This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?
1 Thessalonians 2:13-16: A Deutero-Pauline Interpolation Author(s): Birger A. Pearson Reviewed work(s): Source: The Harvard Theological Review, Vol. 64, No. 1 (Jan., 1971), pp. 79-94 Published by: Cambridge University Press on behalf of the Harvard Divinity School Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/1508972 . Accessed: 25/03/2012 14:39
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact email@example.com.
Cambridge University Press and Harvard Divinity School are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to The Harvard Theological Review.
1967).whereit is statedthat the Jewsin Thessalonica stirred the heathenagainst the apostle'sconverts. will not be completely irrelevant to the contemporarytheological scene. H. PEARSON UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA SANTA CALIF. trans. IN any discussion of the origins of Christian "anti-Semitism. i Thessalonians 2:14-16 will inevitably be brought to the fore. christl. 3-40. 14-16: Antiet. of course.for he himselfwas the personprincipally concerned the only persecution to which our passage can refer. 50-59* The quotation is the title of chapter I in PETERC. (Such a study.-J.93106 BARBARA. moreover.-jiid.HARVARD THEOLOGICAL REVIEW 64 (I97I). . 28." among a numberof New Testament passages that can be adduced.. . do we everfindthe apostleelsewhere holding as up the Judaeo-Christians a patternto the GentileChristians.and againsthimself. .Fragen zu I Thessalonicher 2. HoDGSON's is an impressive and sympathetic treatment of that controversial and oft-misunderstood giant of German scholarship.quite out of place for him to speak of these persecutions in in Judaea. 1963)." Ferdinand Christian Baur. SCHOEPS. This passage a thoroughly has un-Pauline stamp. HODGSON'srecent study of book BAUR. See also HODGSON's general introduction in Ferdinand Christian Baur on the Writing of Church History (New York." but to discuss historically and exegetically this important passage in i Thessalonians. Miinchen. . in W. e.' The purpose of this article is not per se to contribute to the current Jewish-Christian "dialog. Antijudaismus im Neuen Testament? Exegetische und systematische Beitriige (Abh. It agreescertainly with the Acts. The Formation of Historical Theology (New York. ed. The Jewish-Christian Argument. z.g. 1966). Is this polemic againstthe Jews at all naturalto him. 1968).2 Of I Thessalonians 2:14-16 he wrote. David Green (London. jiidische Polemik bei Paulus.It is. Dialog x. al. also O.. MICHEL.. 79-94 1 THESSALONIANS 2:13-16: A DEUTERO-PAULINE INTERPOLATION BIRGERA. ECKERT.) The foundations for an understandingof our passage in its own historical context were laid in the nineteenth century by "the author of historical theology. a polemicso externaland so ' See. up is yet the comparison certainlyfar-fetchedbetween those troubles raisedby the Jewsand Gentiles and of conjointly the persecution the in Nor Christians Judaea.
19632). v. cit. 88. New York.' Schmiedelextended the scope of the interpolation to incorporate vv. 1925). DIBELIUS (Handbuch N.8 Holtzmann included v.. according to J. Briefe an die Thessalonicher 1892). Tiibingen. (1847).. .A Critical and Exegetical Commentaryon the Epistles of St. 5See. G. MOFFAT. LiTNEMANN. 38. Io9. at a time when Pauline Christianity was seeking an accommodationwith Jewish Christianity. A. DOBSCHsTZ 10E.6 He was followed subsequentlyby a numberof other scholars.. with an anti-Semitic bias.NT. trans.g. cited in P. '•STAoS. 1918").4 Baur saw in this passage a powerful argument against the authenticity of i Thessalonians as a whole. ii (New York. Freiburg. M. SIbid.80 HARVARDTHEOLOGICAL REVIEW is vaguethat the enmityof the Jewsto the Gospel characterized solely in the termsof that well-known which the Gentilesaschargewith sailed them.T. 1957). Gentile Christians. loc. Edinburgh. Paul to the Thessalonians(I. FRAME. SIn his Einleitung in das N. 15 and 16. (MEYER'S Critical and Exegetical Handbook to the New Testament.. BRANDON. 14 as well. RITSCHL is mentioned in the critical apparatus of the NESTLE-ALAND ed. 214. 8. also J..T. 280. And when it is said that after the Jews have continuallyfilled up the measureof their sins. SCHMIEDEL. this solution is. 21. unsatisfactory. 1955). According to S. Menzies (London.C.C.g.. E.9 In my view these nineteenth-centuryscholars were on the right track. ad loc. BAILEY The in Interpreter's Bible. 93. 73. Other nineteenth-century scholars5 though by no means all .suggested that the difficulties could be solved by the hypothesis of later interpolation. cf.. and the Jews were regardedon all sides as enemies of the gospel. Die und an die Korinther (Hand-Com. the odium generis humani? . Albrecht Ritschl proposed to excise i Thessalonians 2 : i 6c as a scribal gloss post-7o referring to the destruction of Jerusalem. All references to the Greek text of the N. e. see The Fall of Jerusalem and the Christian Church (London. (Stuttgart. 8 SCHMIEDEL. An Introduction to the 'Amongst the 2oth-Century scholars by J. 1889). in this article are to this edition. Nevertheless most twentieth-century commentators10 reSF. BAUR. of course. C. I875). also 320.Lit-Ztg. Paul the Apostle of Jesus Christ. ad loc. American ed. of the N. that came upon them in the destrucnaturallythan the punishment tion of Jerusalem? 3 aro E30a0u S~ r"3' i" E~p what does this suggest to us more Baur concludes that the reproach against the Jews in 2:14-16 reflects a later period. Literature of the New Testament (New York. 6In an article in Halle'sche allg. 14-16 is understandable as "an interpolation made by some VV. 1912). .T. from 2nd German ed. . 87f. HOLTZMANN'S book was unavailable to me. such as Marcion".T.
