22

IntroductionPaul’s Thessalonian epistles both deal atlength with questions related to theParousia (Second Coming) of Christ. TheThessalonians seem to have had seriousquestions in this area. The two letters lookat Jesus’ return from very different per-spectives. 1 Thessalonians is quite pasto-ral. In the letter Paul sought to comfortand assure the Thessalonians about Jesus’coming. In 2 Thessalonians he was lesspatient. Some were spreading the falseword to the church that the day of theLord had already occurred, and Pauladdressed the problem more forcefully.

The Thessalonian epistles are the earli-est extant Pauline epistles. Paul estab-lished the Thessalonian church during hissecond mission, after leaving Philippi. Thetime was around A. D. 50. The two epistleswere written in close proximity to thefounding of the church, perhaps withinsix months from Paul’s departure from thecity. The two seem to have been writtenclose together. They are strikingly similarin both language and content.

The first part of this essay will exam-ine Paul’s establishment of the work inThessalonica and the period of his minis-try immediately following, including hiswork in nearby Berea and his flight toAthens. It is possible that Paul wrote hisfirst Thessalonian letter from Athens. Theremainder of the essay will introduce theThessalonian correspondence.

Establishment of the Churchat Thessalonica

We have two accounts of Paul’s found-ing of the Christian community atThessalonica. The first is Luke’s accountin Acts 17:1-9. Acts 17:10-15 tells of thework at Berea, and Acts 17:16 of Paul’sarrival in Athens. The same period of mis-sionary activity is covered by Paul’s ownaccount in 1 Thessalonians 1-3. The Lukanand Pauline versions are quite distinct.They supplement one another and will beexamined separately.

Thessalonica (Acts 17:1)After leaving Philippi, Paul, Silas, and

Timothy proceeded along the EgnatianWay toward Thessalonica. A journey ofapproximately 100 Roman miles, it tookthem through the towns of Amphipolis(32 miles from Philippi) and Apollonia (31miles from Amphipolis, 38 miles fromThessalonica). Amphipolis was a largetown. In previous years it was the capitalof the first division of Macedonia. But,Paul did not stop to witness there. Heheaded for Thessalonica. With a popula-tion of 65,000 to 100,000, it was the largestcity of Macedonia.2

Thessalonica was an important com-mercial center located on major land andsea routes. The Egnatian Way ran throughthe center of town. The city grew uparound the best natural harbor inMacedonia. The ancient town of Thermehad been located there. In 315 B.C.,Cassander, one of Alexander’s generals,who succeeded him as king of Macedonia,organized Therme and a number of sur-rounding towns into his new capital. He

Hope in the Lord:Introduction to 1-2 Thessalonians1

John B. Polhill

John B. Polhill is the James

Buchanan Harrison Professor of New

Testament Interpretation at The South-

ern Baptist Theological Seminary. Dr.

Polhill has taught at Southern since

1969. He has written numerous articles

and a widely acclaimed commentary on

Acts in the New American Commen-

tary. The article printed here is from his

most recent book titled Paul: The Man

and His Letters (Broadman).

23

renamed his new capital Thessalonica forhis wife, who was also Alexander’s half-sister. In the second century B.C.,Macedonia allied against Rome and wasdefeated at the battle of Pydna (168 B.C.).The victorious Roman general AemiliusPaullus organized all of Macedonia intofour administrative districts with Thessa-lonica as capital of the second. In 146 B.C.Macedonia was made a Roman senatorialprovince with Thessalonica as capital. Thecity befriended Julius Caesar and subse-quently Octavian and Antony at the timeof the republican war. It was rewarded forits loyalty in 42 B.C. by being granted thestatus of a free city, a status that was re-confirmed by Octavian in 31 B.C. In A.D.15 Octavian (now “Augustus”) removedMacedonia from senatorial provincial sta-tus and placed it directly under his ownrule (imperial provincial status) becauseof Macedonian unrest over the heavy pro-vincial taxes. (Unlike senatorial provinces,imperial provinces were under the directcontrol of the emperor and had one ormore legions stationed within them.) InA.D. 44 the emperor Claudius removedthe legions, returning Macedonia to itsformer senatorial provincial status.

The significance of all this is thatThessalonica’s fortunes were very closelytied to Rome. From the time of Augustus,a temple had been established there tovenerate Julius Caesar. By Paul’s day acult had been established in Thessalonicafor the worship of the goddess Roma.3

Thessalonica was never made a Romancolony but remained a free Greek city. Thismeant that the local Greeks maintainedtheir own legislative and governing pre-rogatives, were exempt from the provin-cial taxes, had their own rights of coinage,and had no Roman troops within theirborders. The city’s Greek government is

reflected in the names of the local officialswhom Luke mentioned in Acts 17:6, 8. Hecalled them politarchs (NIV, “city offi-cials”), a local term that only seems tohave been used in Macedonia. The namehas been found on some 70 inscriptionsin Macedonia, 28 of them from Thessa-lonica alone. The number of politarchs atany one time seems to have varied, butThessalonica appears to have had 5 inPaul’s day. They were the main publicofficials, responsible for maintainingrecords, keeping the peace, convening thetown council, and maintaining good rela-tions with the Roman provincial officials.4

Paul’s Relationship with theThessalonians According toActs 17:2-16Establishing the Church (17:2-4).

Upon arriving in Thessalonica, Paulpreached in the synagogue, as was hiscustom. For three sabbaths he “reasoned”with them from the Old Testament scrip-tures, seeking to demonstrate that Jesuswas the expected Messiah. Luke gives nodetails, but probably Paul employed suchtexts as those used by Peter in his sermonat Pentecost (Acts 2:16-35), by himself atPisidian Antioch (Acts 13:16-41), and per-haps the Servant passages which Philipshared with the Ethiopian eunuch (Acts8:30-35). As was generally the case, themembers of the synagogue eventuallyturned on Paul, but not before he hadmade many converts. Three categories ofconverts are mentioned: “some” Jews, “anumber” of God-fearing Greeks, and a siz-able number of prominent Greek women(v. 4). Many such Gentile women, likeLydia, seem to have been attracted to theDiaspora synagogues.

The breach with the synagogue is indi-cated in Acts 17:5-9 by the account of the

24

Jews stirring up a mob against Paul. Theseparation probably occurred a consider-able time before the mob incident. Luke’sreference to three sabbaths (17:2) mostlikely refers to Paul’s initial period of wit-ness in Thessalonica, which occurred inthe synagogue. Paul must have continuedon in Thessalonica for some time afterseparating from the synagogue. An exten-sive period of ministry in Thessalonica isindicated by the Philippians sending himaid there “again and again” (Phil 4:16) andby his having to support himself inThessalonica with his own hands (1 Thess2:9, 2 Thess 3:8).

The Mob (17:5-6a).Eventually the Jewish opposition did

force Paul to leave Thessalonica, a patternall too familiar from Paul’s first mission-ary journey. This time the Jews did not actalone. They incited the Gentile populationagainst the Christians. Specifically, theyenlisted some “rabble from the market-place.” This riffraff succeeded in provok-ing a full-scale riot. The mob rushed to thehouse of a certain Jason, who was evi-dently a Christian with whom Paul andSilas had been staying. Not finding themissionaries, they dragged Jason andsome of his fellow Christians off to thepolitarchs.

The Charges (17:6b-8).Much as at Philippi, there were mul-

tiple charges, but only one that wouldhave raised the alarm of the magistrates.This was the charge that the Christianswere “defying Caesar’s decrees” by pro-claiming that there was another king.Roman emperors were very nervousabout their job security. Both Tiberius andAugustus issued decrees against personswho made any predictions pertaining to

the person of the emperor. Everyone wasexpected to take an oath of loyalty to theemperor. When viewed superficially, theChristian message about Christ the Kingcould be seen as seditious; it had been sotaken in the case of Jesus (cf. John 19:12).The politarchs of Thessalonica foundthemselves much in the situation of Pilatewith Jesus. On the one hand, the chargeswere unsubstantiated. On the other, therewas an angry mob and a politically sensi-tive accusation. They arrived at a solutionthat they probably viewed as a reasonablecompromise. No one suffered any physi-cal harm and the peace was preserved.

Jason (v. 9).The politarchs had Jason “post bond”

and then dismissed the Christians. Lukedid not specify the terms of the bond. Thelarger narrative would suggest that Jasonwas asked to guarantee that there wouldbe no further disturbances to the peace. Itmay have specified that Paul and Silaswere to leave the city. Jason’s role in theincident is significant. He seems to havebeen a Christian of considerable socialstanding and the church apparently metin his house. He was its patron. It is pos-sible that his house was an urban insula,an apartment with a workshop on theground floor and living quarters in theupper floors. If so, Paul may have workedin Jason’s workshop and slept in hisliving quarters above.5 It would havebeen the location for Christian assemb-ling and witness after the expulsion fromthe synagogue.

Ministry in Berea (17:10-16).The Thessalonian Christians sent Paul

and Silas out of the city under cover ofnight, evidently because they were stillbeing sought by their persecutors. We are

25

not told of Timothy’s whereabouts at thetime. He was later present with Paul andSilas in Berea (v. 14). Berea was southwestof Thessalonica about 50 miles. It was notlocated on the Egnatian Way but some-what off the beaten path at the foot ofMt. Bermion in the Olympian mountainrange. In the second century B.C. it hadbeen capital of one of the four divisionsof Macedonia and was still a sizable cityin Paul’s day.

