Two of the tasks I have set for my blogging have been to
present biblical studies in a format that is both accessible to a wide
readership online and that steers clear of unnecessary controversy in order to
present to this wide readership, which is theoretically an unlimited and
ecumenical audience, information that allows readers to better engage and
understand the Bible. Beginning in January
2012 and ending in March 2013, I blogged a commentary on the Gospel of Mark,
available at the Bible
Junkies blog and at America
Magazine, which will be published in e-book and paperback sometime in early
2014. I completed this task in March 2013. From March to May 2013, I blogged a
commentary on the Letter of Jude and links to each entry are available here.
From May to August 2013, I wrote a commentary on Paul’s
First Letter to the Thessalonians.
The fourth online Bible Junkies Commentary, which begins
with this post, will be a study of Paul’s second letter to the Thessalonians. The
differences in treatment between 1 Thessalonians and 2 Thessalonians among
biblical scholars is telling, not least about the nature of biblical
scholarship. Of the extant letters of Paul, those to which we have access, 1
Thessalonians is universally considered to be the earliest and to have been
written by Paul with his co-workers Silvanus and Timothy. The letter known as 2
Thessalonians, however, is declared by many scholars to be deutero-Pauline, that is, not to have been written by Paul.
1
Thessalonians, therefore, is seen as significant for introducing us to Paul’s
entire corpus, his style and numerous theological and ecclesial themes which
will be encountered in all of his letters, while 2 Thessalonians, since it is not
considered Pauline by many, is often ignored and its themes minimized or
marginalized. This is a significant issue, which we will discuss throughout the
whole of this commentary, since 2 Thessalonians, whatever our decision
regarding authorship, remains a part of the deposit of faith, that is, a part
of Sacred Scripture.
In addition, 2 Thessalonians is treated in a different
manner than 1 Thessalonians because it is a shorter letter, but also because
its theological themes are seen as derivative of 1 Thessalonians or only
slightly related to Paul’s genuine concerns. Those who see it as a deutero-Pauline letter, that is, often
consider it to be literarily and theologically a weak, unoriginal copy of 1
Thessalonians. This assessment is intensified by the comparison of the “tone”
of 2 Thessalonians to that of 1 Thessalonians. 1 Thessalonians is one of Paul’s
warmest and most affectionate letters while 2 Thessalonians is seen as cold and
distant.
As with 1 Thessalonians this study will be in the form of a
more traditional commentary, though the introductory questions of authorship,
date and the location are more difficult to assess and the answer to one of
these questions impacts the others. That is, if Paul is the author, the letter
must be written soon after 1 Thessalonians from the same location, which I
think is Corinth, but if Paul is not the author, then the date and location of
where the letter was written become much more complex issues. The problems
concerning whether a letter is written by Paul are all best dealt with
concretely and not abstractly, which means that as well as dealing with them as
introductory matters, they will be dealt with in the context of the study of
the letter itself.
As was the case with 1 Thessalonians, something must be said about the
distinction between an “epistle” and “letter” with which some readers might be
aware. This distinction goes back to the work of Adolf Deissmann (see New Jerome Biblical Commentary,
769). A letter in this
categorization is defined as a private, non-literary correspondence, while an epistle is a communication that is more
literary in character, not necessarily occasioned by a particular event or
situation and intended for a public audience. I will be using the terms
interchangeably, since I consider that all of the letters in the New Testament,
including the Pastoral epistles, were intended for public, not just private
reading and that there is no definable difference between the literary
character of “letters” and “epistles” in the New Testament.
Letters (or epistles) in the wider Greco-Roman world
basically had four parts, though these can be sub-divided in numerous ways. The
four basic parts are as follows:
1)
Salutation (name(s) of writer(s) and recipient(s); greeting)
2)
Thanksgiving
3)
Body of the Letter
4)
Closing: greeting.
