Thessalonians, Epistles to the

Thessalonians Epistles To The

1. The Thessalonian Church

(1) The narrative of Acts 17.-Thessalonica, a free Greek city with the right to summon its own assembly, was a flourishing seaport and the capital of one of the four divisions of Macedonia. Thither, in the course of his second missionary journey, came Paul, together with Silas and Timothy, to carry on the work cut short in Philippi by the civil power. Beginning as usual with the Jews, the Apostle preached in the synagogue on three successive Sabbaths. The result of his preaching was the conversion of a few of the Jews, of a great multitude of Greek proselytes, and of a considerable number of the principal women. Subsequently the Jews, aided by the rabble* [Note: Lake (The Earlier Epistles of St. Paul, p. 69 n.) suggests that (Act 17:5) means not loafers but agitators (cf. Plutarch, aemil. Paul. 38), and that the to which the apostles were to have been brought was not a special juridical body, but merely the agitation meeting called into existence by the .] of the city, created an uproar, stormed the house where the apostles lodged, and dragged Jason their host before the municipal assembly. There they accused him of harbouring men whose presence was a menace to the public peace, adherents of a rival Emperor, one Jesus. To such a charge no Imperial officer could safely turn a deaf ear, least of all in a city possessing peculiar privileges. Yet the action of the politarchs was lenient. They bound over Jason and the rest to keep the peace of the city and let them go, probably holding them responsible for the continued absence of Paul and Silas from Thessalonica (Ramsay, St. Paul the Traveller and the Roman Citizen, p. 231). Meanwhile the apostles and Timothy had been sent by night to Bera, where they continued their missionary labours. But the hostility of the Thessalonian Jews still pursued them, and their work had to be abandoned. Paul departed to the sea,* [Note: Zahn, following in v. 14 the reading of the MSS HLP , suggests that Paul travelled overland to Athens (Introd. to the NT, Eng. tr., 3 vols., Edinburgh, 1909, vol. i. p. 214).] probably to Dium, where he embarked for Athens. Silas and Timothy remained at Bera with instructions to rejoin him as soon as possible ( , Act 17:15).

(2) Supplementary details supplied by the Epistles.-The reliability of Acts 17 is attested by the accuracy of its focal information. The existence of the Thessalonian (Act 17:5), the title (Act 17:6-8), the greater freedom of women in Macedonian life as compared with that of Athens (Act 17:4), are all facts substantiated by contemporary evidence (cf. Lightfoot, Biblical Essays, p. 237 ff.; Ramsay, St. Paul the Traveller, p. 227, AJTh [Note: JTh American Journal of Theology.] ii. [1898] 598-632). Yet the Acts narrative is an outline sketch rather than a finished picture (Ramsay, St. Paul the Traveller, p. 233; cf. Harnack, The Acts of the Apostles, London, 1909, p. 206). Its appearance is considerably altered by the addition of details gleaned from 1 Thessalonians.

(a) Though the writer of the Acts admits that most of the Thessalonian Christians were Gentiles, he speaks only of Gentile proselytes to Judaism ( , Act 17:4). 1 Thess. implies that the Thessalonian Church was composed largely of converts from heathenism (1Th 1:9; 1Th 2:14; 1Th 4:1-5). This discrepancy certainly disappears if we regard as the true text of Act 17:4 Ramsays emendation , . (St. Paul the Traveller, p. 226 n. [Note: . note.] ). But probably the insertion of by the Bezan and inferior Manuscripts on which it is based represents only a scribes attempt to avoid the unusual phrase (Askwith, An Introduction to the Thessalonian Epistles, p. 12 ff.).

(b) Acts 17 seems to suggest that Paul left Thessalonica soon after his three weeks of synagogue teaching. From 1 Thess. we gather that the Apostle settled down to his ordinary trade (1Th 2:9; cf. 2Th 3:8), dealt personally with individual converts (1Th 2:7-11), and built up a simple form of church organization (1Th 5:12). Twice at Thessalonica he received donations from Philippi (Php 4:15-16). These things would scarcely be crowded into three weeks. Clearly the Apostle spent a much longer time at Thessalonica. The chronological scheme of Acts would allow for a stay of six months (Ramsay, St. Paul the Traveller, p. 228).

(c) From Act 18:5 it would naturally be inferred that Silas and Timothy first rejoined Paul at Corinth. 1 Thess. makes it clear that before this they had been with him in Athens (1Th 3:1). These differences between Acts and 1 Thess., while they betray no fundamental contradiction, yet serve to show the complete independence of the two narratives. It is evident that that epistle was not in the hands of the author of Acts nor was Acts in the hands of the author of 1 Thess. (Encyclopaedia Biblica iv. 5040 f.).

2. Occasion and date of the Epistles.-In Athens Paul was joined by Silas and Timothy, who caused him grave anxiety by their tidings of fresh persecutions suffered by the Thessalonian Church (1Th 3:1-5). More than once Paul planned a return to Thessalonica, but the way was barred. What particular obstacle is meant by the Oriental phrase (1Th 2:18) is uncertain. Perhaps it was the unrescinded prohibition of the Thessalonian politarchs (Ramsay, St. Paul the Traveller, p. 231). Whatever its nature, it did not affect Timothy, and accordingly Paul and Silas (cf. , 1Th 3:1) sent him in their stead to learn the state of the Churchs affairs, and to strengthen the persecuted Christians. Left alone in Athens, after a sojourn in that city of not more than four or five weeks Paul went on to Corinth, where Silas and Timothy found him on their return from Macedonia* [Note: Soon after Timothys departure from Athens, Silas seems to have been sent on a similar errand to another Macedonian Church (Act 18:5), perhaps to Philippi (Php 4:15).] (Act 18:5). Timothys report, supplemented perhaps by a letter from the Thessalonians, was on the whole extremely satisfactory (see Expositor , 5th ser. viii. [1898] 161 ff, for an attempt to reconstruct the supposed letter). The constancy of the Thessalonians under persecution not only had proved them worthy of their election, but had also caused their example to be held up for imitation to all believers throughout Macedonia and Achaia (1Th 1:2-10; 1Th 3:5-8) yet they were beset by dangers. Adversaries of the apostles had misrepresented their motives in preaching at Thessalonica, possibly making capital out of their secret departure from the city (1Th 2:3 ff., where the words , , , , , seem to echo actual charges brought against the writers). If the Thessalonian Christians were once brought to distrust their teachers, it seemed probable that persecution would soon drive them back to heathenism.

Furthermore, difficulties existed within the Christian community. Heathen social life and the impurity tolerated by public opinion still had attractions for some (1Th 4:1-6); some were inclined to abandon useful employment for a life of idleness (1Th 4:11), while others snowed a spirit of disorder and contempt for those in authority (1Th 5:12-14). Misunderstandings had arisen as to the use of peculiar spiritual gifts (1Th 5:19-20). Some Christians who had lost friends by death were anxious to know what part these should have in the Parousia.

Harnack (Das Problem des zweiten Thessalonicherbriefs, in SBAW [Note: BAW Sitzungsberichte der Berliner Akademie der Wissenschaften.] , 1910) thinks that Timothy also reported a serious cleavage between Jewish and Gentile converts; hence the insistence on all the brethren, e.g. 1Th 3:12; 1Th 5:15; 1Th 5:26.

To remove these difficulties, the two apostles and Timothy wrote the joint Epistle, 1 Thessalonians. It was the only possible substitute for a personal visit, and every paragraph bears witness to the warmth of personal affection existing between teachers and pupils. Who bore this letter to its destination, and whether he returned immediately to Paul, we do not know. By some means, however, the Apostle learned that fresh trouble had arisen at Thessalonica. Persecution still continued and was still bravely endured (2Th 1:4); but a new source of anxiety had arisen from a spreading belief in the imminence of the Parousia. 1 Thess. had spoken not of the time, but only of the suddenness of the Lords coming, yet one phrase at least ( .,1Th 4:15) seemed to give colour to the idea that it was to be expected within the lifetime of the existing generation. This notion was fostered by men who claimed the authority not only of the apostolic letter, but also of their own personal gift of prophecy 1Th 2:2). Wild excitement followed, and men began entirely to neglect the duties of daily life (1Th 3:11).

To end this disorder, the three teachers wrote a second letter. Its main point lies in the section 2Th 2:1-12, which supplements the eschatological teaching of 1 Thess., by dwelling on the number of things which must happen before the victorious coming of the Lord, and so removing all ground for the belief that it is near at hand.

This account of the order of writing of the two Epistles is generally accepted by those who admit their genuineness. Harnack, however, suggests that they were written at or about the same time, 1 Thess. to the Gentile, 2 Thess. to the Jewish section of the community [Note: This theory of the destination of 2 Thess. is based chiefly on the essentially Jewish complexion of the Epistle, especially 2:1-12, and on the reading (2:13). Its author is inspired by a desire to accept the authenticity of 2 Thess., although he thinks that its difference in tone from 1 Thess. makes it incredible that the two Epistles were written to the same people about the same time.] (Das Problem des zweiten Thessalonicherbriefs, in SBAW [Note: BAW Sitzungsberichte der Berliner Akademie der Wissenschaften.] , 1910).

The actual date assigned to the Epistles depends upon the particular system of Pauline chronology adopted. Both, if genuine, were written during Pauls stay at Corinth at the end of his second missionary journey (Act 18:11; see Encyclopaedia Biblica iv. 5037), and must in any case have been composed between a.d. 47 and 53 (see Moffatt, Historical NT2, pp. 121-137). The interval between them would be at most a few weeks.

