Sermon Tone Analysis

Andrew Hodge                                                                                                         7th July 2007

 

 

New Testament Survey NTES 111

 

 

Seminar 14

 

 

The Thessalonian Epistles

 

 

/1 and 2 Thessalonians/

Irving L. Jensen /Jensen//’s Survey of the New Testament /1981, Moody Press, Chicago Ch 17

/Libronix DLS/

Guthrie, Donald  /New Testament Introduction  /Apollos, Leicester, England 4th Ed  1990 Ch 15

/Thompson// Chain// Reference Bible/  Fifth Improved Edition B.B.Kirkbride Bible Co., Inc.

Indianapolis, Indiana 1988

 

 

/Review Paul’s ministry to the Thessalonian churches:/

/            /After visiting Philippi for a necessarily short time on his second missionary journey, Paul continues west along the Egnatian Way to the next big European city, Thessalonica, the capital of the Roman province of Macedonia.

It is not clear from scripture how long Paul and his party were in Philippi, but it may have been even shorter than he spent in Thessalonica - only three Sabbath days (Acts 17:2).

The Holy Spirit was surely shaking and moving!

(see Acts 16:20, 17:5-6, 13, 16-20).

Even though the Athenians were just intensely curious about the Gospel and he moved on to Corinth shortly after harvesting a few souls, Paul’s first roller-coaster through Macedonia and Greece along the Egnatian trade route did not start to settle until he reached Athens after stopping, again for a short time, in Berea (Jensen Map V p 337).

It would appear that Paul used common sense in determining where he should minister and how he should get there; we should remember that common sense is not always how God wants us to do things eg Acts 16:9-12 - Paul is directed away from further common sense ministry in Asia in order to take the Gospel to Europe, without which early Christian history would be very different.

He was able to leave Silas and Timothy in Berea (Acts 17:14), but had to leave swiftly himself in order to avoid an unnecessary confrontation with the Jews who had followed them.

This sequence says a lot about the power of Paul’s ministry in all these cities, and about the way he led his group, and about the means God used to kick-start the Gospel in Europe.

In spite of the brief exposure to a radical new doctrine, the Europeans embraced it with the power and grace of God such that for the Thessalonians (1 Thessalonians 1:6-8) “… ye became followers of us, and of the Lord, having received the word in much affliction, with joy of the Holy Ghost: \\ 7 So that ye were ensamples to all that believe in Macedonia and Achaia.

\\ 8 For from you sounded out the word of the Lord not only in Macedonia and Achaia, but also in every place your faith to God-ward is spread abroad; so that we need not to speak any thing.”[1]

It is remarkable that so much was achieved in such a short time - not so much the short time spent by Paul in these places, but the short time (two years 50 to 52 AD? see below) between visiting them and writing this letter, during which the Holy Spirit was able to use these European congregations to His glory.

It also makes one wonder what kind of experiences were so rapidly spread abroad.

Bad news travels the fastest and if the persecutions in Rome were bad, one wonders what the “much affliction” the Thessalonians had to put up with (1 Thessalonians 1:6, 2:14; 2 Thessalonians 1:4-7, 11-12).

Note that the Thessalonians already believed that the ‘day of the Lord’ had come because of the tribulations they had experienced.

Given the favourite evil topics of today’s media it seems unlikely that a recently formed radical group doing good would hit the international news.

I am sceptical that Jensen’s “it’s fame was widespread because of the miraculous transformation of lives from idolatry to Christianity” (p 350) is entirely correct.

The same phenomenon would have occurred in Philippi, Corinth, Athens and Ephesus but is not expressly mentioned as a characteristic of any of those early church bodies.

I think something recognised as universally bad by the unsaved was happening to the saints in Thessalonica, greater than just a single recorded episode of mob violence stirred up by disaffected Jews (Acts 17:5-9, 13).

Discuss.

As was his habit, Paul was eager to share the Gospel in the local synagogue on the first Sabbath he was in Thessalonica (Acts 17:2), reasoning with them out of the scriptures ie he used the existing Word of God to state his case.

As there was a significant Jewish population amongst the Greeks and Romans in the city and possibly more than one synagogue (Acts 17:5), the average Jew probably knew much about the OT (or at the very least were well versed in Jewish customs and practices).

They had to compete against Roman emperor-worship and the local idolatries, compounded by the proximity of Mount Olympus, the birthplace of the Grecian gods.

