to give them the ability to implement that will in concrete action. He gives this assurance in order to exhort them to “work out [their] salvation” by availing themselves (no doubt, by faith) of such grace of God. In our verse, he prays to God to do for the Thessalonian believers what he assures the Philippian believers God is doing for them. He prays to God so that in this way God may “make [the Thessalonian believers] worthy of his call”—­his call that has made them become his holy and righteous people. Could a forger have produced here such a close material parallelism to this most striking formulation in Phil 91 For all this, cf. Kim, Justification, 81–91. 92 If ἡ εὐδοκία in this Philippians verse is to be taken as the Philippian Christians’ goodwill rather than as God’s, as it is usually taken, the parallelism of our verse to the Philippians verse would be even more exact; cf. Rainbow, “Justification,” 270, who also notes the parallelism between our verse and Phil 2:13.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 543

7/12/23 11:29 AM

544

2 Thessalonians 1:11–12

2:12–13 by means of a quite different formulation? Or could he have expressed here so accurately and succinctly the present process of justification that Paul teaches as an element of his most distinctive doctrine of justification? 12 ὅπως ἐνδοξασθῇ τὸ ὄνομα τοῦ κυρίου ἡμῶν Ἰησοῦ ἐν ὑμῖν, καὶ ὑμεῖς ἐν αὐτῷ, “so that the name of our Lord Jesus may be glorified in you, and you in him.” Paul now states the purpose of his prayer in the words of Isa 66:5 (LXX: “Speak, our brothers/sisters, to those who hate and detest us, so that the name of the Lord may be glorified [ἵνα τὸ ὄνομα κυρίου δοξασθῇ], and may appear in gladness; but they shall be put to shame”). The Isaianic oracle was given as a promise to the faithful Israelites who were taunted and persecuted by their unfaithful compatriots for their faith in God. Apparently, Paul finds the situation of the Thessalonian believers similar to that of those faithful Israelites. So, having echoed the text of Isa 66 in our vv. 6–8 above to affirm the Lord’s future coming in fire for vengeance upon the unbelieving persecutors of the readers, he echoes it here again to speak about the Lord’s glorification, in which the readers will participate.93 However, he changes the original conjunction ἵνα into ὅπως, to distinguish this purpose clause from the preceding ἵνα clause in v. 11, with which he expressed the content of the prayer.94 He also changes the original simple form of the verb δοξασθῇ into the compound form ἐνδοξασθῇ, aligning our verse with v. 10, which has the latter form from Ps 89:7 (88:8 LXX). Some commentators95 interpret the glorification of the name of the Lord Jesus and of the readers as taking place in the present. Taking the phrase ἐν ὑμῖν (“in you”) as instrumental or causal and referring to the Pauline passages such as 1 Cor 6:20; 10:31; and Gal 1:24 (cf. Rom 15:6; 2 Cor 9:13), they argue that Paul means here that the Lord Jesus is glorified “by virtue of” the readers, that is, by their good deeds (2 Thess 1:11). But Malherbe confesses that it is then difficult to explain how the glorification of believers by the Lord (καὶ ὑμεῖς ἐν αὐτῷ, “and you in him”) takes place in the present,96 although Wanamaker appeals to 2 Cor 3:18 for the present process of glorification of Christians through the Lord, who is the Spirit.97 However, 2 Cor 3:18 is unique, and Paul normally speaks of Christians’ glorification as the end-­t ime hope (e.g., Rom 5:2; 8:18–19; 1 Cor 15:42–57; Phil 3:20–21; Col 3:4). In fact, later in our letter in 2:13–14, where Paul turns the content of this prayer into a reassuring thanksgiving, he will re-­present the idea of believers “being glorified in the Lord” in terms of their “obtaining the glory of our Lord Jesus Christ” (see comment ad loc). So the parallelism between our passage and 2:13–14 is really the decisive evidence for an eschatological interpretation of 93 Cf. Fee, 266–67; Weima, 484–85. 94 Weima, 484. 95 E.g., Dobschütz, 257; Trilling, 64; Wanamaker, 235; Richard, 311; Malherbe, 411–12; Schreiber, II:120; Nicklas, 107. 96 Malherbe, 411. 97 Wanamaker, 235.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 544

7/12/23 11:29 AM

Comment 545 our verse here. Likewise, the obvious parallelism between our verse and v. 10 serves the same purpose.98 Here, we must pay special attention to the fact that, with the opening phrase εἰς ὅ of v. 11, Paul has already indicated that he offers the present prayer so that what he assured in v. 10 for the readers may be fulfilled (see above). So our ὅπως clause repeats the substance of v. 10 (the Lord Jesus will be glorified in and through the readers), making explicit what is only implicit in v. 10 (the readers will be glorified in and through the Lord Jesus)—­“when he comes.”99 The parallelism between our verse and v. 10 leads us to interpret the prepositional phrases “in you” and “in him” here in the same way as “in his holy ones” and “in all the believers” of v. 10: both locally and instrumentally, as we have just done. However, in this purpose clause the preceding v. 11 specifies the instrumental sense to take on the causal sense “by virtue of”:100 “the name of our Lord Jesus will be glorified by you, that is, by virtue of your good deeds.” His “name”—­his reputation—­is “glorified” when those who bear that name bring credit to it by their lives, like the messengers of the churches in 2 Cor 8:23 who are “a credit to Christ” (δόξα Χριστοῦ). This ethical sense of ἐνδοξασθῆναι is found in the LXX: God, for example, will be “glorified” by his servant’s obedience (ἐν σοὶ δοξασθήσομαι, “in you I will be glorified,” Isa 49:3). For a similar sense expressed in related words, see Isa 24:15 (τὸ ὄνομα κυρίου ἔνδοξον ἔσται, “give glory . . . to the name of the Lord”); Mal 1:11 (τὸ ὄνομά μου δεδόξασται ἐν τοῖς ἔθνεσιν, “my name is great among the nations”). Yet what then might be the causal sense of “and you [may be glorified] in him” (καὶ ὑμεῖς ἐν αὐτῷ) in our v. 12 beyond the instrumental sense? Perhaps it means: “and you will be glorified by him, that is, by virtue of his having made you his righteous saints and enabled you to do good works as such.” The parallelism between our verse and v. 10 also makes it clear that there is no difference between saying that the name of the Lord Jesus will be glorified and saying that the Lord Jesus will be glorified. In the Bible, someone’s name stands for the person who bears it. In our verse, Paul has “the name of our Lord Jesus” instead of the simple “our Lord Jesus” because he is echoing Isa 66:5.101 κατὰ τὴν χάριν τοῦ θεοῦ ἡμῶν καὶ κυρίου Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ, “according to the grace of our God and the Lord Jesus Christ.” The fact that θεοῦ and Χριστοῦ are under the regimen of the one article might suggest the rendering “the grace of our God and Lord, Jesus Christ,” but this would be an un-­Pauline locution, and in any case the anarthrous κύριος, in reference to Jesus (whether followed or not by Ἰησοῦς or Ἰησοῦς Χριστός), is not unparalleled (cf. 1:1, 2;

98 99 100 101

Cf. Frame, 241; Best, 271; Marxsen, 75; Weima, 485; Menken, 94. Cf. Hoppe, II:107. Cf. Malherbe, 411. Pace Best, 271; Wanamaker, 235.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 545

7/12/23 11:29 AM

546

2 Thessalonians 1:11–12

2:13; 3:4, 12; also l Thess 3:8; 4:1, 6, 17; 5:2). Moreover, “that one article in the singular rightly in Greek designates even distinct persons, if the object be to express their union in a common category (as here in ‘grace’), ought to be known not only to scholars in general, but familiarly to all students of the later body of revelation in its original tongue.”102 However, Nicklas thinks that the anarthrous κύριος “forces” us to take our phrase as designating Jesus Christ as “our God and Lord.”103 He argues that this unusual designation of Christ as God is un-­Pauline but is “no accident” within this letter because it is only a logical consequence of the pseudonymous author speaking of God’s judgment but then describing Jesus as the judge of the world (vv. 6–8), as well as of transferring the OT statements about God to Christ in this letter.104 But Paul himself regularly transfers OT statements about God to Christ in his other letters and also sometimes implies that the Lord Jesus Christ executes God’s judgment by speaking of “the judgment seat of Christ” (2 Cor 5:10) instead of “the judgment seat of God” (Rom 14:10). So our vv. 6–8 is well understandable in terms of Paul’s fundamental understanding of the risen Christ Jesus as exalted to God’s right hand to exercise God’s kingship or lordship on God’s behalf (Rom 1:3–5; 1 Cor 15:23–27; Phil 2:9–11; see comment on v. 8 above). Therefore, our phrase “the grace of God and the Lord Jesus Christ” may be understood just as an abbreviated form of “the grace . . . from God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ” (Rom 1:7; 1 Cor 1:3; 2 Cor 1:2; Gal 1:3; Eph 1:2; Phil 1:3; Phlm 3), that is, the grace of God mediated through the Lord Jesus Christ. Since in the greetings of all the Pauline letters “Lord” appears anarthrous, the only difference of our phrase from them is omission of designating God as “our Father” (2 Thess 2:13, where also “God” appears without that epithet and “Lord” without the article, but still they are distinguished; see comment ad loc). It is a question of whether that omission is more understandable in terms of Paul’s carelessness here or of a forger’s carelessness. To us, the latter is more difficult because a forger who seeks to present himself as Paul would hardly make such a careless mistake in imitating the distinctive and repeated Pauline formula “the grace . . . from God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ.” Since in commenting on 1:2 Nicklas argues that there the forger added to the simple greeting χάρις ὑμῖν καὶ εἰρήνη of 1 Thess 1:1c the phrase ἀπὸ θεοῦ πατρὸς [ἡμῶν] καὶ κυρίου Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ taken from other Pauline letters to present himself more Pauline than Paul himself,105 he has created for himself a particularly hard task of explaining how the forger then decided in our verse to give to the formula a slight variation to make such a significant theological point contrary to Paul’s usual practice.

102 Kelly, Peter and Jude, 99–100. 103 Nicklas, 109. 104 Nicklas, 109, following Müller, 258. 105 Nicklas, 69.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 546

7/12/23 11:29 AM

Explanation 547 Paul adds our phrase not just to suggest that the readers’ eschatological glorification will take place “according to the grace of God and the Lord Jesus Christ,” but to make it clear that the whole process of their salvation is according to that grace, from God’s call of them “in the grace of Christ” at their baptism (cf. Gal 1:6), through his present enabling of them “by his power” (2 Thess 1:11) to render the obedience of faith and bear good fruit, to his “righteous judgment” that would declare them as worthy to enter his kingdom and share the Lord Jesus’s glory (cf. the parallel in 2:16). So our phrase is really meant to conclude the whole thanksgiving section (vv. 3–12), with a special stress, nevertheless, on the effect of the divine grace upon the present process of their salvation (or justification); this stress Paul lays by beginning the section with thanksgiving to God for his grace that has enabled the readers to grow in faith and love (v. 3) and closing with a prayer that God go on enabling them by his power to fulfill their work of faith and love (v. 11). He adds “the Lord Jesus Christ” not just to make the solemn formula fulsome,106 but in full consciousness that God’s grace is mediated through the Lord Jesus Christ,107 the consciousness that he explicitly expressed in vv. 5–10 (see comment on v. 8 above). For the significance of reference to God’s grace in the concluding prayers of our passage and 2:16–17, see comment on 2:16 below, and Explanation there.

Explanation The prayer reported in this subsection emphasizes again the ethical implications of the eschatological prospect held out to the Thessalonian Christians in the words immediately preceding. This prospect is not only an incentive to patient endurance of affliction for Christ’s sake but is also an incentive to a life of positive action in keeping with the purpose for which God has called them. The God who calls his people “into his own kingdom and glory” (1 Thess 2:12) requires conduct worthy of that call, and he provides the necessary power for such conduct by his Spirit who indwells them. If their Lord is to be glorified in them at his advent, he must be glorified in their present way of life. Yahweh spoke in earlier days of “the people whom I formed for myself that they might declare my praise” (Isa 43:21)—­to declare it with their lives as well as with their lips—­and these words are adapted and applied by another NT writer to Christ’s disciples: “God’s own people, that you may declare the wonderful deeds of him who called you out of darkness into his marvelous light” (1 Pet 2:9). Those who bear the name of Christ must glorify God in that name (cf. 1 Pet 4:16), and they can do so only by living in such a way as to reflect credit on the name. The prayer of Paul and his colleagues has the advent in view, but it will be fulfilled then only as their converts are progressively transformed by 106 Pace Trilling, 64–65; Malherbe, 412. 107 Cf. Weima, 487.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 547

7/12/23 11:29 AM

548

2 Thessalonians 1:11–12

the Spirit here and now into the image of Christ, “from one degree of glory to another” (2 Cor 3:18). The hope of glory depends on the revelation and supply of grace, and the grace revealed and supplied is inseparable from the Spirit of God. For Paul’s doctrine of justification that is reflected in our vv. 11–12, as well as in the preceding vv. 5–10 and the following 2:9–12, 13–14, and 16–17, see my essay, “Paul’s Doctrine of Justification in 2 Thessalonians 1–2.”

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 548

7/12/23 11:29 AM

2. Thanksgiving Renewed (2:1–17) and Transition (3:1–5) The parallelism between the twice repeated thanksgiving section in 2 Thess 1–2 and the thrice repeated thanksgiving section in 1 Thess 1–3 (see II.4.B. in the Introduction) suggests that 2 Thess 2:1–17 should be treated as a single unit that renews and expands the initial thanksgiving of 2 Thess 1:3–12.1 Having strongly assured the readers in the initial thanksgiving of their certain salvation at the just judgment of God at the parousia of the Lord Jesus, in contrast to the condemnation and destruction of their persecutors (1:5–10), Paul now comes to clarify a particular problem concerning the parousia of the Lord, namely, its timing, which is making them very anxious. It is one of the two chief issues (the other being the problem of the disorderly idlers, dealt with in 3:6–15) that have necessitated this letter. So he explains in detail what should first transpire before the coming of the day of the Lord, and declares that the feared day means condemnation and destruction for unbelievers (2:1–12). He then offers thanksgiving anew (2:13–14) and thus implicitly reinforces his assurance about the salvation of the readers that he expressed in 1:5–10 and especially in the prayer-­report of 1:11–12. This contrast between the condemnation of unbelievers and the salvation of believers at God’s judgment on the day of the Lord leads Paul to make a summary exhortation for the readers to stand firm in their faith and to hold fast the teaching that he imparted (2:15). Then, with a wish-­prayer (2:16–17), he closes the thanksgiving section and makes transition to part 2 of this letter, just as he does likewise in the first letter with the prayer of 1 Thess 3:11–13. See above on p. 503 for the summary analysis of the seven subsections of the thanksgiving section of part 1 of 2 Thess 1–2. The second half of the thanksgiving section, namely, 2 Thess  2, may be analyzed into the following subunits: a. Coming of the day of the Lord (vv. 1–12) b. Renewed thanksgiving with assurance for believers (vv. 13–14) c. The moral: therefore, stand firm in faith and hold fast to the right tradition (v. 15) d. Closing wish-­prayer (vv. 16–17)

1

Cf. Weima, 492–95, for some internal reasons for treating the whole of 2 Thess 2 as a unit, contrary to the common practice of treating 2:1–12 and 2:13–17 as two separate units.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 549

7/12/23 11:29 AM

550

2 Thessalonians 2:1–12

A. Coming of the Day of the Lord (2:1–12) Bibliography Bockmühl, M. N. A. Revelation and Mystery in Ancient Judaism and Pauline Christianity. WUNT 2/36. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1990. Bousset, W. The Antichrist Legend. Trans. A. H. Keane. London: Hutchinson, 1896. Cullmann, O. “Der eschatologische Charakter des Missionsauftrags und des apostolischen Selbstbewusstseins bei Paulus.” Pages 305–36 in Vorträge und Aufsätze 1925–1962. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1966. Hannah, D. D. “The Angelic Restrainer of 2 Thessalonians 2.6–7.” Pages 28–45 in Calling Time: Religion and Change at the Turn of the Millennium. Ed. M. Percy. Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 2000. —­—­— ­. Michael and Christ. WUNT 2/109. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1999. Kim, S. “The ‘Mystery’ of Romans 11:25–26 Once More.” NTS 43 (1997): 412–29. Reprint in pages 239–58 in PNP. —­—­—.­ “Paul’s Doctrine of Justification in 2 Thessalonians 1–2.” Bib 102 (2021): 78–96. Revised version in pages 279–95 in PGTO. —­—­—­. “The Restraining Thing (τὸ κατέχον) and the Restraining Person (ὁ κατέχων) of the Lawless Man (2 Thess 2:1–12).” Pages 297–312 in PGTO. Metzger, P. Katechon: II Thess 2,1–12 im Horizont apokalyptischen Denkens. BZNW 135. Berlin: de Gruyter, 2005. Munck, J. Paul and the Salvation of Mankind. Trans. F. Clarke. London: SCM, 1959. Nicholl, C. R. From Hope to Despair in Thessalonica: Situating 1 and 2 Thessalonians. SNTSMS 126. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2004. —­—­—­. “Michael, The Restrainer Removed (2 Thess 2:6–7).” JTS 51 (2000): 27–53. Peerbolte, L. J. L. The Antecedents of Antichrist: A Traditio-­Historical Study of the Earliest Christian View on Eschatological Opponents. Supplements to the Journal for the Study of Judaism 49. Leiden: Brill, 1996. Rainbow, O. A. “Justification according to Paul’s Thessalonian Correspondence.” BBR 19 (2009): 249–74. Röcker, F. W. Belial und Katechon: Eine Untersuchung zu 2 Thess 2,1–12 und 1 Thess 4,12–5,11. WUNT 2/262. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2009. Stettler, H. “Colossians 1:24 in the Framework of Paul’s Mission Theology.” Pages 185–208 in The Mission of the Early Church to Jews and Gentiles. Ed. J. Ådna. WUNT 127. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2000. Strobel, A. Untersuchungen zum eschatologischen Verzögerungsproblem auf Grund der spätjüdisch-­urchristlichen Geschichte von Habbakuk 2,2ff. NovTSup 2. Leiden: Brill, 1961. Stuhlmacher, P. Biblical Theology of the New Testament. Trans. D. P. Bailey. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2018. From Biblische Theologie des Neuen Testaments. Band I & II. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1992, 1999.

Translation Now, brothers and sisters, with regard to the advent of our a Lord Jesus Christ and our assembling to him, 2we beg you not to be quickly shaken out of your wits or b alarmed, neither by Spirit-­inspired utterance nor by spoken word nor by letter purporting to be (written) by us, to the effect that c the day of the Lord d has come. 3 See that no one deceives you by any means. (That day will not arrive) unless 1

the rebellion comes first and the man of lawlessness e is revealed, the son of perdition, 4 who opposes and exalts himself over every being called god or every object of worship, so that he takes his seat f in the sanctuary of God, proclaiming himself, that he is God.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 550

7/12/23 11:29 AM

Notes 551 Do you not remember that I repeatedly told you these things while I was g still with you? 6And now you know what is restraining him, so that he may be revealed at his h proper time. 7For the mystery of lawlessness is already at work; only until he who is now restraining is out of the way. 8And then 5

the lawless man will be revealed, whom the Lord Jesus i will slay j with the breath of his mouth, and bring to an end with the dawning of his advent. His advent, by virtue of the working of Satan, will be attended by all power and fraudulent signs and wonders, 10 and by all deceit of unrighteousness k for those who are on the way to perdition,l because they did not accept the love of the truth,m so as to be saved. 11 And therefore God will send n them a working of delusion, so that they should believe the lie, 12 that all o should be judged who did not believe the truth, but took pleasure in unrighteousness.p 9

Notes a. ἡμῶν (“our”) is omitted in B Ψ 33 pc lat vg.cod syrhel. b. μηδέ, in place of which μήτε is read by D2 byz and μήποτε (“lest perchance”) by 33 pc. c. ὡς ὅτι, an unclassical combination, found also in 2 Cor 5:19; 11:21. Here and in 2 Cor 11:21, Vg renders ὡς ὅτι by quasi (“as though”). d. For κυρίου, D2 byz read Χριστοῦ (cf. KJV, “the day of Christ”). e. For ἀνομίας (“lawlessness”), A D F G Ψ byz lat syr Irenlat Euseb. read ἁμαρτίας (cf. KJV, “the man of sin”). f. Before καθίσαι, D2 byz syr pesh hel insert ὡς θεόν (cf. KJV, “so that he as God sitteth in the temple of God”); F G* insert ἵνα θεόν. g. For ταῦτα ἔλεγον (“I told these things”), latb d Ambst read ταῦτα ἐλέγετο (“these things were told”), a construction that requires the replacement of nominative ὤν (“being”) by the genitive absolute ἐμοῦ ὄντος (so D* Ambst); latb reads cum essemus, “when we were (with you).” h. For ἑαυτοῦ (“his own”), ‫ *א‬A I K P 33 81 et al read αυτου, which might be taken as αὑτοῦ (“his own”) or αὐτοῦ (“his”). i. Ἰησοῦς is omitted in B D2 byz copbo.cod. j. For ἀνελεῖ (“will slay”), ‫א‬2 D* vid F G 33 1739 pc read the aorist optative ἀνέλοι (“may he slay”); D2 Ψ byz cop read ἀναλώσει (“will consume”; cf. KJV). k. ἀδικίας, to which τῆς is prefaced by ‫ *א‬D Ψ byz. l. τοῖς ἀπολλυμένοις, to which ἐν is prefaced by ‫א‬2 D1 Ψ byz syr. m. For τῆς ἀληθείας, Irenlat (in one place, Haer. 5.28.2) reads τοῦ θεοῦ (dei); D* reads τῆς ἀληθείας Χριστοῦ. n. For πέμπει (present), πέμψει (future) is read by ‫א‬2 D2 Ψ byz lat vet vg.cl copsa.codd bo Ambst Iren.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 551

7/12/23 11:29 AM

552

2 Thessalonians 2:1–12

o. For πάντες, ‫ א‬A F G 33 81 104 1739 pc read ἅπαντες. p. τῇ ἀδικίᾳ, to which ἐν is prefaced by ‫א‬2 A D2 Ψ byz.

Form/Structure/Setting Apparently, led or misled by the various editions of the Greek New Testament that put a comma rather than a period at the end of v. 8, some commentators see a break between v. 7 and v. 8 and a new subunit starting with v. 8 and ending either with v. 102 or v. 12.3 But it is better to see that at v. 8 Paul is concluding the scenario of the parousia of the Lord Jesus Christ (or the coming of the day of the Lord) that he introduced at v. 3 as the subject matter of the subsequent verses. From v. 3 on, Paul explains that the day of the Lord will come only after the revelation of “the man of lawlessness,” but that there is something or someone restraining his revelation at present and therefore that only with the disappearance of the restrainer will “the man of lawlessness” be revealed. So, in v. 8 Paul is saying that when the restrainer disappears and “the man of lawlessness” is revealed, the Lord’s parousia (or the day of the Lord) will take place, and he will destroy “the man of lawlessness.” Thus, vv. 3–8 is a subunit in which Paul depicts the scenario of the events that would usher in the parousia of the Lord or the coming of the day of the Lord. The inclusio between v. 3 and v. 8 (first, the revelation of the lawless man, and then the coming of the day or the parousia of the Lord) is a tell-­t ale indicator for this analysis.4 Another sign that vv. 9–12 is a separate subunit added to the scenario of vv. 3–8 is the relative pronoun οὗ (“whose”) that opens v. 9. Grammatically its immediate antecedent is the Lord Jesus of v. 8b, but the content of v. 9 makes it clear that the relative pronoun refers to the lawless man in v. 8a. Since the readers are troubled by the false announcement that the day of the Lord has already come, at first Paul counters this false announcement by explaining the sequence of the events: someone or something restraining the coming of the lawless man at present; the disappearance of the restrainer; the coming of the lawless man; and the coming of the Lord Jesus and destruction of the lawless man (vv. 3–8). Then, having done that, in vv. 9–12 Paul steps back to depict the mode of the lawless man’s coming, his rebellious activities, and their effects upon unbelievers. He does this because, while repeatedly talking about the coming of the figure in unfolding the scenario in vv. 3–8, he did not fully explain his activities and their effects. Moreover, he wants to stress how unbelievers will be deceived by him to believe what is false instead of loving the truth of the gospel, and therefore how they will be condemned

2 3 4

E.g., Weima, 533; Hoppe, II:131; cf. Malherbe, 414. E.g., Fee, 289; cf. Nicklas, 150, with his confusion in 154–55. Contra Weima, 537, who mistakenly takes this climax of the scenario of the parousia of the Lord (v. 8b) as a “digression.”

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 552

7/12/23 11:29 AM

Comment 553 and destroyed at God’s judgment at the parousia of the Lord Jesus. Thus, by adding this explanation to the scenario of the events that will usher in the parousia, Paul takes up once more the theme of 1:5–10. Then, in the immediately following thanksgiving section of 2:13–14, he goes on to reflect on the contrasting theme of justification and salvation of the Thessalonian believers of that earlier passage. This section thus falls into three parts: a. vv. 1–2: The problem: a false teaching about the day of the Lord b. vv. 3–8: Paul’s clarification: the right scenario of the coming of the day c. vv. 9–12: The coming of the lawless man and the destruction of unbelievers

(a) The Problem: A False Teaching about the Day of the Lord (2:1–2) Comment 2:1 Ἐρωτῶμεν δὲ ὑμᾶς, ἀδελφοί, “Now, we beg you, brothers and sisters.” So introduces Paul a new issue arisen about the subject (the parousia or advent of the Lord Jesus) that he has been addressing since 1:7—the issue of the timing of that advent. With ἐρωτῶμεν Paul uses a variant of the more usual παρακαλοῦμεν construction in the “appeal-­formula.” In 1 Thess 4:1 he combined the two verbs, while alternating them in 1 Thess 5:11, 12, 14 (cf. Phil 4:2–3). So, here, using ἐρωτῶμεν alone, he may be conveying the nuance of more anxious requesting (hence “beg,” NRSV; or “beseech,” KJV) than authoritative directing.5 The verb is followed not only by the vocative ἀδελφοί but also by a prepositional phrase (ὑπὲρ τῆς παρουσίας κτλ.) and a request expressed by εἰς τό with the infinitive (v. 2). Having used the vocative “brothers and sisters” fourteen times in the first letter (1 Thess 1:4; 2:1, 9, 14, 17; 3:7; 4:1, 10, 13; 5:1, 4, 12, 14, 25), Paul uses it again in this letter seven times (2 Thess 1:3; 2:1, 13, 15; 3:1, 6, 13), in both letters mostly in transitional sections or in places where he wants to convey his affection for the readers or to call their special attention. The proportionately more frequent use of the vocative in our two letters than in other Pauline letters seems to reflect both his and his missionary team’s special affection for and anxiety about the young Thessalonian Christians in their great difficulties (see comment on 1 Thess 1:4 above). ὑπὲρ τῆς παρουσίας τοῦ κυρίου ἡμῶν Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ καὶ ἡμῶν ἐπισυναγωγῆς ἐπ᾽ αὐτὸν, “concerning the advent of our Lord Jesus Christ and our assembling to him.” The occasional use of ὑπέρ in the sense of περί (cf. John 1:30; 2 Cor 12:8) 5

Cf. Schreiber, II:137; Hoppe, II:120.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 553

7/12/23 11:29 AM

554

2 Thessalonians 2:1–2

for introduction of the subject matter is found in Attic and Hellenistic Greek;6 the reverse use of περί in the sense of ὑπέρ is also attested.7 For the “advent [παρουσία] of the Lord Jesus Christ” as a reference to the second coming of Christ and its interchangeable use for “the day of the Lord,” see comment on 1 Thess 2:19; 5:1–2; 2 Thess 1:10 above. The article τῆς controls both παρουσίας and ἐπισυναγωγῆς and thereby indicates that the two nouns belong together and the whole phrase is a summary reference to the event described in 1 Thess 4:17. At the advent of the Lord, his people (whether resurrected or surviving to the parousia) will be transported to meet him (εἰς ἀπάντησιν τοῦ κυρίου) and to be eternally with him (καὶ οὕτως πάντοτε σὺν κυρίῳ ἐσόμεθα).8 It is also a summary reference back to what has just been said in 2 Thess 1:10 and 12 of the Lord Jesus Christ coming to be glorified among his saints and his saints participating in his glory (cf. 2:14). The only other NT instance of ἐπισυναγωγή is in Heb 10:25, in reference to a local gathering of Christians. In Isa 52:12 and 2 Macc 1:27; 2:7 its verb form (ἐπισυνάγειν) is used of the regathering of Israel after the Babylonian exile.9 Its verb form (ἐπισυνάξουσιν) is also used for the eschatological ingathering of God’s elect people in Matt 24:31 (cf. Mark 13:27), which is echoed in 1 Thess 4:17 (see comment ad loc). However, this thought of believers’ ingathering to the Lord Jesus is not taken up in the following verses. In fact, it has just been expressed in the preceding 1:9–12, in which Paul presented the picture that, at the Lord Jesus’s parousia or on the day of the Lord, believers would stand in the presence of the Lord and participate in his glory, whereas unbelievers would be excluded from it and be destroyed. So his formula “the parousia of our Lord Jesus Christ and our gathering together to him” here is to be seen as a summary reference to what he has just said in 1:9–12, as well as to his previous teaching in 1 Thess 4:13–5:11 (note esp. 4:14, 17; 5:10). He appears to be introducing the subject of the day of the Lord with this formula in order to tell the readers right from the outset that they ought to expect that day to be a glorious day for them. Apparently they are still anxious about the parousia because they think of it mainly in terms of the day of the last judgment (see comment on 1 Thess 5:2). So the introductory formula reflects Paul’s pastoral care and literary skill to preface his discussion of the fear-­raising subject of the day of the Lord (cf. 2 Cor 5:10–11) by reminding the readers of the ultimately positive meaning of the day/parousia of the Lord for them that he taught in his previous letter10 and has just imparted in the preceding section.11 The same pastoral care 6 7 8 9 10

BDF §231. BDF §229.1. Cf. Malherbe, 415. See Schreiber, II:136, and Hoppe, II:122n29, for more OT and Jewish references. Cf. Best, 55, for arguments against the alleged differences between 2 Thess 2 and 1 Thess 5:1–11. 11 Cf. Best, 274; Malherbe, 415.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 554

7/12/23 11:29 AM

Comment 555 leads him also to round off the discussion of the day/parousia (2:1–12) with a report of his thanksgiving to God (2:13–14), in which he reassures the readers that God has chosen them to obtain the glory of the Lord Jesus Christ at his parousia (1:12; see comment ad loc), as well as with a prayer for God’s comfort for them (2:16–17). With this understanding of ἐπισυναγωγή and with the occurrence of παρουσία (as in 1 Thess 4:15), it is difficult to suppose that the day of the Lord in this section (v. 2) belongs to a different time from that in view in 1 Thess 4:13–18, as is held by the Darby school of dispensationalism. 2 εἰς τὸ μὴ ταχέως σαλευθῆναι ὑμᾶς ἀπὸ τοῦ νοὸς μηδὲ θροεῖσθαι, “(we ask you) not to be quickly shaken out of your wits or alarmed.” This is the purpose or content of Paul’s exhortation. For εἰς τό with the infinitive in such a construction, see also 1 Thess 2:12; 3:10; 4:9.12 The verb σαλευθῆναι, which conjures up the picture of being tossed by a storm, is used here metaphorically to mean “being so perturbed as to lose one’s normal composure and good sense.”13 The sense of mental breakdown is further strengthened by the accompanying phrase ἀπὸ τοῦ νοός (for ἀπό strengthening the separative force of the genitive, cf. Rom 7:6; 2 Cor 11:3; Gal 5:4),14 hence our rendering as above. The verb is joined by another verb, θροεῖσθαι, which adds a sense of fear to the similar meaning of being disturbed.15 This verb is used in a similar eschatological context in the Olivet discourse (Mark 13:7//Matt 24:6). Since one article (τό) controls both infinitives, they are to be taken as meaning together being perturbed and frightened. The adverb ταχέως (“quickly”) is to be taken primarily in the modal sense (“readily”), which naturally carries in itself also a temporal connotation: “readily,” therefore also “quickly” (cf. Gal 1:6).16 Paul is here exhorting the readers not to be so readily shocked (the aorist σαλευθῆναι) upon hearing the false news about the day of the Lord so as to lose their minds and thus not examine it carefully, and so go on being anxious about it (the present θροεῖσθαι).17 μήτε διὰ πνεύματος, “neither by Spirit,” that is, by a prophetic utterance made in the name of the Spirit of God. Pointing to 1 Thess 5:19–20, which refers to “the Spirit” and “prophecy” separately, Röcker argues against this majority view and interprets the “Spirit” here in the more comprehensive sense of a “power that manifests itself in an extraordinary way.”18 But it is

12 13 14 15 16

BDF §402.2. Marshall, 186. BDF §211. BDAG 911: “disturbed or frightened.” Cf. Nicholl, Hope, 126–31. BDAG 992 (see 1.β); Best, 275; Fee, 273; Weima, 501n7; Schreiber, II:139; pace Malherbe, 415, who takes ταχέως temporally as meaning soon after getting instruction from Paul on the subject of the parousia in the first letter. 17 Cf. Best, 275; Marshall, 186; Malherbe, 416; Weima, 503n10; Hoppe, II:124. 18 Röcker, Belial, 336–37.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 555

7/12/23 11:29 AM

556

2 Thessalonians 2:1–2

difficult to imagine how one could have supported the claim that “the day of the Lord has come” by demonstration of such a power in a way other than a prophetic utterance. The prophecy might be a false prophecy or it might be a genuine prophecy misunderstood. For πνεῦμα in relation to prophecy in the church, see 1 Cor 14:12, 32; 1 John 4:1–3. Prophecy was encouraged in the Thessalonian church (1 Thess 5:19–20), and no doubt things to come figured largely in such prophecy.19 But critical examination was necessary (1 Thess 5:21–22; cf. also 1 Cor 14:29; 1 John 4:1–3) and nowhere more so than with prophecies relating to future events. μήτε διὰ λόγου, “nor by spoken word.” Here, λόγος is distinguished from prophecy, which might be communicated (as most often) by spoken word or (as occasionally) by written word (cf. ὁ ἀναγινώσκων νοείτω, “let the reader take note,” Mark 13:14; also Rev 1:3, 11, etc.); it is also distinguished from the written word of an epistle. It therefore denotes in this context a non-­ecstatic spoken word, which might be a word of apostolic authority (as in 2 Thess 2:15), a word of spiritual wisdom (as in 1 Cor 12:8), or a word lacking either authority or wisdom. Again, critical examination on the hearer’s part was called for. μήτε δι᾽ ἐπιστολῆς ὡς δι᾽ ἡμῶν, “nor by letter purporting to be by us.” With regard to the phrase ὡς δι᾽ ἡμῶν, there are two exegetical issues: whether it is to be related to the whole preceding triad (“Spirit,” “word,” and “letter”) or only to the last element of the triad (“letter”), and whether the preposition διά is to be taken as indicating source (“from”) or mediator (“through”). Fee argues that since the phrase ὡς δι᾽ ἡμῶν has the preposition διά rather than ἀπό (“from”), it should not be taken as indicating Paul as the alleged source of either the immediately preceding “letter” or the entire triad “letter,” “word,” and “Spirit,” but rather as the alleged mediator of the (false) message about the day of the Lord (v. 2c). He writes: “Paul is not saying the letter did not come from him—­it did indeed—­but that what they are now believing about the day of the Lord did not come through him.”20 So Fee adopts the TNIV rendering of our verse: “not to become easily unsettled or alarmed by the teaching allegedly from us—­whether by a prophecy, or by word of mouth or by letter—­a sserting that the day of the Lord has already come.” 21 Note here that even the TNIV (hence Fee and Johnson also) renders the phrase ὡς δι᾽ ἡμῶν with the proposition “from.” So it is not a question of whether to render the preposition διά with “through” or “from,” but of whether the phrase ὡς δι᾽ ἡμῶν is to be taken together with the following false claim in v. 2c or with the preceding “letter” (or the whole triad) in v. 2b. But taking

19

See comment on 1 Thess 4:15 above for a discussion on the view that the “word of the Lord” cited there was communicated in this form. 20 Fee, 274–75 (emphasis original). Followed by Weima, 505–6. 21 Fee, 271 (emphasis added). Cf. Johnson, 183.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 556

7/12/23 11:29 AM

Comment 557 the phrase with v. 2c makes the two main verbs (“to be shaken or frightened”) separated far from their cause (“as if through us, to the effect that the day of the Lord has already come”) by a long insertion (“neither by Spirit, nor by word, nor by letter”),22 which (misleadingly for the commentators like Fee) appears in the word order not as parenthetical but as providing the cause for the two verbs. So in order to overcome this syntactical awkwardness, the TNIV and Fee have to create a summary representation of the cause (v. 2c), “by the teaching allegedly from/through us,” and attach it immediately to the two verbs in v. 2a.23 Weima avoids this problem, but then his rendering is ambiguous, insofar as it does not express the meaning according to his type of interpretation: “[to be shaken or alarmed], whether through a prophetic utterance or through a spoken word or through a written letter, supposedly through us, claiming that the day of the Lord has come.”24 Thus the attempt to take the phrase ὡς δι᾽ ἡμῶν in the sense of mediation makes the syntax of our verse unnecessarily complex and awkward. It is much more natural to take the phrase in the sense of “as if from us” and in connection with the preceding noun(s), justifying such interpretation with the examples of Paul’s use of the preposition διά in the causal sense (cf. δι’ οὗ, 1 Cor 1:9; διὰ πολλῶν = ἐκ πολλῶν προσώπων, 2 Cor 1:11). Fee stresses that Paul’s wording μήτε διὰ πνεύματος μήτε διὰ λόγου μήτε δι᾽ ἐπιστολῆς suggests that he is not quite sure how the false claim about the day of the Lord was communicated to the readers,25 and he projects a situation of someone in the Thessalonian church misinterpreting or misrepresenting Paul’s prophetic utterances and teachings.26 Following Fee again, Weima spells out the possible scenario thus: [Someone might have claimed that] “the Spirit has revealed to me that what Paul really meant in his preaching or his letter is this,” or “Paul must mean this about the day of the Lord because I heard the word from his own lips during his ministry in our city,” or “Paul’s letter may not say this explicitly but it clearly implies that this is the truth about the day of the Lord.”27 But then aren’t Fee and Weima in fact interpreting the phrase ὡς δι᾽ ἡμῶν in the sense of “as if from us” rather than “as if through our mediation” and thereby committing a self-­contradiction in interpreting the phrase? Furthermore, if their projected situation were the case, isn’t it strange that in 2:5 Paul just reminds the readers of his teaching without explicitly condemning such troubling misrepresentation of it (cf. 1 Cor 5:9–13), and that again in 2:15 he goes on to exhort the readers simply to uphold the

22 23 24 25 26 27

Cf. Best, 278. Cf. Schreiber, II:140. Weima, 497. This ambiguity is pointed out even by Fee, 273n16. So also Best, 279; Johnson, 184. Fee, 275–76. So also Malherbe, 416. Weima, 506 (emphases his).

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 557

7/12/23 11:29 AM

558

2 Thessalonians 2:1–2

“traditions” of his teaching, without stressing the need to interpret his “word” and “letter” correctly?28 It therefore appears better to see the phrase ὡς δι᾽ ἡμῶν as connected only with the immediately preceding member of the triad, namely, “letter,”29 and to suppose that by the whole phrase “neither by Spirit, nor by word, nor by letter purporting to be from us” Paul is dealing with a false prophecy, a false teaching, and a false letter sent to the Thessalonians in his name. It appears better to project a situation in which some members of the Thessalonian church (or visitors from outside?) make false prophetic utterances, propound a false teaching based on a questionable interpretation of the Scriptures, and even produce a false letter as written by Paul, all to assert that the day of the Lord has already come. (From Paul’s exhortation to the Thessalonian church at large in 2:15, as well as the wording of our v. 2a, we may infer that those who made such assertions were small in number, and the majority of the church members had not yet adopted it but only been confused and alarmed by it.) Since the false prophecy and the false teaching are presented without an appeal to Paul himself, he just counters them with his own teaching without criticizing them as false representations of his own teaching, and he simply exhorts the readers to uphold the “traditions” of his teaching without alerting them about possible misinterpretations of it (2:15). However, since the “letter” was falsely presented as written by Paul himself, he indicates its pseudonymous nature with the phrase ὡς δι᾽ ἡμῶν here,30 and then he also in 3:17, by highlighting the mark of authentication of his genuine letters, warns the readers to discriminate such a letter. Some scholars31 take the phrase “by letter purporting to be by us” as referring to 1 Thessalonians. Interpreting our passage 2:3–8 here as intending to correct the supposed teaching of 1 Thess 4:13–5:11 that the parousia/day of the Lord is imminent, they think that in our verse the pseudonymous author (of 2 Thessalonians) wishes the readers to reject 1 Thessalonians as spurious. But just like the interpretation that explains the phrase ὡς δι᾽ ἡμῶν in terms of misunderstanding or misrepresenting Paul’s teaching, this interpretation also founders on the simple exhortation in 2:15. For it is hardly credible that with no elaboration a Paul-­pretender (the supposed pseudonymous author of 2 Thessalonians) would just urge the readers to hold fast to the traditions taught by “Paul,” by “letter” as well as by his “word of mouth,” while seeking

28 Cf. Best, 279. 29 BDF §425.4; BDAG 1105 (3.c); KJV; NASB; ESV; Richard, 325; Green, 304; Witherington, 214; Furnish, 154; pace Malherbe, 417; Fee, 275; Weima, 505–6, who take the phrase as connected with all three members of the triad, claiming that that is the majority view among commentators. 30 Cf. Eve-­Marie Becker, “ὡς δι᾽ ἡμῶν in 2 Thess 2.2,” 55–72. 31 E.g., Lindemann, “Zum Abfassungszweck,” 39; Marxsen, 80; Lüdemann, Fälschung, 57–59, among more recent writers.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 558

7/12/23 11:29 AM

Comment 559 to persuade them to reject that letter (1 Thessalonians) that was sent in the name of “Paul.”32 So it is the simplest to see that, with the phrase δι᾽ ἐπιστολῆς ὡς δι᾽ ἡμῶν, the genuine Paul is referring to a letter falsely claiming to have come from him. ὡς ὅτι ἐνέστηκεν ἡ ἡμέρα τοῦ κυρίου, “to the effect that the day of the Lord has come.” Here Paul spells out the false teaching that has caused the readers to be so shocked and frightened. Formally there is no difference between the unusual ὡς ὅτι and the simple ὡς or ὅτι. But the addition of ὡς before ὅτι in a negative context as here may impart a subjective flavor to the clause thus introduced: the day of the Lord is alleged to be present. If so, Paul implicitly dissociates himself from any endorsement of the allegation (cf. also 2 Cor 11:21, in contrast to 2 Cor 5:19). It cannot be seriously disputed that “is present” is the natural sense of ἐνέστηκεν. This is the regular force of the perfect tense of ἐνιστάναι in NT usage. Twice Paul distinguishes ἐνεστῶτα from μέλλοντα as “things present” from “things to come” (Rom 8:38; 1 Cor 3:22). The ἐνεστῶσα ἀνάγκη of 1 Cor 7:26 is the “present distress”; the αἰὼν ἐνεστὼς πονηρός of Gal 1:4 is the “present evil age”; the καιρὸς ἐνεστηκώς of Heb 9:9 is the “present time” (whether the “time now present” or “time then present” is to be decided by exegesis). Compare the RV: “the Day of the Lord is now present”; RSV: “has come”; NEB: “is already here.” But there are some who support the sense of imminence (which ἐνέστηκεν does not bear) rather than actual presence: for example, KJV: “the day of Christ is at hand”; ASV: “the Day of the Lord is just at hand”; Lightfoot: “is imminent.”33 But, had Paul meant this, he could have written ἤγγικεν (“is at hand”) as in Rom 13:12, or ἐγγύς (ἐστιν) (“is near”) as in Phil 4:5. Furthermore, if the message that the readers received had been about the imminence of the day of the Lord, why would they have been so shocked and alarmed by it, when they already knew it from the teachings that Paul had delivered during his mission among them and again through his letter to them (1 Thessalonians)? Even more seriously, why, in the subsequent vv. 3–12, would Paul have warned them to “let no one deceive [them]” with such a claim and gone on to explain to them that the day/parousia of the Lord would take place in the future only after certain events happen first? In v. 5 Paul says that he already taught the readers that “the rebellion” and the revelation of “the man of lawlessness” would take place before the coming of the day of the Lord. So those who propose to render ἐνέστηκεν with “is imminent” face the same problem as those who would render it with “has come.” For they would also have to explain how the readers could possibly have accepted the claim, “the day of the Lord is imminent,” when “the man of lawlessness” had not yet come and “the rebellion” was not taking place. Therefore, in consideration 32 Cf. Schreiber, II:141, who lists more scholars who hold the untenable view. 33 Lightfoot, 110. Cf. Dobschütz, 267–68; Dibelius, 29; Rigaux, 652–53.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 559

7/12/23 11:29 AM

560

2 Thessalonians 2:1–2

of such contextual factors as well as strong lexicographical grounds, we have to decide with the majority of Bible translations and commentaries that the false claim was that “the day of the Lord has come.”34 Nevertheless, the question still remains how the Thessalonians could have been shocked and alarmed by such a claim when none of the things that Paul taught them to expect with the parousia of the Lord Jesus Christ or the day of the Lord (2 Thess 2:3b–4; see too 1 Thess 4:14, 16–17; 5:3) was actually taking place. Most commentators think that by “the day of the Lord” they probably thought not of a single twenty-­four-­hour day, but of a certain limited period in which a series of events would take place, culminating with the parousia of the Lord Jesus.35 The proponents of the false claim then could have pointed to certain events as signs of the dawning of the day of the Lord. Nicholl rejects this explanation, pointing to Paul’s identification of the day of the Lord with the parousia of the Lord in our passage (vv. 1, 8): “throughout verses 3b–12 ‘Paul’ seems to be presupposing that the Day is co-­referential with the parousia and is a single event rather than a complex of events and that ‘the Thessalonians’ share these assumptions.”36 Indeed, a few verses earlier (i.e., 1:10) Paul clearly says that the parousia of the Lord will take place on the day of the Lord, which is to make explicit what he already communicated implicitly to the readers in 1 Thess 5:1–2 (see comment ad loc). However, do we need to infer from such pronouncements of Paul’s that the Thessalonians learned that the day of the Lord would begin with the parousia of the Lord Jesus? Or is it possible that they obtained no more than a general idea that on the day of the Lord (whose duration not having been specified) the parousia of the Lord Jesus would take place as its main event? Only the latter possibility seems to make sense of not only the readers’ response to the false claim but also the false claim itself. For if the former had been the case, how could the false prophets have made up the false claim that “the day of the Lord has already come” and imagined to persuade the readers with it, when the Lord Jesus was nowhere to be seen with their physical eyes? From 1 Thess 4:13–5:11 (cf. also 1:10; 2:19–20; 3:13; 5:23) we know that, during his mission in Thessalonica and later through his letter (1 Thessalonians), Paul taught the Thessalonians to expect several things to take place at the day/parousia of the Lord. In our passage he says he also told them that before the coming of the day/parousia of the Lord the rebellion must happen first and the lawless man must appear (v. 5), and that something or someone was restraining him from appearing at present (v. 6). From this, we may presume that he taught them also about the messianic woes in connection with the rebellion and the appearance of the lawless man—­a 34 Cf. Weima, 502. 35 Cf. Weima, 502, and the authors cited by him there; also Röcker, Belial, 356; Nicklas, 123. 36 Nicholl, Hope, 119–25.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 560

7/12/23 11:29 AM

Comment 561 Jewish idea well-­attested in the rabbinic literature, that there would come a time of severe affliction for God’s people as a harbinger or birth-­pangs of the coming of the Messiah and/or the day of the Lord.37 Then, as the persecution of the believers in Thessalonica became more intense, some of them could have seen it as a sign that the rebellion had already broken out and the lawless man had already appeared (cf. v. 7 for Paul’s own observation that “the mystery of the lawlessness is already at work”) and that their severe persecution was a part of the messianic woes or eschatological birth-­pangs that Paul had taught them to expect.38 And a small number of more enthusiastic people among them could have gone further to proclaim that therefore the day of the Lord had already come (in the sense of it having dawned), so that the parousia of the Lord Jesus would take place at any moment (within the day, about whose duration they most probably had no idea).39 At this point, we must carefully appreciate Paul’s description about the readers’ response to the false claim: they were “shaken out of [their] wits or alarmed.” This description need not be taken as implying that the readers (or the majority of them) believed or accepted that claim wholly. To understand their response, we need to recognize that, in their intensely apocalyptic atmosphere of waiting for an imminent day of the Lord, they could have been made emotionally susceptible or vulnerable to such a claim through their intense suffering. Then, when the false prophecy came with a claim to inspiration of the Spirit, a support of scriptural interpretation, and even a letter of “Paul,” they could have been just “shocked and frightened” at it, so much so that with their (critical) minds paralyzed they were unable to consider calmly whether the things happening around them really matched what Paul had taught them to expect. The false prophets’ appeal to their own severe persecution could have been enough to arouse their fear and sway them to their claim. Best compares our passage with Mark 13:3–13, where a warning is issued against being led astray by some who would appear with the claim to be Christ before certain things that are to happen prior to the parousia of Christ have happened.40 This warning well illustrates that in an eschatological atmosphere charged with intense hope for the parousia of Christ, a false claim to a realized parousia can be manufactured and some can be led astray by it, even if the objective conditions cannot be drawn to support it. In fact, even in our times, claims similar to those in our v. 2 and Mark 13:6 do appear, and some poor souls are led astray by them. However, it has to be admitted that all this is no more than a (hopefully)

37 38 39 40

Cf. G. Bertram, TDNT 9:671–72; also Mark 13:8//Matt 24:8. Cf. Metzger, Katechon, 111. Cf. Aus, “Relevance,” 263–64; also Nicklas, 123–24. Best, 278.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 561

7/12/23 11:29 AM

562

2 Thessalonians 2:3–8

reasonable conjecture about the origin of the false claim and the readers’ response to it. In fact, all that we can learn about the sense in which they thought the day of the Lord to have come must be inferred from the counterargument of vv. 3–8, and the interpretation of the counterargument is so uncertain that the wise interpreter will recognize the limits placed here on his or her knowledge. Probably there was no question of the Thessalonians’ replacing the teaching they had already received with a completely new system. But if some of them had drawn unwarranted inferences from the statement in 1 Thess 5:5 that they were all “sons of the day,”41 or if a prophet had announced in the church that the day of the Lord was now present, they might well have been bewildered; what had happened to the resurrection and translation into the Lord’s presence, which they had been taught to expect at the parousia? Paul, who knew more about their converts’ problem than the exegete of today can know, judged that it would help them if he explained to them again something about the sequence of events leading up to the day of the Lord, which he had already told them during his mission among them (v. 5).

(b) The Right Scenario of the Coming of the Day of the Lord (2:3–8) Comment 3 Μή τις ὑμᾶς ἐξαπατήσῃ κατὰ μηδένα τρόπον, “(See to it) that no one deceives you by any means.” Instead of the third-­person subjunctive ἐξαπατήσῃ, we might have expected the third-­person imperative, μή . . . ἐξαπατησάτω (“let no one deceive you”). But βλέπετε or ὁρᾶτε (“see to it”) may be understood before μή (ὁρᾶτε is expressed in such a construction in 1 Thess 5:15; it is left to be understood, as here, in 1 Cor 16:11; cf. 2 Cor 11:16, μή τίς με δόξῃ ἄφρονα εἶναι, “let no one think me foolish”). This exhortation sums up the contents of vv. 1–2, heightening the emphatic warning about the source and means of the false claim (“neither by Spirit nor by word nor by letter purporting to be from us”) further with the indefinite pronoun τις (“no one”) and the absolutizing phrase κατὰ μηδένα τρόπον (“in any way”). Still further, by employing the emphatic compound form ἐξαπατᾶν (ἀπατᾶν plus the preposition ἐκ), Paul strongly warns the readers that giving any credence to the false claim would be, in effect, to fall victim to a deception. Thereby he appears also to be warning its advocates that, even if they have no evil intent, their erroneous teaching can ultimately be nothing but a dangerous deception that has serious adverse effects on their fellow believers, as well as themselves. Following Kreinecker, Nicklas stresses that both the verb ἐξαπατᾶν and the concluding phrase κατὰ μηδένα τρόπον recall judicial associations that they have in the contemporary 41 So Dobschütz, ad loc.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 562

7/12/23 11:29 AM

Comment 563 commercial documentary papyri and that with them our author intends to warn the makers of the deceptive claim that they would have to bear the judicial consequences at the last judgment on the day of the Lord.42 ὅτι ἐὰν μὴ ἔλθῃ ἡ ἀποστασία πρῶτον, “because [that day will not arrive] unless the rebellion comes first.” The apodosis on which the protasis, the conditional clause (ἐὰν μὴ ἔλθῃ . . . ), is dependent is not expressed (so the clause is left as an anacoluthon); it would be introduced by ὅτι (“because”) but is left to be understood. The omitted apodosis (“that day will not arrive”) is obvious in the context, but still since it would be normal, if not required, to state it firmly as the antidote to the false claim, Paul’s omission of it leads us to think about the possible reason. Clearly he wants to stress this condition for the coming of the day of the Lord. Furthermore, the context shows that he is eager to explain about “the man of lawlessness” at length. Apparently this eagerness has caused him to “los[e] track of the structure of the sentence (something that happens with some frequency to Paul, especially when he is animated or emotional about something: e.g., 1 Thess 2:11–12, 19; 2 Thess 2:7; Rom 4:16; 5:12; 1 Cor 1:31; 2 Cor 8:13; Gal 2:20; 2:4).”43 This could mean that his mind is occupied by the thought of the revelation of “the man of lawlessness.” Clearly that topic is an important part of his eschatological vision, so that he taught it to the readers during his initial gospel preaching among them (2 Thess 2:5–6) and explains it here again in detail. But our passage is unique among his letters for containing an extended discussion of that grave topic. However, if it was so important for his eschatological vision, would he not have left at least some allusions to or echoes of it also in his other letters? And may it not be worthwhile to conduct a heuristic study of some passages in them to see whether he has left there at least some clues for them while laying out his eschatological vision?44 ἡ ἀποστασία, “the rebellion,” a Hellenistic formation corresponding to and equivalent to the classical ἀπόστασις, refers to political or military “rebellion” in Greek literature. Josephus uses it in that sense (Life 43: in reference to the Jewish revolt against Rome; see also Ant. 13.219, using the latter term). In the LXX it is also used in the political sense (1 Esd 2:21), and its cognate verb ἀφίστασθαι is often used in both the political and religious senses.45 However, in the LXX, the intertestamental literature, and the NT, the word group is used mostly in the religious sense of “apostasy” from God (e.g., Josh 22:22; 2 Chr 29:19; 33:19; Jer 2:19; 1 Macc 1:15; 2:15; Acts 21:21; 1 Tim 4:1; Heb 3:12). In some Jewish literature there are warnings that people will turn away from God and his law in the last days and that, as a consequence, the world will turn into a

42 43 44 45

Nicklas, 127–28, following Kreinecker, 158–60. Weima, 509; cf. Best, 280. Cf. discussions on the “mystery” in v. 7 below; and see Excursus below. Cf. Schlier, TDNT 1:512–14.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 563

7/12/23 11:29 AM

564

2 Thessalonians 2:3–8

chaos of increasing falsehood and unrighteousness (e.g., Jub. 23.11–23; 4 Ezra 5.1–12; 1 En 91.5–11; 93.8–9; 2 Bar. 41.3; 42.4; 1QpHab 2.1–10; 11QMelch 2.12; cf. b. Sanh. 97).46 The similar warnings continue in the NT with a greater emphasis on the activities of false prophets leading God’s people astray from the right faith (Matt 24:9–24; Mark 13:3–23; 1 Tim 4:1–2; 2 Tim 3:1–9; 4:3–4; 2 Pet 3:3–4; Jude 17–18). Against this background, Malherbe argues that Paul has in view a religious and ethical apostasy rather than a political rebellion, and he reports that this is the view of “the vast majority of commentators.”47 Weima points to the same background, as well as Paul’s further statements in our passage, and also thinks that primarily a religious rebellion is in view here, a rebellion against God by refusing to believe his gospel of truth (v. 10), instead worshiping a pseudo-­god (v. 4) and accepting a false gospel (v. 11).48 However, he also points to Paul’s view of government as a divine institution (Rom 13:1–7), as well as the indivisibility of religion and politics in the ancient world, and adds that the rebellion against God could also have a political dimension. In fact, from the whole context of our passage (note well the connection of “the rebellion” and the activities of “the man of lawlessness” in vv. 4, 9–12; see below), it appears that the reference here is to a worldwide rebellion against divine authority itself at the end of the age, which involves not only a religious apostasy but also a political revolt, a large-­scale revolt against public order maintained by the “governing authorities” who “have been instituted by God” (Rom 13:1–2). It is, in fact, the whole concept of divine authority over the world that is set at defiance in “the rebellion” par excellence. This view of ἡ ἀποστασία obviates a discussion of the question whether Paul has in view a large-­scale Jewish or Christian apostasy to the gospel before the parousia of the Lord Jesus Christ.49 In fact, neither option is plausible anyway. For, on the one hand, Paul views a historic Jewish apostasy to the gospel as having already taken place with the crucifixion of Christ Jesus (1 Thess 2:15–16; cf. Rom 11:1–12), appreciates some individual Jews coming to faith in Christ, albeit in small numbers, in the present (Rom 11:11–16), and believes that the Jewish nation as a whole will be saved at the parousia of the Lord (Rom 11:25–27). On the other hand, nowhere in his letters does Paul show any anxiety about a large-­scale Christian apostasy but everywhere expresses his confidence in God’s faithfulness and Christians’ perseverance in faith (e.g., Rom 8:31–39; 1 Cor 1:7–9; 1 Thess 3:12–13; 2 Thess 1:3–4, 10–12; 2:13–15). However, recently Röcker has strongly argued for ἡ ἀποστασία here referring to the eschatological apostasy of Christians.50 For this view, he appeals to an 46 47 48 49

Cf. Billerbeck, 3:637; 4/2:977–86. Malherbe, 418. Weima, 511–12. Pace Beale & Gladd, Hidden, 215–29, who argue for this view, reading our text closely in connection with the prophecies of Dan 2 and 11. 50 Röcker, Belial, 372–79. Cf. Metzger, Katechon, 111.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 564

7/12/23 11:29 AM

Comment 565 allegedly close parallelism between our passage and Matt 24, as well as to some OT, Qumran, and pseudepigraphical texts, especially those that speak of Belial leading Israel to apostatize from God and the right faith.51 We may grant that there is a broad agreement between our passage and Matt 24 in speaking of eschatological woes before the parousia of the Messiah, including some parallelism in vocabulary (ἐπισυναγωγῆς [v. 1] and θροεῖσθαι [v. 2] // ἐπισυνάξουσιν and θροεῖσθε in Matt 24:31 and 24:6 respectively), in concepts (false prophecies, ἐξαπατᾶν [v. 3] // πλανᾶν in Matt 24:4; ἀποστασία [v. 3] // σκανδαλίζειν in Matt 24:10; “the man of lawlessness” taking his seat in the temple [v. 4] // “the desolating sacrilege” standing in the temple in Matt 24:15), and in the eschatological scheme (the apostasy and the persecution of believers; the defilement of the temple; the parousia of the Messiah). Furthermore, in 1 Thess 4:16 and 5:2 (see comment ad loc), Paul seems to allude to the words of Jesus respectively in Matt 24:30–31 and 24:43. Therefore, it is reasonable to take this broad agreement between our passage and Matt 24 as evidence that Paul reflects here also the common Jesus tradition embedded in Matt 24 (//Mark 13//Luke 21).52 However, in Matt 24, unlike our passage, the role of the one who makes “the desolating sacrilege stand in the temple” is not described, and certainly his relationship to the apostasy is not made clear. Furthermore, Matt 24 refers to the apostasy of some believers only very briefly (vv. 10–12; note the reference is absent in the Synoptic parallels of Mark 13 and Luke 21), but speaks much more extensively of the eschatological woes in terms of worldwide or cosmic events, such as wars between nations, famines and earthquakes, and great sufferings. And it issues repeated warnings for believers not to believe false claimants to be Christ and false claims that Christ has appeared here or there. In contrast to this, in our passage, there is no such warning for the Thessalonian Christians. If with ἀποστασία here Paul has in view the apostasy of Christians, is it not rather strange that in our letter he warns the readers only about making a mistake in accepting the false claim about the day of the Lord, but not at all about the danger of abandoning their faith in Christ (contrast with Matt 24:10)? On the contrary, he only assures them that God, who chose them for salvation, will keep them in faith so that they may obtain the glory of the Lord Jesus Christ on the day of the Lord (2 Thess 2:13–15; cf. 1:3–12). Here, Paul states only that unbelievers will be deluded by “the lawless man” not to love the truth but instead to believe falsehood and indulge in unrighteousness, so that they may end up condemned on the day of the Lord. This description of unbelievers here is strongly reminiscent of his description of Adamic humanity’s rebellion in Rom 1:18–32 (see comment on 2:9–12 51 Röcker, Belial, 372–79, and see on pp. 191–200 for some texts in the Testament of the Twelve Patriarchs. 52 Cf. Wenham, Paul, 316–19; also McNicol, Jesus’ Directions, 55–63.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 565

7/12/23 11:29 AM

566

2 Thessalonians 2:3–8

below, and on 1 Thess 4:3–7 above, for many parallels between those texts and Rom 1:18–32). Hence, it is more plausible to understand that by ἡ ἀποστασία here Paul has in view a general rebellion of Adamic humanity against God as in Rom 1:18–32—indeed, the eschatological climax of fallen humanity’s rebellion against God the creator, which results in worldwide chaos of all sorts of evil, idolatry, immorality, falsehood, unrighteousness, conflicts, and suffering.53 It is “the rebellion,” the eschatological one, which Paul already told the readers during his founding mission in Thessalonica to expect before the coming of the day of the Lord (v. 5). That has to take place “first.” This adverb πρῶτον is not to be taken in connection with the following clause, “and the man of lawlessness is revealed, the son of destruction,” as if it were meaning “the rebellion takes place first and it is then followed up by the revelation of the man of lawlessness.”54 It is not just because the description of the revelation of “the man of lawlessness” is not accompanied by the adverb ἔπειτα (“then”; cf. 1 Cor 15:46; 1 Thess 4:16) or δεύτερον (“second”; cf. 1 Cor 12:28). Rather, it is because vv. 4 and 9–12 make it clear that “the man of lawlessness” is “the rebel”55 who instigates “the rebellion,” so that if Paul is here thinking of the temporal or logical order of the revelation of “the man of lawlessness” and the coming of “the rebellion,” he would state the former before the latter.56 It would be natural for him to set them in that order also if he means the πρῶτον to be taken both with the coming of “the rebellion” and the revelation of “the man of lawlessness.”57 Therefore, the adverb “first” is to be taken rather with the omitted apodosis: “(the day of the Lord will not come,) unless the rebellion comes first.”58 It is indeed logical to say that “the man of lawlessness” will first come and will then lead the ultimate eschatological rebellion against God. Nevertheless, Paul relates “the day of the Lord” directly with “the rebellion” and states his main thesis concerning the coming of the day of the Lord as he does: “(the day of the Lord will not come) unless the rebellion comes first.” He does this because for him “the rebellion” marks the end of “this age” in which Satan reigns in rebellion against God (cf. Rom 12:2; 1 Cor 1:20; 2:6, 8; 3:18; 2 Cor 4:4; Gal 1:4; Eph 1:21; 2:2), while “the day of the Lord” ushers in “the age to 53 Cf. Nicholl, Hope, 120; Marshall, 189; Morris, 218–19; Weima, 512. 54 Pace Findlay, 167; Milligan, 98; Witherington, 216; Röcker, Belial, 372n209. 55 Cf. Fee, 282. 56 Metzger, Katechon, 101, partly recognizes this, but he does not ask why Paul sets them in the reverse order. 57 Pace the majority of commentators, including Dobschütz, 269; Best, 281; Marshall, 188; Malherbe, 418; Fee, 280; cf. Weima, 510, who presents the strange view that the grammatical ambiguity here without a “next” or “second” following the “first” reflects “the reality that Paul is not clear about the precise relationship of the two events.” 58 Cf. Bruce, 167: “But πρῶτον, ‘first,’ in reference to the coming of the ἀποστασία . . . means that it comes before the Day of the Lord.”

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 566

7/12/23 11:29 AM

Comment 567 come” (Dan 12:4, 9, 13; Matt 12:32; Eph 1:21; 2:7) in which God reigns over all (cf. 1 Cor 15:23–28). The day of the Lord that launches the new age will not come unless “the rebellion” first takes place, marking the climax and end of the present evil age. In order to counter the false claim that the day has already come, Paul has to state this thesis clearly at the outset (2 Thess 2:3b). Only then does he go on in the rest of the passage (vv. 3c–12) to explain how the man of lawlessness will be revealed, how he will lead the world to its climactic eschatological rebellion against God, and how it will trigger the parousia of the Lord Jesus, who will slay the rebel (“the man of lawlessness”) and put down his eschatological rebellion. Thus, the extended explanation about the revelation of “the man of lawlessness” and the parousia of the Lord Jesus (vv. 3c–12) is made in support of the main thesis (v. 3b), which was stated as a succinct answer to the false claim. καὶ ἀποκαλυφθῇ ὁ ἄνθρωπος τῆς ἀνομίας, ὁ υἱὸς τῆς ἀπωλείας, “and the man of lawlessness is revealed, the son of perdition.” This clause is immediately attached to the preceding clause, because “the rebellion” starts with the revelation of this figure, its leader. He is described by two phrases constructed in the form of a Semitic idiom, with a generic personal noun (“man” or “son”) and an adjectival genitive that expresses relationship to a person, thing, or quality. This form is common in the OT and is taken over repeatedly into the LXX and the NT. He is “the man of lawlessness” and “the son of perdition (or destruction)” (cf. Isa 57:4 LXX: τέκνα ἀπωλείας σπέρμα ἄνομον, “children of perdition, lawless seed”). The noun ἀνομία (“lawlessness”) here has in view the opposition not specifically to the Mosaic law but more generally to any conception of honoring God and obeying his will, as the following v. 4 suggests.59 The more idiomatic Greek ὁ ἄνομος (“the lawless man”) for ὁ ἄνθρωπος τῆς ἀνομίας in v. 8 makes it clear that ἀνομία is the original reading over against the variant reading ἁμαρτία (see Notes e. above). In 1 John 3:4, ἁμαρτία (“sin”) is defined as ἀνομία, and Paul pairs them together as synonyms (Rom 4:7; cf. Heb 10:17). Apparently some later copyists replaced the rare ἀνομία with the more common ἁμαρτία here. Nestle suggests that “man of lawlessness” is a rendering of the OT phrase “man of Belial” (‫)איׁש בליעל‬, pointing out that in the LXX both ἀνομία (as in 2 Sam 22:5 = Ps 18:4 [17:5 LXX]) and ἀποστασία (as in 1 Kgs 21:13 [20:13A LXX]) appear as renderings of Hebrew ‫בליעל‬.60 Tracing the origin of this view to Bousset, Röcker develops it with a thorough investigation of the OT (MT and LXX), the Qumran literature, the Pseudepigrapha, as well as a NT parallel (2 Cor 6:14–16), and affirms that Paul has here Belial in view, who is conceived of in the OT-­Jewish tradition as the opponent of God that 59 Cf. Dobschütz, 272; Trilling, 84; Marshall, 189; Malherbe, 419; Weima, 513; Metzger, Katechon, 112. 60 Nestle, “2 Thess. ii.3,” 472.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 567

7/12/23 11:29 AM

568

2 Thessalonians 2:3–8

leads people to rebellion against God and his law.61 Also pointing out that the LXX often renders Hebrew ‫( ֲא ַבּדֹון‬place of destruction, the underworld of the dead) with ἀπωλεία (Job 26:6; 28:22; 31:12 [the related verb ἀπόλλυμι]; Ps 88:12; Prov 15:11; cf. Prov 27:20), Röcker suggests that ὁ υἱὸς τῆς ἀπωλείας (“the son of perdition”) here is to be understood as ‫( ֵבן ֲא ַבּדֹון‬cf. Rev 9:11: Ἀβαδδών is the Hebrew name of “the angel of the bottomless pit”).62 So “the man of lawlessness” or “the man of Belial” is “the son of Abaddon,” the one who belongs to the underworld of destruction and death, the realm of Belial. Weima discusses the question of whether ἀπωλεία (“perdition” or “destruction”) should be taken in a transitive sense (“the destruction that one causes”; cf. Matt 26:8; Mark 14:4) or an intransitive sense (“the destruction that one experiences”; cf. Rom 9:22; Phil 1:28; 3:19; etc.), and decides to take it in the latter sense (cf. the application of the same phrase ὁ υἱὸς τῆς ἀπωλείας to Judas Iscariot in John 17:12).63 But if with the phrase Paul has in mind ‫ ֵבן ֲא ַבּדֹון‬here, he may mean that “the man of lawlessness” or “the man of Belial” is the one who, being destined to eternal destruction himself (cf. v. 8), also brings others to it (cf. v. 10: τοῖς ἀπολλυμένοις). However, this person is not Satan himself, but the man/son of Belial/Satan,64 that is, an agent of Satan (v. 9), like the beast of Rev 13:1–10 who gets power from the dragon, Satan, and acts as his agent. For the expectation of the revelation of “the man of lawlessness, the son of perdition,” the description of this figure in the following v. 4 makes it quite likely that, along with the OT-­Jewish linguistic and conceptual backgrounds, Paul reflects also the Danielic prophecies about the eschatological adversary of God and his people, which are apparently modeled after Antiochus IV Epiphanes (Dan 8:11; 9:27; 11:31, 36–37; 12:10–11).65 The verb ἀποκαλυφθῇ (“be revealed”) implies that the “man of lawlessness,” like the Lord Jesus (cf. 2 Thess 1:7), is to have his ἀποκάλυψις (called his παρουσία in v. 9). This suggests that he is an evil parody of Christ or an opposite counterpart of Christ, the ἀντίχριστος of 1 John 2:18 (“you have heard that antichrist is coming”; cf. further 1 John 2:22; 4:3; 2 John 7). 4 ὁ ἀντικείμενος καὶ ὑπεραιρόμενος ἐπὶ πάντα λεγόμενον θεὸν ἢ σέβασμα, “he who opposes and exalts himself over every being called god or every object of worship.” Standing in apposition to ὁ ἄνθρωπος τῆς ἀνομίας, ὁ υἱὸς τῆς ἀπωλείας, this long participial clause further characterizes the great rebel, focusing on his activities. Thus it supplements the two preceding phrases that characterize him, focusing on his nature. “The lawless man” brings about “the rebellion” against God by “opposing” (ἀντικείμενος) him. The second participle phrase, καὶ ὑπεραιρόμενος, in the middle voice, has reflexive force here (“and exalts 61 Röcker, Belial, 5–222, 380–83, tracing it to Bousset, Antichrist, 86, 99, 101. 62 Röcker, Belial, 383–87. 63 Weima, 514–15. 64 Cf. Metzger, Katechon, 113; cf. Acts 13:10: the magician Elymus as υἱὸς διαβόλου. 65 Cf. Röcker, Belial, 11–12; also Weima, 514.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 568

7/12/23 11:29 AM

Comment 569 himself ”; cf. the repeated ἵνα μὴ ὑπεραίρωμαι, “lest I should be excessively exalted, too elated,” in 2 Cor 12:7). It intensifies the hubris of the rebel, which is already implied in the first participle. It is then still further intensified by the phrase ἐπὶ πάντα λεγόμενον θεὸν ἢ σέβασμα that follows it as its object. He exalts himself over every god. The language echoes that in which Antiochus IV is depicted in Dan 11:36: Antiochus, the willful king, is to “exalt himself and magnify himself above every god” (ἐπὶ πάντα θεόν). By inserting λεγόμενον into the Danielic phrase, Paul makes it clear that he does not recognize the beings that pagans call god.66 So the phrase πάντα λεγόμενον θεόν may be rendered as “every so-­called god” on analogy to the similar phrase λεγόμενοι θεοί in 1 Cor 8:5. But then it would exclude the God whom Christians worship, and that would be contrary to Paul’s chief concern in the context, which is about the lawless man’s rebellion against that real God. Hence, the phrase must be rendered with “every being called god” and understood as including the real God as well as the false gods.67 In order to stress the totalitarian claim of the rebel still further, Paul adds to that phrase the more comprehensive “(πάντα) σέβασμα,” which denotes (as in Acts 17:23) any object of worship. Formally the two participles joined together by one article (ὁ ἀντικείμενος καὶ ὑπεραιρόμενος) govern the following prepositional phrase (ἐπὶ πάντα λεγόμενον θεὸν ἢ σέβασμα) together.68 However, while the idea of the rebel “exalting himself above every being called god and every object of worship” (i.e., claiming to be higher than such beings) is well understandable, the idea of him “opposing” the so-­called gods of the pagans is not. Since for Paul there is only one “living and true God,” the Father of the Lord Jesus Christ (1 Cor 8:6; 1 Thess 1:9), and other gods are mere idols with no reality (1 Cor 8:5; 10:19–20; Gal 4:8), it seems that we should see him having with the first participle (ἀντικείμενος) only the one real God in mind.69 The rebel “opposes” God, the one creator, sustainer, and savior of the world. By the word “opposing” here, Paul does not mean that the rebel opposes the notion that Zeus, Apollos, Dionysus, Cabirus, or Demeter are gods or that he opposes the will of such idols or forbids their adherents to worship them. Why would Paul be interested in that sort of the rebel’s activity and speak of it in the negative way? In fact, he is concerned only about the rebel’s opposition to the “living and true God”: the rebel refuses to recognize him and works to counter his will. That is “the (eschatological) rebellion” he brings about (v. 3). This fact leads us to consider whether Paul reflects here the biblical tradition of seeing Satan as God’s opponent par excellence, which can be seen in LXX 3 Kgdms [1 Kgs] 11:25α´; Job 1:6 θ´, where ἀντικείμενος is used as a rendering 66 67 68 69

Cf. Fee, 283n50. So Best, 285–86; Malherbe, 420; Fee, 283; Weima, 516. Best, 285; Weima, 516. Note that Dan 11:36 speaks of Antiochus IV “exalt[ing] himself above every god and say[ing] unheard-­of things against the God of gods [i.e., Yahweh, the God of Israel].”