3. Contents of the Epistles

(i.) 1 Thessalonians.-After the opening salutation (1Th 1:1), which represents a combination of the conventional Greek and Hebrew greetings of the period ( ), the Epistle falls into two sections.

(a) Narrative and personal (1Th 1:2 to 1Th 3:13).-(1) Thanksgiving for the Thessalonians steadfastness under trial and progress in the faith, which have made them a pattern for all Christians throughout Macedonia and Achaia. Their new strength springs from the fact that they have become servants of a God who is living and real (1Th 1:2-10).

(2) Surely they can have no doubts about the apostles motives, when they recall their freedom from all self-seeking, their solicitude for individuals, the persecution they had suffered, the labour and privation necessitated by their voluntary independence. Pupils themselves bear witness that their teachers attitude was that of a father exhorting his children to walk worthily of God (1Th 2:1-12).

(3) The children have responded nobly. The message of power they received has inspired them bravely to endure persecution at the hands of their countrymen, even as the Jewish Christians had already done in Judaea (1Th 2:13-16).

(4) Driven from Thessalonica, the apostles have longed to return. More than once Paul planned to do so, but in vain. Unable to bear suspense, he and Silas sent Timothy from Athens to learn how they fared.* [Note: (1Th 3:5) may perhaps imply that St. Paul sent ft second messenger on his own account.] The good news he brought back has put new life into the apostles. In spite of persecution, the Thessalonians have remained steadfast. The apostles therefore pour out their hearts in thanksgiving to God, and in new longing to revisit and strengthen their spiritual children (1Th 2:17 to 1Th 3:10). May God soon grant them their desire, and lead their converts still further in the way of holiness (1Th 3:11-13).

(b) Hortatory and doctrinal.-(1) So far they have done well. They must not relax their efforts. The Christian watchword is progress. Christian progress will involve complete severance from the impurity of pagan life. They who wilfully sin against the body, the dwelling-place of the Spirit, lay themselves open to the vengeance of God (1Th 4:1-8).

(2) Brotherly love, already a manifest token of Divine guidance in them, must be maintained. One mark of its presence will be such quiet performance of daily duties as will be an example to heathen neighbours (1Th 4:9-12).

(3) Let no one be anxious about departed friends. Christians are one with Christ. Those who sleep will awake and have their place along with the living at His coming (1Th 4:12-18). When He will come no man can tell. Christians must so live as to be prepared for His coming at any time (1Th 5:1-11).

(4) Finally, they must remember their duty of obedience to those in authority and of mutual help and forbearance to each other. Joy, prayer, thanksgiving are the basis of the Christian life. Peculiar spiritual gifts are to be neither discouraged nor over-estimated: that which is good must be held fast; all that bears the image of evil must be rejected (1Th 5:12-22).

The Epistle ends with a prayer for their complete sanctification, a request for their intercessions, a command to circulate the Epistle itself, and a final benediction (1Th 5:23-28).

(ii.) 2 Thessalonians.-(1) The salutation (2Th 1:1-2) leads up to a thanksgiving for the readers spiritual progress, especially for their endurance under persecution. Such constancy is a proof of what awaits them at the Final Judgment (2Th 1:2-4). The Final Judgment is then described in a rhythmical passage based on OT phrases (2Th 1:5-10), perhaps an adaptation of a primitive Christian hymn (Bornemann, Die Thessalonicherbriefe, pp. 329, 336). May they be made worthy to set forth the glory of the name of the Lord Jesus in that day (2Th 1:10-12).

(2) But let them not be misled. That day is not yet, whatever mistaken teachers may say, even though they claim the support of the Apostles letter (2Th 2:1-3). Do they not remember the Apostles teaching? A mystery of lawlessness is at work in the world, but as yet it is kept in check. First must come the removal of the restraining power, the great apostasy, the climax of lawlessness in the person of the man of lawlessness and the time of his temporary success. Then, and not before then, will Christ come in victory to destroy the man of lawlessness and his followers (2Th 2:1-12). Thanks be to God who has delivered the readers from such a fate: let them hold fast those things which they have received, and may God strengthen and keep them steadfast (2Th 2:13-17).

(3) Let them pray for their teachers, who have full confidence in their sincerity. God grant them love and patience (2Th 3:1-5).

(4) Idle and unruly brethren are to be shunned. Such conduct is opposed both to the teaching and to the example of the apostles. The Christian must be self-supporting or be cut off from the community (2Th 3:6-15). May Gods own peace rest on them all (2Th 3:16). The Epistle closes with a salutation in Pauls own handwriting.

4. Teaching of the Epistles

(i.) Doctrine of God.-The dominant thought is that God is a living personal reality, as opposed to the abstractions of heathen philosophy or the mere fancies of heathen religion (1Th 1:9-10.). God gave the apostles their message (1Th 2:4; 1Th 2:13), and His inward power moved their hearers to accept it (1Th 2:13, 2Th 2:13), so that their life is now lived in His very presence ( , 1Th 1:3). From Him alone come grace and peace (1Th 3:12, 1Th 5:23, 2Th 2:16; 2Th 3:16). He is our Judge (1Th 2:4) but He is also our Father (1Th 1:3, 1Th 3:11; 1Th 3:13, 2Th 1:1-2; 2Th 2:16).

(ii.) Christology

(a) Person of Christ.-It is not too much to say that the essential Divinity of Christ and His essential equality with the Father are everywhere taken for granted. Christ is the Son (1Th 1:10): He is linked with the Father as the source of the Churchs life (1Th 1:1, 2Th 1:1; cf. 1Th 2:14), as the object of prayer (1Th 3:11, 2Th 2:16), as the giver of supreme blessings (2Th 1:2; 2Th 3:18, 1Th 5:28). To one trained in Jewish monotheism, this can have meant nothing less than that Christ Himself is God (see Sanday in Hasting’s Dictionary of the Bible (5 vols) iii. 648). Therefore He is naturally called , a title commonly applied to God among the Hellenistic Jews. At the same time His humanity is indicated by the use of the simple human name Jesus (1Th 1:10; 1Th 4:14), and His Messiahship by the frequent repetition of the title .

(b) Work of Christ.-On earth Christ died and rose again (1Th 1:10; 1Th 4:14; 1Th 5:10). His death was the means of mans salvation (1Th 5:9-10); His resurrection is the pledge of the resurrection of His followers (1Th 4:14), who shall hereafter share His glorified life (1Th 4:17, 1Th 5:10). As Messiah He will finally vanquish the forces of evil (2Th 2:8-10), and sit on the judgment-seat (2Th 1:7-10).

(iii.) The Holy Spirit.-As the Son is linked with the Father, so also the Holy Spirit is associated with the Divine activity. The Holy Spirit inspired both the conviction with which the apostles preached and the joy with which their message was received (1Th 1:5-6). From the Holy Spirit came those charismatic gifts which abuse seemed likely to bring into contempt (1Th 5:19). Bodily impurity is a sin against the Holy Spirit of God planted within (1Th 4:8). It cannot be claimed, however, that the Holy Spirit is spoken of as distinctly personal.

(iv.) Eschatology.-The eschatological teaching of these Epistles centres round the doctrine of the victorious coming of the Lord Jesus as the climax of human history. Yet in neither Epistle do the writers profess to give a complete description of that final event. They select only those points which bear directly on the practical question before them at the moment. The teaching of the First Epistle is framed to answer the question What part will dead Christians take in the Parousia? That of the Second Epistle is shaped by the desire to quiet hysterical unrest at Thessalonica with an assurance that the Parousia is not imminent. If the statements of the two Epistles have few points of contact, it is because they are dealing with entirely different aspects of their subject.

(1) 1Th 4:13-18; 1Th 5:1-10

(a) The Parousia and the resurrection of the dead (1Th 4:13-18).-No anxiety need be felt about the faithful departed. When Jesus comes again, God, who raised Him from the dead, will also raise up those who are united to Him.* [Note: This seems to be the sense of the difficult verse 1Th 4:14 if we connect the clause with rather than with .] Nor will they be at any disadvantage as compared with the living. For the Lord himself will descend from heaven with a commanding word (), with the voice of the archangel and with the trumpet of God. The dead in Christ will first rise; then they who are (still) alive will be snatched up along with them into the air in clouds to meet the Lord: thus shall they be ever with the Lord (1Th 4:15-18). In this passage the writers claim to be speaking (1Th 4:15). Whether they are referring to actual sayings recorded in the Gospels (e.g. Mat 24:30 ff., Joh 6:39) or to some personal revelation to Paul is uncertain (cf. Milligan, Thessalonians, ad loc.). But there can be no doubt as to the source of many of the details of their picture. They have freely borrowed the bold imagery of Jewish Apocalyptic. This should be a sufficient warning against a too literal interpretation of their statements.

