Jump to content

Second Epistle to the Thessalonians: Difference between revisions

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Browse history interactively
← Previous edit
Content deleted Content added
VisualWikitext
add pics
m added hyperlinks
 
(8 intermediate revisions by 7 users not shown)
Line 12: Line 12:
{{Main|Authorship of the Pauline epistles}}
{{Main|Authorship of the Pauline epistles}}


{{quote
⚫
The authenticity of this epistle is still in widespread dispute. As Professor Ernest Best, New Testament scholar, explains the problem:
|text=Paul, and [[Silas|Silvanus]], and [[Saint Timothy|Timotheus]], unto the church of the Thessalonians [...]
|author=First verset of the epistle (King James version)
}}

The authenticity of this epistle is still in widespread dispute. Even assuming that it is authentic, this epistle was not sent by Paul alone, but by three people: Paul, Silvanus, and Timothy.<!--Subsequently, it is impossible to establish which proportion of the letter was not written by Paul, but by his two companions.-->

⚫
As Professor Ernest Best, New Testament scholar, explains the problem:


{{quote|[I]f we only possessed ''Second Thessalonians'' few scholars would doubt that Paul wrote it; but when ''Second Thessalonians'' is put alongside ''First Thessalonians'' then doubts appear. There is a great dissimilarity between the two; this is not only one of words, small phrases and concepts but extends to the total structure of the two letters which is in addition different from what is taken to be the standard Pauline form. At the same time the second letter is alleged to be less intimate and personal in tone than the first, and in some of its teaching, particularly in relation to [[eschatology]], to conflict with the first.|Ernest Best, ''The First and Second Epistles to the Thessalonians''<ref>{{cite book |last=Best |first=Ernest |title=The First and Second Epistles to the Thessalonians |location=New York |publisher=Harper and Row |date=1972}}</ref>{{rp|37}}}}
{{quote|[I]f we only possessed ''Second Thessalonians'' few scholars would doubt that Paul wrote it; but when ''Second Thessalonians'' is put alongside ''First Thessalonians'' then doubts appear. There is a great dissimilarity between the two; this is not only one of words, small phrases and concepts but extends to the total structure of the two letters which is in addition different from what is taken to be the standard Pauline form. At the same time the second letter is alleged to be less intimate and personal in tone than the first, and in some of its teaching, particularly in relation to [[eschatology]], to conflict with the first.|Ernest Best, ''The First and Second Epistles to the Thessalonians''<ref>{{cite book |last=Best |first=Ernest |title=The First and Second Epistles to the Thessalonians |location=New York |publisher=Harper and Row |date=1972}}</ref>{{rp|37}}}}
Line 25: Line 32:
G. Milligan argued that a church which possessed an authentic letter of Paul would be unlikely to accept a fake addressed to them.<ref>{{cite book |last=Milligan |first=G. |title=Saint Paul's Epistles to the Thessalonians |date=1908}}</ref>{{rp|vi, ix, 448}} This argument was similarly supported by Colin Nicholl, who has put forward a substantial argument for the authenticity of Second Thessalonians.<ref name=Nicholl>{{cite book |last=Nicholl |first=Colin |date=2004 |title=From Hope to Despair in Thessalonica |publisher=Cambridge University Press |isbn=978-0-521-83142-0}}</ref><ref>"All Thessalonians scholars will need to engage with the arguments of this contribution to the study of the letters." Oakes, P, Review of Nicholl in ''Journal for the Study of the New Testament'' 2005; 27; pp. 113–14</ref> He points out that "the pseudonymous view is{{nbsp}}[...] more vulnerable than most of its advocates conceded.{{nbsp}}[...] The lack of consensus regarding a date and destination{{nbsp}}[...] reflects a dilemma for this position: on the one hand, the date needs to be early enough for the letter to have been accepted as Pauline{{nbsp}}[...] [on] the other hand, the date and destination need to be such that the author could be confident that no contemporary of 1 Thessalonians {{nbsp}}[...] could have exposed 2 Thessalonians as a{{nbsp}}[...] forgery."<ref name=Nicholl/>{{rp|5–6}}
G. Milligan argued that a church which possessed an authentic letter of Paul would be unlikely to accept a fake addressed to them.<ref>{{cite book |last=Milligan |first=G. |title=Saint Paul's Epistles to the Thessalonians |date=1908}}</ref>{{rp|vi, ix, 448}} This argument was similarly supported by Colin Nicholl, who has put forward a substantial argument for the authenticity of Second Thessalonians.<ref name=Nicholl>{{cite book |last=Nicholl |first=Colin |date=2004 |title=From Hope to Despair in Thessalonica |publisher=Cambridge University Press |isbn=978-0-521-83142-0}}</ref><ref>"All Thessalonians scholars will need to engage with the arguments of this contribution to the study of the letters." Oakes, P, Review of Nicholl in ''Journal for the Study of the New Testament'' 2005; 27; pp. 113–14</ref> He points out that "the pseudonymous view is{{nbsp}}[...] more vulnerable than most of its advocates conceded.{{nbsp}}[...] The lack of consensus regarding a date and destination{{nbsp}}[...] reflects a dilemma for this position: on the one hand, the date needs to be early enough for the letter to have been accepted as Pauline{{nbsp}}[...] [on] the other hand, the date and destination need to be such that the author could be confident that no contemporary of 1 Thessalonians {{nbsp}}[...] could have exposed 2 Thessalonians as a{{nbsp}}[...] forgery."<ref name=Nicholl/>{{rp|5–6}}


