Text -- 2 Thessalonians 2:15 (NET)

2:15 Therefore, brothers and sisters, stand firm and hold on to the traditions that we taught you, whether by speech or by letter.

Commentary -- Word/Phrase Notes (per phrase)

Robertson: 2Th 2:15

So then ( ara oun ).

Accordingly then. The illative ara is supported (Ellicott) by the collective oun as in 1Th 5:6; Gal 6:10, etc. Here is the practical conclusion from God’ s elective purpose in such a world crisis.

Robertson: 2Th 2:15

Stand fast ( stēkete ).

Present imperative active of the late present stēko from hestēka (perfect active of histēmi ). See note on 1Th 3:8.

Robertson: 2Th 2:15

Hold the traditions ( krateite tas paradoseis ).

Present imperative of krateō , old verb, to have masterful grip on a thing, either with genitive (Mar 1:31) or usually the accusative as here. Paradosis (tradition) is an old word for what is handed over to one. Dibelius thinks that Paul reveals his Jewish training in the use of this word (Gal 1:14), but the word is a perfectly legitimate one for teaching whether oral, by word (dia logou ), or written, by epistle of ours (di' epistolēs hēmōn ). Paul draws here no distinction between oral tradition and written tradition as was done later. The worth of the tradition lies not in the form but in the source and the quality of the content. Paul in 1Co 11:23 says: "I received from the Lord what I also handed over (paredōka ) unto you."He praises them because ye "hold fast the traditions even as I delivered them unto you."The tradition may be merely that of men and so worthless and harmful in place of the word of God (Mar 7:8; Col 2:6-8). It all depends. It is easy to scoff at truth as mere tradition. But human progress in all fields is made by use of the old, found to be true, in connection with the new if found to be true. In Thessalonica the saints were already the victims of theological charlatans with their half-baked theories about the second coming of Christ and about social duties and relations.

Robertson: 2Th 2:15

Which ye were taught ( has edidachthēte ).

First aorist passive indicative of didaskō , to teach, retaining the accusative of the thing in the passive as is common with this verb like doceo in Latin and teach in English.

Vincent: 2Th 2:15

Traditions ( παραδόσεις )

See on 1Co 11:2. Not emphasizing a distinction between written and oral tradition. Tradition, in the scriptural sense, may be either written or oral. It implies on the part of a teacher that he is not expressing his own ideas, but is delivering or handing over (παραδίδωμι ) a message received from some one else. See 1Co 11:23. The prominent idea of παράδοσις is therefore that of an authority external to the teacher. Comp. by word nor by letter , 2Th 2:2.

Wesley: 2Th 2:15

Without adding to, or diminishing from, the traditions which ye have been taught - The truths which I have delivered to you.

Wesley: 2Th 2:15

He preached before he wrote. And he had written concerning this in his former epistle.

JFB: 2Th 2:15

God's sovereign choice of believers, so far from being a ground for inaction on their part, is the strongest incentive to action and perseverance in it. Compare the argument, Phi 2:12-13, "Work out your own salvation, FOR it is God which worketh in you," &c. We cannot fully explain this in theory; but to the sincere and humble, the practical acting on the principle is plain. "Privilege first, duty afterwards" [EDMUNDS].

JFB: 2Th 2:15

So as not to be "shaken or troubled" (2Th 2:2).

JFB: 2Th 2:15

So as not to let go. Adding nothing, subtracting nothing [BENGEL]. The Thessalonians had not held fast his oral instructions but had suffered themselves to be imposed upon by pretended spirit-revelations, and words and letters pretending to be from Paul (2Th 2:2), to the effect that "the day of the Lord was instantly imminent."

JFB: 2Th 2:15

Truths delivered and transmitted orally, or in writing (2Th 3:6; 1Co 11:2; Greek, "traditions"). The Greek verb from which the noun comes, is used by Paul in 1Co 11:23; 1Co 15:3. From the three passages in which "tradition" is used in a good sense, Rome has argued for her accumulation of uninspired traditions, virtually overriding God's Word, while put forward as of co-ordinate authority with it. She forgets the ten passages (Mat 15:2-3, Mat 15:6; Mar 7:3, Mar 7:5, Mar 7:8-9, Mar 7:13; Gal 1:14; Col 2:8) stigmatizing man's uninspired traditions. Not even the apostles' sayings were all inspired (for example, Peter's dissimulation, Gal 2:11-14), but only when they claimed to be so, as in their words afterwards embodied in their canonical writings. Oral inspiration was necessary in their case, until the canon of the written Word should be complete; they proved their possession of inspiration by miracles wrought in support of the new revelation, which revelation, moreover, accorded with the existing Old Testament revelation; an additional test needed besides miracles (compare Deu 13:1-6; Act 17:11). When the canon was complete, the infallibility of the living men was transferred to the written Word, now the sole unerring guide, interpreted by the Holy Spirit. Little else has come down to us by the most ancient and universal tradition save this, the all-sufficiency of Scripture for salvation. Therefore, by tradition, we are constrained to cast off all tradition not contained in, or not provable by, Scripture. The Fathers are valuable witnesses to historical facts, which give force to the intimations of Scripture: such as the Christian Lord's day, the baptism of infants, and the genuineness of the canon of Scripture. Tradition (in the sense of human testimony) cannot establish a doctrine, but can authenticate a fact, such as the facts just mentioned. Inspired tradition, in Paul's sense, is not a supplementary oral tradition completing our written Word, but it is identical with the written Word now complete; then the latter not being complete, the tradition was necessarily in part oral, in part written, and continued so until, the latter being complete before the death of St. John, the last apostle, the former was no longer needed. Scripture is, according to Paul, the complete and sufficient rule in all that appertains to making "the man of God perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works" (2Ti 3:16-17). It is by leaving Paul's God-inspired tradition for human traditions that Rome has become the forerunner and parent of the Antichrist. It is striking that, from this very chapter denouncing Antichrist, she should draw an argument for her "traditions" by which she fosters anti-Christianity. Because the apostles' oral word was as trustworthy as their written word, it by no means follows that the oral word of those not apostles is as trustworthy as the written word of those who were apostles or inspired evangelists. No tradition of the apostles except their written word can be proved genuine on satisfactory evidence. We are no more bound to accept implicitly the Fathers' interpretations of Scripture, because we accept the Scripture canon on their testimony, than we are bound to accept the Jews' interpretation of the Old Testament, because we accept the Old Testament canon on their testimony.

JFB: 2Th 2:15

As distinguished from a "letter AS from us," 2Th 2:2, namely, that purports to be from us, but is not. He refers to his first Epistle to the Thessalonians.

Clarke: 2Th 2:15

Therefore, brethren, stand fast - Their obtaining eternal glory depended on their faithfulness to the grace of God; for this calling did not necessarily and irresistibly lead to faith; nor their faith to the sanctification of the spirit; nor their sanctification of the spirit to the glory of our Lord Jesus. Had they not attended to the calling, they could not have believed; had they not believed, they could not have been sanctified; had they not been sanctified they could not have been glorified. All these things depended on each other; they were stages of the great journey; and at any of these stages they might have halted, and never finished their Christian race

Clarke: 2Th 2:15

Hold the traditions which ye have been taught - The word παραδοσις, which we render tradition, signifies any thing delivered in the way of teaching; and here most obviously means the doctrines delivered by the apostle to the Thessalonians; whether in his preaching, private conversation, or by these epistles; and particularly the first epistle, as the apostle here states. Whatever these traditions were, as to their matter, they were a revelation from God; for they came by men who spake and acted under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit; and on this ground the passage here can never with any propriety be brought to support the unapostolical and anti-apostolical traditions of the Romish Church; those being matters which are, confessedly, not taken from either Testament, nor were spoken either by a prophet or an apostle.

Calvin: 2Th 2:15

He deduces this exhortation on good grounds from what goes before, inasmuch as our steadfastness and power of perseverance rest on nothing else than assurance of divine grace. When, however, God calls us to salvation, stretching forth, as it were, his hand to us; when Christ, by the doctrine of the gospel, presents himself to us to be enjoyed; when the Spirit is given us as a seal and earnest of eternal life, though the heaven should fall, we must, nevertheless, not become disheartened. Paul, accordingly, would have the Thessalonians stand, not merely when others continue to stand, but with a more settled stability; so that, on seeing almost all turning aside from the faith, and all things full of confusion, they will, nevertheless, retain their footing. And assuredly the calling of God ought to fortify us against all occasions of offense in such a manner, that not even the entire ruin of the world shall shake, much less overthrow, our stability.

15.Hold fast the institutions. Some restrict this to precepts of external polity; but this does not please me, for he points out the manner of standing firm. Now, to be furnished with invincible strength is a much higher thing than external discipline. Hence, in my opinion, he includes all doctrine under this term, as though he had said that they have ground on which they may stand firm, provided they persevere in sound doctrine, according as they had been instructed by him. I do not deny that the term παραδόσεις is fitly applied to the ordinances which are appointed by the Churches, with a view to the promoting of peace and the maintaining of order, and I admit that it is taken in this sense when human traditions are treated of, (Mat 15:6.) Paul, however, will be found in the next chapter making use of the term tradition, as meaning the rule that he had laid down, and the very signification of the term is general. The context, however, as I have said, requires that it be taken here to mean the whole of that doctrine in which they had been instructed. For the matter treated of is the most important of all — that their faith may remain secure in the midst of a dreadful agitation of the Church.

Papists, however, act a foolish part in gathering from this that their traditions ought to be observed. They reason, indeed, in this manner — that if it was allowable for Paul to enjoin traditions, it was allowable also for other teachers; and that, if it was a pious thing ⁶⁹¹ to observe the former, the latter also ought not less to be observed. Granting them, however, that Paul speaks of precepts belonging to the external government of the Church, I say that they were, nevertheless, not contrived by him, but divinely communicated. For he declares elsewhere, (1Co 7:35,) that it was not his intention to ensnare consciences, as it was not lawful, either for himself, or for all the Apostles together. They act a still more ridiculous part in making it their aim to pass off, under this, the abominable sink of their own superstitions, as though they were the traditions of Paul. But farewell to these trifles, when we are in possession of Paul’s true meaning. And we may judge in part from this Epistle what traditions he here recommends, for he says — whether by word, that is, discourse, or by epistle. Now, what do these Epistles contain but pure doctrine, which overturns to the very foundation the whole of the Papacy, and every invention that is at variance with the simplicity of the Gospel?

Defender: 2Th 2:15

"Traditions" can be either valuable or harmful, depending on whether or not they support God's Word. Jesus, for example, rebuked the Pharisees on this basis: "Why do ye also transgress the commandment of God by your tradition?" (Mat 15:3). Paul, on the other hand, encouraged the Thessalonians to keep the traditions they had been taught by him, either verbally or in writing, (2Th 3:6). For the first twenty years or so of the spread of Christianity, each church needed to remember, carefully and accurately, what they had been taught orally by the apostles or their prophets, pastors, and teachers, for they did not yet have the New Testament in written form. By this time, however, Paul had written down at least some of his teachings, and the New Testament was beginning to take shape. Eventually, by the time the last apostle died, it would all be written and circulated among the churches, and there would be no further need for them to be guided by the oral traditions. The corresponding message to us today, therefore, would be to "stand fast, and hold the traditions which ye have been taught.""

TSK: 2Th 2:15

stand : 1Co 15:58, 1Co 16:13; Phi 4:1

hold : 2Th 3:6; 1Co 11:2

the traditions : Rom 16:17; Jud 1:3 *Gr.

whether : 2Th 2:2, 2Th 3:14

Commentary -- Word/Phrase Notes (per Verse)

Barnes: 2Th 2:15

Therefore - In view of the fact that you are thus chosen from eternity, and that you are to be raised up to such honor and glory.

Stand fast - Amidst all the temptations which surround you; compare the notes on Eph 6:10-14. And hold the traditions which ye have been taught On the word "traditions,"see the notes on Mat 15:2. It means properly things delivered over from one to another; then anything orally delivered - any precept, doctrine, or law. It is frequently employed to denote that which is not written, as contradistinguished from that which is written (compare Mat 15:2), but not necessarily or always; for here the apostle speaks of the "traditions which they had been taught by his epistle;"compare the notes, 1Co 11:2. Here it means the doctrines or precepts which they had received from the apostle, whether when he was with them, or after he left them; whether communicated by preaching or by letter. This passage can furnish no authority for holding the "traditions"which have come down from ancient times, and which profess to have been derived from the apostles; because:

(1)\caps1     t\caps0 here is no evidence that any of those traditions were given by the apostles;

(2)\caps1     m\caps0 any of them are manifestly so trifling, false, and contrary to the writings of the apostles, that they could not have been delivered by them;

(3)\caps1     i\caps0 f any of them are genuine, it is impossible to separate them from those which are false;

(4)\caps1     w\caps0 e have all that is necessary for salvation in the written word; and,

(5)\caps1     t\caps0 here is not the least evidence that the apostle here meant to refer to any such thing.

He speaks only of what had been delivered to them by himself, whether orally or by letter; not of what was delivered from one to another as from him. There is no intimation here that they were to hold anything as from him which they had not received directly from him, either by his own instructions personally or by letter. With what propriety, then, can this passage be adduced to prove that we are to hold the traditions which professedly come to us through a great number of intermediate persons? Where is the evidence here that the church was to hold those unwritten traditions, and transmit them to future times?

Whether by word - By preaching, when we were with you. It does not mean that he had sent any oral message to them by a third person.

Or our epistle - The former letter which he had written to them.

Poole: 2Th 2:15

The former verses contained consolation, this is an exhortation: the apostle had assured them of their being elected and called, yet exhorts them to their duty. Assurance of salvation doth not encourage negligence; the apostle takes his argument from thence to quicken them:

Therefore & c. And that which he exhorts them to is:

1. To stand fast a military word, speaking as a captain to his soldiers; so 1Co 16:13 Eph 6:14 ; having before foretold a great apostacy that would come. Or because he had told them of the great glory they had been called to the obtaining of by the gospel, he exhorts them to stand fast, which implies a firm persuasion of mind and constant purpose of will, and stands opposite to hesitation and despondency.

2. To hold the traditions which they had been taught The word tradition signifies any thing delivered to another; especially meant of doctrines. The Pharisees’ doctrine is called tradition, Mat 15:3 ; and so the true doctrines of the gospel, being such as the apostles delivered to the people; as the doctrine of the Lord’ s supper is said to be delivered, 1Co 11:23 ; and so Rom 6:13 .

Whether by word, or our epistle by word of mouth in public preaching, or private instruction. The apostle had both preached and written to these Thessalonians, before he wrote this Second Epistle. And that the papists should hence infer that there are matters of necessary consequence in religion, not contained in the Scriptures, is without ground. These they call traditions, some whereof are concerning faith, others concerning manners, others ritual, with respect to the worship of God, or the external polity of the church. But who can assure us what these are? What a door is here opened to introduce what men please into the church, under pretence of tradition! Who were the persons the apostle intrusted to keep these traditions? Why should he not declare the whole system of gospel truths he had received from Christ in writing, as well as part? Why should he conceal some things, when he wrote others? And doth not the apostle assure Timothy that All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof for correction, for instruction; that the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works? 2Ti 3:16,17 . What need then traditions? And how can we know that they are by Divine inspiration, as we are assured all Scripture is? Our Saviour reproved the Pharisees about their traditions, when from hence they would observe and impose ceremonies of washing hands, cups, and platters, Mat 15:2-6 , yea, and by them make the commandments of God of none effect; which the apostle cautions the Colossians about, Col 2:8 ; and whereof Paul declares his zeal before his conversion, Gal 1:14 : and we find men’ s zeal still more about them than moral duties, and express institutions of God’ s worship. All the apostle’ s doctrine,

whether by word or epistle he calls by the name of traditions in the text here, and he commends the Corinthians, 1Co 11:2 , that they kept the traditions delivered to them; but were not they all committed to writing in some place or other of his Epistles? And which were, and which were not, who can be certain? And why should traditions be confined only to those things which the apostle did not write? He exhorts the Thessalonians to hold the traditions which they had been taught, whether by word or epistle. And if they hold them with strength, as the word is, by this means they would stand fast.

PBC: 2Th 2:15

2Th 2:15

Tradition: The Good and the Bad

2Th 2:15 Therefore, brethren, stand fast, and hold the traditions which ye have been taught, whether by word, or our epistle.

Tradition is one of those words that can have such a distinct, even polarizing, meaning. People react to it with fierce loyalty or with equally fierce disdain. Interestingly, the word appears with both meanings in the New Testament. If you study your Bible based on stereotyped definitions from a dictionary, this word may well serve up frequent confusion to your thoughts. Few words illustrate as clearly as this one the value of the first three rules of hermeneutics (Biblical interpretation); 1 context, 2 context, 3 context. We must treasure the value of a comprehensive dictionary of Biblical words, but once we survey the breadth of possible definitions we must allow context to guide our minds to the correct meaning within that scope.

We should never ignore a definition in favor of a private interpretation that favors our personal ideas. For example, the Greek word translated world most frequently in the New Testament has eight definitions in Strong’s dictionary of New Testament words, one of the most abbreviated of acceptable Greek New Testament dictionaries. Which definition will you apply to Joh 3:16? Within this range many sincere Christian people apply the broadest definition of the eight, not considering that this definition forces the passage to contradict other passages in both the Old and the New Testament.

In the gospels Jesus caustically assaulted the first century religious leaders for making their traditions more important than the word of God.

They honored their traditions while voiding Scripture in the process!

If we allow recent practice or even recent history to control our thinking, we are liable to the same errors in principle as that generation. Scripture alone must lead and inform our faith.

Apparently Paul had certain specific ways of doing things in the churches that he founded. By following this practice consistently he established common grounds between these isolated new communities of worship. Paul does not define them in our passage. Or does he? He urges the Thessalonians to stand fast in their faith, part of which requires them to hold certain traditions that they had learned from him. What was Paul’s source for these ideas and practices? We have no way of knowing anything of these traditions other than what we may pick up from Scripture. Perhaps this is the primary point. Scripture alone, not Scripture and tradition, must define and limit our faith and practice. As soon as we broaden our tolerance for any other authority in addition to Scripture, we open the door to a never-ending flow of either erroneous or at the least questionable ideas. Extend the questionable idea a few generations; it soon becomes an institution with its own life and following. You thereby alter rather than preserve the essential culture of the church.

In his commentary on 2 Thessalonians Leon Morris makes an insightful point. " Tradition...is a word that points us to the fact that the Christian message is essentially derivative. It does not originate in people’s fertile imaginations but rests on the facts of the life, death, resurrection, and ascension of Jesus Christ. Paul disclaims originating these things and expressly says that the things he passed on he had himself first received. {1Co 15:3} For us these traditions are preserved in the New Testament.[i]" (Emphasis mine)

Are we willing, truly willing, to accept Morris’ point in our own faith and practice? There are certain cultural ideas that may well find their way into a church due to its own culture. For example, a church in Europe during the Middle Ages existed in a vastly different culture than ours. No doubt many of its practices differed from ours. Perhaps they sang in whispered sounds to avoid being overheard by their persecutors. History documents that at times they avoided singing altogether because of this concern. Later when persecution no longer threatened them, many of them didn’t remember when they had practiced singing in worship, so they objected to it as a new invention, not an old Biblical " tradition" that was being reintroduced into their church culture.

The remainder of this chapter will approach some of our own culture’s traditions that in all likelihood fail the New Testament test. However well meaning or sentimentally favored, we should practice nothing or believe nothing not clearly set forth in New Testament teaching. Actual faith (what we believe) and practice (what we do), not sincerity or a few generations of questionable practice, will determine the validity of our claim to New Testament Christianity. The Roman Catholic Church leads the way in claiming that church tradition and Scripture equally determine acceptable faith and practice. We should not follow her leadership if we expect credibly to claim that our forefathers were not part of that institution.

In many regions of this country churches that are blessed with a young promising gift to the ministry will at some point in his development " liberate" him. The intent is for the church to give its blessing to him and its endorsement to other churches within the fellowship; they believe that this brother has a calling from God and is growing favorably in his work, leading predictably to his ordination. What is the basis of this practice? Most leaders who defend the practice will refer to Heb 13:22, " Know ye not that our brother Timothy is set at liberty..." In that context the correct intent is almost certainly a reference to a time when Timothy may have been imprisoned for his faith, just as Paul was. This verse forms a strong support for Paul’s authorship of the Hebrew epistle. It offers essentially no support whatever for this practice of liberating a young man in the process of his eventual ordination. Arguments as to its being harmless or to its offering encouragement, though well-intended, are irrelevant to Biblical Christian tradition and practice! They merely underscore the idea that either a spurious interpretation of Scripture or something other than Scripture is perfectly acceptable to contemporary church practice.

Other less formally instituted practices, and even less supported by Scripture, sometimes surface in churches. For example, can you imagine people in a church of the first century chatting with each other during the song service? The insult to the reverence of the worship hour would not have been tolerated. Nor would the occasional practice of people casually getting up and moving around during the worship hour have been ignored. For them-it should be no less so for us- worship was a reverential time between the congregation and God, not a casual social hour. Every act, however casually practiced, should contribute to the dignity of worship.

In his history of Primitive Baptists Sylvester Hassell makes a pointed reference to " new school" practices that were introduced and rejected by Primitive Baptists in his day. He published his history around 1875. His reference is to the conflict between old and new school beliefs and practices that brought the Baptist family in America to a tragic schism in 1832. As we read the list that includes mourner’s benches and many other spurious ideas to Biblical teaching, we gladly claim " Old School" standing. Then we encounter a surprise.

Hassell specifically names " shaking hands while singing" as a new school practice that his generation of Primitive Baptists soundly rejected!

