Authorship. The vast majority of scholars acknowledge 1 Thessalonians to be Pauline, the majority recognizing it as Paul’s first extant letter.
Date. First and Second Thessalonians may be the earliest of Paul’s extant letters, written shortly after the evangelization of the Thessalonians, hence by about A.D. 50, within two decades of Jesus’ *resurrection.
Situation. While preaching Jesus as *Messiah (the Jewish king) in Thessalonica, Paul had been accused of preaching another king besides Caesar (Acts 17:7; cf. “*kingdom” in 1 Thess 2:12; 2 Thess 1:5). The very young Thessalonian *church continued to experience persecution after Paul’s departure, but he encourages them with the promise of a future hope, which applies even to those who have already died (1 Thess 4:13-18). Paul borrows much of the language used by Jesus and Jewish *apocalyptic motifs that had become part of the early Christian movement.
Form. Technically, the handbooks that mention letter types are later, and divide letters into types merely to provide examples for composition; nevertheless, they may provide some sensitivity to ancient ways of thinking about important themes in letters. Most of Paul’s letters include a thanksgiving, but some commentators think that his thanksgiving in this letter extends from 1:2 to 3:13 (which is unlikely); thus they characterize this as a “letter of thanksgiving.” Others categorize it as a “letter of comfort” or a “parenetic letter” (a letter telling them how to behave); it also contains substantial elements of a “letter of praise,” commending the Thessalonians, and features from “letters of friendship.” Like most ancient letters, 1 Thessalonians is a mixture of various types, borrowing themes as necessary from each type (to the extent that they existed as such) without concern for formal categories; its closest parallels, however, are to parenetic letters. It has deliberative elements.
Unity. Nearly all scholars today acknowledge that 1 Thessalonians is a unity (the change of tone in chaps. 4–5 is characteristic of Paul’s and some similar letters), except for 2:14-16, which some scholars think (on content grounds) were added later to Paul’s letter. Chapters 1–3 seem to exhibit a slightly modified chiastic (inverted parallel) structure, however, which suggests that even these verses belong: thanksgiving (1:2-5; 3:9-10), victory in suffering (1:6-10; 3:6-8), apostolic care (2:1-13, 17-20) and suffering (2:14-16; 3:1-5).
Commentaries. Among commentaries helpful for background are Abraham J. Malherbe, The Letters to the Thessalonians, AB 32B (New York: Doubleday, 2000); I. Howard Marshall, 1 and 2 Thessalonians, NCB (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1983); note also F. F. Bruce, 1 and 2 Thessalonians, WBC 45 (Waco, TX: Word, 1982); and Leon Morris, The First and Second Epistles to the Thessalonians, NICNT, rev. ed. (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1991). Among other helpful studies, see Karl Paul Donfried, Paul, Thessalonica, and Early Christianity (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2002); Abraham Malherbe, Paul and the Thessalonians: The Philosophic Tradition of Pastoral Care (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1987).
It is uncertain where (or if) Paul’s thanksgiving breaks off; because Paul did not write in paragraphs but according to flows of thought and *digressions, one cannot always outline his letters as we might outline discussions of topics today.
1:1. This was the standard way to open a letter. “Silvanus” is Silas’s Latin name as a Roman citizen; a Jewish Roman citizen’s parents often chose for their child Jewish (*Aramaic) and Latin names that sounded similar.
1:2. Thanksgivings were a common feature of ancient letters. Verses 2-10 might function like a proem, the customary opening designed to secure the hearers’ goodwill, although Paul also wishes at the same time to encourage them; he is lavish in praising them (a skill emphasized in antiquity most extensively in epideictic *rhetoric). On “mentioning” in prayers, see comment on Philippians 1:3-4.
1:3-4. “Chosenness” (v. 4) was a term the Jewish people applied exclusively to themselves; Paul applies it here to a *church that includes many *Gentile converts.
1:5. Parenetic letters often reminded readers of what they already knew. Appealing to readers’ own eyewitness knowledge was an irrefutable technique of argument.
1:6. Students often imitated their teachers, and invitations to imitation were normal in parenesis; but Paul claims that they have already begun to do so. The common Jewish association of the *Spirit with divine inspiration might suggest inspired or even ecstatic joy (perhaps in jubilant worship), although the Spirit was associated with other activities as well. Most of pagan culture reacted angrily to Jewish people’s converting pagans from the religion of their ancestors; because a greater percentage of Christians were converts from Gentile backgrounds, they would face still greater hostility.
1:7. Achaia, south of Macedonia, was well aware of events in that nearby province.
1:8. Travelers usually carried news with them, and the other churches may have heard of the Thessalonians through the Philippian messengers, also from Macedonia, who brought Paul support (2 Cor 11:9; Phil 4:15-16), or through any other Jewish or Christian travelers. Cf. Psalm 19:4. Geographical *hyperbole (“every place”) was not uncommon.
1:9. Statues of deities were pervasive; some Gentile intellectuals (as opposed to the masses) viewed them as merely reminders of the deities, but Jews rejected them as idols. Jewish texts often described the radical change required of pagans converting to Judaism in terms like those Paul uses here; the Roman writer *Tacitus also criticizes Judaism for making *proselytes despise the gods and so reject their own countries and families. Foreign religions could become accepted in Thessalonica, however. Among major cults in Thessalonica were the Egyptian cults of Serapis and Isis, as well as those of the more traditional Greek gods like Dionysus and the Roman cult of the emperor; some of the upper class sponsored the cult of the Cabiri from the Aegean island of Samothrace.