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 569

7/12/23 11:29 AM

570

2 Thessalonians 2:3–8

of Hebrew ‫“( שטן‬adversary”); in LXX Zech 3:1, where the verb ἀντίκεισθαι, “to oppose,” is used to render the corresponding Hebrew verb ‫“( שטן‬oppose,” “prosecute”) and the substantive ‫ שטן‬is rendered with διάβολος; and in 1 Tim 5:14, where ὁ ἀντικείμενος designates Satan, the supreme “adversary.”70 This consideration strengthens the view that, in designating the rebel as ὁ ἄνθρωπος τῆς ἀνομίας, Paul has Belial or Satan in view: ὁ ἄνομος is ὁ ἀντικείμενος.71 However, since v. 9 below indicates that “the man of lawlessness” (ὁ ἄνθρωπος τῆς ἀνομίας) or “the lawless man” (ὁ ἄνομος, v. 8) is not Satan himself but his agent (‫איש בליעל‬/‫ן‬‎‫)ב‬, ὁ ἀντικείμενος here is likewise to be understood in terms of the “son of Satan” (υἱὸς διαβόλου, cf. Acts 13:10), as one who opposes God as Satan’s agent.72 ὥστε αὐτὸν εἰς τὸν ναὸν τοῦ θεοῦ καθίσαι ἀποδεικνύντα ἑαυτὸν ὅτι ἐστὶν θεός, “so that he takes his seat in the sanctuary of God, proclaiming himself, that he is God.” This result clause presents the rebel’s acts that embody his self-­exaltation. To heighten the sense of his arrogance, it is emphatically formulated with the insertion of αὐτόν and ἑαυτόν at the prominent places: he himself takes his seat (rather than being set or enthroned by a higher authority) in the sanctuary of God, and he proclaims himself that he is God (displaying his egocentric and arrogant nature).73 The ναός is the sanctuary proper, the holiest part of the temple complex (ἱερόν), the dwelling place of the deity. The inner sanctuary of the Jerusalem temple, the holy of holies, was the throne room of the invisible presence of the God of Israel: there, in the house that Solomon built for him, as earlier at Shiloh (1 Sam 4:4), he was worshiped as “Yahweh of hosts, who is enthroned on the cherubim” (cf. Pss 80:1; 99:1). Although no ark surmounted by cherubim was to be found in the postexilic holy of holies, the God of Israel was still believed to have his dwelling there. The man of lawlessness is pictured as enthroning himself (the aorist infinitive καθίσαι, “to take his seat”) there in the place of God, in the spirit of the king of Babylon who is portrayed in Isa 14:13–14 as aspiring to “ascend to heaven” to sit at the heavenly throne in rivalry to the Most High, as well as in the spirit of the king of Tyre, who says in his heart, “I am God [‫אל‬‎]; I sit on the throne of God” (Ezek 28:2). Since in our v. 4a Paul alludes to the figure of Antiochus IV in Dan 11:36–37, it is also likely that he carries on that allusion in this v. 4b to him who styled himself as Epiphanes (“god manifest”) and defiled the sanctuary (ἁγίασμα or ναός) of the Jerusalem temple by entering it and plundering the sacred vessels and treasures there (1 Macc 1:20–24; 2 Macc 5:15–16, 21; Josephus, Ant. 12.249–50), as well as by turning it into the sanctuary of Zeus (2 Macc 6:1–11) and setting upon the altar an “abomination of desolation,” a pagan altar, while forbidding Jewish sacrifices to their God (Dan 8:9–13; 9:27;

70 71 72 73

Cf. Nestle, “2 Thess. ii.3,” 472. Cf. Röcker, Belial, 406. Cf. Röcker, Belial, 406–7. Cf. Weima, 518.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 570

7/12/23 11:29 AM

Comment 571 11:31; 12:11; 1 Macc 1:54; Josephus, Ant. 12.251–56). It is also highly likely that in our v. 4b Paul has also the Roman Emperor Gaius (Caligula) in mind, who only some years before (AD 40) created a great crisis among the Jews with his attempt to have his statues set up in the Jerusalem temple, in assertion of his claims to divinity—­the attempt aborted because he was assassinated (AD 41) before his cautious legate Petronius could carry it out.74 In 63 BC, the Roman general Pompey took Jerusalem and entered with his staff into the sanctuary (ναός) and inspected the sacred vessels and treasures there. However, he did not touch them but instead ordered the custodians to cleanse the temple and carry on their customary sacrifices.75 Pompey made no claim to divinity, so that, unlike Antiochus IV and Caligula, he does not quite fit the description of “the man of lawlessness” in our verse. Yet, in Pss. Sol. 2.1–2 and 17.11–18, where apparently Pompey’s acts of defiling the Jerusalem sanctuary and laying the land waste are recounted, he is referred to as “the lawless man” (ὁ ἄνομος, 17.11), like “the man of lawlessness” in our text (v. 8). So it is likely that here Paul has him also in mind when conceiving of the type of the coming eschatological rebel, “the man of lawlessness.”76 It is then likely that Paul thinks of the rebel as a human being rather than a nonhuman or supernatural being. But which sanctuary is actually meant here? The later idea that it is in the Christian church, “God’s dwelling place in the Spirit” (Eph 2:21–22; cf. 1 Cor 3:16–17; 2 Cor 6:16), that the antichrist is to manifest himself and establish his power base77 is inapplicable at this early stage, when there was no united church organization that could provide such a power base. A local church such as the church in Thessalonica, let alone the body of individual Christians (cf. 1 Cor 6:19), scarcely comes into consideration in this regard. One might think of the Jerusalem church, which (by some of its members, at least) was viewed as the new and living sanctuary of God, with James the Just and his successors as the new high priesthood; but there is no evidence that a manifestation of the antichrist was expected within it, and no hint that it is referred to in the present context. The allusions to the claims and deeds of Antiochus IV, Pompey, and Caligula make it quite clear that Paul has the Jerusalem sanctuary in view here.78 But it may be best to conclude that he uses its picture in a metaphorical or symbolic sense. When he says, “so that he takes his seat in the sanctuary of God,” few would feel it necessary to think of a literal throne; it would simply be regarded as a graphic way of saying that the eschatological rebel attempts to usurp the authority of God. This is what is meant by the language actually used here, 74 Philo, Embassy 203–346; Josephus, Ant. 18.261–301; J.W. 2.184–203. 75 Josephus, J.W. 1.152; Ant. 14.71–73. 76 Cf. Röcker, Belial, 395–96. 77 E.g., Giblin, Threat, 76–80; Beale, 207–11, among recent commentators. 78 So most commentators; cf. Weima, 520, and Schreiber, II:162–63, who point also to the articles before both “temple” and “God”: “the temple of the God.”

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 571

7/12/23 11:29 AM

572

2 Thessalonians 2:3–8

although the sacral associations of ναός imply that he demands not only the obedience, but also the worship due to God alone.79 However, Röcker strongly argues for the view that Paul means the literal Jerusalem temple here.80 But he does not consider the question of how that view can cohere with Paul’s view of Christ’s death as the eschatological atonement and his church as the sanctuary of God (1 Cor 3:16–17; 2 Cor 6:16; Eph 2:21–22). Schreiber thinks that, with the language that reflects what Titus the Roman general and later Caesar actually did while destroying the Jerusalem temple in AD 69–70, “Pseudo-­Paul” is here making “Paul” prophetically characterize the nature of the Roman emperor.81 But Titus is not known to have done the things that in our v. 4 the man of lawlessness is supposed to do, and what he actually did, namely, destruction of the temple, is not what the man of lawlessness is supposed to do. If, nevertheless, the “Pseudo-­Paul” presumed that his intended readers would take Titus’s destruction of the temple as covering the things mentioned in our v. 4, he was in effect making “Paul” proclaim to his readers that the man of lawlessness had already been revealed and therefore that the parousia of the Lord was imminent. But why does the “Pseudo-­Paul” let “Paul” go on speaking instead of something or someone restraining the revelation of the man of lawlessness at present and try to persuade the readers to patiently wait for the Lord’s parousia?82 In fact, some commentators take our verse as the “most persuasive” sign of the authenticity of our epistle,83 or even as the “Achilles heel” for the view of it as a pseudonymous work of a post-­A D 70 period.84 For, after the destruction of the Jerusalem temple in AD 70, hardly anyone would write of a man of lawlessness coming to “take his seat in the temple.” Trilling counters this view, arguing that the apocalyptic writer uses the image of the Jerusalem temple only as a symbol for God’s presence and seeks, with the picture of the lawless man taking his seat in the temple, just to convey the sense of his self- ­deification.85 Marshall concedes that there is some validity to this argument, and also thinks that our verse cannot be used for a pre-­A D 70 dating of our letter, although he upholds its Pauline authorship and therefore a pre-70 dating of our letter on other grounds.86 However, if the Jerusalem temple were no longer standing, would the author use it even metaphorically to describe the self-­deification of the man of lawlessness? When the author 79 Similarly Dobschütz, 276; Marshall, 191–92; Fee, 283–84; so also Weima, 518–23, who comes to the same conclusion after a thorough discussion of the alternative views that here Paul has in mind a heavenly temple or the Christian church. 80 Röcker, Belial, 402–6. Cf. also Nicholl, Hope, 122–23. 81 Schreiber, II:168–69; cf. Lindemann, “Abfassungszweck,” 44. 82 Cf. Marshall, 44. 83 Keener, Acts, 3:2533. 84 Weima, 54. 85 Trilling, 86. 86 Marshall, 44. Cf. also Best, 57–58.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 572

7/12/23 11:29 AM

Comment 573 can simply write in our verse “so that he proclaims himself to be God,” why would he insert into that clause the phrase “taking his seat in the temple of God,” which conveys only the same sense but makes the readers wonder how the lawless man would take his seat in the (Jerusalem) temple that no longer exists? Even while upholding the Pauline authorship of our epistle, Malherbe also rejects viewing our verse as an obstacle for a post-­A D 70 dating of our letter. He points to the example of the post-­A D 70 author of Hebrews writing as if the Jerusalem temple was still standing.87 But he fails to realize that the situation of 2 Thessalonians is different from that of Hebrews. Whereas the author of Hebrews explains the sacrifices in the Jerusalem temple according to the regulations of the Mosaic law or the Scriptures in order to demonstrate their fulfillment and supersession by the eschatological atoning and covenant-­ establishing sacrifice of Jesus Christ, the author of 2 Thessalonians refers to what is to take place in the (Jerusalem) temple as an act of the coming lawless man and as a prelude to the coming of the Lord Jesus himself. So Malherbe has to face the same problem that we have just raised against Trilling and Marshall. Thus, it appears reasonable to see our verse at least as an important piece of evidence for a pre-70 dating of our letter. 5 Οὐ μνημονεύετε ὅτι ἔτι ὢν πρὸς ὑμᾶς ταῦτα ἔλεγον ὑμῖν, “Do you not remember that I repeatedly told you these things while I was still with you?” This is a question with the adverb οὐ, expecting an affirmative answer from the readers. Here Paul begins a new sentence, without closing with an apodosis (to the effect that “the day of the Lord will not come”) the sentence that he began in v. 3b with the conditional clause (the protasis, [ὅτι] ἐάν . . . ) and stretched to the end of v. 4. Many commentators see, in his putting of this sentence in the form of “don’t you remember that . . . ?” (cf. 1 Cor 3:16; 5:6; 6:2, 3, 9, 15, 16, 19; 9:13, 24) and his employment of the iterative imperfect ἔλεγον (“I repeatedly told” or “kept on telling”), a note of rebuke to the readers for being so readily shaken by the false claim about the day of the Lord, despite the sufficient teaching about it that he delivered to them during his mission among them.88 There is disagreement whether to take our verse with the preceding89 or the following,90 while some commentators91 regard it as a parenthesis, seeing it as an interruption in Paul’s explanation of the coming of the man of lawlessness. But while ταῦτα connects our verse with the preceding,92 οἴδατε (“you know”)

87 Malherbe, 420–21. 88 E.g., Frame, 258; Best, 290; Marshall, 192; Malherbe, 421; Weima, 523; otherwise Morris, 224; Richard, 329; Fee, 285n60. 89 So Rigaux, 662; Malherbe, 421. 90 Greek editions of NT; NIV. 91 E.g., Trilling, 87–88; Weima, 523. 92 “These things” primarily refer back to the rebellion, the man of lawlessness, etc., although implicitly also forward to the things spoken about in vv. 6–8, as they are also related to those things (note οἴδατε in v. 6). Cf. Marshall, 192; Wanamaker, 250; Röcker, Belial, 414–15.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 573

7/12/23 11:29 AM

574

2 Thessalonians 2:3–8

in v. 6 connects our verse with vv. 6–8.93 Hence, it is unnecessary to see our verse as a parenthesis94 or to dispute whether it goes with the preceding or the following. It is better to treat the whole of vv. 3–8 as a coherent unit and v. 5 as an integral part of it. It is also better to take Paul’s question here as a rhetorical device of inducing the readers to recall the details of his teaching about the parousia of the Lord Jesus, as he is giving here only a summary résumé of his teaching. The pronoun ταῦτα in our verse makes it clear that he taught the Thessalonians about “the rebellion” and “the man of lawlessness,” and the word οἴδατε in v. 6 also makes it clear that he taught the readers about τὸ κατέχον (“that which is restraining” the revelation of the lawless man) and ὁ κατέχων (“he who is restraining”) as well as about how that restraining person will be put “out of the way” (vv. 6–7). Paul must then have also taught the content of v. 8: then the Lord Jesus will come (cf. v. 3) and destroy the lawless man. Thus, in our section of vv. 3–8 Paul refers to all the things that he already taught the readers while he was with them (ἔτι ὢν πρὸς ὑμᾶς, v. 5) during his mission in their city. However, what he says here about “the rebellion,” τὸ κατέχον/ὁ κατέχων, and even “the man of lawlessness” (although the clause in v. 4 makes this figure somewhat identifiable), appears like no more than just codes, as they are not accompanied by the sufficient explanations that he must have given the readers during his stay with them in order to make the whole narrative of the eschatological drama intelligible to them. For some reason(s)95 beyond his desire not to repeat his previous teaching in its entirety, he mentions in a very allusive way just the main points of the narrative of the upcoming eschatological drama that are necessary to convince the readers that the day of the Lord Jesus has not yet come and to help them wait for its coming with a right understanding. Therefore, with the rhetorical question in our verse, he seeks to remind the readers of the teaching that he imparted while he was with them and encourage them to fill in the gaps of his present narrative with the details of that prior teaching.96 Here, it is worthwhile to appreciate the fact that Paul forgets to state the apodosis to the conditional clause in v. 3 and that he concentrates on speaking about “the man of lawlessness” throughout our passage. Having stated the crisis facing the readers (v. 2) and issued a warning about it (v. 3a), he may be expected to state firmly in the causal ὅτι clause (v. 3b) the apodosis (“the day of the Lord will not come”) before starting the ἐάν conditional clause (the protasis). But he does not do that, nor does he stop with the conditional

93 94 95 96

Cf. Röcker, Belial, 421. Cf. Malherbe, 421. See Kim, “The Restraining Thing (τὸ κατέχον),” 306. Cf. Morris, 224.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 574

7/12/23 11:29 AM

Comment 575 clause, which implicitly contains the required response to the readers’ worry: “the day of the Lord has not yet come.” Instead, he goes on to describe in v. 4 “the man of lawlessness” mentioned in v. 3b, and after reminding the readers of his previous teaching (v. 5), he carries on his teaching about this figure (vv. 6–8). In fact, he focuses on him so much as to make the reference to the parousia of the Lord Jesus a subsidiary clause to the main sentence in v. 8, “and then the lawless man will be revealed,” and even to formulate the reference to the parousia of the Lord Jesus from a rebel-­centered perspective: “and then the lawless man will be revealed, whom the Lord [Jesus] will slay . . . and destroy by the appearance of his parousia.” Then, as soon as he mentions the parousia of the Lord, he reverts to explaining the rebel’s parousia and activities in vv. 9–12 (see comment on v. 9 below), rather than expanding on the Lord’s parousia, as if he has forgotten his topic: “concerning the parousia of our Lord Jesus Christ and our assembling to meet him” (v. 1) or “the day of the Lord” (v. 2). The concerns of the topic announced in vv. 1–2 are then taken up only in vv. 13–15 in the form of thanksgiving to God. Thus, throughout vv. 3–12 the rebel is the main subject of Paul’s teaching. Weima attributes Paul’s lengthy discussion about the rebel to his “animation” about that subject.97 But he does not ask why Paul is so “animated” about it as to compose our passage in the way observed here. We will have to find an explanation for this (see Explanation below). It could well be related to Paul’s decision to write our verse in the first-­ person singular (“I”), breaking the style of the plural “we” used throughout this letter (even in v. 2b: “by letter purporting to be from us”) before the closing signature sentence (3:17; cf. 1 Thess 5:27). Comparing this shift from the plural to the singular with the same phenomenon in 1 Thess 2:18 and 3:5 (see comment ad loc), Weima sees here a reflection of Paul’s desire to stress “the role that he personally played in teaching his Thessalonian readers about the eschatological events such that he knows them now to be well informed about these matters.”98 However, for stressing that he personally (not together with Silvanus and Timothy, his coworkers in the mission to Thessalonica and his cosenders of this letter) delivered the eschatological teaching, there may be a reason weightier than merely to support his assumption that the readers already know about the eschatological events to which he is referring here. My theory is that the weightier reason is related to Paul’s personal involvement in what he expresses here with the coded language of τὸ κατέχον/ὁ κατέχων, that is, in the upcoming eschatological drama that he lays out in outline in our passage.99

97 Weima, 515–16, citing Vos, Pauline Eschatology, 95. 98 Weima, 524. 99 See Excursus (“The ‘Restraining Thing’ [τὸ κατέχον] and the ‘Restraining Person’ [ὁ κατέχων] of the ‘Lawless Man’ ”) below on pp. 589–93.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 575

7/12/23 11:29 AM

576

2 Thessalonians 2:3–8

From 1 Thessalonians we have already learned that Paul taught the Thessalonians about the parousia of the Lord Jesus Christ and the day of the Lord during his mission among them. He taught them, as a core element of the gospel of God’s Son, Jesus the Lord, that the day would be the day of ultimate redemption from God’s wrath for believers (1 Thess 1:10) and that it would come like a thief at an unknown and unexpected hour (5:3), so that the readers know this well (v. 2). Now, from our present passage, we learn that Paul taught them also about “the rebellion,” “the man of lawlessness,” and τὸ κατέχον/ὁ κατέχων. From this we may infer that he taught them a scenario of the eschatological drama of the parousia in which these persons and things play a part, stressing that still the exact timing of the day of the Lord could not be known in advance. Here, however, while reminding the readers of the eschatological teachings that he delivered to them during his founding mission, he does not refer to the teachings that he imparted to them in his previous letter (1 Thess 4:13–5:11). Wanamaker uses this fact to support his view that 2 Thessalonians was written before 1 Thessalonians.100 Trilling claims this fact even as a sign that our 2 Thessalonians is a pseudepigraphon.101 But since the problem dealt with in our passage is different from the issues dealt with in 1 Thess 4:13–18 (the fate of the believers who died before the parousia of the Lord Jesus) and 1 Thess 5:1–11 (the exact timing of the day of the Lord), Paul has no reason to refer here to his teachings in the two passages of 1 Thessalonians.102 However, Bailey argues that during his founding mission Paul could not have imparted to the Thessalonians both the warning about the day of the Lord coming like a thief in the night (1 Thessalonians) and the teaching about a series of apocalyptic events to precede the coming of that day (2 Thessalonians), and therefore we need to see in our passage a pseudonymous author trying to counter the gnostics who used 1 Thess 4:13–5:11 (esp. 5:4–8) to claim that the day of the Lord has already come.103 But Marshall counters this well: [I]t is well known that in Jewish eschatology the coming of the End is preceded by signs, and that the gospel tradition contains the same juxtaposition of the suddenness and unpredictability of the End and of the prophecy of premonitory signs as we find in the two epistles. There is no real problem in Paul having taught that the End was coming soon and unpredictably and that certain events would precede it, and equally 100 101 102 103

Wanamaker, 249. Trilling, 88n333. Marshall, 192; Malherbe, 421; Weima, 525. Bailey, “Who,” 136–37, 142. Thus, while reflecting the fashion of scholarship of the 1970s, the heyday of appealing to Gnosticism for interpretation of various texts in the NT (cf. also Marxsen, 53–55), Bailey at least avoids some other scholars’ assumption that the pseudonymous writer was trying to correct Paul’s teaching in 1 Thess 4:13–5:11 itself.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 576

7/12/23 11:29 AM

Comment 577 there is no problem in the Thessalonians overstressing the imminence and ignoring what Paul had said about events that must first take place. It is also worth noting that nothing in 1 Th. shows that Paul expected the parousia immediately; at most he reckoned with the possibility of it in his lifetime (1 Th. 5:10), but his teaching about its unpredictability and imminence could have led his readers to assume that it could happen immediately.104

Trilling still argues that the pseudonymous writer knows that in no letter of Paul is there such a teaching about the coming of the antichrist as given here, and thus he creates in our v. 5 the fiction that Paul gave it orally at his founding mission in Thessalonica, in order to convince the readers to accept it as Paul’s.105 But it would be most foolhardy of a forger to expose his identity by creating such a fiction and asking the readers to recall that as what Paul taught them. Trilling tries to avoid this argument by suggesting that 2 Thessalonians was sent to another church than to the Thessalonians.106 But, even if that was so, in view of close communication that apparently existed between Christians of the capital city of Macedonia and those of other cities and regions in Macedonia, Achaia, and elsewhere (1 Thess 1:7–10),107 a forger would have been wary of such danger. The desire to avoid this argument may have been a factor that led Trilling to move the place of writing of our epistle so far away to Asia Minor,108 as well as moving its date so late to a time between the AD 80s and the early second century. But, of course, these speculations for a letter that a forger is supposed to have written “to the church of the Thessalonians” remain just speculations. For us, the teachings in our passage can be integrated with Paul’s teachings in his other letters (see comment on v. 7 below),109 so that the reminder of our v. 5 rings quite true. Here, we may note also the comment of Wanamaker that hardly any forger would write so carelessly “as to disrupt his own thought at a crucial point [v. 3] by introducing an anacoluthon into his argument.”110 In fact, this comment about the “careless” writing should not be confined to v. 3b but should be extended to the whole passage (cf. also v. 7b), where there is such a concentration on the revelation of the lawless man to the seeming neglect of the concerns of the topic announced in vv. 1–2, as we have just 104 105 106 107

Marshall, 37. Trilling, 88. Cf. Schreiber, II:169. Trilling, 27 with n24. See comment on 1 Thess 1:8 above. Cf. also Hannah, “Restrainer,” 37, who points also to 1 Cor 16:5–9, 12, 19–20; Phil 2:25–30; Col 4:16 for frequent contacts of various churches with one another within Pauline Christianity. 108 Trilling, 28. He seems to think that it was also destined to some church in the same area (26). 109 See also Excursus (“The ‘Restraining Thing’ [τὸ κατέχον] and the ‘Restraining Person’ [ὁ κατέχων] of the ‘Lawless Man’ ”) below on pp. 589–93. 110 Wanamaker, 249.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 577

7/12/23 11:29 AM

578

2 Thessalonians 2:3–8

indicated. Therefore, both the impetuous writing in vv. 3–8 and the reminder of our v. 5 may be taken as marks of the authenticity of our epistle, rather than of its spurious nature. 6 καὶ νῦν τὸ κατέχον οἴδατε, “and now [cf. Heb. equivalent adverb ‫ ]ועתה‬you know what is restraining him.” The NRSV perpetrates a solecism by rendering, “And you know what is now restraining him” (as though νῦν were separated from its adjunct by the article, like ὧδε in Mark 9:1). This rendering is followed by NASB, and Weima presents a strong argument for it.111 But νῦν is to be construed with οἴδατε, not with κατέχον, and its force is probably resumptive rather than temporal: “and, as it is, you know what is restraining him.”112 The phrase τὸ κατέχον is brought forward for emphasis, so that νῦν is separated from οἴδατε (see also the phrase ὁ κατέχων ἄρτι in an emphatic position in v. 7b; see comments below). This emphasis on τὸ κατέχον and this forward positioning of it correspond to the emphasis on the coming of ὁ ἄνθρωπος τῆς ἀνομίας throughout the foregoing verses since v. 3b (including its forward position in v. 3b itself immediately after the problem was stated in v. 2, that is, in the protasis placed prominently without the apodosis). Trilling also takes νῦν with οἴδατε, but strangely suggests to interpret it in contrast to ἔτι ὢν πρὸς ὑμᾶς (“while I was with you”) in v. 5.113 Paul employs here the neuter articular participle of the verb κατέχειν (BDAG: to “prevent, hinder, restrain”), τὸ κατέχον (“the thing that is restraining [the revelation of ‘the man of lawlessness’]”), and in the following v. 7 he uses a masculine articular participle ὁ κατέχων (“he who is restraining”). The object of the participle τὸ κατέχον is made clear by the following articular infinitive clause: “the revelation of the man of lawlessness,” whose coming has been the subject matter of the preceding verses since v. 3b. The articular participles are clearly codes. The readers knew what and whom they respectively were referring to because they had been told by Paul while he was with them. But later readers are at a disadvantage compared to them and are left to guess. εἰς τὸ ἀποκαλυφθῆναι αὐτὸν ἐν τῷ ἑαυτοῦ καιρῷ, “so that he may be revealed at his proper time.” If εἰς τό with the infinitive denotes purpose here (as in 1:5, etc.), the meaning must be: “you know what is restraining him in order that he may not be revealed before his proper time.” If εἰς means “until,” the meaning is: “you know what is restraining him, until he is revealed at his proper time,” but this is less probable. In the context it is clear that the masculine pronoun αὐτόν (“he”) in the infinitive clause refers to “the man of lawlessness,” whose “revelation” belongs to the subject matter of our passage (note the two other uses of the verb ἀποκαλυφθῆναι in vv. 3, 8). So it is also clear 111 Weima, 526. Cf. Frame, 262–63; Dibelius, 46; Best, 290; Fee, 286–87. 112 So KJV; ASV; NAB; NET; NIV. Cf. Marshall, 193; Malherbe, 422; Röcker, Belial, 421; Schreiber, II:170. 113 Trilling, 88–89. Cf. Malherbe, 422, who rejects this interpretation, saying that for that Paul would write νῦν δέ, “but now.”

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 578

7/12/23 11:29 AM

Comment 579 that the reflexive pronoun ἑαυτοῦ (“his own”; for the variant reading αὑτοῦ or αὐτοῦ, see Notes h. above) also refers to that figure. If purpose is indicated in our clause, the purpose is God’s, to which both “the man of lawlessness” and “the restraining thing” are perforce subservient. It is implied that there is a proper time decreed by God for the revelation of the eschatological rebel or antichrist, as well as for the epiphany of the Lord Jesus Christ (cf. καιροῖς ἰδίοις, “in his own time,” 1 Tim 6:15; also Mark 13:32; Acts 1:7. For καιρός, cf. also the comments on 1 Thess 5:1). Since “the restraining thing” (τὸ κατέχον) and “the restraining person” (ὁ κατέχων) restrain the revelation of “the man of lawlessness” until the God-­decreed time, by that act they are really, though unconsciously, serving God’s purpose as his tool or agent. 7 τὸ γὰρ μυστήριον ἤδη ἐνεργεῖται τῆς ἀνομίας· μόνον ὁ κατέχων ἄρτι ἕως ἐκ μέσου γένηται, “for the mystery of lawlessness is already at work; only until he who is now restraining is out of the way.” The conjunction γάρ indicates that this sentence is meant to explain or substantiate the preceding sentence in v. 6. But it is composed in the most contracted form (esp. v. 7b, lit. “only he who restrains now until [he] from the midst has happened”), so that the logical connections between its two parts and between it and the preceding v. 6 are not quite clear and its whole meaning not so apparent.114 The distinctive NT usage of μυστήριον relates to the hitherto concealed but now disclosed purpose or plan of God, with special reference to the fulfillment of his purpose or plan in Christ (cf. Mark 4:11; Rom 11:25–26; 16:25; 1 Cor 2:1, 7; 4:1; 15:51; Eph 1:9; 3:1–13; 6:19; Col 1:23–29; 2:2; 4:3; Rev 10:7; also Rev 1:20; 17:5, 7).115 The Qumran texts use the Hebrew-­A ramaic equivalent ‫ רז‬in a similar way (following the precedent of Dan 2:18, 19, 27, 28, 29, 30, 47 [2x]; 4:9 [4:6 MT]); see 1Q27 1.2, ‫ע‬‎‫פש‬ ‎ ‎ ‫“( רזי‬mysteries of iniquity”), which, unfortunately, lacks sufficient context to establish its relevance, if any, to the present passage (cf. 1QH 13[5].36; cf. further 1QM 14.9, “mysteries of [Belial’s] enmity”). Qumran text 1Q27 1.7 looks forward to the time when “those who hold back the wonderful mysteries [‫ ]רזי פלא תומכי‬shall be no more,” but these “restrainers” are impeding the divine purpose. Here, it is important to note that in Col 1:23–29 and Eph 3:1–13 (cf. Rom 16:25–27) Paul defines the divine “mystery of Christ” (Eph 3:4; the formerly hidden but now revealed divine plan of salvation in and through Christ) in terms of the gospel of Jesus Christ preached to all the nations for their obedience of faith (Rom 16:25–27), or “Christ in you” (i.e., Christ, the eschatological savior, present among gentile believers; Col 1:27), or “the gentiles [being made] fellow-­heirs, members of the same body, and partakers of the promise in Jesus Christ through the gospel” (Eph 3:4, 6). It is also important 114 Cf. Fee, 287–88. 115 Cf. G. Bornkamm, TDNT 4:817–24; Brown, Semitic Background, 38–66; Bockmühl, Revelation, 157–214; also Röcker, Belial, 477–85.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 579

7/12/23 11:29 AM

580

2 Thessalonians 2:3–8

to note that Paul expresses his self-­understanding to be a minister (διάκονος) or steward (οἰκονόμος) of that divine “mystery” as the apostle to the gentiles (Col 1:25–27; Eph 3:2, 7–12; cf. Rom 15:16; 1 Cor 4:1). Note also that in Rom 11:25–26 he defines the divine “mystery” in terms of God’s hardening of the hearts of Israel until the full number of the gentiles come into God’s kingdom and the eventual salvation of all Israel at the parousia of Christ. It is my view that in Rom 11:25–26 he is referring essentially to the same “mystery” as that in Col 1:23–29 and Eph 3:1–13 (cf. Rom 16:25–27) and that in Rom 11:25–26 he presupposes his apostolic self-­understanding that he expresses in those Colossians and Ephesians passages.116 See Excursus on “The Restraining Thing (τὸ κατέχον) and the Restraining Person (ὁ κατέχων)” below for the importance of these definitions of the “mystery” and this apostolic self-­understanding of Paul in deciphering that code language. The “mystery of lawlessness” is formally antithetic to the μυστήριον τοῦ Χριστοῦ (Eph 3:4) and to τῆς εὐσεβείας μυστήριον, “the mystery of our religion” (1 Tim 3:16). So the genitive phrase τῆς ἀνομίας here in our v. 7 is to be taken as appositional: “the mystery concerning lawlessness.”117 Since “the mystery of lawlessness” is related to “the man of lawlessness” and the latter to “the rebellion” (v. 3), we are bound to take the former as concerning that which seeks to frustrate God’s purpose or saving reign. Hence, it is a satanic counterpart to “the mystery of Christ,” God’s plan to save the world through Christ (cf. v. 9).118 However, since, as we have seen, the preceding purpose clause (εἰς τὸ ἀποκαλυφθῆναι αὐτὸν ἐν τῷ ἑαυτοῦ καιρῷ; cf. v. 8a) implies God’s sovereign government even in the timing of the revelation of “the man of lawlessness,” it appears proper to see “the mystery of lawlessness” as comprehended within the mystery of God’s overall saving plan, as well as to see the ἐνεργεῖται here as connoting that it is at work under God’s permission. Röcker supports this interpretation,119 comparing our verse with 1QS 3.23–25; 4.18–20, which convey the idea of God setting in his mystery a firm date to put an end to the operation of “the spirit of iniquity.” We need to pay attention to the fact that, three times over, Paul refers to the coming of the man of lawlessness as his “revelation” (ἀποκαλύπτεσθαι, vv. 3, 6, 8), using a virtual terminus technicus of apocalyptic literature, and that in that context he also speaks about “the mystery of lawlessness,” employing μυστήριον, a key concept in the semantic field of ἀποκάλυψις.120 Verse 9 shows that Paul could easily refer to the appearance of the lawless man (or the 116 For all these, cf. Kim, Origin, 20–25, 74–99; idem, “The ‘Mystery’ of Romans 11:25–26 Once More.” 117 Best, 293, considers this possibility, but unfortunately decides to interpret the phrase as “the secret rebellion,” referring to Frame, 263–64, and Rigaux, 272. 118 Cf. Bockmuehl, Revelation, 196–98. 119 Röcker, Belial, 482–83. Cf. Best, 293. 120 Cf. Bockmuehl, Revelation and Mystery.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 580

7/12/23 11:29 AM

Comment 581 man of lawlessness) in terms of his παρουσία. Yet although he is going to switch to that word παρουσία immediately in v. 9, he keeps on using the word ἀποκαλύπτεσθαι three times over in vv. 3–8, in which he has in mind God’s overall plan concerning the parousia of the Lord Jesus and the coming of the day of the Lord—­“the mystery of Christ” (μυστήριον τοῦ Χριστοῦ, cf. Eph 3:4). Within that plan or that “mystery,” “the mystery of lawlessness” is a part, and the latter is related to God’s plan concerning the revelation of the man of lawlessness. Since Paul thus makes the threefold reference to the revelation of the man of lawlessness as well as his reference to the μυστήριον τῆς ἀνομίας while speaking from the perspective of God’s overall saving plan and government, we may infer that he is here thinking of the “mystery” concerning the man of lawlessness (as it were, the μυστήριον τοῦ ἀνόμου), along with the μυστήριον τῆς ἀνομίας. Insofar as the revelation of the lawless man is part of God’s overall “mystery,” God’s overall plan, ἀποκαλύπτεσθαι (the passive form of the verb ἀποκαλύπτειν) that Paul consistently uses three times in our passage may be taken as a divine passive (the lawless man is to be “revealed” by God “in his time” predetermined by God’s plan, v. 6). But insofar as the lawless man is an agent of Satan (v. 9), we need to see that he is to be “revealed” by Satan. We may resolve this apparent contradiction in this way: the lawless man is to be “revealed” by Satan; nevertheless, since that is part of God’s overall plan of letting him be “revealed in his time,” in the ultimate sense he can be said to be “revealed” by God. This nuance appears to be present in Paul’s threefold reference to the future coming of the man of lawlessness in terms of the passive ἀποκαλύπτεσθαι. For another example of Paul’s understanding of God materializing his saving plan by making use of Satan’s rebellion against him, see 1 Cor 2:1–2, 6–10. There, he speaks of “the mystery [μυστήριον] of God” concerning “Jesus Christ crucified” as the formerly “secret and hidden” but now “revealed” “wisdom of God.” This wisdom “God had decreed before the ages for our glorification” and “prepared for those who love him” and has materialized through the unwitting rebellion of “the rulers of this age,” the satanic forces, who crucified Christ, the Lord of glory (cf. John 11:45–52). “The mystery of lawlessness is already at work.” But since it refers to what is taking place at present before the revelation of “the man of lawlessness,” we may take our v. 7a in the sense that it is already at work—­but beneath the surface121—­until the due time comes for its full disclosure with the revelation of “the man of lawlessness,” its embodiment. Having recently experienced the Caligula crisis, its rise and end, Paul knows that “the mystery of lawlessness is already [ἤδη] at work” but is held in check at present by the restrainer (ὁ κατέχων). Nevertheless, with the adverb ἤδη, Paul conveys also the impression that its full disclosure is not too far in the future. 121 Cf. Marshall, 195: “under restraint for the time being”; Bockmuehl, Revelation, 197: “still hidden from men”; similarly also Röcker, Belial, 483–84.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 581

7/12/23 11:29 AM

582

2 Thessalonians 2:3–8

Citing Gal 2:10 as a formal parallel, many commentators122 see v. 7b as an ellipsis and supply a verb (e.g., ἐνεργεῖται) between μόνον and ὁ κατέχων. But some commentators123 would see here only an inversion of word order, that is, only ὁ κατέχων ἄρτι as brought forward for emphasis out of the ἕως clause. The supporters of this view also appeal to the parallel phenomenon in Gal 2:10 of τῶν πτωχῶν (“the poor”) brought forward for emphasis before the ἵνα clause to which it properly belongs. However, no matter how we construe the verse, its sense remains substantially the same,124 and seeing ὁ κατέχων as placed in an emphatic position is not affected. Anyway, it is noteworthy that both in v. 6 and v. 7, through an inversion of the normal word order, Paul highlights respectively τὸ κατέχον and ὁ κατέχων. Since “the revelation of the man of lawlessness” is the object of the participle τὸ κατέχον in v. 6, that figure or his revelation must also be the implicit object of the participle ὁ κατέχων here.125 However, it appears necessary to see our verse implying that ὁ κατέχων (and therefore also τὸ κατέχον) also keeps “the mystery of lawlessness” in check at present (ἄρτι) by holding back the revelation of “the man of lawlessness” (hence, we have interpreted v. 7a above as meaning that “the mystery of lawlessness” is at work beneath the surface at present). And we need also to see the adversative ἀλλά omitted before μόνον here: “[but] only until he who restrains now is removed,” μόνον . . . ἕως ἐκ μέσου γένηται. Essentially the same effect is achieved by taking v. 7a as having a concessive force.126 Richard combines both suggestions: “Certainly, the mystery of lawlessness is already at work, but only until the restrainer is gone.”127 The phrase ἐκ μέσου (without further qualification of the μέσον) in itself implies removal (cf. 1 Cor 5:2, with the qualification of ὑμῶν; Col 2:14). For other instances of ἐκ μέσου γίνεσθαι in Greek literature, see Plutarch, Timoleon 5.3, “he decided to live by himself, having moved away [ἐκ μέσου γενόμενος] out of public view”; Achilles Tatius, Leucippe and Clitophon 2.27, “when Clio has been removed [τῆς Κλειοῦς ἐκ μέσου γενομένος]”; Ps.-­Aeschines, Ep. 12.6, “what they formerly covered up is clearly revealed, now that they have been removed [ἐκ μέσου γενομένων]”—­that is, by death or exile. The question of whether our phrase ἐκ μέσου γένηται means a voluntary “retirement” or a forceful “removal” hangs together with the question who ὁ κατέχων is (see Excursus below).128 For the moment, by filling our verse out with the insights obtained from our exegesis so far, we may make the flow of Paul’s thought in vv. 6–7 a little 122 123 124 125 126 127 128

E.g., Lightfoot, 264; Frame, 264–65; Trilling, 94; Morris, 229n49; Malherbe, 423; Fee, 288. E.g., Milligan, 102; Wanamaker, 255–56; Richard, 331; Martin, 241n44; Weima, 531. Cf. Best, 294. Cf. Martin, 241. Marshall, 195. Richard, 330–31. Cf. Röcker, Belial, 473–76.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 582

7/12/23 11:29 AM

Comment 583 clearer as follows: “And now you know what is restraining (the revelation of the man of lawlessness), so that he may be revealed in his own time; for the mystery of lawlessness is already at work (albeit under the surface at present), (but this will be so) only until he who restrains (the revelation of the man of lawlessness) is out of the way.” Anyone undertaking to identify the restraining agency must reckon with the fact that it may be viewed either personally (ὁ κατέχων) or impersonally (τὸ κατέχον). It is plain, moreover, that both the mystery of lawlessness and the restraining agency are at work at the time of the writing of the epistle; the restrainer has not yet been removed, therefore the man of lawlessness has not yet appeared, and a fortiori the day of the Lord has not yet arrived. No more convincing account of the restrainer has been suggested than that put forward by Tertullian (De resurrectione carnis 24): “What is this but the Roman state, whose removal when it has been divided among ten kings will bring on Antichrist?” (the reference to the ten kings is an importation from Rev 17:12–14). Similarly, Chrysostom (Hom. 2 Thess. 4) says of ὁ κατέχων, “some interpret this of the grace of the Spirit [an allusion perhaps to his rival Severian of Gabala], but others of the Roman Empire, and this is my own preference. Why? Because, if Paul had meant the Spirit, he would have said so plainly and not obscurely . . . but because he meant the Roman Empire, he naturally glanced at it, speaking covertly and darkly. . . . So . . . when the Roman Empire is out of the way, then he [the antichrist] will come.” In general, Paul viewed established government as imposing a salutary restraint on evil (Rom 13:3–4), and, in his mission field, established government meant effectively the Roman Empire (τὸ κατέχον), personally embodied in the emperor (ὁ κατέχων). He himself had cause to appreciate the benevolent neutrality of Roman rule; shortly after this epistle was written came his brief appearance before Gallio (Acts 18:12–17), and his consequent reflections on the divinely governed benefits of Roman rule for the progress of the gospel could have influenced his language in Rom 13:1–7. He knew that Roman rule would not last forever and its benevolent neutrality could not be counted on indefinitely, but in the present situation a welcome curb was placed on the forces of lawlessness.129 8 καὶ τότε ἀποκαλυφθήσεται ὁ ἄνομος, “and then the lawless man will be revealed.” The words καὶ τότε, “and then,” point to when the restrainer has been removed—­when “the lawless man” will be revealed openly in contrast to the covert operation of “the mystery of lawlessness.” The subject ὁ ἄνομος is the idiomatic Greek representation of ὁ ἄνθρωπος τῆς ἀνομίας, “the man of lawlessness,” which is constructed in Semitic style (v. 3). Since in vv. 3–4 129 For a more detailed substantiation of this view of Bruce, see Excursus below. See also Kim, “The Restraining Thing (τὸ κατέχον) and the Restraining Person (ὁ κατέχων),” PGTO, 297–312.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 583

7/12/23 11:29 AM

584

2 Thessalonians 2:3–8

“the man of lawlessness” is described after the model of Antiochus IV in Dan 11:36, it appears better to render the masculine Greek phrase with “the lawless man” than “the lawless one,”130 although the latter is the preferred rendering in Bible versions and commentaries (perchance the phrase might refer to a nonhuman being). Anyway, he is lawlessness incarnate. For the third time (cf. vv. 3, 6), the passive of ἀποκαλύπτειν is used to denote the appearance of this figure, implying both his character as the evil counterpart of Christ (the antichrist; cf. 1:7) and his being still under God’s sovereign control (see comment on vv. 3, 6, and 7 above). ὃν ὁ κύριος [Ἰησοῦς] ἀνελεῖ τῷ πνεύματι τοῦ στόματος αὐτοῦ, “whom the Lord [Jesus] will slay with the breath of his mouth.” Regardless of inclusion or omission of Ἰησοῦς here (see Notes i. above), it is clear that “the Lord” refers to Jesus Christ. This clause is based on Isa 11:4 LXX, where the coming prince of the house of David (“the shoot from the root of Jesse”) is to “smite the earth with the word of his mouth [τοῦ στόματος αὐτοῦ] and destroy [ἀνελεῖ] the wicked one [ἀσεβῆ] with breath [πνεύματι] through his lips.” There “the wicked one” is generic; here he is the particular individual in whom lawlessness is embodied. Paul combines “the word of his mouth” and “breath through his lips” of this text into “the breath of his mouth” in our verse here, perhaps under the influence of the phrase “by the breath of his mouth” in Ps 33:6 [32:6 LXX].131 In the phrase τῷ πνεύματι τοῦ στόματος αὐτοῦ, the modifying phrase “of his mouth” requires us to take πνεῦμα metaphorically as meaning simply “breath” rather than the Holy Spirit.132 Even so, we should understand it as symbolizing the power of God rather than conveying the sense of an easy defeat of the lawless man.133 In Rom 15:12 Paul cites Isa 11:10 LXX to affirm that, with the rise of the Davidic Messiah (“the root of Jesse”) to God’s right hand as his Son and Lord over all nations (cf. Rom 1:3–5, with which Rom 15:12 builds an inclusio), the gentiles have hope in him. His allusion to Isa 11:4 here and his citation of Isa 11:10 in Romans clearly suggest that Paul appreciates the traditional messianic understanding of Isa 11 (cf., e.g., 1 QSb 5.20–29; Pss. Sol. 17.24–39; 18.8–9; also Rev 5:5–6; 19:11, 15)134 as a prophecy for Jesus, the Davidic Messiah, who rules over Israel and the nations with justice, destroying the wicked and giving righteous judgment for the poor. So Paul is convinced that the Davidic Messiah, Jesus the Lord, will slay the lawless man, the leader of the rebellion against God’s just order, and root out unrighteousness and injustice in the world, so that all the nations may have hope in his righteous rule.

130 131 132 133 134

Cf. Marshall, 201–2: “the rebellious man.” So, e.g., Frame, 265; Best, 303; Malherbe, 424; Fee, 291. See Fee 291n77, against Giblin, Threat, 91–95. So Weima, 535, citing some OT and Jewish texts. Cf. Wildberger, Jesaja 1, 460–62.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 584

7/12/23 11:29 AM

Comment 585 καὶ καταργήσει τῇ ἐπιφανείᾳ τῆς παρουσίας αὐτοῦ, “and will destroy (him) with the dawning of his advent.” Fee sees Paul pairing the preceding clause with this second clause in synonymous parallelism in terms of Semitic poetry style.135 In such case, the second line usually elaborates or intensifies the first line. So Fee explains the relationship between the ἀνελεῖ (“slaying”) of the first clause and the καταργήσει (“abolishing, destroying”; cf. 1 Cor 15:24, 26) of this second clause in terms of the latter clarifying or intensifying the former. He sees the “redundancy” of ἐπιφανεία and παρουσία for Christ’s coming in our clause also as displaying a poetic moment, in which ἐπιφανεία (“manifestation”) is intended to emphasize “the unmistakable and evidential character” of Christ’s coming. This is the only NT occurrence of ἐπιφανεία outside the Pastoral Epistles, where it is used once (2 Tim 1:10) of the first coming of Christ and four times (1 Tim 6:14; 2 Tim 4:1, 8; Titus 2:13) of his parousia in glory (παρουσία does not occur in the Pastorals). If ἐπιφανεία (“manifestation”) were synonymous with παρουσία here, the construction would be pleonastic; so it could mean “dawning,” as in Polybius, Histories 3.94.3, τὴν ἐπιφάνειαν τῆς ἡμέρας (“the dawn of day,” “daybreak”). The bright dawn of Christ’s parousia will consume the man of lawlessness; we may compare the “flaming fire” of 1:7, 8. Röcker argues that there is some parallelism between our verse and Matt 24:27–30 and thinks similarly that ἐπιφανεία refers to “the parousia [of the Lord Jesus] that is just beginning . . . which results in a worldwide recognition of him as the coming Savior.”136 However, Weima argues that ἐπιφανεία was a technical term in Hellenism referring to “a visible and frequently sudden manifestation of a hidden deity”137 and that by employing that term here Paul stresses “the sudden or unexpected aspect of Christ’s appearance.” Weima interprets the meaning of our verse thus: “ just when all may appear lost due to the revelation of the lawless man, this eschatological enemy will be destroyed by the abrupt manifestation of Christ at his coming.”138 Weima may well be right thus to interpret Paul’s intent in stressing the sudden manifestation of Christ at an unforeseen moment. However, it is only implicit, as Paul affirms only the revelation of the lawless man without adding any word about his menace. Actually, it is striking that at v. 8 Paul states the fact of the revelation of the lawless man with the minimum number of words necessary and without even a summary reference back to his rebellious activities that he predicted in v. 4, and proceeds straight to stating the Lord Jesus’s destruction of him in a subordinate clause, mentioning his parousia only at the end of that clause. When Paul steps back to speak about

135 Fee, 291–92. 136 Röcker, Belial, 497–98. 137 Weima, 537; see BDAG 385. 138 Weima, 537, citing for support Wanamaker, 258; Menken, “Structure,” 114; Witherington 223.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 585

7/12/23 11:29 AM

586

2 Thessalonians 2:3–8

the future activities of the lawless man at his coming in vv. 9–12, he focuses not on describing his cruel rebellion that would bring great suffering to believers but rather on his wicked deception of unbelievers and God’s condemnation of those unbelievers.139 This picture of the warrior Messiah has OT precedent (cf. Isa 11:4 quoted in preceding comment; Isa 66:15–16; and Mal 4:1 quoted in comment and explanation on 1:8; also Yahweh’s portrayal as a man of war in Isa 42:13, 25; 59:15b–19; 63:1–6). It passed into apocalyptic imagery, as in the Ascension of Isaiah (4.14) where “the Lord will come with his angels and with the armies of the holy ones from the seventh heaven with the glory of the seventh heaven, and he will drag Beliar into Gehenna together with his armies,” and in the detailed picture of Rev 19:11–21 where the “Word of God,” mounted on a warhorse, smites his enemies with the sharp sword proceeding from his mouth and throws the “beast” (corresponding to the man of lawlessness) and his agent, the false prophet, into the lake of fire and brimstone.

Explanation We have just observed how striking it is that at v. 8 Paul states the bare fact of the revelation of the lawless man and that after that stark statement he refers to the Lord Jesus’s destruction of the lawless man in a subordinate clause, mentioning his parousia only at the end of that clause. In the context set by vv. 2–3, would it not be more natural for him to start a new sentence in v. 8b with another “and then” and with the Lord Jesus as the subject in some such way as “and then the Lord Jesus will be revealed” or “and then the day of the Lord will come,” making it the emphatic climax of his argument of vv. 1–8? It is also noteworthy that, just as with the statement of the revelation of the lawless man Paul does not refer to his rebellious activities, so also with the affirmation of the parousia of the Lord Jesus he does not unfold his activities of judging and saving, which would interest the readers the most, but states only that the Lord Jesus will destroy the lawless man. This is especially surprising in view of the way he announced the topic of our passage in v. 1, namely, “concerning the parousia of the Lord Jesus and our assembling to meet him.” For that would naturally have aroused the readers’ expectation for a more detailed description of the Lord Jesus’s parousia and their glorious gathering with him beyond what he already said in 1 Thess 4:13–18. All these observations show that, in our section of vv. 3–8, Paul focuses on the revelation of the lawless man, which will be the triggering event for the parousia of the Lord, and single-­mindedly concentrates on carrying out the

139 Or is it possible to take vv. 9–10 as a paraphrastic representation of the meaning of v. 4? (Cf. comment on those verses below.)

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 586

7/12/23 11:29 AM

Explanation 587 most urgent task of allaying the paralyzing fear of the Thessalonian believers that has been caused by the false message that “the day of the Lord has come.” No, the day is yet to come because it is due to come only after the lawless man is revealed, who is restrained for the moment. So, in v. 8, after stating that the lawless man will be revealed—­in the future—­a s if it were the climax in the whole scenario of the parousia of the Lord, Paul adds the reference to the parousia of the Lord to complete the scenario that he implicitly presented in v. 3, and he does that only from the perspective of the revelation and demise of the lawless man. Only after the successful completion of the most urgent task does Paul turn to describe the evil, rebellious activities of the lawless man and their effects on unbelievers (vv. 9–11) and to affirm—­only implicitly—­the effects of the parousia of the Lord: God’s judgment on unbelievers (v. 12) and his salvation of believers (vv. 13–14) on the day of the Lord, which is a summary re-­presentation of what he already said in 1:5–10. In the following two sections, namely, vv. 9–12 and vv. 13–14, he reaffirms them in order to reassure the readers once more of their certain participation in the glory of the returning Lord Jesus. These observations are a far cry from the view that some commentators140 present, namely, that in our text Paul focuses on Christ, giving minimal attention to the lawless man.141 They are right if they refer only to the fact that in v. 8 Paul surprisingly states just the future revelation of the lawless man without devoting even a word to describing his activities, as we have seen. But they are wrong to see that fact as evidence for Paul’s focus on Christ. Their view is quite incomprehensible because it is obvious even on a cursory reading that the lawless man is the subject or the subject matter of vv. 3–4, 6, and 8, and then again of vv. 9–10, whereas the Lord Jesus is referred to only in the subordinate clause of v. 8b and then later in the thanksgiving section of vv. 13–14 (see comment on v. 5 above). However, their view ironically leads us to appreciate the apparent incongruity between what actually stands in our text and Paul’s announcement of the subject matter of our section in v. 1 (“concerning the parousia of our Lord Jesus Christ and our assembling to him”), which naturally leads the readers (including modern commentators like those named above) to expect that in the subsequent verses he would focus on Christ and his benefits for believers. Above we have attempted to account for this incongruity by highlighting the need for Paul to focus in vv. 3–8 on explaining the future coming of the lawless man in order to convince the anxious readers that the day of the Lord has not yet come and that it will come in the future.

140 E.g., Best, 302; Holmes, 244–45; Fee, 290; Weima, 534–35n29. 141 Cf. Weima, 515–16, where he expresses the opposite view, somewhat self-­contradictorily.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 587

7/12/23 11:29 AM

588

2 Thessalonians 2:3–8

We may supplement that attempt further with another consideration. There is no question that in vv. 3–8 the revelation of the lawless man is the chief subject matter. But what makes Paul dwell on this topic longer than necessary is the need or desire to explain that his revelation is being restrained at present. In fact, for the sake of economy or succinctness in explaining the condition for the Lord Jesus’s parousia, Paul could easily have added directly to the end of v. 4 just these sentences: “He will be revealed before long (to do all these evil things). And then the Lord Jesus will come, and he will slay him and judge unbelievers while bringing salvation to you.” But instead of doing this and before speaking of the revelation of the lawless man, he inserts two verses (vv. 6–7) to say that there is something and someone that are restraining him at present, as well as one verse (v. 5) to remind the readers that he taught about these things during his mission among them. When he says in v. 5 that he taught them “these things” (ταῦτα), of course, he means the various things concerning the revelation of the lawless man and the parousia of the Lord Jesus that are spoken about in our passage (see comment on v. 5 above). However, it is noteworthy that he inserts that reminder just before speaking about τὸ κατέχον and ὁ κατέχων, and that with the verb οἴδατε (“you know”) in the ensuing v. 6 he singles out τὸ κατέχον and ὁ κατέχων as the points of his previous teaching about which he especially wants to remind his readers. Since he speaks about τὸ κατέχον and ὁ κατέχων over two verses (or three verses, if we count v. 5 also as the introductory preface for them) and then refers only briefly both to the revelation of the lawless man itself and to the parousia of the Lord Jesus (v. 8), we may even say that he is highlighting the roles of those “restrainers” in the eschatological drama (see comment on the emphatic position of τὸ κατέχον and ὁ κατέχων in vv. 6–7 above). Obviously he does this because their remembrance of his teaching about them would help them understand and accept the delay of the parousia of the Lord. However, at the same time he seems to be doing this because he himself values τὸ κατέχον and ὁ κατέχων and the time that they create for his gentile mission at present before the parousia of the Lord Jesus.142 Thus his interest in τὸ κατέχον and ὁ κατέχων prolongs his explanation of the condition for the revelation of the lawless man and leads him to explain about them at length while referring to the revelation of the lawless man itself only briefly.

142 See Excursus below. Contra Metzger, Katechon, 124–27 and passim, who argues that τὸ κατέχον/ὁ κατέχων is perceived here as a negative power that prolongs the period of the church’s suffering by hindering the speedy parousia of the Lord Jesus through restraining the revelation of the lawless man.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 588

7/12/23 11:29 AM

Excursus: The “Restraining Thing” (τὸ κατέχον) and the “Restraining Person” (ὁ κατέχων) of the “Lawless Man” Among all his letters, our passage (2:1–12) is the place where Paul offers his most detailed scenario of the sequence of events that would usher in the parousia of the Lord Jesus, so that it naturally attracts much attention. However, he makes coded references to something and someone that will play a key role in that scenario, τὸ κατέχον and ὁ κατέχων, in part appealing to Thessalonian Christians’ knowledge of the referents, since he taught them about the scenario during his founding mission among them (v. 5). But as the two terms, τὸ κατέχον and ὁ κατέχων, appear only in our passage in the NT and Paul does not divulge those referents in this letter, exegetes are forced to do their best to decipher the codes by considering them in the light of Paul’s statements (especially eschatological scenarios) elsewhere, the possible OT allusions, and the historical circumstances of his time. In this way, since the age of the Apostolic Fathers, diverse views have been suggested. They are somewhat comprehensively surveyed in the recent monographs of Metzger and Röcker,143 as well as more briefly in the commentaries of Best, Marshall, and Weima.144 Many scholarly efforts to identify τὸ κατέχον and ὁ κατέχων have not yielded a majority opinion, let alone a consensus. In fact, many modern commentators have joined Augustine, who declared, “I frankly confess that the meaning of this completely escapes me” (The City of God 20.19).145 However, I believe that we can present a plausible interpretation by rethinking some of the insights contained in a couple of the proposals that have already been made but proven in themselves to be inadequate. I have made this attempt in the essay with the same title in my volume, PGTO. Here I just present a bare outline of it and reproduce only its conclusion. There, among the various proposals for identifying τὸ κατέχον and ὁ κατέχων, I discuss the following that are worthy of serious consideration: 1. God’s Saving Plan and God (the view propounded by A. Strobel [Untersuchungen, 98–116] in modern times) 2. The Angel Michael (the view suggested by some commentators [e.g., Dibelius, 46–51; Marshall, 199–200; Menken, 133; Beale, 216–17] and 143 Metzger, Katechon, 15–47, and Röcker, Belial, 422–58. 144 Best, 296–301, Marshall, 196–99, and Weima, 570–77. 145 E.g., Rigaux, 278–79; D. M. Martin, 242; Gaventa, 114; Müller, 270.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 589

7/12/23 11:29 AM

590 Excursus made popular recently by Hannah [Michael, 132–34; idem, “Restrainer,” 35–45], Nicholl [Hope, 230–49], and Weima [574–77]) 3. Paul’s Mission and Paul (the view propounded by Cullmann [“Charakter,” 311–36] in modern times and adopted by Munck [Paul, 37–42] and, more recently, also by Stuhlmacher [Biblical Theology, 491–92] and his former students, Stettler [“Colossians 1:24,” 198–208] and Röcker [Belial, 458–76]) 4. God’s Saving Plan/Paul’s Gentile Mission and God/Paul (the view presented by Röcker [Belial, 458–76], combining Cullmann’s interpretation with the insights of Strobel) Each of these proposals has its own weaknesses, but they all share the common difficulty of explaining the clause ἕως ἐκ μέσου γένηται (“until he is out of the way,” v. 7) satisfactorily. 5. The Roman Empire and the Emperor This is the most popular view from the ancient times until at least the middle of the twentieth century, and it has been based on five considerations: (a) Both in Jewish apocalypticism (4 Ezra 11–12) and Christian apocalypticism (Rev 13; 17–20), the Roman Empire is identified with the fourth and last beastly empire of Dan 7, and after its demise the ultimate opponent of God (the equivalent to “the man of lawlessness” in 2 Thess 2:3–8) is thought to appear; (b) Paul apparently appreciates the Roman Empire for restraining evil and maintaining the law and order of the world (cf. Rom 13:1–7), despite his and the church’s frequent suffering at the hands of the Roman officials; (c) this hypothesis explains best both the change from the neuter τὸ κατέχον (the Roman Empire) to the masculine ὁ κατέχων (the emperor) and the reason for Paul’s use of the coded terms (see below); (d) it also explains smoothly the clause ἕως ἐκ μέσου γένηται (cf. Paul’s recent experience of the “removal” of Caligula), whereas all the other suggested hypotheses stumble on it; and (e) in view of the fact that Paul describes “the man of lawlessness” in 2 Thess 2:3–4 in terms of Antiochus IV in the prophecy of Dan 11:36–37, as well as the likelihood that in doing so he has also in mind the lawless emperor Caligula, it is reasonable to think that he has the fear of another Caligula rising after the relatively good current emperor Claudius “is out of the way” (2 Thess 2:7)—­a super-­Caligula who will lead the world in the ultimate rebellion against God in fulfillment of that Danielic prophecy (see comment on v. 4 above; cf. also Dan 7:7–8).146 There is no question that these considerations together build up a powerful argument for 146 Cf. Best, 296, who lists some of these points.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 590

7/12/23 11:29 AM



The “Restraining Thing” and the “Restraining Person” 591 identifying τὸ κατέχον and ὁ κατέχων as the Roman Empire and its current emperor Claudius, respectively. One of the assumptions of this proposal is that in our passage Paul reflects a view of the restraining thing/person as good rather than evil in character.147 However, unless we can satisfactorily explain why Paul appreciates the Roman Empire and its emperor as “the restrainer” of the revelation of the lawless man, this fifth proposal in itself remains inadequate. Now, it is obvious that Paul would not appreciate them as such simply because they keep the world in relatively good order and peace, or even because thereby they are delaying the end-­t ime chaos and tribulation for believers that the revelation of the lawless man will unleash. For, seen from that perspective, the Roman Empire can be viewed as an evil power, which, by restraining the revelation of the lawless man, delays the parousia of the Lord Jesus and prolongs the period of believers’ present suffering.148 So if Paul has a positive view of the Roman Empire and its emperor, he must do so because he sees them from some other perspective. 6. The Roman Empire/Emperor and Paul’s Gospel Preaching Here, Cullmann’s stress on the importance of Paul’s gentile mission for our subject is helpful (although his theory in itself and as a whole has to be rejected). Paul has a positive view of the Roman Empire and its emperor because he sees them from the perspective of the need for his mission to all the nations. He appreciates their (relatively good) maintenance of law and order, as well as the political unity and security of the oecumene because thereby they provide the conditions for him to conduct his mission to all the nations and so bring the full number of the gentiles into God’s kingdom, which will trigger the repentance and salvation of all Israel so that the parousia of Christ may take place (Rom 11:25–26). So, interpreting their present, relatively good governance as restraining the revelation of the man of lawlessness, the eschatological rebel, which effectively creates time and conditions for his mission to all the nations, Paul refers to the Roman Empire and its current emperor Claudius respectively as τὸ κατέχον and ὁ κατέχων.

