Thessalonians

Richard Ascough

LAST MODIFIED: 29 JUNE 2015

DOI: 10.1093/OBO/9780195393361-0090

Introduction

The two letters written to the Christian group at the city of Thessalonica occupy the thirteenth and fourteenth places in the canon of the
New Testament; they are eighth and ninth in the sequence of Paul’s letters. There is little doubt that Paul wrote 1 Thessalonians, and
many scholars consider it to be one of his earliest letters. In contrast, the authenticity of 2 Thessalonians is much contested, with
scholars split between ascribing it to Paul and ascribing it to a later writer using Paul’s name. On the other hand, the textual integrity of
2 Thessalonians is secure, while 1 Thessalonians is argued by some to be a combination of two or more letters, or at the very least,
they suggest, it contains a nonauthentic interpolation at 2:13–16. The primary aim of 1 Thessalonians is to encourage Jesus’ believers
to continue to progress in their faith, and Paul addresses some practical concerns to that effect: sexual morality, community
relationships, and Jesus’ return. In 2 Thessalonians the emphasis lies on addressing fear and anxiety over the return of Jesus and
some problematic behavior within the group.

General Overviews

Most New Testament introductions and Bible dictionaries provide good orientations to the Thessalonian letters. Important ancillary
works are worth pointing to, however, as they attempt a somewhat different approach and break new ground. Suggs 1960 was not the
first to argue against the chronology of Acts but focuses specifically on Macedonia. Ascough 2014 briefly introduces critical issues in
the study of the two letters. Collins 1993 is different from many introductory works, because it is a monograph-length study of the
seminal place of the Thessalonian church in early Christianity. Felder 2007, Johnson-DeBaufre 2010, and Jennings 2006 represent
cutting-edge scholarship outside the mainstream that attempts to raise issues often overlooked by others while giving attention to the
interpreter’s context.

Ascough, Richard S. 1 and 2 Thessalonians: Encountering the Christ Group at Thessalonike. Phoenix Guides to the New
Testament 13. Sheffield, UK: Sheffield Phoenix Press, 2014.
Narrates the founding of the Christ group at Thessalonica and subsequent interactions, giving particular attention to the literary form,
rhetorical strategies, theologies, and reception of the two canonical letters. It sets the letters within their broad social and cultural
contexts by drawing on a wide range of literary and archaeological data, particularly from Greek and Roman associations

Collins, Raymond F. The Birth of the New Testament: The Origin and Development of the First Christian Generation. New York:
Crossroad, 1993.
1 Thessalonians brought about a new way of conceptualizing the church as believers gathered to hear it read aloud and to experience
differently the apostolic presence. Broad in scope, this work offers many insights into 1 Thessalonians.
Felder, Cain Hope. “1 Thessalonians.” In True to Our Native Land: An African American New Testament Commentary. Edited
by Brian K. Blount, 389–400. Minneapolis: Fortress, 2007.
Technically a commentary. Felder interprets the text in relation to African American experiences and expectations. Its usefulness
extends beyond that limited audience in the important hermeneutical issues it raises. See also “2 Thessalonians” on pages 401–408.

Jennings, Theodore W. “1 and 2 Thessalonians.” In The Queer Bible Commentary. Edited by Deryn Guest, Robert E. Goss,
Mona West, and Thomas Bohache, 669–683. London: SCM, 2006.
Focuses on how lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgendered perspectives affect the reading and interpretation of the texts and how these
texts, in turn, affect lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgendered communities.

Johnson-DeBaufre, Melanie. “‘Gazing upon the Invisible’: Archaeology, Historiography, and the Elusive Women of 1
Thessalonians.” In From Roman to Early Christian Thessalonik! : Studies in Religion and Archaeology. Edited by Laura Salah
Nasrallah, Charalambos Bakirtzis, and Steven J. Friesen, 73–108. Harvard Theological Studies 64. Cambridge, MA: Harvard
University Press, 2010.
Argues that since “wo/men” are not mentioned specifically in Paul’s letter, interpreters wrongly assume that they were not present, or at
least not significant, within the community structure. Offers proposals for reconstructing the Thessalonian Christian community with
“wo/men” more fully in view.

Suggs, M. Jack. “Concerning the Date of Paul’s Macedonian Ministry.” Novum Testamentum 4 (1960): 60–68.
Argues from Thessalonians and Philippians that Macedonia was the first area evangelized by Paul. Controversial at the time of
publication because it challenged the chronology given in Acts, this position has come to be accepted by most scholars.

Bibliographic Overviews

Some excellent bibliographic surveys are available of works published up to the turn of the millennium. Although presented without
critical commentary, the entries in Weima and Porter 1998 are extensive in their inclusivity and scope. Porter 1999 traces non-English
scholarly trends but is more summary than actual critique of the arguments themselves. Collins 1984 likewise traces threads in
scholarship and in much more detail than Porter 1999 but with an earlier terminus ad quem. Adams 2009 picks up after Collins 1984,
drawing attention to how new methods are being used. Watson 2006 is more focused and lists works without comment but presents an
important dimension missing from the other surveys as it focuses on a newer approach to the texts. The website maintained by Mark
Goodacre (1 and 2 Thessalonians) offers links to books, articles, and dissertations relating to Thessalonians.

Adams, Sean A. “Evaluating 1 Thessalonians: An Outline of Holistic Approaches to 1 Thessalonians in the Last 25 Years.”
Currents in Biblical Research 8 (2009): 51–70.
General dissatisfaction with traditional methodologies has led scholars to employ methods from other disciplines to gain new
perspectives on biblical texts. Epistolary and rhetorical studies are now often combined with literary or linguistic approaches, which
Adams summarizes and evaluates with respect to work done on 1 Thessalonians.
Collins, Raymond F. “Recent Scholarship on the First Letter to the Thessalonians.” In Studies on the First Letter to the
Thessalonians. By Raymond F. Collins, 3–75. Bibliotheca ephemeridum theologicarum Lovaniensium 66. Leuven, Belgium:
Leuven University Press, 1984.
A thorough review of scholarship from 1956 through 1983 under four broad headings: text-critical concerns, literary concerns (including
genre, forms, integrity), historical concerns, and the life of Christians at Thessalonica. Succinct summaries of mainstream and obscure
works trace patterns and interactions and demonstrate Collins’s mastery of the primary and secondary materials.

Goodacre, Mark. “1 and 2 Thessalonians.” New Testament Gateway.

Provides links to a few books, articles, and dissertations. Limited in scope but handy for quick access to a couple of older
commentaries.

Porter, Stanley E. “Developments in German and French Thessalonians Research: A Survey and Critique.” Currents in
Research 7 (1999): 309–334.
Trends in German and French scholarship are traced for introductory issues (authenticity, unity, eschatology) and individual passages
(1 Thess. 1:9–10, 2:13–16, 3:3; 2 Thess. 2:6, 7). An important orientation to a vast range of research, some of which was agenda
setting for Thessalonian studies.

Watson, Duane Frederick. The Rhetoric of the New Testament: A Bibliographic Survey. Tools for Biblical Study 8. Blandford
Forum, UK: Deo, 2006.
1 and 2 Thessalonians are covered in five pages (167–171) that include sixty-four entries.

Weima, Jeffery A. D., and Stanley E. Porter. An Annotated Bibliography of 1 and 2 Thessalonians. New Testament Tools and
Studies 26. Leiden, The Netherlands, and Boston: Brill, 1998.
Includes twelve hundred references from the 19th and 20th centuries, most with annotations of more than one hundred words
summarizing the arguments. Divided into four sections: commentaries and reference materials (without annotation), special topics (city,
church, text, authenticity, unity, order date, form, purpose, theology), and a section on exegetical treatments of 1 and 2 Thessalonians,
each according to divisions in each letter.

Essay Collections

Collins 1984 and Donfried 2002 collect the work of each scholar, respectively, while Collins 1990, Donfried and Beutler 2000, and
Tuckett 2013 gather papers presented by a range of international scholars at focused conferences.

Collins, Raymond F. Studies on the First Letter to the Thessalonians. Bibliotheca ephemeridum theologicarum Lovaniensium
66. Leuven, Belgium: Leuven University Press, 1984.
Republication of thirteen essays between 1974 and 1983 complemented by the addition of three new essays by a distinguished scholar
of 1 Thessalonians. A bibliographic survey is followed by essays on the text and its provenance, its theology, and its pastoral concerns.
Collins, Raymond F., ed. The Thessalonian Correspondence. Bibliotheca Ephemeridum theologicarum Lovaniensium 87.
Leuven, Belgium: Leuven University Press, 1990.
Thirty-eight essays by international experts gathered for the 1988 Colloquium Biblicum Lovaniense are arranged under four broad
topics: Paul’s proclamation in Thessalonica, the composition of 1 Thessalonians, the content of 1 Thessalonians, and 2 Thessalonians
as deutero-Pauline.

Donfried, Karl P. Paul, Thessalonica, and Early Christianity. Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 2002.
Republication of fourteen essays published between 1974 and 2000, with the addition of one new essay by a scholar at the forefront of
Thessalonian studies. An introductory essay allows Donfried to address criticisms and comments raised by his critics.

Donfried, Karl P., and Johannes Beutler, eds. The Thessalonians Debate: Methodological Discord or Methodological
Synthesis? Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 2000.
Collects essays and responses presented at the 1995–1998 Studiorum Novi Testamenti Societas (SNTS) seminar. A snapshot of
debates and disagreements among specialists who apply rhetorical and epistolographic methods.

Tuckett, Christopher ed. 2 Thessalonians and Pauline Eschatology: For Petr Pokorny on His 80th Birthday. Colloquium
Oecumenicum Paulinum 21, Rome, 11–15 September 2012. Leuven, Belgium: Peeters, 2013.
Collects eight essays presented at the 2012 meeting of the Colloquium Oecumenicum Paulinum in Rome. Despite the title, only three
essays address 2 Thessalonians directly, while two others explore how 1 Thessalonians relates to 2 Thessalonians. The remaining
essays treat eschatological issues in 1 Corinthians and Romans.

