1 and 2 Thessalonians, Volume 45 (45) (Word Biblical Commentary) [Revised ed.] 9780310521990, 0310521998

Citation preview

WORD BIBLICAL COMMENTARY

Editorial Board O ld Testament Editor: Nancy L deClaisse-Walford (2011 - ) New Testam ent Editor: Peter H . Davids (2013 - )

Past Editors General Editors Ralph P. Martin (2012 - 2013) Bruce M. Metzger (1997 - 2007)

David A. H ubbard (1977 - 1996) Glenn W. Barker (1977 - 1984)

Old Testament Editors: Jo h n D . W. Watts (1977 - 2011)

Jam es W. Watts (1997 - 2011)

New Testament Editors: Ralph P. Martin (1977 - 2012)

Lynn Allan Losie (1997 - 2013)

Volumes 1 2 3 4 5 6a

Genesis 1 - 15 Gordon J. W enham Genesis 16 - 50 Gordon J. W enham Exodus........................ Jo h n I. Durham Leviticus Jo h n E. Hartley Num bers Philip J. B udd D euteronom y 1:1 - 21:9, 2nd ed D uane L. Christensen 6b D euteronom y 21:10 - 34:12 D uane L Christensen 7a Joshua 1-12, 2nd ed Trent C. Butler 7b Joshua 13-24, 2nd ed. Trent C. Butler 8 Judges Trent C. Butler 9 Ruth - Esther Frederic W. Bush 10 1 Samuel, 2nd ed Ralph W. Klein 11 2 Samuel A. A. A nderson Simon J. Devries 12 1 Kings, 2nd e d .......... 13 2 Kings........................ ..................T. R. Hobbs 14 1 Chronicles Roddy Braun 15 2 Chronicles Raymond B. Dillard 16 Ezra, Nehem iah . .H . G. M . Williamson 17 Jo b 1 - 20 David J. A. Clines David J. A. Clines 18a Job 21 - 3 7 .................. 18b Job 38 - 42 .................. David J. A. Clines 19 Psalms 1 - 50, 2nd ed Peter C. Craigie, Marvin E. Tate Marvin E. Tate 20 Psalms 51 - 1 0 0 ......... Leslie C. Allen 21 Psalms 101 - 150, rev ed R oland E. M urphy 22 Proverbs 23a Ecclesiastes R oland E. M urphy 23b Song o f Songs/L am entations . . . .D uane H. Garrett, Paul R. House Jo h n D. W. Watts 24 Isaiah 1 - 33, rev. ed. . Jo h n D. W. Watts 25 Isaiah 3 4 - 66, rev. e d . Peter C. Craigie, 26 Jerem iah 1 - 25 Page H. Kelley, Joel F. D rinkard J r. Gerald L. Keown, 27 Jerem iah 26 - 52 Pamela J Scalise, Thomas G. Smothers *forthcoming as of 2014 **in revision as of 2014

28 Ezekiel 1 - 1 9 ............................ Leslie C. Allen 29 Ezekiel 2 0 -4 8 .......................... Leslie C. Allen 30 Daniel Jo h n E. Goldingay 31 H osea - J o n a h * * ....................Douglas Stuart 32 Micah- M alachi**...................Ralph L. Smith 33a Matthew 1 - 13..................Donald A. H agner 33b Matthew 1 4 -2 8 ............... Donald A. H agner 34a Mark 1 - 8:26** R obert A. Guelich 34b Mark 8:27 - 16:20 ................... Craig A. Evans 35a Luke 1 - 9 :2 0 .............................Jo h n Nolland 35b Luke 9:21 - 18:34......................Jo h n Nolland 35c Luke 18:35 - 24:53....................Jo h n Nolland 36 John, 2nd ed. . . . George R. Beasley-Murray 37a Acts 1 - 1 4 * .........................Stephen J. Walton 37b Acts 15 - 28* Stephen J Walton 38a Rom ans 1 - 8 Jam es D G D unn 38b Romans 9 - 1 6 ...................James D. G. D unn 39 1 Corinthians* Andrew D. Clarke 40 2 Corinthians, rev e d Ralph P. Martin 41 Galatians Richard N Longenecker 42 Ephesians Andrew T. Lincoln 43 Philippians, rev. ed. . . .Gerald F. Hawthorne, rev by Ralph P. Martin 44 Colossians, Philemon** . . . Peter T. O'Brien 45 1 & 2 T hessalonians**..................F. F. Bruce 46 Pastoral Epistles William D M ounce 47a Hebrews 1 - 8 .......................... William L. Lane 47b Hebrews 9 - 13........................William L. Lane 48 Jam es Ralph P Martin 49 1 Peter J Ramsey Michaels 50 Jude, 2 P e te r* * ........... Richard J. Bauckham 51 1, 2, 3, Jo h n , rev. ed Stephen S. Smalley 52a Revelation 1 - 5 David E. Aune 52b Revelation 6 - 1 6 .......................David E. Aune 52c Revelation 17 - 2 2 ................... David E . Aune

WORD BIBLICAL COMMENTARY 1 and 2 T hessalonians

F. F. BRUCE General Editors: Bruce M. Metzger, David A. Hubbard, Glenn W. Barker Old Testament Editors: John D. W. Watts, James W. Watts New Testament Editors: Ralph P. Martin, Lynn Allan Losie

0

ZONDERVAN®

ZONDERVAN 1 and 2 Thessalonians, Volume 45 Copyright © 1982 by Thomas Nelson, Inc. Previously published as 1 and 2 Thessalonians. Formerly published by Thomas Nelson, now published by Zondervan, a division of HarperCollinsChristian Publishing. Requests for information should be addressed to: Zondervan, 3900 Sparks Dr. SE, Grand Rapids, Michigan 49546 This edition: ISBN 978-0-310-52199-0 The Library of Congress has cataloged the original edition as follows: Library of Congress Control Number: 2005295211 All Scripture quotations, unless otherwise indicated, are taken from the Revised Standard Version of the Bible, copyright © 1946, 1952, 1971 by the Division of Christian Education of the National Council of Churches of Christ in the USA. Used by permission. Scripture quotations marked NIV are taken from The Holy Bible, New International Version®, NIV®. Copyright © 1973, 1978 by Biblica, Inc®. Used by permission. All rights reserved worldwide. The author’s own translation of the Scripture text appears in italic type under the heading “Translation”. 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.

9780310521990_1_2_Thess_vol45.indd 4

1/8/15 1:22 PM

To

A rnold A nderson co llea g u e and friend

Contents Editorial Preface Author’s Preface Abbreviations Introduction I. Background to the Thessalonian Letters Bibliography 1. Macedonia 2. The Gospel Comes to Macedonia 3. Christianity at Thessalonica 4. Paul’s Plan of Action 5. Paul and the Churches of Macedonia II. The ThessalonianLetters Bibliography 1. Authorship 2. Date and Occasion 3. Early Christian Experience at Thessalonica 4. Eschatology at Thessalonica 5. Relation Between the Two Letters 6. Miscellaneous Solutions 7. Christian Doctrine in Thessalonians The First Letter to the Thessalonians Structure Chapter 1 Chapter 2 Chapter 3 Chapter 4 Chapter 5 The Second Letter to the Thessalonians Structure Chapter 1 Chapter 2 Excursus on Antichrist Chapter 3 Indexes

ix xi xiii xix xix xix xx xxi xxii xxvi xxvii xxviii xxviii xxxii xxxiv xxxv xxxvi xxxix xliv xlvi 1 3 5 23 58 77 105 137 139 141 159 179 197 219

Editorial Preface T h e la u n c h in g o f th e Word Biblical Commentary b rin g s to fulfillm ent an e n te r ­ p rise o f several y e a rs’ p la n n in g . T h e p u b lish e rs an d th e m e m b e rs o f th e e d ito ria l b o a rd m et in 1977 to e x p lo re th e p o ssibility o f a new c o m m en tary on th e b o o k s o f th e B ible th at w ould in c o rp o ra te several distin ctiv e featu res. P ro sp e c tiv e re a d e rs o f th e se v olum es a re e n title d to know w hat such featu res w ere in te n d e d to be; w h e th e r th e aim s o f th e co m m e n ta ry have b e e n fully ach iev ed tim e a lo n e will tell. First, we h av e trie d to cast a w ide n e t to in c lu d e as c o n trib u to rs a n u m b e r o f sch o lars from a ro u n d th e w o rld w ho n o t only sh a re o u r aim s, b u t a re in th e m ain e n g a g e d in th e m in istry o f te a c h in g in university, co lleg e a n d sem i­ nary. T h e y r e p re s e n t a rich diversity o f d e n o m in a tio n a l allegiance. T h e b ro a d stan ce o f o u r c o n trib u to rs can rig h tly b e called evangelical, a n d this term is to b e u n d e rs to o d in its positive, h isto ric se n se o f a c o m m itm e n t to sc rip tu re as div in e re v e la tio n , a n d to th e tru th a n d p o w e r o f th e C h ristian g o sp el. T h e n , th e c o m m e n ta rie s in o u r series a re all co m m issio n ed a n d w ritten for th e p u rp o s e o f in clu sio n in th e Word Biblical Commentary. U nlike several o f o u r d is tin g u is h e d c o u n te rp a rts in th e field o f c o m m en tary w riting, th e re are n o tra n s la te d w orks, o rig in ally w ritte n in a n o n -E n g lish la n g u ag e. A lso, o u r c o m m e n ta to rs w ere asked to p re p a re their ow n re n d e rin g o f th e o rig in al biblical tex t a n d to u se th o se la n g u a g e s as th e basis o f th e ir ow n co m m e n ts a n d ex eg esis. W h a t m ay be claim ed as d istin ctiv e w ith this series is th at it is b a se d o n th e biblical la n g u a g e s, yet it seeks to m ake th e tech n ical an d sch o larly a p p ro a c h to a th eo lo g ical u n d e rs ta n d in g o f sc rip tu re u n d e rs ta n d a b le by— a n d usefu l to — th e fled g lin g stu d e n t, th e w orking m in iste r as well as to c o llea g u e s in th e guild o f p ro fe ssio n a l sch o lars a n d teach ers. Finally, a w o rd m u st be said a b o u t th e fo rm a t o f th e series. T h e layout in clearly d e fin e d sectio n s has b e e n co n scio u sly d ev ised to assist re a d e rs at d iffe re n t levels. T h o s e w ishing to le a rn a b o u t th e tex tu al w itnesses o n which th e tra n s la tio n is o ffered a re in v ited to c o n su lt th e sectio n h e a d e d “ N o te s .” If th e r e a d e r s ’ c o n c e rn is w ith th e sta te o f m o d e rn sc h o la rsh ip on any given p o rtio n o f sc rip tu re , th e n they sh o u ld tu rn to th e sectio n s o n “ B ib lio g ra p h y ” a n d “ F o r m /S tr u c tu r e /S e ttin g .” F o r a cle a r e x p o sitio n o f th e p a s s a g e ’s m e a n ­ in g an d its re le v a n ce to th e o n g o in g biblical rev elatio n , th e “ C o m m e n t” an d c o n c lu d in g “ E x p la n a tio n ” a re d e s ig n e d e x p ressly to m eet th at n e e d . T h e r e is th e re fo re so m e th in g fo r ev e ry o n e w ho m ay pick u p a n d u se th e se volum es. If th e se aim s co m e a n y w h ere n e a r realizatio n , th e in te n tio n o f th e e d ito rs will h av e b e e n m et, a n d th e la b o r o f o u r team o f c o n trib u to rs re w a rd e d . G e n e ral E d ito rs:

David A. Hubbard Glenn W. Barker t O ld T e sta m e n t: John D. W. Watts New T e sta m e n t: Ralph P. Martin

Author’s Preface

T h e invitation to contribute the volum e on 1 and 2 T h essalon ian s to the W ord Biblical C om m entary has provided a w elcom e incentive to exam ­ ine th ese two short d ocu m en ts in greater depth than I have previously d on e. T h e exercise has b een rewarding. T h e letters to the T h essa lo n ia n s, if not absolutely the earliest Christian writings to have survived (as is widely believed) are certainly am on g the earliest. T h ey w ere written n ot m ore than twenty years after the death and resurrection o f Jesu s, at a tim e when the g o sp el was already m aking headway in the G en tile w orld. T h ey claim to have b een sent by three m issionaries— Paul, Silvanus and T im othy— to the church o f T hessalonica a few m onths after its foundation. T h e nam es o f Silvanus and T im othy are n ot added to Paul’s in the prescripts o f the two letters sim ply as a gesture o f courtesy: internal evid en ce su g g ests that Silvanus at least played a fully resp on sib le part in the authorship a lon g with Paul. T h e letters reflect basic Christian teaching o f the period— teaching m aintained both in the church o f Jerusalem and in the G en tile m ission. W hile difficulties are raised w hen an attem pt is m ade to establish the relationship o f 2 T h essa lo n ia n s to 1 T h essalon ian s, the greatest difficulties are th ose involved in argum ents that 2 T h essalon ian s is pseudonym ous. B oth letters are h ere treated as authentic. Any com m en tator m ust stand on the shoulders o f his predecessors. A m on g com m entators on T h essalon ian s to whom I am con sciou s o f being especially in d eb ted , G. W oh len b erg, G. M illigan, B. R igaux and E . Best are outstanding. T h e Greek text follow ed in this com m entary, excep t w here there is a clear indication to the contrary, is that o f the new (twenty-sixth) edition o f the N estle-A land Novum Testamentum Graece. For the G reek O ld T estam en t the text o f A. Rahlfs’s Septuaginta has b een follow ed. August 1981

F. F. Bruce

Abbreviations (a) G eneral Ad. Att. Adv. Haer. Adv. Jov. Adv. Marc. Aemil. Paul. AER AGJU

AJP AJT AnBib Ann. ANRW

Ant. Anth. Antiq. Apol. AsSeign ASTI ATANT

ATR

AV

Ad Atticum (Cicero’s Letters to Atticus) Adversus Haereses (Irenaeus) Adversus Jovimanum (Jerome) Adversus Marcionem (Tertullian) Aemilius Paullus (Plu­ tarch) American Ecclesiastical Review Arbeiten zur Ges­ chichte des Antiken Judentum s und U r­ christentum s American Journal of Phi­ lology American Journal of The­ ology Analecta Biblica Annales (Tacitus) Aufstieg und Niedergang der römischen Welt, ed. Tem porini, H. and Haase, W. B erlin/ New York: W. de Gruyter, 1972-. Antigone (Sophocles) Anthologia (Vettius Va­ lens) Antiquitates (Josephus) Apologia (Justin); Apologeticus (Tertullian) Assemblies du Seigneur Annual of the Swedish Theological Institute Abhandlungen zur Theologie des Alten und Neuen T esta­ ments Anglican Theological Re­ view

BA BAG

BBB BBC BC

BDF

Bell. BETL BHT Bib BibOr BJRL BS BT BTB BU BW BWANT

Authorized Version = King Jam es Version Biblical Archaeologist Bauer, W., Arndt, W. F., Gingrich, F. W., A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Tes­ tament and Other Early Christian Literature (Chicago: Chicago University Press, 1957). Bonner Biblische Bei­ träge Broadman Bible Com­ mentary The Beginnings of Chris­ tianity (ed. Jackson, F. J. Foakes and Lake, K.) Blass, F., Debrunner, A., Funk, R. W., A Creek Grammar of the New Testament (Chi­ cago: Chicago Univ­ ersity Press, 1961). De Bello Judaico (Jose­ phus) Bibliotheca Ephemeridum Theologicarum Lovaniensium Beiträge zur histori­ schen Theologie Biblica Biblica et Orientalia Bulletin of the John Rylands ( University) Li­ brary, Manchester Bibliotheca Sacra The Bible Translator Biblical Theology Bulletin Biblische U ntersu­ chungen The Biblical World Beiträge zur Wissen-

xiv

BZ BZNW

C.Ap. CBC CBQ Cels. CGT CIL Claud. CNT Comm, in Matt. ConB CPI CTM Cyr. De resurr. cam. Dial. Diss. EBib EGT

EKKNT

Ep. (Epp.) EstBib EstEcl

A b b r e v ia t io n s

Schaft vom Alten und Neuen T esta­ m ent Biblische Zeitschrift Beihefte zur Zeitschrift für die neutestamentliche Wissen­ schaft Contra Apionem (Jose­ phus) Cam bridge Bible Com m entary on the New English Bible Catholic Biblical Quar­ terly Contra Celsum (Origen) Cam bridge Greek T e s­ tam ent Corpus Inscriptionum La­ tinarum Divus Claudius (Sueto­ nius) C om m entaire du Nou­ veau T estam ent Commentary on Matthew (Origen) Coniectanea Biblica Corpus Papyrorum ludaicarum Concordia Theological Monthly Cyropaedia (Xenophon) De resurrectione camis (Tertullian) Dialogue with Trypho (Justin) Dissertation Etudes Bibliques Expositor's Greek Testa­ ment. 5 volumes (London: H odder 8c Stoughton, 19001910). Evangelisch-Katho­ lischer Kom m entar zum Neuen T estam ent Epistle( s) Estudios Biblicos Estudios Eclesiásticos

Eth. Nie. ETL EvQ ExpB ExpTim FRLANT

Geog. Gnom. Byz. Gos. Thom. H CN T HDB HE Hut.

HNT HNTC Horn. HTR HUCA IB

ICC Id. IDB

IG II.

Nicomachean Ethics (Ar­ istotle) Ephemerides Theologicae Lovanienses The Evangelical Quar­ terly T he E xpositor’s Bible The Expository Times Forschungen zur Reli­ gion und Literatur des Alten und Neuen Testam ents Geography (Strabo) Gnomologium Byzanti­ num Gospel of Thomas (from Nag Hammadi) H andcom m entar zum Neuen Testam ent Hastings’ Dictionary of the Bible, 5 volumes His tona Ecclesiastica (Eusebius) Histona(e) (Herodotus, Thucydides, Poly­ bius, Diodorus, Livy, Tacitus, Dio Cassius) H andbuch zum Neuen Testam ent (ed. Lietzmann, H.) H arper’s New T esta­ ment Com m entar­ ies Homiliae (Chrysostom) Harvard Theological Re­ view Hebrew Union College Annual Interpreter’s Bible. 12 volumes (Nashville/ New York; Abing­ don, 1952-57). International Critical Commentary Idyllia (Theocritus) Interpreter's Dictionary of the Bible. 5 volumes (Nashville/New York: Abingdon, 1962-76). Inscriptiones Graecae Iliad (Homer)

Abbreviations IN T Iph. in Taur. IrBibSt(ud) JBL JBLMS

JETS JHS JRS JRStatSoc JSS JTS LD Leg. LouvStud LSB LXX Mart. Isa. Med. Mem. MeyerK

MHT

MM

Introduction io the New Testament Iphigenia in Tauris (Eu­ ripides) Irish Biblical Studies Journal of Biblical Litera­ ture Journal o f Biblical Lit­ erature M onograph Series Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society Journal of Hellenic Stud­ ies Journal of Roman Studies Journal of the Royal Sta­ tistical Society Journal of Semitic Studies Journal of Theological Studies Lectio Divina De Legatione ad Gaium (Philo) Louvain Studies La Sacra Bibbia Septuagint Martyrdom of Isaiah Meditationes (Marcus Aurelius) Memorabilia (Xeno­ phon) Kritisch-Exegetischer Kommentar (ed. Meyer, H. A. W.) Moulton, J. H., How­ ard, W. F., T urner, N., Grammar of New Testament Greek. 4 volumes (Edin­ burgh: T. Sc T. Clark, 1906-76). Moulton, J. H., Milli­ gan, G., The Vocabu­ lary of the Greek Testament (London: H odder Sc Stough­ ton, 1930).

xv

Moffatt New Testa­ m ent Commentary MT Masoretic Text New Century Bible NCB New Clarendon Bible NClarB New English Bible NEB Nederlands Theologisch N edTTs Tijdschrift Nestle-Aland 26 Nestle, E., Aland, K. Sc B., etc., Novum Testa­ mentum Graece (Stutt­ gart: Deutsche Bibelstiftung, 1979) Neutestamentliche NF Forschungen N.F. Neue Folge New International NICNT Commentary on the New Testam ent New International Dic­ NID NTT tionary of New Testa­ ment Theology, ed. Brown, C., 3 vol­ umes (Grand Rap­ ids, MI: Zondervan, 1975-78) Neue kirchliche Zeitschrift NKZ Novum Testamentum NovT Novum Testam entum NovTSup Supplements new series n.s. New Testam ent Com­ NTC mentary (Hendriksen, W.) Das Neue Testam ent NTD Deutsch New Testament Studies NTS New Testam ent for NTSR Spiritual Reading Oedipus Coloneus (Soph­ Oed. Col. ocles) Olynthiaca (Demos­ Olynth. thenes) Oracula Sibyllina Or. Sib. Persae (Aeschylus) Pers. Plant De Plantis (? Aristotle) London Papyri P. Lond. Oxyrhynchus Papyri P. Oxy. von Pauly, A. F., WisPW sowa, G., Realencyclo-

MNTC

xvi

RB REGr RestQ RHPR RivB RNT RSR

RSV RTR SAB

SBL SBS SBT

A b b r e v ia t io n s

pädie für die klassische A Itertumswissenschaft Revue Biblique Revue des Etudes Grecques Restoration Quarterly Revue d ’Hxstoire et de Philosophie Religieuses Rivista Biblica Regensburger Neues Testam ent Recherches de Science Rehgieuse Revised Standard Ver­ sion Reformed Theological Re­ view Sitzungsberichte der köni­ glichen preussischen Akademie der Wissen­ schaften zu Berlin Society of Biblical Lit­ erature Stuttgarter Bibelstu­ dien Studies in Biblical Theology

(Tertullian)

Scorp.