1:10. Jesus’ *resurrection was the advance installment of the resurrection of all the righteous dead at the end of the age (which figured prominently in Jewish teaching from Dan 12:1-2 onward); Jesus will thus deliver the Thessalonians from wrath at the time of their resurrection. The *Old Testament often applied the term “wrath” to God’s judgments within history, but this term was often extended, as nearly always in Paul and the *New Testament, to the outpouring of God’s wrath in the final day of the Lord, the day of judgment when, according to the New Testament, *Christ returns to punish the wicked (e.g., Is 13:9, 13; 26:20; 30:27; Zeph 1:18; Rom 2:5).
Speeches and letters often contained a strong *narrative element near the beginning, recounting the events leading up to the circumstances of the speech or writing. As in much other parenetic (i.e., moral exhortation) writing, Paul contrasts proper and improper lifestyles by antithetical parallels (“not . . . but”).
Paul need not be responding to actual “opponents” in this section, as some earlier commentators thought (although given the persecution the *church in Thessalonica faces, it is not unlikely that he suspects that standard criticisms have been raised against him in his absence). Wandering sages were often criticized and hence developed some traditional themes that they emphasized whether or not they were defending themselves, themes that Paul also uses here. As Malherbe points out, Dio Chrysostom, a public speaker who lived a generation after Paul, accused most *Cynics (wandering beggar philosophers) of error, impurity, deceit (2:3), flattery (2:5), and love of honor (2:6) and money (2:5). In contrast, Dio Chrysostom also observed that a true philosopher is gentle, like a nurse (2:7).
2:1-2. Dio Chrysostom criticized false philosophers, who feared insulting treatment from the masses, and he described their speech as vain. True philosophers, he said, spoke with boldness even in the face of opposition. Paul and his companions were “mistreated” (NASB, NRSV), “treated outrageously” (NIV) or “shamefully treated” (ESV) in Philippi shortly before arriving in Thessalonica; this term means that they were scandalously treated in a humiliating manner, being publicly stripped and beaten without a hearing (Acts 16:22-23).
2:3. Spurious philosophers were charged with speaking out of error, impurity and deception. (“Impurity” here might allude to the philosophical idea that one should use reason to purify one’s mind from its slavery to human lusts. Given the complaints about Judaism and eastern cults seducing women away from their husbands’ religions, it is also possible that charges of sexual impurity [cf. 4:7] could have been raised against the sponsors of Egyptian, Jewish and Christian religious associations in Thessalonica; cf. Acts 17:4.) Religious and philosophical charlatans were widespread in the ancient Mediterranean, and genuine philosophers were thus at pains to distinguish themselves from the phony variety by denying these characteristics.
2:4. This contrasting style (“not . . . but”) was a common way of emphasizing the point, whether or not these exact charges had been leveled against Paul and his companions. Pleasing God rather than people was an important part of *Diaspora Jewish ethics. Divine authorization and inspiration were accepted as a sure sign that one was not a charlatan, although not everyone who claimed such inspiration was believed.
2:5. Despite the encouraging proem (opening) in this letter (1:2-10), Paul disclaims dishonest flattery. Selfish sages were often guilty of flattery, which could earn them more money by begging or employment; demagogic politicians likewise catered to the masses, becoming “all things to all people” (cf. comment on 1 Cor 9:19-23). But most philosophers and moralists complained that flattery was not for the hearers’ good; although one should speak gently, a true teacher ought to correct faults boldly. Contempt for flatterers is thus one of the most common characteristics of ancient moral literature (cf. also Prov 28:23; 29:5).
2:6. Sages claimed the right to rule all things because of their wisdom. Openly seeking honor for oneself was seen in a negative light, although competition for honor was rife.
2:7. Well-to-do Romans often had slave or free wet nurses to care for young children, as did some, though fewer, lower-class Romans. According to the ideal of the educated Romans who could afford them, wet nurses should be educated so they could teach the young children; their most important trait, however, was their gentleness. They often endeared themselves to young children, who when they grew older frequently freed those nurses who had been slaves. The harshest Cynics criticized those who were gentle like wet nurses or the aged; other thinkers, like Dio Chrysostom, insisted that such gentleness should be cultivated.
Many moralists, e.g., *Plutarch, recommended that mothers nurse their own children rather than delegate the task to nursemaids, and this was no doubt the common practice for most people, who could not afford wet nurses anyway. The image could thus be one of a nursing mother, although all Paul’s hearers would have known of the custom of wet nurses as well. The particular image—wet nurse or nursing mother—does not affect Paul’s point: gentleness. People in the eastern Mediterranean, where nursemaids were less frequent, often considered mothers more affectionate than fathers (see *4 Maccabees 15:4), although Roman culture frequently emphasized mothers’ severity.
Although flattery was to be avoided (2:5), Dio Chrysostom and others despised vulgar Cynics who simply cursed those from whom they were begging; one should mix praise with the blame, making one’s message gentle enough for the hearers to be able to respond to it. (Paul’s extant letters include no complete “letters of reproach,” the harshest form of blame in ancient *rhetoric.)
