Module Sixteen
Paul's Early Letters
Grouping the letters of the New Testament into manageable clusters is common practice in introductory books because it avoids allocating a chapter to every letter, which vary greatly in size. In keeping with the convenience of common practice, Paul’s letters are grouped into the following clusters: “Earliest Letters,” “Major Letters,” and “Prison Letters.” While these categories are general, they may not be accurate.
Three of Paul’s writings can be placed within the category of “Earliest Letters”: 1, 2 Thessalonians and Galatians, though not without caveats. The inclusion of 2 Thessalonians among the “Earliest Letters” is contingent on its authorship, which is frequently contested. If Paul did not write it, then it technically does not belong in the cluster. The dating of Galatians is also problematic because we are not entirely sure if Paul composed the letter during his first missionary journey or his second.
Nevertheless, categorizing the earliest writings is helpful for tracing the chronology of Paul’s journeys, his missionary strategy, and the development of his theology. If these are the earliest letters, then they express some of Paul’s initial beliefs about the significance of Jesus’ death and resurrection. Since the letters are not narratives that look back at Jesus’ ministry in story form, but rather are direct responses to the problems facing the early churches, they reflect the beliefs of what scholars have called the oral stage of Christian development. The study of the origins of Christianity begins with these letters, not with Matthew or Luke, despite their narration of Jesus’ birth and their prior placement in the New Testament canon.
1 Thessalonians
16.1 Introduction
Of the three “Earliest Letters,” 1 Thessalonians has the distinction of being called the earliest surviving Christian writing, though it probably is not the first Christian writing ever written. There were probably writings that predated it, which are no longer extant, such as the sayings of Jesus in Q and earlier letters of Paul (e.g. 1 Cor 5:9). In Paul’s first letter to the church in Thessalonica, which he founded, we are able to get a glimpse into both the life of an early Christian church and the early theological thinking of Paul, which many argue developed over the span of his ministry.
This city of Thessalonica was founded in approximately 315 BCE by King Cassander of Macedonia, who named it after his wife, the half-sister of Alexander the Great. Its location on the Gulf of Therme made it one of the best natural harbors on the Aegean Sea. During the Roman period, Thessalonica was the largest commercial center in the province of Macedonia. As with most major port cities, Thessalonica was cosmopolitan. In Paul’s day, it attracted laborers, tradesmen, and other skilled workers from all over the empire, and along with them, a vast array of philosophical and religious traditions. Archeological and inscriptional evidence points to religious practices that included (1) the mystery religions, which included the cult of Dionysus and especially Cabirus, which were patron deities who were thought to be regional guardians, (2) the cult of Roma, which was the worship of the female deity that personified Rome and more broadly the Roman state, (3) the emperor cults, which deified Julius Caesar and his adopted son Augustus, and (4) the Egyptian cults, which included the worship of Isis, Serapis, and Osiris. Religious practice was foundational in the formation of a common identity, social order, and civic life (e.g. shared feasts, festivals, expectations). Many religions were financially sponsored and maintained by the city’s aristocracy because they contributed to the safeguarding of the hierarchical social structure. While Thessalonica was largely a pagan city (e.g. 1 Thess 1:9), both the reference to a synagogue in Acts 17:1 and a few Jewish inscriptions that probably came from that region, though from a later period, suggest that it also included a Jewish community, which was not unusual in the major cities of the Eastern Mediterranean.
16.2 Authorship
The letter begins by identifying Paul, Silvanus (Silas) and Timothy as the authors (1:1). Despite the credit given to Silas and Timothy and the frequent use of the first-person plural (“we,” “us” and “our”), Paul is clearly the driving force in the letter’s composition (2:18). On several occasions, he uses the first-person plural (3:5; 5:27) and even appends his name (2:18). This does not imply, however, that his companions had no role in the composition. Timothy was Paul’s convert, close associate, and possibly his amanuensis. Silas was not one of Paul’s converts, but was a prominent member of the Jerusalem church (Acts 15:22), which would have further elevated the status of the letter. Attributing credit to fellow workers, especially Timothy, is not unusual for Paul, in spite of his leading role in those compositions (cf. 1 Cor 1:1; 2 Cor 1:1; Phil 1:1; Col 1:1; 2 Thess 1:1; Phlm 1:1). In Galatians, he goes so far as to mention “all the brothers and sisters with me” as his co-authors (Gal 1:1-2).