Scorpiace

SD

Studies and Docu­ ments Studia Evangelica Sylloge Inscriptionum Graecarum (ed. W. Dittenberger) Scottish Journal of Theol­

SE SIG SJT SNT SNTSMS ST TB TBl TDNT

Theod. Tim.

ogy

Studien zum Neuen Testam ent Society for New T esta­ m ent Studies M ono­ graph Series Studia Theologica Tyndale Bulletin Theologische Blätter Theological Dictionary of the New Testament. Tr. Bromiley, G. W. 10 volumes (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1964-76) The Greek O T of T heodotion Timaeus (Plato)

TJ TQ TS TSK TU TZ UBS3

VD Vis. VS VT

wc

WMANT

WSB ZAW ZBK ZK ZNW ZST ZTK ZWT

Theologische Jahrbücher Theologische Quartal­ schüft Theological Studies Theologische Studien und Kritiken Texte und U nter­ suchungen Theologische Zeitschrift The Greek New Testa­ ment. United Bible Societies, 3rd edi­ tion, 1975. Verbum Domini Vision (in Shepherd of Hermas) Verbum Salutis Vetus Testamentum W estminster Com­ mentaries Wissenschaftliche M onographien zum Alten und Neuen Testam ent W uppentaler StudienBibel Zeitschrift für die alttesta­ men thehe Wissenschaft Zürcher Bibelkom­ m entare Zahn-Kommentar Zeitschrift für die neutestamenthche Wissen­ schaft Zeitschrift für systema­ tische Theologie Zeitschrift für Theologie und Kirche Zeitschrift für wissen­ schaftliche Theologie

(b) Ancient Authors Aeschylus Aesch. Clement (of Rome) Clem. Euripides Eurip. Eusebius Euseb. Hermas Herrn. Sophocles Soph. Thucydides Thuc. X enophon Xen.

Abbreviations (c) Jewish literature bSanh. Babylonian Talmud: tractate Sanhedrin Gen.Rab. Genesis Rabba Mur Wadi M urabba‘at texts QL Q um ran Literature 1Q27 T ext 27 from Q um ran Cave 1 IQ pH ab Pesher (commentary) on Habakkuk from Q um ran Cave 1 Tg.Isa T argum on Isaiah Tg.Neof Targum Neofiti 1 (Vat­ ican Library) on the Pentateuch T. Jos. Testam ent o f Joseph T. Levi Testam ent o f Levi (from Testam ents of the Twelve Patri­ archs) (d) Textual notes The letters and num bers used to indi­ cate individual manuscripts are those commonly found in apparatus critica. O ther abbreviations are: byz Byzantine text (exhib­ ited by majority of manuscripts) cop Coptic versions Bohairic version copbo cop8* Sahidic version lat Latin versions latvet O ld Latin latVB Latin Vulgate latvgcl Latin Vulgate, Clem­ entine edition (1592) latvg 8t Latin Vulgate, Stutt­ gart edition (21975) syr Syriac versions pesh syr1 Peshitta version

S y r hcl** gyj-hcl.HI«

TR

*

c

cod codd

vid

al pc pm

xvii Harclean Syriac, aster­ isked reading Harclean Syriac, m ar­ ginal reading Textus Receptus (text of early printed edi­ tions of the Greek New Testam ent) after the siglum o f a m anuscript indi­ cates the original hand (later cor­ rected) correction by later hand 1 first corrector 2 second corrector reading of one codex reading of some codi­ ces T he witness cited shows this reading partly (partim) or some times when he reproduces the text; at other times he shows a different reading. T he witness cited seems (videtur) to show this reading (it may be too obscure or mutilated for cer­ tainty) O ther (alii) codices also show this read­ ing. A few (pauci) codices show this reading. Very many (permulti) codices show this reading.

Names of patristic authorities cited in the textual notes are abbreviated as follows: Ambst “ Am brosiaster” (Latin, 4th century) Aug Augustine (Latin, 4 th /5 th century) Clem.Al Clement of Alexandria (Greek, late 2nd century) Did Didymus o f Alexandria (Greek, late 4th century) Euseb Eusebius o f Caesarea (Greek, early 4th century)

x v iii

Irenlat Mcion Pelag Spec T ert

A b b r e v ia t io n s

Latin translation (4th century) o f Irenaeus o f Lyons (Greek, late 2nd century) Marcion (Greek, mid-2nd century) Pelagius (Latin, 4 th /5 th century) Speculum (Pseudo-Augustinian compilation, Latin, 5th century) Tertullian (Latin, 2 n d /3 rd century)

(e) Others T h e usual literary abbreviations (such as ad loc., “at the place” referred to) are self-explanatory; so are the abbreviations for books o f the Bible and the better known apocrypha and pseudepigrapha. Commentaries on Thessalonians (see list on pp. xxviii, xxix) are cited by authors’ names; so occasionally are other works where reference to the appropriate sectional bibliography rules out the possibility o f ambiguity. More often short titles are used.

Introduction

I. Background

to the

T hessalonian Letters

Bibliography Bauman, R. A. The Crimen Maiestatis in the Roman Republic and Augustan Principate. Johannesburg: W itwatersrand University Press, 1967. Bauman, R. A. Impietas in Principem. München: Beck, 1974. Bell, Η. I. Jews and Christians in Egypt. London: British Museum, 1924. Bornkamm, G. Paul. Tr. I). M. G. Stalker. London: H odder 8c Stoughton, New York: H arper and Row, 1971. Bruce, F. F. “T he Romans through Jewish Eyes.” In Paganisme, Judaisme, Christianisme: Mélanges offerts à Marcel Simon, ed. A. Benoit, M. Philonenko, C. Vogel. Paris: E. de Boccard, 1978, 3-12. Burton, E. D. “T he Politarchs.” AJT 2 (1898) 598-632. Cadbury, H. J. The Book of Acts in History. New York: H arper, 1955. Davies, P. E. “T he Macedonian Scene of Paul’s Journeys.’’ BA 26 (1963) 91-106. Edson, C. “ M acedonica,” I (“ A Dedication of Philip V ”), II (“State Cults o f Thessalonica’’), Harvard Studies in Classical Philology 51 (1940), 125-126, 127-136; III (“Cults of Thessalonica” ), HTR 41 (1948) 153204. Eisler, R. The Messiah Jesus and John the Baptist. Ed. A. H. Krappe. London: Methuen, 1931. Geyer, F. Mazedonien bis zur Thronbesteigung Philipps II. Beihefte der historischen Zeitschrift, 19. München: O ldenbourg, 1930. Geyer, F., and Hoff­ mann, O. “ M akedonia.” PW xiv.l (1928) 638-771. Hammond, N. G. L. History of Macedonia, i-ii. Oxford: C larendon Press, 1972-79. Hammond, N. G. L. “The W estern Part o f the Via Egnatia.” JRS 64 (1974) 185-194. H arnack, A. The Mission and Expansion of Christianity in the First Three Centuries, i-ii. Tr. J. Moffatt. London: Williams and Norgate, 1908. Harnack, A. “ Probabilia über die Adresse und den Verfasser des H ebräerbriefs.” ZNW 1 (1900) 16-41. Hemer, C. J. “ Alexandria T ro a s.” TB 26 (1975) 79-112. H engel, M. Acts and the History of Earliest Christianity. Tr. J. Bowden. London. SCM Press, 1979. Jewett, R. “T he Agitators and the Gala­ tian C ongregation.” NTS 17 (1970-71) 198-212. Judge, E. A. “T he Decrees of Caesar at Thessalonica.” R TR 30 (1971) 1-7. Judge, E. A. The Social Pattern of the Christian Groups in the First Century. London: Tyndale Press, 1960. Judge, E. A., and Thomas, G. S. R. “T he Origin of the Church at Rome. A New Solution.” RTR 25 (1966) 81-94. Lake, K. The Earlier Epistles of St. Paul. London: Rivingtons, 21914. Laourdas, B., and Makaronas, C. (ed.), Ancient Macedonia. Thessaloniki: Institute for Balkan Studies, 1970. Larsen, J. A. O. Greek Federal States. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1968. Larsen, J. A. O. “ Roman G reece.” In T. Frank (ed.), An Economic Survey of Ancient Rome, iv. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins Press, 1938, 259498. Morgan, M. G. “ Metellus Macedonicus and the Province M acedonia.” Historia 18 (1969) 422-446. Oberhummer, E. “Thessalonike.” PW, 2te Reihe, vi.l (1936) 143-163. O ’Sullivan, F. The Egnatian Way. Newton Abbot: David and Charles, 1972. Papazoglu, F. “Q uelques aspects de l’histoire de la province M acedoine.” In ANRW ii.7.1 (1979), 302-369. Smallwood, E. M. Documents illustrating the Pnncipates of Gaius, Claudius and Nero. Cambridge: Cam bridge University Press, 1967. Tarn, W. W., and Griffith, G. T. Hellenistic Civilisation. London: E. Arnold, 31952. Vacalopoulos, A. History of Thessaloniki. Thessaloniki: Institute for Balkan Studies, 1963. Vickers,

XX

I n t r o d u c t io n

H. J. “ Hellenistic Thessaloniki.” JH S 92 (1972) 156-170. Walbank, F. W. Philip V of Macedon. Cambridge: Cam bridge University Press, 1940. I . Macedonia M aced o n ia was an a n c ie n t k in g d o m in th e B alkan p e n in su la , to th e n o rth o f th e G reek sta te s. W h e n th e P e rsia n s in v a d e d E u ro p e in th e early fifth c e n tu ry b .c ., th e M a c e d o n ia n kings c o lla b o ra te d w ith th e m a n d so p re se rv e d th e ir p o sitio n ; n e v e rth e le s s A le x a n d e r I gave co v ert aid to th e G reek s w ho w ere a tta c k e d by X erx es in 4 8 0 b .c . (H e ro d o tu s , Hist. 5 .1 7 , 18; 7.173; 9.45 ). A le x a n d e r I a n d his su ccesso rs p a tro n iz e d G re e k a rt a n d le tte rs; in d e e d , A le x a n d e r as a y o u n g m an was allo w ed to c o m p e te in th e fo o tra c e at th e O ly m p ia n g am es, p e rh a p s b e c a u se his fam ily claim ed A rgive d e sc e n t (H e ro d o tu s , Hist. 5.22; 8 .1 3 7 ). By th e fo u rth c e n tu ry M a c e d o n ia was for m o st p ractical p u rp o s e s p a rt o f th e G re e k w o rld . P hilip II (3 5 6 -3 3 6 b .c .) m a d e h im s e lf m a s te r o f th e fo rm e rly in d e p e n d e n t city -states o f G reece; a fte r his a s sa ssin a tio n his so n A le x a n d e r III (th e G re a t) m a d e this u n ite d G ra e c o -M a c e d o n ia n d o m in io n th e b ase fo r his c o n q u e s t o f W e ste rn Asia a n d E gypt. W ith th e d iv isio n o f A le x a n d e r’s e m p ire a fte r his d e a th (323 b .c .), M a c e d o n ia so o n b e c a m e a se p a ra te k in g d o m ag ain . T h e M a c e d o n ia n k in g d o m first c la sh e d w ith th e R o m an s w h en Philip V (2 2 1 -1 7 9 b .c .) m a d e a tre a ty w ith H a n n ib a l d u rin g th e S e c o n d Punic W ar (P olybius, Hist. 7.9). T h e R o m an s, h o w ev er, s tirre d u p sufficient tr o u ­ b le fo r him e a st o f th e A d riatic to k eep him o c c u p ie d , a n d his treaty with H a n n ib a l re m a in e d ineffective. W h en th e S e c o n d P u n ic W ar was over, a n d w ith H a n n ib a l safely o u t o f th e way, th e R o m an s in v e n te d a p re te x t fo r d e c la rin g w ar o n P hilip. T h is S e c o n d M aced o n ian W ar, as it is called (2 0 0 -1 9 7 b .c .), e n d e d w ith P h ilip ’s d e fe a t at C y n o sc e p h a la e (Polybius, Hist. 2 8 .2 2 -2 8 ). H e was o b lig e d h e n c e fo rth to co n fin e his ru le to M aced o n ia, a n d R o m e p ro c la im e d h e rs e lf th e lib e ra to r a n d p r o te c to r o f th e city-states o f G re e c e (P lu ta rc h , Flamininus 10). P h ilip ’s so n P e rse u s in his tu rn ex cited R o m e ’s su sp ic io n s, w hich w ere fu rth e r fo m e n te d by his en e m y th e k in g o f P e rg a m u m , R o m e ’s ally. T h e e n s u in g T h ir d M a c e d o n ia n W ar (1 7 1 -1 6 8 b .c .) e n d e d w ith th e R om an victory at P ydna (P olybius, Hist. 31.29). T h e royal d y n asty o f M aced o n ia was a b o lish e d ; th e k in g d o m was d iv id ed by th e R o m a n s in to fo u r rep u b lics (Livy, Hist. 4 5 .2 9 .5 ff.; L arsen , States, 295 ff.). But in 149 b .c . an a d v e n tu re r n a m e d A n d riscu s, claim in g to be a son o f P erseu s, re u n ite d M aced o n ia u n d e r his ru le fo r a s h o rt tim e (D io d o ru s, Hist. 3 2 .9 b , 15; F lo ru s, Epitome 1.30). W h e n h e was p u t d o w n in 148 b .c ., th e R o m an s d e c id e d th a t th e only c o u rs e to take w ith M aced o n ia was to a n n e x it as a p ro v in c e (F lorus, Epitome 1.32.3; cf. M o rg an , “ M etellu s M aced o n icu s . . .” ). T h e fo u r r e p u b ­ lics set u p tw enty years b e fo re re m a in e d as g e o g ra p h ic a l d iv isio n s, but re ta in e d little p o litical significance. T o c o n s o lid a te th e ir h o ld o n th e new p ro v in c e , th e R o m a n s b u ilt a m ilitary highw ay, th e Via E g n atia, fro m A p o l­ lonia a n d D y rrh ach iu m o n th e A d riatic co ast of M aced o n ia to T h e ssa lo n ic a ; it was in d u e c o u rs e e x te n d e d fa rth e r e ast to P hilippi a n d its p o rt N eap o lis,

Introduction

XXI

a n d la te r still to B yzan tiu m (S tra b o , Geog. 7.7.4; cf. H a m m o n d , “ T h e W e st­ e rn P art a n d , fo r a g o o d p o p u la r a c c o u n t o f re c e n t d a te , O ’Sullivan, The Egnatian Way). As m ay b e g a th e re d fro m 1 M accabees 8 :1 -1 6 , th e story o f th e o v e rth ro w o f th e M aced o n ian kings, lo sin g n o th in g in th e tellin g , m a d e a d e e p im p re ssio n o n th e in h a b ita n ts o f Syria a n d P alestin e as they le a rn e d m o re a n d m o re a b o u t th o se invincible R o m an s fro m th e d ista n t w est (cf. B ruce, “ T h e R o m a n s th ro u g h Je w ish E yes’’). M a ced o n ia th u s b e c a m e a b ase fo r th e fu rth e r e x te n sio n o f R o m an p ow er. A u g u stu s m a d e it a s e n a to ria l p ro v in c e in 27 b .c . In a .d . 15 it was co m b in ed w ith A chaia a n d M oesia to fo rm o n e im p erial p ro v in ce (T acitu s, Ann. 1.76.4; 80.1 ), b u t was h a n d e d back to th e se n a te in a .d . 44, w ith T h e ssa lo n ic a as th e seat o f p ro v in cial a d m in is tra tio n (cf. also P ap azo g lu , “ M a c e d o in e ’’). 2. The Gospel Comes to Macedonia T h e g o sp e l re a c h e d M a ced o n ia less th a n tw enty years a fte r th e d e a th o f C h rist. O n e o f th e e a rlie st C h ristia n d o c u m e n ts (if n o t a b so lu tely th e earlie st e x ta n t)— th e first P a u lin e le tte r to th e T h e s s a lo n ia n s — was sen t, p ro b a b ly to w ard th e e n d o f a.d . 50, to th e C h ristia n c o m m u n ity in T h e s s a lo ­ nica. F ro m this le tte r it a p p e a rs th a t th e co m m u n ity ow ed its ex isten ce to a m issio n ary visit p aid to th e city by Paul a n d two o f his co lleag u es n o t lo n g b e fo re . T h a t visit h a d b e e n p re c e d e d by a visit to Philippi, w here th e m issio n a rie s h a d b e e n “ sh am efu lly tr e a te d ” (l T h e s s 2:2). T h e ir so jo u rn in T h e s s a lo n ic a h ad also b e e n a tte n d e d by tro u b le , a n d th e ir co n v erts th e re h a d e n d u re d so m e m e a s u re o f p e rs e c u tio n (1 T h e s s 1:6; 2:14). F rom T h e s s a lo n ic a th ey — o r at least Paul h im se lf—h a d g o n e o n to A th en s (1 T h e s s 3:1); a tte m p ts to r e tu rn to T h e ssa lo n ic a h ad b e e n fru s tra te d (1 T h e ss 2:17, 18). T h e le tte r h a d to serve in lieu o f a p e rso n a l visit. T h is o u tlin e o f ev e n ts, g a th e re d from 1 T h e ssa lo n ia n s, a g re e s so well w ith th e fu ller re c o rd o f A cts 1 6 :6 -1 8 :5 th a t th e re c o rd , th o u g h it is s u b s ta n ­ tially la te r th a n 1 T h e s s a lo n ia n s , m ay co n fid en tly b e a c c e p te d as p ro v id in g a h isto rical fram ew o rk w ithin w hich th e d a ta o f 1 T h e ssa lo n ia n s can be re a d w ith g re a te r u n d e r s ta n d in g (on Acts as a h isto rical so u rc e cf. H en g el, Acts). A c c o rd in g to th e n a rra tiv e o f A cts, sh o rtly after th e C o u n cil o f J e ru sa le m (Acts 1 5 :5 -2 9 ), P aul set o u t w ith his c o lle a g u e Silas (called Silvanus in th e P a u lin e le tte rs) to tra v e rse Asia M in o r fro m th e C ilician G ates w estw ard. M aced o n ia p lay ed n o p a rt in th e ir p la n n e d itin erary . So far as can be in fe rre d from th e re c o rd , they w ere m ak in g fo r E p h esu s. B ut they w ere p re v e n te d from c o n tin u in g th e ir jo u r n e y in th at d ire c tio n a n d fo u n d th e m ­ selves (a c c o m p a n ied now by T im o th y , w ho h a d jo in e d th em at Lystra) o b lig e d to tu rn n o rth w e s t fro m Ico n iu m o r P isidian A n tio ch u n til they re a c h e d th e A eg ean Sea at th e p o rt o f A lex an d ria T ro a s (cf. H e m e r, “ A lex­ a n d ria T r o a s ” ). At this p o in t th e first o f th e “ w e” p assag es o f 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

