Paul’s Work Previous to the Founding Mission at Thessalonica
Paul’s work prior to the founding mission in Thessalonica may be
briefly summarized. When Paul visited Thessalonica for the first time, he
had recently come from Philippi, where he had “already suffered and been
shamefully mistreated” (1 Thessalonians 2:2; see Philippians 1:30).
Indeed, we may reasonably assume that he had reached Macedonia by way of a
journey through Galatia, during which he would have founded the churches
there.2
2We have a possible reference
to the earlier founding of the Galatian churches when, in Philippians
4:15, Paul writes, “. . . No church shared with me in the
matter of giving and receiving, except you alone.” See J.
Murphy-O’Connor, “Pauline Missions Before the Jerusalem Conference,”
RB 89 (1982) 82.
We come to the founding mission in Thessalonica. Paul’s companions
were evidently Silvanus and Timothy, if we may give an inclusive meaning
to the “we” in 1 Thessalonians 1–3.3 Paul’s
preaching appears to have met with good success (1 Thessalonians 1:6-10;
2:1, 13). His message was received in spite of persecution (1
Thessalonians 1:6). The gentile makeup of the congregation is made evident
by Paul’s recollection that they had turned from idols to serve the
living and true God (1 Thessalonians 1:9).4
3The meaning of the first
person plural in 1 Thessalonians is problematical and is sometimes
equivalent to “I,” so I would not wish to make too much of this point.
The complimentary words about Timothy (1 Thessalonians 3:2) do not
indicate the absence of Timothy at the founding visit, against W.
Schmithals, Paul and the Gnostics (Nashville/NY: Abingdon, 1972)
181; Paul tends to be commendatory in his references to Timothy: 1
Corinthians 4:17; 16:10; Philippians 2:20-22. Acts does not seem to be
well informed about the movements of Silvanus and Timothy during the
period which we are considering; one may consult E. Best, A Commentary
on the First and Second Epistles to the Thessalonians (NY: Harper
& Row, 1972) 131.
4E. von Dobschuetz, Die Thessalonicher-Briefe, MeyerK10
7. Auflage (Goettingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1909) 11, thinks that
Jason was a Jew (Acts 17:5-9); this view would be convincing only if we
identified him with the Jason of Romans 16:21, an identification
questioned by A. Oepke, Die Briefe an die Thessalonicher, NTD 89
155. Scholars who accept the evidence of Acts (19:29; 20:4; 27:2) and
Colossians (4:10-11) would designate Aristarchus as a Jew. Aristarchus
could have come into the church later (Traugott Holtz, Der erste Brief
an die Thessalonicher EKKNT13 10, n. 13). The claim that
some of the Thessalonians had been God-fearers (Best, 1-2 Thess
181; cp. Holtz 10) seems to be contradicted by 1 Thessalonians 1:9.
From what may be plausibly be regarded as kerygmatic fragments [i.e.
his early gospel proclamation] in the
letter, we may suppose that Paul’s original preaching emphasized
monotheism, the death and resurrection of Christ, and his imminent
Parousia [or coming again]. Paul presupposes in the letter their
knowledge that salvation will come “through our Lord Jesus Christ, who
died for us . . . ” (1 Thessalonians 5:9-10; cp.
4:14). Paul had probably informed them not only of the imminence of the
Parousia but also of its unexpectedness (1 Thessalonians 5:2).5
[At the same time, on the hypothesis of the
authenticity of 2 Thessalonians, Paul would also have instructed them
concerning the rebellion and the revelation of the man of lawlessness, and
concerning the restraint presently placed upon the son of perdition; that
is to say, instruction about the elaborate apocalyptic scenario leading up
to the Parousia of the Lord Jesus (2 Thessalonians 2:1-12).]
As for Paul’s teaching about the resurrection of believers, he
probably discussed this with them at the founding visit, though neglected
to explain the connection between resurrection and Parousia.6
5E. von Dobschuetz (Thess-Br
204) is probably correct on this point. See also E. Bammel,
“Judenverfolgung und Naherwartung: zur Eschatologie des Ersten
Thessalonicherbriefs,” ZTK 56 (1959) 310; and G. Milligan, St
Paul’s Epistles to the Thessalonians (London: Macmillan, 1908) 63-4.
6I have no difficulty believing that, in the excitement
of their expectation of the end-of-time, Paul may have neglected to teach
them about the general resurrection. But in this case, it is difficult to
understand why he should have introduced the resurrection of believers in
such a casual way in 1 Thessalonians (4:16; perhaps, 4:14). For a
fuller discussion, see W. Marxsen, Eschatologische Existenz: Ein
exegetischer Beitrag zum Sachanliegen von 1. Thessalonicher 4,13–5,11
FRLANT 110 (Goettingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1973). Holtz (1
Thess 187, n. 219) doubts that Paul is introducing the resurrection of
believers for the first time.
