Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of 1 Thessalonians 2:15

Who both killed the Lord Jesus, and their own prophets, and have persecuted us; and they please not God, and are contrary to all men:

15. who both killed the Lord Jesus, and their own prophets ] Revised reading, simply the prophets.

Christ represented His death as the culmination of the murders of the ancient prophets (Luk 11:47-52; Luk 13:31-33; Luk 20:9-16); St Stephen had said the same thing in Paul’s hearing, with poignant force (Act 7:52). Now the Apostle takes up the accusation.

More exactly, killed the Lord, (even) Jesus; or, changing the grammatical form but retaining the order of the Greek words, The Lord they slew, Jesus, as well as the prophets. This sets the deed in an appalling light. To have killed the Lord Who bears a title that belongs to God, and “Him whom they were bound to serve” (Jowett); (comp. 1Co 2:8: They “crucified the Lord of glory”); that Lord being Jesus their Saviour (comp. Act 4:12), and such an one as Jesus was known to be! The double name, emphasized in each part, brings into striking relief at once the Divine authority and the human character of Christ. Comp. Act 2:36 (“Him did God make both Lord and Christ this Jesus whom you crucified!”); also the parable of Luk 20:9-18, Mar 12:1-11, “The husbandmen said, This is the heir; come, let us kill him!”

and have persecuted us ] Better, and drave us out (R. V.), words which echo those of Christ in Luk 11:49: “I will send them prophets and apostles; and some of them they will kill and persecute.” Already Christ, like the prophets, had been killed; and now His apostles were driven out, “fleeing from city to city” (Mat 23:34) to avoid the like fate. Read the account of Paul’s departure from Jerusalem in Act 9:28-30; and his later experience there, Acts 21-23; also the narrative of James’ death and Peter’s escape from Herod’s prison, in Act 12:1-9. Paul and Silas had now been hunted all the way from Philippi to Corinth by Jewish malignity, and it was only the authority and good sense of the Roman Governor, Gallio, that made it possible for him to remain in the latter city. Comp. 2Co 11:26: “In perils from mine own countrymen.”

and they please not God ] Omit they, and put a comma only before this clause, for it is immediately continuous with the last: more exactly, and are not pleasing to God. This is an instance of what the grammarians call meiosis or litotes, the studiously restrained and smooth expression covering intense feeling; as where the Apostle says, “I praise yon not,” meaning severe blame (1Co 11:17; 1Co 11:22). Their unpleasingness to God was due not to these wicked acts alone, but to their whole conduct. Comp., in the O.T., such sayings as Isa 65:5: “These are a smoke in My nostrils;” and Jer 32:30. By contrast, the Apostle spoke of himself as “not pleasing men, but God” (1Th 2:4).

and are contrary to all men ] At war both with God and men! The sense of God’s displeasure often shews itself in sourness and ill-temper towards one’s fellows. Unbelief and cynicism go together. The rancour of the Jews against other nations at this time was notorious. Tacitus, the Roman historian, writing in the next generation, remarks on their “ adversus omnes alios hostile odium ” ( Histor. 1Th 2:5). This animosity culminated in the war against Rome (a.d. 66 70), and brought a fearful retribution.

The quarrel between Judaism and the world, alas, still continues, as the Judenhasse of Germany and Russia testifies. Jewish hatred has been more than repaid by Christian persecution. The antipathy is powerfully impersonated in Shakespeare’s Shylock. The Jew says of his debtor, “I hate him, for he is a Christian.” And Antonio in turn:

“You may as well use question with the wolf,

Why he hath made the ewe bleat for the lamb;

You may as well do anything most hard,

As seek to soften that (than which what’s harder?)

His Jewish heart.”

But we may hope that better feelings will prevail in the future on both sides. St Paul is thinking, however, not of the Jewish sentiment in general, but of the opposition of his people to the rest of the world on that one point which concerned him so deeply, viz. the salvation of men through Christ.

Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges

Who both killed the Lord Jesus – see the notes on Act 2:23. The meaning here is, that it was characteristic of the Jews to be engaged in the work of persecution, and that they should not regard it as strange that they who had put their own Messiah to death, and slain the prophets, should now be found persecuting the true children of God.

And their own prophets – see the Mat 21:33-40; 23:29-37 notes; Act 7:52 note.

And have persecuted us – As at Iconium Act 14:1, Derbe, and Lystra Act 14:6, and at Philippi, Thessalonica, and Berea. The meaning is, that it was characteristic of them to persecute, and they spared no one. If they had persecuted the apostles themselves, who were their own countrymen, it should not be considered strange that they should persecute those who were Gentiles.

And they please not God – Their conduct is not such as to please God, but such as to expose them to his wrath; 1Th 2:16. The meaning is not that they did not aim to please God – whatever may have been the truth about that – but that they had shown by all their history that their conduct could not meet with the divine approbation. They made extraordinary pretensions to being the special people of God, and it was important for the apostle to show that their conduct demonstrated that they had no such claims. Their opposition to the Thessalonians, therefore, was no proof that God was opposed to them, and they should not allow themselves to be troubled by such opposition. It was rather proof that they were the friends of God – since those who now persecuted them had been engaged in persecuting the most holy people that had lived.

And are contrary to all men – They do not merely differ from other people in customs and opinions – which might be harmless – but they keep up an active opposition to all other people. It was not opposition to one nation only, but to all; it was not to one form of religion only, but to all – even including Gods last revelation to mankind; it was not opposition evinced in their own country, but they carried it with them wherever they went. The truth of this statement is confirmed, not only by authority of the apostle and the uniform record in the New Testament, but by the testimony borne of them in the classic writers. This was universally regarded as their national characteristic, for they had so demeaned themselves as to leave this impression on the minds of those with whom they had contact. Thus Tacitus describes them as cherishing hatred against all others – adversus omnes alios hostile odium; Hist. v. 5. So Juvenal (Sat. xiv. 103, 104), describes them.

Non monstrare vias eadem nisi sacra colenti,

Quaesitum a.d. fontem solos deducere verpos.

They would not even point out the way to any one except of the same religion, nor, being asked, guide any to a fountain except the circumcised. So they are called by Appollonius atheists and misanthropes, and the most uncultivated barbarians – atheoi kai misanthropoi kai apheustatoi ton barbaron; Josephus, Contra Apion ii. 14. So Diodorus Siculus (34:p. 524), describes them as those alone among all the nations who were unwilling to have any contact (or intermingling – ) epimixias with any other nation, and who regarded all others as enemies kai polemious hupolambanein pantas. Their history had given abundant occasion for these charges.

Fuente: Albert Barnes’ Notes on the Bible

1Th 2:15-16

Who both killed the Lord Jesus and their own prophets

Pauls indictment of the Jews

The apostle goes off upon the word Jews to describe the evil deeds of his countrymen.

I. The explanation of the indictment. Various views have been offered.

1. That as the persecution of believers in Thessalonica, though from the heathen, was yet directly instigated by the Jews, it was natural that Paul should turn aside to speak of them and their wickedness.

2. That the apostle, at the very time of writing, was himself suffering at their hands (Act 18:5-6; Act 18:12). His mind, therefore, we can well conceive, was full of thoughts regarding these Jewish misdeeds, and hence he bursts forth into utterances of sorrowful indignation.

3. That the Thessalonians were converts from Polytheism to a monotheistic religion which was a growth out of Judaism, They could, consequently, hardly fail to stumble by seeing Jews everywhere its most violent opponents. Paul may have striven to meet this state of mind, by showing that the opposition of the Jews was in keeping with their whole character and conduct.

II. Its subject matter.

1. The culminating point in Jewish wickedness is the casting out and murder of their Messiah. In ignorance they did it, it is true. Yet that ignorance was no justification, for the prophets, whose testimony was to Christ, the Jews had also slain. This is the indictment of the Old Testament, and also of Christ (Mat 23:29-39). Pauls words are but an echo of his Masters.

2. Seeing, then, that such was their past conduct, Paul adds, as naturally following, and have persecuted us. What had been meted out to Gods servants in the past it was to be expected would be extended to the apostles and believers. Under new conditions the Jewish character would again assert itself.

3. Hence he declares They please not God and are contrary to all men. The more he came in contact with Gentile life, the more he must have observed the intense dislike with which the Jews were everywhere regarded. Despising other nations, they were themselves only loathed by these nations in return; and now that Pauls feelings had broadened into the love of all mankind, he could not but recognize them as showing what Tacitus called adversus omnes alios hostile odium. The mark of Gods anger had been set upon them, and the Divine judgment had been ratified by men. When God loathes aught, men presently loathe it too.

4. But here it is not the dislike felt by others towards the Jews as the animosity of the Jews towards all others. Forbidding us to speak to the Gentiles, etc. Like their own Pharisees they would neither enter in themselves nor allow others to enter.

5. In thus standing in the way of the Gentiles salvation they were acting so as to fill up their own sins alway with fearful perseverance; alike before Christ had come, when He came, and now that He had gone, they had been filling up the measure of their guilt.

6. And now retribution was approaching. Wrath had already fallen, and was falling upon them; but in a short fourteen years it came upon them to the utmost in the destruction of their city and the dispersion of their race. (J. Hutchison, D. D.)

The fury of the old religion against the new

The transition from the old to a new order of things in the progress of religion is not always accomplished without opposition. Age is naturally and increasingly tenacious: and the old religion looks upon the new with suspicion, jealousy, fear, anger. The Jews had resisted the attempts of their own Divinely commissioned prophets to rouse them to a purer faith and life; but their fury reached its climax in their opposition to Christianity. Observe–

I. The fury of the Jews in their inhuman treatment of the great leaders of religious thought.

1. They plotted against the life of the worlds Redeemer; and, in spite of insufficient evidence to convict, and the endeavours of the Roman Procurator to release, they clamoured for His crucifixion, exclaiming, His blood be on us and on our children–a self-invoked imprecation that fell on them with terrible and desolating vengeance!