, , , whether they be synonymous or distinct ideas, are the usual prelude to a theophany in Jewish imagery (Exo 19:16, Zec 9:14), and are especially connected with the end of the last world age and the Resurrection (Dan 12:1; Dan 12:4 Ezr 6:23; cf. Targum on Zec 14:4, at that time will Jehovah take in His hand a great trumpet and with it blow ten blasts to raise the dead). The advantage of those who survive (qui derelicti sunt; cf. ) at the end over the dead is discussed in 4 Ezr 13:24, though the conclusion is different from that of 1 Thessalonians. The mention of clouds in connexion with the Lords coming seems to go back to Dan 7:13 (cf. Mat 24:30; Mat 26:64). The snatching up of the living in clouds as in a chariot (cf. Psa 104:3) has no known parallel in earlier or contemporary writers, but the idea is quite in keepings with Jewish apocalyptic notions (see Thackeray, The Relation of St. Paul to Contemporary Jewish Thought, ch. v.).

These examples are sufficient to show how large a use is made in 1 Thess. of traditional Jewish ideas. But these ideas have become the setting of new Christian truths-the knowledge of Christs resurrection as a fact, and the assurance that His resurrection is the pledge of the resurrection of His servants (Psa 4:14, Psa 5:10). It is in these truths that we find the real centre of the writers interest. For them, as for us, the setting is relatively unimportant. The permanent lesson of their teaching is that neither death nor any cosmic crisis in the future will make any essential difference to the close relation between the Christian and his Lord (Moffatt, Expositors Greek Testament , Thessalonians, p. 38).

(b) The time of the Parousia.-The expression (Psa 4:15, 17) is generally understood to imply that Paul expected the Parousia to be within his own lifetime. Perhaps this is reading too much into his words. The Thessalonians had asked a question concerning the relative advantages of those who are dead and of us who are still alive, in the event of a speedy return of Christ. It may be that the Apostles answer merely repeats the terms of the question. Or the clause may well be paraphrased, When I say we, I mean those who are living, those who survive to that day (Lightfoot, Notes on Epistles of St. Paul, p. 66). At any rate, the writers definitely refuse to predict times and seasons (Psa 5:1-2). The Christians duty is not to seek to know the future, but so to live as to be prepared for the Lords coming at any time (Psa 5:4 ff.).

(2) 2Th 2:1-12

The signs of the end.-The eschatological teaching of the Second Epistle is supplementary to that of the First. It deals with the troublous times which will immediately precede the Second Advent. The coming of Christ is certain, but the end is not yet. First must come the apostasy, and the culmination of evil in the person of the man of lawlessness, who will wage war on every object of human veneration, and take his seat in the Temple, claiming Divine honours as his right. Deceived by the signs and wonders he displays, those who have rejected the true Christ will hasten to follow this blasphemous imitator. Their infatuation is the Divine punishment of their previous wilful blindness.

The mystery of lawlessness, of which these things will be the climax, is already at work in the world. But at present it is prevented by some influence ( , 2Th 2:6) or person ( , 2Th 2:7) from attaining its full development. Only when the restraining power has been removed will the man of lawlessness be revealed. For a time he will succeed, but his reign will be ended by the coming of the Lord Jesus to destroy him and to set up the kingdom of the saints (2Th 2:1-12). This teaching claims to be merely an echo of instruction already given to the Thessalonians by word of mouth (2Th 2:5). This will help to explain why to us it seems fragmentary and obscure. The readers for whom it was intended had clues to its meaning which we no longer possess. One thing, however, is certain. The main features of this Pauline Apocalypse are taken unmodified from purely Jewish sources.

Later Jewish eschatology always spoke of the time immediately preceding the coming of the Messiah as one of great upheavals among the nations, and of unprecedented out breaks of evil (see 4 Ezr 5:1-12; Ezr 6:19-22, Apoc. Bar. lxx., Jub. xxiii., Ass. Mos. x.; cf. Matthew 24). Whether or not this idea has its roots in a primitive Babylonian Creation-myth (so Bousset, The Antichrist Legend, London, 1896; and H. Gunkel, Schpfung und Chaos in Urzeit und Endzeit, Gttingen, 1895) is immaterial. It is sufficient to trace its development in Jewish literature. The very earliest Messianic* [Note: It is convenient to speak of these passages as Messianic, although some of them contain no reference to a personal Messiah. The fact that in some cases the description of the Messianic age is of much later date than the account of the conflict is unimportant. It is sufficient that they were placed side by side when the prophetic books took their final form.] prophecies of the OT represent the Golden Age as preceded by a time of conflict-the conflict which will destroy the particular oppressor of Israel at the time, and wipe out the ungodly in Israel itself (e.g. Amos 9, Isa 10:28-34; Isa 11:1-9; 11:31-32; cf. Hag 2:6-9). The power to be overcome is in each case an actually existing Empire-Assyria, Babylon, or Persia-whose downfall will immediately usher in the glorious reign of peace. In the later prophetic books a difference appears. The Messianic age is thrown forward into a remote future, and is introduced by a struggle on a much vaster scale. Not one but all the heathen nations gather in a combined attack upon Jerusalem and are destroyed (Ezekiel 38, 39, Joe 3:9-21; cf. Zec 14:1-7; Zec 14:12). Obviously such descriptions are symbolical. They mark the transition-stage between prophecy properly so called and apocalypse.

In the apocalyptic literature of a later period, the general notion of a final conflict between the powers of the world and the kingdom of the saints reappears in varying forms. In times of unusual oppression it seemed to be near at hand, and existing heathen rulers seemed to represent the very incarnation of the heaven-defying world-spirit. The book of Daniel takes this view of Antiochus Epiphanes (Dan 11:36 ff.), and at a later time the Psalms of Solomon seem to regard Pompey in a similar, way (Pss.-Solomon 2:1, 2:20, 17:3).

In later pictures of the last struggle a shadowy figure sometimes appears, half-human, half-demonic, who is to lead the world-forces in the last times (Apoc. Bar. xl.; cf. 4 Ezr 5:1 ff., Sib. Orac. iii. 60ff.). His reign will be a time of general impiety (4 Ezr 5:1; Ezr 5:10-12); he will perform miracles (see 4 Ezr 5:4; Ezr 5:7, Sib. Orac. iii. 65ff., Asc. Isa. iv. 5) and deceive even the faithful (Sib. Orac. iii. 69), till finally he is slain by Messiah (Apoc. Bar. xl.). This is the person familiar to later speculation under the name Antichrist, a name which first appears in 1Jn 2:18-20. An allusion to this idea is possibly to be found in the personal character given to the abomination of desolation by the use of the masculine participle in Mar 13:14. Bousset, less probably, sees a similar reference in the words of Joh 5:43, If another shall come in his own name, him ye will receive (The Antichrist Legend, p. 134).

The picture of the man of lawlessness is indubitably a phase of the Antichrist tradition. Like all Apocalyptists, the writer felt himself free to introduce new details, i.e. the crowning impiety of sitting as God in the Temple, and the idea of a restraining power, which was necessary to explain why the end was delayed. But the figure presented is purely conventional, and is not directly connected with any historical person or circumstances. Its main features are borrowed from Daniels account of Antiochus Epiphanes (Dan 11:36 ff.), with a possible reminiscence of Ezekiels description of the prince of Tyre (Eze 28:2). The idea, common to most apocalyptic works, of a widespread apostasy in the last times seems to have sprung from the memory of the actual apostasy of many Jews in the time of Antiochus (1Ma 1:11; 1Ma 2:15; 1Ma 2:23; cf. Mat 24:10-13). For the miracles wrought by the man of lawlessness, his deluding of the Jews, and his destruction by Messiah, Jewish parallels have already been quoted (cf. also Mar 13:22). It is not necessary to suppose that the writer of 2 Thessalonians 2 intended to make any close application of the details of the old tradition to the circumstances of his own age. Many interpretations of the chapter have been based on that supposition, but they are at best precarious and quite unnecessary (see Milligan, Thessalonians, p. 166 ff.; Findlay, Thessalonians, p. 223 ff.; Hasting’s Dictionary of the Bible (5 vols) iv. 748). The one point which may be granted is that by the force which restrains the final outbreak of lawlessness is meant the Roman Empire.* [Note: will then be the power of the Empire: the Emperor as the representative of that power, or perhaps the angel which presides over the fate of the Empire (cf. Dan 10:13).] The mystery of lawlessness is any power, whether Jewish or heathen, which actively opposes the spread of Christs Kingdom. The portrait of the man of lawlessness is wholly ideal, a kind of personification of the supreme effort of the anti-Christian forces.

Superficially viewed, this teaching may seem to be merely an echo of an obsolete myth. But it must not be forgotten that the language of Apocalypse is essentially symbolical. Paul has not hesitated to use all the imagery of Jewish Apocalyptic, yet through this conventional symbolism he expresses the truly Christian confidence that in the end the cause of Christ must triumph and all the powers of evil cease to be (see Findlay, Thessalonians, p. 230; Kennedy, St. Pauls Conceptions of the Last Things, p. 184).

5. Authenticity of the Epistles

(i.) 1 Thessalonians.-At the present day it is scarcely necessary to defend the authenticity or even the integrity of 1 Thessalonians. Both are accepted as fully established by all modern critics (e.g. Jlicher, Wrede, Harnack, Milligan, Moffatt, Lake), except the small minority who regard all the Pauline Epistles as spurious (see Encyclopaedia Biblica , article Paul, 38). The only really doubtful clause Isa 2:16 b, , which seems to be a reminiscence of Test. Levi, vi. 11, and may have been added after the fall of Jerusalem. The genuineness of the rest of the Epistle is put beyond all doubt by its thoroughly Pauline style, its independence of the Acts narrative, and the absence of any doctrinal or polemical interest which could supply the motive of a forgery.