op. NEIL (Mofatt N. ECKART. On ECKART'S Die Passion Jesu in der Verkiindigung des Neuen Testa18 See. (Kom. 80 (1968-69). For the views of E. J. (MEYER.1 THESS. RIGAUX (Et. 13 through v. Suppl. Paris. reflecting a situation in the church post-7o. 1957). W. and form-criticalobservations.. all of these translations indicate the finality of the wrath that has come upon the Jews in this passage.K. n. Kr. 6. 1903). cit. Concordance." In any case. indeed. N.12 V. Cit. I6c. argumentation see below.. Deutsch. 1949). thus harmonizing Gbttingen. at last.-G. W. e. For the various Hebrew expressions translated in LXX by the phrase EI~(Tb) 'TXossee HATCH/REDPATH. 1956). . J.N.T. ACKROYD cites Ps. 126. the conversion of Israel. 1950).. BAMMEL below. B. insisting that one finds refuge in interpolationhypotheses only as a last resort. MILIGAN. ACKROYD. 33f. l -els r'Xos.-ex..Th. 2:13-16 81 ject all theories of interpolation at this point in i Thessalonians.. completely. and that this interpolationextends from v. New York. OEPKE (N.'3 other possibilities are "finally" or "completely..T. Neuchatel. A. are logical sense. ments (Heidelberg. Leipzig." and "finally. G. 1949). it has recently been suggested that the LXX translators intended by the use of this phrase to render the double meaning of the Hebrew into Greek." i.N. 73(74):3 as an example. SCHELKLE. Cullmann (Nov.. 37. 1962).Bibl. 218ff. Leiden.T. T. KOMMEL'S sneering comment about the 19th-century love of dissecting the Pauline letters. 9gog7). Z."14 Indeed.g." With this methodologicalprinciple I would agree. K. forever.. theological.e. see KUiMMEL. Com. MASSON (Com. op. FRAME. 65.. Paul's Epistles to the Thessalonians (London. WOHLENBERG n Cf. the possibilities for Els 1TEXo and B00ao0Ev still to be considered. 58 (1961). 5"P. St. an interpolation in i Thessalonians 2 as it now stands. I propose to argue that there is. 1908).h "utterly. see " For a good discussion with numerous parallels see MILLIGAN'S commentary ad loc. For criticisms.. 'To my knowledge the only previous argument suggesting 13-16 as an interpolation is that of K. Exp. Das literarische und geschichtliche Problem des ersten Thessalonicherbriefes. 1344f.T.T. Zahn. so that the phrase can mean both 1 n. and of my own historical. El •rEXog been taken as meaning "until the has end". This concluding sentence is pregnant with interpretive here is to be taken in an eschatopossibilities. 214. Gittingen. Freundesgabe O. Yet the historical and theological difficultiesin i Thessalonians 2 are such that one must begin again to entertain such a hypothesis. and G. On the basis of the insights of previous scholars. in Neotestamentica et Patristica. Munck's attempt to paraphrasethe expression to mean "until the last events at the end of the world. Der zweite echte Brief des Apostels Paulus an die Thessalonicher. 16.Kom.T. Assuming that 6pyj. C.
io. Ibid. 356ff."21 All of these suggestions fail to do justice to the text as it stands.Th. 1967). is untenable. BERG in their commentaries. He argues that this event was enough to set in motion the "apocalyptic machinery"of both Jews and Jewish Christiansand a heightening of end-expectation. ' The v. speaks of the "prophetic style" of the passage." Expositor. Ser.82 HARVARDTHEOLOGICAL REVIEW the passage with Romans II:25f. viz. and does not commend itself. Dibelius. The aorist E'0aorv is to be retained in the text.and WOHLENLfONEMANN. 301. 'B. DOBSCHiTTZ. Ingeborg Nixon (Philadelphia. The phrase "apokalyptische Maschinerie" occurs on p.. 56 (I959). accepting the past-tense force of 9#0aaev finds a whole list of "current events" to . 8.Christ and Israel." The aorist I•0ao-eY is interpreted with a present meaning. cit. cit. 19DIBELIUS.. But they were then reduced to the necessity of interpreting '~0bao-ev a as "propheticaorist": Paul is speaking "im prophetischenSinne. 16 64. Wrath "unto the Uttermost. MICHEL: "Paulus spricht nicht im Sinn der Liturgie oder einer Geschichtsbetrachtung."6The passage excludes categorically any possibility for the Jews except the naked wrath of God. II. The aorist 'b0ao-Ev must be taken as referringto an event that is now past. (above. 20E.1.22 and the phrase Eld r1hog underscoresthe finality of the See J. I).20 In Bammel's view Paul takes over Jewish apocalyptic motifs and reinterprets them.. the "enemies of God. 58." Op. MUNCK. 24 (1922)..7 How is this aorist to be interpreted? Many of the commentatorswho rejected the views of Baur and others and held to the genuineness of the passage nevertheless took over their suggestions as to what the "wrath" referred to.. connecting the contemporary events in the political sphere with the persecution of Christians by Jews. indicating that the events of the times are an indication that God's judgment is proceeding yet another step "in das 7reho hinein. but disallows looking for specific events in the Zeitgeschichte for the reference. NEIL. Bammel has seen in this passage a reference to Claudius'expulsion of the Jews from Rome in 49 A. Z. n. too. 308f. See now also O.'9 Recently E. OEPKE. " So v. BACON. BAMMEL. 294ff. the destruction of Jerusalem. 600aKev is only weakly attested. trans.D. Judenverfolgung und Naherwartung.K. sondern im prophetischen Sinn des sich erfiillenden apokalyptischen Gerichtes. cited in n. Op."Is either predicting the destructionof Jerusalem or predicting generally the impending judgment.see also FRAME.