2. The sin of murder already darkly stained their race–the best and noblest of their prophets being the unoffending victims. Isaiah, Jeremiah, Amos, and Zechariah met with violent deaths. The charge of Stephen was unanswerable (Act 7:52).

3. The apostles were subjected to similar treatment–Have chased and driven us out. They drove them out of Thessalonica, afterwards out of Berea, and were at that moment engaged in instigating an insurrection to drive the apostle out of Corinth. The spirit of persecution is unchanged. Wherever the attempt is made to raise the Church, it is met with a jealous, angry opposition. And yet what a wretched, short-sighted policy does persecution reveal! It is the idolized weapon of the tyrant and the coward, the sport of the brutal, the sanguinary carnival of devils.

II. The fury of the Jews was displeasing to God. They fondly imagined that they were the favourites of heaven, and that all others were excluded from the Divine complacency. They could quote the words of their law, such as Deu 14:2, with the utmost facility, to support their assumption of superiority and exclusiveness, wilfully shutting their eyes to the difference between the holy intention of Jehovah, and their miserable failure to realize that intention. In all their opposition to Christianity they thought they were doing God service. How fatally blinding is sin–goading the soul to the commission of the most horrible crimes under the guise of virtue.

III. The fury of the Jews was hostile to man.

1. Their hostility was directed against the world of mankind. Are contrary to all men. The Jews of that period were the adversaries and despisers of all. Tacitus brands them as the enemies of all men: and Apion, the Egyptian, calls them Atheists and misanthropes, in fact, the most witless and dullest of barbarians.

2. Their hostility was embittered by a despicable religious jealousy. Forbidding us to speak to the Gentiles, etc. Here the fury of the old religion against the new reached its climax. It is the perfection of bigotry and cruelty to deny to our fellow men the only means of salvation! Into what monsters of barbarity will persecution convert men! Pharaoh persisted to such a degree of unreasonableness as to chastise the Hebrews for not accomplishing impossibilities! Julian the Apostate, carried his vengeful spirit to his deathbed.

IV. The fury of the Jews hurried them into irretrievable ruin.

1. Their wickedness was wilfully persistent. To fill up their sins alway–at all times, now as much as ever. So much so, the time is now come when the cup of their iniquity is filled to the brim, and nothing can prevent the consequent punishment. The desire to sin grows with its commission. St. Gregory says, Sinners would live forever that they might sin forever–a powerful argument for the endlessness of future punishment–the desire to sin is endless!

2. Their punishment was inevitable and complete. For the wrath is come upon them to the uttermost–is even now upon them. The process has begun. Their fury to destroy others will accelerate their own destruction. Punishment descended upon the wicked, unbelieving, and resisting Jews; and utter destruction upon their national status and religious supremacy.

Lessons:–

1. There is a fearful possibility of sinking into a lifeless formality, and a blind, infatuate opposition to the good.

2. The rage of man against the truth defeats its own ends and recoils in vengeance on himself. (G. Barlow.)

Guilty of the death of Christ

Bridaine was one of the most celebrated of the French preachers. Marmontel relates that in his sermons he sometimes had recourse to the interesting method of parables, with a view the more forcibly to impress important truths on the minds of his hearers. Preaching on the passion of Jesus Christ, he expressed himself thus:–A man, accused of a crime of which he was innocent, was condemned to death by the iniquity of his judges. He was led to punishment, but no gibbet was prepared, nor was there any executioner to perform the sentence. The people, moved with compassion, hoped that this sufferer would escape death. But one man raised his voice, and said, I am going to prepare a gibbet, and I will be the executioner. You groan with indignation! Well, my brethren, in each of you I behold this cruel man. Here are no Jews today, to crucify Jesus Christ: but you dare to rise up, and say, I will crucify Him. Marmontel adds, that he heard these words pronounced by the preacher, though very young, with all the dignity of an apostle, and with the most powerful emotion; and that such was the effect, that nothing was heard but the sobs of the auditory. For the wrath is come upon them to the uttermost–

The Jews under the wrath of God

Bishop Patrick quotes the following affecting inquiry addressed by Rabbi Samuel Moraccanus to a friend in the eleventh century:–I would fain learn from thee, out of the testimonies of the law, and the prophets, and other Scriptures, why the Jews are thus smitten in this captivity wherein we are, which may be properly termed the perpetual anger of God, because it hath no end. For it is now above a thousand years since we were carried captive by Titus; and yet our fathers, who worshipped idols, killed the prophets, and cast the law behind their back, were only punished with a seventy years captivity, and then brought home again; but now there is no end of our calamities, nor do the prophets promise any. If, says Bishop Patrick, this argument was hard to be answered then, in his days, it is much harder in ours, who still see them pursued by Gods vengeance, which can be for nothing else but rejecting and crucifying the Messiah, the Saviour of the world.

Severity consistent with benevolence

Take the case of an earthly parent. Suppose him to be endowed with all the tenderest sensibilities of nature, conceive of him as delighting in the health and welfare of his children, and, in the exercise of every benevolent affection, lavishing on them all the riches of a fathers kindness and a fathers care. You say, on looking at his benignant countenance and his smiling family, this is an affectionate father. But a secret canker of ingratitude seizes one or more of his children, they shun his presence, or dislike his society, and at length venture on acts of positive disobedience; he warns them, he expostulates with them, but in vain, they revolt more and more; and at length, in the exercise of deliberate thought, he lifts the rod and chastens them; and he who once was the author of all their happiness has become also their calm but firm reprover. And who that knows the tenderness of a fathers love will not acknowledge that, severe as may be the suffering inflicted, such a man doth not afflict willingly, nor grieve the children of his love? Again, conceive of a man of benevolent feelings invested with the office of magistrate or judge–conceive that Howard, the unwearied friend of his race, who visited the prisons of Europe to alleviate the miseries of the worst and most destitute of men–conceive of such a man sitting in judgment over the life or liberty of another, and can you not suppose, that while every feeling within him inclined him to the side of mercy, and his every sensibility would be gratified, were it possible to make the felon virtuous and happy, he might, notwithstanding, have such a deep moral persuasion of the importance of virtue and order to the well-being of the state, that he could consign the prisoner to a dungeon or the gallows, and that, too, with the perfect conviction that it was right and good to do so; while still, every sentiment of the heart within him, if it could be disclosed, would bear witness, that he afflicted not willingly, and that he had no pleasure in the death of the criminal? Such a father, and such a judge is God; and the sufferings which he inflicts, whether they be viewed as corrective or penal, are compatible with the loftiest benevolence in the Divine mind. (Dr. J. Buchanan.)

Fuente: Biblical Illustrator Edited by Joseph S. Exell

Verse 15. 16. Who hath killed the Lord Jesus, c.] What a finished but just character is this of the Jews!

1. They slew the Lord Jesus, through the most unprincipled and fell malice.

2. They killed their own prophets there was no time in which the seed of the serpent did not hate and oppose spiritual things, they slew even their own prophets who declared to them the will of God.

3. They persecuted the apostles showing the same spirit of enmity to the Gospel which they had shown to the law.

4. They did not please God, nor seek to please him; though they pretended that their opposition to the Gospel was through their zeal for God’s glory, they were hypocrites of the worst kind.

5. They were contrary to all men; they hated the whole human race, and judged and wished them to perdition.

6. They forbade the apostles to preach to the Gentiles, lest they should be saved; this was an inveteracy of malice completely superhuman; they persecuted the body to death, and the soul to damnation! They were afraid that the Gentiles should get their souls saved if the Gospel was preached to them!

7. They filled up their sins always; they had no mere purposes or outlines of iniquity, all were filled up; every evil purpose was followed, as far as possible, with a wicked act! Is it any wonder, therefore, that wrath should come upon them to the uttermost? It is to be reckoned among the highest mercies of God that the whole nation was not pursued by the Divine justice to utter and final extinction.

Fuente: Adam Clarke’s Commentary and Critical Notes on the Bible

Who both killed the Lord Jesus; no wonder then though they have persecuted you, and the believing Jews their countrymen. They killed the Lord Jesus by the hands of Pilate, crying: Crucify him, crucify him. Though it was by Gods determinate counsel, and the Roman power, yet by the Jews malice they killed him; Mat 21:38; This is the heir; let us kill him.

And their own prophets; of their own nation, and directed and sent particularly to them of God; so that it was no new thing in them thus to do. Not that these individual Jews who persecuted Paul killed the prophets, but they were of the same nation, the same blood, and of the same spirit with them, and were the children of them, that killed the prophets, as our Saviour charged them, Mat 23:31. The spirit of persecution was natural to them, it descended from one generation to another; their kings were guilty of it, their priests, their false prophets, and the common people. And though better things might be expected of the Jews than any other people, yet thus they did. And it was not only because of the new doctrine or worship that the apostle preached, for they killed their own prophets before them; but it was their love to their lusts, hatred of reproof, enmity to holiness, &c., that was the cause. And Christ himself chargeth them with the same things, Mat 23:37; O Jerusalem, thou that killest the prophets, & c.; and foretells it as that which they would yet practise, Mat 23:34.

And they please not God; by the figure called meiosis; it is meant they highly displeased God, and were haters of God, and hated, and now rejected, of him. Though they had the advantages and reasons to please God above all other people, having had the law and ordinances of his worship among them, yet they pleased not God, and particularly in their persecutions of the gospel and the apostles, though they might think that therein they did God good service, as Joh 16:2.

And are contrary to all men; contrary in their worship, laws, and customs. Or rather, contrary to all men, in hindering the course of the gospel appointed for mens salvation. And despising all other nations in comparison of themselves, they were apt to be seditious, and raise tumults every where, and to disdain familiarity and common friendship with the Gentiles.