(ii.) 2 Thessalonians.-The case for 2 Thess. is not so clear. Its genuineness has been doubted on the following grounds.

(1) Its close resemblance in structure to 1 Thess., with which is said to be coupled a difference in tone and colour so great as to make it incredible that the two Epistles were written by the same writer to the same community about the same time (Wrede). This is the most weighty objection that has been advanced, but it is by no means conclusive. It may be granted that, apart from the sections 2Th 1:5-12; 2Th 2:1-12; 2Th 2:15; 2Th 3:1-5; 2Th 3:10; 2Th 3:13; 2Th 3:17, the Second Epistle is almost a reproduction of the First. Yet, amid this general resemblance, we do not find those subtle differences of vocabulary and syntax which betray the hand of the imitator. The difference of vocabulary is not greater than can be accounted for on natural grounds (Moffatt, Introd. to Literature of the New Testament (Moffatt)., p. 79). There is an un-Pauline stiffness and formality about the style of some passages (e.g. 2Th 1:5-10, 2Th 2:7-10), yet it occurs chiefly in what may be quotations of some semi-liturgical sentences (cf. Findlay, Thessalonians, p. lvii; Encyclopaedia Biblica iv. 5044). A possible explanation of the close resemblance between the two Epistles may be that Paul had a copy of 1 Thess. before him when he dictated 2 Thessalonians. Such a reference to the earlier Epistle would be quite natural, in view of its having been quoted to support mistaken ideas about the Parousia (2Th 2:2). The colder, more official tone of 2 Thess. as compared with the First Epistle may be explained by the necessity for plain speaking occasioned by the errors of some Thessalonians. Its more Jewish complexion is due to the essentially Jewish nature of its subject. Harnacks theory that it was addressed exclusively to the Jewish community is ingenious but unconvincing.

(2) Its eschatology.-(a) A former generation of scholars maintained that the passage 2Th 2:1-12 contains references to events much later than the death of Paul (so Kern, Baur, Hilgenfeld, Bahnsen). This position is no longer tenable. Increased knowledge of Jewish and primitive Christian eschatology has shown that the references of the Epistle are not to actual events but to traditional expectations.

(b) A second argument has been based on the ground that the teaching of 2Th 2:1-12, which represents the Parousia as heralded by many signs, is incompatible with the view of 1Th 5:1 ff., that it will be sudden and unexpected. In any case, this is not a fatal objection to the Pauline authorship of either Epistle. Such seeming inconsistencies are characteristic of all primitive Christian conceptions of the end (e.g. Mat 24:29 ff.). But it is possible to exaggerate the discrepancy. Perhaps the meaning which the writer of 1Th 5:1 ff. intended to convey was that the day of the Lord comes as a thief in the night only for those who are asleep in indifference. Those who are awake will not be taken unawares (see Encyclopaedia Biblica iv. 5042). If this be the true explanation of the passage, the discrepancy between the two Epistles disappears.

(3) References to forged epistles.-A minor objection to the authenticity of 2 Thess. has been found in its supposed reference to the existence of forged epistles (2:2, ). It is certainly difficult to believe that spurious Pauline Epistles were circulated while the Apostle was alive. But close examination of the syntax of the verse 2:2 shows that the clause should be connected not with but with . The allusion then is not to spurious epistles, but to erroneous interpretations of a genuine one (Askwith, Thessalonian Epistles, p. 92 ff.). Various theories of the origin of 2 Thess. have been formulated on the assumption that the whole or part of it is spurious, e.g. () that into a genuinely Pauline Epistle have been interpolated the two later sections 2Th 1:5-12; 2Th 2:1-12 (P. Schmidt, ad loc.); () that 2Th 2:1-12 is a genuine Pauline fragment for which a later writer has provided a setting by a close imitation of 1 Thess. (Hausrath, History of NT Times, Eng. translation , 4 vols., London, 1895, iii. 215); () that the Epistle was written by Timothy, who was influenced by a Caligula-apocalypse (Spitta, Zur Geschichte und Litteratur des Urchristentums, i. 111 ff.); () that the whole of 2 Thess. was written to counteract the eschatological views encouraged by the Pauline Epistles. The writer took 1 Thess. as his model because it contains the most notable outline of Pauline eschatology (Wrede, Die Echtheit des zweiten Thessalonicherbriefs, in TU [Note: U Texte and Untersuchungen.] , new ser. ix. 2). All these theories raise more difficulties than they remove. The style of 2 Thess. is too uniform throughout to lend any support to the theory of interpolation. The Epistle must stand or fall as a whole. On the other hand, it is difficult to believe that a forger wishing to correct Pauls teaching would address his work to a Church already in possession of a recognized Epistle of Paul. When all possible objections have been fully weighed, the conclusion which presents the least difficulty is that 2 Thess. is actually what it claims to be-an authentic letter of Paul to the Christians of Thessalonica. As such it found a place in the canon of Marcion and in the Old Latin and Syriac translations of the NT. Earlier still its language (2Th 1:4) was quoted as Pauline by Polycarp (ad Phil. xi.), though by mistake he quotes it as addressed to the Philippians.

6. Value of the Epistles.-(1) The Thessalonian Epistles are probably the earliest extant Christian writings. They present to us a primitive stage in the growth of the Church, and an early form of Christian teaching. They may be compared with Pauls speeches at Lystra (Act 14:15 ff.) and at Athens (Act 17:22 ff.) as examples of his preaching to the heathen world. Though their teaching is simple and undeveloped, it is thoroughly Pauline in tone, and latent in it we may find the germs of the full-grown Pauline theology.

(2) These letters are an interesting expression of the writers personality. They show us Paul the pastor and his method of treating newly-made converts, his self-sacrificing devotion, his gentle dealing with personal difficulties and temptations, his continual yearning for his children in the faith. They show us Paul the Hebrew, saturated with the eschatological ideas of his own race and age, though for him all the eschatology that matters is summed up in the words: Whether we wake or whether we sleep, we live together with Christ (cf. 1Th 5:10).

(3) They help us to supplement the incomplete account of the founding of the Thessalonian Church given by the Acts.

Literature.-(1) articles The Thessalonian Epistles, Anti-christ, Man of Sin, Apocalyptic Literature, in Smiths Dict. of the Bible , Hasting’s Dictionary of the Bible (5 vols) , Encyclopaedia Biblica , and Encyclopaedia Britannica 10.

(2) General works on the NT, especially the Introductions of T. Zahn (Eng. translation , 3 vols., Edinburgh, 1909); A. Jlicher (Eng. translation , London, 1904); B. W. Bacon (New York, 1900); J. Moffatt, Historical NT2, Edinburgh, 1901, Introd. to Literature of the New Testament (Moffatt)., do., 1911; K. Lake, The Earlier Epistles of St. Paul, London, 1911.

(3) Commentaries: (a) German: P. Schmidt, Der erste Thessalonicherbrief, Berlin, 1885; W. Bornemann, Die Thessalonicherbriefe (Meyers Kommentar ber das NT), Gttingen, 1894; B. Weiss, Brief an die Thessalonicher2, Leipzig, 1902; G. Wohlenberg, Der erste und zweite Thessalonicherbrief ausgelegt (Zahns Kommentar zum NT), do., 1903.

(b) English: H. Alford, The Greek Testament2, London, 1857, iii.; B. Jowett, Thessalonians, Galatians, Romans 2, do., 1859; J. B. Lightfoot, Notes on Epistles of St. Paul, do., 1895; J. Denney, Thessalonians (Expositors Bible), do., 1892; J. Drummond, The Epistles of Paul the Apostle (International Handbooks to the NT), New York, 1899; G. G. Findlay, Thessalonians (Cambridge Greek Testament), Cambridge, 1904; G. Milligan, Thessalonians, do., 1908; J. Moffatt, Expositors Greek Testament , Thessalonians, London, 1910; J. E. Frame, International Critical Commentary , Thessalonians, Edinburgh, 1912.

(4) Special Studies: E. H. Askwith, Introduction to the Thessalonian Epistles, London, 1902; F. Spitta, Der zweite Brief an die Thessalonicher, in Zur Geschichte und Litteratur des Urchristentums, i. [Gttingen, 1893]; W. Wrede, Die Echtheit des zweiten Thessalonicherbriefs, in TU [Note: U Texte and Untersuchungen.] , new ser. ix. 2 [Leipzig, 1903]; A. Harnack, Das Problem des zweiten Thessalonicherbriefs, in SBAW [Note: BAW Sitzungsberichte der Berliner Akademie der Wissenschaften.] , 1910.

(5) Historical and doctrinal: J. B. Lightfoot, Biblical Essays, London, 1893, pp. 253-269; W. M. Ramsay, St. Paul the Traveller and the Roman Citizen, do., 1895; H. St. J. Thackeray, St. Paul and Contemporary Jewish Thought, do., 1900; R. J. Knowling, The Testimony of St. Paul to Christ, do., 1911; H. A. A. Kennedy, St. Pauls Conceptions of the Last Things, do., 1904; W. Bousset, The Antichrist Legend, Eng. translation , do., 1896.

A fuller list of authorities will be found in J. Moffatt, Introd. to Literature of the New Testament (Moffatt)., pp. 64-66.

F. S. Marsh.

Fuente: Dictionary of the Apostolic Church

Thessalonians, Epistles to the

Two of the canonical Epistles of St. Paul. This article will treat the Church of Thessalonica, the authenticity, canonicity, time and place of writing, occasion, and contents of the two Epistles to that Church.