XXII

I n t r o d u c t io n

he had seen the vision, immediately we sought to go on into Macedonia, conclud­ ing that God had called us to preach the gospel to them (Acts 16:9, 10). T h e m issionary party, now increased to four by the addition o f the narrator h im self (as the transition from “ th ey” to “ w e ” su g g ests), crossed by sea to N eap olis (m odern Kavalla) and traveled a lo n g the Via Egnatia for about ten m iles to the R om an colon y o f Philippi. T h ere they m ade several converts and estab lish ed a prom ising church, but they ran into trouble with the city authorities. T h eir two leaders, Paul and Silas/Silvanu s, suffered an official b eatin g with the lictors’ rods, follow ed by a n igh t’s im prisonm ent in the city jail. W hen the authorities discovered that the m en to w hom they had m eted out this sum mary treatm ent w ere Rom an citizens like th em selves, they w ere alarm ed and b eg g ed them to leave Phi­ lippi: they did not feel stron g en o u g h to b e resp on sib le for their safety (Acts 16:11—40). L eaving the narrator behind in Philippi (it appears), the three others contin u ed their westward jo u rn ey alo n g the Via Egnatia until they reached T h essalon ica, about ninety m iles distant from Philippi (Acts 17:1). 3. Christianity at Thessalonica T h essalon ica, fou n d ed about 3 15 b .c . by the M acedonian king C assander and nam ed after his wife (a half-sister o f A lexander the Great) had as its original residents the form er inhabitants o f T h erm e and so m e twenty-five neigh b orin g tow ns or villages, w hom C assander forcibly settled in his new foundation. It was m ade the seat o f provincial adm inistration w hen M acedo­ nia was an n exed by R om e in 167 b .c . From 42 b .c . it en joyed the status o f a free city, govern ed by its own politarchs (five or six in num ber). T h e term “ politarchs” is w ell attested epigraphically as the d esign ation o f the ch ie f m agistrates o f M acedonian cities, but Acts 17:6 is the only place w here it occurs in G reek literature (cf. B urton, “T h e Politarchs” ). In T h essalon ica there was a sizeable Jew ish com m unity with its syna­ g o g u e, which Paul and his friends atten d ed according to their custom . Paul in particular participated anim atedly in the services, especially in the ex p o sitio n o f the scripture lesso n s, arguing that the Scriptures foretold a suffering M essiah, and that this M essiah had co m e in the person o f Jesus (Acts 17:2, 3). S om e m em bers o f the co n gregation w ere persu ad ed —Jason, for exam ple, w h ose h ospitality the m issionary party en joyed in T h essa lo ­ nica, and Aristarchus, later to be Paul’s traveling com p an ion and fellowp rison er (cf. C ol 4:10; Phlm 24; Acts 19:29; 20:4; 27:2). Several converts w ere also m ade am on g the fringe o f G en tile G od-fearers who attended the synagogue; th ese in clu d ed several ladies o f g o o d family, wives o f leading citizens. T h e s e adherents form ed the nu cleu s o f the church in T h essalon ica. T h eir num bers w ere so o n a u gm en ted by an even greater body o f converts w on from outright paganism . After three sabbath days the syn agogu e au­ thorities d ecid ed that they had had en o u g h o f the m issionaries and their

Introduction

xxiii

m essage. T h e m issionaries therefore m ade a direct approach to the rank and file o f the citizens, many o f w hom “ turned to G od from idols, to serve a living and true G o d ” (1 T h ess 1:9). T h e church o f T h essalon ica was thus established, com prising a majority o f form er pagans. Paul and his colleagu es gave the m em bers o f the young church such instruction in the Christian faith and way o f life as they were accustom ed to give their converts elsew here. But their stay in T hessalonica was interrupted. A dem on stration was staged against them by the first-century counter­ parts o f our m odern “ R en tam ob ”— in the d elightful idiom o f King Jam es’s translators, “ certain lew d fellow s o f the baser sort” (t Cjv ayopaitov cwbfxvs τινάς πονηρούς, Acts 17:5; Lake, Epistles 69 n . 1, translates äyopaZoi as “agita­ tors,” citing Plutarch, Aemil. Paul. 38: άνθρώπονς äyevv και δβδουλβυκότας, ayopaioxs be και όυναμένους όχλον ovvayayelv, “ ign ob le and servile fellow s, agitators adept at gathering a crow d” ). T h e “lew d fellow s” them selves w ere incited by parties that had an interest in the m issionaries’ enforced departure from T h essalon ica. U nable to lay hands on the m issionaries them selves, the d em onstrators seized Jason and others who had befriended them and dragged them before the politarchs: “T h ese m en who have sub­ verted the civilized world (oi την οικουμένην άναστατώσαντ€ς) have com e here to o ,” they p rotested , “and Jason has harbored them . T heir practices are clean contrary to C aesar’s decrees; they are proclaim ing a rival em peror, J e su s” (Acts 17:6, 7). A m ilitant m essianism was spreading am on g the Jew ish com m unities throughout the R om an Em pire (cf. Jew ett, “T h e Agitators and the Galatian C on g reg a tio n ” ). It was ju st about this tim e that Claudius exp elled the Jew s from R om e b ecau se o f their persistent rioting. If (as is m ost probable) the “C h restu s” at w h ose instigation, according to Suetonius (Claudius 25.4 ), this rioting had broken out was identical with the Jesus whom Paul pro­ claim ed to be Christ, the case against Paul and his associates was clear. If he was som e oth er m essianic figure, possibly alive and active in R om e in a .d . 4 9 — Sim on M agus has b een im plausibly su ggested by Eisler (The Messiah Jesus, 581) and, m ore guardedly, by J u d ge and T hom as (“T h e O rigin . . . ,” 8 7 )— the custodians o f law and order in the R om an world were not likely to see any material difference b etw een him and the one for w hom Paul m ade m essianic claim s. T h e trouble in R om e had not been sp on tan eou sly gen erated there; it had b een carried by visitors from the east. It was from the east, too, that these a lleged troublem akers had com e to T h essalon ica, carriers o f what the em peror him self had described a few years earlier as “ a general p lagu e which infests the w hole w orld” (Clau­ dius, Letter to the Alexandrines, P. Lond. 1912, CPI 2 .153, line 99). T h e fact that the rival em peror w hom Paul and the others were accused o f proclaim ing had b een sen ten ced to death by a Rom an ju d g e on a charge o f sed ition — as any o n e cou ld ascertain w ho took the trouble to inquire— spoke for itself. T h e “d ecrees (bόyμaτa) o f C aesar” which they were said to contravene have form ed the subject o f a study by Ju d ge (“T h e D ecrees

XXIV

I n t r o d u c t io n

o f C a e s a r” ). H e p o in ts o u t th a t, w hile th e d e m o n s tra to rs h a d in te n d e d to b rin g P aul a n d th e o th e r m issio n a rie s b e fo re th e “ p o p u la r assem b ly ” (δΙ)μθ9), it was b e fo re th e p o lita rc h s th a t they d ra g g e d J a s o n a n d his c o m p a n ­ ions, a n d su g g e sts th a t th e c h a rg e s b e fo re th e o n e b o d y n e e d n o t have b e e n id en tical w ith th o s e actually p re s s e d b e fo re th e o th e r. (T his p re s u p ­ p o se s th a t th e a u th o r o f A cts, tru e to his c u sto m , u ses his term s h e re w ith p re c isio n a n d d o e s n o t sim ply m e a n th at th e d e m o n s tra to rs w ished to e x p o se th e m issio n a rie s to th e v io len ce o f th e m o b .) E vid en tly th e p ro c la m a tio n o f a n o th e r e m p e ro r was th e m o st serio u s re sp e c t in w hich th e m issio n a rie s w ere a c c u se d o f c o n tra v e n in g th e d ec re e s o f C aesar. B ut su ch se d itio n (maiestas) was an offen se a g a in st pu b lic law a n d re q u ire d n o specific d e c re e o f C a e sa r to m ake it illegal (for th e lex lulia de maiestate se e B a u m a n , The Crimen Maiestatis . . . , a n d Impietas in principem). It is p lain , h o w ev er, fro m th e tw o T h e s s a lo n ia n le tte rs th a t th e re was a p ro m in e n t e sc h a to lo g ic a l n o te in th e a p o sto lic p re a c h in g in T h e s s a lo ­ nica. It affirm ed n o t only th a t th e M essiah fo re to ld by th e p ro p h e ts o f Israel h a d a p p e a re d in th e p e rs o n o f J e s u s , b u t also th a t this J e s u s — cru ci­ fied, risen a n d e x a lte d — w o u ld r e a p p e a r o n e a rth as u n iv ersal ju d g e (cf. 2 T h e s s 1 :7 -1 0 ). “ It w o u ld n o t h av e b e e n h a rd to in te r p r e t su ch a n n o u n c e ­ m en ts as p re d ic tio n s o f a c h a n g e o f r u le r ” (Ju d g e , “ D e c re e s ,” 3). B oth A u g u stu s a n d T ib e riu s h a d b e e n very sen sitiv e a b o u t th e activities o f a s­ tro lo g e rs a n d o th e r p ro g n o s tic a to rs . A u g u stu s in a.d . 1 1 issu ed a d e c re e fo rb id d in g , a m o n g o th e r th in g s, th e fo re c a stin g o f a n y o n e ’s d e a th (Dio C assiu s, Hist. 5 6 .2 5 .5 , 6); five years la te r this p ro h ib itio n was reaffirm ed a n d e x te n d e d by T ib e riu s (D io C assiu s, Hist. 5 7 .1 5 .8 ). T h e p ractice o f m agic a n d d iv in a tio n in g e n e ra l was b a n n e d as well as o f astro lo g y ; in p a rtic u la r, c o n s u lta tio n a b o u t th e e m p e r o r ’s h e a lth o r a b o u t h ig h m a tte rs o f sta te was a p p a re n tly f o rb id d e n u n d e r th e se v e re st p e n a ltie s (cf. T a c itu s, Ann. 2 .2 7 -3 2 ; P au lu s, Sententiae 5.21). T h e r e is also th e p o ssib ility th a t C la u d iu s ’s d isa p p ro v a l o f Jew ish m ili­ tancy, w hich fo u n d e x p re s s io n in his le tte r to th e p e o p le o f A lex an d ria at th e b e g in n in g o f his p rin c ip a te (a.d . 4 1 ), fo u n d fu rth e r e x p re ssio n in an official d e c re e . If so, th e te rm s o f th e in d ic tm e n t a g a in st Paul a n d his p arty w o u ld n a tu ra lly im ply th e ir d is o b e d ie n c e to su ch a d e c re e . It has b e e n a rg u e d , m o re o v e r, th at city m a g istra te s a n d o th e r local a u ­ th o ritie s th ro u g h o u t th e p ro v in c e s w ere re s p o n s ib le (possibly u n d e r oath) to e n fo rc e th e d e c re e s o f C a e sa r a n d to take a p p ro p ria te actio n in th e face o f any th re a t to his p e rs o n a l o r p o litical w ell-b ein g (Ju d g e , “ D e c re e s,” 5 -7 ; The Social Pattern, 34, 35). In th e s e c irc u m sta n c es, o n e can only a d m ire th e w isdom o f th e T h e s s a lo ­ nian p o lita rc h s in k e e p in g co o l h e a d s a n d re fu sin g to tak e p an ic action. P e rh a p s J a s o n a n d th e o th e rs b ro u g h t b e fo re th e m w ere know n to b e m en o f su b s ta n c e w ho w o u ld n o t read ily e n c o u ra g e tro u b le m a k e rs. At any ra te th e p o lita rc h s c o n te n te d th e m se lv e s w ith “ tak in g se c u rity ” (Χαβέιν το Ικανόν, cf. L atin satis accipere) fro m th e m (A cts 17:9)— m ak in g th em resp o n si-

Introduction

XXV

b le fo r th e m issio n a rie s’ g o o d b eh a v io r, w hich m e a n t th e ir g u a ra n te e in g th a t they, a n d in p a rtic u la r P au l, w ould leave th e city q u ietly . T o p ro te c t his frie n d s, P aul h ad n o o p tio n b u t to leave, b u t h e left m o st relu ctan tly . H e b eliev ed th a t th e new C h ristia n s in T h e ssa lo n ic a had receiv ed insufficient in s tru c tio n to p re p a re th e m fo r th e life w hich they w ould h e n c e fo rth h av e to lead , b u t su ccessive a tte m p ts w hich h e m ad e to re tu rn to th e m w ere th w a rte d (1 T h e s s 2:18). H e well knew th e kind o f tre a tm e n t they w o u ld h ave to p u t u p w ith, a n d h e felt fo r th e m acutely. W hat w ould th e le a d in g citizen s say to th e ir wives w ho h ad jo in e d this new a n d su sp e c t society? “ A fine lot th e se Jew ish s p e llb in d e rs are! T h ey co m e h e re a n d p e rs u a d e you to jo in th e ir fo llow ing, b u t as so o n as tro u b le blow s up , off they g o an d leave th e ir d u p e s to face th e m u sic !” T h a t was h a rd e n o u g h to b e a r, b u t b o th le tte rs to th e T h e s s a lo n ia n s m ake it p lain th a t so m e o f th e c o n v e rts h a d to e n d u re w o rse th a n rid icu le: they are c o m m e n d e d fo r th e ir ‘‘ste a d fa stn e ss a n d fa ith ” in all th e ir ‘‘p e rse c u tio n s a n d . . . afflictio n s” (2 T h e s s 1:4). P aul a n d S ilvanus w ere sp irite d away q u ie tly by n ig h t a n d e sc o rte d to B ero e a , a city lying so m e way s o u th o f th e Via E g n a tia — oppidum deuium, ‘‘a tow n o ff th e m ain r o a d ,” as C icero calls it (In Pisonem 89). In B e ro e a as in T h e ssa lo n ic a th ey visited th e sy n a g o g u e a n d u se d th e re a d in g o f th e S c rip tu re le sso n s as an o ccasio n fo r c o m m u n ic a tin g th e g o sp el to th e c o n g re g a tio n . T h e Jew s o f B e ro e a gave th e m u n p re ju d ic e d a tte n tio n a n d sh o w ed th em selv es w illing to stu d y th e sa c re d tex t carefully to see if it c o u ld re a so n a b ly b e in te r p r e te d a lo n g th e lin es in d ic a te d by th e tw o visitors. A n u m b e r o f th em w ere co n v in ced . O n e is k now n to us by n a m e — S o p a te r th e so n o f P y rrh u s (p ro b a b ly id en tical w ith th e S o sip a te r o f R o m 16:21), w ho seven years la te r a c c o m p a n ie d Paul to J u d e a w ith o th e r d e le g a te s fro m his A eg ean m issio n -field w ho w ere tak in g th e ir resp e c tiv e c h u rc h e s ’ c o n trib u tio n s to th e J e ru s a le m re lie f fu n d (Acts 20:4). In a d d itio n , th e c o n v e rts a t B e ro e a , as at T h e ssa lo n ic a , in c lu d e d sev eral ‘‘G reek w o m en o f h ig h s ta n d in g ” (Acts 17:12). T h r o u g h o u t P a u l’s M a c e d o n ia n m issio n , th en , w o m en o f su b sta n c e a p ­ p e a r to have p lay ed an in flu e n tia l p a rt a m o n g his co n v e rts, b e g in n in g w ith Lydia, his first c o n v e rt in P h ilip p i (Acts 16:14). T h is is in k e e p in g w ith th e tra d itio n a l sta tu s o f w o m en in M a c e d o n ia n society. ‘‘If M aced o n ia p r o ­ d u c e d p e rh a p s th e m o st c o m p e te n t g ro u p o f m e n th e w o rld h a d yet seen , th e w o m en w ere in all re sp e c ts th e m e n ’s c o u n te rp a rts ; they p lay ed a la rg e p a rt in affairs, re c e iv e d envoys a n d o b ta in e d c o n c e ssio n s fro m th e m fo r th e ir h u s b a n d s , b u ilt te m p le s, fo u n d e d cities, e n g a g e d m e rc e n a rie s, c o m ­ m a n d e d a rm ies, h e ld fo rtre sse s, a n d a c te d o n o ccasio n as re g e n ts o r even c o -ru le rs ” (T a rn a n d G riffith, Hellenistic Civilisation, 98, 9 9). T h is ex am p le, set by w o m en o f th e ru lin g classes, was ev id en tly follow ed by th e ir fre e b o rn sisters in low er social ran k s. B ut so m e o f P a u l’s a n d S ilv a n u s’s o p p o n e n ts in T h e ssa lo n ic a , le a rn in g o f th e ir activity in B e ro e a , m a d e th e ir way th e re a n d s tirre d u p th e sam e

XXVI

I n t r o d u c t io n

kind o f agitation as they had d o n e at h om e. O n ce again Paul had to be spirited away for his ow n safety and that o f his converts. His B eroean friends con veyed him to A thens, and from A thens, after a short stay, he w ent on to C orinth, w here h e arrived, as he says, “in w eakness and in m uch fear and trem b lin g” (1 C or 2:3). H e had b een virtually e x p e lle d as a troublem aker from o n e M acedonian city after another. H ad h e and his com p an ions b een m istaken w hen they crossed the sea from Asia M inor to M acedonia under a conviction o f divine guidance? H ad the M acedonian m ission proved abortive? In each M acedo­ nian city they visited they had estab lish ed a com m unity o f believers. But the m issionaries had b een forced to leave th ese you n g converts abruptly, quite inadequately eq u ip p ed with the instruction and en cou ragem en t n eces­ sary to en ab le them to stand firm in the face o f determ in ed op p osition . W ould their im m ature faith prove equal to the challenge? It did, ou tstan d ­ ingly so, but this cou ld n ot have b een foreseen . T h e first g o sp el cam paign in M acedonia, in the light o f the seq u el, can be recogn ized as an illustrious success, but at the tim e w hen Paul was co m p elled to leave the province it m ust have b een felt as a heartbreaking failure. 4. Paul's Plan o f Action Paul is n ot said in our records to have had any definite plan o f action in m ind w hen h e landed in M acedonia. But perhaps, as h e and his com pan­ ions jo u rn ey ed westw ard a lo n g the Via Egnatia, a plan o f action began to take sh ap e in his thinking. It was not by his ow n ch o ice that h e left the Via Egnatia at T h essa lo n ica and turned south to B eroea. If n o obstacles had b een placed in his path, h e cou ld have co n tin u ed to its w estern term inus on the Adriatic. But the w estern term inus o f the Via Egnatia w ould have b een no goal in itself; its im portance lay in its b ein g a stage on the road to R om e. A short sea -crossin g over the Straits o f O tranto w ould have taken him to B rundisium (Brindisi), and from there the Via Appia led to R om e. S om e seven years later Paul tells the R om an Christians that he has fre­ quently b een p reven ted from carrying out a lon gstan d in g in ten tion o f pay­ ing them a visit (R om 1:13; 15:22). H is first steps a lo n g the Via Egnatia m ight certainly have m oved him to con ceiv e such an in ten tion . So Bornkamm ju d ges: “ W e can be perfectly sure that, at the latest, in Asia Minor and on the jou rn ey through M acedonia to T h essalon ica, R om e was present in P aul’s m ind as a far-off ob jectiv e” (Paul, 51; cf. Harnack, Mission and Expansion, 7 4 -7 5 ; Cadbury, Book o f Acts, 6 0 -6 1 ; J u d g e and T h om as, “O ri­ g in ,” 90). But h e was “ h in d ered ” from realizing it at the tim e, partly by the agitation in T h essa lo n ica which com p elled him to turn south, partly by his in volvem en t in the form ation and b u ild ing up o f Christian com m u n i­ ties in C orinth and oth er places in Achaia after his en forced departure from M acedonia and partly, perhaps, b ecau se new s o f C laudius’s recent exp u lsion o f Jew s from R om e show ed him that he n eed not think o f g o in g there at that tim e. H e certainly learned o f the exp u lsion edict at the latest