Fuente: English Annotations on the Holy Bible by Matthew Poole

15. the Lord Jesusrather asGreek, “Jesus THELORD.” This enhancesthe glaring enormity of their sin, that in killing Jesus they killedthe LORD (Compare Act 3:14;Act 3:15).

their ownomitted inthe oldest manuscripts.

prophets (Mat 21:33-41;Mat 23:31-37; Luk 13:33).

persecuted usrather asGreek (see Margin), “By persecution drove us out”(Lu 11:49).

please not Godthat is,they do not make it their aim to please God. He implies thatwith all their boast of being God’s peculiar people, they all thewhile are “no pleasers of God,” as certainly as, by theuniversal voice of the world, which even they themselves cannotcontradict, they are declared to be perversely “contrary to allmen.” JOSEPHUS[Against Apion, 2.14], represents one calling them “Atheistsand Misanthropes, the dullest of barbarians”; and TACITUS[Histories, 5.5], “They have a hostile hatred of allother men.” However, the contrariety to all men heremeant is, in that they “forbid us to speak to theGentiles that they may be saved” (1Th2:16).

Fuente: Jamieson, Fausset and Brown’s Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible

Who both killed the Lord Jesus,…. For though Pilate condemned him to death, and the Roman soldiers executed the sentence, yet it was through the malice and envy of the Jews that he was delivered to him, who brought charges against him, and insisted upon the crucifixion of him; and who are therefore said to have taken him with wicked hands, and crucified and slain him; and to have killed the Prince of life, and to have been the betrayers and murderers of him; and therefore it is no wonder that such persons should persecute the followers of Christ, whether in Judea or elsewhere:

and their own prophets; whom God sent unto them; these they not only mocked and misused, and persecuted, but many of them they put to death, as Isaiah and others; and though this was done by their fathers, yet the present generation were the children of them that killed the prophets; and showed themselves to be of the same principles, and by their practices approved of what they had done: hence our Lord addresses the city of Jerusalem thus, “O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, that killest the prophets”, Mt 23:31. The Vulgate Latin and Ethiopic versions leave out the phrase “their own”, and so does the Alexandrian copy; but it stands in the Syriac and Arabic versions, and is rightly retained, it having an emphasis in it; these prophets being of their own nation, born among them, and raised up in the midst of them, and sent unto them particularly, and yet were so used; and therefore it need not seem strange that they should treat in an ill manner persons of a lower character, that did not agree with them; the consideration of which serves to support under reproach and persecution; see Mt 5:12.

And have persecuted us; the apostles of Christ; have drove us out of our own country, and pursued us from place to place, and caused us to flee from one city to another:

and they please not God: though they reckoned themselves his chosen people, the favourites of heaven, and whom God delighted in; but neither their persons nor their actions were pleasing to him, their carnal minds being enmity to him, to his law and to his Gospel; and they in the flesh, or in an unregenerate estate, and without faith in Christ, without which it is impossible to please God, and their actions such as before described:

and are contrary to all men; not only Christians, but Heathens; to all the Gentiles, who are called all men, the nations of the world, the world, and the whole world; they were contrary to these, both in their religious and civil principles, and had an aversion to them, of which the following is a full instance.

Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible

Who both killed the Lord Jesus and the prophets ( ). First aorist active participle of . Vivid justification of his praise of the churches in Judea. The Jews killed the prophets before the Lord Jesus who reminded them of their guilt (Mt 23:29). Paul, as Peter (Ac 2:23), lays the guilt of the death of Christ on the Jews.

And drove us out ( ). An old verb to drive out or banish, to chase out as if a wild beast. Only here in N.T. It is Paul’s vivid description of the scene told in Ac 17:5ff. when the rabbis and the hoodlums from the agora chased him out of Thessalonica by the help of the politarchs.

Please not God ( ). The rabbis and Jews thought that they were pleasing God by so doing as Paul did when he ravaged the young church in Jerusalem. But Paul knows better now.

And are contrary to all men ( ). Dative case with the adjective (old and common word, face to face, opposite). It seems like a bitter word about Paul’s countrymen whom he really loved (Rom 9:1-5; Rom 10:1-6), but Paul knew only too well the middle wall of partition between Jew and Gentile as he shows in Eph 2 and which only the Cross of Christ can break down. Tacitus (Hist. V. 5) says that the Jews are adversus omnes alios hostile odium.

Fuente: Robertson’s Word Pictures in the New Testament

Persecuted [] . Rev. more literally and correctly, drave out. The word only here, though it occurs as an alternative reading, Luk 11:49. Probably with special reference to his own expulsion from Thessalonica. Act 17:5 – 10.

Contrary to all men. Tacitus (Hist. 5 5) describes the Jews as stubborn in their faith, prompt in kindly offices to each other, but bitterly hostile toward everybody else : Juvenal (Sat. 14 102 f.) says that they observe and respect whatever Moses has taught in his mystical volume; not to show the way except to one who practices the same rites, and to show the well only to the circumcised.

Fuente: Vincent’s Word Studies in the New Testament

1) “Who both killed the Lord Jesus” (ton kai ton kurion apokteinanton lesoun) “who killed both the Lord Jesus”; Paul here endorsed the testimony of the martyr Stephen, at whose death he presided, that the Jews slew Jesus and certain of their own prophets, Act 7:52; Act 9:22-23.

2) “And their own prophets” (kai tous prophetas) and their (own race) prophets”, or “the prophets”; and garnished their tombs, Mat 23:29-36.

3) “And have persecuted us” (kai hemas ekdioksanton) “and have chased (hounded) us out”, out of the country, Act 17:4-9. In bitterness, the Jews, people of Paul’s own race, not only persecuted and slew Jesus Christ and former prophets but also bitterly persecuted the Church and the apostles, hounding Paul from city to city and country to country.

4) “And they please not God” (kai theo me apeskonton) “and they are not pleasing God”, but are breakers of the very law they claim to believe, Exo 20:1-18.

5) “And are contrary to all men” (kai pasin anthropois enantion) “and to all men (they) are contrary” in hindering and forbidding the preaching of the gospel to all nations, as commanded of the Lord, Mar 16:15; Mat 28:20; Act 1:8.

Fuente: Garner-Howes Baptist Commentary

15 Who killed the Lord Jesus. As that people had been distinguished by so many benefits from God, in consequence of the glory of the ancient fathers, the very name (544) was of great authority among many. Lest this disguise should dazzle the eyes of any one, he strips the Jews of all honor, so as to leave them nothing but odium and the utmost infamy.

“

Behold,” says he, “the virtues for which they deserve praise among the good and pious! — they killed their own prophets and at last the Son of God, they have persecuted me his servant, they wage war with God, they are detested by the whole world, they are hostile to the salvation of the Gentiles; in fine, they are destined to everlasting destruction.”

It is asked, why he says that Christ and the prophets were killed by the same persons? I answer, that this refers to the entire body, (545) for Paul means that there is nothing new or unusual in their resisting God, but that, on the contrary, they are, in this manner, filling up the measure of their fathers, as Christ speaks. (Mat 23:32)

(544) “ De Juif;” — “Of Jew.”

(545) “ A tout le corps du peuple;” — “To the whole body of the people.”

Fuente: Calvin’s Complete Commentary

CRITICAL AND EXPLANATORY NOTES

1Th. 2:15. Who both killed.The New Testament form of the verb is always compoundas we should say, killed off. A tragic contrast to what might have been expected is set forth in our Lords parable. It may be they will reverence My Son. They cast Him out and killed Him off (Luk. 20:13-15). Have persecuted us.A.V. margin, chased us out. R.V. text, drave. How deeply humbling was the thought to St. Paul, that he had at one time taken part in this hounding! The A.V. margin gives us a most vivid picture. They please not God.This expression is thought by some to be a meiosis, a softening down of the hard reality by the negative form of the language. Is not the best comment found in Joh. 16:2, Whosoever killeth you shall think that he offereth service unto God? The sophistry that makes killing no murder and sanctions an auto da f is something quite other than pleasing to God. Are contrary to all men.The sense of Gods displeasure often shows itself in sourness and ill temper towards ones fellows. Unbelief and cynicism go together. The rancour of the Jews against other nations at this time was notorious. The quarrel between Judaism and the world, alas, still continues, as the Judenhasse of Germany and Russia testifies (Findlay).

1Th. 2:16. Forbidding us to speak to the Gentiles.The very spirit of the dog in the manger! They would not even have left the uncovenanted mercies to the Gentiles. To fill up their sins alway.The phrase signifies ripeness for judgment, and is used in Gen. 15:16 of the Amorites in Abrahams timean ominous parallel (Ibid.). For the wrath.R.V, but the wrath. As though he said, But the end comes at last; they have always been sowing this harvest; now it has to be reaped (Ibid.).

MAIN HOMILETICS OF THE PARAGRAPH.1Th. 2:15-16

The Fury of the Old Religion against the New.

It is the natural order of things that the old must give place to the new. The inexorable operation of the law of progress is seen in a thousand different forms. In the world of vegetation the old life is continually yielding supremacy to the new. The leaves, buds, and blossoms of the tree, as they force their way to the light, fling their shadows on the grave where their predecessors lie decayed and buriedlife blooming amid the ghastly emblems of death. And, in the world of religious thought and opinion, while divine truth remains in its essence unchangeably the same, old forms and old definitions are ever giving place to the new. The transition from the old to a new order of things in the progress of religion is not always accomplished without opposition. Age is naturally and increasingly tenacious; and the old religion looks upon the new with suspicion, with jealousy, with fear, with anger. The Jews had resisted the attempts of their own divinely commissioned prophets to rouse the nation to a purer faith and more vigorous religious life; but their fury reached its climax in their blind, unreasonable, and fiendish opposition to Christianity. The text describes the fury of the old religion against the new.
I. The fury of the Jews is seen in their inhuman treatment of the great leaders of religious thought.Who both killed the Lord Jesus and their own prophets, and have persecuted us (1Th. 2:15).