I recall two instances that will illustrate the degree to which this now-common and defended practice evolved from a rejected to a revered tradition. When I was very young, I recall an old deacon in the church of my membership complaining that people in our time were soft about their practice of faith. He illustrated the point. In his youth that church did practice the " right hand of fellowship," shaking hands while singing. However, for that church the act had specific meaning. It meant that you believed and supported the words preached by the minister in his sermon. The church knew nothing of the more contemporary idea that shaking hands means that every person in the congregation tries to shake hands, if not carry on brief social visitation, with every other person in the auditorium! For that generation shaking hands meant that each member of the congregation that specifically endorsed the sermon went forward and shook the preacher’s hand. This old deacon approvingly recalled a time when a visiting preacher delivered a sermon that denied the reality of eternal hell-every member of the church stood firmly in their places when the invitation to give him the right hand of fellowship was given! Not a single person in the audience went forward to shake his hand after the sermon! They didn’t believe what the man preached, so they refused to shake his hand in a hypocritical gesture!

My wife’s parents grew up in Texas and came to California in the early years of World War II My wife’s mother specifically recalled that shaking hands while singing was never practiced among the churches where her father pastored during her childhood in Arkansas and Texas. Shortly after the end of World War II the family moved to Lindsay. She recalled someone from that church who had recently visited among Primitive Baptist churches in the east. The returning traveler announced a " new practice" he had witnessed during his travels. The people sang a hymn at the close of the service and shook hands. What a nice thing to do! He suggested that they start the practice. Today this practice is widely observed among Primitive Baptists, though in several regions with close ties to more remote Primitive Baptist history, it is still not practiced.

This particular practice will exemplify the danger of tradition that is elevated to the position of authority in competition with Scripture. There is no record of this practice whatever in the New Testament, nor in church history before the 1832 tension. For eighteen centuries the church didn’t practice it! In Hassell’s day, around 1875, the practice was consistently rejected as originating with the new school movement, not as an undocumented " New Testament" practice to be defended. Apparently the early practice, when it was finally initiated by Primitive Baptists long after Hassell’s death, was observed specifically as a way for individual members to give public endorsement to the content of a sermon. Then it evolved into a way for people to greet other members of the congregation on their way to and from the man who preached and stands at the front of the auditorium to receive their handshake. Today in some areas, California included, the practice demonstrates still more evolution. Have the people form a chain around the perimeter of the auditorium as they shake hands so that every individual person in the congregation can shake hands with every other individual in the group. This practice insidiously degenerates, inevitably so, into a social hour in which the people laugh, exchange words and otherwise distract from the reverential spirit that should always characterize every moment of public worship activities. Occasionally the visitation will become so intense that the congregation can’t even continue the song.

When tradition becomes an expression of personal preference, as Morris observes from people’s " fertile imagination," instead of an expression of New Testament simple and reverential worship, there is no end of the nuances that will appear. Without question, once tradition is given a life apart from New Testament Scripture, every generation will grow its own extension of the practice so that what originated as one tradition in fact evolves into something entirely different.

For Paul and the Thessalonian church, tradition referred specifically to something that began with Jesus and the first apostles. Even Paul didn’t claim the liberty to modify those ideas and practices. Will we stand with New Testament teachings alone in both faith and practice? Or will we join the flow of relativistic ideas that slowly evolve from generation to generation, becoming as much an institution, as much a tradition with life and authority of their own, as what we read in Scripture? We cannot ignore Scripture, or honor Scripture plus something else, and maintain a credible claim to being a simple, a primitive, New Testament community of worship. Paul indeed allowed minimal cultural variation (for example, Gentiles eating certain meats that were prohibited to the Jews), but he did not allow deviation from the basic form of worship, faith, and practice.

These examples merely serve as illustrations that relate to us and to our contemporary ideas. Other examples could be offered from church history. Similar " traditions" evolve in other church fellowships. Our human nature loves variety; it enjoys creating novelty. However, one tradition that cannot find its origin in the New Testament is no more commendable than the other. To practice New Testament Christianity, faithfulness to Scripture, not creative and sentimentally supported novelty, is commanded. Will we claim the New Testament high ground and stand in all things on Scripture alone?

342

[i] Morris, Leon NIGNT: The First and Second Epistles to the Thessalonians, revised, (Grand Rapids, Michigan: William B. Eerdman’s Publishing Company, 1991,) 241.

Gill: 2Th 2:15

Therefore, brethren, stand fast,.... In the doctrine of the Gospel in general, and in the article of Christ's second coming in particular, and not in the least waver about the thing itself, nor be shaken in mind, and troubled as if it was just at hand; and the rather it became them to be concerned that they stood fast in the truth, and persevered unto the end, since there was to be a falling away, and the mystery of iniquity was already working, and antichrist would shortly appear, whose coming would be with all deceivableness, of unrighteousness; and they had the greater encouragement to continue firm and unmoved, seeing they were chosen from eternity unto salvation through sanctification and belief of the truth, and were called in time by the Gospel to the enjoyment of the glory of Christ in another world.

And hold the traditions which ye have been taught: meaning the truths of the Gospel, which may be called traditions, because they are delivered from one to another; the Gospel was first delivered by God the Father to Jesus Christ, as Mediator, and by him to his apostles, and by them to the churches of Christ; whence it is called the form of doctrine delivered to them, and the faith once delivered to the saints: and also the ordinances of the Gospel which the apostles received from Christ, and as they received them faithfully delivered them, such as baptism and the Lord's supper; as well as rules of conduct and behaviour, both in the church, and in the world, even all the commandments of Christ, which he ordered his apostles to teach, and which they gave by him; see 2Th 3:6. And so the Syriac version here renders it, "the commandments": and these were such as these saints had been taught by the apostles, under the direction of Christ, and through the guidance of his Spirit; and were not the traditions of men or the rudiments of the world, but what they had received from Christ, through the hands of the apostles:

whether by word, or our epistle, that is, by "our" word, as well as by our epistle, and so the Arabic version reads; these doctrines, ordinances, and rules of discipline were communicated to them, both by word of mouth, when the apostles were in person among them, and by writing afterwards to them; for what the apostles delivered in the ministry of the word to the churches, they sent them in writing, that they might be a standing rule of faith and practice; so that this does not in the least countenance the unwritten traditions of the Papists; and since these were what were taught them, "viva voce", and they received them from the mouth of the apostles, or by letters from them, or both, it became them to hold and retain them fast, and not let them go, either with respect to doctrine or practice.

Commentary -- Verse Notes / Footnotes

NET Notes: 2Th 2:15

¹ tn Grk “brothers.” See note on the phrase “brothers and sisters” in 1:3.

² tn Grk “that you were taught whether by word or by letter of ours.”

Geneva Bible: 2Th 2:15

^{( 11 )} Therefore, brethren, stand fast, and hold the traditions which ye have been taught, whether by word, or our epistle.

^{( 11 )} The conclusion: it remains then that we continue in the doctrine which was delivered to us by the mouth and writings of the apostles, through the free good will of God, who comforts us with an invincible hope, and that we also continue in all godliness our whole life long.

Commentary -- Verse Range Notes

TSK Synopsis: 2Th 2:1-17

1 Paul urges them to continue stedfast in the truth received;

3 shows that there shall be a departure from the faith,

9 and a discovery of Antichrist, before the day of the Lord come;

15 and thereupon repeats his former exhortation, and prays for them.

MHCC: 2Th 2:13-15

When we hear of the apostacy of many, it is a great comfort and joy, that there is a remnant according to the election of grace, which does and shall persevere; especially we should rejoice, if we have reason to hope that we are of that number. The preservation of the saints, is because God loved them with an everlasting love, from the beginning of the world. The end and the means must not be separated. Faith and holiness must be joined together as well as holiness and happiness. The outward call of God is by the gospel; and this is rendered effectual by the inward working of the Spirit. The belief of the truth brings the sinner to rely on Christ, and so to love and obey him; it is sealed by the Holy Spirit upon his heart. We have no certain proof of any thing having been delivered by the apostles, more than what we find contained in the Holy Scriptures. Let us then stand fast in the doctrines taught by the apostles, and reject all additions, and vain traditions.

Matthew Henry: 2Th 2:13-15

Here observe, I. The consolation the Thessalonians might take against the terrors of this apostasy, 2Th 2:13, 2Th 2:14. For they were chosen to salvation, and called to the obtaining of glory. Note, When we hear of the apostasy of many, it is matter of great comfort and joy that there is a remnant according to the election of grace which does and shall persevere; and especially we should rejoice if we have reason to hope that we are of that number. The apostle reckoned himself bound in duty to be thankful to God on this account: We are bound to give thanks to God always for you. He had often given thanks on their behalf, and he is still abounding in thanksgiving for them; and there was good reason, because they were beloved by the Lord, as appeared in this matter - their security from apostatizing. This preservation of the saints is owing,

1. To the stability of the election of grace, 2Th 2:13. Therefore were they beloved of the Lord, because God had chosen them from the beginning. He had loved them with an everlasting love. Concerning this election of God we may observe, (1.) The eternal date of it - it is from the beginning; not the beginning of the gospel, but the beginning of the world, before the foundation of the world, Eph 1:4. Then, (2.) The end to which they were chosen - salvation, complete and eternal salvation from sin and misery, and the full fruition of all good. (3.) The means in order to obtaining this end - sanctification of the spirit and belief of the truth. The decree of election therefore connects the end and the means, and these must not be separated. We are not the elected of God because we were holy, but that we might be holy. Being chosen of God, we must not live as we list; but, if we are chosen to salvation as the end, we must be prepared for it by sanctification as the necessary means to obtain that end, which sanctification is by the operation of the Holy Spirit as the author and by faith on our part. There must be the belief of the truth, without which there can be by true sanctification, nor perseverance in grace, nor obtaining of salvation. Faith and holiness must be joined together, as well as holiness and happiness; therefore our Saviour prayed for Peter that his faith might not fail (Luk 22:32), and for his disciples (Joh 17:17), Sanctify them by thy truth; thy word is truth.

2. To the efficacy of the gospel call, 2Th 2:14. As they were chosen to salvation, so they were called thereunto by the gospel. Whom he did predestinate those he also called, Rom 8:30. The outward call of God is by the gospel; and this is rendered effectual by the inward operation of the Spirit. Note, Wherever the gospel comes it calls and invites men to the obtaining of glory; it is a call to honour and happiness, even the glory of our Lord Jesus Christ, the glory he has purchased, and the glory he is possessed of, to be communicated unto those who believe in him and obey his gospel; such shall be with Christ, to behold his glory, and they shall be glorified with Christ and partake of his glory. Hereupon there follows,

II. An exhortation to stedfastness and perseverance: Therefore, brethren, stand fast, 2Th 2:15. Observe, He does not say, "You are chosen to salvation, and therefore you may be careless and secure;"but therefore stand fast. God's grace in our election and vocation is so far from superseding our diligent care and endeavour that it should quicken and engage us to the greatest resolution and diligence. So the apostle John having told those to whom he wrote that they had received the anointing which should abide in them, and that they should abide in him (in Christ), subjoins this exhortation, Now abide in him, 1Jo 2:27, 1Jo 2:28. The Thessalonians are exhorted to stedfastness in their Christian profession, to hold fast the traditions which they had been taught, or the doctrine of the gospel, which had been delivered by the apostle, by word or epistle. As yet the canon of scripture was not complete, and therefore some things were delivered by the apostles in their preaching, under the guidance of the infallible Spirit, which Christians were bound to observe as coming from God; other things were afterwards by them committed to writing, as the apostle had written a former epistle to these Thessalonians; and these epistles were written as the writers were moved by the Holy Ghost. Note, There is no argument hence for regarding oral traditions in our days, now that the canon of scripture is complete, as of equal authority with the sacred writings. Such doctrines and duties as were taught by the inspired apostles we must stedfastly adhere to; but we have no certain evidence of any thing delivered by them more than what we find contained in the holy scriptures.

Barclay: 2Th 2:13-17

In this passage there is a kind of synopsis of the Christian life.

(i) It begins with God's call. We could never even begin to seek God unless he had already found us. The whole initiative is with him; the ground and the moving cause of the whole matter is his seeking love.

(ii) It develops in our effort. The Christian is not called to dream, but to fight; not to stand still, but to climb. He is called not only to the greatest privilege but also to the greatest task in the world.

(iii) This effort is helped continually by two things. (a) It is helped by the teaching, guidance and example of godly men. God speaks to us through those to whom he has already spoken. "A saint," as someone has said, "is a person who makes it easier for others to believe in God." And there are some who help us, not by anything they say or write, but simply by being what they are, men whom to meet is to meet God. (b) It is helped by God himself We are never left to fight and toil alone. He who gives us the task also gives us the strength to do it; more, he actually does it with us. We are not thrown into the battle to meet it with the puny resources we can bring to it. At the back of us and beside us there is God. When Paul was up against it in Corinth, he had a vision by night in which the Lord said to him, "Do not be afraid...for I am with You" (Act 18:9-10). They that are for us are always more than they that are against us.

(iv) This call and this effort are designed to produce two things. (a) They are designed to produce consecration on earth. Literally in Greek a thing which is consecrated is set apart for God. They are meant to set us apart in such a way that God can use us for his service. The result is that a man's life no longer belongs to him to do with it as he likes; it belongs to God for him to use as he likes. (b) They are designed to produce salvation in heaven. The Christian life does not end with time; its goal is eternity. The Christian can regard his present affliction as a light thing in comparison with the glory that shall be. As Christina Rosetti wrote:

" 'Does the road wind uphill all the way?'

'Yes, to the very end.'

'Will the day's journey take the whole tong day?'

'From morn to night, my friend.'

'But is there for the night a resting-place?'

'A roof for when the slow dark hours begin.'

'May not the darkness hide it from my face?'

'You cannot miss that inn.'

'Shall I meet other wayfarers at night?'

'Those who have gone before.'

'Then must I knock, or call when just in sight?'

'They will not keep you waiting at that door.'

'Shall I find comfort, travel-sore and weak?'

'Of labour you shall find the sum.'

'Will there be beds for me and all who seek?'

'Yes, beds for all who come.' "

Constable: 2Th 2:13-17

IV. THANKSGIVING AND PRAYER 2:13-17

Paul proceeded to give thanks for his readers' salvation and to pray for their steadfastness to help them appreciate their secure position in holding fast to apostolic teaching. These verses form a transition between the didactic and hortatory sections of the epistle.

Constable: 2Th 2:13-15

A. Thanksgiving for calling 2:13-15

2:13 In contrast to the wicked unbelievers just referred to (v. 12), Paul was grateful that he could always give thanks for his readers. Moreover he did so.⁵⁸ The ground for his joy was God's choice of them for salvation before He created the world ("the beginning," v. 13; cf. Eph. 1:4). Though God loves all people (John 3:16), He does not choose all for salvation. Paul consistently taught what the rest of Scripture reveals, namely that the initiative in salvation comes from God, not man. God accomplishes salvation through the sanctifying work of the Holy Spirit (cf. Rom. 15:16; 1 Cor. 6:11-12; 1 Thess. 4:7-8; 1 Pet. 1:2).⁵⁹ He makes it efficacious when individuals believe the gospel. Even though unbelievers oppose us, we can take courage because God loves us, and He will deliver us.

"It is a travesty of God's electing grace to suppose that, because he chooses some for salvation, all the others are thereby consigned to perdition. On the contrary, if some are chosen for special blessing, it is in order that others may be blessed through them and with them. This is a constant feature in the pattern of divine election throughout the Bible story, from Abraham onward. Those who are chosen constitute the firstfruits, bearing the promise of a rich harvest to come."⁶⁰

2:14 God's purpose in choosing the Thessalonians was that they might one day share the splendor and honor that their Lord does and will enjoy, beginning at the Rapture.

2:15 In view of their calling Paul urged his readers not to abandon what he and his associates had taught them in person and by letter. He wanted them to hold firmly to the inspired instructions that he handed on to them (i.e., "the traditions").

"We are almost incurably convinced that the use of notebooks is essential to the learning process. This, however, was not the case in the first century. Then it was often held that if a man had to look something up in a book he did not really know it. The true scholar was a person who had committed to memory the things he had learned. Until a man had a teaching in his memory he was not considered really to have mastered it.⁶¹

"There is a distinction in the Pauline writings between the gospel received by revelation (as in Gal 1:12) and the gospel received by tradition (as in 1 Cor 15:3), and the language of didache ["teaching"] and paradosis ["tradition"] is appropriate to the latter, not to the former. Even communications made dia pneumatos ["by the Spirit"] must be tested by their conformity to the paradosis and if they conflict with it they are to be refused (cf. 1 Thess 5:19-22)."⁶²

College: 2Th 2:1-17

2 THESSALONIANS 2

III. INSTRUCTION ON THE LORD'S RETURN (2:1-12)

This section, which is central to the entire second Thessalonian letter, presents one of the most difficult interpretive problems in the New Testament. The problem can be summarized around four specific questions: (1) what is the "rebellion" (v. 3); (2) who is the "man of lawlessness" (v. 3) or "the secret power of lawlessness" (v. 7); (3) what is it that "is holding him back" (v. 6) or "now holds it back" (v. 7); (4) how does all this answer the question which Paul addresses, namely, whether "the day of the Lord" has already come (v. 2)?

The most common answers to these questions have shared an assumption about the passage: Paul speaks primarily of events which are to occur in the future as preliminaries to the return of Jesus. On this basis, conclusions, though widely diverse in particulars, have been confined to a fairly narrow scope. The "rebellion" is generally taken as the period of widespread apostasy from true devotion to God expected in Jewish apocalyptic literature just before God's final act of salvation and judgment at the end of this age. It is further assumed that Paul believes that this period lies in the future, though that may be his own immediate future.

The "man of lawlessness" is generally taken as a future political figure who will lead the climax of opposition to God. The expression is taken as referring to the same figure as the "antichrist" in 1 John 2:18, 22; 4:7, 15; 2 John 7 or the "beast" in Rev 11:7-20:10, a figure based on the Old Testament and intertestamental expectation of a great end-time opponent of God (Dan 7:8, 25; 11:36, 40-41, 45; As. Moses 8:1; Pss. Sol. 2:29; Mart. Isa. 4:2-3; 4 Ezra 5:6; T. Isaac 6:1; T. Jud. 25:3; T. Dan. 5:4; Sib. Or. 2:63, 75). He will be "revealed" (v. 3) when he appears on the world stage and becomes active, a future event, though again one which may lie in Paul's immediate future. In the meantime, he is restrained (vv. 6-7) by some means, but that restraining power will at some point be removed so that he will become fully active. If this general line of interpretation accurately represents Paul's answer, then the "day of the Lord" in v. 2 probably refers not to the actual event of the Lord's return for salvation and judgment but the period immediately preceding that event. The NIV, even more so than most other English versions, strongly reflects this approach to the text; at several points, noted in comments below, where the Greek text is at best ambiguous, the translators have rendered the text in English in such a way as to point clearly toward this interpretation.

While most interpretation of this text has adhered to these established general boundaries, the specifics have varied widely. In particular, the identity of the restrainer, apparently clearly known to the readers (v. 6), has remained mysterious. Suggestions have included the preaching of the gospel, the church, Paul himself, the Holy Spirit, the Roman Empire, the Jewish nation, angels or a particular angel, and the principle of order, among others. Similar confusion reigns in regard to the identity of the man of lawlessness. Does Paul identify this figure with a person or institution of his own period of history, such as the emperor or the Roman government? Does he regard the statement, "he sets himself up in God's temple," as a literal or a metaphorical expression? The answers to these questions are many and the arguments supporting them are cogent at points; consequently, absolutely no consensus among interpreters has arisen.

In addition to the interpretive chaos which this approach to this text has created, it raises another problem. In 1 Thess 4:13-5:11 Paul stresses the imminence of Jesus' return. The Thessalonians' comfort in grief and their motivation to be watchful and ready for Christ's return are based on the hope that his return is imminent, that it could occur at any moment. If this text refers to events which on God's timetable must precede Christ's return, that imminence is sharply qualified, if not contradicted. This tension has led some to deny that Paul wrote 2 Thessalonians or that his view of the Lord's return had changed between the writing of the two letters.

Others, however, insist that in Jewish literature the idea that the final act of judgment and salvation is imminent regularly stands together with the idea that it will be preceded by various preliminary events or signs. In particular it has been argued that in 1 Thess 5:1-11 the Lord's return is unexpected by unbelievers, while the sign provided here is only understood by believers. Against this it must be said that in 1 Thess 5:1-11 the time of the Lord's coming is unknown to all; what distinguishes believers is not their knowledge of the time but their expectation of Christ's return and their consequent watchfulness. Whatever the merits of these explanations, it is admitted by all that if 2 Thess 2:1-12 refers to future events which precede Christ's return, it does create at least a difficult tension with the imminent expectation of the parousia.

Another general weakness with this approach is its lack of congruence with the question which Paul addresses. If in this text Paul is discussing events which precede Christ's return, at best he answers indirectly the question which begins the discussion, namely, whether the day of the Lord has already come (v. 2). Rather than pointing out directly that this event has not occurred, he in effect says that the day of the Lord has not come because the events necessarily prior to the day have not come. While this problem is ameliorated somewhat by taking "day of the Lord" to refer to events just preceding Christ's return, the argument remains less than straightforward. One might have expected the apostle instead to point out what the day of the Lord would bring in itself, noting how those things have not yet been fully realized.

In such a situation of exegetical confusion, established patterns of interpretation deserve reexamination. If the prevailing approach to the text yields so wide a range of possible interpretations and so many problems, it may be that the prevailing approach is not in harmony with the author's intended meaning. To be sure, the traditional understanding of this text may be correct, and the particulars of Paul's meaning may be too remote for us ever to recover them. However, if another approach yields a clear interpretation in harmony with the details of the text and with Paul's teaching elsewhere, it at least deserves a hearing.