Texts and Translations

The standard text for exegetical work on Thessalonians is Novum Testamentum Graece, 27th revised edition (Eberhard Nestle, Erwin
Nestle, Barbara Aland, and Kurt Aland, eds. [Stuttgart: Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft, 1993]), the text of which is also published in The
Greek New Testament, 4th revised edition (Barbara Aland, Kurt Aland, Johannes Karavidopoulos, Carlo M. Martini, and Bruce M.
Metzger, eds. [Stuttgart: Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft: United Bible Societies, 1993]). The difference between the two is the textual
apparatus, although for those who want to go further Aland and Juckel 2002 provides specialist help. For students translating the text
for the first time, Vaughan and Gideon 1979 provides a helpful orientation, but most translators will find Blight 1989 and Ellingworth and
Nida 1975 engaging, even if they do not agree with all of their suggestions. How one approaches the exegesis of a text is nicely
surveyed in Fee 1992, which uses the Thessalonian letters as exemplars.

Aland, Barbara, and Andreas Juckel, eds. Das Neue Testament in Syrischer Überlieferung. II. Die Paulinischen Briefe. Teil 3:
1./2. Thessalonicherbrief, 1./2. Timotheusbrief, Titusbrief, Philemonbrief und Hebräerbrief. Arbeiten zur neutestamentlichen
Textforschung 32. Berlin: De Gruyter, 2002.
The verses of 1 and 2 Thessalonians are presented in parallel horizontal lines taken from three sources, the Peshitta, the Harclean, and
quotations in Syriac literature, with variants from other early manuscripts signaled in the apparatus. A key work for text-critical
specialists.
Blight, Richard C. An Exegetical Summary of 1 and 2 Thessalonians. Dallas: Summer Institute of Linguistics, 1989.
Designed as a handbook for translators but extremely useful for exegetes and students. Provides a semiliteral translation of a word or a
clause followed by the Greek form and lexical observations, including dozens of English translations and commentaries. Provides
answers for “questions” by again summarizing versions and commentaries.

Ellingworth, Paul, and Eugene A. Nida. A Handbook on Paul’s Letters to the Thessalonians. New York and London: United
Bible Societies, 1975.
Gives the Revised Standard Version (RSV) and Today’s English Version (TEV) English text alongside comments on vocabulary,
grammar, and syntax to provide options for translators. Applies discourse analysis.

Fee, Gordon D. “On Text and Commentary on 1 and 2 Thessalonians.” In Society of Biblical Literature 1992 Seminar Papers:
One Hundred Twenty-Eighth Annual Meeting, November 21–24, 1992, San Francisco, California. Edited by Eugene H.
Lovering, 165–183. Society of Biblical Literature Seminar Papers 31. Atlanta: Scholars, 1992.
A case study of the inadequate attention commentators pay to text-critical issues. Textual criticism should function as grammar does in
terms of discussing impact on interpretation.

Vaughan, Curtis, and Virtus E. Gideon. A Greek Grammar of the New Testament: A Workbook Approach to Intermediate
Grammar. Nashville: Broadman, 1979.
For use by students who have completed at least one year of Greek study. The translation exercises move through the text of 1
Thessalonians by providing notes on grammar and syntax and requiring parsing of key words. By lesson 28, students have translated 1
Thessalonians in its entirety.

Commentaries

There is no shortage of commentaries that approach the text from different perspectives and employ a variety of critical (and not so
critical) perspectives. Of necessity, our listing representatives are here limited to three broad categories: older scholarly commentaries,
recent scholarly commentaries (post-1956), and commentaries that are aimed at a general reading audience or have as their primary
focus pastoral applications. This section is broken down into three subsections, Older Scholarly Commentaries, Recent Scholarly
Commentaries, and Commentaries for Ministers and General Readers.

Older Scholarly Commentaries

The philological skills of previous generations often outstrip those of modern scholars, even where the latter may have a much better
grasp of hermeneutics and a broader repertoire of critical tools at their disposal. Commentary on biblical texts began almost as soon as
they were written, as can be seen in the collection of ancient commentary collected in Gorday 2000 and the reception history survey of
Thiselton 2011. Late-19th-century and early-20th-century commentators focused on lexical issues, particularly in light of advances in
the study of inscription and papyri, as can be seen in Lightfoot 1895, Frame 1912, Plummer 1918a, and Plummer 1918b in English and
Dobschütz 1909 and Dibelius 1937 in German. Written in French, Rigaux 1956 engages earlier works while offering some fresh
interpretations.
Dibelius, Martin. An die Thessalonicher I, II: An die Philipper. 3d ed. Handbuch zum Neuen Testament 11. Tübingen, Germany:
Mohr, 1937.
Dibelius’s expertise in form criticism allows him to identify how particular parts of the letters employ traditional formulations, even as he
provides insightful historical and linguistic data information from a history of religions perspective.

Dobschütz, Ernst von. Die Thessalonicher-Briefe. Göttingen, Germany: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1909.
Primarily focused on philological and historical observations, which are dated but can still be of some use. His approach to the history of
religions is more conservative than that of Martin Dibelius.

Frame, James E. The Epistles of St. Paul to the Thessalonians. The International Critical Commentary. Edinburgh: T&T Clark,
1912.
A verse-by-verse commentary that provides invaluable philological notes and exegetical observations. Still extremely useful despite its
age, although the introduction is sparse.

Gorday, Peter, ed. Ancient Christian Commentary on Scripture: New Testament IX; Colossians, 1–2 Thessalonians, 1–2
Timothy, Titus, Philemon. Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity, 2000.
Collects in one easy-to-use resource the comments of Christian writers from the 1st through the 8th centuries. Brief overviews orient
the reader to the comments. Helpful both for exegetical insights and for understanding the history of interpretation.

Lightfoot, Joseph Barber. Notes on the Epistles of St. Paul from Unpublished Commentaries. London: Macmillan, 1895.
Lightfoot uses his considerable lexical skill in explicating the Greek text by drawing on classical and patristic writings. The first 136
pages comprise his comments on the two Thessalonian letters. Republished (Peabody, UK: Hendrickson, 1999).

Plummer, Alfred. A Commentary on St. Paul’s First Epistle to the Thessalonians. London: Roxburghe House, 1918a.
Plummer is known more for his solid grasp of Greek and of church history than for his originality of interpretation, but his lexical and
literary comments continue to be useful.

Plummer, Alfred. A Commentary on St. Paul’s Second Epistle to the Thessalonians. London: Roxburghe House, 1918b.
Good lexical analyses grounded in a wide reading of ancient texts. Treats 2 Thessalonians as authentically Pauline.

Rigaux, B. Les épitres aux Thessaloniciens. Études bibliques. Paris: Gabalda, 1956.
A prominent and influential work that marks the transition from classical to modern scholarship. Two volumes draw together insights
from past historical-critical work and lay the groundwork for scholars to pursue new methods and insights.

Thiselton, Anthony C. 1 and 2 Thessalonians through the Centuries. Blackwell Bible Commentaries. Chichester, UK: Wiley-
Blackwell, 2011.
For each section of the two letters Thiselton makes some brief exegetical comments before compiling reception-historical surveys of
how the text was used in the time of the Apostolic Fathers, the Patristic era, medieval period, Reformation and post-Reformation eras,
18th century, and 19th century.

Recent Scholarly Commentaries

Modern commentaries on 1 and 2 Thessalonians provide a range of methodological and ideological perspectives. Trilling 1980, Bruce
1982, and Malherbe 2000 bring into focus a century of historical-critical work, while Morris 1991, Fee 2009, Holtz 1998, and Weima
2014 bridge the gap between scholarly and pastoral concerns. Richard 1995 applies epistolary analysis, while Wanamaker 1990 uses
rhetorical forms of argumentation. Kreinecker 2010 draws heavily on nonbiblical papyri for a broadened understanding of the textual
features of 2 Thessalonians.

Bruce, F. F. 1 and 2 Thessalonians. Word Biblical Commentary 45. Waco, TX: Word Books, 1982.
Theologically conservative and exegetically astute. For each passage, Bruce provides a bibliography; a fresh and fairly literal
translation; text-critical notes; comments on form, structure, and setting; clause-by-clause comments on the Greek; and a narrative
explanation. 2 Thessalonians is considered to be authentically Pauline.

Fee, Gordon D. The First and Second Letters to the Thessalonians. New International Commentary on the New Testament.
Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 2009.
The replacement for Morris 1991 in the same series. Fee’s approach is more exegetical, while based predominantly on the Today’s
New International Version (TNIV) English text, and is committed to the authority of scripture. Detailed in its verse-by-verse analysis, it
encapsulates a wide range of biblical scholarship for students and ministers. Both letters are considered authentic.

Holtz, Traugott. Der erste Brief an die Thessalonicher. 3d ed. Evangelisch-katholischer Kommentar zum Neuen Testament 13.
Zürich, Switzerland: Benziger, 1998.
One of the few modern German commentaries on Thessalonians. Each passage is subjected to analysis of its structure, detailed verse-
by-verse exegesis, a summary of the main thought, and its possible links to modern contexts. Footnotes interact extensively with
scholarly literature, but the primary thrust is pastoral.

Kreinecker, Christina M. 2. Thessaloniker. Papyrologische Kommentare zum Neuen Testament 3. Göttingen, Germany:
Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2010.
Documentary papyri and ostraca from the 3rd century BCE through the 3rd century CE illuminate the text and context of 2
Thessalonians. Formulas and phrases break with letter-writing conventions, thus confirming that a pseudonymous author is attempting
to imitate Paul. The author does employ many phrases from a legal context in the letter.

Malherbe, Abraham J. The Letters to the Thessalonians: A New Translation with Introduction and Commentary. Anchor Bible
32B. New York: Doubleday, 2000.
Brings together decades of work by a recognized expert on Thessalonians. Remains the best available historical-critical commentary
and the beginning point for all further work. Gives detailed attention to the social, cultural, religious, and philosophical contexts through
philological notes and exegetical comments along with a fresh translation. Treats both letters as authentic.
Morris, Leon. The First and Second Epistles to the Thessalonians. Rev. ed. New International Commentary on the New
Testament. Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1991.
Somewhat updated and revised from the 1959 edition, this is a fairly conservative explication of the New International Version (NIV)
translation. Morris is solid if not exciting in his observations. It is more theological than historical in its approach and treats both letters
as authentic.

Richard, Earl J. First and Second Thessalonians. Sacra Pagina 11. Collegeville, MN: Liturgical, 1995.
A translation of each passage is followed by textual and linguistic notes and a broader interpretation of themes, with an emphasis on
historical-critical exegesis. Argues that 1 Thessalonians is a composite, with 2:13–4:2 being an earlier letter of Paul. 2 Thessalonians is
post-Pauline. Its strength is its analysis of formal epistolary features.