Another scholar who argues for the authenticity of this letter is [[Jerome Murphy-O'Connor]]. Admitting that there are stylistic problems between 2 Thessalonians and 1 Thessalonians, he argues that part of the problem is due to the composite nature of 2 Thessalonians (Murphy-O'Connor is only one of many scholars who argue that the current text of 2 Thessalonians is the product of merging two or more authentic letters of Paul). Once the text of this interpolated letter is removed and the two letters compared, Murphy-O'Connor asserts that this objection is "drastically weakened", and concludes, "The arguments against the authenticity of 2 Thessalonians are so weak that it is preferable to accept the traditional ascription of the letter to Paul."<ref>{{cite book |last=Murphy-O'Connor |first=Jerome |title=Paul: A critical life |location=Oxford |publisher=Clarendon Press |date=1996}}</ref>{{rp|111}}
Another scholar who argues for the authenticity of this letter is [[Jerome Murphy-O'Connor]]. Admitting that there are stylistic problems between 2 Thessalonians and 1 Thessalonians, he argues that part of the problem is due to the composite nature of 2 Thessalonians. Murphy-O'Connor, along with many others scholars, argues that the current text of 2 Thessalonians is the product of merging two or more authentic letters of Paul. Once the text of this interpolated letter is removed and the two letters compared, Murphy-O'Connor asserts that this objection is "drastically weakened", and concludes, "The arguments against the authenticity of 2 Thessalonians are so weak that it is preferable to accept the traditional ascription of the letter to Paul."<ref>{{cite book |last=Murphy-O'Connor |first=Jerome |title=Paul: A critical life |location=Oxford |publisher=Clarendon Press |date=1996}}</ref>{{rp|111}}


Those who believe Paul was the author of 2 Thessalonians also note how Paul drew attention to the authenticity of the letter by signing it himself: "I, Paul, write this greeting with my own hand, which is how I write in every letter."<ref>{{bibleverse|2 Thessalonians|3:17}}; see similar indications in {{bibleverse|1 Corinthians|16:21}}; {{bibleverse|Galatians|6:11}}; and {{bibleverse|Colossians|4:18}}. NETBible</ref> [[Bruce Metzger]] writes, "Paul calls attention to his signature, which was added by his own hand as a token of genuineness to every letter of his (3:17)."<ref>{{cite book |last=Metzger |first=Bruce M |date=2003 |title=The New Testament: Its Background, Growth, & Content |edition=3rd |location=Nashville |publisher=Abingdon}}</ref>{{rp|255}} While some draw attention to this verse as an excessive attempt of a forging author to convince his readers of authenticity, a parallel stock phrase has been noted by some in the authentic Galatians 6:11.<ref name="keith own hand">{{cite book |last=Keith |first=Chris |title='In My Own Hand': Grapho-Literacy and the Apostle Paul |publisher=Biblica |date=2008}}</ref>{{rp|42}} A parallel has also been noted among [[Cyprian]] where he stresses in his 9th epistle, under potential fears of the circulation of a forged letter, that examination of the style of the signature should be used in order to authenticate the letter: "examine whether both the writing and the signature are yours and write back to us what the matter is in truth."<ref name="keith own hand"/>{{rp|44}}<ref>Translation of the letter taken from The Fathers of the Church: St. Cyprian Letters 1-81, Catholic University of America Press 1964, p24</ref>
Those who believe Paul was the author of 2 Thessalonians also note how Paul drew attention to the authenticity of the letter by signing it himself: "I, Paul, write this greeting with my own hand, which is how I write in every letter."<ref>{{bibleverse|2 Thessalonians|3:17}}; see similar indications in {{bibleverse|1 Corinthians|16:21}}; {{bibleverse|Galatians|6:11}}; and {{bibleverse|Colossians|4:18}}. NETBible</ref> [[Bruce Metzger]] writes, "Paul calls attention to his signature, which was added by his own hand as a token of genuineness to every letter of his (3:17)."<ref>{{cite book |last=Metzger |first=Bruce M |date=2003 |title=The New Testament: Its Background, Growth, & Content |edition=3rd |location=Nashville |publisher=Abingdon}}</ref>{{rp|255}} While some draw attention to this verse as an excessive attempt of a forging author to convince his readers of authenticity, a parallel stock phrase has been noted by some in the authentic Galatians 6:11.<ref name="keith own hand">{{cite book |last=Keith |first=Chris |title='In My Own Hand': Grapho-Literacy and the Apostle Paul |publisher=Biblica |date=2008}}</ref>{{rp|42}} A parallel has also been noted among [[Cyprian]] where he stresses in his 9th epistle, under potential fears of the circulation of a forged letter, that examination of the style of the signature should be used in order to authenticate the letter: "examine whether both the writing and the signature are yours and write back to us what the matter is in truth."<ref name="keith own hand"/>{{rp|44}}<ref>Translation of the letter taken from The Fathers of the Church: St. Cyprian Letters 1-81, Catholic University of America Press 1964, p24</ref>
Line 41: Line 48:


== Background ==
== Background ==
[[Thessalonica]] was the second city in Europe where Paul helped to create an organized Christian community. At some point after the first letter was sent, probably soon, some of the Thessalonicans grew concerned over whether those who had died would share in the [[Second Coming|parousia]]. This letter was written in response to this concern. The problem then arises, as [[Raymond E. Brown|Raymond Brown]] points out, whether this letter is an authentic writing of Paul or written by one of his followers in his name.<ref>Raymond Brown, ''An Introduction to the New Testament'' (New York: Doubleday, 1997), pp. 594–96</ref>
[[Thessalonica]] was the second city in Europe where Paul helped to create an organized Christian community. At some point after the first letter was sent, probably soon, some of the Thessalonians grew concerned over whether those who had died would share in the [[Second Coming|parousia]]. This letter was written in response to this concern. The problem then arises, as [[Raymond E. Brown|Raymond Brown]] points out, whether this letter is an authentic writing of Paul or written by one of his followers in his name.<ref>Raymond Brown, ''An Introduction to the New Testament'' (New York: Doubleday, 1997), pp. 594–96</ref>


If this letter is authentic, then it might have been written soon after Paul's first letter to this community—or possibly years later. Brown notes that Paul "most likely visited Thessalonica several times in his journeys to Macedonia". However, if the letter is not authentic, Brown notes that "in some ways interpretation becomes more complex."<ref>Brown, ''Introduction'', p. 595</ref> Brown believes that the majority of scholars who advocate pseudonymity would place it towards the end of the first century, the same time that [[Book of Revelation|Revelation]] was written. These scholars emphasize the appearance of "[[man of sin]]" in the second chapter of this letter, whether this personage is identified with the [[Antichrist]] of [[1 John]] and Revelation, or with a historical person like [[Caligula]].<ref>See the discussion on this chapter in Best, ''Thessalonians'', pp. 273–310</ref>
If this letter is authentic, then it might have been written soon after Paul's first letter to this community—or possibly years later. Brown notes that Paul "most likely visited Thessalonica several times in his journeys to Macedonia". However, if the letter is not authentic, Brown notes that "in some ways interpretation becomes more complex."<ref>Brown, ''Introduction'', p. 595</ref> Brown believes that the majority of scholars who advocate pseudonymity would place it towards the end of the first century, the same time that [[Book of Revelation|Revelation]] was written. These scholars emphasize the appearance of "[[that man of sin]]" in the second chapter of this letter, whether this personage is identified with the [[Antichrist]] of [[1 John]] and Revelation, or with a historical person like [[Caligula]].<ref>See the discussion on this chapter in Best, ''Thessalonians'', pp. 273–310</ref>


==Content==
==Content==
Line 49: Line 56:
The traditional view is that the second epistle to the Thessalonians was probably written from [[Roman Corinth|Corinth]] not many months after the first.
The traditional view is that the second epistle to the Thessalonians was probably written from [[Roman Corinth|Corinth]] not many months after the first.


Biblical commentator and pastor John Macarthur writes, "The emphasis is on how to maintain a church with an effective testimony in proper response to sound [[eschatology]] and obedience to the truth."<ref>{{Cite book|last=Macarthur|first=John|title=The MacArthur Bible Commentary |edition=Kindle |year=2009|publisher=Thomas Nelson|location=Smyrna, Tennessee|id=Kindle Location 59337}}</ref>
Biblical commentator and pastor [[John MacArthur (American pastor)|John MacArthur]] writes, "The emphasis is on how to maintain a church with an effective testimony in proper response to sound [[eschatology]] and obedience to the truth."<ref>{{Cite book|last=Macarthur|first=John|title=The MacArthur Bible Commentary |edition=Kindle |year=2009|publisher=Thomas Nelson|location=Smyrna, Tennessee|id=Kindle Location 59337}}</ref>


Paul opens the letter praising this church for their faithfulness and perseverance in the face of persecution:
Paul opens the letter praising this church for their faithfulness and perseverance in the face of persecution:
Line 59: Line 66:
From the inference of 2:1–2, the Thessalonians were faced with a false teaching, saying that Christ had already returned. This error is corrected in chapter 2 (2:1–12),<ref>{{bibleverse|2 Thessalonians|2:1–12}}</ref> where Paul tells the Thessalonians that a great [[tribulation]] must occur before Christ's return. Seeing as how this series of events has not yet happened, his argument reads, Christ cannot have returned yet. He then expresses thanks that his readers were the [[Unconditional election|elect]] of God, chosen for salvation and saved by his grace through faith, and thus not susceptible to the deception of the "[[Great Apostasy]]," (2 Thessalonians 2:13–14)<ref>{{bibleverse|2 Thessalonians|2:13–14}}</ref> first mentioned here as is the "[[Katechon]]" (2 Thessalonians 2:6–7).<ref>{{bibleverse|2 Thessalonians|2:6–7}}</ref>
From the inference of 2:1–2, the Thessalonians were faced with a false teaching, saying that Christ had already returned. This error is corrected in chapter 2 (2:1–12),<ref>{{bibleverse|2 Thessalonians|2:1–12}}</ref> where Paul tells the Thessalonians that a great [[tribulation]] must occur before Christ's return. Seeing as how this series of events has not yet happened, his argument reads, Christ cannot have returned yet. He then expresses thanks that his readers were the [[Unconditional election|elect]] of God, chosen for salvation and saved by his grace through faith, and thus not susceptible to the deception of the "[[Great Apostasy]]," (2 Thessalonians 2:13–14)<ref>{{bibleverse|2 Thessalonians|2:13–14}}</ref> first mentioned here as is the "[[Katechon]]" (2 Thessalonians 2:6–7).<ref>{{bibleverse|2 Thessalonians|2:6–7}}</ref>