/ /

/Discuss the Date, Purpose and Authenticity of the two Epistles:/

            Paul identifies himself as the writer by name in 1 Thessalonians 1:1 and 2:18, and in 2 Thessalonians 1:1 and 3:17.

Assuming the reader accepts that “all scripture is given by inspiration of God” and that both Letters to the Thessalonians are scripture, then God is saying both Letters are written by Paul.

The designation “apostle” does not occur in either Letter (with the possible exception of 1 Thessalonians 2:6), nor in Philippians or Philemon.

None of these books are strongly anti-heretical or condemnatory and therefore do not need to carry an apostle’s “weight”.

All of Paul’s other NT books introduce him as an apostle so that he establishes his authority to speak up front (Romans, 1&2 Corinthians, Galatians, Ephesians, Colossians, 1&2 Timothy and Titus).

Discuss

Jensen states that “It was from (Corinth) that Paul wrote both of the Thessalonian letters” (p 348), quoting Acts 18:1, 11, but neither of these verses establish that Paul wrote to the Thessalonians from Corinth, merely that Paul was in Corinth at an appropriate time.

The redactor-postscript to each of these letters states “written from Athens”.

Is one right or are they both wrong?

Which is authentic?

Corinth might have been assumed on the basis that both the Thessalonian letters include Timothy and Silas in the greeting, and these two did not rejoin Paul until after he had left Athens for Corinth (Acts 18:5).

On the other hand, Paul was expecting them to join him any day in Athens (Acts 17:15) and he may have written in anticipation of this, particularly including them because they were both well known to the Thessalonians.

It might be thought that Paul was in Athens too short a time to write to Thessalonica, which may be an argument for 2 Thessalonians, but not necessarily for the first letter.

It might also be thought that the “we” of 1 Thessalonians 3:1 was Paul + Timothy and that therefore the first letter was written from Athens after Paul sent Timothy to Thessalonica (3:2) who therefore had to return to Athens before the first Letter could be written.

Guthrie’s contribution concerning the movements of Timothy and Silas is: “which suggests that they had carried out a journey from Athens to Macedonia and back to Corinth which Acts does not record”.[2]  Discuss

The date of writing of both Letters is during the second missionary journey - AD 49-52.

Jensen places it at about 52 AD (and Galatians about 48 AD.

Footnote 5 p 351 states that ‘If Galatians was not the first to be written, as many hold, then the Thessalonian letters were Paul’s first inspired writings’).

From the generally accepted chronology Paul had been saved for 15 years by 48 AD and had conducted one missionary journey before writing his first Letter accepted as being canonical.

Guthrie states: “The date of this epistle may be fixed with a fair degree of precision since it falls within Paul’s period at Corinth, which provides us with one of the most certain contacts with secular chronology in the proconsulate of Gallio.”[3]

He then goes on to establish a date for the proconsulate of Gallio, but gives no data why Paul should have written to the Thessalonians at this time or from this place.

The first Letter to the Thessalonians was occasioned by his sending Timothy from Athens to find out how they were getting along after their first flying visit (1 Thessalonians 3:1-5).

Paul was Satanically hindered (by what or whom?

Discuss) more than once from going himself (1 Thessalonians 2:17-18).

Timothy returns (to which city? Athens or Corinth?) reporting to Paul on their generally healthy spiritual state, which Paul receives with joy and comfort, and is stimulated to write to them and to pray for them (1 Thessalonians 3:10).

Jensen lists four reasons why Paul wrote the first letter (p 351):

·         To commend the Christians for their faith and generosity (3:6)

·         To expose sins (eg fornication 4:3; idleness 4:11) and to correct misunderstandings about the second coming of Christ (4:13-17)

·         To encourage the new Christians in their faith (4:1-12)

·         To answer false charges made against Paul.

Possibly:

#.

Paul was just out to make money (replied to in 2:3, 9, 10)

#.

Paul was a flatterer, his ministry purely for self-gratification (replied to in 2:4-6)

#.

Paul was afraid to ever show his face in Thessalonica again (replied to in 2:17-20)

It should be noted that the explanatory passages on the second coming are

interspersed with doctrines regarding the proper conduct of the Christian life, rather than being an end in itself.

The second coming was a doctrine in place from the very beginning of the Church (eg James 5:8 written 45 AD) and is fundamental to Christian hope and practice.