At Berea Paul continued his procedureof preaching first in the synagogues. Lukeprovides no time references; so it is notclear how long Paul spent in the city. TheJews of Berea are described as being “morenoble” (“refined”) than those of Thessa-lonica. Not just on sabbaths, but daily theyjoined Paul in study of the scriptures toconfirm the truth of his claim that Jesuswas the Messiah. The same three groupsresponded as at Thessalonica (v. 12, cf. v.4), only this time “many” of the Jews cameto faith in Christ.

Paul’s ministry in Berea was curtailedby the coming of Jews from Thessalonica.As at Thessalonica, they stirred up the“crowds” against the Christian mission-aries. Nothing is said about the involve-ment of the Berean Jews. It seems that the“crowds” were the Gentile populace. Thepicture is thus very much like that ofThessalonica; the Jews as the instigators,the Gentile populace as the bulk of themob. The text of Acts 17:14 is somewhatuncertain, and the meaning of the bestreading is unclear. It says that Paul wentas far as the coast. This could mean eitherthat he went to Athens by sea or along thecoastal land route. Whichever means oftravel he took, he arrived there alone, hav-ing left Timothy and Silas behind in Berea(v. 14). At Athens Paul sent instructionsback to Timothy and Silas that they were

to join him there as soon as possible(vv. 15-16). It is unclear why they did notaccompany him to Athens. They mayhave been working elsewhere in thevicinity when the mob arose and forcedPaul’s hasty departure from Berea.

Paul’s Relationship to ThessalonicaAccording to 1 Thessalonians 1-3

Half of 1 Thessalonians is devoted toPaul’s relationship with the church (chap-ters 1-3). Paul reminded the Thessaloniansof his coming to them and establishing thechurch (1:4-2:16). He also told them of hisworry about them after his departure andof the events leading up to the writing ofthe epistle (2:17-3:10). There are significantdifferences between Paul’s account in 1Thessalonians 1-3 and Luke’s account inActs 17:1-16. Some would see them asirreconcilable contradictions. We wouldmaintain that the two accounts are com-plementary rather than contradictory.

Paul’s First Preaching (1:4-2:16).Paul reminds the Thessalonians of how

he came to them after being insulted andmade to suffer at Philippi (2:1-2, cf. Acts16:16-24). He spoke of how he came withdeep conviction and in the demonstrablepower of the Holy Spirit (1:5; cf. 1 Cor 2:4,Gal 3:3). In 1:9-10 Paul summarized hisinitial preaching at Thessalonica. It is clearfrom 1 Thessalonians that the church con-sisted mainly of Gentiles. Paul’s firstpreaching to them is an example of hisgospel for Gentiles. They were calledupon to turn from dead idols to the onetrue and living God.6 They were informedof the resurrection of Christ, of theParousia hope, and of the coming judg-ment. In verse 10, Paul mentioned Christ’sParousia for the first time in the epistle. Itcontinues to have a prominent place

26

throughout the entire letter (cf. 2:19, 3:13,4:13, 5:2, 5:23).

In 1 Thessalonians 2:3-12 Paul remindsthe Thessalonians of how he sought tomodel selfless ministry and genuine pas-toral concern when he was with them. Hismotives were pure. He did not seek toplease people; he did not flatter; heshowed no greed. He provided gentle,loving care for the Thessalonians, like anurse cooing over her children (2:7). Paulcontinues his family metaphors in verses11-12, where he speaks of how he had alsobeen a father to them, instructing them inthe Christian life through words of com-fort and encouragement. He did not wantto be a burden to them; so he supportedhimself with his own manual labor (2:9,cf. 2 Thess 3:8).

Paul’s ministry in Thessalonica was noteasy. He experienced strong opposition(2:2). The Thessalonians likewise hadcome to share in these same sufferings(1:6, 2:14-16). Just who the persecutorswere is unclear from Paul’s comments. Hedescribed them as “your own country-men” and likened them to the Jews ofJudaea who persecuted the churches there(2:14). “Your own countrymen” seems tobe more a political than a racial designa-tion and could embrace both Jews andGentiles, as in Acts 17:5-9. In any event,the Thessalonian endurance in the face ofpersecution was well known and servedas an example for Christians throughoutMacedonia and Achaia (1:7). They weremore than an example, however. Paulindicates that they had become activeparticipants in the Christian missionthemselves (1:8, cf. 4:10).

Paul’s Relationship with theThessalonians After Leaving Them(2:17-3:10).

At 2:17-20 Paul shifts from the eventsof his founding visit to his concern for theThessalonians after being forced to leavethem. He states that he attempted “timeand again” to come see them, but “Satan”always hindered him. One wonders whatPaul meant by this Satanic hindrance. Inearly Christianity “Satan” was sometimesemployed as deliberately veiled languagefor Rome. One wonders if the charge ofsedition and Jason’s bond may nothave formed the Satanic barrier to Paul’sreturning to Thessalonica.

In 3:1-5 Paul continues to inform theThessalonians of his intense desire to seethem. He was worried about them, espe-cially about how they were bearing upunder the persecutions they were boundto be experiencing. He tells of how he sentTimothy as his personal envoy, to makeup for his absence, to bring him back apersonal report about his belovedThessalonians. The sending of Timothy isperhaps the most serious of the supposedconflicts between Acts and Thessalonians.It will be remembered that Acts left Timo-thy and Silas in Berea when Paul went toAthens (17:14-16). Acts does not mentionthe pair rejoining Paul until Paul’s arrivalin Corinth (18:5). But, in 1 Thessalonians3:1-2, Paul stated that he sent Timothy from

Athens. The accounts are not irreconcil-able. Timothy’s travels may have beenmore extensive than either Acts or 1Thessalonians indicate. The two togethermay furnish the whole picture.

First Thessalonians 3:6-10 rounds outPaul’s recapitulation of the events thatpreceded his writing of the epistle. Timo-thy came back from Thessalonica withgood news: the Thessalonians were stillfaithful to Paul and firm in the faith. Over-come with relief and joy, Paul wrote 1Thessalonians. He was perhaps still in

27

Athens when he sent off the epistle, quitepossibly again through the agency of Timo-thy. The first three chapters of 1Thessalonians fit the genre of a “friend-ship” letter. What Paul could not expressin personal presence he attempted throughhis letter. His strongest desire, of course,was to see them in person, and that requestbecame the opening petition of a prayer forthe Thessalonians as he concluded thispersonal portion of the epistle (3:11).

Introduction to theThessalonian Letters

Several issues have occupied the atten-tion of recent research in the Thessalonianepistles. A matter of particular promi-nence has been the situation of thechurch—its racial and social composition,its religious background, and the natureof the persecution it faced. Also much dis-cussed is the integrity of the two letters,especially whether 1 Thessalonians 2:13-16 might be an interpolation. Closelyrelated is the debate over the authenticityof 2 Thessalonians and the occasion forthat epistle. A final area of research hasbeen the genre of the epistles.

Social Composition of the ChurchThe Thessalonian church seems to have

been primarily Gentile in composition.This is indicated by Paul’s summary of hisinitial preaching in 1 Thessalonians 1:9-10, which is aimed at Gentiles, urgingthem to abandon their idols and embracethe one true God. Likewise, the emphasison sexual purity would point towardthose with a pagan background (4:3-8).The church seems to have been somewhatmixed socially, having wealthier memberslike Jason and the noble women (Acts17:4) together with a significant numberfrom the working class and urban poor.

Those tempted to idleness (2 Thess 3:11)may have come from the ranks of thelatter.7

The Thessalonians probably experi-enced considerable social disruptionwhen they were converted. They neededto be integrated into a new community.This would explain Paul’s extensive useof “family” language in 1 Thessalonians.The word “brother” occurs 18 times in theletter, proportionately the heaviest densityfor any Pauline epistle. Paul describedhimself with a striking variety of familyterms. He depicted himself as being gentlelike a nurse (2:7); he encouraged them likea father (2:11). They were his children (2:7,11). Separation from them was like beingorphaned (NIV, “torn away,” 2:17). 1Thessalonians is permeated with the lan-guage of encouragement and comfort,even in the hortatory sections of the epistle(cf. 4:18, 5:11). It is in every respect a pas-toral epistle through which Paul soughtto integrate the Thessalonians into theirnew Christian family.8

The need for pastoral care was the moreurgent because the Thessalonians werefacing intense persecution (1 Thess 1:6,2:14, 3:3-4; 2 Thess 1:4-6). The nature ofthe persecution is debated. The accountin Acts indicates that Paul’s persecutionin Thessalonica was at the hands of aGentile mob that had been incited byJews (Acts 17:5-9). First Thessaloniansseems to point to the local Gentiles as themain persecutors of the Thessalonians, es-pecially 2:14, which speaks of “your owncountrymen.” The “countrymen” mayhave included Jews, as is possibly indi-cated by the strong anti-Jewish polemicthat follows in 2:15-16.