2:8. Dio Chrysostom claimed that a true philosopher (like himself, he noted) would give no thought for personal danger but speak truth out of concern for his hearers. Others expressed affection in saying they loved their hearers as themselves or wishing to be able to die for them. In contrast to most writers who made such claims, Paul had demonstrated the truth of his claim to endanger himself for the Thessalonians while he was among them.
2:9. The Thessalonian Christians were mostly poor (cf. 2 Cor 8:1-2) and did not share some of the Corinthians’ objections to manual labor (see comment on 1 Cor 9:6). The Christians in Philippi had sent him funds while he was in Thessalonica (Phil 4:15-16), but Paul still had to labor as an artisan. Because he could have set up shop in the marketplace, he could have done work and gained customers even if he was there only a brief time (cf. Acts 17:2, though Paul may have remained in Thessalonica longer than he spoke in the *synagogue). Many Jewish teachers in this period had another trade besides teaching, often learned from their fathers.
“Night and day” was a common phrase, which could mean parts of the night and parts of the day. A manual laborer began work around sunrise and could talk with visitors while working; but from the early afternoon on Paul could use his time for more direct evangelism.
2:10-11. Although Romans valued the dignity of the stern public man, most ancient portrayals of fathers (including Roman ones) stress their love, indulgence and concern for their children. True philosophers compared their concern for their hearers to that of a father as well as to that of a nurse (2:7), and *disciples often saw teachers as paternal figures.
2:12. “Worthy” can mean appropriate to the dignity or standards of the person being honored (see comment on Col 1:10-11); Jewish wisdom texts sometimes spoke of the righteous being “worthy of God” (e.g., Wisdom of Solomon 3:5; 6:16). To new Christians who could no longer participate in the civic cult that honored the emperor in Thessalonica (1:9), God’s “*kingdom” may have had political overtones; recognizing their greater allegiance to God’s kingdom would be costly (see comment on Acts 17:7).
Far from being non-Pauline, as some scholars have suggested, this paragraph reflects Paul’s apocalyptic expectations of judgment on Israel. Against the interpretation of some scholars, Paul does not here deny that the remnant will be saved or that Israel will turn in the end time (Rom 11). His words instead fit the *apocalyptic Jesus tradition (the body of Jesus’ sayings about the end time) that Paul uses later in the same letter (1 Thess 4:13–5:11). *Digressions were a common feature of ancient writing.
2:13. Antiquity was replete with stories about people who rejected divine messengers, thinking them only charlatans; Paul is grateful that the Thessalonians embraced himself and his companions more appropriately.
2:14. Virtue was often taught by advocating imitation of a good example. The Thessalonian Christians were persecuted by others in Thessalonica, as Judean Christians were by Judean non-Christians (as Paul of all people could attest—Gal 1:13). That Paul’s readers have had some problems with the local Jewish community is also likely (Acts 17:5-7); although they did not make up the majority of the church’s opposition (Acts 17:8), they would account for the elaboration on Jewish opposition in verses 15 and 16.
2:15. The Jewish people nurtured the tradition that their ancestors had killed the prophets (Neh 9:26), intensifying the *Old Testament account. Opposition to missions-minded, Greek-speaking Jewish Christians had been increasing among Palestinian Jews as Jewish-Gentile tensions increased there (see comment on Acts 21:20-22 describing a situation that existed within a decade of this letter). Jewish practices led Jewish people to band together in an often-hostile environment, leading many *Gentiles to accuse them of hatred toward humanity; but Paul’s meaning here is quite different, referring only to their opposition to the Jewish Christian missionary outreach to the Gentiles.
2:16. “Filling up the measure of sins” (NASB) is an Old Testament idea (e.g., Gen 15:16) also used by Jesus (Mt 23:32). In keeping with Paul’s teaching elsewhere (Rom 11), “wrath has come on them to the end” (the literal translation) may mean “wrath has come on them until the time of the end” (cf. Lk 21:9, 23), rather than “forever,” or simply the equally natural “fully” or “finally” (cf. “at last”—NIV, NRSV, GNT). The Old Testament prophets said that after many judgments the remnant of Israel would turn with their whole hearts toward God, and then he would restore his people and bring in the new age of his rule (e.g., Jer 29:11-14; Ezek 34:11-31; Hos 14:4-7; Amos 9:11-15).
Emotion was appropriate even in persuasive speeches and letters of friendship; Paul’s letters are full of emotion, and this passage is one of the clearest examples of it.
2:17. Letters of friendship commonly expressed a longing to see the other person and often noted that they were apart only in body, not in spirit. (Today we might say, “My heart is with you.”) Paul goes even beyond these conventions by protesting (literally), “We were orphaned without you” (see NRSV); though emphasizing gentleness, many philosophers would have considered such language too passionate.
2:18. Ancients sometimes spoke of Fate hindering them. Given the geographical proximity of Paul to Macedonia, “*Satan’s hindering” (KJV) here may refer to some concrete obstacle preventing his return to Thessalonica—either the Jewish opposition he mentioned in 2:14-16 or opposition from city magistrates and its consequences for his friends there (Acts 17:8-9).
