Essays on I Thess. 2.7-12 (Part 1)

The next few posts will be a series of excerpts from a paper I wrote for my Pauline Epistles III class titled: A Defense of Paul’s Ministry of Christ-like Faithfulness and Love Portrayed in the Images of I Thessalonians 2.7-12.

Framing the Passage

Upon a cursory study of 1 Thessalonians 2 it would seem that Paul is giving an apologia for his ministry, defending its nature and character.[1] Typically, this is understood as a defense against comparisons to wandering moralist teachers in search of money, fame, and power at the expense of gullible devotees.[2] But, Abraham Malherbe argues that the chief intention of the passage is paranetic; that is, an example of the way that ministers of the gospel should behave.[3] And while Malherbe is correct in his assessment that this passage does not necessitate specific opponents in Thessalonica, casting the passage as mere rhetorical function seems to be inappropriate.

In place of either of these options Gene Green offers that the primary reason for Paul’s vindication of his actions was to acquit himself of accusations leveled from within the church because of his forced sudden departure of the city.[4] It is this situation in light of the dubious behavior of the popular philosophers and moral teachers that Paul is writing from. This is supported contextually by the explanation Paul gives for not returning (2.17-20), his explanation of the measures he took to strengthen the church in their persecution (3.1-5), and his expression to see the church again (3.6-12).[5]

Each of these positions holds its strengths, but there is no reason to assume that the text is offering a solution to only one of these problems. Green says, “In the end, due to the intimate relationship between Paul and the message he preached, what was at stake was not simply the message of the Christian messenger among the believers but rather the Thessalonians continuation in the faith.” In fact, as Paul clarifies the nature of his ministry in light of the culture around him he also offers his ministry as “an example of Christ-like faithfulness and love.”[6] In this way 1 Thess. 2 should be viewed both as an apologetic for Paul and his team as well as a paranetic of what it means to be conformed to Christ in every day life, of which both paradigms are provided for under the paternal image of Paul that is presented in 2.7-12.

---

[1] Simpson, J.W. “Letters to the Thessalonians,” Dictionary of Paul and His Letters (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 1993), 936.

[2] Bruce, F.F. 1 & 2 Thessalonians (Waco, TX: Word Books, 1982), 26.

[3] Malherbe, Abraham J. Ap 1970. Gentle as a nurse: the Cynic background to 1 Thess 2. Novum Testamentum. 12 (2):203-217.

[4] It should be noted that included in the address of the letter was Sylvaus and Timothy. However, Paul is commonly held to be the one writing the letter (for further discussion see Simpson, 937). Thus, when Paul is referenced in terms of what is said in the letter to the Thessalonians, Sylvanus and Timothy may also be inferred, though it is not found to be necessary to include them in every mention of the author or his intentions.

[5] Green, Gene L. The Letters to the Thessalonians (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 2002), 114. Green understands chapters 2 and 3 to be a cohesive unit and can thus argue for the continuity of thought between both.

[6] Gorman, Michael J. Apostle of the Crucified Lord: A Theological Introduction to Paul and His Letters (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 2004), 154-55. Gorman says, “The language of selfless, accommodating behavior is at the core of Paul’s self understanding of his apostleship, for in relinquishing a right for the welfare of others, he reenacts the story of Christ who chose not to exploit his equality with God but emptied himself (Phil. 2:6-8).