What was the basis of the persecution?Robert Jewett suggests that it might belinked to the ancient Thessalonian cult of

28

the Cabiri. A local religion that venerateda slain hero, it was historically associatedwith the working classes. Its symbol, forinstance, was a hammer. In the first cen-tury the Cabirus cult was appropriated bythe aristocracy and made into an officialcivil religion. This left the working classfeeling abandoned. The resulting vacuummade Christianity particularly attractiveto them. The eschatological aspect of theChristian message was especially appeal-ing with its promise of social redress. InJewett’s view, this “millenarian” aspect ofThessalonian Christianity was seen asrevolutionary by the authorities and pro-voked the persecution.9 One does notneed to postulate a millenarian move-ment to account for the persecution ofthe Thessalonian Christians. The localemperor cult would itself have furnishedsufficient basis for the persecution of theChristians. Thessalonica prided itself onits close relationship with Rome.10 Thecult of Caesar was initiated there veryearly, during the time of Augustus. Thereare Thessalonian coins from that periodwhich depict Julius Ceasar, designatinghim as divus (“divine”). The Acts accountmay actually mute the seriousness withwhich the Thessalonian politarchs tookthe Christian threat to their Roman con-nections. The local persecution madePaul’s pastoral care to the new Christianfamily all the more urgent.

Integrity of the EpistlesA scholarly minority have argued that

the present form of 1 Thessalonians is acomposite of two letters. This is usuallybased on the observation that the epistlehas a second thanksgiving at 1 Thessa-lonians 2:13. It is argued that thanks-givings occur normally at the beginningof Paul’s letters, thus indicating the intro-

duction of an epistle at 2:13. According tothis view, 1 Thessalonians 2:13-4:1(2) is afragment of a separate letter inserted into1 Thessalonians. The fragment deals pri-marily with Paul’s relief over the goodreport brought by Timothy. It is usuallyseen as written after the remainder of 1Thessalonians.11

Most interpreters maintain the integ-rity of 1 Thessalonians. A significant num-ber, however, argue that 1 Thessalonians2:13-16 is an interpolation. This is basedprimarily on its strong polemic againstthe Jews, which is viewed as beingunlikely for Paul, who never gave up onhis fellow Jews (cf. Romans 9-11).12 On theother hand, one must remember that Jewsincited the mob at Thessalonica and“drove [Paul] out” (v. 15; cf. Acts 17:5-9).Also, 1 Thessalonians 2:14-16 is notdirected against Jews in general butagainst the Jewish persecutors of theChristians.13

Very few scholars argue against theintegrity of 2 Thessalonians. One of thefew who has is Walter Schmithals, whoargued that our present two Thessalonianletters are a composite of four originallyseparate letters. In his view, Paul’s first

letter to Thessalonica consisted of 2Thessalonians 1:1-12 + 3:6-16 and was pri-marily a warning against false teachersand idleness. It was followed by a second

letter in which Paul had to defend him-self against Gnostics in the church (1 Thess1:1-2:12 + 4:2-5:28). In a third letter, Paulcountered the Gnostic claim that the dayof the Lord had arrived (2 Thess 2:13-14 +2:1-12 + 2:15-3:3). A fourth and final letterexpressed Paul’s relief that the situationhad been resolved (1 Thess 2:13-4:1).Schmithals based his reconstruction on theassumption that Paul was contendingwith Gnostics at Thessalonica.14 Hardly

29

anyone has been convinced that Paulfought Gnostics in 1 Thessalonians,although a number who deny the Paulineauthorship of 2 Thessalonians would seeGnosticism as the target of that epistle.

Authorship of 2 Thessalonians A number of contemporary scholars

argue that 2 Thessalonians was not writ-ten by Paul. Generally it is argued that adisciple of Paul wrote the letter in the lat-ter part of the first century during a timewhen Christians were experiencing severepersecution. Arguments against Paulineauthorship of 2 Thessalonians run alongseveral lines. First, the close similaritybetween 1 and 2 Thessalonians is noted.Fully a third of the actual phraseology of2 Thessalonians is paralleled in 1 Thessa-lonians. Even unusual structural detailsare identical, such as the occurrence of asecond thanksgiving (1 Thess 2:13, 2 Thess2:13). This is seen to be slavish imitationby a later writer. It is also noted that thetwo epistles deal with the same themes—persecution, the Parousia of Christ, andthe problem of idleness. Yet, they dealwith these themes in different ways. FirstThessalonians encourages hope in theLord’s return; 2 Thessalonians stresses thedelay of the Parousia. The tone of 1 Thessa-lonians is warm and pastoral; 2 Thessa-lonians is harsh and judgmental. SecondThessalonians 2:1-2 and 3:17 deal with theissue of forgeries. This is seen as a “diver-sionary tactic” on the part of the imitator.It is also argued that the emphasis onholding to the teachings that have beenpassed down is more indicative of thesense of tradition of a later age than ofPaul (2:15, 3:6). Some would argue that theproblems of a realized eschatology (2:1-2)and of disorder in the church (3:6-15)reflect the problems of the later church,

perhaps an early form of Gnosticism.Finally, it is argued that the writer of 2Thessalonians does not “encourage;”rather, he “commands” (3:6, 10, 12). Thepastoral Paul of 1 Thessalonians has givenway to the authoritarian voice of his 2Thessalonian imitator.15

In support of Pauline authorship it isargued that the language and style of theletter are thoroughly Pauline, even in thetwo-thirds of 2 Thessalonians that doesnot parallel the first epistle. The similari-ties are easily accounted for if Paul wrotethe two in close proximity.16 The patristicevidence unanimously favors Paulineauthorship; no early canonical list ofPaul’s epistles omits 2 Thessalonians orquestions Paul’s having written it. Per-haps the key issue is the occasion for theepistle, especially the controversialeschatological section (2:1-12). When thelater church fought eschatological enthu-siasm or Gnosticism, it never seems tohave incorporated the sort of apocalypticschematic that one finds in these verses.They are more easily accounted for on theassumption of Pauline authorship thanotherwise.

The Occasion for the EpistlesThe occasion for 1 Thessalonians has

already been treated for the most partunder the earlier discussion of 1 Thessa-lonians 1-3. Paul sent Timothy from Ath-ens as his personal envoy to Thessalonica.Timothy had returned to Paul, perhapsstill at Athens, with a good report aboutthe loyalty and steadfastness of theThessalonians (3:1-10). Joyful at the goodnews, Paul wrote 1 Thessalonians, prob-ably sending it back by Timothy. Timothybrought him fresh news about the situa-tion in the church. The church was stillexperiencing persecution, and Paul

30

sought to encourage and fortify them.Also, Timothy may have reported aboutproblems within the fellowship of a sexualnature, and Paul addressed that issue aswell (4:3-8). It is possible that the Thessa-lonians had sent Paul a letter by way ofTimothy. In three places (4:9, 4:13, 5:1)Paul used a set phrase “now concerning”(Greek, peri de) which may indicate pointsat which he was picking up questions theyhad raised. Two of the questions con-cerned the return of Christ (4:13, 5:1). Evi-dently, some members of the congregationhad died, and there was concern abouttheir involvement in the Lord’s return.Paul dealt with the issue at some length,assuring them that the dead and the liv-ing would both participate fully in theParousia and encouraging them to be alertand prepared for that event (4:13-5:11).

There is considerably more divergenceof opinion about the occasion for 2Thessalonians. Even those who believe inPauline authorship disagree on the reasonfor its composition. A number of scholarsmaintain that Paul wrote 2 Thessaloniansbefore 1 Thessalonians. They base this onseveral observations. First, it is argued thatthe note of persecution is much strongerin 2 Thessalonians (cf. 1:4-10) while thepersecution seems to be past in 1 Thessa-lonians. Second, it is noted that Paulseemed to be learning about the problemsof idleness for the first time in 2 Thessa-lonians 3:11-12, whereas they are nottreated as something new in 1 Thessa-lonians 5:14. A final argument claims thatthe eschatology in 2 Thessalonians iscloser to Jewish apocalyptic and hencemore primitive than that of 1 Thessa-lonians.17 Others would explain the dif-fering eschatological treatment of theepistles on the basis of Paul’s having writ-ten the two letters to two different groups.