The book of James was addressed “to the twelve tribes scattered abroad” (James 1:1) and by the time of Paul’s writing to the Thessalonians, had had about seven years to circulate among the scattered Jews in the known world, possibly well known to the Jewish population in Thessalonica.

Guthrie mentions critics who cast doubt on the authenticity of 1 Thessalonians on the ground of style, Pauline eschatology, historical setting, Paul’s character, and a supposition that it is the compilation of up to four non-existent letters also written by Paul.[4]

Regarding authenticity, Wanamaker makes the comment: “The shift to the first person singular in the verb ἐνορκίζω (“I adjure”) is unexpected, but probably means that Paul took over writing the letter from the amanuensis to whom he had been dictating or who was writing the letter on Paul’s behalf.

This corresponds to 2 Thes.

3:17, where Paul tells his readers that it is his practice to write the final greetings in his own hand as a sign of authenticity.

The original readers would of course have immediately noted the change in handwriting, if this suggestion is correct, and would presumably have recognized it as Paul’s since elsewhere the apostle seems to imply that his script was unusual (Gal.

6:11).”[5]

The second Letter to the Thessalonians was apparently written a few months

after the first (52 AD) as “a second prescription for the same case, made after discovering that some certain stubborn symptoms had not yielded to the first treatment”.

1a In my view this is more accurate (although the second letter is much more than this) than claiming, as does Guthrie[6] that the second letter was written to counteract the misapprehensions caused by the first.

The existence of 2 Thessalonians is strong evidence that 1 Thessalonians is authentic.

1a R.H.Walker /The Second Epistle of Paul the Apostle to the Thessalonians /in /The International Standard Bible Encyclopedia / G.W.Bromiley General Editor, Fully Revised 1988, William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company  Grand Rapids, Michigan *V*, 2968 quoted in Irving L. Jensen /Jensen//’s Survey of the New Testament /1981, Moody Press, Chicago footnote 10 p 361

 

Guthrie states his view regarding 2 Thessalonians: “Many modern scholars are disinclined to regard this epistle as authentic, but there are still those who defend it.”2,[7]

He supports this with an impressive bibliography (see below) but others more

 

qualified than he or his compatriots have certified this Book as being entirely authentic - the early Christians who naturally included it in their canon.

Guthrie even includes a three page discussion of whether 2 Thessalonians was written before 1 Thessalonians, and concludes: “But the evidence as a whole is more in favour of the traditional order than the reverse.”[8]

Fancy that.

There is no doubt that there is an emphasis in the first letter on the second coming of Christ, which Paul had personally preached and accuses them of forgetting (2 Thessalonians 2:5).

The second coming (rapture and revelation) is mentioned or enlarged upon in each of the five chapters of the first letter (1 Thessalonians 1:10, 2:19, 3:13, 4:13-17, 5:1-7, 9-10, 23).

In a sense, the need to add to the doctrine of the second coming in the second letter was either Paul’s own fault for raising their expectations that the second coming was so imminent that they believed that it might have already occurred, or the Thessalonians’ fault that they had not understood the spiritual basis on which Paul had preached about the second coming (ie live your Christian lives to the full, now, today, in the expectation that the Lord will return at any moment).

Or a combination of both.

Perhaps the Thessalonians thought that if the day of the Lord had already arrived (the Revelation) because of their persecutions, then what about the Rapture that Paul had preached and written about?

Had they missed it?

Was Paul still there or had he been snatched away already?

NB This is a strong argument for Pauline authorship ie if someone had written it after Paul had died, would they have expected Paul to rapidly rise from the dead if the /parousia /was so imminent?

It is not clear from 2 Thessalonians how Paul came to know about the wrong thinking of the congregation at Thessalonica.

It is assumed by Jensen that another visitor to Thessalonica reported back to Paul in Corinth (p 361).

Reading somewhat between the lines, the Thessalonians had believed that the ‘day of the Lord’ had already come, the end of all things was upon them, those of their saved brethren who had already died in the short interim had missed out on the wonderful events of the Coming, and in anticipation of being raptured, those who were still alive had quit work and were idle.

Paul also knew that they had received a forged letter - purportedly from Paul - saying that ‘the day of Christ is at hand’ (2:2).

Jensen states that “the two epistles differ mainly over which phase of the Lord’s return is in view.