3:1 The rest. Be praying, brothers [and sisters] for us so that the word of the Lord might run and be glorified as also [it did] toward you 2. and in order that we might be rescued from the wicked and evil people...
Chapter 3 begins the end of the letter. Philippians 3:1 also begins with this expression, "the rest." If we are correct that 2 Thessalonians comes at the end of Paul's ministry, then Philippians would already be written by the time of 2 Thessalonians. In any case, it is a key indicator of the literary structure of the letter.
These verses seem to indicate that Paul, Silas, and Timothy are under significant pressure at the time of writing. This would certainly be true if Paul were in Rome facing his final hour. If the Jewish War is the context, then all Jews, including Jewish Christians, would be feeling the tremendous weight of the Roman empire on their neck. It is a weight of impending doom, like history is headed toward an inevitable conclusion and there is nothing you can do about it. The chess pieces are in play. The fate is sure. Only God's intervention could change the destination.
Pray. That's the only thing to do. Paul faced Roman authority several times. A writing called 1 Clement suggests he was jailed seven times and exiled once (1 Clem. 5). No action on his part, perhaps not even apostasy, would have saved him at his final appearance. Similarly, the war with Rome could only end in significant loss once it had reached a certain point.
We Christians sometimes find ourselves as the by-standers in world machinations. The nations and empires of which we are part go to war. Evil leaders oppress their own people or outsiders. We did not choose the conflicts between the parties fighting through our homes and cities. Still we can find ourselves run over in the conflict.
Accordingly, Paul, Silas, and Timothy pray for rescue, if it would be God's will. We can pray at any time, knowing that God has the power to stop the world. He often does not. He often reserves his salvation and judgment for another time. Our ultimate salvation is what is important far more than our immediate rescue.
The proclamation of the good news continues regardless of world events or personal tragedy. The word of the Lord continues forth. The reception of the good news brings glory to God. The glory of God is the real story, the real significance, despite the world story and what the world thinks is important.
For not all have faith. 3. But the Lord is faithful, who will strengthen you and will guard [you] from the evil [one].
There is a contrast between the Lord, who keeps faith with his people, and those who would persecute Christians, who do not have faith. Two different nuances of words relating to faith are used. The first refers to those who do not trust in Christ. They have not committed or given their allegiance to him as Lord.
By contrast, the Lord is faithful. The Lord is committed to us. Lord here probably refers to Jesus the Lord rather than God the father. Verse 11 below refers to the "Lord Jesus Christ" as does 2 Thessalonians throughout, including just a few verses previous (2:16). There is no indication that Paul is blurring Jesus the Lord with Yahweh as Lord in this letter. [1]
1 Corinthians 10:13 gives us a similar confidence from God--"God is faithful, who will not allow you to be tested above what you are able but will make with the temptation also the escape so you are able to endure it." 2 Thessalonians 3:3 puts this principle in terms of strength and protection. Jesus will both strengthen you in the time of trial and guard you from the forces of evil, especially from the Devil, the evil one.
4. And we have been persuaded in the Lord about you (pl) that what we are commanding both you are doing and you will do.
It is very motivating when someone believes in you, especially someone whose opinion matters to you. It is instructional to those who are in leadership. Fear does motivate, but you will get much greater and long lasting results if you provide positive inspiration. Paul, Silas, and Timothy are instructing the Thessalonians, and there is some corrective in their instructions. But they ultimately believe in them, that they will do it even though Paul is not physically present with them.
It is good to remind ourselves frequently that the "you" of Scripture is typically plural. In a Western individualist context, it is natural to see the "you" in a passage like this one as me as an individual. But Paul, Silas, and Timothy are addressing an entire congregation--or on the apocalyptic reading, all Christians of that day.
5. And may the Lord direct your hearts into the love of God and into the endurance of the Christ.
A time of persecution and hardship calls for endurance. Paul calls it "the endurance of the Christ." Perhaps Paul is urging us to what is called the imitatio Christi, the "imitation of Christ." This dimension of Jesus is sometimes missed because we so emphasize the divinity of Christ that we do not see him also as an example of what our humanity should be.
Jesus "endured the cross, despising the shame" (Heb. 12:2). This is how the Thessalonians must face the trials that may come. This is the mindset of those who love God. They will endure to the end.
The expression, "love of God," is a little ambiguous. It can refer to a love for God, God's love for us, a type of love, and there are even more possible meanings. Since the verse seems to be a call to a certain kind of action, it seems most likely that Paul is urging them to behave in accordance with a love for God, namely, to endure. Such action requires God's power. Paul prays for God's "direction" to take them down this path.
Idleness
6. Now we command you, brothers [and sisters] in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ to stay away from every brother [or sister] walking idly and not according to the tradition that they received from us.
1 Thessalonians 5:14 briefly addressed those who are "idle," who do not contribute to their families and community with work. It has sometimes been suggested that the Thessalonians were so expectant that the Lord would return at any time that they had stopped working. This hypothesis fits with the idea that some thought that the Day of the Lord had already come (2:2). Why go to work if you think the world as we know it is about to end?
Paul indicates that idleness does not fit with the example he, Silas, and Timothy had left them. We note again that the word tradition seems to suggest a longer relationship with the church than the few weeks of his initial visit. Paul suggests a kind of shaming of them by "staying away." This approach certainly fit with the honor-shame world in which Paul lived.
Shaming would not have the same effect in Western culture because we are largely an individualistic rather than group culture. Shaming comes across as harming, as hateful in the Western world. We would probably deploy other means to reach similar ends. Such means include loving conversation and of course consequences such as those mentioned below.
7. For you yourselves know how it is necessary to imitate us, because we have not been idle among you, 8. nor did we eat bread for free from someone but by work and labor, both night and day, working in order that we might not be a burden to someone among you.
Paul uses himself, Silas, and Timothy as examples. It is significant to note that Paul regularly told his churches to follow his example (e.g., 1 Cor. 4:16). He did not view himself as a moral failure but as a moral example, empowered by the Holy Spirit.
In this particular instance, he uses his work practices as an example. Again, they were not long in Thessalonica on his first visit, but we do not know for certain whether he had other stays of greater length. Acts 20:2 and 2 Corinthians 2:13 indicate that Paul did spend at least one more time in Macedonia, but Acts does not give us a complete account of Paul's movements.
Either way, we know from places like Acts 18:3 and 1 Corinthians 4:12 that Paul worked with his own hands at tentmaking in order to support his own ministry rather than to draw on the support of the churches where he was at, although he would take support from other churches (cf. Phil. 4:16). [2] He likely used this work as an opportunity to share the good news with Gentiles in the marketplace.
This approach kept Paul and his co-workers from the informal strings of patronage. In the ancient world, receiving gifts (charismata) created informal obligations. It is hard enough to preach to someone who is paying for your livelihood. In Paul's world, it would have been deeply insulting to correct your patron. By working with his own hands, Paul was free to speak the word of God unhindered.
9. Not that we do not have authority but in order that we might give ourselves as an example to you that you might imitate us.
If 2 Thessalonians came at the end of Paul's ministry, then we are hearing echoes of his previous letters. Here we are reminded of what Paul told the Corinthians in 1 Corinthians 9:8-14. Those served by ministers like Paul should materially support their ministers as they "tread the grain" (1 Cor. 9:9). So he would have the authority to receive from those churches for whom he works, but he did not invoke it.
Again, he urges his churches to follow his example. In Philippians 4:11, he tells the Philippians that he has learned to be content regardless of his circumstances. Gifts he received from them did not obligate him to them but were rather their sacrifices to God (Phil. 4:18). He did not live off such gifts but supported himself.
10. For even when we were with you we commanded you this, that if someone is not willing to work, do not let them eat.
This verse is the infamous Protestant Work Ethic, made famous in America by Captain John Smith in the Jamestown settlement. According to the lore, some of those in the settlement were not particularly work brittle. In England, they were used to a softer, more privileged life. But Jamestown was in serious trouble, with starvation, sickness, and attack endangering it. It was "all hands on deck" to survive.
There is certainly an important principle here. It is not right for those who can contribute to do nothing while others do all the work for them. But we should be careful not to drive a cultural truck through the verse. For example, this principle could be applied to rich capitalists and their families in the late 1800s living off the hard labor of workers in their factories. It could be applied to slave owners in the antebellum South who sat drinking mint julip while their slaves toiled in the sun picking cotton.
Similarly, it is blind to think that the economic systems of a society do not channel people in particular directions. Generational poverty is a kind of enslavement that makes it difficult for a person to know how to support themselves by work, let alone to have the motivation to pursue it. Western individualism can blind the dominant culture from the encumbrances of people growing up and living under quite different conditions. One can assume an individual freedom and power to act that simply does not exist in the same way for people in different circumstances.
In such cases the structures of society need to be addressed in order to create a playing field where the Protestant work ethic is actually attainable. In the meantime, it would contradict an even stronger strand of the Gospels and New Testament to use this verse to undermine the gospel as good news for the poor. This verse is clearly not directed at the poor to whom Jesus ministered. It is directed at the able-bodied and ably-situated to contribute.
11. For we hear some [are] walking among you idly, doing no work but being busybodies. 12. And to such ones we command and exhort in the Lord Jesus Christ so that, working in quietness, they might eat their own bread. 13. But you, brothers [and sisters], do not tire of doing good.
1. A "busybody" is someone who, rather than contributing in a positive way, goes around causing problems. The concept will be familiar to parents and teachers. If someone does not have anything to do, they may very get into trouble. You may have heard the saying, "Idle hands are the Devil's workshop."
We do not know if an expectation of Christ's immanent return played any role in idleness in Thessalonica. As we mentioned above, few people are going to go to work if you know the world is going to end that day. From the book of Acts, it seems likely that the church at least tried to take care of its own. The weekly communion meal itself was something to count on. It is at least possible that some people grew to depend on the church for their subsistence rather than taking care of themselves.
Millenarian groups may especially face such dynamics. There was such a group in Chicago around the year 1900. [3] They quit their normal jobs and sold their businesses to live together both in the belief that Jesus would soon return and following the model of Acts 2. Yet the Lord did not come back, and since they were in the city rather than the country where they might farm, they could not feed themselves except by continuing to take in new estates and donations.
Paul suggests that those who are able to work and can provide for themselves should. Again, this basic concept must be developed within an understanding of culture and societal dynamics at work on particular segments of society. But the basic principle is fair and just. It is a principle that is found in the Genesis story before the Fall, where Adam and Eve are caretakers of the Garden of Eden. Work is not a product of sin but part of God's cosmic design.
2. Doing good suggests that we do not merely work for our own benefit but for the benefit of others as well. Work thus fits within both capitalistic and communitarian contexts. In a communitarian context, the community works for their mutual good, such as in some of the utopian communities of the American 1800s like the Shakers and community in Oneida, New York.
A philosophy known as "egoism" would suggest that it is immoral to work for the good of others. The philosopher Ayn Rand even wrote a book called, The Virtue of Selfishness. But this is not a Christian perspective. Giving to others from the abundance of our own work fits deeply with the New Testament.
In 2 Corinthians 8:14-15 Paul tells the Corinthians that when they have an abundance beyond their needs, they should share it with other communities in the church that are lacking. Then when they are in need and the other communities are blessed with over-abundance, they will share with them.
Paul did not anticipate a world where Christians would have the level of abundance that many in the American church have. Most people worked to receive a daily wage that was just about enough to provide for their family. Any abundance beyond subsistence could then be shared with others in need.
John Wesley put it this way: "Earn all you can. Save all you can. Give all you can." By "save all you can" he did not mean to store it up in the stock market or a savings account. He meant to buy the generic rather than name brand so you "save" money. So while Wesley earned lots of money in his life from his books and such, he gave almost all of it away and lived frugally.
14. And if someone does not obey our word through [this] letter, take note of this [person], not to associate with him in order that he might be ashamed. 15 And do not consider [them] as an enemy, but warn [them] as a brother [or sister].
The motivational technique of shaming appears here again. We have argued above that this approach probably would not have similar effective in the Western individualist world as it did in Paul's collectivist, group culture. For one, shaming makes enemies in our world. It translates as hateful and hostile in our world.
We can thus warn others in other ways in our culture. There is of course the discipline of not giving, the "love must be tough" tactic. We must be careful in so doing, however, for it is not God's will for anyone to starve and those who practice "tough love" can sometimes come across as arrogant and condescending. Be sure that person will win few to Christ but more likely drive them away.
Still, Paul, Silas, and Timothy believed in church discipline. This letter held and authority. There was an implication of withholding upon disobedience. So while we must be incredibly careful not to think ourselves superior to those we try to "help," one can discipline with sincere love.
Again, extreme caution is necessary. For example, one form of racism is "benevolent" racism. This is when a person "gives" to someone from another race with an air of superiority. "Aren't I wonderful for helping this poor person?" Missionaries of the past sometimes fell into this trap of "helping" people in other cultures with an implied sense of their own greatness and cultural dominance.
Closing Benediction
16. May the Lord of peace himself give to you peace always in every way. The Lord [be] with you all.
We now reach the letter conclusion. Paul blesses the Thessalonians with a benediction wishing them peace. Jesus is called the "Lord of peace." Indeed, peace is one of the greatest gifts that God gives his people and, I would argue, is God's most frequent voice into our lives. Many claim to receive other revelations and directions and no doubt many do, but the peace of the Lord is the baseline of God's presence in our lives.
Not all will feel this peace at all times. Many things can scream over the quietness of God's peace. Sometimes our past, sometimes our body chemistry, sometimes the busyness of life will crowd it out. But the peace is the surest presence of God. "Be still and know that I am God" (Ps. 46:10).
17. The greeting with my own hand, of Paul, which is a sign in every letter. So I write. 18. The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ be with you all.
This verse strongly indicates that Paul is the authorial voice of 2 Thessalonians. It provides his signature, against which other letters can be validated. Even if the rest of the letter had been written by a secretary--a common practice--Paul would take the stylus and write his name in his own hand here. From Galatians, it might have been a known Pauline practice to write something in his own hand at the end of the letter (cf. Gal. 6:11).
We have speculated whether Silas might have been the primary author of 2 Thessalonians. This verse is a strong argument against that theory. However, authorship in the ancient world was more than simply who literally put ink to papyrus. A secretary could also write the edited thoughts of someone (cf. Rom. 16:22). The author was the "authority," the voice behind the words more than the person who put the words onto papyrus. It would be highly speculative, but we could at least imagine a scenario where Silas or Timothy was saying, "This is the authentic voice of Paul, not any other letter in his name you might see."
The closing is Paul's customary closing in which he wishes Christ's grace on the audience. Christ's grace is Christ's favor. It is of course "unmerited" in the sense that we do not earn it or deserve it. Christ's grace are his acts of love toward us, reflecting his goodness to his merit. This grace is for all who trust in him. If 2 Thessalonians were written narrowly to the Thessalonians, then it is a wish of God's grace on that communion, on that house church or collection of house churches. If 2 Thessalonians is an "apocalyptic letter," then it is a wish of God's grace on all believers who might read this letter, including ourselves!
[1] Quite possibly, reference to Jesus as Lord in the earliest church derived from Psalm 110:1--"The LORD said to my Lord, 'Sit at my right hand'..." In Hebrew, the two Lords are clearly distinguished: Yahweh and the anointed king. Paul rarely blurs the two uses together, although he can (Rom. 10:13; Phil. 2:11).