On this theory, they would have beenwritten at the same time, with 2 Thessa-lonians going to another Christian groupthan the main Thessalonian congrega-tion—to a Jewish minority at Thessalonica(Harnack), or to the church of Berea(Goguel), or to Philippi (E. Schweizer).18

There is no canonical reason why 2Thessalonians could not have been theearlier epistle. Writings were arranged inthe canon according to length and notaccording to chronological considerations.There are, however, good reasons for see-ing 2 Thessalonians as coming after 1 Thes-salonians. Second Thessalonians 2:15refers to a letter Paul had previously writ-ten the Thessalonians. The most naturalassumption is that the letter was 1 Thessa-lonians. It is also easier to account for theausterity, the tone, and the differenteschatological emphasis of 2 Thessalon-ians on the assumption it was subsequentto 1 Thessalonians. Paul’s treatment of theParousia in 1 Thessalonians led some inthe church to conclude that the Parousiahad already come. Along with the escha-tological excitement the tendencyincreased for some to be indolent and gen-erally disruptive. The fervor of the apoca-lyptic group may have heightened theuneasiness of outsiders about the Chris-tians and led to stronger persecution.Learning of these new developments,Paul, now located in Corinth, wrote 2Thessalonians. He assured the sufferingThessalonians by reminding them thatGod would vindicate them over their per-secutors (1:5-10). He introduced an apoca-lyptic program about the events of the endtime that had not yet occurred in an effortto counter those who argued that it hadalready arrived (2:1-12).19 Realizing theseverity of the problems created by theindolent and disruptive members, he

31

urged the others to shun them if theyfailed to contribute their fair share (3:6-15). It was probably a matter of months,perhaps only weeks after the writing ofthe first letter, sometime around the endof A.D. 50 or beginning of A.D. 51. We donot know what effect the letter had on theThessalonians. We do know that thechurch continued to be supportive ofPaul’s mission. Two Thessalonians accom-panied Paul to Jerusalem with his latercollection for the saints, Secundus andAristarchus (Acts 20:4). Aristarchus waswith Paul when the apostle departed onhis voyage to Rome to appear beforeCaesar (Acts 27:2).

The Genre of theThessalonian Epistles

Recent literary analyses have looked atthe Thessalonian epistles from two differ-ent perspectives with much the sameresults. Some have analyzed them by thecanons of ancient rhetoric. There is a gen-eral consensus that 1 Thessalonians fits theepideictic category of rhetoric with itsemphasis on example and praise. Wana-maker outlines the epistle according to thedivisions of formal rhetoric, just as Betzdid for Galatians. In 2 Thessalonians Paulmade less of an attempt to hold himselfup as an example. He devoted less spaceto praise of the Thessalonians, and he wasfar more directive in seeking to changetheir behavior. Accordingly, Wanamakerplaces 2 Thessalonians in the category ofdeliberative rhetoric and outlines itaccordingly.20

Others have categorized 1 Thessalon-ians according to its epistolary genre.Meeks and Malherbe describe it as aparaenetic letter, a basically hortatory let-ter which sought to aid the Thessaloniansin their process of community building.21

Paul sought to teach them by his own per-sonal example. He used the language offriendship throughout the letter, and evenhis exhortations to follow a Christianlifestyle were marked by a strong note ofencouragement and consolation. Somehave noted the setting of the epistle in thecommunity’s experience of being perse-cuted. They would categorize the letter asone of consolation, with its strong empha-sis on following Paul’s example in remain-ing steadfast through persecution.22

It is probably wise to avoid rigid cat-egorization of Paul’s epistles. Examinationof his letters through the lenses of ancientrhetorical devices and epistolary conven-tions has helped us focus on them in a newlight. Paul adapted his epistles to fit thespecific occasions he was addressing. Thiswas certainly true of both Thessalonianepistles. Both were aimed at formation ofthe new Christians, consoling and encour-aging them. Though the tone of the twois quite different, ultimately both wereoccupied with primarily pastoral concerns.

1 Thessalonians

Study Outline of 1 Thessalonians

I. Opening of the Letter 1:1-10

A. Salutation 1:1B. Thanksgiving 1:2-10

II. Paul’s Relationship with the

Thessalonians 2:1-3:13

A. Paul’s Initial Ministry inThessalonica 2:1-161. His pastoral care 2:1-122. His thanksgiving for their

steadfastness in persecution2:13-16

B. Paul’s Continuing Concern for theThessalonians 2:17-3:131. His longing to see them 2:17-202. His joy over Timothy’s good

report about them 3:1-10

32

3. His prayer for them 3:11-13III. Paul’s Pastoral Advice for the

Thessalonians 4:1-5:22

A. Purity, Both Sexual and Social 4:1-8B. Living the Quiet Life in Mutual

Love 4:9-12C. Taking Comfort in the Coming of

the Lord 4:13-5:111. Assured about the dead in

Christ 4:13-182. Ready for the Lord’s return

5:1-11D. Living in Peace with One Another

5:12-15E. Heeding General Admonitions

5:16-22IV. Conclusion of the Letter 5:23-28

A. Prayer for Blamelessness atChrist’s Coming 5:23-24

B. Exchange of Greetings, Readingthe Letter 5:25-27

C. Grace Benediction 5:28

Highlights of 1 ThessaloniansOpening of the Letter (1:1-10)

In both Thessalonian letters Paul listedSilas and Timothy as cosenders. Thiswas appropriate, since both had workedwith Paul when the church was first estab-lished. Timothy had continued to bePaul’s personal representative with thechurch. Paul usually began his letters withthe “grace and peace” benediction. In 1Thessalonians “peace” also occurs at theend of the letter (5:23), thus bracketingPaul’s concern throughout the letter forthe peace and consolation of the perse-cuted Christian community.23

As is often the case, Paul’s openingthanksgiving introduces themes that areprominent in the body of the letter. Thetriad of faith, love, and hope (v. 3) occursagain toward the letter’s end (5:8), form-ing a bracket for the entire epistle, just like

“peace.” Paul lists “hope” last in bothplaces, probably for emphasis, since theThessalonian assurance in the Christianhope was one of the primary concernsof the letter. In verse 5 Paul speaks ofhow the Thessalonians had “imitated”him. Serving as a model for the youngChristians is an emphasis Paul continues,especially in 2:1-12. The Thessalonians, ofcourse, imitated Paul in their suffering forChrist (vv. 4-6), and Paul will return to thattheme later in the epistle (2:14-16, 3:3-4).24

Likewise, he has occasion to mentionagain the Thessalonian participation in theChristian mission in their own provinceand throughout the world (vv. 7-8, cf.4:10). Finally, in verse 10, as Paul summa-rizes his initial preaching to them, he con-cludes with a reference to Christ’s returnand the coming judgment, which becomesthe central emphasis of the entire letter(4:13-5:11).

Paul’s Initial Ministry inThessalonica (2:1-16)

Paul’s reference to the style of hisministering among the Thessalonians in2:1-12 has often been seen as the apostle’sreply to his critics. For example, Schmi-thals saw Paul responding in these versesto charges of his Gnostic opponents thathe was weak and lacking in personal pres-ence. It is more likely that Paul was hold-ing himself up as an example, urging thatthe Thessalonians follow him in their ownselflessness and devotion to others. Paul’suse of family terms throughout this pas-sage was also a means of solidifying hisfriendship with them. The passage is not aresponse to opponents but a good exampleof epideictic rhetoric.25 Paul was also per-haps distancing himself from the type ofpopular philosopher of the day whopreyed on the unsuspecting and gullible.26

33

In 2:9 Paul refers to his example of hon-est work. He toiled “night and day” so asnot to burden anyone. His tentmakingwould have been considered demeaningto the upper classes in his day. As aRoman citizen Paul probably shared moreof an upper than lower class perspectivehimself. He probably saw his work asdemeaning (cf. 2 Cor 11:7). But he alsoshared the philosopher’s ideal that it wasbetter to earn one’s keep in degradingwork than to be dependent on anyone.27

He must keep himself free to preach thegospel with no strings attached (1 Cor9:15-18). The fact that Paul resorted to self-support at Thessalonica indicates that hespent some time there. It is also quitepossible that his workshop was a placeof witness for him. Philosophers likeSocrates were known to have carried ondiscussions in the context of the work-shop. Paul may well have engaged in ac-tive witness as he worked at his tents.28

Paul’s Continued Concern for theThessalonians (2:17-3:13)

With the exception of Romans, 1 Thes-salonians has the longest section devotedto Paul’s personal affairs of all hisepistles.29 In the lengthy treatment of hispersonal circumstances in Romans 15 Paulsought to introduce himself to the church.In 1 Thessalonians he was concerned withstrengthening the Thessalonian commit-ment to Christ and with solidifying hisown relationship with them. He sentTimothy as his own personal envoy, anextension of himself.30 He wanted toreturn to Thessalonica, but “Satan” hadhindered him (2:18). The best commentaryon this whole section is the account ofPaul’s forced departure from Thessalonicain Acts 17:5-9. Paul left Thessalonicaabruptly because of the threat of the mob

and whatever terms the politarchs hadlaid down in connection with the bondpaid by Jason. The latter may well havebeen the “Satanic hindrance” to whichPaul was alluding; it may be that he could

not himself return to Thessalonica. Paulknew that the Christians left behind inThessalonica would continue to experi-ence local hostility. He was concerned forboth their safety and their stability inthe faith. He longed to hear from them.Unable to go himself, he sent Timothy asan extension of himself. Timothy returnedto Paul with the best possible news: theThessalonians continued firm in theircommitment to Christ and their devotionto Paul.

Paul’s Pastoral Advice: Purity (4:1-8)The whole of 1 Thessalonians 4:1-5:22

is “paraenetic,” that is, advice about theliving of the Christian life. Paraenesis wasa traditional form of Greek moral teach-ing and was often quite general in nature.In 1 Thessalonians Paul’s paraenesis ismostly quite specific, closely related toactual circumstances in the life of theThessalonian church. The sources forPaul’s information were certainly Timo-thy and possibly a letter from the Thessa-lonians. The first two verses of chapterfour introduce the whole paraenetic sec-tion. Note the encouraging pastoral man-ner with which Paul broaches the subject.He reminds them of how he instructedthem in Christian living when with themand he commended them for their havingheeded his teachings (4:1-2).