Introduction

xxvn

w hen h e cam e to C orinth and m et Priscilla and Aquila, w ho had been ob lig ed to leave R om e b ecau se o f that edict (Acts 18:2). But he may have learned o f it earlier. If Jew s who were ex p elled from R om e headed for the east, the Via Egnatia offered itself as a major highway alon g which they m ight travel. N ew s o f the edict (which is probably to b e dated a.d . 49), and possibly so m e o f th ose w ho had b een evicted b ecause o f it, could have reached T h essa lo n ica w hile Paul was still there. If so, this would help to fill in m ore o f the background against which the charges against Paul and his collea g u es at T h essalon ica are to be evaluated. 5. Paul and the Churches o f Macedonia Paul’s con tin u in g relations with the T h essalon ian and other M acedonian churches can be follow ed to som e exten t in the letters to the T hessalonians and the Philippians; h e alludes to them further in w riting to the Corinthians and the R om ans. From th ese referen ces we gather that his relations with them w ere outstandingly happy. H e com m ends them for their steadfastness in faith and w itness even under severe persecu tion and for their consistently gen ero u s giving— not only to h im self personally but also to the Jerusalem relief fund— in circum stances o f d eep poverty (cf. 2 C or 8:1-5; 11:9; Rom 15:26). Five years after P aul’s enforced departure from M acedonia he was able to revisit the province, and this tim e no great difficulties appear to have arisen for him . With the a ccession o f N ero in O ctober, a .d . 54, som e o f the hindrances im p o sed in the principate o f C laudius may have lapsed. T ow ard the end o f his E phesian ministry (in the spring o f a.d . 55) Paul planned to pass through M acedonia and con tinue south to see his friends in C orinth (1 C or 16:5) and, although troubles in the C orinthian church caused so m e m odification in his plans (2 C or 1:15-2:13), he did spend a consid erab le tim e in M acedonia. It is indicated also by the narrative o f Acts (19:21; 20:1, 2) that he visited M acedonia at this tim e, but a careful reading o f the ev id en ce su g g ests that his stay in the province was lon ger than m ight appear o n the surface o f the Acts narrative— that, in fact, he was able to travel farther w est alon g the Via Egnatia than he had b een allow ed to d o on his first visit. T h is con clu sion is dictated by the w ording o f R om ans 15:19 where Paul, at the en d o f his ap ostolic program in the eastern M editerranean, says that he has co m p leted the preaching o f the g o sp el “from Jerusalem and as far round as Illyricum .” T h e m ention o f Illyricum, as the farthest west area w here he has preached hitherto, implues that he has traveled along the Via Egnatia possibly as far as its term inus at Dyrrhachium and then turned north to cross the frontier separating M acedonia from Illyricum. It was not his in ten tion on this occasion to take ship across the Straits o f O tranto. H e h o p ed to visit R om e on the way to Spain in the near future (perhaps he crossed into Illyricum to gain som e exp erien ce in preaching the g o sp el in Latin, the lan gu age which h e w ould be ob liged to use in Spain); m eanw hile, he planned to visit Jerusalem with th ose d elegates o f

x x v iii

I n t r o d u c t io n

his G e n tile c h u rc h e s w ho w ere to carry th e ir c o n trib u tio n s to th e fu n d for th e re lie f o f th e m o th e r c h u rc h . H e r e tu r n e d fro m Illy ricu m in (p ro b ab ly ) th e late s u m m e r o f a .d . 56 a n d tra v e le d back e a st a lo n g th e Via E g n atia; th e n h e m o v ed so u th fro m e a s te rn M aced o n ia to C o rin th to sp e n d th e w in ter th e re . A b o u t th e b e g in ­ n in g o f th e n a v ig a tio n se a so n in a.d . 57 h e was jo in e d by th e d e le g a te s o f th e G e n tile c h u rc h e s, w ho w ere to sail with him fro m C e n c h re a e to J u d e a (cf. Acts 20:4; they re p re s e n te d “ all th e c h u rc h e s o f C h ris t” from w hich g re e tin g s a re s e n t to th e R o m an C h ristia n s in R om 16:16). T h e y did in d e e d sail fro m C e n c h re a e b u t Paul, le a rn in g o f a p lo t a g a in st his life, c h a n g e d his tra v e lin g p la n s, w en t n o rth to M aced o n ia by lan d an d to o k sh ip fro m th e p o r t o f P h ilip p i to A lex an d ria T ro a s , w h e re h e fo u n d his fello w -trav elers aw aitin g him . At P h ilip p i he was re jo in e d by th e a u th o r o f th e “ w e” n a rra tiv e , w ho jo u r n e y e d to J e ru s a le m w ith h im (Acts 20:5, 6). T h is b rie f a n d u n p la n n e d visit to P h ilip p i (on w hich h e n o d o u b t p a sse d th ro u g h T h e ssa lo n ic a ) was th e last o ccasio n sp e n t by Paul o n M a c ed o n ian soil. B ut th e c h u rc h e s o f M a ced o n ia n e v e r fo rg o t him , a n d his a p o sto lic ach ie v e m en t in th e p ro v in c e h as e n d u re d in v ig o r to th e p re s e n t day. II. T he T hessalonian Letters

Bibliography (a) Commentaries Alford, H. The Greek Testament, iii. London: Rivingtons, 51871, 43-69, 248-299. Amiot, F. S. Paul, Epitre aux Galates: Epitres aux Thessaloniciens. VS. Paris: Beauchesne, 1946. Bailey, J. W. ‟T h e First and Second Epistles to the T hessalonians.” IB. xi. Nashville: Abingdon, 1955, 243-329. Bengel, J. A. Gnomon Novi Testamenti (Tübin­ gen, 1773). L ondon/E dinburgh: Williams and Norgate, 31862, 746-764. Best, E. The First and Second Epistles to the Thessalonians. HNTC. New York: H arper, 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. W uppertal: Brockhaus, 1960. Bornemann, W. Die Thessalonicherbriefe. MeyerK. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 5/61894. Calvin, J. The Epistles of Paul the Apostle to the Romans and to the Thessalonians (Strasbourg, 1540). T r. R. Mackenzie. Edinburgh: Oliver 8c Boyd, 1960, 329-423. Denney, J. The Epistles to the Thessalonians. ExpB. London: H odder & Stroughton, 1892. Dewailly, L.-M. La Jeune Eglise de Thessalonique. LD 37. Paris: Cerf, 1963. Dibelius, M. An die Thessalonicher 1-11. An die Philipper. HNT 11. Tübingen: Mohr, 31937. Dobschütz, E. von. Die Thessalonicherbriefe. MeyerK Gottingen: Vandenhoeck 8c Ruprecht, 71909. Donfried, K. P. The Epistles to the Thessalonians. ICC. Edinburgh: T . 8c T. Clark, forthcoming. Eadie, J. A Commentary on the Greek Text of the Epistles of Paul to the Thessalonians. London: Griffin, 1877. Ellicott, C. J. St. Paul's Epistles to the Thessalonians. London: Longmans, 41880. Find­ lay, G. G. The Epistles to the Thessalonians. CGT. Cambridge: Cam bridge University Press, 1925. Frame, J. E. The Epistles of St. Paul to the Thessalonians. ICC. Edinburgh: T. 8c T. Clark, 1912. Grayston, K. The Letters of Paul to the Philippians and to the Thessalonians. CBC. Cambridge: Cam bridge University Press, 1967. Hendriksen, W. I & II Thessalonians. NTC. G rand Rapids, MI: Baker, 1955. Hiebert, D. E. The

Introduction

XXIX

Thessalonian Epistles: A Call to Readiness. Chicago: Moody Press, 1971. Hobbs, Η. H. “ 1-2 Thessalonians.“ BBC xi. Nashville: Broadman Press, 1972, 257-298. Hogg, C. F., and Vine, W. E. The Epistles of Paul the Apostle to the Thessalonians. Glasgow: Pickering & Inglis, 1914. Holtz, T. Der erste Brief an die Thessalonicher, EKKNT 13 Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener Verlag, forthcoming. Hubbard, D. A. Thessaloni­ ans, Waco, TX: W ord, 1977. Jowett, B. The Eputles of St. Paul to the Thessalonians, Galatians, Romans. 2 volumes. London: John Murray, 31894. Kelly, W. The Epistles of Paul the Apostle to the Thessalonians. London: C. A. Hammond, 31953. Lightfoot, J. B. Notes on the Epistles of St. Paul. London: Macmillan, 1895, 1-136. Lünemann, G. Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the NT: The Epistles to the Thessalonians. Tr. P. J. Gloag. Edinburgh: T. Sc T. Clark, 1880. Marxsen, W. Der erste Brief an die Thessalonicher. ZBK:NT IL L Zürich: Theologischer Verlag, 1979. Marxsen, W. Der zweite Brief an die Thessalonicher. ZBK:NT 11.2. Zürich: Theologischer Verlag, forth­ coming. Masson, C. Les deux Epitres de Saint Paul aux Thessalomciens. CNT xia. Neuchätel/Paris: Delachaux et Niestlé , 1957. Milligan, G. St. Paul's Epistles to the Thessalonians. London: Macmillan, 1908. Moffatt, J. “T he First and Second Epistles of Paul the Apostle to the Thessalonians.” EGT iv. London: H odder & Stoughton, 1910, 1-54. Moore, A. L. 1 and II Thessalonians. NCB. London: Nelson, 1969. Morris, L. The First and Second Epistles to the Thessalonians. NICNT. Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1959. Neil, W. The Epistles] of Paul to the Thessalonians. MNTC. London: H odder 8c Stoughton, 1950. Oepke, A. “ Die Briefe an die Thessalonicher.” In Die kleineren Briefe des Apostels Paulus. NTD 8. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck 8c Ruprecht, 31953. Plummer, A. A Commentary on St. Paul's First Epistle to the Thessalonians. London: R. Scott, 1918. Plummer, A. A Commentary on St. Paul's Second Epistle to the Thessaloni­ ans. London: R. Scott, 1918. Reese, J. Μ. I and 2 Thessalonians. NT Message 16, Wilmington, DE, Glazier, 1979. Rigaux, B. Saint Paul: Les Epitres aux Thessalomciens. EB. Paris: Gabalda, 1956. Rossano, P. Lettere ai Tessalonicesi. LSB. Torino: Marietti, 1965. Schlatter, A. Die Briefe an die Thessalonicher, Philipper, Timotheus und Titus. Stutt­ gart: Calwer Verlag, 1950. Schlier, H. Der Apostel und seine Gemeinde. Auslegung des ersten Briefes an die Thessalonicher. Freiburg: Herder, 1972. Schmiedel, P. W. Die Briefe an die Thessalonicher und an die Korinther. HCNT. Freiburg: Mohr, 1892. Schür­ mann, H., and Egenholf, H. A. The Two Epistles to the Thessalonians. NTSR. London: Sheed and Ward, 1981. Staab, K. Die Thessalomcherbriefe. RNT. Regensburg: Pustet, 1965. Trilling, W. Der zweite Briefe an die Thessalonicher, EKKNT 14 NeukirchenrVluyn: Neukirchener Verlag, 1980. Walvoord, J. F. The Thessalonian Epistles. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1967. Ward, R. A. Commentary on 1 & 2 Thessalonians. Waco, TX: Word, 1973. Whiteley, D. E. H. Thessalonians in the RSV. NClarB. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1969. W ohlenberg, G. Der erste und zweite Thessalonicherbrief. ZK. Leipzig: Deichert, 1909. (b) Other Works Askwith, E. H. “ T and ‘W e’ in the Thessalonian Epistles.” Expositor, series 8, 1 (1911) 149-159. Bacon, B. W. Introduction to the New Testament. New York: Macmillan, 1900. Barnett, A. E. The New Testament." its Making and Meaning. New York: AbingdonCokesbury, 1946. Baur, F. C. Paul: his Life and Works. 2 volumes. Tr. A. Menzies. London: Williams and Norgate, 1875-76. Appendix III of Volume II of the English edition is a translation of Baur’s “ Die beiden Eiriefe an die Thessalonicher,“ TJ 14 (1855) 141-167. Beare, F. W. “Thessalonians, First Letter to the” and “T hes­ salonians, Second Letter to the.” In IDB iv, 621-629. Bomkamm, G. Paul. Tr. D. M. G. Stalker. New York: H arper, 1971. Brassac, A. “ Une inscription de Del-

XXX

I n t r o d u c t io n

phes et la Chronologie de Saint Paul.” RB 10 (1913) 36-53, 207-217. Buck, C. H., and Taylor, G. St. Paul: A Study of the Development of his Thought. New York: Scribners, 1969. Bultmann, R. Theology of the New Testament. 2 volumes. T r. K. Grobel. London: SCM Press, 1952-55. Burkitt, F. C. Christian Beginnings. London: University of Lon­ don Press, 1924. Collins, R. F. ‘‘T he Theology o f Paul’s First Letter to the Thessalo­ nians.” LouvStud 6 (1977) 315-337. Collins, R. F. ‘‘A propos the Integrity of 1 Thessalonians.” ETL 55 (1979) 67-106. Collins, R. F. “ 1 Thessalonians and the Liturgy of the Early C hurch.” BTB 10 (1980) 51-64. Davies, J. G. “T he Genesis o f Belief in an Im minent Parousia.” JTS n.s. 14 (1963) 104-107. Day, P. “T he practical purpose o f 2 T hessalonians.” ATR 45 (1963) 203-206. Eckart, K. G. “ Der zweite echte Brief des Apostels Paulus an die T hessalonicher.” ZTK 58 (1961) 30-44. Ellingworth, P., and Nida, E. A. A Translator's Handbook on Paul's Letters to the Thessalonians. Stuttgart: United Bible Societies, 1975. Ellis, E. E. “ Paul and his Co-W orkers.” NTS 17 (1970-71) 437-452. Faw, C. E. “O n the Writing of First T hessalonians.” JBL 71 (1952) 217-225. Fuller, R. H. A Critical Introduction to the New Testament. London: Duckworth, 1966. Giblin, C. H. The Threat to Faith. AnBib 31. Rome: Pontifical Biblical Institute, 1967. Goguel, M. Introduction au Nou­ veau Testament, iv. 1 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, i. Amsterdam: Blaev, 1641; ii. Paris, 1646. Hadorn, W. Die Abfassung der Thessalonicherbriefe in der Zeit der dritten Missionsreise des Paulus. BFCT 24, 3-4. Gütersloh. Bertelsmann, 1919. Hadorn, W. “ Die Abfassung der Thessalonicherbriefe auf der dritten Missionsreise und der Kanon des M arcion.” ZNW 19 (1919-20) 67-72. Harnack, A. von “ Das Problem des zweiten Thessalonicherbriefs.” SAB 31 (1910) 560-578. Henneken, B. Verkündigung und Prophetie im ersten Thessalomcherbrief SBS 29. Stuttgart: Katholisches Bibelwerk, 1969. H ilgenfeld, A. “ Die beiden Briefe an die Thessalonicher, nach Inhalt und U rsprung.” ZW T 5 (1862) 225-264. Hort, F. J. A. The Christian Ecclesia. London: Macmillan, 1897. Jewett, R. “The Agitators and the Galatian C ongregation.” NTS 17 (1970-71) 198-212. Jewett, R. Paul's Anthropological Terms. A Study of their Use in Conflict Settings. AGJU 10. Leiden: Brill, 1971. Jewett, R. Dating Paul's Life. London: SCM Press, 1979. Kaye, B. N. “ Eschatology and Ethics in 1 and 2 T hessalonians.” NovT 17 (1975) 47-57. Kemmler, D. W. Faith and Human Reason. A Study of Paul's Method of Preaching as illustrated by 1-2 Thessalonians and Acts l 7, 2-4. NovTSup 40. Leiden: Brill, 1975. Knox, J. “ A C onjecture as to the Original Status of II Corinthians and II Thessalonians in the Pauline C orpus.” JBL 55 (1936) 145-153. Koester, Η. “ 1 Thessalonians—Experim ent in Christian W riting” in Continuity and Discontinu­ ity in Church History: Essays presented io G. H. Williams, ed. Church, F. F. and George, T. Studies in the History of Christian T hought, 19. Leiden: Brill, 1979, 33-44. Kümmel, W. G. Introduction to the New Testament. T r. A. J. Mattill. London: SCM Press, 1965. Kümmel, W. G. “ Das literarische und geschichtliche Problem des ersten Thessalonicherbriefes.” Neotestamentica und Patristica: Eine Freundesgabe O. Cullmann . . . überreicht, ed. W. C. van Unnik. NovTSup 6. Leiden: Brill, 1962, 213227. Lake, K. The Earlier Epistles of St. Paul. London: Rivingtons, 219 14. Levison, M., Morton, A. Q., Wake, W. C. “ On Certain Statistical Features of the Pauline Epistles.” Philosophical Journal 3 (1966), 129-148. Lightfoot, J. B. Biblical Essays. London: Macmillan, 1893, 235-250 (“T he Churches of Macedonia”), 251-269 (“T he Church of Thessalonica” ). Lindemann, A. “ Zum Abfassungszweck des Zweiten Thessalonicherbriefes.” Z N W 68 (1977) 35-47. Lipsius, R. A. “ Über Zweck und Veranlassung des ersten Thessalonicherbriefs.” TSK 27 (1854) 903—934. Lüde·

Introduction

XXXI

mann, G. Paulus, der Heidenapostel. Band l: Studien zur Chronologie. FRLANT 123. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck 8c Ruprecht, 1980. Lütgert, W. Die Vollkommenen im Philip­ perbrief und die Enthusiasten in Thessalonich. BFCT 13.6. Gütersloh: Bertelsmann, 1909. Lütgert, W. Freiheitspredigt und Schwarmgeister in Korinth. BFCT 12.3. Gütersloh: Ber­ telsmann, 1908. Lütgert, W. Gesetz und Geist. Eine Untersuchung zur Vorgeschichte des Galaterbriefs. BFCT 22.6. Gütersloh: Bertelsmann, 1919. Manson, T. W. Studies in the Gospels and Epistles, ed. M. Black. Manchester: M anchester University Press, 1962, 259-278 (“T he Letters to the Thessalonians,“ reprinted from BJRL 35, 1952-53, 428^147). Martin, R. P. New Testament Foundations. 2 volumes. Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1975-78. Marxsen, W. Introduction to the New Testament. Tr. G. Buswell. Oxford: Blackwell, 1968. Mearns, C. L. “ Early Eschatological Development in Paul: the Evidence of I and II T hessalonians.“ NTS 27 (1980-81) 137-157. Michaelis, W. Die Gefangenschaft des Paulus in Ephesus und das Itinerar des Timotheus. NF 1.3. Gütersloh: Bertelsmann. 1925. Michaelis, W. “ Der zweite Thessalonicherbrief kein Philipperbrief.“ TZ l (1945) 282-286. Moffatt, j . Introduction to the Literature of the New Testament. Edinburgh: T. 8c T . Clark, 31918. Morton, A. Q. “T he Authorship of Greek Prose.“ JRStatSoc series A 127 (1965), 169-233. Morton, A. Q., “T he Authorship of the Pauline C orpus” in The New Testament in Historical and Contemporary Perspective. Essays in Memory of G. H. C. Macgregor, ed. W. Barclay and H. Anderson. Oxford: Blackwell, 1965, 209-235. Morton, A. Ch The Integrity of the Pauline Epistles. Manchester: M anchester Statistical Society, 1965. N ellessen, E. Untersuchungen zur altlateinischen Überlieferung des 1. Thessalonicherbriefes. BBB 22. Bonn: Hanstein, 1965. O gg, G. The Chronology of the Life of Paul. London: Epworth, 1968. Orchard, J. B. “Thessalonians and the Synoptic Gospels.” Bib 19 (1938) 19-42. Plassart, A. “L’inscription de Delphes m entionnant le Proconsul Gallion.“ REGr 80 (1967) 372378. Rigaux, B. “Vocabulaire chr£tien ant£rieure ä la prem iere pitre aux Thessaloniciens.“ BETL 13 (1959) 380-389. Robinson, J. A. T. Redating the New Testament. London: SCM Press, 1975. Schade, H.-H. Apokalyptische Christologie bei Paulus. G öttin­ gen: Vandenhoeck 8c Ruprecht, 1981. Schmidt, J. E. C. Vermutungen über die beiden Briefe an die Thessalonicher. Bibliothek fü r Kritik und Exegese des Neuen Testam ents. Hadamer, 1801, 385-386. Schmidt, J. E. C. Einleitung in das Neue Testament. Giessen, 1804, 256-257. Schmithals, W. Paul and the Gnostics. Tr. J. E. Steely. Nashville/ New York: Abingdon, 1972, 123-218 (“T he Historical Situation o f the Thessalonian Letters“). Schmithals, W. Der Römerbnef als historisches Problem. SNT 9. Gütersloh: Mohn, 1975. Schmithals, W. “ Die Thessalonicherbriefe als Briefkompositionen.” In Zeit und Geschichte: Dankesgabe an Rudolf Bultmann, ed. E. Dinkier. Tübingen: Mohr, 1964, 295-315. Schrader, C. Der Apostel Paulus, Teil 5. Leipzig: 1836. Schwank, B. “ Der sogenannte Brief an Gallio und die Datierung des 1 T hess.“ BZ 15 (1971) 265-266. Schweizer, E. “ Der zweite Thessalonicherbrief ein Philipperbrief?“ TZ 1 (1945) 90-105. Schweizer, E. “ Replik.“ TZ 1 (1945) 286-289. Schweizer, E. “ Zum Problem des zweiten T hessalonicherbriefes.“ TZ 2 (1946) 74-75. Smallwood, E. M. Documents illustrating the Pnncipates of Gains, Claudius and Nero. Cambridge: Cam bridge University Press, 1967. Smith, D. The· Life and Letters of St. Paul. London: H odder 8c Stoughton, 1919. Suhl, A. Paulus und seine Briefe: Eine Beitrag zur Paulinischen Chronologie SNT 11. Gütersloh: Mohn, 1975. Thieme, K. Die Struktur des Ersten Thessa­ lonicher-Briefes. In Abraham unser Vater . . . Festschnft für Otto Michel, ed. O. Betz, M. Hengel, P. Schmidt, Leiden: Brill, 1963, 450-458. Trilling, W. Untersuchungen zum zweiten Thessalonicherbrief. Leipzig: St. Benno, 1972. Uprichard, R. E. H. “T he Person and Work o f Christ in 1 Thessalonians.“ IrBibStud 1 (1979) 19-27 = EvQ 53 (1981) 108-114. Ware, P. “T he Coming o f the Lord: Eschatology and 1 Thessa­