[2] See also 1 Corinthians 9:12, 15.
[3] The group, affectionately called the "holy jumpers," ended up in Waukesha, Wisconsin. An account of their story is found in William Kostlevy, Holy Jumpers: Evangelicals and Radicals in Progressive Era America (Oxford: Oxford University, 2010).
Showing posts with label 2 Thessalonians. Show all posts
Showing posts with label 2 Thessalonians. Show all posts
Saturday, October 10, 2020
Wednesday, September 30, 2020
2 Thessalonians 2 (Explanatory Notes)
Finishing up some loose ends. See explanatory notes on 2 Thessalonians 1 here.
______________________
2:1 And I ask you, brothers [and sisters] about the arrival of our Lord Jesus Christ and our gathering to him...
Here Paul returns to language of the parousia or "arrival" of Jesus back to earth. Our first impression is that we are talking about the second coming, the return of Christ to earth to establish the kingdom of God on earth fully. Our gathering to him could thus either mean the gathering of scattered believers around the world to Jerusalem as the kingdom's center.
It could also refer to our gathering in the air that was mentioned in 1 Thessalonians 4:17. As we said there, the meeting in the air is probably not to go off to heaven but a meeting to return to the earth as the judgment commences. The picture is that of going out to the edge of a city in order to re-enter with the king.
2. ... that you not be quickly shaken in mind nor to be alarmed, neither through a spirit or word nor letter as [if it is] through us as [if] the Day of the Lord has come. 3. Do not let someone deceive you in any way.
This is a curious statement. How could one have any questions about whether the Day of the Lord had truly come? The Day of the Lord here seems to be the Day of Judgment. It is a whole world event that commences with the return of Christ from heaven, as mentioned in 1 Thessalonians 4.
One possibility is of course a significant lack of knowledge on the part of the Thessalonians. The Thessalonians may not have understood how it was all supposed to happen. At this point some scholars have wondered if 2 Thessalonians were written before 1 Thessalonians, although we have not concluded in that direction.
They are undergoing persecution. 1 Peter 4:17 speaks of judgment beginning with the household of God before it moved on to the world at large. Perhaps they were interpreting their persecution as the beginning of the final judgment.
Paul, Silas, and Timothy mention a "spirit or word or letter" influencing them. This could indicate some varied teaching in the church at the time. Were there false letters circulating, claiming to be from Paul? The time when Paul was at Corinth seems pretty early in the story of the church for that to be happening. Paul hadn't even begun his letter-writing ministry.
As we mentioned in the introduction, this comment is one data point that has led us to wonder whether 2 Thessalonians could have been written not at the beginning but at the end of Paul's ministry or by Silas in the throes of the Jewish War. In the late 60s, Paul's letter-writing ministry was better known, and so it would make more sense for there to be letters incorrectly claiming to represent his voice.
If Paul or Silas were writing apocalyptically, they would be picturing a letter written to the Thessalonians almost twenty years prior. They would be writing about the circumstances of their own day during the Jewish War through the lens of the letter to the Thessalonians several years before.
For [the Day will not come] unless the falling away should come first and the man of lawlessness should be revealed, the son of destruction, 4. the one who opposes and exalts himself above everything called God or an object of worship so that he sits in the temple of God, claiming that he himself is God.
1. The reference to a "falling away" (apostasia) or "rebellion" is quite ambiguous from where we sit today. It is very common to take it in relation to events that have not yet happened and will happen still in the future. On the one hand, this interpretation makes sense because the ultimate Day of the Lord has not yet happened.
On the other hand, verse 4 pushes us toward thinking Paul or Silas are talking about events prior to the destruction of the temple in AD70. Surely the temple that would come to any first century audience's mind was the temple standing then in Jerusalem. So our first attempt is to find something in Paul's day to which this event might relate. Certainly God will fulfill this Scripture however he wishes. But the text says nothing about a rebuilt temple in some distant future--the New Testament nowhere speaks of such a thing. The most likely referent is the temple about which the Thessalonians or any reader would immediately think.
So was this rebellion to be a falling away within the church, a rebellion within Judaism, or a rebellion against the church or Judaism? Certainly if a Jew set himself up in the temple, that would be a falling away from the faith of Israel. In that scenario, the man of lawlessness would be a Jew that rebelled against true Judaism and set himself in the temple as God. However, we have no evidence of anything of this sort having happened prior to the temple's destruction. It is hard even to imagine. Nevertheless, there is imagery both here and in other places suggesting there were false messiahs during the time of the Jewish War (e.g., Mark 13:5-6).
Was there a falling away within the church? Certainly we have no evidence of a Christian Jew (or otherwise) wanting to set himself up in the temple as God. It is hard for us to imagine a falling way within the church that correlated with someone trying to set themselves up in the temple as God.
The most likely rebellion in view is thus the Jewish War, a Jewish rebellion against the Romans that started in AD66 and more or less ended with the destruction of Jerusalem in AD70. We do not have good evidence about how the early Christians viewed this war. In Mark 13:14, Jesus urges his followers to flee Jerusalem before the temple is desecrated, suggesting that most were in that undesirable category of potential collateral damage.
There is some reason to believe that many in the early church did not think rebellion was the appropriate response to Rome. [1] Certainly the Gospels would indicate this was Jesus' approach (e.g., Matt. 5:41). 1 Peter also, which has overtones of Roman oppression (5:13) still urges submission to the emperor and Roman governors (2:13-14). The "rebellion" could thus imply Christian disapproval of the Jewish rebellion against Rome.
Of course the fulfillment of prophesy is often unexpected. We are not in a position to say whether some future time will see the temple rebuilt again and that these events will play out again. We can say that Christians have no need for a temple, for Jesus has offered the sacrifice to end all sacrifices (Heb. 10:14). The veil to the Most Holy Places has been torn in two (Mark 15:38). There will be no temple in the New Jerusalem (Rev. 21:22). God would not approve of any rebuilt temple.
2. The mention of the "temple of God" seems an interpretive key. There is no hint of metaphor here, especially since Paul and Silas are writing about world events. 1 Corinthians does use temple in a metaphorical way in reference to a local church assembly (1 Cor. 3:16), but the Day of the Lord has a global scope rather than a local one.
Once again, the most straightforward way to take the temple here is in reference to the actual temple, which stood until AD70. [2] Here is a strong indication that the temple was still standing at the time of writing. Nothing is said about a rebuilt temple in the future. Nothing is even said about the temple's destruction. For these reasons, we can presumably date 2 Thessalonians with some certainty to the time before the temple was destroyed.
There are certainly several instances in the Jewish history of the time where pagans had either defiled the temple or tried to defile it. Antiochus Epiphanes, in 167BC, had ordered the temple's defilement. This is what the abomination of desolation in Daniel 11:31 referred to originally. These are images 2 Thessalonians 2:4 would surely bring to mind.
In 63BC, the Roman general Pompey took advantage of a dispute between two Maccabean brothers and effectively took control of Israel for Rome. He marched right into the Most Holy Place of the temple, defiling it. In AD38, the Roman Caligula ordered a status of himself set up in the temple. He in effect wanted to set himself up in the temple as God. However, he was assassinated before he could enforce the plan.
It is thus possible that the "man of lawlessness" could be someone who would assault the temple of that day. Clearly the Romans come into view. Nero was certainly a man of lawlessness, and he was alive at the beginning of the Jewish War. Since Nero put Paul to death, we have a narrow window when Paul could have been alive to write this letter at the beginning of the war.
If Silas were writing in Paul's name, then we have the possibility that Vespasian or Titus were in view. Vespasian would begin the assault on Jerusalem, and Titus would finish it. It would increasingly become conventional to consider Roman emperors as gods upon their deaths. There are potentially interesting parallels here with the beast from the sea of Revelation 17:8-11. It seems to be modeled on Nero and his at least symbolic return. [3]
5. Do you not remember that, while still being with you, I used to say these things to you?
There is a certain irony for us in this verse. We were not there. We do not know all the things Paul used to say to them. We wish he had repeated more here.
It is a reminder that this letter was not written to us. Indeed, nothing in the Scriptures was written directly to us or anyone alive today. These books were written directly to people who have been dead for thousands of years. As Scripture these books are for us. They are the story of our people. They are the instructions of our people. Sometimes God does re-purpose the words and speak directly to us, but that was not their first meaning.
On the hypothesis that 2 Thessalonians came late in Paul's ministry or that it was written by Silas, we might call this verse a "tell." That is to say, it would hint that more was going on in this letter than meets the eye. If Silas were using the form of 1 Thessalonians to write about current events, then this verse might reflect that, almost twenty years previous, Paul had taught about the Day of the Lord. If Paul had recently passed, Silas would be writing with irony, since Paul would truly no longer be with them.
The cryptic nature of these comments would make sense if the Roman empire stands somehow in the background. What if Paul were in Rome awaiting execution when these comments were written? As we speculated in the introduction, a need to hide the subversive nature of the letter might explain the "apocalyptic use" of a previous letter.
6. And now you know what is restraining so that he might be revealed in his own time. 7. for the mystery of lawlessness is already working. Only the one holding back now until he should become from [your] midst.
The cryptic comments and allusions continue. The fact that the audience "knows" makes it clear that this letter is not deceptive. It is not a forgery. There is code language here that author and audience know but to which we are not privy.
That which is restraining the Day of the Lord from happening is both a what and a he. It is "what" is restraining, and it is "who" is restraining. The Holy Spirit is a "what" and a "who," since the word for spirit is neuter but the Holy Spirit is a person. Perhaps the Holy Spirit is in view. On the other hand, these verses seem to be saying more than that these things will happen when the Spirit wants.
On the Silas hypothesis, these comments could refer to Paul himself. The sense could be that unleashing of the Roman "man of lawlessness" would not take place until after Paul was removed from the scene. In that case the audience would know that Paul was now removed and thus that the events of the Day of the Lord--understood perhaps as the events of the Jewish War--was free to unfold.
8. And then the lawless [one] will be revealed, whom the Lord will destroy by the Spirit of his mouth and will destroy at the appearance of his arrival.
Perhaps we have a blurring here into the end times, as we also see in passages like Mark 13 and Matthew 24. This is the same man of lawlessness as was mentioned in 2:3, but he seems to be linked to the second coming. While we might relate what has come before to events of Paul and Silas' day, we are now hearing about Christ's return, as 2:1 said.
This is not the only place where we have this tension. It is there in Mark 13 where the topic is the destruction of that temple, the one destroyed in AD70, but the line of thought jumps to Christ's return. We might argue that the destruction of Jerusalem was a "type" of the final days. It is for this reason that interpreters like N. T. Wright have been tempted to take the coming of Christ in more metaphorical ways, such as relating the second coming directly to the destruction of Jerusalem. [4]
On the other hand, because of this blurring, we cannot be sure that the dispensational interpretation will not in the end prove to be correct. Though we should always do our best to interpret Scriptures like these in terms of what they are most likely to have meant in their first century context, God is free to fulfill them in whatever way he wishes.
9. The [other] arrival according to the activity of Satan with all power and signs and false wonders...
Interestingly, the word parousia (arrival) is used both for the arrival of Christ and the arrival of another. Is it the man of lawlessness? The performance of signs and wonders does not clearly fit the Roman emperors of the 60s. Some scholars at this point have mentioned the expectation of some that Nero would return from the dead. Nero committed suicide in AD68. The beast from the sea in Revelation 13 seems to be modeled on Nero, like a revived Nero (e.g., 13:3). Revelation also mentions a "beast from the land" (13:11-15) who is also called a false prophet (e.g., 19:20) and performs wonders.
10. ... and with all deceit of unrighteousness for those who are being destroyed because of they did not receive the love of the truth so that they might be saved.
Those who are being destroyed could be Jews who rebelled against the Romans. They would surely oppose a Roman man of lawlessness. We have at least two possibilities. On the one hand, this statement could refer to individuals who wrongly side with the man of lawlessness. However, on the hypothesis we are pursuing, it would refer to those Jews who wrongly rebelled against the Romans and thereby brought on the man of lawlessness.
On this scenario, if they had followed Christ, they would have escaped like the Christians who fled Jerusalem for Pella in the Jewish War. But by pursuing the course of rebellion, they ended up destroyed by the Roman armies. The last hold out at Masada perished around AD73. The Romans spent a year piling up dirt to enter this former palace. Then they broke the doors down, only to find that almost everyone inside had committed suicide rather than be captured.
Whoever they were, the individuals in question did not believe in the real Christ. They did not love the truth of a Christ that would come from heaven to save. On this hypothesis, they tried to take salvation into their own hands and take up arms against the Romans. They brought destruction on themselves. As a result, Jerusalem was destroyed, and they all perished.
We human beings are not particularly lovers of the truth. We tend to believe what we want to believe. We can have truth staring us glaringly in our faces and still explain it away. Those who rebelled against the Romans in the Jewish War no doubt thought they were fighting for God. But it turned out to be a zeal without knowledge (cf. Rom. 10:2). Their misguided zeal ended in devastation.
11. And because of this [fact] God sends on them a working of deception so that they believe in the lie 12. so that all those who did not believe in the truth but took pleasure in unrighteousness might be judged.
Again, we can read these verses against at least two possible scenarios. On one scenario, those participating in the rebellion misguidedly support the man of lawlessness. They think he is the one to follow. They think he is the one who will be victorious. He is the great and mighty one. He is the one with spiritual power.
The capacity of even those who call themselves Christians to be deceived by worldly power is sobering. There were certainly Christians within Nazi Germany who thought that Hitler's movement represented what is right. They would have considered any talk of a Holocaust a hoax and justified the internment of Jews and others as the rightful punishment of wicked or evil people. We think of New Testament scholars like Gerhard Kittel or philosophers like Martin Heidegger. Even as seemingly honorable a New Testament scholar as Otto Michel seems to have been sympathetic to this law and order figure.
We must always guard against such self-deception. Mark 13:22 suggests that even the elect can be gullible to false prophets and messiahs. In our second possible interpretation, Paul is warning against putting faith in the militants who rebelled against the Romans. The unrighteousness would then be their violent rebellion, and they all did indeed end up destroyed.
Again, we must marvel in the ability of the fallen human mind to see virtue in unrighteousness. Jesus and the New Testament have shown us the true path of righteousness. It consists in loving our neighbors and enemies (e.g., Matt. 5:43-48). Jesus will come again in judgment, but we cannot force his timing.
Second Thanksgiving
13. But we ourselves ought to give thanks to God always concerning you, brothers [and sisters], beloved by God, because God chose you [to be] the first fruit for salvation by the sanctification of the Spirit and by faith in truth, 14. because of which he called you through our gospel for the possession of the glory of our Lord Jesus.
Another one of the parallels between 1st and 2nd Thessalonians is a second thanksgiving section (cf. 1 Thess. 2:13). None of Paul's other letters has this feature but, then again, the traditional dating puts 2 Thessalonians not long after 1 Thessalonians. By the other reckoning, the similarity could be taken as evidence that 2nd Thessalonians is more than just a letter but that it is meant to evoke 1 Thessalonians as background.