I. THE CHURCH OF THESSALONICA

After Paul and Silas had, during the Apostle’s second missionary journey, left Philippi, they proceeded to Thessalonica (Thessalonike, the modern Saloniki), perhaps because there was in the city a synagogue of the Jews (Acts 17:2). Thessalonica was the capital of the Roman Province of Macedonia; it was a free city, ruled by a popular assembly (cf. Acts 17:5, eis ton demon) and magistrates (cf. verse 6, epi tous politarchas). St. Paul at once began to preach the Gospel to the Jews and proselytes. For three successive sabbaths he explained the Scriptures in the synagogue, opening up the way and gradually leading his hearers to the tremendous truth that there was need the Christ should die and rise again from the dead, and that Jesus whom Paul preached was in very truth this Christ. Some of the Jews believed and took sides with Paul and Silas.

It would seem that Paul stayed in the city some time thereafter, for, according to the reading of Codex Bezæ (fifth century), and the Vulgate and Coptic Versions (Acts 17:4), he converted a large number not only of proselytes (ton te sebomenon) but of Gentile Greeks (kai Hellenon). In the first place, it is unlikely that a large number of these latter were won over to the Faith during the three weeks devoted to the synagogues; for Paul did manual labour night and day, so as not to be burdensome to his converts (1 Thessalonians 2:9). Secondly, these converts from idolatry (1 Thessalonians 1:9) would scarcely have become, after so brief an apostolate, a “pattern to all that believe in Macedonia and in Achaia” (1 Thessalonians 1:7). Thirdly, the Church of Philippi sent alms twice to Paul at Thessalonica (Phil., iv, 16), a fact which seems to indicate that his sojourn there was longer than three weeks.

Be this as it may, the signal success of Paul’s apostolate among Jews, proselytes, and Hellenes together with the conversion of “not a few noble ladies” (Acts 17:4), aroused the Jews to a fury of envy; they gathered together a mob of idlers from the agora and set the whole city in tumult; they beset the home of Jason, found the Apostle away, dragged his host to the tribunal of the politarchs and charged him with harbouring traitors, men who set Jesus up as king in place of Cæsar. That night the brethren made good the escape of their teacher to Berea. There the Gospel of Paul met with a much more enthusiastic reception than that accorded to it by the synagogue of Thessalonica. The Jews of that city drove Paul to Berea and there, too, stirred up the mob against him. He left Silas and Timothy to complete his work and went to Athens (Acts 17:1-15).

II. FIRST EPISTLE

A. Authenticity

(1) External Evidence

(a) II Thessalonians. The strongest external evidence in favour of the authenticity of I Thessalonians is II Thessalonians which, whatsoever be its date of composition, is the very earliest document that clearly presupposes I Thessalonians to have been written by Paul.

(b) Manuscripts. The evidence of manuscripts alone is such as to set the authenticity of this letter beyond all doubt; it is in the Greek text of the Codex Sinaiticus (fourth century), Cod. Vaticanus (fourth century), and Cod. Alexandrinus (fifth century); it is in the Old Latin and Syriac Versions, which trace its authenticity down to the middle of the second century.

(c) The Apostolic Fathers give evidence of very early use of the Epistle as Sacred Scripture. St. Ignatius of Antioch (d. A.D. 110-17, according to the chronology of Harnack which we shall follow in this article), in “Eph.”, X, i, probably uses the adialeiptos proseuchesthai, “pray without ceasing”, of I Thess., v, 17; and undoubtedly had in mind I Thess., ii, 4, when writing to the Romans (II, i) the distinctly Pauline thought of ou thelo hymas anthropareskein alla theo, “I will that ye please not man but God”. Because St. Ignatius, as the other Apostolic Fathers, cites from memory, without the exactness of later Fathers and without ever mentioning the name of the sacred writer quoted, Dr. Inge, the Lady Margaret professor of divinity in the University of Cambridge, says: “The evidence that Ignatius knew I Thessalonians is almost nil” (cf. “The New Testament in the Apostolic Fathers”, Oxford, 1905, p. 74). Against such scepticism, the clear use of St. Paul by the Apostolic Fathers is of no avail. Harnack, who cannot be accused of overmuch credulity, thinks that St. Ignatius of Antioch possessed a collection of the Pauline Epistles; and that by the year 117, St. Polycarp of Smyrna had a complete collection (eine ganze Sammlung) thereof before him and veritably lived therein (cf. Chronologie der altchristlichen Litteratur, I, 249, note 2). In the “Pastor” of Hermas (A.D. 140), we find the phrase of I Thess., v, 13, “Be at peace among yourselves” (eireneuete en heautois) several times, used almost as it occurs in the Alexandrian and Vatican Codices (cf. Hermas, “Simil.”, VIII, vii, 2; “Vis.”, III, vi, 3; III, ix, 2, 10; III, xii, 3).

The Apologetic Fathers are clear and to the point. St Irenæus (A.D. 181-9) cites I Thess., v, 23, expressly attributing the words to the Apostle’s First Epistle to the Thessalonians (“Contra hæreses”, V, vi, 1 in P. G., VIII, 1138), and I Thess., v, 3, as the saying of the Apostle (ibid., V, xxx, 2 in P. G., VII, 1205). Tertullian quotes at length passages from each of the five chapters of I Thess. to prove his thesis of the resurrection of the body (“Liber de resurrectione carnis”, xxiv, in P. L., II, 874) and uses the Epistle against Marcion (“Adv. Marcionem”, V, xv in P. L., II, 541). St Clement of Alexandria (A.D. 190-210) very often cites this brief letter — cf. “Pædagogus”, I, v, 19 (Stählin’s ed., I, 101) and “Stromata”, I, i, 6 (Stählin’s ed., II, 5) for I Thess., ii, 5-7; “Stromata”, II, xi, 4, IV, xii (Stählin’s ed., II, 138 and 286), for an allusion to I Thess., iv, 3, and an accurate citation of six verses (3-8) of the same chapter; “Pædagogus”, II, ix, III, xii, IV, xxii (Stählin’s ed., I, 206 and 288, and P. G., VIII, 1352) for the appeal to almost every verse of I Thess., v, i. e. verses 5, 8, 13, 15, 19, 22; “Stromata”, I, xi (Stählin’s ed., II, 34) for a quotation from the same chapter. So strong is the external evidence in favour of the authenticity of I Thess. as to convince all scholars save only those who, on account of internal evidence, deny to Paul the authenticity of all his Epistles.

(2) Internal Evidence

In I Thessalonians all the main Pauline doctrines are taught — the Death and Resurrection of Jesus Christ (i, 10; iv, 14; v, 10); His Divinity and Sonship of the living God (i, 9, 10); the resurrection of our bodies (iv, 15-18), the mediatorship of Christ (v, 10); the call of the nations to the Kingdom of Christ, which is the Church (ii, 12), sanctification by the indwelling of the Holy Spirit (iv, 8). The plain and direct style, the writer’s affectionate concern for his spiritual children, his impatience of Judaizers, the preponderance of personal over doctrinal statements, the frank and honest self-revelation of the writer — all these distinctly Pauline characteristics argue strongly for the authenticity of this letter.

Baur, the prime mover of neo-Tübingen ideas, was the first to wave aside recklessly all external evidence and seriously to attack the authenticity of I Thess. from internal evidence (cf. “Der Apostel Paulus”, ed. 2, II, 94). He was followed by Nowack, “Der Ursprung des Christentums” (Leipzig, 1857), II, 313; Volkmar, “Mose, Prophezie und Himmelfahrt” (Leipzig, 1867), 114; and Van der Vries, “De beiden brieven aan de Thessalonicensen” (Leyden, 1865). The reasons which impel Baur and his followers are trivial. The lack of doctrine makes the letter unworthy of Paul. We have noted that the main heads of Paul’s teaching are included in this short letter. Moreover, the letter is a most touching revelation of the great heart of St. Paul and as such alone is befitting the outspoken Apostle. The Epistle is a clumsy forgery. The author has worked up his story from Acts. Paul could not have written ii, 14-16. It is far-fetched to compare the woes inflicted by the Jews upon the Church of Thessalonica with the ills they wrought upon the Church of Judea. It is un-Pauline to set Jewish Christians up as an example to Gentile converts (Baur, op. cit., 482). These purely subjective objections are worthless. The Apostle was too broadminded to be tied down to the narrow ideas of Baur. True, in his later letters — to the Romans end Corinthians and Galatians, for instance — we might not look for the juxtaposition of Jewish with Gentile Christians; but the Judaizers were not so troublesome to Paul when he wrote to the Thessalonians as when he wrote to the Romans. The expression ephthase de ep autous he orge eis telos, “the wrath hath come upon them unto the end” (ii, 16), naturally refers to the destruction of Jerusalem (A.D. 70) as an accomplished punishment of the Jews for killing the Lord Jesus. This is an unwarranted assumption. The phrase eis telos is indefinite; it has no definite article nor any defining qualificative; it modifies ephthase and refers to no definite end either accomplished or to be accomplished. St. Paul indefinitely but surely sees the oncoming end, reads the easily legible writing on the wall, and interprets that writing: “The wrath [of God] hath come upon them even unto making an end of them”. (iv) Baur (op. cit., 485) finds the eschatology of the Epistle un-Pauline. In the Epistles to the Corinthians, Romans, and Galatians, for instance, there is no diving into the future, nothing said of the Parousia, or second coming of Jesus. But the reason is clear — those to whom Paul wrote his great and later Epistles had not the eschatological difficulties of the Thessalonians to meet. He adapted his letters to the wants of those to whom he wrote. The very fact that the apprehension of an immediate Parousia us not mentioned in the later letters would have prevented a forger from palming off as Pauline such an unusual topic. Canonicity

The two Epistles to the Thessalonians are included among the canonical books accepted by the Councils of the Vatican, of Trent, and of Florence, and are among the homologoumena of all early lists of canonical New-Testament Scriptures; for instance, to mention only such early lists as accord with the received canon of Trent, these two Epistles are listed in the Muratorian Fragment (A.D. 195-205), in the canons of St. Athanasius of Alexandria (A.D. 373), of the Third Council of Carthage (A.D. 397), in which Saint Augustine took part, of St. Epiphanius (A.D. 403), of Innocent I (A.D. 405), and of Gelasius (A.D. 492). In fact there can be no reason whatsoever to doubt the canonicity of either letter.