1 Thessalonians falls within the category of undisputed letters. Despite the omission of well-known Pauline theological ideas and terminology, such as “justification by faith” and “works of the Law,” there is consensus that Paul is the author. The so-called grand theological ideas that most people associate with Romans or Galatians are not found in 1 Thessalonians. The problems faced by the church at Thessalonica, which Paul knew well, were simply different.
There are, however, a few parts of the letter that have been the subject of scholarly debate because they are thought to be later insertions, called interpolations, by someone other than the original author. These consist of very small portions of the letter that appear to be uncharacteristic in style, content, and/or terminology. Interpolations, which are not uncommon in the literature of the ancient world, were added for various reasons. One of the main reasons was to address an issue or add a perspective that the original letter did not consider. By inserting new material, the interpolator could use the authorship of the original letter to his own advantage.
Info Box 16.1: Examples of Interpolations
Interpolations were widespread. In Jewish literature, for example, Josephus’ references to Jesus that he was the Christ, that he attracted many Jews and Gentiles, and that he rose again on the third day as the prophets foretold is often considered as a later Christian interpolation (Antiquities 18.3.3). In the New Testament, the following passages are variously considered as possible interpolations: Matt 6:13; 16:2-3, 18-18; 25:13; 27:35; 28:19; Mark 7:16; 9:31; 10:21, 34; 15:28; 16:9-20; Luke 2:14; 9:55-56; 11:2, 4; 22:43-44; 23:34; 24:12; John 1:18; 7:53-8:11; Acts 8:37; 1 Cor 14:33b-35; 15:3-11; 1 John 5:7-8.
The section of this letter that is often thought to be an interpolation is 1 Thess 2:13-16. Not only does it appear to be an interruption in the flow of the letter, it is unusually bitter in its anti-Jewish sentiment. In this section, the Jews—whether they represent the leadership or ethnic group—are blamed for killing Jesus and the prophets, which finds no parallel in the undisputed letters. The Jews are also blamed for expelling Paul and his fellow workers and hindering their ministry to the Gentiles. For many scholars, since the middle of the nineteenth century, the statement in 2:16 that “the wrath of God has come upon them [the Jews] at last” is often read as a reference to the destruction of the Jerusalem Temple in 70 CE, which postdates the rest of the letter by about twenty years. That the Jewish people were subject to the “wrath of God” as some kind of final act does not coincide with Paul’s other references to Israel’s adoption and salvation (Rom 9:4 and11:26) or to his own hope of their conversion (1 Cor 9:20). Instead, 1 Thess 2:13-16 is more characteristic of what one finds in Acts where the Jews are blamed for the death of Jesus and are portrayed as Paul’s hostile antagonists. If 1 Thess 2:14-16 is an interpolation, then it was probably inserted after the fall of Jerusalem by someone who was not only influenced by Luke, but was caught up in some kind of hostile action by Jews against Christians after 70 CE.
Scholars who argue that 1 Thess 2:13-16 is not an interpolation view this section as a digression that explains why Paul is so concerned about the Thessalonian converts. It is also argued that the bitter anti-Jewish statement is similar to Paul’s forceful rhetoric in other undisputed letters, such as 2 Cor 11:24-26, Gal 5:12 and Phil 3:2. While these are certainly strong condemnations, they are not necessarily anti-Jewish, but rather target either select Jewish leaders or Jewish Christians who want Gentile converts to Christianity to be circumcised. Since Paul did not live to see the fall of Jerusalem, the statement about the “wrath of God” coming upon the Jews in 2:16 is read as a reference to other calamities, such as the death of King Agrippa (44 CE), the famine in Judea (46-47 CE), the revolt of Theudas (66-70 CE), the expulsion of the Jews from Rome by Claudius (49 CE), or the riot in Jerusalem that resulted in multiple casualties—no less than twenty thousand according to Josephus (Ant. 20.112; War 2.225). Even if this number is inflated, the aftermath must have been disastrous. Alternatively, it is possible that Paul’s use of “wrath” is intended to be understood as Jewish apocalyptic language, which typically used poetry, symbol and imagery to capture the author’s feeling about the state of the world. Since the “wrath” has already “drawn near” to the Jews, Paul phrased it as an inevitability (1 Thess 2:16). If this is the case, then there is no need to isolate a specific historical event that corresponds to “wrath.”