S. 8 (1966). I5f. also BAMMEL. The interpretationsuggested by Baur and others is still valid: I Thessalonians 2:16c refers to the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 A. For a recent discussion see R. 126. SCHIPPERS.. modifying r~c^v Iovaloaoy VV.5.25 It is somewhat surprising to find the characteristic Gentile charge of "misanthropy" against the Jews reflected in the Pauline correspondence. REINACH.. adds to BACON's a riot in Jerusalem between 48 and 51 (Jos. I1. TCHERIKOVER. 223-34. n. 357ff. i Thess. Acts 7:52. 126-43. 44-46. it is not sufficientmerely to excise this one sentence as a post-70 gloss.. Nov. Cf. trans. Levi 6:ii and Daniel 11:36 refer in v. Schoeps.D. Applebaum (Philadelphia. It need only be inquired further what event in the first century was of such magnitude as to lend itself to such apocalyptic theologizing. 173ff.28 In early Christianliterature it bewhich he believesPaul is referring:the death of Agrippain 44.. Ibid.24 The phrase cKat racrLv to God'spunishmentof the persecutors his people. 2:15. Notes and Comments. ' SCHOEPS the followingpassagesas representative all parts of the N. The PreSynoptic Tradition in i Thessalonians II i3-16. with the aid of the index entry. . 29-31.T. for formally it constitutes the conclusion to the material represented in the participial clauses of vv. Both T. It is universally agreed that much of the material in vv. 2:16c and T. 2:13-16 83 "wrath"that has occurred. 15 and I6 E'vavrkiw picks up a theme from Graeco-Roman antiM&vOparros Semitism.. SCHOEPS. the famine in Judaea in 46-47. and the expulsionof the Jews from Rome by Claudiusin 49.Angl.23 Nevertheless. See on this furtherbelow. ' See for commentary discussionand for a list of texts from especiallyDIBELIUS' Textes d'auteursgrecset romainsrelatifs also the texts assembled TH. 456ff.2"The charge of killing the prophets is a reflection of a Jewish tradition widespreadin New Testament times. Hildesheim. 309.: cites of Mt. 23:3Iff. 1966). as was noticed already by Baur.Hellenistic Civilization and the Jews. For discussion. 14.. op. 1894..T. 20.i. Aus friihchristlicher Zeit (Tiibingen. Greek and Latin authors illustrating pagan anti-Judaism.D. cit. is traditional and formulaic. J. r. The "misoxenie." ~ For discussion see V. of notion of "pre-synoptic" traditionhas to be qualifiedat the point of distinguishing traditionalformulaefrom the way in which these formulaeare put together. 1 H.27 and appears at numerouspoints elsewhere in the New Testament. list 23 (I94I). by au judaisme (Paris. 1963). cit. p. 1950). Heb.3) and a famine in Greece and Rome ca..-J. see RIGAUX. op. JOHNSON. Theol. in Die jiidischenProphetenmorde.op. II:36ff. 49 A. Rev. also Daniel 11:36. S. Levi 6:iI is beyond the scope 3The relationship of this paper to define. 15-16. These events are a sign that God's patience with Israel has come to an end. the insurrection of Theudasca. cit. between i Thess. Ant. as has been thoroughlydocumented by H.though it is widespread in the Graeco-Romanworld of the period. See 2" See the commentaries.1 THESS.
CLEM. " See below for a discussion of the historical context in Jewish-Christian polemics post-7o. e. JUSTIN. It will certainly not do to use the speeches in Acts as an example of the early origin of this topos.. Lehrman. becausehe had compassion his peopleand on his on the of dwelling place.till therewas no remedy. OAs. esp. 47..48.30for. 4. 30f. de Rab.25 and the v. esp.127. Levi).84 HARVARD THEOLOGICAL REVIEW comes standard to interpret the death of Jesus in connection with the murder of the prophets. . carn. ORIGEN.II. De antich. Apol. 145ff.. but they keptmocking messengers God. in Aus friihchristlicher Zeit.23. see 5. Neukirchen. HIPP. 58.15. I. Op. Adv..: The LORD. and it is written 'They have made their faces harder than a rock' (Jer.16. ' R.andscoffing his prophets. 446.29 But precisely when the charge of "killing the Lord Jesus" was levelled against the Jews is problematical.-J.N. Apol. as U. London. TERT.5.. presents the basic outline of i Thessalonians 2 :15f. Dial. the reference is cited by SCHOEPS. 1. jud. Mt. the wrathof the LORD roseagainsthis people. Magn. 16. etc.Mon.33Indeed.. TERT. WILCKENS.512. I5o. (Matthean allegorization: see below). 6. and cf.3).. cit.De res. 'See. 12of.A.34 A common origin for both of these interpretations might be suggested: reflection on and study of scripture.despisat till ing his words. SCHOEPS. e. Strom.Aus fr.(RSV)35 This passage. 21:34ff." Exodus Rabba 31. MEIR in Ex. 1U. Petri 7.. ' See.32 There is ample evidence that Christianspost-7o interpretedthe destruction of Jerusalem as a punishment inflicted by God upon the Jews for killing the Christ.T. 26. 1963%). certain of the rabbis connected the destructionof the nation and the temple with the theme of the persecution of the prophets by the fathers. 14 (R. IGN. 23:48. 36. 5.Alex. e. Ev.g.2. 8.. ' Note that this passage is partially quoted by R. one must look to a time after 70 AD for such a development. Die Tempelzerstirung des Jahres 70 in der jiidischen Religionsgeschichte. BARN.31 in the speeches of Acts.sent persistently themby to his messengers. For discussion see H. One particularly applicable passage in such a situation would be 2 Chronicles36:1 5f. MEIR: "The citizens of Jerusalem were also smitten because they despised the prophets. Zeit. Pionii 13. Contra Cels.1. Wilckens has one finds very little of primitive palestinian Christianity shown. Die Missionsreden der Apostelgeschichte (Wiss. in any case. 'But they mocked the messengers of God' (2 Chron. 25. Mart. 1939). on the whole the speeches reflect the work and thought of the author of Luke-Acts.g.16( Trans.2... RIGAUX. BARN. for it says.g.. citing Acts 2:36. He also cites Pes.16). at Lk. Acts 7:52..the Godof their fathers. JUSTIN. 13. S. Kah. Rabba 31. In my view.