In 2 Thessalonians 2:15, Paul instructs his readers to "[h]old fast to the traditions ({{lang-grc|παραδόσεις}}, {{lang-la|traditiones}}) which you were taught, whether by word of mouth or by our letter."<ref name="Rombs8">Rombs (2010), p. 8</ref> Quoting this verse, in his ''On the Holy Spirit'', [[Basil the Great]] writes, "These [traditions] have been passed on by word of mouth from Paul or from the other apostles, without necessarily being written down,"<ref name="Thiselton">{{cite book |title=1 and 2 Thessalonians Through the Centuries |first=Anthony C. |last=Thiselton |publisher=John Wiley & Sons |year=2011 |isbn=9781444390148}}</ref> and mentions the Trinitarian confession of faith as an example of "unwritten tradition".<ref>Rombs (2010), p. 27</ref> [[Cyril of Jerusalem]] shares a similar view in his ''Catechetical Lectures'', argues that the traditions stated by Paul should be preserved and memorized, at a minimum in the form of the Creed.<ref name="Thiselton"/> In his homily on this verse, [[John Chrysostom]] differentiates oral tradition from written tradition.<ref>Rombs (2010), p. 28</ref> At that time, the oral tradition has been defined as the "tradition" and the written tradition as "Scripture", united together in "the authenticity of their apostolic origin".<ref>{{cite book |title=Remembering Our Future: Explorations in Deep Church |editor-first=Andrew |editor-last=Walker |editor2-first=Luke |editor2-last=Bretherton |publisher=Wipf and Stock Publishers |year=2013 |isbn=9781620328354 |pages=67–68}}</ref> [[Everett Ferguson]] says Paul's reference to tradition implicates that "what was delivered was from the Lord",<ref name="Rombs8"/> and [[John Stott]] calls the tradition ({{lang-grc|παράδοσις|paradosis}}) "apostolic 'tradition{{'"}}.<ref>{{cite book |title=The Gospel & the End of Time: The Message of 1 & 2 Thessalonians |first=John R. W. |last=Stott |publisher=InterVarsity Press |year=1991 |isbn=9780830817498 |page=77}}</ref>
In 2 Thessalonians 2:15, Paul instructs his readers to "[h]old fast to the traditions ({{langx|grc|παραδόσεις}}, {{langx|la|traditiones}}) which you were taught, whether by word of mouth or by our letter."<ref name="Rombs8">Rombs (2010), p. 8</ref> Quoting this verse, in his ''On the Holy Spirit'', [[Basil the Great]] writes, "These [traditions] have been passed on by word of mouth from Paul or from the other apostles, without necessarily being written down,"<ref name="Thiselton">{{cite book |title=1 and 2 Thessalonians Through the Centuries |first=Anthony C. |last=Thiselton |publisher=John Wiley & Sons |year=2011 |isbn=9781444390148}}</ref> and mentions the Trinitarian confession of faith as an example of "unwritten tradition".<ref>Rombs (2010), p. 27</ref> [[Cyril of Jerusalem]] shares a similar view in his ''Catechetical Lectures'', argues that the traditions stated by Paul should be preserved and memorized, at a minimum in the form of the Creed.<ref name="Thiselton"/> In his homily on this verse, [[John Chrysostom]] differentiates oral tradition from written tradition.<ref>Rombs (2010), p. 28</ref> At that time, the oral tradition has been defined as the "tradition" and the written tradition as "Scripture", united together in "the authenticity of their apostolic origin".<ref>{{cite book |title=Remembering Our Future: Explorations in Deep Church |editor-first=Andrew |editor-last=Walker |editor2-first=Luke |editor2-last=Bretherton |publisher=Wipf and Stock Publishers |year=2013 |isbn=9781620328354 |pages=67–68}}</ref> [[Everett Ferguson]] says Paul's reference to tradition implicates that "what was delivered was from the Lord",<ref name="Rombs8"/> and [[John Stott]] calls the tradition ({{langx|grc|παράδοσις|paradosis}}) "apostolic 'tradition{{'"}}.<ref>{{cite book |title=The Gospel & the End of Time: The Message of 1 & 2 Thessalonians |first=John R. W. |last=Stott |publisher=InterVarsity Press |year=1991 |isbn=9780830817498 |page=77}}</ref>


The letter continues by encouraging the Thessalonian church to stand firm in their faith, and to "keep away from every brother who leads an unruly life and not according to the tradition which you received from us{{nbsp}}[...] do not associate with him, so that he will be put to shame. Yet do not regard him as an enemy, but admonish him as a brother" (2 Thessalonians 3:6–7, 14–15).<ref>{{bibleverse|2 Thessalonians|3:6–7}}; {{bibleverse|2 Thessalonians|3:14–15}}</ref>
The letter continues by encouraging the Thessalonian church to stand firm in their faith, and to "keep away from every brother who leads an unruly life and not according to the tradition which you received from us{{nbsp}}[...] do not associate with him, so that he will be put to shame. Yet do not regard him as an enemy, but admonish him as a brother" (2 Thessalonians 3:6–7, 14–15).<ref>{{bibleverse|2 Thessalonians|3:6–7}}; {{bibleverse|2 Thessalonians|3:14–15}}</ref>
Line 78: Line 85:


==See also==
==See also==
* [[2 Thessalonians 2]]
* [[2 Thessalonians 3]]
* [[Textual variants in the Second Epistle to the Thessalonians]]
* [[Textual variants in the Second Epistle to the Thessalonians]]
* [[Authorship of the Pauline epistles]]
* [[Authorship of the Pauline epistles]]

Latest revision as of 08:59, 3 December 2024

Part of a series on
Books of the
New Testament
Papyrus 46, one of the oldest New Testament papyri, showing 2 Cor 11:33–12:9
Gospels and Acts
Four Evangelists
Lukan Acts
Epistles and Apocalypse
Pauline epistles
Catholic epistles
Apocalypse
Authorship
Related topics
Part of a series of articles on
Paul in the Bible
Pauline literature (Authorship)
Related literature
See also

The Second Epistle to the Thessalonians[a] is a book from the New Testament of the Christian Bible. It is traditionally attributed to Paul the Apostle, with Timothy as a co-author. Modern biblical scholarship is divided on whether the epistle was written by Paul; some scholars believe Paul wrote this epistle, but others reject its authenticity based on what they see as differences in style and theology between this and the First Epistle to the Thessalonians.[3]

Scholars who support its authenticity view it as having been written around 51–52 AD, shortly after the First Epistle.[4][5] Those who see it as a later composition assign a date of around 80–115 AD.[6]

The original text was written in Koine Greek.

Composition

[edit]
Main article: Authorship of the Pauline epistles

Paul, and Silvanus, and Timotheus, unto the church of the Thessalonians [...]

— First verset of the epistle (King James version)

The authenticity of this epistle is still in widespread dispute. Even assuming that it is authentic, this epistle was not sent by Paul alone, but by three people: Paul, Silvanus, and Timothy.

As Professor Ernest Best, New Testament scholar, explains the problem:

[I]f we only possessed Second Thessalonians few scholars would doubt that Paul wrote it; but when Second Thessalonians is put alongside First Thessalonians then doubts appear. There is a great dissimilarity between the two; this is not only one of words, small phrases and concepts but extends to the total structure of the two letters which is in addition different from what is taken to be the standard Pauline form. At the same time the second letter is alleged to be less intimate and personal in tone than the first, and in some of its teaching, particularly in relation to eschatology, to conflict with the first.

— Ernest Best, The First and Second Epistles to the Thessalonians[7]: 37 

The structures of the two letters (to which Best refers) include opening greetings (1 Thessalonians 1:1a, 2 Thessalonians 1:1–2) and closing benedictions (1 Thessalonians 5:28, 2 Thessalonians 3:16d–18) which frame two, balancing, sections (AA'). In 2 Thessalonians these begin with similar successions of nine Greek words, at 1:3 and 2:13. The opening letter section (1:3–2:12) itself comprises two halves, 1:3–12 (where the introductory piece, A, is 1:3–5; the first development, B, is 1:6–10; and the paralleling and concluding development, B', is 1:11–12) and 2:1–12 (with pieces: A 2:1–4, B 2:5–7, B' 2:8–12).[8]

The second, balancing, letter section (2:13–3:16c) also comprises two halves: 2:13–3:5 (with pieces: A 2:13–14, B 2:15–17, B' 3:1–5) and 3:6–16c (with pieces: A 3:6–9, B 3:10–12, B' 3:13-16c). Of the twelve pieces in 2 Thessalonians, seven begin with 'brother' introductions. Of the eighteen pieces in 1 Thessalonians, fourteen begin with 'brother' introductions. In both letters, the sections balance in size and focus, and in many details. In 2 Thessalonians, in 2:5 and 3:10, for example, there is a structural balance of the use of "when I was with you..." and "when we were with you...".[8]

Support for authenticity

[edit]

One piece of evidence for the authenticity of the epistle is that it was included in Marcion's canon and the Muratorian fragment. It was also mentioned by name by Irenaeus, and quoted by Ignatius, Justin, and Polycarp.[9]: 593 

G. Milligan argued that a church which possessed an authentic letter of Paul would be unlikely to accept a fake addressed to them.[10]: vi, ix, 448  This argument was similarly supported by Colin Nicholl, who has put forward a substantial argument for the authenticity of Second Thessalonians.[11][12] He points out that "the pseudonymous view is [...] more vulnerable than most of its advocates conceded. [...] The lack of consensus regarding a date and destination [...] reflects a dilemma for this position: on the one hand, the date needs to be early enough for the letter to have been accepted as Pauline [...] [on] the other hand, the date and destination need to be such that the author could be confident that no contemporary of 1 Thessalonians  [...] could have exposed 2 Thessalonians as a [...] forgery."[11]: 5–6 

Another scholar who argues for the authenticity of this letter is Jerome Murphy-O'Connor. Admitting that there are stylistic problems between 2 Thessalonians and 1 Thessalonians, he argues that part of the problem is due to the composite nature of 2 Thessalonians. Murphy-O'Connor, along with many others scholars, argues that the current text of 2 Thessalonians is the product of merging two or more authentic letters of Paul. Once the text of this interpolated letter is removed and the two letters compared, Murphy-O'Connor asserts that this objection is "drastically weakened", and concludes, "The arguments against the authenticity of 2 Thessalonians are so weak that it is preferable to accept the traditional ascription of the letter to Paul."[13]: 111 