2:19-20. Crowns and garlands were used for rewards throughout Jewish and Greco-Roman literature of this period; not a royal crown but a victor’s wreath is in view. Crowns (cf. Is 28:5; 62:3) and garlands (cf. Is 61:3) sometimes appeared as symbols of future reward in the *Old Testament and in ancient Judaism. Paul’s reward, however, is simply the perseverance of the Thessalonians themselves (cf. similarly 3 John 4).
3:1-2. Letters of friendship often expressed longing to see another person, sometimes even grief over being separated. Even when the expressions were formulaic, they were usually no less genuine (compare modern greeting cards for various occasions). Timothy and possibly Silas rejoined Paul in Athens, and he dispatched them back to Macedonia while he labored alone in Athens. Luke omits some of these details in the account in Acts (Acts 17:14-16; 18:5), as one would expect; any author who has written a readable *narrative knows that one cannot report every detail and must smooth the narrative out. But the correspondences between the accounts are striking, while the divergences indicate that Luke probably did not derive his account from this letter.
3:3-4. Jesus, the Old Testament and some Jewish *apocalyptic writers had predicted a period of sufferings just before the impending end of the age. These sufferings would accompany the *gospel’s proclamation (according to Jesus; cf. Mk 13:9-11) and help bring about the *repentance of Israel (according to the Old Testament, e.g., Jer 30:7; Dan 12:1; cf. Deut 4:30; Is 26:20-21). If this is in view here, Christians were destined to endure this suffering but were also destined to escape the wrath at the Second Coming (1:10; 5:9; cf. Acts 14:22).
3:5-8. Letters often displayed affection by reporting the author’s sorrow over not being together (e.g., Oxyrhynchus papyri 528.6-9). Ancient letter writers often complained that their feelings were hurt when they did not receive letters back promptly; this complaint was meant as a sign of their affection. Because letters had to be carried by travelers, Paul would not expect to have heard from them, especially if they had not known where to find him; it would be easier for him to send someone to them than the reverse. Yet his complaint about not knowing their situation expresses affection, like that of a worried parent. On “living” in verse 8, see comment on 2:8. Letter writers sometimes showed affection by emphasizing that they were well if only their addressees were (*Cicero, Letters to Friends 12.12.1; 12.13.1; 13.6a.1; 14.8.1; Pliny, Epistles 5.18.1).
3:9-10. Paul resumes, completes or adds a thanksgiving (see comment on 1:2); cf. Psalm 116:12. Most people slept during the night, and prayer during the night was a mark of special devotion in the Old Testament and Jewish literature (e.g., Ps 22:2; 42:8; 63:6; 77:2, 6; 119:55, 148). “What is lacking” in their faith (3:10) might be adequate hope (3:6; cf. 1:3; 5:8), which Paul seeks to supply in 4:13–5:11.
In most letters, the prayer immediately follows the thanksgiving; because the prayer in 1 Thessalonians begins in 3:11, some commentators suggest that Paul finishes the thanksgiving only in 3:9-10. But Paul might simply be following a format in this letter different from his later, more customary one.
3:11. “Wish-prayers” (“Now may God . . . ” addressed to those for whom the prayer is offered) were considered genuine prayers in Judaism and were offered with the expectation that God would hear them. Paul continues the motif of longing in verse 11.
3:12. Thanksgivings and prayers could introduce topics to be taken up later in the letter, especially in Paul’s letters; he returns to “love” in 4:9 and to “outsiders” in 4:12.
3:13. The *Old Testament, Judaism and Jesus’ teaching also looked forward to a future hope that gave meaning to endurance in the present. The “*saints” or “holy ones” here could refer to God’s people (4:14) or to the holy angels (Zech 14:5; cf. *1 Enoch 1:9); both were called “holy ones” regularly in Jewish literature. Paul usually uses the term for the former.
The issue throughout this passage is adultery (4:6). Paul may have heard of a specific instance in the congregation, or he may still be concerned because of the known sexual looseness of pagans, reinforced during his stay in proverbially immoral Corinth. Unmarried Greek men (i.e., Greek men below the age of thirty) commonly indulged in intercourse with prostitutes, slaves and other males; non-Christian Greek religion and culture did not provide any disincentive for doing so.
4:1-2. Paul here uses ancient Jewish and Christian language that sometimes designates the passing on of an earlier teacher’s words. Paul and his companions spent much of their time in Thessalonica teaching the new believers Jesus’ sayings, to some of which he plainly appeals in 4:13–5:11. Speakers often invoked deities when they urged others (e.g., Isaeus, Menecles 47: “I entreat you by the gods”), as Paul here exhorts by Jesus.
4:3. Greek and Roman practice allowed for intercourse with prostitutes and slaves; premarital sex was prohibited for males under Roman law only if an aristocrat were doing it with an upper-class woman (this was called stuprum). Judaism was much stricter, reserving sex for marriage (although ancient sources indicate that some Jewish men did fall prey to premarital and extramarital temptations). Paul condemns all sexual immorality, although he moves to a specific example in 4:6. He shares the *Old Testament view that premarital sex with someone other than one’s future spouse is adultery against one’s future spouse and thus is as sinful as adultery after the wedding (under the law, a capital offense; Deut 22:13-29).