The Thessalonian church was not of course the first congregation that Paul planted, even if it was the first to which we know Paul wrote a letter. If 2 Thessalonians was written near the end of Paul's ministry, then it would make perfect sense to think of the Thessalonians as one of the first fruits of his ministry. Certainly from the standpoint of his letters, the Thessalonian congregation stands out as one of his earliest.
Salvation for Paul, as we have observed, primarily refers to the coming day when those who are in Christ will escape the judgment. They "will be saved from wrath" (Rom. 5:9). How have they been "set apart" or sanctified for that appointment? The Holy Spirit has done it on the basis of their faith.
We have in these two verses a short version of Paul's ordo salutis, his "order of salvation." First, God calls. This is not an "unconditional election" but a calling to all who might believe. However, the called are ultimately those who respond to God's calling with faith in the truth. They came to this faith because Paul, Silas, and Timothy preached the good news or gospel to them, the good news that Jesus is Lord.
On the basis of a person's faith in the truth, they are set apart as belonging to God. They are designated as holy. They are sanctified. They are purified. As a result, they will experience salvation from the judgment of God when Christ returns. They will attain to the glory of God intended for humanity in creation but that all humans currently lack because all have sinned.
15. Therefore, then, brothers [and sisters], stand firm and hold fast the traditions which you were taught, whether through word or through our letter.
The mention of Paul's teaching as traditions may again suggest that this letter comes more at the end of Paul's ministry than at the beginning. We remember the language of the Pastoral letters, which speak of the "deposit" of good teaching that Paul is leaving behind (e.g., 2 Tim. 1:14). Paul, Silas, and Timothy left such teaching for them both in person and in the letter of 1 Thessalonians.
If 2 Thessalonians dates from later in Paul's ministry, the Thessalonians might also be aware of some of the other letters Paul had written. He would also have visited them again by that time. Acts 20 indicates that Paul later returned to the Thessalonian church.
16. May our Lord Jesus Christ himself and God our Father, who loved us and gave an eternal encouragement and a good hope in grace 17 encourage and strengthen your hearts for every work and good word.
Although chapter 3 will formally close the letter, Paul ends the teaching part of the letter with a blessing. He prays that both Jesus their Lord and God the Father will encourage them and strengthen them to live the life appropriate to God. Far from resisting the notion of good works, Paul expects them both to live and talk virtuously.
The basis for such a blessing is the fact that both the Lord Jesus and God the Father love us. Though the moment may seem perilous, we have an eternal reason to be encouraged. We have hope because of God's graciousness toward those who love and serve him.
The Lord Jesus Christ and God the Father are one in love and purpose. Jesus is Lord. He is the King of Kings, the one God the Father has sent to rule God's kingdom on earth as it is in heaven. God the Father is the Father, the originator, the source. God the Father is the one from whom and through whom and for whom are all things (cf. Rom. 11:36).
[1] On the other hand, it is intriguing that the disciple Simon is called "Simon the Zealot" (Luke 6:15). The Zealots as a distinct group probably did not exist until the time of the Jewish War, although there were always "zealots" around.
[2] We might note, as an aside, that 2 Thessalonians 2 does not mention the destruction of the the temple. It only implies its defilement. We find an interesting parallel in Mark 13. While the framing of the chapter refers to the temple's destruction, the rest of the chapter only speaks of its desecration.
[3] See my Explanatory Notes on Revelation.
[4] For example, N. T. Wright, "Hope Deferred? Against the Dogma of Delay," Early Christianity 9 (2018): 37-82.
______________________
2:1 And I ask you, brothers [and sisters] about the arrival of our Lord Jesus Christ and our gathering to him...
Here Paul returns to language of the parousia or "arrival" of Jesus back to earth. Our first impression is that we are talking about the second coming, the return of Christ to earth to establish the kingdom of God on earth fully. Our gathering to him could thus either mean the gathering of scattered believers around the world to Jerusalem as the kingdom's center.
It could also refer to our gathering in the air that was mentioned in 1 Thessalonians 4:17. As we said there, the meeting in the air is probably not to go off to heaven but a meeting to return to the earth as the judgment commences. The picture is that of going out to the edge of a city in order to re-enter with the king.
2. ... that you not be quickly shaken in mind nor to be alarmed, neither through a spirit or word nor letter as [if it is] through us as [if] the Day of the Lord has come. 3. Do not let someone deceive you in any way.
This is a curious statement. How could one have any questions about whether the Day of the Lord had truly come? The Day of the Lord here seems to be the Day of Judgment. It is a whole world event that commences with the return of Christ from heaven, as mentioned in 1 Thessalonians 4.
One possibility is of course a significant lack of knowledge on the part of the Thessalonians. The Thessalonians may not have understood how it was all supposed to happen. At this point some scholars have wondered if 2 Thessalonians were written before 1 Thessalonians, although we have not concluded in that direction.
They are undergoing persecution. 1 Peter 4:17 speaks of judgment beginning with the household of God before it moved on to the world at large. Perhaps they were interpreting their persecution as the beginning of the final judgment.
Paul, Silas, and Timothy mention a "spirit or word or letter" influencing them. This could indicate some varied teaching in the church at the time. Were there false letters circulating, claiming to be from Paul? The time when Paul was at Corinth seems pretty early in the story of the church for that to be happening. Paul hadn't even begun his letter-writing ministry.
As we mentioned in the introduction, this comment is one data point that has led us to wonder whether 2 Thessalonians could have been written not at the beginning but at the end of Paul's ministry or by Silas in the throes of the Jewish War. In the late 60s, Paul's letter-writing ministry was better known, and so it would make more sense for there to be letters incorrectly claiming to represent his voice.
If Paul or Silas were writing apocalyptically, they would be picturing a letter written to the Thessalonians almost twenty years prior. They would be writing about the circumstances of their own day during the Jewish War through the lens of the letter to the Thessalonians several years before.
For [the Day will not come] unless the falling away should come first and the man of lawlessness should be revealed, the son of destruction, 4. the one who opposes and exalts himself above everything called God or an object of worship so that he sits in the temple of God, claiming that he himself is God.
1. The reference to a "falling away" (apostasia) or "rebellion" is quite ambiguous from where we sit today. It is very common to take it in relation to events that have not yet happened and will happen still in the future. On the one hand, this interpretation makes sense because the ultimate Day of the Lord has not yet happened.
On the other hand, verse 4 pushes us toward thinking Paul or Silas are talking about events prior to the destruction of the temple in AD70. Surely the temple that would come to any first century audience's mind was the temple standing then in Jerusalem. So our first attempt is to find something in Paul's day to which this event might relate. Certainly God will fulfill this Scripture however he wishes. But the text says nothing about a rebuilt temple in some distant future--the New Testament nowhere speaks of such a thing. The most likely referent is the temple about which the Thessalonians or any reader would immediately think.
So was this rebellion to be a falling away within the church, a rebellion within Judaism, or a rebellion against the church or Judaism? Certainly if a Jew set himself up in the temple, that would be a falling away from the faith of Israel. In that scenario, the man of lawlessness would be a Jew that rebelled against true Judaism and set himself in the temple as God. However, we have no evidence of anything of this sort having happened prior to the temple's destruction. It is hard even to imagine. Nevertheless, there is imagery both here and in other places suggesting there were false messiahs during the time of the Jewish War (e.g., Mark 13:5-6).
Was there a falling away within the church? Certainly we have no evidence of a Christian Jew (or otherwise) wanting to set himself up in the temple as God. It is hard for us to imagine a falling way within the church that correlated with someone trying to set themselves up in the temple as God.
The most likely rebellion in view is thus the Jewish War, a Jewish rebellion against the Romans that started in AD66 and more or less ended with the destruction of Jerusalem in AD70. We do not have good evidence about how the early Christians viewed this war. In Mark 13:14, Jesus urges his followers to flee Jerusalem before the temple is desecrated, suggesting that most were in that undesirable category of potential collateral damage.
There is some reason to believe that many in the early church did not think rebellion was the appropriate response to Rome. [1] Certainly the Gospels would indicate this was Jesus' approach (e.g., Matt. 5:41). 1 Peter also, which has overtones of Roman oppression (5:13) still urges submission to the emperor and Roman governors (2:13-14). The "rebellion" could thus imply Christian disapproval of the Jewish rebellion against Rome.
Of course the fulfillment of prophesy is often unexpected. We are not in a position to say whether some future time will see the temple rebuilt again and that these events will play out again. We can say that Christians have no need for a temple, for Jesus has offered the sacrifice to end all sacrifices (Heb. 10:14). The veil to the Most Holy Places has been torn in two (Mark 15:38). There will be no temple in the New Jerusalem (Rev. 21:22). God would not approve of any rebuilt temple.
2. The mention of the "temple of God" seems an interpretive key. There is no hint of metaphor here, especially since Paul and Silas are writing about world events. 1 Corinthians does use temple in a metaphorical way in reference to a local church assembly (1 Cor. 3:16), but the Day of the Lord has a global scope rather than a local one.
Once again, the most straightforward way to take the temple here is in reference to the actual temple, which stood until AD70. [2] Here is a strong indication that the temple was still standing at the time of writing. Nothing is said about a rebuilt temple in the future. Nothing is even said about the temple's destruction. For these reasons, we can presumably date 2 Thessalonians with some certainty to the time before the temple was destroyed.
There are certainly several instances in the Jewish history of the time where pagans had either defiled the temple or tried to defile it. Antiochus Epiphanes, in 167BC, had ordered the temple's defilement. This is what the abomination of desolation in Daniel 11:31 referred to originally. These are images 2 Thessalonians 2:4 would surely bring to mind.
In 63BC, the Roman general Pompey took advantage of a dispute between two Maccabean brothers and effectively took control of Israel for Rome. He marched right into the Most Holy Place of the temple, defiling it. In AD38, the Roman Caligula ordered a status of himself set up in the temple. He in effect wanted to set himself up in the temple as God. However, he was assassinated before he could enforce the plan.
It is thus possible that the "man of lawlessness" could be someone who would assault the temple of that day. Clearly the Romans come into view. Nero was certainly a man of lawlessness, and he was alive at the beginning of the Jewish War. Since Nero put Paul to death, we have a narrow window when Paul could have been alive to write this letter at the beginning of the war.
If Silas were writing in Paul's name, then we have the possibility that Vespasian or Titus were in view. Vespasian would begin the assault on Jerusalem, and Titus would finish it. It would increasingly become conventional to consider Roman emperors as gods upon their deaths. There are potentially interesting parallels here with the beast from the sea of Revelation 17:8-11. It seems to be modeled on Nero and his at least symbolic return. [3]
5. Do you not remember that, while still being with you, I used to say these things to you?
There is a certain irony for us in this verse. We were not there. We do not know all the things Paul used to say to them. We wish he had repeated more here.
It is a reminder that this letter was not written to us. Indeed, nothing in the Scriptures was written directly to us or anyone alive today. These books were written directly to people who have been dead for thousands of years. As Scripture these books are for us. They are the story of our people. They are the instructions of our people. Sometimes God does re-purpose the words and speak directly to us, but that was not their first meaning.
On the hypothesis that 2 Thessalonians came late in Paul's ministry or that it was written by Silas, we might call this verse a "tell." That is to say, it would hint that more was going on in this letter than meets the eye. If Silas were using the form of 1 Thessalonians to write about current events, then this verse might reflect that, almost twenty years previous, Paul had taught about the Day of the Lord. If Paul had recently passed, Silas would be writing with irony, since Paul would truly no longer be with them.
The cryptic nature of these comments would make sense if the Roman empire stands somehow in the background. What if Paul were in Rome awaiting execution when these comments were written? As we speculated in the introduction, a need to hide the subversive nature of the letter might explain the "apocalyptic use" of a previous letter.
6. And now you know what is restraining so that he might be revealed in his own time. 7. for the mystery of lawlessness is already working. Only the one holding back now until he should become from [your] midst.
The cryptic comments and allusions continue. The fact that the audience "knows" makes it clear that this letter is not deceptive. It is not a forgery. There is code language here that author and audience know but to which we are not privy.
That which is restraining the Day of the Lord from happening is both a what and a he. It is "what" is restraining, and it is "who" is restraining. The Holy Spirit is a "what" and a "who," since the word for spirit is neuter but the Holy Spirit is a person. Perhaps the Holy Spirit is in view. On the other hand, these verses seem to be saying more than that these things will happen when the Spirit wants.
On the Silas hypothesis, these comments could refer to Paul himself. The sense could be that unleashing of the Roman "man of lawlessness" would not take place until after Paul was removed from the scene. In that case the audience would know that Paul was now removed and thus that the events of the Day of the Lord--understood perhaps as the events of the Jewish War--was free to unfold.
8. And then the lawless [one] will be revealed, whom the Lord will destroy by the Spirit of his mouth and will destroy at the appearance of his arrival.
Perhaps we have a blurring here into the end times, as we also see in passages like Mark 13 and Matthew 24. This is the same man of lawlessness as was mentioned in 2:3, but he seems to be linked to the second coming. While we might relate what has come before to events of Paul and Silas' day, we are now hearing about Christ's return, as 2:1 said.
This is not the only place where we have this tension. It is there in Mark 13 where the topic is the destruction of that temple, the one destroyed in AD70, but the line of thought jumps to Christ's return. We might argue that the destruction of Jerusalem was a "type" of the final days. It is for this reason that interpreters like N. T. Wright have been tempted to take the coming of Christ in more metaphorical ways, such as relating the second coming directly to the destruction of Jerusalem. [4]
On the other hand, because of this blurring, we cannot be sure that the dispensational interpretation will not in the end prove to be correct. Though we should always do our best to interpret Scriptures like these in terms of what they are most likely to have meant in their first century context, God is free to fulfill them in whatever way he wishes.
9. The [other] arrival according to the activity of Satan with all power and signs and false wonders...
Interestingly, the word parousia (arrival) is used both for the arrival of Christ and the arrival of another. Is it the man of lawlessness? The performance of signs and wonders does not clearly fit the Roman emperors of the 60s. Some scholars at this point have mentioned the expectation of some that Nero would return from the dead. Nero committed suicide in AD68. The beast from the sea in Revelation 13 seems to be modeled on Nero, like a revived Nero (e.g., 13:3). Revelation also mentions a "beast from the land" (13:11-15) who is also called a false prophet (e.g., 19:20) and performs wonders.
10. ... and with all deceit of unrighteousness for those who are being destroyed because of they did not receive the love of the truth so that they might be saved.
Those who are being destroyed could be Jews who rebelled against the Romans. They would surely oppose a Roman man of lawlessness. We have at least two possibilities. On the one hand, this statement could refer to individuals who wrongly side with the man of lawlessness. However, on the hypothesis we are pursuing, it would refer to those Jews who wrongly rebelled against the Romans and thereby brought on the man of lawlessness.
On this scenario, if they had followed Christ, they would have escaped like the Christians who fled Jerusalem for Pella in the Jewish War. But by pursuing the course of rebellion, they ended up destroyed by the Roman armies. The last hold out at Masada perished around AD73. The Romans spent a year piling up dirt to enter this former palace. Then they broke the doors down, only to find that almost everyone inside had committed suicide rather than be captured.
Whoever they were, the individuals in question did not believe in the real Christ. They did not love the truth of a Christ that would come from heaven to save. On this hypothesis, they tried to take salvation into their own hands and take up arms against the Romans. They brought destruction on themselves. As a result, Jerusalem was destroyed, and they all perished.