XXX11

In t r o d u c t io n

lonians.” RestQ 22 (1979) 109-120. Weiss, J. Earliest Christianity. Tr. F. C. Grant and others. 2 volumes. New York: H arper (Torchbooks), 1959. W est, J. C. “The O rder of 1 and 2 T hessalonians.” JTS 15 (1913-14) 66-74. W rede, W. Die Echtheit des zweiten Thessalonicherbr i f s. TU 24.2. Leipzig: Hinrichs, 1903. 1. Authorship T w o le tte rs a d d re s s e d to “ th e c h u rc h o f th e T h e s s a lo n ia n s “ have b e e n p re se rv e d to us in th e N T c a n o n . T h e y a re in c lu d e d in th e corpus Paulinum, b u t in fact each o f th e m is s u p e rs c rib e d in th e n am es o f “ Paul, Silvanus a n d T im o th y .” B o th S ilvanus (Silas) a n d T im o th y (at least by inferen ce) a p p e a r in th e re c o rd o f A cts as P a u l’s c o m p a n io n s d u rin g his first visit to T h e ssa lo n ic a (Acts 1 7 :1 -9 ). F o r a s h o rt tim e a fte r P a u l’s d e p a rtu re from T h e ssa lo n ic a th e th re e w ere se p a ra te d , b u t they w ere re u n ite d in C o rin th (Acts 18:5; cf. 2 C o r 1:19). C o rin th th u s su g g ests its e lf as th e p lace from w hich th e le tte rs to th e T h e s s a lo n ia n c h u rc h w ere sen t. S ince Paul, S ilvanus a n d T im o th y a re n a m e d to g e th e r as jo in t-a u th o rs o f th e le tte rs, it is prim a facie c o n ceiv ab le th a t S ilvanus a n d T im o th y played a re s p o n sib le p a rt a lo n g w ith Paul in th e c o m p o sitio n . T im o th y in d e e d was P a u l’s a id e -d e -c a m p a n d is n a m e d a lo n g w ith P aul in th e p re sc rip t o f so m e o th e r le tte rs (2 C o rin th ia n s, P h ilip p ian s, C o lo ssian s, P h ilem on), certain ly b e c a u se h e was in P a u l’s c o m p a n y w h en th e se w ere w ritten an d possib ly b e c a u se h e se rv e d P aul as a m a n u e n sis. S ilvanus, o n th e o th e r h an d , o c c u p ie d a m o re in d e p e n d e n t sta tu s in re la tio n to Paul. H e was n o t a c o n v e rt o f P a u l’s (as T im o th y was); h e was a m e m b e r o f th e c h u rch o f Je ru s a le m , e n jo y in g th e c o n fid e n c e o f th e le a d e rs o f th a t c h u rch , b e in g h im s e lf o n e o f th e “ le a d in g m e n a m o n g th e b r e th r e n ” th e re (Acts 15:22). T h e a ρriοri lik e lih o o d th a t such a m an w o u ld be jo in t- a u th o r o f lette rs in w hich h e is n a m e d as o n e o f th e se n d e rs, in a su b sta n tia l a n d n o t a m erely n o m in a l se n se , is b o rn e o u t by in te rn a l ev id en ce. T h e te a c h in g o f th e s e tw o le tte rs is th a t w hich (so far as can b e ju d g e d ) was c o m m o n in p rim itiv e C h ristia n ity . It was receiv ed a n d im p a rte d by Paul a m o n g o th e rs , b u t th e re is little h e re th a t is distinctively P au lin e. F. C. B u rk itt in p a rtic u la r m a in ta in e d th a t b o th le tte rs w ere th e w ork o f S ilvanus ( Christian Beginnings, 1 3 0 -1 3 3 ). T h is, to his m ind, e x p la in e d th e ir “ archaic fe a tu re s ” (n o t least in c o m p a ris o n w ith G a latian s, w hich h e ju d g e d o n in d e p e n d e n t g ro u n d s to b e th e e a rlie st o f P a u l’s e x ta n t le tte rs). H e re c o g ­ n ized in th e m “ a m o n u m e n t o f n o t q u ite th e earlie st sta g e o f J e ru s a le m ite C h ris tia n ity ,” a d d in g , “ I f I m ay h a z a rd a final g u ess, I sh o u ld say th at Silas h a d h e a rd St. S te p h e n g la d ly .” W h e n P aul in o th e r le tte rs e x p re sse s his th anks to G o d fo r th o se to w hom h e w rites, h e usu ally d o e s so in th e first p e rs o n sin g u la r (“ I give th an k s . . .” ), ev en w hen o th e rs a re a sso c ia te d w ith him in th e p re sc rip t (cf. I C o r 1:4; Phil 1:3; P hlm 4). (C o lo ssian s, se n t in th e n a m e o f h im se lf a n d T im o th y to a c h u rc h n o t p e rso n a lly k n o w n to him , is an e x cep tio n . C ol 1:3 b eg in s, “ W e alw ays th a n k G o d . . . .” ) In b o th th e T h e ssa lo n ia n le tte rs th e first p e rs o n p lu ra l is u sed : “ W e give th an k s to G o d always . . . ”

Introduction

xxxiii

( l T h ess 1:2); “W e are b ou n d to give thanks to G od always . . .” (2 T h ess 1:3). T his u se o f the first p erson plural is m aintained throughout both letters, apart from certain places w here the singular suddenly appears (1 T h ess 2:18; 3:5; 5:27; 2 T h ess 2:5; 3:17). In two o f th ese five places the first personal p ron ou n is accom panied by the nam e “ Paul” (1 T h ess 2:18; 2 T h ess 3:17). All o f them are best exp lained by the su p p osition that they are Paul’s personal additions, w hether inserted by him orally as the letters w ere b ein g dictated or ap p en d ed — possibly in his ow n hand— w hen they were b ein g read over after com p letion (see com m ents o n each). T h e inclu sion o f his nam e in the prescripts and especially his signature at the end o f the seco n d letter w ould provide ev id en ce en o u g h that the contents as a w h ole w ere approved by him , w hoever was resp on sib le for the actual com p osition . T h e authenticity o f both letters, and especially o f 2 T h essalon ian s, has b een q u estio n ed from tim e to tim e, although both appear in the earliest lists o f the Pauline w ritings. T h e first scholar to cast doubts on the authentic­ ity o f 2 T h essalon ian s appears to have b een J. E. C. Schm idt, in a succession o f works published b etw een 1798 and 1804. F. C. Baur regarded h im self as a p io n eer in d ou b tin g the authenticity o f 1 T h essalon ian s which, he wrote in 1845, “has as yet excited n o su sp icion s” (it seem s, how ever, that he was anticipated by C. Schrader in 1836). T h e ab sen ce o f anything in 1 T h essalon ian s on which criticism can easily lay h old has b een for many critics a pow erful argum ent for its authenticity. Baur, how ever, saw in this “ a criterion adverse to a Pauline origin ” (im plying, perhaps, that the authen­ tic Paul provides n o lack o f m aterial for criticism to lay hold o f—which, in o n e sen se, is true en o u g h ). In Baur’s eyes, 1 T h essalon ian s was based on the narrative o f Acts (itself, as h e reckoned, a second-century work), and contains rem in iscen ces o f g en u in e Pauline letters (especially 1 and 2 C orinthians). M oreover, the statem ent in 1 T h essalon ian s 2:16 that retribu­ tion has overtaken the Jew s ei τέλ ο ς “finally” p resu p p oses the fall o f Jerusa­ lem in a .d . 70 (Paul: His Life and Works, ii, 8 5 -9 2 ). W hereas 1 T h essa lo n ia n s appeared to Baur to reflect Paul’s esch atologi­ cal views (at seco n d hand, to be sure), h e found in 2 T h essalon ian s the esch atology o f a very different sch o o l o f thought. In an article published in 1855 h e argued that 2 T h essalon ian s was com p osed under the influence o f th e jo h a n n in e A pocalypse: the “ man o f la w lessn ess” o f 2 T hessalonians 2 :3 -1 0 is m o d eled on the “b ea st” o f R evelation 13:1-9. Paul’s alleged signature at the en d o f 2 T h essalon ian s is a mark o f pseudonym ity: in Paul’s day there was no n eed to guarantee the authenticity o f his letters; only with the circulation o f pseudepigrapha did this b eco m e necessary (“ Die b eid en B riefe an die T h essa lo n ich er”). O n e o f Baur’s d iscip les, R. A. Lipsius, found it p ossib le to accept the authenticity o f 1 T h essa lo n ia n s w hile rem aining true to his m aster’s general position: by d etectin g an anti-judaizing ten d ency in the letter he was able to fit it into B aur’s historical reconstruction o f prim itive Christianity (“ Über Zweck und V eranlassung des ersten T h essalon ich erb riefs” ).

XXXIV

I n t r o d u c t io n

M ore recently M orton’s statistical analysis o f the style o f 1 and 2 T h essa ­ lonians has led to the con clu sion that neither o f th ese letters com es from the author o f the R om an, C orinthian and G alatian corresp o n d en ce. T h e data which he adduces cou ld be satisfied sim ply if Silvanus w ere held to have had a major part in the com p o sitio n o f the two letters. M ore will be said about the authenticity o f 2 T h essa lo n ia n s. At present, it may be observed that o f the two letters 1 T h essa lo n ia n s is m uch m ore inform ative about the m ovem en ts o f Paul and his co m p an ion s after their departure from T h essalon ica. 2. Date and Occasion It is com m only agreed that 1 T h essa lo n ia n s, togeth er with 2 T h essa lo n i­ ans, if its authenticity is accep ted , sh ou ld be dated shortly after the first evangelization o f T h essalon ica, during what is traditionally (but im pre­ cisely) called Paul’s “ seco n d m issionary jo u r n e y ”— about a . d . 50. T h e p ro­ posal has som etim es b een m ade, becau se o f the su p p o sed referen ce in 2 T h essalon ian s 2:4 to the E m peror G aiu s’s attem pt to set up his statue in the Jerusalem tem ple, to date the evan gelization o f T h essa lo n ica and the writing o f at least 2 T h essa lo n ia n s several years earlier. H u g o G rotius in the seven teen th century d ated 2 T h essa lo n ia n s in a .d . 4 0, the year o f that attem pt (Annotationes i, 1032; ii, 6 5 1 ). M ore recently Buck and T aylor, id en ti­ fying the “ restrainer” o f 2 T h essalon ian s 2:6, 7 with the E m peror C laudius, who replaced Gaius in a .d . 4 1 , have dated the evan gelization o f T h e ssa lo ­ nica early in that year (b efore G aiu s’s assassination) and the w riting o f 2 T h essalon ian s in the later part o f a .d . 44 (St. Paul, 1 5 0 -1 6 2 ). But the e x e ­ gesis o f 2 T h essalon ian s 2 :1 -1 2 is too deb atable to p rovid e the basis for chronological calculations. (Buck and T aylor identify the “ w rath” o f 1 T h ess 2:16 with the Judean fam ine o f a .d . 46.) O thers have argued for a later dating o f o n e or both ep istles, in the course o f the “ third m issionary jo u r n e y ” (cf. M ichaelis, Gefangenschaft, 6 0 67). T his later dating is generally (though not in M ichaelis) bound up with the view that the problem s with which Paul and his collea g u es take issue in the T h essa lo n ia n co rresp o n d en ce w ere essen tially the sam e as those which m anifested th em selves in the C orinthian church in the period o f Paul’s Ephesian m inistry— problem s arising from a g n o sticizin g ten ­ dency. T h e argum ents for this dating put forward by H adorn in 1919 (Die Abfassung der Thessalonicherbriefe in der Zeit der dritten Missionsreise des Paulus) have b een am plified by Schm ithals (Paul and the Gnostics, 1 2 3 -2 1 8 ). H e m aintains that the a p ostolic m ovem en ts o f 1 T h essa lo n ia n s 3 :1 -1 0 should not be correlated with th o se o f Acts 17. the referen ce to A thens in v 1, for exam ple, is to be u n d erstood n ot o f the fam ous stop -over in A thens o f Acts 17:1 5 -3 4 but o f a later, oth erw ise u n recorded, stop -over m ade in the course o f P aul’s “ painful visit” from E phesus to C orinth (2 C or 2:1). It is not clear why Paul should sp en d tim e in A thens w hen his business in C orinth was so urgent. T h ere is no hint, either in Acts or in Paul’s letters, that the situation in T h essa lo n ica caused him special con cern at

Introduction

XXXV

that later tim e. N or is there any indication, either in Acts or in Paul’s letters, that Silvanus was in his com pany at that later tim e, as he m anifestly was w hen the T h essa lo n ia n letters w ere written. N or is there anything in either o f the T h essa lo n ia n letters which requires a gnosticizin g tendency at T h essa lo n ica for its explanation. After b ein g ex p elled from T h essalon ica, and then in turn from Beroea, Paul was taken to A thens, w here h e waited for his com panions to rejoin him (Acts 17:15, 16). W hen they did so, h e sent T im othy back to T h essa lo ­ nica to se e how the new converts there w ere faring and to report on their w ell-b ein g. T im oth y was personally attached to Paul, so it was by Paul’s authority that he w ent to T h essalon ica (1 T h ess 3:5), but Silvanus concurred in his m ission (1 T h ess 3 :1 -4 ). T im othy returned with g o o d new s, and it was the receipt o f his new s that p rom pted the sen d in g o f 1 T h essalon ian s. By the tim e T im oth y returned, Paul had m oved on to C orinth, and Silvanus was also there, having com e back from a visit which he also had paid to som e place in M acedonia (Acts 18:5). W e may confidently date 1 T h essalon ian s in the earlier part o f Paul’s stay in C orinth, and 2 T h essa lo n i­ ans n ot lo n g afterward. If we wish to date 1 T h essalon ian s m ore precisely, our m ain piece o f evid en ce is the D elphi inscription ( SIG ii3, 8 0 1), reproducing a letter from Claudius to that city, apparently confirm ing the citizens in certain privileges and m aking referen ce to G allio, p rocon su l o f Achaia (cf. Sm allw ood, Docu­ ments § 376; Brassac, “U n e inscription d e D elphes et la C hronologie de Saint Paul” ). T h e letter is dated in the period o f C laudius’s twenty-sixth acclam ation as imperator—a period known from oth er inscriptions (CIL iii.476, vi.1256) to have covered the first seven m onths o f a .d . 52. It has usually b een su p p o sed that the letter m en tion s G allio as current proconsul o f Achaia; in that case, sin ce p rocon su ls norm ally en tered on their tour o f duty on 1 July, it w ould follow that G allio arrived in Achaia as proconsul on 1 July, a .d . 51 or (less probably) 1 July, a.d . 52. It w ould follow further that Paul’s eig h teen m on th s in C orinth (Acts 18:11-17) lasted from the late sum m er o f a .d . 50 to the spring o f a .d . 52 or (less probably) from the late sum m er o f a .d . 51 to the spring o f a .d . 53, so that the later part o f a .d . 50 or (less probably) a .d . 51 w ould be the date o f 1 T h essalon ian s. But it has b een argued by Plassart (“ L’inscription d e D elp h es”) that Claudius in the letter refers to G allio n ot as the current proconsul but as having been p rocon su l in the recent past. If this is so (lacunae in the inscription m ake certainty im p ossib le), then he cannot have entered on his p rocon su lsh ip later than July, a .d . 51, and may have d o n e so a year earlier. T h e later part o f a .d . 50 w ould in that case be the latest date for the sen d in g o f 1 T h essa lo n ia n s (cf. Schwank, “D er so g en an n te B rief”). 3. Early Christian Experience at Thessalonica T h e report brou gh t back by T im oth y from the church o f T hessalonica was so generally en co u ra g in g that the m issionaries sent o ff a letter there and then, exp ressin g their jo y and relief. If they had feared that the T hessa-

XXXVI

I n t r o d u c t io n

Ionian converts w ere d isillu sion ed or d iscou raged by the turn o f events atten d in g and follow in g their hasty departure from the city— which, in the eyes o f less w ell-d isp o sed p e o p le , m ight have seem ed like leaving them in the lurch— they w ere assured that, on the contrary, their converts w ere enthusiastically prop agatin g the new faith on their ow n initiative. Even so, Paul in particular felt it necessary to exp lain his failure to return after his hurried leave-taking. If the converts did n ot blam e him, som e o f their relatives and n eigh b ors did; and it w ould be well if the converts had the necessary inform ation to answ er any criticism s. B esides, q u estion s had b een asked about the m ission aries’ con d u ct during their stay in T hessalonica: they w ere b ein g charged with m ercenary m otives and w orse. Happily, they w ere able in this regard to appeal to their con verts’ k now led ge o f the facts. T h e m issionaries did not behave like parasites, but earned their ow n living by m anual work. T h e new believers could thus learn by exam p le as well as by p recept how C hristians o u gh t to live. If the T h essa lo n ia n Christians found th em selves en d u rin g persecution becau se o f their new faith and way o f life, let them reflect that this was the com m on lot o f C hristians. In this respect they sto o d in the n o b le su cces­ sion o f the churches o f Judea. But T im oth y brought new s n ot only o f their faith and charity, and o f their steadfastness under p ersecu tion , but also o f the failure o f som e o f them to grasp the ethical im plications o f the g o sp el. Sexual relations, for exam p le, should be con fin ed within the frontiers o f marriage; a life c o n se ­ crated to the service o f G od cou ld m ake no room for fornication. And for a m em ber o f the church to be guilty o f a sexual trespass against the family circle o f a fellow -C hristian w ould be an appalling denial o f the broth­ erly love which ou g h t to prevail am ong them , and w hich was actually m ani­ festin g itse lf am o n g them in so m any desirable ways. T h e earn estn ess with which the writers warn them against sexual laxity su g g ests they had learned that such a w arning was necessary. A n oth er w arning was called for becau se so m e o f them , w hether from an over-enthusiastic ex p ecta tio n o f the im m inent A dvent o f Christ or from som e o th er cause, th ou gh t that it was p o in tless to g o on working, and so w ere inevitably b eco m in g a burden to others. T h is to o was a denial o f brotherly love, and it m ade a very unfavorable im p ression o n non-C hris­ tians. T h e writers th erefore urge on each o f them the im portance o f earning an h o n est living. 4 4. Eschatology at Thessalonica T h e esch atological interest in the T h essa lon ian church is reflected in the relatively large am ount o f space d ev o ted to esch a to lo g y in th ese two epistles. Early Christian esch a to lo g y is closely related to a pattern o f exp ectation w idely h eld am o n g Jew s at the tim e. In this pattern the presen t age (charac­ terized by som e, as by the Q um ran com m unity, as “ the age o f w ick ed n ess” ) was in d u e cou rse to b e su p ersed ed by the a ge to com e, the resurrection age. T his view o f the two ages finds exp ression in the synoptic G osp els,