Conclusion: How Paul Developed Such a Unique Eschatological View and How He Taught It to the Thessalonians During His Founding Mission among Them In 2 Thess 2:6–7 Paul uses the code-­like terms τὸ κατέχον and ὁ κατέχων in order to avoid the potentially unpleasant attention of Roman authorities to his interpretation of their empire and emperor as serving the purpose of the God 147 Cf. Marshall, 199; Weima, 572. 148 Cf. Metzger, Katechon, 124, 282, 285–89, 293–94, passim, for his repeated argument in this sense.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 591

7/12/23 11:29 AM

592 Excursus of his disputed religion, fledgling Christianity. The positive evaluation of the role of the contemporary Roman Empire and its current emperor, implicit in the designations themselves, is based on his conviction that he must preach the gospel to all the gentiles and bring in the full number of them into God’s kingdom. Thereby he will also lead all Israel to repent of their hardness of heart and obtain salvation, so that the Lord Jesus Christ may return to judge the world and consummate salvation for believers. Paul calls the content of this conviction a “mystery” (Rom 11:25–26), an eschatological plan of God, which was revealed to him when he, a Pharisee exceedingly zealous for Judaism (Gal 1:13–14; Phil 3:5–6), was called to be an apostle to the gentiles on the Damascus road, at a time (ca. AD 32–34) when even the church’s mission to the Jews had barely begun. In order to interpret the revelatory experiences and comprehend the meanings of both that shocking call and that revolutionarily new saving plan of God, he naturally had to search the Scriptures, such as Deut 32; Isa 6; 42; 49; and Jer 1:5.149 Alongside those OT Scriptures, the common belief of the early church based on what is believed to be dominical teaching, namely, that the gospel must be preached to all the nations before the parousia of Christ (e.g., Mark 13:9–12//Matt 24:17–22; Acts 1:6–8), as well as its OT and Jewish background, that the Messiah would come when all Israel repented, also helped Paul to formulate that revolutionary understanding of God’s saving plan, as Cullmann, Wenham, Röcker, and others have so helpfully shown.150 As he understands himself to be a (if not the) minister (διάκονος) or steward (οἰκονόμος) of that divine “mystery” of Rom 11:25–26 as the apostle to the gentiles (1 Cor 4:1; Eph 3:1–13; Col 1:23–29; cf. 2 Cor 3:1–4:6; 5:11–21; Gal 2:7–9), Paul must hurry with his work of the gentile mission to bring the full number of the gentiles into God’s kingdom and thereby trigger the repentance and salvation of all Israel. He knows that before the parousia of Christ there is to be the revelation of the lawless man, who will lead the whole world to a total rebellion against God. When the Roman emperor Gaius Caligula tried to have his statue set up at the Jerusalem temple a decade prior (AD 40–41), Paul wondered whether Caligula was that lawless man and whether the total rebellion would break out at any moment—­even before he made any significant headway in his gentile mission. But in God’s mercy and according to his plan, Caligula was removed and Claudius was enthroned as the new emperor. And under Claudius, the Roman Empire has been maintaining law and order sufficiently well for Paul to move about in relative freedom and safety among the cities of the oecumene to preach the gospel to the gentile nations. So Paul sees Claudius and his empire as “restraining” the revelation of the lawless man at present and appreciates them for it, because thereby they 149 Cf. Kim, “Isaiah 42 and Paul’s Call,” and idem, “The ‘Mystery’ of Romans 11:25–26 Once More,” both in PNP, 101–27 and 239–58 respectively. 150 Wenham, Paul, 316–19; Röcker, Belial, 411–14, 485–88, 497–502.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 592

7/12/23 11:29 AM



The “Restraining Thing” and the “Restraining Person” 593

are providing him with the time and conditions for fulfilling his apostolic commission, that is, for realizing the divine saving plan of bringing gentiles and Jews into God’s kingdom, thus paving the way for the parousia of the Lord Jesus Christ. By restraining the revelation of the lawless man at present, “so that he may be revealed in his own [God-­decreed] time” (v. 6), Claudius and his empire are serving this saving purpose of God as his servants (cf. Rom 13:1–7; see comment on v. 6 above). However, Paul’s experience of Caligula’s demise has taught him that Claudius (or another relatively good emperor who might succeed him) could “be removed out of the way” (ἐκ μέσου γένηται), just like Caligula. Then, another, even more terrible emperor, a “super-­C aligula,” could ascend to the throne. That figure would be “the lawless man” who is to do the things described in our vv. 4, 9–12 and plunge the whole world into rebellion against God in fulfillment of the prophecy of Dan 11:36–37. When that happens, Paul will be able to conduct his mission no more. Hence he is anxious that a super-­Caligula, the lawless man, might be revealed before long, and he is very conscious that he must rush with his mission to preach the gospel to all the nations during the short time remaining (cf. Rom 13:11; 1 Cor 7:29) while Claudius and his empire “restrain” the revelation of the lawless man and maintain order and peace in the world (cf. Rom 15:15–24). Thus, the subject of “the revelation of the man of lawlessness” excites Paul’s feelings. Therefore, in our passage vv. 3–8, he concentrates on talking about that figure and about his being restrained at present, forgetting even to state clearly the apodosis in v. 3 (“the day of the Lord will not come”; see comment on vv. 3, 5 above, and also Explanation above). During his founding mission in Thessalonica, Paul taught the Thessalonians these things concerning God’s saving plan (v. 5). As part of his gospel preaching, he taught them not only about the parousia of the Lord Jesus Christ (cf. 1 Thess 4:13–18) and the consummation of their salvation on that day of the Lord (cf. 1 Thess 5:1–11; 2 Thess 2:1), but also about those things or events that would lead up to the parousia of the Lord (2 Thess 2:5–6). Since he understood them in connection with his own gentile apostleship and mission, he taught about them, naturally referring to the role of his apostleship and mission in the divine eschatological drama. This way of teaching the divine eschatological drama is uniquely Pauline. Therefore, in his delivery of this teaching, his colleagues, Silvanus and Timothy, did no more than just endorse it. It appears that the abrupt change of the subject from the collective “we” to the first-­person singular in v. 5 (“do you not remember that when I was with you I told you about these things?”) reflects this fact (see comment on v. 5 above).151 151 This interpretation of ὁ κατέχων as a code for Claudius, the Roman emperor (AD 41–54), has an implication for both the authenticity and dating of our epistle, 2 Thessalonians. In fact, my whole thesis on τὸ κατέχον/ὁ κατέχων or my interpretation of 2 Thess 2:3–8 has significant implications also for the debates on Paul’s positive view of Roman rulers as “God’s servants” in Rom 13:1–7 and on the viability of a counter-­imperial interpretation of Paul.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 593

7/12/23 11:29 AM

Excursus: Antichrist (F. F. Bruce’s original writing is here preserved with only a few minor adjustments)

1. The Background The personage called “the man of lawlessness” is certainly identical with the personage elsewhere referred to as antichrist. The earliest literary occurrence of Greek ἀντίχριστος is in 1 John 2:18, but the word and its significance were already known to the readers of that document: “you have heard,” the writer tells them, “that antichrist is coming.” The teachers against whom the writer warns were so many lesser “antichrists” who presumably were paving the way for the final antichrist himself. It is a reasonable inference from his language that the final antichrist would lead a large-­scale departure from God. He does not say from whom or when his readers had heard of the coming of antichrist; it was part of the common stock of early Christian eschatology. The rise and development of the expectation of the antichrist were examined in 1895 by Bousset.152 He concluded, from a study of the relevant literature, that the Christian expectation was adapted from an existing Jewish conception. According to Bousset’s reconstruction of the antichrist expectation, the antichrist would appear among the Jews after the fall of Rome, proclaiming his divine status and installing his cult in the Jerusalem temple. He would himself be a Jew, born of the tribe of Dan (an idea based on Gen 49:17; Deut 33:22; Jer 8:16). Elijah would appear and denounce him and would be put to death for his pains. The antichrist would reign for three and a half years. True believers, refusing to give him the worship that he demanded, would seek refuge in the wilderness and be pursued by him there, but when they are on the point of being wiped out, he is destroyed by the intervention of God (who may use an agent such as Michael the archangel or the messiah of David’s line). All the details in this reconstruction are attested separately in the literature, but they do not add up to a picture that can properly be called “the antichrist legend.” Some pieces of evidence do point to the idea of a Jewish antichrist, but those that point to a gentile antichrist are more relevant to the NT. The antichrist expectation was held among Jews and Christians alike, but in both communities it took a wide variety of forms. A near synonym of ἀντίχριστος is ψευδόχριστος, which appears in the Olivet discourse of the Gospels; during the coming, unparalleled time of distress, says Jesus, “false Christs and false prophets will arise and show signs and 152 Bousset, The Antichrist Legend.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 594

7/12/23 11:29 AM

Antichrist 595 wonders, to lead astray, if possible, the elect” (Mark 13:22//Matt 24:24). Like the antichrist of 1 John 4:3, these “false Christs” are linked with false prophets who, speaking by the spirit of error (τὸ πνεῦμα τῆς πλάνης, 1 John 4:6), lead their hearers astray (ἀποπλανᾶν, Mark 13:22). The antichrist himself does this, but he goes further than the “false Christs” of the Olivet prophecy by claiming divine worship for himself. The attempt by Emperor Gaius (Caligula) to set up his statue in the temple at Jerusalem was fresh in the minds of Jews and Christians when the gospel came to Thessalonica and would be remembered by readers of 2 Thess 2:4, which describes the leader of the end-­time rebellion as “exalting himself above every so-­called god or object of worship, so that he takes his seat in the sanctuary of God and proclaims himself to be God.” During the critical days of AD 40, some of the disciples of Jesus probably thought that his words about “the abomination of desolation standing where he ought not” (Mark 13:14) were on the point of being fulfilled by Gaius and published the discourse to which those words belonged so that Christians would know what to do when the appalling horror materialized. The parenthesis “let the reader understand,” attached to the reference to the abomination of desolation, may have been a direction to the reader of this separate leaflet (which was later incorporated into the Gospel of Mark). In any event, Gaius’s statue was not set up in the temple; it proved unnecessary for the Judean disciples to “flee to the mountains” on that occasion. But the dismay and anxiety of those days remained for long in the memories of those most closely affected and suggested to them what was likely to happen when the abomination of desolation did indeed stand “where he ought not.” The phrase “the abomination of desolation” goes back two centuries before the time of Gaius. It was the derogatory designation given by Jews to the installation of the cult of Olympian Zeus in the Jerusalem temple by the Seleucid monarch Antiochus IV toward the end of 167 BC. It is applied in 1 Maccabees 1:54 to the altar of Olympian Zeus that Antiochus’s agents erected on top of the altar of Yahweh. But in origin the βδέλυγμα ἐρημώσεως, or rather its Hebrew Vorlage ‫שקוץ שמם‬‎ (Dan 12:11), was a mocking pun on ‫“( בעל שמין‬the lord of heaven”), the name by which Olympian Zeus was known in the Aramaic-­speaking parts of Antiochus’s kingdom.153 Antiochus’s title Epiphanes (“manifest”) expressed his claim to be the earthly manifestation of his patron deity, Olympian Zeus. It is probably because the god whom he allegedly manifested usurped the place of the God of Israel that Antiochus is said to “exalt himself and magnify himself above every god, and . . . speak astonishing things against the God of gods” (Dan 11:36), language which anticipates what is said about the man of lawlessness in 2 Thess 2:4. Three years after the cult of Olympian Zeus was installed at Jerusalem 153 Cf. Nestle, “Der Greuel der Verwüstung,” 248.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 595

7/12/23 11:29 AM

596 Excursus it was removed, and the temple was restored to its proper use (a restoration commemorated ever since then in the Jewish festival of the dedication, or Hanukkah). The picturesque wording used to describe the idolatrous installation was retained and reapplied to comparable sacrileges. Jesus, as we have seen, spoke of the setting up of the (personal) “abomination of desolation” as a future event that would launch the great tribulation of the last days. The Matthean form of his discourse envisages the abomination as “standing in the holy place” (Matt 24:15). This has sometimes been thought to point to the Roman legionaries setting up their standards in the temple court while the sanctuary was going up in flames at the end of August, AD 70, and offering sacrifice to them opposite the east gate (Josephus, J.W. 6.316). While Josephus may have seen a fulfillment of Daniel’s prophecy in this event,154 the evangelists probably did not; the temple court was not “the holy place,” and there was no demand that the Jews should join in the worship of the Roman standards. Besides, by the time that this act of sacrilege took place, it was too late for those in Judea to “flee to the mountains.”

2. In the Apocalypse The antichrist appears again in the NT in the Apocalypse, although he is not called by that name there. The beast from the abyss that kills the two witnesses of God in Rev 11:7 is introduced more formally in Rev 13. In the first ten verses of that chapter, we can hardly fail to recognize a more detailed description of the man of lawlessness of 2 Thess 2, although in Revelation there is some oscillation between the anti-­Christian power and the individual in whom that power is vested. But for John of Patmos, the anti-­Christian power is unambiguously the Roman Empire that, with Nero’s assault on the Christians of Rome in the aftermath of the great fire of AD 64, had embarked on the intermittent course of persecution of the church that was to last for two and a half centuries. But the fact that the imperial power persecuted Christians would not have sufficed to equate it with the antichrist in their eyes. Nero’s attack on them may have been capricious, but the real issue between church and empire in the generations that followed was a religious one. The imperial power claimed divine honors that Christians could not conscientiously accord it. When the emperor claimed the title κύριος in a divine sense, they were bound to refuse it; to them there was one Lord, Jesus Christ, and to grant the title to anyone else in the sense in which they used it of Christ would have been high treason against Christ. The emperor’s claim to the title in that sense made him the antichrist, a rival Christ, who treated the refusal of the divine honors that he claimed as high treason against him or against the Roman state. 154 Cf. Bruce, “Josephus and Daniel.”

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 596

7/12/23 11:29 AM

Antichrist 597 John sees this state of affairs developing until it reaches its climax in the first beast of Rev 13, the ultimate antichrist. The depiction of this beast represents a conjunction of ancient symbols. Some of these were of great antiquity. His seven heads, for example, link him with Leviathan, the primeval monster that symbolizes the unruly deep, curbed by the creator’s fiat. His ten horns link him with the fourth beast of Daniel’s vision of judgment (Dan 7:7). (The fact that the great red dragon of Rev 12:3 also has seven heads and ten horns indicates that it is he who energizes the beast, as Rev 13:2b states in less pictorial language.) It is not only with Daniel’s fourth beast that John’s beast is linked; he incorporates features of all four of Daniel’s beasts, and he also takes over the functions of the “little horn” that Daniel saw sprouting from the head of his fourth beast. Like the “little horn” (Dan 7:21), he “makes war with the saints and prevails against them” (Rev 13:7). Like the man of lawlessness, he receives all but universal worship. The duration of his rule (forty-­t wo months) is based on Dan 7:25; 9:27; 12:7. In the receiving of worldwide worship, John’s imperial beast is greatly helped by the “false prophet,” portrayed as “another beast which rose out of the earth” in Rev 13:11. It is this false prophet who performs the “mighty works and signs and lying wonders” by which, according to 2 Thess 2:9, 10, people are beguiled into worshiping the man of lawlessness. Here John may have had in mind the priesthood of the emperor worship that had been established as a popular cult in the province of Asia since 29 BC. John foresees the end product of the beast’s regime to be a social and economic boycott of all who refuse to worship him, cutting them off from access to the necessities of life. But, as in 2 Thess 2:8 the man of lawlessness is destroyed by the advent of Christ, so in Rev 19:20 the beast and the false prophet are consigned to perdition by the victorious Word of God at his appearing. In Rev 17 the imperial beast reappears, serving as a mount for the scarlet woman, the city of Rome. The beast’s seven heads are interpreted incidentally as the city’s seven hills but more importantly as seven emperors—­f ive of whom have come and gone, one of whom is currently on the throne, and the seventh of whom will rule only for a short time. The eighth emperor, who will succeed the short-­lived seventh, will be the demonically energized persecuting antichrist, but in fact he will be one of the seven, restored to life. (He is identical with the head that, according to Rev 13:3, had its mortal wound healed.) It has been supposed by many commentators that this detail reflects the belief in Nero redivivus. The identity of this demonic ruler is not divulged; the numerical value of his name is said to be 666, which might point to Nero Caesar (Heb. ‫נרון קסר‬, so spelled in Mur 18.1, dated AD 55/56). Certainly there is clear evidence in the generations immediately following that the last antichrist was envisaged by many Christians as a returning Nero.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 597

7/12/23 11:29 AM

598 Excursus

3. The Imperial Persecutor The Ascension of Isaiah, an early Christian document, incorporates a Testament of Hezekiah, in which the ultimate antichrist appears as an incarnation of Beliar (the Greek spelling of Belial, as in 2 Cor 6:15), the spirit of evil in the world. This expected incarnation of Beliar, moreover, is identified with the returning Nero, described by King Hezekiah as “a lawless king, the slayer of his mother” (Ascen. Isa. 4.2)—­a reference to Nero’s widely suspected responsibility for the killing of the younger Agrippina. This king, Hezekiah continues, “will persecute the plant which the twelve apostles of the Beloved have planted” (Ascen. Isa. 4.3). From about the same date (late first century AD) some of the Sibylline Oracles foretell the domination of Beliar, who will be burned up with “all men of pride, all who put their trust in him” (Sib. Or. 3.63–75), and also predict the return of Nero (Sib. Or. 5.137–54), without apparently identifying the two, for Nero is an impious tyrant while Beliar is a false prophet who leads many astray, including “many faithful and elect among the Hebrews.” Both these manifestations of the antichrist—­the false prophet and the persecuting tyrant—­are found in early Christian literature. But during the age of imperial repression of the church, the persecuting tyrant naturally occupied a prominent place in Christian thought about the antichrist. The author of Barnabas (ca. AD 90) seems to have envisaged him as overthrowing the Flavian dynasty of emperors (his interpretation of the three “horns” of Dan 7:8, 20) and ruling in their place (4.4–5). This author was also moved to the conviction that the last days had set in by a report that the temple in Jerusalem was about to be rebuilt (inevitably, from his viewpoint, an anti-­ Christian institution). These last days would consummate the epoch of evil, controlled by the power variously called “the black one” and “the wicked archon” (2.1; 4.9, 13). At a later date, a Christian named Judas, in a discourse on the seventy heptads of Dan 9:24–27, thought that the severity of the persecution of the church under Septimius Severus (AD 202) pointed to the imminent approach of the antichrist (Eusebius, Hist. eccl. 6.7). Christian perspective on the subject was naturally changed when the empire began to show favor to the church instead of persecuting it. On the other hand, the Jews suffered more persecution under the Christian emperors than they had under their pagan predecessors; it is in the post-­Constantinian age that Jewish literature first presents a Roman antichrist, in the person of Armilus (probably a corruption of Romulus), who is to be slain by the messiah.

4. The False Prophet The portrayal of the antichrist as a false prophet and misleader of the elect rather than a persecutor is also attested in the NT writings; indeed, the only

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 598

7/12/23 11:29 AM

Antichrist 599 explicit NT instances of ἀντίχριστος relate to false teaching. John in his letters sees the spirit of antichrist manifesting itself in contemporary docetic teaching that denied Christ’s coming “in flesh” (1 John 4:2–3; 2 John 7); those who misled people by such teaching he describes as “many antichrists,” whose activity was a token that it was now “the last hour” (1 John 2:18). While Jude does not use the term ἀντίχριστος, it is probable that, when he denounces certain false teachers as “loud-­mouthed boasters” (v. 16), he alludes to the “little horn” of Dan 7:8 with “a mouth speaking great things” and to the self-­w illed king of Dan 11:36 who “shall speak astonishing things against the God of gods” (the Theodotionic version calls those “astonishing things” ὑπέρογκα, the same adjective as is used of the heretics’ boastful words in Jude 16 and 2 Pet 2:18). The perspective of John’s letters reappears in Polycarp’s Letter to the Philippians (ca. AD 120). “Whosoever does not confess that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is antichrist. And whosoever does not confess the testimony of the cross is of the devil; and whoever perverts the oracles of the Lord to his own lusts and says that there is neither resurrection nor judgment—­he is Satan’s firstborn” (Pol. Phil. 7.1). By “the testimony of the cross,” Polycarp perhaps means the witness that the passion and death of Jesus bore to his genuine manhood (cf. John 19:35; 1 John 5:6–8). “Satan’s firstborn” is presumably a synonym for “antichrist”; on a later occasion, when Marcion met Polycarp and sought his recognition, Polycarp is said to have replied, “I recognize—­Satan’s firstborn” (Eusebius, Hist. eccl. 4.14.7).

5. In Irenaeus and His Successors The idea that the antichrist will be a Jew is first extant in Irenaeus (ca. AD 180). It may have been derived from Papias of Hierapolis, but certainty on this is unattainable because of the fragmentary preservation of his work. (Some have discerned a still earlier reference to the idea in John 5:43, where Jesus says to his critics in Jerusalem, “I have come in my Father’s name, and you do not receive me; if another comes in his own name, him you will receive”—­but this is very uncertain.) According to Irenaeus, the Roman Empire is to be partitioned among ten kings (cf. Rev 17:12), in whose days the antichrist will arise and lead the final apostasy. He is identified with the man of lawlessness (2 Thess 2:3), the abomination of desolation (Matt 24:15), the little horn (Dan 7:8), the “king of bold countenance” (Dan 8:23), the deceiver who is to come in his own name (John 5:43), and the beast from the abyss (Rev 11:7; 17:8, etc.). His rule will mark the completion of six millennia of world history; his overthrow will be followed by the seventh (sabbatic) millennium. Irenaeus makes various attempts to solve the riddle of the number of the beast; Euanthas, Lateinos,

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 599

7/12/23 11:29 AM

600 Excursus and Teitan are put forward as possible solutions, but he wisely refuses to dogmatize. He bases the antichrist’s Jewish origin—­more particularly, his derivation from the tribe of Dan—­on Jer 8:16 LXX: “From Dan we shall hear the sound of the speed of his horses; at the sound of the neighing of his cavalry the whole earth shakes; he will come and devour the earth and its fullness, the city and those who dwell therein.” These words, spoken by the prophet with reference to a gentile invader, are interpreted of the antichrist; “from Dan” is understood not geographically but genealogically, and this, says Irenaeus, is why Dan is omitted from the list of tribes in Rev 7:5–8. The antichrist is thus pictured as an apostate Jew, sitting enthroned in the temple of Jerusalem, and claiming to be worshiped there as God (Haer. 5.25–30). Hippolytus’s treatise De antichristo (ca. AD 200) takes over and elaborates the ideas found in Irenaeus, including the derivation of the antichrist from the tribe of Dan. If Jacob says, “Judah is a lion’s whelp” (Gen 49:9), referring to Christ as the lion of the tribe of Judah, Moses says, “Dan is a lion’s whelp” (Deut 33:22), referring to the antichrist as a counterfeit imitation of the true Christ. And when Jacob says, “Dan shall be a serpent in the way” (Gen 49:17), the allusion to the old serpent of Eden (Hippolytus thinks) is too evident to be missed. But Jacob also says, “Dan shall judge his people” (Gen 49:16). This, says Hippolytus (who would probably have been unaware of the play on words in Hebrew), is not (as others thought) a reference to Samson, the judge from the tribe of Dan, but to the antichrist as the unjust judge, in which role he figures in one of the Gospel parables (Luke 18:2–5). Hippolytus repeats the various identifications of the antichrist made by Irenaeus and other predecessors, but he recognizes him further in the Assyrian king of Isa 10:12–19, the Babylonian king of Isa 14:4–21, and the prince of Tyre of Ezek 28:2–10. (This joining together of distinct enemies of Israel in earlier days and giving them a unitive eschatological interpretation is similar to the method of OT exegesis attested in the Qumran texts.) The antichrist, according to Hippolytus, is also the partridge of Jer 17:11 (he adds a brief excursus on the natural history of the partridge), and the sender of ambassadors in vessels of papyrus described in Isa 18:2, carrying his directives against the saints. Exegesis has here slipped its moorings to drift in the sea of imagination (De antichristo 7; 14–18; 54–58). Victorinus of Pettau (martyred AD 303), the earliest Latin commentator on the Apocalypse, is important not only in his own right but also because he preserves material from earlier writers no longer extant, particularly Papias. On Rev 11:7, where the “beast that ascends from the abyss” first appears, Victorinus explains this designation in terms of the Old Latin translation of Ezek 31:3–9 LXX (which he mistakenly attributes to Isaiah, perhaps by confusion with Isa 10:34). In the Greek text of Ezek 31, Assur (the Assyrian) is a cypress in Lebanon nourished by the waters (“the many thousands of men,”

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 600

7/12/23 11:29 AM

Antichrist 601 says Victorinus, “who will be subject to him”) and caused to grow high by the abyss (which, says Victorinus, “belched him forth”). Victorinus then quotes from 2 Thess 2:7–12, saying that the statement “the mystery of lawlessness is already at work” was intended to show that the coming antichrist was the man who was even then emperor, that is, Nero (that Nero was not yet emperor when the letters to the Thessalonians were written would not have occurred to Victorinus). On Satan’s expulsion from heaven in Rev 12:9 Victorinus says: “This is the beginning of the advent of Antichrist. However, Elijah must first prophesy and there must be times of peace then; so it is after that, when the three years and six months of Elijah’s prophesying have been completed, that Antichrist, with all the renegade angels, is to be cast out of heaven (to which hitherto he has had the right to ascend). That Antichrist is thus raised up from hell is further attested by the apostle Paul when he says, ‘unless first there come the man of sin, the son of perdition, the adversary, who will exalt himself above everything that is called god or that is worshiped.’ ” There is some confusion here between the antichrist, who is energized by Satan, and Satan himself, and it is curious to be told that the antichrist is both cast down from heaven and raised up from hell. Following Irenaeus (Haer. 5.30.3), Victorinus dates the Apocalypse in the time of Domitian (AD 81–96); therefore Domitian, he reckons, is the sixth ruler of Rev 17:10 (the “one” who “is”), while the seventh (who “has not yet come”) is Nerva (AD 96–98). The eighth is Nero redivivus, the “head” of Rev 12:3, whose “mortal wound was healed.” But Victorinus’s truly original contribution to the understanding of the antichrist is his combining of Nero redivivus with the expectation of a Jewish antichrist; Nero will come back to life as a Jew and will indeed demand that all his subjects accept circumcision. It is the new name that he is to bear in his reincarnation that will have (in Greek) the numerical value of 666: this, says Victorinus, will enable the wise to recognize his identity when he appears. He will erect a golden image and require it to be worshiped, as Nebuchadnezzar did. This image, the “abomination of desolation,” representing the antichrist himself, will stand in the temple of Jerusalem. But he will meet his doom at the advent of Christ, and his dominion will be superseded by the millennial reign of the saints. With the peace of the church, which dawned ten years after the death of Victorinus, the line of interpretation that he represents died out, until aspects of it were revived by Francisco Ribeira in the sixteenth century and again in a fresh form by the latter-­day futurism pioneered by Manuel de Lacunza and others at the end of the eighteenth and beginning of the nineteenth centuries. But a line of interpretation that was reasonable while the Roman Empire still existed as a persecuting power loses something of its persuasiveness when it has to be stretched on a Procrustean bed to make

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 601

7/12/23 11:29 AM

602 Excursus room for a gap of many centuries between the fall of that empire and the rise of the antichrist.

6. Later Developments In the post-­Constantinian age, the form of the expectation of the antichrist was inevitably modified. He was envisaged as an enemy of Christendom that now comprised both church and empire, but opinions continued to differ on whether he would arise from without or within. On the one hand, he was envisaged as an external enemy, like Genseric the Vandal in the fifth century (whose name could be spelled in Greek so as to yield the total 666) or Muhammad in the seventh century. On the other hand, he was envisaged as an apostate individual or group arising within Christendom. Such an individual was recognized by some in a pope, like John XII (955–963), or in a secular ruler, like Frederick Barbarossa (Holy Roman Emperor, 1155–90). If an individual pope was identified with the antichrist, he was regarded as an unworthy occupant of a sacred office, a usurper “taking his seat in the sanctuary of God” (2 Thess 2:4). When Joachim of Fiore met Richard Coeur-­de-­L ion at Messina in the winter of 1190/91, he may have had such a development in mind when he told him that the antichrist “is already born in the city of Rome and will set himself yet higher in the see apostolic.” 155 But some of Joachim’s disciples, notably Gerard of Borgo San Donnino (in his introduction to a collection of Joachim’s works, published about 1254 under the title The Eternal Gospel), went further and identified the papacy itself with the antichrist. This idea lived on in some circles throughout the later Middle Ages and was taken up by Luther, Calvin, and other Reformers in the sixteenth century. It attained confessional status in many churches of the Reformation; for example, according to the Westminster Confession of Faith (1646), “the Pope of Rome . . . is that Antichrist, that man of sin, and son of perdition, that exalteth himself, in the Church, against Christ and all that is called God” (25.6). The first Reformed exegete to abandon the identification of the papacy with the antichrist was Hugo Grotius (1644). On the other side, the adherents of the old religion were not slow to recognize the features of the antichrist in Luther and his followers. Luther’s name could, with a modicum of ingenuity, be made to yield the sum of 666; he himself was identified by one exegete with the fallen star that is permitted in Rev 9:1–2 to unlock the exit from the abyss, and another exegete identified the locusts that thereupon emerged from the abyss (Rev 9:3–11) with the Lutherans.

155 Reeves, Joachim, 136.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 602

7/12/23 11:29 AM

Antichrist 603 No identification of the mystery of lawlessness can be acceptable if it would not have been intelligible to the Christians to whom 2 Thessalonians was first addressed. Individuals or systems of the subsequent course of Christian history cannot be considered when the primary application of the apostolic words is being decided. As for a possible further application, the best policy might be for everyone who studies the matter to ask the question that came to the lips of the disciples in the upper room when they were told that one of them was a traitor: “Lord, is it I?” The spirit of the antichrist will be strengthened if Christians allow themselves to be seduced by it and to foster it in their hearts; it will be diminished and weakened if they individually watch for every manifestation of it within themselves, cast it out, and wage unceasing war against it, confessing Jesus as Lord and Christ not in word only, but in deed and in truth.

7. The Restraining Thing Unlike the man of lawlessness, the restraining thing does not seem to figure in any NT writing outside 2 Thess 2:6–7. There is indeed a figure in the Apocalypse who is in a position to exercise restraint in this situation: the “angel of the abyss,” whose name is Apollyon (Rev 9:11), holds the key by which he can release the demonic locusts from the abyss and lock the dragon up there (Rev 20:1–3), so that he could presumably have hindered the seven-­ headed beast from coming up from the abyss (Rev 11:7), but he is not said to have done so. Since the force being restrained is evil, the restrainer might be thought to be good. God himself is not the restrainer, for the restrainer is to “be taken out of the way” (2 Thess 2:7); yet the restrainer is identified with God by Hort, Strobel, Ernst, and Aus: God’s plan is τὸ κατέχον, God is ultimately ὁ κατέχων, and it is the man of lawlessness who is to “be taken out of the way”).156 At the other extreme, the restrainer is identified with the devil by Giblin: the neuter τὸ κατέχον denotes “satanic activity”).157 Among other identifications of the restraining thing (apart from those referred to in the comments on 2:6, 7) may be mentioned Warfield’s view that it was the continuing existence of the (second) Jewish commonwealth; he writes: “so soon as the Jewish apostasy was complete and Jerusalem given over to the Gentiles . . . the separation of Christianity from Judaism, which had already begun, became evident to every eye; the conflict between the new faith and heathenism, culminating in and now alive almost only in the

156 Hort, Life and Letters, i, 213; Strobel, Untersuchungen, 98–116; Ernst, Gegenspieler, 55–57; and Aus, “God’s Plan,” 544–52. 157 Giblin, Threat, 230, 234.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 603

7/12/23 11:29 AM

604 Excursus Emperor-­worship, became intense, and the persecuting power of the empire was inevitably let loose.”158 This interpretation, however, does not account for the reserve with which the restraining thing is mentioned, nor does it adequately account for the personal restrainer (ὁ κατέχων). Warfield indeed doubts if the masculine participle “demands interpretation as a person,” but if it does, “it might possibly be referred without too great pressure to James of Jerusalem.”159 One merit of the imperial interpretation preferred in the commentary above is that it accounts at one and the same time for the diplomatic allusiveness of the language and for the alternation between the neuter and masculine genders (τὸ κατέχον and ὁ κατέχων). It may be added that, even after the Roman Empire passed away, the principle of the wording did not become obsolete, for when the secular power in any form continues to discharge its divinely ordained commission, it restrains evil and prevents the outburst of anarchy. If, however, Paul meant that the imperial power held back the advent of the antichrist, while John the seer identified the imperial power with the antichrist, must it be concluded that Paul and John held irreconcilable positions on this matter? Not necessarily. Is it conceivable, then, that the restrainer should himself become the antichrist? Quite conceivable—­the crisis provoked by Emperor Gaius, ten years before this letter was written, showed what the imperial power itself was capable of, and what had happened then might happen again, without such timely relief as brought that crisis to an end. But while civil authority was maintained as it was during the principate of Claudius, lawlessness was held at bay and the cause of Christ advanced throughout the Roman world. Indeed, to such an extent was good order maintained even under the persecuting empire that Tertullian, a century and a half later, believed that the antichrist could not appear so long as the Roman state remained intact.

158 Warfield, “Prophecies,” 473. 159 Warfield, “Prophecies,” 474.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 604

7/12/23 11:29 AM

Comment 605

(c) The Coming of the Lawless Man and the Fate of Unbelievers (2:9–12) Comment As said above (see the introductory comment for the whole section 2:1–12 above), in order to counter the false alarm that the day of the Lord has already come, which is unsettling the Thessalonian believers (vv. 1–2), in vv. 3–8 Paul has to explain that the day of the Lord will come only after the man of lawlessness is revealed (the implicit thesis of v. 3b), but that the latter event is being delayed at present. This need makes him in effect lay out the sequence of the events that would usher in the parousia of the Lord Jesus: someone/something is restraining the revelation of the lawless man at present; the restrainer will be removed; then the lawless man will be revealed; and then the Lord Jesus will come and destroy the lawless man. Having thus “proven” the thesis of v. 3b, in this subunit of vv. 9–12 he steps back to depict the mode of the lawless man’s coming and his activities as an agent of Satan. However, as we have already noted in our comment on v. 8, it is noteworthy that this depiction does not just repeat or unfold those rebellious activities of the figure that were suggested at v. 4, but rather re-presents them in terms of his deceptive activities for people to believe his lie instead of the truth of the gospel and to indulge in wickedness, so that they may be condemned and perish at God’s last judgment, in contrast to the Thessalonian believers of the gospel who are assured in the following section (vv. 13–14) of obtaining salvation.160 9 οὗ ἐστιν ἡ παρουσία κατ᾽ ἐνέργειαν τοῦ σατανᾶ, “His advent, by virtue of the working of Satan, will take place.” The nearest antecedent of the relative pronoun οὗ is “the Lord Jesus” (v. 8b). But the content of the relative clause makes it clear that the relative pronoun refers to “the lawless man” (v. 8a), like the relative pronoun ὅν of v. 8b. So this relative pronoun is a tell-­t ale sign that with this verse Paul begins a new subunit (vv. 9–12), in which he steps back to explain the activities of the lawless man whom he had to leave behind in v. 8a after first mentioning his revelation. For the implicit thesis in v. 3b required him to follow up the reference to the revelation of the lawless man with a firm affirmation of the parousia of the Lord Jesus (v. 8b) and so complete the whole sequence of the eschatological drama. The commentators who take vv. 8–10 (or 12) as a subunit have to see v. 8b as a “digression” and the two relative clauses of v. 8b and v. 9 as being “illogical and temporally out of sequence,” as Weima explicitly says.161 But clearly this is a mistake. Anyway, the fact that with the relative pronoun οὗ here Paul begins to explain the parousia of the lawless 160 Pace Schreiber, II:182–92, who presents an idiosyncratic and counter-­Roman interpretation of our text 2:1–12 (à la Revelation of John), strangely insisting that pseudo-­Paul is here speaking about these events as taking place in the present in the form of the parousia of Caesar or a Roman general into a city. 161 Weima, 534, 537.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 605

7/12/23 11:29 AM

606

2 Thessalonians 2:9–12

man and his activities, rather than that of the Lord Jesus, reveals once more that Paul’s focus is on the revelation of the lawless man in our passage 2:1–12, almost making us wonder whether he had forgotten his topic (“concerning the parousia of our Lord Jesus Christ and our assembling to meet him”) announced in v. 1 for the whole section.162 Having repeatedly referred to the coming of the lawless man in terms of his revelation (ἀποκαλύπτεσθαι, vv. 3, 6, 8),163 here Paul speaks of his παρουσία. The use of that word probably suggests a parody of Christ’s παρουσία (v. 8b). The anti-­Christ has his solemn parousia or, as we might call it (remembering the title of that proto-­antichrist, Antiochus Epiphanes), his “epiphany.”164 The present tense ἐστιν is used to convey “the certainty of the future event” (i.e., it “will take place”) as in v. 11 (πέμπει); see also 1 Thess 5:2 (ἔρχεται), 3 (ἐφίσταται); see also 1 Cor 3:13 (ἀποκαλύπτεται).165 The lawless man’s parousia is “by virtue of” (κατά) the energizing (ἐνέργειαν) of Satan. In Phil 3:21 Paul expresses his eschatological vision that at his parousia the Lord Jesus Christ “will change our lowly body to be like his glorious body by the energy of [God] who enables him even to subject all things to himself” (κατὰ τὴν ἐνέργειαν τοῦ δύνασθαι αὐτὸν καὶ ὑποτάξαι αὐτῷ τὰ πάντα). In Col 1:29 he says that he is carrying out his apostolic ministry “by the energy of [God or Christ] who energizes/works in me mightily” (κατὰ τὴν ἐνέργειαν αὐτοῦ τὴν ἐνεργουμένην ἐν ἐμοὶ ἐν δυνάμει; cf. Eph 3:7). So, whereas Christ and Paul are the agents of God who do their saving work with the energy or power provided by God, the lawless man is an agent of Satan who is empowered by Satan (cf. Rev 13:2, where the beast from the abyss receives “his power and his throne and great authority” from the great red dragon). ἐν πάσῃ δυνάμει καὶ σημείοις καὶ τέρασιν ψεύδους, “in all power and signs and wonders of falsehood.” This phrase and the following phrase in v. 10a are parallels, both being introduced by ἐν, which is here comitative, so that the meaning of the sentence is: “his parousia, by virtue of the energizing of Satan, will be attended by all power and signs and wonders of falsehood and by all deception of wickedness.” It is difficult to figure out the exact grammatical interrelationship of the words appearing in the two phrases. Here, the discussion of Weima is quite helpful.166 First, he analyzes three issues involved here: (a) Does the opening adjective “all” modify only the first noun or all three?; (b) Are the three nouns to be regarded as a triad of equal members or grouped differently?; and (c) Is the closing adjectival genitive “of falsehood” to 162 See Explanation at the end of the previous subunit vv. 3–8 for a reflection on Paul’s focus on the revelation of the lawless man. 163 For the significance of this, see comment on v. 7 above. 164 From the time of Gaius Caligula onward, ἐπιφάνεια is used of an emperor’s parousia, with the implication that his visit is a “manifestation” of divinity. 165 Malherbe, 425. 166 Weima, 538–39.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 606

7/12/23 11:29 AM

Comment 607 be taken only with the last noun, the final two, or all three? Weima then points to the formulaic nature of the word pair “signs and wonders” for supernatural and miraculous acts in the many texts of the OT and the NT, as well as to the fact that the first noun, “power,” appears in the singular in contrast to those two in the plural. He suggests to take “power” as the key word and “signs and wonders” as spelling out what “power” means: “in power—­both signs and wonders.”167 This decision naturally means that the adjective “all” (πάσῃ) is to be seen as modifying only “power” (δυνάμει), and this view is supported also by the fact that it agrees only with that noun in gender, number, and case. This analysis also means that the closing adjectival genitive “of falsehood” is to be taken only with the formulaic pair “signs and wonders.” Having thus resolved the three issues, Weima decides that that qualitative genitive (reflecting the Hebrew usage) qualifies the “signs and wonders” of the lawless man not as unreal or spurious, but rather as real but leading to falsehood.168 However, we cannot be sure whether here Paul thinks of their reality beyond their “miraculous” or awe-­inspiring appearances. He just focuses on their deceptive quality and function. This interpretation is supported by vv. 10–11: those who are misled by the lawless man do not accept “the truth” but believe “the lie” or what is false (τὸ ψεῦδος). Whereas Paul himself carries out his ministry of preaching the gospel, “the truth,” “by the energy provided by God and Christ” (Col 1:29), that is, “by the power of the Holy Spirit” (cf. 1 Thess 1:5) or by performing “the signs and wonders by the power of God’s Spirit” (cf. Rom 15:19: ἐν δυνάμει σημείων καὶ τεράτων, ἐν δυνάμει πνεύματος [θεοῦ]), the lawless man will proclaim “the lie” by “the energy provided by Satan” or by performing “signs and wonders by all [the] power [of Satan].” Compare the σημεῖα μεγάλα of Rev 13:13–14, by which the earth-­dwellers are persuaded (i.e., deceived) to worship the imperial beast as god. This interpretation is further supported by the fact that here Paul may well be echoing Jesus’s prophecy that false messiahs and false prophets would appear in the interval preceding the coming of the Son of Man “and show signs and wonders [σημεῖα καὶ τέρατα], to lead astray [ἀποπλανᾶν], if possible, the elect” (Mark 13:22//Matt 24:24). 10 καὶ ἐν πάσῃ ἀπάτῃ ἀδικίας τοῖς ἀπολλυμένοις, “and in all deception of wickedness for those on the way to perdition.” As said above, this phrase is parallel to the preceding one in v. 9b. It formally continues describing the activities of the lawless man at his coming, but, in content, it states the effect of the lawless man’s activities described in the preceding phrase. By demonstrating the great (or all kinds of) power (πάσῃ δυνάμει) through “signs and wonders,” the lawless man will deceive people in all kinds of ways (πάσῃ ἀπάτῃ). The word ἀδικίας is another instance of the qualitative genitive, and it parallels ψεύδους of the preceding phrase, so that it is to be interpreted like 167 For this interpretation, Weima cites Richard, 334; Fee, 293. 168 So also Fee, 294.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 607

7/12/23 11:29 AM

608

2 Thessalonians 2:9–12

it. This means that we need to interpret the phrase ἀπάτῃ ἀδικίας as deception to induce wickedness.169 The lawless man’s deception will be effective with “those on the way to perdition.” In 1 Cor 1:18 and 2 Cor 2:15, Paul uses this present participle phrase (οἱ ἀπολλύμενοι) in contrast to “those on the way to salvation” (οἱ σῳζόμενοι; cf. 2 Cor 4:3). Here also he has that contrast in mind (cf. vv. 10b; 13b), although the latter expression is absent. “Salvation” here refers to the eschatological blessing that will be given to believers on the day of the Lord (cf. 1 Thess 5:9; 2 Thess 1:5, 7, 10, 12). Therefore, “perdition” or “destruction” here is to be seen likewise as a reference to eschatological punishment on the day of the Lord. ἀνθ᾽ ὧν τὴν ἀγάπην τῆς ἀληθείας οὐκ ἐδέξαντο εἰς τὸ σωθῆναι αὐτούς, “because they did not accept the love of the truth so as to be saved.” The phrase ἀνθ᾽ ὧν, a form found elsewhere in the NT in Luke’s writings (Luke 1:20; 12:3; 19:44; Acts 12:23), is perfectly classical (“in return for which,” hence “because”); it continues into Hellenistic usage (including the LXX).170 The clause “they did not accept [ἐδέξαντο] the love of the truth” is rephrased in v. 12 as “those who did not believe [πιστεύσαντες] the truth but had pleasure [εὐδοκήσαντες] in wickedness.” Already in 1 Thess 1:6 and 2:13 Paul used the verb δέχεσθαι (“to accept”; not just παραλαμβάνειν, “to receive”; see comment on 1 Thess 2:13) in the aorist tense, in the sense of gladly accepting the gospel and coming to believe it (note well how Paul followed up his reference to the readers’ “acceptance” of the gospel with his designation of them as “believers” in both 1 Thess 1:6–7 and 2:13). And already in 1:8–12 of this letter he indicated that, whereas the readers are destined to salvation at the parousia of the Lord Jesus because they believed the gospel, their persecutors are doomed to destruction because they disobeyed the gospel. Therefore, the readers would have no difficulty understanding that by “the truth” (note the arthrous ἡ ἀλήθεια) here Paul means the gospel of the Lord Jesus Christ (cf. 2 Cor 4:2; 13:8; Gal 2:5, 14; 5:7; Eph 1:13; Col 1:5, 6). However, here Paul speaks of accepting not simply “the truth” but “the love of the truth.” The parallel of v. 12 helps us understand his intent in this complicated formulation also. He means that all human beings ought to love the truth (the gospel; yet also righteousness, as the truth and righteousness are organically interconnected) in order to be saved.171 But “those on the way to destruction” refused to love the truth (and righteousness) because they “took pleasure in wickedness,” that is, because they loved (the lie [v. 11] and) wickedness.172 The clause, “they did not accept [the love of] the truth [gospel] so as to be saved,” reflects Paul’s fundamental conviction that the 169 So Weima, 540, citing Richard, 334; Beale, 222. 170 Cf. BDF §208.1. 171 This assumption is explained in Rom 1:18–32, to which our present passage shows close parallelism. See below. 172 Cf. Lightfoot, 117, for the correspondence of ἀγάπη in v. 11 to εὐδοκήσαντες in v. 12.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 608

7/12/23 11:29 AM

Comment 609 gospel “is the power of God for salvation to everyone who believes” (Rom 1:16; cf. Rom 10:9–10; 1 Cor 15:1–2), that is, his doctrine of justification by faith in the gospel (see v. 12 below for a negative expression of this gospel). The aorist tense of ἐδέξαντο here and its equivalent πιστεύσαντες (as well as εὐδοκήσαντες) in v. 12 refer to the past act of the unbelievers’ rejection of the gospel from the present viewpoint,173 rather than from the viewpoint of the lawless man’s parousia.174 The gospel reveals “the living and true God” (1 Thess 1:9) and teaches God’s people to abandon false gods, to worship him alone, and to live in trust in and obedience to him so as to receive his salvation. Hence it is “the truth.” The Thessalonian believers accepted this gospel (1 Thess 1:6; 2:13), and so they are destined to receive this eschatological salvation (1 Thess 1:9–10; 5:9–10; 2 Thess 1:10–12); they are “those on the way to salvation.” But those who did not accept the gospel do not know the true God (cf. 1 Thess 4:5; 2 Thess 1:8) and therefore will easily be swayed by the lawless man’s demonstration of power to accept his false claims (v. 4), that is, “to believe the lie” (v. 11), so that they worship him as the supreme god and obey him to commit all sorts of wicked and unrighteous deeds (ἀδικία). So they are “those on the way to destruction.” Thus the lawless man, “the son of perdition” (v. 3), will take his adherents to perdition with him. 11 καὶ διὰ τοῦτο πέμπει αὐτοῖς ὁ θεὸς ἐνέργειαν πλάνης εἰς τὸ πιστεῦσαι αὐτοὺς τῷ ψεύδει, “and therefore God will send them a working of delusion, so that they should believe the lie.” The conjunction καί (“and”) connects this sentence with the preceding clause in v. 10b, and διὰ τοῦτο (“because of this,” “therefore”) refers to the content of that clause: “And therefore [i.e., because those on the way to destruction did not accept the truth for salvation] God will send them . . .” The present-­tense πέμπει appears here, but consistent with the present-­tense ἐστιν in v. 9, it will need to be taken in the future sense: it refers to what God will do during the time after the coming of the lawless man.175 Apparently, to make this sense clear, some copyists changed it into the future-­ tense πέμψει (see Notes n. above). The phrase ἐνέργειαν πλάνης has in view a power working to make people deceived. Paul means that God will set a power within unbelievers that makes them prone to embrace error or be led astray.176 The purpose of God’s setting that power within unbelievers is indicated by the εἰς τό plus infinitive phrase: “so that they may believe the lie.” The arthrous τὸ ψεῦδος (“the lie”) here stands in contrast to the arthrous ἡ ἀλήθεια (“the truth”) 173 So Wanamaker, 261; Weima, 542. 174 Best, 307; Malherbe, 426. 175 Frame, 271; Marshall, 204; Hoppe, II:161; cf. Lightfoot, 118; contra Malherbe, 427; Weima, 543. 176 Contrast Phil 2:13, in which Paul speaks of God ἐνεργῶν (“working”) in the Philippian believers (no doubt, through the power of his Spirit that he set in them at their baptism) both to arouse their will to work for his good pleasure and to enable them to work out (ἐνεργεῖν) that will; cf. Col 2:12; Eph 1:19).

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 609

7/12/23 11:29 AM

610

2 Thessalonians 2:9–12

of vv. 10 and 12, namely, the gospel. But in the context it has a more pointed meaning, namely, “the lie” that the lawless man proclaims (v. 9), himself as the supreme god and his lawlessness as the rule (v. 4), which is the opposite of the gospel of Christ that proclaims the true God and his rule of righteousness.177 The same process of God’s judicial blinding of pagans in consequence of their unbelief in him is traced in Rom 1:18–32. In fact, our passage presents a close parallelism to that Romans passage:178 (a) just as here unbelievers are charged with having rejected “the truth” of the gospel, so in the Romans passage pagans are charged with having rejected “the truth” revealed in creation (Rom 1:18, 25); (b) both here (2 Thess 1:8) and in Romans (1:21) unbelievers are charged with not acknowledging God properly; (c) their rejection of “the truth” of the true God led them to believe “the lie” of a false god both here and in Rom 1:25; (d) in both places God is said to respond to unbelievers’ rejection of “the truth” by leaving or making them fall deeper into the world of “the lie” and wickedness (ἀδικία); (e) the forms of expressing this thought in the two passages are very similar: both here and in Rom 1:26 the thought is introduced by διὰ τοῦτο (cf. also διό in Rom 1:24), and “God [will] send them a working of delusion” here corresponds to “God gave them up to a reprobate mind” in Rom 1:28 (cf. also vv. 24, 26); (f) unbelievers’ rejection of “the truth” and indulgence in wickedness form an organic unity both here and in the Romans passage (though it is explained in much more in detail in the latter); and (g) just as Paul declares in the Romans passage that God’s wrath is revealed for such unbelieving evildoers (Rom 1:18; 2:5, 8) in contrast to God’s justification of all those who believe the gospel (Rom 1:16–17), so also in our passage he declares that they will be condemned at God’s judgment (v. 12; cf. Rom 2:8–9) in contrast to believers obtaining God’s salvation and glory (vv. 13–14).179 The only significant difference between our passage and the Romans passage is a matter of different temporal perspective: whereas our passage looks from the perspective of the future parousia of the lawless man at unbelievers’ (past) rejection of the gospel truth, their (future) response to the lawless man’s lie, and God’s (future) judgment, the Romans passage looks from the perspective of the present preaching of the gospel at pagans’ (past) rejection of God’s truth revealed in creation, and God’s (past) judgment that has a present effect in the lives of those pagans. Nevertheless, the principle of human rejection of God’s truth and salvation leading to God’s response with a judicial abandonment of them to remain in their reprobate mind and 177 Cf. Malherbe, 427; contra Weima, 543–44, who interprets “the lie” here only in the general sense of rejection of the gospel, unrelated to the lawless man, because he wrongly interprets the whole v. 11 in terms not of the future events that will take place after the coming of the lawless man (v. 9), but in terms of the events that take place in the present. 178 See also Kim, “Paul’s Doctrine of Justification in 2 Thessalonians 1–2,” in PGTO, 286–87. 179 Cf. Lightfoot, 117; Marshall, 204.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 610

7/12/23 11:29 AM

Comment 611 moral depravity is the same in both passages. And it is important to note that in the two passages Paul employs the same principle, concepts, and vocabulary in explanation of God’s condemnation of unbelievers in contrast to his justification or salvation of believers. For God’s judicial blinding of those who reject the gospel, see also Rom 11:7–10 where Paul, quoting Isa 29:10 as well as Deut 29:3 and Ps 68:23–24, tells how God has hardened unbelieving Israel and given them “a spirit of stupor, to prevent eyes from seeing and ears from hearing” (cf. Mark 4:11–12parr.). Similarly to Rom 11:7–10, in our verse Paul says God will send “a working [ἐνέργειαν] of delusion” to those who have refused to accept the truth of the gospel, so that they may be deceived by the lawless man to believe his lie. However, both in our verse and Rom 11:7–10, Paul can hardly mean that the true God is the deliberate author of the unbelievers’ infatuation with falsehood and wickedness; for it is, as he puts it clearly in 2 Cor 4:4, “the god of this aeon” (cf. the “working [ἐνέργειαν] of Satan” in our v. 9 above) who “has blinded the minds of the unbelievers, to keep them from seeing the light of the gospel of the glory of Christ.” Therefore, here we need also to understand that by talking of God sending a “working [ἐνέργειαν] of delusion” to unbelievers, he means that God will abandon them to the “working [ἐνέργειαν] of Satan” (v. 9) so that they may be deceived by the lawless man, the agent of Satan (v. 9), to believe his lie and indulge in wickedness, incurring condemnation at the last judgment (vv. 9–10, 12). Thus, in our v. 11 (and in Rom 11:7–8), Paul basically expresses the same thought as in Rom 1:18–32. God will simply let unbelievers continue to be deceived by the satanic agent into further depravity, or God will simply let the power of deception continue to work in them, for their own destruction. It is true nevertheless that Paul’s language here (and in Rom 11:7–8) conveys the sense of God’s active role in this judgment a little more clearly than his formula “God gave them up to . . .” found in Rom 1:18–32 (see Explanation on 1:5–10 above). 12 ἵνα κριθῶσιν πάντες οἱ μὴ πιστεύσαντες τῇ ἀληθείᾳ ἀλλ᾽ εὐδοκήσαντες τῇ ἀδικίᾳ, “that all should be judged who did not believe the truth but had pleasure in wickedness.” Above we have already noted that this verse provides a parallel in thought to v. 10b. This verse is also a close parallel to Rom 2:8, where “those who disobey the truth but obey wickedness” (τοῖς . . . ἀπειθοῦσιν τῇ ἀληθείᾳ πειθομένοις δὲ τῇ ἀδικίᾳ) are threatened with God’s eschatological judgment (cf. ἀληθείᾳ μὴ πείθεσθαι in Gal 5:7). Compare the phrase τοῖς . . . ἀπειθοῦσιν τῇ ἀληθείᾳ in Rom 2:8 also with τοῖς μὴ ὑπακούουσιν τῷ εὐαγγελίῳ in 2 Thess 1:8, and see comment on 1:8 above.180 Our phrase εὐδοκήσαντες τῇ ἀδικίᾳ is best interpreted as the opposite of the phrase εὐδοκίαν ἀγαθωσύνης 180 See also Kim, “Paul’s Doctrine of Justification in 2 Thessalonians 1–2,” 287–88, where a broad parallelism of Rom 2:5–11 with our 2:10–17 as well as with its parallel passage 1:4–12 is shown.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 611

7/12/23 11:29 AM

612

2 Thessalonians 2:9–12

(“desire/resolve to do good”) of 2 Thess 1:11 (see comment ad loc) and therefore best translated as “having the desire to indulge in wickedness.”181 God’s sending of “a working of delusion” to unbelievers is already a form of his judgment (cf. Rom 1:28), but that judgment now and during the time of the lawless man serves the purpose of bringing unrepentant unbelievers to his ultimate judgment on the day of the Lord (cf. Rom 1:32). With this ἵνα final clause,182 Paul concludes the subsection vv. 9–12. But note here that he does not simply say “so that they [those on the way to perdition] may be condemned,” which would be adequate and clear in the context. Note also the all-­inclusive πάντες (“all”), rather than “they,” as the subject of the sentence. Furthermore, note that with the two participle phrases (οἱ μὴ πιστεύσαντες τῇ ἀληθείᾳ ἀλλ᾽ εὐδοκήσαντες τῇ ἀδικίᾳ), Paul succinctly summarizes the two chief characteristics of those on the way to perdition, which have already been explained sufficiently clearly in the present compact subsection (note esp. v. 10b). As Paul forgoes the simple “they” and formulates the subject of the concluding sentence rather formally with the two participle phrases headed by the all-­inclusive πάντες, we need to appreciate that he wants to make a general statement about the last judgment of God or to set forth a general principle about it.183 The general statement here is a negative form of the principle declared in Rom 1:16–17: “[The gospel stated in Rom 1:3–4] is the power of God for salvation to every one [παντί] who believes. . . . For in it the righteousness of God is revealed from faith unto faith.” All those who believe this gospel or render “the obedience of faith” to it (Rom 1:5) will be saved (i.e., justified) at the last judgment of God (Rom 8:31–39; 10:9–10). But all those who do not will be condemned (to eternal destruction; Rom 2:8–9; see also 2 Thess 1:8–9 with comment ad loc). Thus in our vv. 9–12, as in 1:5–10, Paul explains the fate of unbelievers on the basis of his doctrine of justification, often reflecting the teachings that he unfolds more systematically and extensively in Rom 1–2.184

Explanation Some members of the Thessalonian church had recently been persuaded that the day of the Lord, described in 1 Thess 5:2–6 as destined to come when least expected and to take the unwary by surprise, had already arrived. This

181 Cf. Malherbe, 427. 182 Cf. Weima, 544; Schreiber, II:189; Hoppe, II:162. 183 Cf. Marshall, 205, who recognizes v. 12 as a generalized statement, even while failing to see its reflection of the doctrine of justification; see our observation made while commenting on 1:8 above, that in 1:8–10a Paul similarly makes a generalized explanation about God’s judgment according to his doctrine of justification. 184 Pace Fee, 295, 302–3, who, failing to recognize this, unnecessarily slights “those who read Paul only through the lens of his battle with the Judaizers in Galatians and Romans.” See Kim, “Paul’s Doctrine of Justification in 2 Thessalonians 1–2,” 292–94.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 612

7/12/23 11:29 AM

Explanation 613 was causing them bewilderment and anxiety; it was difficult to reconcile this account of the matter with the teaching they had already received from Paul and his companions. Paul and his companions had learned of this strange notion that their friends were entertaining, but plainly they were unsure from where they had gotten it. If they were unsure at that time, then of course we can only guess today. More recent analogies might suggest that an alleged prophecy to this effect had circulated among them, just as voices are heard today that assure people living in the twenty-­f irst century that they belong to the “terminal generation.” Paul therefore explains that certain developments are bound to precede the day of the Lord. Even if these developments are near at hand, they have not appeared yet, and therefore the day of the Lord cannot have arrived. The developments that must precede that day are sinister enough; they will involve a widespread rebellion against God, led by one who is the very embodiment of lawlessness, who will try to usurp the throne of God and claim divine honors for himself. (The readers are reminded that Paul told them this while he was with them.) For the time being, this outburst of rebellion is held in check. The “mystery” or hidden principle of lawlessness is at work beneath the surface, but it is contained by a restraining thing. When that restraint is removed, then (but not until then), in the words of W. B. Yeats: Things fall apart: the centre cannot hold; Mere anarchy is loosed upon the world, The blood-­dimmed tide is loosed, and everywhere The ceremony of innocence is drowned; The best lack all conviction, while the worst Are full of passionate intensity.185

In the twentieth chapter of his City of God (written early in the fifth century), Augustine quotes Paul’s words about the restraining thing and says, “I admit that the meaning of this completely escapes me.” He mentions, however, one or two guesses at its meaning that others had made; guesses at its meaning are all that the exegete can manage even today. The Thessalonian Christians knew what the restraining thing was, because Paul had told them; they also knew that it was operating at that time. But a certain reticence can be detected in the references made to it in the letters; this can best be explained if more explicit language was liable to cause trouble should the letter fall into the wrong hands. In Thessalonica the missionaries had been charged with subversion, with proclaiming a rival to the emperor who ruled in Rome. It would be best not 185 W. B. Yeats, “The Second Coming,” The Dial, November 1920 (public domain).

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 613

7/12/23 11:29 AM

614

2 Thessalonians 2:9–12

to say anything in a letter that could be interpreted as lending color to such a charge. Their opponents had tried to hinder the progress of the gospel by enlisting the aid of the city rabble. The readiness of the rabble to be used for this purpose may well have brought home to Paul and the others the ease with which the forces of anarchy might be mustered against the cause of God. In Thessalonica, indeed, the attempt to stir up trouble had less disastrous consequences than the instigators hoped, because the magistrates acted sensibly. Paul indeed had to leave the city and was prevented from returning, but public order was maintained and the progress of the gospel was not impeded, whatever the converts had to endure in the way of persecution. Some weeks earlier, an attempt had been made to put a stop to gospel witness in Philippi. There the custodians of law and order had shown themselves weak and easily influenced by clamor, but when they were persuaded of their duty, the outcome there, too, had been for the furtherance of the gospel. And so long as the forces of law and order were able to maintain control, not in Macedonia only but throughout the Mediterranean world, the gospel would succeed in surmounting all obstacles in its path. Above the praetors of Philippi and the politarchs of Thessalonica stood the power and authority of the Roman Empire. Civic and provincial authorities could function only as power was delegated to them, directly or indirectly, by the emperor. It was the imperial power that was the ultimate protector on earth of ordered life and (as it seemed in AD 50) of gospel progress. The protection that the gentile mission enjoyed under the imperial administration is one of the themes of Luke’s history (the book of Acts); even more relevant to the present passage is Paul’s insistence in Rom 13:1–7 that rulers are not a terror to law-­abiding subjects but only to criminals and should therefore receive the respect, obedience, and tribute due to them, since the work they do is the work of God. Paul was not so ingenuous as to suppose that the secular authorities would invariably protect the gospel and those who preached or practiced it. Occasions would arise when those authorities would claim more than Christians could conscientiously give; in such situations Paul would have agreed with Peter that “we must obey God rather than men” (Acts 5:29). But in his missionary experience thus far, he had reason to appreciate the security afforded by the imperial organization; it had helped the gospel forward, not hindered it. This state of affairs, however, would not last indefinitely. Paul’s experience of unruly mobs in the cities of Macedonia (and earlier in some cities of South Galatia) gave him a forewarning of what would happen on a wider and more irresistible scale at the end-­time. When the restraint of law and order was relaxed, the forces of lawlessness would have it all their own way, under the direction of the “man of lawlessness.” This figure has OT antecedents in such God-­defying monarchs as the king of Babylon in Isa 14:12–14 or the prince of Tyre in Ezek 28:2. But these

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 614

7/12/23 11:29 AM

Bibliography 615 adumbrations were later filled out in the apocalyptic portrayal of the persecuting Antiochus IV Epiphanes (175–164 BC). His depiction as the “little horn” of Dan 7:8, with “a mouth speaking great things,” or as the willful king of Dan 11:36–45, who “shall exalt himself and magnify himself above every god, and shall speak astonishing things against the God of gods,” provides the prototype for the NT “lawless one.” Antiochus came to his end “with none to help him,” but his attempt to abolish the worship of the true God was not forgotten and served as a precedent for later visions of the end. Jesus’s Olivet discourse gave warning that, after the preaching of the gospel to “all the nations,” the crisis immediately preceding the coming of the Son of Man would be precipitated by “the abomination of desolation standing where he ought not” (Mark 13:10, 14–27). The personal characterization of the “abomination” is noteworthy. Ten years later it looked as if these words were on the point of fulfillment when Emperor Gaius (nicknamed Caligula), annoyed because his Jewish subjects would not take his divinity seriously, ordered that his statue should be set up in the Jerusalem temple. This order was countermanded at the last moment, but the consternation of those days made a deep impression on the minds of Jews (including Jewish Christians) and supplied further details for the picture of the expected antichrist. Behind the present description of the lawless man enthroning himself in the sanctuary of God and claiming divine honors lay Jesus’s words about the “abomination of desolation” and the memory of Gaius’s threat to desecrate the temple. Gaius’s madness was cut short by his assassination in AD 41. The forces of order were powerful enough to check his insane policy. But what had happened once could happen again, and the forces of order would not always be available to hold anarchy in check. One day those forces would be removed. With the removal of their restraint, the incarnation of lawlessness would dominate the scene, captivating the minds of the unthinking masses and leading a large-­scale revolt against the authority of God. This revolt would be put down by the glorious advent of the Lord Jesus. How the rise and fall of the antichrist are presented in later NT documents is considered in the Excursus: Antichrist above.

B. Thanksgiving Renewed with Assurance for Believers(2:13–14) Bibliography Kim, S. “Paul’s Doctrine of Justification in 2 Thessalonians 1–2.” Bib 102 (2021): 78–96. Revised version in pages 279–95 in PGTO. O’Brien, P. T. Introductory Thanksgivings in the Letters of Paul. NovTSup 49. Leiden: Brill, 1977. Rainbow, O. A. “Justification according to Paul’s Thessalonian Correspondence.” BBR 19 (2009): 249–74. Stettler, H. Heiligung bei Paulus: Ein Beitrag aus biblisch-­theologischer Sicht. WUNT 2/368. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2014.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 615

7/12/23 11:29 AM

616

2 Thessalonians 2:13–14

Translation But as for us, we are bound to give thanks to God for you always, brothers and sisters beloved by the Lord,a because God chose you as firstfruits b for salvation by sanctification of the Spirit and belief in the truth. 14It was for this c that he called you d through our gospel, that you might obtain the glory of our Lord Jesus Christ. 13

Notes a. For κυρίου, a few witnesses (influenced evidently by 1 Thess 1:4) read θεοῦ (D* lat ). b. ἀπαρχήν is read by B F G P 33 81 1739 2464 al lat vg syrhcl copbo; ἀπ’ ἀρχῆς (“from [the] beginning”) by ‫ א‬D Ψ byz lat vet syr pesh copsa Ambst. c. εἰς ὅ [καί], the καί is omitted by A B D Ψ byz lat a b m* vg.codd syr pesh Ambst. d. For ὑμᾶς (“you”), ἡμᾶς (“us”) is read by A B D* 1881 pc latb f vg.codd. b m vg

Form/Structure/Setting In form, this is a thanksgiving section. It renews the initial thanksgiving of 1:3, just as 1 Thess 2:13 and 3:9–10 renewed the initial thanksgiving of 1 Thess 1:2, and thereby it concludes part 1 of 2 Thessalonians together with the following exhortation (2:15) and transitional prayer (2:16–17), just as the thanksgiving section of 1 Thess 3:9–10 concludes part 1 of 1 Thessalonians together with the following transitional prayer there in 3:11–13. In content, however, this section is a direct continuation of the preceding section, vv. 9–12 (just as 1 Thess 3:9–10 is a direct continuation of the preceding vv. 1–8). There is a broad parallelism between 1:5–12 and 2:9–14, 16–17. In 1:5–12 Paul deals with God’s judgment upon those who refuse to believe and obey the gospel (vv. 6–9) and his salvation of the readers who suffer for their faith in the gospel (vv. 5, 7, 10–12). Then, having taken up the former in vv. 9–12 of our chapter 2 and described the activities of the lawless man and their effects on unbelievers and affirmed their certain condemnation at God’s last judgment, now in this section (vv. 13–14) Paul takes up the latter theme of 1:5, 7, 10–12 and goes on to assure the believers of their certain eschatological salvation. Therefore, this section should not be separated from the preceding section of vv. 9–12. Nevertheless, it is done here only to highlight the formal features of this section as explained above.

Comment 13 ἡμεῖς δὲ ὀφείλομεν εὐχαριστεῖν τῷ θεῷ πάντοτε περὶ ὑμῶν, ἀδελφοὶ ἠγαπημένοι ὑπὸ κυρίου, “But as for us, we are bound to give thanks to God for you always, brothers and sisters beloved by the Lord.” Basically this is a repetition of the first clause of 1:3, but with four slight changes. First, the personal pronoun “we” is prominently added. In Greek the form of the verb itself indicates the subject, and so the personal-­pronoun subject is normally omitted in the case of

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 616

7/12/23 11:29 AM

Comment 617 Paul’s thanksgiving formula (cf. Rom 1:8; 1 Cor 1:4; Eph 1:16; Col 1:3; 1 Thess 1:2; 3:9; 2 Thess 1:3). The only other exception is 1 Thess 2:13. There also ἡμεῖς appears at a similarly emphatic position (see comment ad loc for the reason). Therefore, its mere presence here is emphatic. Yet then its placement at the head of the sentence makes it doubly so. Clearly Paul is seeking to convey his and his missionary colleagues’ deep empathy with the readers in their suffering and anxiety, as well as to strengthen authoritatively as their pastors the sense of assurance about their salvation that he is expressing in the thanksgiving.186 The second change is the addition of the particle δέ. This is also unusual because it appears in none of the other cases of the Pauline thanksgiving formula. Best views it as having just the transitional sense of “now” as in 2:1. He argues against viewing it as carrying the sense of contrast (“but”) with the preceding because there is nothing in the preceding with which to contrast ἡμεῖς. He contends that if Paul had wished to express a contrast he would have started the sentence with περὶ ὑμῶν (“for you”) rather than ἡμεῖς.187 Grammatically speaking, these are good arguments. However, since it is so obvious that the content of vv. 13–14 is set in contrast to that of vv. 10–12, the majority of commentators take the unusual δέ here as functioning to contrast God’s salvation of the readers with his condemnation of their unbelieving opponents that has just been described in vv. 10–12. So the grammatical oddity here highlights Paul’s intent to emphasize his and his missionary colleagues’ sense of gratitude to God all the more. The third change is that here Paul places the verb ὀφείλομεν (“we ought”) before the infinitive εὐχαριστεῖν (“to give thanks”), reversing the order in the thanksgiving formula of 1:3. In 1:3, we compared the unusual combination of the verb and the infinitive in the Pauline thanksgiving formula with Jewish and Christian liturgical language and appreciated Paul’s intent to emphasize his sense of gratitude to God. Here, by reversing the order of them, he seems to be again furthering that intent. The fourth change is the addition of the modifying phrase ἠγαπημένοι ὑπὸ κυρίου (“beloved by the Lord”) to the simple vocative ἀδελφοί (“brothers and sisters”) of 1:3. Not only the usual Pauline practice of referring with the title “Lord” to the risen and exalted Christ Jesus, but more specifically his two references to God in this thanksgiving report make it clear that here by “the Lord” Paul refers to the Lord Jesus Christ rather than to God. Marshall succinctly notes this matter thus: “the contrast with the immediately preceding and following occurrences of ‘God’ guarantees this identification.”188 For, having just written “we ought to give thanks to God,” if he meant God by “the Lord,” he would write “beloved by him” rather than “beloved by the Lord,” and 186 Cf. Weima, 546; also Milligan, 106. 187 Best, 311. 188 Marshall, 207.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 617

7/12/23 11:29 AM

618

2 Thessalonians 2:13–14

again “because he chose you” rather than “because God chose you.”189 Then, our phrase “brothers and sisters beloved by the Lord [Jesus Christ]” here stands in some contrast to the form “brothers and sisters beloved by God” in the thanksgiving section of 1 Thess 1:4, where Paul also speaks of God’s election of the readers, as here. Nevertheless, Weima sees in our phrase “brothers and sisters beloved by the Lord” the kind of implication that we saw in connection with the phrase “brothers and sisters beloved by God” in 1 Thess 1:4, namely, that Paul regards the readers, gentile Christians, as members of the renewed Israel beloved by God, along with Jewish Christians (see comment on 1 Thess 1:4 above).190 Further, since the phrase ἠγαπημένοι ὑπὸ κυρίου here is the same as that in Moses’s blessing upon the tribe of Benjamin (Deut 33:12 LXX), Fee and Weima think that here Paul, a Benjaminite (Rom 11:1; Phil 3:5), is applying his ancestral blessing to his converts in Thessalonica.191 However, it is a question whether we should appreciate any Benjaminite implication here beyond Paul’s use of a phrase familiar to him that expresses the Lord’s favor for his people. This is so especially because here by “the Lord” Paul means the Lord Jesus Christ rather than God, as Weima and Fee themselves recognize.192 So instead of just affirming that our phrase and the phrase “beloved by God” in 1 Thess 1:4 express “the same reality,”193 we need to discern Paul’s purpose in changing the phrase of 1 Thess 1:4 into our phrase here. It is best explained by Marshall: “in the present context it [the change] may be deliberate in order to reassure the readers that the Lord Jesus, who is coming for his own people and who will destroy the wicked, loves them in particular and will keep them in safety for final salvation.”194 We may strengthen this point further by specifying the present context as that in which Paul deals with the readers’ great anxiety about the day of the Lord or the parousia of the Lord (v. 2; cf. 1 Thess 5:1–11). On the day of the Lord, the returning Lord Jesus will destroy wicked unbelievers but will save the readers, the believers, because he loves them. As Paul is so focused on making this point, both in 1:5–10 and 2:9–14 he speaks only about judgment and destruction for wicked unbelievers and salvation for believers. He does not utter a word in this whole epistle about his frequently issued reminder or warning that believers also are to stand before the judgment seat of God or the Lord Jesus at his parousia (e.g., Rom 14:10; 2 Cor 5:10; also Rom 6:19–23; 1 Cor 3:10–17; 4:1–5; 6:9–11; 9:16–27; Gal 5:19–21; 6:7–8; Phil 2:12–17; Col 1:21–23)—­something that he did not forget in his previous letter to the readers (1 Thess 3:12–13; 5:23).195 189 190 191 192 193 194 195

So Weima, 547. Weima, 548. Fee, 299, and Weima, 548. Cf. O’Brien, Thanksgivings, 186; Martin, 251. Fee, 298, and Weima, 548. Fee, 299. Marshall, 206. Weima, 548, also cites this; cf. O’Brien, Thanksgivings, 186. Is this fact easier to expect from Paul or a pseudonymous author pretending to be Paul?