We human beings are not particularly lovers of the truth. We tend to believe what we want to believe. We can have truth staring us glaringly in our faces and still explain it away. Those who rebelled against the Romans in the Jewish War no doubt thought they were fighting for God. But it turned out to be a zeal without knowledge (cf. Rom. 10:2). Their misguided zeal ended in devastation.
11. And because of this [fact] God sends on them a working of deception so that they believe in the lie 12. so that all those who did not believe in the truth but took pleasure in unrighteousness might be judged.
Again, we can read these verses against at least two possible scenarios. On one scenario, those participating in the rebellion misguidedly support the man of lawlessness. They think he is the one to follow. They think he is the one who will be victorious. He is the great and mighty one. He is the one with spiritual power.
The capacity of even those who call themselves Christians to be deceived by worldly power is sobering. There were certainly Christians within Nazi Germany who thought that Hitler's movement represented what is right. They would have considered any talk of a Holocaust a hoax and justified the internment of Jews and others as the rightful punishment of wicked or evil people. We think of New Testament scholars like Gerhard Kittel or philosophers like Martin Heidegger. Even as seemingly honorable a New Testament scholar as Otto Michel seems to have been sympathetic to this law and order figure.
We must always guard against such self-deception. Mark 13:22 suggests that even the elect can be gullible to false prophets and messiahs. In our second possible interpretation, Paul is warning against putting faith in the militants who rebelled against the Romans. The unrighteousness would then be their violent rebellion, and they all did indeed end up destroyed.
Again, we must marvel in the ability of the fallen human mind to see virtue in unrighteousness. Jesus and the New Testament have shown us the true path of righteousness. It consists in loving our neighbors and enemies (e.g., Matt. 5:43-48). Jesus will come again in judgment, but we cannot force his timing.
Second Thanksgiving
13. But we ourselves ought to give thanks to God always concerning you, brothers [and sisters], beloved by God, because God chose you [to be] the first fruit for salvation by the sanctification of the Spirit and by faith in truth, 14. because of which he called you through our gospel for the possession of the glory of our Lord Jesus.
Another one of the parallels between 1st and 2nd Thessalonians is a second thanksgiving section (cf. 1 Thess. 2:13). None of Paul's other letters has this feature but, then again, the traditional dating puts 2 Thessalonians not long after 1 Thessalonians. By the other reckoning, the similarity could be taken as evidence that 2nd Thessalonians is more than just a letter but that it is meant to evoke 1 Thessalonians as background.
The Thessalonian church was not of course the first congregation that Paul planted, even if it was the first to which we know Paul wrote a letter. If 2 Thessalonians was written near the end of Paul's ministry, then it would make perfect sense to think of the Thessalonians as one of the first fruits of his ministry. Certainly from the standpoint of his letters, the Thessalonian congregation stands out as one of his earliest.
Salvation for Paul, as we have observed, primarily refers to the coming day when those who are in Christ will escape the judgment. They "will be saved from wrath" (Rom. 5:9). How have they been "set apart" or sanctified for that appointment? The Holy Spirit has done it on the basis of their faith.
We have in these two verses a short version of Paul's ordo salutis, his "order of salvation." First, God calls. This is not an "unconditional election" but a calling to all who might believe. However, the called are ultimately those who respond to God's calling with faith in the truth. They came to this faith because Paul, Silas, and Timothy preached the good news or gospel to them, the good news that Jesus is Lord.
On the basis of a person's faith in the truth, they are set apart as belonging to God. They are designated as holy. They are sanctified. They are purified. As a result, they will experience salvation from the judgment of God when Christ returns. They will attain to the glory of God intended for humanity in creation but that all humans currently lack because all have sinned.
15. Therefore, then, brothers [and sisters], stand firm and hold fast the traditions which you were taught, whether through word or through our letter.
The mention of Paul's teaching as traditions may again suggest that this letter comes more at the end of Paul's ministry than at the beginning. We remember the language of the Pastoral letters, which speak of the "deposit" of good teaching that Paul is leaving behind (e.g., 2 Tim. 1:14). Paul, Silas, and Timothy left such teaching for them both in person and in the letter of 1 Thessalonians.
If 2 Thessalonians dates from later in Paul's ministry, the Thessalonians might also be aware of some of the other letters Paul had written. He would also have visited them again by that time. Acts 20 indicates that Paul later returned to the Thessalonian church.
16. May our Lord Jesus Christ himself and God our Father, who loved us and gave an eternal encouragement and a good hope in grace 17 encourage and strengthen your hearts for every work and good word.
Although chapter 3 will formally close the letter, Paul ends the teaching part of the letter with a blessing. He prays that both Jesus their Lord and God the Father will encourage them and strengthen them to live the life appropriate to God. Far from resisting the notion of good works, Paul expects them both to live and talk virtuously.
The basis for such a blessing is the fact that both the Lord Jesus and God the Father love us. Though the moment may seem perilous, we have an eternal reason to be encouraged. We have hope because of God's graciousness toward those who love and serve him.
The Lord Jesus Christ and God the Father are one in love and purpose. Jesus is Lord. He is the King of Kings, the one God the Father has sent to rule God's kingdom on earth as it is in heaven. God the Father is the Father, the originator, the source. God the Father is the one from whom and through whom and for whom are all things (cf. Rom. 11:36).
[1] On the other hand, it is intriguing that the disciple Simon is called "Simon the Zealot" (Luke 6:15). The Zealots as a distinct group probably did not exist until the time of the Jewish War, although there were always "zealots" around.
[2] We might note, as an aside, that 2 Thessalonians 2 does not mention the destruction of the the temple. It only implies its defilement. We find an interesting parallel in Mark 13. While the framing of the chapter refers to the temple's destruction, the rest of the chapter only speaks of its desecration.
[3] See my Explanatory Notes on Revelation.
[4] For example, N. T. Wright, "Hope Deferred? Against the Dogma of Delay," Early Christianity 9 (2018): 37-82.
Sunday, August 30, 2020
3-4. Through the Bible -- 1 and 2 Thessalonians
Below are links to my explanatory work on 1 and 2 Thessalonians as part of my project, "Through the Bible in Ten Years." Each Sunday I put out a video on YouTube for a chapter, as well as a podcast version on Patreon. I plan to self-publish the notes in written form.
Previous books in the series include:
1. Gospel of Mark
2. Book of Acts
3.1 1 Thessalonians 1 (including introduction)
3.2 1 Thessalonians 2
3.3 1 Thessalonians 3
3.4 1 Thessalonians 4
3.5 1 Thessalonians 5
4.0 Introduction to 2 Thessalonians
4.1 2 Thessalonians 1
4.2 2 Thessalonians 2
4.3 2 Thessalonians 3
Previous books in the series include:
1. Gospel of Mark
2. Book of Acts
3.1 1 Thessalonians 1 (including introduction)
3.2 1 Thessalonians 2
3.3 1 Thessalonians 3
3.4 1 Thessalonians 4
3.5 1 Thessalonians 5
4.0 Introduction to 2 Thessalonians
4.1 2 Thessalonians 1
4.2 2 Thessalonians 2
4.3 2 Thessalonians 3
Sunday, May 03, 2020
2 Thessalonians Introduction
Author and Audience
1. Our first impression may indeed be a correct impression. 2 Thessalonians begins very similarly to 1 Thessalonians, with the names of Paul, Silas, and Timothy as authors.
Indeed, 2 Thessalonians 2:2 warns about the possibility of fake letters that are not really from Paul, Silas, and Timothy. 3:17 emphasizes that Paul is writing the closing greeting with his own hand. He emphasizes his signature for comparison with any other letter that might claim to be from him.
This is a very strong argument for the literal Pauline authorship of the letter. If it were not the case, would we not have to conclude that 2 Thessalonians was a forgery? There is debate over whether there are letters in the New Testament that were "allonymous"-- written by someone other than the name on them. [1] Some have argued that the recipients might have known that these letters were not directly from the person named in the greeting.
We will return to this question under the heading of genre below. Nevertheless, the impression we get is that Paul, Silas, and Timothy are the co-authors. Similarly, the impression we get is that the Thessalonian church is once again the audience of the letter.
Date and Situation
2. We do not find Silas as an author on any of Paul's other letters. Timothy is mentioned in the greeting of Colossians. The specific names of Paul, Silas, and Timothy, as well as the Thessalonian audience, thus suggest that we might think of this letter in the same general time frame as 1 Thessalonians. The impression we get is that 2 Thessalonians must have also been written from Corinth to Thessalonica around the years AD50-52.
Paul's letters are arranged in the canon by length, so it is at least theoretically possible that 2 Thessalonians was written before 1 Thessalonians. 1 Thessalonians is first because it has 5 chapters, while 2 Thessalonians only has 3. Nevertheless, the current order seems to be the correct one. The story of the founding of the church and Timothy's recent return suggests that 1 Thessalonians is Paul's first contact with the church since he left.
1 Thessalonians addresses the matter of Christians who die before the Lord returns. 2 Thessalonians seems to address those who might believe the judgment has already begun. Some have also argued that an immanent expectation of Christ's return might explain the idleness addressed in 2 Thessalonians 3. If you believe the Lord is coming back immediately, why work?
The impression we thus get is that 2 Thessalonians was written to indicate events that would take place before the second coming. The point was to indicate that the Lord had not yet returned. Nor would he would return immediately, for some of the key signs had not yet happened. There is still a near expectation, just not an immediate expectation. Some things still had to happen. There was reason to keep working as usual.
Genre
3. Above you find the impressions we get from a surface level reading of the letter, and these impressions may indeed be the correct ones. However, a close reading of the letter also finds a number of curiosities. They have led some to wonder if more is going on with this letter than we might get from our first impressions.
For one, the content of 2 Thessalonians 2 is unique to Paul's letters. Nowhere else does he speak of a man of lawlessness or a rebellion. The impression we get from 1 Thessalonians and 1 Corinthians is indeed that the Lord could return at any time. Indeed, even the eschatological passages of the Gospels hardly speak of such things. Mark 13:14 does speak of an "abomination of desolation," presumably in the temple, which Luke 21:20 interprets in relation to the destruction of Jerusalem.
At the same time, the form of 2 Thessalonians is very close to that of 1 Thessalonians. The greeting is very similar. Elements of the thanksgiving section are very similar to those of 1 Thessalonians. 2 Thessalonians even has a second thanksgiving (2:13) in the same general location as 1 Thessalonians (2:13).
Yet the language of 2 Thessalonians is more formal and the general feel less relational. Some have wondered if someone was following the form of 1 Thessalonians and yet writing for a quite different situation. It could of course have been Paul himself, writing a kind of code letter at a much different point in his ministry. The hand could have been Silas or Timothy, either before or after Paul's death. Then of course some suggest it could be someone else entirely, either an allonymous author or even a forger. [2]
4. The form and style of 2 Thessalonians alone would not be sufficient to push us in a different direction than our first impressions. However, there are other curiosities. For example, by almost all reckonings, 2 Thessalonians is a candidate to be either the second or third letter Paul wrote. It would thus be highly curious for Pauline forgeries already to be in circulation, as 2 Thessalonians 2:2 seems to suggest. Such an occurrence seems much more likely after Paul became known as a letter writer and several of his letters were known. In other words, 2:2 does not fit as nicely into the time frame of Paul's time at Corinth as it would fit a time either later in Paul's ministry or beyond it.
Another example of possible context misfit is the mention of traditions the Thessalonians received from Paul, Silas, and Timothy (3:6). They were only there for less than two months and they had one letter from them, 1 Thessalonians. One verse hardly seems a tradition (5:14). Tradition sounds like a word that implies more time than the default dating of 2 Thessalonians might suggest.
Similarly, we find what at least sounds like code language, "tells" that more is going on here than meets the eye. "You know what is restraining him" (2:6). "Do you not remember that, while still being with you, I used to say these things to you?" (2:5). It sounds like there is an understanding between authors and audience that they do not want to put down in writing. The audience knows what is going on--there is no deception. But someone may read Paul, Silas, and Timothy's letter, so they are intentionally cryptic.
5. These hints might suggest that 2 Thessalonians is something like an "apocalyptic letter." An apocalypse was a genre where someone wrote about their current circumstances through a voice from the past. For example, 4 Ezra is a book written about AD100 in which an author uses the voice of Ezra from the past (400s BC) to address the destruction of Jerusalem in AD70. In the genre of the book, Ezra seems to be given a revelation about the future, but it is really someone from much later talking about their present.
What if Paul or Silas or Timothy wished to speak about the events of their time using their own voice from over fifteen years earlier? They take 1 Thessalonians, a letter that explicitly addressed the second coming. They follow its form, not to deceive, but because it fits the form of what they wish to say and because a letter from the past might pass a Roman filter more easily. If Silas were the primary writer and Paul were already gone, it would be all the less threatening.
The intended audience would thus not be the Thessalonians specifically, but all Christians of that moment. the Thessalonians would be a literary representative for all Christians. If Silas were writing soon after Paul's passing, the words, "while still being with you" become even more poignant. Paul could thus be the one "restraining" these events, though now with him removed they might take place.
The most difficult piece of this hypothesis is Paul's signature in 3:17. But perhaps Paul is about to die at the hands of Nero. Perhaps Silas could be writing for him with him giving the signature. Or perhaps the audience knows that what the letter is saying is that Silas is the one who can give the authentic voice of Paul, as opposed to other voices for him that were not authentic. Since 2 Thessalonians is in Scripture, we would assume that 2 Thessalonians gives an authentic voice.
Situation 2
6. We assume the inspiration of 2 Thessalonians, whether our first impression is correct or if something deeper was going on. In either case, it is difficult to know what the events of 2 Thessalonians 2 were addressing. The mention of the temple probably suggests that the events in view were to take place while the temple was still standing, that is, before AD70. We note the similar language again to Mark 13:14 and the "abomination of desolation." No mention is made either of the temple being destroyed or being rebuilt.
As with Mark 13, it is thus likely that we have some blurring between events that took place in the first century and events surrounding the return of Christ. The phrase, "man of lawlessness" could refer either to an external or an internal figure. Among external figures, a Roman emperor or general seems quite possible.
Ample precedents for foreign powers defiling the temple were at hand. In 167BC, it was Syrian representatives of Antiochus Epiphanes (cf. Dan. 11:31). In 63BC it was the Roman general Pompey. In AD38 the Roman emperor Caligula tried to set up a statue of himself in the temple. When a first century Jewish audience heard talk of someone setting themselves as God in the temple, surely the Romans would be the first thing to come to mind.
At the same time, mention of leading those who do not believe astray could suggest a Jewish leader (2:10-12). Could the rebellion against Rome in the Jewish War be seen as an inappropriate falling away? Might a revolutionary leader or a high priest be seen as a "man of lawlnessness"? Or are those who do not believe Gentiles rather than Jews?
The idea that Nero might return after his apparent suicide was known in Jewish circles, and there were some pretenders. A Jewish writing called the Sibylline Oracles refers to this legend. [3] Some have suggested that 2 Thessalonians alludes to this concept. It is sometimes suggested that this concept also stands in the background of Revelation 13:3 and 18:9-11. If we consider Nero as a type of one who is yet to come, the imagery need not be problematic.