Those who believe Paul was the author of 2 Thessalonians also note how Paul drew attention to the authenticity of the letter by signing it himself: "I, Paul, write this greeting with my own hand, which is how I write in every letter."[14] Bruce Metzger writes, "Paul calls attention to his signature, which was added by his own hand as a token of genuineness to every letter of his (3:17)."[15]: 255  While some draw attention to this verse as an excessive attempt of a forging author to convince his readers of authenticity, a parallel stock phrase has been noted by some in the authentic Galatians 6:11.[16]: 42  A parallel has also been noted among Cyprian where he stresses in his 9th epistle, under potential fears of the circulation of a forged letter, that examination of the style of the signature should be used in order to authenticate the letter: "examine whether both the writing and the signature are yours and write back to us what the matter is in truth."[16]: 44 [17]

Other scholars who hold to authenticity include Gregory Beale,[18] Gene L. Green,[19] Ivor H Jones,[20] Leon Morris,[21] Ben Witherington III,[22] Paul Foster,[23] and Kretzmann.[24] According to Leon Moris in 1986, the majority of current scholars at that time still held to Paul's authorship of 2 Thessalonians.[25]

Opposition to authenticity

[edit]

At least as early as 1798, when Johann Ernst Christian Schmidt published his opinion, Paul's authorship of this epistle was questioned.[26] More recent challenges to this traditional belief came from scholars such as William Wrede in 1903[27] and Alfred Loisy in 1933,[28] who challenged the traditional view of the authorship.

Regarding Nicholl's argument for authenticity, on the one hand, it is worth noting that at least some forged Pauline letters were written well after a date modern scholars might deem early enough for the letter to be considered Pauline, such as the Third Epistle to the Corinthians, estimated to have been written around 160-170 CE; forgers were not forced to write close in time to the writers they imitated. On the other hand, it is not clear that a forger would need to ensure his writing was not contemporaneous with 1 Thessalonians if he was not actually writing the letter to Thessalonica; furthermore, if Nicholls is correct in believing 2 Thessalonians to be authentic, then Paul in 2 Thessalonians 2:2 provides evidence that forgeries in his name already existed in his own lifetime, discrediting his argument that forgers would take care to write far enough apart in time to ensure contemporaries could not denounce the forgery.

In his book Forged, New Testament scholar Bart D. Ehrman puts forward some of the most common arguments against the authenticity of 2 Thessalonians. For example, he argues that the views concerning the Second Coming of Christ expressed in 2 Thessalonians differ so strikingly from those found in 1 Thessalonians that they cannot be written by the same author.[29]

Several modern scholars agree with Ehrman that 2 Thessalonians was not written by Paul but by an associate or disciple after his death. Scholars include Beverly Roberts Gaventa,[30] Vincent Smiles,[31] Udo Schnelle,[32] Eugene Boring,[33] and Joseph Kelly.[34] Norman Perrin observes, "The best understanding of 2 Thessalonians [...] is to see it as a deliberate imitation of 1 Thessalonians, updating the apostle's thought."[35] Perrin bases this claim on his hypothesis that prayer at the time usually treated God the Father as ultimate judge, rather than Jesus.

Background

[edit]

Thessalonica was the second city in Europe where Paul helped to create an organized Christian community. At some point after the first letter was sent, probably soon, some of the Thessalonians grew concerned over whether those who had died would share in the parousia. This letter was written in response to this concern. The problem then arises, as Raymond Brown points out, whether this letter is an authentic writing of Paul or written by one of his followers in his name.[36]

If this letter is authentic, then it might have been written soon after Paul's first letter to this community—or possibly years later. Brown notes that Paul "most likely visited Thessalonica several times in his journeys to Macedonia". However, if the letter is not authentic, Brown notes that "in some ways interpretation becomes more complex."[37] Brown believes that the majority of scholars who advocate pseudonymity would place it towards the end of the first century, the same time that Revelation was written. These scholars emphasize the appearance of "that man of sin" in the second chapter of this letter, whether this personage is identified with the Antichrist of 1 John and Revelation, or with a historical person like Caligula.[38]

Content

[edit]
Quotation from 2 Thess 3:16 on a wall in Cēsis, Latvia (English NIV: "Now may the Lord of peace himself give you peace at all times and in every way.")

The traditional view is that the second epistle to the Thessalonians was probably written from Corinth not many months after the first.

Biblical commentator and pastor John MacArthur writes, "The emphasis is on how to maintain a church with an effective testimony in proper response to sound eschatology and obedience to the truth."[39]

Paul opens the letter praising this church for their faithfulness and perseverance in the face of persecution:

We ought always to give thanks to God for you, brethren, as is only fitting, because your faith is greatly enlarged, and the love of each one of you toward one another grows ever greater; therefore, we ourselves speak proudly of you among the churches of God for your perseverance and faith in the midst of all your persecutions and afflictions which you endure

— 2 Thessalonians, 1:3–5 NASB[40]

The letter contains a whole chapter regarding the second advent of Christ, among other themes and instructions.