Introduction

XXXVll

as in Luke 2 0 :3 4 -3 6 , w here “ the sons o f this a g e ” are set in contrast with “ th ose w ho are accou n ted worthy to attain to that age and to the resurrection from the d ea d .” T h e “days o f the M essiah” in som e forms o f this ex p ectation w ould mark a transition b etw een the two ages, represent­ ing p ossib ly the clim ax o f “ this a g e ” or the dawn o f “ that a g e ,” or interven­ in g as an in term ediate age b etw een the two. T h e early C hristians took over this general pattern. For them , how ever, the pattern underw ent a crucial m odification in the fact that the M essiah had co m e, in the p erson o f Jesu s. T h e days o f the M essiah had therefore begun. N ot only so: Jesu s had d ied and b een raised from the dead. In him the first installm ent (ά π α ρ χή ) o f the resurrection had already taken place. T h e “ age to c o m e ,” the resurrection age, had thus invaded this age; this age was on its way out but had n ot yet disappeared, w hile that age had broken in but was n ot yet fully m anifested. T his doctrine o f the overlap p in g o f the two ages (the “already” and the “not yet”) is highly germ ane to Paul’s distinctive teach in g about the Spirit as the “ guarantee” or “ initial dow n p aym en t” (άρραβών) o f the com in g heritage o f glory (cf. 2 C or 1:22; 5:5; Eph 1:13, 14; Gal 5:5; R om 8:23) which, how ever, is not m ade explicit in th e T h essa lo n ia n corresp on d en ce. T h e T h essa lo n ia n s had received so m e esch atological instruction while the m issionaries w ere with them . T h ey were taught to exp ect the A dvent from heaven o f the S on o f G od who had b een raised from the dead; by his A dvent they w ould be saved from the en d -tim e retribution to be experi­ enced by the u n god ly (1 T h ess 1:9, 10; 5:9, 10) and w ould receive a share in his kingdom and glory (1 T h ess 2:12). But the m issionaries had to leave the city b efore the teach in g necessary for their con verts’ equipm ent had b een com p leted ; so m e q u estion s therefore w ere left unansw ered in their m inds. W hat w ould be the relation o f the L ord’s A dvent to the con d i­ tion o f “ the dead in C hrist” ? W ould believers w ho d ied before the A dvent be at so m e disadvantage as com pared with th ose w ho survived to w itness the great event? A nd what relation did the A dvent bear to the last great rebellion against G od which also figured in the general pattern o f exp ecta­ tion? T h e end o f the p resen t age, it was held in som e strands o f Jew ish thought, w ould be a tim e o f severe distress for the p eo p le o f G od in which only a m inority w ould stand firm: apart from that m inority there w ould be a largescale apostasy. T h e leader o f the apostasy and persecu tor o f the faithful w ould be a sinister p erso n a g e som etim es en visaged as a d em on ic pow er, som etim es as a hum an tyrant, m o d eled o n A ntiochus Epiphanes (175— 164 B . c . ) and, later, on the E m peror Gaius (a .d . 3 7 -4 1 ), both o f whom, in o n e way or another, d em an d ed the w orship which was due to the true G od alon e. In the O livet discou rse o f the synoptic G osp els it is probably this sinister p erso n a g e w ho is referred to as “ the abom ination o f desolation standing w here h e o u gh t n o t” (ro ßSeXvypa τη ς έρημώ θ€ω ς έσ τηκότα οπού ον Seΐ, Mark 13:14). At the h eigh t o f his pow er he w ould b e overthrow n by an act o f G od. In Christian th ou gh t, the act o f G od by which the great rebel w ould

xxxviii

I n t r o d u c t io n

be overthrow n was identified with the A dvent o f Christ. B oth orally and in writing the m issionaries (and especially Paul) taught the T h essalon ian s this. But if the great rebel was to b e con su m ed in the blaze o f C hrist’s A dvent-glory, it follow ed that the A dvent w ould not take place before the great rebel had m ade his appearance and played his b rief but frightful part on the stage o f history. At his A dvent, Christ w ould gather his p eo p le to h im self to give them their reward for faithfulness and reco m p en se for suffering; their m anifesta­ tion with him w ould in d eed en h an ce his glory, and from then on they w ould be with him forever. For unrep en tan t rebels and ap ostates, on the other hand, and especially for persecutors o f his p eo p le, his A dvent w ould be an occasion for retribution and destruction. (T h ere is n o th in g particu­ larly Pauline in this ou tlin e o f ex p ected events: Paul received it as part o f the Christian tradition and d ev elo p ed it a lo n g distinctive lines, but there is little if any trace o f his d istinctive d ev elo p m en t in the T h essalon ian letters.) T h e T h essa lo n ia n letters presen t the first literary ev id en ce for the use o f παρουσία (Parousia) in the sen se o f the future A dvent o f Christ: it occurs in this sen se six tim es in the two letters. T h e event is d ep icted repeatedly in lan gu age borrow ed from portrayals o f O T th eop h an ies. But it is the ethical im plications that are chiefly stressed: the writers look forward to the Parousia especially as the tim e w hen their service will be review ed and rewarded by the Lord w ho com m ission ed them , and they will b e c o n ­ tent, they say, to have it a ssessed by the quality o f their converts. In the relatively short interval since the m ission aries’ departure from T h essalon ica som e m em bers o f the church had died. T h e others were concern ed about the status o f th ese d eparted friends at the Parousia. W ould they in som e way forfeit the glory o f b ein g associated with their returning Lord? A pparently they had n ot b een told that the resurrection o f departed believers in Christ w ould co in cid e with his Advent: they are now given this assurance, and that on the h igh est authority— “ by the word o f the L ord’’ ( l T h ess 4:15). In fact, the first thin g to happen at the Parousia is that “ the dead in Christ will rise.’’ It is im plied, but n ot exp ressly stated, that the Parousia is exp ected within the lifetim e o f m ost C hristians then living, including the writers. At a later stage in P aul’s career he ex p ected rather to be am on g th ose w ho w ould be raised from the dead (2 C or 4:14; 5 :1 -1 0 ). But this shift o f p erspective— the so-called “delay o f the P arousia”— d oes not appear to have o ccasion ed any m aterial ch an ge in his th eology in general or his esch atology in particular. T h e ap ostolic doctrine o f the Parousia is in d ep en ­ dent o f its tim ing. N o m ore p ositive indication o f the tim ing o f the Parousia is given than that, as Jesu s had spoken o f the Son o f Man com in g w hen h e was least exp ected (Mark 1 3 :3 3 -3 7 ), so “ the day o f the Lord will co m e like a th ief in the n ig h t’’ (1 T h ess 5:2). It is on the ungodly, how ever, that the day will break with such u n w elcom e su d denness: b elievers will b e prepared

Introduction

XXXIX

for it— n ot b ecau se they know w hen it will com e (they do not know) but becau se to live the Christian life is to be perm anently ready for the great day. O thers may rem ain in the darkness and fall asleep; believers live in the light and stay awake (1 T h ess 5 :1 -1 1 ). U nhealthy excitem en t is discour­ aged; moral alertness and sobriety are enjoined. T h e enjoining o f moral alertness and sobriety includes th ose practical exhortations with which 1 T h essalon ian s ends. T h e se exhortations cover general principles o f Christian ethics; so m e o f them reflect the part which prophesying played in the church. Prophesying is encouraged, but not everything that claim s to be the product o f prophetic inspiration is to be accepted uncritically. W hat m atters is what is said rather than how it is said, and what is said m ust be w eighed by the hearers to make sure that it is con sisten t with what is already known to be true. 5. Relation between the Two Letters If only 1 T h essalon ian s had com e dow n to us, the T h essalon ian corre­ sp on d en ce w ould p resen t no great problem . T h e authenticity o f 2 :1 3 -1 6 w ould have to be d iscu ssed (see p. 43 below ) and it w ould be necessary to consider argum ents for discern in g two distinct letters in this short d ocu ­ m ent (see p. xliv below ); but in general the letter could be accepted without serious question as o n e sen t by Paul and his associates to their converts in T h essalon ica shortly after they were forced to leave the city, and from it we could fill in various details about the evangelization o f T hessalonica and the fortunes o f the church there after the m ission aries’ departure. Again, if only 2 T h essalon ian s had been preserved, its gen u in en ess would be “ scarcely c o n te ste d ” (Harnack, “ P roblem ,” 562). From it we could not reconstruct the cou rse o f events as can be d o n e from 1 T hessalonians, but it could be gathered that the church was in good heart, so that the writers are prom pted to give G od sp on tan eous thanks for it as well as to impart further en cou ragem en t. It stood in n eed o f further instruction about the com in g Day o f the Lord, and th ose m em bers who, because o f esch ato­ logical excitem en t or so m eth in g similar, were idle and b ecom in g a burden to their friends, required plain and stern adm onition. It is the fact that both letters have com e dow n to us that raises questions which dem and an answer— q uestions, in particular, about their relation to o n e another. In general, 2 T h essa lo n ia n s covers m uch the sam e ground as 1 T h essa lo ­ nians, if m ore perfunctorily. Again there is thanksgiving to G od for the T hessalon ian C hristians’ faith and love, amid the persecutions which they are enduring. T h e se persecu tion s, it is remarked, are a m eans o f fitting them for the kingdom o f G od, while they are equally certain tokens o f the d oom o f their persecutors w hen the Lord com es “ to be glorified in his holy o n e s ” (1:10). T h e o n e ou tstan d in g feature which distin guishes 2 T h essalon ian s is the eschatological section in 2 :1 -1 2 . T his is follow ed by exhortation o f a general kind, including a severe warning against id leness. Again the readers are

xl

I n t r o d u c t io n

rem inded, as in 1 T h essalon ian s 2 :9 -1 2 , how the m issionaries had set them an exam ple in this respect. T h is exam ple, cou p led with teaching to the sam e effect— “ If any o n e refuses to work, let him not ea t” (2 T h ess 3:10)— form ed part o f the “ traditions” to which the T h essalon ian s are urged to hold fast (2 T h ess 2:15; 3:16). If both letters are authentic, they w ere evidently sent within a brief interval, o n e after the other. (T h o se w ho view them as sent to distinct groups within the T h essalon ian church m ight con clu d e that they w ere sent sim ultaneously.) Why then sh ou ld there be so m uch rep etition and overlap­ ping b etw een them ? And why, at the sam e tim e, should there be a different esch atological o u tlook in the o n e as against the other? O n e o f the b o ld est answ ers to this d o u b le q u estion has b een given by Lindem ann (“ Zum A bfassungszw eck”), follow in g in part lines laid down in 1862 by H ilgen feld (“ D ie b eid en B riefe an die T h essa lo n ich er”). H e argues that 2 T h essa lo n ia n s was written as a d eliberate replacem ent for 1 T h essalon ian s by so m e o n e w ho did n ot approve o f the eschatological perspective o f 1 T h essa lo n ia n s. T h is p erson reproduced the substance o f 1 T h essalon ian s in the m atter o f thanksgiving, en cou ragem en t and adm oni­ tion, in a som ew hat abridged and im personal form , but he replaced the esch atological teaching o f 1 T h essalon ian s, with its em phasis on the im m i­ nence o f the Parousia, with a new section (2 T h ess 2 :1 -1 2 ) in which he insisted that the Parousia w ould be preced ed by certain even ts— in particu­ lar by the rise o f the “m an o f la w lessn ess”— and that n ot until the man o f law lessness was en tren ch ed in suprem e pow er w ould Christ appear in glory and deal him his deathblow . T hat we have to do with a deliberate replacem ent, L indem ann maintains, is show n, first, by the w riter’s su g g estio n in 2 T h essalon ian s 2:2 that any esch atological teaching in P aul’s nam e which disagrees with that about to be set forth should be treated as a forgery and, secon d , by the explicit signature o f Paul in 2 T h essa lo n ia n s 3:17. In L indem ann’s view, 2 T h essa lo ­ nians is not an exam p le o f con ven tion al d eu tero-P auline pseudepigraphy (in which a d evoted d iscip le o f Paul tries to apply to a new situation the treatm ent which he b elieves Paul w ould have given it); the writer wants his readers to reject the gen u in e 1 T h essalon ian s as spurious and sets h im self to substitute for it a com p osition o f his own. H e was only partially successful in his aim; the church did n ot reject 1 T h essalon ian s but it did accept the new co m p o sitio n and thus saddled itself with the problem o f recon cilin g the two. Mearns explains the different esch atological perspectives in the two let­ ters by Paul’s having ch an ged his teaching so as to m itigate “ the enthusiastic excesses o f an extrem e im m inentistic h o p e which follow ed his exp ou n d in g o f the apocalyptic sch em e in I T h essa lo n ia n s” (“ Early E schatological D evel­ o p m en t,” 157). A nother attem pt to solve the problem o f the relation b etw een the two letters is the su g g estio n that they were sent to distinct groups in the T h essa ­ lonian church.

Introduction

xli

Harnack (“ P rob lem ” ) thought that 2 T h essalon ian s was addressed m ore particularly to the Jew ish-C hristian m em bership o f the church, 1 T h essa lo ­ nians having b een sen t to the G entile C hristians. T his view found favor with Lake (Epistles, 8 2 -9 5 ) and Burkitt (Christian Beginnings, 133). But it is difficult to reconcile it with Paul’s policy o f integrating form er Jew s and form er G entiles in the new fellow ship. A nything calculated to en courage the m aintenance o f a sen se o f separateness betw een the two groups would have b een resisted by him. W hile 1 T h essalonians is expressly addressed to th ose who have “ turned to G od from id o ls” (1:9), there is n oth in g in 2 T h essalon ian s which appears to be inten d ed distinctively for Jew ish m em ­ bers o f the church. Ellis (“ Paul and his C o-W orkers” ) recogn izes positive substance in Harnack’s observation that a distinct group is addressed in 2 T hessalonians, but thinks that the distinct group was Paul’s T h essalon ian co-workers, the resp on sib le leaders o f the con gregation . It is they w ho are in a p osition to deal authoritatively with idlers and others w ho disregard the apostolic injunctions (2 T h e ss 3 :6 -1 5 ). In 1 T h essalon ian s the readers are urged to give recogn ition and esteem to their leaders; then follow s a on e-sen ten ce exhortation to the leaders to care for the others (1 T h ess 5 :1 2 -1 4 ). What is com p ressed into o n e sen ten ce in 1 T h ess 5:14 is expanded in 2 T h essa lo ­ nians as a w hole. T h is interpretation d o es n ot lie op en to the fundam ental objections which H arnack’s thesis invites. T h e su g g estio n that 2 T h essalon ian s was earlier than 1 T hessalonians was first put forward, it appears, by H u g o G rotius in 1641 (Annotationes i, 1032; ii.651). It has b een m ade also by M anson (“T h e Letters to the T h essa ­ lon ian s” ), W eiss (Earliest Christianity, i, 2 8 9 -2 9 1 ), W est (“T h e O rder o f 1 and 2 T h essa lo n ia n s” ), Buck and Taylor (St. Paul, 1 5 0 -1 6 2 ), and G regson (“A Solu tion to the Problem s o f the T h essalon ian E p istles” ). T h ere is n oth in g an teced en tly im probable in dating 2 T hessalonians before 1 T h essalon ian s. T h e traditional seq u en ce o f Pauline letters to churches is based on len gth , n ot on date. If 2 T h essalon ian s is indeed the earlier o f the two, this d o es n ot affect what has b een said above about the occasion o f 1 T h essalon ian s. It w ould sim ply have to be assum ed that w hen T im othy was sen t back from A thens to T h essalon ica (1 T h ess 3:2), he carried with him a letter for the church-—our 2 T h essalon ian s. T h en , w hen he returned with g o o d new s from T h essalon ica, 1 T h essalon ian s was w ritten in resp o n se to that g o o d new s. T h e main argum ents for the priority o f 2 T h essalon ian s are these: (a) At the b eg in n in g o f 2 T h essalon ian s (1:4, 5) the readers are said to be currently en d u rin g persecu tion for their faith; in 1 T hessalon ian s (2:14) the p ersecu tion is referred to in the past tense. (b) T h e d ep lorab le id len ess o f so m e m em bers o f the church has ju st com e to the w riters’ atten tion in 2 T h essalon ian s (3:11, 12); in 1 T h essa lo n i­ ans (4:10-12; 5:14) it is m en tio n ed as som eth in g well known to writers and readers.

xlii

I n t r o d u c t io n

(c) T h e personal signature at the en d o f 2 T h essalon ian s, with its e x ­ planatory n ote (3:17), is p oin tless excep t in the first letter to a new ad­ dressee or ad d ressees. (d) If the p e o p le ad d ressed had already received the eschatological teaching o f 2 T h essa lo n ia n s 2 :1 -1 2 , then the statem ent in 1 T h essalon ian s 5:1 that they had no n eed o f instruction about “ tim es and se a so n s’’ would be very m uch to the point. (e) T h e two section s in 1 T h essa lo n ia n s which b egin with the words “ Now con cern in g . . .’’ (nepi δέ . . .) take up topics already touched on (ex hypothesi) in 2 T h essa lo n ia n s— brotherly love (1 T h ess 4:9; cf. 2 T h ess 3:6 -1 5 ) and the tim es and sea so n s (1 T h ess 5:1; cf. 2 T h ess 2 :1 -1 2 ). (Q uite apart from the ch ron ological seq u en ce o f the two letters, Faw, “ On the W riting o f First T h e ssa lo n ia n s,” argues that, as in 1 C orinthians, the sec­ tions in 1 T h essalon ian s b eg in n in g πepi Se in troduce ap ostolic answers to questions which the T h essa lo n ia n church had put in a letter.) T h e se argum ents are o f varying cogency; they receive further notice below in the com m entary proper. O n the other side, it m ust be said that there is no explicit m en tion in 1 T h essa lo n ian s o f a previous letter sent to the church, w hereas in 2 T h essa lo n ia n s 2:15 there is what could well be a reference to an earlier letter: “ H old fast the traditions which you were taught, w hether by word o f m outh or by a letter from u s.” In particular, the esch ato lo g ica l teach in g o f the two letters is easier to understand if 1 T h essa lo n ia n s is the earlier. In 1 T h essalon ian s the Parousia is spoken o f as if it w ere likely to take place in the lifetim e o f m ost o f the readers (and writers); it will com e w hen least ex p ected , “like a th ief in the n ig h t’’ (1 T h ess 5:2). T h is may have led som e readers to conclude that it was so im m inent that there was n o p oint in g o in g on with the ordinary con cern s o f daily life; perhaps, in d eed , it had already arrived. T o correct this error the writers say in 2 T h essalon ian s 2 :1 -1 2 , “T h e Parou­ sia is im m inent in d eed , but n ot so im m inent as all that. D o not be m isled into thinking that the great day is already with us. It will com e so o n en ou gh , but certain things m ust first take place— the clim ax o f world rebellion against G od and the appearance o f the m an w ho incarnates the spirit o f rebellion and claim s for h im self the w orship due to G od. W hen he has reached the sum m it o f his pow er, then the Parousia o f Christ will com e and with its com in g the reb ellion will c o lla p se.” If it be thought that the idea o f certain w ell-defined events preceding the Day o f the Lord is in con sisten t with the idea o f its arrival like a thief by night, let it be co n sid ered , first, that the sam e am bivalence is found in the synoptic tradition o f J e s u s ’ esch atological teaching. T rue, in the g o sp els sou rce analysis can be applied to the tradition: it is in Q that the day o f the Son o f M an’s revelation overtakes the world with the su d d en n ess o f N o a h ’s flood or the d estru ction o f S o d o m and G om orrah (Luke 17 :2 6 30), w hereas in Mark’s account o f the O livet discou rse “ wars and rumors o f w ars’’ will be rife, but “ the en d is not yet” ; “ the g o sp el m ust first be

Introduction

xliii

preached to all the n a tio n s,” and n ot until the abom ination o f d esolation is seen “ standing w here h e ou gh t n o t” will the S on o f Man com e (Mark 13:7, 10, 14, 26). Luke and M atthew do n ot appear to have b een conscious o f in con sisten cy b etw een th ese two perspectives: Luke incorporates both separately— the Q, m aterial in Luke 17:2 2 -3 7 and the Markan material in Luke 2 1 :5 -3 6 — w hile M atthew interw eaves the two in o n e co m p osite d is­ course (Matt 2 4 :1 -5 1 ). M oreover, in the two separate strands it is Mark w ho includes the urgent call to be on the alert, “ for you d o not know when the tim e will c o m e ” (Mark 13:32-37), w hile Q, not only says that first the Son o f Man “ m ust suffer many things and be rejected by this g en era tio n ” (Luke 17:25)— this could be regarded as Luke’s insertion o f a Markan m o tif in a Q, co n tex t— but su ggests that w hen the spiritually alert recogn ize a situation ripe for ju d g m en t, they may ex p ect the ju d gm en t to fall: “w here the body is, there the eagles will be gathered to g eth er” (Luke 17:37; cf. Matt 24:28). Let it be con sid ered , again, that the esch atological teaching o f 1 T h essa ­ lonians is mainly o n a personal level: it is given in resp o n se to questions about the lot o f believers w ho have died b efore the Parousia. T his is fol­ low ed by a b rief referen ce to the Day o f the Lord as it affects m en and w om en in general: it will take the ungodly by surprise, but believers, being children o f light, will be awake and prepared for it. In 2 T h essa lo n ia n s believers are told further how they may be prepared for the great day: they will reco g n ize the even ts which signal its approach. Personal esch atology b elo n g s m ore to the realm o f individual piety and is largely unrelated to world happenings; a cosm ic p erspective on the Day o f the Lord calls for so m e account to b e taken o f the cou rse o f history. Paul’s con su m in g urge for the evan gelization o f the w orld did not blind him to the significance o f world events; on the contrary, his m issionary strategy w ould have b een less effective had he not paid attention to them. H e had b een able thus far to exp loit the peaceful con d ition s o f the Rom an world in the interests o f his G en tile m ission, but there w ere d isq u iet­ ing straws in the wind. T h ere was m ou n tin g unrest in Judea, and this unrest had repercussions elsew h ere, as h e and his co lleagu es learned in T h essalon ica, w here they w ere branded as m en w ho had “ subverted the w orld .” By the tim e they arrived in C orinth, they had heard o f the exp u lsion o f Jew s from R om e. T h e troubles which had driven him from o n e M acedo­ nian city after anoth er w ere fresh in Paul’s m ind w hen 2 T h essalon ian s was written. Probably G a llio ’s en cou ragin g ju d g m en t at C orinth had not yet b een given. R om an law and order w ere still in control, but it was only too clear that the “ h id d en pow er o f la w lessn ess” was already at work, and it w ould probably con tin u e to work until it erupted violently and swept all before it. W hen the T h essalon ian s are told that the Day o f the Lord cannot arrive until the great reb ellion has broken out, the Day is not b ein g p o stp o n ed to the indefinite future: the great reb ellion m ight well break out within a few years. I f they paid h eed to what they w ere b ein g told, they w ould be ready— w ell inform ed as w ell as m orally alert.