4:4. “Vessel” (KJV, NASB) was commonly used as a metaphor for one’s “body” (NIV, NRSV) in Greek and *Diaspora Jewish literature; it was occasionally applied to one’s wife (in some Jewish texts and, on one interpretation, in 1 Pet 3:7). It probably means “body” here, although the matter is debated. Proper treatment of one’s sexuality was a matter of serious honor and shame (among Greeks and Romans, especially for women).
4:5. Adopting more *ascetic Greco-Roman ideals, some Diaspora Jewish writers decided that sex was permissible only for procreation, and passion even toward one’s wife was unacceptable. Because Paul elsewhere sees marriage as the only appropriate place to release passion (1 Cor 7:2-9), it is more likely that he opposes only adulterous passion (1 Thess 4:6), not sexual pleasure in marriage. Jewish people viewed nearly all *Gentiles as sexually immoral (later *rabbis even argued that one could not assume the virginity of a Gentile woman over three years and one day old); some other groups also viewed outsiders as immoral, though by biblical standards, most Gentile men were immoral. Although many of Paul’s hearers are ethnically Gentiles, he expects them to recognize that they are spiritually non-Gentiles by virtue of their conversion to the biblical faith (cf. Rom 2:29; 4:12).
4:6. Adultery, or “wife stealing,” as it was often considered, was shameful and punishable by banishment under Roman law; in some circumstances, a couple caught in the act could be killed on the spot. Adultery seems to have been common and usually unpunished, however; but a Roman husband who learned that his wife was committing adultery was required by law to divorce her or himself be prosecuted on the charge of lenocinium—“pimping.” Palestinian Judaism could no longer execute the Old Testament death penalty for adultery, but Jewish people believed that what they could not execute, God would (especially on the day of judgment).
4:7. From the standpoint of many temples in ancient culture, intercourse made one ritually impure for a time. This impurity could be extended metaphorically, however, to spiritual impurity in the case of sexual sin (cf. also the *Septuagint of Lev 20:21; Testament of Joseph 4:6; perhaps 1 Enoch 10:11). “Sanctification” (NASB) or “holiness” means being “set apart” to God; Israel in the Old Testament was “set apart” and exhorted therefore to live as if they were set apart (to be holy as God was holy; e.g., Lev 20:24-26).
4:8. The *Holy Spirit’s major roles in Jewish texts included inspiring *prophecy and purifying the righteous; the latter was particularly prominent in *Essene literature and based especially on Ezekiel 36:25-27. Even someone unfamiliar with this role of the Spirit, however, would catch Paul’s point from the title (Holy Spirit); although Old Testament writers call the Spirit of God “the Holy Spirit” only twice, this had become a common title by Paul’s day. Paul has in mind the Spirit who purifies and sets apart God’s people (1 Thess 4:7).
4:9-10. Moralists often wrote on the topic “on love of family” and similar themes. For Paul, all Christians were also one family and the ethics of familial love should apply. Many extended the title “brother” to intimate friends or members of a committed in-group (see comment on Acts 9:17). Thessalonica was a prominent city of Macedonia. One who offers advice could graciously add that it was superfluous to offer it, because the person would surely do it anyway (e.g., Galen, Avoidance of Grief 79b).
4:11. On working with the hands, see comment on 1 Corinthians 4:12. Landowning aristocrats despised manual labor, but for most of the ancient world manual labor was the only means of livelihood. Although the Thessalonian *church may have included a few well-to-do benefactors (Acts 17:4, 9), Paul seems not to have encountered there the opposition to his views on manual labor that arose in Corinth.
Minding one’s own affairs and clinging only to one’s own philosophical community were central to *Epicureanism but also came to characterize a number of other people in the first century who remained aloof from public or political life. Complete quietism of this sort drew criticism from the rest of society, just as Jewish allegiance to its own customs and people did.
In the broad sense of avoiding public controversies, however, “leading a quiet life” was wise guidance for a persecuted minority in the first-century Roman Empire. Some writers such as *Plutarch advocated the involvement of wise men in the affairs of the state, but even they advised certain people (e.g., those who had already enjoyed a full political career) to withdraw from active service. Paul asks his hearers to be inconspicuous, not monastic.
4:12. Treating outsiders appropriately (“behaving properly toward outsiders”—NASB, NRSV) may mean that Paul does not only not want them destitute but also (given cultural attitudes) not known for dependence on wealthy benefactors. Many poor people lived in Thessalonica, and unemployment was high there. Begging on the street normally characterized only the poorest, often propertyless persons (and *Cynic philosophers; cf. comment on 2 Thess 3:11-12).
People in antiquity often wrote letters of consolation. Paul loads this consolatory section of his letter with Jewish *apocalyptic motifs taken directly from Jesus’ teaching. (Given the vast number of apocalyptic motifs Paul omits, and that most of those he includes coincide with the oral tradition of Jesus’ teaching later recorded in the Gospels, there can be little doubt as to his source—see 4:15. Given the many prophets and hence prophecies in the early *church, it is quite improbable that Paul and the Gospel writers simply drew on the same *prophecy of someone other than Jesus; it is also unlikely that the Gospel writers would have known of 1 Thessalonians, or if they had, that they would have modeled their reports of Jesus’ teaching after it.) Appealing to Jewish future hopes was a natural approach in consolation, as Jewish tomb inscriptions attest. Table 7 shows some parallels between 1–2 Thessalonians and Jesus’ teachings reported elsewhere.