The first subject Paul addresses wassexual purity (4:3-8). Pagan and Biblicalmorality were miles apart in the area ofsexuality, and Paul frequently had to dealwith matters of sexual behavior whenaddressing Gentile converts. There are

34

several obscurities in the Greek of thispassage, particularly the word translatedin verse 4 as “body” by the NIV. As theNIV footnote indicates, the word can alsobe translated “wife.” The Greek wordbehind these translations literally means“a vessel.” If translated “wife,” it wouldtie in with the reference to taking advan-tage of one’s brother in verse 6. The mean-ing would be that one is to honor his ownmarriage and not covet the wife of hisbrother. The more likely meaning of “ves-sel,” however, is “body,” and in particu-lar the male sex organ. Some of the pagancults of Thessalonica made extensive useof the phallus in their symbolism. Thiswas true of the Cabirus cult and of theworship of Dionysus to whom a templewas dedicated in Thessalonica.31 Paulmay have deliberately alluded specificallyto the male member to remind the Thessa-lonians that for Christians its proper placewas not in the excesses of the pagan cultsbut only within the sanctity of a solidChristian marital commitment.

Paul’s Pastoral Advice: Living theQuiet Life (4:9-12)

In verse 9 Paul used the phrase “nowabout” (Greek, peri de), which may indi-cate that he was addressing an issue raisedby the Thessalonians, perhaps through aletter or through Timothy. The questionconcerned “brotherly love” and mayhave specifically applied to the area offinancial assistance. Paul spoke of howthey already loved their fellow Christiansthroughout Macedonia (v. 10). This prob-ably referred to monetary support. Paulurged them to continue in this worthyendeavor, but in verses 11-12 he“adjusted” his advice somewhat. Chris-tian benevolence did not mean the sup-port of those who were unwilling to work

with their own hands. No able person wasto be dependent on others.

A majority of the Thessalonians mayhave come from the impoverished work-ing classes. (In 2 Corinthians 8:2, Paulspoke of the “extreme poverty” of theMacedonians.) During the imperialperiod, Rome often provided a grain doleto maintain peace among the masses, andsome of the Thessalonians may have oncebenefited from the Roman welfare system.Very possibly the Thessalonian Christianslived in a close-knit community. They mayhave regularly shared a common table.The community may have dependedespecially on the largesse of wealthiermembers like Jason. But, such benefactorswere unable to support the entire commu-nity. They may have been the ones whoraised the question with Paul. Theywanted to know the limits of this “broth-erly love.” Paul’s answer is that there isno limit to Christian compassion but thereis also no place for Christian parasites.Everyone was to bear their own share. Hisurging them to lead the “quiet life” andto “win the respect of outsiders” mayindicate that some of those who were not

doing their fair share had become sociallydisruptive in their indolence. Their disor-derliness may have raised concern in thenon-Christian community about whetherthis new group might not be a threat tothe peace and security of the city.

Paul’s Pastoral Encouragement:The Dead in Christ (4:13-18)

At 4:13 Paul begins a long treatment ofthe return of the Lord, which extends to5:11. Paul dealt with two separate aspectsof the Parousia—the place of dead Chris-tians in it (4:13-18), and its timing (5:1-11).Paul seems again to be responding to aquestion raised by the Thessalonians:

35

“now concerning (peri de) those who fallasleep.” Apparently there was concernthat those who had died would in someregard miss out on the Parousia of Jesus.It is not clear what prompted this concern.Scholars differ widely on the question.Some have suggested that a group ofGnostics or “charismatics” at Thessalonicawere teaching a thoroughly realizedeschatology which left no place for a res-urrection. This perturbed the Thessalon-ians who had heard Paul speak of theresurrection of the dead. Paul thus wrotethese words to reassure them of the real-ity of resurrection.32 The problem with thisview is that Paul did not polemicizeagainst a realized eschatology in 1 Thessa-lonians. He addressed not an erroneouseschatology but a deficient eschatology.The easiest explanation for the Thessalon-ian misunderstanding is that Paul had notdealt with the place of dead Christianswhen he first preached in Thessalonica.Some have argued that Paul was so caughtup in his own expectation of the Lord’simminent return that he had not even con-sidered the possibility that some Chris-tians might die before the Parousia.33 It ismore likely that Paul had not dealt at anylength with the issue. He had stressed theLord’s return; he did expect it soon. Butsome Christians had died after Paul’sdeparture, and it raised a real concernwith the Thessalonians about the place ofthe dead in the events of the end time.They may not have questioned the realityof an eventual resurrection. They maysimply have worried that those who diedmight be left out of the immediate eventssurrounding Christ’s return. Paul gave nodetails as to what those events mightinvolve. His concern in 1 Thessalonians wasnot to provide instruction in eschatology butcomfort for bereaving Christians.

Paul begins by assuring the Thessa-lonians of the reality of the resurrection(vv. 13-14). Christians are not hopeless likepagans. The resurrection of Christ is theprecursor of the resurrection of those whoare in Christ. Paul described the dead asthose who “fall asleep.” This is a euphe-mism for death and not Paul’s discussionof the condition of believers betweendeath and resurrection.34 Paul does notdiscuss that issue here. In verse 16 hedescribed the dead simply as “the deadin Christ.” What did Paul mean when hestated that God would “bring with Jesusthose who have fallen asleep in him” (v.14)? Probably he meant the same thing asin 2 Corinthians 4:14, where he spoke ofGod raising the dead with Christ and pre-senting them in his presence.35

Paul expresses his main concern inverse 15. He assures the Thessaloniansthat the living will have no precedenceover the dead at the coming of the Lord.He describes this as a word from the Lord.Exactly what he had in mind is uncertain.There is no saying in the Gospels to thiseffect. Some have argued that Paul isreferring to a revelation which he hadpersonally received from the risen Lord.It is more likely he was referring to anactual teaching of Jesus, either one that islost, or a tradition like John 11:25-26.36

In verses 16-17 Paul summarizes theevents that would occur at the Parousia.Christ would descend from heaven,accompanied by a “loud command,” “thevoice of the archangel,” and “the trumpetcall of God.” In apocalyptic literature adivine command is often associated withtheophanies and with the coming day ofthe Lord. The voice of an archangel like-wise is connected to theophanies.37 Pauldoes not specify the identity of the arch-angel. Michael has been suggested, the

36

only archangel denoted by name as anarchangel in the New Testament (Jude 9).Trumpets are a major item in apocalypticliterature. One need only recall the seventrumpets of Revelation 8-11. At the blastof the seventh trumpet, God sits down onhis throne for his eternal reign (Rev 11:15).In 1 Corinthians 15:52 Paul spoke of theblowing of this “last trumpet” as preced-ing the resurrection. Here also the deadare depicted as rising at the trumpet’ssound. They rise “first.” Then only do theliving rise. Note that Paul included him-self among the living—“we who are stillalive” (v. 17). He expected the Parousia tooccur during his own lifetime. Apparently,he saw the dead as being transformedwhen they rise from the grave (cf. 1 Cor15:51-52). One would assume that the liv-ing are likewise transformed as they risein the clouds to meet the Lord.38 An inter-esting detail is that the clouds are con-nected with the ascent of believers intoheaven rather than with the Lord’s descent.

The significant matter is that believers willmeet the Lord in the air “and so will bewith the Lord forever.” Interpreters differas to whether the believers should be seenas “meeting” the Lord in the air and thenescorting him to earth, or whether theyare to be seen as joined by the Lord in theirown ascent into heaven.39 Paul gives nodetails. He was not interested in detailingthe apocalyptic drama but only in com-forting the Thessalonians. Hence, his laststatement about the Parousia was that all,both the living and the resurrected, willmeet the Lord at his coming and would“be with him forever.” Paul emphasizesthe assurance of the believer’s eternalexistence in the presence of the Lord. Heurges the Thessalonians to comfort oneanother with the same assurance (4:18).

Paul’s Pastoral Advice: Ready forthe Lord’s Coming (5:1-11)

If 4:13-18 emphasizes the aspect ofcomfort for the believer in the Lord’sreturn, 5:1-11 focuses on the aspect ofjudgment. For Paul Christ’s Parousia andthe day of the Lord were one and the sameevent, and a major aspect of the day ofthe Lord is the divine judgment of man-kind.40 Much like the Old Testamentprophets, Paul warns that for those whowere unprepared the day of the Lordwould be darkness and not light. Evi-dently the Thessalonians had inquiredabout the time of the Parousia. Paul doesnot provide any time table for them butsimply repeats what he evidently hadalready taught them: the Lord’s returnwould be sudden and unexpected, like athief breaking into a house during themiddle of the night. The image is a famil-iar one. Jesus used it in his “Parousiaparables” to warn of the sudden return ofthe Master (Luke 12:39, Matt 24:43). Theimage became a standard description inearly Christianity for the unexpectednesswith which the Parousia would take placeand the need to stay alert (cf. 2 Pet 3:10).