Info Box 16.2: Vilifying Language in the Ancient World
The anti-Jewish language in 1 Thess 2:13-16 and in other parts of the New Testament should be understood as a common feature of ancient rhetoric called vituperatio, which was used in the context of social conflict. Groups or individuals that were in competition with each other commonly used vilifying language of the other. The purpose was to cast doubt on the legitimacy of rival individuals/groups and to promote their own legitimacy or that of their own group. In 1 Thessalonians, Paul uses this language to question the legitimacy of the Jews as the people of God because they have not adopted their own messiah. Conversely, he legitimizes his Gentile converts who have come to accept Jesus as messiah. While this awareness does not invalidate the anti-Jewish expressions, it does put the language into a proper context so that we do not collapse ancient and modern expressions.
16.3 Place of Writing
There is no direct evidence in 1 Thessalonians from where the letter was written. Therefore, scholars generally turn to Acts in order to locate the letter’s composition within Paul’s travels. While Acts often differs from the undisputed letters on a number of biographical details, the references to Paul’s establishment of the church at Thessalonica and to his subsequent trip to Athens correspond to Paul’s own account.
Corinth often emerges as the most likely place of writing. Here is why. According to Luke, both Silas and Timothy (by inference) appear to be with Paul during his first visit to Thessalonica (Acts 17:1-9), some eight months prior to the writing of the letter. Paul’s preaching in the synagogue over three weeks yields several converts, but also prompts a public uproar by opposing Jews. Paul and his companions escape the uproar by fleeing during the night to Beroea, from where they journey onward in separate directions. Paul traveled to Athens, where he delivered his famous speech to the Epicurean and Stoic philosophers on the Areopagus (Acts 17:10-32). He had hoped that Silas and Timothy would join him there, but according to Luke they do not (17:13-15). Paul’s account in 1 Thess 3:1-2 is different, implying that Timothy was with Paul in Athens, from where he was sent to the Thessalonians. Nevertheless, after Athens, Paul travels to Corinth where he first meets up with Silas and then with Timothy, who returns from Thessalonica (Acts 18:1-5). Since Timothy first delivered the news to Paul about the Thessalonians’ faith in Corinth (1 Thess 3:6), this is most likely the city where the letter was written and from where it was sent.
16.4 Date of Writing
Unlike some other Pauline letters, 1 Thessalonians can be dated with some precision, largely based on Acts 18:12, which reports that the Jews in Corinth attacked Paul and brought him before Gallio, the proconsul of Achaia, in order to present their grievances against him. Since their complaints were deemed as a matter of ethnic concern, namely their own Jewish law rather than civil law, Gallio dismissed the case outright. This historical reference to Gallio is important because an inscription has been discovered that locates his proconsulship to 51-52 CE. If the reference to Gallio in Acts is accurate, then this evidence, combined with Paul’s eighteen-month term in Corinth leads to dating 1 Thessalonians between 50-52 CE. Other dates have been proposed, but the majority of scholars do not differ from this tight range by more than a year in either direction. If this range is correct, then 1 Thessalonians is our earliest New Testament writing.
16.5 Letter Sequence
Since the 17th century, scholars have proposed on occasion that the sequence of the letters to the Thessalonians should be reversed. They have correctly noted that the priority of 1 Thessalonians should not simply be assumed because of its title and position in the canon. The Pauline letters initially did not have titles. These were probably added when the letters began to circulate together. Also, the letters in the New Testament are not arranged chronologically. They are instead arranged in descending order of length, with the letters written to the same communities placed adjacent to each other (1, 2 Corinthians, 1, 2 Thessalonians). The Petrine and Johannine letters are arranged in the same way. If 2 Thessalonians is the first letter, then we should probably assume that when Timothy arrived in Thessalonica from Athens (1 Thess 3:2), he brought with him what is today called 2 Thessalonians. When Timothy returned back to Paul with news from Thessalonica, the letter that we today call 1 Thessalonians was written in response to his report.
Info Box 16.3: Was 2 Thessalonians Written First?
There are several reasons why 2 Thessalonians is thought to precede 1 Thessalonians. (1) 2 Thessalonians (1:4-5) refers to present persecution of the faithful, whereas 1 Thessalonians refers to it in the past. (2) The idleness in 2 Thessalonians appears to be a recent problem (3:11-12), whereas in 1 Thessalonians it is well known (4:10-12; 5:14). (3) If Paul wrote both letters, then the emphatic personal ending in 2 Thess 3:17 is strange, unless it was the initial letter to a new audience. (4) The eschatological teaching in 2 Thess 1-12 makes more sense as an initial response to the Thessalonian anxiety, not as a follow-up response to 1 Thessalonians wherein Paul writes that they have no need of instruction (5:1). And (5) the two sections in 1 Thessalonians that begin with “now concerning” cover topics that are already hinted at in 2 Thessalonians, namely “brotherly love” (1 Thess 4:9; cf. 2 Thess 3:6-15) and “times and seasons” (1 Thess 5:1; cf. 2 Thess 2:1-12).