Trilling, Wolfgang. Der zweite Brief an die Thessalonicher. Evangelisch-Katholischer Kommentar zum Neuen Testament 14.
Zürich, Switzerland: Benziger, 1980.
Provides an original German translation with detailed historical-critical observations, with some emphasis on form criticism and
philology. Dates 2 Thessalonians between the year 80 and the mid-2nd century.

Wanamaker, Charles A. The Epistles to the Thessalonians: A Commentary on the Greek Text. New International Greek
Testament Commentary. Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1990.
Subjects both letters to rhetorical and linguistic analysis, although it is best suited for those who know Greek. Argues that 2
Thessalonians was written by Paul prior to 1 Thessalonians. The rhetorical analysis is one of the best available.

Weima, Jeffrey A. D. 1–2 Thessalonians. Baker Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker, 2014.
In keeping with the series, this is a thorough exegetical treatment of each verse, undertaken by a scholar who has spent his career
working on the Thessalonian letters. Theologically evangelical but broad in its treatment and discussion of other perspectives on critical
problems.

Commentaries for Ministers and General Readers

Scholars and students are best served by recent scholarly commentaries, but too often, technical data decrease their usefulness for
busy ministers or interested nonspecialists. Beale 2003, Green 2002, and Witherington 2006 will appeal more to those with evangelical
leanings, while adherents of mainline denominations will find Furnish 2007 and Gaventa 1998 more useful. Only those who know
German can access Walter, et al. 1998, but European scholarship is reflected in Lüdemann 2013 on 1 Thessalonians and Menken 1994
on 2 Thessalonians.

Beale, Gregory K. 1–2 Thessalonians. InterVarsity Press New Testament Commentary Series 13. Downers Grove, IL:
InterVarsity, 2003.
Biblical exposition based on the New International Version (NIV) from an evangelical perspective. While not without exegetical insight, it
aims to bring the text to life for sermons and Bible studies.
Furnish, Victor Paul. 1 Thessalonians, 2 Thessalonians. Abingdon New Testament Commentaries. Nashville: Abingdon, 2007.
Intended for students, seminarians, and pastors, it provides basic exegetical insights with section summaries that draw together
interpretive strands. 1 Thessalonians is the earliest of Paul’s letters, and 2 Thessalonians is deutero-Pauline and gives insight into the
reception and interpretation of Paul in the late 1st century.

Gaventa, Beverly Roberts. First and Second Thessalonians. Interpretation. Louisville: John Knox, 1998.
A commentary for teaching and preaching. Exegetical comments on each section are followed with observations on its application to
the contemporary church or its place in the lectionary.

Green, Gene L. The Letters to the Thessalonians. Pillar New Testament Commentary. Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 2002.
Solidly conservative in its interpretations and especially useful for pastors and Bible teachers. Thematic sections are exposited verse by
verse by drawing on a range of secondary literature and nonbiblical literary texts.

Lüdemann, Gerd. The Earliest Christian Text: 1 Thessalonians. Salem, OR: Polebridge, 2013.
Brief introductory chapters on Paul and 1 Thessalonians are followed by a fresh translation of the letter and exegetical comments that
summarize work Lüdemann has published elsewhere in more technical detail. An appendix provides a clear and concise demonstration
for the dating of 1 Thessalonians to 41 CE, almost a decade earlier than the consensus position.

Menken, Maarten J. J. 2 Thessalonians. London and New York: Routledge, 1994.

Almost half of this short commentary discusses the genre, authorship, and context of this deutero-Pauline letter. An original translation
is the basis of the historical exegesis that emphasizes the apocalypticism throughout. Grounded in scholarship, it is accessible to
nonspecialists.

Walter, Nikolaus, Eckart Reinmuth, and Peter Lampe. Die Briefe an die Philipper, Thessalonicher und an Philemon. Das Neue
Testament Deutsch 8/2. Göttingen, Germany: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1998.
Fresh translation and general explication for ministers and general readers. Reinmuth’s comments emphasize Paul’s apocalypticism in
1 Thessalonians and the clarifications introduced by the later writer of 2 Thessalonians.

Witherington, Ben, III. 1 and 2 Thessalonians: A Socio-rhetorical Commentary. Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 2006.
The verse-by-verse exegesis is enhanced through scattered asides on theological and social topics. Examines 1 Thessalonians as
epideictic rhetoric while treating 2 Thessalonians as deliberative. In both letters Paul’s language and images subvert Roman imperial
rule. Lacks detailed analysis but has broad coverage.

Authorship
Although there is little debate around Paul’s authorship of 1 Thessalonians (but see Crüsemann 2010), there have been considerable
challenges to the authenticity of 2 Thessalonians. Wrede 1903 encapsulates earlier linguistic and theological arguments against
Pauline authorship, to which Trilling 1972 provides even more evidence from style, tone, and form. The position is further bolstered by
arguments from syntax (Schmidt 1990) and tradition history (Holland 1988, Verhoef 1997), and style (Kreinecker 2013). Friesen 2010
teases out some implications of the non-authenticity of 2 Thessalonians, while Nicholl 2004 and Donfried 2013 present the case in favor
of the authenticity of the letter, a position found among a number of the works listed under Commentaries.

Crüsemann, Marlene. Die pseudepigraphen Briefe an die Gemeinde in Thessaloniki: Studien zu ihrer Abfassung und zur
jüdisch-christlichen Sozialgeschichte. Beiträge zur Wissenschaft vom Alten und Neuen Testament 10. Stuttgart: Verlag W.
Kohlhammer, 2010.
A number of peculiarities in 1 Thessalonians demonstrate that it was not written by Paul but rather dates to a time in which there was
greater separation between Christianity and Judaism. 2 Thessalonians is likewise deutero-Pauline but attempts to revoke the extensive
social separation between Christianity and Judaism of the first letter.

Donfried, Karl P. “Issues of Authorship in the Pauline Corpus: Rethinking the Relationship between 1 and 2 Thessalonians.” In
2 Thessalonians and Pauline Eschatology: For Petr Pokorny on His 80th Birthday. Edited by Christopher Tuckett, 81–113.
Colloquium Oecumenicum Paulinum 21, Rome, 11–15 September 2012. Leuven, Belgium: Peeters, 2013.
Donfried provides an outline of his understanding of the historical context of 1 Thessalonians, which, in turn, provides insight into the
authorship of 2 Thessalonians. The latter was coauthored by Paul, Silvanus, and Timothy shortly after the first letter to address an
intensification of Roman harassment and persecution as well as to correct misinterpretations of the earlier letter.

Friesen, Steven J. “Second Thessalonians, the Ideology of Epistles, and the Construction of Authority: Our Debt to the
Forger.” In From Roman to Early Christian Thessalonik! : Studies in Religion and Archaeology. Edited by Laura Nasrallah,
Charalambos Bakirtzis, and Steven J. Friesen, 189–210. Harvard Theological Studies 64. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University
Press, 2010.
On the premise that 2 Thessalonians is not written by Paul, Friesen demonstrates how written traditions came to dominate oral
traditions as sources of authority. Also suggests that 2 Thessalonians is an early stage of a shift from letters as a means of
communication to letters as repositories of authoritative statements of divine truth.

Holland, Glenn Stanfield. The Tradition That You Received from Us: 2 Thessalonians in the Pauline Tradition. Hermeneutische
Untersuchungen zur Theologie 24. Tübingen, Germany: Mohr Siebeck, 1988.
A detailed rhetorical analysis of 2 Thessalonians demonstrates that a later writer presents his or her own apocalyptic material to explain
similar material in 1 Thessalonians. His or her interpretation of Paul aims to discredit an unruly party of apocalyptic prophets.

Kreinecker, Christina M. “The Imitation Hypothesis: Pseudepigraphic Remarks on 2 Thessalonians with Help from
Documentary Papyri.” In Paul and Pseudepigraphy. Edited by Stanley E. Porter and Gregory P. Fewster, 197–219. Pauline
Studies 8. Leiden, The Netherlands, and Boston: Brill, 2013.
How requests are brought forward in 2 Thessalonians is compared with similar formulations in documentary papyri and the undisputed
Pauline letters in order to reveal the individual style of each writer. The evidence demonstrates that 2 Thessalonians is a constructed
pseudepigraphic writing.
Nicholl, Colin R. From Hope to Despair in Thessalonica: Situating 1 and 2 Thessalonians. Society for New Testament Studies
Monograph Series 126. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 2004.
A compelling challenge to the view that 2 Thessalonians is deutero-Pauline. Argues that the letters address two stages of the same
crisis, which is rooted in a misunderstanding of the deaths of some community members. Paul sent the letters within weeks of one
another, the first to answer the Thessalonians’ questions and the second to address their hopelessness and anxiety.

Schmidt, D. “The Syntactical Style of 2 Thessalonians: How Pauline Is It?” In The Thessalonian Correspondence. Edited by
Raymond F. Collins, 383–393. Bibliotheca Ephemeridum theologicarum Lovaniensium 87. Leuven, Belgium: Leuven University
Press, 1990.
Modern linguistic theory provides insightful analysis of syntactical features of sentences and demonstrates that 2 Thessalonians is
closer to Colossians and Ephesians––the authorship of which are disputed––than to 1 Thessalonians or other letters considered
authentically Pauline.

Trilling, Wolfgang. Untersuchungen zum zweiten Thessalonicherbrief. Leipzig: St. Benno, 1972.
Extensive and compelling arguments against the authenticity of 2 Thessalonians on the basis of style, tone, form criticism, and
theology, which form the basis of his 1980 commentary. Any argument for authenticity must address the issues Trilling raises.

Verhoef, Eduard. “The Relation between 1 Thessalonians and 2 Thessalonians and the Inauthenticity of 2 Thessalonians.”
Hervormde teologiese studies 53 (1997): 163–171.
2 Thessalonians is a non-Pauline letter written after 1 Thessalonians and uses the latter as a model while presenting a different
eschatological schema.

Wrede, William. Die Echtheit des zweiten Thessalonicherbriefs untersucht. Texte u. Untersuchungen z. Gesch. der altchristl.
Literatur. N.F. 9: H.2.1903. Leipzig: Heinrichs, 1903.
Although not the first to argue against the authenticity of 2 Thessalonians, his marshaling of arguments from vocabulary, composition,
content, and theology forms the basis for much of the ensuing debate and arguments for and against a post-70 CE dating of the letter.