Paul has unbelievers in mind when hewarns against a false sense of security.Destruction would come suddenly likelabor pains in childbirth. The language isthat of the Old Testament prophets.Jeremiah admonished Israel about its falsesense of security (Jer 6:14), warning themof the destruction facing them as Godmeted out his judgment. It would be sud-den and painful like a woman in child-birth (Jer 6:24, cf. Isa 13:8). Jesus used thesame image to depict the “Messianicwoes” of the final times (Mark 13:8, Matt24:8), but in Thessalonians the emphasisis on the suddenness and unexpectednessof the coming judgment. It is much like

37

the parables of Jesus that warn of the needto be prepared for the master’s return(Luke 12:42-46) and to be watchful whilethe bridegroom delays (Matt 25:1-13). Onewonders if Paul’s warning might havehad a specific group in mind (e.g., theThessalonians depended on Rome forpeace and security). In the light of thecoming judgment it was a false security, aclaim for peace which ultimately was nopeace at all.41

In verses 4-8 Paul assured the Thessa-lonians that they need not fear the com-ing of the Lord, because they are childrenof the light and not of the darkness. Theimage of the thief at night probably ledhim to this vivid contrast between thosewho belonged to the darkness and thosewho walked in the light. It was a commonand widespread religious metaphor. Forexample, the Essenes of Qumran claimedto be the “sons of light,” describing theirenemies as “the sons of darkness.” Paulemployed a paraenetic complex which heused in other places as well. He spoke ofbelonging to the light (v. 5), staying alertand awake (v. 6), avoiding drunkennessand revelry (v. 7), and putting on thearmor that befits the children of light (v.8). Exactly this same group of motifsoccurs in Romans 13:11-14. The same com-plex is found in Ephesians, where it is fullydeveloped: the children of the light con-trasted with children of darkness (Eph 5:8-13), an appeal to wake from sleep to thelight of Christ (Eph 5:14), the need to avoiddrunkenness (Eph 5:18), and a call to puton the whole armor of God (Eph 6:10-20).The image of the divine armor is found inIsaiah 59:17 and in a more developed formin the Wisdom of Solomon 5:17-20. Pauldeveloped it most fully in Ephesians. InThessalonians he used the armor imageryto emphasize the three essential Christian

virtues of faith, love, and hope. The triadalso appears—in the same order—in 1:3.In 3:6 Paul spoke of how Timothy hadbrought him a report on the faith and loveof the Thessalonian Christians. Hope wasmissing. Perhaps it was not omitted byaccident. The Thessalonians were unsureabout some aspects of the Christian hope.Now, having dealt with the Christian hopeextensively in the epistle, Paul may havetrusted that their armor was completewith the full Christian triad.

Verses 9-11 are Paul’s final words ofencouragement with regard to the Lord’scoming. The Thessalonians were chosenfor salvation (cf. 1:4); they need not fearthe coming judgment (v. 9). Verses 10 and11 round off Paul’s discussion of theParousia. Verse 10 harks back to the refer-ence to those who are “asleep” in the Lord(4:13) and Paul’s assurance that whetherdead or alive at the Lord’s return, allChristians would join him and be withhim forever. Verse 11 parallels 4:18: Paul’spurpose had been the same in both sec-tions of his discussion about the Lord’sreturn—to encourage the Thessaloniansabout the Christian hope. The form mayhave been that of traditional ethical teach-ing. The purpose was to comfort andstrengthen the Thessalonians. It was athoroughly pastoral concern.

Living in Peace with One Another,General Admonitions, EpistolaryConclusion (5:12-28)

The whole section 5:11-15 may relate tothe problem of the “idle” addressed inverse 14. The word translated “idle” liter-ally means “disorderly” and could referto some in the church who, though depen-dent on the church, were doing their “ownthing,” neither following the leadershipof the church nor bearing their own share

38

in providing for the church’s common life.The problem seems to have exacerbatedby the time Paul wrote 2 Thessalonians,and Paul addressed it in more severeterms there (2 Thess 3:6-15).

Verses 16-22 are the sort of generalparaenesis one often finds at the end ofPaul’s letters. The assorted sayings wereprobably not directed to any specific prob-lems in the church. First Thessalonians hastwo benedictions, Paul’s customary con-cluding “grace benediction” of verse 28and the “peace benediction” of verse 23.Paul’s praying that the Thessalonianswould experience God’s peace may linkup with 5:3. The world has its many falsepromises of peace; only God brings truepeace. Only God can “sanctify.” To besanctified means to be set apart. God hadset the Thessalonians apart in Christ; hechose them (1:4). And, he would remaintrue to his calling them; he would keepthem as his own, blameless until the com-ing of Christ. Paul thus ends with a finalassurance that they will share in Christ’sParousia.

2 Thessalonians

Study Outline of 2 Thessalonians

I. Introduction 1:1-12

A. Salutation 1:1-2B. Thanksgiving and Prayer 1:3-12

1. Thanksgiving for Thessaloniansteadfastness 1:3-4

2. God’s judgment on theirpersecutors 1:5-10

3. Prayer that God will beglorified in the community1:11-12

II. Appeal Not to Be Shaken by False

Reports 2:1-3:5

A. False Reports That the Day of theLord Has Come 2:1-2

B. End-Time Events Which Have Not

Come 2:3-12C. Thanksgiving for their Election

and Prayer to Stand Firm 2:13-17D. Prayer for Mutual Empowerment

3:1-5III. Appeal to Shun the Disorderly 3:6-15

A. Shun the disorderly 3:6, 3:14-15B. Follow Paul’s Example 3:7-9C. Earn One’s Own Keep 3:10-13

IV. Conclusion to the Epistle 3:16-18

A. Prayer for God’s Peace 3:16B. Paul’s Autograph 3:17C. Grace Benefiction 3:18

Highlights of 2 ThessaloniansIntroduction (1:1-12)

Paul’s second letter to Thessalonicabegins very much like the first. The firstverse of the two epistles is identicalexcept for the addition of the word “our”to “Father” in 2 Thessalonians. In thethanksgiving of 2 Thessalonians Paulagain commends the Thessalonians fortheir faith and love for referred to theirexperiencing persecution. The uniqueelement in the thanksgiving of 2 Thessa-lonians is Paul’s detailed treatment ofGod’s judgment. The emphasis is onGod’s vindicating the Thessalonians bypunishing their persecutors. Both thelength and intensity with which Pauldepicts the divine judgment wouldindicate that the persecution of theThessalonians had intensified. The clos-est corresponding passage in 1 Thessalon-ians is 2:13-16, where Paul spoke of God’swrath upon the Jews who had persecutedChristians. Paul’s prayer for the churchwas a regular feature in many of hisepistles, and he included one at 1:11-12.There is no corresponding prayer in 1Thessalonians. The second epistle is cer-tainly no “slavish imitation” of the first,as some have claimed who question Paul’s

39

being its author.

Appeal Not to be Shaken by FalseReports (2:1-3:5)

Paul’s words about the Parousia in hisfirst letter seem to have been distorted bysome. They were proclaiming that “theday of the Lord has already come” (2:2).Paul urges the Thessalonians not to be un-settled by such a teaching, even if itsproclaimers claimed a basis in prophecyor in a letter supposed to have come fromPaul himself. It is not clear who this groupwas or what was the basis of their teach-ing. They may have possibly been somemillenarians who were claiming that theend of the world was at the door. Theymay have been “super-spiritualists” whomaintained that they were already per-fected in the Spirit, had already “arrived,”and had nothing further to await in thefuture. Whatever their teaching, they seemto have claimed Paul’s backing for theirviews. The most likely explanation forPaul’s reference to a letter purported tohave come from him (v. 2) is that they wereclaiming that Paul’s treatment of theParousia in 1 Thessalonians supportedtheir viewpoint. Paul replies that he saidno such thing, either by word of mouthor by letter. He then proceeds to set forththe proof that the day of the Lord hadindeed not yet arrived.

Paul counters the false eschatology bypresenting a mini-apocalypse of eventswhich would precede the Lord’s return.There would be a period of great “rebel-lion,” and this would accompany the com-ing of the “man of lawlessness” (v. 3). Paulsays that this lawless one was now beingheld back by a “restraining power” (vv.6-7), but eventually the restraint would beremoved, giving him full room to do hislawless work (v. 8). The “lawless one” will

set himself up in God’s temple and claimto be God himself (v. 4). He will parade asGod, working all sorts of miraculousdeeds but would actually be the incarna-tion of Satan himself (v. 9). He will leadmany astray who had not followed thetruth, and God would confirm them intheir mass delusion. They would suffercondemnation for their wickedness (vv.10-12). The lawless one will not prevail.He will be utterly destroyed by Christ athis coming (v. 8).

Paul’s purpose in employing thisapocalyptic language is clear. He wantedto assure the Thessalonians in the face ofan unsettling eschatological teaching. Hereminds them (v. 5) that certain eventswill take place before the return ofChrist. Since these had obviously not yetoccurred, the claim that the day of theLord had arrived was patently false. Inparticular, Paul employs the figure of theAnti-Christ, a feature found both in Jew-ish apocalyptic thought and elsewhere inthe New Testament. Paul never used theterm “Anti-Christ.” In fact, the term isfound in the New Testament only in theJohannine epistles (1 John 2:18, 2:22, 4:3; 2John 7). There it refers to false teacherswho were denying the incarnation ofChrist. The idea of the Anti-Christ is alsofound in Revelation in the figure of thearrogant beast that sets itself up as God,performing many apparent miracles andleading the masses astray (Rev 11:7, chap-ters 13 and 17). The basic concept is thatthe Anti-Christ is the antithesis of Christ,the incarnation of Satan. He is a figure ofthe last days who will delude the masses,pretending to be God, leading them in amass rebellion against all religion andauthority.