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 618

7/12/23 11:29 AM

Comment 619 Note further how he carefully formulates his exhortative prayers in 2 Thess 1:11–12 and 2:16–17 so as to avoid such an obvious reference to the last judgment or to the need for their standing “blameless” at it, as in his prayers in 1 Thess 3:12–13 and 5:23, even while petitioning God and the Lord Jesus to help the readers fulfill the good work of faith (see comment on 2 Thess 1:11–12 and 2:16–17 as well as on 1 Thess 3:12–13 and 5:23). So with the phrase “brothers and sisters beloved by the Lord” here, Paul tries to convey: “you need not fear ‘the day of the Lord,’ for the returning Lord loves you, although he will condemn and destroy unbelieving evildoers!” Thus, the first three changes in the opening main clause of the thanksgiving here from that in 1:3 show us how strong an emphasis Paul puts on his own pastoral empathy with the readers’ suffering and anxiety, and the fourth change shows how deeply he is concerned to alleviate their fear of the day of the Lord and assure them of their salvation. The judgment of Marshall is quite fitting here: “Why Trilling, p. 119, should regard the whole expression as lacking in warmth is beyond comprehension.”196 However, the greatest change from 1:3 is the reason for the thanksgiving here, which begins with the following ὅτι clause (v. 13b). It is noteworthy that, whereas the thanksgivings in 1 Thess 2:13–16 and 3:6–10 repeat the cause of the initial thanksgiving of 1 Thess 1:2–10 (see comment ad loc), this second thanksgiving in 2 Thessalonians mentions a new cause, which is contextually appropriate. ὅτι εἵλατο ὑμᾶς ὁ θεὸς ἀπαρχήν, “because God has chosen you as firstfruits.” Paul gives thanks to God because he chose the readers for salvation. This is the only place in the NT where the simple verb αἱρεῖσθαι is used (in the middle voice) of God’s choosing his people (cf. Deut 26:18 LXX; in Phil 1:22 Paul uses it for his choosing his own destiny). The compound ἐξαιρεῖσθαι appears in Gal 1:4 (ὅπως ἐξέληται ἡμᾶς, “that he might deliver us”). But the sense of αἱρεῖσθαι here is close to that of ἐκλέγεσθαι elsewhere (as in Eph 1:4, καθὼς ἐξελέξατο ἡμᾶς). Like ἐκλογή in 1 Thess 1:4 (see comment ad loc), it refers to the readers’ “election.” Here Paul refers to God’s “election” of them (and his “call” of them in the following verse) to assure them of God’s love and faithful preservation of them for their eschatological salvation, as well as to lift their self-­esteem and morale as God’s people over against their unbelieving opponents, who will be destroyed at the parousia of the Lord Jesus (cf. Rom 8:30, where Paul speaks of God’s “predestination” and “call” of believers to assure them of God’s faithful preservation of them unto the eschaton; also 1 Cor 1:8–9; 1 Thess 5:24). ἀπαρχήν, “firstfruits.” The evidence (see Notes b. above) is slightly stronger for ἀπαρχήν than for ἀπ’ ἀρχῆς, “from the beginning” (for which πρὸ καταβολῆς κόσμου in Eph 1:4 might provide a parallel). See Weima for a full discussion

196 Marshall, 206–7.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 619

7/12/23 11:29 AM

620

2 Thessalonians 2:13–14

about the textual choice.197 But in what sense could the readers be called firstfruits? The Thessalonian believers could not be called the firstfruits of Macedonia (cf. the “firstfruits of Achaia” in 1 Cor 16:15 or the “firstfruits of Asia” in Rom 16:5), for the Philippian church was established before theirs. Elsewhere in the NT, believers in Christ are the firstfruits of God’s creation (Jas 1:18); faithful confessors and martyrs are the firstfruits of humankind (Rev 14:4). But this usage does not apply here, as Paul refers only to the readers, the Thessalonian church, rather than to the worldwide church of Christ as a whole. Does Paul mean then that they are God’s firstfruits in Thessalonica and use the term with an expectation that many others from their city would yet come to faith in Christ?198 Note that Paul apparently thinks of his missionary geography in terms of Roman provinces such as Galatia, Asia, Macedonia, Achaia, Illyricum, Rome, and Spain (Rom 15:19, 24, 26; 1 Cor 16:1, 5; 2 Cor 1:8; Phil 4:15; 1 Thess 1:8) and sees Christians in connection with those provinces to which they belong, rather than with their cities (cf. Rom 16:5; 1 Cor 16:15). Note also the fact that in Rom 16:5 and 1 Cor 16:15 Paul refers to Epaenetus and the household of Stephanas as the firstfruits, respectively, of Asia and Achaia. It is also noteworthy that, in the case of the household of Stephanas, Paul highlights their service to God’s holy people in Corinth or Achaia. So it may be that here Paul is thinking of the Thessalonian church as the firstfruits of Macedonia in view of the fact that they were the first converts that were offered to God in the capital city of Macedonia and caused others in their province, as well as in Achaia and elsewhere, to be offered to God (cf. 1 Thess 1:8; see comment ad loc). From a strictly chronological point of view, he would refer to the Philippian church as the firstfruits of Macedonia. But considering the status of the city of Thessalonica within Macedonia and the missionary role of the church there, as well as the chronological fact that the members of the church still belonged to the first group of converts along with the Philippian church, whom he won for Christ in Macedonia, he seems to be referring to the church as “firstfruits.” The reason why he nevertheless does not specify the provincial identification “of Macedonia” in our verse may be because he is conscious of the Philippian church and wants to avoid the need to add the cumbersome explanation “[firstfruits of Macedonia] together with the believers in Philippi and other cities of Macedonia.” At any rate, the designation “firstfruits” here is also designed to boost the readers’ self-­esteem and confidence in God’s care. εἰς σωτηρίαν, “for salvation.” This is the object for which God has chosen them. It is a matter both of present enjoyment and of future hope, but here it is chiefly the latter that is in view, as in 1 Thess 5:9, as Paul is speaking about it in 197 Weima, 550–51. 198 So Fee, 302; Weima, 550.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 620

7/12/23 11:29 AM

Comment 621 contrast to God’s condemnation and destruction of wicked unbelievers on the day of the Lord (vv. 9–12). Its elaboration in the following v. 14 confirms this. ἐν ἁγιασμῷ πνεύματος καὶ πίστει ἀληθείας, “by sanctification of the Spirit and belief in the truth.” These are means by which the salvation is secured rather than attendant circumstances (i.e., ἐν has instrumental rather than comitative force). The noun ἁγιασμός is here a nomen actionis, “sanctification,” as in 1 Thess 4:7, and πνεύματος refers to God’s Spirit, the Holy Spirit;199 its genitive case is subjective, so that the phrase “sanctification of the Spirit” means sanctification wrought by the Holy Spirit.200 In 1 Thess 4:7–8 Paul speaks about God as having “called” believers to be “in sanctification,” that is, as having “sanctified” them to be his holy people at their baptism and supplying them with his Holy Spirit at present in order for them to remain in that state, avoiding the impurities of the world (see comment ad loc). In that passage he indicates that the Holy Spirit is God’s agent who makes believers progress in the present process of sanctification toward its consummation before the judgment seat of God at the parousia of the Lord Jesus Christ (cf. 1 Thess 3:12–13; 5:23; see comment ad loc). But in our present verse he means that God employed the agency of his Spirit to sanctify the readers (i.e., to make them his holy people; cf. 1:10) at their baptism (cf. 1 Cor 6:11), so that they might obtain eschatological salvation. This divine initiative (i.e., grace, cf. v. 16) for their salvation was met by their “belief in the truth” to make it effective.201 The word ἀληθείας here refers back to that in vv. 10, 12 and therefore means the gospel.202 This belief in the truth/gospel leads to salvation, but wicked unbelievers deceived by the lawless man refused to believe it, with the result that they are doomed to condemnation and destruction on the day of the Lord. Since our phrase πίστις ἀληθείας is set in this context, ἀληθείας is clearly an objective genitive: “belief in the truth.” Since the readers’ “belief in the truth” is set over against the wicked unbelievers’ refusal to “accept the love of the truth” (v. 10) or “believe the truth” (v. 12), it refers to the readers’ acceptance of the gospel when it was preached to them by Paul and his missionary team (cf. 1 Thess 1:5–7; 2:13), rather than their (continuing and growing) faith in the gospel. Note that πίστις ἀληθείας is associated with ἁγιασμὸς πνεύματος in a construction governed by one instrumental preposition, ἐν, and that the latter is set before the former. This construction makes it clear that by ἁγιασμὸς πνεύματος 199 For Paul’s use of πνεῦμα unaccompanied by either the article, or the adjective “holy,” or the pronoun “his” [or “of God”], cf. Rom 8:4, 9, 13; Gal 5:16, 18; etc. 200 Cf. H. Stettler, Heiligung, 262–63, who points out that Paul never singles out the sanctification of human spirit; cf. the sanctification of the whole person: “spirit and soul and body” (1 Thess 5:23); “flesh and spirit” (2 Cor 7:1). 201 Pace Schreiber, II:202, who takes πίστις here in the sense of “faithfulness,” even while recognizing a contrast between the readers here and their opponents in v. 12. 202 Cf. Stettler, Heiligung, 263.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 621

7/12/23 11:29 AM

622

2 Thessalonians 2:13–14

here Paul is referring to the work of the Holy Spirit (i.e., his prevenient grace) that led the readers to believe the gospel and confess Jesus as Lord at their baptism (cf. Rom 10:9–10 plus 1 Cor 12:3b), rather than to the work of the Holy Spirit that aids them in the present process of their sanctification.203 Since Paul specifies the work of the Holy Spirit here as “sanctification,” that is, as making the readers separated from the world and consecrated to the holy God as his own people, he seems to have in mind the Spirit’s help for the readers to accept especially the gospel’s teachings to know and serve only “the living and true God” (1 Thess 1:9; 4:5; 2 Thess 1:8) and to render the obedience of faith to his Son, the Lord Jesus Christ who reigns on his behalf (2 Thess 1:8, see comment ad loc; cf. 1 Cor 6:11), so as to turn from idolatry and immorality and live a life of holiness and love (1 Thess 4:1–12, see comment ad loc). Thus, aided by God’s sanctifying Spirit, the readers believed the gospel and availed themselves of the divine salvation offered in it. God chose them to obtain salvation in this way. Thus, having applied in vv. 10–12 to wicked unbelievers his doctrine of justification through faith in the gospel in the negative way, now here Paul applies it to the Thessalonian Christians in the positive way. In the former, he maintains the juridical framework of that doctrine with his emphasis on God’s condemnation (κριθῶσιν) for their belief in the lie of “the lawless man” and for their wickedness (ἀδικίᾳ), instead of believing the truth (of Christ). But here he explains that doctrine in the category of sanctification within the juridical framework of the last judgment (this framework must be seen as presupposed in vv. 13–14, as the passage is set in contrast to the preceding section, vv. 9–12). In this respect, our verse is similar to 1 Thess 3:12–13 and 5:23. In Explanation after the comments on 1 Thess 3:11–13, observing there how Paul uses the justification and the sanctification language, we have suggested that justification (restoring people to right relationship with God, i.e., making them members of the righteous people of God) and sanctification (consecrating them to belong to God—­making them members of the holy people of God) are parallel metaphors for salvation. We also suggested that justification is the more fundamental category of Paul’s soteriology, and that in the Thessalonian correspondence (and the Corinthian correspondence) he contextualizes his justification doctrine partly in terms of sanctification because the Thessalonian Christians (like the Corinthian Christians) face the danger of idolatry and immorality in their pagan environment, rather than the issue of keeping the Mosaic law (cf. also Rom 6:19–22). 14 εἰς ὃ [καὶ] ἐκάλεσεν ὑμᾶς διὰ τοῦ εὐαγγελίου ἡμῶν, “It was for this that he called you through our gospel.” As in 1:11, the antecedent of the neuter relative pronoun ὅ in the opening phrase εἰς ὅ (lit. “for which”) is the whole preceding 203 Cf. Hoppe, II:172.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 622

7/12/23 11:29 AM

Comment 623 clause “salvation through sanctification by the Spirit and belief in the truth.”204 Composing this clause in a similar structure to that of the preceding ὅτι clause of v. 13b,205 Paul elaborates on the latter. God’s “election” (εἵλατο, v. 13) of the readers was actualized through his “call” (ἐκάλεσεν) by means of the gospel that Paul and his colleagues Silvanus and Timothy preached to them. It contained God’s offer of salvation wrought in and through his Son, Jesus Christ (1 Thess 1:9–10; 4:14; 5:9–10) and his call for the hearers to avail themselves of it by faith and become his holy and righteous people (1 Thess 2:12; 4:7; 5:23–24; cf. Rom 8:30; also 10:6–17).206 The word “gospel” in the phrase “our gospel” may be taken as a nomen actionis, “our gospel preaching,” as in 1 Thess 1:5 (see comment ad loc; cf. 2 Thess 1:10: “our testimony”). However, in view of Paul’s wariness about teachings deviating from his gospel (v. 2) or contrary to it (v. 11), as well as his exhortation for the readers to hold to the traditions that he and his colleagues taught (v. 15), we may see a polemical connotation in this expression “our gospel” here.207 We need to see the expression as having in view the content of his and his team’s gospel teaching as well as the act of their preaching. εἰς περιποίησιν δόξης τοῦ κυρίου ἡμῶν Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ, “for the obtaining of the glory of our Lord Jesus Christ.” This is the purpose of God’s call of the readers through the gospel that Paul preached to them. With this phrase Paul elaborates on the “salvation” that he mentioned in the preceding clause (v. 13). The “salvation” for which God chose and called the readers is to obtain the glory of the Lord Jesus Christ at his parousia. For this sense of περιποίησις, see also 1 Thess 5:9, where God is said to have appointed his people “for the obtaining [εἰς περιποίησιν] of salvation through our Lord Jesus Christ” (see comment ad loc). For δόξα in the sense of divine majesty or fullness, see comment on 1 Thess 2:12, where God is said to call them “into his own . . . glory.” The glory is here said to be Christ’s. It presupposes the understanding that God exalted the risen Christ to his right hand and made him “Lord” (cf. Rom 1:3–4; Phil 2:9–11), entrusting him with his “dominion and glory and kingship” (cf. 1 Cor 15:20–27, echoing Dan 7:14 as well as Pss 8:6; 110:1),208 and that Christ is “the image of God” who bears “the glory of God in [his] face” (2 Cor 4:4, 6). Paul often expresses Christians’ eschatological salvation in terms of obtaining the glory of God or Christ (Rom 5:2; 8:17–18, 21, 30;

204 Malherbe, 437. 205 Cf. Weima, 533. 206 Cf. Marxsen, 92; Hoppe, II:173; pace Müller, 283, who regards our clause as un-­Pauline, arguing that “Paul sees the election and call of believers strictly theocentrically as something that is grounded in God’s action and not as something that is brought about through the medium of his gospel; the call takes place before the preaching of the gospel and not first through it”; Nicklas, 169, endorses this view. 207 Cf. Weima, 555. 208 Cf. Kim, “Jesus’ Son of Man Sayings,” in PGTO, 133–49 (esp. sec. 4).

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 623

7/12/23 11:29 AM

624

2 Thessalonians 2:13–14

1 Cor 2:7; 15:43; 2 Cor 4:17; Phil 3:21; 1 Thess 2:12; cf. 2 Cor 3:18), as it means (negatively) redemption from our creaturely finitude (or frailty) and consequent suffering and (positively) participation in divine fullness and divine life (eternal life). In 1:8–12, which is a material parallel to our 2:10–14, he already said that the readers would participate in the glory of the Lord Jesus at his parousia because they believed the gospel preached by him, while their opponents would be excluded from it and destroyed because they refused to believe the gospel and obey the Lord. He recapitulates it here by way of concluding his message of assurance and comfort for the readers, making the thought of their participation in the Lord Jesus Christ’s glory more explicit and concrete in terms of their “obtaining [his] glory.” We have observed how both in 1:5–12 and 2:10–14 Paul reflects his doctrine of justification and how in doing that he echoes the teachings that he later unfolds in Rom 1–2 (or 3) about fallen humanity, God’s condemnation of unbelievers, and his justification of all who believe in the gospel. So it appears appropriate to compare also his presentation of believers’ consummated justification in terms of their obtaining God’s glory at the last judgment here and in 1:11–12 with what he does in Romans. There, having concluded his indictment of fallen humanity (Rom 1:18–3:20) with the affirmation that “all have sinned and lack the glory of God” (3:23), he concludes his whole exposition of the gospel of justification by affirming that the consummation of believers’ justification is to obtain God’s glory (5:2; 8:17–18, 21, 30) and by following that affirmation up with a depiction of the scene of their triumphant justification at the last judgment (8:31–39). Within this parallelism between 2 Thess 1–2 and Rom 1–8 in the overall scheme of dealing with the human fall from God and God’s redemption of believers in the gospel of Christ Jesus, there is also the parallelism between our passage (to paraphrase: “God elected you, called you, and sanctified you, so that you may obtain the glory of our Lord Jesus”) and Rom 8:30 (“those whom he predestined he also called; and those whom he called he also justified; and those whom he justified he also glorified,” i.e., made them “be conformed to the image of his Son,” Rom 8:29)—­both passages having the same purpose of comforting and reassuring suffering and anxious Christians in view of the last judgment (Rom 8:18–39). This overall parallelism lends support to our view that in 2 Thess 1–2 Paul teaches his doctrine of justification and that in this there is a clear continuity between this early letter and his later letter to the Romans.

Explanation The writers express their thanks to God that he has chosen these Thessalonian believers—­not simply that he chose them in Christ before all worlds but that his eternal choice of them has now been actualized in time by their wholehearted response to the gospel. This actualization was made when

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 624

7/12/23 11:29 AM

Explanation 625 in due course they heard his call issued in and through Paul’s preaching of the gospel, and they accepted the gospel by faith. It is a travesty of God’s electing grace to suppose that, because he chooses some for salvation, all the others are thereby consigned to perdition. On the contrary, if some are chosen for special blessing, it is in order that others may be blessed through them and with them. This is a constant feature in the pattern of divine election throughout the biblical story, from Abraham onward. Those who are chosen constitute the firstfruits, bearing the promise of a rich harvest to come. The salvation for which the people of God have been chosen comprises much more than their deliverance from the wrath to come. It is their participation in the glory of their Lord Jesus Christ. The readers’ anxiety about the day of the Lord has led Paul to speak of the coming of the lawless man, and the latter subject has led him to explain this man’s effects upon unbelievers. This explanation has led him to repeat in 2:9–12 and 13–14 the substance of his teachings in 1:5–9 and 10–12 about the contrasting fates of unbelievers and believers at the parousia of the Lord Jesus. So, addressing the Thessalonian believers’ anxiety about the day of the Lord at the center (2:1–8), Paul expounds God’s “ just judgment” (1:5) before (1:5–12) and after (2:9–14) it in terms of his doctrine of justification by faith. He writes in this repetitive or “sandwich” way for two reasons. First, he writes in this way because, having given thanks to God for the readers’ perseverance despite persecution by the opponents, he wants to comfort and reassure them by explaining God’s “ just judgment” in terms of his doctrine of justification by faith—­justification of believers and condemnation of their unbelieving persecutors (1:5–12). Second, he writes in this way because, having referred to the readers’ anxiety about the day of the Lord when the last judgment of God is to take place and having explained the scenario of the revelation of the lawless man and the parousia of the Lord Jesus (2:1–8), he has to explain God’s last judgment (as it is a fundamental Christian belief that that judgment is to take place at the end or at the parousia of the Lord Jesus). That is, he must explain God’s condemnation of those who refuse to believe the gospel under the influence of the lawless man, as well as his salvation (or justification) of the readers who have faith in the gospel. This repetition of God’s just judgment clearly has the effect of greatly strengthening the assurance and comfort that he wants to give to the anxious and persecuted readers. Thus, the explanation of God’s just judgment for believers’ salvation and unbelievers’ destruction according to the doctrine of justification through faith in the gospel constitutes the real substance of 2 Thess 1–2, even if it partly takes place within the framework of explaining that the day/parousia of the Lord Jesus is yet to come, that is, only after the revelation of “the lawless man.” However, Paul’s explanation of the parousia of the Lord in connection with the revelation of the mysterious figure, “the man of lawlessness,” in 2:3–12 has

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 625

7/12/23 11:29 AM

626

2 Thessalonians 2:13–14

so fascinated not only common readers of the Bible but also many commentators that they have failed to pay sufficient attention to this real substance of 2 Thess 1–2. Therefore, having repeatedly shown in comments on 1:5–9, 10–12; 2:9–12, 13–14, and 16–17 (see below) how the justification doctrine is reflected in all those passages, I wrote an essay to provide a more extended and systematic explanation of the doctrine as reflected in this epistle, drawing parallels with other Pauline epistles, especially Romans.209 However, here we need to make a couple more observations about our passage, 2 Thess 2:13–14. As noted above, in vv. 3–12 Paul concentrates so much on the coming of “the lawless man”—­his activities and their effects on unbelievers—­that he refers to Christ’s parousia and his destruction of that figure only in a subordinate clause attached to the affirmation of the revelation of that figure (v. 8b). This may make some readers wonder whether he has forgotten the topic for our chapter that he set forth in v. 1, especially its second part: “concerning the parousia of our Lord Jesus Christ and our assembling to meet him.” But we need to understand that by providing the readers with a strong assurance of their eschatological salvation (vv. 13–14) and especially by presenting it in terms of “obtaining the glory of our Lord Jesus Christ” (v. 14), which is a summary of the parousia of the Lord and believers’ participation in his glory that he described in 1:9–12 (see comment on 2:1 above), Paul does address the second part of the topic that he set forth in 2:1—thus appropriately marking the climax of part 1 of this epistle. In our passage of vv. 13–14, three things are striking by their absence: (a) reference to “the day of the Lord”; (b) the Lord Jesus Christ’s role in judgment; and (c) a warning for believers about the lawless man. Concerning (a): we may see that in teaching about God’s judgment and destruction of unbelievers (vv. 10–12) and his salvation of believers (vv. 13–14), Paul has implicitly in view the notion of “the day of the Lord.” Nevertheless, in view of the fact that a misunderstanding about the coming of that day is what is troubling the readers, his avoidance to mention that concept completely after vv. 2–3, let alone describing it, is still noteworthy. Concerning (b): after stating in v. 8b that upon his parousia the Lord Jesus will destroy the lawless man, 209 Kim, “Paul’s Doctrine of Justification in 2 Thessalonians 1–2.” Here we may just show summarily the verses within 2 Thess 1–2 that parallel Rom 1:16–17 (the classic formulation of the justification doctrine)—1:10 and 2:13 (positive parallels) and 1:8 and 2:10–12 (negative parallels)—­and highlight the parallelism in ordo salutis between Rom 8:29–30 and 2 Thess 2:13–14: (1) predestination//election; (2) call (through the gospel); (3) justification// sanctification (for their parallelism, see the Explanation section on 1 Thess 3:11–13); and (4) obtaining of God’s glory or the glorious image of the Lord Jesus Christ, God’s Son. Note also the stress on the love of God and the Lord Jesus Christ in order to assure and comfort believers with a view to the last judgment of God: cf. Rom 8:28–39 with 2 Thess 2:13, 16. Note also the relatively much higher frequency of the word “faith/to believe” in the Thessalonian letters: nine times in 2 Thess (1:3, 4, 10 [2x], 11; 2:11, 12, 13; 3:2); twelve times in 1 Thess (1:3, 7, 8; 2:10, 13; 3:2, 5, 6, 7, 10; 4:14; 5:8); cf. six times in Phil; thirteen times in 1 Cor; and eight times in 2 Cor.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 626

7/12/23 11:29 AM

Bibliography 627 Paul does not refer to his role in God’s judgment of unbelievers (contrast with 1:8–9) and salvation of believers in vv. 9–12 and vv. 13–14. He only stresses the Lord Jesus’s love for believers (v. 13; also v. 16). Concerning (c): in view of the larger context as well as the description of that figure’s expected rebellious activities in v. 4, we may see Paul’s description of that man’s deceptive activities in vv. 9–10 as an implicit warning for the readers about the confusions, temptations, and suffering that he will bring to them. But it is still noteworthy that in vv. 9–12 Paul does not explicitly issue any warning for his readers about him but concentrates only on describing the lawless man’s effects upon unbelievers. And in vv. 13–14 he likewise concentrates just on reassuring the readers that they are destined to salvation at the parousia of the Lord because it is based on God’s eternal election and his call through the gospel. So it appears that he does not want to add any cause for more anxiety for the already nervous and suffering readers by mentioning the dreaded “day of the Lord,” warning about the menace of the lawless man to them, or highlighting the judgment of the returning Lord Jesus.

C. The Concluding Exhortation (2:15) Bibliography Bruce, F. F. Tradition Old and New. Exeter: Paternoster, 1970. Campenhausen, H. von. Tradition and Life in the Church. Translated by A. V. Littledale. London: Collins, 1968. Cullmann, O. “The Tradition.” Pages 55–99 in The Early Church. Edited and translated by A. J. B. Higgins. London: SCM, 1956. Hanson, R. P. C. Tradition in the Early Church. London: SCM, 1962.

Translation So then,a brothers and sisters, stand firm b and hold fast the traditions that you were taught, whether by our word (of mouth) or by our epistle. 15

Notes a. ἄρα οὖν (cf. 1 Thess. 5:6), a combination peculiar to Paul in the NT, is intended “presumably to provide an emphatically inferential connective” (M. E. Thrall, Greek Particles in the New Testament [Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1962], 10). b. στήκετε, imperative (as in 1 Cor 16:13; Gal 5:1; Phil 4:1); cf. its use as indicative in 1 Thess 3:8 (see Notes ad loc).

Form/Structure/Setting Both the two imperative verbs “stand firm” and “hold fast” and the phrase “whether by our word (of mouth) or by our epistle” indicate that this exhortation forms an inclusio with 2:2, where Paul raised the problem of the readers “being shaken out of their mind [and] alarmed either by Spirit or by word or by letter.” Paul here concludes his teaching about the day of the Lord found

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 627

7/12/23 11:29 AM

628

2 Thessalonians 2:15

in the whole preceding section of 2:1–14, draws the moral out of it, and issues this exhortation.

Comment 2:15 Ἄρα οὖν, ἀδελφοί, στήκετε καὶ κρατεῖτε τὰς παραδόσεις ἃς ἐδιδάχθητε, “So then, brothers and sisters, stand firm and hold fast the traditions that you were taught.” Unlike other NT writers who use this verb στήκειν for its literal or physical sense (Mark 3:31; 11:25; John 1:26), Paul always uses it metaphorically for “standing firm” in connection with Christian faith. He usually clarifies its sense by adding to it an explanatory prepositional phrase: “in the Lord” (1 Thess 3:8; Phil 4:1), “in the faith” (1 Cor 16:13), or “in one spirit” (Phil 1:27). But here, as in Gal 1:5, he does it by adding a second verb that explains the means by which the readers are to stand firm.210 Clearly the command is issued in view of the readers “being shaken [σαλευθῆναι] out of their wits or alarmed [θροεῖσθαι]” over a false prophecy that the day of the Lord has come (2:2). So Paul is exhorting the readers to maintain “emotional stability in the face of the erroneous eschatological teaching.”211 The conjunction καί (“and”) that joins the second command, κρατεῖτε (“hold fast”), to the first, στήκετε, is explicative: it explains that the readers are to “stand firm” (in their right faith) by “holding fast” to the traditions.212 In 1 Cor 11:2 Paul uses the synonymous verb κατέχειν with παραδόσεις (cf. 1 Cor 15:2; 1 Thess 5:21). But he may be using κρατεῖν here instead to avoid confusion with his earlier use of the participles of κατέχειν (ὁ κατέχων and τὸ κατέχον, 2 Thess 2:6–7), as well as to invoke the picture of more forceful holding (cf. Col 2:19).213 Paul speaks about his having “received” (παρέλαβον) the gospel and the institution of the Lord’s Supper from the Lord or his Christian predecessors and “delivered” (παρέδωκα) them to the Corinthians (1 Cor 11:23; 15:1, 3a). This language is commonly recognized as Jewish technical terminology for transmitting “tradition” (παράδοσις) of teachings.214 It is well understandable that Paul, a former “Pharisaic scribe,”215 who used to be extremely zealous for his ancestral traditions (παραδόσεις, Gal 1:14), continued to use the traditional terminology for transmitting his own teachings, as well as the teachings of Jesus and other apostles, even after his apostolic call on the Damascus road. So he applies this language of tradition not only to his gospel (1 Cor 11:23; 15:1, 3a; 1 Thess 2:13) but also to his ethical teachings (1 Cor 11:2; 1 Thess 4:1; 2 Thess 3:6; cf. Rom 6:17). Here, he has in view his gospel teaching. 210 211 212 213 214

Weima, 557, but Rom 14:4 is somewhat different. Malherbe, 439. Best, 317; Malherbe, 440; Fee, 305; Weima, 557. BDAG 565 (s.v. κρατέω 6). Cf. Green, 329, who shows that Greeks had a similar conception of passing on sacred traditions. 215 Hengel and Schwemer, Paul, 36.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 628

7/12/23 11:29 AM

Comment 629 Since he is alarmed about the readers being “deceived” and “shaken” by a false prophecy about the coming of the day of the Lord (2 Thess 2:1–3), we may see that by the “traditions” here he has in view especially the eschatological component concerning the parousia of the Lord Jesus and the day of the Lord that he taught the Thessalonians (v. 5). In commenting on 1 Thess 4:15–17 and 5:2, we have suggested that Paul delivered some eschatological sayings of Jesus of the Synoptic type to the Thessalonians during his mission among them, and we have also noted that in our 2 Thess 2:3–9 he reflects some other sayings of Jesus in presenting the scenario of the revelation of the lawless man and the parousia of the Lord. Therefore, it is probable that by “traditions that you were taught (by us)” here he has especially in view his eschatological teachings that were built on the Jesus tradition. However, we need also to consider that he places this exhortation in the context of speaking about the lawless man’s false claims and deceptive activities for unbelievers, as well as of comforting and exhorting the readers with his gospel of justification for believers (vv. 9–14 and vv. 16–17; note the opening ἄρα οὖν; see Notes a. above). So it is likely that, in speaking of “the traditions” taught by himself, Paul has in view not only right eschatology but also right Christology, soteriology, and ethics that he taught the Thessalonians during his founding mission among them (see comment on v. 17 below). Perhaps, for those multiple references, he uses the plural “traditions” here. If so, the doctrine of justification he teaches in vv. 9–14 and vv. 16–17 was a “tradition” that he delivered to them at that time. This is confirmed by 1 Thess 1:10 and 5:9–10 (cf. 4:1–8; see comment ad loc). Paul stresses his teachings as “traditions” in 1 Cor 11:2 and 15:1–3a and then appeals to their acceptance by the ecumenical church at large in 1 Cor 11:12 and 15:11 in order to bring the Corinthians back to right faith and practice (cf. 1 Cor 11:17–34; 1 Thess 3:6). Here also he may be using the language of “traditions” for his teachings in order to impress upon the Thessalonians that his teachings are the common teachings of the church at large and therefore they should hold fast to them without deviation.216 εἴτε διὰ λόγου εἴτε δι᾽ ἐπιστολῆς ἡμῶν, “whether by word (of mouth) or by letter of ours.” The ἡμῶν probably refers as much to λόγου as to ἐπιστολῆς (“whether by our oral or written teaching”). There is no restriction of “tradition” to what is unwritten. The oral teaching here refers to that which Paul and his missionary colleagues delivered during their mission in Thessalonica (and may also include that which Timothy delivered at his return visit to the readers, 1 Thess 3:1–3). He already referred to it in 2 Thess 1:10 (“our testimony”) and 2:14 (“our gospel”). It was centered on believers’ salvation at the last judgment at the parousia of the Lord Jesus (e.g., 1 Thess 1:10; 5:10). By the

216 Cf. Weima, 558.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 629

7/12/23 11:29 AM

630

2 Thessalonians 2:15

“letter” he most probably means 1 Thessalonians;217 he might conceivably mean 2 Thessalonians, but the aorist ἐδιδάχθητε is scarcely epistolary, and ἐπιστολῆς appears without an article.218 Through that letter, 1 Thessalonians, Paul supplemented his oral teaching especially with regard to the question of the day of the Lord (1 Thess 5:1–11) and believers’ assembling to meet the Lord Jesus at his parousia (1 Thess 4:13–18). With this εἴτε . . . εἴτε construction here in our verse, Paul counters the negative form of the same construction in v. 2: μήτε . . . μήτε . . . μήτε. The readers are not to be shaken and alarmed by a prophecy or a sermon or a letter purporting to be his that deviates from his teachings (about the coming of the day of the Lord and God’s judgment on that day), but they are to stand firm by holding fast to the traditions that he taught during his mission among them and also in his letter (1 Thessalonians). Here in our verse, there is no phrase that corresponds to “by Spirit” (i.e., by a prophetic utterance made in the name of the Spirit) in v. 2 (see comment ad loc). According to Fee and Weima, Paul omits it because he suspects a Spirit-­inspired prophecy as being the source of the false alarm and mental instability of the readers about the day of the Lord.219 But it is simpler to think that he omits it because it was not a major means of his teaching or because he includes his prophecies within the category of “word.” Even so, Fee and Weima are right in seeing in our verse that Paul’s counter to the problem of the readers in v. 2 contains an implicit demand to test prophetic utterances (cf. 1 Thess 5:19–22)—­yet not them only, but also any sermon purporting to expound a Christian doctrine or any letter purporting to come from him—­by the “traditions” that he actually taught.

Explanation The spirit of Christian freedom and progress is by no means incompatible with loyalty to the primitive Christian heritage. Christian stability calls for the maintenance of Christian continuity, in belief and action alike, in corporate as in personal life. This maintenance of continuity is encouraged in the injunction to “hold the traditions.” The Christian tradition, in all its variety, is rooted in the historical Jesus, in his redemptive work and in the way of life set out in his teaching, but as these are made good to one generation after another by the risen Lord through his Spirit, the Christian tradition remains alive and dynamic. Other kinds of tradition are referred to with disapproval in the NT. Jesus rebuked some of his contemporaries because, as he said to them, “you leave 217 So most commentators; also recently Eve-­Marie Becker, “ὡς δι᾽ ἡμῶν in 2 Thess 2.2,” 67. 218 Contra Wanamaker, 268–69, who renders δι᾽ ἐπιστολῆς ἡμῶν with “this our letter” as if ἐπιστολῆς were appearing with an article, as in 3:14 and 1 Thess 5:27, in order to make it refer to “this letter”; cf. Weima, 558n53. 219 Fee, 305, and Weima, 558.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 630

7/12/23 11:29 AM

Bibliography 631 the commandment of God, and hold fast the tradition of men” (Mark 7:8). Similarly, the false philosophy against which the Colossian Christians are put on their guard is described by Paul as “the tradition of men” (Col 2:8). But it is not tradition as such, but false, inadequate, or outmoded tradition that is deprecated. The tradition of Christ shares his truth, his adequacy, and his abiding vitality. The Jewish rabbis made a distinction between the written precepts of Moses’s law and the oral “tradition of the elders.” While in theory the oral law went back to Moses, who was said to have received it “from Sinai” together with the written law and delivered it to later generations through a succession of “tradents,” in practice the oral tradition amplified and applied the principles of the written law. In Christianity too (especially in the Western church) the relation of unwritten tradition to canonical Scripture has been ardently debated, but a widely accepted view today is that unwritten tradition performs an interpretative service for the written text it represents. In NT times, however, the apostolic teaching was equally valid whether it was delivered by word of mouth or in written form. It was more satisfactory in general for the apostles to talk to their converts face to face; the very tone of voice they used could add something to the force of their words, as Paul confesses in Gal 4:20. But when face-­to-­face communication was not convenient, the teaching was imparted in a written letter. We in our day must be thankful that the latter course was so often necessary; the spoken words have gone beyond recall, but the letters remain, preserving the traditions for our instruction and obedience.

D. Conclusion of Part 1 with First Wish-­Prayer(2:16–17) Bibliography Kim, S. Justification and God’s Kingdom. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2018. —­—­—.­ “Paul’s Doctrine of Justification in 2 Thessalonians 1–2.” Bib 102 (2012): 78–96. Revised version in pages 279–95 in PGTO. Wiles, G. P. Paul’s Intercessory Prayers. SNTSMS 24. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1974.

Translation Now may our Lord Jesus Christ himself and God our Father,a who has loved us and given us eternal comfort and good hope by grace, 17comfort your hearts and support [them] to stand firm in every good work and word.b 16

Notes a. [ὁ] θεὸς ὁ πατὴρ ἡμῶν, the article ὁ is omitted before θεός by B D* K 33 1739 1881 al. The word καί is inserted before ὁ πατήρ by A D2 I Ψ byz latb d m vg syrhcl (this καί would be epexegetic: “God, even our Father”). b. ἔργῳ καὶ λόγῳ, for which the reverse order λόγῳ καὶ ἔργῳ is read by F G K al latb m and ἔργῳ alone by 33 pc.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 631

7/12/23 11:29 AM

632

2 Thessalonians 2:16–17

Form/Structure/Setting Like the wish-­prayers of 1 Thess 3:11–13 and 5:23, this wish-­prayer begins with the emphatic αὐτός and is expressed by means of the aorist optative (παρακαλέσαι . . . στηρίξαι). It continues on the thoughts of the preceding thanksgiving section of vv. 13–14, summarizing them in v. 16. It is an eschatological prayer like 1 Thess 3:12–13 and 2 Thess 1:11–12, yet without any reference to the parousia of the Lord Jesus Christ. Like 1 Thess 3:11–13, it concludes the first part of the letter (the eschatological teaching) and makes transition to the second part (exhortation). In content, it has close parallels to the earlier prayer report (a de facto wish-­prayer) of 1:11–12 (see comment below). The qualification of the twofold subject by the repeated article, followed by two aorist participles (ἀγαπήσας ἡμᾶς καὶ δούς) and their objects (the equivalent of an adjective clause), gives this wish-­prayer something of the character of a collect in the third person (cf. the more elaborate example in Heb 13:20–21).

Comment 2:16 Αὐτὸς δὲ ὁ κύριος ἡμῶν Ἰησοῦς Χριστὸς καὶ [ὁ] θεὸς ὁ πατὴρ ἡμῶν, “Now may our Lord Jesus Christ himself and God our Father.” For the emphatic αὐτός in wish-­prayers, cf. 1 Thess 3:11; 5:23; 2 Thess 3:16. Like other wish-­prayers, this one is also introduced by δέ, which is here just transitional (“now”) and not “slightly adversative.”220 For the composite subject (“Lord” and “God”) with singular verbs, compare 1 Thess 3:11; there “our God and Father” precedes “our Lord Jesus”; here “our Lord Jesus Christ” precedes “God our Father” (for this sequence, cf. the apostolic benediction of 2 Cor 13:14). In such a context, God the Father and his fully empowered Son, Christ Jesus the Lord, are so completely united in action that either may be named before the other without making any difference to the sense. For a more detailed explanation of all these points, see comment on 1 Thess 3:11. ὁ ἀγαπήσας ἡμᾶς καὶ δοὺς παράκλησιν αἰωνίαν καὶ ἐλπίδα ἀγαθὴν ἐν χάριτι, “who has loved us and given us eternal comfort and good hope by grace.” For similar uses of the articulated aorist participle of ἀγαπᾶν, see Rom 8:37; Gal 2:20. Here ἀγαπήσας and δούς may agree formally with [ὁ] θεός, but in sense it relates to both subjects, ὁ κύριος and [ὁ] θεός (like κατευθύναι in 1 Thess 3:11). However, Paul puts forward “our Lord Jesus Christ” at the emphatic position with αὐτός here because he is composing this wish-­prayer in reference to the thoughts that he has expressed in the preceding thanksgiving section (vv. 13–14). In the latter, he spoke about the love of the Lord (Jesus) and about the consummation of salvation for the readers in terms of their “obtaining the glory of the 220 So Malherbe, 441, against Frame, 285, and Weima, 560, who read here the sense of contrasting what Paul prays for Christ and God to do (vv. 16–17) with what the readers should do (v. 15); cf. 1 Thess 5:23.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 632

7/12/23 11:29 AM

Comment 633 Lord Jesus Christ.” Then, in this wish-­prayer he continues expressing those thoughts by starting to name “our Lord Jesus Christ” first in the composite subject and describing “our Lord Jesus Christ and God our Father” as having loved them and given them the “good hope” (of participating in the glory of the Lord Jesus Christ, see below). Apparently the influence of v. 14 is also reflected in the full designation of “our Lord Jesus Christ” here, which is a change from the short form of “our Lord Jesus” in the parallel wish-­prayer in 1 Thess 3:11. As the two participles ἀγαπήσας and δούς are introduced by one article, they refer not to two distinctive activities of God and Christ, loving and giving, but rather to their one activity of loving by giving,221 as in the so-­called “giving-­up formula” (Rom 8:32: “God did not spare his own Son but gave him up for us all”; Gal 2:20: “God’s Son loved me and gave himself up for me”; cf. also John 3:16: God loved the world and gave his Son). “Good hope” here refers to “obtaining the glory of our Lord Jesus Christ” (v. 14) at his parousia (1:10–11; cf. Rom 5:2, “the hope of sharing the glory of God”; also Rom 8:24–25). That consummation of salvation is also called “eternal comfort” (i.e., eternally lasting or everlasting comfort) because, as participation in divine fullness or obtainment of rest from all afflictions in God’s kingdom (2 Thess 1:5, 7), it provides the afflicted and anxious readers with comfort and encouragement that is effective now and forever. So it may have been a better logical order to coordinate the two concepts as “good hope and eternal comfort,” but Paul puts “eternal comfort” ahead in order to emphasize it for the suffering and anxious readers. With the two aorist participles ἀγαπήσας and δούς, Paul summarizes what he has said in vv. 13–14: what God the Father and the Lord Jesus did out of their love for the readers (as well as for him and his colleagues—­this thought is now included in the “us” in our verse), namely, their election, sanctification by the Spirit, and calling of them through the gospel to avail themselves by faith of salvation.222 By these acts of their “love,” God the Father and the Lord Jesus “gave” the readers the “good hope” of eschatological salvation, that is, to obtain the glory of the Lord Jesus Christ, which gives them “eternal comfort.” It is highly significant that Paul summarily designates these acts of love of God the Father and the Lord Jesus as their “grace” and uses the phrase “by grace,” which he employs elsewhere as a shorthand or virtual terminus technicus for God’s work of justification (or salvation; e.g., Rom 3:24; 4:4, 16; 5:2, 15; 6:1, 15; Gal 1:6; 2:21; 5:4; Eph 2:5, 7, 8). Actually, the two participles ἀγαπήσας and δούς already indicate clearly enough that the saving work of God and Christ referred to in vv. 13–14 was wrought and made effective to believers by their grace. But by adding this phrase “by grace” here, Paul makes that absolutely clear. Thereby he clearly indicates also that in the thanksgiving 221 So Best, 320; Weima, 561. 222 Cf. Malherbe, 442.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 633

7/12/23 11:29 AM

634

2 Thessalonians 2:16–17

section (vv. 13–14) and in this ensuing wish-­prayer (vv. 16–17) he is expressing his doctrine of justification (or sanctification) by God’s grace and through faith in the gospel. Commenting on the parallel prayer report of 2 Thess 1:11–12 above, we suggested that Paul refers to “the grace of our God and the Lord Jesus Christ” there not only in view of God and the Lord Jesus granting the readers their eschatological glorification as the consummation of their justification (v. 12), but also God’s baptismal call of them (v. 11; cf. Gal 1:6). It also refers to God’s and the Lord Jesus’s enabling of them to fulfill their good work of faith in the present process of their justification or salvation (1:11) toward that eschatological consummation. Likewise here, it appears that, although he refers to the grace of God and the Lord Jesus with their granting the readers “eternal comfort and good hope” (of the eschatological consummation of their justification/sanctification) through their election and call of them immediately in view (vv. 13–14, 16), he also has in view their enabling of them to stand firm in faith and do “every good work and word” in the present process of their justification/sanctification (v. 17). 17 παρακαλέσαι ὑμῶν τὰς καρδίας καὶ στηρίξαι ἐν παντὶ ἔργῳ καὶ λόγῳ ἀγαθῷ, “comfort your hearts and support [them] to stand firm in every good work and word.” Having summarily characterized God the Father and the Lord Jesus Christ in reference to their saving acts listed in vv. 13–14, Paul now prays that they “comfort” the readers’ “hearts” and help them stand firm in faith to produce good works (toward the consummation of their salvation, namely, obtaining the glory of the Lord Jesus Christ). Having started this third-­person wish-­prayer by referring to the composite subject of the Lord Jesus Christ and God the Father in a similar way to the wish-­prayer in 1 Thess 3:11–13, Paul also expresses his prayer concern here in a way both similar to and different from that earlier wish-­prayer. In 1 Thess 3:13 he prays that the Lord “may support [the readers’] hearts to stand firm” (εἰς τὸ στηρίξαι ὑμῶν τὰς καρδίας), but here he prays that the Lord Jesus Christ and God the Father “may comfort [the readers’] hearts and support [them] to stand firm.” Here, his first petition is that God and Christ may comfort or encourage (παρακαλέσαι) the readers’ hearts. Both the placement of this petition in the first place and the repetition of the word “comfort” immediately after designating God as the one who gave believers “eternal comfort [παράκλησις]” (v. 16) clearly indicate how anxious Paul is to comfort his afflicted and frightened flock, the readers (note our comment above about the order of “eternal comfort and good hope” in v. 16). But the readers are not only alarmed or frightened because of the false prophecy about the day of the Lord so as to need comforting (παρακαλέσαι), but they are also shaken in mind so as to need establishing (see v. 2). So he adds the second petition that God may support (στηρίξαι) their hearts to stand firm (this second optative verb appears without an object, so that the object of the first verb παρακαλέσαι, namely, “your hearts,” is to be supplied here).

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 634

7/12/23 11:29 AM

Comment 635 In 1 Thess 3:2–3, Paul used the same word pair “establish firm and comfort” for Timothy’s mission to Thessalonica: he “sent Timothy . . . to establish firm and comfort [the Thessalonian Christians] in [their] faith [εἰς τὸ στηρίξαι ὑμᾶς καὶ παρακαλέσαι ὑπὲρ τῆς πίστεως ὑμῶν], so that no one be moved [σαίνεσθαι] by these afflictions.” Since the word pair is used there also against the Thessalonians being shaken in their faith by the satanic forces’ “temptation” (i.e., the attempt to lead them astray from their faith), it presents an almost perfect parallel to the word pair in our verse that is used against the Thessalonians being shaken by a false prophecy leading them astray from their right faith. (Paul could also have in view here the possible danger of the readers being shaken by the deception of the lawless man, the agent of Satan, vv. 9–10.) However, the order of the word pair στηρίξαι . . . καὶ παρακαλέσαι there in 1 Thess 3:2 suggests that he saw “establishing” the Thessalonians (i.e., helping them stand firm) in faith more urgent than “comforting” them for their suffering.223 So we may see the reverse order of the word pair παρακαλέσαι . . . καὶ στηρίξαι here in our verse as indicating that he now feels it more urgent to “comfort” the afflicted and frightened Thessalonian Christians. Perhaps he thinks that only after they are comforted and freed from their anxiety would they be able to recover their sound mind and understand the right doctrine of the parousia of the Lord (and avoid falling victim to a false prophecy about it or to the deception of the lawless man). Furthermore, Paul’s reference to “your hearts” here, unlike 1 Thess 3:2 where he simply referred to “you,” seems to suggest that he is more concerned about the readers’ well-­being at the deep level of emotion than he was in 1 Thess 3 (the reference to “heart” in 1 Thess 3:13 seems to have a somewhat different implication or focus; see comment ad loc). This comparison with 1 Thess 3:2–3 leads us to see that in our present verse Paul uses the word στηρίξαι only for the sense of “establishing” the readers, so that they may “stand firm” in the right faith (cf. 2 Thess 2:15; note the parallelism of the combination of στηρίζειν and στήκειν in 1 Thess 3:2, 8 and 2 Thess 2:15, 17), with no implication of the Lord Jesus Christ’s intercessory support at the last judgment that the word has in 1 Thess 3:13 (see Explanation after comment ad loc). If our observation of the use of the word pair “comfort and establish” here is right, in that it closely parallels (with appropriate contextual variance) that in 1 Thess 3:2–3, could this phenomenon be attributed to a pseudonymous writer imitating Paul of 1 Thess 3:2–3? It is not immediately clear how the prepositional phrase ἐν παντὶ ἔργῳ καὶ λόγῳ ἀγαθῷ is connected with the two preceding verbs or what exactly Paul means by praying for the Lord Jesus Christ and God the Father to “comfort 223 This view is further supported by Paul’s focus in the subsequent verses, 1 Thess 3:4–8, on establishing them firm in their faith in the Lord Jesus Christ against the forces that were shaking their faith (see comment ad loc).

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 635

7/12/23 11:29 AM

636

2 Thessalonians 2:16–17

[the readers’] hearts and establish them firm in every good work and word.” “Every good work and word” cannot be seen as the location where the readers’ hearts are to be established to stand firm. Hence, regarding the location as omitted here, we may relate the preposition ἐν directly with “every good work and word” and interpret it as functioning as a “marker of extension toward a goal,” like εἰς.224 Paul would then be praying for Christ and God the Father to establish or strengthen the readers’ hearts to produce “every good work and word.” However, it is more natural to see Paul here omitting the location as he makes this petition in connection with his exhortation in v. 15: having exhorted the readers to “stand firm and hold fast to the traditions” of his teachings, he now prays for the Lord Jesus Christ and God the Father to help them carry out the exhortation—­to “establish” or strengthen their hearts to stand firm in the “traditions” of the right faith that he taught, in order to do “every good work and word” (cf. 1 Thess 3:2 with comment there). All the eschatological wish-­prayers in 1 Thess 3:12–13; 5:23; 2 Thess 1:11–12 (cf. Phil 1:9–11) as here contain a petition for God and the Lord Jesus to help the readers perfect their sanctification/justification with good deeds. Note especially the close parallelism between our wish-­prayer here and the prayer report in 1:11–12 in understanding the grace of God and the Lord Jesus enabling the readers to fulfill the good work of faith (despite the minor difference: in 1:11–12 the reference to good work appears before that to God’s grace, whereas in our passage the order is reversed). In view of this parallelism with the prayer in 1:11–12, we need to understand that Paul prays here that the Lord Jesus Christ and God the Father help the readers produce the good work of faith for the consummation of their salvation, namely, obtaining the glory of the Lord Jesus Christ at the eschaton, as he does in 1:11–12 and other eschatological wish-­prayers (even though here he does not make an explicit reference to the Lord Jesus’s parousia). Weima calls the construction of παντὶ ἔργῳ καὶ λόγῳ ἀγαθῷ, with the adjectives “every” and “good” located in the first and last positions respectively, a “typical inclusio” in Paul, which means that both adjectives go with both nouns.225 Note the parallelism between “every good work” here and “every desire of goodness and work of faith” in 1:11. Elsewhere Paul collocates “work” and “word” in the reverse order: “word and work” (Rom 15:18; Col 3:17; cf. Luke 24:19; Acts 7:22). If by the collocation of the two words he had simply wanted to refer to “all human activity,”226 he might have written “word and work” as in Col 3:17. So it appears that we need to see that here his focus is on “good work” and that he is praying for God and the Lord Jesus to enable the readers to produce good works of faith, as he did in his prayer in 1:11. We then need to ask why he adds “good word” here. 224 BDAG 327 (s.v. ἐν 3). 225 Weima, 563n57. So also Schreiber, II:214. 226 Cf. Malherbe, 442.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 636

7/12/23 11:29 AM

Explanation 637 Of course, it is possible that he does that in order to stress that the readers must bear good fruits in all their activities for the perfect sanctification of their whole being (cf. 1 Thess 5:23 with comments there). That view must be right if he originally wrote vv. 16–17 with an intention to close the letter with the following paragraph (3:1–5). But if he wrote those verses already with a plan to add 3:6–15, it seems also possible that referring to “good work” here with the problem of the idlers also in mind, which he will address momentarily, he adds “good word” because he is going to admonish them not only to work for their livelihood but also to refrain from meddling in the affairs of others as busybodies with criticism, gossip, and other bad words (cf. 3:11–12, see below). If this interpretation is right, we must look at the phrase “every good work and word” here from two perspectives: as a constitutive element of an eschatological wish-­prayer and as an announcement of the subject matter of part 2 of the letter that follows upon this transitional wish-­prayer.227 We saw the wish-­prayer of 1 Thess 3:12–13 performing both functions. Just like that wish-­prayer in the first letter, so in this second letter our wish-­prayer may be seen as concluding part 1 of the letter, calling for good works for the eschatological consummation of salvation and thereby also announcing the subject matter of part 2 of the letter, the exhortation part. However, since it is difficult to determine the function of the following passage of 3:1–5, we cannot be certain about the question of whether with the phrase “every good work and word” Paul intends to announce the subject matter of 3:6–12, as well as generally calling for good works. Perchance he does, he must mean that working for their own bread and stopping their busybody behavior are the specific forms of fulfilling the Lord’s commandment to love one’s neighbor that are required of the disorderly idlers and therefore that they are part of the good “work of faith” (1:11) that the idlers ought to produce.

Explanation We have drawn several parallels between our wish-­prayer here and that of 1 Thess 3:12–13. Our wish-­prayer is also an eschatological prayer that recapitulates the eschatological prayer of 1:11–12 and concludes the whole eschatological part 1 of the letter. By their grace, the Lord Jesus Christ and God the Father have given the Thessalonian believers “eternal comfort” and “good hope” of “obtain[ing] the glory of the Lord Jesus Christ” as the consummation of their salvation (vv. 13–14). So Paul prays that they continue to bestow grace upon them and help them stand firm in the right traditions of faith that he taught them (without being shaken by a false prophecy about the Day of the Lord or by a deceptive message of the lawless man), and produce good works so that they may be counted worthy to obtain that glory at the last judgment at the parousia of the Lord Jesus Christ. 227 For this second point, cf. Fee, 309; Weima, 563–64.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 637

7/12/23 11:29 AM

638

2 Thessalonians 3:1–5

Thus, like the prayers in 1 Thess 3:12–13 and 2 Thess 1:11–12, this prayer also implies Paul’s doctrine of justification (or sanctification)—­the doctrine that requires those who were justified (or sanctified) by God’s grace and through faith at their baptism to go on availing themselves through faith of God’s grace (which is provided by his Spirit) to produce the “work of faith” (1:11), that is, to bear “the fruit of righteousness/sanctification” (Phil 1:11; Rom 6:22), “the fruit of the Spirit” (Gal 5:22–23), in the present process of their justification (or sanctification) so as to obtain its consummation, a sharing of God’s glory in his kingdom (cf. 1:5; Rom 8:29–30; 1 Cor 6:9–10; Gal 5:21), at the parousia of the Lord Jesus Christ (see comment on 1:11–12).228 For an explanation as to why Paul refers to God’s “grace” only twice in the two prayers (1:11–12 and 2:16–17) among the passages where he reflects his doctrine of justification, while referring to “faith” as many as nine times (1:3, 4, 10 [2x], 11; 2:11, 12, 13; 3:2 plus the implicit “obedience [of faith] to the gospel” in 1:8), see my essay “Paul’s Doctrine of Justification in 2 Thessalonians 1–2.” However, in one important point, our prayer is different from those of 1 Thess 3:12–13 and 5:23. In contrast to the solemn reminder of the judgment of God and the stark demand for holiness that are central in the two wish-­prayers of the first letter, in our prayer there is no allusion to the judgment of God or even to the parousia of the Lord Jesus Christ (unless the reference to obtaining the glory of the Lord Jesus Christ in v. 14b is counted as an allusion), but there is only a most gently formulated demand to do “every good work and word.” In commenting on 2 Thess 1:11 above, we already observed how, reporting of his prayer (1:11–12) in the context of teaching about God’s “ just judgment” (1:5–10), Paul reminds the readers of the requirement of good works quite mildly in terms of “fulfilling every resolve to do good and the work of faith,” in contrast to their standing “blameless” or “unblameable” before God’s judgment seat in 1 Thess 3:12–13 and 5:23. In our present wish-­prayer, he expresses the requirement even more mildly than in 2 Thess 1:11. Clearly Paul the pastor wants to avoid increasing anxiety among his flock about the last judgment on the day of the Lord. He wants only to assure them of their certain salvation at the eschaton. That is why he refers to the need for the readers to produce good works in such a gentle way and only after such a long introduction about the saving love and grace of the Lord Jesus Christ and God the Father (vv. 13–14, 16).

E. Transition with Second Wish-­Prayer (3:1–5) Bibliography Lambrecht, J. “Loving God and Steadfastly Awaiting Christ (2 Thessalonians 3,5).” ETL 76 (2000): 435–41. Metzger, B. M. A Textual Commentary on the Greek New Testament. 2nd ed. Stuttgart: Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft, 1994. Wiles, G. P. Paul’s Intercessory Prayers. SNTSMS 24. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1974. 228 Cf. Kim, Justification, 81–91.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 638

7/12/23 11:29 AM

Translation 639

Translation For the rest, brothers and sisters, pray for us, that the word of the Lord may run and be received with honor, as it has done among you. 2(Pray) also that we may be delivered from perverse and evil people; for not all have faith. 3But faithful is the Lord a: he will establish b you and guard you from the evil one. 4And we have confidence in the Lord concerning you, that you are doing and will continue to do c the things that we command (you to do).d 5Now may the Lord direct your hearts to love God and to wait steadfastly for Christ. 1

Notes a. For ὁ κύριος, A D*.c F G 2464 pc lat vet.el copbo.cod Ambst read ὁ θεός (under the influence of 1 Cor 1:9, etc.). b. For στηρίξει, F G read τηρήσει (“will keep”). c. [καὶ] ποιεῖτε καὶ ποιήσετε. The καί before ποιεῖτε is omitted by ‫ *א‬A 6 29 1739 pc latb d m vg codd; D* reads ποιήσατε (imperative) for ποιήσετε. For the whole phrase F G read καὶ ἐποιήσατε καὶ ποιεῖτε; B lat a copsa read καὶ ἐποιήσατε καὶ ποιεῖτε καὶ ποιήσετε. d. ἃ παραγγέλλομεν, to which ὑμῖν is added by A D2 F G byz lat a m syr.

Form/Structure/Setting Despite the present chapter division that makes 3:1–5 the opening passage of a new chapter, most commentators find it difficult to relate it with the following main unit of 3:6–15, as well as to discern a logical coherence within this unit. Wanamaker cites the observation of Rigaux that vv. 3–4 are connected well neither with the preceding vv. 1–2 nor with the following v. 5, and he writes: “Perhaps [Paul] was interrupted in his composition of the letter after 2:17, and in returning to the letter did not give enough care to continuing his train of thought smoothly, or perhaps he originally intended to end the letter at v. 5 but then for some reason continued it.”229 However, Weima makes great efforts to connect 3:1–5 with 3:6–15 and see them forming a unity. He appeals to the correspondence of “command” in the two passages, 3:4 and 3:6, 10, 12, as well as to the view of 3:1–5 as an instance of captatio benevolentiae offered in preparation for vv. 6–15. That is, in 3:1–5 Paul writes commendatory words for the readers in order to make them receptive to his strong or even stern commands in 3:6–15.230 However, Paul’s prayer request for himself and his colleagues in vv. 1–2 can hardly be considered as such.231 Paul makes such a prayer request usually at the end of a letter or near it (Rom 15:30–32; Eph 6:19–20; Col 4:3–4; 1 Thess 5:25; cf. Phlm 22), rather than just before a section of exhortation.232 229 230 231 232

Wanamaker, 273, citing Rigaux, 692–93. Weima, 579–83. Similarly also Fee, 310–11; already Frame, 288–89; cf. Menken, 125. Pace Frame, 288. The passages 2 Cor 1:11 and Phil 1:19 are the only other texts that contain such a request outside of a letter closing, but even they do not introduce a section of exhortation.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 639

7/12/23 11:29 AM

640

2 Thessalonians 3:1–5

Marshall takes this fact as suggesting that the prayer request “is closely connected with the preceding teaching.”233 This judgment will be borne out with our exegesis of v. 3, which together with v. 2 is connected with the preceding 2:16–17 rather than with the following 3:6–15.234 So there is some justification for Marshall, Holmes, and Malherbe to take our passage together with the preceding passage of 2:13–17 rather than with 3:6–15.235 However, v. 4 is to be seen as an instance of captatio benevolentiae given in preparation for the charge in vv. 6–15. Thus there is a change of perspective between v. 3 and v. 4.236 It is then to be recognized that the wish-­prayer of v. 5, while summarizing the teachings imparted in the preceding two chapters and functioning like 1 Thess 5:23 to signal a letter closing, also functions to prepare the readers for the exhortations in vv. 6–15. Thus, having started the present passage as a letter closing with τὸ λοιπόν (“finally,” v. 1) and a request for prayer for himself, Paul closes it with a wish-­prayer that functions rather like that of 1 Thess 3:12–13. So this passage has become a bridge between the main part of this letter (chs. 1–2) and the special addition (3:6–15).237

Comment 3:1 Τὸ λοιπόν, “for the rest,” “finally.” This serves as an indication that the letter is drawing to a conclusion (even if Paul and his colleagues subsequently remember other matters that they must mention); compare Phil 3:1; 4:8 (where the repeated τὸ λοιπόν may have belonged originally to two separate letters); also λοιπόν, 1 Thess 4:1; also 2 Cor 13:11; τοῦ λοιποῦ, Gal 6:17. προσεύχεσθε, ἀδελφοί, περὶ ἡμῶν, “brothers and sisters, pray for us.” This is practically identical with the request for prayer in 1 Thess 5:25. As in the closing prayers of 1 Thess 5:25 and Rom 15:30–32, the prayer request is emphasized by the vocative ἀδελφοί, and the intercessory aspect is indicated by the prepositional phrase περὶ ἡμῶν. Here, the content of the prayer is made explicit by means of the ἵνα clauses. It is missing from 1 Thess 5:25. However, the partially same prayer content (deliverance from the peril of unbelievers) is found also in Rom 15:31a. ἵνα ὁ λόγος τοῦ κυρίου τρέχῃ καὶ δοξάζηται καθὼς καὶ πρὸς ὑμᾶς, “that the word of the Lord may run and be received with honor, even as it has done among you.” As in 1:11, ἵνα with the subjunctive after προσεύχεσθαι (or a verb of similar meaning) encroaches on the use of the infinitive to express an indirect request.238 Praying for Paul and his team is concretely to pray for the contents or purposes of the two ἵνα clauses to be realized. Along with 1 Thess 1:8, this is 233 234 235 236 237 238

Marshall, 212. Cf. Best, 322–23. Marshall, 212, 216–67; Holmes, 251; Malherbe, 439. Cf. Holmes, 257. Cf. the introduction to the next section (3:6–15) below. Cf. BDF §392.1(c).

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 640

7/12/23 11:29 AM

Comment 641 the only place where he uses the familiar OT phrase “the word of the Lord” in reference to the gospel (cf. “the word of God” in 1 Thess 2:13; also “the word of the Lord” in 1 Thess 4:15 in reference to the word of the historical Jesus or the risen Lord). It indicates that its author and content is the Lord Jesus Christ (see comment on 1 Thess 1:8). The primary object of Paul’s prayer requests is regularly the progress of the gospel (cf. Eph 6:19–20; Col 4:3–4). Just like Luke in Acts 6:7 and 12:24, here Paul almost personifies the gospel that he preaches.239 For the pictorial language of “running” for the gospel’s spread here, Paul is often seen as echoing the phrase of Ps 147:15 (147:4 LXX), ἕως τάχους δραμεῖται ὁ λόγος αὐτοῦ (“his word runs swiftly”). However, pointing out his use of the verb τρέχῃ here at 2 Thess 3:1 instead of δραμεῖται of Ps 147:4 LXX, as well as the absence of ἕως τάχους (“swiftly”) of the Psalm, Weima disputes that view. He suggests instead that we should see Paul applying to the gospel the athletic metaphor that he often uses for his apostolic ministry (cf. 1 Cor 9:26; Gal 2:2; Phil 2:16) as well as Christians’ faithful discipleship (1 Cor 9:24; Gal 5:7).240 Weima claims that the verb δοξάζηται that Paul adds here supports this suggestion with its image of the gospel “run[ning] or compet[ing] in the public arena with other religions or worldviews . . . [and] win[ning] the competition and ‘be[ing] honored’ . . . just as a winning athlete is openly honored in the bestowing of the victory wreath.”241 This is an interesting interpretation. But it is a question whether in using this athletic metaphor Paul really has in mind the gospel’s winning a competition with other religions and worldviews beyond its speedy and victorious (or unhindered) spread.242 For his interpretation of the word of the Lord receiving “glory” here, Weima appeals to Acts 13:48, where the gentile hearers of Paul’s gospel in Pisidian Antioch are said to have “glorified the word of the Lord” (ἐδόξαζον τὸν λόγον τοῦ κυρίου).243 Certainly Acts 13:48 presents a close parallel to our verse here. But it will need much greater efforts to read into that Lukan passage the idea of the gospel’s winning victory over other religions and worldviews. In fact, even when he applies to himself the metaphor of running, Paul does not normally imply winning a competition beyond the idea of fulfilling his apostolic commission faithfully and successfully.244 Actually, Acts 13:48 says that many gentiles “glorified the word of the Lord and believed [ἐπίστευσαν].”

239 Cf. Marshall, 213. 240 Weima, 586–87. 241 Weima, 586–87. For this interpretation, Weima cites Green, 335; cf. also Frame, 291; Malherbe, 444; Fee, 314. 242 Cf. Best, 324; Marshall, 213; Schreiber, II:221. 243 Weima, 587. 244 The only exception is 1 Cor 9:24–27, but even there the idea of winning a competition is not carried through. Weima appeals also to 1 Thess 2:19, but it is far-­fetched. See comments ad loc.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 641

7/12/23 11:29 AM

642

2 Thessalonians 3:1–5

So also did the Thessalonian Christians, when “[the] gospel came to [them]” (1 Thess 1:5): “[they] accepted it not as the word of human beings but as what it really is, the word of God, which is indeed at work in [them] believers” (1 Thess 2:13). That is to say, they “glorified” or honored the gospel as God’s word and believed it. The elliptic clause καθὼς καὶ πρὸς ὑμᾶς (“even as also among you”) in our present passage refers to that event.245 This is then contrasted with those who do not have faith—­who have not come to believe the gospel (v. 2). Thus it is best to understand that here, echoing the sense (though not the letter) of Ps 147:4 LXX246 and combining it with his favorite athletic metaphor for his apostolic ministry of preaching the gospel,247 Paul asks the readers to pray for a speedy and successful spread of the gospel. Since, as observed above, this purpose clause together with the following one (v. 2a) specifies praying for Paul and his missionary team (“for us”), it appears important to note here that he is not requesting the readers to pray just generally for a speedy and successful spread of the gospel, but to pray rather more specifically that the gospel may spread speedily and successfully through an effective ministry of him and his team, that is, to pray for them to carry out their apostolic ministry effectively for a rapid and successful spread of the gospel. Hence, it is important for him and his team to be kept safe from the opponents of the gospel. Therefore, he appends the second purpose clause. In relating the two purposes with each other and mentioning them in that order, he clearly shows that he is most concerned about the swift and successful preaching of the gospel and is very conscious of his and his team’s role in it. Can we then see here also implied his understanding of God’s plan that the gospel must be preached to all the nations before the parousia of the Lord Jesus Christ (cf. “the mystery,” Rom 11:25–26; cf. also Mark 13:9–12; Acts 1:6–8), as well as his understanding of himself as a (if not, the) steward of that “mystery” and of his gentile mission as the means of realizing that plan of God, which, we have argued, are implied in 2 Thess 2:6–7? (See comment ad loc with Excursus on “The ‘Restraining Thing’ [τὸ κατέχον] and the ‘Restraining Person’ [ὁ κατέχων] of the ‘Lawless Man’ ” above.)248 2 καὶ ἵνα ῥυσθῶμεν ἀπὸ τῶν ἀτόπων καὶ πονηρῶν ἀνθρώπων, “and that we may be delivered from perverse and evil people.” It is insufficient just to appreciate Paul for putting the priority on the spread of the gospel rather than on his own safety and well-­being here. As we have just observed (cf. Rom 10:14–15), this second purpose clause or second prayer topic is logically or even organically connected with the preceding one: if the gospel is to spread speedily and successfully, Paul and his team as its proclaimers need to be protected 245 246 247 248

Cf. also Nicklas, 176. Cf. Fee, 313n13. Cf. Marshall, 213. Cf. Dobschütz, 305; Best, 325; and Nicklas, 175–76, who accept part of this suggestion; Marshall, 214, says there is “no positive evidence” for it.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 642

7/12/23 11:29 AM

Comment 643 from the threat and obstruction of wicked people, the opponents of the Christian faith.249 Paul elsewhere uses the verb ῥύεσθαι (“to rescue, deliver”) for eschatological deliverance from God’s wrath or the power of death, that is, for eschatological salvation (1 Thess 1:10; see also Rom 7:24; 11:26; cf. Col 1:13). But here he uses it for deliverance from any present threat or danger. In Rom 15:30–31, in a way very similar to our verse here, Paul asks the Roman Christians to pray for him, ἵνα ῥυσθῶ ἀπὸ τῶν ἀπειθούντων ἐν τῇ Ἰουδαίᾳ (“that I may be delivered from the unbelievers in Judea”), so that he may successfully complete his apostolic ministry (cf. 2 Cor 1:10). The opponents who pose a threat to Paul and his team and obstruct their preaching of the gospel are designated here in our verse as τῶν ἀτόπων καὶ πονηρῶν ἀνθρώπων. The word ἄτοπος (“out of place,” “untoward,” “improper”), used of persons only here in the Greek Bible250 (cf. Luke 23:41; Acts 25:5; 28:6) and combined with πονηρός (“wicked, evil”), has here the pejorative sense of being morally “perverse.” Despite the unusual combination with the word ἄτοπος, many commentators overhear an echo here of Isa 25:4 (LXX: ἀπὸ ἀνθρώπων πονηρῶν ῥύσῃ αὐτούς, “from wicked people you will rescue them”; cf. Ps 140:1 [139:2 LXX]). Pointing to the article “the perverse and evil people” here, some commentators251 think that Paul is referring to a definite group of opponents to the gospel whom he assumes the readers know; further, some commentators252 assume that Paul writes this letter from Corinth shortly after 1 Thessalonians and believe that he is here referring to the Jews who are opposing and hindering his gospel preaching there (Acts 18). However, Best cautions against such a specific identification of the opponents, pointing out the fact that Paul had to face the opponents of the gospel, both Jewish and gentile, everywhere in his mission field.253 Certainly the readers know well that he had to face them during his mission in their city as well as in Philippi (1 Thess 1:5–6; 2:1–8, 14–16). They themselves are now persecuted by them (2 Thess 1:5–10; 2:10–12), and therefore they can well assume that Paul is facing and will face the same kind of opponents of the gospel wherever he is now or wherever he will go. So it appears better to understand that by “perverse and evil people” Paul has in mind the opponents of the gospel whom he regularly meets in the course of his mission, rather than just those who are currently hindering his gospel preaching in Corinth. οὐ γὰρ πάντων ἡ πίστις, “for not all have faith.” This is an instance of meiosis (understatement; cf. Rom 10:16, ἀλλ᾽ οὐ πάντες ὑπήκουσαν τῷ εὐαγγελίῳ, where in fact only a minority had “obeyed the gospel”). The construction is illustrated in the trimeter quoted by Strabo, Geogr. 8.6.20: οὐ παντὸς ἀνδρὸς 249 250 251 252 253

Cf. Lightfoot, 124; Dobschütz, 306; Best, 325; Marshall, 214; Weima, 588. Frame, 293. E.g., Frame, 292; Malherbe, 444. E.g., Frame, 292; Marshall, 214. Best, 326.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 643

7/12/23 11:29 AM

644

2 Thessalonians 3:1–5

ἐς Κόρινθον ἔσθ’ ὁ πλοῦς (“not for every man is the voyage to Corinth”). In our passage, this elliptic causal clause (lit. “for not of all the faith”) is added as an explanation for the preceding prayer request. At first sight, it appears an unnecessary truism.254 Why then does Paul add it here? Clearly he does it because it “is what the first part of this letter is all about,” as Fee comments.255 So even Fee, who is eager to interpret our passage 3:1–5 as forward looking, that is, to interpret it in connection with the following 3:6–15, has to admit that here Paul is looking back to what he has said in the preceding two chapters. Paul is requesting the readers to pray for his and his team’s deliverance from the kind of wicked people whom he has just condemned for not believing the gospel and for persecuting the readers (1:5–10; 2:9–12). Hence, we need to interpret ἡ πίστις here as referring to a believing response to the gospel,256 rather than to the body of Christian teaching or even to “putting their trust in Christ”257 or “faithfulness” to Pauline tradition.258 Apparently Paul adds the article to “faith” to indicate that he is talking about the wicked opponents’ failure to believe the gospel or render obedience to it that he stressed three times over in 1:8; 2:10, 12. This interpretation of the explanatory clause supports our interpretation of the preceding phrase “perverse and evil people.” 3 πιστὸς δέ ἐστιν ὁ κύριος, ὃς στηρίξει ὑμᾶς καὶ φυλάξει ἀπὸ τοῦ πονηροῦ, “but faithful is the Lord, who will establish you and guard you from the evil one.” Several commentators259 find the transition from the prayer request for Paul and his missionary team (vv. 1–2) to this word of assurance for the readers (vv. 3–4) abrupt or awkward. But Weima tries to smooth out this abruptness by observing the double wordplay here.260 The first is the paronomasia of πίστις (“faith”) at the end of v. 2 and πιστός (“faithful”) in the beginning of this v. 3, and the second is the use of the adjective πονηρός in v. 2 and here in v. 3. They certainly make it clear that Paul did relate the two parts, vv. 1–2 and vv. 3–5. But we need to discern what might have been in his mind when he related them, without feeling the abruptness that modern readers feel. It is clear that requesting the readers to pray for his deliverance from evil people who do not believe the gospel has reminded him that his readers are actually suffering persecution for their faith (1:5–10) and therefore that he has to add a word of assurance and encouragement for them at this point. So, in v. 3 he adds such a word, using the verb στηρίζειν (“to establish or support, to stand firm”), which he used just a couple of verses earlier (2:17), thereby letting the readers understand 254 255 256 257 258 259 260

Cf. Fee, 316–17; also Marshall, 214. Fee, 317. So Weima, 590; Hoppe, II:190. Pace Fee, 317. Pace Schreiber, II:222. E.g., Marshall, 215; Wanamaker, 276; Furnish, 171; Gaventa, 125. Weima, 591.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 644

7/12/23 11:29 AM

Comment 645 that the faithful Lord will grant what he prayed for in his wish-­prayer in 2:16–17 (and in 1:11–12): God/the Lord Jesus will “establish” or “strengthen” (στηρίξει) their hearts to stand firm in faith to do every good work for the consummation of their salvation at the last judgment (cf. 1 Thess 3:12–13). So the adversative δέ (“but”) in v. 3a must be contrasting the readers with “perverse and evil people” who have no faith (v. 2). In 1:5–10 and 2:9–14 he said that God and/or the Lord Jesus will condemn and destroy evil people because they do not believe the gospel, but God/the Lord Jesus will save the readers to participate in their glory because they believe the gospel. So the opening “but” in v. 3 seems to suggest that here Paul has these contrasting thoughts in mind in making the transition from v. 2 to v. 3. In characterizing in v. 2 “perverse and evil people” as those who have no faith, he implicitly has in mind what he said about them in the preceding chapters. And in following that characterization up with the statement “but faithful is the Lord,” he likewise has implicitly in mind what he said about the readers, the believers, and is reassuring them that what he said the Lord Jesus would do for them he will certainly do because he is faithful. So it is proposed here to read vv. 2–3 with the implicit thoughts of Paul in parenthesis between them, thus: Pray . . . that we may be delivered from perverse and evil people, for not all have faith. (At the last judgment the Lord will destroy those unbelieving evil people, but he will save you because you have faith in the gospel). (But) faithful is the Lord, who will establish you and guard you from the evil one.