xliv

I n t r o d u c t io n

G allio’s ju d g m en t may have m odified Paul’s p erspective, but it was not radically changed. A lth ou gh in his later letters he d oes n ot u se the apocalyp­ tic terms o f the T h essa lo n ia n co rresp on d en ce, the substance o f his ou tlook rem ained unch an ged , as may b e seen even in the maturity o f his letter to the R om ans. Shortly after the very positive a ssessm en t o f the pow ers that be in R om ans 1 3:1-7, h e g o es on to say, “ R ecogn ize this critical season: it is already high tim e for you to wake up from sleep , for our deliverance is nearer now than w hen we first b elieved . T h e night is far advanced; the day is at hand. Let us th en -p u t o ff the works o f darkness and put on the arm or o f light. Let our con d u ct be seem ly, fit for the light o f day . . .” (Rom 13:1 1 -1 3 ). 6. Miscellaneous Solutions (a) O n e or two scholars have argued that 2 T h essa lo n ia n s was sent not to the church o f T h essa lo n ica but to o n e o f the oth er M acedonian churches, about the sam e tim e as 1 T h essa lo n ian s was sen t to T h essalon ica. T his, it is said, w ould account for the large proportion o f m aterial com m on to both. G ogu el, for exam p le, su g g ested that 2 T h essalon ian s was originally in­ tend ed for the new ly form ed church in B eroea ( Introduction au N T iv.I, 335). Schw eizer has th ou gh t o f it as originally a letter to Philippi (“ Der zw eite T h essa lo n ich erb rief ein P h ilipperbrief ?” ; cf. M ichaelis’s reply, “Der zw eite T h essa lo n ich erb rief kein P hilipperbrief,” and Schw eizer’s “ R eplik”). A copy o f this letter to Philippi was preserved in the T h essalon ian church and cherished by it to the point w here the original greetin g to Philippi was replaced by o n e borrow ed from the prescript o f 1 T h essa lo n i­ ans. It w ould in that case be the first letter to the Philippians, our present E pistle to the Philippians b ein g the seco n d . Polycarp, it is p oin ted out, in his letter to the church o f Philippi, knows o f m ore than o n e letter sent to that church by Paul (E p. 3:2); he says, too (Ep. 11:3), that Paul in his letters praises the Philippians to all the churches (an in feren ce which could be m ade m ore readily from 2 T h ess l :4 than from anything in our Philippi­ ans). But if Paul w rote a letter to the Philippians at the sam e tim e as 1 T h essa lo ­ nians, we m ight exp ect it to contain the sam e kind o f warm personal refer­ en ces to the p eo p le ad d ressed as we find in 1 T h essa lo n ia n s— and, for that m atter, several years later in our Philippians. (b) M ention m ust be m ade also o f attem pts to analyze the T h essalon ian co rresp o n d en ce into m ore d ocu m en ts than the two letters in our textual and canonical tradition. Eckart’s argum ent that 1 T h essalon ian s consists o f two letters (along with certain non-P auline ad d ition s), editorially jo in e d at 3:5 (“ D er zw eite ech te B r ie f” ), was rebutted by Küm m el (“ Das literarische und gesch ich t­ liche P rob lem ”). A m ore elaborate analysis, based on the recogn ition o f epistolary p rotocols and “ e sch a to co ls“ as w ell as on internal evidence, has b een d efen d ed by Schm ithals (Paul and the Gnostics, 2 1 1 ,2 1 3 ) . H e distin­

Introduction

x lv

guish es four separate letters to the T h essalon ian s, each o f them authentic, in the follow in g ch ron ological order: Thessalonians Thessalonians Thessalonians Thessalonians

A= B= C = D=

2 Thessalonians 1:1-12 + 3:6-16 1 Thessalonians 1:1-2:12 + 4:2-5:28 2 Thessalonians 2:13-14 + 2:1-12 + 2:15-3:5 + 3:17-18 1 Thessalonians 2:13—4:1

H e p oints out that each o f the four ends with an “esch a to co l” introduced by αυτός δέ 6 κύριος/θβός (2 T h ess 3:16; 1 T h ess 5:23; 2 T h ess 2:16; l T h e ss 3:11). S o m e features o f this analysis are review ed at appropriate points in the com m entary below . In a later study (Der Römerbrief) Schm ithals argues that R om ans 5 :(1 )2 11 and 1 3 :1 1 -1 4 (qu oted above, p. xliv) also b elo n g originally to Paul’s T h essalon ian corresp on d en ce. (c) Schm ithals’s arrangem ent o f the seq u en ce o f the T h essalon ian let­ ters, like his dating o f them to the sam e period as the Corinthian corresp on ­ d en ce, is b ound up with his identification o f gnosticism as the root o f the trouble in the T h essalon ian church with which the letters deal. Schm ithals is n ot the first to explain the adm onitions o f 1 and 2 T h essa lo ­ nians in term s o f gn osticism or so m e form o f enthusiasm . In 1909 Llitgert (Die Vollkommenen in Philipperbrief) envisaged the writers taking issue with enthusiastic ten d en cies o f the sam e kind as th ose which (he believed) caused Paul such concern in the churches o f Corinth (Freiheitspredigt und Schwarmgeister in Korinth) and Galatia ( Gesetz und Geist). T en years later H adorn argued that in writing to the T h essalon ian s Paul was rebutting a libertine heresy such as was rife at C orinth (and which, as at C orinth, involved a denial o f the doctrine o f resurrection). M ore recently, M arxsen ( I N T 3 7 -4 0 ) exp ressed the view that 2 T h essa lo ­ nians— n ot, in his ju d g m en t, a Pauline ep istle— was written to counter a form o f gnosticism . T h e warning in 2 T h essalon ian s 2:2 against sup p osin g the Day o f the Lord to have arrived is com pared with Paul’s ironical reply in 1 C orinthians 4 :8 -1 3 to th ose “ m en o f the Spirit’’ in the church o f C orinth w h ose con d u ct su g g ested that they had already entered the com ing kingdom o f glory. But the p ersecu ted Christians o f T h essalon ica (as they are presum ed to be in 2 T h ess 1:4) are not likely to have entertained this particular form o f overrealized esch atology. Even if they did hold som e form o f overrealized esch atology, it was p ossib le in the ap ostolic age, as it is m anifestly p o ssib le today, to em brace such an ou tlook and yet have n oth in g to do with gnosticism . Schm ithals, how ever, has p resen ted the m ost detailed case for a gnostic background to the T h essa lo n ia n corresp on d en ce. N o doubt, when a gnostic background is p ostu lated , m any features o f the letters can be explained in term s o f it, such as the a p ostolic ap ologia o f 1 T h essalon ian s 2:3 -1 2 (cf. 2 C or 11:21-29; Phil 3 :4 -7 ). But the a p o stles’ m otives m ight be queried

xlvi

I n t r o d u c t io n

by a variety o f critics, w hile their reply to the critics’ queries w ould remain essentially the sam e. T h ere is, in fact, n oth in g in the T h essalon ian letters which requires exp lan ation in term s o f gnosticism ; gn osticism can b e read out o f them only if it be first read into them . 7. Christian Doctrine in Thessalonians T h e esch atology o f the T h essa lo n ia n letters has b een ou tlin ed above (pp. xxxvi-xxxix); it was su g g ested that it is not distinctively Pauline but that which was generally accep ted in the prim itive church, by Paul and others alike. T h e sam e may be said o f the oth er areas o f Christian doctrine which are covered in th ese two letters; what we have here is the com m on tradition o f the earliest a p ostolic teaching. Perhaps even at this early date diversity was m an ifestin g itse lf togeth er with the unity: not all, for exam ple, m ight have b een happy to exp ress their h o p e o f glory by m eans o f the apocalyptic im agery found in both 1 and 2 T hessalon ian s. But this w ould have b een a q u estion o f lan gu age rather than o f substance: all w ould have agreed in ack n ow led gin g Christ as their h o p e o f glory. (a) God. G od is the “ living and true G o d ” to w hom form er pagans turned in faith from their idolatry (1 T h ess 1:9). H e is thus identical with the G od o f Israel, w ho w ould have b een referred to by his Jew ish worshipers in the sam e term s. But he is also “G od the Father” (1 T h ess 1:1), “our G od and Father” (1 T h ess 1:3)— n ot only b ecause he is ipso facto the Father o f his children but b ecau se h e is primarily the Father o f Jesu s Christ “his S o n ” (1 T h ess 1:10) and therefore also the Father o f all th ose w ho are believers in Christ. G od has ch o sen his p e o p le (1 T h ess 1:4); he is the object o f their faith (1 T h ess 1:8). H e bestow s the authority underlying the a p o stle s’ bold confi­ d ence (1 T h ess 2:2); it is he who has en tru sted them with the g o sp el (1 T h ess 2:4); it is his pleasure that they seek and his w itness that they invoke to the purity o f their m otives and con d u ct (1 T h ess 2 :5 -1 0 ). It is his guid­ ance that m ust be follo w ed (1 T h ess 3:11), his will that m ust b e obeyed (1 T h ess 4:3; 5:18). H e has called his p e o p le to lead holy lives (1 T h ess 4:7) and he is able to bring to its consum m ation the h o lin ess to which he has called them (1 T h e ss 5:23). It is h e who raised up Jesu s from the dead (l T h ess 1:10) and will, with him , bring back his p e o p le from the dead (1 T h ess 4:14), thus finally accom p lish ing the salvation to which he has ap p oin ted them (1 T h e ss 5:9). (b) Christ. T h e sp o n ta n eo u s and repeated association o f Christ with G od in th ese letters bears w itness to the exalted place which he occu p ied , a lo n g ­ side G od, in the thou gh t and w orship o f the writers, as o f other early Christians. T h e church has its b ein g “ in G od the Father and the Lord Jesu s C hrist” (1 T h ess 1:1; 2 T h ess 1:1); it is from them b oth that grace and p eace are invoked on the readers (2 T h ess 1:2; cf. also 2 T h ess 1:12, “the grace o f our G od and the Lord J esu s C hrist”). W hen guidance is sough t for the writers or spiritual help for the readers, the prayer is directed to “ our G od and Father h im self and our Lord J e su s” (1 T h ess 3:11) or

Introduction

xlvii

“our Lord Jesu s Christ and G od our Father” (2 T h ess 2:16)— the very indifference o f the seq u en ce in which the two are nam ed is significant. If the Father is G od, 0 e 0 , the Son is Lord, κύριος, and m uch that is said o f G od can be said equally well o f the Lord: alon gsid e “the G od o f p ea ce” (1 T h ess 5:23) we have “ the Lord o f p ea ce” (2 T h ess 3:16). If believers are “loved by G o d ” (1 T h ess 1:4), they are also “ loved by the Lord” (2 T h ess 2:13). Jesu s is the Son o f G od (1 T h ess 1:9). His W ord carries unsurpassed authority (1 T h ess 4:15). H e “died for us, in order that we . . . m ight live togeth er with h im ” (1 T h ess 5:10). H e was raised from the dead by G od and is at presen t with him in heaven, from which his p eop le expect him to com e as their d eliverer from the en d-tim e retribution (1 T h ess 1:10). H is com ing, at which “ the dead in Christ will rise first” (1 T h ess 4:16), will bring r elief and glory to his p eo p le and final ju d gm en t to the ungodly (1 T h ess 5:9; 2 T h ess 1:5-10). T his is in keeping with his portrayal as “ju d g e o f the living and the d ea d ” (Acts 10:42). (c) The Spirit. T h e Spirit is all-pervasive in the Christian life, which is indeed his creation. It is by his pow er that the go sp el is proclaim ed effec­ tively (1 T h ess 1:5); not only is his jo y im parted to th ose who believe it (1 T h ess 1:6) but he h im self is given to them as the Holy Spirit (1 T h ess 4:8) to perform his sanctifying work in their lives (2 T h ess 2:13). In church life, too, he plays his part by com m unicating the divine will through pro­ phetic utterances; to ign ore or inhibit such utterances is to “ quench the Spirit” (1 T h ess 5:19). (d) Christian living. Christians m anifest the new life which the gospel has brought them by spreading the gosp el abroad in their turn (1 T hess 1:8). T h eir lives sh ou ld be con sisten t with the gosp el, marked by “work o f faith and labor o f love and steadfastness o f h o p e in our Lord Jesus C hrist” (1 T h ess 1:3). S om e particular aspects o f Christian ethics are al­ luded to as the occasion arises: endurance under trials (1 T h ess 2:14; 2 T h ess 1:4), love for o n e another (1 T h ess 3:12; 2 T h ess 1:3), chastity (1 T h ess 4 :3 -8 ), h on esty in everyday living ( l T h ess 4:11; 2 T h ess 3:6-13) and d o in g g o o d to all (1 T h ess 5:15). A gain, these ethical com m en d ation s and adm onitions are couched in general Christian and n ot in distinctively Pauline terms. If nothing is said expressly in these letters o f the antithesis betw een flesh and Spirit, that is not b ecause Paul did n ot yet have “ in his rep ertoire” the flesh-Spirit categories on which he drew in other letters (Jewett, P a u l’s Anthropological Terms, 111), but b ecause th ose categories did not figure in the thinking o f the other authors o f the T h essalon ian letters, m ore particularly Silvanus.

The First Letter to the Thessalonians

Structure

1. Prescript (1:1) 2. T hanksgiving (1:2-10) 3. Apostolic D efense (2:1-12) (a) The Missionaries’ Visit (2:1-4) (b) The Missionaries’ Behavior (2:5-8) (c) The Missionaries' Example (2:9-12) 4. Further T hanksgiving (2:13-16) 5. Plans (a) (b) (c) (d)

for a

Second V isit (2:17-3:13)

Out o f Sight, Not Out o f M ind (2:17-20) Mission o f Timothy (3:1-5) fo y and Thanksgiving at Timothy's Report (3:6-10) First Wish-Prayer fo r the Thessalonian Christians (3:11-13)

6. Exhortation (4:1-5:24) (a) (b) (c) (d) (e) (/) (g) (h)

On Keeping the Traditions (4:1, 2) On Sexual Purity (4:3-8) On Brotherly Love (4:9-12) On the Faithful Departed (4:13-18) On Times and Seasons (5:1-11) On Recognition o f Leaders (5:12, 13) On Various Christian Duties (5:14-22) Second Wish-Prayer fo r the Thessalonian Christians (5:23, 24)

7. Letter C losing (5:25-28)

Prescript

(1 Thess 1:1)

Bibliography Lohmeyer, E. “Probleme paulinischer Theologie. I. Briefliche Grussüberschriften.” ZNW 26 (1927) 158-173; with Friedrich, G. “Lohmeyers These iiber‘das paulinische Briefpräskript’kritisch beleuchtet.” ZNW 46 (1955) 272-274. Roller, O. Das Formu­ lar der paulinischen Briefe: Ein Beitrag zur Lehre vom. antiken Briefe. BWANT 4 /6 (58). Stuttgart: Kohlhammer, 1933. White, J. L. The Form and Function of the Body of the Greek Letter. SBL Dissertation Series, 2. Missoula, MT: Scholars Press, 1972.

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

Notes a ήμών (“o u r”) added by A 81 pc lata rg. codd copsa. codd. b από OeoO πατρος ήμων και κυρίου ΙησοΟ Χριστοί) added by Ν A I byz latvg.cod 2 Thess 1:2).

syrhc1** (from

Form/Structure/Setting T h e standard form o f the initial salutation or prescript in ancient letters was “A to B, g r e e tin g s.” Cf. Ezra 7:12, “A rtaxerxes, king o f kings, . . . to Ezra the priest, g r e e tin g s”); C icero, Epistulae ad (Quintum fratrem, 1.2 (M. Cicero Q. fr a tri s[alutem], “ Marcus C icero to Q uintus his brother, h ealth ” ); P. Oxy. 119.1 (Θεών Θεωνι τ φ πα τρί χαίρειν, “T h e o n to T h eo n his father, g reetin g s” ). H ere A com prises the three nam es Paul, Silvanus and T im othy; B is “ the church o f the T h essalon ian s . . .” ; the greetings take the form “ grace to you and p e a c e .“ T h is is the shortest prescript am on g the Pauline homologoumena.

Comment 1:1. ΠαΟλος και Σιλουανός και Τιμόθεος, “ Paul and Silvanus and T im oth y.” T h e sam e three nam es appear in the prescript o f 2 T h essalon ian s. It is not unusual to find Paul’s nam e com bined with others in the prescripts o f the Pauline letters; cf. Παύλος . . . και Σω σθένης ο άδελφός, “Paul . . . and S o sth en es the b roth er” (1 C or 1:1); Παύλος . . . και Τιμόθεος (2 Cor 1:1; similarly Phil 1:1; C ol. 1:1; Phlm 1); Παύλος . . . και οί σύν έμοί πόρτες άδελφοί, “ Paul . . . and all the brothers with m e ” (Gal. 1:1, 2). O nly in

6

1 T h e s s a l o n ia n s 1:1

R om ans, E phesians and the Pastoral L etters d o es Paul’s nam e stand unac­ com p an ied in the prescript. H ere the seq u en ce o f nam es may reflect seniority. But w hile Paul was the sen io r partner, the in clu sion o f the o th er two nam es n eed not be a m atter o f courtesy only: both Silvanus and T im oth y, and esp ecially Silvanus (see 3:2, with com m en t), may have participated resp on sib ly in the co m p osi­ tion o f the letter. Silvanus is m en tio n ed in 2 C or 1:19 as having shared with Paul and T im oth y in the evan gelization o f C orinth, and the im plication o f the re­ peated “ w e” in this letter is that h e sim ilarly shared in the evangelization o f T h essalon ica. It is uncertain if he is identical with the Silvanus o f 1 Pet 5:12. But it is certain that h e is identical with the Silas o f A cts. Silas was associated with Paul and T im oth y in the evan gelization o f T hessalon ica (Acts 17:1-9) and C orinth (Acts 18:5). If further ev id en ce may b e adduced from Acts to fill in our know led ge o f Silvanus, Silas was a m em b er o f the Jeru salem church, d ep u ted (along with o n e Judas Barsabbas) to convey the letter con tain in g the ap ostolic d ecree to A ntioch (Acts 15:22, 27, 32). N ot lo n g afterward, he was co ­ o p ted by Paul as his c o llea g u e for a m issionary jo u rn ey w hich took them from A ntioch through Asia M inor to A lexandria T roas on the northw est coast o f the p en in su la and from there by sea to M acedonia, w here he was involved in the evan gelization o f Philippi, T h essa lo n ica and Beroea; later he rejoined Paul in C orinth. If it is a reasonable in feren ce from Acts 16:37, w here Paul d escrib es Silas and h im self as ‘Pίομαιοι, “ R o m a n s,” that Silas was a R om an citizen as w ell as Paul, then Silvanus m ight be his Rom an co g n o m en , w hile Silas is a hypocoristic (as Epaphras to E paphroditus) or else represents his Aramaic nam e (cf. T alm udic Palm yrene N N Ü ) . T im oth y receives m ore frequent m en tion in Paul’s letters. H e was plainly an associate in w hom Paul had com p lete con fid en ce, en tru stin g him with resp o n sib le m issions, e.g . to T h essa lo n ica (3:2, 6), to C orinth (1 C or 4:17; 16:10) and to Philippi (Phil 2:19). A ccord in g to Acts h e was a native o f a South Galatian city (probably Lystra), the son o f a Jew ish m other and a Greek father, and was con verted to Christianity during Barnabas and Paul’s first visit to that region . W hen Paul later revisited the region with Silas, h e circum cised T im oth y and took him a lo n g as a ju n io r co llea g u e. T im othy accom panied Paul and Silas o n their jo u rn ey to M acedonia (Acts 16: Ι ΙΟ; 17:14, 15) and later rejoined Paul in C orinth (Acts 18:5). T h e picture o f his com p an ion sh ip with Paul in Acts is confirm ed by Paul’s ow n account in Phil 2 :2 0 -2 2 : “ I have n o o n e like him , w ho will b e gen u in ely anxious for your w elfare. . . . But T im o th y ’s worth you know, how as a son with a father h e has served with m e in the g o s p e l.” τχι έκκλησίφ Θβσσαλονικέων, “ to the church o f the T h e ssa lo n ia n s.” Paul’s earlier letters are explicitly ad d ressed to churches (cf. 2 T h e ss 1:1; Gal 1:2; 1 C or 1:2; 2 Cor 1:1), but his later letters to churches are variously add ressed to “ all G o d ’s b elo v ed . . . , called to b e sain ts” (R om 1:7); “ all the saints” (Phil 1:1); “ the saints and faithful brethren in C hrist” (Col

Comment

7

1:2); “ the saints w ho are also faithful in Christ J e su s“ (Eph 1:1). For “sain ts“ see com m en t on 2 T h e ss 1:10. έν θβφ π α τρί καί κυρίω Ιησού Χ ρ ισ τ φ , “ in G od the Father and the Lord Jesu s C hrist.“ T his phrase probably qualifies rf έκκλησ iq. Θεσσαλονικέων. C lassical u sage w ould require rf) to be repeated before έν defy to m aintain the phrase in the attributive p osition , but H ellenistic usage is less strict. T h e church o f the T h essalon ian s has its b ein g “in G od the Father and the Lord Jesu s C hrist” (cf. 2 T h ess 1:1). W e may com pare the collocation o f G od and Christ in a sim ilar exp ression in 2:14, τω ν έκκλησιώ ν του dedo . . . έν Χ ρ ισ τ φ Ιησού “ the churches o f G od . . . in Christ J e su s”). T h e n ou n έκκλησία, “ church, assem bly“ w ould n ot have any sacral associ­ ation in the m inds o f recen t converts from paganism : h en ce it is qualified by w ords which declare plainly w h o se “ assem bly” it is to which the converts now b elon g. Gk. έκκλησία was quickly specialized am ong G entile Christians to d esign ate a com pany o f believers in Jesus; its synonym συναΎ ω γή, “ syna­ g o g u e ” was increasingly reserved to d en o te a Jew ish con gregation . T h e phrase έκκλησία κυρίου is fou n d occasionally in LXX to d en o te the p eo p le o f Israel as “ the assem bly o f the L ord “ (H eb. ΓΠΓΡ n p )— repeatedly so in the early part o f D eut 23. But G o d ’s έκκλησία in the New T estam en t age has no national frontiers; it com prises Jew ish and G entile believers w ithout distinction. H ere, how ever, the b elievin g com m unity in T h essalon ica is n ot called the church o f G od, but the church “ in G o d .” T h is is an unusual expression in the Pauline corpus, w here otherw ise “ in G o d ” is u sed o f b oasting in G od (R om 2:17; 5:11) or o f b ein g hidden in G od (Eph 3:9; C ol 3:3). O n the oth er hand, “ in C hrist,“ “ in Christ j e s u s “ or “in the L ord” is a character­ istic Pauline exp ressio n , especially w hen it has “incorporativ e” force, p oin t­ ing to b eliev ers’ participation in C hrist’s risen life or their m em bership in his body. If this is the force o f the w ords “ in . . . the Lord Jesus C hrist” here, then “ in G od the Father” m ust b e u n d erstood in the sam e way. T h is is so uncharacteristic o f Paul that B est (62) thinks the p reposition έν m ust have instrum ental force: “ the Christian com m unity brought into b ein g by G od the Father and our Lord Jesus C hrist.” (T h e affirmation o f Acts 17:28, “ in him we live and m ove and have our b e in g ,” perhaps q u oted from E pim enides o f C rete, refers to the old creation and not to the new order o f grace.) Possibly Silvanus rather than Paul is responsible for the present w ording, which d esign ates G od and Christ as the sphere in which the church exists. In any case, the sp o n ta n eo u s jo in in g o f “ G od the Father” and “ the Lord Jesu s C hrist” under a sin gle p rep osition bears w itness to the exalted place which the risen Christ occu p ies in the thoughts o f Paul and his col­ leagu es (cf. 3:11). In resurrection Christ wears a heavenly hum anity as “ a life-giving spirit” (1 C or 15:4 5 -4 9 ) and has b een invested by G od with the title κύριος, “ lo r d ,” “ the nam e which is above every n am e” (Phil 2:9). G od and Christ are entirely at o n e in the salvation o f believers and in their m aintenance in a spiritual fellow ship.