For this reason, the balance seems to point more toward an external, Roman figure as the basis for the man of lawlessness imagery. There might be many enamored by such a figure, whether Jewish or Gentile. However, those who believe would not be deceived. For us there is but one king on earth, and it is Jesus.
[1] The more conventional term is pseudonymous, but I. Howard Marshall suggested we use a different term because it might imply a value judgment that the name on the letter is "false." See A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Pastoral Epistles (Edinburgh: T & T Clark, 2004), 84. An allonymous author would thus be an "other" author writing under the authority of someone else's name.
[2] See n.1.
[3] Cf. Sibylline Oracles 4.119-24; 5.137-41, 361-96.
1. Our first impression may indeed be a correct impression. 2 Thessalonians begins very similarly to 1 Thessalonians, with the names of Paul, Silas, and Timothy as authors.
Indeed, 2 Thessalonians 2:2 warns about the possibility of fake letters that are not really from Paul, Silas, and Timothy. 3:17 emphasizes that Paul is writing the closing greeting with his own hand. He emphasizes his signature for comparison with any other letter that might claim to be from him.
This is a very strong argument for the literal Pauline authorship of the letter. If it were not the case, would we not have to conclude that 2 Thessalonians was a forgery? There is debate over whether there are letters in the New Testament that were "allonymous"-- written by someone other than the name on them. [1] Some have argued that the recipients might have known that these letters were not directly from the person named in the greeting.
We will return to this question under the heading of genre below. Nevertheless, the impression we get is that Paul, Silas, and Timothy are the co-authors. Similarly, the impression we get is that the Thessalonian church is once again the audience of the letter.
Date and Situation
2. We do not find Silas as an author on any of Paul's other letters. Timothy is mentioned in the greeting of Colossians. The specific names of Paul, Silas, and Timothy, as well as the Thessalonian audience, thus suggest that we might think of this letter in the same general time frame as 1 Thessalonians. The impression we get is that 2 Thessalonians must have also been written from Corinth to Thessalonica around the years AD50-52.
Paul's letters are arranged in the canon by length, so it is at least theoretically possible that 2 Thessalonians was written before 1 Thessalonians. 1 Thessalonians is first because it has 5 chapters, while 2 Thessalonians only has 3. Nevertheless, the current order seems to be the correct one. The story of the founding of the church and Timothy's recent return suggests that 1 Thessalonians is Paul's first contact with the church since he left.
1 Thessalonians addresses the matter of Christians who die before the Lord returns. 2 Thessalonians seems to address those who might believe the judgment has already begun. Some have also argued that an immanent expectation of Christ's return might explain the idleness addressed in 2 Thessalonians 3. If you believe the Lord is coming back immediately, why work?
The impression we thus get is that 2 Thessalonians was written to indicate events that would take place before the second coming. The point was to indicate that the Lord had not yet returned. Nor would he would return immediately, for some of the key signs had not yet happened. There is still a near expectation, just not an immediate expectation. Some things still had to happen. There was reason to keep working as usual.
Genre
3. Above you find the impressions we get from a surface level reading of the letter, and these impressions may indeed be the correct ones. However, a close reading of the letter also finds a number of curiosities. They have led some to wonder if more is going on with this letter than we might get from our first impressions.
For one, the content of 2 Thessalonians 2 is unique to Paul's letters. Nowhere else does he speak of a man of lawlessness or a rebellion. The impression we get from 1 Thessalonians and 1 Corinthians is indeed that the Lord could return at any time. Indeed, even the eschatological passages of the Gospels hardly speak of such things. Mark 13:14 does speak of an "abomination of desolation," presumably in the temple, which Luke 21:20 interprets in relation to the destruction of Jerusalem.
At the same time, the form of 2 Thessalonians is very close to that of 1 Thessalonians. The greeting is very similar. Elements of the thanksgiving section are very similar to those of 1 Thessalonians. 2 Thessalonians even has a second thanksgiving (2:13) in the same general location as 1 Thessalonians (2:13).
Yet the language of 2 Thessalonians is more formal and the general feel less relational. Some have wondered if someone was following the form of 1 Thessalonians and yet writing for a quite different situation. It could of course have been Paul himself, writing a kind of code letter at a much different point in his ministry. The hand could have been Silas or Timothy, either before or after Paul's death. Then of course some suggest it could be someone else entirely, either an allonymous author or even a forger. [2]
4. The form and style of 2 Thessalonians alone would not be sufficient to push us in a different direction than our first impressions. However, there are other curiosities. For example, by almost all reckonings, 2 Thessalonians is a candidate to be either the second or third letter Paul wrote. It would thus be highly curious for Pauline forgeries already to be in circulation, as 2 Thessalonians 2:2 seems to suggest. Such an occurrence seems much more likely after Paul became known as a letter writer and several of his letters were known. In other words, 2:2 does not fit as nicely into the time frame of Paul's time at Corinth as it would fit a time either later in Paul's ministry or beyond it.
Another example of possible context misfit is the mention of traditions the Thessalonians received from Paul, Silas, and Timothy (3:6). They were only there for less than two months and they had one letter from them, 1 Thessalonians. One verse hardly seems a tradition (5:14). Tradition sounds like a word that implies more time than the default dating of 2 Thessalonians might suggest.
Similarly, we find what at least sounds like code language, "tells" that more is going on here than meets the eye. "You know what is restraining him" (2:6). "Do you not remember that, while still being with you, I used to say these things to you?" (2:5). It sounds like there is an understanding between authors and audience that they do not want to put down in writing. The audience knows what is going on--there is no deception. But someone may read Paul, Silas, and Timothy's letter, so they are intentionally cryptic.
What if Paul or Silas or Timothy wished to speak about the events of their time using their own voice from over fifteen years earlier? They take 1 Thessalonians, a letter that explicitly addressed the second coming. They follow its form, not to deceive, but because it fits the form of what they wish to say and because a letter from the past might pass a Roman filter more easily. If Silas were the primary writer and Paul were already gone, it would be all the less threatening.
The intended audience would thus not be the Thessalonians specifically, but all Christians of that moment. the Thessalonians would be a literary representative for all Christians. If Silas were writing soon after Paul's passing, the words, "while still being with you" become even more poignant. Paul could thus be the one "restraining" these events, though now with him removed they might take place.
The most difficult piece of this hypothesis is Paul's signature in 3:17. But perhaps Paul is about to die at the hands of Nero. Perhaps Silas could be writing for him with him giving the signature. Or perhaps the audience knows that what the letter is saying is that Silas is the one who can give the authentic voice of Paul, as opposed to other voices for him that were not authentic. Since 2 Thessalonians is in Scripture, we would assume that 2 Thessalonians gives an authentic voice.
Situation 2
6. We assume the inspiration of 2 Thessalonians, whether our first impression is correct or if something deeper was going on. In either case, it is difficult to know what the events of 2 Thessalonians 2 were addressing. The mention of the temple probably suggests that the events in view were to take place while the temple was still standing, that is, before AD70. We note the similar language again to Mark 13:14 and the "abomination of desolation." No mention is made either of the temple being destroyed or being rebuilt.
As with Mark 13, it is thus likely that we have some blurring between events that took place in the first century and events surrounding the return of Christ. The phrase, "man of lawlessness" could refer either to an external or an internal figure. Among external figures, a Roman emperor or general seems quite possible.
Ample precedents for foreign powers defiling the temple were at hand. In 167BC, it was Syrian representatives of Antiochus Epiphanes (cf. Dan. 11:31). In 63BC it was the Roman general Pompey. In AD38 the Roman emperor Caligula tried to set up a statue of himself in the temple. When a first century Jewish audience heard talk of someone setting themselves as God in the temple, surely the Romans would be the first thing to come to mind.
At the same time, mention of leading those who do not believe astray could suggest a Jewish leader (2:10-12). Could the rebellion against Rome in the Jewish War be seen as an inappropriate falling away? Might a revolutionary leader or a high priest be seen as a "man of lawlnessness"? Or are those who do not believe Gentiles rather than Jews?
The idea that Nero might return after his apparent suicide was known in Jewish circles, and there were some pretenders. A Jewish writing called the Sibylline Oracles refers to this legend. [3] Some have suggested that 2 Thessalonians alludes to this concept. It is sometimes suggested that this concept also stands in the background of Revelation 13:3 and 18:9-11. If we consider Nero as a type of one who is yet to come, the imagery need not be problematic.
For this reason, the balance seems to point more toward an external, Roman figure as the basis for the man of lawlessness imagery. There might be many enamored by such a figure, whether Jewish or Gentile. However, those who believe would not be deceived. For us there is but one king on earth, and it is Jesus.
[1] The more conventional term is pseudonymous, but I. Howard Marshall suggested we use a different term because it might imply a value judgment that the name on the letter is "false." See A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Pastoral Epistles (Edinburgh: T & T Clark, 2004), 84. An allonymous author would thus be an "other" author writing under the authority of someone else's name.
[2] See n.1.
[3] Cf. Sibylline Oracles 4.119-24; 5.137-41, 361-96.
Sunday, April 05, 2020
2 Thessalonians 1 (Explanatory Notes)
I have a life goal of following in Wesley's steps and self-publishing Explanatory Notes on the whole Bible. I have a fair amount already on the New Testament and published Galatians some time ago. I've also had notes on 1 Thessalonians done for years.
I have a podcast/video series every week I call, "Through the Bible in Ten Years." My Thessalonians videos are in a playlist there. Thus far I've been through the Gospel of Mark and most of Acts. This week I begin 2 Thessalonians. But I've never done Explanatory Notes on 2 Thessalonians.
So here goes. I'll do the chapters first and the introduction at the end.
_____________________________
Prescript (1:1-2)
1:1 Paul and Silas and Timothy to the church of the Thessalonians in God, our Father, and the Lord Jesus Christ. 2. Grace to you and peace from God, the Father, and [the] Lord Jesus Christ.
The authors of 2 Thessalonians are the same as that of 1 Thessalonians, giving us the immediate impression that this letter was written in the same time frame as the earlier letter. Paul, Silas, and Timothy were together on Paul's second missionary journey. We do not see Silas mentioned on any later letters of Paul other than 1 and 2 Thessalonians. We would then guess that 2 Thessalonians was written from Corinth to Thessalonica around the years AD50-51. [1]
As we mentioned in the introduction, the order of the Thessalonian letters is open for discussion. 1 Thessalonians was put first because it is longer than 2 Thessalonians. It would thus be possible that 2 Thessalonians was written first, and it has been suggested. However, most scholars have concluded that this order is in fact the order in which they were written.
The same comments we made about the greeting of 1 Thessalonians thus apply here. This is the prescript, a standard letter greeting. The greeting of "grace and peace" potentially embodied the unity between Jew and Gentile that stood at the heart of Paul's mission theology.
A quick comparison between the greetings of 2 Thessalonians and 1 Thessalonians show a very strong similarity. In general, this is not surprising. However, the similarity may go beyond what we would expect unless there was some degree of copying going on. We will return to this question.
A singular church is addressed again. The default interpretation would thus suggest that there is one major house church in the city that consisted of perhaps 40-50 people. There may of course have been smaller cell groups within this overall "assembly."
[1] As we said in the introduction, if the implied setting of 2 Thessalonians were to differ noticeably from the Corinthian time frame, we might wonder if something more is going on here than what appears.
Thanksgiving
1:3 We ought to give thanks to God always concerning you, brothers [and sisters], just as is worthy, because your faith is exploding and the love of each one of all you multiplying toward one another, 4 with the result that we ourselves boast in you in the assemblies of God about your endurance and faith among all your persecutions and the tribulations that you are bearing.
Again, a thanksgiving section was common in ancient letters. We should not take the common features of Paul's thanksgiving sections as an argument against his genuine feeling for his churches or his actual prayers for them. He gives thanks for some of the same things mentioned in 1 Thessalonians 1--their faith and love.
As mentioned in the introduction, the similarity to 1 Thessalonians, although with some different words, is something to observe. We speculated in the introduction that perhaps Silas or Timothy had more to do with the writing of 2 Thessalonians than Paul. We speculated that perhaps one of them stuck closely to the content of 1 Thessalonians in keeping with the overall purpose of the letter. Whether this speculation is true or not, we note here the similarities between the two letters.
We get the impression that their faith and love have grown since the writing of 1 Thessalonians. They are on the same path and trajectory. Persecution has not diminished their faith and love, only increased it.
They have become a source of boasting for Paul, Silas, and Timothy. Paul had mentioned boasting in them in 2 Thessalonians 2:19. They bring him honor before Christ, like a parent is proud of one of their children.
We certainly get the feeling that the level of persecution has increased for the church at Thessalonica. No mention is made of what group might be doing so. Since the church was predominantly Gentile, we doubt that their persecution comes from Jews in the city. They probably have little to do with the synagogues of the city.
It seems more likely that they would encounter resistance from the city leadership in general, remembering that the Christian gospel was potentially subversive. It proclaimed a different king than Caesar and the immanent upheaval of the current world order! Paul himself apparently set the city on this trajectory, since it was the city not the Jews who had the power to force him to leave.
The "churches of God" are the "assemblies of God." They are the collection of all the house churches meeting all over the world. There are as yet no church buildings.
5 [It is a] demonstration of the righteous judgment of God so that you might be deemed worthy of the kingdom of God, on behalf of which you also suffer, 6 since it is right for God to repay with oppression those who are oppressing us
Persecution for Christ both confirms the impending judgment on those who do the persecution and confirms the righteousness of those who are persecuted. Note the importance throughout Paul's writings of the worthiness of God's people when Jesus returns. Paul insists that Jesus-followers live in a manner worthy of the gospel (e.g., Phil. 1:27).
There was no contradiction in Paul's mind between faith and works. Works might not be a basis for justification, but once you had received the Spirit, both faith and a worthy life were normative. The works that were impossible without the Spirit were now indicative of the Spirit.
We note that judgment is not contrary to God's character as love. In this case, judgment is the demonstration of God's love toward the persecuted. Loving judgment protects the innocent and restores order to the world by removing the instruments of evil.
7 and relief to you who are being oppressed, along with us, at the revelation of the Lord Jesus from [the] sky with the angels of his power. 8 "with fire of flame, giving judgment to those who do not know God" [2] and to those who are not obedience to the gospel of our Lord Jesus,
While 1 Thessalonians 1 speaks of the arrival, the "parousia" of Jesus, 2 Thessalonians speaks of the revelation of Jesus, the "apocalypse" of Jesus. Revelation of this sort is the unveiling of that which has been hidden. It is the unveiling of the heavenly, spiritual realm, the breaking in of heaven into earth.
1 Thessalonians 4-5 do not focus on the judgment of those on the earth but on the salvation of those in Christ. 1 Thessalonians 5:9 alluded to the judgment of those who are not "snatched up" to meet the Lord in the air (1 Thess. 4:17). But we indicated in our notes on that chapter that the saved were probably not joining Christ merely to go party forever. 1 Corinthians 6:2-3 suggest that the meeting in the air is in preparation for judgment.
These verses give greater clarity on what happens to the world after those in Christ are removed. King Jesus, his powerful angels, the dead in Christ, and the still alive in Christ will proceed to finalize the arrival of the kingdom of God. The kingdom that had come near and was inaugurated in Jesus's earthly ministry will now be consummated. God's kingdom will come on earth as it is in heaven.