1. They plotted against the life of the worlds Redeemer; and in spite of insufficient evidence to convict, and the endeavours of the Roman procurator to release, they clamoured for the immediate crucifixion of their innocent Victim, exclaiming in the wild intoxication of malignant passion, His blood be on us and on our childrena self-invoked imprecation that fell on them with terrible and desolating vengeance.

2. The sin of murder already darkly stained their race.The best and noblest of their prophets were unoffending victims: Isaiah, Jeremiah, Amos, Zechariah, met with violent deaths. The charge of the proto-martyr Stephen was unanswerable (Act. 7:52).

3. The apostles were subjected to similar treatment.And have persecuted ushave chased and driven us out. They drove them out of Thessalonica, afterwards out of Bera, and were at that moment engaged in instigating an insurrection to drive the apostle out of Corinth. The spirit of persecution is unchanged. Wherever the attempt is made to raise the Church from the grave of spiritual death and reanimate her creed and ritual with intenser reality and life, it is met with a jealous, angry opposition. What a wretched, short-sighted policy does persecution reveal! It is the idolised weapon of the tyrant and the coward, the sport of the brutal, the sanguinary carnival of demons!

II. The fury of the Jews was displeasing to God.They please not God (1Th. 2:15). They fondly imagined they were the favourites of heaven, and that all others were excluded from the divine complacency. They had the words of the law carefully committed to memory, and could quote them with the utmost facility to serve their own purpose. They would support their proud assumption of superiority and exclusiveness by quoting Deu. 14:2, wilfully shutting their eyes to the vital difference between the holy intention of Jehovah and their miserably defective realisation of that intention. In their opposition to Christianity they thought they were doing God service; yet all the time they were displeasing to Him. How fatally blinding is sin, goading the soul to the commission of the most horrible crimes under the sacred guise of virtue!

III. The fury of the Jews was hostile to man.

1. Their hostility was directed against the world of mankind. Are contrary to all men (1Th. 2:15). The Jews of that period delighted in hatching all kinds of sedition, privy conspiracy, and rebellion. They were the adversaries of all, the despisers of all. Tacitus, the Roman historian, brands them as the enemies of all men; and Apion, the Egyptian, according to the admission of Josephus, calls them atheists and misanthropesin fact, the most witless and dullest of barbarians.

2. Their hostility was embittered by a despicable religious jealousy.Forbidding us to speak to the Gentiles, that they might be saved (1Th. 2:16). Here the fury of the old religion against the new reached its climax. It is the perfection of bigotry and cruelty to deny to our fellow-men the only means of salvation. Into what monsters of barbarity will persecution turn men! Pharaoh persisted to such a degree of unreasonableness as to chastise the Hebrews for not accomplishing impossibilities! Julian, the apostate from Christianity, carried his vengeful spirit to his deathbed, and died cursing the Nazarene!

IV. The fury of the Jews hurried them into irretrievable ruin.

1. Their wickedness was wilfully persistent. To fill up their sins always (1Th. 2:16)at all times, now as much as ever. So much so, the time is now come when the cup of their iniquity is filled to the brim, and nothing can prevent the consequent punishment. The desire to sin grows with its commission. Sinners, says St. Gregory, would live for ever that they might sin for evera powerful argument for the endlessness of future punishment. The desire to sin is endless.

2. Their punishment was inevitable and complete.For the wrath is come upon them to the uttermost (1Th. 2:16)is even now upon them. The process has begun; their fury to destroy others will accelerate their own destruction. Punishment fell upon the wicked, unbelieving, and resisting Jews, and utter destruction upon their national status and religious supremacy (vide Josephus, Wars, Books v., vi.).

Lessons.

1. There is a fearful possibility of sinking into a lifeless formality, and blind, infatuate opposition to the good.

2. The rage of man against the truth defeats its own ends, and recoils in vengeance on himself.

GERM NOTES ON THE VERSES

1Th. 2:15-16. The Persecuting Jews

I. Often misled by professed zeal for truth.

II. Tortured and murdered the noblest men of their own race.

III. Opposed the gospel with violent and unreasoning severity.

IV. Have themselves been persecuted by all the nations among whom they sojourned.

V. Furnish an unanswerable argument for the truth of Christianity.

Fuente: The Preacher’s Complete Homiletical Commentary Edited by Joseph S. Exell

Text (1Th. 2:15-16)

15 who both killed the Lord Jesus and the prophets, and drove out us, and please not God, and are contrary to all men; 16 forbidding us to speak to the Gentiles that they may be saved; to fill up their sins always; but the wrath is come upon them to the uppermost.

Translation and Paraphrase

15.

(These Jews are the people) who both killed the Lord Jesus and the prophets, and have persecuted (and pursued) us, and (they) please not God, and are antagonistic to all men.

16.

preventing us (if they possibly can) from speaking to the Gentiles so that they could be saved. (All of this wickedness is working) unto the (result, that they, like the Amorites of old, are) filling full their (cup of) sins always. But (God has not overlooked this wickedness any more than He overlooked the iniquity of the Amorites.) Rather, the wrath (of God) has come upon them to the (bitter) end.

Notes (1Th. 2:15-16)

1.

Facts about the Jews.

(1)

They killed the Lord Jesus.

(2)

They killed the prophets.

(3) They persecuted and pursued Paul.
(4)

They please not God.

(5)

They are contrary to all men.

(6)

They forbade Paul to speak to the Gentiles.

2.

This list of charges which Paul lays upon the Jews would be enough in modern times to raise scrams of Anti-Semitism! from coast to coast. Nonetheless, everything which Paul said about them was true.

3.

They killed the Lord Jesus. We have observed in recent times a lot of propaganda trying to get people to stop blaming the Jews for killing Jesus. But the fact remains that Pilate, the Roman governor who sentenced Jesus to die, did not want to do so. See Joh. 19:6; Joh. 19:12. Only the mob pressure from the Jews prevailed upon him to do it.

The Jews had tried to kill Jesus several times previously, before He finally was crucified. See Joh. 8:59; Joh. 10:31; Luk. 4:29.

Just fifty days after Jesus died, right in Jerusalem where He was killed, the apostle Peter said publicly to the Jews, YOU have taken (Jesus) and by wicked hands have crucified and slain, Act. 2:23. No Jew there could deny that Peter spoke the truth about their deed.

4.

The Jews killed their prophets, Jesus himself laid this charge upon them. O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, thou that killest the prophets, and stonest them which are sent unto thee. Mat. 23:37. See also Mat. 23:29-35; Act. 7:52.

The Jews during their history had turned against Moses, They persecuted Jeremiah. Amos was told to leave and prophesy no more, Amo. 7:12. Micaiah was imprisoned, 1Ki. 22:24-28. Hanani imprisoned. 2Ch. 16:7-10. Zechariah slain. 2Ch. 24:20-22. This list could go on and on.

5.

The Jews had persecuted Paul, almost from the moment he had become a Christian. To list all the places where Paul had been hounded and persecuted by the Jews would be to list every place he ever visitedDamascus, Jerusalem, Antioch of Pisidia, Lystra, etc. Shortly before this letter was written, Paul had had to leave Berea, because Jews had come all the way from Thessalonica to run Paul out of town. See Act. 17:10-13.

This was such an unreasonable thing for them to do, sort of a dog in the manger attitude. But, there is no limit to what religious prejudice will really do when mens eyes become blinded. (Ironside, ADDRESSES, p. 28.)

6.

The Jews please not God. Probably of all the charges made by Paul against the Jews, this one would be the most hotly disputed. But as proof that Paul was right when he said, The Jews please not God, let us remind you that Gods prophets which He sent to the Jews confirm Pauls judgment:

(1)

John the Baptist called them a generation of vipers. Mat. 3:7.

(2)

Isaiah called them a sinful nation, a people laden with iniquity, a seed of evildoers, children that are corrupters. Isa. 1:4.

(3)

Jeremiah said that they were all grievous revolters, walking with slanders. Jer. 6:28.

(4)

Malachi declared Gods judgment, that from the days of your fathers ye are gone away from mine ordinances. Mal. 3:7.

Jesus said to his apostles, Whosoever killeth you shall think that he offereth service to God. Joh. 16:2. The mistaken zeal of men like Saul of Tarsus led them even to commit murder in Gods name. This certainly did NOT please God.

Now we must in all fairness interject, that there have always been many devout, gracious, open-hearted Jews, men like their father Abraham. Paul himself acknowledged this, for he himself was a Jew. Rom. 11:5. Many Jews honestly considered what, Jesus said and did, and many became Christians. But many closed their minds, and became violent against Christ and His followers. In doing that, they did NOT please God.

7.

The Jews are contrary to all men. Contrary (Gr., enantios) means opposite, antagonistic, etc.

The Jews of Pauls time delighted in hatching all manner of sedition, private conspiracy, and rebellion. Tacitus, the Roman historian, brands them as the enemies of all men. The great Jewish doctor of the law, Gamaliel, himself tells of two violent rebellions of the Jews. Act. 5:36-37.

The Jews despised the Gentiles as unclean. They would not enter the house of Pilate the Roman governor. Joh. 18:29. The apostle Peter said to Cornelius, Ye know how that it is an unlawful thing for a man that is a Jew to keep company or come unto one of another nation. Act. 10:28.

We admit that it is plain evident history that Gentiles (and even professed Christians) have been cruel to the Jews throughout the centuries. But the Jews have themselves been guilty of everything that they have suffered from others. Gentiles and Jews alike are guilty before God.

8.