as argued.. by U. The only other passage in Paul that MUNCK uses to support the statement that "the Jews had killed the Messiah" is I Thess. 26. 17:22). WILCKENS. On the Trial of Jesus (Studia Judaica. or even to the inhabitants of Judaea. op. If indeed there is such a "theological" meaning attached to "the Jews" in I Thess. 69:21 and "a common early Christian interpretation" of the Psalm connecting it with the crucifixion of Jesus by the Jews. A. 69:21.. Weisheit und Torheit (Beitr. (=LXX 68:23f. e. Hist. FEUILLET. 6-8.88 then one can credit Paul with historical accuracy in pointing to the Roman imperial authorities as responsible for the crucifixion rather than the Jewish people. II:9f.). 4~y' EqLI. Paulus och judarna (Uppsala. 69:22f. Th. . 1961). 15.1 THESS. Though Paul undoubtedly knows the current tradition concerningthe persecution of the prophets. on The "gnostic" interpretation. 2:14i6. II.. Berlin. 2:15. 2:14 does not refer to the Jewish people as a whole. reads too much into the text. i Kings 19:io. even after he became a Christian he continued to refer to himself as a Jew (7~~E . 1966). 'IoTpapkXirrv the thought that God's wrath has come upon Moreover.8. 1:14. and Paul's thought as expressed elsewhere in his epistles.39 I find it also virtually impossible to ascribe to Paul the ad hominem fragment of Gentile anti-Judaism in v. Les "chefs de ce siecle" et la Sagesse divine d'apres I Co. ol 'Iovsa^ot in I Thess.g. 1947). 3:5f.. ' See.he quotes the basic "proof-text" for attributes the death of Jesus to the Jews. Rom. 205. WINTER. 25-36. Mt. I. i i1:). 2:13-16 85 Could Paul have written such a statement? In my view there are some basic incompatibilities between i Thessalonians 2:i 5f. e. Phil. Paul seems to have been rather proud of his achievements in Judaism prior to his "conversion" (Gal. 99. cit. Paul's quotation of Ps. Tiibingen. op. But Paul does not quote Ps. whom the apostle identifies with Messiah. i.. 1959. MAiNSSON. 7Iff. cit. "In J. " The best discussion of the historical problems connected with the execution of Jesus is that of P.) in Rom. . (13.and prophet-murderers.6" I Corinthians 2:8 is the best example of Paul's own view: Jesus was brought to his death by the demonic "rulers of this age" who did not know that by so doing they would defeat themselves in the process. They are the "fanatic Torah-Jews" (fanatiska lagjudarna).g. 40According to N. MUNcx's view. in Le Christ Sagesse de Dieu d'aprds les dpitres pauliniennes (Paris. 14 in Romans ii:3-he never in i Corinthians 2:8 as a reference to purely human agencies. it is quite unacceptable to read it into the text of Romans.. 3" So the passage is interpreted by ORIGEN in his commentary on Mt.)..87 And even if one wants to take the phrase ol aPXOvrTE aClcvoi roTrov roO this tradition. in fact. IIS. implies also a reflection on Ps.40 Gal. 'ovSaiL.