It is certainly possible that the letters have been reversed in the canonical process. Placing 2 Thessalonians first in the sequence explains some of the similarities and differences between the letters, but it also raises new questions that require explanations. Though the problem of the letters’ sequence is far from being settled, the traditional canonical order is assumed in this chapter for several reasons. First, there is no mention of a previous letter in 1 Thessalonians, whereas in 2 Thess 2:15 (and possibly in 2:2; 3:17), the writer explicitly refers to one, writing, “So then, brothers and sisters, stand firm and hold fast to the traditions that you were taught by us, either by word of mouth or by our letter.” Second, the differences in the eschatological teachings of the two letters make more sense if 1 Thessalonians is earlier. It is easier to imagine that the more general expectation of the parousia, or the coming of Christ, which in 1 Thessalonians is anticipated when it is least expected (e.g. 1 Thess 5:2), led to the anxiety addressed in 2 Thessalonians that it had already arrived (e.g. 2 Thess 2:1-12). Explaining the reverse sequence of events is more difficult. Third, 1 Thessalonians includes many more details about Paul’s stay in Thessalonica than 2 Thessalonians, which is consistent with an initial letter instead of a subsequent one. Finally, if Paul is the author of both letters, the reference to his habit of writing final greetings in his own hand in 2 Thess 3:17 may be intended to authenticate the claim that this second letter actually came from him, which would imply that his personal greeting could be compared to his prior letter.
16.6 Audience
There is no mistaking that Paul identifies his audience as Gentile converts, writing, “you turned to God from idols to serve the living and true God” (1:9). He refers to “the Jews” as well, but the they are categorized as a group that persecutes the church in Judea, which presumably consists primarily of Jewish Christians. Paul does not mince words. He claims that “the Jews” were responsible for Jesus’ death and that they are always trying to prevent the gospel from reaching the Gentiles (2:14-16). They seem to be mentioned solely for the purpose of drawing a comparison of persecutions, which is Paul’s way of conveying empathy. As the Gentile Christians in Thessalonica have undergone a certain degree of persecution from their pagan neighbors, so also have the Jewish Christians in Judea experienced persecution from “the Jews” (2:14).
It is doubtful that Paul’s audience included Jewish Christians or that they had much knowledge of Judaism. Unlike in Acts, Paul makes no mention of a synagogue. There is no mention of the Law and there are no direct scriptural quotations. The Jewish prophets are only mentioned in passing as victims who, like Jesus, were killed by “the Jews” (2:15). However, there are a few allusions to scripture and Jewish tradition, though they may not have been picked by the Thessalonians. For example, the anticipated day of the Lord is described as coming “like a thief in the night” when people are content and unsuspecting (5:2-3). The imagery, which is similar to that of Matt 24:36-44 (cf. Luke 17:22-35), alludes to the unsuspecting disposition in Noah’s time before the flood. Another example is the mention of Satan who is hindering Paul’s plans to visit. It is difficult to know what the Thessalonians would have known about Satan in the Jewish tradition. Paul likewise describes the resurrection within the linguistic and cultural sphere of Jewish apocalypticism, using imagery like the Lord’s descent from heaven, the voice of the archangel, the trumpet call, and the dichotomy between light and darkness (4:16-5:8). If there were no Jewish Christians in the Thessalonian church, they may have become aware of the imagery from a local Jewish community, resident God-fearers, or during Paul’s visit. Nevertheless, Paul’s pagan converts were clearly shaped by his deep-seated Jewish apocalyptic view of the world.
In Acts 17:1-9, Luke presents a slightly different portrayal of the Thessalonian church. At the beginning of his missionary activity in Thessalonica, Paul focuses his efforts on the city’s Jewish residents by preaching in the synagogue, “as was his custom” (17:2). Paul’s arguments from the scriptures that “it was necessary for the Messiah to suffer and to rise from the dead” (17:3) over a three-week period did not win many Jewish converts, though “many of the devout Greeks and not a few of the leading women” believed his message (17:4). Luke’s account certainly opens the door for the possibility that the newly established Thessalonian church consisted of a mix of Jews and Gentiles, with the former being a minority. For many scholars, the Acts accounts present a slight problem when compared with 1 Thessalonians, which clearly indicates that the church consisted only of Gentiles. Moreover, the Acts account fits a literary pattern that Luke uses elsewhere, which suggests that it was not composed for the purpose of reconstructing the past, but for rhetorical purposes (see Module 13). If this is the case, then it is easier to make sense of an exclusively Gentile audience in 1 Thessalonians.