The Jews forbade Paul to speak to the Gentiles. Nothing roused the Jews to more fury than for Paul to go to the Gentiles with the gospel of Christ.

Paul, in telling about his conversation and life before the Jews in Jerusalem, said, And He (Jesus) said unto me, Depart; for I will send thee far hence unto the Gentiles. And they gave him audience unto this word, and then lifted up their voice, and said, Away with such a fellow from the earth: for it is not fit that he should live. And as they cried out, and cast off their clothes, and threw dust into the air. . . . Act. 22:21-23.

It was always the same story wherever Paul went. The Jews tried to prevent him from teaching the Gentiles. In Lystra the Jews from Antioch and Iconium persuaded the people (Gentiles) to stone Paul. Act. 14:19; Act. 17:13.

9.

The result of all these wicked acts by the Jews, was that they fill up their sins always. This expression appears to be a reference to what God had long before said about the wicked Amorites in the land of Canaan: The iniquity of the Amorites is not yet full, Gen. 15:16, At a later date God indicated that their iniquity was full, and that their own land would vomit them out. Lev. 18:24-28.

To say that the Jews resembled the heathen Amorites, whom they conquered in the time of Joshua, was perhaps a crowning insult, but not an exaggeration.

10.

As a result of the iniquity of the Jews, wrath was come upon them to the uttermost, or unto the end. This does not mean that wrath would continue upon them to the end of the world. For Paul himself prophesied that the Israelites would return to God before that time. Rom. 11:25-26. Rather, wrath unto the uttermost means wrath that fully expends itself.

Gods wrath against the Jews was particularly demonstrated at the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 A.D. Already at the time when Paul wrote this epistle, the great rebellion of the Jews against the Romans was taking form. When the rebellion finally came in 66 A.D., it led to a bloody war, in which the walls, temple, and much of the rest of Jerusalem were demolished and burned down. 97,000 people were carried away captive into slavery, and eleven hundred thousand (1,100,000) perished, many by starvation and killing one another. Josephus, the Jewish historian, tells us about this in Wars of the Jews, VI, ix, 4.

Paul was certainly correct when he said that wrath was come upon them to the uttermost.

11.

This statement about wrath upon them to the uttermost leaves some overly sensitive people shuddering with dislike and unbelief. Some interpreters even assert that this statement must be a later interpolation into the text. (So Moffatt, Interpreters Bible, etc.) There is no proof whatsoever of such an opinion. It is just the reaction of the natural mind of man to Gods judgment. Naturally, men do not like to accept what God says about such things as hell, the blood of Jesus, Gods wrath, and the judgment. See 1Co. 2:14. But surely we must accept anything that God says. The Thessalonians did. 1Th. 2:13.

STUDY SUGGESTIONS

1.

You have now come to the closing verses of the second part of Chapter two. We urge you to review the outline of chapter 2.

2.

Also you should now try to answer the remaining questions in the section that follows. Questions over the second section of chapter two are questions 30 to 45.

Fuente: College Press Bible Study Textbook Series

(15) Who both killed.A tremendous invective against the Jews, the purpose of which is (1) to show the deep sympathy of St. Paul with the persecuted Thessalonians, and his indignation against the persecutors; (2) to make them see still more deeply the value of their faith by the efforts made to keep it from them. Objection is often made to St. Johns Gospel on the ground that no born Jew could have written of the Jews in the bitter way so common in that book, or viewed them so completely as a separate body from himself. This passage, in an indubitable epistle of a Hebrew of the Hebrews. seems a satisfactory answer. The memories of St. Stephens speech (Act. 7:52) seem to be waking in the mind of him who was once a persecuting Jew himself.

Have persecuted.Take the marginal version, chased (not have chased) us violently out of Thessalonica.

They please not God(though to serve and please Him was the special purpose for which the nation was set apart, ) and are at cross purposes with all mankind. The historian Tacitus gives, as a characteristic of the race, an attitude of hostility and hatred towards all others. Juvenal makes the same accusation.

Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)

15. Who After having mentioned Jews, Paul’s mind runs up the line of Hebrew history and traces the persecutions which the good and holy have received at Hebrew hands. They killed Jesus, their own prophets, and finally Paul includes us in the line of virtual martyrs. And so even his Thessalonians are also in the sacred line of holy sufferers. Thence his thought runs down the line of Jewish sin.

Please not God Though hereditary monotheists, worshipping with a divinely appointed ritual in the Holy Land, and resorted to by devout pagans, they nevertheless please not God, because they receive not his Messiah.

Contrary to all men Almost repeating the words of Tacitus, the Roman historian, adversus omnes alios hostile odium, “a hatred against all others.” The exclusiveness of their monotheism alone would not justify, though it probably occasioned, this charge. But to that the Jews added a fanatical contempt of others instead of a benevolence. It was this fanaticism that not only prevented their accepting Christ, but inspired them to persecute Paul for presenting Christ to either Jews or Gentiles.

Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments

1Th 2:15. Who both killed, &c. Who have both killed the Lord Jesus, and the, or his prophets. Mill, and Wetstein. Not only heathen authors have given the Jews the character of being an obstinate, prejudiced people, contrary to all men; but even their own prophet, Ezekiel, (ch. 1Th 3:4-9 1Th 5:6.) and Josephus, their own historia

Fuente: Commentary on the Holy Bible by Thomas Coke

1Th 2:15-16 . As to the occasion of this invective, see on 1Th 2:14 .

] not signifying even ; also not to be connected with the next , both and ; but means who also , and proves the propriety of the preceding statement from the analogous conduct in 1Th 2:15 . Grotius (comp. Chrysostom, Oecumenius, Theophylact, Pelagius): Quid mirum est, si in nos saeviunt, qui dominum nostrum interfecerunt ? Non debent discipuli meliorem sortem exspectare quam magistri fuit.

Moreover, emphatically precedes, and is separated from in order to enhance the enormity of the deed.

] De Wette and Koch unite this with ; Chrysostom, Oecumenius, Theophylact, Calvin, Musculus, Bengel, Pelt, Schott, Olshausen, Baumgarten-Crusius, Bloomfield, Alford, Hofmann, Auberlen, and most critics, more correctly refer it to . In the catalogue of the sins of the Jews which Paul here adduces, he begins directly with that deed which formed the climax of their wickedness the murder of the Son of God, of Jesus the Messiah. In order to cut off all excuses for this atrocious deed of the Jews, as that they had done it in ignorance, not recognising Jesus as the Son of God, Paul adds, going backwards in time, that they had already done the same to the Old Testament prophets, whom, in like manner, they had murdered against their better knowledge and conscience. Christ Himself accuses the Jews of the murder of the prophets, Mat 23:31 ; Mat 23:37 , Luk 11:47 ff; Luk 13:34 ; and Stephen does the same, Act 7:52 ; with which passages comp. 1Ki 19:10 ; 1Ki 19:14 (see Rom 11:3 ); Jer 2:30 ; Neh 9:26 .

] and have persecuted us . refers not to Paul only (Calvin), also not to Paul and Silas only (de Wette, Koch, Alford), or to Paul and the companions who happened to be with him at Thessalonica (Auberlen); but to Paul and the apostles generally (Estius, Aretius, Bengel, Koppe, Flatt, Pelt, Schott). The preposition in strengthens the verbal idea. In an unjustifiable manner, Koppe and de Wette (the latter appealing to Luk 11:49 and Ps. 118:157, LXX.) make it stand for the simple verb.

] and please not God . Erroneously Wieseler on Gal 1:10 , p. 41, note, and Hofmann: live not to please God ; similarly Bengel, Koppe, Flatt, and Baumgarten-Crusius: placere non quaerentium; for after the preceding strong expressions that would be flat. Rather the result is inferred from the two preceding statements, namely, the consequences of the obstinacy of the Jews, with which they persecute the messengers of God , is that they please not God, that is, are hateful to Him ( , Meiosis ).

] and are hostile to all men . Grotius, Turretin, Michaelis, Koppe, Olshausen, de Wette, Baumgarten-Crusius, Koch, Bloomfield, Jowett, and others, erroneously find here expressed the narrow exclusiveness, by means of which the Jews strictly separated themselves from all other nations, and about which Tacit. Hist. v. 5 (“adversus omnes alios hostile odium”); Juvenal, Sat. xiv. 103 ff.; Diod. Sic. xxxiv. p. 524; Philostr. Apollon. v. 33; Joseph, c. Apion. ii. 10, 14, wrote. For (1) that hostile odium and desire of separation among the Jews was nothing else than a shrinking from staining themselves and their monotheistic worship by contact with idolaters. But Paul would certainly not have blamed such a shrinking, which was only a fruit of their strict observance of their ancestral religion. (2) If 1Th 2:16 begins with an independent assertion, would denote nothing essentially new, but would only repeat what was already expressed in , 1Th 2:15 . (3) It is grammatically inadmissible to understand the words as an independent assertion, and thus to be considered as a general truth . For the participle (1Th 2:16 ) must contain a causal statement, as it is neither united with , nor by an article ( . . . or . . ., or . . .), and thus is closely and directly connected with the preceding, and giving a reason for it, i.e. explaining wherefore or in what relation the Jews are to be considered as . Thus the thought necessarily is: And who actually proved themselves to be hostilely disposed to all men since they hindered us from publishing the gospel to the Gentiles, and thus leading them to salvation. That is to say, the gospel offers salvation to every one, without distinction, who will surrender himself to it. But the Jews, in opposing themselves with all their might to the publication of this free and universal gospel, prove themselves, in point of fact, as enemies to the whole human race , in so far as they will not suffer the gospel, which alone can save men, to reach them. So Chrysostom, Theodoret, Oecumenius, Theophylact, Calovius, Bern. a Piconio, Schott, Alford, Hofmann, and others correctly interpret the words; also Wieseler on Gal 1:10 , p. 49, note , and Auberlen, only that he would incorrectly unite with , which would only be tenable if, instead of the simple connected clause , the more definitely separating form . . . had been put. [38]

] hindering us , namely, by contradictions, calumnies, laying snares for our life, etc. Comp. Act 9:23 ff; Act 13:45 ; Act 17:5 ; Act 17:13 ; Act 22:22 . Unnecessarily, Pelt, Schott, de Wette, Koch, seeking to hinder ; for the intrigues of the Jews are an actual hindrance to the preaching of the apostle, certainly not an absolute, but a partial hindrance, conditioned by opportunity of place and influence.