Scholars of Paul often offer a number of other subdivisions
and I will give a couple of examples to make this clear:
1)
Salutation (name(s) of writer(s) and recipient(s); greeting)
2)
Thanksgiving
3)
Opening of the Body of the Letter
4)
Body of the Letter (usually in two parts, theoretical and practical)
5)
Closing of the Body of the Letter (often with the promise of a visit)
6)
Ethical Instructions (‘Paraenesis’)
7)
Closing: greetings; doxology; benediction (John Ziesler, Pauline Christianity, 7)
1)
Salutation: a) sender; b) recipient; c) greeting
2)
Thanksgiving: (Prayer)
3)
Body of the Letter (Paraenesis: Ethical Instruction and Exhortation)
4)
Closing commands
5)
Conclusion: a) peace wish; b) greetings; c) kiss; d) close (grace; benediction)
(Calvin Roetzel, The Letters of Paul:
Conversations in Context, 53-54)
For the letters of Paul, I have created a hybrid scheme
based on the work of these scholars and my own understanding of Paul’s letters,
though not every one of these elements is present in each of Paul’s letters:
a) Salutation: a) sender; b)
recipient; c) grace;
b) Thanksgiving: This often
contains intentions for the entire letter and a prayer for the recipients;
3c Body of the
Letter: often contains two parts, though not necessarily neatly divided:
a) theological teaching and instruction, especially regarding errors in belief
and practice; b) Paraenesis: Ethical Instruction and Exhortation;
d) Closing of the
Body of the Letter: Closing commands, often with
the promise of a visit and greetings;
e) Closing: Conclusion might
contain some or all of these elements: a) peace wish; b) greetings; c) kiss; d)
close (grace; doxology; benediction) (Roetzel, 53-54;Ziesler, 7)
2. The Background to Paul’s Activity in Thessalonica
A) The History of the Mission to
Thessalonica: Paul and Barnabas launch the first missionary
journey at the instigation and guidance of the Holy Spirit (Acts 13:1-3). We
have no letters which survive from this time period, which dates to the late
30’s and early 40’s.The 2nd Missionary Journey (Acts 15:40 –18:22) begins
with the “sharp disagreement” between Paul and Barnabas concerning, it seems,
the role of John Mark. Paul travels on and connects with Timothy and Silvanus
at some point. They go to Phillipi, Thessalonica, Beroea, Athens Corinth
B) The Founding of the Church: Paul,
along with Barnabas and Timothy, went to Thessalonica on the second missionary
journey, departing from Philippi. They stayed in Thessalonica, which was
a predominantly pagan community, but with a Jewish population, for a period of
time which is undisclosed. The time period is certainly not the three weeks
some scholars attribute to them on the basis of Acts 17: 3, which simply
indicates the length of time Paul spent debating with the Jews in the
Synagogue. Paul himself founded the church at this point (see 1 Thess. 1:4-10).
C) The Situation in Thessalonica:
Paul and Silas left Thessalonica according to Acts of the Apostles when
some of the Jewish population became disturbed by his preaching and joined with
a pagan mob to seek out Paul. They did not find Paul or his companions, but
they “attacked Jason's house” and then “they dragged Jason and some believers before the city authorities” (Acts 17:5-6). Paul, Timothy and Silas
all arrived in Beroea, to the west of Thessalonica, and found a warm welcome
from the Jewish community there. Some of the mob from Thessalonica followed
them to Beroea, however, and according to Acts Paul was taken from the city to
the coast and then escorted to Athens. Timothy and Silas followed Paul and left
Beroea a short time later and met up with Paul in Corinth, to which he had
traveled after a lukewarm reception by the Greek philosophers in Athens.
The first letter to the Thessalonians is sent from somewhere
in Greece, most likely Corinth, as Paul went there after his time in Athens. We
can actually date this period with some certainty: 1 Thess. 2:17-3:13 shows
that Paul was not long removed from the Thessalonians when he sent Timothy back
to check on them from Athens. A sojourn in Athens is only accounted for in Acts
17 between Beroea and Corinth. Timothy and Silas had arrived from Macedonia
some time earlier, prior to Gallio becoming proconsul in Corinth, which he was
from the Autumn of 50 to 51 CE. Since Paul writes to the Thessalonians soon
after Timothy and Silas left Thessalonica, and before Gallio was proconsul of
Corinth, we can date this letter to the year 49 or early 50.
2 Thessalonians is harder to date, since we do not know
Paul’s own location at the time or how soon it arrived after 1 Thessalonians. If
it is written not long after 1 Thessalonians, though, it is probable that Paul
is still in Corinth
2) Claims
that the day of the Lord has arrived (2 Thess. 2:2);
3) A problem with idleness (2 Thess.
3:6-15; cf. 1 Thess. 5:14) (Gorman, Apostle
of the Crucified Lord, 169-170).
It does seem that lying behind all of the problems in the
Church in 2 Thessalonians is confusion regarding the nature of resurrection, the
second coming of Jesus and how the Church is to respond to this future hope and
promise.
Next entry, we begin to look at the content of the letter
and consider initially the issues of authorship.
John W. Martens
I invite you to follow
me on Twitter @Biblejunkies
I encourage you to
“Like” Biblejunkies on Facebook.
This entry is cross-posted at America Magazine The Good Word
0 comments:
Post a Comment