Info Box 16.4: Did the Jews Drive Paul out of Thessalonica?
While there is little question that there was a Jewish community in Thessalonica during Paul’s day, did it have the political influence that Luke suggests? Since we have no evidence outside the New Testament about the presence of Jews in Thessalonica in the first half of the first century, one’s answer depends on one’s view of the authorship of 1 Thess 2:13-16, which includes a reference to Jews who drove Paul and his fellow workers out of Thessalonica and hindered them from speaking to the Gentiles. If Paul wrote this uncharacteristically anti-Jewish portion, then it is in line with Luke’s account, affirming a powerful, well-established Jewish community. The Jewish hindering of Paul’s ministry throughout Acts (e.g. 13:45-50; 14:2; 18:12) may also be consistent with 2 Cor 11:24. However, if 1 Thess 2:13-16 is not written by Paul, but is an interpolation (see above) based perhaps on Acts, then the presence of a powerful community is more difficult to establish.
16.7 Purpose
Why did Paul write to the Thessalonian Christians and what did he hope to achieve? Answering questions of purpose are vital for interpreting Paul’s letters properly. In formulating an answer, it must be recognized that we only have a portion of the communication from which to infer the situation(s) to which Paul is responding. This means that when we read the letter—or any writing in the New Testament, for that matter—we must be thinking about what circumstances initiated its composition. All of the letters are occasional. When one reads through the entire Pauline corpus, for example, one immediately realizes that each audience had its own peculiar needs, which resulted in letters that look very different from one another, despite their common authorship. Reconstructing the peculiar circumstances and needs of the Thessalonian Christians is an imprecise endeavor because the data is limited to the letters themselves. Nevertheless, some inferences can be made.
It seems that I Thessalonians was written almost immediately after Timothy arrived from Thessalonica with news about the state of its Christian community (1 Thess 3:6). Timothy may have delivered only an oral report or he may have combined it with a letter written by the Thessalonians. While Paul does not refer to a letter, there are hints that he is responding to itemized issues that could have been written down by them. Twice, Paul abruptly introduces a new subject with “But concerning…” (4:9; 5:1), which is the same transitional language he uses in response to the letter from the Corinthians (1 Cor 7:1, 25; 8:1).
Nevertheless, one of the features of the letter that stands out is its lack of doctrinal or behavioral correction, which in his other letters provide us with the clearest entry into the conditions of the nascent Christian communities. In 1 Thessalonians, we see no evidence of gross misconduct that requires urgent rectification. If anything, Paul expresses a tone of affirmation and encouragement instead of correction. The letter conveys praise, without persuasion. He writes: “We instructed you how to live in order to please God, as in fact you are living. Now we ask you and urge you in the Lord Jesus to do this more and more” (4:1). Later, he reiterates the same praise: “Now about your love for one another we do not need to write to you, for you yourselves have been taught by God to love each other. And in fact, you do love all the brothers and sisters throughout Macedonia. Yet we urge you, dear friends, to do so more and more” (4:9-10). And finally, Paul says to them, “encourage one another and build each other up, just as in fact you are already doing” (5:11). Paul did not feel the need to break new ground with the Thessalonians, but rather he wanted to strengthen and affirm the behavior that they were already exhibiting. As is the pattern in many of his letters, he uses his own conduct as a moral example. It is likely that he wanted to reinforce the boundaries and distinctive features of Christian life within a religiously diverse urban center.
What we do not know is why Paul needed to do this immediately after Timothy’s return. There has been no shortage of speculation about the underlying issues that potentially threatened the Thessalonian converts. The clearest hint why Paul wrote the letter comes from 2:17-3:6, which expresses his concern that when he left the Thessalonians, they would be vulnerable to temptations. In 1 Thess 3:5, Paul summarizes his concern, writing, “For this reason, when I could bear it no longer, I sent to find out about your faith; I was afraid that somehow the tempter had tempted you and that our labor had been in vain.” The “tempter” is probably Satan, who is mentioned earlier in 1 Thess 2:18. As in 1 Cor 7:5, Paul believed that Satan was constantly undermining his ministry through human agents. This deep-seated anxiety that his converts would abandon their beliefs in his absence, which allowed Satan to get a foothold, was probably unrelenting during his entire ministry (e.g. 2 Cor 11:28; 12:7).