Unity

The unity of 2 Thessalonians has generally gone unquestioned, and the suggestion of 1 Thessalonians as a composite has gone
unheeded (the arguments are reviewed in most of the works in Recent Scholarly Commentaries). The exception is 1 Thess. 2:13–16,
which claims that God’s final judgment has come upon the Jewish people. Its seeming contradiction of Paul’s views on the universal
salvation of the Jews in Romans 9–11 has raised significant doubt as to whether it came from Paul’s hand. Pearson 1971 mounts a
solid historical-critical argument that the passage is not authentic, although Weatherly 1991 argues that it fits with Paul’s style. Those
scholars who do see the text as authentic all mitigate anti-Semitic interpretations by offering grammatical (Gilliard 1989, Lamp 2003),
contextual (Donfried 1984, Holtz 1990, Schlueter 1994), or social-scientific (Wortham 1995) explanations as to why Paul places the
Jews in such a negative light.

Donfried, Karl P. “Paul and Judaism: 1 Thessalonians 2.13–16 as a Test Case.” Interpretation 38 (1984): 242–253.
In 1 Thess. 2:13–16, Paul claims God’s wrath is directed toward the Jews from the death of Jesus until the last day, whereas Rom. 9–
11 adds that in the last day God’s mercy will be revealed toward them. There is no theological contradiction. Reprinted in Donfried’s
Paul, Thessalonica, and Early Christianity (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 2002), pp. 195–208.

Gilliard, Frank D. “The Problem of the Antisemitic Comma between 1 Thessalonians 2.14 and 15.” New Testament Studies 35
(1989): 481–502.
The interpretive comma between these verses in most English and Romance language translations leads to a universalizing of blame
(“the Jews, who killed . . . Jesus”), but the evidence suggests that this interpretive comma does not belong, thus making the focus of
blame much more restrictive (“the Jews who killed . . . Jesus”).

Holtz, T. “The Judgment on the Jews and the Salvation of All Israel: 1 Thes 2:15–16 and Rom 11:25–26.” In The Thessalonian
Correspondence. Edited by Raymond F. Collins, 284–294. Bibliotheca Ephemeridum theologicarum Lovaniensium 87. Leuven,
Belgium: Leuven University Press, 1990.
Paul’s verdict in 1 Thess. 2:15–16 applies specifically to Jews who act against God (and Paul), much like those described in Acts
17:11–13, a position not unlike that expressed in Rom. 1–3. Jews in general, however, are as able as anyone else to obtain God’s
mercy, as per Rom. 9–11.

Lamp, Jeffrey S. “Is Paul Anti-Jewish? Testament of Levi 6 in the Interpretation of 1 Thessalonians 2:13–16.” Catholic Biblical
Quarterly 65 (2003): 408–427.
Although Paul’s language is generally anti-Jewish, a comparison of Testament of Levi 6:11 with 2 Thess. 2:16c demonstrates that Paul
is nonspecific, does not consign every individual Jew to judgment, and holds out hope for many of them.

Pearson, Birger A. “1 Thessalonians 2:13–16: A Deutero-Pauline Interpolation.” Harvard Theological Review 64 (1971): 79–94.
Verse-by-verse historical, theological, and form-critical observations demonstrate that 1 Thess. 2:13–16 is an interpolation from the
post-70 CE era, when Pauline Christianity was seeking unity with Jewish Christianity. Nonbelieving Jews were seen by both traditions
as enemies of Christ, an attitude also noted in the Gospels.

Schlueter, Carol J. Filling up the Measure: Polemical Hyperbole in 1 Thessalonians 2:14–16. Journal for the Study of the New
Testament Supplement Series 98. Sheffield, UK: Journal for the Study of the New Testament, 1994.
Paul’s polemical hyperbole in 1 Thess. 2:14–16 is no stronger than similar rhetoric against Christians in other genuine letters (2 Cor. 11;
Gal. 2–5). Paul uses this strategy to move his audience to his side while showing his opponents to be wrong––in this case not because
they are Jewish but because they pose a threat to Paul and his work.

Weatherly, Jon A. “The Authenticity of 1 Thessalonians 2:13–16: Additional Evidence.” Journal for the Study of the New
Testament 42 (1991): 79–98.
Provides syntactical evidence from the context to support the authenticity of 1 Thess. 2:13–16. In addition it is consistent with other
letters of Paul and is included in all textual manuscripts.
Wortham, Robert A. “The Problem of Anti-Judaism in 1 Thess 2:14–16 and Related Pauline Texts.” Biblical Theology Bulletin
25 (1995): 37–44.
Uses social psychology and symbolic anthropology to argue that Paul’s own sense of inadequacy and his marginal social status led him
to develop his prejudicial attitudes. These attitudes are of a religious rather than a racial nature in 1 Thess. 2:14–16, which is why he
can be more positive about ethnic Judeans in Rom. 9–11.

Epistolary Studies

Comparing Paul’s letters to nonbiblical ancient letters allows analysis of their formal features and classification of their genre. Aside
from some works under Recent Scholarly Commentaries, work has focused on 1 Thessalonians, and there is some consensus that it
includes features of consolation (Smith 1995, Chapa 1994) or friendship (Schoon-Janßen 2000) to affirm existing good relations
between the writer and the recipients. In contrast, Patte 1983 argues that the letter has a didactic purpose. While Wanamaker 2000
admits to the benefits of epistolary analyses, the author thinks rhetorical studies hold more promise (see Rhetorical Studies).

Chapa, Juan. “Is First Thessalonians a Letter of Consolation?” New Testament Studies 40 (1994): 150–160.
Although some topics in 1 Thessalonians are similar to those found in Greco-Roman “letters of consolation,” there is insufficient
thematic or literary overlap to categorize 1 Thessalonians as such. It does, however, include some rhetorical strategies of consolation.

Patte, Daniel. “Method for a Structural Exegesis of Didactic Discourses: Analysis of 1 Thessalonians.” Semeia 26 (1983): 85–
129.
A semiotic model gives rise to a method of structural exegesis that demonstrates that Paul’s letter reinforces the Thessalonians’ beliefs
to a greater degree than it attempts to manipulate them (the latter having occurred at Paul’s earlier visit). A complex argument that
requires a solid grasp of discourse analysis.

Schoon-Janßen, Johannes. “On the Use of Elements of Ancient Epistolography in 1 Thessalonians.” In The Thessalonians
Debate: Methodological Discord or Methodological Synthesis? Edited by Karl P. Donfried and Johannes Beutler, 179–193.
Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 2000.
Demonstrates that 1 Thessalonians is a letter of friendship that uses epideictic rhetoric to commend the community and exhort it to
pursue honorable work while consoling it over the deaths of some members.

Smith, Abraham. Comfort One Another: Reconstructing the Rhetoric and Audience of 1 Thessalonians. Literary Currents in
Biblical Interpretation. Louisville: Westminster John Knox, 1995.
Despite the word “rhetoric” in the title, the emphasis herein lies with the epistolary genre. Literary and social conventions of a letter of
consolation bring comfort and care to the Thessalonians during their physical separation from Paul.

Wanamaker, Charles A. “Epistolary vs. Rhetorical Analysis: Is a Synthesis Possible?” In The Thessalonians Debate:
Methodological Discord or Methodological Synthesis? Edited by Karl P. Donfried and Johannes Beutler, 255–286. Grand
Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 2000.
A survey and assessment of scholarship reveals that, while epistolary analysis can uncover formal features, rhetorical analysis helps
determine meaning and significance, intention, and strategy.

Rhetorical Studies

Ancient rhetorical handbooks help identify the rhetorical strategies and purposes. Early applications sought to identify the species of
rhetoric in each letter (Hughes 1989, Hughes 1990, Olbricht 1990, Walton 1995), although Jewett 1986 pushed further by focusing on
how understanding the rhetoric helps explicate the context it addresses. Hoppe 1997 calls for using rhetorical analysis with other
methods, which has found its way into some recent scholarly commentaries (see Recent Scholarly Commentaries), although this can
also be seen in Johanson 1987. Watson 1999 and Kim 2005 demonstrate how more-refined attention to rhetorical features aids
exegesis.

Hoppe, Rudolf. “Der erste Thessalonicherbrief und die antike Rhetorik.” Biblische Zeitschrift 41 (1997): 229–237.
A review of a decade of studies of rhetorical analyses of 1 Thessalonians, concluding that it makes an important contribution to
exegesis but is insufficient as a stand-alone analytic instrument and must be used in conjunction with other methods.

Hughes, Frank Witt. Early Christian Rhetoric and 2 Thessalonians. Journal for the Study of the New Testament Supplement
Series 30. Sheffield, UK: Journal for the Study of the New Testament, 1989.
Argues that 2 Thessalonians is a deutero-Pauline response to the theology of Colossians and Ephesians. It employs deliberative
rhetoric to refute a form of realized eschatology in other branches of Pauline Christianity.

Hughes, Frank Witt. “The Rhetoric of 1 Thessalonians.” In The Thessalonian Correspondence. Edited by Raymond F. Collins,
94–116. Bibliotheca Ephemeridum theologicarum Lovaniensium 87. Leuven, Belgium: Leuven University Press, 1990.
Epideictic rhetoric characterizes 1 Thessalonians, through which Paul intends to strengthen an already positive relationship. Includes a
detailed overview of the rhetorical strategies in each section of the letter.

Jewett, Robert. The Thessalonian Correspondence: Pauline Rhetoric and Millenarian Piety. Foundations and Facets.
Philadelphia: Fortress, 1986.
A seminal work by an eminent exegete employing rhetorical and social-scientific methods. Proposes “millenarian radicalism” as the
impetus for both letters––in the first to address the deflation of millennial faith through deaths and persecution and in the second to
address libertinism and anarchy brought about through millennial excitement.

Johanson, Bruce C. To All the Brethren: A Text-Linguistic and Rhetorical Approach to 1 Thessalonians. Coniectanea biblica,
New Testament series 16. Stockholm: Almqvist & Wiksell, 1987.
Investigates the letter as an act of communication as a whole by applying rhetorical criticism and in its constituent parts through text-
linguistic analysis of the syntactic, semantic, and pragmatic markers. The results confirm many insights of historical-critical exegesis but
are overburdened with technical jargon.
Kim, Seyoon. “Paul’s Entry ("’#$ %&%’ ) and the Thessalonians’ Faith (1 Thessalonians 1–3).” New Testament Studies 51 (2005):
519–542.
Paul makes five references to his entrance in emphatic parallel formulations (1 Thess. 1:5, 9–10; 2:1, 13; 3:6). He is commending a
positive evaluation of his time among the Thessalonians as a means of apologetic self-defense and to strengthen their faith in the face
of opposition.