Verse 8 alludes perhaps to two or three Scriptures in the Old Testament. Psalm 79:6 speaks of God pouring out his anger on those who do not know God. Jeremiah 10:25 also speaks of God coming in judgment on those who do not know him. Isaiah 66:15 speaks of the LORD coming back in fire, rebuking the earth with flames of fire.
The Isaiah passage is particularly interesting because it is in the context of the restoration of Jerusalem. Part of this restoration is the destruction of those that oppress it. This allusion may be significant as we move into 2 Thessalonians 2.
9 who will suffer justice, eternal destruction "from the face of the Lord and from the glory of his strength" [3] 10 whenever he should come to be glorified among his holy ones and to be marveled at among all who have faith, because, on that day, our witness was believed among you.
1:9 does not specify the nature of eternal destruction. Indeed, Paul has almost nothing to say about the fate of those who are not in Christ. Eternal destruction could of course refer to eternal punishment, but it could also in theory refer to eternal annihilation. If the allusion to Isaiah 66 continues here, it is noteworthy that Isaiah 66:24 speaks of the worm not dying and the flame not being quenched among the dead bodies of those who rebelled against God. [3]
Paul also seems to allude to Isaiah 2 here. Isaiah 2:19 and 21 both speak of running from the glory of God's majesty. People hide in the crags of rocks and in caves trying to get away from judgment. His holy ones or "saints" are those who have faith. They are holy because they are set apart to God. It all started when they believed (had faith in, trusted in) the witness that Paul brought to King Jesus.
In my opinion, any image of vindictiveness is anthropomorphic. It is uses human anger in justice to picture the finality and definitiveness of judgment. It is the end of all that opposes God. It is the removal of that which harms the righteous because of God's love for them. It is the protection of the innocent. It is the setting of everything right in the world.
[3] This image from Isaiah 66 is also used in Mark 9:48.
11 For which also we pray always concerning you in order that our God might might deem you worthy of election and might fulfill every good pleasure of goodness and work of faith with power, 12 so that the name of our Lord Jesus might be glorified among you and you in him, according to the grace of our God and [the] Lord Jesus Christ.
The Thanksgiving section continues. The theme of worthiness also continues, although there is no hint at all that the Thessalonians have been unworthy. It is simply the case that Paul, Silas, and Timothy believe that a person must be worthy when Christ returns in judgment.
Notice that one must be worthy of election (cf. 2 Peter 1:10). This is not what we would expect Paul to say if election implied worthiness. That is to say, in the system of John Calvin, those who are elect will certainly prove to be worthy, for it is completely a matter of God's choosing. Paul's wording suggests that it is exactly the opposite. Election is conditional upon our faithfulness. This faithfulness is God-empowered, but it requires an act of our will.
The phrase, "work of faith" also appeared in 1 Thessalonians. It once again demonstrates that Paul knows no dichotomy between these two concepts. Our worthiness brings honor and glory to God even though it is empowered by his grace. The power is God's unmerited gift, although it requires our act of faith.
I have a podcast/video series every week I call, "Through the Bible in Ten Years." My Thessalonians videos are in a playlist there. Thus far I've been through the Gospel of Mark and most of Acts. This week I begin 2 Thessalonians. But I've never done Explanatory Notes on 2 Thessalonians.
So here goes. I'll do the chapters first and the introduction at the end.
_____________________________
Prescript (1:1-2)
1:1 Paul and Silas and Timothy to the church of the Thessalonians in God, our Father, and the Lord Jesus Christ. 2. Grace to you and peace from God, the Father, and [the] Lord Jesus Christ.
The authors of 2 Thessalonians are the same as that of 1 Thessalonians, giving us the immediate impression that this letter was written in the same time frame as the earlier letter. Paul, Silas, and Timothy were together on Paul's second missionary journey. We do not see Silas mentioned on any later letters of Paul other than 1 and 2 Thessalonians. We would then guess that 2 Thessalonians was written from Corinth to Thessalonica around the years AD50-51. [1]
As we mentioned in the introduction, the order of the Thessalonian letters is open for discussion. 1 Thessalonians was put first because it is longer than 2 Thessalonians. It would thus be possible that 2 Thessalonians was written first, and it has been suggested. However, most scholars have concluded that this order is in fact the order in which they were written.
The same comments we made about the greeting of 1 Thessalonians thus apply here. This is the prescript, a standard letter greeting. The greeting of "grace and peace" potentially embodied the unity between Jew and Gentile that stood at the heart of Paul's mission theology.
A quick comparison between the greetings of 2 Thessalonians and 1 Thessalonians show a very strong similarity. In general, this is not surprising. However, the similarity may go beyond what we would expect unless there was some degree of copying going on. We will return to this question.
A singular church is addressed again. The default interpretation would thus suggest that there is one major house church in the city that consisted of perhaps 40-50 people. There may of course have been smaller cell groups within this overall "assembly."
[1] As we said in the introduction, if the implied setting of 2 Thessalonians were to differ noticeably from the Corinthian time frame, we might wonder if something more is going on here than what appears.
Thanksgiving
1:3 We ought to give thanks to God always concerning you, brothers [and sisters], just as is worthy, because your faith is exploding and the love of each one of all you multiplying toward one another, 4 with the result that we ourselves boast in you in the assemblies of God about your endurance and faith among all your persecutions and the tribulations that you are bearing.
Again, a thanksgiving section was common in ancient letters. We should not take the common features of Paul's thanksgiving sections as an argument against his genuine feeling for his churches or his actual prayers for them. He gives thanks for some of the same things mentioned in 1 Thessalonians 1--their faith and love.
As mentioned in the introduction, the similarity to 1 Thessalonians, although with some different words, is something to observe. We speculated in the introduction that perhaps Silas or Timothy had more to do with the writing of 2 Thessalonians than Paul. We speculated that perhaps one of them stuck closely to the content of 1 Thessalonians in keeping with the overall purpose of the letter. Whether this speculation is true or not, we note here the similarities between the two letters.
We get the impression that their faith and love have grown since the writing of 1 Thessalonians. They are on the same path and trajectory. Persecution has not diminished their faith and love, only increased it.
They have become a source of boasting for Paul, Silas, and Timothy. Paul had mentioned boasting in them in 2 Thessalonians 2:19. They bring him honor before Christ, like a parent is proud of one of their children.
We certainly get the feeling that the level of persecution has increased for the church at Thessalonica. No mention is made of what group might be doing so. Since the church was predominantly Gentile, we doubt that their persecution comes from Jews in the city. They probably have little to do with the synagogues of the city.
It seems more likely that they would encounter resistance from the city leadership in general, remembering that the Christian gospel was potentially subversive. It proclaimed a different king than Caesar and the immanent upheaval of the current world order! Paul himself apparently set the city on this trajectory, since it was the city not the Jews who had the power to force him to leave.
The "churches of God" are the "assemblies of God." They are the collection of all the house churches meeting all over the world. There are as yet no church buildings.
5 [It is a] demonstration of the righteous judgment of God so that you might be deemed worthy of the kingdom of God, on behalf of which you also suffer, 6 since it is right for God to repay with oppression those who are oppressing us
Persecution for Christ both confirms the impending judgment on those who do the persecution and confirms the righteousness of those who are persecuted. Note the importance throughout Paul's writings of the worthiness of God's people when Jesus returns. Paul insists that Jesus-followers live in a manner worthy of the gospel (e.g., Phil. 1:27).
There was no contradiction in Paul's mind between faith and works. Works might not be a basis for justification, but once you had received the Spirit, both faith and a worthy life were normative. The works that were impossible without the Spirit were now indicative of the Spirit.
We note that judgment is not contrary to God's character as love. In this case, judgment is the demonstration of God's love toward the persecuted. Loving judgment protects the innocent and restores order to the world by removing the instruments of evil.
7 and relief to you who are being oppressed, along with us, at the revelation of the Lord Jesus from [the] sky with the angels of his power. 8 "with fire of flame, giving judgment to those who do not know God" [2] and to those who are not obedience to the gospel of our Lord Jesus,
While 1 Thessalonians 1 speaks of the arrival, the "parousia" of Jesus, 2 Thessalonians speaks of the revelation of Jesus, the "apocalypse" of Jesus. Revelation of this sort is the unveiling of that which has been hidden. It is the unveiling of the heavenly, spiritual realm, the breaking in of heaven into earth.
1 Thessalonians 4-5 do not focus on the judgment of those on the earth but on the salvation of those in Christ. 1 Thessalonians 5:9 alluded to the judgment of those who are not "snatched up" to meet the Lord in the air (1 Thess. 4:17). But we indicated in our notes on that chapter that the saved were probably not joining Christ merely to go party forever. 1 Corinthians 6:2-3 suggest that the meeting in the air is in preparation for judgment.
These verses give greater clarity on what happens to the world after those in Christ are removed. King Jesus, his powerful angels, the dead in Christ, and the still alive in Christ will proceed to finalize the arrival of the kingdom of God. The kingdom that had come near and was inaugurated in Jesus's earthly ministry will now be consummated. God's kingdom will come on earth as it is in heaven.
Verse 8 alludes perhaps to two or three Scriptures in the Old Testament. Psalm 79:6 speaks of God pouring out his anger on those who do not know God. Jeremiah 10:25 also speaks of God coming in judgment on those who do not know him. Isaiah 66:15 speaks of the LORD coming back in fire, rebuking the earth with flames of fire.
The Isaiah passage is particularly interesting because it is in the context of the restoration of Jerusalem. Part of this restoration is the destruction of those that oppress it. This allusion may be significant as we move into 2 Thessalonians 2.
9 who will suffer justice, eternal destruction "from the face of the Lord and from the glory of his strength" [3] 10 whenever he should come to be glorified among his holy ones and to be marveled at among all who have faith, because, on that day, our witness was believed among you.
1:9 does not specify the nature of eternal destruction. Indeed, Paul has almost nothing to say about the fate of those who are not in Christ. Eternal destruction could of course refer to eternal punishment, but it could also in theory refer to eternal annihilation. If the allusion to Isaiah 66 continues here, it is noteworthy that Isaiah 66:24 speaks of the worm not dying and the flame not being quenched among the dead bodies of those who rebelled against God. [3]
Paul also seems to allude to Isaiah 2 here. Isaiah 2:19 and 21 both speak of running from the glory of God's majesty. People hide in the crags of rocks and in caves trying to get away from judgment. His holy ones or "saints" are those who have faith. They are holy because they are set apart to God. It all started when they believed (had faith in, trusted in) the witness that Paul brought to King Jesus.
In my opinion, any image of vindictiveness is anthropomorphic. It is uses human anger in justice to picture the finality and definitiveness of judgment. It is the end of all that opposes God. It is the removal of that which harms the righteous because of God's love for them. It is the protection of the innocent. It is the setting of everything right in the world.
[3] This image from Isaiah 66 is also used in Mark 9:48.
11 For which also we pray always concerning you in order that our God might might deem you worthy of election and might fulfill every good pleasure of goodness and work of faith with power, 12 so that the name of our Lord Jesus might be glorified among you and you in him, according to the grace of our God and [the] Lord Jesus Christ.
The Thanksgiving section continues. The theme of worthiness also continues, although there is no hint at all that the Thessalonians have been unworthy. It is simply the case that Paul, Silas, and Timothy believe that a person must be worthy when Christ returns in judgment.
Notice that one must be worthy of election (cf. 2 Peter 1:10). This is not what we would expect Paul to say if election implied worthiness. That is to say, in the system of John Calvin, those who are elect will certainly prove to be worthy, for it is completely a matter of God's choosing. Paul's wording suggests that it is exactly the opposite. Election is conditional upon our faithfulness. This faithfulness is God-empowered, but it requires an act of our will.
The phrase, "work of faith" also appeared in 1 Thessalonians. It once again demonstrates that Paul knows no dichotomy between these two concepts. Our worthiness brings honor and glory to God even though it is empowered by his grace. The power is God's unmerited gift, although it requires our act of faith.
Saturday, October 06, 2018
For Patrons: The Church at Thessalonica
My podcast/video for patrons this week is now available. It's a look at the Thessalonian church and the two letters of Paul to the Thessalonians.
Patrons are those who donate at least $5 a month to my Patreon.com page, supporting my daily podcast commentaries on Acts, along with the daily videos on the Greek of these same passages.
Patrons are those who donate at least $5 a month to my Patreon.com page, supporting my daily podcast commentaries on Acts, along with the daily videos on the Greek of these same passages.
Monday, December 20, 2010
The Insanity of Prophecy Chasers
A paragraph from chapter 8 of my second Paul book:
"It is hard to know what to take from the specifics of 2 Thessalonians 2. However, the history of the interpretation of passages like this one is clear enough. Those who have connected contemporary events with the details of passages like this one have not only been consistently wrong; they have been wrong every single time to date as far as we can tell. A case in point was a little booklet called Eighty-Eight Reasons Why the Lord Is Coming Back in 1988. What a sobering thought! If I engage in prophetic speculation, the odds are astronomically against me being correct on pretty much everything. I am far more likely to win the lottery every week for the rest of my life than to be correct on any one detail of prophetic interpretation."
"It is hard to know what to take from the specifics of 2 Thessalonians 2. However, the history of the interpretation of passages like this one is clear enough. Those who have connected contemporary events with the details of passages like this one have not only been consistently wrong; they have been wrong every single time to date as far as we can tell. A case in point was a little booklet called Eighty-Eight Reasons Why the Lord Is Coming Back in 1988. What a sobering thought! If I engage in prophetic speculation, the odds are astronomically against me being correct on pretty much everything. I am far more likely to win the lottery every week for the rest of my life than to be correct on any one detail of prophetic interpretation."
Wednesday, October 20, 2010
Day of the Lord here?
Got ya. This is actually from the 7th chapter of my second Paul book. :-)
________
2 Thessalonians 2 is one of the most cryptic passages in the Bible. Paul seems intentionally vague. He alludes to knowledge he and the Thessalonians share but that he apparently does not want to mention explicitly in the letter. “You know,” Paul says, “what is holding him back” (2:6). But he does not say what or who it is. He mentions things he told them when he was with them but keeps the details out of the letter. It feels like some of the powers he of which speaks are looking over his shoulder.
The general topic is the “Day of the Lord,” which Paul associates with the parousia or “arrival” of Jesus, as well as with believers being gathered to him (2:1-2). 1 Thessalonians also speaks of the Day of the Lord. It says that this event will come “like a thief in the night” (1 Thess. 5:2). For unbelievers, the arrival of Christ will be surprising, along with the wrath of God that ensues (1:10; 5:9). But it will not surprise believers for they are awake (5:4-5). Just before that Day, Christ will return from heaven. The dead will rise and Christ will meet us with them in the clouds (4:16-17).
The tone here is quite different in 2 Thessalonians. If 1 Thessalonians urges them to be ready for the Lord to come at any time like a thief, 2 Thessalonians puts on the brakes and tells them to wait because a few things still have to happen yet. For this reason, they do not feel like they were written one right after the other. Certainly 2 Thessalonians does not feel like it was written before 1 Thessalonians. A scenario sometimes advanced is that Paul wrote the Thessalonians that Christ could return any day then some of them stopped working and acted as if the Day had already come.