363. STAUFFER. N. suggested that i Thess. Gen- would be the only New Testament text - were it a genuine expression of Paul . historical and theological questions arise. 9:1). 29. cit. Ant. as Theodore of Mopsuestia correctly interpreted the word centuries ago. 4' BACON interprets the account of the death of James in Acts I2:Iff.).g. 19... Com. Swete.S. cit. " " 'Contribulibus' ut dicat 'Gentibus' ". e. "compatriots" of the Thessalonians. . trans.New Testament Theology. as referring to a systematic pogrom against the Christians. cf. too. 1959). GOGUEL. F. 4So. op. IIO. op. Cambridge. Matthew (Soc.. expresses the thought that God has not abandoned his ancient covenant people (Rom. Acts 10:37. but this event had occurred almost 20 years prior to the time of the writing of I Thess. the passage refers specifically to per- caused by o-vl. trans. (ed.it is that of the interpolator and not of Paul. I1:26).86 HARVARDTHEOLOGICAL REVIEW the Jewish people with utter finality (v.). cit.). J.T. In addition to the texts he cites (Lk. 190. M. 1954). 42"Judaea" here refers to the Roman province. ad loc. In this verse the author draws a connection between Jewish persecutions of Christian churches in Palestine 42 and Gentile persecution of the church in Thessalonica. Marsh (London.vXECTrat. 4:44. There is no evidence that it was any such thing.. 2:14 refers to the persecution of the "Hellenists" (Acts. 53 . speaks of "an astonishing volte face.45 Those who have 2:14 . MILLIGAN. unique in the New Testament. Some have sought to explain this with reference to the book of Acts and the troubles Paul and his coworkersare said to have had at the instigation of local Jews secutions in Judaea. MUNCK. 1967).41 V. Cambridge. ii. MILLIGAN. op.. cf. i Thessalonians 2:14 (Acts 17:5ff. op. 29.to indicate that the churches in Judaea suffered persecution at the hands of the Jews between 44 AD and the outbreak of the war against Rome. The Birth of Christianity. 123. 6.. H. See on this D.. a E. Cit. I20. which includes all of the territory formerly ruled by Herod Agrippa I (41-44 A. and the persecutionin Thessalonica has been tiles.. Here. 16) is manifestly foreign to Paul's theology which. 8:1.44 With reference to the alleged persecutions in Judaea. for such an interpretation of "the Jews" is without parallel in the Pauline epistles. cit. trans. 370. Paul and the Salvation of Mankind. 2 to those expressed in Rom.D..16o) see also Jos. 1. also J. 30ff. 14. Clarke (London. FRAME. 6:Iff. Ant." from the thoughts expressed in i Thess. Mon. 1955)."4 However. Jos. The Theme of Jewish Persecution of Christians in the Gospel According to St. i88o).see also MICHEL.. Snape (New York. op. HARE. and indeed "all Israel will be saved" (Rom.
:6. revealing his eschatologically oriented theology . Not only is it improbablethat Paul would cite the Judaean Christians as examples for his Gentile congregations. It is a very interesting fact that when Paul uses the terminology of "imitation. 2:14 implies that Paul expects the * B. in fact. II:23ff. Uppsala. were living in harmony with their fellowJews. GOPPELT. II:I. on which see HARE. Segen und Fluch 472 Cor.The Imitation of Paul (Kampen. 14. cit. and BRANDON. 4s So also HARE. Schroeder (London. 4:12. Paul speaks generally. 4:16. im Urchristentum (Norsk vidensk." Memory and Manuscript (Acta Sem. there was no significant persecution of Christians in Judaea before the war. a serious quesbut tion as to how friendly the Christians in Judaea were towards Paul (Rom. Op. 127.47 there is. and sees a hint of this also in i Cor. op. I. 1932). and had Ananus deposed from his high-priesthood. kl. DE BOER. also L.. 274. 15:31). BRUN. L. i:6. This interesting theory goes beyond the evidence.cit. Paul and Judaism. With respect to the situation in Thessalonica at the time of the writing of i Thessalonians. Hist.this is a theological topos.i. Oslo. the brotherof Jesus.. Ups. 3:17. I05ff.5o Nor does he counsel his congregations to 46 See HARE. E. asserts that I Thess. indeed. 5o For a full-scale treatment see W. 9:3 that Paul was under a curse by the Diaspora Jews. op.1 THESS. cf. 2 Thess. 2:7-9). On the Birkhath ha-Minim see below.. at least up until 62 AD. 1964).This would indicate that the Christiansin Judaea.48 Mention should also be made of the mimesis terminologywhich occurs in v.. trans. 64. Jesus.-ak. I Thess. Of course Paul himself encounteredquite a bit of hostility in the Diaspora synagogues. 1961). I am unable to understand how such a conclusion could be suggested by the text. We are told by Josephus (Ant.. argues with reference to Rom. GERHARDSSON Thessalonian congregation to "receive" from the Judaean churches the word of God and to "imitate their halakic practice.. 2:13-16 87 recently dealt with this question in some detail 4" argue that. cit.* the mimesis usage in this verse does not cohere with Paul's usage elsewhere."he uses it with reference to the imitation of himself (i Cor. .200) that the execution of James.about the apostle and his congregation undergoing "tribulation" (OVXOn. by the Sadducaeanpriesthood so angered those who were "strict in observance of the law" (the Pharisees) that some of them went to meet the incoming Roman governorwith the news.. Phil. 20.-fil. Oslo. 62. Neot. op. 22. recapitulated at 3:3). cit. but that the Thessaloi nian Christians were actually suffering systematic persecution in the apostolic period is very much in doubt.