The figure of the Anti-Christ has rootsin the Old Testament—in the king of

40

Babylon, who aspired to be above God (Isa14:12-14), in the arrogance of the princeof Tyre who called himself God (Ezek28:2). It seems to have fully developedduring the time of Antiochus Epiphanes,who in 167 B.C. sought to stamp out theworship of God and install the cult of Zeusin the Jerusalem temple (Dan 11:31, 36-37;1 Macc 1:54; 2 Macc 6:2). Antiochus’sattempt to replace the worship of Godwith his own cult in the Holy Place ofGod’s temple came to be designated as the“desolating sacrilege” or “abomination ofdesolation.” Jesus used this image in histeaching on the events of the end time(Mark 13:14). In the same discourse hewarned of false Messiahs who wouldemploy signs and wonders to lead peopleastray (Mark 13:22). Scarcely a decadebefore Paul wrote 2 Thessalonians, theAnti-Christ concept had experienced afresh stimulus in the attempt of theemperor Caligula in A.D. 40 to set up hisimage in the Holy of Holies in Jerusalem,an attempt thwarted only by his timelyassassination (Josephus, War, ii, 184-203;Ant., xviii, 261-309).42 Paul had taught theThessalonians previously about this com-ing incarnation of evil and the massrebellion he would organize (v. 5). Obvi-ously, these events had not yet occurred,and Christ would not return until they had

taken place; the day of the Lord had not

yet arrived.Paul also reminds the Thessalonians

that they knew what was holding the manof lawlessness back (vv. 6-7). The Thessa-lonians may have known what Paulmeant by this “restraining power” (v. 6)or “restraining person” (v. 7). Unfortu-nately, we do not. Obviously Paul wasspeaking of something or someone thatwas holding the “lawless one” back, keep-ing him in check and thus also delaying

the events of the final times. The earlychurch fathers suggested that the“restraining power” was the Roman pres-ence, particularly the law and order thatit maintained. This understanding wasvery much in keeping with Paul’s teach-ing about the purpose of government inRomans 13:1-5. Paul may have kept thereference to Rome veiled so as not to raisethe suspicions of the authorities by hisreference to its eventually being “takenout of the way” (v. 7). A less common view,also traceable to the church fathers, sug-gests that Paul’s mission was the restrain-ing power. God would hold back theevents of the end until the full number ofthe nations had been reached with thegospel.43 This is an attractive possibility.Its main problem is that Paul expected tobe alive at the Parousia (1 Thess 4:17); hesurely did not expect to be “taken out ofthe way” before Christ returned. Somehave suggested that the restraining powermight be Satan,44 or God himself. Paulwould probably have agreed with thelatter. What or whoever the restrainermight be, God himself ultimately is incontrol of all history.

Second Thessalonians has no sectioncorresponding to 1 Thessalonians 2:17-3:10, where Paul detailed his personal re-lationship with the church. It does,however, have a second thanksgiving(2:13-15), corresponding to 1 Thessalon-ians 2:13. Paul urged the Thessaloniansto stand firm, holding to the teachingswhich he had brought them by “word ofmouth” (when with them) and “by letter”(1 Thessalonians). The teaching he wasmost concerned with was that about theLord’s return. If the Thessalonians held toPaul’s teaching on that subject, theywould realize that the Parousia could notyet have come. Just as in the first epistle,

41

Paul concludes this initial portion of thebody of the letter with a benediction (2:16-17, cf. 1 Thess 3:11-13). It is perhaps notby accident that Paul did not mentionthe Lord’s return in the benediction of2 Thessalonians as he had in the firstepistle (1 Thess 3:13). There was enougheschatological fervor in the church alreadywithout adding fuel to the fire.

Appeal to Shun the Disorderly(3:6-15)

In addition to the confusion over theLord’s return, the problem of disorderli-ness seems to have escalated at Thessa-lonica. In all probability the two wererelated. The disorderly group were likelythe same as those who were claiming thatthe day of the Lord had arrived. Pauldescribes them with a word that literallymeans “disorderly” (Greek, ataktos; 3:6,3:7, 3:11, cf. 1 Thess 5:14). The NIV trans-lates the word as “idle,” and idleness wassurely part of their problem. Paul accusesthem of not doing their share in commu-nity support (vv. 7-10), of not abiding byhis teachings (v. 6), and of being general“busybodies” (v. 11). Throughout Chris-tian history, groups that emphasize theimminent return of the Lord have beenknown to abandon their livelihood andcease normal human activity. This couldhave happened in Thessalonica. Justexactly what their full agenda was we donot know. We do know that they weregenerally disruptive to community life.They had become a burden to the largerfellowship. They presented a bad imageof the Christian community to outsiders(1 Thess 4:11-12). They also probably werethe eschatological enthusiasts whosespeculations were unsetting the church.

It has been recently suggested that thedisrupters came largely from the unem-

ployed urban poor, who were dependenton the wealthier members of the congre-gation to provide for them.45 This maywell have been the pattern of householdchurches like that of Lydia and perhapsJason, where the heads of the householdsserved as patrons or benefactors for thechurch that met in their homes. RobertJewett has suggested another possibleorganization for the congregational life ofthe working class. He postulates that theymay have met in the urban insulae, theapartment complexes of the inner citywhere shops were located on the streetlevel with crowded living spaces on theupper floors. He sees them as perhapsrenting their own meeting space and gath-ering together daily to partake of theirmeals. This makes sense of Paul’s instruc-tions that those who did not work shouldnot be permitted to eat (v. 10). Such a ruleimplies that the church had communitycontrol over such matters. It also impliesthat it was a shared enterprise, with alldoing their part in support of the commu-nity life.46 Paul perhaps worked in a shopbelow their meeting place. They wouldall have been familiar with his personalexample of doing his part in the materialsupport of himself and the community(vv. 7-9).

The problem obviously reached seriousproportions as is indicated by Paul’s bid-ding the rest of the congregation to shunthe disorderly members (vv. 6, 14). In 2John 10, the Elder advised the membersof his churches to avoid those who deniedthe incarnation. In Thessalonica the prob-lems seem to have been more social thantheological, but probably involved bothdimensions. In any event, Paul’s advicenot to associate with them was primarilyintended to shake them back to theirsenses and return them to the truth (vv.

42

14-15).Like 1 Thessalonians, the second epistle

has two concluding benedictions, a gracebenediction (v. 18) and a “peace” benedic-tion (v.16). Also like 1 Thessalonians, Paulconcluded the letter with his own per-sonal autograph. In 1 Thessalonians heurged the congregation to pray for him,exchange a “holy kiss,” and see thateveryone heard the letter (5:25-27). In 2Thessalonians Paul insisted that he waswriting the final greeting in his “ownhand,” probably to authenticate its con-tents against those who were claiming hehad said or written things which he hadnot (2:2).

ENDNOTES1 Reprinted with slight adaptation from

chapter ten of John Polhill, Paul and His

Letters (Nashville: Broadman andHolman Publishers, 1999). All rights re-served. Used by permission.

2 R. Riesner, Paul’s Early Period: Chronol-

ogy, Mission Strategy, Theology, trans.Doug Stott (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans,1998) 337-341.

3 J. Murphy-O’Connor, Paul, a Critical Life

(Oxford: Clarendon, 1996) 114-116.4 G. H. R. Horsley, “The Politarchs,” in The

Book of Acts in its First Century Setting,

Vol. 2: Graeco-Roman Setting (Grand Rap-ids: Eerdmans, 1994) 419-431.

5 A. J. Malherbe, Paul and the Thessalonians.

The Philosophic Tradition of Pastoral Care

(Philadelphia: Fortress, 1987) 5-33.6 God is at the center of Paul’s teaching in1 Thessalonians. See R. F. Collins, “TheTheology of Paul’s First Letter to theThessalonians,” Louvain Studies 6 (1977)315-337.

7 W. Meeks, The First Urban Christians: The

Social World of the Apostle Paul (New Ha-ven: Yale University Press, 1983) 173-174.

8 Malherbe, Paul and the Thessalonians, 34-60.

9 R. Jewett, The Thessalonian Correspon-

dence: Pauline Rhetoric and Millenarian

Piety (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1986).10K. P. Donfried, “The Cults of Thessa-

lonica and the Thessalonian Correspon-dence,” New Testament Studies 31 (1985)336-356.

11Murphy-O’Connor, 110-111.12B. Pearson, “1 Thessalonians 2:13-16: A

Deutero-Pauline Interpolation,” Harvard

Theological Review 64 (1971) 79-94. For theargument that the grammatical structureof 1 Thessalonians 2:13-16 does not ac-cord with the remainder of the epistle,see D. Schmidt, “1 Thess. 2:13-16: Lin-guistic Evidence for an Interpolation,”Journal of Biblical Literature 102 (1983) 269-279.