Info Box 16.5: Satan as the Tempter
Within Paul’s apocalyptic view of the world, two powers are constantly at work: Satan and God. The imagery of Satan as the tempter of Christians is the chief adversary of God whom Paul blames for undermining his missionary work. Elsewhere, Paul calls him the “god of this age” who prevents unbelievers from following Christ (2 Cor 4:4; 2 Thess 2:9-12) and tempts believers to waiver in, or abandon, their new faith (1 Cor 7:5; 2 Cor 2:11; 11:13-15). All who afflict Paul’s converts are implicitly demonized because their work is contrary to that of God. In Paul’s apocalyptic schema, the death and resurrection of Jesus marked the end of the age when Satan’s reign will soon be overthrown at Christ’s coming from heaven which will be visible to all (1 Thess 1:10; 4:16-17).
16.8 Themes
16.8.1 Expression of Thanksgiving
Paul’s letters generally follow standard Greco-Roman convention, though they are often longer. They usually begin by identifying the sender(s) and recipient(s), followed by a brief expression of thanksgiving before addressing the main concerns in the body of the letter. While a letter’s expression of thanksgiving is usually brief when compared to the main body, this is not the case in 1 Thessalonians. Thanksgiving dominates the first three chapters (1:2-3:13). It is expressed in a heartfelt, affectionate, and joyful manner. This tone not only indicates the genuinely good relationship Paul had with his converts, but also conveys a huge relief that their faith has remained strong in his absence, despite the persecutions they suffered. Since the thanksgiving is prominent, 1 Thessalonians is often compared with similar letters in the ancient world that scholars call “friendship letters,” which were sent to convey good wishes and/or to renew friendships and acquaintances. Paul clearly enjoyed writing this letter, unlike for example Galatians and 1 Corinthians. His expressions of thanksgiving are intertwined with encouragement that the Thessalonians remain strong in their faith and with a desire to see them again.
16.8.2 Eschatology
Toward the end of the letter, Paul addresses issues relating to the Thessalonians’ misunderstanding of post-mortem existence for those who are in Christ. While this does not reflect the overall purpose of writing, it is an important theme. In 1 Thess 4:13, Paul writes, “But we do not want you to be uninformed, brothers and sisters, about those who have died, so that you may not grieve as others do who have no hope.” Although we lack the specifics of the problem (cf. 2 Thess 2:1-12), Paul assures his converts that their deceased loved ones who are in Christ will be included in the resurrection along with the living when Jesus returns. Similarly, in 5:1-2 Paul assures the Thessalonians that while the return of Jesus is imminent, they need to maintain their ethical behavior and posture of patience, encouragement, and peace.
The concern probably stemmed from Paul’s initial visit, which was then relayed to Timothy. We can surmise from 1 Thessalonians (and some would say 2 Thessalonians if it was the first letter) that Paul taught his new converts that the death and resurrection of Jesus, who is the son of the one true God (1:9), was necessary for the final judgment and restoration of the world. It seems that the most important part of his teaching for the Thessalonians was the return of Jesus from heaven who will rescue his followers from the impending wrath (2:19; 3:13; 4:13-18; 5:1-11). In the time between Paul’s departure from Thessalonica and Timothy’s reunion with Paul, some of the members of the congregation apparently died. Their passing was especially troubling to the surviving members because it preceded the return of Jesus. Since the Thessalonians were expecting an imminent return, the deaths of their fellow congregants proved bewildering. Would they still be able to experience the much-anticipated communion with Christ, as they knew the living would? Would those who were still alive ever see their departed loved ones again?
Paul responds sensitively to such concerns. He does not want ignorance to breed hopelessness (4:13). The answer to the Thessalonians’ worries is found in the resurrection of Jesus himself. Paul writes, “We believe that Jesus died and rose again, and so we believe that God will bring with Jesus those who have fallen asleep in him” (4:14). In establishing Jesus’ resurrection as the pattern for the future resurrection of Jesus’ followers, Paul effectively makes clear that death is not the end for Christians. Those who have died will be raised, while those who are living will meet them “in the air” as they all go to meet Christ (4:16-17). It is noteworthy that Paul includes himself in the group of living believers who will see Jesus’ return, saying, “we who are still alive…” (4:17). From such expressions, it is clear that Paul expected Jesus’ return, and thus the end of the age, to occur within his own lifetime.
After Paul has reassured his audience that the dead will be resurrected, he anticipates their next question: When will the parousia happen? While Paul has no doubt concerning the return of Jesus, this does not mean that he knows exactly when it will take place. Paul employs two similes to describe the event of Jesus’ return: it will come “like a thief in the night” (5:2) and “as labor pains on a pregnant woman” (5:3). Both of these refer to its unexpected timing.