What it is... He and no one else . Nachfolge und Nachahmung Jesu Christi im Neuen Testament (Beitr. 859-77. I43. O. in fact. indicated by E~XapLO-T70ILV.T. but MICHAELIS' view is preferable. and given the otherwise coherent picture of the mimesis terminology in the Pauline letters. Apophoreta (Festschr. as I am of Christ.. EIDEM. Form and Function of the Pauline Thanksgiving (Beih.. See also D. Berlin. BETZ. Abraham Unser Vater (Festscher.. unfortunately unavailable to me. "Become Imitators of Me": The Pauline Conception of Apostolic Tradition. 1964). 1922). (Unters. on "imitation" see 250ff. 13-16. cit. places v. 194-235. in his structural analysis of I Thess. ELTESTER. Die Struktur des ersten Thessalonicherbriefes.surely not the Judaean churches.. Biblica 40 (I959). 24. i Thessalonians 2:14 stands out as not only historically incongruous but theologically incongruous as well. 1967). N. in W.T. •uLpe~ DE BOERargues against 668f. N. 1963). 67-85. ' On the "imitation of Christ" see now H. Ernst Haenchen. Leiden/Kbiln. which is deutero-Paulineand in structure a slavish 1962). BETZ. For a study of the liturgical background of the thanksgiving formula see J.. LMeo&at. 20. 13 at the end of a subsection beginning in 2:I. "Imitatio Pauli. ROBINSON. THIEME."5 Given this unique understanding of his own apostolic role and authority on the part of Paul. 55P.. is a secondary extension on the part of a later editor of the mimesis motif that occurs in i Thessalonians 1:6. and cf. WINDISCH." Here. I54ff. the supremeauthority and "model" for his congregations.. ed. cit. op. I would see an expression of the intermediary function of the apostle in the mimesis process. 138. VV.. W. 450-58. cit." in Teologiska Studier tilliignade Erik Stave (Uppsala. I cannot see any merit at all in his analysis. 1939). obedience.op."5In the case of I Thessalonians (and 2 Thess. 4. ed.. in O. in his article. Berlin. too. Tiibingen. still a very important study. 13 introduces a "thanksgiving" period. BETZ. Th."5 The "thanksgiving" form in the Pauline letters was delineated and described form-criticallyin the pioneeringwork of P. Hist. Schubert. 2o9f. 37. Leipzig. SCHUBERT. ZNW. " K. . Dict. op. MICHAELIS understands OaLto imply a claim to Th. 52 AgainstBETZ..... under the Lord. Die Hodajot-Formel in Gebet und Hymnus des Friihchristentums. ' Paul's use of So. 185f. and E. 1934)." In i Thes- "imitate Christ" directly. STANLEY. and of the Lord.52 What is involved in this usage is nothing less than an intense apostolic self-understandingon the part of Paul. this interpretation. al. Formally v.88 thians i i:I: HARVARDTHEOLOGICAL REVIEW "Be imitators of me. et. Michel.is."5Characteristicof his usage is 2 Corinsalonians 1:6 Paul uses the expression in the indicative mood: "You became imitators of us (me). Paulus und Christus On Paul's apostolic consciousness see especially H.
Unters. BJERKELUND.. Tiibingen.1 THESS. I. Bultmann. the "thanksgiving" period itself constituted the main "body" of the letter. and W. Theol. The Apostolic Parousia: Form and Significance. Cambridge. in et. and 3:9ff. Die Thessalonicherbriefe als Briefcomposied.. Funktion und Sinn der parakalo-Siitze in den paulinischen Briefen (Bibl. cit. criticisms of SCHMITHALS. on the basis of formal considerations. 4: ob-I2. these repetitions "serving to unify formally the entire section from 1:28vva'/LEOa 7r OE 3" 3. 249-68. ibid.. 2:1. Form. see Parakal6. 5:12-22. Neither study demonstrates any form-critical control. Norv. FARMER. cit. FUNK.59 He pointed out that in the case of i Thessalonians the opening "thanksgiving"period is rounded off with an "eschatological climax" in i:io. 26.or even three. JBL 81 (1962). He further concluded that in the case of i Thess. Zeit und Geschichte (Festschr. Op.. i. op. ECKART. SWREDE already remarked about this peculiarity in 1-2 Thess. C. W. Hermeneutic. a second "thanksgiving" period begins which continues up to 4:1. and Word of God (New York. into two separate letters.-G. see K. dividing it into two genuine letters.. is an opening formula introducing the "body" of the letter.. 263ff.. cit.. see 263. ed. John Knox. 24." 60 R. This "body" draws to a close at 2:12. Language. in E. SCHMITHALS finds four genuine .. 6 R. SANDERS. 4:1-8. and has delineated an entirely new form." he writes. 20. 125ff. tionen. Thess. i8ff. 295-315. which is simply repeated in 2:I3ff. where the EvXapto-Tc formula does not occur but the clause sXaptor-av avraaro8o0vat could be taken as parallel to it. Die Echt6I find W. "these two thanksgiving periods may be more concisely delineated. and marking off as non-Pauline interpolations 2:13-16. DINKLER. and with 2:13. cit. WREDE'S heit des II Thess. than is done by merely uniting them functionally into one. Ibid. 1966).. Funk has done further form-critical work on the Pauline corpus. R. n. and that the following verse. if one counts 3:9 as a further instance. (Texte u. deals only with I 1964). Oslo... Schubert decided that in fact there was only one "thanksgiving"period in i Thessalonians. strangely enough. For theories dividing i Thess. ECKART. For For criticism of ECKART. SOp. SCHMITHALS.. and R. the "travelthorough study of 2 Thess. 356. see SCHMITHALS.. op. 1967). FUNK. Leipzig. 1967). Christian History and Interpretation (Festschr.) 58 Subsequently J. 2:13-16 89 imitation of I Thess. rejecting the authenticity of 2 Thess. 1903). 348ff. Pauline letters in 1-2 Thess.) 56 there is an apparent anomaly in that it has as now constituted two "thanksgiving"sections 57 . "Thus. " The Transition from Opening Epistolary Thanksgiving to Body J. Sanders analyzed the transition from "thanksgiving" to "body" in the Pauline letters.. al. entirely convincing. and KilMMEL. in the Letters of the Pauline Corpus. o Ibid.