Although a number of these motifs appear in other early Jewish sources, none appear with such frequency together in one book (much less one chapter) as to leave any doubt that Jesus’ teachings are Paul’s direct source here. (Likewise, many conventional Jewish end-time motifs, such as mutant babies, are absent.) In the light of the local persecution that this letter addresses (1:6; 2:14-16; 3:3-6), some scholars have suggested that those in the congregation who died since Paul’s departure died as martyrs. Martyrdom must have been the exception rather than the rule around A.D. 50; it would not have taken many exceptions, however (as martyrs or dying otherwise), to provoke questions among the Thessalonian Christians.
4:13. Philosophers often “consoled” the recipients of their letters by saying, “Do not grieve,” or “Do not grieve too much,” since “it will not do any good.” This is not, however, Paul’s point; rather, it is that Christians do not grieve for their fellow Christians as non-Christians grieve, because Christians have hope. Most Gentiles believed in a shadowy afterlife in the underworld and did not share the philosophers’ optimism or neutrality toward death. Most Gentiles grieved, and Jewish and other Near Eastern peoples engaged in very cathartic grief rituals. “Sleep” was a common euphemism for death.
4:14. Like many Jewish people, Paul believed that the soul lived in heaven till the *resurrection of the body, and that soul and body would be reunited at the resurrection (2 Cor 5:1-10). Many ancient writers distinguished the upper atmosphere (“aether”) where pure souls would reside, from the lowest heaven, the realm of “air.” Thus here the Lord descends from “heaven,” meaning the highest heavens (4:16), and meeting his people in the “air,” the lower atmosphere (4:17; cf. comment on Eph 2:22).
4:15. “Word of the Lord” in this case means a saying of Jesus (cf. Lk 22:61; Acts 20:35; 1 Cor 7:10). Jesus spoke of his “coming” (e.g., Mt 24:27), a term that could apply to the visit of a king or royal dignitary, which was celebrated with great pomp and majesty.
4:16-17. In the *Old Testament, trumpets (shofars, rams’ horns) were used especially to gather the assembly or give orders for battle; in this context, both connotations may be in view. Roman armies also used trumpets in war; Jewish views of the end time included Israel being gathered with a trumpet and trumpets used in the final war at the same time (daily Jewish prayers; the *Qumran War Scroll). Michael, the chief archangel of Jewish literature, was considered Israel’s guardian angel and thus figures in Jewish texts about the final battle; here Jesus seems to assume Michael’s role on behalf of believers, God’s people.
The “clouds,” “trumpet” and possibly “archangel” allude to a saying of Jesus about the end time (Mt 24:30-31); the meeting in the air may be inferred from the gathering to join him (Mt 24:31). Judaism traditionally associated the *resurrection of the dead with the end of this age and the inauguration of the *kingdom, and readers would assume this connection in the absence of a direct statement to the contrary. When paired with a royal “coming” (see comment on 1 Thess 4:15), the word for “meeting” in the air normally referred to emissaries from a city going out to meet the dignitary and escort him on his way to their city. The contrast that this image provides with the honor thought to be particularly due to the “Lord” Caesar and his emissaries could well have provoked hostility from local officials (cf. 2:12; 5:3; Acts 17:7).
Table 7. Parallels Between 1–2 Thessalonians and Jesus’ Teachings
| Themes | Jesus’ teachings in the Gospels or elsewhere |
1 Thess 4 | 2 Thess 2 | Sources before these documents |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Temple destroyed |
Mt 24:2; cf. 23:38; 24:15; Mk 13:2; Lk 13:35 |
– | – | Some traditions; views on Dan 11:31; 12:11 |
| Temple desecrated |
Mt 24:15; Mk 13:14 |
– | 2:4 | – |
| False prophets | Mt 24:5, 11, 24; Mk 13:6 |
– | 2:9 | One common motif in end-time woes |
| False prophets’ signs |
Mt 24:24; Mk 13:22 |
– | 2:9 | – |
| Eschatological “distress” |
Mt 24:21, 29; Mk 13:19, 24 |
(3:3) | (1:4, 6) | Dan 12:1 |
| Birth pangs | Mt 24:8; Mk 13:8 |
5:3 (though probably applied differently) |
– | Possibly eschatological idiom (cf. e.g., 1QH 3.3-18) |
| Lawlessness | Mt 24:12 | – | 2:3, 7-8 | One common motif in end-time woes |
| Apostasy | Mt 24:10, 12; Mk 13:12 |
– | 2:3 | One common motif in end-time woes |
| Parousia | Mt 24:3, 27, 37, 39 | 4:15; cf. 2:19; 3:13; 5:23 |
2:1, 8 (cf. 2:9) | – |
| Coming on clouds |
Mt 24:30; cf. 26:64; Mk 13:26; cf. 14:62 |
4:17 | – | Dan 7:13 |
| Trumpet for gathering |
Mt 24:31 | 4:16 (also 1 Cor 15:52) |
– | Familiar image (e.g., Is 27:12-13; cf. *Psalms of Solomon 11:1-4; Shemoneh Esreh 10) |
| Gathering | Mt 24:31; Mk 13:27 |
(4:15-17) | 2:1 | Familiar Jewish expectation |
| Unknown time | Mt 24:36; Mk 13:32 |
5:1-2 | – | A strand in Jewish expectation |
| Unknown “times and seasons” |
Acts 1:7 | 5:2 | – | – |
| Unexpected destruction |
Mt 24:38-41; Lk 17:26-30, 34-35 |
5:3 | – | – |
| Coming like a thief in the night |
Mt 24:43; Lk 12:39 |
5:2-4 (cf. 2 Pet 3:10) |
– | – |
| Stay alert (in explicitly eschatological context) |
Mt 24:42; 25:13; Mk 13:33-37; Lk 12:37-38; 21:36 |
5:6 | – | – |
| Asleep | Mk 13:36 | 5:7, 10 | – | – |
Table 7 is adapted from Craig S. Keener, The Historical Jesus of the Gospels (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2012), pp. 366-71.