8

1 T h e s s a l o n ia n s 1:1

χάρις ύμίρ και βίρηρη, “ grace and peace to y o u .” “ P ea ce” (H eb. ΌΊ*?ϋ) was (and is) the norm al Jew ish greetin g, as “ rejoice” (xaipetp, χοίρε, χαίρετε) was the norm al G reek greetin g. It is very doubtful if, as has o ften been su gg ested , χάρις in the prescript o f Pauline letters is a C hristian adaptation o f the greetin g χοίρε tv. T h e d o u b le form χάρις και βίρηρη is rather a variant on “ m ercy and p e a c e ” current in so m e Jew ish circles (cf. 2 Bar 78:2). E. Lohm eyer (Probleme, 159) argues that the form ula χάρις και €ίρήρη was pri­ marily liturgical and only secondarily epistolary. “ Χάρις is the source o f all real b lessin gs, βίρήρη their en d and issu e ” (L ightfoot, 8). T o χάρις ύμίρ και ά ρ η ρ η Paul habitually adds άπό θβοϋ π α τρο ς [ήμώρ] και κυρίου Ίησοϋ Χ ρίστου— an oth er instance o f the jo in in g o f “ G od the Father” and “ the Lord Jesu s C hrist” under a sin g le p rep osition . T h e om ission o f these w ords (as here) is ex cep tion al, and may perhaps be d u e to the heavi­ ness o f style which their inclu sion w ould impart after ip deco πατρί και κυρίω Ιησοϋ Χ ρ ισ τ φ in the p reced in g phrase (although that d o es n ot stand in the way o f their inclusion in 2 T h ess 1:2).

Explanation Paul, Silvanus (Silas) and T im othy, the three m issionaries w ho had first brought the g o sp e l to T h essa lo n ica and planted the church there, now send a letter to that church a few weeks or, at m ost, a few m onths after their departure from the city. T h ey greet the church as “ the church o f the T h essalon ian s in G od the Father and the Lord Jesu s C hrist,” perhaps in recogn ition o f the fact that it con sisted for the m ost part o f form er pagans w ho, as they are rem in d ed below (vv 9, 10), had ab an d on ed their false g od s not only “ to serve the living and true G o d ” but also “to wait for his Son from heaven, w hom h e raised from the dead, J e su s.”

Thanksgiving (1 Thess 1:2-10)

Bibliography Ahern, B. M. “Fellowship of his Sufferings.’’ CBQ 22 ( 1960) 1-32. Betz, H.-D. Nachfolge und Nachahmung Jesu Christi im Neuen Testament. BHT 37. Tübingen: Mohr, 1967. Charpentier, E. “L’action de gräce du pasteur. 1 Th 1, l-5 b .” AsSeign n.s. No. 60 (1975) 10-15. De Boer, W. P. The Imitation of Paul. Kämpen: Kok, 1962. Friedrich, G. “Ein Tauflied hellenistischer Judenchristen, 1 Thess. 1, 9 f.’’ TZ 21 (1965) 502-516. Giblin, C. H. In Hope of God's Glory. New York: Herder, 1970. Hanson, A. T. The Wrath of the Lamb. London: SPCK, 1957. Harris, J. R. “A Study in Letter-Writing.’’ Expositor, Series 5, 8 (1898), 161-180. Hunter, A. M. Paul and his Predecessors. London: SCM Press, 21961. Kamlah, E. “Wie beurteilt Paulus seine Leiden? Ein Beitrag zur Untersuchung seiner Denkstruktur.’’ ZNW 54 (1963) 217232. Käsemann, E. Commentary on Romans. Tr. G. W. Bromiley. Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1980. 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. NovT Sup 40. Leiden: Brill, 1975, 149-168 (“ 1 Th. 1, 3’’). Langevin, P.-fe. fisus Seigneur et l’eschatologie. Exàgèse de textes prèpauliniens. Bruges/Paris: Desclèe et Brouwer, 1967, 64-99 (“Exegese de 1 Th 1, 9 -1 0 ”). Laub, F. Eschatologische Verkündigung und Lebens­ gestaltung nach Paulus. Eine Untersuchung zum Wirken des Apostels beim Aufbau der Gemeinde in Thessalonike. Biblische Untersuchungen, 10. Regensburg: Pustet, 1973. Mattem, L. Das Verständnis des Gerichtes bei Paulus. ATANT 47. Zürich: Zwingli, 1966, 8286 (“ 1 Thess 1, 10”). Mearns, C. L. “Early Eschatological Development in Paul: the evidence of I and II Thessalonians.” NTS 27 (1980-81) 137-157. Morris, L. “The Wrath o f God.“ ExpTim 63 (1951-52) 142-145. Munck, J. “I Thess. 1.910 and the Missionary Preaching o f Paul.” NTS 9 (1962-63) 95-110. O’Brien, P. T. Introductory Thanksgivings in the Letters of Paul. NovT Sup 49. Leiden: Brill, 1977. Rigaux, B. Dieu l’a ressuscité. Exégese et théologie biblique. Gembloux: Duculot, 1973. Robinson, W. C., Jr. “Word and Power.” In Soli Deo Gloria. New Testament Studies in Honor of William Childs Robinson, ed. J. McD Richards. Richmond, VA: John Knox Press, 1968, 68-82. Rossano, P. “La Parola e lo Spirito. Riflessioni su 1 Tess 1, 5 e 1 Cor 2, 4 -5 .” In M élanges Bibliques en hommage au R. P. Bida Rigaux, ed. A. Descamps et A. de Halleux. Gembloux: Duculot, 1970, 437-4 44. Sanders, J. T. “The Transition from Opening Epistolary Thanksgiving to Body in the Letters of the Pauline Corpus.” JBL 81 (1962) 348-362. Schneider, G. “Urchristliche Gottesverkündigung in hellenistischer Umwelt.” BZ 13 (1969) 59-75. Schubert, P. Form and Function of the Pauline Thanksgivings. BZNW 20. Berlin: Töpelmann, 1939. Schulz, A. Nachfolgen und Nachahmen. Studien über das Verhältnis der neutestamentlichen Jüngerschaft zur urchristlichen Vorbildethik. München: Kösel, 1962. Stanley, D. M. ‘Become Imitators of m e.’ The Pauline Conception of Apostolic Tradition.” Bib 40 (1959) 859-877. Tannehill, R. C. Dying and Rising with Christ. BZNW 32. Berlin: Töpelmann, 1967, 100-104 (“ 1 Thessalonians 1, 5-8 and 2, 13-16”). Tasker, R. V. G. The Biblical Doctrine of the Wrath of God. London: Tyndale Press, 1951. Weir, T. H. “ 1 Th i.3.” ExpTim 34 (1922-23) 525. Weir, T. H. “Notes on 1 and 2 Thessalonians.” ExpTim 35 (1923-24) 140. Wilckens, U. Die Missionsreden der Apostel­ geschichte. Form- und traditionsgeschichtliche Untersuchungen. WMANT 5. Neukirchen-

10

1 T h e s s a l o n ia n s 1:2-10

Vluyn: Neukirchener Verlag, 1974, 80-86 (“ 1 Thess 1, 9.10 und Hebr 5, 11-6, 2°). 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.

2 We give thanks to God continually fo r you all as we mention you a in our prayers, 3 unceasingly calling to mind your work o f fa ith and labor o f love and patience o f hope in b our Lord Jesus Christ, in the presence o f our God and Father, 4 knowing as we do (the genuineness o f) your election, brothers so dear to God. 5 Our c gospel indeed did not come d to you in word only but also in power— in the Holy Spint and in fullest conviction. You fo r your part know what kind o f persons we were among e you fo r your sakes. 6 As fo r you, you became imitators o f us and o f the Lord, when you accepted f the word amid much tabulation, with joy inspired by * the Holy Spint. 7 So you became an example h to all the believers in Macedonia and in Achaia. 8 From you the word o f the Lord has sounded out not only in Macedonia and in 1 Achaia, b u ti in every place your fa ith toward God has gone fo rth , so that we have no need to speak a word. 9 They themselves report concerning us k what kind o f entrance we had among you, and how you turned to God from your idols to serve the living and true God 10 and to wait for his Son from heaven, the one whom he raised from the 1 dead, fesus, our deliverer from the coming wrath.

Notes • υμών (“you”) is implied; it is expressly read by C D F G Φ byz latvet syr Ambst. b This translation treats roO κυρίου ημών 'Ιησού Χριστού as objective genitive after the verbal idea implicit in έλπώος (“ h o p e”). c For ημών (“o u r”) roO 0eoO (“ G od’s”) is substituted in N2 C; the conflated roO 0eoO ημών is read by N*. d έ^ατήβη, aorist o f yipeoGat in default o f an aorist o f eivai (cf. έΎαηβημεμ later in v 5). • έν is om itted before ΰμΟυ (yielding the meaning “ to you”) in N A C P 048 33 81 1739 pc latVBet. r δζξάμενοι, simultaneous aorist participle. • καί is read before πνεύματος (“ with joy and the Holy Spirit” ) in B latVBCOdd. hτύπους (“exam ples”) is read for τύπου by N A C F G Φ byz syrhd. 1ev Tfi (“in”) is om itted by B K a i J άλλα καί (“but also” ) is read for άλλά (“ b u t”) by N2 D2 byz latVBcl Ambst. *ΰμώυ (“ you”) is read for ήμωυ (“ us” ) by B 81 al lat* d (Best prefers ήμωυ as lectio

difficilior). 1τώυ is om itted before veKpCw by A C K al.

Comment

11

F o rm /S tru c tu re /S e ttin g T h e thanksgiving follow in g the prescript, attested occasionally in G reek ep istolograp h y, was d ev elo p ed as a special feature o f Paul’s epistolary style. T h e presen t thanksgiving report, w hich b eg in s in v 2, appears to be inter­ rupted by the ap olo g ia o f 2 :1 -1 2 and the “ ap ostolic parousia” o f 2 :1 7 3:8, but is resum ed in 2:13 and again in 3:9. T h e n o te o f thanksgiving perm eates the first part o f the letter as far as 3:10 at least; in d eed , O ’Brien ( Thanksgiving, 144), follow in g Schubert (Form, 1 7 -2 7 ), sees “ g o o d reasons for con sid erin g that Paul’s introductory thanksgiving stretches from chaps. 1:2 to 3 :1 3 .” T h e thanksgiving report includes a b rief prayer report (vv 2 b -4 ), which is m ainly con cern ed with the T h essa lo n ia n s’ faith and w hich exhibits a rhythm ical pattern marked by the three participial constructions μνείαν ποιούμενοι . . . μνημονεύοντες . . . βΐδότβς . . . (“m en tio n in g . . . calling to m ind . . . k n ow in g”). W ithin the seco n d o f th ese three constructions we n o te the triple beat o f τοϋ ip y o v τής π ίσ τεω ς / τού κόπου τής αγάπης / τής υπομονής τής έλπίδος (“ your work o f faith . . . labor o f love . . . patience o f h o p e ,” v 3). T h e report o f the T h essa lo n ia n s’ co n version in w 9 b - 10 com prises two tristichs, b eg in n in g respectively with επ εσ τ ρέψ α τε “you turned” and ον τγγειρεν, “w hom h e raised ” (see translation above). Comment 1:2. Ε ύχαριστοϋμεν, “w e give thanks.” T h e plural form im plies that all three m issionaries w ere in a real sen se jo in t authors o f the letter. In other letters w here the nam e o f o n e o f Paul’s com p an ion s is con join ed with his ow n in the prescript (e.g. S osth en es in 1 C orinthians or T im othy in Philippians) the u se o f the singular ευ χα ρ ισ τώ , “ I give thanks,” makes it plain that Paul h im se lf is the author (1 C or 1:4; Phil 1:3; in C ol 1:3 εύχαριστοϋμεν may indicate that T im othy is in so m e d eg ree jo in t author). In 2 T h e ss 1:3, εύχαριστοϋμεν is replaced by εύχα ριστειν οφείλομεv, “w e are b ou n d to give thanks.” In R om 1:8 (πρώ τον μεν ευ χα ρ ισ τώ ), Paul indicates the im portance which he attaches to thanksgiving. In 2 C or 1:3 and Eph 1:3, the thanksgiving takes the form βύλσγητός ό θεός (cf. also 1 Pet 1:3). O nly in Galatians is the n o te o f thanksgiving absent; the new s from the Galatian churches gave Paul n o th in g to be thankful about. περί πάντω ν ύμών, “co n cern in g you a ll,” may be construed either with εύχαριστοϋμεν τω θ ε φ or with μνείαν ποιούμενοι (if υμώ ν be om itted after μνείαν; se e n o te a). If it is con stru ed with μνείαν ποιούμενοι then the balance o f the sen ten ce requires that ά ό α ιλείπτω ς, “u n ceasin gly,” be construed with μνημονεύοντες (as in N estie-A lan d 2e). (For άδιαλείπτοος cf. 2:13; 5:17.) μνείαν ποιούμενοι, “ m aking m en tio n ” (cf. R om 1:9; Eph 1:16; Phlm 4). In Plato (Phaedrus 254a; Protagoras 3 l7 e ) and oth er Attic writers μνείαν

12

1 T h e s s a l o n ia n s 1:2-10

ποιεϊσθαι m eans “ to m e n tio n ” and it probably has the sam e m eaning in Paul. Cf. 3:6 for μνείαν έχειν. 2. μνημονεύοντες, “ rem em b erin g (ά δ ια λ είπ το ς, ‘u n cea sin g ly ’).” In the Pauline corpus μνημονεύειν regularly m eans “ rem em b er” (cf. 2:9; 2 T h ess 2:5; Gal 2:10; Eph 2 : l l ; C ol 4:18; 2 T im 2:8). H ere the object o f the verb is the threefold gen itive έργου . . . κόπου . . . ύπομονής. υμώ ν, “your”— g en itive in d e p e n d e n c e on έργου . . . κόπου . . . υ π ο μ ο ν ή (“your work o f faith . . .” ). του έργου τή ς π ίσ τεω ς καί τού κόπου τή ς άηγάπης και τή ς υπομονής τή ς έλπίδος. For the triad o f graces, “ faith, love, h o p e ” (π ίσ τις, α γά π η , ελπίς), cf. 5:8; Gal 5:5, 6; R om 5:1-5; C ol 1:4, 5, in addition to the w ell-know n 1 Cor 13:13. (Instances o u tsid e the Pauline corpus are H eb 10:22-24; 1 Pet 1:21, 22.) T h e writers rejoice that th ese graces are m anifested in the life and activity o f the T h essa lo n ia n Christians. “T h e triad o f faith, h op e and love is the q u in tessen ce o f the G od -given life in C hrist” (Bornkam m , Paul, 219). H unter (3 3 -3 5 ) and oth ers have m aintained that the triad b e­ lon g s to the vocabulary o f pre-P auline Christianity. Faith is based on the assurance that G od has acted for his p e o p le ’s salvation in Christ; love is the p resen t (and con tin u in g) relationship b etw een G od and his p eo p le through Christ; h o p e is b ou n d up with the conviction that “h e w ho has begun a g o o d work” in them “ will co m p lete it until the day o f J esu s C hrist” (Phil 1:6). Faith show s itse lf in work (cf. Gal 5:6, π ίσ τις Sc άηγάπης ένεργουμένη, “faith working through lo v e ” ) and love in labor, but the d istin ction b etw een έργον a n d κόπος here is m ore rhetorical than substantial. As for τ ή ς υπομονής τή ς έλπίδος, w hile it is form ally parallel to τοϋ έργου τ ή ς π ίσ τεω ς and του κόπου τή ς αιγάπης, it “ m ore likely exp resses subjectively the patient h op e which accom panies active faith . . . and laboring lo v e ” (BDF § 163). του κυρίου ημώ ν Ιησού Χ ριστού, “ o f our Lord J esu s C hrist,” is objective genitive after έλπίδος. It is in him that his p e o p le ’s h o p e is placed, and their h o p e will b e realized at his Parousia. Cf. 5:8, έλπίδα σ ω τη ρ ία ς , “h op e o f salvation,” the “ salvation ” b ein g that to which G od has ap p oin ted his p eo p le “ through our Lord J esu s C hrist” (5:9). T h e sam e h o p e is described in R om 5:2 as “h o p e o f the glory o f G o d ” (cf. C ol 1:27, Χ ρ ισ τό ς έν ύμιν, η έλ π ίς τή ς δόξης, “ Christ in you, the h o p e o f glory” ). Perhaps “h o p e ” has the em phatic p o sitio n at the en d o f the triad here b ecau se o f the esch ato­ logical n o te o f the w h ole letter (just as the con text o f 1 C or 13:13 re­ quires that “ lo v e ” sh ou ld occupy that em phatic p o sitio n there). For the n ouns which respectively govern the three graces in the gen itive cf. Rev 2:2, w here the Lord says to the church o f E phesus, όίδα τ α έ ρ γ α σου και τον κόπον καί τη ν υπομονήν σου (“ I know your works, your labor and your en d u rin g” ). έμπροσθεν του θεού καί πα τρός η μ ώ ν, “ in the p resen ce o f our G od and Father.” It is uncertain h ow m uch o f the p reced in g construction is to be taken togeth er with this phrase. It is to o distant from μνημονεύοντες to be constru ed with that participle; it is m ore natural to su p p o se that the

Comment

13

T h essa lo n ia n s’ work, labor and patient h o p e are exercised in the p resen ce o f G od— n ot only in aw areness o f their responsibility to him but also in view o f the Parousia (cf. 3:13, w here the sam e phrase, εμπροσ0εv τον Oeov καί πα τρός ημών, is closely associated with “ the Parousia o f our Lord J e su s’’). 4. είδότες, “ k n ow in g,” like the p reced in g participles ποιούμενοι (v 2) and μνημονεύοντες (v 3), refers to the m issionaries, the subject o f the principal verb εύχαριστουμεν. T h ey know that the T h essalon ian believers are truly am on g the elect p eo p le o f G od b ecau se the unm istakable signs o f the new life have b eco m e apparent in them , in cluding their ready resp on se to the g o sp el— a vital as well as a verbal resp on se. T h is k now ledge (είδότες, “b ecau se we know ” ) en h an ces the writers’ sen se o f gratitude to G od. άδελ