One alternative is that the appearance of the man of lawlessness refers to the Roman destruction of Jerusalem in A.D. 70. This interpretation has several merits. One is that Jesus clearly refers to the destruction of the temple in the Olivet Discourse (Matt 24:15-22; Mark 13:14-20; Luke 21:20-24). Since Paul seems to allude to this teaching of Jesus both in this passage (vv. 9-10; cf. Matt 24:23-38; Mark 13:21-23) and in others in these letters (cf. 1 Thess 4:13-5:11; 2 Thess 1:7-10 and comments above), he may do so here as well. The text does refer directly to the temple (v. 4), and "lawless" is used in some other texts to refer to Romans (Acts 2:23; Pss. Sol. 17:11-22). Furthermore, this ameliorates somewhat the tension between the prediction of preliminary events and the imminent expectation of the Lord's return in 1 Thess 4:13-5:11.

There are, however, some serious weaknesses with this approach. One is the lack of substantial verbal parallels between this passage and the specific discussion of the fall of Jerusalem in the Olivet Discourse. Only the statement about sitting in the temple (v. 4) can be offered as a specific allusion to anything in Matt 24:15-22 and its parallels, and then only as an interpretive allusion to "abomination of desolation." If Paul is referring specifically to the Olivet Discourse, he is doing so obliquely at best.

Secondly, in order to see a reference to the destruction of the temple in v. 4, "sets himself up" must be taken figuratively while "temple" is interpreted literally. The comments on this verse below will note that the rest of the verse suggests a consistently figurative meaning for the entire expression.

Thirdly, Jesus' teaching about Jerusalem in the Olivet Discourse presents the fall of Jerusalem less as a preliminary sign of his coming than as an event not to be confused with his coming. It has the impact of a specific warning to Christians living in Palestine to flee the approaching Roman armies, to depend on God's provision for them during a time of great distress, and not to confuse this event and the false messianic claims that will accompany it with the actual return of Jesus. Paul's approach here is significantly different if he refers to that event. Most important is the observation, noted in detail in the comments below, that Paul's language in this text emphasizes not so much the future activity of the lawless one as his present activity. Though obscured at nearly every point by the NIV's interpretive translation, this observation is probably the decisive one in indicating the possibility of a different interpretation.

Recognizing that Paul emphasizes the present activity of the lawless one throughout this passage prompts us to put forward another possibility for consideration. We begin with the recognition that for Paul the "end time" has already begun with the appearance of Jesus in history and especially with his death and resurrection. In a variety of other texts, many of them already noted in previous comments, Paul points out that the promised blessings of the end time are already a reality for the Christian because in Christ God has inaugurated the fulfillment of his promises.

Likewise, the suffering of the faithful which in the Old Testament and intertestamental Jewish apocalyptic literature precedes the final act of salvation (Isa 24:17-23; Dan 12:1; Joel 2:1-11; Amos 5:16-20; Zeph 1:14-16; Jub. 23:11; 24:3; 2 Bar . 22:6; 55:6; 4 Ezra 7:37; 1 Enoch 80:4-5), is also for Paul a present reality (cf. Rom 8:22; 1 Cor 2:6-8; 15:55-57; Eph 6:10-16; Col 2:14), one which begins with Christ's own sufferings and continues in the lives of believers as they are united with Christ and suffer as he did.

The very structure of Paul's thought, then, is that the end-time events have already been manifested in Christ and are being manifested in the lives of believers. What remains to occur, as Paul has stressed in 2 Thess 1:6-10, is for Christ's return to bring an end to the suffering of his people, vindicating them before their enemies - who are also his enemies - and bringing to full realization the glory which already belongs to the people of God and the judgment that already belongs to the others.

Could this be the very point which Paul makes in this text? If the following conclusions, presented in detail in the comments below, have merit, then the answer appears to be affirmative: (1) the "rebellion" refers to Jewish rejection of the gospel, already a reality in Paul's ministry; (2) the "appearance" (or "revelation") of the man of lawlessness refers not to his activity in history, which is already a reality, but the final, definitive revealing that all opposition to God and Christ is ultimately the activity of the great opponent, Satan; (3) "what is holding him back" (v. 6) and "the one who now holds it back" are better rendered as "the one who now prevails" and do not refer to someone or something that restrains the man of lawlessness but instead refer to the man of lawlessness himself as one who appears to prevail in this age. If so, for Paul the "man of lawlessness" was as much a present manifestation of the end-time opponent of God as was the "antichrist" in the epistles of John (1 John 2:18, 22; 4:7, 15; 2 John 7). In this case Paul in this text stresses that the Lord's work will not be complete until the opposition which the Thessalonians and other Christians already experience is revealed for what it is and is fully and finally eliminated at the Lord's return. In effect he assures the readers that the day of the Lord has not yet come because they continue to see the prevalence of evil all around them.

It might be argued that the structure of Paul's thought, with its balance between the present realization of God's end-time promises and the future completion of them, demands that the present manifestation of end-time evil climax in the appearance near the end of history of a great opponent of God. While this assumption does lend a certain symmetry to Paul's eschatology, it remains an assumption only. If the conclusions summarized above and argued below are correct, this text gives no explicit reason to expect an intensification of trouble at some point in the future. If the revelation of the man of lawlessness refers to the revealing of his activity throughout history for what it is and if "what is holding him back" is in fact "the one who prevails," then nothing in the text indicates that in the future the activity of the lawless one will be any worse than it is already. This conclusion does not, however, minimize the intensity or significance of the suffering of Christians in any way. Throughout these letters Paul has shown the readers that their tribulations belong to the context of God's salvation-historical plan (1 Thess 2:14-16; 3:4-5); they are part of the end-time sufferings inaugurated by Christ, not unlike the experience of God's people in the past. These troubles, because they are part of the opposition to God's final act of salvation in Jesus, already represent the climax of evil in the world. Thus, all that remains for the future is the judgment due the opponents (2 Thess 1:6-7). The present sufferings of Christians do not require an intensification in order to fulfill the predicted sufferings of the end. Modern American Christians who have difficulty believing that opposition to the Lord and his people has already reached such a pitch have perhaps focused too much on their relative security and too little on the suffering of their brothers and sisters in other places.

If this interpretation is correct, several difficulties with this text are addressed in a single stroke. The mysterious identities of the man of lawlessness and the one who restrains are immediately resolved. If both expressions refer to Satan as he is at work in this age, then the text speaks less cryptically than is regularly assumed. Secondly, the tension between the imminence of Christ's return and the prediction of preliminary events is eliminated. If what Paul addresses here is the present activity of evil, which at once will be revealed for what it is and destroyed when Christ returns, then Christ's return remains imminent. Furthermore, the resulting emphasis of the text is that his return will mean deliverance and vindication for the believers, who in the meantime must remain alert and steadfast as they resist the deceptive activity of the Evil One and look forward to his final defeat at Christ's return, precisely the emphasis of the rest of Paul's eschatological teaching in these letters. Finally, the impact of the argument for the question which begins the discussion is direct and cogent. Paul's point is to reassure the Thessalonians that the day of the Lord has not yet occurred because when it does, the opposition which they now endure will be eliminated entirely. It offers them the reassurance that God's work in history is not finished until his people experience the fullness of fellowship with him, no longer restricted or hindered by the activity of Satan and those who belong to him.

Such are the general merits of the interpretation which this commentary sets forth; the specifics are spelled out in the verse-by-verse comments below. Recognizing, however, that this interpretation represents a departure from the approach to this text which has prevailed for some time, the comments will also note the way in which this text has traditionally been interpreted.

A. THE DAY OF THE LORD NOT YET PRESENT (2:1-2)

¹ Concerning the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ and our being gathered to him, we ask you, brothers, ² not to become easily unsettled or alarmed by some prophecy, report or letter supposed to have come from us, saying that the day of the Lord has already come.

This section begins with the question which prompts Paul's discussion. As in other cases where Paul addresses a specific problem in a church, we can only speculate about the circumstances which led to the problem. The prevailing opinion is that the expectation of the Lord's return, fueled in part by 1 Thessalonians 4:13-5:11, has reached a fever pitch in the Thessalonian church, so that the Christians there believed themselves to be living in the period immediately before Christ's return. To lessen the intensity of this expectation, Paul wrote the section that follows, correcting their imminent hope for Christ's return with the reminder that certain events, namely the rebellion and the appearance of the man of lawlessness, must occur first.

This explanation has the virtue of seeing in Paul's answer a direct address of the problem. If the Thessalonian church includes a large contingent of former pagans (cf. 1 Thess 1:9 and comments above), Paul's use of language and images from Jewish apocalyptic literature might be surprising. However, if the problems in the church were prompted by a message which employed such language, we would not by surprised that Paul would correct the problem using similar language.

There are, however, other ways in which the problem may have arisen. Later in Corinth it appears that a species of teaching arose which asserted that all of God's promises, including the promise of the resurrection, had already been fulfilled in their entirety in what Christians had already received in Jesus and through the Holy Spirit. Paul appears to address this problem in its many manifestations throughout 1 Corinthians, but especially in 1 Corinthians 15. To the idea that all of God's work is complete in what the Christian has already received, Paul there asserts emphatically that God has a work yet to come, the resurrection of the dead at Christ's return. Later Paul reflects a similar idea in 2 Tim 2:18, where he refers to those who teach that the resurrection had already occurred. The problem may be similar in Thessalonica. The possibility that some had taught the Thessalonians, with alleged apostolic authority, that the Lord's work was finished, in effect that the promise of a coming "day of the Lord" had been fulfilled, is all the more likely because Paul addresses a church not far removed geographically, culturally or chronologically from the Corinthian church. As noted below, this scenario allows the phrase "day of the Lord" to have its usual meaning for Paul: it refers not to the period just preceding the end but to the end itself, which will bring the final victory of God's purposes in the world (cf. 1 Thess 5:2 and comments above).

The value of this text for the modern reader lies in precisely this area. Ultimately the New Testament's expectation of the Lord's return promises the ultimate fulfillment of God's eternal good purposes for creation and humanity. As long as evil is active in the world, even more when it appears that evil prevails, God's purpose remains incomplete. So in addressing the question of the Lord's coming, Paul is not simply settling the matter of the eschatological calendar. He is asserting the utter goodness and power of God, which will finally prevail completely over every manifestation of evil. When his people are persecuted, they can be assured that God's power and goodness will one day triumph fully.

2:1 Concerning the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ and our being gathered to him,

Paul announces here the general subject which he will address. "Coming" is parousiva ( parousia ), a term which Paul uses later in this section (vv. 8-9) and often in the first letter (1 Thess 2:19 [see comments]; 3:13; 4:15; 5:23) to refer to the Lord's return as his visitation or presence as an important official. This visitation also signifies the gathering of his people to be with him, as Paul has stated specifically in 1 Thess 4:17. If, as both internal evidence and tradition would indicate, 1 Thessalonians was written before this letter, Paul is in effect reminding the readers of the content of that first letter and offering a clarification or expansion on its teaching. The word translated "being gathered, ejpisunagwghv ( episynago-ge- ) occurs only here and at Heb 10:25, but the cognate verb appears in Matt 24:31; Mark 13:27. So the unusual expression here may echo the teaching of Jesus about his return. This gathering fulfills the expectation of the Old Testament that the scattered people of God would be gathered again (Isa 43:4-7; 52:12; 56:8; Jer 31:8; Ezek 28:9; Ps 106:47) and for Christians signified the gathering of believers from all parts of the earth as well as the reuniting of the living and the dead.

The fact that Paul here equates the "coming" of the Lord, implying his abiding presence, with the "gathering" of his people again leaves us with little reason to see the gathering as an secret event years prior to a second, open return of Christ when he will remain on earth. When it is observed that this coming also will mean the final defeat of the great opponent (v. 8), that conclusion is even more secure. Whatever the specific interpretation of this section, it is at least clear that the Lord's coming and the gathering of his people are a single event which signal the end, not the beginning, of the troubles described in the following verses.

we ask you, brothers, 2:2 not to become easily unsettled or alarmed by some prophecy, report or letter supposed to have come from us,

Apparently the Thessalonian church had received some communication asserting what Paul indicates here and purporting to have come from him or his associates. Paul's difficulties with others who claimed apostolic authority equal to or greater than his own are very much in evidence in the Corinthian letters and Galatians; here the problem seems to be some who represent themselves as actually speaking for Paul. The string of terms which Paul uses here - prophecy (literally "spirit," pneu'ma , pneuma ), report (literally "word," lovgo" , logos ) or letter - probably indicates that Paul knows that the Thessalonians have been disturbed by a message but is uncertain as to how it came precisely. It is possible that the "letter" to which Paul refers to 1 Thessalonians, since the problem may have arisen from a misunderstanding of it. Since "supposed" is a likely inference from the Greek text but is not strictly necessary, Paul could refer to an authentic letter. But the combination of terms more likely indicates some imitation of the inspired messages delivered through a prophet or apostle and falsely claiming to have come from Paul or his associates. In effect Paul is calling for a specific application of his instructions in 1 Thess 5:21: the Thessalonians are to test this alleged apostolic message by what they know to be true about the gospel, as Paul will remind them of it in vv. 3-12. He further addresses the problem of messages falsely claiming to come from him in 3:17.

Paul urges them not to be "easily" shaken, literally "quickly" (tacevw" , tacheo-s ). As in Gal 1:6, any departure from confident faith in the gospel is quick, since the right response is to hold faithfully to the message until Christ returns (1 Thess 5:4-11). Two verbs describe the effect of the false message on the Thessalonians: saleuvw ( saleuo- ), which indicates a shaking from a position of confidence, and qroevw ( throeo- ), which implies a mental arousal or disturbance. Both are used here in a negative sense, indicating not excitement but distress. They demonstrate that the problem addressed is not merely a matter of abstract theology; it seriously affects the readers' entire Christian outlook.

saying that the day of the Lord has already come.

The specific problem concerns whether the "day of the Lord" has already come. As noted above, a key interpretive question in this section is whether this phrase refers to the Lord's coming itself or includes the period immediately preceding the Lord's coming. In favor of the latter is the sense it makes of Paul's argument if he is discussing events which occur prior to the Lord's return. If "day" includes the period just before Christ comes back, then the Thessalonians have received a report that those days have come and so they are living in a state of great excitement and anticipation, indicated with "unsettled or alarmed" in this verse. Paul in turn tones down their agitation by stating in what follows that Christ will not return until the man of lawlessness makes his appearance on the world stage, that in effect his appearance is what will signal the period just before the end.

There are, however, several specific difficulties with this interpretation. One is the fact that Paul represents the situation of the Thessalonians not merely as over-excitement but actual disturbance. The verbs in v. 2 are more consistently understood if Paul sees the Thessalonians' situation not simply as too much of a good thing, that is, anticipating Christ's return, but as a threat to their confident hope. More significant is the fact that in the other eight uses of "day of the Lord" or the equivalent in Paul's letters (1 Cor 1:8; 2 Cor 1:14; Phil 1:6, 10; 2:16; 1 Thess 5:2, 4; 2 Thess 1:10; N.B. that Paul uses the expression much more frequently than any other New Testament writer), it never refers to anything other than the actual climax of God's work in salvation and judgment. This meaning is confirmed for this passage in the way that Paul begins the discussion in v. 1, referring to "the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ and our being gathered to him." Therefore, though in other literature it is at best conceivable that the phrase could be used for the period preceding this climax, there is little in this text or in Paul's letters generally to indicate that meaning here.

Alternately the verb ejnivsthmi ( eniste-mi ) may mean "be imminent" instead of "has come." However, such a meaning is not clearly attested for this word, since in the examples in which it may be implied the sense of "be present" is equally consistent. Furthermore, the verb here is in the perfect indicative, indicating a past action and so allowing at best only the awkward sense, not attested in any other use, of "has become imminent." The NIV's rendering of the verb is highly preferable.

If in this sense "the day of the Lord" had already come, then God's work in history is finished. For the Thessalonian Christians - small in number, persecuted by their neighbors, and suffering the grief of separation from dead brothers and sisters - that prospect would be disturbing and depressing indeed. Their hope of final vindication and glorification, of which Paul wrote in 1:5-10, would vanish. They would have no prospect that God would finish the work begun in them (Phil 1:6). They would indeed "be pitied more than all men" (1 Cor 15:19). Reassuring them that this is in fact not the case is Paul's task in the following verses.

B. THE APOSTASY AND THE MAN OF LAWLESSNESS (2:3-12)

Following the tradition of most English versions, the NIV translators have made a number of interpretive decisions that sharply affect the impression which this text makes on the reader. In particular, the Greek present tense has been rendered with the English future in vv. 4, 9, and an object for the verb translated "is holding"/"holds" has been supplied in vv. 6-7. While none of these renderings is impossible, the fact that so many unusual translations are necessary to support the traditional interpretation of this passage suggests that another interpretation may more closely reflect Paul's meaning. In the comments below, the specifics of Paul's Greek text will be examined closely and alternative translations suggested. These will converge on a single point, that Paul sees the activity of the man of lawlessness not as something which lies in the future but as something already present, something which already dominates this age but which will come to its outright end when Christ returns.

If this interpretation is correct, then the impact of this text for the Thessalonians is as clear as it is for the Christian of any period who doubts the future return of Christ. Paul's reminder is that as long as evil is active in the world - claiming God's place, appearing to prevail in everyday life, deceiving the spiritually gullible and so denying them salvation - God's work in Christ is not complete. But because God's promise is faithful and his power supreme, Christ will indeed return to destroy all evil and the one who stands behind it, establishing the fullness of his righteous kingdom for which his people yearn.

1. The Apostasy and the

Revelation of the Man of Lawlessness (2:3)

³ Don't let anyone deceive you in any way, for that day will not come until the rebellion occurs and the man of lawlessness ^a is revealed, the man doomed to destruction.

^a 3 Some manuscripts sin

2:3 Don't let anyone deceive you in any way, for that day will not come until the rebellion occurs

In response to the false report which the Thessalonians have received, Paul first urges a healthy and holy skepticism. The message that the day of the Lord has come is deception, like that of the serpent with Eve (2 Cor 11:3; 1 Tim 2:14), because of what Paul is about to explain. Paul warns against this deception emphatically; "anyone . . . in any way" is literally "not anyone . . . in no way," a double-negative expression that stresses the prohibition.

Following the warning about deception, the rest of the verse in the Greek text is an anacoluthon, a subordinate clause with no clause to complete it. Literally the text reads, "Because unless the rebellion comes first and the man of lawlessness is revealed." Translators must supply the clause introduced with "because" (o{ti , hoti ), which can be clearly inferred from v. 2. Since the question concerns the coming of the day of the Lord, Paul obviously expects the reader to infer that the day is preceded by the rebellion and revelation of the man of lawlessness.

Interpreters of this passage have generally taken the "rebellion" to refer to something in the future, a widespread departure from the church, a civil rebellion or a combination of the two which will be an immediate prelude to the Lord's return. Though the language of this text could be consistent with that idea, elsewhere Paul gives reasons to believe that he saw this rebellion as something already at work during his lifetime. "Rebellion" translates ajpostasiva ( apostasia ), sometimes rendered "apostasy"; in the LXX this word and its cognates are especially used to refer to sinful departure from the worship of God. Especially in light of v. 11, this is clearly its sense here. In intertestamental Jewish apocalyptic literature, this word group was used sometimes to refer to a great period of religious unfaithfulness just before the age to come ( Jub. 23:14-23; 4 Ezra 5:1-13; 2 Apoc. Bar. 70:1-10; 1 Enoch 5:4; 91:3-10; 93:9; 1QpHab 2:1), but in some cases it clearly referred to the present departure of members of a Jewish sect (1QS 7:18-22).

Grammatically the sentence allows this rebellion to be an event in either the future or the present for Paul: the verb e[lqh/ ( elthe- ) is in the subjunctive mood, which has no time value, and the rest of the clause requires only that this event occur before the day of the Lord. Clearly elsewhere Paul indicates that such rebellion is already a reality (1 Tim 4:1; 2 Tim 3:1). But what is most significant for understanding this word as Paul intended it is the concern which he expresses elsewhere for the rebellion against God of those Jews who have rejected the gospel (1 Thess 2:14-16; Rom 9-11). This point is difficult to appreciate for modern Christians who take for granted the division between Christians and non-Christian Jews, but for Paul and his contemporaries this was a crucial problem. For early Christians who proclaimed that through Jesus they had received the fulfillment of God's promises to Israel, the unbelief of so many in Israel demanded an explanation. Part of that explanation is probably implied here: Jewish refusal of the gospel is a manifestation of the expected end-time rebellion. So here Paul uses "rebellion" as it is used in the Old Testament, to refer to the falling away of those who are ostensibly God's people. If the Thessalonians had undergone persecution prompted by Jewish opponents of the gospel (Acts 17:5-9), Paul's meaning would be entirely clear and relevant to them.

and the man of lawlessness is revealed, the man doomed to destruction.

The revelation of the man of lawlessness is similarly regarded by most interpreters as a future event, specifically as the appearance at the end of this age of an archenemy of the Lord, one who is presently restrained from appearing by some being or force. Certainly some Jewish groups of this period expected such a figure to appear in the future, though some of the intertestamental literature which has been interpreted as referring to such a figure may in fact have been intended to refer to some specific opponent of God's people at the time of writing. The question here, though, is whether Paul uses "is revealed" to refer to the appearance of this figure in history or to something else.

While the traditional meaning is not impossible, Paul elsewhere uses this verb, ajpokaluvptw ( apokalypto -) and its cognate noun ajpokavluyi" ( apokalypsis ) to indicate not that something formerly inactive becomes active but that something formerly hidden to the world but nevertheless real becomes visible to all. Hence in 1:7 the revelation of Christ is the making visible to all of his supreme authority as judge, authority which has been his since his resurrection but has not been perceived by any but his followers. Likewise, as Bruce notes, in Rom 8:19 the revealing of the sons of God is the final disclosure that the Christians are indeed God's sons, the unveiling of the identity which has always been theirs but has been hidden to unbelievers. If the word has similar impact here, then Paul refers not to a point when the man of lawlessness becomes fully active in history but the point when he is revealed for who he is. This interpretation is corroborated when we observe that the rest of the text stresses not the future activity of this figure but his present activity. Hence, Paul's point is to say that the readers can be sure that the day of the Lord has not yet come because God's purpose will not be complete until this man of lawlessness, already at work in the world, is revealed for who he is, the archenemy of God and deceiver of humanity.