Olbricht, Thomas H. “An Aristotelian Rhetorical Analysis of 1 Thessalonians.” In Greeks, Romans, and Christians: Essays in
Honor of Abraham J. Malherbe. Edited by David L. Balch, Wayne A. Meeks, and E. Ferguson, 216–236. Minneapolis: Fortress,
1990.
Using Aristotle’s The Rhetoric, Olbricht examines the proofs, style, and arrangement of 1 Thessalonians. Since it cannot be classified
as one of the three Aristotelian genres, it must be a new genre of “church rhetoric,” the characteristics of which are highlighted in the
ensuing analysis.

Walton, Steve. “What Has Aristotle to Do with Paul? Rhetorical Criticism and 1 Thessalonians.” Tyndale Bulletin 46 (1995):
229–250.
Surveys and rejects earlier rhetorical analyses and concludes that Paul did not actually face opponents at Thessalonica; his self-
defense is part of his rhetorical strategy. Thus the rhetorical genre of the letter is epideictic, because it includes praise, thanksgiving,
and blame aimed at strengthening the recipients’ faith.

Watson, Duane F. “Paul’s Appropriation of Apocalyptic Discourse: The Rhetorical Strategy of 1 Thessalonians.” In Vision and
Persuasion: Rhetorical Dimensions of Apocalyptic Discourse. Edited by Greg Carey and Gregory Bloomquist, 61–80. Saint
Louis, MO: Chalice, 1999.
The Thessalonian believers are suffering at the hands of their neighbors, so Paul uses apocalyptic terms in a rhetorically sophisticated
letter to provide them with a new symbolic universe in which they are sided with God against Satan.

Thematic Studies

Scholars have focused on three related themes in Thessalonians: community, morality, and theology. Study of how Paul first
established the believing community links with investigation of community structure and interaction with municipal and provincial
authorities. Paul’s exhortations to ethical conduct are often linked to issues of sexual morality, since the latter is highlighted in 1
Thessalonians 4. Although both letters raise a number of general theological themes, eschatology dominates and seems linked to
forms of idleness and disruptive behavior. This section is broken down into eight subsections: Community Origins, Community
Structure, Civic and Imperial Interactions, Ethics, Sexual Morality, Theology, Eschatology, and Idleness and Disruption.

Community Origins

How Paul established believing communities has fascinated scholars, although often generic models have been applied to all of his
groups. The distinctiveness of the Thessalonian community was recognized when Hock 1980 proposed the workshop as the locus of
Paul’s preaching. Ascough 2000 builds on this by suggesting that the core of the group was a professional association. Blumenthal
2005 extends the earlier argument, proposed in Laub 1976, that the synagogue is the intermediary for the Gentile Thessalonians’ belief
in Christ, although its reliance on Acts 17 runs counter to the evidence mounted in Coulot 2006. Lührmann 1990 and Wanamaker 1995
give voice to the nature of Paul’s message at Thessalonica.

Ascough, Richard S. “The Thessalonian Christian Community as a Professional Voluntary Association.” Journal of Biblical
Literature 119.2 (2000): 311–328.
Paul’s assumptions about community structure and internal relationships give the Thessalonians an outward appearance and internal
function similar to associations. Paul may have turned a professional association en masse to Christ while working among them.

Blumenthal, Christian. “Was sagt 1 Thess 1.9b–10 über die Adressaten des 1 Thess? Literarische und historische
Erwägungen.” New Testament Studies 51 (2005): 96–105.
Challenges the usual understanding that Gentiles formed the core of the Thessalonian Christian community, by suggesting that Gentile
God fearers associated with the synagogue were required to put aside worship of other gods.

Coulot, Claude. “Paul à Thessalonique (1Th 2.1–12).” New Testament Studies 52 (2006): 377–393.
The context and structure of 1 Thess. 2:1–12 reveal that the conditions under which Paul first engaged the Thessalonians were very
different from those reported in Acts 17. Paul’s own description of preaching to pagan handworkers must be given priority.

Hock, Ronald F. The Social Context of Paul’s Ministry: Tentmaking and Apostleship. Philadelphia: Fortress, 1980.
Chapter 3, “Paul’s Life as an Artisan-Missionary,” argues that Paul preached the gospel while in a tent-making workshop (1 Thess. 2:9).
His earliest community was formed among the artisan class.

Laub, Franz. “Paulus als Gemeindegründer (1 Thess).” In Kirche im Werden: Studien zum Thema Amt und Gemeinde im
Neuen Testament. Edited by Josef Hainz, 17–38. Munich: Schöningh, 1976.
The Thessalonian believers are former “God-fearers” to whom Paul presents himself as a model of Christian living, although he allows
them to develop their own community structure. His relationship is maintained through letters and envoys.

Lührmann, Dieter. “The Beginnings of the Church at Thessalonica.” In Greeks, Romans, and Christians: Essays in Honor of
Abraham J. Malherbe. Edited by David L. Balch, Wayne A. Meeks, and Everett Ferguson, 237–249. Minneapolis: Fortress, 1990.
A form-critical analysis of Paul’s summary of his initial preaching in Thessalonica (1 Thess. 1:9–10 and 4:1–12) demonstrates that Paul
emphasized the return of Jesus (parousia), imminent judgment (“coming wrath”), and ethics (“live to please God”).

Wanamaker, Charles A. “Like a Father Treats His Own Children: Paul and the Conversion of the Thessalonians.” Journal of
Theology for Southern Africa 92 (1995): 46–55.
The four stages of resocialization through conversion can be seen in 1 and 2 Thessalonians: reconstructing one’s biography, adopting a
new metanarrative, affirming the uniqueness of the group, and representing the group to outsiders.

Community Structure
Social-scientific methods have increased understanding of the Thessalonian Christian community structure. Although somewhat
divergent in their conclusions, Barclay 1992, Jewett 1993, and Ascough 2003 agree on the necessity of focusing on local conditions at
Thessalonica rather than some broad category of “Pauline” community. Burke 2003 and Gaventa 2007 focus on the familial images
Paul uses to bond believers to one another, to which McNeel 2014 applies theories from the cognitive sciences. The Malherbe 1987
study of Paul’s emphasis on love in 1 Thessalonians is challenged in Konradt 2003, which unpacks the language of judgment in the
letter.

Ascough, Richard S. Paul’s Macedonian Associations: The Social Context of Philippians and 1 Thessalonians.
Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament 2. Reihe, 161. Tübingen, Germany: Mohr Siebeck, 2003.
Many features of the Thessalonian Christian community reflected in Paul’s letter find ready analogies in Greco-Roman association
inscriptions. Thus it appeared to outsiders as an association and functioned internally as an association.

Barclay, John M. G. “Thessalonica and Corinth: Social Contrasts in Pauline Christianity.” Journal of New Testament Studies
47 (1992): 49–74.
In contrast to the friendly relations the Corinthian Christians enjoyed with their nonbelieving neighbors, the Thessalonian Christians
experienced social hostility in response to their enthusiastic embrace of Paul’s apocalyptic message. One cannot therefore generalize
about “Pauline Christians.”

Burke, Trevor J. Family Matters: A Socio-historical Study of Kinship Metaphors in 1 Thessalonians. Journal for the Study of
the New Testament Supplement Series 2 247. London: T&T Clark International, 2003.
Paul draws on a wide metaphoric pool of familial terms in 1 Thessalonians to shape, regulate, and guide believers. An array of Jewish
and non-Jewish textual material demonstrates cultural assumptions concerning kinship language in the letter.

Gaventa, Beverly Roberts. “Apostles as Infants and Nurses.” In Our Mother Saint Paul. By Beverly Roberts Gaventa, 17–28.
Louisville: Westminster John Knox, 2007.
Paul’s application of images of children and nurses to himself and coworkers in 1 Thess. 2:7 places them outside the boundaries of the
way the world was normally constructed. It is a jarring image that points to a completely new configuration of family arising from Christ’s
work.

Jewett, Robert. “Tenement Churches and Communal Meals in the Early Church: The Implications of a Form-Critical Analysis
of 2 Thessalonians 3:10.” Biblical Research 38 (1993): 23–43.
An alternative scenario to the house-church model. The Thessalonian believers are from the underclass, meeting in the living or
working spaces of Roman houses (insula) without the support of a patron. Their “love communalism” was most tangibly expressed in
“love-feasts” supplied from the proceeds of their daily labor, hence the requirement to work in order to eat (2 Thess. 3:10).

Konradt, Matthias. Gericht und Gemeinde: Eine Studie zur Bedeutung und Funktion von Gerichtsaussagen im Rahmen der
Paulinischen Ekklesiologie und Ethic im 1 Thess und 1 Kor. Beihefte zur Zeitschrift fur die Neutestamentliche Wissenschaft
117. Berlin and New York: Walter de Gruyter, 2003.
Judgment was an important theme in Paul’s ecclesiology and ethics. A close exegetical analysis of 1 Thess. 1:10, 2:16, 2:19–20, 3:13,
4:1–8, 5:1–11, and 5:23 shows how Paul uses this theme to provide guidance for holy living and for the structure of the community
itself.

Malherbe, Abraham J. Paul and the Thessalonians: The Philosophic Tradition of Pastoral Care. Philadelphia: Fortress, 1987.
Paul uses the philosophical conventions of his day to form and shape Christian community identity, although he puts traditional
elements to new and creative use. In particular, he presents himself as mild in manner and speech and full of self-giving love, which
they are to imitate.

McNeel, Jennifer Houston. Paul as Infant and Nursing Mother: Metaphor, Rhetoric, and Identity in 1 Thessalonians 2:5–8. Early
Christianity and Its Literature 12. Atlanta: SBL Press, 2014.
Cognitive metaphor theory and social identity analysis show how Paul presents himself to the Thessalonians as an innocent infant and
affectionate mother as part of his self-defense. These same metaphors solidify the identity of the Thessalonians as a kinship group
when facing hostility and persecution.