C. Time and Place

The textus receptus, at the end of the two Epistles, gives a subscription stating that they were written from Athens (egraphe apo Athenon); and this same subscription is contained in the great uncial codices A, B2, K2, L2 — that is, Alexandrinus (fourth century), Vaticanus (fifth century corrector), Mosquensis, and Angelicus (both of the ninth century); it is likewise translated in important Latin, Syriac and Coptic manuscripts. None the less, there can be no doubt but that the letters were written during Paul’s first stay in Corinth. Timothy had been sent to Thessalonica by Paul from Athens (1 Thessalonians 3:2). Hence some Fathers inferred that, on this mission, Timothy brought along I Thess. The inference is wrong. As Rendel Harris says in “The Expositor” (1898), 174, Paul may have sent another letter from Athens by Timothy to the Thessalonians. He cannot have sent I Thessalonians from there by him. Paul clearly states that Timothy had returned from Thessalonica before the writing of I Thessalonians. (cf. iii, 6). Whither did he return? I Thessalonians does not state. Acts, xviii, 5, supplies answer. When Timothy returned from Macedonia with Silas to Paul, the Apostle was at Corinth. The news brought him by Timothy was the occasion of I Thessalonians. Moreover, in the greeting with which each letter begins, the names of Paul, Silvanus (i.e. Silas), and Timothy are grouped together; and we know that the three were together at Corinth (Acts 18:5) during Paul’s first visit to that city (cf. also 2 Corinthians 1:19). We have no proof that they were ever elsewhere together. I Thess., then, was written during the eighteen months Paul stayed. at Corinth, i.e. in the year 48 or 49, according to the chronology of Harnack, “Chronologie der altchristlichen Litteratur” (Leipzig, 1897), I, 717; in the year 53 or 54 according to the commonly received scheme of Pauline chronology. Both letters are generally considered to be the earliest extant writings of St. Paul. Some few now deem it proved that Paul wrote to the South Galatians even before he wrote to the Thessalonians, cf. Zahn, “Einleitung in das Neue Testament” Leipzig, 1897), I, 138.

D. Occasion

Having arrived at Athens, Paul at once set himself to convert the Jews, proselytes and Gentiles of that city. Among the latter he met with unusually small success. The Epicureans and Stoics for the most part rated him as a talkative lounger in the agora and either berated him with ridicule upon the Hill of Ares or waved him aside (Acts 17:16-32). Meanwhile he trembled for the Church of Thessalonica. So long as he had been there, only the Jews strove to set his work at naught; now in his absence, the Gentiles joined the Jews (1 Thessalonians 2:14), and made a vigorous onslaught upon the faith of his children. Paul yearned mightily to see their face once more. In his intense affection and concern, he breaks away from his wonted first plural: “We willed to have come to you, even I, Paul, and that once and again; but Satan hindered us” (ii, 18). The hindrance wrought by Satan was probably a security against his return given by Jason and some friends (Acts 17:9). Being unable to follow the yearnings of his heart, Paul sent Timothy to save the flock from the ravening wolves (1 Thessalonians 2:2). The Acts make no mention of this legation of Timothy from Athens to Thessalonica. Not long after, Paul left for Corinth (Acts 18:1). Thither Timothy, who returned from Thessalonica, brought back an eyewitness’s testimony as to the conditions of the faithful of that city. Rendel Harris, in “The Expositor” (1898), 167, thinks that the Thessalonians sent Paul a letter by Timothy and, to make good his theory, appeals to I Thess., i, 2, 5; ii, 1, 5, 9-13; iii, 3-6. There may be some ground for such conjecture in “We also” (kai hemeis) of I, ii, 13; “Also I” (kago) of I, iii, 5, and in “you have a good remembrance of us always” (echete mneian hemon agaphen) of I, iii, 6. Be this as it may, whether by letter or by word of mouth, Timothy fully informed Paul of the needs of the Christian community at Thessalonica; and these needs were the occasion of the first Epistle to that community.

E. Contents

No other letter of Paul to a Church is so free and easy and epistolary as is this letter; it defies strict doctrinal analysis, and is far more personal than doctrinal. Merely for the sake of some division, we may consider chapters i and iii as personal, chapters iv and v as doctrinal. Personal part — a missionary’s free outpouring of a noble heart’s yearnings. He is filled with joy at hearing how they stand fast by the faith which he preached to them (i, 2, 8); fondly talks about his labours and about his stay with them (I, 9-ii, 12); thanks God for the way they received from him the word of God (ii, 13 – 16); delicately hints at his apprehensions for them, by telling how at Athens he yearned to see them, how he sent Timothy in his stead, how relieved he now is as Timothy’s message has brought him peace of mind (ii, 17-iii, 10). Then follows a brief and beautiful prayer which sums up the yearnings of the great soul of the Apostle (iii, 11-13). Doctrinal part. With this prayer ends what is meant to be free and epistolary. Now follows as little phrase of transition — “For the rest, therefore, brethren” — and a thoroughly Pauline and direct exhortation upon how they “ought to walk and to please God” by purity (iv, 1-8), brotherly love (iv, 9-10), and peaceful toil (verse 11). The peace of everyday toil had been disturbed by a fanatical lethargy due to the supposed oncoming Parousia. Hence the eschatological passage that follows. The brethren who have died will have part in the Second Coming just as they that are now alive (verses 12-17); the time of the Parousia is uncertain, so that watch-fullness and not lethargy are needed (v, 1-11). The letter ends with a series of pithy and pointed exhortations to respect for their religious teachers, and to the other virtues that make up the glory of Christian life (v, 12-22); the Apostolic benediction and salutation, a request for prayers and the charge that the letter be read in public (verses 23-28).

III. SECOND EPISTLE

A. Authenticity

(1) External Evidence

Manuscript evidence is the same for II Thessalonians as for I Thessalonians; so, too, the evidence of the ancient versions. The Apostolic and Apologetic Fathers are more clearly in favour of II Thess. than of I Thess. St. Ignatius, in Rom., x, 3, cites a phrase of II Thess., iii, 5, eis ten hypomonen tou Christou, “in the patience of Christ”. St. Polycarp (XI, 3) refers the letter expressly to Paul, although, by a slip of the memory, he takes it that the Apostle glories (2 Thessalonians 1:4) in another Macedonian Church, that of the Philippians; elsewhere (XI, 1) Polycarp uses II Thess., iii, 15. St. Justin (about A.D. 150), in “Dialog.”, xxxii (P.G., VI, 544), seems to have in mind the eschatological language of this letter. Besides it is set down as Pauline in the Canon of Marcion (about A.D. 140).

(2) Internal Evidence

The literary dependence of II Thessalonians on I Thessalonians cannot be gainsaid. The writer of the former must have written the latter, and that too not very long thereafter. II Thess., ii, 15, and iii, 6, are to be explained by I Thess., iv, 1-8 and 11. The style of the two letters is admittedly identical; the prayers (I, iii 11, v, 23; II, ii, 16, iii, 16), greetings (I, i, 1; II, i, 1, 2) thanks (I, i, 2; II, i, 3), and transitions (I, iv, 1; II, iii, 1) are remarkably alike in form. Two-thirds of II Thess. is like to I Thess. in vocabulary and style. Moreover, the structure of the Epistle, its subject-matter, and its affectionate outbursts of prayer for the recipients and of exhortation are all decidedly Pauline characteristics. The argument from internal evidence is so strong as to have won over such critics as Harnack (Chronologie, I, 238) and Jülicher (Einleitung, 40). Schmiedel, Holtzmann, Weizacker, and others deny the force of this argument from internal evidence. Its very similarity to I Thess. in vocabulary and style is made to militate against the authenticity of II Thess.; the letter is too Pauline; the author was a clever forger, who, some sixty years later, took up I Thess. and worked it over. There has been no motive assigned for such a forgery; no proof given that any post-Apostolic writer was so cunning as to palm off thus letter as a Pauline imitation.