Exactly who is this "man of lawlessness"? He is generally assumed to be a figure of history, what might be termed a political figure, who will bring to a climax all human rebellion against God. Beyond that general identification, interpreters have found no unity whatever in understanding this expression. Noting especially stress on the present activity of this lawless one, some have understood the writer to be referring to the Roman government or emperor. Some therefore see this prophecy as a failed one, since Rome has fallen and the expected "day" has not come. Others have attempted to reclaim this line of interpretation, offering that the rebellion and the revelation of the man of lawlessness refers to the destruction of Jerusalem, which Paul merely presented as a necessary preliminary to the Lord's return, not necessarily as an event which point to Christ's return immediately afterward. Luther identified the man of lawlessness with the pope, a conclusion clearly based on his own polemical needs and now almost universally abandoned. The predominant view remains that this "man" is an uncertain figure of the future, whose appearance is the immediate harbinger of the Lord's return.

As already indicated, this traditional interpretation runs afoul of the stress in the text on the present activity of this evil one. Moreover, the fact that his evil activity is expressed as comprehensively as it is in the text that follows and the focus elsewhere in the New Testament on Christ's final destruction of Satan and his minions suggest that the "man of lawlessness" is here a way of referring to Satan as the one who stands behind every act of rebellion against God's work. If, as noted above, "revealed" has its expected sense here, then Paul's point would be that Christ's work, to be completed on his "day," is not finished until Satan, the Evil One, is revealed to all as the one who stands behind all human rejection of God's will.

"Man of lawlessness" is an apt description of such a figure. For Paul God's law was, among other things, that which defined God's people as those who genuinely belong to him. Lawlessness can therefore be used as a comprehensive description for the one who opposes all of God's work for his people and inspires rebellion against him (cf. Rom 6:19; 2 Cor 6:14; Titus 2:14; 1 John 3:4). "Man" translates a[nqrwpo" ( anthro-pos ), which normally refers to a human being. However, the word was commonly used with a weakened sense, almost as an indefinite pronoun, when the emphasis was not on the word "man" but on the words which qualify it. That would be the case here, where the emphasis lies on "lawlessness" as the characteristic of this figure (cf. Rev 13:18). This is confirmed by the next expression: the second occurrence of "man" in the NIV translates uJiov" ( huios ), literally "son," which is used in a similar indefinite fashion to put the emphasis on the descriptive noun "destruction" (cf. Matt 8:12; 13:38; Luke 16:8; 20:34; John 17:12; Acts 3:25; Eph 2:2; 5:6; Col 3:6). That the terms do not necessarily stress humanity in this context is indicated later in the text, where Paul will refer more indefinitely to "the mystery of lawlessness" (v. 7) and "the lawless one" (v. 8; cf. Matt 6:13).

As the NIV footnote indicates, many Greek manuscripts read "man of sin" instead of "man of lawlessness," substituting aJmartiva ( hamartia , "sin") for ajnomiva ( anomia , "lawlessness"). This variant is widely attested, but since "lawlessness" occurs twice later in this passage, it appears to be the more likely original reading. A later copyist may have substituted "sin" since it is a more common word in Paul's letters.

"The one doomed to destruction," as indicated above, is literally "the son of destruction." The same term is used of Judas Iscariot in John 17:12. Like the first expression, this one suggests the activity of this opponent, but it points also to his destiny. "Destruction" is ajpwvleia ( apo-leia ), signifying complete loss or ruin, often used of the final destruction of judgment. Paul will later speak generally of those who "perish" (v. 10), a cognate of this word. The implication as the section develops is that the one here described brings destruction on those whom he deceives as all who follow him will share in the destruction which will finally be his (v. 8). The combination of terms at the beginning of the section thus serves not only to identify the subject of Paul's discussion but also to warn against following him and sharing his fate.

2. A Description of the Man of Lawlessness (2:4)

⁴ He will oppose and will exalt himself over everything that is called God or is worshiped, so that he sets himself up in God's temple, proclaiming himself to be God.

2:4 He will oppose and will exalt himself over everything that is called God or is worshiped,

Assuming a future point of reference to the entire context, the NIV inserts "will" twice in this text. On this reading the activity of the man of lawlessness lies in the future from Paul's perspective. Literally, however, Paul's words have no explicit reference to the future. "Will oppose" and "will exalt" represent two Greek present participles which have no particular time value but stress that the action named is continuing. Literally this part of the text could be translated, "the one opposing and exalting himself over everything that is called 'God' or an object of worship." The NRSV captures the literal sense clearly: "He opposes and exalts himself above every so-called god or object of worship." At this point, therefore, it is at least uncertain whether the man of lawlessness is a present or future figure. The language later in this section will resolve this question.

The description given here is one of comprehensive opposition to God and utter arrogance and presumptuousness. Paul is no doubt echoing earlier biblical expressions of great opponents of God, like Isaiah's prophetic description of Babylon (Isa 14:12-15), Ezekiel's of Tyre (Ezek 28:2, 11-19) or Daniel's of Antiochus IV Epiphanes (Dan 8:11, 23-26; 9:26-27; 11:31, 36; 12:11; cf. 1 Macc 1:54). These figures have several features in common: they oppress the people of God, assume the supreme place of God and demand worship, and finally meet a decisive judgment which puts an end to their presumption.

For each prophet these descriptions have a significance wider than their immediate reference to specific historical figures. Babylon in Isaiah stands at the head of a catalogue of nations, all of which will be judged by the universal God for their rebellion against him (Isa 13-26). It is, in effect, the archetype of all sinfulness in this section of Isaiah. Likewise, in Daniel the Abomination of Desolation is the most horrid of the opponents of Daniel's visions, but all such opponents and their human kingdoms will be destroyed with the coming of God's kingdom (Dan 7:13-14, 23-28; 9:27; 11:31; 12:11). In Ezekiel Tyre is pictured as the great opponent in Eden, the serpent (Ezek 28:12-17).

It can be argued with some cogency, then, that these prophets saw the particular manifestations of evil to which they were referring as part of a larger pattern of human sinfulness which stands under the comprehensive judgment of God. This pattern continues in later Jewish literature: in Sib. Or. 5:33, for example, Nero is described as declaring himself as God's equal, though he proves not to be.

These prophetic descriptions of supreme pride and sinfulness suggest intriguing comparisons to the description of the first sin of Genesis 3 (cf. Ezek 28:12-17). There the temptation is to become "like God" (Gen 3:5) through a deliberate act of rebellion against God. Likewise, the sin of Babel in Genesis 11, motivated by the desire "to make a name for ourselves," has as its objective to be able, like God, to do whatever the people of Babel desire (Gen 11:4, 6). Against this background it is not surprising that Paul would use similar language to describe the one who stands behind every act of sinfulness as supremely arrogant and presumptuous, to the point of usurping the very place of God himself. The idea that Paul refers not to a specific person who will appear in history to manifest these evil qualities but to the archenemy of God who provokes all such manifestations is consistent with the what follows this initial description. It is also consistent with his usage elsewhere, as he focuses the struggle between the people of God and God's enemies as the final spiritual battle between the people of God and Satan (Rom 16:20; 2 Cor 2:11; 11:13-15; Eph 2:1-10; 6:10-17; 1 Thess 3:5). If the end of the age has truly begun with the cross, it should be no surprise that for Paul the end-time struggle with evil should already be actualized.

The specifics of Paul's description here are consistent with this interpretation. "Oppose" translates ajntivkeimai ( antikeimai ), which is used elsewhere for opposition to Jesus, his disciples or the gospel (Luke 13:17; 21:51; 1 Cor 16:9; Phil 1:28). In 1 Tim 5:14 Paul uses the same expression found in this text to refer to the devil, and similar examples can be found in the Apostolic Fathers ( 1 Clem. 51:1; Mart. Pol. 17:1). "Exalt" is uJperaivrw ( huperairo -), used to refer to an inappropriate or exaggerated exaltation of the self (cf. 2 Cor 11:7). The first object of this opposition and exaltation is "everything that is called God." Such a comprehensive description is necessary to point out that Paul speaks not merely of paganism, which might make claims for deities other than the God of Israel, but to that which falsely claims superiority to anything regarded as deity. Paul may have in mind a perspective like the one found in Deut 32:16-17: the pagan gods are but representatives of demons. The one who ultimately claims priority over all such "gods" is the prince of demons. That point is reiterated with "object of worship," sevbasma ( sebasma ), which broadens the point to include anything that might receive human reverence and so be a rival to the lawless one.

so that he sets himself up in God's temple, proclaiming himself to be God.

The arrogation of divine status which Paul describes is pictured in concrete terms here. "Temple" here is naov" ( naos ), which normally is used to refer specifically to the central "house" of the temple, the Holy Place and Most Holy Place, representative of the dwelling of God. The image of an opponent of God who desecrates his temple has a long history in Jewish history and literature. The Philistines (1 Sam 4:10-11) and the Egyptians (1 Kgs 14:25-26) both put the tabernacle or temple to the sack, but it is the Babylonians who bring destruction to Solomon's temple and so stand as the archetypical temple violators.

Even closer to the image here, though, was the action of Antiochus IV Epiphanes, the Seleucid king who in 167 B.C. erected a statue of Zeus in the Jerusalem temple. Also similar were the actions of the Roman general Pompey, who when he captured Jerusalem in 63 B.C. entered into the Most Holy Place, and Caligula, who in A.D. 41 unsuccessfully planned to have his own image erected in the temple. After Paul wrote, of course, the temple was again destroyed by the Romans in A.D. 70.

While all of these events closely parallel Paul's description, none literally matches it: the Babylonians' destruction of the temple and Pompey's entry into it are not the same as receiving worship in the temple, Antiochus did not demand worship of himself (though Daniel nearly describes him so [Dan 11:36], and the title "Epiphanes" did imply a divine claim) but of a pagan god and erected the image at the altar rather than in the temple building (1 Macc 1:54), and Caligula's image was never actually put in place. So if Paul's expression is intended to remind the reader of these events, as it appears to be, he would seem not to be uttering a prophecy which he expects to be fulfilled with absolute literalness but supplying a vivid, evocative image for the broader kind of hubris which he describes throughout this verse. That understanding is confirmed by the phrase which follows, "proclaiming himself to be God," which serves to specify the meaning of the previous expression. All in all the text drives home the emphatic point that the man of lawlessness seizes for himself divine authority which is in no way his, thereby assuring his utter defeat.

3. Reminder of Oral Instruction on the Subject (2:5)

⁵ Don't you remember that when I was with you I used to tell you these things?

Paul's instruction in this passage is no innovation for the readers but is based on the oral teaching which they had first received while he was establishing the Thessalonian church (cf. 1 Thess 2:13; 3:4; 4:1). His language here indicates that the readers should know this point very well: ouj ( ou , "don't") indicates that the question anticipates a positive answer. This teaching had been a point of continued instruction: "used to tell" translates the imperfect-tense verb e[legon ( elegon ) which implies a continuing action.

If this teaching was a matter of repeated instruction for the Thessalonians, we might expect to see it reflected elsewhere in these letters. Paul may well have in mind the kind of instruction found in 1 Thess 3:4, that persecution is inevitable for believers, 1 Thess 1:10 and 2:16, that God's wrath is coming on unbelievers, and 2 Thess 1:6-10, that God will bring a final judgment on all who oppose him and his people. The difference in this passage as opposed to those is that Paul expresses these ideas with apocalyptic language, probably because the false report (v. 2) had employed similar images for different ends.

4. The One Who Restrains/Prevails (2:6-10)

⁶ And now you know what is holding him back, so that he may be revealed at the proper time. ⁷ For the secret power of lawlessness is already at work; but the one who now holds it back will continue to do so till he is taken out of the way. ⁸ And then the lawless one will be revealed, whom the Lord Jesus will overthrow with the breath of his mouth and destroy by the splendor of his coming. ⁹ The coming of the lawless one will be in accordance with the work of Satan displayed in all kinds of counterfeit miracles, signs and wonders, ¹⁰ and in every sort of evil that deceives those who are perishing. They perish because they refused to love the truth and so be saved.

2:6 And now you know what is holding him back, so that he may be revealed at the proper time.

The concept that the "man of lawlessness" is a figure who has yet to appear in history largely hinges on the interpretation of this verse and v. 7. "What is holding him back" translates a Greek substantive participle, toΙ katevcon ( to katechon ), from the verb katevcw ( katecho- ). There is considerable reason, however, to question the accuracy of the translation "holding . . . back" in this context. While katevcw often does mean to restrain or hold back, it has this meaning only when it occurs with an object. Though an object has been supplied for this verb in the NIV and most English versions, there is no object in either occurrence of the verb in the Greek text of vv. 6-7. It is therefore more likely that it carries the intransitive sense, normal when it has no object, of "prevail." In this case, the text can be translated, "And you know what prevails now." If this is Paul's sense here, this expression probably does not refer to one opposed to the man of lawlessness but serves as another way of referring to the man of lawlessness or his activity. He is, indeed, the one who now prevails, who works pervasively through the world system in opposition to God's purposes (cf. Eph 2:2).

Paul says that the readers already know the identity of this restraining/prevailing one, presumably from the instruction which they have already received (v. 5). Traditionally it has been assumed that while he was in Thessalonica Paul had identified orally for the Thessalonians the identity of the one who restrains the man of lawlessness, information now lost to us. But if the interpretation set forth here is correct, Paul is merely reminding the readers, as he has elsewhere, of the application of the core of the gospel which they have already received, namely, that evil and the Evil One will appear to prevail in this age until Christ returns.

"Now" clearly contrasts with "at the proper time," literally "at his/its own time." But is it the prevailing or the Thessalonians' knowing that Paul stresses is "now"? Though the effect is largely the same, the Greek word order suggests that "now" is connected to "the one who prevails," providing a contrast to his future revelation and defeat. However, the text also contrasts the Christians' present knowledge of the prevailing one with the future revelation to all of his true identity, so the difference is slight at best.

In v. 6 Paul's expression for the restraining/prevailing one is neuter, suggesting an abstraction or principle (" what is holding him back"; better, "what is prevailing"), whereas in v. 7 the expression is masculine, oJ katevcwn ( ho katecho-n ), indicating a person ("the one who now holds him back"; better, " the one who now prevails"). This difference is relatively inconsequential, however, since a similar alternation between masculine and neuter expression also occurs with "lawless one" (vv. 3-4, 8, masculine; v. 7, "secret power of lawlessness," neuter). If Paul is indeed discussing the pervasive power of evil in the world which ultimately derives from Satan himself, such an alternation between masculine and neuter is quite consistent with his point. The masculine pronoun "him" in the latter part of the verse (aujtovn , auton ) can therefore easily have the same referent as "what prevails" in the first part of the verse, its gender assigned by its larger sense.

The second part of the verse makes a statement of contrast: the readers know the one who restrains/prevails "so that he may be revealed at the proper time." Again, if "revealed" has the sense it carries elsewhere for Paul (cf. v. 3 and comments above), this revelation signifies not the beginning of the activity of the man of lawlessness but the final disclosure that all opposition to God and his people has been inspired by the great Evil One. In this case "his time" is not the time when he will be more powerful, since he prevails "now"; rather, it refers to the time of his destruction, the emphasis in vv. 7-8. Emphasizing that even the present dominance of the man of lawlessness is under the supervision of God's final authority, Paul expresses the final revelation and destruction of the man of lawlessness as the purpose of his present activity. Though the dominance of evil might make it appear that God has lost control, his purpose will be fully and finally realized in the future. Thus, Paul can even present the final revelation of this opponent as the purpose of his present dominance: "so that" translates a Greek articular infinitive which almost certainly expresses the purpose of the "prevailing," not of what the Thessalonians "know."

2:7 For the secret power of lawlessness is already at work;

Paul's language is compressed and difficult, but the point emerges clearly when this verse is connected to the verses that precede and follow. "Secret power of lawlessness" translates toΙ musthvrion . . . th'" ajnomiva" ( to myste-rion . . . te-s anomias ), literally "the mystery of lawlessness." Even those who assume that in this text Paul predicts the future appearance in history of an "antichrist" note that he asserts the present activity of the principle of lawlessness here. But the reason that Paul refers to this activity as a "mystery" is clearer when we understand that the future revelation of the man of lawlessness points not to his becoming more active but his being revealed for what he is. In this case, the present lawlessness activity of the lawless one is a "mystery" precisely because the world does not yet recognize it for what it is, as they also fail to recognize the "mystery" of God's purpose in history declared in the gospel (1 Cor 2:1, 7; 4:1; 15:51; Eph 1:9; 3:3-4, 9; 5:32; 6:19; Col 1:26-27; 2:2; 4:3; 1 Tim 3:9, 16), though it is clearly known by the Christians (v. 6). The warning about the deceptive power of evil in vv. 9-12 is entirely consistent with this understanding: the world, under the deceptive power of Satan, does not yet realize the nature of "the god of this age" (2 Cor 4:4).

The verb translated "is . . . at work," ejnergei'tai ( energeitai ) is grammatically ambiguous. It could either be in the middle voice, in which case it merely indicates that lawlessness is at work, or in the passive voice, in which it would mean "has been put at work" and implies that someone has taken that action. It appears that Paul probably uses this verb with impersonal subjects like "mystery" with the simpler middle sense. However, if Paul does in fact use the verb as a passive here, he could be implying either that the mystery is put in place by Satan (v. 9) or more broadly through the providence and judgment of God (vv. 11-12).

but the one who now holds it back will continue to do so till he is taken out of the way.

As in v. 6, "the one who now holds it back" is better rendered as "the one who now prevails." This phrase constitutes the subject of the clause, but Paul has given no predicate. The NIV supplies "will continue to do so," which probably reflects Paul's general implication. The NIV also translates Paul's movnon ( monon ) as the conjunction "but"; however, this conjunctive use of the word is not clearly attested in Paul's letters elsewhere. The usual meaning for movnon is "only," which fits the text well here, yielding the result, "The one who prevails now [will continue to do so] only until he is taken out of the way." However, it is also possible that the Greek conjunction e{w" ( heo-s , "till") is out of its usual position, in which case the sentence could be taken with good sense as, "The mystery of lawlessness is already at work only until the one who prevails is taken out of the way." In this case, what Paul supplies here is the additional assurance that the dominance of the man of lawlessness, already experienced by the readers, will last not forever but only until he is removed by the Lord at his coming, as the next verse will further explain. If the traditional interpretation is followed and "the one who holds it back" is the opponent of the man of lawlessness, then the text is ambiguous as to whether it is the restrainer or the man of lawlessness who is taken away. If the view put forward here is correct, no such ambiguity arises because the two are identical.

2:8 And then the lawless one will be revealed, whom the Lord Jesus will overthrow with the breath of his mouth and destroy by the splendor of his coming.

The close connection between the revelation of the man of lawlessness and his final judgment, implied in the earlier discussion, is explicit here. It must be carefully noted that if this "revelation" signifies intensified activity, nothing at all in this text expresses it. If Paul is referring to a future appearance of an antichrist and a period of greater evil, that period of evil must be assumed between the revelation and the Lord's coming mentioned here.

Paul has shifted from the neuter back to the masculine for the lawless one, focusing on the unveiling of the evil personality who is ultimately responsible for the work of lawlessness in this age. "Then" (tovte , tote ) connects this unveiling with the removal of the prevailing one in the previous verse; "whom" (o{n , hon ) connects it to his destruction. The resulting sequence signifies the comprehensive elimination of every aspect of his activity: (a) he will no longer be present to prevail in the world; (b) he will be revealed to all for who he is; (c) he will be utterly ruined for any further activity.

The description of Jesus' decisive activity against the lawless one emphasizes his supreme power in contrast to the opponent's pretensions (v. 4). As the great enemy of Dan 8:23-25 could not be defeated by any human hand, this greatest enemy will be defeated instantly by the Lord himself. Jesus is first of all "Lord," implying his divine authority (cf. 1 Thess 1:1 and comments above). His power is so superior that he is able to bring immediate and effortless destruction on his opponent "by the breath of his mouth." Paul has probably borrowed this expression from the description of the coming king in Isa 11:4; the apocryphal 2 Esdr 13:9-11, 38 uses a similar image to indicate the messiah's total triumph over his enemies.

Likewise, the "splendor of his coming" will be such that all who have opposed him will be thoroughly overwhelmed. This phrase combines two significant words. "Splendor" translates ejpifavneia ( epiphaneia ), often used as a technical term for the visible manifestation of a deity, especially a sudden appearance in a hostile situation. In the New Testament it is used only of the appearance of Christ, usually of his return (1 Tim 6:14; 2 Tim 4:1, 8; Titus 2:13), though once of his first appearance on earth (2 Tim 1:10). Here it especially implies that the one who is truly divine but is hidden in this age will by his appearance utterly shatter all the pretensions of his opponent. This event is identified as his "coming," or parousiva ( parousia ), used elsewhere in 1-2 Thessalonians for Christ's return as the visitation of a great dignitary (1 Thess 2:19; 3:13; 4:15; 5:23; 2 Thess 2:1; see comments above). This expression is apt for the point that Paul makes here, but it also supplies the basis for further comparison with the lawless one in the verses that follow.

2:9 The coming of the lawless one will be in accordance with the work of Satan displayed in all kinds of counterfeit miracles, signs and wonders,

In this verse the NIV translators have made their most significant interpretive move, rendering a present, indicative verb, ejstin ( estin ), as a future, "will be." While such futuristic uses of the present tense are possible, there is little to support such a translation here except for the assumption that the entire text discusses the future appearance of the man of lawlessness. Elsewhere Paul indicates that he regards the Satanic activity described here as already at work in the world (2 Cor 11:14; 1 Tim 3:1-9; cf. Rom 1:18-32; 1 Cor 2:8), so in light of the unequivocal statement of v. 7, this present-tense verb should be taken in its ordinary sense, as it is rendered in the NRSV: "The coming of the lawless one is apparent in the working of Satan . . . ."