] as above, us the apostles .

] to the Gentiles , with emphasis; for it was the preaching to the Gentiles that enraged the Jews. resumes the previous , as that expression comprehended the non-Jewish humanity, i.e. the Gentile world.

] is not to be taken absolutely, so that it would be equivalent to docere (Koppe, Flatt), or would require for its completion (Piscator), but is to be conjoined with in one idea, and the whole is then another expression for , but in a more impressive form.

. . . ] to fill up their sins always . does not denote the result = or quo fit ut (Musculus, Estius, Cornelius a Lapide, Grotius, Koppe, Flatt, Pelt, Schott, Baumgarten-Crusius, Koch, Bloomfield), but the object , the design ; and that not of (Hofmann), as this is a dependent clause, but of the whole description. But it expresses not the ultimate design which the Jews themselves , in their so acting, had either consciously (Oecumenius: , , , , ) or unconsciously (de Wette: they do it, though unconsciously, to the end, etc.; Auberlen), so that an ironical expression would have to be assumed (Schott). But in entire conformity with the Pauline mode of thought, which delights to dive into the eternal and secret counsels of God, it expresses the design which God has with this sinfulness of the Jews. So, correctly, Piscator. God’s counsel was to make the Jews reach in their hardness even to the extreme point of their sinfulness, and then, instead of the past long-suffering and patience, the severity of anger and punishment was to commence.

] to fill up their sins, i.e. to fill up the measure destined for them, to bring them to the prescribed point; comp. LXX. Gen 15:16 ; 2Ma 6:14 .

] refers to the subject of the preceding verses the Jews.

] emphatically placed at the end, is not equivalent to or (Bretschneider, Olshausen), on all sides, in every way (Baumgarten-Crusius), but merely involves the notion of time, always , that is, the Jews before Christ, at the time of Christ, and after Christ, have opposed themselves to the divine truth, and thus have been always engaged in filling up the measure of their iniquities. (Oecumenius: , .) When, however, the apostle says that this is practised by the Jews , at all times, his meaning cannot be that the Jews had at any given moment, thus already repeatedly, filled up the measure of their sins (Musculus), but he intends to say that at every division of time the conduct of the Jews was of such a nature that the general tendency of this continued sinful conduct was the filling up of the measure of their sins. Paul thus conceives that the Jews, at every renewed obstinate rejection of the truth, approached a step nearer to the complete measure of their sinfulness, ] but the wrath has come upon them even to the end . The Vulgate, Luther, Beza, Wolf, erroneously take in the sense of . Rather, forms the contrast to (not to the whole preceding description), in so far as the increase of the divine wrath is contrasted to the continued wicked conduct of the Jews.

] contains, in classical usage, the idea of priority in time. Schott thinks that this idea must also be here preserved, whilst he finds indicated therein the breaking forth upon the Jews citius quam exspectaverint vel omnino praeter opinionem eorum. Incorrectly; for when is united not with the accusative of the person (comp. 1Th 4:15 ), but with prepositions ( , Rom 9:31 [see Fritzsche in loco ]; Phi 3:16 ; , 2Co 9:14 ; . , Mat 12:28 ; Dan 4:25 ), then, in the later Greek, the meaning of the verb “to anticipate” is softened into the general meaning of reaching the intended end. The aorist is not here to be taken in the sense of the present (Grotius, Pelt), also not prophetically instead of the future (Koppe: mox eveniet iis; Flatt: it will certainly befall them, and also it will soon befall them; and so also Schott, Bloomfield, Hilgenfeld, Zeitschr. f. wissensch. Theol. , Halle 1862, p. 239), but reports in quite a usual manner a fact which already belongs to the past.

] sc. , does not mean the divine punishment , which certainly in itself it may denote (Erasmus, Musculus, Cornelius a Lapide, Flatt, Schott, de Wette, Ewald), but the divine wrath . The article denotes either the wrath predicted by the prophets (Theophylact, Schott), or generally the wrath which is merited (Oecumenius).

] belongs to the whole sentence , and denotes even to its (the wrath’s) end, i.e. the wrath of God has reached its extreme limits, so that it must now discharge itself, now , in the place of hitherto long-suffering and patience, punishment must step in. The actual outbreak of the wrath, the punishment itself, has thus not yet occurred at the composition of this Epistle. To interpret the words of the destruction of Jerusalem as already happened , would be contrary to the context. On the other hand, it is to be assumed that Paul, from the by no means dark signs of the times, had by presentiment foreseen the impending catastrophe of the Jewish people, and by means of this foresight had expressed the concluding words of this verse. It is accordingly an unnecessary arbitrariness when Ritschl ( Hall. A. Lit. Z. 1847, No. 126) explains the words . as a gloss. Incorrectly, Camerarius, Er. Schmid, Homberg, Koch, and Hofmann understand in the sense of , penitus . Also incorrectly, Heinsius, Michaelis, Bolten, Wahl: postremo, tandem . Others erroneously unite with , whilst they supply , and then either explain it: the wrath which will endure eternally or to the end of the world (Chrysostom, Theophylact, Oecumenius, Theodoret, Fab. Stapulens., Hunnius, Seb. Schmid, and others); or: the wrath which will continue to work until its full manifestation (Olshausen); or lastly: the wrath which shall end with their (the Jews’) destruction (Flatt). In all these suppositions the article must be repeated before . Erroneously, moreover, de Wette refers to the Jews, although he unites it with the verb: “so as to make an end of them.” So also Bloomfield and Ewald: “even to complete eradication.” The apostle rather preserves the figure used in ; namely, as there is a definite measure for the sins of the Jews, at the filling up of which the divine wrath must discharge itself; so also there exists a definite measure for the long-suffering patience of God, whose fulness provokes divine punishment. Comp. also Rom 2:5 .

[38] The article , wanting before , makes it likewise impossible to make the two last in ver. 15 to signify, with Hofmann, “both and.”

REMARK.

In 1Th 2:14-16 , Baur (see Introd. 4) finds a “particularly noticeable” criterion for the spuriousness of the Epistle. “The description has a thoroughly un-Pauline stamp,” and, besides, betrays a dependence on the Acts. First of all, the comparison of the Thessalonian church with the Palestinian churches is “far-fetched,” although nothing is more simple, more natural, and more unforced than these very parallels, since the tertium comparationis consists simply in this, that both were persecuted by their own countrymen , and both endured their persecutions with similar heroic courage . The parallels are further “inappropriate” to Paul, as he does not elsewhere hold up the Jewish-Christians as a pattern to the Gentile-Christians. As if the repeated collections which the apostle undertook for the poor churches of Palestine had not demonstrated by fact that his love extended itself equally to the Jewish as to the Gentile churches! As if the words of the apostle, in 2Co 8:13-15 , did not express a high esteem for the Palestinian Jewish-Christians! As if, in Rom 15:27 , the Gentile churches are not called debtors to the Jewish-Christians, because the spiritual blessings of Christianity reached the Gentiles only from the mother church of Jerusalem! As if Paul himself, after the fiercest persecutions, and after openly manifested obstinacy, did not always cleave to his people with such unselfish and solicitous love, that he could wish in his own person to be banished and driven from Christ, who was his all in all, in order by such an exchange to make his hardened and always resisting fellow-countrymen partakers of salvation in Christ! But if such were his feelings toward the unconverted among his people, why should he not have been proud of those among them who believed? Why should he not have recognised the heroic faith of the Palestinian brethren, and recognised and praised the stedfastness of a Gentile church as an imitation and emulation of the pattern given by these?

Further, the mention of the persecutions of the Palestinian Christians was inappropriate, because Paul could not speak of them “without thinking of himself as the person principally concerned in the only persecution which can have come properly into consideration.” But how little importance there is in such an inference is evident from this, that Paul elsewhere does not shun openly to confess his share in the persecutions of the Christians, although with a sorrowful heart (comp. 1Co 15:9 ; Gal 1:13 ); and, besides, this very participation in the persecution was for him the occasion that, from being the bitterest enemy of Christianity, he became its most unwearied promoter and the greatest apostle of Christ. If, further, “the apostle unites his own sufferings for the sake of the gospel with the misdeeds of the Jews against Jesus and the prophets,” this serves strikingly to represent the continuation of Jewish perversity.

Baur may be right when he asserts that we could not expect from the apostle “a polemic against the Jews so general and vague, that he knew not how to characterize the enmity of the Jews against the gospel than by the well-known charge brought against them by the Gentiles, the odium generis humani ;” only it is a pity that this odium generis humani is an abortion of false exegesis.

Baur infers a dependence upon the Acts from “the expressions: , , etc., which correspond accurately with the incidents described in Act 17:5 ff. and elsewhere;” likewise from the verb , which “elsewhere is never used by Paul of his own preaching of the gospel, but is quite after the manner of the Acts (Act 14:1 , Act 16:6 ; Act 16:32 , Act 18:9 ).” But that the expressions: , , etc., cannot be borrowed from Act 17:5 ff. is evident enough, as they are not even found there; that, moreover, the circumstances of the persecution itself are narrated in both writings, is only a proof of its actual occurrence; also there is nothing objectionable in , as it is so used by Paul in 2Co 2:17 ; 2Co 4:13 ; Col 4:4 ; Eph 6:20 , and elsewhere.