Only when we explain the transition from v. 2 to v. 3 this way does the wordplay of πίστις (“faith”) at the end of v. 2 and πιστός (“faithful”) at the beginning of this v. 3 become a truly valid and meaningful wordplay. For the Lord is faithful (i.e., keeps his faith) only with those who have faith in him or his gospel, but not with those “perverse and evil people” who “have no faith” in him or his gospel. In 1 Thess 5:24 Paul offers a similar word of assurance (“[God] is faithful”) at the end of his wish-­prayer (5:23), in which he prays for God’s grace of perfecting the readers’ sanctification for the last judgment in a similar way to the wish-­prayers of 1 Thess 3:12–13; 2 Thess 1:11–12; 2:16–17. In 1 Cor 1:9 and 10:13 Paul also uses the same assurance formula “God is faithful” for God’s faithful sustaining of believers unto the eschatological consummation of their salvation (2 Cor 1:18 is the only place where Paul uses the formula in a noneschatological context). In all these passages, except our verse, he has this formula with God as the subject. So Malherbe takes “the Lord” here as referring to God.261 But as by the designation Paul usually 261 Malherbe, 445. So also Marxsen, 97; Green, 337.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 645

7/12/23 11:29 AM

646

2 Thessalonians 3:1–5

refers to Christ Jesus, most commentators take it as referring to the Lord Jesus Christ. Since in the subsequent vv. 4–5 he is going to refer to the present saving reign of the Lord (Jesus Christ, God’s Son, on behalf of God the Father, cf. Rom 1:3–4; 1 Cor 15:23–27; Phil 2:9–11; Col 1:13–14), it is quite certain that here in our v. 3 he means that the Lord Jesus Christ, the viceroy of God, will faithfully execute his saving work in the present to establish the readers in all good works for the consummation of salvation, keeping them safe from the harms of the evil one. When he issues the assurance formula in other places in the form of “God is faithful,” in substance Paul means the same: God is faithful and therefore he will do those things—­through his fully empowered agent, his Son, the Lord Jesus Christ. Hence, in our 2 Thess 2:16–17 he offers his petition to the Lord Jesus Christ and God the Father together to “comfort” and “establish” or “strengthen” (στηρίξαι) their hearts to do good works. Having assured the readers of the Lord’s faithful sustaining work for their eschatological salvation, in view of their present suffering of persecution from evil people Paul adds here in our present verse καὶ φυλάξει ἀπὸ τοῦ πονηροῦ (“and guard [you] from the evil [one]”). This is reminiscent of the petition ἀλλὰ ῥῦσαι ἡμᾶς ἀπὸ τοῦ πονηροῦ, “but deliver us from (the) evil,” in the fuller text of the Lord’s Prayer preserved in Matt 6:13. It is debated whether τοῦ πονηροῦ is personal (masculine: “the evil one”) or impersonal (neuter: “evil”); the latter is defended by Dibelius and other commentators,262 but the personal “evil one” forms a more effective antithesis to the personal κύριος. Behind the ἄτοποι καὶ πονηροὶ ἄνθρωποι, “perverse and evil people” (v. 2), may be recognized ὁ πονηρός himself (for this as a designation of the devil, cf. Matt 13:19, 38; Eph 6:16; 1 John 2:13, 14; 5:18, 19). For Paul recognizes Satan as empowering “the lawless man” to deceive unbelievers to indulge in wickedness (2 Thess 2:9–12), as well as seeing Satan working against the interests of his missionary team and their converts (1 Thess 2:18; 3:5 [ὁ πειράζων]). For these and other reasons,263 the phrase is to be taken as masculine and as referring to Satan.264 The Lord is faithful, and he will faithfully keep the readers, his believers, from the harms of Satan, the evil one, or those who are controlled and empowered by him. 4 πεποίθαμεν δὲ ἐν κυρίῳ ἐφ᾽ ὑμᾶς, “and we are confident in the Lord concerning you.” Having expressed his confidence in the Lord’s faithfulness in strengthening and protecting the readers, here Paul expresses his confidence in the readers that they will do their part in remaining faithful to their commitment to the requirements of the gospel he has taught them. The conjunctive particle δέ formally marks a contrast between what “the Lord” is going to do (v. 3) and what “you” are to do (v. 4), but in content they form a unity, as they indicate what “the Lord” and “you” are to do toward each other in their 262 Dibelius, 53; Wanamaker, 277; Schreiber, II:224; Nicklas, 178–79; Hoppe, II:192. 263 Cf. Best, 327–28; Weima, 593. 264 So also, e.g., Malherbe, 446; Green, 337; Fee, 319.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 646

7/12/23 11:29 AM

Comment 647 relationship. Therefore, the δέ may be rendered better with “and” than “but.” Thus, the content of this verse is continuous with that of the preceding verse. Yet it marks a transition: while Paul looks backward in vv. 2–3b to what he said the Lord would do for unbelievers and believers in the preceding chapters, and adds v. 3c also on the basis of that, in our v. 4 he looks forward to what he (Paul) will command the readers to do in the following section of vv. 6–15. Paul’s confidence about the readers is “in the Lord.” It is based on the fact that both he and the readers are in the lordship sphere of Christ Jesus, who has been exalted to God’s right hand in order to exercise sovereign lordship on his behalf (Rom 1:3–5; 1 Cor 15:23–27; Phil 2:9–11; Col 1:13–14). Because Paul exists in that sphere of lordship, he is confident that the faithful Lord Jesus will help the readers with his sovereign power and grace to do good work (cf. 1 Thess 3:12; 2 Thess 2:16–17), and because the readers also exist in that sphere of lordship, he is confident that they will obey the command that he issues as an apostle of the Lord Jesus (cf. 1 Thess 4:2 with comment ad loc). For ἐν κυρίῳ in similar contexts, see Rom 14:14; Gal 5:10; Phil 2:24; Phlm 20–21. This “confidence formula” has the effects of reminding the readers of their duty to obey the Lord Jesus and of pressuring them to live up to the confidence that Paul has in them.265 ὅτι ἃ παραγγέλλομεν [καὶ] ποιεῖτε καὶ ποιήσετε, “that you are doing and will continue to do the things that we command (you to do).” With this clause Paul expresses the content of what he is confident about. Since he speaks of a plural number of things that he commands, we could wonder whether he has in mind here various exhortations that he gave the readers in 1 Thessalonians, as well as during his mission among them (cf. 1 Thess 4:2). However, since he uses the word παραγγέλλομεν for his exhortation for the idlers three times over in the following section (vv. 6, 10, 12; cf. also 1 Thess 4:11), we may assume that he has in view chiefly the command that he is going to issue in the following section. Nevertheless, he has the plural form “the things” here, apparently because he is thinking of the plural number of issues related to the problem of the idlers, for which he has issued and is going to issue his commands: the command for the idlers to work to earn their own living, the command for them not to be busybodies, the command for the other members of the church as to how they are to treat them, and so on. Paul says that he is confident that in obedience to the Lord Jesus the readers “will do the things that [he as the Lord’s apostle] commands [them to do].” However, in the middle of this sentence he inserts his affirmation that they “are doing” (καὶ ποιεῖτε) them at present. He did the same three times while imparting exhortations in the paraenetic section of 1 Thessalonians (4:1: “even as you do walk”; 4:10: “for indeed you are doing it”; 5:11: “as indeed you are doing”). As there, so here also his compliment of the readers for doing what he exhorts 265 Cf. Weima, 594.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 647

7/12/23 11:29 AM

648

2 Thessalonians 3:1–5

is a rhetorical device designed at enhancing their motivation to go on doing the things that he exhorts. From vv. 6–15 below we can discern that the idlers are in the minority of the Thessalonian church. So with this compliment for the majority of the members of the church who are actually obeying his commands, he is encouraging them to go on doing that and at the same time strongly challenging the idle minority to do the same. 5 Ὁ δὲ κύριος κατευθύναι ὑμῶν τὰς καρδίας εἰς τὴν ἀγάπην τοῦ θεοῦ καὶ εἰς τὴν ὑπομονὴν τοῦ Χριστοῦ, “Now may the Lord direct your hearts to love God and to wait steadfastly for Christ.” As in 2:16–17 as well as in 1 Thess 3:11–13, with a wish-­prayer in the optative mood Paul closes this bridge passage of 3:1–5, which both concludes the foregoing and introduces the following. Whereas in 1 Thess 3:11 the aorist optative κατευθύναι is used in the literal sense of God “making straight” Paul’s way to the Thessalonian Christians, removing the hindrances of Satan (1 Thess 2:18), here it is used in the metaphorical sense of the Lord (meaning Jesus) making their hearts (their whole person from the innermost being, cf. 1 Thess 3:13; 2 Thess 2:17) directed and devoted completely to God and Christ. It is widely recognized that here Paul adopts the phrase κατευθύνειν τὴν καρδίαν (or τὰς καρδίας) that is used repeatedly in 1–2 Chronicles LXX (1 Chr 29:18; 2 Chr 12:14; 19:3; 20:33; 30:19) and elsewhere (Ps 78:8 [77:8 LXX]; Prov 21:2; Sir 49:3) to render Hebrew (‫“( הכין לב)ב‬to incline one’s heart”).266 The objects to which their hearts are to be directed are indicated by the two prepositional phrases εἰς τὴν ἀγάπην τοῦ θεοῦ and εἰς τὴν ὑπομονὴν τοῦ Χριστοῦ. It is debated whether the genitives in both phrases are subjective (“God’s love [for them]” and “Christ’s endurance/steadfastness [for them]”) or objective (“[their] love for God” and “[their] endurance/steadfastness for Christ”).267 Elsewhere Paul uses the phrase “the love of God” in the subjective sense (Rom 5:5; 8:39; 2 Cor 13:13), and in fact he just referred to God’s love: “God the Father who loved us” (2 Thess 2:16). So most recent commentators take the phrase in the subjective sense. However, with the unusual phrase “the endurance of Christ,” commentators are divided. Some268 take τοῦ Χριστοῦ as an objective genitive and interpret the whole phrase in the sense of “the patient waiting for Christ,” as in KJV (following Geneva). This interpretation chimes in happily with the emphasis on the parousia that characterizes these two letters and could be related to the “patience [ὑπομονή] of hope in our Lord Jesus Christ” of 1 Thess 1:3. However, it is pointed out that in Pauline usage the word ὑπομονή never bears the connotation of “expectation” or “waiting,”269 and that it sits less easily with τὴν ἀγάπην τοῦ θεοῦ understood as “God’s love.” Thus a greater number of recent commentators take τοῦ Χριστοῦ also as a subjective genitive and interpret 266 E.g., Best, 329–30; Marshall, 217; Fee, 322; Weima, 597; Lambrecht, “Loving God,” 440. 267 For fuller discussions, cf. Best, 330–31; Weima, 598–99; Lambrecht, “Loving God.” 268 E.g., Calvin, 351; Dobschütz, 309; Menken, 129; Lambrecht, “Loving God,” 437–40; Nicklas, 181. 269 Lightfoot, 128; Best, 330; Weima, 598.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 648

7/12/23 11:29 AM

Comment 649 the whole phrase as “the endurance/steadfastness of Christ,” referring to Christ’s exemplary endurance and steadfastness during his passion,270 or to the endurance and steadfastness that Christ gives.271 Those who take both phrases as subjective genitives interpret Paul’s wish-­prayer as an indirect petition for the Lord to make the readers pay attention to or reflect on the phrases, so that they may thereby be moved to love others and endure afflictions steadfastly in imitation of Christ.272 Weima goes one step further to claim that Paul offers such a prayer here in order to make the readers, especially the unruly idlers among them, obey the commands that he is issuing in the following verses, and therefore that only this line of interpretation fits in with the context well.273 However, it is a question whether that interpretation fits well with the OT idiom κατευθύνειν τὴν καρδίαν πρός/εἰς . . . that Paul employs here, for the OT phrase is normally used in the sense of seeking God’s will and obeying it. Lambrecht rejects the above line of interpretation and stresses that the phrase κατευθύναι ὑμῶν τὰς καρδίας εἰς . . . here in our verse suggests humans (i.e., the readers) doing something [for God and Christ] rather than just reflecting on something of God and Christ. Therefore, he takes both genitives in “the love of God” and “the endurance of Christ” as objective genitives and interprets Paul’s prayer in terms of an indirect petition for the Lord to make the Thessalonian Christians love God and wait steadfastly for Christ.274 He grants that elsewhere in his letters Paul uses the phrase “the love of God” in the sense of God’s love for his people. But Lambrecht suggests that our verse may be an exception, just as 1 John 5:3 (αὕτη γάρ ἐστιν ἡ ἀγάπη τοῦ θεοῦ, ἵνα τὰς ἐντολὰς αὐτοῦ τηρῶμεν) is an exception in the Johannine literature where the phrase “the love of God” is subjective genitive.275 Clearly we cannot write off the possibility of such an exception occurring in Paul’s mind, as he does stress our duty to love (ἀγαπᾶν) God, not just in those passages of his letters where he explicitly calls for it (Rom 8:28; 1 Cor 2:9; 8:3; 16:22; cf. also Rom 8:8; 1 Cor 7:32–34; Gal 1:10; 2 Cor 5:9; 1 Thess 2:4, 15 for his stress on believers’ duty to “please” God), but implicitly in all his paraenesis (see above all Rom 12:1–2). In our present context, he appears to have in mind the Thessalonian Christians’ conversion from idol worship to the true God “to serve” him (1 Thess 1:9) and their doing good works of faith in obedience to him to “please” him (1 Thess 1:3; 4:1–3). This is in contrast to unbelieving evildoers who refuse to recognize God, “love” his gospel (“the truth,” 2 Thess 2:10), and render the obedience of faith (1:8) but instead indulge in wickedness, following the agent of Satan, “the lawless man,” who opposes God and proclaims himself to be god (2:3–12). 270 271 272 273 274 275

E.g., Marshall, 218; Wanamaker, 279; Richard, 372; Weima, 598–99. Best, 330; Holmes, 258; Fee, 322–23. Cf. Best, 330; Wanamaker, 279. Weima, 598–99. Lambrecht, “Loving God,” 439–41. Lambrecht, “Loving God,” 440–41.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 649

7/12/23 11:29 AM

650

2 Thessalonians 3:1–5

So, having just offered the first wish-­prayer for the Lord Jesus Christ and God the Father to “establish [the readers’ hearts to stand firm in faith] to do every good work and word” (2:16–17), in this second wish-­prayer Paul repeats the same petition, abbreviating the good works of faith with “love for God” (note κατευθύναι ὑμῶν τὰς καρδίας in this verse corresponding to στηρίξει ὑμᾶς in the preceding v. 3, which in turn echoes στηρίξαι [τὰς καρδίας] of 2:17). Lambrecht also grants that in the NT ὑπομένειν/ὑπομονή is never used in the sense of “awaiting,” but still he refers to the possibility that the frequent Septuagint expression ὑπομένειν τὸν κύριον (“to wait upon the Lord,” Pss 25:3 [24:3 LXX]; 37:9, 34 [36:9, 34 LXX]; Isa 51:5; Lam 3:25–26; Mic 7:7; etc.)276 influenced Paul to formulate the phrase εἰς τὴν ὑπομονὴν τοῦ Χριστοῦ in the sense of “steadfastly awaiting Christ.”277 Since the phrase ἡ ὑπομονὴ τοῦ Χριστοῦ is unique here in the NT and Paul does not dwell in his letters on Christ’s steadfast endurance of humiliations and suffering during his passion (cf. Heb 5:7–8; 12:2–4; 1 Pet 2:21–25), referring only to the facts of his humiliation and suffering, it is at least a reasonable hypothesis that in our verse, already phrasing his wish-­prayer in the familiar Septuagintal language κατευθύναι ὑμῶν τὰς καρδίας, he employs the equally familiar Septuagintal formula ὑπομένειν τὸν κύριον with two adjustments to the context. He first transforms it into a noun phrase, ἡ ὑπομονὴ τοῦ κυρίου, in parallel to the preceding ἡ ἀγάπη τοῦ θεοῦ, and then second he replaces κυρίου with Χριστοῦ since he started the prayer with ὁ κύριος as the subject. In 1 Thess 1:10 Paul summarized part of the Thessalonians’ faith in terms of “waiting” (ἀναμένειν) for the parousia of God’s Son Jesus “who will deliver us from the wrath to come.” The reason why he expresses this thought here with ὑπομονή, the cognate noun of the verb ὑπομένειν, rather than with the cognate noun of the verb ἀναμένειν (or ἀπεκδέχεσθαι, 1 Cor 1:7; Phil 3:20) is probably because with the familiar Septuagintal formula he wants to convey the implication more strongly that the readers are to wait for the Lord steadfastly, persevering in their current afflictions (cf. 2 Thess 1:4; also 1 Thess 1:3).278 We suggest that, by offering this wish-­prayer in Septuagintal language at the close of the first and main part of this letter, Paul summarily underlines the teachings and exhortations that he has imparted in it about the parousia of the Lord Jesus Christ, the need for the readers to wait confidently and steadfastly for that day of the Lord amid their afflictions, and the need for them to do good works in love for God and for the glory of God. By doing so, with the reference to the need for them to love God here as well as with what he writes in v. 4, he prepares the readers for the commands that he is going to issue in the following part 2, namely, 3:6–15. 276 Cf. Hauck, TDNT 4:583–84; also Metzger, Textual Commentary, 427. 277 Lambrecht, “Loving God,” 437–38. 278 Cf. Hoppe, II:195.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 650

7/12/23 11:29 AM

III. Part 2: Exhortations (3:6–16)

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 651

7/12/23 11:29 AM

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 652

7/12/23 11:29 AM

1. Exhortations on Idleness (3:6–15) Even if the subject matter of this section is seen as announced in v. 4 and hinted at also in v. 5, the transition from vv. 1–5 to this section is quite rough. This impression is increased by the harsh tone of rebuke and correction in this section, in contrast to the comforting and reassuring tone that Paul has maintained throughout the letter until 3:1–5. Certainly the harsh tone is a reflection of his grave concern about the problem of the idlers, as well as his frustration about its persistence and deterioration despite his command that the believers work for their own living, which he gave during his mission in Thessalonica (1 Thess 4:11c) and repeated in his previous letter (1 Thess 4:11; 5:14b). Even so, for some readers, it may be difficult to believe that, while writing the first two chapters of this letter in such a caring tone, Paul kept in mind all along his plan to address the problem of the idlers in such a harsh tone at the end of it. But if he did not, we would need to imagine that, upon hearing the urgent news that the Thessalonian believers were suffering greatly from the worsening persecution of the opponents and were also deeply troubled by a prophecy about the day of the Lord, he originally had set out to write the letter addressing only those issues. He meant to finish the letter with the benediction (2:16–17) and with a prayer request and a reassuring word (3:1–3). And we would need to imagine further that while writing the closing section, Paul heard the additional news from Thessalonica that the disorderly idlers were disrupting the church life there much more seriously than before, so that he decided to add this section of stern instruction for the idlers (3:6–15) and announce it in the closing section of 3:1–5 (i.e., in vv. 4–5). This possibility cannot be ruled out. However, it appears simpler to think that from the beginning Paul intended to attach to his main message of chs. 1–2 strong admonitions for the idlers and an instruction for the Thessalonian congregation about proper handling of those members in their midst. Apparently the idlers were a small minority of the church, and their problematic attitude was related to their fervent belief in the imminent parousia of the Lord. If so, it was not strange for Paul to attach his harsh charges for them as an appendix after providing the whole church with a clear explanation about the delayed parousia of the Lord Jesus and a strong and reassuring message about salvation on the day of the Lord. We may elaborate on this summary statement of our view a little. In commenting on 1 Thess 4:11, we upheld the traditional view as the most plausible one, that the idlers were those members of the Thessalonian church who gave up their jobs in their belief that the parousia of the Lord was imminent. We then added some other factors for the rise of those idlers: (a) ostracism from their places of employment because of their Christian conversion; (b) poor

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 653

7/12/23 11:29 AM

654

2 Thessalonians 3:6–15

remuneration that discouraged seeking a new job; (c) the long-­standing practice of the urban poor living on the dole of rich leading citizens in Greco-­Roman cities; (d) Paul’s teaching on sibling love and the early church’s practice of running a common fund for its poor members; and (e) one-­sided interpretation of some words of Jesus such as Luke 12:22–34//Matt 6:25–34 plus 19–21 (cf. also Luke 12:13–21). There, we also suggested that the idlers were creating trouble in the church by abusing its common fund or communal meals provided by the better-­off members of the church, by meddling in the affairs of other members as well as of the church, and by being rebellious to the admonitions of the leaders of the church. Those who reject this traditional view tend to point out that neither in 1 Thessalonians nor in 2 Thessalonians does Paul relate the problem of the idlers to a belief in the imminent parousia of the Lord. Earlier we countered this argument partly by citing Marshall on the fact that in 1 Thessalonians Paul’s treatment of the Thessalonians’ concerns for the parousia of the Lord over two long sections (4:13–18; 5:1–11) follows the instruction about the idlers (4:11–12) and is then itself followed by further instruction about the idlers (5:14), which seems to suggest that the two themes are connected.1 Here in 2 Thessalonians also the same conclusion may be drawn from the fact that Paul’s instructions about the idlers follow on his long treatment of the crisis in the Thessalonians’ faith, which has arisen out of their intense expectation of the parousia of the Lord. In 1 Thess 4:13–5:11, perhaps Paul thought that, by properly informing the Thessalonians about the glorious fate of dead believers at the parousia, as well as by reassuring them of their certain salvation on the day of the Lord, he could ease their high tension about the parousia and even cool down the high eschatological fever of the idlers. But shortly after sending 1 Thessalonians, Paul received the news that the Thessalonians’ anxiety about the day of the Lord was freshly and even more greatly flared up by a prophecy that the day of the Lord had already come (2 Thess 2:2), as well as the news that the pagan persecution of them and the problem of the idle members among them had worsened. It is possible that the deterioration of the problem of the idlers was related to the deterioration of the eschatological crisis.2 For it can easily be supposed that, having given up working for a living due to their belief in the imminent parousia of the Lord in the first place, the idlers would have been especially vulnerable to the prophecy that the day of the Lord had already come. They could have entered into an even more heightened state of eschatological enthusiasm, so that with even less interest in working for living, they spent all

1

2

Marshall, 117. See comment on 1 Thess 4:11. There, against Malherbe, 253, and others who reject the traditional view, we attempted to improve the argument that Paul’s sequence of treatment of the two themes does indeed suggest their interconnection. Cf. Nicklas, 111, 181–82, passim.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 654

7/12/23 11:29 AM



Introduction 655

their time arguing about their eschatological speculations among themselves and trying to persuade other members of the church to adopt their views and perhaps also their lifestyle for the impending end of this world—­only making them more anxious about God’s impending judgment. Thus, they could have created controversies and conflicts within the church. Therefore, in 2 Thessalonians, Paul tries to cool down their eschatological fever by explicitly teaching that the day of the Lord is to come only after certain future events have taken place (2:3–8). Certainly, just like Paul’s eschatological teachings in 1 Thess 4:13–5:11, his emphatic declaration in 2 Thess 2 that the parousia is delayed at present addresses wider needs of the Thessalonian believers than just that of instruction regarding the idlers. But here we are suggesting that the latter is one of the needs. If this view is correct, it is better for us to think that the news of the deterioration of the problem of the idlers reached Paul together with the news of the problem of the false prophecy about the day of the Lord. We will then need to think that, while addressing the latter in the first two chapters of the letter, he had in mind all along the plan to attach stern charges to the idlers at the end of the letter. We then need also to understand that the harsh tone in this section is really directed to them. Certainly, throughout our whole section marked by the inclusio of his command for the whole church to discipline the disorderly idlers (3:6 and 3:14–15), Paul addresses the whole church and issues the stern command generally to all the “brothers and sisters” of the church (vv. 6, 10), as well as separately and specially to the disorderly idlers themselves (vv. 11–12). But in using the same harsh language for the Thessalonian congregation as a whole, whom he addressed in such a caring tone in the preceding two chapters, he is not intending to rebuke them for their failure to deal properly with the disorderly idlers in their midst (cf. v. 4), but he is really intending indirectly to make the idlers aware of his grave concern about the problems they are creating in the church. For the troubles they are making, the whole congregation gets this harsh command! If this is the case, it is quite understandable that, after writing comforting and reassuring words for the Thessalonian church as a whole in the main part of the letter, here Paul issues stern charges to the disorderly idlers as well as instructs the majority of the congregation as to how to deal with the troublemakers in their midst. If the problem of the idlers is related to their belief in an imminent parousia, as we are suggesting, Paul’s response to that problem both in 1 Thessalonians and in this second letter is to be seen as implicitly reflecting his view that the date of the parousia is uncertain (as shown both in 1 Thess 5:1–11 and in 2 Thess 2:3–8). Believers must therefore work on for their own living so long as this aeon lasts. In 1 Cor 7, in view of the critical situation before the imminent end of this aeon (vv. 26, 29, 31), Paul advises believers to remain in the state in which they find themselves at present. Yet he allows singles to get married if they want, but still he prefers to see them foregoing

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 655

7/12/23 11:29 AM

656

2 Thessalonians 3:6–15

marriage (1 Cor 7:27–28). When he thus advises the singles in the Corinthian church to forsake marrying in view of the imminent end of this aeon, why does he criticize the idlers in the Thessalonian church for forsaking working with a job in their belief that the end is imminent? Clearly he sees a difference between marrying and working for living. The latter is an existential necessity, while the former is an option. Furthermore, as he implies clearly enough in 1 Thess 4:11–12, 5:14, and in our passage, the idlers’ failure to work for their own living results in abusing the love of others while failing to love others on their part, as well as in creating conflicts within the church and presenting a bad image of the church to outsiders. Therefore, he issues a strong command for the idlers to work for their own bread.

Bibliography Bjerkelund, C. J. Parakalô: Form, Funktion und Sinn der Parakalô-­Sätze in den paulinischen Briefen. Bibliotheca Theologica Norvegica 1. Oslo: Universitetsforlaget, 1967. deSilva, D. A. “Paul, Honor, and Shame.” Pages 26–47 in Paul in the Greco-­R oman World: A Handbook, Volume II. Edited by J. P. Sampley. London: Bloomsbury, 2016. —­—­—­. “ ‘Worthy of His Kingdom’: Honor Discourse and Social Engineering in 1 Thessalonians.” JSNT 19 (1996): 49–79. Evans, R. M. “Eschatology and Ethics: A Study of Thessalonica and Paul’s Letters to the Thessalonians.” PhD diss., University of Basel. Princeton, NJ: McMahon, 1968. Gehring, R. W. Hausgemeinde und Mission: Die Bedeutung antiker Häuser und Hausgemeinden—­von Jesus bis Paulus. Giessen: Brunnen, 2000. Jewett, R. Romans: A Commentary. Hermeneia. Minneapolis: Fortress, 2007. Schnabel, E. Early Christian Mission, Volume 2: Paul and the Early Church. Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 2004.

Translation Now we command you, brothers and sisters, in the name of our a Lord Jesus Christ to keep aloof from any brother or sister who conducts himself or herself in a disorderly manner and not in accordance with the tradition that they received b from c us. 7For you yourselves know how you ought to imitate us, because we did not lead disorderly lives among you, 8nor did we eat anyone’s bread for nothing. But we kept on working with labor and toil by night and by day,d so as not to become burdensome to any of you, 9not because we have no right (to be supported by you); our purpose was rather to present ourselves e as an example for your imitation. 10For when we were with you, we also repeatedly gave you this command: “If anyone is not willing f to work, let him not eat.” 11For we hear g that some are conducting themselves in a disorderly manner among you, doing no work but being busybodies. 12Such people we command and exhort in the Lord Jesus Christ h to work in quietness and eat their own bread. 13But for your part, brothers and sisters, do not be weary i in doing good. 14But if anyone disobeys j our k word (conveyed) by this epistle, take note of this person, so as not to associate l with him or her, in order that they may be ashamed. 15And yet do not count him or her as an enemy, but admonish him or her as a brother or sister. 6

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 656

7/12/23 11:29 AM

Notes 657

Notes a. ἡμῶν is omitted by B D*. b. παρελάβοσαν (‫ *א‬A 33 pc; cf. D* ἐλάβοσαν) illustrates the Hellenistic encroachment of the μι conjugation on the ω conjugation (cf. John 15:22, 24, εἴχοσαν). This particular encroachment may have been the more readily accepted because it removed the occasion of ambiguity arising from the identical classical forms of the first-­person singular and third-­person plural of the imperfect and second-­aorist active of the ω conjugation. Here παρελάβετε is read by B F G 2464 pc lat vg.codd syrhcl copsa; the strictly concordant παρέλαβε(ν) by 1962 pc; the classical παρέλαβον by ‫א‬2 D1 Ψ byz. c. For παρ’ ἡμῶν, B 104 630 pc read ἀφ’ ἡμῶν. d. For νυκτὸς καὶ ἡμέρας, A D I Ψ byz read νύκτα καὶ ἡμέραν. e. For ἑαυτούς as reflexive pronoun of the first-­person plural, cf. 1 Thess 2:8 (ἑαυτῶν, first person); 5:13 (ἑαυτοῖς, second person; see Notes d. ad loc). f. εἴ τις οὐ θέλει. The negative after εἰ is οὐ, not μή, because οὐ and θέλειν are taken closely together in the sense “refuse” (cf. v. 14, εἰ δέ τις οὐχ ὑπακούει). g. ἀκούομεν, perfective present (a classical usage); the writers do not mean that the news was coming in as their letter was being dictated (cf. ἀκούω in Luke 9:9; 16:2; 1 Cor 11:18). h. ἐν κυρίῳ Ἰησοῦ Χριστῷ, for which ‫א‬2 D2 Ψ byz syrhcl read διὰ τοῦ κυρίου ἡμῶν Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ (ἡμῶν is omitted by Ψ pc). i. ἐγκακήσητε, for which ἐκκακήσητε is read by D2 F G Ψ byz. j. εἰ δέ τις οὐχ ὑπακούει, with οὐ, not μή, after εἰ, because οὐχ is so closely joined to ὑπακούειν (cf. v. 10, εἴ τις οὐ θέλει). k. For ἡμῶν, B 81 326 2464 pc have the misreading ὑμῶν. l. For the infinitive construction μὴ συναναμίγνυσθαι (“not to associate”), D2 byz syr have the imperative preceded by καί (καὶ μὴ συναναμίγνυσθε, “and do not associate”).

Form/Structure/Setting Verse 6 (“that you keep away from . . .”) and v. 14 (“that you not associate with . . .”) form an inclusio and thereby indicate that vv. 6–15 comprise a unit. This whole section forms one sustained hortatory period exhibiting the pattern outlined by Bjerkelund,3 with the verb of exhortation (here in v. 6 the stronger παραγγέλλομεν in place of παρακαλοῦμεν) followed by a vocative (ἀδελφοί), a prepositional phrase indicating the source of authority (ἐν ὀνόματι τοῦ κυρίου ἡμῶν Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ), and an injunction in the infinitive (στέλλεσθαι ὑμᾶς). The pattern is repeated in briefer compass in v. 12, without the vocative and with the injunction expressed by ἵνα and the subjunctive (ἵνα ἐσθίωσιν).

Comment 3:6 Παραγγέλλομεν δὲ ὑμῖν, ἀδελφοί, “Now we command you, brothers and sisters.” Paul now issues the command that he mentioned in v. 4. As in 1 Thess 5:14, the question arises whether the ἀδελφοί here are the Thessalonian 3 Bjerkelund, Parakalô, 34–58, 125–40.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 657

7/12/23 11:29 AM

658

2 Thessalonians 3:6–15

believers as a whole or a particular group (the leaders of the church or the idlers themselves) within their fellowship. But the reference to the disorderly idlers as “some . . . among you” in v. 11 indicates that the second-­person plural in our passage refers to the whole congregation of the church. Paul usually uses the milder terms like παρακαλεῖν, παραμυθεῖσθαι, ἐρωτᾶν, and so on in his paraenetic instructions and uses the strong (originally military) term παραγγέλλειν rather rarely (see comment on 1 Thess 4:2 above). He uses the latter here—­both because it is given in the name of the Lord Jesus (cf. 1 Cor 7:10; 1 Thess 4:2) and because it concerns a grave issue (cf. 1 Cor 11:17 [the abuse of the Lord’s Supper by the rich, about which Paul explodes in anger, 1 Cor 11:22]; cf. 1 Thess 4:2 [in view of serious sexual immorality and also the problem of the idlers to whom he will shortly issue a command, 1 Thess 4:11]). Clearly here in our verse he feels the need to use the strong word “command” to bring the unruly idlers to submission to his instruction (see further vv. 10, 12), as he does also with regard to the unruly rich (and therefore likely powerful and arrogant) abusers of the Lord’s Supper in the Corinthian church.4 In 1 Thess 5:14 he already used a strong word, νουθετεῖν (to “admonish”), with regard to the disorderly idlers (see comment ad loc). Here he uses an even stronger word. However, as we have suggested above, he uses it not so much because he thinks that the church as a whole has seriously failed in dealing with the idlers so as to require such a strong admonition (note his praise for them in v. 4) as because he wants indirectly to make the idlers aware of the gravity of the troubles they are creating in the church (cf. vv. 10, 12). Nevertheless, it is significant that he begins and closes our section with the exhortation to the church as a whole, addressing the idlers directly only in vv. 11–12 within the inclusio. Clearly Paul is trying to make the whole church take their responsibility of disciplining their errant members seriously.5 ἐν ὀνόματι τοῦ κυρίου [ἡμῶν] Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ, “in the name of [our] Lord Jesus Christ.” Apostolic authority is essentially the authority of Christ, received by delegation from him and to be exercised only in accordance with his will. The apostles are his accredited representatives. Therefore, the command that Paul the apostle issues here is really that of the Lord Jesus Christ: it is the ἐντολή (“command, order”) of the Lord himself (1 Cor 14:37).6 Note also 1 Thess 4:2, where he expresses the same thought with the phrase διὰ τοῦ κυρίου Ἰησοῦ (see comment ad loc). If we read “our” as original together with the majority of the manuscripts (see Notes a. above), we may see Paul adding it here to “the Lord Jesus Christ” in order to heighten the Thessalonians’ sense of obligation

4

5 6

For the further significance of Paul’s use of παραγγέλλειν/παραγγελία five times with regard to the rebellious idlers in the Thessalonian correspondence out of his total use of eight times in his whole corpus, see Explanation below. Cf. Weima, 603. Cf. Wanamaker, 281.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 658

7/12/23 11:29 AM

Comment 659 to obey the command by reminding them of the fact that Jesus Christ is their Lord as much as his Lord.7 στέλλεσθαι ὑμᾶς ἀπὸ παντὸς ἀδελφοῦ ἀτάκτως περιπατοῦντος καὶ μὴ κατὰ τὴν παράδοσιν ἣν παρελάβοσαν παρ᾽ ἡμῶν, “to keep aloof from any brother or sister who conducts himself or herself in a disorderly manner and not in accordance with the tradition that they received from us.” This is the content of the command. For στέλλεσθαι (middle) in this sense, compare the only other NT instance of the simple verb: 2 Cor 8:20, στελλόμενοι τοῦτο, “avoiding this.” Compare Mal 2:5 LXX, where it occurs in synonymous parallelism with φοβεῖσθαι and means “to stand in awe of” (ἀπὸ προσώπου ὀνόματός μου στέλλεσθαι αὐτόν). See also Gal 2:12 and Heb 10:38, where the compound verb with the prefix ὑπο-­ (ὑποστέλλειν) is used in the sense of “to withdraw.” The warning against living ἀτάκτως (“disorderly”) is fuller and more peremptory here than in 1 Thess 4:9b–12; 5:14. Those who live in a disorderly manner are still recognized as “brothers and sisters,” members of the church (cf. v. 15 below). Their disorderliness or unruliness consists fundamentally in their living in aberration from “the tradition that they received [παρελάβοσαν] from us.” The “tradition” (παράδοσις) he had delivered (ἐδώκαμεν) to them orally (1 Thess 4:2) during his mission among them, and then again in writing (1 Thess 4:9b–12), covered matters of faith and conduct alike (cf. 2 Thess 2:15; also 1 Thess 4:1–12 with comment ad loc). It is the tradition relating to conduct (more specifically to working for one’s own livelihood) that is primarily in view here. For a similar admonition relating more to matters of faith, see Rom 16:17–18, where the Roman Christians are urged to “avoid” (ἐκκλίνετε ἀπ᾽ αὐτῶν) people “who create dissensions and difficulties, in opposition to the doctrine that you have been taught [παρὰ τὴν διδαχὴν ἣν ὑμεῖς ἐμάθετε].” The nature of the unruliness here in our text can be further inferred from the detailed wording of the charge as it is developed in vv. 7–13 (see comment on next verse). Clearly Paul’s gentler exhortation given to the idlers directly in the earlier letter (1 Thess 4:9–12) had not been effective in checking tendencies to unruliness in the congregation, and even the admonition by the leaders of the church to them (1 Thess 5:14) had not proved to be effective. So here Paul is ordering the Thessalonian church as a whole to take disciplinary action against the disorderly idlers, which is for the church to shun every one (παντός) of them. Green and Weima appropriately stress that to properly appreciate the effectiveness of this disciplinary measure we need to bear in mind the fact that ancient peoples lived in close-­k nit familial and social networks and “in a strongly communal culture, where honor and shame were powerful forces controlling social behavior.”8 With their conversion to the Christian faith, the 7 8

Cf. Fee, 326; Weima, 604. Green, 345, and Weima, 604–5 (quotation is from his p. 604).

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 659

7/12/23 11:29 AM

660

2 Thessalonians 3:6–15

Thessalonians were already cut off from their familial and social networks, so that the church as their new social network or family of “brothers” and “sisters” in Christ was vitally important for them. Therefore, the deliberate act by the church, their new “family,” of dishonoring the disorderly idlers and making them pariahs would have presented them with an existential threat and so effectively forced them to conform to the apostolic traditions of the church.9 7 αὐτοὶ γὰρ οἴδατε πῶς δεῖ μιμεῖσθαι ἡμᾶς, “For you yourselves know how it is necessary to imitate us.” Paul often employs the formula “(as) you know” in order to remind the readers of his past apostolic conduct or teaching and thereby to obtain their willing consent to his present teaching (cf. 1 Thess 1:5; 2:1, 2, 5, 9, 10, 11; 3:3; 4:2; 5:2; 2 Thess 2:5, 6). Here, by adding the pronoun αὐτοί (“yourselves”) at the head of the sentence as in 1 Thess 2:1, he makes the formula emphatic and indirectly puts pressure on the idlers. With this γάρ clause he provides the basis for the preceding command: the whole congregation is to shun the disorderly idlers because they know they ought to imitate Paul and his team and thus live in accordance with the tradition they established through their example during their mission among them, the tradition the disorderly idlers are defying. Then, with the long causal ὅτι clause that stretches to the end of v. 9, Paul gives the basis for v. 7a. In that clause he rehearses his conduct during his mission among them in order to explain how he established the tradition of working hard for one’s own living. The tradition had been delivered by precept as well as by example. So, in v. 10 he will remind the readers of the precept that he set forth during his mission among them. But here in vv. 7b–9 he starts explaining how he established the tradition first by citing his own actual example at that time, of which he later reminded them in the previous letter (1 Thess 2:9–12; 4:11–12; see Explanation below). Since the tradition is so impressively and firmly established, the aberration of the disorderly idlers from it is that much more inexcusable. Therefore, “you” (the church as a whole) who “know how it is necessary to imitate [Paul and his team by living in conformity to the tradition]” (v. 7a) must shun them (v. 6). Thus, in vv. 6–9 Paul is saying that the church is to discipline the disorderly idlers not simply because they are failing to follow his example but rather because they are defying the tradition he established through his own example as well as his precept.10 In the end both ways of putting the matter may amount to meaning the same thing. However, the latter is to follow Paul’s way of argument in our passage more closely, especially in view of the emphatic characterization of the disorderly idlers in v. 6 as those who are living “not in accordance with the tradition that you received from us.” For the recurring theme of imitating Paul that is found in his letters, 9 Cf. Green, 345; Weima, 605. 10 Pace Weima, 606.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 660

7/12/23 11:29 AM

Comment 661 see 1 Thess 1:6 (with comment ad loc); also 1 Cor 4:16; 11:1; Phil 3:17 (cf. also Gal 4:12; Phil 4:9; 1 Thess 3:12). ὅτι οὐκ ἠτακτήσαμεν ἐν ὑμῖν, “because we did not lead disorderly lives among you.” Paul describes the apostolic conduct he displayed during his mission in Thessalonica in an antithetical form of “not . . . nor . . . but . . .” This first clause is a general statement, which is formulated in the negative form in order to contrast starkly the conduct of the disorderly idlers with his own right conduct at the outset. It is elaborated on by the second negative clause (v. 8a). Then, with an emphatic positive description of his apostolic conduct (v. 8b), he sets it forth as the example that the Thessalonians ought to imitate. The verb ἀτακτεῖν (lit. “to be out of order”) appears in Xenophon (Cyr. 7.2.6) and Demosthenes (3 Olynth. 11) of military indiscipline or desertion (cf. the adverb ἀτάκτως in Thucydides, Hist. 3.108, of the defeated Peloponnesians trying to hasten back to their camp ἀτάκτως καὶ οὐδενὶ κόσμῳ, “in no order”), and then in various writers of undisciplined or irregular conduct in general, including being idle (ἀργεῖν).11 These data and the data that we can gather by inferring from Paul’s characterization of those who live ἀτάκτως in our passage (esp. vv. 6, 11) in contrast to his own example (vv. 7b–9), as well as from the precept of v. 10 (cf. 1 Thess 4:10–12), yield a picture of those who live ἀτάκτως (v. 6): they do not toe the line of the tradition, do not work, but disturb the communal peace and project a negative image of the church to outsiders. Hence, it is best to refer to them as “disorderly” or “unruly” idlers (see comment on 1 Thess 5:14). Paul says here that he and his missionary team did not live like that during their mission among the Thessalonians. 8 οὐδὲ δωρεὰν ἄρτον ἐφάγομεν παρά τινος, “nor did we eat anyone’s bread for nothing.” As said above, this second negative clause elaborates on the preceding general negative statement by specifically referring to the main consequence of living idle and disorderly, namely, having to maintain livelihood at somebody else’s expense. “To eat bread” is likely a Semitic idiom that means “to take food” (Gen 3:19), but it can be used more broadly for receiving daily needs (2 Sam 9:7; Ps 41:9; Ezek 12:18–19; Amos 7:12).12 The adverbial accusative δωρεάν, “freely,” “for nothing” (cf. Rom 3:24; 2 Cor 11:7), appears twice in the Matthean account of Jesus’s commissioning of the Twelve (δωρεὰν ἐλάβετε, δωρεὰν δότε, Matt 10:8), in a context not irrelevant to the present passage (see 2 Thess 3:9). “The laborer deserves his food,” said Jesus to the Twelve when sending them out (Matt 10:10), but Paul and his companions did not eat bread at anyone’s expense without payment. By placing the adverbial accusative δωρεάν at the head of the clause for emphasis13 and by employing the coarse Semitic idiom, Paul may be intending to vividly convey the sense 11 See Milligan, 152–54, note G: “On ἀτακτέω and its cognates.” 12 Cf. Best, 336; Marshall, 221–22; Weima, 609. 13 Cf. Weima, 609.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 661

7/12/23 11:29 AM

662

2 Thessalonians 3:6–15

that he and his colleagues avoided doing exactly what the disorderly idlers are doing at present. ἀλλ᾽ ἐν κόπῳ καὶ μόχθῳ νυκτὸς καὶ ἡμέρας ἐργαζόμενοι πρὸς τὸ μὴ ἐπιβαρῆσαί τινα ὑμῶν, “but with labor and toil by night and by day we kept on working so as not to become burdensome to any of you.” After stating with the two negative clauses what he did not do, now he makes an emphatic statement about what he did do. This is practically a repetition of what he had said in 1 Thess 2:9 (see comment ad loc). That here Paul repeats his earlier statement is suggested by the participle ἐργαζόμενοι that he retains without the main verb, instead of turning it into an indicative. As in 1 Thess 2:9, so here also he stresses that he and his colleagues did hard labor without proper rest to earn their own living (note the emphatic positioning of ἐν κόπῳ καὶ μόχθῳ νυκτὸς καὶ ἡμέρας at the head of the clause),14 so that they might not make any of the Thessalonians bear the burden of providing them with their daily needs. In commenting on 1 Thess 2:9 we reflected on the maximum impact that Paul aims to bring upon the idlers with the emphatic formulation “labor and toil by night and by day,” there and here. In effect he states: “Do not make the poor pay an excuse for your abandonment of job seeking; find a job, and if pay is poor, labor all the harder and longer to earn enough for your living, as we ourselves are doing!” 9 οὐχ ὅτι οὐκ ἔχομεν ἐξουσίαν, ἀλλ᾽ ἵνα ἑαυτοὺς τύπον δῶμεν ὑμῖν εἰς τὸ μιμεῖσθαι ἡμᾶς, “not because we have no right, but in order to present ourselves to you as an example so as to imitate us.” Paul adds this statement to reinforce the exhortation he has imparted through the preceding antithetical statement that believers should imitate his example in living, not like the idlers, but in working hard to earn their own living. (If Paul, who was entitled to be supported by others, chose rather to support himself, how much more should those who had no such entitlement earn their own living!) Since this statement is dependent on the ὅτι clause of vv. 7b–8, the aorist tense of the verb ἔχειν (“to have”) may be expected here in conformity to the tense of the verbs in vv. 7b–8, but Paul uses the present tense ἔχομεν, apparently being conscious of the fact that he still has that right. This statement is also formulated in the antithesis, and in each part of the antithesis there is an ellipsis.15 After ἐξουσίαν, Paul omits a word or phrase that defines the “authority,” but the readers can easily fill it in from the context: “to eat our bread as a gift.” They can also fill in the elided main verb before the ἵνα purpose clause in the positive half of the statement: for example, “we wanted [ἠθελήσαμεν]” (cf. Mark 6:25; 9:30; 10:35; Luke 6:31; John 17:24 for θέλειν + ἵνα clause). The “right” that Paul mentions here refers to the right that the Lord Jesus granted his apostles to “get their living by the gospel” (1 Cor 9:14; Matt 10:10: “The laborer deserves his food”; cf. Luke 10:7–8; also 1 Thess 2:7a), that is, 14 Cf. Weima, 611. 15 Cf. Weima, 612–13.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 662

7/12/23 11:29 AM

Comment 663 to have their daily needs met by the provision of the hearers of the gospel (1 Cor 9:4–6). But just as in 1 Cor 9:15 and 1 Thess 2:7b–9, so also here Paul says that he forwent this right. Having stated in our v. 8b, as well as in 1 Thess 2:9, his desire not to burden his converts with his upkeep as his motive for this policy, he now refers to another motive, namely, that he wants to set himself as an example for his converts to imitate.16 Although he does not refer to this motive in 1 Thess 2:9–12 or 4:11–12, we have suggested that we can infer from their contexts that he had that motive also when he exhorted his Thessalonian converts to live a holy and righteous life, while demonstrating such a life through his self-­supporting practice during his mission among them (see comment ad loc). This motive of urging his converts to imitate him in maintaining a self-­supporting life has to do with the “tradition” to which Paul refers in 2 Thess 3:6 (see Explanation below for a more detailed explanation). 10 καὶ γὰρ ὅτε ἦμεν πρὸς ὑμᾶς, τοῦτο παρηγγέλλομεν ὑμῖν, ὅτι εἴ τις οὐ θέλει ἐργάζεσθαι μηδὲ ἐσθιέτω, “For when we were with you, we also repeatedly gave you this command: ‘If anyone is not willing to work, let him not eat.’ ” The conjunction καί connects this verse with v. 7, and the causative particle γάρ corresponds to that of that verse.17 So, having provided the first reason with the long ὅτι clause of vv. 7b–9 why the whole Thessalonian church should shun the disorderly idlers (v. 6), now with this clause Paul provides a further reason. Therefore, in order to communicate the connective sense of the καί here, we may render it with “Furthermore, for when we were with you . . .” Or, not to exaggerate the force of the conjunction too much, we may express it in connection with the verb παρηγγέλλομεν: “For when we were with you, we also repeatedly commanded . . .”18 See also 2:5 (also 1 Thess 3:4) for Paul’s recall of the instructions that he delivered to the Thessalonians by word of mouth during his mission among them. In 1 Thess 4:11–12 also, he renews the command that he gave them at that time: “to aspire to live quietly, to mind [their] own business and to work with [their] own hands.” This means that he gave the command here cited along with that one. Of course, Paul could have repeated that command again and again during his time in Thessalonica. With the imperfect tense παρηγγέλλομεν (“repeatedly commanded”; contrast the aorist παρηγγείλαμεν in 1 Thess 4:11), he may be indicating that fact. Or he may be implying that other exhortations, like the command cited in 1 Thess 4:11–12, also amount to this command cited here. Anyway, he is stressing the precept-­like command. He stresses it also by placing τοῦτο (“this”) at the emphatic place before παρηγγέλλομεν (“we . . . gave you this command”).19 16 For τύπος, see 1 Thess 1:7 with comments there; see also Phil 3:17 for his exhortation for the Philippians to live and imitate his τύπος. 17 Weima, 614. 18 So Dobschütz, 312; Marshall, 223; Weima, 614. 19 Cf. Malherbe, 452.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 663

7/12/23 11:29 AM

664

2 Thessalonians 3:6–15

The content of the command is stated: ὅτι εἴ τις οὐ θέλει ἐργάζεσθαι μηδὲ ἐσθιέτω. It is an instance of ὅτι recitantis, introducing direct speech: “If anyone is not willing to work, neither let him eat.” It is refusal to work that is reprobated here. Comparable sayings are quoted from Jewish and Hellenistic sources; for example, Gen. Rab. 2.2 on Gen 1:2, in which the fifth-­century Rabbi Abbahu is cited as saying, “If I do not work, I do not eat”;20 Ps.-­Phoclides, Sentences 153: “work hard so that you can live from your own means”; Phaedrus, Fables, 4.25.17: “You don’t work? That’s why you don’t have anything when you need it.”21 However, these examples are just morals that state a truism in order to encourage diligent work, whereas Paul’s sentence is a stern command for those who refuse to work.22 So although both Paul’s command and the Jewish saying (cf. also Prov 10:4; 12:11; 19:15)23 may be based on Gen 3:19 (“by the sweat of your face you shall eat bread”), or even if Paul’s command “may reflect a popular sentiment,”24 its form is unique, and “no precise parallel has been found.”25 Therefore, it is likely that Paul himself formulated it as a precept and made it part of his “tradition” (v. 6), while demonstrating it with his own hard labor for his bread in his mission fields.26 R. Jewett argues that this precept is in fact a “casuistic law” set forth as a community rule with a view to communal meals in a tenement church.27 Such a law has the form of describing the offense in the conditional clause in its first half and providing the community sanction for it in its second half. As content parallels, Jewett refers to the community rules of the Qumran community (1QS 6.24–7.24) and some Hellenistic guilds, where the sanctions for violating the rules include exclusion of offenders from communal meals. Criticizing commentaries for treating our v. 10b “as a general admonition to maintain a modern-­sounding system of individual self-­support,” Jewett suggests that we should understand it rather as a “casuistic law” that punishes those who refuse to work and fail to contribute their share to the communal meal by excluding them from the love feast that includes the celebration of the Lord’s Supper (cf. 1 Cor 11:20–22, 33).28 It appears that Jewett has correctly seen the primary or immediate intent of the command addressed to the church as a whole (“we gave you this command,” 20 21 22 23 24 25

Cf. Billerbeck, 3:642. The latter two examples are cited respectively from Malherbe, 452, and Weima, 615. Cf. Marshall, 223; Malherbe, 452; Weima, 615. Cited by Weima, 615. Malherbe, 452. Marshall, 223; the later Christian document Didache 12:2–5 presents a closer, though still not exact, parallel than the examples cited above. 26 Cf. Marshall, 223; pace Best, 338; see Explanation below for more discussion. 27 Jewett, Romans, 66–69. Perhaps we need not specify the church as a “tenement” church here; cf. Gehring, Hausgemeinde und Mission, 266, and Schnabel, Early Christian Mission, 2:1305–6 for criticism of Jewett’s notion of “tenement” church. 28 Jewett, Romans, 66.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 664

7/12/23 11:29 AM

Comment 665 v. 10b) rather than to the disorderly idlers themselves directly (see Explanation below for an additional intent of the command here). However, Jewett points to the fact that “the casuistic law” in v. 10b appears only once in its exact form here in the Pauline corpus and argues that it was not created by Paul but arose from a pre-­Pauline church situation.29 But this is a strange argument because, whereas it does appear at least once in our 2 Thessalonians, it occurs nowhere else in the rest of the NT (let alone outside of the NT), and there is no evidence that a pre-­Pauline church wrestled with the problem of idlers as seriously as Paul does here. Furthermore, Jewett does not adequately take into account our passage’s parallelism and continuity with 1 Thess 4:11–12. Nor does he sufficiently appreciate the efforts that Paul made to establish the tradition by his own example of doing hard manual labor to earn his own living during his mission in Thessalonica—­the efforts that he is renewing here to persuade the idlers to live according to the tradition by rehearsing that example at length and in strong language. For us, these are the sufficient grounds for taking the precept as Paul’s own creation (see Explanation below for more arguments for the Pauline origin of the precept). Still, it is not certain whether Paul regards it as a “law.”30 He calls it here as “what [he] commands” (ἃ παραγγέλλομεν, v. 4; so as his “command,” παραγγελία, 1 Thess 4:2) and as his “word” (λόγος, 2 Thess 3:14), and he regards it as a part or an expression of the “tradition that [they] received from us” (v. 6). Hence it may be best to refer to it as his “precept.” During his mission in Thessalonica, Paul established this tradition of every believer with an able body working to earn his or her own bread by repeating the command here cited, while showing an example of living by it himself. So the Thessalonian church “know[s] how [they] ought to imitate” him, and therefore they must discipline those who are refusing to live by the tradition. They have to shun them and exclude them from the communal meals of the church (“let them not eat”). Finally, it is noteworthy that, in order to correct the disorderly idlers who defy his tradition, Paul cites his example first and at length (vv. 7b–9) and only then refers to his precept (v. 10). Apparently he goes about it this way because he is conscious of the persuasive power of his practice of forgoing the Lord-­granted apostolic privilege and maintaining himself through his own hard manual labor, as well as because he understands well that his precept will be taken more seriously when it is confirmed by his own practice.

29 Jewett, Romans, 68. 30 Cf. 1 Cor 7:25–35, where he calls his advice or ruling on the question of marriage of the unmarried as his “opinion” (γνώμη); although he imparts it as a faithful apostle of the Lord, he still distinguishes it from the “command” of the Lord (cf. 1 Cor 7:10–11; 14:37). He restricts the application of the word “law” to “the law of Christ” (1 Cor 9:21; Gal 6:2) in reference to Jesus Christ’s love command.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 665

7/12/23 11:29 AM

666

2 Thessalonians 3:6–15

11 Ἀκούομεν γάρ τινας περιπατοῦντας ἐν ὑμῖν ἀτάκτως μηδὲν ἐργαζομένους ἀλλὰ περιεργαζομένους, “For we hear that some are conducting themselves in a disorderly manner among you, doing no work but being busybodies.” Having commanded the whole church to discipline the disorderly idlers in vv. 6–10, Paul now falls back to explain how he has come to know that they are making troubles at present (note the present tense of the three participles in this verse) and makes a transition to commanding the troublemakers themselves (v. 12). So γάρ here explains why he has given the command of vv. 6–10, and ἀκούομεν is perfective, as in 1 Cor 11:18: “we have heard.”31 In 1 Cor 11:17–34, with that verb Paul first raises the issue of some Corinthian Christians abusing the Lord’s Supper and then goes on to give the command, as well as guidance for the church to celebrate it properly. But here he reverses the order, giving first the command for correction and then stating the issue. He seems to be following the two different orders because, on the one hand, in 1 Cor 11 he deals with a new problem that he has just heard of for the first time, for whose correction he has to give a detailed explanation about the Lord’s Supper before commanding the Corinthians concerning a proper celebration of it, whereas in our passage he deals with a problem that had existed from the time of his mission in Thessalonica, so that he commanded the Thessalonians to correct it at that time and renewed the command in his first letter (4:11–12). Since in our passage he is dealing with such a persistent problem, well-­k nown to the Thessalonian church as well as to himself, he can start this whole exhortation with a direct command for the church to deal with it. Then, having done that, by pointing out that the problem is still taking place, he both provides the reason why he has given the whole church the command in vv. 6–10 and makes a transition to turn to the disorderly idlers and command them. This information about the persistent problem of the disorderly idlers presumably came to Paul and his colleagues orally, together with the news about the misunderstanding regarding the day of the Lord (see the introductory explanation at the beginning of this section). Marshall comments that “the vague form of allusion to ‘some of you’ is typically Pauline (cf. 1 Cor 5:1; 2 Cor 5:5–6; 10:2, 12; Gal 1:7; 2:12) and does not necessarily mean that he was unaware of the identity of the culprits.”32 Yet certainly it refers to a minority of the church, as he praises the church as a whole for their faithful obedience to his command (v. 4; cf. 1:3) and commands them to discipline the culprits (v. 6)—­a number of people that is large enough to merit Paul’s and the church’s very serious attention but still small enough for the church’s ability to discipline them, which is assumed here. Pointing out that the expression τινας . . . ἐν ὑμῖν (“some among you, in your midst”) for “some of you” is unusual (cf. τινα ὑμῶν in v. 8), Marshall suggests 31 Marshall, 224; Malherbe, 452. 32 Marshall, 224. Cf. also Malherbe, 452.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 666

7/12/23 11:29 AM

Comment 667 that with it Paul may be reminding the church of their responsibility for the offenders who are bringing shame upon it.33 But because of the unusualness of that phrase, Malherbe proposes to take the prepositional phrase ἐν ὑμῖν with περιπατοῦντας and ἀτάκτως that immediately surround it, rather than with the separated τινας.34 This is to take the phrase ἐν ὑμῖν here as parallel to ἐν ὑμῖν in v. 7 and to see Paul here contrasting the conduct of the disorderly idlers with that of his and his colleagues: in effect, whereas “we were not idle and disorderly among you” (οὐκ ἠτακτήσαμεν ἐν ὑμῖν), “some are conducting themselves idly and disorderly among you.” This appears to be the right interpretation. περιπατοῦντας . . . ἀτάκτως, which repeats the same phrase in v. 6, is defined more specifically by the following antithetical phrase of two participles, μηδὲν ἐργαζομένους ἀλλὰ περιεργαζομένους (“doing no work but being busybodies”). It is a Greek play on words, the figura etymologica (for which cf. Acts 8:30, ἆρά γε γινώσκεις ἅ ἀναγινώσκεις; Rom 12:3, μὴ ὑπερφρονεῖν παρ’ ὅ δεὶ φρονεῖν ἀλλὰ φρονεῖν εἰς τὸ σωφρονεῖν; 2 Cor 3:2, γινωσκομένη καὶ ἀναγινωσκομένη). Various attempts have been made to convey its meaning while representing its paronomasia in English: for example, “busybodies instead of busy” (J. Moffatt); “neglecting their own business to mind other people’s” (R. A. Knox); “minding everybody’s business but their own” (NEB); “they are not busy; they are busybodies” (NIV). Malherbe cites examples of accusations against Hellenistic philosophers for being busybodies to show that here “Paul uses a well-­k nown term of opprobrium that was applied by his contemporaries to people who thought of themselves as representing higher values.”35 See also 1 Tim 5:13 for a criticism of some young widows who “learn to be idlers [ἀργαί], gadding about from house to house, and not only idlers [ἀργαί] but gossips and busybodies [περίεργοι], saying what they should not” (cf. 1 Pet 4:15). It appears that the Thessalonian believers, whom Paul criticizes here for “conducting themselves disorderly,” lived like those young widows.36 It is then easy to imagine that, in addition to arousing the resentment of other members of the church as they take advantage of their charity without working for their own living, they also create conflicts with them by meddling in their affairs and probably also with the leaders of the church in their rebelliousness toward them (cf. also 1 Thess 5:12–14). Anyway, in our verse those who conduct themselves ἀτάκτως are described as doing no work but spending their time meddling in the affairs of others, which is “disorderly” in the sense of not conforming to the social norm of decency or propriety (cf. 1 Thess 4:11–12), as well as to the tradition of Paul (2 Thess 3:6–10). So, by highlighting the two characteristics (idleness and

33 34 35 36

Marshall, 224. Malherbe, 453. Malherbe, 453. Cf. Weima, 619.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 667

7/12/23 11:29 AM

668

2 Thessalonians 3:6–15

disorderliness) of those who “conduct themselves disorderly” (περιπατοῦντες ἀτάκτως), that is, the ἄτακτοι (1 Thess 5:14), our verse provides the best definition of them, which may be represented as the “disorderly or unruly idlers.” 12 τοῖς δὲ τοιούτοις παραγγέλλομεν καὶ παρακαλοῦμεν ἐν κυρίῳ Ἰησοῦ Χριστῷ, “Such persons we command and exhort in the Lord Jesus Christ.” Having described the disorderly idlers, Paul now turns from commanding the whole church to commanding the offenders themselves—­albeit still in an indirect manner in the form of reporting to the church his command for “such persons.” As in 1 Thess 4:l (ἐρωτῶμεν ὑμᾶς καὶ παρακαλοῦμεν ἐν κυρίῳ Ἰησοῦ), so here also he combines two verbs and invokes the Lord’s authority for emphasis. But here Paul replaces ἐρωτῶμεν (“we request”) with a stronger verb, παραγγέλλομεν (“we command”), thus keeping the same tone of the whole passage (vv. 4, 6, 10). He does this obviously because here he is seeking to bring the disorderly and unruly idlers into submission (v. 14), whereas in 1 Thess 4:1–12 he sought only to issue emphatically his exhortations for sanctification for the Thessalonian church, in which the problem of the disorderly idlers was not yet so serious as it has now become. In 1 Thess 4:1 we have observed that by joining ἐρωτῶμεν with the softer verb παρακαλοῦμεν (“we exhort, encourage, appeal”), Paul makes his exhortations both emphatic and friendly. Here, if he just said παραγγέλλομεν in this more personal address to the disorderly idlers, the offenders, it would sound excessively harsh to them (whereas it would not sound so harsh in vv. 6 and 10, as there it is addressed to the whole church, most of which are not part of the offenders). So the verb παρακαλοῦμεν (“we appeal”) here added is to be appreciated as “inject[ing] a note of passionate pastoral pleading into the instruction.”37 The phrase ἐν κυρίῳ Ἰησοῦ Χριστῷ denotes here, as in 1 Thess 4:1, both the authority of Paul as a fully empowered agent of the Lord Jesus and the obligation of the addressees (here the disorderly idlers) to render “the obedience of faith” (Rom 1:5) to the command in v. 14 that he issues on behalf of the Lord (see comment on 1 Thess 4:1–2).38 ἵνα μετὰ ἡσυχίας ἐργαζόμενοι τὸν ἑαυτῶν ἄρτον ἐσθίωσιν, “that in quietness they work and eat their own bread.” This is the content of the command. The phrase μετὰ ἡσυχίας ἐργαζόμενοι abbreviates the three phrases in 1 Thess 4:11 (φιλοτιμεῖσθαι ἡσυχάζειν καὶ πράσσειν τὰ ἴδια καὶ ἐργάζεσθαι ταῖς [ἰδίαις] χερσὶν ὑμῶν, “to lead a quiet life and to mind your own business and to work with your own hands”), representing the first two of those three phrases with μετὰ ἡσυχίας (“in quietness”), which stands here in contrast to the preceding περιεργαζομένους (“being busybodies”) in v. 11. Such a life is the antithesis to being idle and squandering time in interfering in other people’s affairs. By doing honest work and avoiding becoming a general nuisance to others, 37 Nicholl, Hope, 170, cited from Weima, 620. 38 Pace Marshall, 225; Morris, 258; and Weima, 620, who find also a connotation of Paul’s affirmation of common brotherhood with the disorderly idlers “in the Lord.”