From the inference of 2:1–2, the Thessalonians were faced with a false teaching, saying that Christ had already returned. This error is corrected in chapter 2 (2:1–12),[41] where Paul tells the Thessalonians that a great tribulation must occur before Christ's return. Seeing as how this series of events has not yet happened, his argument reads, Christ cannot have returned yet. He then expresses thanks that his readers were the elect of God, chosen for salvation and saved by his grace through faith, and thus not susceptible to the deception of the "Great Apostasy," (2 Thessalonians 2:13–14)[42] first mentioned here as is the "Katechon" (2 Thessalonians 2:6–7).[43]

In 2 Thessalonians 2:15, Paul instructs his readers to "[h]old fast to the traditions (Ancient Greek: παραδόσεις, Latin: traditiones) which you were taught, whether by word of mouth or by our letter."[44] Quoting this verse, in his On the Holy Spirit, Basil the Great writes, "These [traditions] have been passed on by word of mouth from Paul or from the other apostles, without necessarily being written down,"[45] and mentions the Trinitarian confession of faith as an example of "unwritten tradition".[46] Cyril of Jerusalem shares a similar view in his Catechetical Lectures, argues that the traditions stated by Paul should be preserved and memorized, at a minimum in the form of the Creed.[45] In his homily on this verse, John Chrysostom differentiates oral tradition from written tradition.[47] At that time, the oral tradition has been defined as the "tradition" and the written tradition as "Scripture", united together in "the authenticity of their apostolic origin".[48] Everett Ferguson says Paul's reference to tradition implicates that "what was delivered was from the Lord",[44] and John Stott calls the tradition (Ancient Greek: παράδοσις, romanized: paradosis) "apostolic 'tradition'".[49]

The letter continues by encouraging the Thessalonian church to stand firm in their faith, and to "keep away from every brother who leads an unruly life and not according to the tradition which you received from us [...] do not associate with him, so that he will be put to shame. Yet do not regard him as an enemy, but admonish him as a brother" (2 Thessalonians 3:6–7, 14–15).[50]

Paul ends this letter by saying, "I, Paul, write this greeting with my own hand, and this is a distinguishing mark in every letter; this is the way I write. The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ be with you all" (2 Thessalonians 3:17–18). Macarthur writes, "Paul added an identifying signature (cf. 1 Corinthians 16:21; Colossians 4:18) so his readers could be sure he was truly the author."[51]

A passage from this book reading "For even when we were with you, this we commanded you, that if any would not work, neither should he eat", (3:10),[52] was later adapted by Vladimir Lenin as an adage of the Soviet Union: "he who does not work, neither shall he eat".[53]

Surviving early manuscripts

[edit]
Codex Vaticanus page showing the end of Second Thessalonians and the beginning of Hebrews.

Some early manuscripts containing the text of this book are:

See also

[edit]

Notes

[edit]
  1. ^ The book is sometimes called the Second Letter of Paul to the Thessalonians, or simply 2 Thessalonians.[1] It is most commonly abbreviated as "2 Thess."[2]