The idea of false miracles has a long history in Scripture. Pharaoh's priests were able to duplicate in part the works of Moses (Exod 7:11-12, 22; 8:7, 18; 9:11) and later the Pentateuch warned of false prophets who could deceive with similar signs and induce Israel to worship false gods (Deut 13:1-3). In the Olivet Discourse Jesus picks up the pentateuchal language and applies it to the false prophets who will be characteristic of the age in which his disciples await his return (Matt 24:11, 24; Mark 13:22). These lure the people of God to follow a false messiah, just as the false prophets of old encouraged the worship of false gods. The same concept is found in Rev 13:13-14, where the beast from the earth performs false miracles. As a corollary, the Gospels indicate that Jesus is accused of performing his own miracles by demonic power (Matt 12:24; Mark 3:22; Luke 11:15). Paul is probably picking up on the language of the Olivet Discourse but is doubtlessly aware of the larger biblical context of Jesus' statement also. For Paul such deceptive activity is entirely in accord with the character of Satan, who "masquerades as an angel of light" (2 Cor 11:14) and "has blinded the minds of unbelievers, so that they cannot see the light of the gospel and the glory of Christ" (2 Cor 4:4). Hence, these signs represent his "work" or activity in the world, the visible manifestation of one who remains invisible until he is revealed at the Lord's return.

The terms used here for these false miracles are commonly found in combination in the New Testament referring to the miracles of Jesus or the apostles (John 4:48; Acts 2:22, 43; 4:30; 5:12; 6:8; 14:3; 15:12; Rom 15:19; 2 Cor 12:12; Heb 2:4; cf. Acts 7:36). Here these are literally "power and signs and wonders of a lie," the last term identifying them unequivocally as false because of their power to entice people away from the truth of Jesus. Hence, Paul makes a play on words at the beginning of the verse, speaking of the "coming" of the lawless one, his parousiva ( parousia ), a counterfeit of the coming of Jesus which the readers anticipate (v. 8). Though "coming" is certainly an adequate translation of this expression in this context, the English reader must not misunderstand it as having a future orientation. As noted above, the verb in this verse stresses the present reality of this activity, and parousia indicates less a future coming than the visitation of a dignitary or his presence with a people. Thus, the expression here suggests that the Christians must endure this false visitation, recognizing it for the lie that it is, until the genuine visitation reveals its genuine nature.

It may be argued that the phrase "in accordance with the work of Satan" indicates that Satan is distinct from the man of lawlessness. This may not be the case, however, if Paul's point is that the Christians can already perceive this work of lawlessness, even supported by false signs, to be the work of Satan himself, since they have been taught to expect such counterfeiting by him. Throughout the text "man of lawlessness" then indicates the clandestine activity of Satan in this age, whereas the name "Satan" here reveals the full identity of the one who is secretly responsible for that work.

2:10 and in every sort of evil that deceives those who are perishing.

The description of the current activity of the man of lawlessness continues here, now with an emphasis on its consequences and the responsibility of those who follow it. "Every sort of evil that deceives" is literally "all deceit of unrighteousness," pointing comprehensively to every aspect of evil which would seduce people away from salvation and toward destruction. By this expression Paul indicates that this seductive influence is to be found in more than what could narrowly be described as miracles. Those who fall prey to this deceit are already under judgment for their choice; hence, Paul uses a present participle, ajpollumevnoi" ( apollumenois , "those who are perishing") to stress that their ruin is a continuing reality (cf. 1 Cor 1:18; 2 Cor 2:15; 4:3).

They perish because they refused to love the truth and so be saved.

Though these have fallen prey to the deception of the Evil One, they are not helpless victims. Their fate is a result of their willful decision to reject the message of salvation. Literally Paul's statement is "they did not receive the love of the truth so that they would be saved." By naming "the love of the truth" as the object of their refusal, he stresses that in rejecting the gospel, the heart of God's truth, these have repudiated any commitment to truth of any kind, devoting themselves instead to the deception of the Evil One. They have in effect "exchanged the truth of God for a lie" (Rom 1:25). Having rejected salvation, they are therefore already perishing. Paul's language here is sharply dualistic, drawing a strict division of humanity into two camps, the saved and the perishing. As far as this text is concerned, there is no middle ground of uncertainty.

5. God's Consequent Actions (2:11-12)

¹¹ For this reason God sends them a powerful delusion so that they will believe the lie ¹² and so that all will be condemned who have not believed the truth but have delighted in wickedness.

2:11 For this reason God sends them a powerful delusion so that they will believe the lie

In the previous verse Paul has noted that the deceptive activity of Satan in no way compromises human responsibility. Here he indicates that Satan's activity in no way compromises God's sovereignty. This same interplay between the deceit of the Evil One, human refusal of God's will, and God's control of the universe is also seen in such episodes as the hardening of Pharaoh's heart, which is both Pharaoh's own action (Exod 8:15, 32; 9:34; cf. 1 Sam 6:6) and the action of God (Exod 4:21; 7:3; 9:12; 10:1, 20, 27; 11:10; 14:4, 8); the evil spirit which troubles Saul, sent by God as a judgment on Saul's stubborn disobedience (1 Sam 16:14; 18:10; 19:9; cf. 15:11, 16:1); and, most directly, in Paul's statement that in response to human rejection of knowledge of God, God "gave over" humanity to idolatry and degeneracy (Rom 1:18-32).

In all these cases God's rule over the world is preserved along with human responsibility. In each case God sends that which leads to hardening, deception and sin, but in each case he sends it only in response to the rejection of his message which the human subject has already chosen. In effect God gives to those who reject him a greater measure of that which they have chosen for themselves, demonstrating to those with the will to see the consequences of the choice which was made. Here the concept is much the same. Satan's deceptive activity should not be seen as a failure of God's rule over the world. Rather, God's larger purpose of judgment and redemption, in which his free creatures experience the full consequences of their choices, is achieved as the full force of rejecting God's truth is felt in Satan's deceptive power. In this sense, even though the adversary appears to prevail now, he is still subject to the rule of God (cf. Job 1:6-12; 2:1-6), ironically bringing to bear the consequences of judgment on sinful humanity in this age even as he will himself be fully judged in the age to come.

The language of these verses closely connects them to the statement about Satan's deception in vv. 9-10. "For this reason" translates diaΙ tou'to ( dia touto ), used also by Paul in the similar discussion in Rom 1:26, indicating that the acceptance of Satan's deception is the reason God acts as he does here. "Powerful delusion" is literally "a working of error"; ejnevrgeia ( energeia , "working") is the same term used for the "work" of Satan in v. 9 and is the cognate of the verb rendered "is . . . at work" in v. 7. Likewise, "lie" (yeu'do" , pseudos ) is repeated from v. 9, where the NIV translates the same Greek word as "counterfeit." "So that they will believe the lie" is also syntactically parallel to "and so be saved" in v. 10 (both are articular infinitives introduced by eij" ( eis) , indicating purpose), sharply contrasting the consequences of acceptance or rejection of the truth.

2:12 and so that all will be condemned who have not believed the truth but have delighted in wickedness.

Rejection of the truth is again underlined in v. 12, where Paul reiterates the point of v. 10 that these are judged for their refusal to believe the truth. In place of believing truth these have "delighted in wickedness," literally "approved of unrighteousness." This last expression, ajdikiva ( adikia , "wickedness, unrighteousness") probably stands as a reminder of the lawlessness (ajnomiva , anomia ) of the one who inspires it (v. 7). Paul's aim throughout is to make the readers see that this work of Satan is ultimately used by God in his providence to achieve his own purpose of judgment in the world. We should certainly understand that it is not God but Satan who deceives, but that he does so by the permission of God, who thereby accomplishes his objective to bring to bear on sinners the full consequences of their rejection of his salvation.

The effect of these last four verses on the readers is to do more than correct their understanding of the Lord's coming. By attributing unbelief to the deceptive work of Satan and its consequences to God's judgment, Paul has provided a partial answer to a question which must have troubled the small, persecuted Thessalonian church, namely, why did the truth of the gospel not persuade everyone who heard it? Likewise, this instruction would reinforce their own loyalty to the gospel, since it stated in unequivocal terms the nature of the division between believers and unbelievers.

The complexity of the interpretive issues surrounding vv. 1-12 are such as to require a concluding summary of the interpretation argued above. In short: Paul regards the promised end-time to be already present because of the work of Christ. The prevalence of evil, variously manifested, is ultimately the work of Satan. That fact is already recognized by the Christians, but the world is unaware of it, having fallen prey to Satan's deceptive powers. But when Christ returns, he will reveal Satan and his activity for what it truly is, ending his rule over this age and consigning him to eternal punishment. Therefore, as long as evil still prevails in the world, the Christians can know that God's work is not yet complete. They can therefore be confident in the faithfulness and power of God, remaining true to the gospel despite the difficulties they face and looking forward to their vindication at the final judgment.

IV. RENEWED THANKSGIVING, ENCOURAGEMENT AND PRAYER (2:13-17)

As in 1 Thess 2:13, Paul renews the letter's initial thanksgiving (cf. 1:3). Here the repetition of the thanksgiving allows Paul to remind the readers again of their standing with God as those who have responded in faith to the gospel. This reminder has special impact because of the preceding discussion. The readers need to remember this status as they continue to resist the deceptive power of evil (vv. 9-12). Furthermore, after the emphasis in the preceding section on the work of God which still lies in the future, this section will remind the readers again of what they have already received. If the problem of 2:2 stemmed from seeing all of the promises of God as already fulfilled, the Thessalonians should not conclude from Paul's counter-argument that all of the fulfillment still lies in the future. Remembering what they have already received holds the key for steadfastness in awaiting the fulfillment yet to come.

Such steadfastness is exactly what Paul seeks to stimulate in this section, and so he ends it, as in 1 Thess 3:11-13, with a prayer for the readers' future, focusing on God's work in enabling the readers to remain firm against the pressures of this age. This in turn becomes the transition point for the final section of the letter in ch. 3.

A. THANKSGIVING FOR THE SALVATION OF THE THESSALONIANS (2:13-14)

¹³ But we ought always to thank God for you, brothers loved by the Lord, because from the beginning God chose you ^a to be saved through the sanctifying work of the Spirit and through belief in the truth. ¹⁴ He called you to this through our gospel, that you might share in the glory of our Lord Jesus Christ.

^a 13 Some manuscripts because God chose you as his firstfruits

2:13 But we ought always to thank God for you, brothers loved by the Lord,

Paul begins this section with the emphatic personal pronoun hJmei'" ( he-meis ), perhaps to shift the focus of attention after the long discussion of the lawless one (cf. 1 Thess 2:17 and comments above). As in 1:3 (see comments above), Paul expresses the thanksgiving indirectly as that which he "ought to do." Again the term expresses obligation or necessity. That obligation is based on the readers' standing with God. Paul points to this status first with "brothers," his habitual form of address in both letters (1 Thess 1:4; 2:1, 9, 14, 17; 3:7; 4:1, 10, 13; 5:1, 4, 12, 14, 25; 2 Thess 1:3; 2:1, 15; 3:1, 6, 13), which suggests their shared membership in God's family. The point is reinforced by "beloved by the Lord," which, like the similar phrase in 1 Thess 1:4 (see comments above) stresses that the readers are the unworthy objects of divine favor. There the reference is to the love of God the Father; here "Lord" refers to Jesus, again assuming his divine status equal to the Father. Paul may focus particularly on Jesus' love here because of the earlier focus on Jesus' return or because of the assurance it gives as he returns for judgment.

because from the beginning God chose you

Paul's explicit reason for the thanksgiving is God's choosing of the readers to be his people, again echoing 1 Thess 1:4. As in that passage, this combination of expressions stresses that through their response to the gospel the readers have been incorporated into the people of God, what might be termed the Israel of fulfillment. Such an identity would be too precious to lose through a lack of diligence in resisting the evil power that prevails in this age.

A rather difficult textual problem occurs in this verse, as indicated in the NIV's footnote. The expression ajp ' ajrch'" ( ap' arche-s , "from the beginning") followed in the NIV, appears as ajparchvn ( aparche-n , "firstfruits") in several manuscripts. Either expression is coherent in the context, both have wide attestation in the manuscripts, and the difference between the two, since no spaces appeared between words in Greek uncial manuscripts, is only one letter.

There are, however, several reasons to conclude that "firstfruits" is Paul's original expression here: (1) ap' arche-s is not used elsewhere in Paul's letters, but proΙ /avpoΙ tw'n aijwvnwn ( pro/apo to-n aio-no-n , "from eternity") appears with a similar meaning in 1 Cor 2:7 and Col 1:26 and proΙ katabolh'" kovsmou ( pro katabole-s kosmou , "from the foundation of the world") does the same duty in Eph 1:4; (2) Paul uses ajrchv ( arche- ) to mean "power" everywhere but Phil 4:15; (3) Paul uses ajparchv six other times; (4) in two other texts copyists altered ajparchvn to ajp ' ajrch'" (Rom 16:5; Rev 14:4), even though the latter expression did not fit those contexts. On balance then, the reading in the NIV footnote is probably to be preferred. "Firstfruits" suggests the Old Testament offering of the first part of the harvest to the Lord, a pledge that the remainder of the harvest, though not yet received, would be dedicated to him as well (Deut 26:1-11). As a small group facing an enormous struggle for their faith, the Thessalonian Christians needed the reminder that as "firstfruits" they too were pledged to God as his possession and were the vanguard of a greater people of God to be harvested in the future (cf. 3:1).

to be saved through the sanctifying work of the Spirit and through belief in the truth.

The purpose of God's choosing of the readers is their salvation, the very thing refused by those under the deception of evil in v. 10. This salvation comes by two means. "Sanctifying work" or "sanctification" (aJgiasmov" , hagiasmos ; cf. 1 Thess 4:3 and comments above) indicates a making holy, the particular work of the Spirit both in identifying the Christian as one who belongs to God (Eph 1:13; 4:30; cf. 2 Cor 1:22) and in producing in the believer a life that imitates God's holiness (Gal 5:22-25; 1 Thess 4:7-8). It is possible that pneu'ma ( pneuma ) refers to the human spirit here, in which case it gives the object of sanctification: "through sanctifying the human spirit." But Paul's repeated statements elsewhere about the Spirit's work in sanctification suggest that the NIV's rendering is correct. "Belief in the truth" certainly contrasts with the false belief of vv. 10-12, again underlining that those who have believed the gospel are resisting the trend and pressure of this age. Maintaining such belief and growing in the sanctification that accompanies it are the obvious, fundamental responses of anyone who values his standing as one of God's saved people.

While it has been argued that the order of these two phrases, first the work of the Spirit and then faith, indicates that the work of the Spirit is the cause of that faith, nothing in this text indicates that connection explicitly. More likely is the connection which each idea makes to the concepts of the surrounding context than a cause-and-effect connection between them. And as Marshall notes, if the Spirit's work guarantees the result of faith, then the command of v. 15 to remain firm in the faith has little cogency. In fact, the statement that God chose his people "through" or "by" (ejn , en used instrumentally) their faith in the truth is more consistent with the concept of conditional election than the Calvinistic view.

2:14 He called you to this through our gospel, that you might share in the glory of our Lord Jesus Christ.

The new sentence here in the NIV is in fact a continuation of the previous sentence. "To this" refers loosely to the entire preceding discussion, including membership in God's people, salvation, the sanctifying work of the Spirit, and belief in the truth; a Greek neuter pronoun o{ ( ho ) refers not to any one word in the preceding clause but to the entire preceding idea. Here Paul stresses that God's choice of the readers is actualized through their response to the gospel (cf. 1 Thess 1:5 and comments above). As noted in the discussion of 1 Thess 1:4 above, Paul's larger concept is not that God first chooses unconditionally those who will be his and then causes them to believe in Jesus; rather, as Rom 8:29 implies, he chooses them conditionally, on the basis of their faith which he foreknows. It is probably significant here that Paul stresses that the call is issued through the gospel: one becomes a member of God's family through heeding the message of salvation (Rom 10:17; cf. Rom 10:10-11), not by a direct operation of God on the heart which then causes belief.

The purpose of this call is to obtain (peripoivhsi" , peripoie-sis , "share"; cf. 1 Thess 5:9) the Lord's own glory (cf. 1 Thess 2:12 and comments above; Rom 8:17, 29-30; 1 Cor 15:43; 2 Cor 3:18; Phil 3:21). In light of Paul's earlier discussion, this glory is primarily what the believers will share with him when they are gathered (v. 1) at his triumphant return (v. 8; cf. 1 Cor 15:43; Phil 3:21), though Paul also understands glory to be a present possession through God's call (Rom 8:30). Again, in light of what Christ's return will mean both for believers and opponents, the need to stand firm in the faith which brought them this salvation is entirely clear to the readers.

B. ENCOURAGEMENT TO REMAIN FAITHFUL TO THE TRADITIONS DELIVERED BY PAUL (2:15)

¹⁵ So then, brothers, stand firm and hold to the teachings ^a we passed on to you, whether by word of mouth or by letter.

^a Or traditions

2:15 So then, brothers, stand firm and hold to the teachings we passed on to you,

The implication of 2Thes vv. 13-14 is now made explicit; Paul uses two Greek particles a[ra ou ( ara oun , "so then") to stress that this command is a direct inference from the previous discussion. Paul uses two verbs to express this command, both in the Greek present tense to emphasize continuing action. The Thessalonians must first of all "stand," as Paul urged in 1 Thess 3:8 (Cf. 1 Cor 16:13), remaining firm in their faith so that the result of their faith, the fullness of salvation, will be theirs. In effect, they are told not to be affected as Paul had described in v. 2. This standing firm is specified with the second verb and its object. Holding a genuine faith means not holding to the gospel teaching which they have received (cf. 1 Cor 11:2). Paul uses paravdosi" ( paradosis ) here, which, as reflected in the NIV's footnote, commonly referred to traditions delivered by word of mouth (cf. 1 Thess 2:13; 4:1; 2 Thess 3:6). This term underscores that the Thessalonian church must remain true to the original gospel deposit, including what Paul has just clarified about the day of the Lord, not accepting any of the innovations or misunderstandings with which they have been confronted. This original deposit is theirs through Paul's own teaching. As Paul noted in the first letter, they can have confidence in this teaching both because of the way Paul brought it to them (1 Thess 2:1-12) and because of what it produced in their lives (1 Thess 1:4-10).

whether by word of mouth or by letter.

That teaching, first delivered orally, is now supplemented by the letters which they have received. Whether Paul is referring to 1 or 2 Thessalonians or both is a moot point, since his expression here implies any letter that he might write. Linking letters to oral teaching reflects Paul's perspective that his letters served as substitutes for his own presence and direct teaching activity with the church. Both now are to serve as the touchstones by which they will measure the content of their faith and evaluate other teaching which they will encounter. That Paul was conscious of the authority of his teaching is abundantly clear here. Though he does not seek to "canonize" his letters with this statement, the authority which he expresses here is the basis for the later formal recognition of his letters as Scripture (cf. 1 Thess 5:27 and comments above).

C. PRAYER FOR THE LORD'S ENCOURAGEMENT AND STRENGTH (2:16-17)

¹⁶ May our Lord Jesus Christ himself and God our Father, who loved us and by his grace gave us eternal encouragement and good hope, ¹⁷ encourage your hearts and strengthen you in every good deed and word.

Like the prayer of 1 Thess 3:11-13 (see comments above), this one is expressed as a wish. Paul begins with an emphatic reference to Christ: "himself" translates the Greek pronoun aujtov" ( autos ), which puts particular emphasis on the subject. Paul also mentions Christ before the Father, an unusual position for Paul which may reflect further emphasis, though Paul may have mentioned Christ first to avoid awkwardness with the long phrase describing God at the end of the verse. Having just referred twice to the Lord's glory ( vv. 8, 14), Paul now calls on this glorious one to bring his power to bear on the readers' lives. Likewise, God is the one "who loved us," as in v. 13, and who has acted "by grace," a concept clearly integral to the point in vv. 13-14. Through his gracious love he has already given "eternal encouragement," enabling them to face with assurance the persecutions of the present and the judgment of the future (2 Thess 1:5-10). Likewise they have "good hope," a phrase commonly in use in the first century to refer to life after death, enabling them to face the kind of difficulties described in vv. 3-12 with confidence.

Because he has already given "eternal encouragement," God can be counted on to encourage the readers in every situation. So just as before (1 Thess 3:11-13), Paul prays that God would give to the Thessalonians more of what he has already given them, especially under their pressurized circumstances. "Encourage" is coupled with "strengthen," the Greek verb sthrivzw ( ste-rizo- ), which indicates especially causing the object to be "more firm and unchanging in attitude or belief," again an appropriate prayer when the problems addressed in vv. 1-13 are in view. Paul sees this strengthening of attitude and mind to have a comprehensive effect on behavior, as he prays that it may take place both in "deed and word." The inclusion of this last term may suggest that the Thessalonians' own right proclamation of the gospel, threatened by the false teaching of v. 2, will be reinforced by God's encouragement.

-College Press New Testament Commentary: with the NIV

McGarvey: 2Th 2:15

So then, brethren, stand fast [in contrast to being shaken, as stated in verse 2], and hold the traditions which ye were taught, whether by word, or by epistle of ours . [God was doing his part in calling and in sanctifying, and so the Thessalonians are here exhorted to do their part in firmly adhering to the truth which they had believed. For if one would hold the gospel salvation he must hold the gospel truths. These truths are here called traditions; for, though inspired truths, they were as yet falling from the lips of living men, and were not yet reduced to writing, though we see by these two epistles of Paul that the New Testament record was in process of construction.]