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 668

7/12/23 11:29 AM

Comment 669 they are to earn their own bread to eat, rather than depending on others’ charity (v. 8a; cf. 1 Thess 4:12). 13 Ὑμεῖς δέ, ἀδελφοί, μὴ ἐγκακήσητε καλοποιοῦντες, “But for your part, brothers and sisters, do not be weary in doing good.” Having spoken about his command to the disorderly idlers briefly in v. 12, Paul resumes telling what the majority of the Thessalonian church should do. The emphatic ὑμεῖς δέ contrasts the majority of the church (“brothers and sisters”) with the disorderly idlers. The Hellenistic verb ἐγκακεῖν (BDAG 272: “lose enthusiasm,” “be discouraged”) is preceded by a negative in all its NT occurrences (cf. Luke 18:1; 2 Cor 4:1, 16; Gal 6:9; Eph 3:13). The use in Gal 6:9 (τὸ δὲ καλὸν ποιοῦντες μὴ ἐγκακῶμεν, “let us not be weary in doing good”) provides a close parallel to our verse. However, whereas the context of the verse in Galatians suggests that there Paul means doing good in a general sense, our present context makes it clear that here he means doing good more specifically in the sense of contributing to the common fund or common meals of the church.39 Seeing the disorderly idlers abuse the church’s common fund by participating in the common meals with no contribution of their own toward them, the rest of the church’s members could easily feel weary to go on making contributions toward them. So, having commanded the idlers to work for their own living as well as directing the church to exclude them from their common meals, Paul is strongly encouraging the hardworking members not to slacken their donations to the church’s common fund, which serves their weak siblings in the Lord who, for no fault of their own, cannot provide themselves with their daily needs. Compare Eph 4:28, where the converted thief no longer robs others but helps them: “let him labor, doing honest work with his hands, so that he may be able to give to those in need.” 14 εἰ δέ τις οὐχ ὑπακούει τῷ λόγῳ ἡμῶν διὰ τῆς ἐπιστολῆς, τοῦτον σημειοῦσθε μὴ συναναμίγνυσθαι αὐτῷ, ἵνα ἐντραπῇ, “But if anyone disobeys our word (conveyed) by this epistle, take note of this person, so as not to associate with him or her, in order that they may be ashamed.” In this and the following verse, concluding his commands in the preceding verses (vv. 6–13), Paul instructs the church about what concrete actions they are to take to keep away from the disorderly idlers (v. 6). The “letter” here refers to this letter, and “our word” refers to the command that he has just issued in v. 12. Even while hoping that some of the disorderly idlers would take heed to his command, Paul is realistic that there will also be those who go on disobeying his command, as that has been his experience with some Thessalonians since he first gave the same command during his founding mission and then renewed it in his first letter (1 Thess 4:11–12). In this way of speaking, which assumes the requirement for

39 Contra Trilling, 154, who sees a break between our v. 12 and v. 13 and so interprets the exhortation of v. 13 in a general sense.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 669

7/12/23 11:29 AM

670

2 Thessalonians 3:6–15

the idlers to obey his word, again the note of his apostolic authority is here struck (cf. vv. 6, 12). Paul states that if there is anyone who does not obey his command to live a life of self-­support, the church is to “take note of this person” or “mark” him or her. In the house setting of an early Pauline church, where the size of the congregation could not have been large, it must have been easy to identify the individuals who lived in an idle and disorderly way. This is the only NT instance of σημειοῦν, found usually (as here) in the middle voice (cf. Ps 4:6 [4:7 LXX], ἐσημειώθη ἐφ’ ἡμᾶς τὸ φῶς τοῦ προσώπου σου, “the light of your face has been set as a mark on us”; 1 Clem. 43.1, Μωϋσῆς τὰ διατεταγμένα αὐτῷ πάντα ἐσημειώσατο ἐν ταῖς ἱεραῖς βίβλοις, “Moses noted down in the sacred books all the injunctions given to him”). The purpose of taking note of such people or marking them is to avoid associating (συναναμίγνυσθαι) with them. This is the concrete meaning of the command in v. 6 for the church to “keep away from any [disorderly idler].” In Rom 16:17 Paul makes a similar exhortation: “keep an eye on [σκοπεῖν] those who create dissensions and stumbling blocks . . . ; avoid them [ἐκκλίνετε ἀπ’ αὐτῶν].” In this passage in Romans, Paul exhorts the Roman Christians to take note of those who create troubles in the church with a false doctrine and to not associate with them. In 1 Cor 5:9, 11 he uses the same verb as here (συναναμίγνυσθαι), in order to instruct the Corinthian Christians “not to associate with anyone who bears the name of brother or sister” but is guilty of fornication, idolatry, and other similar vices. There, he goes on to refer to a specific form of association, namely, table fellowship: believers are “not even to eat with such a person” (τῷ τοιούτῳ μηδὲ συνεσθίειν, v. 11). If our interpretation of 2 Thess 3:10 above is right, we need to understand that this element is also assumed in Paul’s instruction here in our present verse. The Thessalonian Christians are to avoid association with the disorderly idlers by excluding them from the communal meals of the church, as well as by not inviting them to their private meals at home. In the verses in 1 Cor 5, Paul describes the culprits as Christians by name but apparently has doubts about their true Christian identity. Even so, he does not ask the Corinthian church to excommunicate such persons, unlike the man who committed incest (1 Cor 5:1–8). Therefore, it is likely that he sees them continuing to participate in the worship services and other activities of the church and so is instructing the Corinthian Christians to avoid associating with them in those situations, even avoiding eating with them at the communal meals in which the Lord’s Supper is celebrated. This would practically mean an instruction to exclude them at such meals (a “virtual excommunication”?). This seems to be the implication of the escalating particle μηδέ at 1 Cor 5:11; it is placed there not to suggest that “avoidance of eating with the offenders is . . . a lesser thing than associating with them,” which is nonsense,40 but to 40 Cf. Marshall, 228.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 670

7/12/23 11:29 AM

Comment 671 suggest that even if the Corinthian Christians cannot help but allow them to participate in worship services they should avoid associating with them even by refusing to eat with them at such meals in which all the Christians would wish to participate for the sake of the celebration of the Lord’s Supper. In our passage Paul still calls the disorderly idlers “brothers and sisters” (2 Thess 3:6) and instructs the Thessalonian Christians to regard them as such (v. 15). Therefore, it is likely that he assumes the idlers are attending the worship services and other activities of the church and is telling the Thessalonian Christians to “take note of them” and keep distance from them in those settings. To avoid association with them in private settings, the Thessalonian Christians would also need to disallow them to meddle in their affairs. Paul states the purpose of the Thessalonian Christians’ avoidance of associating with the disorderly idlers to be ἵνα ἐντραπῇ (“in order that he may be ashamed”). As in 1 Cor 4:14 (cf. Titus 2:8), so also here he uses the compound verb ἐντρέπειν (“to turn about”) in the metaphorical sense of “to put to shame,”41 in the subjunctive aorist passive form. Commenting on v. 6, we have already appreciated with Green and Weima how effective this disciplinary action of shunning the disorderly idlers by the church at large and thereby putting them to shame would have been in a strongly communal culture where honor and shame were the values that powerfully controlled social behavior.42 Since their conversion to the Christian faith, they have already been ostracized and shamed by their pagan family and society,43 so that the ostracism and shaming by the “brothers and sisters” of their new “family” in Christ would mean great pressure for them to stop with their shameful deviation. In our passage, Paul is interested not just in rebuking or condemning the disorderly idlers but rather in restoring them to a decent and honorable life of working hard for their own living (v. 12; cf. 1 Thess 4:11–12). So in commanding the Thessalonian church to “keep away” from the disorderly idlers (v. 6) and not to “associate” with them (v. 14), he very much hopes that such a hard disciplinary measure would lead to the idlers’ change and restoration (cf. Gal 6:1). 15 καὶ μὴ ὡς ἐχθρὸν ἡγεῖσθε, ἀλλὰ νουθετεῖτε ὡς ἀδελφόν, “and yet do not count him or her as an enemy, but admonish him or her as a brother or sister.” Since the disorderly idlers have been arousing resentment and creating conflicts in the church, there is a danger for the hard-­working members to vent their negative feelings out against them in carrying out the disciplinary measures ordered in the preceding verse. Hence, Paul adds this antithetical statement to help them carry those measures out in the right spirit. When they mark the

41 BDAG 341 (s.v. ἐντρέπω 1). 42 Cf. Green, 355; Weima, 626; also Fee, 338; more fundamentally deSilva, “Paul, Honor, and Shame,” 26–47. 43 Cf. deSilva, “ ‘Worthy of His Kingdom,’ ” 60–63.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 671

7/12/23 11:29 AM

672

2 Thessalonians 3:6–15

disorderly idlers out, shun them, and thereby make them feel ashamed, they are not to do these acts in a hostile and vindictive spirit, as if they were enemies. Rather, they are to admonish them in love, regarding them as brothers and sisters who need help to be brought back from their waywardness. So this concluding exhortation makes it clear that the whole purpose of our passage vv. 6–15 is a positive one of restoring the “brothers and sisters” to proper Christian living. For such an exhortation, an adversative conjunction at the head of the sentence would make a better logical flow. But here surprisingly καί stands. It appears best to understand it in the sense of “and yet.”44 In 1 Thess 5:14 Paul exhorted the Thessalonian church to “admonish the disorderly idlers” (νουθετεῖτε τοὺς ἀτάκτους, see comment ad loc). Here he renews that exhortation. However, if the Thessalonian Christians are to avoid associating with the disorderly idlers, when can they find the opportunities to admonish them? Trilling sees the exhortations in vv. 6, 14, and 15 as “uneven and artificial” and claims that this phenomenon arises ultimately from the fictional nature of our letter.45 But, for us, before explaining the exhortations away by supposing a poor, inconsistent fiction writer here, it is necessary to ask more seriously whether there can be a situation where those exhortations can still make sense together. Since we uphold the Pauline authorship of this letter, we may ask: Is Paul thinking here of a worship setting in which individual members of the church deliver the word of admonishment for a life of self-­support to the whole congregation, but with the disorderly idlers especially in mind (cf. 1 Cor 14:31)? Or is he thinking of the situations where the disorderly idlers try to meddle in the affairs of other members of the church? In such situations, the latter would have the chance to admonish the idlers, in the spirit of sibling love, to live a life of self-­support in quietness, rather than driving them away in a hostile manner. This view may be supported by the wish-­prayer for peace that follows in v. 16.

Explanation In 1 Cor 9, Paul emphatically claims that as an apostle (v. 1) he has the “right” that the Lord Jesus gave to his apostles to live on their audience’s provision of their daily needs (vv. 4, 14), and therefore he has the “right not to work” to earn his own living (v. 6). However, there he says that he has not availed himself of this right (v. 15; also vv. 12, 18), and goes on to explain implicitly why he has not done so (vv. 15–23). He states that it was in order to proclaim the gospel effectively (v. 12) by preaching the gospel free of charge in service of his audience, in contradistinction to the charlatan philosophers and 44 Malherbe, 459; BDAG 495 (s.v. καί 1.b.η). 45 Trilling, 156.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 672

7/12/23 11:29 AM

Explanation 673 sophistic orators who received money from their audience for their lectures. By preaching the gospel this way and so demonstrating clearly the truth of the gospel as God’s “grace,” Paul sought to fulfill his apostolic task of preaching the gospel effectively, which is, after all, the real intent of the Lord Jesus’s directive (see Explanation of 1 Thess 2:1–12). In 1 Thess 2:3–10 also, Paul contrasts his apostolic “entry” (εἴσοδος) into Thessalonica with that of those orators and false prophets and explains that he made the decision at that time to serve his beloved Thessalonian converts rather than to be served by them, thereby forgoing his apostolic right (2:7–8). He then sums up his sustained demonstration of the integrity of his apostolic ministry among them (vv. 3–8) by recalling the hard manual labor that he did for his own living (v. 9), which is more or less exactly reproduced in our v. 8b here, as we have seen. Thus there he reminds his Thessalonian converts of his self-­supporting hard labor in order to demonstrate his “holy, righteous, and blameless” apostolic integrity (1 Thess 2:10). So both in 1 Cor 9 and 1 Thess 2:3–10 Paul affirms two interrelated motives for his forgoing his apostolic right to claim the support of his church: his desire to serve his converts rather than burdening them to serve him, and his apostolic consciousness to preach the gospel effectively. However, from 1 Thess 2:9–12 we may infer yet a third motive in his forgoing his apostolic right, namely, the motive to encourage his converts to work for their own living in imitation of him (see comment on and Explanation of 1 Thess 2:1–12). There, having reminded the Thessalonians of his hard labor for his own upkeep without burdening them as part of the blameless life he lived among them during his mission in their city, Paul reminds them also of the fact that he imparted the strong fatherly exhortation for them “to live in a manner worthy of God who calls them into his kingdom” (vv. 11–12). In commenting on 1 Thess 2:11, we suggested that this summary description of his exhortations there refers to the instructions about the Christian life of sanctification and love of others that he talks about in 1 Thess 4:3–12—the “commands” (παραγγελίας) that he says he “gave” (ἐδώκαμεν) them (1 Thess 4:2, 11) and they “received” (παρελάβετε) as a tradition during his mission among them (1 Thess 4:1, see comment on 1 Thess 4:1–2). In reminding and renewing these commands in 1 Thess 4:1–12, he specifically indicates that he “commanded” (παρηγγείλαμεν) the Thessalonian Christians “to aspire to live a quiet life, to mind [their] own affairs and to work with [their] own hands” (v. 11). Therefore, it is very likely that Paul gave this command to them, pointing to his example of hard manual labor for his own upkeep (1 Thess 2:9). All these connections between 1 Thess 2:9–12 and 4:1–12 make it clear that, right from the beginning of his mission in Thessalonica, Paul made efforts to establish the “tradition” of believers quietly minding their own affairs and working with their own hands to earn their living, demonstrating such a life by his own hard manual labor. This is what he is referring to in our 2 Thess 3:6–9. Therefore, the Thessalonian Christians themselves know (2 Thess 3:7) how

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 673

7/12/23 11:29 AM

674

2 Thessalonians 3:6–15

they ought to imitate him by living according to the “tradition” (παράδοσις) they received (παρελάβοσαν) from him (v. 6). But the disorderly idlers are transgressing that “tradition” (v. 6) and living exactly in the opposite way (v. 11). So Paul calls out their disorderly idleness and reissues the “command” (παραγγέλλομεν) for them (v. 12). Since other apostles apparently followed the tradition established by the Lord Jesus (Matt 10:10; Luke 10:7–8; 1 Cor 9:14) and received material support from churches (cf. 1 Cor 9:3–6), Paul’s policy of supporting his apostolic mission with his own manual labor and teaching his converts to work with their own hands for their living in imitation of him was a new tradition that he established for his churches. It is quite understandable that Paul, a former “Pharisaic scribe,”46 who had become an apostle of the Lord Jesus Christ, tried to establish his teachings as tradition that he would deliver to his churches in the name of his Lord or in the Spirit of his Lord and they would receive it and live by it (cf. 1 Cor 2:13, 16; 7:10–16; 14:37–38). But why did he establish this particular tradition about each believer working to earn his or her own living without burdening others? In commanding the Thessalonian believers according to that tradition in 1 Thess 4:11–12, Paul suggests clearly enough that he is concerned to prevent the abuse by the idlers of the church’s common fund and the consequent resentment and conflicts within the church, as well as preventing the consequent bad reputation of the church from spreading among outsiders (see comments and Explanation ad loc). Since Paul says that already during his mission in Thessalonica he gave the believers there the command for self-­sufficient living by way of transmitting a tradition, we are to understand that he established that tradition at the latest some time before he came to Thessalonica. Apparently he had experienced early on the problem of some idlers abusing a church’s common fund or communal meals, as well as its serious consequences for fellowship within the church and for the church’s image in the outside world. So he established the tradition that believers must each work for their own living and passed it on to every church he founded, even while encouraging contributions to the church’s common fund for their new siblings in the Lord who were not in a position to work because of old age, ailment, unemployment, and so on (cf. Rom 12:8, 13; Eph 4:28; 1 Thess 3:13; cf. Luke’s implicit encouragement through the repeated picture of the common sharing of goods within the primitive church [Acts 2:41–47; 4:32–35], as well as his indication of its problems [Acts 5:1–16; 6:1–6]). How seriously Paul takes the problem of the disorderly idlers and how keen he is in correcting them by enforcing the tradition are intimated by the fact that he uses the strong word “command” five times for his exhortation for the disorderly idlers in his Thessalonian 46 Hengel and Schwemer, Paul, 36.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 674

7/12/23 11:29 AM

Explanation 675 correspondence (1 Thess 4:11; 2 Thess 3:4, 6, 10, 12, or six times if 1 Thess 4:2 is also counted), while using it only two more times in the paraeneses of his whole corpus, once for the directive about divorce (1 Cor 7:10) and then for correction of the abuse of the Lord’s Supper (1 Cor 11:17; cf. also his triple emphatic formulation in 1 Thess 2:11: “we exhorted, encouraged, and charged”). In our passage, Paul’s immediate concern is to enforce the church’s disciplinary shunning of the disorderly idlers, especially exclusion of them from communal meals (no doubt, to protect the integrity and health of the fellowship of the church as a whole). This is clear from the fact that the command for the church to discipline the idlers builds an inclusio for the whole passage (v. 6/vv. 14–15), in the context of which his command “let them not eat” (v. 10b) can most naturally be interpreted in terms of exclusion from communal meals (or else does the church also have the right and power to prevent the idlers from eating at their own home the food they have gotten without their labor for it?). The exhortation in v. 13 for the other members of the church to make generous donations for the church’s common fund or toward the communal meals also supports this view. However, we should not miss Paul’s more fundamental intent also present here, namely, the (redemptive) intent to correct the idlers themselves, so that they may come to live a healthy life of supporting themselves with the fruits of their own labor, as well as making a positive contribution to the communal life of the church. We can see this intent in the detailed description of his life of self-­support and in his exhortation for the Thessalonians to imitate it (vv. 7–9). If Paul has in mind only the church’s exclusion of the idlers from communal meals, he would not need to describe his example in such great length and detail and would not focus just on highlighting his principle of self-­support but would include something having implications for the church’s common fund or communal meals. We can see his intent to correct the idlers also in his command addressed to them (v. 12), especially if we read it in light of its parallel, 1 Thess 4:11–12, in which, as part of his exhortation for sibling love, he specifically commands the Thessalonians believers to work with their own hands so that they may not need to depend on others’ help (see comment ad loc). So the command in our v. 10, “If anyone is not willing to work, let him not eat,” also has the quality of a general precept that inculcates the spirit of self-­support and encourages diligent labor for a wise and successful life, although its primary purpose is to command the church to exclude the idlers from their communal meals. It has justly become proverbial well beyond Christian circles.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 675

7/12/23 11:29 AM

2. Conclusion with a Wish-­Prayer and a Benediction (3:16) Bibliography Gamble, H., Jr. The Textual History of the Letter to the Romans. Studies and Documents 42. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1977. Weima, J. A. D. Neglected Endings: The Significance of the Pauline Letter Closings. JSNTSup 101. Sheffield: JSOT Press, 1994. Wiles, G. P. Paul’s Intercessory Prayers. SNTSMS 24. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1974.

Translation Now may the Lord of peace himself give you peace at all times in all ways.a The Lord be with you all. 16

Notes a. For τρόπῳ (“way,” “manner”), A* D* F G 33 pc lat read τόπῳ (“place”).

Form/Structure/Setting As he did with the wish-­prayer of 1 Thess 5:23, so here again Weima strongly argues that this verse is a “peace benediction” like Rom 15:33; 16:20a; 2 Cor 13:11; Phil 4:9b; Gal 6:16 and therefore it is to be regarded as the beginning of the letter closing (vv. 16–18), rather than as a wish-­prayer that concludes the exhortations in the preceding vv. 6–15.1 However, in the Form/Structure/ Setting of 1 Thess 5:23, for various reasons we have fundamentally questioned whether “peace benediction” as a constant element of a letter closing can form critically be established in Pauline letters. We have also pointed out that the explicit subject of prayer in 1 Thess 5:23 is not peace for the Thessalonian Christians but the consummation of their sanctification at the parousia of the Lord Jesus Christ. Since Weima himself confesses that 1 Thess 5:23 is “unique” as a “peace benediction” as it contains a summary of Paul’s teachings in the preceding chs. 4–5, whereas the other alleged “peace benediction” passages do not,2 we have argued that it is better to regard 1 Thess 5:23 as a wish-­prayer that forms a parallel to and an inclusio with the wish-­prayer of 1 Thess 3:12–13. Our present v. 16a may be called a “peace benediction” since here, unlike in 1 Thess 5:23, Paul does pray for the Lord to grant peace to 1 2

Weima, 631–34. Cf. also Best, 345; Wanamaker, 291; Malherbe, 461; Fee, 339–40. Weima, 418–21.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 676

7/12/23 11:29 AM

Comment 677 the Thessalonian believers. However, since our v. 16a, like 1 Thess 5:23, also summarizes Paul’s teaching in the preceding sections of the letter (certainly 3:6–15 and probably also chs. 1–2), as Weima himself stresses,3 it is better to regard it as a wish-­prayer parallel to 2:16–17—a wish-­prayer that concludes the main body of the letter—­rather than as a “peace benediction” that opens the closing section of the letter (note well that Rom 15:33; Phil 4:7, 9b do not close their respective letters).4 As Paul adds to his wish-­prayer in 1 Thess 5:23 a word of assurance (v. 24: “he who calls you is faithful, and he will do it”), so here also he similarly adds to his prayer another assuring prayer or benediction (v. 16b: “the Lord be with you all”). Weima notes these features in both passages as unusual among the passages that he identifies as “peace benedictions” in the letter-­closing sections.5 Therefore, this benediction also seems to support the view that v. 16a is a wish-­prayer with which Paul closes the preceding section of exhortations. For, in view of the “grace benediction” (v. 18: “the grace of our Lord Jesus Christ be with you all”), it appears a little awkward to think that Paul means to pronounce two more or less synonymous benedictions in the letter closing. So it is better to view v. 16b as a benediction that reinforces the preceding wish-­prayer of v. 16a and closes together with it the whole preceding section of vv. 6–15.6 After concluding the exhortation section of ch. 3 with them, Paul enters into the last phase of closing the letter with greetings to the recipients of the letter and completes it with his standard grace benediction (vv. 17–18).

Comment 3:16 Αὐτὸς δὲ ὁ κύριος τῆς εἰρήνης δῴη ὑμῖν τὴν εἰρήνην διὰ παντὸς ἐν παντὶ τρόπῳ, “Now may the Lord of peace himself give you peace at all times in all ways.” Like all the other wish-­prayers, this one also starts with the transitory δέ. For αὐτὸς δὲ ὁ κύριος, see comment on the same form in 2:16, where it appears together with ὁ θεὸς ὁ πατὴρ ἡμῶν as the composite subject of the wish-­prayer there. For the opening emphatic αὐτός, see comment on 1 Thess 3:11 (a wish-­ prayer; cf. also 1 Thess 4:16), where it appears with God (αὐτὸς δὲ ὁ θεὸς καὶ πατὴρ ἡμῶν καὶ ὁ κύριος ἡμῶν Ἰησοῦς; see also 1 Thess 5:23, another wish-­prayer). There is an echo here of the priestly blessing in Num 6:26 LXX, κύριος . . . δῴη σοι εἰρήνην, “the Lord . . . give you peace.” Paul adapts this liturgical form to his epistolary purpose.7 With the repetition of the word “peace” and the addition of the all-­inclusive rhetorical phrase διὰ παντὸς ἐν παντὶ τρόπῳ (“at all times in 3 4 5 6 7

Weima, 632, 634. Cf. Trilling, 156–57; Marshall, 230; Richard, 384–45. Weima, 635. Thus, it is unnecessary to regard this additional wish-­prayer as a sign of non-­Pauline authorship of our letter, contra Trilling, 157. Cf. Malherbe, 462.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 677

7/12/23 11:29 AM

678

2 Thessalonians 3:16

all ways,” or “continually in every way”), as well as the αὐτός before “the Lord,” the prayer is formulated in a most emphatic and comprehensive way. For διὰ παντός (sc. καιροῦ; sometimes written as one word, διαπαντός), see Matt 18:10; Mark 5:5; Luke 24:53; Acts 2:25 (in a quotation from the LXX); 10:2; 24:16; Rom 11:10 (in a quotation from the LXX); Heb 9:6; 13:15. The multiplication of expressions containing πᾶς (“every, all”) or its derivatives (“all times in all ways” here and “with you all” in the following prayer) is a common rhetorical figure in Greek literature (cf. Acts 24:3); Paul is prone to use it in words of prayer or assurance (cf. esp. 2 Cor 9:8). Whereas in 1 Thess 3:11 and 2 Thess 2:16 Paul offers the prayer to “God our Father himself and our Lord Jesus” or “our Lord Jesus Christ himself and God our Father,”8 here he offers it to “the Lord” alone (which, no doubt, refers to Jesus Christ). Apparently he does this because throughout 2 Thess 3 he has been speaking of the Lord Jesus Christ as the one who loves the Thessalonian believers (2:16), faithfully “establishes and guards” them (3:3), “directs” their hearts (v. 5), and commands them through his apostle Paul to live in obedience to his will (vv. 4, 6, 12). Nicholl and Weima suggest that in highlighting “the Lord himself” in this prayer, Paul has also in view the Thessalonian believers’ confusion and anxiety about “the day of the Lord” (2:2–3).9 Bearing that anxiety in mind, Paul may be wanting to remind them of what he wrote in 1:7–10: on that day when the Lord Jesus executes God’s just judgment, he will destroy unbelievers but grant salvation to believers; so he is for them the Lord who spells (or should spell) peace rather than fear. Anyway, even offering the prayer here to the Lord Jesus alone, Paul of course presupposes the thought that he expresses through making God the Father and the Lord Jesus the composite subject of the wish-­prayers in 1 Thess 3:11 and 2 Thess 2:16. The Lord Jesus Christ is God’s Son, who has inherited full authority and power from God the Father in order to execute his saving work as his agent on earth (cf. Rom 1:3–4; 1 Cor 15:23–27). Hence, Paul can also designate Jesus Christ here as ὁ κύριος τῆς εἰρήνης (only here in the NT), whereas he normally speaks of God as ὁ θεὸς τῆς εἰρήνης in wish-­prayers and similar constructions (Rom 15:33; 16:20; Phil 4:9; 1 Thess 5:23; cf. 2 Cor 13:11; Heb 13:20). The “peace” that Paul is talking about here belongs to God, but it is the Lord Jesus Christ who actually gives it to the Thessalonian believers on behalf of God the Father. So just as Paul speaks about “the Lord of peace” alongside “the God of peace,” so also he can speak about “the peace of Christ” ruling in believers’ hearts (Col 3:15) alongside “the peace of God” guarding their hearts (Phil 4:7). In our verse, the article τήν before εἰρήνην points to the peace as his peace, “the peace of Christ,” that Paul talks about in Col 3:15. Since Paul offers this wish-­prayer in connection with his exhortations in 8 See comments ad loc for the significance of the change of their order in the two wish-­prayers. 9 Nicholl, Hope, 175, and Weima, 634.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 678

7/12/23 11:29 AM

Comment 679 vv. 6–15, especially immediately after vv. 14–15, he must be doing so with an immediate concern that the Lord grant peace to the Thessalonian church in their situation of tension over the disciplining of the unruly idlers (cf. also 1 Thess 5:12–14, where Paul tells the church, “be at peace among yourselves,” while exhorting them about “admonishing” the unruly idlers).10 However, he is conscious of moving toward the end of the letter, and he adds the all-­inclusive phrase “at all times in all ways” to also include in the prayer the concerns for the other troubles addressed in the letter. He prays that the Lord grant peace to the Thessalonian believers in their anxiety about the day of the Lord (2 Thess 2) and in their suffering from the persecutions of the opponents of their faith (2 Thess 1) as well. ὁ κύριος μετὰ πάντων ὑμῶν, “The Lord be with you all.” Following the first wish-­prayer with the optative δῴη, this second wish-­prayer has εἴη (optative of εἶναι) elided. As said above (Form/Structure/Setting), this wish-­prayer is added to the preceding one in order to reinforce it in the same way as the word of assurance (“he who calls you is faithful, and he will do it”) is added to reinforce the preceding wish-­prayer in 1 Thess 5:23–24. The familiar Jewish benediction (e.g., Judg 6:12; Ruth 2:4; 2 Chr 15:2; Luke 1:28) is adapted here (cf. 2 Tim 4:22a). From the parallelism between the two wish-­prayers here, Marshall draws “the point that to pray for a certain gift of [the Lord] is the same as praying for [the Lord] himself to be with them.”11 However, it appears better to see a progression of thought between the two prayers: whereas the first one prays specifically for the Lord to grant peace to the Thessalonian believers, this one prays more comprehensively for the Lord to be with them with all his power, wisdom, and love. So this prayer reinforces the preceding one. This clause contains a further form of πᾶς to stand alongside the two in the preceding wish-­prayer: by adding “all” (“you all”), Paul implicitly conveys not only his goodwill for the disorderly idlers as well as for the majority of the church but also his wish to see them fully restored to the united fellowship of the whole church in and with which the Lord is present with his blessings.

10 Cf. also Schreiber, II:261–62; Hoppe, II:222–23. 11 Marshall, 230.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 679

7/12/23 11:29 AM

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 680

7/12/23 11:29 AM

IV. Letter Closing (3:17–18) Bibliography Gamble, H., Jr. The Textual History of the Letter to the Romans. Studies and Documents 42. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1977. Kern, F. H. “Über 2 Thess 2, 1–12: Nebst Andeutungen über den Ursprung des 2. Briefs an die Thessalonicher.” Tübinger Zeitschrift für Theologie 2 (1839): 145–224. Weima, J. A. D. Neglected Endings: The Significance of the Pauline Letter Closings. JSNTSup 101. Sheffield: JSOT Press, 1994. Wrede, W. Die Echtheit des zweiten Thessalonicherbriefes. TU 24.2. Leipzig: Hinrichs, 1903.

Translation The greeting in my own hand—­Paul’s—­which is a sign in every letter; this is how I write. 18 The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ be with you all.a 17

Notes a. ἀμήν is added after the benediction in ‫א‬2 A D F G Ψ byz lat syr copbo. It represents the congregational response when the benediction was read at the end of the letter in the course of a church service. See Notes d. on 1 Thess 5:28 ad loc.

Form/Structure/Setting This brief letter closing consists of two elements: (1) the attention drawn to Paul’s autograph and (2) the grace-­benediction. Both elements conform to a recurring pattern.

Comment 3:17 Ὁ ἀσπασμὸς τῇ ἐμῇ χειρὶ Παύλου, “The greeting in my own hand—­Paul’s.” The same formula is used in 1 Cor 16:21; Col 4:18 (cf. also Gal 6:11, “see in what large letters I am writing with my own hand [τῇ ἐμῇ χειρί],” and Phlm 19a, where Paul signs his IOU [ἐγὼ Παῦλος ἔγραψα τῇ ἐμῇ χειρί]). It was no uncommon thing in ancient letter writing for the sender, having dictated the bulk of the letter, to write the last sentence or two in his own hand. This is the best explanation of the change of script at the end of several papyrus letters that have been preserved. This practice would help to authenticate the letter (for readers who recognized the sender’s writing). A more general purpose would be to make the letter look more personal than one written entirely by an amanuensis. Cicero seems commonly to have written his letters himself, but where he uses an amanuensis, he indicates that the

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 681

7/12/23 11:29 AM

682

2 Thessalonians 3:17–18

letter closing is in his own hand (cf. Att. 13.28.4: hoc manu mea, “this in my own hand”). Elsewhere he quotes a sentence from a letter which he himself had received from Pompey and says that it came in extremo, ipsius manu, “at the end, in his own hand” (Att. 8.1.1). Paul, it appears, regularly used an amanuensis when sending a letter, like Tertius (Rom 16:22). Sometimes the amanuensis may have been one of his own associates, like Timothy; we cannot be sure. This letter, like 1 Thessalonians, is ostensibly sent from Paul, Silvanus, and Timothy (2 Thess 1:1). But along with the shift from the first-­person plural to the first-­person singular in 2:5 (“Do you not remember that I repeatedly told you these things while I was still with you?”), the fact that here Paul expressly adds his autograph and name shows that he is the real author of the letter, with his two colleagues only assisting him. ὅ ἐστιν σημεῖον ἐν πάσῃ ἐπιστολῇ· οὕτως γράφω, “which is a sign in every letter; this is how I write.” The neuter relative pronoun ὅ indicates that not the masculine noun ἀσπασμός (“greeting”) but the whole phrase (“the greeting in my own hand—­Paul’s”) is a “sign” of his letter, as it shows his autograph, how he writes. It was not usual for the sender of an ancient letter to append his signature; its appearance in the prescript was sufficient. But apparently it was Paul’s usual practice to add the final greeting in his own hand to his letters as his signature, as he claims here and as we can partially verify in five of his letters: 1 Cor 16:21; Gal 6:11; Col 4:18; and Phlm 19a. We may add to this list 1 Thess 5:27, as the adjuration and the benediction in the following v. 28 were most likely Paul’s autograph (see comment ad loc). In the Form/ Structure/Setting on 1 Thess 5:25–28 we suggested the probable reasons why he indicated his authorship of 1 Thessalonians in such an indirect way (i.e., without directly pointing to his autograph) and why he even dispensed with adding his autograph in Rom 16:22. So it appears that he normally appended his autograph as his signature at the end of his letters and deviated from that practice only when there was a special reason (the autograph is missing in the letter closing of 2 Corinthians and Philippians, too, but the greetings and benedictions in 2 Cor 13:11–13 and Phil 4:21–23 could be his autographs, although he does not explain them as such).1 Here, it is necessary to observe also that in these five or six letters where he explicitly appends his autograph at the letter closing, he does it, drawing attention to that fact. There must be some special reason(s) for doing so. Among those letters, our letter has the most explicit and emphatic form of that feature: “[this] is a sign [σημεῖον] in every letter; this is how I write.” This form may then be contrasted with its least stressed or only implicit form in 1 Thess 5:27. In the latter, it was just enough for Paul to write with his own hand the adjuration in the first-­person singular (“I”) in contrast to the first-­person plural 1

Cf. Dobschütz, 319.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 682

7/12/23 11:29 AM

Comment 683 (“we”) that he used throughout the letter, indicating Silvanus and Timothy as his coauthors of the letter. There, it was enough for him to indicate that he was the chief author of the letter, and he saw no reason to stress his autograph. Why does he then in our letter ending so emphatically highlight his autograph and his name as well as affirm autographing as his regular practice? Clearly he does it in view of the fraudulent letter that came to the Thessalonian believers in his name and shook their faith so badly with a misleading eschatological message (“a letter purporting to come from us,” 2:2). In view of that false letter, with this clear explanation of his autograph as his signature, he first seeks to authenticate this letter against it and then also to help the readers formally discern any similarly spurious letter that might come to them in the future. The Thessalonian believers had received 1 Thessalonians not so long ago. But they have been shaken by a fraudulent letter purporting to come from him (2:2). From this fact he realizes that they had not paid enough attention to his handwriting in 1 Thess 5:27 and had not realized that it was his way of adding an authenticating sign to a letter. Hence, in our verse of his second letter to them, he not only makes it clear that the greeting is his autograph but also adds the two explanatory clauses (“which is a sign in every letter; this is how I write”) to ensure that they get his autograph as a criterion of discerning the authenticity of his letters and discriminating the false ones that might still come in his name. Since F. H. Kern and W. Wrede, those who see our letter as a pseudepigraph take our verse as the moment of self-­betrayal by the forger.2 So Hoppe says: “for those who take the letter as authentic is presented here a problem that is hardly soluble, since it must appear puzzling that in a second letter to Thessalonica which was composed soon after 1 Thess Paul refers to a ‘customary practice’ of [his] letter writing. In contrast, the remark lends itself well explicable as a [fabricated] proof of authenticity that is intended by the author of the pseudepigraphical writing.”3 Trilling argues that claiming the greeting as “a sign in every letter” is a “fatal” betrayal of a forgery not only because it is so strikingly peculiar but also because the exact form of the greeting appears only in 1 Cor 16:21.4 However, we would argue that, on the contrary, precisely those reasons suggest our verse and therefore our letter as a whole to be authentically Pauline rather than spurious. For common sense requires us to believe that a forger who knows at least 1 Thessalonians of the Pauline letters would not so foolhardily betray his identity by making in our letter such a strikingly peculiar claim, whose “falsity” would immediately be recognized by any reader who knows Pauline letters. Only those who, like Trilling, take our 2 3 4

Kern, “Über 2 Thess,” 209, and Wrede, Echtheit, 65. Cf. Trilling, 158. Hoppe, II:226. Trilling, 159.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 683

7/12/23 11:29 AM

684

2 Thessalonians 3:17–18

v. 17 literalistically and exclude the other forms of Pauline letter closings that agree with it in sense and intent can argue like him. But I am suggesting that such a literalistic or legalistic argument backfires. In fact, if we compare the various self-­authenticating autographs of Paul at the letter closings of his various letters according to their substance, we can actually see that his claim to his “customary practice” is not false, and we can also appreciate why in our letter he so distinctively stresses his autographic signature and his “customary practice,” as we have just explained (pace Hoppe). In Phlm 19a, with his autograph Paul signs his IOU. In the remaining three letters (1 Cor 16:21; Gal 6:11; Col 4:18) with his autograph as his signature he apparently intends to make his apostolic authority felt among the readers of those letters. In view of the presence of the unruly idlers in the Thessalonian church, as well as of his strong assertion of his apostolic authority to discipline them throughout 2 Thess 3:6–15, probably we need to see that in our letter also Paul has this intent, in addition to the two mentioned above.5 οὕτως γράφω, “this is how I write.” Here Paul writes the present γράφω rather than the epistolary aorist ἔγραψα (as in Gal 6:11; Phlm 19) in order to draw the readers’ attention to his actual writing style (cf. 1 Cor 4:14; 14:37; 2 Cor 1:13; 13:10; Gal 1:20; 1 Tim 3:14). 18 ἡ χάρις τοῦ κυρίου ἡμῶν Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ μετὰ πάντων ὑμῶν, “The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ be with you all.” Apart from the addition of πάντων before ὑμῶν, this benediction is identical with that of 1 Thess 5:28 (see comment ad loc); it is totally identical with that of Rom 16:24, which indeed is textually doubtful.6 Here Paul adds “all” before “you,” as in the benediction of 2 Thess 3:16b, to convey his wish to see the disorderly idlers fully restored to the united fellowship of the whole church, upon which the Lord bestows his grace.

Explanation As at the end of 1 Thessalonians, so here again, contrary to his usual practice (Rom 16:21–23; 1 Cor 16:19–20; 2 Cor 13:13; Phil 4:21–22; Col 4:14), Paul does not append any greetings from his coworkers or from the church at the place where he writes this letter. In the Explanation section at the end of 1 Thessalonians (5:25–28), we appreciated this fact as suggesting that Paul and his colleagues, Silvanus and Timothy, wrote that first letter at the beginning stage of their missionary work in Corinth, that is, before a church was properly established there that could send their greetings to the Thessalonians.7 The same absence of the greetings of others here at the end of 2 Thessalonians appears to suggest that this letter was sent soon after 1 Thessalonians. 5 6 7

Cf. also Weima, 50. See, however, Gamble, Textual History, 129–30. Cf. Holtz, 11; Riesner, Early Period, 365.

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 684

7/12/23 11:29 AM

Indices

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 685

7/12/23 11:29 AM

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 686

7/12/23 11:29 AM

Scripture and Other Ancient Literature Index Old Testament Genesis 2:7. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 491 2:24. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 420 3:19. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 661, 664 5:22. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 324 5:24. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 324, 402 6:9. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 324 14:17 LXX. . . . . . . . . . . . . 403 15:1, 4. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 163 15:16. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 252 17:1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 324 24:40. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 324 48:15. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 324 49:9. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 600 49:16. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 600 49:17. . . . . . . . . . . . . 594, 600

Exodus 2:11. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 148 3:2. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 526 7:4. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 341 12:12. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 341 19:5–6. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 330 19:10–18 LXX . . . . . 403, 404 19:16. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 399 19:16–18. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 402 19:18. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 526 21:23–25. . . . . . . . . . 469, 524 24:15–18. . . . . . . . . . 402, 404 39:37–38. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 490 34:6. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 466 40:34. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 402

Leviticus 11:44–45. . . . . . . . . . 330, 491 16:7. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 490 16:17 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 490 18:1–19:22. . . . . . . . . . . . . 338 19:2. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 491 19:2–4. . . . . . . . . . . . 330, 343 19:18. . . . . . . . . 309, 356, 469 20:7–8. . . . . . . . . . . . 330, 491 20:22–26. . . . . . . . . . 330, 337 20:26. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 491 23:40. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 292

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 687

24:17–21 . . . . . . . . . . 469, 524

Numbers

Ruth 2:4. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 679

1 Samuel

6:26. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 677 11:12 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 215 11:28. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 477 14:18 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 466 16:32–33. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 406 35:30. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 125

4:4. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 570 7:3–4. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 171 8:7. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 345 17:39. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 266 21:5–6, 335

Deuteronomy

2 Samuel

4:37. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 150 6:4. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 298 6:5. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 492 7:6–9. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 493 9:13. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 266 10:8. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 490 12:12, 18. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 292 13: 1–5. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 481 13:3–5, 13–17. . . . . . . . . . 197 13:6. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 197 15:3, 12. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 148 18:5, 7. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 490 18:18–22. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 193 18:20. . . . . . . . . . . . . 198, 482 18:21–22. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 481 19:15. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 125 19:21. . . . . . . . . . . . . 469, 524 21:5. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 490 21:13. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 332 23:2. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 600 24:1. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 332 26:18. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 619 29:3. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 611 32:35. . . . . . . . . . . . . 341, 524 33:2. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 526 33:12. . . . . . . . . . . . . 148, 618 33:22. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 594

7:12–14 . . . . . . . . . . . 391, 527 9:7. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 661 19:16, 21. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 403 22:5. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 567

Joshua 22:22. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 563

Judges 6:12. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 679 10:6–16. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 171

1 Kings 2:10. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 375 3:8. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 150 8:10–11. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 402 11:25a. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 569 13:1, 2, 5, 32. . . . . . . . . . . 386 18:4. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 248 19:10. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 248 19:9–18. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 248 20:13a LXX . . . . . . . . . . . 567 21:5–6. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 333 21:13. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 567 22:6–28. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 199

1 Chronicles 4:22. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 332 15:15. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 386 28:9. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 200 29:7. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 200 29:18. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 648

2 Chronicles 12:14. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 648 15:2. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 679 19:3. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 648 20:33. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 648 23:30. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 143 24:19–21. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 248 29:19. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 563

7/12/23 11:29 AM

688

Scripture and Other Ancient Literature Index

30:19. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 648 33:19. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 563

Ezra 7:12. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 123 9:5. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 143

Nehemiah 6:12. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 198 9:7. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 150 9:26. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 248 13:20. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 266

Job 1:6. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 569 3:21 LXX . . . . . . . . . . . . . 215 15:24. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 288 16:19. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 208 18:21. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 336 26:6. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 568 28:22. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 568 31:12. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 568

Psalms 2:7. . . . . . . . . 62, 63, 391, 527 4:6. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 670 4:7 LXX . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 670 7:9. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 200 8:6. . . . . . . . . . . 389, 391, 623 8:7. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 528 17:5 LXX. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 567 18:4. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 67 18:8. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 526 18:47. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 341 21:20 LXX . . . . . . . . . . . . 297 22:19. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 297 22:22. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 148 24:3 LXX . . . . . . . . . . . . . 650 24:17 LXX. . . . . . . . . . . . . 288 25:17. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 288 25:3. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 650 33:6. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 584 33:15 LXX . . . . . . . . . . . . 458 34:14. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 458 34:14 LXX . . . . . . . . . . . . 324 35:11 LXX . . . . . . . . . . . . 529 35:14. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 324 36:9, 34 LXX. . . . . . . . . . 650 36:10. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 529 36:23 LXX . . . . . . . . . . . . 298 37:9, 34. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 650 37:23. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 298 39:3 LXX . . . . . . . . . . . . . 298 40:2. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 298 40:8. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 348 41:9. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 661

48:6. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 424 51:3 LXX . . . . . . . . . . . . . 508 52:1. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 508 55:14 LXX . . . . . . . . . . . . 324 55:17. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 143 56:13. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 324 62:2. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 215 67:18 LXX. . . . . . . . . . . . . 302 67:36. . . . . . . . . . . . . 534, 536 68:17. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 302 68:23–24. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 611 68:35. . . . . . . . . . . . . 534, 536 73:4 LXX . . . . . . . . . . . . . 508 74:4. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 508 77:8 LXX . . . . . . . . . . . . . 648 78:6 LXX . . . . . . . . . 336, 529 78:8. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 648 79:6. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 336, 529 80:1. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 570 87:5 LXX . . . . . . . . . . . . . 440 87:6 LXX . . . . . . . . . . . . . 441 88:5. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 440, 441 88:8 LXX . . . . . 534, 536, 544 88:12. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 568 89:7. . . . . . . . . . 534, 536, 544 89:37. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 208 94:1. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 341 95:11. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 525 96:7 LXX . . . . . . . . . . . . . 508 97:2. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 402 97:7. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 508 99:1. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 570 102:8 LXX . . . . . . . . . . . . 466 102:20. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 526 103:8. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 466 103:15 LXX . . . . . . . . . . . 300 103:20. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 526 104:15. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 300 105:47 LXX . . . . . . . . . . . 508 106:47. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 508 110:1. . . . .172, 289, 341, 389, 391, 439, 525, 527, 533, 623 111:8 LXX. . . . . . . . . . . . . 300 112:8. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 300 114:9 LXX . . . . . . . . . . . . 324 115:3 LXX . . . . . . . . . . . . 290 116:9. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 324 116:12 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 290 118:43. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 288 119:43 MT. . . . . . . . . . . . . 288 126:1. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 282 127:1 MT. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 282 136:8 LXX . . . . . . . . . . . . 524 137:8. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 524

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 688

138:23 LXX . . . . . . . . . . . 200 139:2 LXX . . . . . . . . . . . . 643 139:23. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 200 140:1. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 643 147:4 LXX. . . . . . . . . 641, 642 147:15 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 641

Proverbs 4:26. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 298 10:4. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 664 12:11. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6464 14:29. . . . . . . . . . . . . 465, 466 15:11. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 568 15:18. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 466 16:31. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 267 16:32. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 466 17:3. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 200 17:27. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 466 18:14 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 465 19:15. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 664 20:28. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 469 21:2. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 648 24:12 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 524 24:29. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 469 25:21–22. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 469 27:20. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 568 30:27. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 398

Ecclesiastes 7:8–9. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 466

Isaiah 1:3. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 529 1:10. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 163 1:16, 17 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 455 1:16b–17a . . . . . . . . . . . . . 478 2:10, 19, 21 . . . . . . . . . . . . 532 2:11, 17 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 537 5:1–14 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 248 8:2. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 600 9:3. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 292 10:12–19 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 600 10:34. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 600 11:4. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 584, 586 11:10 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 584 13:6. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 269 13:6–16. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 418 13:8. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 424 14:4–21. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 600 14:12–14 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 614 14:13–14 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 570 21:2. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 345 24:15. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 545 25:4. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 643 26:7–8. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 424 27:13. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 399

7/12/23 11:29 AM



Scripture and Other Ancient Literature Index 689

29:10. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 611 30:10. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 196 40:5. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 525 40:9. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 152, 195 40:9–11. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 195 40:11. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 195 41:8. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 150 41:9. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 150, 229 41:27. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 195 42:1, 7. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 202 42:6. . . . . . . . . . 202, 229, 250 42:6–7. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 202 42:13, 25. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 586 43:1. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 229 43:10. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 150 43:21. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 547 44:1, 2. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 150 45:4. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 150 48:1, 12. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 229 48:20. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 171 49:1. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 202, 229 49:3. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 171, 545 49:4. . . . . . . . . . 191, 200, 282 49:6. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 202, 250 49:7. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 150, 493 50:2. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 229 51:2. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 229 51:5. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 650 52:7. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 152 52:12. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 554 53:1. . . . . . . . . . 239, 525, 530 53:10. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 219 54:13. . . . . . . . . 356, 357, 358 57:4. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 567 59:15b–19. . . . . . . . . . . . . 586 59:17. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 434 60:6. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 152 60:8. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 406 61:1. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 152 62:5. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 332 63:1–6. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 586 65:23. . . . . . . . . . . . . 191, 200 63:9. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 397 64:1. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 409 65:23. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 281 66:4. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 527 66:5. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 544 66:6. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 524 66:15. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 627 66:15–16. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 526

Jeremiah 1:5. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 202 2:4. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 163 2:19. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 563 2:30. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 248

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 689

6:13. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 208 6:14. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 423 6:24. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 424 6:26. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 424 8:10. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 208 8:11. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 423 8:16. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 594, 600 9:6. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 529 10:25. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 336 11:20. . . . . . . . . 200, 202, 341 12:3. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 200 12:16–17. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 443 13:10. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 171 14:13. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 199 14:14–15. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 198 17:10 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 200 17:11 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 600 20:9. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 477 22:18. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 148 22:23. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 424 23:13, 32. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 197 23:16–17. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 199 23:16–38. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 198 23:16–39. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 482 24:6. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 443 26:7–24. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 248 27:9, 14, 16. . . . . . . . . . . . 199 27:15. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 198 28:2–11. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 199 28:15. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 198 29:8–9. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 198 31:4. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 443 31:31–44. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 349 31:33–34. . . . . . . . . . 357, 358 31:34. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 358 33:7. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 443 42:10. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 443

Lamentations 3:25–26. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 650

Ezekiel 1:13, 27. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 526 1:25–28. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 533 11:19–20. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 349 12:18 12:18–19. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 661 13:2–8. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 198 13:10. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 197 13:10, 16 . . . . . . . . . . 199, 423 14:11 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 197 16:12. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 267 22:28. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 198 23:42. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 267 26:26–27. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 359 28:2. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 570, 614

28:2–10. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 600 30:3. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 269 31:3–9. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 600 36:22–32. . . . . . . . . . 344, 348 36:26–27. . . . . . . . . . 357, 358 36:27. . . . . . . . 345, 346, 348, 349, 358 37:6. . . . . . . . . . 346, 347, 348 37:14 . . . . . . . . 345, 346, 348, 349, 358

Daniel 1:10. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 143 2:18, 19, 27, 28, 29, 30, 47 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 579 2:21. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 417 2:45. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 417 3:22. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 293 4:9. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 579 4:19. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 369 7:7. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 597 7:7–8. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 590 7:8. . . . . . . 389, 598, 599, 615 7:9–10. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 526 7:9–14. . . . . . . .303, 306, 397, 404, 528 7:10. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 302 7:12. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 417 7:13. . . . . . . . . . 385, 390, 397 7:13–14. . . . . . . 389, 391, 401, 402, 528 7:14 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 623 7:16. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 417 7:18, 22. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 403 7:20. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 598 7:21. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 597 7:25. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 597 7:27. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 385, 401 7:28. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 300 8:9–13. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 570 8:11. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 568 8:23. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 252, 599 9:24–27. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 598 9:27. . . . . . . . . . 568, 570, 597 11:31. . . . . . . . . . . . . 568, 571 11:36. . . . . . . . . 569, 595, 599 11:36–37. . 568, 570, 590, 593 11:36–45. . . . . . . . . . 389, 615 12:2. . 400, 401, 440, 441, 531 12:2–3. . . . . . . . 385, 387, 405 12:4, 9, 13. . . . . . . . . . . . . 567 12:7. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 597 12:10–11. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 568 12:11. . . . . . . . . 389, 571, 595 12:12. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 393

7/12/23 11:29 AM

690

Scripture and Other Ancient Literature Index

Hosea

Micah

Zechariah

5:4. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 529

1:15. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 418 2:1. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 399 2:3. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 466

2:6. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 477 3:5. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 197 3:5, 11. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 208 4:9. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 424 5:15. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 341 7:7. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 650

1:14–16. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 399 3:1. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 570 7:9. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 148 9:14. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 399 13:2–3. . . . . . . . . . . . 197, 198 14:5. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 302

Amos

Nahum

Malachi

2:12. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 477 3:2, 14. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 341 5:18. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 269 5:18–20. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 418 7:12. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 661

1:2. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 341

1:11. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 545 2:5. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 659 2:11. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 332 4:1. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 586 4:5. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 418

Obadiah

Zephaniah

15–21 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 418

1:15. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 288

Joel

Habakkuk 1:5. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62 2:4. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62

New Testament Matthew 2:17, 16 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 418 3:11. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 477 4:3. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 281 4:21. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 229, 424 5:14–16. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 427 5:16. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 371 5:18. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 297 5:20. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 420 5:29–30. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 531 5:34. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 497 5:38–42. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 469 5:43–48. . . . . . . 299, 309, 469 6:9. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 149 6:13. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 646 6:19. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 297 6:19–21. . . . . . . . . . . 366, 654 6:25–34. . . . . . . . . . . 366, 654 7:15–23. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 482 8:11–12 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 386 10:4. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 345 10:8. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 455, 661 10:10. . . . . . . . . 661, 662, 674 10:32–33. . . . . . . . . . 306, 308 11:25. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 212 11:28–29. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 525 12:28. . . . . . . . . . . . . 253, 483 12:32. . . . . . . . . . . . . 531, 567 13:19, 38. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 646 13:20. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 159 13:41. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 303 13:41–42. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 526 13:49–50. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 526 18:8–9. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 532 18:10. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 678 19:3–12. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 420

19:28. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 420 20:8. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 20:20–28. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 220 20:28. . . . . . . . . . . . . 408, 439 22:1–14 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 229 23:3. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 248, 540 22:8. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 540 23:29. . 99, 110, 112, 130, 132 23:29–36. . . . . . 247, 248, 252 23:32. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 252 24:1–51. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 118 24:3. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 389 24:6. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 555, 565 24:8. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 425, 561 24:9–24. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 564 24:10. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 565 24:10–12. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 565 24:15. . . . . . . . . 565, 596, 599 24:17–22. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52 24:24. . . . . . . . . . . . . 595, 607 24:27. . . . . . . . . 389, 397, 418 24:27–30. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 585 24:28. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 118 24:30–31. . . . . .303, 387, 389, 391, 393, 394, 395, 396, 397, 399, 400, 401, 403, 405, 407, 409, 565 24:30–32. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 394 24:30b–31a. . . . . . . . . . . . 394 24:31. . . . . . . . . 399, 554, 565 24:37. . . . . . . . . 389, 397, 418 24:39. . . . . . . . . 389, 397, 418 24:42–43. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 419 24:43. . . . . . . . . . . . . 419, 565 24:43–44. . . . . .303, 381, 395, 396, 405, 430

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 690

24:44. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 397 24:45–51. . . . . . . . . . 405, 430 24:48–51. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 432 25:1–13. . . . . . . . . . . 395, 405 25:21. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 473 25:31. . . . . . . . . . . . . 397, 526 25:41, 46. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 532 25:23. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 473 26:24. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 397 26:24–29. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 390 26:45. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 397 26:61. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 420 26:63. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 497 26:64. . . . . . . . . . . . . 397, 403 27:63. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 197

Mark 1:20. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 229 2:2. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 159 2:27. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 229 3:22–27. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 153 3:31. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 528 3:34–35. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 149 4:11. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 369, 579 4:11–12 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 611 4:14–20. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 159 4:16. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 159 4:17. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 159 4:20. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 159, 160 5:5. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 678 5:7. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 497 5:39. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 441 6:3. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 279 6:7. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 125 6:25. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 662 7:8. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 630

7/12/23 11:29 AM



Scripture and Other Ancient Literature Index 691

8:15–16. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 420 8:31. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .248 382 8:34. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 159 8:38. . . . . 303, 306, 308, 397, 399, 528 9:1. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 578 9:7. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 403 9:30. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 662 9:31. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 382, 397 9:37. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 345 9:50. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 458, 461 10:2–12. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 420 10:28–34. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 288 10:33. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 397 10:34. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 382 10:35. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 662 10:35–45. . . . . . 218, 220, 234 10:42–45. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 461 10:45. . . . . . 14, 218, 219, 220, 306, 408, 439, 483 11:25. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 628 11:27–12:11. . . . . . . . . . . . 420 12:1–9. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 564 12:28–34. . 145, 199, 309, 313 12:30. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 492 13:3–13. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 561 13:3–23. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 564 13:4. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 421 13:6. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 561 13:7. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 555 13:8. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 425, 561 13:9–12. . . . . . . . . . . 592, 642 13:10. . . . . . . . . . . . . 118, 615 13:14 . . . . . . . . . 118, 556, 595 13:14–27. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 615 13:22. . . . . . . . . . . . . 595, 607 13:26. . . . . . . . . . . . . 118, 397 13:26–27. . . . . .303, 387, 394, 395, 396, 397, 399, 400, 401, 403, 405, 408, 409 13:27. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 554 13:27b. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 394 13:32. . . . . . . . . . . . . .417, 579 13:32–37. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 118 13:34–37. . . . . . 381, 405, 430 13:35–37. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 430 14:4. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 568 14:9. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 224 14:21. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 397 14:21–25. . . . . . . . . . 408, 439 14:22. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 420 14:24–25. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 401 14:36. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 149 14:41. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 397 14:45. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 496

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 691

14:58. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 420 14:62. . . . . . . . . . . . . 397, 403

Luke 1:19. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 285 1:20. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 608 1:28. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 679 1:75. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 225 1:79. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 298 2:32. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 427 3:16. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 477 3:22. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 479 4:18. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 152 6:22–23. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 159 6:27. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 469 6:27–36. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 469 6:27, 28. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 455 6:31. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 662 6:32–36. . . . . . . . . . . 299, 309 7:45. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 496 8:13. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 159 9:26. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 397 9:29. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 479 10:1. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 125 10:7. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 232 10:7–8. . . . . . . . . . . . 662, 674 10:16. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 344 10:21. . . . . . . . . . . . . 159, 212 11:2. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 149 11:20. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 253 11:47–51. . . . . . . . . . 247, 248 12:3. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 608 12:8–9. . . . . . . . 306, 308, 528 12:13–21. . . . . . . . . . 366, 654 12:22. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 397 12:22–34. . . . . . . . . . 366, 654 12:35–48. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 381 12:36–38. . . . . . 381, 405, 430 12:36–40. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 430 12:39. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 419 12:39–40. . . . . .303, 381, 393, 395, 396, 405, 430 12:40. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 397 12:41–48. . . . . . . . . . 405, 430 12:45–46. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 432 12:49. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 477 13:28–29. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 386 13:34. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 248 14:1. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 524 14:16–24. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 229 15:20. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 496 16:8. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 428 16:23–25. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 532 16:25. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 525 17:22. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 397

17:22–37. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 117 17:24 . . . . . . . . . . . . . 397, 418 17:24, 26. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 389 17:25. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 118 17:26–30. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 117 17:30. . . . . . . . . 389, 397, 418 17:37 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 118 18:1. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 669 18:2–5. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 600 19:44. . . . . . . . . . . . . 417, 608 20:35. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 522 21:4. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 293 21:5–36. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 118 21:7. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 389 21:20–24. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 254 21:23. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 248 21:23–24. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 386 21:34. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 425 21:34–36. . . . . . . . . . 303, 425 21:35. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 425 22:15. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 337 22:17–23. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 390 22:24–27. . . . . . . . . . 220, 461 22:26. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 22:26–27. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 212 22:29–30. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 420 22:47. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 496 22:48. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 397 23:41. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 643 24:7. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 397 24:19. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 636 24:53. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 678

John 1:1–2. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 279 1:4–9. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 427 1:14, 16 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 531 1:26. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 628 1:30. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 553 2:7. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 252 3:13–17. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 220 3:16. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 633 3:19–21. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 427 5:18. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 248 5:23. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 345 5:25. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 398 5:25–29. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 400 5:26–27. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 528 5:27. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 398 5:37. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 479 5:43. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 599 6:35–58. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 229 6:45. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 357 6:51–58. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 390 6:53–58. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 401

7/12/23 11:29 AM

692

Scripture and Other Ancient Literature Index

7:1. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 248 7:12, 47. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 197 7:27, 31. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 421 8:12. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 427 8:55. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 529 10:10–11. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 219 10:10–15. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 217 10:10–16. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 219 10:13. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 219 11:11 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 441 11:25–26. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 395 11:31. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 248 11:45–52. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 581 12:22. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 297 12:36. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 428 12:38. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 239 12:44, 48. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 345 13:20. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 345 13:34. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 145 14:19 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 383 14:26. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 543 15:20. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 278 15:26. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 543 16:13–15. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 543 16:33. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 160 17:12 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 568 17:24 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 662 19:35. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 599

Acts 1:6–8. . . . . . . . . . . . . 592, 642 1:7. . . . . . . . . . . .416, 417, 579 1:9. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 403 1:11. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 397, 403 1:24. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 199 2:3. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 477 2:23, 36. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 248 2:24, 32. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 382 2:25. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 678 2:29. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 192 2:41–47. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 674 3:13–17. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 248 3:21. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 417 3:26. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 58 4:10. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 248 4:21. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 323 4:29, 31. . . . . . . . . . . 159, 192 4:32–35. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 674 5:1–16 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 674 5:14. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 522 5:29. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 614 5:36. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 197, 24 5:41. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 480 5:41–44. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 209 6:1. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 126

6:1–6. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 674 6:7. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 641 7:22. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 636 7:30. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 526 7:52. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 248 7:60. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 383 8:25. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 159, 163 8:30. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 667 8:39. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 402 9:2. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 228 9:13. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 534 9:20. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 58 9:27–28. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 192 9:31. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 242 10:2. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 678 10:41. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 382 10:42. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 528 11:22. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 242 12:1–19 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 245 12:23. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 608 12:24. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 641 13:1. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 242 13:2. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 126 13:5. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 58, 126 13:6–10. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 197 13:10. . . . . . . . . . . . . 197, 568 13:14 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 58 13:15. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 194 13:16–47. . . . . . . . . . . . 62, 63 13:16b–47. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63 13:22. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 329 13:22–23. . . . . . . . . . . . 62, 63 13:24. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 168 13:26–37. . . . . . . . . . . . 63, 64 13:27–28. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 248 13:27, 29, 32–35. . . . . . . . . 64 13:32–36. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63 13:33–34. . . . . . . . . . . 62, 382 13:38–41. . . . . . . . . . . . 62, 63 13:40–41. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62 13:44, 48. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 163 13:45. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65 13:45–50. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 251 13:46. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 58, 192 13:48. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 641 13:52. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 161 14:1. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 58 14:2, 19. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 251 14:15. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 169 14:22. . . . . . . . . 160, 276, 522 15:5–29. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57 15:20, 29. . . . . . . . . . 328, 331 15:22. . . . . . 74, 125, 210, 279, 419, 506, 523 15:22–27. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 331

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 692

15:27. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 125 15:32. . . . . . . . . . . . . 125, 276 15:35, 36. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 163 16:1–3. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 126 16:6–18:5 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57 16:8. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57 16:10. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 58, 288 16:13. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 58 16:14 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 70 16:19–40. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 68 16:20. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 282 16:21–21. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 258 16:20–21, 35–40. . . . . . . . . 68 16:22. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 682 16:22–24. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 192 16:37. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 125 17:1–2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54, 58 17:1–7 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 203 17:1–9 . . . . . . .63, 73, 94, 125, 258, 375, 462 17:2. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59, 222 17:2–3. . . . . . . 58, 63, 64, 204 17:2–4. . . . . . . . . . . . .203 382 17:3. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63, 67 17:3a . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63 17:3b. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63 17:4 . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60, 61, 62 17:4a . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60 17:4b. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60 17:5. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64, 244 17:5–6. . . . . . . . . . . . . 65, 267 17:5–9. . . . . 61, 194, 244, 251 17:5–10. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 248 17:6. . . . . . . . . . . . 60, 65, 118 17:6–7. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63, 65 17:7 . . . . . 63, 64, 65, 225, 363 17:9. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60, 68 17:10 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 58, 70 17:10–11 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 274 17:10–12 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 204 17:11 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 70 17:12 . . . . . . . . . . . . 60, 62, 70 17:13 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 70 17:13–14 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 248 17:14 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 70 17:15 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 70 17:15–16 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 74 17:15–34. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 282 17:17 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 58, 60 17:18 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 258 17:18–20, 31–32. . . . . . . . 380 17:22–31. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 274 17:23. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 569 17:31 . . . . . . . . . 382, 419, 528 18:1. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 70 18:1–13 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 254

7/12/23 11:29 AM



Scripture and Other Ancient Literature Index 693

18:2. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 71 18:3. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 222 18:4. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 58, 222 18:5. . . . . 63, 74, 75, 125, 285 18:6. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 58 18:11, 18 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 380 18:19. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 58 18:26. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 192 19:8. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 58 19:9, 23. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 228 19:10. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 162 19:12. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 223 19:13. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 497 19:21. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 72, 161 19:29. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 58, 462 20:1. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 298 20:1–2. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 72 20:4. . . . . . .58, 60, 61, 62, 70, 72, 462 20:5–6. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 73 20:18. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 224 20:31. . . . . . . . . . . . . 222, 227 20:34. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 223 20:37. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 496 21:21. . . . . . . . . . . . . 323, 563 23:1. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 402 24:3. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 678 24:14, 22. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 228 24:16. . . . . . . . . . . 306–7, 678 25:5. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 643 26:6–8. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 380 26:13. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 533 26:26. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 192 27:2. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 58, 462 28:6. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 643 28:15. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 405 28:31. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 192

Romans 1:1. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 193 1:1–3. . . . . . . . . . . . . 276, 678 1:1–4. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 528 1:1–5. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62, 323 1:1–17 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63 1:2–4. . . . . . . . . . . . . 133, 181 1:2–5. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 531 1:3–4. . . .62, 63, 64, 133, 172, 229, 289, 298, 341, 388, 391, 491, 530, 533, 612, 623, 646 1:3–5. . . . . .69, 129, 525, 543, 546, 584, 647 1:4. . . . . . . . . . . 301, 336, 439 1:4b–5. . . . . . . . . . . . 528, 530 1:5. . . 162, 181, 182, 198, 313, 449, 612, 668

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 693

1:5–10. . . . 106, 110, 107, 108, 503, 505, 511, 512, 517, 520, 521 1:5–12. . . . 110, 112, 130, 176, 313, 519, 529 1:7. . . . . . .126, 134, 310, 343, 534, 540, 546 1:8. . . . . . . 141, 142, 428, 474, 506, 617 1:8–10. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 292 1:8b. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 507 1:9. . . . . . . . . . . 142, 208, 239 1:10. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 293, 329 1:10–13. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 96 1:11. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 216 1:11–12 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 276 1:13. . . . . . . . . . . 71, 267, 374 1:14–17 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 260 1:16. . . . . . . 58, 240, 241, 251, 259, 534, 609 1:16–17 . . . . . .62, 63, 64, 184, 531, 612, 626 1:18. . 253, 254, 260, 342, 610 1:18–32. . .311, 328, 334, 336, 342, 350, 451, 454, 529, 565, 566, 608, 610, 611 1:18–3:20 . . . . . . . . . 255, 624 1:19–21. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 336 1:21. . . . . . . . . . 336, 474, 610 1:21–23. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 336 1:24. . . . . . . . . . 195, 337, 610 1:24–27. . . . . . . 333, 334, 339 1:24–27, 29. . . . . . . . . . . . 338 1:24–28. . . . . . . 334, 335, 339 1:25. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 610 1:25–32. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 336 1:26. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 337, 610 1:26–27. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 337 1:28. . . . . . . . . . 336, 610, 612 1:28–31. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 339 1:32. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 342, 612 2:1–11 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 342 2:1–16 . . . . . . . . . . . . 260, 528 2:2–3. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 474 2:4. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46 2:5. . . . . . . . . . . 268, 388, 521 2:5–6. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 524 2:5–11. . . . . . . . . . . . .521, 611 2:7. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 531 2:8. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 530, 611 2:9. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 532 2:10. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 469 2:10–17. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 611 2:16. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 152, 528 2:18. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 348

2:19. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 427 2:20. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 211 2:23–24. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 337 2:29. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 208 3:22–23, 28, 30. . . . . . . . . 184 3:22–34. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 534 3:23. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 624 3:24. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 633, 661 3:24–25. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 383 3:25–26. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 521 3:28–30. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 534 4:4. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 633 4:7. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 567 4:13. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 277 4:14. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 388, 647 4:16. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 563, 633 4:19. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 466 4:21. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 153, 277 4:24. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 172, 382 4:24–25. . . . . . . . . . . 247, 382 4:25. . 383, 437, 469, 471, 528 5:1. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 134, 445 5:1–2. . . . . . . . . . . . . 310, 446 5:1–5. . . . . . . . . 144, 160, 161 5:1–11 . . . . . . . . . . . . 145, 445 5:2. . . . . . 230, 445, 522, 544, 623, 624, 633 5:2–3. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 473 5:2b. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 445 5:3. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 159, 283 5:3–5. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 445 5:3–10. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 146 5:5. . . 159, 299, 445, 446, 648 5:6. . . . . . . 382, 439, 445, 466 5:6–8. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 311 5:6–11. . . . . . . . 439, 469, 471 5:8. . . . . . . . . . . 382, 439, 445 5:8–10. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 445 5:9. . . . . . . . . . . 310, 445, 522 5:9–10. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 254 5:9a. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 445 5:9b. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 445 5:10. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 437, 445 5:10a–­b. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 445 5:10c. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 445 5:10d. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 446 5:11. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 445 5:12. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 563 5:15. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 633 5:18. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 528 5:20. . . . . . . . . . 293, 299, 507 5:21. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 531 6:1. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 633 6:1–11. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 132 6:1–23. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 281

7/12/23 11:29 AM

694

Scripture and Other Ancient Literature Index

6:2–11. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 400 6:3–11. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 407 6:4–9. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 394 6:5. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 401 6:6. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 333 6:6–23. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 171 6:7, 17–18 . . . . . . . . . . . . . 310 6:8. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 407 6:9–10. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 382 6:11–23. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 334 6:12. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 333, 335 6:12–13. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 334 6:12–19. . . . . . . 334, 335, 350 6:12–23. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 434 6:13, 16–22. . . . . . . . . . . . 310 6:15. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 633 6:17. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 628 6:19. . . . . . 195, 301, 312, 334, 336, 337 6:19–22. . . . . . . 182, 310, 311, 312, 622 6:19–23. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 618 6:22. . . . . . 291, 301, 310, 312, 336, 531, 542, 638 6:22–23. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 531 7:4. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 400 7:4–5. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 299 7:6. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 232, 555 7:7–8. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 266 7:14–25. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 542 7:18–19. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 541 7:24. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 643 7:25. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 171 8:1–2. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 310 8:1–3. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 445 8:1–4. . . . . . . . . . . . . 311, 446 8:1–13. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 542 8:1–17 . . . .230, 291, 299, 349, 350, 449, 490 8:1–18. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 230 8:3. . . . . . . . . . . 445, 466, 513 8:3–4. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 350 8:4. . . 182, 228, 310, 350, 621 8:4–15. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 543 8:4–17a. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 445 8:5–17. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 446 8:8. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 249, 324 8:9. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 621 8:9–10. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 481 8:9–11. . . . . . . . 230, 300, 542 8:11. . . . . . 247, 382, 383, 394 8:12–27. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 161 8:13. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 450, 621 8:14–17. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 481 8:15. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 149