Eschatology of Paul. The chief objection is that the eschatology of II Thess. contradicts that of I Thess.: the letter is in this un-Pauline. In I Thess., iv, 14-v, 3, the writer says the Parousia is imminent; in II Thess., ii, 2-12, iii, 11, the writer sets the Parousia a long time off. Non-Catholics who hold the Pauline authorship of the two letters generally admit that Paul predicted the second coming would be within his own lifetime and deem that the signs narrated in II Thess., ii, as preludes to that coming do not imply a long interval nor that Paul expected to die before these signs occurred. Catholics insist that Paul cannot have said the Parousia would be during his lifetime. Had he said so he would have erred; the inspired word of God would err; the error would be that of the Holy Spirit more than of Paul. True, the Douay Version seems to imply that the Parousia is at hand: “Then we who are alive, who are left, shall be taken up together with them in the clouds to meet Christ, into the air, and so shall we always be with the Lord” (1 Thessalonians 4:16). The Vulgate is no clearer: “Nos, qui vivimus, qui residui sumus ” etc. (iv, 15-17). The original text solves the difficulty: hemeis oi zontes oi paraleipomenoi, ama syn autois arpagesometha. Here the Hellenistic syntax parallels the Attic. The sentence is conditional. The two participles present stand for two futures preceded by ei; the participles have the place of a protasis. The translation is: “We, if we be alive — if we be left — [on earth], shall be taken up” etc. A similar construction is used by Paul in I Cor., xi, 29 (cf. Moulton “Grammar of New Testament Greek”, Edinburgh, 1906, I, 230). St. Paul is here no more definite about the time of the Parousia than he was in I Thess., v, 2, when he wrote “that the day of the Lord shall so come, as a thief in the night.” There is in St. Paul’s eschatology the very same indefiniteness about the lime of the Parousia that there is in the eschatological sayings of Jesus as related in the Synoptics (Matthew 24:5-45; Mark 13:7-37; Luke 21:20-36). “Of that day or hour no man knoweth, neither the angels in heaven, nor the Son, but the Father” (Mark 13:32). In the deposit of faith given by the Father to the Son, to be given by the Son to the Church, the time of the Parousia was not contained. We readily admit that St. Paul did not know the time of the Parousia; we cannot admit that he knew it wrong and wrote it wrong as the inspired Word of God and a part of the deposit of faith.

As for the further objection that the apocalyptic character of ii, 2-12, is post-Pauline and dependent upon so late a composition as the Apocalypse of John (A.D. 93-96) or, worse still upon the Nero redivivus story (Tacitus “Hist.”, II, viii), we answer that this assertion is entirely gratuitous. St. Paul got his apocalyptic ideas from the very same source as John, that is either from revelation to himself or from the Old Testament or from tradition. Most of the details of his apocalyptic description of the Parousia are given in other apocalypses (1 John 2:18; Matthew 24:24; Luke 21:8; Mark 13:22; Deuteronomy 13:1-5; Ezekiel 38 and 39; Daniel 7, 8, 9, 11, 12 etc.). The man of sin, Antichrist, Belial, the well-nigh complete triumph of evil just before the end of time, the almost general apostasy, the portents, and other items are features familiar to Old-Testament and New-Testament apocalyptic writings.

B. Canonicity

The canonicity of II Thessalonians has been treated together with that of I Thessalonians.

C. Time and Place

II Thessalonians was written at Corinth not long after I Thessalonians, for both Timothy and Silas are still with Paul (i, 1), and the silence of the Acts shows that, once Paul left Corinth, Silas was not again his companion in the ministry. There seem to be allusions in iii, 2, to the troublous stay of a year and a half at Corinth (Acts 18); in ii, 14, to the letter quite recently written to the Thessalonians; and in iii, 7-9, to the ministry of Paul among them as not long passed.

D. Occasion

The eschatology of I Thessalonians had been misunderstood by the Thessalonians; they took it, the day of the Lord was at hand (ii, 2); they were overwrought by the exaggerations of some meddlers and perhaps by a forged letter which purported to have come from Paul (ii, 2; iii, 17). Moreover the disorderly conduct of some (iii, 6, 11) gave the Apostle no little concern; this concern he showed by the letter.

E. Contents

The three chapters into which the letter is now divided, aptly analyze the thought. In the first chapter are a greeting, thanksgiving for the faith and love of the Thessalonians, and an assurance of Divine recompense to them and to their persecutors. In the second chapter is the main thought of the letter — the eschatology. Certain signs are detailed which must precede the Parousia. Until these signs appear, there is no reason for terror or taking leave of their senses. The third chapter is the usual Pauline request for prayers, a charge to avoid the disorderly, a truly Pauline allusion to the example he set them, and the final identification of the letter by a greeting written with his own hand.

———————————–

Of the Greek Fathers whose commentaries on I and II Thess. have come down to us, ST. JOHN CHRYSOSTOM is by far the most scholarly; THEODORET is pithy and to the point. THEODORE OF MOPSUESTLA (about A.D. 415) forces the Apostle to his ideas. EUTHALIUS THE DEACON depends on THEODORE; ST. JOHN DAMASCENE on ST. JOHN CHRYSOSTOM. Among the Latin Fathers AMBROSIASTER (about 730) at times errs in matters of faith; PRIMASIUS (about 556) collated the expositions of AMBROSIASTER, PELAGIUS, ST. AUGUSTINE, and ST. JEROME. The great Catholic commentators of more recent time are: JUSTINIANI (Lyons, 1612), A LAPIDE (Antwerp, 1614), CAJETAN (Rome, 1529), SALMERÓN (Madrid, 1602), KISTEMAKER (Münster, 1822), McEVILLY (Dublin, 1875), BISPING (Münster, 1873), MAUNOURY (Paris, 1878), ROEHM (Passau, 1885), JOHANNES (Dillingen, 1898), PANEK (Ratisbon, 1886), PRAT, La théologie de Saint Paul (Paris, 1908), PICONIO (Pans, 1837), PERONNE (Paris, 1881), TOUSSAINT (Paris, 1910). The chief Protestant commentaries are those of LIGHTFOOT (Notes, 1895), DRUMMOND (1899), FINDLAY (1904), MILLIGAN (1908), SCHMIEDEL (1892), B. WEISS (1896).

WALTER DRUM Transcribed by Vernon Bremberg Dedicated to the Cloistered Dominican Nuns of the Monastery of the Infant Jesus, Lufkin, Texas

The Catholic Encyclopedia, Volume XIVCopyright © 1912 by Robert Appleton CompanyOnline Edition Copyright © 2003 by K. KnightNihil Obstat, July 1, 1912. Remy Lafort, S.T.D., CensorImprimatur. +John Cardinal Farley, Archbishop of New York

Fuente: Catholic Encyclopedia

Thessalonians, Epistles to the

The first epistle to the Thessalonians was the first of all Paul’s epistles. It was in all probability written from Corinth, where he abode a “long time” (Acts 18:11, 18), early in the period of his residence there, about the end of A.D. 52.

The occasion of its being written was the return of Timotheus from Macedonia, bearing tidings from Thessalonica regarding the state of the church there (Acts 18:1-5; 1 Thess. 3:6). While, on the whole, the report of Timothy was encouraging, it also showed that divers errors and misunderstandings regarding the tenor of Paul’s teaching had crept in amongst them. He addresses them in this letter with the view of correcting these errors, and especially for the purpose of exhorting them to purity of life, reminding them that their sanctification was the great end desired by God regarding them.

The subscription erroneously states that this epistle was written from Athens.

The second epistle to the Thessalonians was probably also written from Corinth, and not many months after the first.

The occasion of the writing of this epistle was the arrival of tidings that the tenor of the first epistle had been misunderstood, especially with reference to the second advent of Christ. The Thessalonians had embraced the idea that Paul had taught that “the day of Christ was at hand”, that Christ’s coming was just about to happen. This error is corrected (2:1-12), and the apostle prophetically announces what first must take place. “The apostasy” was first to arise. Various explanations of this expression have been given, but that which is most satisfactory refers it to the Church of Rome.

Fuente: Easton’s Bible Dictionary

Thessalonians, Epistles to the

First Thessalonian Epistle

The authenticity and canonical authority of this epistle have been from the earliest ages admitted; nor have these points ever been called in question, either in ancient or modern times, by those who have received any of Paul’s Epistles.

This epistle has generally been regarded as the first written by Paul of those now extant. In the Acts of the Apostles (Act 17:5, sq.) we are told that Paul, after preaching the Gospel with success at Thessalonica, had to flee from that city in consequence of the malice of the Jews; that he thence betook himself to Berea, in company with Silas; that, driven by the same influence from Berea, he journeyed to Athens, leaving Silas and Timothy (the latter of whom had probably preceded him to Berea) behind him; and that after remaining in that city for sometime, he went to Corinth, where he was joined by Timothy and Silas. It appears also from this epistle (1Th 3:1-2; 1Th 3:5), that while at Athens he had commissioned Timothy to visit the infant church at Thessalonica; and from Act 17:15-16, we learn that he expected to be joined by Timothy and Silas in that city. Whether this expected meeting ever took place there, is a matter involved in much uncertainty.

But whatever view we adopt on this point, it seems indisputable that this epistle was not written until Paul met Timothy and Silas at Corinth. The ancient subscription, indeed, testifies that it was written at Athens; but that this could not be the case is clear from the epistle itself. It must, however, have been written very soon after his arrival at Corinth; for, at the time of his writing, Timothy had just arrived from Thessalonica, and Paul had not been long in Corinth before Timothy and Silas joined him there (Act 17:1-5).