Introduction / Outline

Robertson: 2 Thessalonians (Book Introduction)

Second Thessalonians

From Corinth a.d. 50 Or 51

By Way of Introduction

It is plain that First Thessalonians did not settle all the difficulties in Thessalonica. With some there was precisely the opposite result. There was some opposition to Paul’s authority and even defiance. So Paul repeats his " command" for discipline (2Th_3:6) as he had done when with them (2Th_3:10). He makes this Epistle a test of obedience (2Th_3:14) and finds it necessary to warn the Thessalonians against the zeal of some deceivers who even invent epistles in Paul’s name to carry their point in the church (2Th_2:1.), an early instance of pseudepigraphic " Pauline" epistles, but not for a " pious" purpose. Paul’s keen resentment against the practise should make us slow to accept the pseudepigraphic theory about other Pauline Epistles. He calls attention to his own signature at the close of each genuine letter. As a rule he dictated the epistle, but signed it with his own hand (2Th_3:17). Paul writes to calm excitement (Ellicott) and to make it plain that he had not said that the Second Coming was to be right away.

This Epistle is a bit sharper in tone than the First and also briefer. It has been suggested that there were two churches in Thessalonica, a Gentile Church to which First Thessalonians was sent, and a Jewish Church to which Second Thessalonians was addressed. There is no real evidence for such a gratuitous hypothesis. It assumes a difficulty about his sending a second letter to the same church that does not exist. The bearer of the first letter brought back news that made a second necessary. It was probably sent within the same year as the first.

JFB: 2 Thessalonians (Book Introduction)

Its GENUINENESS is attested by POLYCARP [Epistle to the Philippians, 11], who alludes to 2Th 3:15. JUSTIN MARTYR [Dialogue with Trypho, p. 193.32], alludes to 2Th 2:3. IRENÆUS [Against Heresies, 7.2] quotes 2Th 2:8. CLEMENT OF ALEXANDRIA [Miscellanies, 1.5, p. 554; The Instructor, 1.17], quotes 2Th 3:2, as Paul's words. TERTULLIAN [On the Resurrection of the Flesh, 24] quotes 2Th 2:1-2, as part of Paul's Epistle.

DESIGN.--The accounts from Thessalonica, after the sending of the first Epistle, represented the faith and love of the Christians there as on the increase; and their constancy amidst persecutions unshaken. One error of doctrine, however, resulting in practical evil, had sprung up among them. The apostle's description of Christ's sudden second coming (1Th 4:13, &c., and 1Th 5:2), and the possibility of its being at any time, led them to believe it was actually at hand. Some professed to know by "the Spirit" (2Th 2:2) that it was so; and others alleged that Paul had said so when with them. A letter, too, purporting to be from the apostle to that effect, seems to have been circulated among them. (That 2Th 2:2 refers to such a spurious letter, rather than to Paul's first Epistle, appears likely from the statement, 2Th 3:17, as to his autograph salutation being the mark whereby his genuine letters might be known). Hence some neglected their daily business and threw themselves on the charity of others, as if their sole duty was to wait for the coming of the Lord. This error, therefore, needed rectifying, and forms a leading topic of the second Epistle. He in it tells them (2Th. 2:1-17), that before the Lord shall come, there must first be a great apostasy, and the Man of Sin must be revealed; and that the Lord's sudden coming is no ground for neglecting daily business; that to do so would only bring scandal on the Church, and was contrary to his own practice among them (2Th 3:7-9), and that the faithful must withdraw themselves from such disorderly professors (2Th 3:6, 2Th 3:10-15). Thus, there are three divisions of the Epistle: (1) 2Th 1:1-12. Commendations of the Thessalonians' faith, love, and patience, amidst persecutions. (2) 2Th. 2:1-17. The error as to the immediate coming of Christ corrected, and the previous rise and downfall of the Man of Sin foretold. (3) 2Th. 3:1-16. Exhortations to orderly conduct in their whole walk, with prayers for them to the God of peace, followed by his autograph salutation and benediction.

DATE OF WRITING.--AS the Epistle is written in the joint names of Timothy and Silas, as well as his own, and as these were with him while at Corinth, and not with him for a long time subsequently to his having left that city (compare Act 18:18, with Act 19:22; indeed, as to Silas, it is doubtful whether he was ever subsequently with Paul), it follows, the place of writing must have been Corinth, and the date, during the one "year and six months" of his stay there, Act 18:11 (namely, beginning with the autumn of A.D. 52, and ending with the spring of A.D. 54), say about six months after his first Epistle, early in A.D. 53.

STYLE.--The style is not different from that of most of Paul's other writings, except in the prophetic portion of it (2Th 2:1-12), which is distinguished from them in subject matter. As is usual in his more solemn passages (for instance, in the denunciatory and prophetic portions of his Epistles, for example, compare Col 2:8, Col 2:16, with 2Th 2:3; 1Co 15:24-28, with 2Th 2:8-9; Rom 1:18, with 2Th 2:8, 2Th 2:10), his diction here is more lofty, abrupt, and elliptical. As the former Epistle dwells mostly on the second Advent in its aspect of glory to the sleeping and the living saints (1Th. 4:1-5:28), so this Epistle dwells mostly on it in its aspect of everlasting destruction to the wicked and him who shall be the final consummation of wickedness, the Man of Sin. So far was Paul from laboring under an erroneous impression as to Christ's speedy coming, when he wrote his first Epistle (which rationalists impute to him), that he had distinctly told them, when he was with them, the same truths as to the apostasy being about first to arise, which he now insists upon in this second Epistle (2Th 2:5). Several points of coincidence occur between the two Epistles, confirming the genuineness of the latter. Thus, compare 2Th 3:2, with 1Th 2:15-16; again, 2Th 2:9, the Man of Sin "coming after the working of Satan," with 1Th 2:18; 1Th 3:5, where Satan's incipient work as the hinderer of the Gospel, and the tempter, appears; again, mild warning is enjoined, 1Th 5:14; but, in this second Epistle, when the evil had grown worse, stricter discipline (2Th 3:6, 2Th 3:14): "withdraw from" the "company" of such.

Paul probably visited Thessalonica on his way to Asia subsequently (Act 20:4), and took with him thence Aristarchus and Secundus: the former became his "companion in travel" and shared with him his perils at Ephesus, also those of his shipwreck, and was his "fellow prisoner" at Rome (Act 27:2; Col 4:10; Phm 1:24). According to tradition he became bishop of Apamea.

JFB: 2 Thessalonians (Outline)

• ADDRESS AND SALUTATION: INTRODUCTION: THANKSGIVING FOR THEIR GROWTH IN FAITH AND LOVE, AND FOR THEIR PATIENCE IN PERSECUTIONS, WHICH ARE A TOKEN FOR GOOD EVERLASTING TO THEM, AND FOR PERDITION TO THEIR ADVERSARIES AT CHRIST'S COMING: PRAYER FOR THEIR PERFECTION. (2Th 1:1-12)
• CORRECTION OF THEIR ERROR AS TO CHRIST'S IMMEDIATE COMING. THE APOSTASY THAT MUST PRECEDE IT. EXHORTATION TO STEADFASTNESS, INTRODUCED WITH THANKSGIVING FOR THEIR ELECTION BY GOD. (2Th. 2:1-17)
• HE ASKS THEIR PRAYERS: HIS CONFIDENCE IN THEM: PRAYER FOR THEM: CHARGES AGAINST DISORDERLY IDLE CONDUCT; HIS OWN EXAMPLE: CONCLUDING PRAYER AND SALUTATION. (2Th. 3:1-18)

TSK: 2 Thessalonians (Book Introduction)

The First Epistle to the Thessalonians, it is generally agreed, was the earliest written of all St. Paul’s epistles, whence we see the reason and propriety of his anxiety that it should be read in all the Christian churches of Macedonia. - " I charge you by the Lord, that this Epistle be read unto all the holy brethren" (1Th 5:27). " The existence of this clause," observes Dr. Paley, " is an evidence of its authenticity; because, to produce a letter, purporting to have been publicly read in the church at Thessalonica, when no such letter had been read or heard of in that church, would be to produce an imposture destructive of itself. Either the Epistle was publicly read in the church of Thessalonica, during St. Paul’s lifetime, or it was not. If it was, no publication could be more authentic, no species of notoriety more unquestionable, no method of preserving the integrity of the copy more secure. If it was not, the clause would remain a standing condemnation of the forgery, and one would suppose, an invincible impediment to its success." Its genuineness, however, has never been disputed; and it has been universally received in the Christian church, as the inspired production of St. Paul, from the earliest period to the present day. The circumstance of this injunction being given, in the first epistle which the Apostle wrote, also implies a strong and avowed claim to the character of an inspired writer; as in fact it placed his writings on the same ground with those of Moses and the ancient prophets. The second Epistle, besides those marks of genuineness and authority which it possesses in common with the others, bears the highest evidence of its divine inspiration, in the representation which it contains of the papal power, under the characters of " the Man of sin," and the " Mystery of iniquity." The true Christian worship is the worship of the one only God, through the one only Mediator, the man Christ Jesus; and from this worship the church of Rome has most notoriously departed, by substituting other mediators, invocating and adoring saints and angels, worshipping images, adoring the host, etc. It follows, therefore, that " the Man of sin" is the Pope; not only on account of the disgraceful lives of many of them, but by means of their scandalous doctrines and principles; dispensing with the most necessary duties, selling pardons and indulgences for the most abominable crimes, and perverting the worship of God to the grossest superstition and idolatry. It was evidently the chief design of the Apostle, in writing to the Thessalonians, to confirm them in the faith, to animate them to a courageous profession of the Gospel, and to the practice of all the duties of Christianity; but to suppose, with Dr. Macknight, that he intended to prove the divine authority of Christianity by a chain of regular arguments, in which he answered the several objections which the heathen philosophers are supposed to have advanced, seems quite foreign to the nature of the epistles, and to be grounded on a mistaken notion, that the philosophers designed at so early a period to enter on a regular disputation with the Christians, when in fact they derided them as enthusiasts, and branded their doctrines as " foolishness." In pursuance of his grand object, " it is remarkable," says Dr. Doddridge, " with how much address he improves all the influence which his zeal and fidelity in their service must naturally give him, to inculcate upon them the precepts of the gospel, and persuade them to act agreeably to their sacred character. This was the grand point he always kept in view, and to which every thing else was made subservient. Nothing appears, in any part of his writings, like a design to establish his own reputation, or to make use of his ascendancy over his Christian friends to answer any secular purposes of his own. On the contrary, in this and in his other epistles, he discovers a most generous, disinterested regard for their welfare, expressly disclaiming any authority over their consciences, and appealing to them, that he had chose to maintain himself by the labour of this own hands, rather than prove burdensome to the churches, or give the least colour of suspicion, that, under zeal for the gospel, and concern for their improvement, he was carrying on any private sinister view. The discovery of so excellent a temper must be allowed to carry with it a strong presumptive argument in favour of the doctrines he taught....And, indeed, whoever reads St. Paul’s epistles with attention, and enters into the spirit with which they were written, will discern such intrinsic characters of their genuineness, and the divine authority of the doctrines they contain, as will, perhaps, produce in him a stronger conviction than all the external evidence with which they are attended." These remarks are exceedingly well grounded and highly important; and to no other Epistles can they apply with greater force than the present most excellent productions of the inspired Apostle. The last two chapters of the first epistle, in particular, as Dr. A. Clarke justly observes, " are certainly among the most important, and the most sublime in the New Testament. The general judgment, the resurrection of the body, and the states of the quick and the dead, the unrighteous and the just, are described, concisely indeed, but they are exhibited in the most striking and affecting points of view."

TSK: 2 Thessalonians 2 (Chapter Introduction)

Overview

2Th 2:1, Paul urges them to continue stedfast in the truth received; 2Th 2:3, shows that there shall be a departure from the faith, 2Th 2:9, and a discovery of Antichrist, before the day of the Lord come; 2Th 2:15, and thereupon repeats his former exhortation, and prays for them.

Poole: 2 Thessalonians 2 (Chapter Introduction)

THESSALONIANS CHAPTER 2

MHCC: 2 Thessalonians (Book Introduction)

The second epistle to the Thessalonians was written soon after the first. The apostle was told that, from some expressions in his first letter, many expected the second coming of Christ was at hand, and that the day of judgment would arrive in their time. Some of these neglected their worldly duties. St. Paul wrote again to correct their error, which hindered the spread of the gospel. He had written agreeably to the words of the prophets of the Old Testament; and he tells them there were many counsels of the Most High yet to be fulfilled, before that day of the Lord should come, though, because it is sure, he had spoken of it as near. The subject led to a remarkable foretelling, of some of the future events which were to take place in the after-ages of the Christian church, and which show the prophetic spirit the apostle possessed.

MHCC: 2 Thessalonians 2 (Chapter Introduction)

(2Th 2:1-4) Cautions against the error that the time of Christ's coming was just at hand. There would first be a general apostacy from the faith, and a revealing of the antichristian man of sin.

(2Th 2:5-12) His destruction, and that of those who obey him.

(2Th 2:13-17) The security of the Thessalonians from apostacy; an exhortation to stedfastness, and prayer for them.

Matthew Henry: 2 Thessalonians (Book Introduction)

An Exposition, with Practical Observations, of The Second Epistle of St. Paul to the Thessalonians

This Second Epistle was written soon after the former, and seems to have been designed to prevent a mistake, which might arise from some passages in the former epistle, concerning the second coming of Christ, as if it were near at hand. The apostle in this epistle is careful to prevent any wrong use which some among them might make of those expressions of his that were agreeable to the dialect of the prophets of the Old Testament, and informs them that there were many intermediate counsels yet to be fulfilled before that day of the Lord should come, though, because it is sure, he had spoken of it as near. There are other things that he writes about for their consolation under sufferings, and exhortation and direction in duty.

Matthew Henry: 2 Thessalonians 2 (Chapter Introduction)

The apostle is very careful to hinder the spreading of an error into which some among them had fallen concerning the coming of Christ, as being very near (2Th 2:1-3). Then he proceeds to confute the error he cautioned them against, by telling them of two great events that were antecedent to the coming of Christ - a general apostasy, and the revelation of antichrist, concerning whom the apostle tells them many remarkable things, about his name, his character, his rise, his fall, his reign, and the sin and ruin of his subjects (2Th 2:4-12). He then comforts them against the terror of this apostasy, and exhorts them to stedfastness (2Th 2:13-15). And concludes with a prayer for them (2Th 2:16, 2Th 2:17).

Barclay: 2 Thessalonians (Book Introduction)

A GENERAL INTRODUCTION TO THE LETTERS OF PAUL

The Letters Of Paul

There is no more interesting body of documents in the New Testament than the letters of Paul. That is because of all forms of literature a letter is most personal. Demetrius, one of the old Greek literary critics, once wrote, "Every one reveals his own soul in his letters. In every other form of composition it is possible to discern the writercharacter, but in none so clearly as the epistolary." (Demetrius, On Style, 227). It is just because he left us so many letters that we feel we know Paul so well. In them he opened his mind and heart to the folk he loved so much; and in them, to this day, we can see that great mind grappling with the problems of the early church, and feel that great heart throbbing with love for men, even when they were misguided and mistaken.

The Difficulty Of Letters

At the same time, there is often nothing so difficult to understand as a letter. Demetrius (On Style, 223) quotes a saying of Artemon, who edited the letters of Aristotle. Artemon said that a letter ought to be written in the same manner as a dialogue, because it was one of the two sides of a dialogue. In other words, to read a letter is like listening to one side of a telephone conversation. So when we read the letters of Paul we are often in a difficulty. We do not possess the letter which he was answering; we do not fully know the circumstances with which he was dealing; it is only from the letter itself that we can deduce the situation which prompted it. Before we can hope to understand fully any letter Paul wrote, we must try to reconstruct the situation which produced it.

The Ancient Letters

It is a great pity that Paulletters were ever called epistles. They are in the most literal sense letters. One of the great lights shed on the interpretation of the New Testament has been the discovery and the publication of the papyri. In the ancient world, papyrus was the substance on which most documents were written. It was composed of strips of the pith of a certain bulrush that grew on the banks of the Nile. These strips were laid one on top of the other to form a substance very like brown paper. The sands of the Egyptian desert were ideal for preservation, for papyrus, although very brittle, will last forever so long as moisture does not get at it. As a result, from the Egyptian rubbish heaps, archaeologists have rescued hundreds of documents, marriage contracts, legal agreements, government forms, and, most interesting of all, private letters. When we read these private letters we find that there was a pattern to which nearly all conformed; and we find that Paulletters reproduce exactly that pattern. Here is one of these ancient letters. It is from a soldier, called Apion, to his father Epimachus. He is writing from Misenum to tell his father that he has arrived safely after a stormy passage.

"Apion sends heartiest greetings to his father and lord Epimachus.

I pray above all that you are well and fit; and that things are

going well with you and my sister and her daughter and my brother.

I thank my Lord Serapis [his god] that he kept me safe when I was

in peril on the sea. As soon as I got to Misenum I got my journey

money from Caesar--three gold pieces. And things are going fine

with me. So I beg you, my dear father, send me a line, first to let

me know how you are, and then about my brothers, and thirdly, that

I may kiss your hand, because you brought me up well, and because

of that I hope, God willing, soon to be promoted. Give Capito my

heartiest greetings, and my brothers and Serenilla and my friends.

I sent you a little picture of myself painted by Euctemon. My

military name is Antonius Maximus. I pray for your good health.

Serenus sends good wishes, Agathos Daimonboy, and Turbo,

Galloniuson." (G. Milligan, Selections from the Greek Papyri,

36.)

Little did Apion think that we would be reading his letter to his father 1800 years after he had written it. It shows how little human nature changes. The lad is hoping for promotion quickly. Who would Serenilla be but the girl he left behind him? He sends the ancient equivalent of a photograph to the folk at home. Now that letter falls into certain sections. (i) There is a greeting. (ii) There is a prayer for the health of the recipients. (iii) There is a thanksgiving to the gods. (iv) There are the special contents. (v) Finally, there are the special salutations and the personal greetings. Practically every one of Paulletters shows exactly the same sections, as we now demonstrate.

(i) The Greeting: Rom_1:1 ; 1Co_1:1 ; 2Co_1:1 ; Gal_1:1 ; Eph_1:1 ; Phi_1:1 ; Col_1:1-2 ; 1Th_1:1 ; 2Th_1:1 .

(ii) The Prayer: in every case Paul prays for the grace of God on the people to whom he writes: Rom_1:7 ; 1Co_1:3 ; 2Co_1:2 ; Gal_1:3 ; Eph_1:2 ; Phi_1:3 ; Col_1:2 ; 1Th_1:1 ; 2Th_1:2 .

(iii) The Thanksgiving: Rom_1:8 ; 1Co_1:4 ; 2Co_1:3 ; Eph_1:3 ; Phi_1:3 ; 1Th_1:3 ; 2Th_1:3 .

(iv) The Special Contents: the main body of the letters.

(v) Special Salutations and Personal Greetings: Rom 16 ; 1Co_16:19 ; 2Co_13:13 ; Phi_4:21-22 ; Col_4:12-15 ; 1Th_5:26 .

When Paul wrote letters, he wrote them on the pattern which everyone used. Deissmann says of them, "They differ from the messages of the homely papyrus leaves of Egypt, not as letters but only as the letters of Paul." When we read Paulletters we are not reading things which were meant to be academic exercises and theological treatises, but human documents written by a friend to his friends.

The Immediate Situation

With a very few exceptions, all Paulletters were written to meet an immediate situation and not treatises which he sat down to write in the peace and silence of his study. There was some threatening situation in Corinth, or Galatia, or Philippi, or Thessalonica, and he wrote a letter to meet it. He was not in the least thinking of us when he wrote, but solely of the people to whom he was writing. Deissmann writes, "Paul had no thought of adding a few fresh compositions to the already extant Jewish epistles; still less of enriching the sacred literature of his nation.... He had no presentiment of the place his words would occupy in universal history; not so much that they would be in existence in the next generation, far less that one day people would look at them as Holy Scripture." We must always remember that a thing need not be transient because it was written to meet an immediate situation. All the great love songs of the world were written for one person, but they live on for the whole of mankind. It is just because Paulletters were written to meet a threatening danger or a clamant need that they still throb with life. And it is because human need and the human situation do not change that God speaks to us through them today.

The Spoken Word

One other thing we must note about these letters. Paul did what most people did in his day. He did not normally pen his own letters but dictated them to a secretary, and then added Ws own authenticating signature. (We actually know the name of one of the people who did the writing for him. In Rom_16:22 Tertius, the secretary, slips in his own greeting before the letter draws to an end). In 1Co_16:21 Paul says, "This is my own signature, my autograph, so that you can be sure this letter comes from me." (compare Col_4:18 ; 2Th_3:17 .)

This explains a great deal. Sometimes Paul is hard to understand, because his sentences begin and never finish; his grammar breaks down and the construction becomes involved. We must not think of him sitting quietly at a desk, carefully polishing each sentence as he writes. We must think of him striding up and down some little room, pouring out a torrent of words, while his secretary races to get them down. When Paul composed his letters, he had in his mindeye a vision of the folk to whom he was writing, and he was pouring out his heart to them in words that fell over each other in his eagerness to help.

INTRODUCTION TO THE LETTERS TO THE THESSALONIANS

Paul Comes To Macedonia

For anyone who can read between the lines the story of Paulcoming to Macedonia is one of the most dramatic in the book of Acts. Luke, with supreme economy of words, tells it in Act_16:6-10 . Short as that narrative is, it gives the impression of a chain of circumstances inescapably culminating in one supreme event. Paul had passed through Phrygia and Galatia and ahead of him lay the Hellespont. To the left lay the teeming province of Asia, to the right stretched the great province of Bithynia; but the Spirit would allow him to enter neither. There was something driving him relentlessly on to the Aegean Sea. So he came to Alexandrian Troas, still uncertain where he ought to go; and then there came to him a vision in the night of a man who cried, "Come over into Macedonia and help us." Paul set sail, and for the first time the gospel came to Europe.