Civic and Imperial Interactions

References to “distress” or “affliction” in 1 and 2 Thessalonians have been variously interpreted, most often in terms of persecution by
civic leaders (de Vos 1999, Tellbe 2001, Rulmu 2010) or imperial authorities (Smith 2004). Koester 1997 suggests that Paul uses
imperial imagery to challenge the dominance of Rome, a position Oakes 2005 disputes, but which Harrison 2011 pursues with
methodological sophistication. Taylor 2002 goes against the trend by giving credence to the Acts account and positing Jewish
opposition to Paul and subsequent Jewish persecution of the Thessalonian believers, a position that finds some support in Still 1999
and Tellbe 2001.

de Vos, Craig Steven. Church and Community Conflicts: The Relationships of the Thessalonian, Corinthian, and Philippian
Churches with Their Wider Civic Communities. Dissertation Series, Society of Biblical Literature, 168. Atlanta: Scholars, 1999.
Uses a social-scientific model based on psychocultural conflict theory alongside epigraphic evidence to explicate the tension between
the Thessalonian believers and their civic content. Largely artisans and laborers native to the city, they rejected traditional religious
practices.

Harrison, James R. Paul and the Imperial Authorities at Thessalonica and Rome: A Study in the Conflict of Ideology.
Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament 273. Tübingen, Germany: Mohr Siebeck, 2011.
Gives detailed attention to how the imperial cult functioned in Thessalonica and shows how Paul’s apocalyptic gospel challenges the
divinization of successive emperors. In 1 Thessalonians Paul’s terminology resists the imperial propaganda of Augustus (and his heirs)
as savior promulgated through the imperial cult. In 2 Thessalonians Paul reveals the demonizing potential of Roman rule, particularly
under Caligula.

Koester, Helmut. “Imperial Ideology and Paul’s Eschatology in 1 Thessalonians.” In Paul and Empire: Religion and Power in
Roman Imperial Society. Edited by Richard A. Horsley, 158–166. Harrisburg, PA: Trinity Press International, 1997.
The term parousia in 1 Thessalonians evokes community preparedness for the arrival of a king or emperor. Paul subverts typical
Roman usage by presenting Jesus as disrupting imperial “peace and security” in the day of the Lord, which is already realized in the
faith, hope, and love expressed among the Thessalonian believers themselves.
Oakes, Peter. “Re-Mapping the Universe: Paul and the Emperor in 1 Thessalonians and Philippians.” Journal for the Study of
the New Testament 27 (2005): 301–322.
Surveys four scholarly explanations for parallels between Paul’s terminology and that of Roman ideology. Paul is not writing anti-Rome
polemic or advocating nonparticipation in the imperial cult. He decenters earthly power by placing Jesus at the center of the universe
and Christians near to that center.

Rulmu, Callia. “Between Ambition and Quietism: The Socio-political Background of 1 Thessalonians 4, 9–12.” Biblica 91
(2010): 393–417.
The refusal of Thessalonian associations of Christians to participate in the cult of the gods and the emperor made them suspect and
Roman rulers and the local Greek oligarchs disdained them. Paul’s injunction to become invisible and independent can be understood
as a means to survival.

Smith, Abraham. “‘Unmasking the Powers’: Toward a Postcolonial Analysis of 1 Thessalonians.” In Paul and the Roman
Imperial Order. Edited by Richard A. Horsley, 47–66. Harrisburg, PA: Trinity Press International, 2004.
A postcolonial analysis of 1 Thess. 2:13–16 and 5:1–11. Paul advocates resisting Roman imperial order and the pro-Roman aristocracy,
both of which oppose establishing assemblies among the Gentiles and are ignorant about the eschatological battle begun by the risen
Jesus.

Still, Todd D. Conflict at Thessalonica: A Pauline Church and Its Neighbours. Journal for the Study of the New Testament
Supplement Series 183. Sheffield, UK: Sheffield Academic Press, 1999.
Paul was driven from Thessalonica after clashing with nonbelieving Jews over his advocacy of Torah-free living. Since this conflict
continued in the city, Paul’s apocalyptic teaching aims to affirm and comfort believers. Includes an important defense of the authenticity
of 1 Thess. 2:13–16.

Taylor, Nicholas H. “Who Persecuted the Thessalonian Christians?” Hervormde teologiese studies 58 (2002): 784–801.
The Thessalonian community was composed primarily of Jewish believers opposed by other Jews in the city who incited Jews and non-
Jews against the believers, much as narrated in the account of Acts 17:1–9.

Tellbe, Mikael. Paul between Synagogue and State: Christians, Jews, and Civic Authorities in 1 Thessalonians, Romans, and
Philippians. Coniectanea Biblica, New Testament Series 34. Stockholm: Almqvist & Wiksell, 2001.
Thessalonian believers faced hostility and suffering at the hands of local pagans and Jews, the latter using the general Gentile critique
of itinerant philosophers and false prophets. Paul’s eschatological teachings and imperial language and images reflect conflicts with
local Roman authorities. A stimulating thesis despite overreliance on Acts.

Ethics

Unlike other Pauline letters, the Thessalonian correspondences do not include extended discussions of proper behavior. Nevertheless,
they are not devoid of some ethical teaching, for the most part linked to the expectation of the return of Jesus, as is demonstrated in
Schnelle 1990 and Verhoef 2007. Weima 1996 argues that Paul’s behavioral norms are in accordance with demands for holiness, while
DeSilva 1996 links them to divine honor codes. De Villiers 2006 rightly underlines the importance for Paul of the Thessalonians
demarcating themselves from their nonbelieving neighbors through their behavior.

DeSilva, David A. “‘Worthy of His Kingdom’: Honor Discourse and Social Engineering in 1 Thessalonians.” Journal for the
Study of the New Testament 64 (1996): 49–79.
An important early application of social-scientific methods. According to Paul, outsiders are unreliable guides to honorable behavior and
should be ignored in favor of the eternal honor that comes through God’s approval. Believers should reinforce one another’s Christian
values.

De Villiers, Pieter G. R. “‘A Life Worthy of God’: Identity and Ethics in the Thessalonian Correspondence.” In Identity, Ethics,
and Ethos in the New Testament. Edited by Jan G. van der Watt, 335–355. Berlin and New York: Walter de Gruyter, 2006.
As pagans who have formed a new community––a family of God––Paul expects the believers to behave differently from those who do
not know God, particularly in light of the return of Jesus and the ensuing judgment. Paul trained them for such while among them and
continues to do so through his letters.

Schnelle, U. “Die Ethik des 1. Thessalonicherbriefes.” In The Thessalonian Correspondence. Edited by Raymond F. Collins,
295–305. Bibliotheca Ephemeridum theologicarum Lovaniensium 87. Leuven, Belgium: Leuven University Press, 1990.
The ethics of 1 Thessalonians reflects an early stage in Paul’s thinking, ungrounded in later theological concepts, such as justification
and the role of the Spirit, or even in the Hebrew Bible. Unlike other Pauline letters, ethics is here linked to apocalyptic concepts in which
humans will face final judgment.

Verhoef, Eduard. “1 Thessalonians 4:1–8: The Thessalonians Should Live a Holy Life.” Hervormde teologiese studies 63
(2007): 347–363.
Argues that skeuos (4:4) means body and thus that Paul urges the Thessalonians to be always pure in body and mind. This fits with the
preceding text about the Thessalonians’ holiness as preparatory for Jesus’ return (the parousia, 3:13) and prepares for the following
thorough discussion of the nature of the parousia (4:13–5:11).

Weima, Jeffrey A. D. “‘How You Must Walk to Please God’: Holiness and Discipleship in 1 Thessalonians.” In Patterns of
Discipleship in the New Testament. Edited by Richard N. Longenecker, 98–119. McMaster New Testament Studies 1. Grand
Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1996.
The theme of holiness is woven throughout 1 Thessalonians. In 4:1–12 Paul addresses two issues that threaten the believers’ ability to
maintain their holiness: sexual immorality and idleness. Maintenance of this holiness demarcates the eschatological people of God from
nonbelievers.

Sexual Morality

Although there are some general approaches to studying ethics (see Ethics) in the Thessalonian letters, scholars have rightly noted the
particular focus on sexual morality in 1 Thessalonians. Paul’s metaphoric use of “vessel” (skeuos) is a key point of debate. Whitton
1982 advocates its euphemistic use for “male organ” rather than “wife” or “body,” a position supported in Elgvin 1997 and Smith 2001,
although the latter is less sure of such a specific meaning. The vagueness of the metaphor is compounded by a lack of clarity as to
whether Paul draws upon Jewish (Carras 1990) or non-Jewish (Paschke 2007) ethical teachings or perhaps some combination thereof
(Bassler 1995).

Bassler, Jouette M. “Skeuos: A Modest Proposal for Illuminating Paul’s Use of Metaphor in 1 Thessalonians 4:4.” In The Social
World of the First Christians: Essays in Honor of Wayne A. Meeks. Edited by L. Michael White and O. Larry Yarbrough, 53–66.
Minneapolis: Fortress, 1995.
Steers a careful path among the various proposals for interpreting Paul’s metaphoric use of skeuos by emphasizing the flexibility of
metaphoric language rather than attempting to find parallel uses in Jewish and non-Jewish texts. Suggests that Paul invokes “spiritual
marriages” in which partners remain chaste, as may also be the case in 1 Cor. 7:36–38.

Carras, G. P. “Jewish Ethics and Gentile Converts: Remarks on 1 Thes 4:3–8.” In The Thessalonian Correspondence. Edited
by Raymond F. Collins, 306–315. Bibliotheca Ephemeridum theologicarum Lovaniensium 87. Leuven, Belgium: Leuven
University Press, 1990.
Jewish Diaspora sources demonstrate that Paul’s definition of sexual immorality reflects his expectation that his Gentile converts will
act in accordance with Jewish sexual ethics. Doing so distinguishes them from the morals of their non-Christian contemporaries.

Elgvin, Torlief. “‘To Master His Own Vessel’: 1 Thess 4.4 in Light of New Qumran Evidence.” New Testament Studies 43 (1997):
604–619.
A 2nd century BCE composition preserved in fragmentary form at Qumran refers to “the vessel of your bosom” as a euphemism for the
male organ, much like 1 Sam. 21:6 and some Mishnaic and Greek texts. In 1 Thess. 4:4, Paul indicates that male and female Christians
should dress decently and master their sexual drives.

Paschke, Boris A. “Ambiguity in Paul’s References to Greco-Roman Sexual Ethics.” Ephemerides theologicae Lovanienses 83
(2007): 169–192.
A study of Greco-Roman sexuality demonstrates that, whereas Paul’s evaluation of the sexual behavior of the Gentiles is overly positive
in 1 Cor. 5:1, it is unduly negative in 1 Thess. 4:5. Both texts employ rhetorical exaggeration and cannot be taken at face value.