The design of this epistle is to comfort the Thessalonians under trial, and to encourage them to the patient and consistent profession of Christianity. The epistle may be conveniently divided into two parts. The former of these, which comprises the first three chapters, is occupied with statements chiefly of a retrospective character: it details the apostle’s experience among the Thessalonians, his confidence in them, his deep regard for them, and his efforts and prayers on their behalf. The latter part of the epistle (1Th 4:5) is, for the most part, of a hortatory character: it contains the apostle’s admonitions to the Thessalonians to walk according to their profession; to avoid sensuality, dishonesty, and pride; to cultivate brotherly love, to attend diligently to the duties of life, to take the comfort which the prospect of Christ’s second coming was calculated to convey, but not to allow that to seduce them into indolence; or idle speculations; to render due respect to their spiritual superiors; and, by attention to a number of duties which the apostle specifies, to prove themselves worthy of the good opinion he entertained of them. He concludes the epistle by offering fervent supplication on their behalf, and the usual apostolic benediction.

Second Thessalonian Epistle

The apostle’s allusion in his former epistle to the second coming of Christ, and especially his statement in 1Th 4:15-18, appear to have been misunderstood by the Thessalonians or willfully perverted by some among them, so as to favor the notion that that event was near at hand. This notion some inculcated as a truth specially confirmed to them by the Spirit; others advocated it as part of the apostolic doctrine; and some claimed for it the specific support of Paul in a letter (2Th 2:2). Whether the letter here referred to is the apostle’s former epistle to the Thessalonians, or one forged in his name by some keen and unscrupulous advocates of the notion above referred to, is uncertain.

On receiving intelligence of the trouble into which the Thessalonians had been plunged, in consequence of the prevalence among them of the notion (from whatever source derived) that the second coming of Christ was nigh at hand, Paul wrote to them this second epistle, in which he beseechingly adjures them by the very fact that Christ is to come a second time, not to be shaken in mind or troubled, as if that event were near at hand. He informs them that much was to happen before that should take place, and especially predicts a great apostasy from the purity and simplicity of the Christian faith (2Th 2:5-12). He then exhorts them to hold fast by the traditions they had received, whether by word or epistle, and commends them to the consoling and sustaining grace of God (2Th 2:15-17). The rest of the epistle consists of expressions of affection to the Thessalonians, and of confidence in them: of prayers on their behalf, and of exhortations and directions suited to the circumstances in which they were placed.

There is the strongest reason for believing that this second epistle was written very soon after the first, and at the same place, viz. Corinth. The internal evidence in favor of the genuineness of this epistle is equally strong with that which attests the first.

Fuente: Popular Cyclopedia Biblical Literature

Thessalonians, Epistles to the

[Thessalo’nians]

Paul on his second missionary journey, accompanied by Silas, visited Thessalonica. The conversion of some Jews, of a great multitude of Greeks, and of many chief women led to an assembly being gathered there. Paul soon left them, hoping to revisit them within a short time, but Satan hindered him. Fearing as to their firmness under persecution, he sent Timothy to confirm and encourage them. He was cheered by the news which Timothy brought of their faith and love, and wrote the First Epistle from Corinth, about A.D. 52, and somewhere about a year after his visit to them. Act 17:1-11. As to date it is the first of Paul’s Epistles.

THE FIRST EPISTLE. This is mainly occupied with the development and direction of living affections in the newly converted saints to whom Paul wrote. The coming of the Lord has a place of much importance in it, being mentioned in every chapter. The address is to”the church of the Thessalonians which is in God the Father and in the Lord Jesus Christ.” The apostle gives thanks in respect of their faith, love, and hope, which gave evidence of their election of God. Their faith God-ward had been noised abroad, indeed they were ensamples, or models, to all around. They had turned from idols to serve the living and true God; and they waited for His Son from heaven, even Jesus, their deliverer from coming wrath.

1 Thess. 2. The apostle reminds them that though persecuted at Philippi, he had nevertheless been bold to preach the gospel to them. He had been gentle with them as a nurse with her children, and willing to impart even his life also. He recalls how blamelessly he had walked before them, and that he had preached in such a way that they had received his testimony as the word of God, which wrought in them effectually so that they were in consequence persecuted by the heathen, as the saints in Judaea had been by the Jews, who had killed the Lord Jesus. Greatly desiring to see them, Paul could assure the Thessalonian saints that they would be his joy and crown of boasting before the Lord Jesus at His coming. This is the second allusion in the epistle to this event, and goes further than that in 1Th 1:10. Here the blessedness of the saints being gathered together is referred to.

1 Thess. 3. Paul, in his anxiety for them, had sent Timothy to confirm and encourage them, and was greatly relieved by the news which Timothy brought of their faith and love, saying “now we live if ye stand firm in the Lord.” He prays for them that their love might abound, and their hearts be kept unblamable in holiness before their God and Father at the coming of the Lord Jesus with all His saints. Here the ‘appearing’ of the Lord is spoken of, when it will be shown who are unblamable. The affections of the saints one to another, and the holiness inseparable therefrom, are connected with the third mention of the Lord’s return, where it is noted that He comes with all His saints: cf. 1Th 1:10; 1Th 2:19-20.

1 Thess. 4. Exhortations are given as to walk. Fornication (so common among the heathen) was especially to be guarded against. 1Th 4:6 refers to the same subject as touching the wife of a brother. They were also to attend to their own business and to work , walking in good repute towards those without: a needed exhortation, as we see by 2Th 3:11-12.

In 1Th 4:13-18 a difficulty is solved, into which the Thessalonians had fallen in regard to those of their number who had fallen asleep. The Lord’s return to reign was so truly part of their faith, that they thought that those who had died had lost the blessings of the kingdom, being ignorant of the details which are now given them by the word of the Lord. Here we learn that at the Lord’s coming, with an assembling shout, the dead in Christ shall rise first, and then, in company with those saints who are alive, they will be caught away in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air, prior to coming with Him in glory. They were to encourage one another with those words.

It is this which is often called the Rapture, or catching away of the saints, and it is the proper hope of the church. Christ coming for His saints is distinct from His coming with His saints, as in 1Th 3:13 and 1Th 4:14. If 1Th 4:15-18 be read as a parenthesis, verse 14, which speaks of God bringing with Jesus those who have slept through Him, is linked with chapter 5.

1 Thess. 5. The day of the Lord here spoken of, which is connected with judgement on man, is quite distinct from the Rapture. The language changes from ‘we’ to ‘they’ and ‘them.’ The day of the Lord will come upon the world as a thief in the night, whereas the saints are of the day and sons of light. They are exhorted therefore to watch and be sober, and to put on the breastplate of faith and love, and for a helmet the hope of salvation. They were not called to wrath (cf. 1Th 1:10), but to obtain salvation whether alive or sleeping. Exhortations follow and greetings close the epistle.

THE SECOND EPISTLE. Silvanus, or Silas, being with Paul when this epistle was written, leads to the conclusion that it, as well as the First Epistle, was sent from Corinth during the eighteen months that Paul abode there, Act 18:11; its date may be A.D. 52 or 53.

There is evidence in this epistle that the minds of the saints had been disturbed, apparently by a feigned letter or message from Paul, saying that the day of the Lord was present: this supposition may have been strengthened by the persecution they were passing through. Paul sets them right as to this. Christians often misinterpret this Second Epistle, and think that Paul was showing the Thessalonians that they were wrong in expecting the Lord. This mistake is made because the distinction is not seen between the Lord coming for His saints (which is the Christian’s proper hope, and is intended to give them the character of a waiting people), and the day of the Lord which is connected with judgement: cf. Isa 13:6-13; Joel 2; Amo 5:18-20. The Thessalonians were right in expecting the former, but were wrong in thinking that the day of the Lord was (not ‘at hand,’ but) ‘present,’ as 2Th 2:2 should read, as may be seen by the translation of the same word () in Rom 8:38; 1Co 3:22.

After the introduction the apostle thanks God for the growth of their faith and love, but he does not add hope here, as in the First Epistle, for their hope had received a check. Their patience and faith in tribulation were a token that they were counted worthy of the kingdom of God, for which they also suffered. God would punish those who troubled them. He will take vengeance on those who know not God, and on those who have not obeyed the gospel.

2 Thess. 2. The apostle proves that the day of Christ could not be present, because 1 , the Lord had not come, and they had not been gathered to Him, as explained in the First Epistle; and 2 , the Antichrist had not been revealed, the man of sin, the son of perdition: the one whom the Lord will, when He returns, consume “with the brightness of his coming.”

Though the Antichrist will be only a man, he will exalt himself against all that is called God, and will sit down in the temple of God, showing himself that he is God: cf. Rev 13:11-18, and Dan 11:36-37. The mystery of lawlessness was already at work, but its full development was hindered, doubtless by the existing order of government and the presence of the Holy Spirit as a divine Person on the earth. When He is gone and the church with Him, the lawless one will be fully revealed as after the working of Satan, with miracles and wonders and unrighteous deceit in them that perish, who would not receive the love of the truth that they might be saved. “God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie: that they all might be judged who believed not the truth, but had pleasure in unrighteousness.” Paul gives thanks for the Thessalonians, for God had chosen them to salvation. He prays that their hearts might be encouraged.

2 Thess. 3. The apostle asks for their prayers. He had confidence that the Lord would establish and keep them. They were to withdraw from every brother who walked disorderly, and did not obey the apostolic injunctions. He commands the disorderly to work, so as to eat their own bread. The apostle commends them to the Lord of peace to give them peace always by all means, and that He might be with them. The benediction closes the epistle.

Fuente: Concise Bible Dictionary