Employing metaphors of light/day and dark/night (5:4-8) that were typical in Jewish apocalypticism, Paul divides the world into two kinds of people: those who live in the light/day and those who live in the dark/night. Paul describes believers as those who live in the light, which is characterized by sobriety, faith, love and hope (5:5, 8). They will be surprised by Jesus’ return, but they will be prepared and will not suffer God’s wrath (5:4, 9). By contrast, he describes unbelievers as living in darkness, which is characterized by sleep and drunkenness (5:6-7). They will likewise be surprised, but they will be alarmed by Jesus’ return because they will experience the coming wrath.
Info Box 16.6: Paul’s Three-Tiered Universe
Paul’s view of the universe, which reflected the science of the first-century, was drastically different from ours. It consisted of three tiers. The tier above the world was where God resides with the risen Christ. The tier below the world was the place of the departed. And the tier where humans live was sandwiched between the so-called “above” and “below.” So, in Paul’s perception, when Jesus died and rose again, he joined the Father in the heavenly realm above the earth. When he returns, he will come from heaven for his followers, whether they are on earth or below it, and they will live with him in heaven forever. While we still use the metaphors of “up” and “down” to speak about spiritual space, modern cosmology can no longer conceive of the universe in the same way.
16.8.3 God the Father and the Lord Jesus
Both letters repeatedly associate God with Christ. They do not equate the two, but they clearly convey that Jesus as Lord occupies an exalted position alongside God the Father in the thought and worship life of both Paul and his audience. While they are distinct, much of what is said about the Father is also said about Jesus. For example, as the Father is “the God of peace” (1 Thess 5:23) so also is Jesus “the Lord of peace” (2 Thess 3:16), and as the believers are “loved by God” (1 Thess 1:4) so also are they “loved by the Lord” (2 Thess 2:13). Though Jesus is called “son” only once (1 Thess1:9), the intimacy between him and the Father permeates both of the letters. It is through Jesus’ close relationship to the Father that he is exalted and gives hope to all who are faithful. His suffering, death, resurrection, and future return have meaning. They are for the benefit of believers. Paul provides a summary in 1 Thess 5:9-10, assuring his audience, “For God has destined us not for wrath but for obtaining salvation through our Lord Jesus Christ, who died for us, so that whether we are awake or asleep we may live with him.” While the exalted Jesus brings relief in a time of anxiety because of the hope of heavenly glory, Paul warns that he will also bring judgment against those who are afflicting the Thessalonians (2 Thess 1:5-9).
The church not only grounds its existence in both God the Father and the Lord Jesus (1 Thess 1:1; 2 Thess 1:1), but also receives its grace, peace, love and spiritual guidance from both (1 Thess 3:11-13). When it seeks guidance and spiritual strength, it directs its prayers likewise to both. The church’s life, thus reflects Jesus in its suffering (1 Thess 2:14; 2 Thess 1:4), love for one another (1 Thess 3:12; 2 Thess 1:3), honesty (1 Thess 4:11; 2 Thess 3:6-13), and kindness to all (1 Thess 5:15).
16.8.4 Idleness
Paul strongly encourages his converts to keep working and refrain from idleness. Manual work and self-reliance were expected so that no one became a burden in the community. As part of his final remarks, Paul encourages his audience to “acknowledge those who work hard among you” (5:12) and to “hold them in the highest regard in love” (5:13), but also to “warn those who are idle and disruptive” (5:14). This repeated emphasis on work indicates that the idleness of some members of the community was a problem. The expected return of Jesus caused some of the converts of stop working. If they were no longer able to support themselves and their families, it is foreseeable that they would have become a financial burden on others, which would not have presented the converts in a good light and would have reflected poorly on Paul’s ministry.
Paul opposes idleness by presenting himself as an example, reminding his audience that he and his coworkers “worked night and day in order not to be a burden to anyone while we preached the gospel of God” (2:9). Encouraging the Thessalonians to follow suit, Paul later writes that they should lead a quiet life, mind their own business, and work with their hands “so that your daily life may win the respect of outsiders and so that you will not be dependent on anybody” (4:11-12). Paul’s reference to working and preaching the gospel implies that he and his coworkers combined manual work with ministry. We should not imagine Paul preaching on a crowded street to passersby. Rather, it is more accurate to imagine him making contacts and winning converts through his and his fellow workers’ labors and places of business. Today we might call this networking.