Smith, Jay E. “1 Thessalonians 4:4: Breaking the Impasse.” Bulletin for Biblical Research (2001): 65–105.
After evaluating the three traditional ways of interpreting 1 Thess. 4:4, new evidence from semantics is brought to bear on the problem.
Concludes that Paul means each person must control his or her own body, with perhaps a more specific reference to control of the
sexual organ.

Whitton, J. “A Neglected Meaning for Skeuos in 1 Thessalonians 4:4.” New Testament Studies 28 (1982): 142–143.
Although barely a page long, this article is the first to draw upon 1 Sam. 21:5 to show that skeuos has sexual connotations and thus
indicates controlling one’s sexual urges.

Theology
Collins 1984, Donfried 1993a, and Donfried 1993b provide general overviews of the theology of the Thessalonian letters, with Bassler
1991 and Paddison 2005 noting the implications of hermeneutical assumptions for understanding Paul’s views of God and redemption,
although the dominant theological focus of both letters is eschatology, which also underlies Landmesser 2013 (see Eschatology).

Bassler, Jouette M. “Peace in All Ways: Theology in the Thessalonian Letters: A Response to R. Jewett, E. Krentz, and E.
Richard.” In Pauline Theology. Vol. 1, Thessalonians, Philippians, Galatians, Philemon. Edited by Jouette M. Bassler, 71–85.
Minneapolis: Fortress, 1991.
Offers a summary and critique of the three named authors, whose essays precede this one in the same volume. Assumptions about the
authorship and integrity of 2 Thessalonians affect assessments of Paul’s theology. Argues that peace is the dominant theology of both
letters, out of which other concerns (e.g., eschatological, ecclesial) arise.

Collins, Raymond F. “The Theology of Paul’s First Letter to the Thessalonians.” In Studies on the First Letter to the
Thessalonians. Edited by Raymond F. Collins, 230–252. Bibliotheca Ephemeridum Theologicarum Lovaniensium 66. Leuven,
Belgium: Leuven University Press, 1984.
Focuses on the thirty-six references to God and God’s titles in 1 Thessalonians that reveal Paul’s theocentric focus. God is the God of
Israel, who spoke through the prophets and now speaks through Paul and brings both present and future salvation through Jesus
Christ.

Donfried, Karl P. “The Theology of 1 Thessalonians.” In The Theology of the Shorter Pauline Letters. Edited by Karl P.
Donfried and I. Howard Marshall, 1–79. New Testament Theology. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 1993a.
Election (call) by God is the basis of Paul’s theology, which uses eschatology to provide consolation and hope for a discouraged
community. Includes short chapters on the letter’s place in the canon and its significance for the present.

Donfried, Karl P. “The Theology of 2 Thessalonians.” In The Theology of the Shorter Pauline Letters. Edited by Karl P.
Donfried and I. Howard Marshall, 81–113. New Testament Theology. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 1993b.
The anonymous writer attempts to correct a false understanding that the day of the Lord has arrived and urges readers to stand firm in
their afflictions. Includes short chapters on the letter’s place in the canon and its significance for the present.

Landmesser, Christof. “Das Konzept des Heils im Ersten Thessalonicherbrief.” In Paulus–Werk und Wirkung: Festschrift für
Andreas Lindemann zum 70. Geburtstag. Edited by Paul-Gerhard Klumbies and David S. du Toit, 81–101. Tübingen, Germany:
Mohr Siebeck, 2013.
Argues that in 1 Thessalonians full salvation still lies in the future, but it already shapes the lives of believers in the present. Salvation is
expressed through human relationships as believers live out their righteousness within the eschatological community of Christ.

Paddison, Angus. Theological Hermeneutics and 1 Thessalonians. Society for New Testament Studies Monograph Series 133.
Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 2005.
Paddison is unapologetic in assuming that God is revealed through scripture. Using Thomas Aquinas and John Calvin as exemplars, he
provides his own theological reading of Paul’s theology of redemption through the death and resurrection of Jesus. An erudite
articulation of biblical theology and hermeneutics.
Eschatology

In two articles published together (De Villiers 2011a, De Villiers 2011b), De Villiers provides an overview of the eschatology of each
letter. Luckensmeyer 2009 reviews and builds upon a plethora of articles and essays that give attention to literary or social issues linked
to eschatology. Klijn 1982, Koester 1990, and Aernie 2011 focus on the Jewish apocalyptic background, which Moss and Baden 2012
helps broaden though an examination of rabbinic literature. Weima 2012 prefers a Roman context for the phrase “peace and security,”
although White 2013 calls the evidence into question. Ascough 2004 explains the context that may have led to the Thessalonians
becoming troubled by the deaths of some compatriots, while Pahl 2009 probes Paul’s claim of authority for what he writes. Arguments
over the authenticity of 2 Thessalonians rest largely on a comparison of the apocalyptic schema in the two letters, and a number of
works listed under Authorship also deal with eschatology but are not repeated here. This is also the case for some titles noted under
Idleness and Disruption.

Aernie, Matthew D. Forensic Language and the Day of the Lord Motif in Second Thessalonians 1 and the Effects on the
Meaning of the Text. Wales Evangelical School of Theology Theological Monograph Series. Eugene, OR: Wipf & Stock, 2011.
Forensic language, allusions, and idioms in 2 Thess. 1 resonate with descriptions of the “Day of the Lord” in the Hebrew Bible. Paul
uses this language to encourage and motivate believers to remain steadfast in the face of persecution as they wait for justification at the
eschatological tribunal.

Ascough, Richard S. “A Question of Death: Paul’s Community Building Language in 1 Thessalonians 4:13–18.” Journal of
Biblical Literature 123 (2004): 509–530.
As an association, the Thessalonians regularly buried dead members, a practice they thought unnecessary in light of Jesus’ imminent
return. Recent deaths have caused confusion and doubt, for which Paul provides reassurance and hope insofar as the deceased
continue to be full inheritors of Jesus’ promises.

De Villiers, Pieter G. R. “The Glorious Presence of the Lord: The Eschatology of 2 Thessalonians.” In Eschatology of the New
Testament and Some Related Documents. Edited by Jan G. van der Watt, 333–361. Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum
Neuen Testament 2. Reihe 315. Tübingen, Germany: Mohr Siebeck, 2011a.
Paul again comforts and encourages believers under persecution, which has suddenly become worse. The language is intensified as
he addresses matters regarding signs of the end-times and the coming Day of the Lord, which are the lenses through which their
present circumstances should be viewed.

De Villiers, Pieter G. R. “In the Presence of God: The Eschatology of 1 Thessalonians.” In Eschatology of the New Testament
and Some Related Documents. Edited by Jan G. van der Watt, 302–332. Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen
Testament 2. Reihe 315. Tübingen, Germany: Mohr Siebeck, 2011b.
Explores temporal aspects of Paul’s eschatological theology in which salvation and judgment have past, present, and future
pronouncements that are fulfilled with the return of Christ. Paul aims to encourage the community to remain faithful to God in a situation
of dire threat.

Klijn, Albertus Frederik Johannes. “I Thessalonians 4:13–18 and Its Background in Apocalyptic Literature.” In Paul and
Paulinism: Essays in Honour of C. K. Barrett. Edited by Morna D. Hooker and Stephen G. Wilson, 67–73. London: Society for
Promoting Christian Knowledge, 1982.
The Thessalonians’ question to Paul concerning the fate of deceased believers is rooted in apocalyptic literature that saw survival to the
end of time as a special privilege, while Paul’s reassuring response uses other apocalyptic texts that abrogate time constraints on God’s
exercise of judgment.

Koester, Helmut. “From Paul’s Eschatology to the Apocalyptic Scheme of 2 Thessalonians.” In The Thessalonians
Correspondence. Edited by Raymond F. Collins, 441–458. Bibliotheca Ephemeridum theologicarum Lovaniensium 87. Leuven,
Belgium: Leuven University Press, 1990.
Apocalyptic material in both Thessalonian letters is drawn from traditional sources known to Paul, with no influence from pagan
materials or millenarian propaganda. These traditions are used differently in 2 Thessalonians, which stays faithful to the customary
apocalyptic timetable. Reprinted in Koester’s Paul and His World: Interpreting the New Testament in Its Context (Minneapolis: Fortress,
2007), pp. 55–69.

Luckensmeyer, David. The Eschatology of First Thessalonians. Novum Testamentum et orbis antiquus. Göttingen, Germany:
Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2009.
A comprehensive and exhaustive study of eschatology in 1 Thessalonians. An introductory survey synthesizing the vast secondary
literature is followed by chapter-length analyses of key eschatological texts (1:9–10, 2:13–16, 4:13–18, 5:1–11). Concludes that Paul
employs eschatology to explain the Thessalonians’ sociopolitical distress and to help them forge a new communal identity. A key
reference point for all future studies of eschatology in 1 Thessalonians.

Moss, Candida R., and Joel S. Baden. “1 Thessalonians 4.13–18 in Rabbinic Perspective.” New Testament Studies 58 (2012):
199–212.
Shows how Paul’s concept of being caught up in the clouds is part of the wider context of rabbinic eschatological traditions in which
resurrection is described as suspension or flying in the air.

Pahl, Michael W. Discerning the “Word of the Lord”: The “Word of the Lord” in 1 Thessalonians 4:15. Library of New
Testament Studies 389. New York and London: T&T Clark, 2009.
A creative and stimulating study of Paul’s reference to a source of authority for his words of comfort in the face of the deaths of some
Thessalonian believers. Paul demonstrates that what he writes is consistent with the salvific message of Jesus’ death and resurrection
that he first proclaimed.

Weima, Jeffrey A. D. “‘Peace and Security’ (1 Thess 5.3): Prophetic Warning or Political Propaganda?” New Testament Studies
58 (2012): 331–359.
A review of numismatic, monumental, epigraphic, and literary evidence demonstrates that the phrase “peace and security” used by Paul
references Roman political propaganda. Since residents of Thessalonica regularly honored Roman benefactors and gods, Paul’s words
would serve as a warning to those who trusted in the political power of Rome.