Lastly, if Baur, in (so also Schrader on 1Th 3:13 ), finds the destruction of Jerusalem denoted as an event that has already occurred, this is only the result of an interpretation contrary to the context.

Fuente: Heinrich August Wilhelm Meyer’s New Testament Commentary

15 Who both killed the Lord Jesus, and their own prophets, and have persecuted us; and they please not God, and are contrary to all men:

Ver. 15. Who both killed the Lord ] And are therefore banished out of the world, as it were, by a common consent of nations, for their inexpiable guilt. Even in Jerusalem there be hardly to be found a hundred households of them. (Breerwood Inquir.) In Cyprus it is at present death for any Jew to set his foot upon the island. (Dio. Cass.) In Thessalonica and Constantinople there are many thousands of them, but at every Easter they are in danger of death, if they but stir out-of-doors, because at that time they crucified our Saviour. (Biddulph.) The Turks themselves so hate the Jews for crucifying Christ, that they use to say in detestation of a thing, “I would I might die a Jew.” Neither will they permit a Jew to turn Turk, unless he be first baptized. The Romans permitted other nations to call themselves Romans after they had conquered them; but so they would not suffer the Jews to do, though they complied never so much, and were their servants (as August. in Psal. lviii. witnesseth), lest there should some blot stick to the glory of the Romans, by that odious and sordid people. O Marcomanni, O Quadi! said one emperor.

And their own prophets ] Whose slaughter (though long since done) is in recent remembrance with God, and is reckoned and registered together with the death of Christ himself.

And have persecuted us ] They still curse the Christians in their daily prayers, which they close up with a Maledic, Domine, Nazaraeis. Curse, of God, Christians. Lopez at Tyburn affirmed, that he had loved Queen Elizabeth as he loved Jesus Christ. Which from a Jew was heard not without laughter. (Camden’s Elizabeth.)

And they please not God ] Yet they challenged the title of God’s Church, as the Papists will needs be the only Catholics. They cried, ad ravim usque, The temple of the Lord, when they nothing regarded the Lord of the temple.

And are contrary to all men ] Being herein rather Ishmaelites than Israelites, Gen 16:12 . The trout delights to swim against stream. The herb alexander will agree with no other herb but itself. Such antipodes a are our Jesuits, so insufferably ambitious and impudent, that neither their doctrine nor their conversation pleaseth those of their own religion.

a Diametrically opposite (to anything). D

Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)

15, 16 .] Characterization of the Jews as enemies of the Gospel and of mankind . Jowett’s note is worth quoting: “Wherever the Apostle had gone on his second journey, he bad been persecuted by the Jews: and the longer he travelled about among Gentile cities, the more he must have been sensible of the feeling with which his countrymen were regarded. Isolated as they were from the rest of the world in every city, a people within a people, it was impossible that they should not be united for their own self-defence, and regarded with suspicion by the rest of mankind. But their inner nature was not less repugnant to the nobler as well as the baser feelings of Greece and Rome. Their fierce nationality had outlived itself: though worshippers of the true God, they knew Him not to be the God of all the nations of the earth: hated and despised by others, they could but cherish in return an impotent contempt and hatred of other men. What wonder that, for an instant (? on all this see below), the Apostle should have felt that this Gentile feeling was not wholly groundless? or that he should use words which recall the expression of Tacitus: ‘Adversus omnes alios hostile odium?’ Hist. 1Th 2:5 .”

Fuente: Henry Alford’s Greek Testament

15 . ] The repeated serves for enumeration.

. . . is thus arranged to give prominence to . , and thus enhance the enormity of the deed: it should be rendered who killed Jesus the Lord , . being in a position of emphasis.

. ] belongs to (see Mat 23:31-37 ; Act 7:52 ), not to . as De W. His objection, that all the prophets were not killed, is irrelevant: neither were they all persecuted. The of rec. appears to have been an early insertion: Tert. ascribes it to Marcion.

. ] drove out by persecution , viz. from among you, Act 17:5 ff., not for the simple verb . (De W.), nor does the preposition merely strengthen the verb (Lnem.), but it retains its proper meaning ( , Thuc. i. 24), and the aorist refers it to a definite event, as in the case of : when their habit is spoken of, the participles are present , e.g. and below.

refers to Paul and Silas.

. ] The gives a subjective sense: not exactly that of Bengel, al., ‘ Deo placere non qurentium .’ For in strictness, as Ellicott, the shade of subjectivity is only to be found in the aspect in which the subject and the participle is presented to the reader: and therefore can hardly be reproduced in English. Compare on the usage, Winer, edn. 6, 55. 5, g. , and Ellicott’s note here. In , most Commentators, and recently Jowett (see above), have seen the odium humani generis ascribed to the Jews by Tacitus (Hist. 1Th 2:5 ), and by several other classic authors (Juv. Sat. xiv. 103 ff. Diod. Sic. xxxiv. p. 524, &c.). But it is hardly possible that St. Paul, himself a Jew, should have blamed an exclusiveness which arose from the strict monotheism and legal purity of the Jew: and besides this, the construction having been hitherto carried on by copul, but now dropping them, most naturally goes on from to , in that they prevent , and thus . specifies wherein the consists, viz. in opposing the salvation of mankind by the Gospel. So that the other seems to be irrelevant (so nearly Lnem.).

Fuente: Henry Alford’s Greek Testament

1Th 2:15 “The Lord, even Jesus” ( cf. Act 2:36 ). . may go either with . or with .

Fuente: The Expositors Greek Testament by Robertson

Lord. App-98.

Jesus = even Jesus. App-98.

their own = the.

prophets. App-189.

have persecuted us. = chased us out. Greek. ekdioko. Only here and Luk 11:49.

Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics

15, 16.] Characterization of the Jews as enemies of the Gospel and of mankind. Jowetts note is worth quoting: Wherever the Apostle had gone on his second journey, he bad been persecuted by the Jews: and the longer he travelled about among Gentile cities, the more he must have been sensible of the feeling with which his countrymen were regarded. Isolated as they were from the rest of the world in every city, a people within a people, it was impossible that they should not be united for their own self-defence, and regarded with suspicion by the rest of mankind. But their inner nature was not less repugnant to the nobler as well as the baser feelings of Greece and Rome. Their fierce nationality had outlived itself: though worshippers of the true God, they knew Him not to be the God of all the nations of the earth: hated and despised by others, they could but cherish in return an impotent contempt and hatred of other men. What wonder that, for an instant (? on all this see below), the Apostle should have felt that this Gentile feeling was not wholly groundless? or that he should use words which recall the expression of Tacitus: Adversus omnes alios hostile odium? Hist. 1Th 2:5.

Fuente: The Greek Testament

1Th 2:15. , who have killed) This is indeed the sin of the whole people, their greatest sin, and one not yet acknowledged.-, the prophets) This word is construed with who have killed. That former guilt of theirs [in killing the prophets] woke up in all its strength then especially, when they slew the Lord Himself.-, us) the apostles.-, who have cast out by persecution) Luk 11:49, note.- ) not seeking to please.-, and are adverse [contrary]) The Jews regarded the Gentiles with aversion, and were unwilling at that time that the word should be preached to them.

Fuente: Gnomon of the New Testament

1Th 2:15

who both killed the Lord Jesus and the prophets,-Here is a fearful picture of the results of the wicked course of the Jews. They instigated and led to the death of Jesus. Christ told how they had killed the prophets. (Mat 23:3137.) [This was a terrible indictment against the Jews, the purpose of which was to show the deep sympathy of Paul with the persecuted Thessalonians, and his indignation against the persecutors, and to make them see more deeply the value of their faith by the effort to keep it from them.]

and drove out us,-This refers to Paul and his companions, the record of which was given by Luke. (Act 17:5-9.)

and please not God,-They had shown by their history that they could not meet with the divine approval. They made great pretensions of being the peculiar people of God, and it was important to show that their conduct demonstrated that they had so such claims. Their opposition to the Thessalonians, therefore, was no proof that God was opposed to them, and they should not allow themselves to be troubled about such opposition.

and are contrary to all men;-They worked evil to all men, both Jews and Gentiles. Their spirit and policy may be seen from our Lords great denunciatory discourse against the scribes and Pharisees, and his arraignment of their leaders for their impiety and inhumanity when he said: “Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! because ye shut the kingdom of heaven against men: for ye enter not in yourselves, neither suffer ye them that are entering in to enter. (Mat 23:13.)