Incidentally I wish to point out 6 " Ibid. of you for a short Now. 5 As indicated above (nn. for he noted the absence of a formal transition from 2:i6 to 2. (Op. his desire to be with his congregation. but by the apostle's remarks in vv. io. . see a connection between the anti-Jewish polemic of 14-16 and v. II1-12: we each Foryou knowhow. Mon. too.. the apostle continuing in v. SCHUBERT. cit. how naturally the transition to apostolic parousia takes place by means of these verses.in letter. as a substitute for personal presence. and is not specific enough for the Thessalonian situation. V. whatever it was (cf.."6 This form has as its function the effective application. 13. be a connection between v. 60). "but Satan hindered us." Paul is undoubtedly referring to his illness in v. and there is lacking in ECKART'S study both form-critical control and Sachkritik. cit. ECKART has also suggested that 1316 is an interpolation. indeed. 16 and v. and P.who callsyou into his own kingdom glory. RICHARDSON. He sees in 15-16 a programmatic "Judenpolemik" which exhibits a quasi-poetic parallelism.. 12 and 6o) K. 18. op. There may. 14 deals generally with suffering. 32-34. See below. 12:7). (RSV) Note. but it is to be explained in a different way. (above. 105. 18.90 HARVARD THEOLOGICAL REVIEW ogue. 250. (aJropfavaOErvrc•) etc. exhorted one of you and encouraged and charged to lead a life worthy you you and of God.17.like a fatherwithhis children.. we are able to solve Schubert'saporiain his discussion of the "thanksgiving"period in I Thessalonians. 23." 61 more recently defined as the "apostolic parousia. MICHEL." 4 0 Op. In the case of i Thessalonians Funk has defined the "apostolic parousia" as constituting the verses from 2:17 through 3:13. Thus 13-16 is an interpolation. brethren. and I find MICHEL and RICHARDSON's interpretation impossible. Israel in the Apostolic Church (Soc.of the apostle's authority in his churches. and remarkedthat 2:17 "follows most naturally upon the reminiscences of his former relations to the church (2: I-I2). 17: But we.-G. 0. 18. n.) However..13 Funk's analysis now allows us to solve the apparentdifficultyof the double "thanksgiving"in i Thessalonians. 2 Cor. N. cit.S. 1969). It includes such items as the apostle's travel plans. V. n. for it is clear that the "apostolic parousia" is introduced formally not by the verses from 13-16 at all. Paul may just as easily have used "traditional" material as a later interpolator. were bereft timein personif not in spirit. cit.3.etc. Cambridge.T. then. op. shows "einen dhnlich straffen Satzparallelismus" which in content is general and unspecific. 51.
the Lord in that they have received the word joyfully and faithfully albeit with concomitant "affliction. The Structure and Purpose of Second Thessalonians (Harvard Divinity School. . 1968). 6 and v. at the end of the "thanksgiving" period beginning in 1:6 (it thus serves as a repetition of the "thanksgiving") and before Paul's discussion of his travel plans. PETERSEN. The author of the interpolation has "Paulinized" the anti-Jewish TO2 polemic by means of i6a. in circumstancesof persecution.1 THESS. 2:13-16 91 The conclusion. therefore. The position of the interpolationis suggested by the structureof the original letter. to use Pauline words and phrases from a genuine letter in order to provide a putative "Pauline" framework for a new message. The divergence occurs at v. ch. 2. which form-criticalanalysis suggests is this: vv..66 In the case of I Thessalonians 2:13ff. In the case of 2 Thessalonians the new message is contained especially in the eschatological passage. then. are used. therefore. or equivalent words and phrases. KWoXVOVT7v roZM EYOveo. to encouragethe readers with reference to the embattled Christians in Palestine and to underscore now in a post-7o situation the "united front" of all Christians against the Jews who have at last suffered in the destruction of their city and temple the ultimate rejection and judgment from God. polation before I was aware of ECICART'S ' See in addition to WREDE'S work the unpublisheddissertationby ROBERT J.possibly under the influence of a misinterpretation that my own study of the text had led me to the conclusion that 13-16 is an interarticle. but represent a later interpolationinto the text.. The method of our hypothetical interpolatoris strikingly similar to that of the author of 2 Thessalonians. is the modus operandi and the motivation of our hypothetical interpolator? If one now comparesthe passage i3ff. one immediately notices that both passages begin by saying the same thing! Identical words and phrases. then follows the anti-Jewish polemic. with the opening "thanksgiving" in I:2ff. 14: in 1:6 Paul commendsthe Thessalonians for imitating him and." In 2:14 the authorcommendsthe church for imitating the churches in Judaea which have suffered persecution at the hands of the Jews. the new message has as its purpose.yXaXo-aL tva wowecatv. viz.65 What. 13-16 do not belong to Paul's original letter at all.
. HUMMEL. some of whom you will prophets (Trpopgrat) kill (d7ToKrdelvev)and crucify." and probablywith reference to the memory of what happened to Paul upon his arrival in Jerusalem (cf. 24:2b Judentum im Matthiiusevangelium (Beitr. of course. ORCHARD. hypocrites! . 89Using the work of J.. The importance of a proper historical understanding of this "traditional"material can hardly be overstated. Ev. my remarks re MICHEL Jewish-Christian polemic could such a connection be made.O Jerusalem. Thessalonians and the Synoptic Gospels. all this will come upon this generation. Jeruand the prophets stoningthosewhoaresent to you.92 HARVARDTHEOLOGICAL REVIEW of Paul's reference to Satan in 2:18. SR. broodof vipers. that upon come all the righteousblood shed on earth . . scribes and Pharisees. Rom. As has already been noted above. Only in a time of intense 67 Cf. and interprets the phrase 7rapaXap6lvres X65yov dKoS to mean "tradition. therewill not be left hereone stone uponanother. 1966). op. Behold.. This thesis can be tested with reference to the parallels in the gospel of Matthew. Die Auseinandersetzung zwischen Kirche und 70 On Mt. and some you will scourge in your from synagoguesand persecute ([EK-] &W0KEL) town to town. I say to . 64. He may even have prophesied the destruction of Jerusalem. 224. . refers to the quasi technical language of paradosis in v.killing you. Fill up ([ava-] 7rxqpo-v). see R.. Miinchen. of the measure your fathers. Truly. .. See below on the situation post-70.. . Cit. Truly. some of whom may have been Pharisees. 15:31). your house is forsaken and desolate. probable that Jesus had disputes with opponents. . SCHIPPERS. It is..70 But it is the author of the gospel of Matthew and RICHARDSON.68yet it constitutes a new message as it is incorporated into the Thessalonian epistle. for what is reflected here is the fact that "traditional"building blocks are given new form in a historical situation post-7o." the substance of what is contained in 14-16.. You serpents. . He may have referred to the stock idea currentin Judaism concerningthe persecution of the prophets. .how you are you to escape being sentencedto hell? ThereforeI send you and wise men and scribes. 13. quoting the relevant passages from Matthew 23 and 24 (RSV): 69 Woe to you. You are sons of those who murderedthe prophets. I say you may to you. 20off. n. then.that will not be thrown down. much of the material in the interpolation is traditional and formulaic. but disagreeing fundamentally with his conclusions. Acts 21:30ff. Biblica 19 (1938). Theol. 33. salem. 85.