8:17. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 279, 407 8:17–18 . . . . . . . . . . . 623, 624 8:17b–27. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 445 8:18. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 525 8:18–19. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 544 8:18–21. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 533 8:18–22. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 406 8:18–25. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 406 8:18–39. . . 149, 434, 445, 624 8:19. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 525 8:21. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 623, 624 8:23. . . . . . 172, 445, 446, 473 8:23–24. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 445 8:23–25. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 446 8:24. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 445 8:24–25. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 633 8:26. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 293, 37 8:26–27. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 445 8:28. . . . . . . . . . 474, 540. 649 8:28–39. . . . . . . 449, 450, 626 8:29. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 490, 624 8:29–30. . . . . . 436, 449, 494, 626, 638 8:30. . . . . 228, 230, 494, 522, 540, 619, 623, 624 8:31. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 383 8:31–34. . . . . . . 305, 437, 445 8:31–38. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 310 8:31–39. . .145, 281, 302, 444, 522, 528, 564, 612 8:32. . . . . . 407, 439, 445, 633 8:33–34. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 302 8:34. . . . . . . . . . 306, 382, 383 8:34b. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 445 8:34c– ­d. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 445 8:37. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 632 8:38. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 559 8:39. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 648 9:1. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 497 9:1–5. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 249 9:2. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 377 9:3. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 215, 259 9:6. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 239 9:22. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 466, 568 10:1. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 266. 541 10:1–4. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 249 10:4. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 349 10:6–17. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 623 10:8–13. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 241 10:8–17. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 251 10:9. . . . . . . . . . 129, 341, 382 10:9–10. . . 160, 290, 310, 323, 439, 489, 531, 543, 609, 612, 621 10:9–17. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 183

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 694

10:9–13. . . . . . . . . . . 181, 184 10:10. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 181 10:9–10. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 621 10:12–13. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 534 10:13. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 489 10:14. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 152 10:14–15. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 642 10:15. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 152 10:16. . . . . 181, 182, 239, 449, 529, 530, 643 10:17 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 239 10:26. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 182 11:1. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 86, 618 11:1–12 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 564 11:3. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 248 11:5. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 150 11:6. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 161 11:7–8. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 611 11:7–10, 15, 32 . . . . . 255, 611 11:10 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 678 11:11–16 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 564 11:13–14 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 260 11:16 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 161 11:16–24. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 534 11:17–22 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 449 11:25. . . . . . . . . . . . . 255, 374 11:25–26. . . . . .260, 386, 447, 579, 580, 591, 592, 642 11:25–27. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 564 11:25–32. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 249 11:26. . . . . . . . . . . . . 406, 643 11:27. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 357 11:30. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 529 12:1. . 310, 320, 321, 322, 325, 334, 337, 474, 489, 490, 513, 520 12:1–2. . . . 145, 171, 311, 320, 324, 334, 335, 350, 353, 451, 454, 490, 649 12:1–15:13. . . . . 320, 321, 492 12:2. . . . . . . . . . 145, 329, 566 12:3. . . . . . . . . . 198, 324, 481 12:3–8. . . . . . . . 454, 455, 471 12:3–21. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 451 12:3–22. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 454 12:8. . 216, 370, 459, 462, 674 12:8b. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 471 12:9–16. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 455 12:9–21. . . . . . . . . . . 450, 453 12:9a. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 471 12:9b. . . . . . . . . . . . . 454, 478 12:9b–­c. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 480 12:9c. . . . . . . . . . . . . 478, 480 12:9–21. . . 320, 452, 454, 472 12:10. . . . . . . . . 299, 354, 474

7/12/23 11:29 AM



Scripture and Other Ancient Literature Index 695

12:10a. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 454 12:11. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 477 12:11b. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 453 12:12. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 473 12:12a. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 453 12:12c . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 453 12:13. . . . . . . . . . . . . 370, 674 12:14. . . . . . . . . 248, 454, 471 12:14–21. . . . . .388, 469, 470, 471, 524 12:14–13:10. . . . . . . . . . . . 320 12:15. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 377 12:17 . . . . . . . . . . . . . 468, 471 12:17a . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 453 12:17b. . . . . . . . . . . . 454, 468 12:18. . . . . 453, 454, 461, 468 12:19. . . . . . . . . . . . . 341, 524 12:19a. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 524 12:19b–­c. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 524 12:19–21. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 471 12:20. . . . . . . . . 469, 471, 473 12:20–21. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 309 12:21. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 453 13:1–2. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 564 13:1–5. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 129 13:1–7. . . . .69, 119, 454, 564, 590, 593, 612 13:4. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 340 13:7. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 454 13:8. . . . . . . . . . 145, 299, 309 13:8–9. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 309 13:8–10. . . . . . . 199, 388, 454 13:10. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 570 13:11. . . . . . . . . . . . . 451, 593 13:11–12 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 445 13:11–13 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 119 13:11–14 . . . . . .272, 320, 433, 451, 454 13:11b. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 451 13:12. . . . .268, 419, 427, 428, 433, 451, 559 13:13. . . . . . . . . 370, 388, 451 13:13b. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 451 13:14 . . . . . . . . . 433, 451, 490 14:5. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 14:6. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 474 14:9. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 382 14:10. 302, 341, 490, 546, 618 14:10–12. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 528 14:13. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 339 14:15. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 439 14:17 . . . . . 229, 231, 291, 473 14:19 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 461 15:1–2. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 199 15:1–3, 7–9. . . . . . . . . . . . 157

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 695

15:5. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 297 15:6. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 544 15:8. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 490 15:10. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 459 15:12. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 69, 584 15:13. . . . . . . . . 297, 473, 485 15:14–33. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 261 15:15. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 198 15:15–16. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 489 15:15–22. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 162 15:15–24. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 593 15:16. . . . . . . . . 193, 301, 336, 489, 580 15:17 . . . . . . . . . . . . . 161, 407 15:18. . . . . . . . . . . . . 530, 636 15:19. . . . . . 72, 153, 161, 162, 276, 607, 620 15:20. . . . . . . . . . . . . 361, 443 15:22. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 71, 267 15:23. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 162 15:24. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 620 15:25, 31. . . . . . . . . . 310, 534 15:26. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 620 15:28. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 161 15:30. . . . . . . . . . . . . 325, 495 15:30–31. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 643 15:30–32. . . . . . 496, 639, 640 15:31–32. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 243 15:31a. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 640 15:32. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 329 15:33. . . . 459, 484, 485, 486, 676, 677, 678 15:58. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 459 16:1. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 131, 242 16:1–2. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 460 16:2. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 459, 462 16:2–3. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 462 16:3–5. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 460 16:4. . . . . . 128, 129, 376, 508 16:5. . . . . . 131, 162, 242, 620 16:6, 12. . . . . . . . . . . 459, 495 16:16. . . . . . . . . . 73, 496, 508 16:17–18 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 659 16:17–20 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 458 16:20. 267, 281, 434, 486, 678 16:20a. . . . . . . . 484, 485, 675 16:19. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 480 16:21. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60, 70 16:21–23. . . . . . . 75, 495, 684 16:22. . . . . . . . . . . . . 495, 682 16:23. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 462 16:24. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 684 16:25. . . . . . . . . 152, 224, 579 16:25–27. . . . . . . . . . 579, 580 16:26. . . . . . . . . 162, 449, 530

1 Corinthians 1:1. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 329 1:2. . . 126, 128, 129, 131, 132, 242, 301, 310, 330, 336, 343, 490, 508, 534, 540 1:3. . . . . . . . . . . 134, 502, 546 1:4. . . .74, 142, 290, 474, 502, 506, 617 1:4–9. . . . . . . . . . . . . 145, 297 1:5. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 507 1:5–9. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 526 1:6. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 536 1:6–8. . . . . . . . . 305, 306, 310 1:7. . . . . . . . . . . 172, 525, 650 1:7–9. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 564 1:8. . . . . . .305, 388, 419, 522, 538, 543 1:8–9. . . . . . . . . 493, 494, 619 1:9. . . . . . . . . . . 540, 557, 645 1:10. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 322, 325 1:14–16. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 462 1:18. . 240, 241, 254, 382, 608 1:18–3:23. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 270 1:18, 24. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 240 1:20. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 566 1:21. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 224, 336 1:22–23. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65 1:23. . . . . . 203, 204, 224, 276 1:26. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 361 1:26–29. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 363 1:30. . . . . . . . . . 301, 310, 336 1:31. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 563 2:1–2. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 581 2:1–5. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 83, 154 2:1, 7. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 579 2:3. . . . . . . . . . . . 70, 288, 466 2:3–5. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 152 2:4. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 224 2:6. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 565 2:6–8. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 69 2:6–10. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 581 2:7. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 624 2:8. . . . . . . . . . . 247, 267, 566 2:11. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 492 2:13. . 154, 357, 360, 492, 674 2:14–15. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 492 2:16. . . . . . 360, 387, 492, 674 3:1. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 211 3:1–2. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 83 3:5–17. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 162 3:8. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 145 3:9. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 276, 443 3:10. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 198 3:10–17. . . . . . 270, 443, 444, 527, 618 3:13. . . . . . 268, 388, 419, 606

7/12/23 11:29 AM

696

Scripture and Other Ancient Literature Index

3:14. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 270 3:16. . . . . . 154, 325, 420, 573 3:16–17. . . . . . . 450, 571, 572 3:17. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 310, 443 3:18. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 566 3:22. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 559 4:1. . . . . . . . . . . 579, 580, 592 4:1–4. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 270 4:1–5. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 618 4:3. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 419 4:3–4. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 209 4:3–5. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 200 4:4. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 538 4:4–5. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 341 4:5. . . . . . . 268, 300, 528, 538 4:6. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 256 4:8. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 407, 533 4:9–13. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 525 4:11–13 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 388 4:12. . . . . .145, 222, 223, 248, 459, 471, 556 4:12–13. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 470 4:14. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 671, 684 4:14–16. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 320 4:14–17. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 265 4:14–21. . . . 89, 227, 261, 326 4:16–17. . . . . . . . 86, 157, 256 4:16. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 300, 661 4:17. . . . . . 126, 157, 228, 275, 320, 324, 455 4:20. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 229, 231 4:32. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 556 5:1. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 666 5:1–8. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 670 5:2. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 582 5:3. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 265, 388 5:3b. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 382 5:4–5. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 281 5:5. . . . . . . 267, 388, 418, 424 5:6. . . . . . . 154, 325, 420, 573 5:8–10. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 469 5:9, 11. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 670 5:9–11. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 338 5:9–13. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 557 5:11. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 670 5:12–13. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 370 5:12, 13. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 369 5:20–28. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 229 5:23. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 269 6:1–11, 22 . . . . . . . . . . . . . 310 6:2. . . . . . . 154, 325, 420, 573 6:2–3. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 533 6:3. . . . . . . 154, 325, 420, 573 6:8. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 149

6:9. . . 154, 310, 325, 420, 573 6:9–10. . . 229, 230, 338, 449, 522, 638 6:9–11. . . . 230, 311, 450, 618 6:11. . . . . . 301, 310, 330, 336, 490, 621, 622 6:12–20. . . . . . . 334, 335, 345 6:13–20. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 494 6:14. . . . . . . . . . 383, 392, 394 6:15, 16. . . 154, 325, 420, 573 6:19. . . . . .154, 310, 325, 345, 420, 571, 573 6:19–20. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 337 6:20. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 544 7:1. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 352 7:2. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 332 7:2–16. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 347 7:5. . . . . . . 265, 267, 272, 281 7:10. . . . . . 325, 394, 658, 675 7:10–11. . . 387, 388, 420, 665 7:10–16. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 674 7:12. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 387 7:14 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 301, 336 7:15, 18, 24 . . . . . . . . . . . . 343 7:17–24 . . . 128, 228, 229, 540 7:25. . . . . . . . . . 325, 352, 387 7:25–35. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 665 7:26. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 559, 655 7:27–28. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 656 7:29. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 593, 655 7:30. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 377 7:31. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 145, 655 7:32. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 249 7:32–34. . . . . . . . . . . 324, 649 7:34. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 310 8:1. . . . . . . . . . . 352, 443, 444 8:1–3. . . . . . . . . . . . . 145, 313 8:5. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 257, 569 8:6. . . . . . . 133, 298, 336, 569 8:8. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 490 8:9. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 468 8:13. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 256 9:1. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 125, 672 9:1–6, 14. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 232 9:1–18. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 270 9:1, 4. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 211 9:2. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 182, 267 9:3–6. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 674 9:3–14. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 210 9:4–6, 14, 15. . . . . . . 223, 663 9:5–6. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 125 9:12. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 276 9:13, 24. . . . . . . 154, 325, 573 9:14. . . . . .210, 232, 387, 388, 394, 662, 674

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 696

9:14–17. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 89 9:15. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 232, 663 9:15–18. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 232 9:16–27. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 618 9:17. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 198 9:18. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 270 9:19. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 218, 219 9:20. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 259 9:21. . . . . . 128, 199, 219, 313, 349, 358, 543, 665 9:22. . . . . . . . . . .199, 217, 219 9:24–27. . . . . . . 256, 450, 641 9:25. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 268 9:26. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 641 9:27. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 538 10:1. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 374 10:7–8. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 328 10:10. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 421 10:12. . . . . . . . . 449, 450, 468 10:12–13. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 450 10:13. . . . . . . . . . . . . 282, 645 10:16. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 420 10:19–20. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 569 10:23. . . . . . . . . . . . . 443, 444 10:31. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 544 10:31–33. . . . . . . . . . 145, 313 10:32. . . . . . . . . 242, 370, 508 10:33. . . . . . . . . 199, 218, 219 10:33–11:1. . . . . . . . . . . . . 218 11:1. . 157, 219, 256, 300, 661 11:2. . . . . . 239, 320, 628, 629 11:3. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 374 11:7. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 269 11:12 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 628 11:17 . . . . . . . . . 325, 658, 675 11:17–34 . . . . . . . . . . 629, 666 11:18 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 666 11:20–22, 33. . . . . . . . . . . 664 11:22. . . . . . . . . . . . . 508, 658 11:23. . . . . 216. 239, 247, 323, 397, 628 11:23–25. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 387 11:23–26. . . . . . 358, 390, 397 11:24. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 420 11:25. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 357 11:26. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 397 11:30. . . . . . . . . . . . . 383, 466 12:1. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 352, 374 12:3. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 160, 543 12:3b. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 621 12:4–11. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 477 12:4–31. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 455 12:7. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 482 12:8. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 556 12:10. . . . . . . . . . . . . 478, 483

7/12/23 11:29 AM



Scripture and Other Ancient Literature Index 697

12:23. . . . . . . . . . . . . 335, 337 12:28. . . . . . . . . . . . . 242, 566 13:4. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 467 13:8–12. . . . . . . . . . . 531, 533 13:11. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 211 13:13. . . . . 144, 146, 285, 435 14:1–5. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 482 14:3. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 227, 508 14:3–5, 12. . . . . . . . . . . . . 443 14:5. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 428 14:16 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 474 14:17 . . . . . . . . . 443, 444, 445 14:18 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 256 14:20. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 212 14:20b. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 211 14:24–25. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 482 14:26. . . . . 443, 444, 445, 474 14:29. . . . .455, 476, 478, 482, 483, 556 14:29–33. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 477 14:31. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 672 14:33. . . . . . . . . . . . . 486, 487 14:36. . . . . . . . . 163, 239, 477 14:37. . . . . 325, 658, 665, 684 14:37–38. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 674 14:40. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 370 15:1. . . . . . . . . . 152, 382, 628 15:1–2. . . . . . . . 182, 251, 290, 382, 609 15:1–4. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 477 15:1–5. . . . . . . . 181, 382, 383 15:1–11 . . . . . . . . . . . 183, 320 15:2. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 254, 628 15:3. . . . . . 216, 239, 323, 439 15:3–5. . . . . . . . 382, 407, 438 15:3–7. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 210 15:3a. . . . . . . . . . . . . 382, 628 15:3b–5. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 382 15:5–8. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 125 15:7. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 210 15:8. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 210, 526 15:8–10. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 198 15:9. . 131, 132, 242, 248, 508 15:10. . . . . . . . . 145, 191, 192, 231, 543 15:11. . . . . 181, 382, 383, 407, 438, 629 15:11a . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 382 15:12, 35. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 380 15:14. . . . . . . . . . . . . 400, 536 15:15. . . . . . . . . . . . . 382, 620 15:18. . . . . . . . . . . . . 399, 400 15:20. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 383 15:20–27. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 623 15:20–28. . . . . . . . . . 229, 230

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 697

15:21–28. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 394 15:23. . . . . 388, 389, 400, 401 15:23–27. . . . . .528, 533, 546, 646, 647, 678 15:23–28. . . . . . 129, 133, 172, 281, 289, 298, 341, 389, 391, 444, 491, 525, 567 15:24. . . . . . . . . 231, 389, 585 15:24–25. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 397 15:24–28. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 69 15:24, 50. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 230 15:26. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 584 15:28, 54. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 421 15:42–57. . . . . . 230, 533, 544 15:43. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 624 15:44. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 492 15:45. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 491 15:45–56. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 444 15:46. . . . . . . . . . . . . 492, 566 15:50–52. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 402 15:50–54. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 440 15:50–57. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 522 15:51. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 579 15:51–52. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 386 15:52. . . . . . . . . 392, 399, 400 15:58. . . . . . . . . 144, 145. 191, 192, 281 16:1. . . . . . . . . . 131, 310, 534 16:2. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 420 16:1. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 620 16:1–11 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 261 16:1, 12. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 352 16:5. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 620 16:5–9, 12. . . . . . . . . . . . . 577 16:10. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 126 16:10–11. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 274 16:11. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 562 16:13. . . . . . . . . 290, 430, 628 16:15. . . . . . . . . . . . . 162, 620 16:15–18. . . . . . 458, 460, 462 16:16. . . . . . . . . . . . . 145, 459 16:17 . . . . . . . . . 268, 293, 388 16:19. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 460 16:19–20. . . . . . 495, 577, 684 16:20. . . . . . . . . . . . . 495, 496 16:21. 495, 497, 681, 682, 684 16:22. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 390 16:23. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 538 16:24. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 428

2 Corinthians 1:1. . . 126, 128, 129, 131, 132, 162, 310, 329, 508, 534 1:1–2. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 502 1:2. . . . . . . . . . . 134, 502, 546

1:3. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 141 1:3–7. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 90, 142 1:4. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 288 1:8. . . . . . . . . . . 162, 374, 620 1:8–2:13. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 97 1:11. . . . . . . . . . 474, 496, 557 1:10. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 639, 643 1:12. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 89, 310 1:12–7:16. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 90 1:13. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 305, 684 1:14 . . . . . . 267, 268, 388, 419 1:15–2:13. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 72 1:18. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 645 1:18–2:13. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 262 1:18–2:27. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 263 1:19. . . . 74, 75, 124, 131, 276 1:21–22. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 191 1:22. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 346 1:23. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 208 1:23–2:3 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 266 1:24. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 89 2:1. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 339 2:2–5. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 377 2:4. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 266 2:12. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 276 2:12–17 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 90 2:12–4:15. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 92 2:13. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 275 2:13–16. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 162 2:14. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 212 2:14–17 . . . . . . . . . . . . 97, 262 2:15. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 608 2:16. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 648 2:17. . . . . . .88, 163, 195, 208, 239, 240 3:1–6. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 88 3:1–4:6 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 592 3:1–7:4. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 97 3:1–7:4a. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 97 3:2. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 267, 667 3:3–9. . . . . . . . . . . . . 357, 358 3:4–6. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 88, 202 3:4–18. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 88 3:5–6. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 198 3:5–18. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 202 3:6. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 232 3:11–13 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 682 3:12. . . . . . . 88, 192, 193, 202 3:12–4:2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 88 3:16–17. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 572 3:18. . . . . 230, 490, 494, 544, 548, 624 3:31. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 676 4:1. . . . . . . . . . . 198, 202, 669 4:1–2. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 88

7/12/23 11:29 AM

698

Scripture and Other Ancient Literature Index

4:1–6. . . . . . . . . 202, 270, 482 4:1, 16. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 202 4:2. . . .88, 163, 196, 202, 239, 240, 608 4:3. . . . . . . 152, 195, 536, 608 4:3–4. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 446 4:4. . . 267, 281, 311, 428, 429, 431, 433, 566, 611, 623 4:5. . . . . . . . 88, 203, 208, 217 4:6. . . 191, 202, 282, 427, 533, 623 4:7. . . 193, 195, 208, 333, 335 4:7–11. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 208 4:7–16. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 88 4:7–18. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2024:8 428 4:8. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 429 4:10. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 247 4:10–15. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 382 4:14. . . . . .247, 382, 383, 392, 394, 407, 490 4:15. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 298, 474 4:17. . . . . . 210, 525, 533, 624 4:18. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 525 5:1. . . . . . . . . . . 406, 420, 533 5:1–10. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 392 5:2. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 172 5:5–6. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 666 5:6–9. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 392 5:7. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 479 5:8. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 406 5:9. . . . 88, 249, 324, 361, 649 5:10. . . . . .302, 341, 528, 538, 546, 618 5:10–11. . . . . . . . 88, 538, 554 5:11. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 88 5:11–21 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 592 5:11–6:10. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 92 5:14–15. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 382 5:14–17 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 400 5:15. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 439, 440 5:16. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 312 5:18–21. . . . . . . . . . . 469, 471 5:19. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 551, 559 5:19–20. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 88 5:20. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 194 5:21. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 440 6:1. . . . . . . 191, 192, 194, 322 6:1–10. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 88 6:2. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 254 6:4. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 288 6:5. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 89, 459 6:7. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 88 6:8. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 88, 195 6:10. . . . . . 159, 220, 377, 474 6:11. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 310

6:11–13 . . . . . . . . . . . . 89, 227 6:13. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 89 6:14. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 427 6:14–16. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 567 6:15. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 598 6:16. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 571 7:1. . . . . . . . . . . 301, 336, 621 7:2. . . . . . . . . . . . 89, 195, 208 7:2–4. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 92 7:2–16. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 90 7:3. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 89 7:3–7. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 289 7:4. . . . . . . . 88, 192, 293, 507 7:4b–16. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 97 7:5. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 524 7:5–16. . . . . . . . . . . . . 97, 262 7:6, 13–14. . . . . . . . . . . . . 275 7:6–7. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 90, 388 7:7. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 285 7:8. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 265 7:8–11. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 377 7:14 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 508 7:15–16. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 97 8:1. . . . . . . . . . . 131, 359, 508 8:2. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 159 8:1–5. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 72, 124 8:2. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 258 8:3. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 524 8:5. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 217 8:6. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 275 8:9. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 157, 220 8:13. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 563 8:13–15. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 370 8:15. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 562 8:16. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 265, 275 8:18. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 275 8:23. . . . . . 210, 269, 275, 545 8:24. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 521 8:27. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 199 9:1. . . . . . . . . . . 310, 355, 534 9:2. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 508 9:3. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 275 9:5. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 275 9:8. . . . . . . . . . . 474, 479, 678 9:11–12 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 474 9:12. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 293 9:13. . . . . .182, 276, 313, 449, 530, 531, 544 9:14. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 293 10:1. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 322, 325 10:2. . . . . . . . . . 228, 277, 666 10:3–4. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 240 10:8. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 443 10:10. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 388 10:12. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 666 10:13. . . . . . . . . . . . . 494, 530

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 698

10:14. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 276 10:15. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 145 11:2. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 490 11:3. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 555 11:7. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 193, 661 11:7–9. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 195 11:8–9. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 223 11:9. . . . . . . . . . . 72, 223, 293 11:12 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 223 11:13 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 196 11:16 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 562 11:20. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 223 11:21. . . . . . . . . . . . . 551, 559 11:23. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 459 11:24–26. . . . . . . . . . 248, 259 11:27. . . . . . . . . 145, 222, 459 11:30. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 466 12:5. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 466 12:7. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 267, 569 12:8. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 298, 553 12:9. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 387 12:9–10. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 466 12:9–20. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 193 12:12. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 153 12:14–13:10. . . . . . . . . . . . 261 12:16–18. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 208 12:18. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 275 12:19. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 443 13:3. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 490 13:8. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 608 13:10. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 684 13:11. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 485 13:12. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 496 13:13. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 76, 648 12:13–18. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 195 12:14. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 217 12:15. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 217 12:16. . . . . . . . . . . . . 196, 223 12:18. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 275 12:20–13:2 . . . . . . . . . . . . 342 12:21. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 339 13:4. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 407 13:10. . . . . . . . . 266, 388, 443 13:11. . . . .316, 461, 484, 486, 640, 678 13:12. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 496 13:13. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 495 13:14 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 632

Galatians 1:1. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 382 1:1–4. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 502 1:2. . . . . . . . . . . 126, 131, 526 1:3. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 134, 546 1:3–4. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 502

7/12/23 11:29 AM



Scripture and Other Ancient Literature Index 699

1:4. . .281, 329, 433, 439, 559, 566, 619 1:5. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 628 1:6. . . 343, 540, 547, 555, 633 1:6–9. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 201 1:6, 15. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 228 1:7. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 276, 666 1:8. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 152, 172 1:10. . . . . . 199, 249, 324, 649 1:10–17 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 202 1:10b–­c. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 201 1:11. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 152 1:11–12 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 240 1:11–17 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 201 1:12. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 525 1:12–17 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 210 1:13. . . . . . 131, 242, 243, 508 1:13, 23. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 248 1:13–14. . .132, 134, 150, 243, 469, 592 1:13–17, 23 . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61 1:14 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 628 1:15–16. . . 198, 202, 229, 282 1:15–17. . . . . . . . . . . 191, 202 1:16. . . . . . . . . . 202, 276, 525 1:16–17 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 202 1:20. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 497, 684 1:21. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 162 1:22. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 132, 243 1:22–23. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 245 1:24. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 544 2:1–10. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 243 2:1–16 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 438 2:2. . . . . . . 152. 191, 192, 282 2:4. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 563 2:5. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 265, 608 2:7. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 198, 201 2:7–9. . . . . . . . . . . . . 202, 592 2:9. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 198 2:10. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 143, 582 2:12. . . . . . . . . . . 61, 659, 666 2:14. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 608 2:16c. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 534 2:19. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 407 2:20. . 469, 471, 563, 632, 633 2:21. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 382, 633 3:2. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 239 3:5. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 153, 239 3:13. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65, 203 3:15. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 344 3:21–4:7. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .349 3:23–27. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 413 3:25–29. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 184 3:26. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 428, 534 3:28. . 128, 148, 347, 428, 534 4:1. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 211

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 699

4:3. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .171, 211 4:4–5. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 447 4:6. . . . . . . . . . . 149, 346, 481 4:8. . . . . . . . . . . 171, 336, 569 4:8–9. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 171 4:9. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 212 4:11. . . . . . . . . . 145, 282, 459 4:12. . . . . . . . . . . 86, 157, 256 4:13. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 154 4:19. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 215, 227 4:20. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 266, 631 4:21–31. . . . . . . . . . . 132, 243 4:26. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 406 5:1. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 290, 321 5:1–6:10. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 321 5:3. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 228 5:4. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 555, 633 5:5. . . . . . . . . . . 310, 434, 522 5:5–6. . . . . . . . . . . . . 144, 448 5:6. . . . . . . 144, 182, 285, 434 5:7. . . 267, 530, 608, 611, 641 5:8. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 229 5:10. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 647 5:11. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65, 248 5:13. . . . . . . . . . 272, 299, 343 5:14. . . . . . . . . . 199, 309, 388 5:15. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 468 5:16. . . . . . . . . . 134, 484, 621 5:16–24. . . . . . . 446, 449, 482 5:16–26. . . . . . .228, 230, 291, 299, 543 5:18. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 621 5:19. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 339 5:19–21. . . . . . . 349, 481, 618 5:19–25. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 455 5:21. . . . . .229, 230, 231, 325, 449, 522, 638 5:22. . . . . . 159, 161, 291, 467 5:22–23. . . 321, 481, 542, 638 5:22–26. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 182 5:24. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 337 6:1. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 671 6:2. . . 128, 182, 199, 288, 313, 349, 370, 543, 665 6:5. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 370 6:6. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 210 6:7–8. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 618 6:7–10. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 448 6:8. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 531 6:9. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 669 6:10. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 299, 471 6:11. . . . . . 495, 681, 682, 684 6:11–18 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 497 6:12. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 248 6:16. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 676 6:17. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 247, 640

Ephesians 1:1. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 126 1:2. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 134, 546 1:2–3. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 502 1:3. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 141 1:4. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 619 1:5. . . . . . . . . . . 285, 329, 541 1:9. . . . . . . 329, 541, 547, 579 1:11. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 329 1:13. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 608 1:14 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 436 1:16. . . . . . 142, 292, 293, 617 1:19. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 609 1:21. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 566, 567 2:2. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 406, 566 2:3. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 376 2:5. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 633 2:7, 8. . . . . . . . . . . . . 567, 633 2:10. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 343 2:11. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 143 2:12. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 377 2:19. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 534 2:21. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 443 2:21–22. . . . . . . . . . . 571, 572 3:1–13. . . . . . . . 579, 580, 592 3:2. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 198, 580 3:4. . . . . . . . . . . 579, 580, 581 3:6. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 579 3:7. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 606 3:7–12. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 580 3:7, 8. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 198 3:9. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 129 3:12. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 192 3:13. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 669 3:20. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 293 4:1. . . . . . . 228, 321, 322, 541 4:1–16. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 455 4:1–6:20 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 321 4:2. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 467 4:2–5. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 144 4:3. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 461 4:4. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 343 4:12, 16. . . . . . . . . . . 443, 444 4:14. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 211 4:15. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 154 4:17. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 228 4:18. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 428 4:19. . . . . . 195, 338, 339, 443 4:24. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 225 4:28. . 216, 370, 371, 669, 674 4:29. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 479 5:3 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .338, 339 5:4. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 474 5:5. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 339 5:6. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 341

7/12/23 11:29 AM

700

Scripture and Other Ancient Literature Index

5:8. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 428 5:11. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 428 5:14. . . . . . 382, 428, 430, 441 5:15. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 418 5:20. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 474 5:26. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 336 5:26–27. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 490 5:29. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 213 6:10. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 646 6:10–18. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 435 6:11–18 . . . . . . . . . . . 433, 434 6:13–17. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 434 6:17. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 241 6:18. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 474 6:19. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 579 6:19–20. . . 192, 496, 639, 641

Philippians 1:1. . . 124, 126, 310, 460, 534 1:2. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 134 1:3. . . . 74, 142, 288, 506, 546 1:3–5. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 142–43 1:3–6. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 151 1:3–8. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 145 1:3–11. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 505 1:4. . . 143, 290, 292, 293, 428 1:5. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 96 1:5–6. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 507 1:6. . . . . . . 68, 306, 388, 418, 494, 538 1:7. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 265, 506 1:8. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 208, 497 1:9. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 308, 639 1:9–11. . . 306, 307, 308, 309, 313, 532, 538 1:9a. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 307, 308 1:9b–10. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 307 1:9b–10a. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 307 1:10. . . . . .268, 307, 388, 418, 445, 446, 482, 522, 542 1:10b–11. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 309 1:10–11. . . . . . . . . . . 307, 310 1:10a. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 307 1:10b. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 306 1:10b–11. . . . . . 307, 308, 309 1:11. . . . . .182, 291, 299, 308, 310, 312, 542, 638 1:12. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 374 1:14 . . . . . . 163, 239, 240, 275 1:15. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 541 1:19. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 496 1:19–20. . . . . . . . . . . 306, 308 1:19–26. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 69 1:20. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 192 1:20–24. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 392

1:22. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 619 1:23. . 337, 400, 406, 407, 533 1:26. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 388 1:27. . . . . . 130, 217, 228, 276, 290, 377, 628 1:27–30. . . . . . . 145, 487, 514, 516, 517, 518, 519, 520, 523, 538 1:27c–28a. . . . . . . . . . . . . 515 1:28. . 447, 514, 515, 516, 517, 519, 521, 530, 568 1:28–29. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 279 1:28a. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 515 1:28c. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 516 1:29. . . . . . . . . . 160, 278, 523 1:29–30. . . . . . . . . . . 516, 523 2:1. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 227 2:1–4. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 454 2:2. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 216 2:5–11. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 157 2:6. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 474 2:6–11. . . . . 69, 341, 391, 525, 528, 533 2:9. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 293 2:9–11. . . . . 69, 133, 172, 229, 289, 388, 439, 546, 623, 646, 647 2:12. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 388 2:12–13. . . 291, 449, 450, 543 2:12–16. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 538 2:12–17 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 618 2:13. . . . . . 241, 541, 543, 609 2:13–14. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 449 2:14–15. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 371 2:14–16. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 522 2:14–17 . . . . . . . 489, 490, 493 2:15. . . . . . . . . . 301, 310, 490 2:16. . . . . . 163, 191, 192, 268, 281, 306, 388, 389, 418, 447, 459 2:17. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 474 2:18. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 473 2:19. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 126 2:19–21. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 261 2:19–23. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 275 2:19, 23. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 275 2:20. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 216 2:20–22. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 126 2:22. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 227 2:24. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 647 2:25. . . . . . . . . . 210, 275, 433 2:25–30. . . . . . . . . . . 376, 577 2:28. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 275 2:30. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 293 3:1. . . . . . . . . . . 321, 473, 640 3:1–6. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 469

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 700

3:3. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 171 3:4–17. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 157 3:5. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 618 3:5–6. . . . . . . . . . . . . 150, 592 3:6. . . . . . . 248, 310, 493, 508 3:10–11. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 394 3:11–14 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 447 3:12–14 . . . . . . . . . . . 445, 538 3:14. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 406, 540 3:17. . . 86, 157, 256, 300, 661 3:17–4:9. . . . . . . . . . . 320, 321 3:19. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 568 3:20. . 130, 391, 406, 525, 650 3:20–21. . . .69, 172, 230, 320, 440, 444, 445, 446 494, 519, 533, 544 3:21. . . . . . . . . . 397, 606, 624 4:1. . . . . . . 124, 267, 268, 271, 290, 628 4:1–2. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 290 4:2–3. . . . . . . . . . . . . 453, 553 4:2–9. . . . .320, 451, 452, 453, 454, 455, 461, 486, 487 4:2. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 458 4:3. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 458 4:4. . . . . . .290, 469, 470, 471, 452, 473 4:4–6. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 472 4:4–7. . . . . . . . . . . . . 160, 455 4:4–9. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 454 4:5. . . . . . . 320, 447, 467, 559 4:5a. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 453 4:5b. . . . . . . . . . 320, 453, 454 4:6. . . . . . . 143, 452, 453, 473, 474, 487 4:7. . . 453, 485, 487, 677, 678 4:8. . . . . . . 316, 453, 480, 640 4:9. . . .86, 157, 256, 300, 320, 486, 487, 678 4:9b. . . . . . 453, 484, 676, 677 4:10. . . . . . . . . . 339, 473, 485 4:12. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 323, 474 4:15. . . . . . . . . . 162, 462, 620 4:15–16. . . . . . . . . . . . 59, 223 4:16. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 266 4:21. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 495, 496 4:21–22. . . . 76, 275, 495, 684 4:21–23. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 682

Colossians 1:1. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 329 1:1–3. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 502 1:2. . . . . . . . . . . 126, 134, 534 1:3. . . .74, 231, 290, 292, 293, 413, 617 1:3–14. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 505

7/12/23 11:29 AM



Scripture and Other Ancient Literature Index 701

1:4. . . . . . . . . . . 285, 299, 534 1:4–5. . . . . . . . . . . . . 144, 507 1:5. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 608 1:6. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 388, 608 1:9. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 238 1:9–10. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 329 1:9–12. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 297 1:9–14. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 522 1:10. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 228, 479 1:11. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 467 1:12. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 474 1:13. . 229, 230, 290, 391, 643 1:13–14. . . 113, 129, 271, 281, 322, 341, 433, 491, 543, 646, 647 1:18. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 242 1:19. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 531 1:21–23. . 308, 489, 490, 522, 538, 618 1:22. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 310, 490 1:23–29. . . . . . . 579, 580, 592 1:24. . . . . . . . . . 242, 252, 293 1:25. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 239, 240 1:25–27. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 580 1:27. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 230, 579 1:28. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 489, 490 1:29. . . . . . 459, 543, 606, 607 2:1. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 374 2:2. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 153, 579 2:5. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 265 2:7. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 474 2:8. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 468, 630 2:11. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 333, 335 2:12. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 382, 609 2:12–3:4. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 407 2:13–15. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 433 2:14. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 582 2:19. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 628 3:1. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 321 3:1–4. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 394 3:1–4:6 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 321 3:3. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 129 3:3–4. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 407 3:4. . . . . . . . . . . 421, 494, 544 3:5. . . . . . .195, 266, 321, 334, 337, 339 3:5–6. . . . . . . . . 334, 335, 341 3:9–10. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 490 3:12. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 433 3:12–13. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 467 3:14. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 299 3:15. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 678 3:15, 17 . . . . . . . 343, 461, 474 3:17. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 636 3:24–25. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 528 4:2. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 430, 474

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 701

4:3. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 496, 579 4:3–4. . . . . . . . . . . . . 639, 641 4:5. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 369, 370 4:7–8. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 275 4:8. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 275 4:10. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 58, 462 4:10–11. . . . . . . . . . . . 60, 231 4:12. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 153, 329 4:14. . . . . . . . . . . 76, 495, 684 4:16. . . . . . 128, 129, 131, 275, 497, 577 4:18. . . . . .143, 495, 497, 498, 681, 682, 684

1 Thessalonians 1:1. . .242, 243, 298, 330, 341, 369, 410, 420, 484, 485, 486, 498, 501, 502, 513 1:1a . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 502 1:1b. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 502 1:1c . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 546 1:1–2:12. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 237 1:2. . . .74, 80, 93, 94, 95, 109, 151, 153, 162, 163, 186, 193, 236, 238, 242, 284, 290, 291, 292, 293, 294, 428, 428, 472, 474, 506, 617 1:2–3. . . . . 108, 142, 503, 505 1:2–5. . . . . . . .77, 78, 96, 106, 107, 505 1:2–7. . . . . . 78, 151, 159, 237, 255, 262, 290 1:2–10. . . . . . . 77, 81, 98, 101, 106, 137, 140, 141, 163, 190, 203, 284, 290, 510, 619 1:2–3:10. . . . . . . . . . . 140, 317 1:2–3:13. . . . 80, 81, 87, 95, 96, 98, 100, 141 1:2a. . . . . . . . . . .141, 151, 162 1:2b–4. . . . . . . . .141, 151, 162 1:3. . 14, 74, 99, 143, 147, 148, 151, 172, 182, 183., 239, 241, 285, 286, 292, 299, 313, 341, 353, 433, 434, 435, 437, 459, 507, 509, 542, 626, 648, 649, 650 1:3–4. . . . . . . . . . 80, 130, 132 1:3–5. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 109 1:4. . . . 98, 128, 133, 141, 143, 149, 151, 153, 156, 171, 172, 181, 183, 301, 312, 322, 330, 343, 355, 447, 449, 458, 490, 493, 494, 506, 553, 618, 619, 626 1:4–3:10. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 142

1:5. . . . 65, 79, 80, 92, 93, 94, 141, 142, 143, 148, 151, 155, 156, 158, 186. 188, 190, 191, 193, 196, 226, 238, 240, 241, 276, 285, 325, 375, 417, 420, 490, 536, 607, 623, 642, 660, 667 1:5–6. . . .14, 93, 94, 158, 160, 182, 284, 286, 291, 294, 306. 643 1:5–7. . . . . 141, 162, 182, 236, 238, 242, 621 1:5–7a. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 211 1:5–10. . 86, 99, 108, 140, 183 1:5a. . . 95, 151, 153, 154, 155, 156, 157, 236 1:5b. . . 95, 151, 154, 155, 156, 157, 158, 206, 225, 236 1:6. . . .84, 86, 94, 95, 98, 141, 146, 152, 153, 155, 156, 157, 158, 163, 187, 194, 236, 242, 244, 255, 256, 278, 306, 341, 465, 469, 470, 473, 474, 509, 510, 608, 609, 661 1:6–7. . . . . 141, 163. 186, 383, 510, 608 1:6–8. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 181 1:6–10. . . . . . . . . 77, 106, 285 1:6a. . . . . . . . . . 156, 157, 242 1:6b. . . . . . 156, 157, 159, 160, 236, 240 1:7. . . 109, 141, 162, 163, 181, 182. 183, 226, 241, 245, 437, 663 1:7–8. . 94, 144, 160, 359, 365 1:7–10 . . . . . . 91, 99, 236, 237, 262, 294, 577 1:8. . . . . 79, 99, 141, 145, 159, 161, 162, 163, 182, 183, 186, 190, 193, 259, 282, 341, 355, 382, 437, 577, 620, 640, 641 1:8–9. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 193 1:8–10. . . . . . . . . . . . 184, 417 1:8–2:16. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 417 1:9. . . . .14, 59, 60, 62, 65, 79, 80, 92, 116, 130, 134, 141, 155, 156, 181, 193, 208, 226, 238, 330, 331, 337, 343, 365, 459, 508, 529, 569, 609, 622, 649 1:9–10. . . . . 69, 156, 162, 163, 182. 186, 188, 191, 237, 238, 257, 284. 286, 298, 320, 356, 366, 369 428, 445, 450, 491, 530, 623

7/12/23 11:29 AM

702

Scripture and Other Ancient Literature Index

1:9a. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 190 1:9b. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 171 1:9b–10. . . . . . . . . . . 172, 188 1:10. . . .14, 59, 60, 61, 62, 64, 65, 67 68, 79, 80, 92, 99, 110, 112, 130, 132, 133, 134, 141, 146, 147, 148, 155, 171, 172, 181, 203, 204, 245, 247, 252, 253, 254, 255, 269, 306, 311, 313, 342, 347, 379, 382, 390, 391, 394, 396, 397, 407, 408, 410, 416, 419, 420, 432, 435, 437, 438, 439, 443, 445, 450, 522, 525, 528, 538, 560, 566, 576, 626, 629, 643, 650 1:10–12. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 109 1:11–12 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 638 1:13–14. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 182 1:16–3:13. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 101 2:1. . . . . 14, 79, 80, 81, 87, 92, 93, 94, 149, 154, 155, 156, 186, 188, 189, 190, 206, 221, 226, 231, 237, 238, 282,284, 286, 322, 325, 355, 374, 417, 420, 553, 660 2:1–2. . .92, 109, 137, 187, 281 2:1–4. . . . . . . . . . . 61, 81, 186 2:1–8. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 92, 643 2:1–9. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 225 2:1–12. . . . . 60, 77, 81, 82, 83, 84, 85, 86, 87, 89, 91, 92, 93, 94, 95, 96, 97, 99, 102, 106, 155, 156, 158, 181, 187, 188, 191, 196, 218, 226, 231, 233, 234, 235, 236, 238, 255, 262, 286, 287, 294, 295, 362, 365, 394, 482, 483, 523, 525, 673 2:1–14 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 200 2:1–16 . . . . 140, 141, 155, 159, 162, 238, 255, 256, 261, 508 2:1–18. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 447 2:1–3:10. . . . 86, 101, 111, 315, 316, 317 2:2. . . . .68, 81, 84, 86, 87, 88, 92, 93, 94, 146, 152, 153, 154, 156, 189, 199, 200, 206, 208, 216, 217, 224, 226, 231, 234, 240, 276, 325, 356, 375, 420, 449, 470, 490, 660

2:2–6. . . . . . . . . . . . . 202, 482 2:2–8. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 221 2:2–9. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 79 2:2–12. . . . 79, 81, 86, 94, 155, 186, 190, 191, 200, 237, 240 2:3. . 85, 86, 94, 189, 191, 196, 199, 200, 202, 223, 226, 227, 228, 234, 338, 424 2:3–4. . . . . 153, 194, 198, 199, 200, 201, 205, 206 2:3–5. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 88 2:3–6. . . . . . . . . 184, 193, 424 2:3–7. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65, 152 2:3–8. . . . . . . . .203, 222, 231, 232, 673 2:3–10. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 673 2:3–12. . . . . . . . 189, 193, 213 2:3–16. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 158 2:4. . . . . . 61, 85, 88, 133, 201, 202, 206, 209, 224, 234, 245, 249, 300, 323, 324, 344, 356, 482, 649 2:4a. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 81, 202 2:4b. . . . . . . 82, 198, 203, 209 2:4b–6. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 82 2:5. . . . .82, 86, 87, 88, 92, 93, 94, 154, 156, 189, 195, 202, 206, 212, 214, 224, 226, 231, 234, 276, 325, 429, 497, 660 2:5–6. . . . . 189, 199, 201, 211, 212, 223 2:5–7. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 215 2:5–7a. . . . . . . . 206, 214, 217 2:5–7b. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 212 2:5–8. . . . . 186, 189, 206, 231 2:5–12. . . . . . . . . . . . .203 206 2:5a. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 208 2:5b. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 210 2:6. . . 209, 210, 211, 212, 214, 233, 323 2:6–7a. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 206 2:6:7b . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 211 2:6–8. . . . . . 14, 160, 218, 252, 306, 408, 420 2:7. . . . 82, 125, 156, 195, 201, 214, 215, 220, 224, 226, 227, 265 2:7–11. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 212 2:7a. . . . . . 209, 211, 212, 214, 223, 662 2:7b. . . . . . 209, 210, 211, 212, 214, 226 2:7b–9. . . . . . . . . . . . 226, 663 2:7b–­c. . . . .211, 212, 214, 216

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 702

2:7c . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .211, 214 2:7c–8. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 216 2:7–8. . . . . . 89, 213, 224, 673 2:7a. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 206, 232 2:7b. . . . . . 156. 206, 214, 216 2:7c . . . . . . 206, 211, 212, 215 2:7c–8. . . . .206, 211, 214, 217 2:8. . . . . 82, 84, 89, 152, 206, 215, 216, 224, 233, 240, 356, 541 2:8–9. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 214 2:9. . . . .59, 82, 87, 88, 89, 92, 111, 143, 145, 149, 152, 189, 195, 206, 210, 217, 221, 222, 224, 226, 232, 233, 240, 276. 292, 293, 322, 355, 356, 367, 459, 553, 660, 661, 663, 673 2:9–10. . . . . . . . . 60, 258, 609 2:9–11. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 233 2:9–12. . . . . 61, 115, 186, 208, 231, 281, 367, 369, 660, 663, 673 2:9a. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 222 2:9b. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 222, 232 2:10. . . 82 ,87, 89, 92, 93, 161, 181, 182, 189, 208, 221, 226, 230, 231, 245, 270, 301, 437, 626, 660, 673 2:10–12. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59 2:11. . . .87, 92, 154, 189, 206, 211, 212, 213, 215, 222, 226, 227, 231, 325, 429, 443, 507, 626, 660, 673, 675 2:11–12 . . . .14, 59, 62, 82, 86, 89, 145, 194, 226, 227, 231, 233, 234, 265, 323, 325, 342, 374, 440, 539, 563 2:11–13 . . . . . . . . . . . 350, 632 2:12. . . . 65, 89, 112, 129, 130, 171, 172, 184, 189, 194, 209, 222. 226, 227, 230, 245, 252, 258, 293, 300, 301, 306, 310, 312, 313, 323, 324, 330, 343, 345, 369, 410, 445, 491, 493, 520, 522, 523, 525, 541, 547, 555, 621, 623, 624 2:12–13. . . 110, 309, 347, 352, 522, 619, 638 2:13. . . . 14, 61, 77, 79, 80, 86, 93, 94, 96, 97, 109, 140, 142, 143, 144, 151, 152, 154, 155, 156, 158,2:13 159, 161, 163, 181, 182, 183,

7/12/23 11:29 AM



Scripture and Other Ancient Literature Index 703

184, 186, 188, 191, 193, 237, 238, 241, 284, 286, 290, 291, 300, 305, 323, 344, 356, 383, 437, 474, 490, 536, 608, 609, 616, 617, 621, 626, 641, 642 2:13–14. . . . . . . 290, 294, 306 2:13–16. . . . . .81, 94, 98, 154, 237, 366, 619 2:13–4:1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 94 2:13–4:2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 237 2:13a. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 95, 236 2:13aa. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 236 2:13b. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 95, 238 2:13b–­c. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 236 2:13c. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 95 2:13–14. . . . . 93, 94, 200, 262 2:13–16. . . . . 65, 99, 107, 114, 137, 158, 179, 186, 194, 235, 236, 237, 242 2:13–17. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 109 2:13–3:10. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 83 2:14. . . 60, 65, 83, 86. 95, 98, 116, 128, 129, 130, 131, 132, 149, 159, 187, 221, 236, 243, 244, 245, 246, 256, 259, 264, 267, 278, 299, 322, 355, 465, 506, 508, 509, 510, 553 2:14–15. . . . . . . 156, 258, 470 2:14–16. . . . .84, 94, 128, 133, 171, 203, 204, 236, 237, 245, 250, 254, 259, 278, 295, 375, 474, 643 2:14–17 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 266 2:14–18. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 156 2:14–20. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 294 2:14–3:8. . . . . . . . 97, 102, 262 2:14–3:10. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 217 2:15 . . . 54, 68, 246, 252, 264, 324, 327, 341, 437, 649 2:15–16. . . . .81, 96, 184, 236, 241, 244, 245, 247, 251, 253, 259, 264, 267, 523, 525, 564 2:15–16a. . . . . . . . . . 246, 251 2:15a. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 246 2:15b. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 246 2:15b–16a. . . . . . . . . . . . . 246 2:16. . . . . . 130, 171, 243, 244, 253, 260, 438, 522 2:16–17. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 543 2:16a. . . . . . . . . . . . . 246, 251 2:16b–­c. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 246 2:16c. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 248

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 703

2:17. . . . . . 149, 202, 221, 241, 248, 264, 267, 275, 278, 293, 295, 322, 327, 355, 458, 553 2:17–18 . . . . . . . 68, 258, 284, 286. 387 2:17–20. . . 216, 263, 280, 474 2:17–3:5. . . . .95, 98, 137, 236, 237, 255, 286, 295 2:17–3:7. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 107 2:17–3:8. . . . . . . . . . 77, 96, 97 2:17–3:10. . . 81, 84, 86, 87, 95, 98, 99, 140, 141, 186, 216, 261, 292, 300, 317 2:17–3:13. . . . .81, 99, 261, 317 2:18. . . . . 69, 74, 83, 124, 141, 223, 266, 280, 281, 298, 435, 497, 501, 575, 646, 648 2:19. . . . . . 124, 146, 172, 267, 269, 270, 292, 301, 302, 341, 388, 389, 390, 525, 554, 562, 6413 2:19–20. . . 130, 269, 438, 560 2:20. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 269, 448 3:1. . . . . . .216, 280, 288, 289, 541, 632 3:1–2. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 280 3:1–3. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 629 3:1–3a. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 280 3:1–4. . . . . . . . . . 75, 244, 510 3:1–5. . . . . . 83, 187, 449, 470 3:1–6. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 146 3:1–8. . . . . . . . . . . . . 294, 616 3:1–9. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59 3:1–10. . . .59, 70, 90, 93, 109, 159, 162. 188, 233, 466, 474, 494, 511 3:2. . . 116, 126, 144, 149, 161, 182, 183, 193, 277, 281, 288, 289, 300, 305, 322, 355, 437, 449, 466, 626, 635, 636 3:2–3. . . . . . . . .184, 277, 284, 320, 635 3:2–3a. . . . . . . . . . . . 280, 281 3:2–4. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 280 3:2–5. . . . . . . . . . . . . 448, 487 3:2–8. . . . . . . . . . . . . 184, 435 3:3. . . . 83, 154, 160, 231, 276, 289, 290, 325, 339, 429, 466, 509, 660 3:3–4. . . 83, 94, 130, 162, 239, 280, 374, 375, 465 3:3–5. . . . . 156, 191, 474, 509

3:3–6. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 306 3:3a. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 281, 338 3:3b. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 279 3:3b–4. . . . . . . . . 92, 278, 280 3:3b–5. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 338 3:4. . . . 84, 98, 154, 202, 244, 276, 277, 278, 325, 342, 402, 523, 525, 663 3:4–8. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 635 3:5. . . . . . 74, 83, 84, 124, 141, 144, 145, 161, 182, 183, 191, 192, 231, 267, 274, 276, 277, 278, 280, 281, 288, 289, 290, 428, 434, 437, 459, 497, 501, 575, 626, 646 3:5a. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 277, 279 3:5aa. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 280 3:5ab. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 280 3:5b. . . . . . . . . . 277, 280. 287 3:6. . . . .14, 80, 84, 85, 87, 90, 126, 142, 144, 155, 161, 162, 182, 183, 187, 188, 191, 200, 217, 238, 263, 275,276, 284, 288, 289, 300, 324, 353, 414, 434, 437, 507, 626, 629 3:6–8. . . . . . . . 280, 290, 292, 293, 306 3:6–9. . . . 80, 93, 99, 151, 237, 284. 295, 326, 673 3:6–10. . . . 137, 142, 143, 275, 284, 291, 340 3:6–13. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 321 3:7. . . 115, 126, 144, 161, 162, 182, 183, 276, 278, 287, 289, 291, 322, 355, 437, 506, 509, 553, 626 3:8. . . 84, 276, 288, 289, 341, 360, 413, 449, 459, 546, 628, 635 3:8b. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 286 3:9. . . . . 84, 97, 109, 140, 146, 284, 290, 291, 292, 294, 617 3:9–10. . . . . 77, 107, 124, 290, 292, 294, 474, 616 3:9–11. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 290 3:9–13. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 96 3:10. . . . . . 59, 83, 91, 96, 100, 108, 144, 161,182, 183, 222, 228, 266, 276, 284, 292, 295, 296, 317, 320, 326, 327, 353, 368, 437, 452, 460, 503, 507, 555, 626 3:10–13. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 321

7/12/23 11:29 AM

704

Scripture and Other Ancient Literature Index

3:10b–11. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 308 3:11. . . 91, 109, 129, 132, 148, 216, 296, 298, 302, 303, 309, 341, 486, 632, 633, 677, 678 3:11–12 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 116 3:11–13 . . . . 99, 100, 105 107, 137, 141, 145, 147, 290, 294, 295, 316, 486, 488, 490, 503, 549, 616, 618, 622, 626, 634, 636, 648 3:12. . . . . . .85, 157, 202, 303, 305, 306, 307, 308, 309, 341, 354, 360, 443, 470, 471, 491, 507, 647, 661 3:12–13. . . . . 14, 65, 112, 172, 181, 184, 230, 296, 298, 301, 303, 304, 306, 310, 312, 313, 317, 327, 394, 438, 440, 449, 452, 491, 493, 538, 542, 564, 621, 622, 632, 637, 638, 640, 645, 676 3:13. . 130, 146, 147, 148, 172, 252, 269, 270, 289, 292, 298, 300, 303, 304, 307, 308, 309, 329, 336, 341, 342, 343, 346, 360, 378, 388, 390, 391, 399, 432, 437, 438, 445, 487, 489, 491, 493, 525, 526, 533, 560, 634, 635, 648, 674 3:13–14. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 447 3:13–16. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 254 4:1. . . . . 85, 96, 100, 105, 149, 228, 233, 242, 249, 316, 320, 322, 325, 329, 334, 341, 342, 355, 359, 360, 458, 459, 463, 491, 494, 546, 553, 640, 647, 668, 673 4:1–2. . . 59, 62, 230, 315, 319, 320, 329, 342, 348, 349, 352, 353, 668, 673 4:1–3. . . . . . . . . 132, 348, 649 4:1–7. . . . . . . . . 184, 344, 448 4:1–8. . . . . 171, 205, 257, 291, 296, 311, 312, 317, 349, 350, 428, 449, 451, 629 4:1–9. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 446 4:1–12. . . . . . 59, 85, 100, 183, 230, 233, 349, 440, 449, 482, 622, 659, 668, 673 4:1–18. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 474 4:1–5:14. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 315 4:1–5:22 . . . . . . . . . . 293, 316

4:1–5:24. . . . . . . 100, 141, 171, 315, 317 4:1, 10. . . . . . . . . . . . 444, 463 4:1a. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 326 4:1b. . . . . . . . . . 230, 320, 326 4:1c . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 320 4:1d. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 320 4:2. . . 85, 154, 202, 230, 320, 323, 326, 329, 341, 344, 374, 420, 459, 647, 658, 659, 660, 665, 673 4:2–8. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 368 4:3. . . .85, 230, 233, 298, 301, 312, 327, 329, 336, 337, 342, 346, 347, 349, 356, 475, 491, 522 4:3–6. . . . . . . . . . . . . 347, 437 4:3–6a. . . . . . . . 340, 342, 348 4:3–7. . . . .181, 334, 344, 346, 347, 491, 566 4:3–8. . . . . . 55, 310, 319, 326, 327, 340, 347, 353, 452, 466, 492 4:3–12. . . . 160, 319, 320, 673 4:3–5:22 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 315 4:3–5:24 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 317 4:3–5:28 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 237 4:3a. . .327, 328, 330, 340, 342 4:3b. . . 330, 331, 338, 340, 342 4:3b–5. . . . . . . . . . . . 327, 338 4:3b–6. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 339 4:3b–6a. . . . . . . . . . . 331, 342 4:4. . . .59, 301, 333, 334, 336, 339, 345, 347, 494 4:4–5. . . . .132, 330, 331, 332, 335, 338, 339, 340 4:4–6. . . . . . . . . . . . . 329, 330 4:4a–5a. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 331 4:5. . . 130, 135, 181, 230, 247, 266, 330, 335, 336, 346, 348, 376, 377, 446, 529, 609, 622 4:5–7. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 365 4:6. . . . 85, 110, 112, 148, 149, 172, 181, 230, 233, 277, 320, 322, 325, 328, 339, 341, 346, 347, 348, 355, 369, 374, 419, 420, 437, 438, 493, 527, 546 4:6–8. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 348 4:6–12. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 371 4:6a. . . . . . 327, 330, 331, 340 4:6b. . . . . . . . . . 340, 342, 344 4:6b– ­c. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 327 4:7. . . . . . . 171, 184, 228, 229, 230, 301, 310, 312, 328,

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 704

331, 336, 338, 339, 342, 344, 346, 436, 449, 491, 522, 534, 540, 621, 623 4:7–8. . . . . . . . .329, 348, 357, 358, 621 4:7–9. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 358 4:8. . . . 85, 147, 181, 230, 233, 299, 328, 330, 342, 344, 346, 348, 358, 490, 491, 493, 494, 542, 543 4:8–9. . . . . . 85, 160, 424, 446 4:8–11. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 448 4:8–12. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 313 4:8a. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 345 4:9. . . . 79, 117, 228, 230, 284, 293, 298, 299, 343, 349, 352, 354. 358, 374, 416, 417, 555 4:9–10. . . . . . . . .99, 285, 288, 299, 443 4:9–10a. . . . . . . . . . . 354, 360 4:9–12. . . . .92, 145, 258, 296, 317, 319, 340, 351, 353, 354, 356, 360, 363, 364, 365, 366, 368, 370, 417, 452, 454, 466, 491, 507, 659 4:9–5:11 . . . . . . . . . . 352, 353 4:9b. . . . . . . . . . 149, 355, 356 4:9b–12. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 659 4:10. . .79, 322, 324, 355, 359, 455, 553, 647 4:10–12. . . . . . . 116, 365, 661 4:10a. . . . . . . . . 149, 320, 322, 353, 355 4:10b. . . . .320, 322, 353, 361, 363, 364, 366, 367 4:10b–12. . . . . . 109, 110, 354, 360, 411, 415 4:11. . . .61, 85, 230, 233, 320, 322, 325, 360, 361, 362, 363, 364, 365, 366, 367, 369, 370, 374, 411, 423, 465, 498, 647, 653, 658, 663, 668, 673, 675 4:11–12 . . .223, 230, 232, 233, 258, 353, 356, 361, 363, 365, 368, 369, 464, 487, 656, 660, 663, 664, 666, 667, 669, 671, 674, 675 4:11c . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 653 4:12. . . . . 228, 299, 362, 366, 367, 369, 376, 451, 669 4:12a. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 361 4:13. . . . . . 130, 135, 149, 195, 242, 247, 284, 322, 323, 336, 352, 353, 355, 365,

7/12/23 11:29 AM



Scripture and Other Ancient Literature Index 705

371, 374, 378, 383, 385, 386, 392, 393, 407, 413, 416, 423, 430, 458, 553 4:13–14. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 399 4:13–15. . . . . . . 430, 440, 442 4:13–18. . .130, 132, 172, 284, 289, 302, 303, 316, 367, 368, 374, 379, 388, 389, 406, 409, 410, 414, 415, 416, 424, 443, 444, 446, 451, 465, 466, 478, 487, 492, 526, 538, 555, 576, 586, 593, 630, 654 4:13–5:11. . . . . 69, 87, 99, 100, 102, 104, 109, 110, 146, 160, 183, 204, 252, 269, 286, 296, 303, 306, 317, 319, 320, 366, 368, 369, 372, 387, 408, 410, 414, 442, 446, 452, 453, 494, 537, 554, 558, 560, 576, 654, 655 4:14. . . 59, 61, 62, 64, 67, 172, 173, 181, 182, 183, 184, 203, 247, 320, 375, 377, 379, 381, 385, 386, 394, 395, 400, 401, 407, 408, 414, 416, 437, 438, 441, 442, 443, 445, 446, 554, 560, 623, 626 4:14–17. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 404 4:14–5:10. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 442 4:14a. . . . . . . . . . . . . 394, 396 4:14b. . . . . . . . .379, 386, 394, 396, 401 4:15. . . . . .245, 269, 302, 349, 378, 381, 385, 388, 390, 393, 394, 401, 404, 413, 440, 442, 525, 555, 556, 641 4:15–16. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 420 4:15–17. . 378, 380, 384, 385, 386, 407, 408, 629 4:15–17a . . 396, 401, 407, 410 4:15a. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 389 4:15b. . . . . 386, 389, 393, 396 4:15b–17. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 386 4:16. . . . .65, 67, 68, 172, 302, 341, 378, 382, 384, 390, 393, 398, 399, 525, 526, 565, 566, 677 4:16–17. . 386, 389, 392, 393, 395, 400, 405, 408, 445, 560 4:16–17a. . 386, 387, 388, 389, 393, 394, 397 4:16a. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 394

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 705

4:16b. . . . . . . . .379, 394, 395, 397, 399 4:16c. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 398 4:17. . . . . . 245, 349, 377, 378, 381, 384, 390, 393, 400, 401, 407, 414, 439, 440, 443, 446, 533, 546, 554 4:17a . . . . . . . . . 394, 399, 442 4:17b. . . . . . . . . 385, 386, 442 4:17b–18. . . . . . . . . . 394, 395 4:18. . . . . . 407, 443, 444, 465 5:1. . . . 79, 117, 149, 242, 284, 322, 352, 353, 355, 414, 416, 448, 458, 553, 579 5:1–2. . . . . 374, 396, 415, 451, 554, 560 5:1–3. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 414 5:1–4. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 408 5:1–7. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 442 5:1–10. . . . . . . . . . . . 442, 443 5:1–11 . . . . 130, 172, 289, 316, 367, 368, 374, 380, 381, 390, 391, 395, 404, 408, 412, 414, 436, 442, 444, 446, 447, 451, 454, 465, 466, 474, 478, 487, 538, 554, 576, 593, 618, 630, 654, 655 5:1b. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 415 5:2. . . . .59, 62, 154, 269, 325, 341, 389, 396, 405, 415, 416, 424, 425, 428, 451, 533, 546, 565, 606, 629, 660 5:2–3. . . . 65, 67, 68, 415, 437 5:2–6. . . . . . . . . . . . . 465, 612 5:2–7. . . . . . . . . . . . . 381, 387 5:2–8. . . . . . . . . 437, 440, 491 5:2–9. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 449 5:2–11. . . . . . . . . . . . . 79, 117 5:3. . . 132, 365, 392, 410, 411, 414, 418, 421, 426, 427, 428, 429, 430, 431, 432, 435, 560, 576 5:3–7. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 435 5:3–8. . . . . 130, 132, 427, 471 5:3a. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 426 5:3b. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 426 5:4. . . 65, 268, 355, 388, 405, 419, 427, 428, 429, 432 5:4–5. . . . . 150, 365, 414, 415, 416, 426, 430, 433 5:4–5a. . . . . . . . . . . . 429, 432 5:4–7. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 432 5:4–8. . 55, 301, 419, 437, 442 5:4a. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 430

5:5. . . . . . . . 67, 181, 428, 432, 451, 562 5:5–6. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 144 5:5a–­b. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 429 5:5b–8. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 429 5:5b–8a. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 432 5:6. . 272, 405, 430, 432, 433, 440, 442, 464, 553 5:6–7. . . . . . . . .421, 429, 432, 433, 442 5:6–8. . . . . . . . . 172, 414, 415, 416, 451 5:7. . . . . . .430, 431, 432, 442, 451, 464 5:7–8. . . . . . . . . . . . . 432, 451 5:8. . . . . 65, 57, 146, 182, 183, 427, 429, 432, 435, 437, 442, 445, 451, 626 5:8–9. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 147 5:8–10. . . . . . . . 146, 181, 432 5:8–11. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 147 5:8a. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 431, 433 5:9. . . 147, 150, 252, 254, 278, 281, 313, 341, 410, 419, 435, 439, 440, 448, 449, 450, 490, 608, 620, 623 5:9–10. . . . .59, 60, 61, 62, 64, 110, 112, 132, 171, 173, 181, 183, 184, 203, 204, 253, 255, 311, 342, 347, 379, 382, 383, 385, 396, 407, 408, 414, 415, 416, 420, 433, 442, 445, 446, 451, 522, 538, 609, 623, 629 5:9–10a. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 442 5:9–11. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 415 5:9b–21. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 471 5:10. . . . . . 173, 183, 320, 375, 385, 392, 393, 394, 401, 407, 414, 420, 430, 438, 439, 440, 443, 446, 464, 533, 554, 577 5:10–11. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 443 5:10b. . . . . . . . . 414, 442, 443 5:11. . . . . .195, 324, 359, 368, 407, 414, 438, 443, 458, 464, 465, 553, 647 5:11–12 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 461 5:12. . .61, 149, 204, 242, 322, 341, 457, 458, 459, 460, 463, 464, 483, 553 5:12–13. . . .59, 144, 366, 453, 454, 455, 456, 457, 463, 464, 477 5:12–13a. . . . . . 456, 461, 467

7/12/23 11:29 AM

706

Scripture and Other Ancient Literature Index

5:12–14 . . . 109, 110, 452, 470, 487, 667, 679 5:12–15. . . . . . . .99, 367, 368, 456, 487 5:12–22. . . 100, 258, 296, 317, 319, 353, 355, 368, 444, 451, 453, 454, 468, 476, 497 5:12–24. . . . . . . 320, 450, 453 5:12b–14. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 109 5:13. . . . . . 217, 293, 299, 438, 448, 458, 460, 507, 553 5:13–26. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 448 5:13b. . . . .453, 456, 467, 468, 470, 476, 486, 487 5:14. . . . . 59, 60, 61, 116, 149, 223, 227, 258, 322, 355, 360, 362, 367, 368, 369, 371, 453, 455, 456, 457, 458, 460, 461, 463, 465, 466, 467, 487, 496, 553, 654, 656, 657, 658, 659, 661, 668, 672 5:14–15. . . . . . . . . . . 363, 365 5:14–22. . . . . . . . . . . 463, 480 5:14–33. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 455 5:14b. . . . . . . . . . . . . 461, 653 5:14b–­d. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 456 5:14c–15 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 453 5:14e. . . . . . . . . 456, 457, 461, 468, 476 5:15. . . . . 258, 298, 299, 309, 320, 443, 453, 456, 457, 463, 468, 491, 507, 524, 562 5:15–22. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 463 5:15a. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 453 5:15b. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 453 5:16. . . . . . . . . . 452, 453, 473 5:16–18. . . 456, 472, 473, 477 5:16–18a. . . . . . . . . . 455, 456 5:16–22. . . . . . . 143, 456, 472 5:17. . . . . . 239, 452, 453, 474 5:17–18 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 143 5:18. . . . . . 329, 453, 474, 482 5:18b. . . . . . . . . 456, 472, 476 5:19. . . . . . 453, 476, 477, 478 5:19–20. . . 467, 475, 555, 556 5:19–21a. . . . . . 456, 476, 480 5:19–22. . . . . . . 160, 183, 320, 455, 456, 467, 471, 472, 475, 487, 630 5:20. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 476, 477 5:20–21. . . . . . . . . . . 421, 477 5:21. . 414, 468, 469, 478, 628 5:21–22. . . 450, 475, 477, 556 5:21a. . . . . . . . . . . . . 476, 480 5:21b. . . . . . . . . 454, 476, 480 5:21b–22. . . . . . . . . . 456, 481

5:22. . . . . .454, 463, 476, 478, 479, 480, 490 5:23. . . . . . 112, 130, 172, 184, 269, 270, 289, 297, 298, 300, 301, 310, 313, 329, 336, 341, 388, 390, 410, 438, 440, 453, 486, 522, 525, 538, 542, 560, 618, 619, 620, 621, 622, 632, 636, 637, 638, 640. 645, 676, 677, 678 5:23–24. . . . 14, 146, 147, 148, 171, 181, 229, 297, 312, 317, 344, 346, 445, 449, 484, 623, 679 5:23a. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 488 5:23b. . . . . . . . . 487, 488, 489 5:24. .171, 184, 229, 345, 449, 493, 540, 619, 645, 677 5:25. . . . . .149, 322, 355, 496, 497, 639, 640 5:25–28. . . . . . . 495, 682, 684 5:26. . 149, 322, 355, 496, 497 5:26–27. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 299 5:27. . . . . . . 74, 124, 141, 149, 280, 322, 341, 355, 391, 497, 501, 575, 630, 682 5:28. . . . . 341, 484, 485, 490, 498, 682, 684

2 Thessalonians 1:1. . . . .68, 75, 124, 126, 128, 129, 501, 502, 682 1:2. . . . . . . 134, 502, 513, 546 1:3. . . .74, 109, 290, 293, 299, 428, 506, 509, 537, 539, 540, 547, 616, 617, 619, 638, 666 1:3–4. . . . . 107, 109, 108, 503, 505, 506, 509, 513, 564 1:3–7a. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 527 1:3–10. . . . . . . . 106, 107, 505 1:3–12. . . . . . . . . . . . 547, 549 1:3–2:15. . . . . . . . . . . 505, 512 1:3–3:5 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 503 1:3b. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 508, 509 1:4. . . . . . . . 70, 131, 506, 507, 508, 510, 514, 515, 521, 523, 638, 650 1:4–5. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 116 1:4–7. . . . . . . . . . . . . 146, 470 1:4–10. . . . . . . . . . . . 279, 530 1:4–12. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 611 1:5. . . . 14, 112, 229, 231, 507, 513, 514, 516, 519, 520, 521, 522, 523, 527, 528, 530, 531 535, 537, 538,