Among the various kinds of instruction which Paul gave the
Thessalonians during the founding visit, we may note his warning about the
likelihood of suffering persecution (the first person plural in 3:4 may be
inclusive of the Thessalonians). Even more prominent is the importance of
living according to certain moral standards. These standards reflected for
the most part ordinary Christian paraenesis [i.e. moral instruction],
which by this time was at least in part traditionally formulated.7
In no fewer than four places (1 Thessalonians 4:1, 2, 6, 11), Paul makes
it clear that he has already delivered this teaching to them during his
original stay. Paul had instructed them to be monogamous (as well as
monotheistic!) and to
abstain from sexual immorality (4:1-6).8 He had also charged
them to be diligent in their work and to be a model of conduct to
outsiders (4:11-12).9
[Once again, on the hypothesis of the
authenticity of 2 Thessalonians, Paul had already laid down the dictum,
“Anyone unwilling to work should not eat” (2 Thessalonians 3:10; cp.
3:6).]10
7See M. Dibelius, HNT 112
(1925), Exkurs on 1 Thessalonians 4:11-12; cp. Best, 1-2 Thess 156.
8Interpreters have of course disagreed on what to make
of the difficult skeuos [vessel] in 1 Thessalonians 4:4.
Milligan, in Thess 48-9, and D. E. H. Whiteley, in Thessalonians
in the Revised Standard Version (Oxford: University Press, 1969) 60-1,
prefer to render skeuos “his own body;” while J. E. Frame, in A
Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Epistles of St. Paul to the
Thessalonians (Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1912) 149, von Dobschuetz,
in Thess-Br 163, and Best, in 1-2 Thess 161-3, find
“wife” more intelligible. R. F. Collins makes a good case for the
latter interpretation, in Studies on the First Letter to the
Thessalonians (Leuven: University Press, 1984) 331-3. As for the
difficult pleonektein en tô pragmati in 1 Thessalonians 4:6
[“that no one wrong or exploit a brother or sister in this matter”],
von Dobschuetz (Thess-Br 168) proposed that it referred to
financial rather than sexual cheating, but Milligan (Thess 50),
Best (1-2 Thess 165-6) and Collins (Studies 333-5) are
probably correct in preferring the sexual interpretation.
9What lies behind the advice to be diligent: the ferment
of eschatological expectation? a false over-excitement through the Spirit,
as found later in gnostic circles? the rabbinic obligation to follow a
trade? Paul’s familiarity with the moral traditions of the Greco-Roman
philosophers? I find none of these proposals to be entirely satisfactory.
See Best, 1-2 Thess 175-6; Schmithals, Paul and the Gnostics
158-60; Holtz, 1 Thess 176-81, esp. n. 190; and R. F. Hock, The
Social Context of Paul’s Ministry: Tentmaking and Apostleship
(Philadelphia: Fortress, 1980) 34-6, 42-7.
102 Thessalonians 2:15 refers to unspecified traditions
which had been orally transmitted by Paul, presumably during the founding
visit.
Paul had worked to support himself while he was in Thessalonica (1
Thessalonians 2:9), but this had not been enough; need outran resources,
and he had been obliged to depend on help from the community at Philippi
on at least two occasions (Philippians 4:15-16).11 These
indications suggest a settled ministry of some months’ duration.12
A period of three to six months (or even longer) in Thessalonica seems to
fit the situation which we have attempted to reconstruct on the basis of
the letters.
11Leon Morris, “KAI
HAPAX KAI DIS,” NovT 1 (1956) 205-8, takes Philippians
4:16 to mean, “Both (when I was) in Thessalonica and more than once (in
other places);” cp. B. Rigaux, Saint Paul: Les Épîtres aux
Thessaloniciens (Paris: J. Gabalda, 1956) 461. This view is possible,
if on the analogy of the LXX [i.e. Septuagint] one takes hapax kai dis
as the idiomatic expression, without the preceding kai. Thus Paul
would have received only one gift from Philippi in Thessalonica (and the
letters source would be harmonized to Acts, the secondary source!). On the
other hand, it is doubtful whether the preceding kai is correlative
in Philippians 4:16, as Morris argues (108), since in that case we would
expect something like, “Both (kai) when I was in Thessalonica and
(kai) when I was in Corinth.” As the text stands, the place
(en Thessalonikê) and the repetition of the gift (hapax
kai dis) do not seem to correlate. Hence the idiomatic expression will
be kai hapax kai dis, on the analogy of kai dis kai tris,
Plato, Phaed. 63D, 63E, Gorg. 498E; Sophocles, Ajax,
432; references in Morris (205) and Rigaux (461). Holtz (1 Thess
12, 116-7; n. 554) favors the rendering “more than once.”
12No one would guess from Acts 17:1-10 alone that the
mission in Thessalonica lasted more than three weeks. Holtz (1 Thess
12) proposes a stay of months, not weeks.