But the situation seems driven by something more than Paul’s former teaching. 2 Thessalonians 2:2 mentions a rumor going around that the Day of the Lord had come. Paul even mentions the possibility that someone might forge a letter in his name to this effect. This statement, coupled with the strong claim at the end of 2 Thessalonians that Paul signed the letter with his own hand (3:17), raises the stakes for us not to take Paul as the author of this letter. If Paul was not the author of 2 Thessalonians, then it would be difficult not to take this letter as a somewhat blatant attempt to deceive.
But what circumstances might lead the Thessalonians to think that the Day of the Lord had arrived? On the one hand, we should probably think of this comment more as the beginnings of the end. Surely everyone believed that the return of the Lord from heaven to judge the earth would be a fairly obvious event—you will know when it happens. Surely it was not like the Thessalonians had heard Jesus had returned to Jerusalem already!
But surely some event of major proportions was happening to trigger such talk. Even if we bracket the question of Paul’s authorship, the temple must still be standing, for 2:4 mentions some “man of lawlessness” setting himself up in the Jerusalem temple as God. It is very difficult to imagine that any Jew or Gentile believer at that time would have pictured anything but the Jerusalem temple when they heard this statement. Certainly Paul does spiritualize the temple at times (e.g., 1 Cor. 3:16). But 2 Thessalonians is talking about rebellions and the movements of a lawless individual. Surely the audience of 2 Thessalonians would have heard Daniel 11:31 in these words, the desecration of the temple by a contemptible king who sets up an “abomination that causes desolation.”
Indeed, it is hard for us not to hear overtones here of Matthew 24:15 and Mark 13:14, where Jesus speaks of such an abomination in the temple. And surely it would have been hard for any audience at the time of Paul not to remember a somewhat recent event when the emperor Caligula tried to have a statue of himself erected in the Jerusalem temple. This event happened at least ten years before 2 Thessalonians, so it is not the event Paul has in mind. But it seems very likely that it gives important background for what Paul and the Thessalonians would have pictured when Paul spoke of the man of lawlessness setting himself up in the temple as God...
________
2 Thessalonians 2 is one of the most cryptic passages in the Bible. Paul seems intentionally vague. He alludes to knowledge he and the Thessalonians share but that he apparently does not want to mention explicitly in the letter. “You know,” Paul says, “what is holding him back” (2:6). But he does not say what or who it is. He mentions things he told them when he was with them but keeps the details out of the letter. It feels like some of the powers he of which speaks are looking over his shoulder.
The general topic is the “Day of the Lord,” which Paul associates with the parousia or “arrival” of Jesus, as well as with believers being gathered to him (2:1-2). 1 Thessalonians also speaks of the Day of the Lord. It says that this event will come “like a thief in the night” (1 Thess. 5:2). For unbelievers, the arrival of Christ will be surprising, along with the wrath of God that ensues (1:10; 5:9). But it will not surprise believers for they are awake (5:4-5). Just before that Day, Christ will return from heaven. The dead will rise and Christ will meet us with them in the clouds (4:16-17).
The tone here is quite different in 2 Thessalonians. If 1 Thessalonians urges them to be ready for the Lord to come at any time like a thief, 2 Thessalonians puts on the brakes and tells them to wait because a few things still have to happen yet. For this reason, they do not feel like they were written one right after the other. Certainly 2 Thessalonians does not feel like it was written before 1 Thessalonians. A scenario sometimes advanced is that Paul wrote the Thessalonians that Christ could return any day then some of them stopped working and acted as if the Day had already come.
But the situation seems driven by something more than Paul’s former teaching. 2 Thessalonians 2:2 mentions a rumor going around that the Day of the Lord had come. Paul even mentions the possibility that someone might forge a letter in his name to this effect. This statement, coupled with the strong claim at the end of 2 Thessalonians that Paul signed the letter with his own hand (3:17), raises the stakes for us not to take Paul as the author of this letter. If Paul was not the author of 2 Thessalonians, then it would be difficult not to take this letter as a somewhat blatant attempt to deceive.
But what circumstances might lead the Thessalonians to think that the Day of the Lord had arrived? On the one hand, we should probably think of this comment more as the beginnings of the end. Surely everyone believed that the return of the Lord from heaven to judge the earth would be a fairly obvious event—you will know when it happens. Surely it was not like the Thessalonians had heard Jesus had returned to Jerusalem already!
But surely some event of major proportions was happening to trigger such talk. Even if we bracket the question of Paul’s authorship, the temple must still be standing, for 2:4 mentions some “man of lawlessness” setting himself up in the Jerusalem temple as God. It is very difficult to imagine that any Jew or Gentile believer at that time would have pictured anything but the Jerusalem temple when they heard this statement. Certainly Paul does spiritualize the temple at times (e.g., 1 Cor. 3:16). But 2 Thessalonians is talking about rebellions and the movements of a lawless individual. Surely the audience of 2 Thessalonians would have heard Daniel 11:31 in these words, the desecration of the temple by a contemptible king who sets up an “abomination that causes desolation.”
Indeed, it is hard for us not to hear overtones here of Matthew 24:15 and Mark 13:14, where Jesus speaks of such an abomination in the temple. And surely it would have been hard for any audience at the time of Paul not to remember a somewhat recent event when the emperor Caligula tried to have a statue of himself erected in the Jerusalem temple. This event happened at least ten years before 2 Thessalonians, so it is not the event Paul has in mind. But it seems very likely that it gives important background for what Paul and the Thessalonians would have pictured when Paul spoke of the man of lawlessness setting himself up in the temple as God...
Tuesday, January 27, 2009
Interpretation of 2 Thessalonians 2:4
I did some spade work in relation to an assignment my Thessalonians/Corinthians class did for today. The following are PowerPoint slides for class discussion today, going through much of the evidence and doing the exegetical process. Very difficult question! Hard to know the answer!
2 Thessalonians 2:4
Interpretive Question: What does it mean for the man of lawlessness “to sit in the temple of God, showing himself to be divine”?
I. Preliminary Look at Immediate Context
a. Thessalonians 2 seems to deal with events prior to the Day of the Lord.
b. This man of lawlessness would appear before the Day and do whatever this verse is talking about.
II. Broader Literary Context
a. 1:7-10 speaks of the “revelation” of Jesus from heaven with his angels, when he will come and visit judgment on those who trouble the Thessalonians.
b. So we observe 1) a context of Jesus’ return to earth in judgment and 2) an apparent expectation that it will happen while the audience is alive.
c. 2 Thessalonians 2 then goes on to speak of the parousia, arrival of the Lord… apparently the same event.
d. Chapter 2 thus would seem to be about events that Paul expects to take place within the audience’s lifetime.
e. The “Day of the Lord” would seem to be another way of referring to the same judgment.
III. Genre and Critical Issues
a. Some argue that 2 Thessalonians is pseudonymous, perhaps meant to balance out the immanent expectation of 1 Thessalonians.
b. If so, we can ask how much later than Paul it would have been written, something to keep in mind.
IV. Historical-Cultural Background
A. Intertextual Evidence
1. The “Day of the Lord” evokes Old Testament imagery of a day of visitation when God judges some group (e.g., Amos 5:18). There the judgment is more local or epochal. In 2 Thess. more universal.
2. Daniel 11:36--in reference to Antiochus Epiphanes, who “will exalt himself over every god.”
B. Other texts by Paul
1. The parousia for Paul refers to Jesus’ return in salvation and judgment. “Gathering together” in 2 Thess. 2:1 would seem to refer to the same event as 1 Thess. 4:17.
2. The idea that the “letter as through us” might refer to 1 Thessalonians seems incredible. Paul elsewhere says nothing about this “man of lawlessness” or any such action in a temple.
3. Temple in Paul
a. 1 Corinthians 3:16--“You are the temple of God.”
b. 1 Corinthians 6:19--“Your body is a temple of the Holy Spirit.”
C. Contemporary Literature
1. The rest of the New Testament
a. Mark 13/Matthew 24--“When you see the abomination of desolation standing where it should not be”--AD70, possibly end times as well
b. Luke 21—Jerusalem surrounded by armies--AD70
c. Revelation 13 and 17
Beast from the sea and beast from the land have some similarities. Beast from the sea makes war on the saints and takes imagery from Nero. Beast from the land performs wonders. No mention of temple in Revelation.
2. Outside the New Testament
Ascension of Isaiah 4:2-12 (2nd cent.)
"After it is consummated, Beliar the great ruler, the king of this world, will descend, who hath ruled it since it came into being; yea, he will descent from his firmament in the likeness of a man, a lawless king, the slayer of his mother: who himself (even) this king, will persecute the plant which the Twelve Apostles of the Beloved have planted. Of the Twelve one will be delivered into his hands.
"This ruler in the form of that king will come and there will come and there will come with him all the powers of this world, and they will hearken unto him in all that he desires. And at his word the sun will rise at night and he will make the moon to appear at the sixth hour. And all that he hath desired he will do in the world: he will do and speak like the Beloved and he will say: 'I am God and before me there has been none.'
"And all the people in the world will believe in him. And they will sacrifice to him and they will serve him saying: "This is God and beside him there is no other.” And the greater number of those who shall have been associated together in order to receive the Beloved, he will turn aside after him. And there will be the power of his miracles in every city and region. And he will set up his image before him in every city. And he shall bear sway three years and seven months and twenty-seven days."
D. Other Historical Evidence
1. Temple echoes?
a. Desecration by Antiochus Epiphanes (167BC)
b. Entrance into Holy of Holies by Pompey (63BC)
c. Desired desecration by Caligula (40BC)
2. Contemporary Events of Interest
a. Martyrdom of Peter and Paul in Rome (AD60’s)
b. Jewish Revolt against Rome (AD66-73)
c. Destruction of the Temple (AD70)
V. Immediate Literary Context
Vs. 1— “concerning the arrival of Lord and our gathering”
context of parousia, meeting him in air
Vs. 2– “Day of Lord has come”
Sure seems like some situation must be prompting… too many potential sources of such a belief involved. Could it be over-enthusiasm for Christ’s return? Nero’s persecution? Of Paul? Of Roman Christians or Peter? The revolt?
Vs. 3—“apostasy” and “man of lawlessness”
Apostasy—Acts 21:21: “turning away from Moses”; Jeremiah 2:19—turning away from God; 1 Macc. 2:15—the apostasy as the forced Hellenization of Israel; Seems most likely to refer to Jews or Christians turning from God.
Vs. 4—opposes everything being called God
Evokes images of Antiochus, Caligula. Not obviously a Jew, although how otherwise would he be part of a turning away? Turning away seems to be in the direction of the man of lawlessness, so probably not Jewish revolt.
“sits in the temple to show he is divine”
Everything thus far has seemed literal—real parousia, real gathering, real individual opposing God, real turning away. So probably should take temple literally. The temple was standing at the time, so probably pre-AD70.
So likely resonances:
a. apostasy—like the turn away from God at the time of the Maccabees, turn toward the Romans?
b. man of lawlessness—like Antiochus or Caligula (if a specific person was in view, Nero is the best suggestion)
c. sets himself in the temple—like the desecration of Antiochus or Caligula, but in person like Pompey
d. signs and wonders will accompany
VI. Conclusion
Similarities to Mark 13/Matthew 24, possible blurring of contemporary events with end time events
Expectation of desecration of temple by political figure, perhaps literal originally, metaphorical now?
2 Thessalonians 2:4
Interpretive Question: What does it mean for the man of lawlessness “to sit in the temple of God, showing himself to be divine”?
I. Preliminary Look at Immediate Context
a. Thessalonians 2 seems to deal with events prior to the Day of the Lord.
b. This man of lawlessness would appear before the Day and do whatever this verse is talking about.
II. Broader Literary Context
a. 1:7-10 speaks of the “revelation” of Jesus from heaven with his angels, when he will come and visit judgment on those who trouble the Thessalonians.
b. So we observe 1) a context of Jesus’ return to earth in judgment and 2) an apparent expectation that it will happen while the audience is alive.
c. 2 Thessalonians 2 then goes on to speak of the parousia, arrival of the Lord… apparently the same event.
d. Chapter 2 thus would seem to be about events that Paul expects to take place within the audience’s lifetime.
e. The “Day of the Lord” would seem to be another way of referring to the same judgment.
III. Genre and Critical Issues
a. Some argue that 2 Thessalonians is pseudonymous, perhaps meant to balance out the immanent expectation of 1 Thessalonians.
b. If so, we can ask how much later than Paul it would have been written, something to keep in mind.
IV. Historical-Cultural Background
A. Intertextual Evidence
1. The “Day of the Lord” evokes Old Testament imagery of a day of visitation when God judges some group (e.g., Amos 5:18). There the judgment is more local or epochal. In 2 Thess. more universal.
2. Daniel 11:36--in reference to Antiochus Epiphanes, who “will exalt himself over every god.”
B. Other texts by Paul
1. The parousia for Paul refers to Jesus’ return in salvation and judgment. “Gathering together” in 2 Thess. 2:1 would seem to refer to the same event as 1 Thess. 4:17.
2. The idea that the “letter as through us” might refer to 1 Thessalonians seems incredible. Paul elsewhere says nothing about this “man of lawlessness” or any such action in a temple.
3. Temple in Paul
a. 1 Corinthians 3:16--“You are the temple of God.”
b. 1 Corinthians 6:19--“Your body is a temple of the Holy Spirit.”
C. Contemporary Literature
1. The rest of the New Testament
a. Mark 13/Matthew 24--“When you see the abomination of desolation standing where it should not be”--AD70, possibly end times as well
b. Luke 21—Jerusalem surrounded by armies--AD70
c. Revelation 13 and 17
Beast from the sea and beast from the land have some similarities. Beast from the sea makes war on the saints and takes imagery from Nero. Beast from the land performs wonders. No mention of temple in Revelation.
2. Outside the New Testament
Ascension of Isaiah 4:2-12 (2nd cent.)
"After it is consummated, Beliar the great ruler, the king of this world, will descend, who hath ruled it since it came into being; yea, he will descent from his firmament in the likeness of a man, a lawless king, the slayer of his mother: who himself (even) this king, will persecute the plant which the Twelve Apostles of the Beloved have planted. Of the Twelve one will be delivered into his hands.
"This ruler in the form of that king will come and there will come and there will come with him all the powers of this world, and they will hearken unto him in all that he desires. And at his word the sun will rise at night and he will make the moon to appear at the sixth hour. And all that he hath desired he will do in the world: he will do and speak like the Beloved and he will say: 'I am God and before me there has been none.'
"And all the people in the world will believe in him. And they will sacrifice to him and they will serve him saying: "This is God and beside him there is no other.” And the greater number of those who shall have been associated together in order to receive the Beloved, he will turn aside after him. And there will be the power of his miracles in every city and region. And he will set up his image before him in every city. And he shall bear sway three years and seven months and twenty-seven days."