One World

At that moment Paul must have seen much more than a continent for Christ. It was in Macedonia that he landed; and Macedonia was the kingdom of Alexander the Great, who had conquered the world and wept because there were no more worlds left to conquer. But Alexander was much more than a military conqueror. He was almost the first universalist. He was more a missionary than a soldier; and he dreamed of one world dominated and enlightened by the culture of Greece. Even so great a thinker as Aristotle had said that it was a plain duty to treat Greeks as free men and orientals as slaves; but Alexander declared that he had been sent by God "to unite, to pacify and to reconcile the whole world." Deliberately he had said that it was his aim "to marry the East to the West." He had dreamed of an Empire in which there was neither Greek nor Jew, barbarian or Scythian, bond or free (Col_3:11 ). It is hard to see how Alexander could have failed to be in Paulthoughts. Paul left from Alexandrian Troas which was called after Alexander; he came to Macedonia which was Alexanderoriginal kingdom; he worked at Philippi which was called after Philip, Alexanderfather; he went on to Thessalonica which was called after Alexanderhalf-sister. The whole territory was saturated with memories of Alexander; and Paul must surely have thought, not of a country nor of a continent, but of a world for Christ.

Paul Comes To Thessalonica

This sense of the wide-stretching arms of Christianity must have been accentuated when Paul came to Thessalonica. It was a great city. Its original name was Thermal, which means The Hot Springs, and it gave its name to the Thermaic Gulf on which it stood. Six hundred years ago Herodotus had described it as a great city. It has always been a famous harbour. It was there that Xerxes the Persian had his naval base when he invaded Europe; and even in Roman times it was one of the worldgreat dockyards. In 315 B.C. Cassander had rebuilt the city and renamed it Thessalonica, the name of his wife, who was a daughter of Philip of Macedon and a half-sister of Alexander the Great. It was a free city; that is to say it had never suffered the indignity of having Roman troops quartered within it. It had its own popular assembly and its own magistrates. Its population rose to 200,000 and for a time it was a question whether it or Constantinople would be recognized as the capital of the world. Even today, under the name Salonika, it has 70,000 inhabitants.

But the supreme importance of Thessalonica lay in this--it straddled the Via Egnatia, the Egnatian Road, which stretched from Dyrrachium on the Adriatic to Constantinople on the Bosphorus and thence away to Asia Minor and the East. Its main street was part of the very road which linked Rome with the East. East and West converged on Thessalonica; it was said to be "in the lap of the Roman Empire." Trade poured into her from East and West, so that it was said, "So long as nature does not change, Thessalonica will remain wealthy and prosperous."

It is impossible to overstress the importance of the arrival of Christianity in Thessalonica. If Christianity was settled there, it was bound to spread East along the Egnatian Road until all Asia was conquered and West until it stormed even the city of Rome. The coming of Christianity to Thessalonica was crucial in the making of it into a world religion.

PaulStay At Thessalonica

The story of Paulstay at Thessalonica is in Act_17:1-10 . Now, for Paul, what happened at Thessalonica was of supreme importance. He preached in the synagogue for three Sabbaths (Act_17:2 ) which means that his stay there could not have been much more than three weeks in length. He had such tremendous success that the Jews were enraged and raised so much trouble that Paul had to be smuggled out, in peril of his life, to Beroea. The same thing happened in Beroea (Act_17:10-12 ) and Paul had to leave Timothy and Silas behind and make his escape to Athens. What exercised his mind was this. He had been in Thessalonica only three weeks. Was it possible to make such an impression on a place in three weeksime that Christianity was planted so deeply that it could never again be uprooted? If so, it was by no means an idle dream that the Roman Empire might yet be won for Christ. Or was it necessary to settle down and work for months, even years, before an impression could be made? In that event, no man could even dimly foresee when Christianity would penetrate all over the world. Thessalonica was a test case; and Paul was torn with anxiety to know how it would turn out.

News From Thessalonica

So anxious was Paul that, when Timothy joined him at Athens, he sent him back to Thessalonica to get the information without which he could not rest (1Th_3:1-2 , 1Th_3:5 ; 1Th_2:17 ). What news did Timothy bring back? There was good news. The affection of the Thessalonians for Paul was as strong as ever; and they were standing fast in the faith (1Th_2:14 ; 1Th_3:4-6 ; 1Th_4:9-10 ). They were indeed "his glory and Ws joy" (1Th_2:20 ). But there was worrying news.

(i) The preaching of the Second Coming had produced an unhealthy situation in which people had stopped working and had abandoned all ordinary pursuits to await the Second Coming with a kind of hysterical expectancy. So Paul tells them to be quiet and to get on with their work (1Th_4:11 ).

(ii) They were worried about what was to happen to those who died before the Second Coming arrived. Paul explains that those who fall asleep in Jesus will miss none of the glory (1Th_4:13-18 ).

(iii) There was a tendency to despise all lawful authority; the argumentative Greek was always in danger of producing a democracy run mad (1Th_5:12-14 ).

(iv) There was the ever-present danger that they would relapse into immorality. It was hard to unlearn the point of view of generations and to escape the contagion of the heathen world (1Th_4:3-8 ).

(v) There was at least a section who slandered Paul. They hinted that he preached the gospel for what he could get out of it (1Th_2:5 , 1Th_2:9 ); and that he was something of a dictator (1Th_2:6-7 , 1Th_2:11 ).

(vi) There was a certain amount of division in the Church (1Th_4:9 ; 1Th_5:13 ).

These were the problems with which Paul had to deal; and they show that human nature has not changed so very much.

Why Two Letters?

We must ask why there are two letters. They art, very much alike and they must have been written within weeks, perhaps days of each other. The second letter was written mainly to clear up a misconception about the Second Coming. The first letter insists that the Day of the Lord will come like a thief in the night, and urges watchfulness (1Th_5:2 ; 1Th_5:6 ). But this produced the unhealthy situation where men did nothing but watch and wait; and in the second letter Paul explains what signs must come first before the Second Coming should come (2Th_2:3-12 ). The Thessalonians had got their ideas about the Second Coming out of proportion. As so often happens to a preacher, Paulpreaching had been misunderstood, and certain phrases had been taken out of context and over-emphasized; and the second letter seeks to put things back in their proper balance and to correct the thoughts of the excited Thessalonians regarding the Second Coming. Of course, Paul takes occasion in the second letter to repeat and to stress much of the good advice and rebuke he had given in the first, but its main aim is to tell them certain things which will calm their hysteria and make them wait, not in excited idleness, but in patient and diligent attendance to the daywork. In these two letters we see Paul solving the day to day problems which arose in the expanding Church.

FURTHER READINGS

Thessalonians

J. E. Frame, Thessalonians (ICC; G)

G. Milligan, St. PaulEpistles to the Thessalonians (MmC; G)

W. Neil, The Epistles of Paul to the Thessalonians (MC; E)

Abbreviations

CGT: Cambridge Greek Testament

ICC: International Critical Commentary

MC: Moffatt Commentary

MmC: Macmillan Commentary

TC: Tyndale Commentary

E: English Text

G: Greek Text

Barclay: 2 Thessalonians 2 (Chapter Introduction)

The Lawless One (2Th_2:1-12)

God's Demand And Our Effort (2Th_2:13-17)

Constable: 2 Thessalonians (Book Introduction)

Introduction

Historical background

This epistle contains evidence that Paul had recently heard news about current conditions in the Thessalonian church. Probably most of this information came to him from the person who had carried 1 Thessalonians to its recipients and had returned to Paul at Corinth. Perhaps other people who had news of the church had informed Paul, Silas, and Timothy also. Some of the news was good. The majority of the Thessalonians were continuing to grow and to remain faithful to Christ in spite of persecution. Unfortunately some of the news was bad. False teaching concerning the day of the Lord had entered the church and was causing confusion and leading some of the Christians to quit their jobs in expectation of the Lord's return.

In view of these reports Paul evidently felt constrained to write this epistle. He commended his children in the faith for their growth and faithfulness, corrected the doctrinal error about the day of the Lord, and warned the idle to get back to work.

Almost all conservative scholars believe that Paul wrote 2 Thessalonians from Corinth. The basis for this conclusion is that Paul, Silas, and Timothy were present together in Corinth (Acts 18:5). The New Testament does not refer to them being together from then on, though they may have been. Paul evidently wrote 1 Thessalonians from Corinth. The topics he treated in the second epistle seem to grow out of situations he alluded to in the first epistle. They reflect a very similar situation in the Thessalonian church. Corinth, therefore, seems the logical site of composition of 2 Thessalonians.

For these reasons it appears that Paul composed 2 Thessalonians quite soon after 1 Thessalonians, perhaps within 12 months.¹ This would place the date of composition in the early 50's A.D., perhaps 51 A.D., and would make this the third of Paul's canonical writings assuming Galatians was his first.

"The external evidence for the Pauline authorship of 2 Thessalonians is stronger than for 1 Thessalonians."²

Purpose

Three purposes are evident from the contents of the epistle. Paul wrote to encourage the Thessalonian believers to continue to persevere in the face of continuing persecution (1:3-10). He also wanted to clarify events preceding the day of the Lord to dispel false teaching (2:1-12). Finally, he instructed the church how to deal with lazy Christians in their midst (3:6-15).

Message³

We could contrast 1 and 2 Thessalonians by saying that Paul wrote the first epistle primarily to comfort the Thessalonians whereas he wrote the second epistle primarily to correct them.

Paul had said some things in his first epistle from which his readers drew a false conclusion. He had said that Christ would return and His return could be very soon (1 Thess. 4:15-18). He also said the day of the Lord would come as a thief in the night, unexpectedly (1 Thess. 5:2).

In view of what Paul had taught the Thessalonians about the day of the Lord when he was with them (2 Thess. 2:5), they wondered if that day had already begun. They wondered if they were in the Tribulation and if the second coming of Christ was imminent. Teaching from several other sources that confirmed their suspicions (2 Thess. 2:2) intensified their questions about Paul's statements regarding future events that he had written in 1 Thessalonians.

The apostle wrote 2 Thessalonians to correct these erroneous ideas. The return of Christ of which Paul had written was not His second coming but the Rapture. While the day of the Lord would arrive unexpectedly it would be unexpected only by unbelievers. Several predicted events would precede its commencement.

The central message of this epistle is the truth about the day of the Lord.

Paul made an important distinction in this epistle about future events.

In 1 Thessalonians he taught that the Lord's return could take place very soon and that the day of the Lord would come as a thief in the night. Consequently he urged his readers to wait expectantly for the Lord (1 Thess. 4:16-17; 5:2).

In 2 Thessalonians he wrote that the day of the Lord cannot begin immediately. Therefore his readers should continue their work (2 Thess. 2). These statements may seem contradictory, but they are not.

Paul distinguished these two truths in 2 Thessalonians 2:1-2. The distinction is between "our gathering together to Him" (v. 1) and "the day of the Lord" (v. 2). He wrote verses 1-12 to show the difference between the first event and the second period.

Paul also gave definite new revelation about the day of the Lord.

He said that presently the mystery of lawlessness is at work (2:7). Paul did not say the mystery of "sin" or "evil" but "lawlessness." He did so because lawlessness (rebellion against divine law) is the root trouble with human life individually, socially, nationally, and in every other sphere. The "mystery" of lawlessness is the new revelation he expounded here concerning the course of lawlessness in the world and history, in space and time.

Second, he revealed that in the future God will remove what is presently restraining lawlessness (2:7). The restrainer probably refers to the Holy Spirit who indwells the church. Lawlessness produces corruption, but the church is the salt of the earth, and salt prevents the spread of corruption. Lawlessness also produces darkness, but the church is the light of the world, and light dispels darkness. Lawlessness is presently working, but what keeps it from running wild is the Holy Spirit's ministry through Christian men and women.

Third, Paul announced that in the future there will also be a crisis: the man of lawlessness will be revealed (2:8). When will God withdraw the Spirit from the world? He will do so when He withdraws the church from the world. When will He withdraw the church from the world? He will do so at "our gathering together to Him" (v. 1, i.e., the Rapture). After that, the human leader of lawlessness will appear. He will be entirely godless, but he will be such a remarkable character that he will convince most people that he is divine. This is the Antichrist.

Finally, Paul taught that after this crisis Jesus Christ will return to the earth to set up His kingdom (2:8). He will come when the man of lawlessness is the prominent character on the stage of history. However when Christ comes, He will destroy this Antichrist and curtail lawlessness (cf. Ps. 2).

In view of this revelation Paul called on his readers to do two things.

First, he called on them to be courageous. He did not want them to be mentally upset (2:2) but comforted and established (2:17). A clear understanding of the course of future events and the time of the Lord's return is essential for the mental and spiritual encouragement and stability of Christians. We need this to be courageous in the face of all the lawlessness we encounter in the world. Give this to the people you serve in ministry.

Second, Paul called his readers to responsible conduct. He instructed them to go on with life, to wait but also to work. Christians must behave responsibly by providing for our own needs. The hope of Christ's imminent return at the Rapture is no excuse for irresponsibility. Paul was not just urging activity (witnessing, praying, etc.) but specifically earning a living.

The gravest danger we face in our world today is not socialism or communism or fascism but lawlessness specifically refusal to submit to God's laws. The person who lives this way is anti-Christ.

We need to recognize this danger for what it is and to combat it by being salt and light in the world. However, we should also remember that Christ will eventually be victorious. This will keep us from becoming frantic and losing our stability.

Each of us also needs to make sure lawlessness does not characterize our personal lives. We must be submissive to divine rule if we would be consistent and confident Christians.

Outline⁴

I. Salutation 1:1-2

II. Commendation for past progress 1:3-12

A. Thanksgiving for growth 1:3-4

B. Encouragement to persevere 1:5-10

C. Prayer for success 1:11-12

III. Correction of present error 2:1-12

A. The beginning of the day of the Lord 2:1-5

B. The mystery of lawlessness 2:6-12

IV. Thanksgiving and prayer 2:13-17

A. Thanksgiving for calling 2:13-15

B. Prayer for strength 2:16-17

V. Exhortations for future growth 3:1-15

A. Reciprocal prayer 3:1-5

1. Prayer for the missionaries 3:1-2

2. Prayer for the Thessalonians 3:3-5

B. Church discipline 3:6-15

1. General principles respecting disorderly conduct 3:6-10

2. Specific instructions concerning the idle 3:11-13

3. Further discipline for the unrepentant 3:14-15

VI. Conclusion 3:16-18

Constable: 2 Thessalonians

2 Thessalonians

Bibliography

Barclay, William. The Letters to the Philippians, Colossians and Thessalonians. Daily Study Bible series. 2nd ed. and reprint ed. Edinburgh: Saint Andrew Press, 1963.

Baxter, J. Sidlow. Explore the Book. 6 vols. London: Marshall, Morgan & Scott, 1965.

Best, Ernest. A Commentary on the First and Second Epistles to the Thessalonians. Harper's New Testament Commentaries series. New York: Harper and Row, 1972.

Bicknell, E. J. The First and Second Epistles to the Thessalonians. Westminster Commentaries series. London: Methuen, 1932.

Bruce, F. F. 1 & 2 Thessalonians. Word Biblical Commentary series. Waco: Word Books, 1982.

Chafer, Lewis Sperry. Systematic Theology. 8 vols. Findlay, Oh.: Dunham Publishing Co., 1948.

Constable, Thomas L. "Analysis of Bible Books--New Testament." Paper submitted for course 686 Analysis of Bible Books--New Testament. Dallas Theological Seminary, January 1968.

_____. "2 Thessalonians." In Bible Knowledge Commentary: New Testament, pp. 713-25. Edited by John F. Walvoord and Roy B. Zuck. Wheaton: Scripture Press Publications, Victor Books, 1983.

Darby, John Nelson. Synopsis of the Books of the Bible. 5 vols. Revised ed. New York: Loizeaux Brothers Publishers, 1942.

Denney, James. The Epistles to the Thessalonians. The Expositors' Bible series. New York: Hodder and Stoughton, n.d.

Dictionary of the Apostolic Church, Edited by James Hastings. 1915 ed. S.v. "Thessalonians, Epistles to the," by F. S. Marsh.

Dictionary of the Bible, Edited by James Hastings. 1910 ed. S.v. "Thessalonians, Second Epistle to the," by W. Lock.

Donfield, Karl P. "The Cults of Thessalonica and the Thessalonian Correspondence." New Testament Studies 31:3 (July 1985):336-56.

Edgar, Thomas R. "An Exegesis of Rapture Passages." In Issues in Dispensationalism, pp. 203-23. Edited by Weslay R. Willis and John R. Master. Chicago: Moody Press, 1994.

English, E. Schuyler. Re-Thinking the Rapture. Travelers Rest, S.C.: Southern Bible, 1954.

Epp, Theodore H. "The Restrainer Removed." Good News Broadcaster, March 1975, pp. 20-22.

Fickett, Harold L. Keep On Keeping On! Bible Commentary for Laymen series. Glendale: Gospel Light Publications, Regal Books, 1977.

Frame, James Everett. A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Epistles of St. Paul to the Thessalonians. International Critical Commentary series. Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1912.

Gaebelein, Arno C. The Annotated Bible. 4 vols. Reprint ed. Chicago: Moody Press, and New York: Loizeaux Brothers, Inc., 1970.

A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament. By C. G. Wilke. Revised by C. L. Wilibald Grimm. Translated, revised and enlarged by Joseph Henry Thayer, 1889.

Gundry, Robert H. The Church and the Tribulation. Contemporary Evangelical Perspectives series. Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, Academic Books, 1973.

Guthrie, Donald. New Testament Introduction. 3 vols. 2nd ed. London: Tyndale Press, 1966.

Hendriksen, William. New Testament Commentary: Exposition of I and II Thessalonians. Reprint ed. Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1974.

Hiebert, D. Edmond. The Thessalonian Epistles. Chicago: Moody Press, 1971.

Hodges, Zane C. Grace in Eclipse. Dallas: Redencion Viva, 1981.

Hubbard, David A. "The Second Epistle to the Thessalonians." In Wycliffe Bible Commentary, pp. 1361-66. Edited by Charles F. Pfeiffer and Everett F. Harrison. Chicago: Moody Press, 1962.

International Standard Bible Encyclopedia. Edited by James Orr. 1957 ed. S.v. "Thessalonians, The Second Epistle of Paul to the," by M. N. Tod.

Ironside, Harry A. Addresses on the First and Second Epistles to Thessalonians. New York: Loizeaux Brothers, 1959.

Kitchens, Ted G. "Perimeters of Corrective Church Discipline." Bibliotheca Sacra 148:590 (April-June 1991):201-13.

Ladd, George E. The Blessed Hope. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1956.

Laney, J. Carl. "The Biblical Practice of Church Discipline." Bibliotheca Sacra 143:572 (October-December 1986):353-64.

Lange, John Peter, ed. Commentary on the Holy Scriptures. 12 vols. Reprint ed. Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1960. Vol. 11: Galatians-Hebrews, by Otto Schmoller, Karl Braune, C. A. Auberlen, C. J. Riggenbach, J. J. Van Oosterzee, and Carl Bernhard Moll. Translated by C. C. Starburk, M. B. Riddle, Horatio B. Hackett, John Lillie, E. A. Washburn, E. Harwood, George E. Day, and A. C. Kendrick.

Lenski, Richard C. H. The Interpretation of St. Paul's Epistles to the Colossians, to the Thessalonians, to Timothy, to Titus and to Philemon. Reprint ed. Minneapolis: Augsburg Publishing House, 1964.

Lewis, Gordon R. "Biblical Evidence for Pretribulationism." Bibliotheca Sacra 125:499 (July-September 1968):216-26.

Lightfoot, J. B. Notes on the Epistles of St. Paul. Reprint ed. Winona Lake, In.: Alpha Publications, n.d.

Lowery, David K. "A Theology of Paul's Missionary Epistles." In A Biblical Theology of the New Testament, pp. 243-97. Edited by Roy B. Zuck. Chicago: Moody Press, 1994.

Manson, Thomas W. "St. Paul in Greece: The Letters to the Thessalonians." Bulletin of the John Rylands Library 35 (1952-53):428-47.

_____. Studies in the Gospels and Epistles. Manchester: University of Manchester, 1962.

Marshall, I. Howard. 1 and 2 Thessalonians. New Century Bible Commentary series. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., and London: Marshall, Morgan & Scott Pub. Ltd., 1983.

Martin, D. Michael. 1, 2 Thessalonians. The New American Commentary series. N.c.: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 1995.

McCall, Thomas S. "How Soon the Tribulation Temple?" Bibliotheca Sacra 128:512 (October-December 1971):341-51.

_____. "Problems in Rebuilding the Tribulation Temple." Bibliotheca Sacra 129:513 (January-March 1972):75-80.

McLean, John A. "Another Look at Rosenthal's Pre-Wrath Rapture.'" Bibliotheca Sacra 148:592 (October-December 1991):387-98.

McNeile, A. H. An Introduction to the Study of the New Testament. 2nd ed. revised by C. S. C. Williams. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1965.

Milligan, George. St. Paul's Epistles to the Thessalonians. Evangelical Masterworks series. Reprint ed. Old Tappan, NJ: Fleming H. Revell, Co., n.d.

Morgan, G. Campbell. Living Messages of the Books of the Bible. 2 vols. New York: Fleming H. Revell Co., 1912.

Morris, Leon. The Epistles of Paul to the Thessalonians. Tyndale New Testament Commentary series. London: Tyndale Press, 1966.

_____. The First and Second Epistles to the Thessalonians. New International Commentary on the New Testament series. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1959.

_____. The Gospel According to John: Revised Edition. New International Commentary on the New Testament series. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1995.

Peterson, Robert A. "Does the Bible Teach Annihilationism?" Bibliotheca Sacra 156:621 (January-March 1999):13-27.

Powell, Charles E. "The Identity of the Restrainer' in 2 Thessalonians 2:6-7." Bibliotheca Sacra 154:615 (July-September 1997):320-32.