13K. P. Donfried, “Paul and Judaism: 1Thessalonians 2:13-16 as a Test Case,”Interpretation 38 (1984) 242-253. For fur-ther arguments against an interpolationsee J. W. Simpson, “The Problems Posedby 1 Thessalonians 2:15-16 and a Solu-tion,” Horizons in Biblical Theology 12(1990) 42-72.

14W. Schmithals, Paul and the Gnostics,

trans. J. E. Steely (Nashville: Abingdon,1972) 123-218.

15J. C. Beker, Heirs of Paul: Paul’s Legacy in

the New Testament and in the Church To-

day (Minneapolis: Fortress, 1991) 72-74.See also J. A. Bailey, “Who Wrote IIThessalonians?” New Testament Studies

25 (1979) 131-145.16For a comprehensive discussion of

the authorship debate and a thoroughdefense of Pauline authorship, see C. A.Wanamaker, The Epistles to the

Thessalonians. A Commentary on the Greek

Text (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1990) 17-28.

43

17R. W. Thurston, “The RelationshipBetween the Thessalonian Epistles,”Expository Times 85 (1973) 52-56.

18Bailey, 140-141.19Jewett argues that the millenarian

enthusiasts were responsible for the“realized eschatology” at Thessa-lonica, “A Matrix of Grace: TheTheology of 2 Thessalonians as aPauline Letter,” in Pauline Theology,

Vol. I: Thessalonians, Philippians,

Galatians, Philemon (Minneapolis:Fortress, 1994) 63-70. See also in thesame volume the article by E.Krentz, who maintains the pseud-onymity of 2 Thessalonians, argu-ing that its main theme is apoca-lyptic judgment, written to assureChristians who were experiencingsevere persecution (“Through aLens: Theology and Fidelity in 2Thessalonians,” 52-62).

20Wanamaker, 49-51. See also S.Walton, “What Has Aristotle to Dowith Paul? Rhetorical Criticism and1 Thessalonians,” Tyndale Bulletin 46(1995) 229-250.

21W. Meeks, The Moral World of the

First Christians (Library of EarlyChristianity; Philadelphia: West-minster, 1986) 125-130; A. J. Mal-herbe, “Exhortation in 1 Thessa-lonians,” Novum Testamentum 25(1983) 238-256.

22J. Chapa, “Is First Thessalonians aLetter of Consolation?” New Testa-

ment Studies 40 (1994) 150-160.23J. M. Bassler, “Peace in All Ways:

Theology in the Thessalonian Let-ters,” in Pauline Theology, Vol. I, 71-85.

24J. L. Sumney, “Paul’s ‘Weakness’: AnIntegral Part of His Conception ofApostleship,” Journal for the Study of

the New Testament 52 (1993) 71-91.25G. Lyons, Pauline Autobiography:

Toward a New Understanding (SBLDissertation Series, 73; Atlanta:Scholars, 1985) 177-221.

26A. J. Malherbe, “‘Gentle as a Nurse’:The Cynic Background of I Thess.ii,” Novum Testamentum 12 (1970)203-217.

27R. F. Hock, “Paul’s Tentmaking andthe Problem of His Social Class,”Journal of Biblical Literature 97 (1978)555-564.

28R. F. Hock, “The Workshop as a So-cial Setting for Paul’s MissionaryPreaching,” Catholic Biblical Quar-

terly 41 (1979) 438-450.29I. H. Marshall, “Pauline Theology in

the Thessalonian Correspondence,”in Paul and Paulinism: Essays in

Honour of C. K. Barrett, ed. Hookerand Wilson (London: SPCK, 1982)179.

30M. M. Mitchell, “New TestamentEnvoys in the Context of Greco-Ro-man Diplomatic and EpistolaryConventions: The Example of Timo-thy and Titus,” Journal of Biblical Lit-

erature 111 (1992) 641-662.31Riesner, 373-375.32C. L. Mearns, “Early Eschatological

Development in Paul: The Evidenceof I and II Thessalonians,” New Tes-

tament Studies 27 (1981) 137-157.33G. Luedemann, Paul, Apostle to the

Gentiles: Studies in Chronology, trans.F. S. Jones (Philadelphia: Fortress,1984) 201-238.

34Paul never deals clearly with thisissue, and it has been the basis ofmuch discussion. Some argue thatPaul believed in a disembodied “in-termediate state” between deathand resurrection: e.g., B. Lindars,

“The Sound of the Trumpet: Pauland Eschatology,” Bulletin of the John

Rylands Library 67 (1985) 766-782.Others argue for an embodied inter-mediate state: D. E. H. Whiteley, The

Theology of St. Paul (Philadelphia:Fortress, 1964) 233-273. Still othersmaintain that Paul had no viewof an intermediate state but sawbelievers as rising immediately atdeath to be with the Lord: H. M.Shires, The Eschatology of St. Paul in

the Light of Modern Scholarship (Phila-delphia: Westminster, 1966) 77-102.Many would argue for a develop-ment in Paul’s eschatology from theconcept of resurrection at theParousia in 1 Thessalonians to thatof immediate transformation atdeath in 2 Corinthians: e.g., F. F.Bruce, Paul: Apostle of the Heart Set

Free (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans,1977) 300-313.

35For a thorough exegesis of the pas-sage, see J. Plevnik, Paul and the

Parousia: An Exegetical and Theologi-

cal Investigation (Peabody, MA:Hendrickson, 1997) 65-98.

36R. H. Gundry, “The Hellenization ofDominical Tradition and Christian-ization of Jewish Tradition in theEschatology of 1-2 Thessalonians,”New Testament Studies 33 (1987) 161-178.

37This whole section draws from Jew-ish apocalyptic. In apocalypses suchas 4 Ezra, the resurrection of thedead and the rising of the living aresimultaneous, as in 1 Thessalonians.See A. F. J. Klijn, “1 Thessalonians4:13-18 and its Background inApocalyptic Literature,” in Paul and

Paulinism, 67-73.38J. Gillman, “Signals of Transforma-

44

tion in 1 Thessalonians 4:13-18,”Catholic Biblical Quarterly 47 (1985)263-281.

39W. D. Davies maintains that “beingwith the Lord forever” implies onehas reached the final abode (Paul

and Rabbinic Judaism [London:SPCK, 1958] 296).

40T. L. Howard, “The Literary Unityof 1 Thessalonians 4:13-5:11,” Grace

Theological Journal 9 (1988) 163-190.41D. Georgi, Theocracy in Paul’s Praxis

and Theology, trans. D. E. Green(Minneapolis: Fortress, 1991) 25-31.

42For a full discussion of the Anti-Christ, see F. F. Bruce, 1 and 2 Thessa-

lonians (Word Biblical Commentary;Waco, TX: Word, 1982) 178-188.

43J. Munck, Paul and the Salvation of

Mankind (Richmond: John Knox,1959) 36-52.

44P. S. Dixon, “The Evil Restraint in 2Thess. 2:6,” Journal of the Evangelical

Theological Society 33/34 (1990) 445-449.

45R. Russell, “The Idle in 2 Thess. 3.6-12: An Eschatological or a SocialProblem?” New Testament Studies 34(1988) 105-119.

46R. Jewett, “Tenement Churchesand Communal Meals in the EarlyChurch: The Implications of a Form-Critical Analysis of 2 Thessalonians3:10,” Biblical Research 38 (1993) 23-43.

Selected Commentaries on theThessalonian Epistles

Based on the Greek Text

Bruce, F. F. 1 and 2 Thessalonians. WordBiblical Commentary. Waco, TX:Word, 1982.

Frame, James Everett. A Critical and

Exegetical Commentary on the

Epistles of St. Paul to the Thessalon-

ians. The International CriticalCommentary. Edinburgh: T. & T.Clark, 1912.

Milligan, George. St. Paul’s Epistles to

the Thessalonians. London: Mac-millan, 1908.

Wanamaker, Charles A. The Epistles

to the Thessalonians. A Commentary

on the Greek Text. The New Inter-national Greek Testament Com-mentary. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans,1990.

Based on the English Text

Best, Ernest. The First and Second

Epistles to the Thessalonians.

Harper’s New Testament Com-mentaries. New York: Harper andRow, 1972.

Hiebert, D. Edmond. The Thessalonian

Epistles: A Call to Readiness. Chi-cago: Moody, 1971.

Marshall, I. Howard. 1 and 2 Thessa-

lonians. The New Century Bible.Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1983.

Martin, D. Michael. 1, 2 Thessalonians.

New American Commentary.Nashville: Broadman and Hol-man, 1995.

Morris, Leon. The First and Second

Epistles to the Thessalonians. Re-vised edition. The New Interna-tional Commentary on the NewTestament. Grand Rapids: Eerd-mans, 1991.

Neil, William. The Epistles of Paul to

the Thessalonians. The Moffatt NewTestament Commentary. NewYork: Harper and Brothers, 1950.

Richard, Earl J. First and Second

Thessalonians. Sacra Pagina. Col-legeville, MN: Liturgical Press,1995.

Williams, David J. 1 and 2 Thes-

salonians. New International Bib-lical Commentary. Peabody, MA:Hendrickson, 1992.