D. Other Historical Evidence
1. Temple echoes?
a. Desecration by Antiochus Epiphanes (167BC)
b. Entrance into Holy of Holies by Pompey (63BC)
c. Desired desecration by Caligula (40BC)
2. Contemporary Events of Interest
a. Martyrdom of Peter and Paul in Rome (AD60’s)
b. Jewish Revolt against Rome (AD66-73)
c. Destruction of the Temple (AD70)
V. Immediate Literary Context
Vs. 1— “concerning the arrival of Lord and our gathering”
context of parousia, meeting him in air
Vs. 2– “Day of Lord has come”
Sure seems like some situation must be prompting… too many potential sources of such a belief involved. Could it be over-enthusiasm for Christ’s return? Nero’s persecution? Of Paul? Of Roman Christians or Peter? The revolt?
Vs. 3—“apostasy” and “man of lawlessness”
Apostasy—Acts 21:21: “turning away from Moses”; Jeremiah 2:19—turning away from God; 1 Macc. 2:15—the apostasy as the forced Hellenization of Israel; Seems most likely to refer to Jews or Christians turning from God.
Vs. 4—opposes everything being called God
Evokes images of Antiochus, Caligula. Not obviously a Jew, although how otherwise would he be part of a turning away? Turning away seems to be in the direction of the man of lawlessness, so probably not Jewish revolt.
“sits in the temple to show he is divine”
Everything thus far has seemed literal—real parousia, real gathering, real individual opposing God, real turning away. So probably should take temple literally. The temple was standing at the time, so probably pre-AD70.
So likely resonances:
a. apostasy—like the turn away from God at the time of the Maccabees, turn toward the Romans?
b. man of lawlessness—like Antiochus or Caligula (if a specific person was in view, Nero is the best suggestion)
c. sets himself in the temple—like the desecration of Antiochus or Caligula, but in person like Pompey
d. signs and wonders will accompany
VI. Conclusion
Similarities to Mark 13/Matthew 24, possible blurring of contemporary events with end time events
Expectation of desecration of temple by political figure, perhaps literal originally, metaphorical now?
Thursday, January 15, 2009
2 Thessalonians as Christian Scripture
The following is meant as my attempt to show what I am picturing as "thick" Christian interpretation of the Bible read as Christian Scripture. Obviously I am thinking out loud here and welcome feedback and critique.
I
Reading 2 Thessalonians as Christian Scripture is to read it with the eyes of Christian faith, the faith that understands Christ as the Word of God par excellence and that sees the unfolding of the particulars of words of God in the church's ongoing reading of the Bible throughout the centuries. 2 Thessalonians does not have any "classic" passages in the sense of passages that played key roles in Christian debates and that came to embody Christian faith on a particular topic. In that sense, Christian history does not push us toward consensus interpretations of passages in 2 Thessalonians.
Nevertheless, 2 Thessalonians does deal with central Christian issues. 2 Thessalonians 1 speaks of the righteous judgment of God and how He will repay evildoers with eternal destruction at the return of Christ. Chapter 2 discusses the kinds of events that will take place in the time just before the Lord's return. Chapter 3 deals not least with believers who do not work when they could and yet expect to be supported by the Christian community.
We find Christian consensus on some of these issues and not on others. Thus it is the consensus of Christendom that the Lord Jesus Christ will return again one day from heaven. This faith has found its way into the Apostle's and Nicene creed. At the same time, Christians have never come to consensus on the events surrounding the parousia. There is thus no "Christian" view on how to take references to the "man of lawlessness" here. 2 Thessalonians has some very unique material on the matter of Christ's return, and it would be dangerous to base fundamental theology on a single passage when the church of the ages has not.
The books of the Bible as a whole do not present us with a clear picture of the "end times," and this includes the nature of "eternal destruction." Nevertheless, it is the consensus of the church that eternal destruction will take place in hell, a place of eternal torment. The most Christian way to read 1:9 is in reference to hell as the destiny of the wicked, even though Paul himself never uses the word and may not have had this originally in view.
It is the consensus of the church that Christians must help the poor and those in need. However, I cannot think of any consensus type statement on what to do with those who could provide for themselves or could contribute to the community but choose not to. We suspect, in general, however, that Christians have generally followed the idea that those who could work but do not, do not merit participation in the work of the rest of the Christian community.
II.
When we move below the consensus of the church to points of debate or varying emphases in Christian history, we do find passages in 2 Thessalonians that have featured as key passages for certain Christian groups. Similarly, we can find "reforming debates" on some of the issues of Christian consensus that could conceivably emerge in the future as corrections to the trajectory of common Christendom.
Certainly we must mention dispensationalism as a significant movement within modern Christendom. It does not have much claim to the original meaning of Scripture below, nor does it have the weight of history behind it. But it claims a significant number of believers in the United States for the last two centuries.
Dispensationalists read 2 Thessalonians 2 in relation to an Antichrist who will appear in the days either right before or right after the "rapture" of 1 Thessalonians 4. They see 2:4 as an allusion to a coming rebuilding of the Jerusalem temple in the nation of Israel reestablished in 1948. These interpretations are far from a consensus within Christian history and they are dubious even from an original meaning perspective. But they are movements to be watched to see whether they will gain or diminish strength in the church over time.
The Puritan work ethic was expressed by way of 3:11: "He who will not work, shall not eat." Some American Christians again have taken this verse into the realm of national politics as a sentiment against any sort of welfare. Nevertheless, both the weight of Christian history and of the biblical record is toward caring for those in need.
The question of God's vengeance has occasionally given various Christians pause. The New Testament seems to emphasize God's mercy over His justice (e.g., James 2:13). The thrust of the New Testament would not seem to take an "eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth" attitude toward sinners. Thus the question rises. If human sin, no matter how great, is a finite amount, then how can God be just to requite it with an infinite punishment in hell?
The Calvinist answer is that failure to acknowledge God as God is an infinite sin and thus that the punishment is just. Similarly, God is seen as exacting the precise just punishment of all sinners--or at least of those who are saved--from Christ. Others, like C. S. Lewis, have suggested that a person might very well decide to serve God in hell, no matter how unlikely. Seventh Day Adventists have opted to believe in the annihilation of the wicked.
Nevertheless, the consensus of Christendom remains belief in eternal destruction in hell for the wicked. The question of those who have never heard, on the other hand, remains open for debate. Does God judge them according to the light they have (perhaps the majority opinion in Christian history) or are they simply lost the same as those who consciously reject Christ?
II
The original meaning of 2 Thessalonians involves some issues on which there is no scholarly consensus. For example, 2 Thessalonians does not give the impression of recent acquaintance that 1 Thessalonians does. It seems to reflect a stable relationship between Paul and the Thessalonians. At the same time, its teaching about the man of lawlessness is otherwise unknown in Paul's writings. A sizeable minority of New Testament scholars would consider it pseudonymous, although the majority--especially the overwhelming majority of evangelical scholars (if not the unanimous verdict)--see Paul as the author.
It is not clear whether such issues have any significance at all for reading 2 Thessalonians as Christian Scripture. In any case, we cannot speak of any scholarly consensus on the issue, so it would be hazardous to base anything on such a determination one way or the other. 2 Thessalonians 2:4 does seem to have the standing temple of Jerusalem in view, which raises some questions for the dispensationalist reading of 2 Thessalonians.
The question of "eternal destruction" is unclear in Paul's writings. He never mentions hell and is unclear about the fate of any dead other than the dead in Christ. Indeed, one could read Romans 6:7 to imply death as a sufficient punishment for sin. This is not, however, the consensus reading of New Testament scholars nor is it the Christian reading of the passage. So while these considerations might be a basis for future reformation, they are not in play within the church.
I
Reading 2 Thessalonians as Christian Scripture is to read it with the eyes of Christian faith, the faith that understands Christ as the Word of God par excellence and that sees the unfolding of the particulars of words of God in the church's ongoing reading of the Bible throughout the centuries. 2 Thessalonians does not have any "classic" passages in the sense of passages that played key roles in Christian debates and that came to embody Christian faith on a particular topic. In that sense, Christian history does not push us toward consensus interpretations of passages in 2 Thessalonians.
Nevertheless, 2 Thessalonians does deal with central Christian issues. 2 Thessalonians 1 speaks of the righteous judgment of God and how He will repay evildoers with eternal destruction at the return of Christ. Chapter 2 discusses the kinds of events that will take place in the time just before the Lord's return. Chapter 3 deals not least with believers who do not work when they could and yet expect to be supported by the Christian community.
We find Christian consensus on some of these issues and not on others. Thus it is the consensus of Christendom that the Lord Jesus Christ will return again one day from heaven. This faith has found its way into the Apostle's and Nicene creed. At the same time, Christians have never come to consensus on the events surrounding the parousia. There is thus no "Christian" view on how to take references to the "man of lawlessness" here. 2 Thessalonians has some very unique material on the matter of Christ's return, and it would be dangerous to base fundamental theology on a single passage when the church of the ages has not.
The books of the Bible as a whole do not present us with a clear picture of the "end times," and this includes the nature of "eternal destruction." Nevertheless, it is the consensus of the church that eternal destruction will take place in hell, a place of eternal torment. The most Christian way to read 1:9 is in reference to hell as the destiny of the wicked, even though Paul himself never uses the word and may not have had this originally in view.
It is the consensus of the church that Christians must help the poor and those in need. However, I cannot think of any consensus type statement on what to do with those who could provide for themselves or could contribute to the community but choose not to. We suspect, in general, however, that Christians have generally followed the idea that those who could work but do not, do not merit participation in the work of the rest of the Christian community.
II.
When we move below the consensus of the church to points of debate or varying emphases in Christian history, we do find passages in 2 Thessalonians that have featured as key passages for certain Christian groups. Similarly, we can find "reforming debates" on some of the issues of Christian consensus that could conceivably emerge in the future as corrections to the trajectory of common Christendom.
Certainly we must mention dispensationalism as a significant movement within modern Christendom. It does not have much claim to the original meaning of Scripture below, nor does it have the weight of history behind it. But it claims a significant number of believers in the United States for the last two centuries.
Dispensationalists read 2 Thessalonians 2 in relation to an Antichrist who will appear in the days either right before or right after the "rapture" of 1 Thessalonians 4. They see 2:4 as an allusion to a coming rebuilding of the Jerusalem temple in the nation of Israel reestablished in 1948. These interpretations are far from a consensus within Christian history and they are dubious even from an original meaning perspective. But they are movements to be watched to see whether they will gain or diminish strength in the church over time.
The Puritan work ethic was expressed by way of 3:11: "He who will not work, shall not eat." Some American Christians again have taken this verse into the realm of national politics as a sentiment against any sort of welfare. Nevertheless, both the weight of Christian history and of the biblical record is toward caring for those in need.
The question of God's vengeance has occasionally given various Christians pause. The New Testament seems to emphasize God's mercy over His justice (e.g., James 2:13). The thrust of the New Testament would not seem to take an "eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth" attitude toward sinners. Thus the question rises. If human sin, no matter how great, is a finite amount, then how can God be just to requite it with an infinite punishment in hell?
The Calvinist answer is that failure to acknowledge God as God is an infinite sin and thus that the punishment is just. Similarly, God is seen as exacting the precise just punishment of all sinners--or at least of those who are saved--from Christ. Others, like C. S. Lewis, have suggested that a person might very well decide to serve God in hell, no matter how unlikely. Seventh Day Adventists have opted to believe in the annihilation of the wicked.
Nevertheless, the consensus of Christendom remains belief in eternal destruction in hell for the wicked. The question of those who have never heard, on the other hand, remains open for debate. Does God judge them according to the light they have (perhaps the majority opinion in Christian history) or are they simply lost the same as those who consciously reject Christ?
II
The original meaning of 2 Thessalonians involves some issues on which there is no scholarly consensus. For example, 2 Thessalonians does not give the impression of recent acquaintance that 1 Thessalonians does. It seems to reflect a stable relationship between Paul and the Thessalonians. At the same time, its teaching about the man of lawlessness is otherwise unknown in Paul's writings. A sizeable minority of New Testament scholars would consider it pseudonymous, although the majority--especially the overwhelming majority of evangelical scholars (if not the unanimous verdict)--see Paul as the author.
It is not clear whether such issues have any significance at all for reading 2 Thessalonians as Christian Scripture. In any case, we cannot speak of any scholarly consensus on the issue, so it would be hazardous to base anything on such a determination one way or the other. 2 Thessalonians 2:4 does seem to have the standing temple of Jerusalem in view, which raises some questions for the dispensationalist reading of 2 Thessalonians.
The question of "eternal destruction" is unclear in Paul's writings. He never mentions hell and is unclear about the fate of any dead other than the dead in Christ. Indeed, one could read Romans 6:7 to imply death as a sufficient punishment for sin. This is not, however, the consensus reading of New Testament scholars nor is it the Christian reading of the passage. So while these considerations might be a basis for future reformation, they are not in play within the church.
Friday, July 20, 2007
2 Thessalonians and sin
2 Thessalonians does not use the word sin. It does, however, use the word lawlessness (anomia). In particular, 2 Thessalonians speaks of a "man of lawlessness" (2:3; also 2:8) and a "mystery of lawlessness" (2:7). Lawlessness here seems closely connected to opposition to God (2:4). Indeed, this lawless one seems to lead some sort of "rebellion" (apostasia) (2:3).
We should not commit the anachronistic fallacy and assume apostasia means a turning away from faith. The group this lawless one leads astray are "those who are perishing" who "did not receive love of the truth" (2:10). These are "all who did not believe the truth but took pleasure in unrighteousness" (adikia) (2:12).
Sin in 1 Thessalonians 2 is thus once again opposition to God and what He is enacting in history. In contrast to the unbelievers above, the Thessalonians have been "chosen for salvation by the sanctification of the Spirit and by faith in the truth" (2:13).
Chapter 2 ends with a prayer for them to be established in "every good work and word" (2:17), again showing that works do not contradict faith.
There is talk in chapter 1 (1:5, 11) of the Thessalonians being worthy of the kingdom because of their endurance of suffering and because God has fulfilled in them "every good pleasure of goodness and work of faith in power" (1:11). Again, we find no sense of careful distinction between faith and works. Both are in the mix of worthiness for the kingdom.
3:2-3 talk of God's protection "from the evil one" in being delivered from "wicked and evil people." My sense is that this does not refer to deliverance from sin but deliverance from persecution.
The last part of 2 Thessalonians 3 warns against idleness. But it does not identify it as a sin.
We should not commit the anachronistic fallacy and assume apostasia means a turning away from faith. The group this lawless one leads astray are "those who are perishing" who "did not receive love of the truth" (2:10). These are "all who did not believe the truth but took pleasure in unrighteousness" (adikia) (2:12).
Sin in 1 Thessalonians 2 is thus once again opposition to God and what He is enacting in history. In contrast to the unbelievers above, the Thessalonians have been "chosen for salvation by the sanctification of the Spirit and by faith in the truth" (2:13).
Chapter 2 ends with a prayer for them to be established in "every good work and word" (2:17), again showing that works do not contradict faith.
There is talk in chapter 1 (1:5, 11) of the Thessalonians being worthy of the kingdom because of their endurance of suffering and because God has fulfilled in them "every good pleasure of goodness and work of faith in power" (1:11). Again, we find no sense of careful distinction between faith and works. Both are in the mix of worthiness for the kingdom.
3:2-3 talk of God's protection "from the evil one" in being delivered from "wicked and evil people." My sense is that this does not refer to deliverance from sin but deliverance from persecution.
The last part of 2 Thessalonians 3 warns against idleness. But it does not identify it as a sin.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