Poythress, Vern S. "2 Thessalonians 1 Supports Amillennialism." Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 37:4 (December 1994):529-38.

Reese, Alexander. The Approaching Advent of Christ. London: Marshall, Morgan and Scott, 1937; reprint ed., Grand Rapids: Grand Rapids International Publications, 1975.

Rice, John R. The Coming Kingdom of Christ. Wheaton, Il.: Sword of the Lord Publishers, 1945.

Robertson, Archibald Thomas. Word Pictures in the New Testament. 6 vols. Nashville: Broadman Press, 1931.

Rosenthal, Marvin. The Pre-Wrath Rapture of the Church. Nashville: Thomas Nelson Publishers, 1990.

Ryrie, Charles Caldwell. First and Second Thessalonians. Moody Colportage Library series. Chicago: Moody Press, 1959.

Showers, Renald E. Maranatha Our Lord, Come: A Definitive Study of the Rapture of the Church. Bellmawr, Pa.: Friends of Israel Gospel Ministry, 1995.

Stanton, Gerald B. Kept from the Hour. Fourth ed. Miami Springs, Fl.: Schoettle Publishing Co., 1991.

Theological Dictionary of the New Testament. S.v. "olethpos," by J. Schneider, 5 (1967):168-69.

Thiessen, Henry Clarence. Introduction to the New Testament. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1962.

Thomas, Robert L. "1 Thessalonians." In Ephesians--Philemon. Vol. 11 of Expositor's Bible Commentary. 12 vols. Edited by Frank E. Gaebelein and J. D. Douglas. Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1978.

Thornton, Larry R. "Salvation in the Tribulation in Light of God's Working unto Delusion'." Calvary Baptist Theological Journal 3:2 (Fall 1987):26-49.

Walvoord, John F. The Blessed Hope and the Tribulation. Contemporary Evangelical Perspectives series. Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1976.

_____. The Holy Spirit. 3rd ed. Findlay, Oh.: Dunham Publishing Co., 1958.

_____. The Millennial Kingdom. Revised ed. Findlay, Oh.: Dunham Publishing Co., 1963

_____. The Thessalonian Epistles. Study Guide series. Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1979.

_____. "Will Israel Build a Temple in Jerusalem?" Bibliotheca Sacra 125:498 (April-June 1968):99-106.

Wanamaker, Charles A. The Epistles to the Thessalonians. New International Greek Testament Commentary series. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., and Exeter, Eng.: Paternoster Press, 1990.

Wiersbe, Warren W. Be Ready. BE Books series. Wheaton: Scripture Press Publications, Victor Books, 1980.

Wuest, Kenneth S. Prophetic Light in the Present Darkness. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1955.

Copyright 2003 by Thomas L. Constable

Haydock: 2 Thessalonians (Book Introduction)

THE SECOND

EPISTLE OF ST. PAUL, THE APOSTLE,

TO THE THESSALONIANS.

INTRODUCTION.

In this epistle St. Paul admonishes the Thessalonians to be constant in the faith of Christ, and not to be terrified by the insinuations of false teachers, telling them that the day of judgment was near at hand, as there must come many signs and wonders before it. He bids them to hold firm the traditions received from him, whether by word or by epistle; and shews them how they may be certain of his letters by the manner he writes. This epistle was written soon after the former, and also from Corinth, about A.D. 52. (Challoner; Witham) --- From the context we learn that the present is a continuation of the former epistle. He not only rectifies wrong impressions caused by his former letter, but finding that those indolent characters whom he had reprimanded were no ways corrected, he determines to reprimand them still more severely in this letter, which he tells us he writes because he has it not in his power to visit, as he could wish, the Thessalonians.

====================

Gill: 2 Thessalonians (Book Introduction)

INTRODUCTION TO 2 THESSALONIANS

This second epistle was written, not from Athens, as the subscription testifies, nor from Rome, as Athanasius ^a supposes; but from Corinth, from whence was sent the former, and where the apostle and Timothy, and Silvanus met; and which was sent about half a year after the other. The design of which is to comfort and support the Thessalonians under the afflictions and persecutions they endured for the sake of the Gospel; and to rectify a mistake they had gone into, and which might be occasioned by what the apostle had said in his former epistle, concerning the second coming of Christ, as though it was just at hand; which might lead them to neglect their worldly business, and duties of civil life, and give the enemies of the Gospel an advantage against the whole of it as false, should not this prove true; as also to exhort this church to take notice of disorderly persons such as were idle, and busy bodies, and withdraw from them, and remove them from their communion, as being not only burdensome to them, but a reproach to their profession.

Gill: 2 Thessalonians 2 (Chapter Introduction)

INTRODUCTION TO 2 THESSALONIANS 2

In this chapter the apostle guards against a notion, as if the second coming of Christ was at hand; declares that, previous to it, there must be a great apostasy, and a revelation of antichrist; comforts the saints against fears of being included in this defection; exhorts them to stand fast in the faith, and closes this chapter with petitions for them. He entreats them in a most tender and solemn manner not to imagine that the day of Christ was at hand, and that they would not be disturbed and moved at it; and points unto the several ways, and cautions against them, they might be imposed upon and deceived by men with respect to it, 2Th 2:1 and assigns his reasons why it could not be yet, because before this time there was to be a general apostasy, and antichrist must appear; whom from his character, he calls the man of sin, and from his end, the son of perdition; and describes him as an opposer of God, an exalter of himself above all that is called God, as sitting in the temple of God and declaring himself to be God, 2Th 2:3 of which things he had told them before, 2Th 2:5 nor were they ignorant of what at present hindered the revelation of the man of sin, who was then in being, and was working and growing up apace; only there was something (the Roman empire) which hindered, and would continue to do so, until the fixed time of his revelation was up, 2Th 2:6 when be should be manifest; though he should not always continue, being to be consumed and destroyed by the breath of Christ's mouth, and the splendour of his coming, 2Th 2:8 and the appearance of antichrist in the world, being a matter of considerable importance, it is described by being after the working of Satan, and as attended with lying and false miracles, and with all deceitful and unrighteous doctrines and practices; which reprobate men would be left to give into, as a punishment of their not receiving cordially the truth of the Gospel; upon which account God would give them to such judicial blindness, as to give credit to a lie, which would bring on their final damnation, they not believing the truth, but taking pleasure in unrighteousness, 2Th 2:9, but lest this account of things should be discouraging to the saints at Thessalonica, the apostle styles them brethren; asserts them to be the beloved of the Lord; gives an instance of it, for which he gives thanks, namely, their election of God; the date of which was from everlasting; the means sanctification of the Spirit, and belief of the truth; the end salvation by Jesus Christ; and the evidence of which was their effectual calling by the Gospel, to the obtaining of the glory of Christ, 2Th 2:13 and then he exhorts them to stand fast in the doctrines that had been taught them, either in an epistolary way, or by the ministry of the word, 2Th 2:15 and concludes the chapter with petitions for them made to God the Father, and to Christ who had loved and comforted them, and given them good hope of everlasting things; that they might be comforted more and more, and be established in every good doctrine and practice, 2Th 2:16.

College: 2 Thessalonians (Book Introduction)

INTRODUCTION

The pressures of persecution, apparent in 1 Thessalonians, have intensified in this letter. In its three brief chapters the reader perceives the vital importance for suffering believers of confident hope in the Lord's return. Likewise intensified is the problem of idleness. In the face of abuses of Christian generosity, 2 Thessalonians gives a sharp reminder of the individual Christian's duty to live as a responsible member of the community, hard-working and self-supporting.

Much of what was said about the circumstances and organization of 1 Thessalonians can also be affirmed of the second letter (see introduction to 1 Thessalonians above). But unlike 1 Thessalonians, this letter presents two major critical problems. Brief attention will be given to these below.

AUTHORSHIP

Unlike 1 Thessalonians, the second letter has widely been taken as a pseudepigraph, composed after Paul's death by one of his followers who used 1 Thessalonians as a model. Several lines of evidence have been cited to support the hypothesis that 2 Thessalonians is not an authentic letter of Paul.

One of these concerns the letter's eschatology. While 1 Thessalonians emphasized that the Lord's return was imminent, that is, that it could occur at any time (5:1-11), 2 Thessalonians appears to propose a series of preliminary signs which must occur before the Lord can return (2:1-12). If this is indeed the case, then, it is argued, that the tension between the two letters is such that Paul could not have written both. More particularly, it is often argued that the less imminent expectation of 2 Thessalonians reflects a later period in the life of the church, when the vivid expectation that the Lord would return within the lifetime of the first generation of Christians had been disappointed. If so, then it is clearly a production of the generation after the apostle Paul.

Secondly, it is argued that the tone of 2 Thessalonians is considerably colder and more formal than 1 Thessalonians. As an example, "we ought to thank" in 2 Thess 1:3; 2:13 is regarded as less warm than "we thank" in 1 Thess 1:2. Likewise, the repeated use of "command" in 2 Thess 3:6, 12 is said to reflect a less intimate relationship between the writer and the readers. Such a shift in tone is thought to be unlikely if Paul had written both letters, especially if 1 Thessalonians was written first, but is entirely to be expected if the second letter was a pseudepigraph.

Thirdly, the background of the readers appears to be different. 1 Thess 1:9 appears to indicate a predominantly Gentile audience, but in 2 Thessalonians references to the final judgment (1:6-10) and the man of lawlessness (2:1-12) appear to assume knowledge that could be expected only of Jews. It is consequently argued that the second letter was not written for the same church, indicating that the addressee and so also the author named in the salutation are fictions.

Combined with these concerns is the literary style of 2 Thessalonians. In some respects it closely resembles 1 Thessalonians, following a similar outline (including a double thanksgiving: 1 Thess 1:2-10; 2:13-16; 2Thess 2 Thess 1:3-12; 2:13-17) and discussing similar themes (eschatology, idleness). However, it has been argued that the sentence structure of 2 Thessalonians is significantly different from the undisputed letters of Paul. In particular, 2 Thess 2:3-12 is a more complex sentence than is found elsewhere in Paul's letters, constructions with the genitive are more frequent, and subordinating conjunctions are more numerous. Likewise it is argued that a number of terms and concepts from Paul's authentic letters are used in a different sense in 2 Thessalonians. The combination of similarity and dissimilarity is said to point to a post-Pauline imitator, who at some points incorporated elements of Paul's style and substance from 1 Thessalonians and at others reflected followed his own course.

The force of these arguments is considerable, and a large number of contemporary scholars have been persuaded by them to reject Pauline authorship of this letter. However, the idea that 2 Thessalonians is pseudepigraphical is itself problematic. It is first of all difficult to understand why someone would write 2 Thessalonians and ascribe it to Paul, since presumably it contained nothing so controversial as to demand the apostle's authority for its acceptance. Furthermore, if written by a later imitator, that person knew only 1 Thessalonians, since the major parallels are only with that letter. Such a situation would be surprising for a second-generation disciple of Paul. The reference to the temple in 2:4 gives no indication that the Jerusalem temple has been destroyed by the Romans, again surprising if the letter were written near the end of the first century when the fall of Jerusalem was well known. Furthermore, 3:6-15 give every appearance of having been written to a specific congregation in response to a particular problem. It would be most unusual for a letter to be written to specific church in the name of Paul after his death and not be detected as a pseudepigraph. And if all in the church recognized the fiction and accepted it as such, we must explain how the later church forgot the origins of the letter, since all external evidence affirms that Paul is the author (Marcion, c. A.D. 150, and the Muratorian Canon, c. A.D. 180, both ascribe it to Paul). These considerations make the hypothesis of pseudepigraphy less than likely.

In fact, each argument for pseudepigraphy can be explained on the hypothesis that Paul wrote 2 Thessalonians himself. The eschatological tension in fact has less to do with a lessening of expectancy than is often allowed. Exegesis of 2:1-12 in the comments below will indicate that what Paul discusses here is probably not a series of preliminary signs but the present reality that evil and the Evil One appear to dominate and that such dominance is itself proof that the Lord has not yet returned. In this case, there is absolutely no tension between the eschatology of the first and second letters. However, even if this interpretation should be wrong, it is not impossible that Paul would express a different perspective on the Lord's coming in 2 Thessalonians and not view it as contradictory, just as he does in 1 Cor 15:1-58, which stresses the general resurrection, and 2 Cor 5:1-10, which stresses individual immortality.

Likewise, the change in tone between the two letters can be explained by the change in circumstances. In 1 Thessalonians part of Paul's concern was to reassure the readers of his affection for them despite his absence. That need having been met, the second letter - preoccupied with the persecution of the church, the problem about the Lord's return and the idleness of some members - reflects less of the personal warmth emphasized in the first. Furthermore, if Paul used a different amanuensis for each letter, or if Silas and Timothy had different roles in the composition of each letter, the tone and style could easily have changed.

The change from a Gentile to a Jewish background is more apparent than real. As noted in the introduction to 1 Thessalonians, that letter includes a number of phrases which assume knowledge of the Old Testament and Judaism. The Jewish orientation of the second letter is more explicit but hardly necessitates a different audience. This observation also obviates the need for other hypotheses, such as that Paul sent the two letters to two different factions of the church, one Gentile and the other Jewish, or that he sent the first letter to the church at large and the second to the leaders of the church.

The stylistic differences between 2 Thessalonians and the other letters of Paul are real, but they can be exaggerated. The complexity of sentences and concentration of subordinating conjunctions are in fact not two matters but one, since complex sentences require subordinating conjunctions. The sentence of 1:3-12 is exceptional, but it is approximated in Ephesians and Colossians. The authorship of those letters is also disputed, but to base an argument for one letter's inauthenticity on its similarity with another questioned letter is to build a supposition on another supposition. It would be fairer to admit that in a short letter like 2 Thessalonians, a few unusual expressions may create a false impression of stylistic variance. Furthermore, it is admitted by all that Paul's style changed with each letter. Only in Romans, for example, do we find the rhetorical question, "What shall we say then?" (3:5; 4:1; 6:1; 7:7; 8:31; 9:14, 30), and no one disputes the authenticity of Romans on that basis. Alleged differences in the use of key terms and presentation of concepts have likewise been exaggerated. Paul's usage elsewhere is often more flexible than some critics will allow. And 2 Thessalonians contains some Paulinisms which would have been difficult for an imitator to compose. The combination of similarities and differences between the two Thessalonians letters and between the second and the rest of the Pauline corpus is at least as consistent with the hypothesis that Paul wrote both under changing circumstances as it is with the hypothesis of a pseudepigrapher.

Thus, though the controversy over the authorship of this letter is likely to continue among scholars, the arguments against Paul's authorship are not sufficient to overturn the testimony of the letter itself and of the early church. By nature of the case, evidence to prove the authenticity of an ancient document always falls short of absolute proof. But those who have accepted 2 Thessalonians as a genuine letter of Paul can do so with integrity, knowing that the balance of evidence favors their conclusion.

ORDER AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF WRITING

The traditional assumption has always been that 2 Thessalonians was written not long after 1 Thessalonians, while Paul was still in Corinth. Paul had apparently received a report, perhaps from Timothy after the delivery of the first letter, of ongoing problems in the Thessalonian church. The persecution had not abated, misunderstandings about the Lord's return continued, and the willfully idle had not repented. Therefore, Paul composed a second letter to address the developing situation, probably only months after writing the first.

There have been several scholars who have questioned the traditional order, however, postulating that 2 Thessalonians was in fact written first. The traditional order of Paul's letters, these have argued, is based not on chronology but length, longer letters of Paul being placed before shorter ones in the canon. Therefore, internal considerations alone, the evidence of the letters themselves, must determine the order of writing.

The most recent and important advocate of the priority of 2 Thessalonians is Charles Wanamaker. His argument, which in the main follows a line marked out by others, may be summarized as follows. First, the persecution of 2 Thess 1:4-7 appears to be a matter of the past in 1 Thess 2:14. Secondly, the idlers of 2 Thess 3:6-15 appear to be a new problem, while 1 Thess 4:10-12 and 5:14 address it as something well known and already under control. Thirdly, the signature of 2 Thess 3:17 appears to be more fitting in Paul's first letter to the church. Fourth, the eschatological teaching of 1 Thess 4:13-5:11, especially in light of the remark in 5:1 that the readers had no need of such instruction because they had received it before, is more coherently explained if it is an elaboration on 2 Thess 2:1-12, especially if some implications of that passage had been misunderstood. On the other hand, if the church had already received 1 Thess 4:13-5:11, it is difficult to see how they would have concluded that the day of the Lord had already come (2 Thess 2:2), since the dead had not yet been raised and united with the living in the Lord's presence (1 Thess 4:17). Therefore, Wanamaker argues with earlier advocates of the hypothesis that 2 Thessalonians was written by Paul after he received a vague report about problems in the Thessalonian church and was delivered by Timothy in the visit described in 1 Thess 3:1-10.

While Wanamaker has succeeded in showing how little evidence there actually is for the priority of 1 Thessalonians, the case for the priority of 2 Thessalonians is far from proved. External evidence must be weighed also: Marcion apparently referred to 1 Thessalonians as the first letter despite the fact that he did not arrange his canon by length. As far as internal matters are concerned, if 2 Thessalonians was the first letter, it is surprising that Paul makes no reference to it in 1 Thessalonians as a part of his passionate discussion of his prior work with the Thessalonian church (2:1-12) and his attempts to return to them since his departure (2:17-20). Wanamaker suggests that the mention of Timothy's visit may be a tacit reference to it, since Timothy can be assumed to have carried some letter from Paul on this visit. Still, one might expect a more specific mention of so substantial a letter as 2 Thessalonians had it been written first. On the other hand, the references to letters in 2 Thess 2:2, 15; 3:17 are at least consistent with the idea that 1 Thessalonians had already been received, though they do not demand it.

If 1 Thessalonians is prior, as the slight balance of probability suggests, we can assume that the persecution of the church, which may have abated after Paul's departure, has heated up again, or at least that the church is in greater turmoil because of it. Likewise, we must assume that the church's misunderstanding of the Lord's return in 2:2 occurred despite the logical force of 1 Thess 4:13-18. Also, the idle who were warned briefly in 1 Thess 4:11-12 and 5:14 did not heed that warning. Such developments will surprise those who assume that human behavior is always reasonable and orderly, but those who have experienced the give and take of pastoral leadership will recognize that churches and Christians, like stocks, seldom move in a straight line. Against such a background Paul dictated his second letter, seeking to correct the church's course and reinforce its growth.

THEOLOGICAL VALUE

2 Thessalonians focuses primarily on three issues: persecution, the Lord's return, and the problem of idleness. Each has remarkable relevance for today's church.

Persecution is perhaps less a part of the experience of Christians in North America than in other parts of the world. Nevertheless, for many Christians it remains a real threat. More broadly, all believers experience the hostility of unbelievers at various points, and all can be subject to the hurt of their ridicule, even if they are relatively safe from physical violence. 2 Thessalonians provides the important reminder that God notices such suffering and promises to bring vindication for his people. The suffering of the church will one day end.

Likewise, the pervasive dominance of evil, obvious to every modern observer, will one day end as well. Whatever the precise nature of the "man of lawlessness" (2:3), Paul certainly focuses attention on his present activity (2:9-12). Christians who wonder whether their faith is true when they see the opponents of Christianity with the upper hand have their answer in this letter. Evil will continue to run rampant in this age, but when Christ returns, he will utterly destroy every manifestation of it and the One who stands behind it. The goodness and faithfulness of God can be trusted to answer every aspect of injustice in this age.

Unemployment, underemployment and wide gaps in income are no less a social reality now than they were for Paul's readers. And so the need for Christian charity continues as it did in the first century. But the dangers inherent in such sharing are still real as well. Paul's reminders about the need for personal responsibility and self-support (3:6-12), coupled with the reminder to continue in good works of generosity (3:13) are messages to be heeded as today's church considers its role in addressing the pressing issues of poverty and the failures of the secular welfare state.

The observation that problems had intensified since Paul wrote his first letter contains a pertinent message in itself. Even in Paul's ministry, the life of the church was characterized by trouble as much as progress. Yet through such trouble the work and will of God are accomplished. Christians frustrated by the one-step-forward-two-steps-back trajectory of the church can take heart that in similar circumstances the great apostle still found much for which to give thanks and boast (1:3-4; 2:13-14). God's will, which will be fully realized only when Christ returns, is even now being worked out in the life of the church, even when outwardly it appears defeated.

-College Press New Testament Commentary: with the NIV

College: 2 Thessalonians (Outline)

OUTLINE

I. GREETING - 1:1-2

II. OPENING THANKSGIVING, ENCOURAGEMENT AND PRAYER - 1:3-12

A. Thanksgiving for the Thessalonians' Growth and Endurance in Persecution- 1:3-4

B. Encouragement in Light of God's Judgment - 1:5-10

C. The Content of Paul's Prayer - 1:11-12

III. INSTRUCTION ON THE LORD'S RETURN - 2:1-12

A. The Day of the Lord Not Yet Present - 2:1-2

B. The Apostasy and the Man of Lawlessness - 2:3-12

1. The Apostasy and the Revelation of the Man of Lawlessness - 2:3

2. A Description of the Man of Lawlessness - 2:4

3. Reminder of Oral Instruction on the Subject - 2:5

4. The One Who Restrains/Prevails - 2:6-10

5. God's Consequent Actions - 2:11-12

IV. RENEWED THANKSGIVING, ENCOURAGEMENT AND PRAYER - 2:13-17

A. Thanksgiving for the Salvation of the Thessalonians- 2:13-14

B. Encouragement to Remain Faithful to the Traditions Delivered by Paul - 2:15

C. Prayer for the Lord's Encouragement and Strength - 2:16-17

V. EXHORTATIONS - 3:1-16

A. General Exhortations - 3:1-5

B. Exhortations Regarding Church Discipline - 3:6-15

1. Exclusion of the Willfully Idle - 3:6-13

2. Exclusion of the Disobedient - 3:14-15

VI. CONCLUSION - 3:16-18

-College Press New Testament Commentary: with the NIV