and denounced as "childrenof hell. Sanh 13. Christianity in Talmud and Midrash (r. 75 Cf. It is only in this situation that the author of the gospel of Matthew (and other N. STENDAHL. at first under the leadership of R. A. 7 On the Birkhath ha-Minim.T. Probably all of the N. 33. 224ff. Cf.D.N. but are apparently also felt in the Diaspora. D. Cit. 19648). 75ff. New Jersey. Gamaliel II ca. 85 A. SCHOEPS' interpretation of Abodah Zarah I7a.p. Johannan ben Zakkai. not only has the final break between church and synagogue occurred. The Setting of the Sermon on the Mount (Cambridge. but the relations between Jews and Christians are now acutely polemical.. 1969). xiff. TRILLING. 72See J.D. writings. were written after 70oA.. History and Theology in the Fourth Gospel (New York. and passim. (Berakhoth 28b). The Foundations of Judaism and Christianity (Chicago.. 1960). 275f. trans.T. T. have assembled at the coastal town of Jamnia. 58ff. 1969). Israel (Stud.-J. HARE. Hare (Philadelphia. DAVIES. quoted in R. Jewish Christianity.5 In short. As this relates to d7roovpazywy6o in Jn. also Tos. 1968'). Op. and have begun the task of consolidating the practice of Judaism so as to require a new uniformity. MARTYN. The School of St. the twelfth "benediction" of the synagogue prayer Shemoneh Esreh cursing Christians and heretics composed by Samuel the Small under the direction of R. 256ff. "His blood be on us and on our children" (Mt. Clifton. cit. His work reflects a historical situation that did not pertain prior to the destructionof Jerusalem: the final break between the church and the synagogue has taken place. 1966). also W. 5. .g. 1968)." 74 These developments are not limited only to Palestine. For a full discussion of the developments in Jamnia see W. 167ff. see DAVIES. In the parable Das wahre nSee. 1964). and K. Miinchen. 73 their prophets and teachers are being persecuted.7 In the years following the destruction the Pharisaic leaders. This is graphically portrayed in the Matthean passion narrativewith the chilling words. SANDMEL. op. HERFORD. PARKES. 2:13-16 93 that must be credited (or debited!) with putting these motifs together in the way in which they now stand in the passage quoted. 74According to H.1 THESS.. The First Christian Century in Judaism and Christianity (New York. writers) can speak of the Jewish nation as culpable not only for the death of the prophets but also for the death of Jesus.. 2 7:2 5). JusTiN. See also S. I8ff. e. Dial. Matthew (Philadelphia. Even the parables of Jesus are the subject of creative rehandlingso as to connect the death of Jesus and the prophets to the destruction of Jerusalem.72Christians are being cursed in the synagogues and excommunicatedtherefrom..4. io8. 9:22 see especially the brilliant treatment by J. with the exception of the genuine letters of Paul. II8f.T.
7 now increasingly of Gentile constituency77 is in See on this and other redactional elements in Mt.76 For Matthew the church - every respect the inheritor of the promises of God.) the king's (cf. 8:44). 14:16) servants are mistreated and murdered with the result that "the king was angry (cdpylo-0-q). 7 STENDAHL. op." And very possibly one of these churcheshas in its leadershipthe author of the gospel of Matthew. xiii. cf. in a situation of local (presumably Gentile) persecution against the church in could hold up as a shining example"the churchesof Thessalonica. R. So one must.94 HARVARDTHEOLOGICAL REVIEW of the marriage feast (Mt. TRILLING. 7 For general remarks on how Christians fared in the Roman world of the period. are denouncedas "childrenof hell" (Mt.op. HUMMEL. Martyrdom and Persecution in the Early Church (Garden City.79 God which are in Judaea. . For it is only in the period post-7o that an editor working with the text of Paul's letter to the Thessalonians. 155ff. 7). op. cit. Jn. 82ff. cit. 22:2ff. 23:15. see W. and he sent his troops and destroyed those murderersand burned their city" (v.. "true Israel" seems to be a universal assumption in the Christian literature of this and subsequent periods." 78 The non-ChristianJews. the church is the "true Israel... reflecting a common historical situation. FREND. N. cit. consider also the parallel mode of handling these traditions. in speaking of parallel traditions between I Thessalonians 2:14-16 and the gospels. Lk. That the church is the 78 See especially the treatment by W. 1967).Y. on the other hand.
This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?
We've moved you to where you read on your other device.
Get the full title to continue listening from where you left off, or restart the preview.