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 706

540, 541, 560, 578, 608, 616, 625, 633 1:5–6. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 538 1:5–9. . . . . . . . . . . . . 535, 626 1:5–10. . . . 106, 110, 107, 108, 503, 505, 511, 512, 517, 520, 521, 537, 539, 549, 587, 611, 618 1:5–12. . . . 110, 112, 130, 176, 313, 519, 529, 624, 625 1:5, 12. . . . . . . . 230, 515, 524 1:5–7. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 113 1:5–7a. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 530 1:5–10. . . .547, 548, 549, 553, 612, 638, 643, 644 1:5–12. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 616 1:5b. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 525 1:6. . . 290, 513, 519, 521, 523, 527, 528, 529, 530, 535, 560 1:6–7. . . . . 520, 523, 524, 527, 532, 537 1:6–7a. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 527 1:6–8. . . . . . . . . . . . . 544, 546 1:6–9. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 616 1:6–10. . . . 107, 515, 516, 519, 521, 535, 538 1:7. . . 524, 526, 533, 553, 561, 568, 608, 616, 633 1:7–8. . . . . . . . . . . . . 341, 399 1:7–10 . . . . . . . . . . . . 437, 678 1:7a . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 535 1:7b. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 524 1:7b–8a. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 537 1:8. . .130, 182, 276, 313, 336, 438, 449, 509, 513, 519, 522, 524, 526, 531, 533, 534, 536, 546, 547, 586, 609, 610, 611, 612, 622, 638, 644, 649 1:8–9. . . . . . . . . 535, 612, 627 1:8–10. . . . . . . . . 14, 112, 520, 524, 530 1:8–10a. . . . . . . 527, 536, 612 1:8–12. . . . . . . . . . . . 608, 624 1:9. . . 424, 513, 528, 531, 533, 534, 535, 537, 568, 597 1:9–12. . . . . . . . . . . . 554, 626 1:10. . . . . . 114, 126, 183, 184, 269, 310, 388, 419, 505, 513, 520, 524, 526, 533, 534, 535 537, 540, 544, 545, 554, 608, 621,623, 626, 629, 638 1:10–11. . . . . . . 509, 554, 633 1:10–12. . .297, 522, 533, 564, 609, 616, 625, 626

7/12/23 11:29 AM



Scripture and Other Ancient Literature Index 707

1:10a. . . . . . . . .525, 532, 536, 537, 540 1:10b. . . . . 522, 527, 530, 531, 537, 540 1:11. . . . . . 313, 507, 523, 540, 544, 545, 547, 612, 622, 634, 636, 637, 638, 640 1:11–12 . . .108, 313, 503, 505, 520, 527, 548, 549, 619, 624, 632, 634, 636, 637, 638, 645 1:12. . . . . . 230, 515, 520, 524, 533, 534, 535, 540, 544, 545, 555, 608 2:1. . . . . . 269, 388, 389, 394, 458, 525, 535, 545, 553, 560, 565, 575, 586, 587, 593, 606, 617, 626 2:1–2. . . . . 108, 269, 513, 553, 562, 575, 577, 605 2:1–3. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 629 2:1–8. . . . . . . . . 108, 112, 447, 586, 625 2:1–11 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 424 2:1–12. . . . . 14, 102, 107, 115, 117, 369, 389, 391, 404, 416, 444, 503, 505, 511, 519, 525, 539, 549, 550, 555, 589, 605, 606 2:1–14 . . . . . . . . . . . . 512, 628 2:1–17 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 549 2:2. . . 115, 389, 413, 418, 478, 519, 537, 538, 545, 553, 555, 558, 561, 565, 574, 575, 576, 578, 618, 623, 627, 628, 630, 634, 654, 683 2:2–3. . . . . . . . . . . . . 586, 678 2:2a. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 557, 558 2:2b. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 556, 575 2:2c. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 556, 557 2:3. . . . . . .525, 552, 562, 565, 569, 574, 577, 578, 580, 584, 587, 593, 599, 606, 609 2:3–4. . . . . . . . . . . . . 587, 590 2:3–8. . . 65, 74, 110, 552, 553, 557, 593, 561, 562, 574, 578, 581, 586, 587, 588, 590, 593, 605, 606, 655 2:3–9. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 629 2:3–12. . . . 281, 554, 559, 575, 625, 626, 649 2:3a. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 574 2:3b. . . . . . 567, 574, 575, 577, 578, 605 2:3b–4. . . . . . . . . . . . 560, 573 2:3b–12. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 560 2:3c–12. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 567

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 707

2:4. . . . . . .564, 565, 566, 567, 568, 572, 573, 574, 575, 585, 586, 587, 590, 593, 595, 602, 605, 609, 610 2:4a. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 570 2:4b. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 570, 571 2:5. . . . 74, 104, 110, 124, 143, 273, 417, 497, 501, 557, 559, 560, 562, 566, 573, 574, 575, 577, 578, 587, 588, 589, 593, 629, 660, 663, 682 2:5–6. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 593 2:5–8. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 655 2:6. . . 154, 525, 574, 578, 579, 580, 581, 582, 584, 587, 588, 593, 603, 606, 660 2:6–7. . . . . 574, 588, 591, 603, 628, 642 2:6–8. . . . . . . . . . . . . 574, 575 2:7. . . 552, 563, 577, 578, 579, 580, 582, 584, 590, 603 2:7–12. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 601 2:7a. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 581, 582 2:7b. . . . . . 577, 578, 579, 582 2:8. . . 68, 269, 388, 389, 525, 552, 560, 567, 568, 570, 571, 574, 575, 578, 580, 583, 585, 586, 587, 588, 597, 605, 606 2:8–10. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 605 2:8–12. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 605 2:8a. . . . . . . . . . 552, 580, 605 2:8b. . . . . .552, 586, 587, 605, 606, 626 2:9. . . . . . .267, 388, 525, 552, 568, 570, 575, 580, 581, 605, 609, 610, 611 2:9–10. . . . 586, 587, 611, 635 2:9–11. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 587 2:9–12. . . .108, 539, 548, 552, 553, 564, 565, 566, 575, 586, 587, 605, 612, 616, 621, 622, 625, 626, 627, 644, 646 2:9–14. . . . 110, 112, 113, 176, 529, 616, 618, 625, 629 2:9–15. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 130 2:9–17. . . . . . . . 313, 519, 520, 527, 552 2:9b. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 607 2:10. . . . . 564, 568, 596, 606, 607, 610, 621, 644, 649 2:10–11. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 607 2:10–12. . . . . . . . 14, 617, 622, 626, 643 2:10–14. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 624

2:10b. . . . . 608, 609, 611, 612 2:11. . . . . 529, 564, 608, 609, 610, 611, 623, 638 2:11–13 . . . . . . . 183, 509, 606 2:12. . . . . . 184, 465, 519, 527, 529, 534, 552, 587, 608, 609, 610, 611, 612, 621, 634, 638, 644 2:13. . . . . . 109, 148, 290, 301, 310, 336, 436, 506, 533, 546, 616, 622, 623, 626, 627, 628, 638 2:13–14. . . . 14, 107, 108, 519, 533, 539, 544, 548, 549, 553, 555, 587, 605, 610, 615, 616, 617, 622, 625, 626, 627, 632, 633, 634, 637, 638 2:13–15. . . 449, 505, 564, 575 2:13–17. . . . . . . . . . . 549, 640 2:13b. . . . . 608, 619, 623, 638 2:14. . . . . .152, 228, 230, 436, 536, 540, 621, 622, 626, 629, 632, 633 2:15. . 110, 115, 117, 239, 290, 320, 323, 430, 503, 549, 556, 557, 558, 623, 628, 632, 635, 636, 659 2:16. . . . . . 297, 507, 547, 621, 626, 627, 632, 634, 635, 638, 648, 677, 678 2:16–17. . . 105, 107, 112, 297, 313, 503, 519, 539, 547, 548, 549, 555, 616, 619, 626, 629, 634, 637, 638, 640, 645, 646, 647, 648, 650, 653, 677, 678 2:17. . . . . .108, 276, 479, 634, 635, 639, 644, 648, 650 2:17–3:7. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 107 3:1. . . 105, 163, 316, 321, 496, 640, 641 3:1–2. . . . . . . . . . . . . 639, 644 3:1–3. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 653 3:1–3a. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 273 3:1–5. . . . 106, 108, 503, 549, 637, 638, 639, 644, 648, 653 3:2. . . . . . 525, 638, 640, 642, 644, 645, 646 3:2–3. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 645 3:2–3a. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 273 3:2–3b. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 647 3:2a. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 642 3:3c. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 647 3:3. . . 267, 640, 644, 646, 678 3:3–4. . . . . . . . . . . . . 639, 644

7/12/23 11:29 AM

708

Scripture and Other Ancient Literature Index

3:3–5. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 644 3:3a. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 645 3:4. . 108, 325, 546, 639, 640, 646, 647, 650, 653, 655, 657, 658, 665, 666, 668, 672, 675, 678 3:4–5. . . . . . . . . . . . . 646, 653 3:5. . .108, 273, 274, 297, 298, 639, 640, 648, 653, 678 3:6 . . 228, 239, 320, 325, 369, 513, 628, 639. 647, 655, 657, 660, 661, 663, 664, 665, 666, 667, 668, 669, 670, 671, 672, 674, 675, 676, 678 3:6–9. . . . . . . . . . . . . 323, 660 3:6–10. . . . . . . . 274, 666, 667 3:6–12. . . . . 61, 110, 233, 637 3:6–13. . . .325, 369, 369, 371, 455, 464, 465, 669 3:6–15. . . . 107, 108, 109, 110, 113, 117, 223, 360, 366, 367, 368, 461, 498, 507, 637, 639, 640, 644, 647, 648, 650, 653, 657, 672, 676, 677, 679, 684 3:6–17. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 105 3:7. . . . . . .154, 157, 660, 663, 667, 673 3:7–9. . . . 59, 60, 85, 300, 675 3:7–10. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 367 3:7–12. . . . . . . . . . . . . 86, 256 3:7–13. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 659 3:7a. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 660 3:7b–9. . . . . . . . 662, 663, 665 3:7b–9. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 660 3:8. . . 145, 210, 222, 223, 459, 661, 666 3:8–9. . . . . . . . . 224, 230, 232 3:8a. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 661 3:8b. . . . . . . . . . 661, 663, 673 3:9. . . . . . . .157, 217, 660, 661 3:10. . . . . . 115, 279, 325, 639, 647, 655, 658, 660, 661, 663, 665, 668, 670, 675 3:10b. . . . . . . . . 664, 665, 675 3:11. . . . . .228, 258, 320, 367, 507, 513, 658, 666, 674 3:11–12 . . . . . . . 116, 637, 655, 658, 673 3:12. . . . . 322, 325, 546, 639, 647, 657, 658, 666, 668, 669, 670, 671, 672, 674, 675, 675, 678 3:13. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 669, 675 3:14. . . . . .630, 657, 668, 669, 671, 672

3:14–15. . . . . . . 655, 675, 679 3:15. . . . . . 460, 659, 671, 672 3:15–23. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 672 3:16. . . . . .115, 297, 298, 484, 485, 486, 672, 676, 677 3:16–18. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 676 3:16a. . . . . . . . . . . . . 676, 677 3:16b. . . . . . . . . . . . . 677, 684 3:17. . . 74, 104, 115, 117, 124, 495, 497, 501, 575, 681, 684 3:17–18 . . . . . . . . . . . 676, 677 3:18. . . . . . 498, 672, 677, 684

1 Timothy 1:2. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 502 2:6. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 439 2:7. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 224 3:4, 5, 12. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 459 3:7. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 369, 370 3:14. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 684 3:16. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 580 4:1. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 197, 563 4:1–2. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 564 4:13. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 194 5:8. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 370 5;13. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 667 5:14. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 570 5:17. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 459 6:9. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 424 6:14. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 585 6:15. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 579

Philemon 1. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 124 2. . . . . . . . . 128, 131, 433, 461 3. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .134, 546 4. . . . . . . . . 74, 142, 290, 292, 293, 506 4–6 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 297 5. . . . . . . . . . . . .285, 507, 534 6. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 297 7. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 534 8. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 192 9a. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 684 10. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 227 15. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 265 19. . . . . . . . . . . . 355, 495, 684 19a. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 681, 682 20–21 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 647 21–22. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 261 22 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 496, 639 24. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 58, 60, 462

Hebrews

1:2. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 502 1:6. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 477 1:10. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 585 1:11. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 224 1:12–24. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 198 2:3–5. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 433 2:8. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 143, 152 2:12. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 306 2:14. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 343 3:1–9. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 564 4:1, 8. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 585 4:2, 6. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 425 4:3–4. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 564 4:17. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 224 4:18. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 479 4:22a. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 679

3:12. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 563 3:18–19. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 525 4:1. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 525 4:2. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 239 4:12. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 241 4:16. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 192 5:7–8. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 650 6:10–12. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 144 6:11. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 153 8:7. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 493 9:6. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 678 9:9. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 559 10:17 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 567 10:19. . . . . . . . . . . . . 168, 192 10;22. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 153 10:22–24. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 144 10:25. . . . . . . . . 419, 498, 554 10:30. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 524 10:33–34. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 258 10:38. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 659 12:1. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 344 12:2. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 159 12:2–4. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 650 12:14. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 461 13:1. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 354 13:15. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 678 13:20. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 678 13:20–21. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 632 13:22. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 194

Titus

James

1:4. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 502 1:8. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 225 2:8. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 369, 670 2:13. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 585 3:8, 14. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 459

1:4. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 493 1:7, 13 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 525 1:18. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 620 4:13. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 525 5:7, 8. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 389

2 Timothy

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 708

7/12/23 11:29 AM



Scripture and Other Ancient Literature Index 709

1 Peter 1:3. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 141 1:3–8, 21–22. . . . . . . . . . . 144 1:3–9. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 160 1:5. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 417 1:15–16. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 330 1:20. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 417 1:22. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 354 2:9. . . . . . . 371, 427, 436, 547 2:12. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 371 2:11–12 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 92 2:17. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 455 2:21–25. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 650 2:23. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 470 3:7. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 333 3:8. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 355 3:9. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 468, 470 3:15. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 91 4:12–13. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 160 4:13. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 160 4:15. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 667 4:16. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 547 5:8. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 431 5:12. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 125 5:14. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 496

2 Peter 1:7. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 354 1:11. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 168 1:16. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 389 2:18. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 599 3:3–4. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 564 3:10. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 418, 419

1 John 2:6. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 323 2:13, 14. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 646

2:18. . . . . . . . . . 568, 594, 599 2:20. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 357 2:22. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 568 2:22–28. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 306 2:27. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 357 2:28. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 192, 389 3:4. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 389, 567 3:12. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 389 3:16. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 145 3:21. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 192 4:1. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 478 4:1–3. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 556 4:1–6. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 197 4:2–3. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 599 4:3. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 568, 595 4:6. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 595 4:7–12. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 145 5:3. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 649 5:6–8. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 599 5:18, 19. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 646

2 John 7. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .568

Jude 9. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .398 14. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 399 16. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 599 17–18. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 564

Revelation 1:3, 11. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 556 1:16. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 241 1:20. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 579 2:2. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 144 2:14, 20. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 328 2:23. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 199

3:3. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 387, 419 5:10. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 407 6:11. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 252 6:16–17. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 297 7:5–8. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 600 8:2. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 398 9:1–2. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 602 9:11. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 568, 603 10:7. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 579 11:7. . . . . . 596, 599, 600, 603 11:15 . . . . . . . . . . . . . 297, 399 12:3. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 597, 601 12:5. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 402 12:9. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 601 13:1–10 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 568 13:2. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 606 13:2b. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 597 13:3. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 597 13:7. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 597 13:10. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 509 13:11. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 597 13:13–14. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 607 13:14 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 197 14:4. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 620 16:5. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 225 16:13–14. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 197 16:15. . . . . . . . . 387, 419, 431 17:5, 7. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 579 17:8. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 599 17:10 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 601 17:12 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 599 19:11–16 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 241 19:11–21 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 586 19:20. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 597 20:1–3. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 603 22:3–4. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 297 22:5. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 407 22:20. . . . . . . . . . . . . 303, 538

Apocryphal/Deuterocanonical Books Tobit 7:11 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 134 12:13. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 398 12:15. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 398

Wisdom of Solomon 4:11. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 402 5:17–20. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 434 8:8. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 417 9:3. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 225 13:12. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 328 14:12, 21–27. . . . . . . 328, 336 17:14 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 425

Sirach/Ecclesiasticus 5:11. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 466 6:37. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 300

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 709

22:16. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 300 28:1–7. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 469 45:1. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 148 48:3, 5. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 386 49:3. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 648

1 Maccabees 1:15. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 563 1:20–24. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 570 1:54. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 571, 595 2:15. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 563 3:30. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 266 3:60. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 329 8:1–16. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52

2 Maccabees

2:7. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 554 5:5. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 425 5:15–16, 21. . . . . . . . . . . . 570 6:1–11. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 570 6:12–16. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 514 6:14. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 252 9:26. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 211 14:17 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 425 14:22. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 425

1 Esdras 2.21. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 563

2 Esdras 13.24. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 393

1:27. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 554

7/12/23 11:29 AM

710

Scripture and Other Ancient Literature Index

Old Testament Pseudepigrapha Ascension of Isaiah 4.2. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 598 4.14. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 586, 598

2 Baruch 13.3–10. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 514 14.1. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 417 20.6. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 417 29.3–30.5. . . . . . . . . . . . . 406 41.3. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 564 42.4. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 564 73.1. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 525 78.2. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 134 78.5. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 514

1 Enoch 1.6–9. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 302 1.9. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 399 20.1–7. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 398 38.10. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 525 62.4. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 424 91.5–11. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 564 91.12–13 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 406 93.8–9. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 564 201–7. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 398

4 Ezra 4.36. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 399 5.1–12. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 564 6.26. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 402 7.25. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 525 7.28–29. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 406 7.36. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 525 7.38. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 525 7.78. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 525 7.95. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 525

11–12. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 590 14.9. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 402

Joseph and Aseneth 8.9. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 149 12.11. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 149 13.1. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 149 23.9. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 469 28.4. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 469 29.3. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 469

Jubilees

5.499. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 170 9.13–15. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 417 10.17–18 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 469

Testament of Benjamin 3.4. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 406 4.2–3. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 469 10.8–10. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 341

Testament of Dan 5.2. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 525

21.3–4. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 170 23.1–23. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 563 23.11–23. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 564

Testament of Gad

4 Maccabees

Testament of Judah

10.15. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 531 13.23, 26. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 355 14.1. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 355

18.2. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 338

Psalms of Solomon 2.1–2. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 571 2.35. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 531 13.9–10. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 514 17.11 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 271 17.11–18. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 571 17.24–39. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 584 17.50. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 393 18.8–9. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 584 25.11. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 531

Sibylline Oracles 3.29–45. . . . . . . . . . . 328, 336 3.652–760. . . . . . . . . . . . . 406 5.137–54. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 598

6.1–7. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 469 6.7. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 341

Testament of Joseph 20.1. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 341

Testament of Levi 6.11. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 252 14.5–6. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 338

Testament of Naphtali 3.2–5. . . . . . . . . . . . . 328, 336 4.1. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 328, 336

Testament of Reuben 6.6. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 341

Testament of Job 43.6. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 428

Dead Sea Scrolls and Related Texts Thanksgiving Hymns (1QH) 7.10 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 357 7.19–23, 25. . . . . . . . . . . . 215 13[5].36 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 579

War Scroll (1QM) 1.1, 3. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 428 3.9. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 259 14.9. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 579

Pesher Habakkuk (1QpHab) 2.1–10. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 564 7.1–14 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 417

Rule of the Community (1QS)

1Q27

1.9–10. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 428 2.15. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 259, 531 3.13–4.26 . . . . . . . . . . . . . 428 3.23–25. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 280 3.29–45. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 328 3.652–760. . . . . . . . . . . . . 406 4.9–10. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 338 4.18–20. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 580 5.13. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 531 6.10, 22. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 148 6.24–7.24. . . . . . . . . . . . . .664

1.2. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 579 1.7. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 579

Rule of the Blessings (1QSb)

11Q13 (Melchizedek) 2.12. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 564

Cairo Genizah Copy of the Damascus Document (CD) 4.17–18 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 338 5.21–22. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 197 6.22. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 148 12.3. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 197

5.20–29. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 584

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 710

7/12/23 11:29 AM



Scripture and Other Ancient Literature Index 711

Philo Agriculture 130. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .489

203–346. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 571 281. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54

Cherubim

Joseph

96 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 489

218. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 355

Dreams

Rewards

1.150. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 441

117. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 398

Embassy to Gaius

Special Laws

86 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 355

1.52. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 149

Virtues 103–4, 179 . . . . . . . . . . . . 149

Josephus The Life 43 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 563

Against Apion 1.48. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 249 1.310. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 249 2.121. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 249 2.125. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 249

Jewish Antiquities 2.161. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 355

2.286. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 197 3.80. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 390 3.203. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 390 8.51–52. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 322 8.404. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 497 9.55. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 390 11.55. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 170 12.249–50. . . . . . . . . . . . . 570 12.251–56. . . . . . . . . . . . . 571 13.219. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 563 14.71–73 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 571

18.261–301. . . . . . . . . . . . 571 20.105–12. . . . . . . . . . . . . 254 20.105–36. . . . . . . . . . . . . 245

Jewish War 1.152. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 571 2.122. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 148 2.184–203. . . . . . . . . . . . . 571 2.224–27. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 254 6.316. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 596

Mishnah, Talmud, and Other Rabbinic Literature Mishnah Abot

2.2. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 222

Berakhot 4:1. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 143 5:5. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 345 9:5. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 506

Pesahim

Other Rabbinic Works

10:5. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 506

Genesis Rabbah

Babylonian Talmud

2.2. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 664 33.1. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 514

Sanhedrin

97. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .564

Apostolic Fathers Barnabas

1 Clement

Polycarp

1.4. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 144 2.1. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 598 4.4–5. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 598 4.9, 13. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 598 5.3. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 506 7.1. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 506 9.8. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 144 21.6. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 356

17.3. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 493 38.4. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 506 42.3. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 153 43.1. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 670

3.2–3. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 144 7.1. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 599

To the Philippians

Didache 10.6. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 390

New Testament Apocrypha and Pseudepigrapha Gospel of Thomas 21. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 419, 430 103. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 419, 430

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 711

7/12/23 11:29 AM

712

Scripture and Other Ancient Literature Index

Classical and Ancient Christian Writings Achilles Tatius

Dio Chrysostom

Leucippe and Cleitophon

Orations

Jerome

2.27. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 582

3.16.24. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 208 4.34–35, 37. . . . . . . . . . . . 196 7.103–53. . . . . . . . . . . 362–63 7.124 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 363 12.48. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 196 32. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .82, 196 32.11. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 196 77/78.36–38. . . . . . . . . . . 195

237. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 248 247. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 248

Aeschylus

Libation-­Bearers 906 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 441

Persians 397 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 398

Aristotle

Nicomachean Ethics 4.3.3 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 465 4.3.7 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 465 4.6.9 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 208 1123b . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 465

Augustine

The City of God 20.19. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 589

Epistles

Diodorus Siculus Library of History

32.9b, 15. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52

Diogenes Laertius

Lives of the Philosophers 8.41. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 277

Epictetus Discourses

3.22.19, 93. . . . . . . . . . . . . 196

Eusebius

Against Jovinian

John Chrysostom

Homilies on 2 Thessalonians 2. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 529 4. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 583

Justin Martyr First Apology

62. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 526 63 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 526 65.2. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 496

Dialogue with Trypho 7.7–8. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 197

Livy

History of Rome 45.29.5–9. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52

197.2. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 416

Ecclesiastical History

Malalas of Antioch

Cicero

4.14.7. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 599 5.1.6. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 479 6.7. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 598

10.247. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 245

Against Piso 89 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 70

Epistulae ad Quintum fratrem 1.2. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 123

Letters to Atticus

Florus

Epitome 1.30. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52

Hippolytus

De antichristo

8.1.1. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 682 8.16.2. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 403 13.28.4 . . . . . . . . . . . . 681–82 16.11.6. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 403

7. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .600 14–18. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 600 54–58 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 600

Claudius

4.1. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 496 18.3. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 496 22.6. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 496

Letter to the Alexandrines CPI 2.153, line 99. . . . . . . . 66

Demosthenes

The Apostolic Tradition

Commentary on Daniel

Marcus Antonius 7.66.3 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 225

Marcus Aurelius Meditations

3.16. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 492

Paulus

Sententiae 5.21. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 66

Phaedrus Fables

4.25.17. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 664

Plato

Apology of Socrates

419. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 369

40c– ­d . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 441

Homer

Phaedrus

Iliad

254a . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 142

11. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 661

11.241. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 375 14.482. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 441

Protagoras

Dio Cassius

Irenaeus

Against Neaera

59.122. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 328

3 Olynthiac

Roman History 56.25.5–6. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 66 57.15.8. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 66

317e. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 142

Against Heresies

Timaeus

5, preface. . . . . . . . . . . . . 440 5.25–30. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 600

30B . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 492 44 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 489

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 712

7/12/23 11:29 AM



Scripture and Other Ancient Literature Index 713

Plutarch

Suetonius

107d. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 441

25.4. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 66, 254

Timoleon

Sophocles

Moralia

Claudius

Tertullian

Antidote for the Scorpion’s Sting 8. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .248, 332

5.3. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 582

Antigone

The Resurrection of the Flesh

Titus Flaminus

257. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 355 527. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 355

24. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 583

Oedipus coloneus

Idylls

10. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52

Polybius Histories

3.94.3 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 585 7.9. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51 28.22–28. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52 31.29. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52

Ps.-­Aeschines Epistles

12.6. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 582

Ps.-­Cebus Table

4–5 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 196

Ps.-­Phoclides Sentences

Theocritus

621. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 441

4.42. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 376

Strabo

Thucydides

Geography 7.7.4. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52 7 frg. 21. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53 8.620. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 643

Tacitus

History of the Peloponnesian War 2.50. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 479 2.92. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 398 3.108. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 661

Annals

Xenophon

1.76.4. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52 2.27–32. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 66 15.44.5 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 249

Cyropaedia

7.2.6. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 661

Histories

2.3.17. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 355

Memorabilia

5.5.2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 249

153. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 664

Papyri and Inscriptions Corpus Inscriptionum Graecarum (CIG) III 4000, 7. . . . . . . . . . . . . 215

Corpus Inscriptionum Latinarum (CIL) 3.476. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 76 6.1256. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 76

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 713

Inscriptiones Graecae (IG) 10.2.1.31, 131, 133 . . . . . . . 55 10.2.1.131 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56 10.2.1.134. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55 10.2.199. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 336

Papyrus Oxyrhynchus

119.1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 123 930 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 217

Sylloge Inscriptionum Graecarum (SIG) 23, 801. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 76

115. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 376, 407

7/12/23 11:29 AM

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 714

7/12/23 11:29 AM

Subject Index 1 Thessalonians apologetic function of chapters 1–3, 89–93 assurance about Christ’s advent, 372–412 authorship of, 73–75 basic Christian piety, 472–75 basic principle of interpersonal relationships, 467–72 concluding wish-­prayer, 295–309, 484–94 context and purpose of, 84 directives for life that pleases God, 319–26 exhortations in, 315–17 letter closing, 495–98 life together in the church, 452–57 ministry to weak members, 463–67 nature of letter clarification of points of eschatological hope, 102 exhortation for sanctification and healthful communal life, 102 pastoral letter, 102 occasion and purpose of, 76–77 prophesying in congregational worship, 475–83 purpose of part 1 of, 98–100 recognition of leaders and maintaining community peace, 457–42 structure and function of chapters 1–3, 76, 93–98 thanksgiving sections of, 137–40, 234–60, 283–95 thesis of book and Paul’s divine mission, 189–203 tone of letter, 111 2 Thessalonians authenticity of, 2, 103–5, 112–13 reasons for doubting, 104 authorship of, 102–3, 113 closing wish-­prayer and benediction, 676–79 coming of the day of the Lord, 550–53 coming of the lawless man and the fate of unbelievers, 605–15 concluding exhortation, 627–31 conclusion of part 1 with first wish-­prayer, 631–38 date of writing of, 113, 115 exhortations on idleness, 652–76 last judgment of God, 511–39 letter closing, 681–84

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 715

prayer report, 539–48 right scenario about coming of the day of the Lord, 562–88 second wish-­prayer, 638–50 thanksgiving, 503–11, 549, 615–27 tone of letter, 111 666 (numerical value of), 601, 602 abomination of desolation, the, 595, 596, 601 Achaia (see also “Macedonia”), 76, 161, 162 adoption of believers as God’s children, 149 affliction, 473 boasting in, 473 Agora, 60 Alexander I, 51 Alexander III (the Great), 51 amanuenses (scribe), 75 Alexandria, 66 Jewish agitation in, 65 Alexandria Troas, 57, 73, 125 amenuensis, 681–82 Andriscus, 52, 55 antichrist, the (see also “man of lawlessness”), 568, 571, 584, 594c604 Antioch, 126 controversy, 61 Antiochus IV Epiphanes (see also “antichrist” and “man of lawlessness”), 568–71, 584, 590, 595, 606, 615 Antony, 53, 55 Anubis, 55 Apocalypse, the, 596–97 apologia, 83 Aristarchus, 58, 60 “assembly of God/the Lord” (church), 127, 128, 131, 132 alternative “assembly ‘in God,’ ” 129 Paul’s full definition of Thessalonian church, 133 term distinguished from “civic assembly,” 128, 130 astrology, 65 Athens, 57, 70, 83, 274 Augustus, 52, 55, 65 baptism, 311 Barnabas, 61, 125 beast from the abyss (see “man of lawlessness”), 597

7/12/23 11:29 AM

716

Subject Index

Belial/Beliar, 598 believers’ participation in God’s glory (see also “glorification of God’s people at his coming”), 625 Caesar Augustus, 55, 56 “Roman benefactors,” 55 Caesar, temple of, 55 Caligula (Gaius), 54, 571, 590, 592, 593, 595, 615 Cassander, 52 Cassius, 53 Cenchreae, 72 charity (see “idlers in Thessalonica”) Christ as warrior Messiah, 586 Christology/christological gospel, 62, 63 Christ’s advent, assurance about, 372–412 exaltation, 172, 623 second coming (see also “parousia”), 172 Christian leaders due honor, 461 must be deserving of recognition and honor, 461, 462 Christian traditions, 630 importance of continuity, 630 Claudius, 53, 65, 68, 71, 76, 590–93 collegium domesticus, 62 contrast between old Adamic self and new self, 171 conversion, 184–85 concise formulation of, 171 of Thessalonians, 78, 91, 94 Corinth, 70, 72, 76, 83 Council of Jerusalem, 57 crucified Messiah, idea repugnant to Jews, 64, 65 cultic practices of Thessalonica, 55 date and occasion of writing the Thessalonian letters, 75–76 day of the Lord (see also “parousia” and “last judgment”), 108–10, 117, 412–444, 554, 560, 567 as Old Testament concept, 418 coming of the, 550–53 emphasis in 2 Thessalonians on preparation for, 118, 415 events preceding the, 613 false teaching about, 553–62 right scenario about coming of the, 562–88 Thessalonian believers’ anxiety about, 112, 549, 538 “decrees of Caesar,” 64–68 deification of emperor, 56 Delphi inscription, 76

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 716

“deutero-­Pauline letters”; see also “pseudepigraph (2 Thessalonians as?),” 103 Dionysus, 55 cult of, 328, 336 divination, 65 Domitian, 601 election, doctrine of, 13, 149, 150, 151, 184, 343, 623, 624 and preservation, 150, 450 foundational text of Jewish election theology, 150 Paul’s theology of in Thessalonians, 184 emperor worship, 56 end of Paul’s Thessalonian mission, 69–71 eschatology/eschatological emphasis in 2 Thessalonians on preparation for the day of the Lord, 118 hope, 100 ingathering of God’s people, 554, 586 perceived difference in view between 1 and 2 Thessalonians, 110, 115 personal eschatology in realm of individual piety, 118 realized vs. futuristic, 448 section in 2 Thessalonians, 115 teaching in 1 Thessalonians mainly on personal level, 118 eternal destruction not as annihilation but as separation from God, 532 everlasting life, 531 faith and “the work of faith,” 180–83 as acceptance of preached gospel, 181 includes belief, trust, and faithfulness, 183 with aspects of trust and obedience, 181, 182, 531 false prophecy of the day of the Lord, 108, 598–99 firstfruits, 620 fraudulent letter to the Thessalonians, 683 Gaius (see “Caligula”) Gallio, 76, 118, 119 generosity (see “idlers in Thessalonica”) gentile believers God’s holy people, 183–84 gentile focus of letters to Thessalonica, 60 gifts of the Holy Spirit (see “Holy Spirit, gifts of the”) glorification of God 544–45 of God’s people at his coming, 544–45, 587, 624 God’s call of his people, 623

7/12/23 11:29 AM



Subject Index 717

election of his people (see also “election, doctrine of”), 623 Fatherhood, 148 final judgment, 147, 148, 303, 305 and salvation of believers, 587 glorification (see “glorification”) judgment against Thessalonians’ opponents, 107 is just and righteous, 523, 531, 625 on unbelievers, 531, 587 hardening of unbelieving Israel, 611 judicial blinding of pagans, 610 new covenant for life in the Spirit, 88 offer of salvation, 623 people, 132, 133 plan, 581 God materializes saving plan by using Satan’s rebellion against him, 581 retribution against afflicters of Thessalonians, 524 timing, 579–81 wisdom, 581 wrath, 147, 576 gospel protection under Roman Empire, 614 requirements of faith and obedience, 181, 182, 531 “gospel of God,” 63, 88 gospel of grace to Jews and gentiles by grace through faith, 61 gossips (see “idlers in Thessalonica”) grief, 376–85 Hannibal, 51 Harpocrates, 55 Herod Agrippa, 54 Hippolytus, 600 holiness (see also “sanctification”), 330, 337, 343 definition, 329 Holy Spirit, 345, 346 and charismatic manifestations, 476 as enabler for living holy life, 346, 547 as source of Christian joy, 473 as ultimate cause of success of the gospel/ believers’ faith in Thessalonica, 160 gifts of the, 477–78, 481 gift of prophecy, 481, 482 his prevenient grace, 621 his role in sanctification, 345, 346 work of the, 622 hope, 376–85 hopelessness of pagans, 376–385 household church, 62 Iconium, 57

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 717

idlers in Thessalonica, 109, 110, 258, 360–71, 464, 655–75 Illyricum, 72 imperial cult, 55, 56 insula workshop, 61 interpersonal relationships, 467–72 Irenaeus, 599, 600 Isis, 55 James, 61 Jason, 58, 60, 61, 65, 68, 69 Jerusalem, 72 Jerusalem Council, 61 Jerusalem relief fund, 72 Jesus as Davidic Messiah, 63, 66, 67, 68 Lord, 88 political king? 64, 65 seed of David, 63 Son of God, 133 suffering Messiah, 58 the Christ, 67 Jesus’s death as atonement, 63 lordship, 482 resurrection, 383 Son of Man sayings, 408 Jew-­gentile issues/relationship, 60–61 Jewish opposition to Paul in Thessalonica, 203–5 John Mark, 126 joy as command for Christians, 473 as fruit of the Spirit, 473 available to believers through the Holy Spirit, 473 in affliction, 473 Judas Barsabbas, 125 Judea, 72 judgment (see also “day of the Lord, the,” “parousia,” “Christ’s second coming,” and “God’s judgment”), 424, 531 last judgment of God, 511–39 Julius, 55 justification, 62, 63, 112, 301, 622 and reconciliation, 134 and sanctification, 309–13, 622 as both acquittal of sins and restoration of right relationship with God, 181 definition of, 311 doctrine of, through faith, 110, 111, 113, 144, 347, 527, 531, 534, 622, 624, 625 kingdom of God call for right living in preparation for, 541 citizenship in, 130

7/12/23 11:29 AM

718

Subject Index

inaugurated already, 473 individual’s relationship to God as criterion, 529–30 intercessory role in, 305 lawless man (see “man of lawlessness”) leaders (see “Christian leaders”) length of stay in Thessalonica, 59 life that pleases God, 319–26 life together in the church, 452–57 love (see also “sibling love”) for enemies (see “nonretaliation”) of truth and righteousness, 608 Lydia, 70 Lyons, 87 Lystra, 57, 126 Macedonia, 51–54, 162 and Achaia, as two distinct provinces, 161 arrival of gospel in, 56–58 “metropolis of Macedonia,” 53 magic, 65 makeup/composition of Thessalonian church, 61 “man of lawlessness” (or antichrist) (see also “Apocalypse,” “parousia,” and “Satan”), 115, 117, 560–81 as agent of Satan, not Satan himself, 568, 581, 601 coming of the, and the fate of unbelievers, 605–15 destruction of the, 552 his evil deeds and their effects on unbelievers, 587, 608 his hubris/self-­deification, 570, 571 restraining of the, 583, 603–5 identities of “restraining thing” and “restraining person,” 589–93 restraining of the revelation of, 588 revealing/revelation of the, 552, 583, 586 Messiah (see “Jesus as Messiah”), 58 Metellus, Quintus, 55 “Roman benefactors,” 55 model theory of Paul’s emphasis on his integrity, 86, 87 Mosaic covenant, 88 mystery of lawlessness, 580–83, 592, 603, 613 Neapolis, 58 Nero, 72, 596, 597, 598, 601 nonretaliation, 469, 470, 471 oaths of loyalty to Caesar (see also “decrees of Caesar”), 67 Octavian (Augustus), 53, 55

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 718

opponents’ slander campaign against Paul, 97, 99, 102, 188 orderly conduct (see “idlers in Thessalonica”) organization of Thessalonian church, 62 Osirus, 55 pagan cults, 55–56 pagans God’s judicial blinding of, 610 parousia (see also “Christ’s second coming” and “day of the Lord”), 106–110, 117, 146, 147, 172, 303, 379–83, 408–9, 554–60 after gospel preached to all nations, 592 after repentance of all Israel, 592 as “day of the Lord,” 416 date of, 414, 444 followed by revelation of the lawless man, 112, 115 imminence of, as presented in 1 Thessalonians, 115 order of events ushering in, 589, 655 preparation for, 415 suddenness of, 585 Paul and the churches of Macedonia, 72–73 as model for Thessalonians, 85, 86, 662, 663 as slave for Christ’s sake, 89 Paul’s accusation of being charlatan preacher preaching false doctrine, 84, 92 advocating hard work (see “idlers in Thessalonica”), 89 apostolic authority, 211, 658 apostolic commission, 85 boldness based on, 88 apostolic conduct, 205–34 apostolic ministry, 86, 90, 91, 294 defense of his, 91 integrity of his, 82, 85, 88, 90, 91, 92, 97, 186–89 apostolic right to claim support from the church, 673 approval by God to be entrusted with the gospel, 81 authorship of 2 Thessalonians, 102 comfort and reassurance of Thessalonians, 108 concern/anxiety about Thessalonians’ young and vulnerable faith, 91, 144, 262 condemnation of Jews for their opposition to the gospel and persecution of prophets and later of Christians, 255 consuming urge for evangelization, 118

7/12/23 11:29 AM



Subject Index 719

continuing relationship with the Thessalonians, 72 definition of people of God, 132 definition of Thessalonian church, 134 denunciation by Jews as false prophet, 203 desire to see the Thessalonians again, 266–72 distinction between church and Judaism, 132 divine commission, 81, 82 eschatology, 445–448 expulsion from Thessalonica, 65, 69 frustration in attempts to come to Macedonia, 83 hard work in Thessalonica, 672–75 image of himself as nurse to Thessalonians, 227 image of himself as father to Thessalonians, 227 missionary strategy/success in Thessalonica, 78, 118 need to establish ethos/credibility/trust with readers?, 86, 87 paraenesis, 86 persecution (see “persecution”) plans after leaving Thessalonica, 71 preaching as counter-­Roman?, 68–69 predestination and human responsibility, 448–51 presentation of himself as ideal philosopher, 85 rebuke of unruly idlers, 109, 110 second missionary journey, 75 self-­support policy, 60, 222, 232 sending of Timothy as his representative, 272–83 stance toward Roman Empire, 68–69 suffering in Philippi, 84 theology of election in Thessalonians, 184 virtues, 82, 83, 89 Paulus, 65 Pax romana, 65, 68 people of God, 132, 622 elect, 132 perdition, 150 persecution (see also “suffering”) by Satan, 95, 267, 281 different reasons for Paul’s and Thessalonians’, 159 of Christians false prophet, 598–99 imperial persecutor, the, 598–99 Irenaeus and his successors, 599–602 of Christians in Macedonia/Thessalonica, 72, 83, 84, 91, 93, 94. 95, 98, 99, 109, 294, 561

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 719

mixed with temptation, 83, 91, 95 ostracized by pagan neighbors, 188 seriously worsened between writing of 1 and 2 Thessalonians, 108 of Paul/apostles, 64, 88, 94 Perseus, 52 perseverance, 148 of the saints, 450 personal piety, 472 Peter, 61 Philemon, 192 Philip II, 51 Philip V, 51 Philippi, 54, 56, 58, 73, 84, 88, 192 Philo, 54 piety, 472–75 Pisidian Antioch, 57, 62–64 Pompey, 571 prayer, 474 during times of worry, 474 petitionary, 474 with thanks, 474 predestination (see also “election, doctrine of”), 447–50 does not negate possibility of losing salvation through lack of vigilance, 450 Priscilla and Aquila, 71 prophecy (see “Holy Spirit, gifts of the, gift of prophecy”) test of, 483 prophesying in congregational worship, 475–83 pseudepigraphy (2 Thessalonians as?), 103, 104, 111, 112, 115 quiet life (see “idlers in Thessalonica”) rapture, the, 402, 409 rebel/rebellion (see “man of lawlessness”) reconciliation, 134 relationship between 1 and 2 Thessalonians, 114–19 reputation of church, 371 restraining thing (of the man of lawlessness; see also “man of lawlessness, restraining of the”), 603–5 resurrection of the dead, 379–85, 498 Jesus’s resurrection, 383 retaliation (see “nonretaliation”) Christians not to retaliate against enemies, 524 retribution (see “God’s retribution”) Roman benefactors, 55 Roman Empire, Paul’s stance toward, 68–69 Rome, 72, 73

7/12/23 11:29 AM

720

Subject Index

salvation as deliverance from God’s wrath in the last judgment, 181 Samos, 67 sanctification (see also “holiness”), 85, 148, 301, 309, 330, 343, 344–346, 475, 490, 622 and relationship to justification, 309, 310–12, 622 as incompatible with impurity (see “sexual impurity”) Trinitarian structure of, 312–13 Satan (see also “man of lawlessness” [antichrist, Satan’s agent]), 271, 272, 281 Second Macedonian War, 51 Second Punic War, 51 Secundus, 60, 61 sequence of 1 and 2 Thessalonians, 116 Serapeum, 56 Serapis, 55 sexuality, 326–50 holiness in sexual conduct, 326–50 sexual immorality, 328–44 sibling love and a “becoming life,” 351–71 Silvanus/Silas, 57, 73, 75, 124, 125, 134, 210, 274 as co-­author with Paul and Timothy, 74, 124, 141, 501 Sopater/Sosipater, 70 Sophists, 83, 84, 102 Sosthenes, 74 soteriology, 62 Spain, 72 status of women in Macedonian society, 70 Suetonius, 65 suffering as common lot of Christians, 84, 145, 160 call for patient endurance in, 547 Christians destined to suffer afflictions, 278–79 synagogue in Thessalonica, 58 Tacitus, 65 “temple of Caesar,” 55 temptation of Thessalonians away from faith, 83, 87, 91 Thessalonians as beloved by God, 149, 183 as examples for believers in Macedonia and Achaia, 162, 163 as “orphans,” 271 Thessalonians’ “betrayal” of ancestral religions, 259 concern that dead in Christ might not be raised at parousia, 408–10 conversion, 94, 149, 184–85

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 720

and gift/reception of Holy Spirit at, 160, 184 ingredients of, 185 election, 148, 149 eschatological hope, 100 faith, 94, 98, 106, 294 gullibility to false prophecy of arrival of the day of the Lord, 108 joyful acceptance of gospel, 161, 621 missionary zeal, 94, 99 moral and communal life (exhortations for), 100 ostracism by family and neighbors, 259 persecution (see “persecution”) perseverance, 145 sanctification in preparation for final judgment (see also “sanctification”), 108 sexual immorality (see “sexual immorality”) suffering (see “persecution”), 294 Thessalonica, 52–55, 84 Christianity comes to, 58–61 imperial cult of, 55 Jewish accusations against Paul there, 64–65 charge of violation of “decrees of Caesar,” 65–68 persecution and end of Pauline mission there, 62–64 social composition of church there, 61–62 Third Macedonian War, 52 Tiberius, 53, 65 Timothy, 57, 73, 75, 80, 83–85, 99, 107, 126, 134, 210, 274–78, 282–85, 501 as co-­author with Paul and Silas/Silvanus, 74, 124, 141, 501 functioning as Paul’s representative, 275 his good report to Paul about Thessalonians’ faith, 262 Titus, 97 traditions, 630–31 Trinity, 312 unbelievers’ rejection of the truth, 609–10 Via Ignatia, 52, 53, 58, 70, 71, 72 Victorinus of Pettau, 600–601 women in Macedonian society, status of, 70 women of substance, 70 work (see “idlers in Thessalonica”), 672–75 Xerxes, 51 Zeus, 56, 595

7/12/23 11:29 AM

Author Index Aasgaard, R., 212, 213 Ackroyd, P. R., 254 Aejmelaeus, L., 393, 425 Allison Jr., D. C., 430 Ascough, R. S., 62, 164 Aus, R. D., 506, 561, 603 Baden, J. S., 406 Bailey, J. W., 104, 110, 112, 506, 576 Bammel, F., 254, 278 Barclay, J. M. G., 164, 257, 258, 365, 376, 377 Barrett, J., 305 Barton, S. C., 376 Bash, A., 284 Bassler, J., 514, 515 Bauckham, R., 387, 430 Baumert, N., 215, 216 Baumga¨rtel, F., 199 Beale, G. K., 103, 142, 152, 276, 297, 304, 332, 341, 385, 456, 466, 498, 521, 532, 564, 571, 589, 608 Beauvery, R., 338 Becker, Eve-­Marie, 558, 630 Becker, J., 184, 379, 438 Behm, J., 175, 199 Bengel, J. A., 329, 397 Benson, G. P., 159 Bertram, G., 169, 228, 324, 424, 561 Best, F., 75, 103, 104, 105, 109, 110, 111, 113, 129, 142, 143, 144, 158, 165, 167, 171, 174, 193, 194, 195, 206, 209, 210, 213, 224, 226, 240, 242, 248, 250, 251, 252, 253, 268, 272, 274, 276, 278, 285, 286, 302, 304, 305, 309, 322, 332, 338, 339, 345, 356, 366, 370, 371, 374, 377, 384, 386, 399, 400, 401, 406, 407, 415, 417, 418, 421, 423, 428, 431, 433, 436, 437, 443, 454, 455, 458, 459, 466, 467, 468, 475, 476, 477, 478, 480, 484, 488, 489, 492, 506, 514, 527, 532, 545, 554, 555, 557, 558, 561, 563, 566, 569, 578, 580, 582, 584, 587, 589, 590, 609, 617 628, 633, 640, 641, 642, 643, 646, 648, 649, 661, 664, 676 Betz, O,152, 215, 389, 390 Billerbeck, P., 403, 406, 564, 664 Bjerkelund, C, J., 315, 322, 457, 458, 657 Blumenthal, C., 170 Bockmuehl, M., 94, 237, 245, 254, 580, 581 Boers, H., 81, 94, 237, 261, 315

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 721

Bousset, W., 567, 568, 594 Bornkamm, G. 71, 162, 579 Bousset, W., 568, 594 Brocke, C., 53, 54, 55, 56, 57, 60, 82, 93, 164, 196, 335, 336, 422, 424, 431 Brown, Colin, 579 Bruce, F. F., 52, 114, 277, 332, 334, 375, 376, 485, 566, 596 Buck, C. H., 116 Bultmann, R., 180, 181, 336, 382 Burke, T. J., 160, 213, 215, 227, 331, 355, 365 Burkitt, F. C., 116 Cadbury, H. J., 71, 531 Caird, G. B., 409 Calvin, J., 409, 648 Caragounis, C., 253 Chadwick, H., 277 Chow, J. K., 460 Cineira, D. Alvarez, 67 Collins, A. Y., 169, 393 Conzelmann, H., 27 Cosby, M. R., 404 Cullmann, O., 589, 591, 592 Davies, W. D., 239, 430 Deidun, T. J., 357 Deissmann, A., 390 Delling, G., 305 Denis, A. M., 197 deSilva, D. A., 426, 443, 671 Dibelius, M., 187, 142, 156, 187, 196, 197, 268, 321, 338, 354, 506, 559, 578, 590, 646 Dickson, J. P., 163, 164, 165 Dobschütz, E., 104, 105, 142, 157, 187, 253, 274, 277, 286, 304, 325, 331, 338, 361, 363, 368, 436, 437, 497, 506, 527, 529, 540, 541, 544, 559, 562, 566, 567, 572, 642, 643, 648, 663, 682 Dodds, E. R., 371 Donfried, K. P., 56, 67, 103, 105, 111, 127, 130, 132, 187, 274, 328, 335, 364, 375, 404, 422 DuPont, J., 403, 404 Eckart, K. G., 94, 237 Elgvin, T., 332 Ellis, E. E., 275, 497, 498 Engberg-­Pedersen, T., 471 Erhardt, A., 67

7/12/23 11:29 AM

722

Author Index

Ernst, J., 603 Evans, R. M., 223, 366 Falkenberry Miller, J. B., 264, 265 Faw, C. E., 117, 352 Fee, G. D., 103, 105, 111, 134, 142, 145, 146, 150, 151, 152, 154, 156, 157, 160, 163, 164, 167, 168, 173, 184, 188, 190, 191, 196, 207, 209, 210, 212, 213, 216, 224, 225, 226, 237, 241, 245, 246, 247, 250, 251, 252, 253, 268, 269, 273, 275, 276, 277, 278, 285, 286, 297, 298, 300, 304, 320, 322, 323, 328, 331, 332, 338, 340, 341, 342, 346, 354, 360, 366, 370, 374, 376, 385, 386, 400, 404, 406. 415, 417, 418, 423, 426, 431, 435, 436, 437, 439, 443, 451, 456, 458, 459, 464, 467, 468, 470, 472, 475, 476, 477, 478, 479, 480, 481, 484, 486, 488, 489, 492, 498, 502, 506, 507, 523, 527, 536, 537, 541, 544, 552, 556, 557, 558, 566, 569, 572, 573, 578, 579, 582, 584, 585, 587, 607, 612, 618, 620, 628, 630, 637, 639, 641, 642, 644, 646, 648, 649, 659, 676 Findlay, G. G., 418, 514, 536, 566 Fitzmyer, J. A., 428 Foerster, W., 320, 324 Frame, J. E., 104, 111, 114, 142, 212, 238, 251, 253, 266, 268, 277, 284, 292, 304, 305, 338, 352, 354, 362, 366, 377, 385, 388, 415, 428, 461, 465, 466, 498, 514, 523, 529, 545, 573, 578, 580, 582, 584, 609, 632, 639, 641, 643 Friedrich, G.,169 Funk, R., 81, 261 Furnish, V. P., 103 144, 159, 258, 506, 514, 558, 644 Gamble Jr., H., 684 Gaventa, B. R., 103, 196, 211, 212, 213, 215, 402, 472, 514, 589, 644 Gehring, R. W., 664 Gerber, C., 212, 213, 214 Gerhardsson, B., 239 Gese, H., 400 Giblin, G. H., 571, 584, 603 Gildersleeve, B. L., 273 Gilliard, F. D., 245, 246 Gillman, J., 91, 206 Gladd, B. L., 564 Gnilka, J., 307 Green, G. L., 56, 67, 103, 142, 150, 163, 166, 167, 168, 171, 179, 187, 216, 225, 252, 276, 297, 304, 320, 332, 338, 340, 352, 355, 364, 367, 374, 378, 380, 415, 461, 465, 466. 469, 478, 488, 498, 508, 514, 532, 540, 558, 628, 641, 645, 646, 660, 671

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 722

Greeven, H., 293 Gregson, R. G., 116 Griffith, G. T., 70 Grotius, Hugo, 116 Grundmann, W., 289 Gundry, R. H., 394, 395, 404 Gundry, Volf, 436 Gupta, N. K., 182, 183 Hagner, D. A., 247, 255, 259, 260 Hannah, D. D., 577, 590 Harnack, A., 71, 114, 116, 497 Harrison, J. R., 56, 364, 404, 422 Hartman, L., 385, 393, 401, 425 Hauck, F., 145, 225, 310, 650 Hawthorne, G. F., 307 Heil, John P., 441, 442 Heininger, B., 355, 366 Hemer, C. G., 57, 67 Hendrix, H. L., 55, 56 Hengel, M., 57, 101, 176, 197, 389, 628, 674 Hilgenfeld, A., 115 Hock, R. F., 60, 222, 347, 348, 361, 362, 363, 364, 369 Hofius, O., 400 Holmes, M. W., 402, 587, 640, 649 Holtz, T., 54, 58, 59, 75, 76, 79, 84, 91, 93, 94, 96, 125, 129, 142, 145, 146, 152, 157, 159, 163, 164, 165, 167, 169, 171, 188, 193, 195, 198, 207, 208, 209, 210, 213, 216, 227, 235, 237, 240, 241, 244, 248, 250, 251, 253, 257, 259, 265, 275, 276, 277, 281, 285, 286, 289, 292, 293, 298, 300, 304, 305, 322, 325, 332, 338, 340, 341, 346, 348, 354, 355, 376, 382, 385, 386, 387, 388, 406, 414, 415, 417, 423, 425, 427, 428, 436, 437, 439, 440, 449, 451, 451, 455, 458, 459, 466, 467, 470, 473, 477, 484, 488, 489, 496, 684 Hooker, M. 349, 350, 440 Hoppe, R., 103, 276, 278, 298, 301, 386, 423, 506, 514, 515, 525, 533, 541, 545, 552, 553, 554, 555, 609, 612, 622, 623, 644, 646, 680, 683, 684 Horbury, W., 94, 195, 197 Horn, F. W., 346 Horsley, Richard A., 56, 127, 132, 404, 422 Horst, J., 466 Hort, F. J. A., 603 Hubbard, D. A., 469, 471 Hughes, F. W., 101, 315, 316, 317 Hunter, A. M., 144 Hurd, 239, 352 Hyldahl, N., 378, 393, 401 Jensen, J., 331 Jeremias, J., 125, 388

7/12/23 11:29 AM



Author Index 723

Jervis, L. A., 261 Jewett, R., 61, 101, 187, 245, 254, 361, 369, 460, 664, 665 Johanson, B. C., 86, 87, 238, 253, 254, 278 Johnson, A., 103, 556, 557 Judge, E., 65, 66, 67, 71 Keener, C. S., 57, 59, 67, 72, 572 Kelly, W., 257, 546 Kern, F. H., 683 Kern, P. K., 101 Kim, S., 61, 62, 63, 68, 87, 100, 112, 113, 145, 152, 154, 160, 169, 173, 174, 176, 182, 191, 193, 201, 205, 220, 229, 231, 260, 270, 290, 298, 302, 303, 306, 308, 309, 311, 312, 324, 331, 334, 344, 346, 347, 349, 350, 358, 366, 370, 377, 386, 387, 390, 394, 397, 408, 412, 420, 424, 434, 438, 439, 444, 448, 450, 451, 455, 471, 474, 518, 521, 522, 524, 528, 531, 543, 574, 582, 592. 610, 611, 612, 623, 626, 638 Kittel, G., 229 Klauck, H.-­J., 355 Kloppenborg, J. S., 355, 356 Knox, J., 273 Knox, R. A., 667 Koester, H., 317, 357, 404, 423 Konradt, M., 253, 269, 301 Konstant, D., 399 Kooten, G. H., 127 Korner, R. J., 127, 128, 130, 131, 133 Kramer, W., 173, 247, 382, 398 Kreinecker, C. M., 103, 562, 563 Kremer, J., 159 Krentz, E., 101 Kümmel, W. G., 103 Kuhn, H. W., 428 Küng, H., 173 Lake, K., 64, 116, 375 Lambrecht, J., 81, 648, 649, 650 Lamp, J. S., 253 Lang, E., 277, 390, 527 Larsen, J. A. O., 52 Laughton, Eric, 442 Lautenschlager, M., 440, 441, 442 Lieu, J. M., 170 Lightfoot, J. B., 134, 222, 225, 238, 251, 277, 278, 288, 292, 299, 304, 306, 322, 329, 331, 339, 413, 417, 431, 461, 467, 469, 478, 480, 488, 489, 490, 514, 527, 529, 536, 540, 559, 582, 608, 609, 610, 643, 648 Lincoln, A. T., 339 Lindemann, A., 115, 558, 572

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 723

Lohfink, G., 232, 378 Lohmeyer, E., 134 Lohse, E., 490 Luckensmeyer, D., 316, 374, 376, 385, 386, 402, 404, 423, 441, 442 Lüdemann, G., 103, 374, 379, 558 Luz, U., 378, 379, 380 Lyons, G., 85, 187, 196, 239 MacMullen, R., 257, 380 Malherbe, Abraham J., 54, 60, 82, 84 85, 86, 87, 93, 96, 99, 101, 104, 109, 110, 111, 114, 125, 129, 142, 143, 144, 146, 149, 151, 152, 153, 154, 156, 157, 158. 159, 160, 163, 166, 168, 169, 187, 190, 191, 193, 194, 196, 199, 200, 204, 208, 209, 210, 213, 214, 215, 222, 224, 225, 226, 227, 233, 237, 241, 245, 246, 247, 248, 250, 251, 252, 253, 254, 256, 257, 261, 262, 263, 265, 266, 268, 271, 274, 275, 276, 277, 278, 282, 284, 285, 286, 287, 289, 290, 293, 295, 297, 298, 299, 302, 316, 320, 321, 324, 325, 331, 338, 339, 340, 341, 347, 348, 352, 354, 355, 356, 359, 361, 362, 363, 364, 367, 371, 374, 376, 377, 378, 380, 385, 386, 392, 400, 401, 402, 406, 414, 417, 418, 421, 423, 428, 430, 431, 432, 435, 436, 437, 440, 442, 443, 456, 458, 459, 465, 467, 469, 472, 474, 477, 478, 479, 484, 488, 492, 498, 505, 506, 508, 513, 514, 521, 522, 523, 525, 527, 529, 531, 532, 536, 540, 541, 544, 545, 547, 552, 554, 555, 557, 558, 564, 566, 567, 569, 573, 574, 576, 578, 582, 584, 606, 609, 610, 612, 623. 628, 632, 633, 636, 640, 641, 643, 645, 646, 654, 663, 664, 666, 667, 672 676, 677 Manson, T. W., 116 Marshall, I. H., 82, 83, 103, 104, 109, 110, 111, 113, 129, 151, 152, 167, 171, 174, 175, 191, 192, 195, 196, 197, 206, 209, 210, 213, 222, 224, 225, 236, 240, 243, 248, 250, 251, 253, 254, 263, 265, 272, 274, 275, 276, 278, 285, 286, 291, 292, 297, 298, 302, 304, 320, 323, 325, 330, 332, 338, 339, 341, 346, 362, 366, 367, 368, 370, 378, 380, 385, 388, 392, 393, 401, 406, 407, 409, 415, 418, 421, 423, 427, 428, 433, 436, 443, 444, 449, 451, 454, 455, 458, 459, 461, 466, 468, 470, 473, 475, 476, 477, 478, 479, 489, 492, 502, 506, 514, 521, 523, 529, 532, 535, 536, 540, 541, 555, 566, 567, 572, 573, 576, 577, 578, 581, 582, 584, 589, 590, 609, 610, 612, 617, 618, 619, 640, 641, 642, 643, 644, 648, 649, 654, 661, 663, 664, 666, 667, 670, 677, 679

7/12/23 11:29 AM

724

Author Index

Martin, D. M., 582, 589, 618 Martin, R. P., 307, 472, 473 Martyn, J. L., 201 Marxsen, W., 156, 331, 379, 399, 545, 558, 576, 623, 645 Ma¨rz, C.-­P., 430 Masson, C., 284, 498 Maurer, C., 219, 332, 333, 338 McNicol, A. J., 387, 393, 399, 565 Mearns, C. L. 115, 116, 379 Meeks, Wayne, 53, 150, 257, 459, 460 Menken, M. J. J., 103, 545, 589, 648 Metzger, B. M., 561, 564, 566, 567, 568, 588, 589, 590, 650 Michaelis, W., 228, 324 Milligan, G., 165, 417, 464, 566, 582, 617, 661 Mitchell, M., 101 Mitchell, M. M. 282, 283 Moffat, J., 667 Moo, D. J., 448 Morgan, M. G., 52 Morris, L., 103, 142, 266, 277, 322, 332, 341, 354, 366, 388, 417, 431, 478, 514, 566, 573, 574, 582 Moss, C. R., 406 Moule, C. F. D., 277 Müller, P. G., 298, 540, 546, 589, 623 Mullins, T. Y., 374 Munck, 590 Neil, N., 316 Neirynck, F., 386 Nepper-­Christensen, P., 384, 394 Nestle, E., 56, 570, 595 Neufeld, Yoder, 434 Neugebauer, F., 129, 132, 400 Nicholl, C. R., 374, 378, 379, 384, 385, 386, 388, 399, 406, 420, 421, 423, 426, 435, 436, 437, 440, 555, 560, 572, 590, 668, 678 Nicklas, T., 103, 110, 113, 502, 512, 513, 514, 540, 544, 546, 552, 560, 561, 562, 563, 623, 642, 646, 648, 654 Niebuhr, K.-­W., 103 Oakes, P., 223, 410, 423 O’Brien, P. T., 96, 146, 150, 165, 237, 290, 305, 307, 618 Oepke, A., 388, 389, 390 Ollrog, W.-­H., 276 Papazoglu, F., 52 Park, Young-­Ho, 127, 377, 380 Pearson, B. A., 94, 237, 254 Peterson, E., 403, 404 Pilhofer, P., 148, 149, 355

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 724

Piper, J., 470 Plassart, A., 76 Plevnick, Joseph, 278, 384, 404 Pobee, J. S., 375, 384 Porter, S. E., 101 Procksch, O., 336 Rabens, V., 346, 349, 543 Rainbow, O. A., 112, 522, 540 Ramelli, I., 399 Reeves, M., 602 Reicke, B., 459 Reinmuth, E., 103, 533 Reiser, M., 45, 469 Rengstorf, K. H., 171, 345 Reynolds, J., 170 Richard, E. J., 142, 196, 224, 237, 251, 268, 277, 278, 302, 332, 338, 341, 374, 378, 384, 386, 418, 436, 440, 443, 451, 456, 458, 459, 460, 484, 488, 498, 502, 506, 514, 523, 541, 544, 558, 573, 582, 607, 608, 649 677 Riesner, Rainer, 53, 54, 55, 57, 58, 59, 60, 61, 62, 67, 76, 93, 170, 215, 219, 248, 254, 336, 361, 375, 431, 496, 684 Rigaux, B., 142, 146, 159, 225, 253, 275, 286, 302, 303, 304, 332, 366, 421, 423, 436, 478, 484, 559, 573, 580, 589, 639 Robeck Jr., C. M., 477 Röcker, F. W., 393, 404, 406, 555, 560, 564, 565, 566, 567, 568, 570, 571, 572, 573, 574, 578, 579, 580, 581, 582, 585, 589, 590, 592 Roetzel, C., 357 Roose, H., 514, 533, 541 Russell, R., 223, 366, 368, 464 Sailors, T. B., 207, 212 Sandness, K. O., 94, 191, 194, 195, 197, 257 Sang-­Won, Aaron Son, 77 Schermann, T., 248 Schippers, R., 248 Schlatter, A., 305 Schlier, H., 159, 192, 563 Schlueter, C. J., 94, 237, 253, 259 Schmidt, D., 94 Schmidt, J. E. C., 102 Schmidt, K. L. 229 Schmidt, U., 211, 212, 214 Schmithals, W., 210 Schmitz, O., 325 Schneider, G., 145 Schnelle, U., 379, 438 Schoeps, H. J., 248 Schoon-­Janssen, J., 87, 187, 196

7/12/23 11:29 AM



Author Index 725

Schreiber, S., 54, 54, 58, 103 104, 127, 164, 191, 207, 213, 253, 269, 276, 285, 298, 301, 322, 332, 385, 386, 388, 422, 433, 436, 437, 439, 441, 442, 458, 460, 465, 470, 493, 518 514, ,525, 532, 533, 541, 542, 544, 553, 554, 557, 559, 571, 572, 576, 578, 605, 612, 621, 636, 641, 644, 646, 679 Schrenk, G., 340 Schubert, P., 95, 96, 98, 101, 140, 141, 316 Schwank, B., 76 Schwemer, A. M., 176, 197, 628, 674 Seifrid, M. A., 399 Seesemann, H., 228, 264, 324 Sherwin-­W hite, A. N., 66 Siber, P., 380, 385 Siegert, F., 170 Silberman, N. A., 404 Simpson, E. K., 439 Smallwood, E. M., 76 Smith, A., 196, 332, 333, 334, 404, 422, 434 Söding, T., 350 Sta¨hlin, G., 496 Stauffer, E., 145 Steck, O. H., 248 Stettler, H., 309, 311, 329, 330, 590, 621 Still, T. D., 93, 111, 237, 244, 248, 257, 258, 375, 422 Stratmann, H., 171 Strobel, A., 589, 590, 603 Stuhlmacher, P., 103, 387, 393, 400, 590 Tannebaum, R., 170 Tarn, W. W., 70 Taylor, G., 116, 169, 244, 257 Tellbe, M., 54, 56, 57, 58, 60, 61, 62, 91, 188, 237, 244, 248, 251, 253, 257, 361, 404, 410, 411, 412, 422, 424 Thiselton, A. C., 332 Thomas, G. S. R., 71 Thompson, M. B., 470 Thorsteinsson, R., 469, 471 Tomson, P. J., 338, 349 Torrey, C. C., 248 Travis, S, H., 514 Trebilco, Paul, 126 Trench, R. C., 489 Trilling, W., 102, 103, 104, 105, 108, 111, 112, 113, 502, 506, 512, 532, 540, 541, 544, 547, 567, 573 576, 577, 578, 582, 619, 669, 672, 677, 683 Tuckett, C. M., 394, 400, 425 Turner, M. M. B., 346 Unnik, W. C., 192

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 725

Vacalopoulos, A., 54 van Kooten, G. H., 127, 128 Vögtle, A., 451 Vos, 53, 54, 56, 60, 61, 92, 128, 169, 244, 257, 361, 363, 364, 376, 470, 575 Walter, N., 387 Walton, S., 85 Wanamaker, C, A., 74, 86, 87, 93, 99, 101, 103, 104, 125, 142, 146, 150, 151, 156, 159, 163, 166. 167, 169, 187, 196, 206, 208, 210, 213, 224, 225, 227, 233, 235, 236, 237, 239, 244, 248, 250, 251, 255, 256, 261, 268, 272, 274, 276, 278, 281, 285, 286, 287, 289, 299, 304, 305, 309, 315, 316, 317, 322, 323, 332, 338, 341, 347, 348, 355, 356, 364, 365, 378, 382, 384, 385, 386, 393, 406, 429, 430, 431, 435, 443, 444, 445, 455, 458, 459, 460, 465, 466, 476, 477, 478, 484, 488, 509, 510, 514, 515, 516, 525, 527, 540, 544, 545, 573, 576, 577, 582, 609, 630, 639, 644, 646, 649, 658, 676 Ware, P., 164 Warfield, B. B., 603, 604 Weatherly, J. A., 237, 480, 498 Weima, J. A. D., 54, 56, 57, 59, 60, 67, 74, 85, 91, 93, 101, 103, 104, 109, 111, 128, 134, 142, 144, 146, 147, 151, 154, 156, 159, 160, 163, 167, 169, 179, 186, 187, 207, 208, 209, 210, 212, 213, 216, 217, 229, 237, 238, 241, 242, 245, 246, 251, 253, 261, 262, 264, 265, 266, 268, 269, 270, 274, 275, 276, 277, 278, 279, 285, 286, 287, 289, 291, 292, 295, 298, 300, 302, 303, 317, 319, 321, 322, 323, 328, 330, 331, 332, 333, 335, 338, 340, 343, 346, 354, 355, 357, 359, 364, 366, 374, 378, 380, 384, 385, 386, 388, 398, 402, 404, 414, 415, 417, 418, 419, 420, 421, 422, 423, 424, 426, 427, 428, 429, 430, 431, 432, 433, 435, 436, 437, 439, 441, 442, 443, 451, 456, 458, 459, 461, 466, 467, 468, 470, 472, 475, 477, 478, 479, 480, 481, 484, 485, 488, 492, 498, 502, 508, 510, 514, 515, 523, 529, 532, 533, 536, 537, 540, 541, 542, 544, 545, 547, 549, 552, 555, 556, 557, 558, 560, 563, 564, 566, 567, 568, 569, 570, 571, 572, 573, 575, 576, 578, 582, 584, 585, 587, 589, 590, 605, 606, 607, 608, 610, 612, 617, 618, 619, 620, 623, 628, 629, 630, 632, 633, 636, 637, 639, 641, 643, 644, 646, 647, 648, 649, 658, 659, 660, 661, 662, 663, 664, 667, 668, 671, 676, 677, 678, 684 Wengst, K., 422

7/12/23 11:29 AM

726

Author Index

Wenham, D., 159, 248, 386, 388, 393, 405, 406, 425, 430, 470, 565, 592 Westermann, C., 171 White, J. L., 81, 261 White, J. R., 422, 423 Whiteley, D. E. H., 409 Wilckens, U., 168 Wildberger, H., 584 Wiles, G. P., 284, 296 Wilson, W. T., 470 Winter, Bruce W., 82, 83, 84, 101, 168, 187, 196, 217, 265, 364 Wischmeyer, O., 144, 145

9780785250210_02_315-734_WBC_Thess_int.indd 726

Witherington III, B., 101, 103, 111, 142, 151, 187, 276, 297, 304, 309, 315, 316, 317, 322, 331, 332, 355, 375, 417, 440, 451, 456, 532, 558, 566 Witmer, S. E., 357 Wohlenberg, G., 151 Wolter, M., 469 Wrede, W., 103, 104, 110, 111, 112 Wright, N. T., 56, 191, 282, 389, 404, 422, 445 Yarbrough, O. L., 331, 338, 348 Yeats, W. B., 613 Yinger, K. L., 469, 470, 471

7/12/23 11:29 AM