Fuente: Old and New Testaments Restoration Commentary

killed: Mat 5:12, Mat 21:35-39, Mat 23:31-35, Mat 23:37, Mat 27:25, Luk 11:48-51, Luk 13:33, Luk 13:34, Act 2:23, Act 3:15, Act 4:10, Act 5:30, Act 7:52

persecuted us: or, chased us out, Amo 7:12, Act 22:18-21

please: Act 12:3, 1Co 10:5

contrary: Est 3:8, Luk 11:52, Luk 11:53

Reciprocal: Deu 21:8 – lay not Psa 34:21 – they Psa 55:19 – hear Psa 69:24 – Pour Psa 69:26 – For Psa 72:14 – precious Psa 109:20 – Let this Pro 25:26 – General Pro 29:8 – Scornful Isa 30:10 – say Isa 49:5 – Israel Isa 59:12 – our transgressions Isa 65:2 – a rebellious Isa 66:5 – Your Isa 66:24 – and they Jer 2:30 – your own sword Jer 11:22 – young Jer 26:15 – ye shall Jer 26:23 – who Jer 51:24 – General Lam 4:13 – that Eze 11:8 – General Dan 9:6 – have we Dan 9:27 – that determined Hos 4:2 – toucheth Amo 2:11 – and Mic 1:5 – the transgression of Jacob Mic 2:6 – Prophesy ye Zec 1:4 – unto Zec 7:12 – therefore Zec 13:8 – two Mat 12:45 – Even Mat 22:6 – the remnant Mat 23:13 – for ye shut Mar 12:3 – they Luk 3:20 – General Luk 4:28 – were Luk 6:22 – when men Luk 6:23 – for in Luk 11:47 – for Luk 13:9 – if not Luk 19:27 – General Luk 19:43 – the days Luk 21:12 – before Luk 22:36 – But Joh 8:28 – then Joh 11:48 – all Joh 15:20 – word Joh 16:9 – General Act 4:17 – let Act 5:28 – blood Act 9:23 – the Jews Act 14:2 – General Act 25:11 – no man Rom 11:28 – are enemies Rom 15:31 – I may 2Co 11:26 – in perils by mine Gal 4:29 – even Eph 3:1 – for Phi 1:30 – the same 1Ti 2:4 – will Tit 1:2 – God Heb 10:27 – which Heb 10:38 – my Jam 5:6 – have Jam 5:10 – for 1Pe 5:9 – the same Rev 18:24 – in her

Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge

1Th 2:15. The Jews did not directly kill Jesus, because they did not have that authority (Joh 18:31), but they caused it to be done, and for that reason they were charged with His death. Jesus and Stephen accused them of killing the prophets before them (Mat 5:12 Mat 23:27-36; Act 7:52). Persecuted is rendered “chased us out” in the margin. That is correct, for the original word is defined by Thayer as follows: “To drive out, banish; to pursue; to persecute, oppress with calamities.” Paul was virtually chased out in Act 16:39-40. Contrary to all men. The Jews were forbidden to participate with the heathen in their false worship, but they were told not to oppress them (Exo 23:9). These instructions were observed for many years, but in later times, especially after the Greek and Roman Empire took control of the world, the Jews became suspicious of the Gentiles in general, and became bitter in their treatment of all who would not submit to their religious bigotry.

Fuente: Combined Bible Commentary

1Th 2:15. Who killed both the Lord Jesus. As the unbelieving Thessalonians had persecuted their Christian townsmen, so had the Jews persecuted Jesus, and the prophets and the apostles. They had driven out the apostles, and endeavoured to prevent them from preaching salvation to the Gentiles. Various reasons have been assigned to account for this outburst against the Jews: as, that the Jews were the real instigators of the Thessalonian persecution; or, that some persons were seeking to persuade the Thessalonians that the Gospel was wholly a Jewish affair; or, that the converts might be thinking it strange that if this new religion were true, it should be so ill received by the Jews, Gods people. But the slight digressive outburst seems to have been occasioned simply by Pauls desire to show how the Judan Christians had suffered at the hands of the Jews.

Contrary to all menjealous that salvation should be for the world and not for themselves only. Comp. Tacitus, Hist. v. 5, adversus omnes alios hostile odium.

Fuente: A Popular Commentary on the New Testament

Our apostle’s design being to encourage the Thessalonians to patience and constancy under their persecutions for Christianity, he acquaints them, that they did not walk alone in this thorny path, but that Jesus Christ, the prophets and apostles, went before them, and every step they took in it, was up to the knees in blood; They killed the Lord Jesus, &c.

Where observe, the bitter and bloody persecution which the Jews were guilty of,

they killed the Lord Jesus, and before him their own prophets, called their own, because of their own nation, and sent with a peculiar message to them; and now they persecuted, banished, and drove away St. Paul, and the rest of the apostles;

they pleased not God, that is, they highly displeased him, dreadfully provoked him, they were haters of God, hateful to him, now hated of him, and, lastly,

rejected by him; contrary to all men, that is, to the common interest of all men, by endeavouring to obstruct the preaching of the gospel, which bringeth salvation to all men;

forbidding us to speak to the Gentiles, that is, to preach the gospel to the Gentiles, and consequently obstructing, what in them lay, the salvation almost of all the world;

filling up the measure of their sins, till at last the wrath of God came upon them to the uttermost, in their judicial obduration, and the final destruction of Jerusalem by the Romans; after which the Jews have been no more a people, but scattered abroad through the face of the earth.

From the whole, learn 1. That it is a singular support to suffering saints to consider, that Christ and his apostles suffered before them; and by his sufferings, has sanctified a state of affliction and persecution to them.

Learn, 2. That a spirit of persecution seems oft-times to run in the blood, and passes from parent to child, through many generations. Persecution became, as it were, hereditary, and, in a sort, transient from one generation to another among the Jews; they killed Christ, stoned the prophets, and persecuted the apostles.

Note 3. How St. Paul ranks and reckons them that are enemies to the preaching of the gospel, with the obstinate shedders of Christ’s blood, they are enrolled amongst the capital enemies of mankind; They killed the Lord of life, forbidding us to preach to the Gentiles; such as are enemies to preaching are enemies to the souls of men.

Object. But what need so much preaching amongst us, who are converted from heathenism to Christianity?

Ans. It is one thing to be converted from heathenism to Christianity, and another thing to be converted from sin to God.

Object. But we have the Bible for that end, and can make use of that.

Ans. Observe it, and you will find that such as are no friends to the pulpit, are usually none of the best friends to the Bible; follow them to their families, how doth the Bible lie by as a neglected book amongst them; and it must be a large charity, that can judge it is conscientiously used in the closet, when it is carelessly neglected in the family.

Fuente: Expository Notes with Practical Observations on the New Testament

who both killed the Lord Jesus and the prophets, and drove out us, and please not God, and are contrary to all men;

Fuente: McGarvey and Pendleton Commentaries (New Testament)

Verse 15

Contrary to all men; contending against what would be for the welfare and happiness of all men.

Fuente: Abbott’s Illustrated New Testament

2:15 {13} Who both killed the Lord Jesus, and their own prophets, and have persecuted us; {14} and they please not God, and are contrary to {i} all men:

(13) He prevents an offence which might be taken, because the Jews especially above all others persecuted the Gospel. That is no new thing, he says, seeing that they slew Christ himself, and his Prophets, and have banished me also.

(14) He foretells the utter destruction of the Jews, lest any man should be moved by their rebellion.

(i) For the Jews would neither enter into the kingdom of God themselves, nor allow others to enter in.

Fuente: Geneva Bible Notes

The Thessalonians’ opponents seem to have been mainly Jews (1Th 2:14). Paul desperately wanted unbelieving Jews to come to faith in Christ (Rom 9:1-3; Rom 10:1). Yet they were some of his most antagonistic persecutors (cf. 2Co 11:24; 2Co 11:26). Their actions were not pleasing to God and were not in the best interests of all men who need to hear the gospel. By their opposition the enemies of the gospel added more transgressions on their own heads with the result that they hastened God’s judgment of them (cf. Gen 15:16). God had already focused His wrath on them for their serious sin. They not only rejected the gospel themselves, but they also discouraged others from accepting it. It was only a matter of time before God would pour out His wrath in judgment. In view of the eschatological emphasis of the letter, Paul seems to be alluding primarily to the judgment coming on unbelievers during the Tribulation. We should probably understand "utmost" (Gr. telos) in a temporal sense. [Note: Ernest Best, A Commentary on the First and Second Epistles to the Thessalonians (1972 ed.), p. 119; Reginald H. Fuller, The Mission and Achievement of Jesus, p. 26; Thomas, pp. 259-60. Martin, p. 95.]

This is the only place in his inspired writings where Paul charged "the Jews" with the death of Jesus (cf. 1Co 2:8). Elsewhere in the New Testament it is the sins of all people that were responsible. Therefore, Paul was just identifying a segment of humanity that was responsible. He was not blaming the Jews in some special sense for Jesus’ death. [Note: See Michael A. Rydelnik, "Was Paul Anti-Semitic? Revisiting 1 Thessalonians 2:14-16," Bibliotheca Sacra 165:657 (January-March 2008):58-67.] The Apostle John frequently used the term "the Jews" to describe those Jews who actively opposed the Lord and the gospel (cf. Joh 5:18; Joh 7:1; Joh 18:14; Joh 18:31; cf. Joh 11:45; cf. Joh 11:54).

Why did Paul describe this outpouring of divine wrath as past ("has come," aorist tense ephthasen) if it was future? Jesus spoke of the arrival of His kingdom in comparable terminology (Mat 12:28; Luk 11:20). The verb connotes "arrival upon the threshold of fulfilment [sic] and accessible experience, not the entrance into that experience." [Note: Kenneth W. Clark, "Realized Eschatology," Journal of Biblical Literature 59 (1940):379.] The messianic kingdom was present in Jesus’ day only in that the King had arrived and could have established it then, but the Jews did not enter into it because they rejected Him. Likewise God’s wrath had come on the Jews to the utmost in Paul’s day for their rejection of Messiah, but they had not entered into it’s full manifestation yet, namely, the Tribulation.

"This indictment implies that Paul saw a continuity in the pattern of Jewish rejection of God’s agents from OT times to his own." [Note: Wanamaker, p. 115.]

"The Thessalonians’ persecution lasted a long time, and so did their steadfastness. Some six years later Paul can still speak of the churches of Macedonia (not least, the church of Thessalonica) as enduring ’a severe test of affliction’ and continuing to give evidence of the reality of their faith in that ’their abundance of joy and their extreme poverty have overflowed in a wealth of liberality’ (2Co 8:1-2). The ’extreme poverty’ might well have been the result of mob violence and looting; elsewhere in the NT members of another Christian group are reminded how, in the early days of their faith, they ’joyfully accepted’ the plundering of their property in addition to other forms of brutal maltreatment (Heb 10:32-34)." [Note: Bruce, pp. 50-51.]

Fuente: Expository Notes of Dr. Constable (Old and New Testaments)