The “shout” is undoubtedly the commander’s shout of war (Amos 2:2), an image applied to God as warrior in the Old Testament (Is 42:13; cf. the shout of triumph with a trumpet in Ps 47:5, 8-9), as is his descent (Is 31:4; cf. Zech 14:3-4). From the earliest *New Testament sources, Old Testament imagery about God’s coming in the day of the Lord is applied directly to Jesus; Judaism envisioned this role as God’s, not the *Messiah’s. “Clouds” were used both as imagery for the coming day of God’s judgment (e.g., Ezek 30:3; 32:7; Joel 2:2; often the clouds are the smoke of battle and pillaging) and the coming of the *Son of Man (Dan 7:13).
4:18. Writers of letters of consolation (mentioned in, e.g., *Cicero, Letters to Atticus 13.20) sometimes urged their readers to “comfort” (KJV, NASB; or “exhort,” “encourage”) themselves and others with their words. (Funeral speeches especially praised the deceased, but often also offered comfort to the bereaved.) In the same way, Jewish people recognized that committed servants of God could exhort one another to stand firm in the face of suffering and martyrdom (2 Maccabees 7:5). Even the majority of the Old Testament prophets who wrote most fiercely of judgment included words of comfort and hope for the righteous remnant of God’s people, and hope is central to Paul’s message about the future for his readers, who make up such a remnant.
Paul continues his discussion of the Lord’s coming (4:13-18), ending on the same exhortation to comfort or encourage one another (4:18; 5:11).
5:1. Here Paul cites another saying of Jesus (later recorded in Acts 1:7; writers normally paraphrased sayings when quoting them). The general thought—that the time of the end was unknown—was common enough in other Jewish circles; teachers debated whether the righteous could hasten the time of the end or whether it would simply come in the time that God had ordained, but most agreed that people could not know the time of the end. Some Jewish writers, however, worked up elaborate schemes to predict that it was about to occur; Paul does not subscribe to such theories.
5:2. This verse is another saying of Jesus (Mt 24:43; also used in 2 Pet 3:10; Rev 3:3; 16:15; cf. Joel 2:9, but there is no close parallel in Jewish sources before Jesus). “The day of the Lord” in the *Old Testament was the day of God, the judgment at the end of the age (sometimes prefigured in nearer judgments, but ultimately cataclysmic in its final form; cf. Ezek 30:3; Joel 3:14; Obad 15). Jewish *apocalyptic literature commonly spoke of an unexpected end, yet one that was preceded by signs. Paul does not mean that no signs can precede the day of the Lord (2 Thess 2:2-4)—only that they will not pinpoint the time or provide sufficient warning to the wicked (1 Thess 5:3-4).
5:3. These “birth pangs” are not the initial or age-long ones of Matthew 24:8, but the final pangs of destruction in the day of the Lord (cf. Is 13:8). Birth pangs were a common image of agony and destruction (Ps 48:6; Is 21:3; 26:17-18; 42:14; Jer 4:31; 6:24; 13:21; 22:23; 49:22-24; 50:43; Hos 13:13). Sudden destruction was also a common biblical idea (Is 47:11; Jer 6:26), and unexpected judgment on the wicked became a regular motif of Jewish apocalyptic; but given the other echoes in the context Paul may here especially reflect Jesus’ teaching (Mt 24:36-44).
The Jewish people knew well about false peace: false prophets prophesying peace had led to Judah’s judgment in the Old Testament (e.g., Jer 6:14); the first-century B.C. Roman general Pompey had entered Jerusalem falsely pretending peace; and roughly two decades after Paul wrote this letter, false prophets of victory led the Jerusalemites to slaughter at the hands of Titus’s Roman army. Paul’s hearers in Thessalonica, however, could take his words as an attack on claims of earlier Roman emperors to have established peace and security (pax et securitas) throughout the empire. Teachings like this one sounded subversive and may have aroused persecution against Christians (Acts 17:7).
5:4-5. The background to these verses is quite natural: Paul extends the image of the day of the Lord coming as a thief in the night (see comment on v. 2). Thieves normally broke in at night, but believers in Jesus were people of the day of the Lord. Paul parallels day with light and night with darkness, using common images for good and evil in his day. “Children of” (KJV, NRSV, NIV) was a way of saying “people characterized by.”
5:6-7. Night was the time for both sleeping and drunken parties. Paul may draw on the sayings of Jesus in Matthew 24:42, 49 and 26:45, besides the obvious Matthew 24:43. Other moralists also used “sobriety” metaphorically.