White, Joel R. “‘Peace and Security’ (1 Thessalonians 5.3): Is It Really a Roman Slogan?” New Testament Studies 59 (2013):
382–395.
White challenges the growing consensus, and especially Weima 2012, that “peace and security” alludes to a well-known Roman
slogan. Although “peace” was vital for Rome, reviewing eighteen key pieces of evidence suggests “security” was less of a concern, and
evidence is slim for the slogan itself.
Idleness and Disruption

In both Thessalonian letters Paul addresses issues of work. Menken 1992 argues that one result of the Thessalonians’ eschatological
enthusiasm was a disruption of regular labor, a problem that Russell 1988 and Winter 1989 propose is more likely linked to an
overreliance on Christian patrons. In 1 Thess. 4:9, Paul coins the term “God-taught” (theodidaktos) to address this issue. Both Roetzel
1986 and Witmer 2006 agree that Paul uses the term to advocate communal responsibilities and self-reliance but disagree about the
specific background to Paul’s creation of the term.

Menken, Martinus J. J. “Paradise Regained or Still Lost: Eschatology and Disorderly Behaviour in 2 Thessalonians.” New
Testament Studies 38 (1992): 271–289.
The disorderly behavior to which Paul refers in 2 Thess. 3:6–12 is likely caused by a sense of realized eschatology that viewed Jesus
as returned and Paradise as an abrogation of Gen. 3:17–19. The letter writer attempts to show that there is still some temporal distance
between the present time and future restoration.

Roetzel, Calvin J. “Theodidaktoi and Handwork in Philo and I Thessalonians.” In Apôtre Paul: Personnalité, style et
conception du ministère. Edited by Albert Vanhoye, 324–331. Bibliotheca Ephemeridum theologicarum Lovaniensium 73.
Leuven, Belgium: Peeters, 1986.
Draws upon philosophical ethics and particularly Philo’s notion of autodidaktos (self-taught) as background to Paul’s term theodidaktos.
Doing so makes explicit what was already implied in Hellenistic Jewish understandings of autodidaktos, although Paul links it more
directly to communal responsibilities.

Russell, R. “The Idle in 2 Thess. 3:6–12: An Eschatological or a Social Problem?” New Testament Studies 34 (1988): 105–119.
Surveys and rejects scholarly theories linking the “idle” to eschatological concerns, such as the imminence of the parousia (return of
Jesus), concluding that 2 Thess. 3:6–12 addresses poor manual laborers relying on the Christian benefaction of others rather than
supporting themselves.

Winter, Bruce W. “‘If a man does not wish to work . . . ’: A Cultural and Historical Setting for 2 Thessalonians 3:6–16.” Tyndale
Bulletin 40 (1989): 303–315.
Builds on Russell 1988 to suggest that the refusal of poor manual laborers to work was rooted in a preexisting convention of providentia
that encouraged reliance upon patronage and continued into Christian relationships. Paul advocates for believers to act as patrons
rather than clients.

Witmer, Stephen E. “( "%&#&) * +%,” in 1 Thessalonians 4.9: A Pauline Neologism.” New Testament Studies 52 (2006): 239–250.
Paul draws upon Isa. 54:13 to coin the term theodidaktos and uses it within his wider purpose of strengthening the communal identity
and social cohesiveness of the Thessalonian believers. It describes those who are receiving the fulfillment of the eschatological
prophecy of Isa. 54:13.
Sociocultural Context

Archaeological developments and social-scientific methods of analysis have impacted the interpretation of ancient texts from all
sectors, and biblical books are no exception. Most commentaries (see Commentaries) include some information about the city of
Thessalonica and the religious and philosophic groups attested there, although they are often too brief. One needs to consult focused
books and articles such as those noted in the two subsections here, Thessalonica and Greco-Roman Religions and Philosophy.

Thessalonica

The archaeological remains of ancient Thessalonica are difficult to access, because they lie under the modern, bustling capital of the
region. However, significant progress in uncovering the city’s past has been made since the 1990s. This work has allowed for important
scholarly assessments of the Roman character of the city (vom Brocke 2001, Ancient Thessalonike), the religions there (Steimle 2007,
Steimle 2008), and the development of Christianity therein (Breytenbach and Behrmann 2007, Nasrallah and Friesen 2010). The
opening of the Archaeological Museum of Thessaloniki and the coincident publication of an exhibit guide (Grammenos 2003) allow
modern visitors to experience the rich remains that have been unearthed.

Ancient Thessalonike.
A very brief description of the ancient city. Worthwhile for an initial orientation to the main layout of the site.

Archaeological Museum of Thessaloniki.

A brief description of the galleries in the museum at Thessalonica that is well worth a visit for its selection of illustrative artifacts and
inscriptions and informative descriptions.

Breytenbach, Cilliers, and Ingrid Behrmann, eds. Frühchristliches Thessaloniki. Studien und Texte zu Antike und Christentum
44. Tübingen, Germany: Mohr Siebeck, 2007.
German translations of six essays previously published in Greek make accessible important archaeological and epigraphic evidence for
the flourishing of Christianity at Thessalonica during the first four centuries. They are preceded by Helmut Koester’s essay orienting
readers to the archaeological finds from the time of Paul.

Grammenos, D. V., ed. Roman Thessaloniki. Thessaloniki Archaeological Museum Publications 1. Thessalonica, Greece:
Thessaloniki Archaeological Museum, 2003.
Although not focused specifically on Christian Thessalonica, these six essays contextualize the Thessalonian Jesus group. The first
three essays give attention to the history of Rome in Macedonia and Thessalonica, while the latter three treat religion, entertainment,
and coinage. The book is amply illustrated with photographs of important artifacts, which are discussed in detail.

Nasrallah, Laura, Charalambos Bakirtzis, and Steven J. Friesen, eds. From Roman to Early Christian Thessalonik! : Studies in
Religion and Archaeology. Harvard Theological Studies 64. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2010.
Fourteen essays are divided equally between “The Early Roman Empire” and “The Later Roman Empire and the Early Byzantine
Period.” Up-to-date reflections on how recent archaeological finds affect our understanding of Christianity in the first four centuries,
some contributed by the archaeologists themselves.
Steimle, Christopher. “Religion im römischen Thessaloniki.” In Antike Religionsgeschichte in räumlicher Perspektive. Edited
by Jörg Rüpke, 66–72. Tübingen, Germany: Mohr Siebeck, 2007.
A brief summary of Steimle’s book-length orientation to the topic (Steimle 2008).

Steimle, Christopher. Religion im römischen Thessaloniki: Sakraltopographie, Kult und Gesellschaft 168 v. Chr.–324 n. Chr.
Studien und Texte zu Antike und Christentum 47. Tübingen, Germany: Mohr Siebeck, 2008.
A detailed orientation to the complex religious landscape of Thessalonica over a five-hundred-year period, this is required reading for
anyone wanting to understand the context in which Paul founded one of his earliest communities. Uses archaeological and literary data
from Egyptian religions, emperor worship, and cult associations to show patterns of mutual interaction.

vom Brocke, Christoph. Thessaloniki, Stadt des Kassander und Gemeinde des Paulus: Eine frühe christliche Gemeinde in
ihrer heidnischen Umwelt. Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament 2. Reihe 125. Tübingen, Germany: Mohr
Siebeck, 2001.
The thorough survey of the history, development, economy, and society of Thessalonica from Hellenistic through Roman times is the
book’s strength. The interpretation of 1 Thessalonians 1:8, 9; 2:14b; 5:3; and Acts 17:1–10 is interesting, but the detailed description of
the religious life of the city is the core contribution.

Greco-Roman Religions and Philosophy

Within the wider study of the context of Thessalonica, some scholarship focuses specifically on the religious environment of the city.
Edson 1948 laid the groundwork upon which Donfried 1985 builds with more-recent data about religious groups in the city. Perkins
1989 gives a general sense of what it would mean to “turn to God from idols” (1 Thess. 1:9). Kloppenborg 1993 and Malherbe 1970
demonstrate how Paul builds a sense of community among the believers by using cultic images and philosophical language with which
they would be familiar.

Donfried, Karl P. “The Cults of Thessalonica and the Thessalonian Correspondence.” New Testament Studies 31 (1985): 336–
356.
The religious and civic cults of Thessalonica at the time of Paul were closely interrelated. Paul employs language from these mysteries
and Roman royal theology to demonstrate to the believers the continuities with their past religious commitments as well as sharp
discontinuities brought about through their transformation in Christ. Reprinted in Donfried’s Paul, Thessalonica, and Early Christianity
(Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 2002), pp. 21–48.

Edson, Charles. “Cults of Thessalonica (Macedonia III).” Harvard Theological Review 41 (1948): 153–204.
A lengthy review of epigraphic evidence for the structure of four important religious groups at Thessalonica: the Asiani, the Dionysos
cult, the municipal cult of the Egyptian gods, and the cult of Cabirus. Although dated, it still provides a solid orientation to the religious
environment of the city.

Kloppenborg, John S. “- ./ 0 1 2 / - 3 .0 , 4 2 5 1 .1 0 6 75 8, and the Dioscuri: Rhetorical Engagement in 1 Thessalonians 4:9–12.”

New Testament Studies 39 (1993): 265–289.
Paul plays off his audience’s familiarity with the traditions of brotherly love of the Dioscuri––Castor and Polydeuces––known through
Roman imperial propaganda and among the cults of Roman Thessalonica. These divine twins exemplified the familial solidarity and
selfless sharing Paul wants to evoke among the Thessalonian Jesus believers.

Malherbe, Abraham J. “‘Gentile as a Nurse’: The Cynic Background to 1 Thessalonians 2.” Novum Testamentum 12 (1970):
203–217.
Paul is not defending himself against criticisms but rather is using a typical cynic contrast of the harshness of bold speech with the
gentle speech of a nurse. In using this image, Paul presents himself as a philosopher. Reprinted in Malherbe’s Paul and the Popular
Philosophers (Minneapolis: Fortress, 1989), pp. 35–48.

Perkins, Pheme. “1 Thessalonians and Hellenistic Religious Practices.” In To Touch the Text: Biblical and Related Studies in
Honor of Joseph A. Fitzmyer, S. J. Edited by Maurya P. Horgan and Paul J. Kobelski, 325–334. New York: Crossroad, 1989.
1 Thess. 1:9a presents conversion as a cultic issue rather than as a turn toward philosophical enlightenment. The requirement of
Christian withdrawal from cultic practices caused their tension with civic and private groups. Paul uses Jewish images and concepts to
strengthen their community bonds.

back to top

Copyright © 2015. All rights reserved.