References

[edit]
  1. ^ ESV Pew Bible. Wheaton, IL: Crossway. 2018. p. 989. ISBN 978-1-4335-6343-0. Archived from the original on 3 June 2021.
  2. ^ "Bible Book Abbreviations". Logos Bible Software. Archived from the original on 21 April 2022. Retrieved 21 April 2022.
  3. ^ Aune, David E. (2010). The Blackwell Companion to The New Testament. Blackwell. p. 517. ISBN 978-1-40510825-6.
  4. ^ "The New Testament (Recovery Version)" p. 959, ISBN 1-57593-907-X (economy ed., black)
  5. ^ Earl D. Radmacher (Th.D.), Ronald B. Allen (Th.D.), H. Wayne House (Th.D., J.D.). "NKJV Study Bible (2nd ed.)" p. 1903.
  6. ^ Menken, Maarten J.J. (2002). 2 Thessalonians. Routledge. p. 65. ISBN 978-1-134-86748-6.
  7. ^ Best, Ernest (1972). The First and Second Epistles to the Thessalonians. New York: Harper and Row.
  8. ^ a b Palmer, David G. (2006). New Testament: New Testimony to the skills of the writers and first readers. Ceridwen Press. ISBN 0-9513661-4-9.
  9. ^ Guthrie, Donald (1990). New Testament Introduction. Hazell Books.
  10. ^ Milligan, G. (1908). Saint Paul's Epistles to the Thessalonians.
  11. ^ a b Nicholl, Colin (2004). From Hope to Despair in Thessalonica. Cambridge University Press. ISBN 978-0-521-83142-0.
  12. ^ "All Thessalonians scholars will need to engage with the arguments of this contribution to the study of the letters." Oakes, P, Review of Nicholl in Journal for the Study of the New Testament 2005; 27; pp. 113–14
  13. ^ Murphy-O'Connor, Jerome (1996). Paul: A critical life. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
  14. ^ 2 Thessalonians 3:17; see similar indications in 1 Corinthians 16:21; Galatians 6:11; and Colossians 4:18. NETBible
  15. ^ Metzger, Bruce M (2003). The New Testament: Its Background, Growth, & Content (3rd ed.). Nashville: Abingdon.
  16. ^ a b Keith, Chris (2008). 'In My Own Hand': Grapho-Literacy and the Apostle Paul. Biblica.
  17. ^ Translation of the letter taken from The Fathers of the Church: St. Cyprian Letters 1-81, Catholic University of America Press 1964, p24
  18. ^ Beale, GK, 1–2 Thessalonians, IVP New Testament Series, Leicester: InterVarsity Press, 2003, ISBN 0-85111-686-8
  19. ^ Green, Gene L, The Letters to the Thessalonians: The Pillar New Testament Commentary, Eerdmans/Apollos, 2002, (Eerdmans) ISBN 0-8028-3738-7 /(Apollos) ISBN 0-85111-781-3
  20. ^ Jones, Ivor H, The Epistles to the Thessalonians, Peterborough: Epworth Press, 2005, ISBN 0-7162-0595-5
  21. ^ Morris, Leon, The First and Second Epistles to the Thessalonians, Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, rev.edn, 1991, ISBN 0-8028-2168-5
  22. ^ Witherington III, B, (2006), 1 and 2 Thessalonians: A Socio-Rhetorical Commentary, Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, ISBN 0-8028-2836-1
  23. ^ Foster, P 2012, Who Wrote 2 Thessalonians: A Fresh Look at an Old Problem, Journal for the Study of the New Testament , vol. 35, no. 2, pp. 150-175. https://doi.org/10.1177/0142064X12462654
  24. ^ Popular Commentary
  25. ^ Moris, Leon (1986). Concordia NIV Study Bible. ed. Hoerber, Robert G. St. Lous: Concordia Publishing House, p.1840.
  26. ^ Best, Thessalonians, p. 50
  27. ^ William Wreded, Die Echtheit des zweiten Thessalonicherbriefes untersucht (The Authenticity of the Second Letter to the Thessalonians investigated), Leipzig 1903
  28. ^ Alfred Loisy, The Birth of the Christian Religion, University Books, New York 1962, pp. 20–21 (originally published as La Naissance du Christianisme, 1933)
  29. ^ Ehrman, Bart D. (22 March 2011). Forged: Writing in the Name of God—Why the Bible's Authors Are Not Who We Think They Are. Harper Collins. pp. 121–122. ISBN 978-0-06-207863-6.
  30. ^ Beverly Roberts Gaventa, First and Second Thessalonians, Westminster John Knox Press, 1998, p. 93
  31. ^ Vincent M. Smiles, First Thessalonians, Philippians, Second Thessalonians, Colossians, Ephesians, Liturgical Press, 2005, p. 53
  32. ^ Udo Schnelle, translated by M. Eugene Boring, The History and Theology of the New Testament Writings (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1998), pp. 315–25
  33. ^ M. Eugene Boring, Fred B. Craddock, The People's New Testament Commentary, Westminster John Knox Press, 2004 p. 652
  34. ^ Joseph Francis Kelly, An Introduction to the New Testament for Catholics, Liturgical Press, 2006 p. 32
  35. ^ Norman Perrin, The New Testament: An Introduction: Proclamation and Parenesis, Myth and History, (Harcourt College Publishers, 1974)
  36. ^ Raymond Brown, An Introduction to the New Testament (New York: Doubleday, 1997), pp. 594–96
  37. ^ Brown, Introduction, p. 595
  38. ^ See the discussion on this chapter in Best, Thessalonians, pp. 273–310
  39. ^ Macarthur, John (2009). The MacArthur Bible Commentary (Kindle ed.). Smyrna, Tennessee: Thomas Nelson. Kindle Location 59337.
  40. ^ 2 Thessalonians 1:3–5
  41. ^ 2 Thessalonians 2:1–12
  42. ^ 2 Thessalonians 2:13–14
  43. ^ 2 Thessalonians 2:6–7
  44. ^ a b Rombs (2010), p. 8
  45. ^ a b Thiselton, Anthony C. (2011). 1 and 2 Thessalonians Through the Centuries. John Wiley & Sons. ISBN 9781444390148.
  46. ^ Rombs (2010), p. 27
  47. ^ Rombs (2010), p. 28
  48. ^ Walker, Andrew; Bretherton, Luke, eds. (2013). Remembering Our Future: Explorations in Deep Church. Wipf and Stock Publishers. pp. 67–68. ISBN 9781620328354.
  49. ^ Stott, John R. W. (1991). The Gospel & the End of Time: The Message of 1 & 2 Thessalonians. InterVarsity Press. p. 77. ISBN 9780830817498.
  50. ^ 2 Thessalonians 3:6–7; 2 Thessalonians 3:14–15
  51. ^ Macarthur (Kindle Locations 59568–59569)
  52. ^ 2 Thessalonians 3:10
  53. ^ "Constitutional principles". The Economist. 9 November 2011. ISSN 0013-0613. Retrieved 1 February 2017.

Public Domain This article incorporates text from a publication now in the public domain: Easton, Matthew George (1897). Easton's Bible Dictionary (New and revised ed.). T. Nelson and Sons. {{cite encyclopedia}}: Missing or empty |title= (help)

  • Buttrick, George Arthur; Bowie, Walter Russell; Scherer, Paul; Knox, John; Bailey Harmon, Nolan; Terrien, Samuel, eds. (1955), The Interpreter's Bible, vol. 11th, Nashville: Parthenon Press
  • Brown, Raymond; Collins, Raymond; Murphy, Roland, eds. (1990), The New Jerome Biblical Commentary, Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall
  • Clarke, Adam (1831), The New Testament of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, vol. 2nd, New York: Methodist Episcopal Church
  • Rombs, Ronnie J.; Hwang, Alexander Y., eds. (2010), Tradition and the Rule of Faith in the Early Church, Washington, DC: Catholic University of America Press
[edit]
Wikiquote has quotations related to Second Epistle to the Thessalonians.
Wikisource has original text related to this article:

Online translations of the Second Epistle to the Thessalonians:

Exegetical Papers on Second Thessalonians:

Second Epistle to the Thessalonians
Preceded by New Testament
Books of the Bible 		Succeeded by
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Second_Epistle_to_the_Thessalonians&oldid=1260923479"