5:8. Roman guards and other kinds of night watchmen (such as shepherds) were the only people who stayed awake at night, apart from those engaging in drunken revelry. Paul’s armor imagery may also reflect the standard Jewish idea of a final war preceding the end and the military imagery used by moralists concerning their struggle with the passions (see comment on Rom 13:12; cf. also comment on Eph 6:10-20).
5:9. Although “salvation” could mean “deliverance,” in the context of the final salvation it would also be associated with the bodily *resurrection of the righteous, as here. Judaism juxtaposed this resurrection with the wrath God would pour out on the *Gentiles and disobedient Jews at his coming to judge the earth, which they expected would occur at the same time.
5:10. On the image of “sleep,” see comment on 4:13 (it cannot allude to the image of 5:5-7, where it refers to the people of darkness).
5:11. See comment on 4:18.
Verses 12-15 deal with how to treat one another; verses 16-22 address corporate (and partly private) worship (cf. similar exhortations to corporate worship in Eph 5:18-21, followed by household codes).
5:12-13. The term for those who “have charge” (NASB, NRSV) or “are over” (KJV) the Thessalonian Christians can refer to oversight more generally, but was also sometimes applied in the Greco-Roman world to *patrons, sponsors of *clients and religious associations. If that sense is in view here, these would be the Christians who opened their homes for the *churches to meet in them and sponsored them, providing what financial and political help they could (the Thessalonian patrons probably included Jason—Acts 17:5-9).
That they would also “admonish” (not just “instruct”—NASB, GNT) is not unusual, since they would probably be the wealthier members of the congregation and hence better educated. (Most people in antiquity were functionally illiterate; exhorting was generally easier for those with the training and leisure to read the Scriptures, since the Scriptures were the source of exhortations in both *synagogue and church.) If no one was particularly well-to-do, those who were relatively better off would have to perform the functions of patron as best they could, requiring either smaller or more crowded house churches; but the congregation probably included relatively well-to-do people (Acts 17:4).
5:14. The “unruly” (KJV, NASB) are the undisciplined—“idlers” (NRSV) or “those who are idle” (NIV) who can work but refuse to do so (cf. 4:11; 2 Thess 3:7-8). The word for “faint-hearted” (NASB, NRSV, NIV) or “timid” (GNT) referred especially to those who were self-denigrating, who had a low opinion of themselves. Cf. Isaiah 35:3-4.
5:15. Compare Jesus’ teaching (Mt 5:39); some other Jewish teachers also advised nonretaliation (see comment on Rom 12:17).
5:16. Greek ethics often listed succinct statements one after another as Paul does here. Many biblical psalms associate rejoicing with celebration and worship (e.g., Ps 9:14; 33:1; 47:1; 95:2; 149:1-5); here it is thus naturally linked with prayer and thanksgiving (1 Thess 5:17-18).
5:17. Even the strictest pietists of Judaism did not pray all day; but they prayed regularly, much and faithfully. “Pray without ceasing” could mean this type of prayer or to carry the attitude of prayer with oneself throughout the day, not just in corporate worship or personal quiet times.
5:18. Pagans who recognized that Fate or some god was sovereign over everything acknowledged that one should accept whatever comes or even give thanks for it. For Paul, those who trust God’s sovereignty and love can give thanks in every situation.
5:19-20. Most of early Judaism associated the *Spirit especially with *prophecy; Paul does not want anyone quenching genuinely inspired speech. The term translated “quench” was often used with fire, which appropriately fits one *Old Testament image of prophets unable to repress God’s inspiration (Jer 20:9).
5:21-22. In the context, “test them all” (NIV) may mean test prophetic utterances (5:19-20), retaining the good but rejecting the bad. Perhaps because some Greek religious cults practiced ecstatic inspiration, Paul warns the Thessalonians not to confuse their inspiration with that of paganism; but judging prophecy was already an issue in the Old Testament. In the Old Testament, many prophets were trained under senior prophets, guided in their sensitivity to the Spirit’s inspiration (1 Sam 19:20); because such senior prophets were not available to most early Christian congregations, mutual testing by others moving in the prophetic gift was necessary (see comment on 1 Cor 14:29).
5:23-25. On “wish-prayers,” see comment on 3:11. Although Paul emphasizes the whole person here by listing component parts in good Jewish fashion (cf., e.g., Deut 6:5; Lk 10:27), he uses the language of his culture to describe the parts (which he can divide differently elsewhere, e.g., 1 Cor 7:34; 14:14-15). He is quite unlike the philosophers who constructed detailed analyses, dividing the soul into two (*Cicero), three (*Plato, *Philo) or eight (*Stoics) components. Like most Jewish writers and the *Old Testament, Paul saw people especially as a whole, with body and soul separated at death, and distinguished various components only as needed. (Valentinian *Gnostics, mainly under Middle Platonic influence, later made much more of the differences between soul and spirit, and thus “soulish” and “spiritual” persons, than Paul intended here; their radical distinctions led them to deny the full incarnation, or enfleshment, of Jesus the Word. Some philosophers advocated a form of trichotomy [three parts], although they did not tend to use Paul’s wording here.)
5:26. Kisses were a common affectionate greeting for those with whom one had an intimate or respectful relationship; see comment on Romans 16:16.
5:27-28. Many people could not read, so reading his letter aloud was the only way everyone in the congregation could be acquainted with it.