While living in Thessalonica, Paul along with his co-workers most likely rented rooms in a multi-level building called an insula where they could reside and do business. On the street level, where most of the shops were located, Paul and his companions may well have set up a small storefront where they would have built their network of contacts. Paul does not say what kind of manual work or trade he practiced, but the book of Acts (18:3) indicates that he was a leather worker, which is often too narrowly interpreted as a tentmaker.
2 Thessalonians
16.9 Introduction
Among the Pauline epistles, 2 Thessalonians has often been eclipsed. It is a short letter, consisting of only three chapters (forty-seven verses), that lays in the shadows of not only 1 Thessalonians, but also the entire Pauline corpus. 2 Thessalonians contains a unique depiction of imminent eschatological events and does not convey major theological themes found in Romans, Galatians, or 1 and 2 Corinthians. It says nothing, for example, about the place of the Law for Gentile converts, justification by faith, the role of Israel, or human identity in Christ. Instead, it targets the audience’s suffering and specific anxieties about the imminent return of Jesus. In addition, it is a letter whose authorship has frequently been questioned by modern scholars and often placed within the category of Paul’s “disputed letters.”
16.10 Authorship
As in 1 Thessalonians, the letter begins by identifying Paul, Silvanus (Silas) and Timothy as the authors (1:1). Despite their acknowledgment, and the use of the first person plural pronouns and verbs (“we,” “us” and “our”), there are enough uses of the first person singular (e.g. 2:5) to assume that the letter was composed by a single author, who identifies himself as “Paul” in an unusual way at the end of the letter. He writes, “I, Paul, write this greeting with my own hand. This is the mark in every letter of mine; it is the way I write” (3:17). While it is common for Paul to write that the final greeting is in his own hand, only in 2 Thessalonians do we find the need to emphasize it as if he needed to convince his audience. Why did the author close his letter this way? A common explanation is that the author was not Paul.
Unlike 1 Thessalonians, which is universally accepted as being written by Paul, the authorship of 2 Thessalonians has been in doubt since the beginning of the nineteenth century. It has sometimes been said that if 1 Thessalonians did not survive, the question of authenticity would not have been an issue since many of the arguments against Pauline authorship are based on similarities and differences between the two letters. The main difference in 2 Thessalonians is the eschatological section in 2:1-12, which attempts to calm the anxiety of the congregation that the “day of the Lord” has already arrived. The author disavows himself from such deceptive claims and instead forecasts that a series of events must first unfold, including “the rebellion” and the revelation of “the lawless one.” This is a noticeable divergence since it implies that the end, while coming soon, is extended with prior warning signs (unlike 1 Thess 5:2-3). What is more, the author claims to have explained these anticipated events to the Thessalonians while he was with them (2:5). If Paul was the author, why are they not included in the first letter? Another major difference is the tone. 2 Thessalonians is much more forceful than the gentle demeanor of the first letter, which expresses Paul’s good relations with the Thessalonians. An example of the less patient tone is the severe warning to refrain from idleness, which continues to be an issue when the second letter is written. The admonition is terse without empathy: “Anyone unwilling to work, should not eat” (3:10).
In addition to the differences, proponents of non-Pauline authorship point to the overlapping material in the letters. Overall, 2 Thessalonians reflects several key themes in 1 Thessalonians, most notably Paul’s apocalyptic hope, which is central to his gospel, his assurance that perseverance in suffering will be vindicated, and that their oppressors will be judged and destroyed. In addition, 2 Thessalonians mirrors Paul’s gratitude for the Thessalonians’ faith and love in the midst of their suffering. Both letters also share several stylistic and linguistic features, such as their introductory sections that contain the author(s), recipients, and expressions of thanksgiving (2 Thess 1:1-3).
If Paul wrote both letters, why would he repeat himself so often to the same audience within a short period of time? The answer proposed by some is that Paul wouldn’t need to repeat himself. Instead, the similarities are indicative of an author that attempted to imitate Paul, probably one of his disciples who wrote sometime later.
While we cannot be entirely sure, it seems probable that Paul did not write 2 Thessalonians. Since students in antiquity learned how to write by imitating the styles of notable authors, pseudonymous authorship was a common practice when new ideas required the support of established traditions and/or authority figures (on pseudonymous authorship, see 15.5.4). Nevertheless, our deficiency is that we have very little information about the state of the Thessalonian Christians and their communication with Paul, his amanuensis, and his fellow workers. Some of the differences and similarities can also be used in support of Pauline authorship. If 2 Thessalonians was written after 1 Thessalonians, then its shift in tone, its reiteration of perseverance, and its apocalyptic hope may have been required due to changing circumstances. When Paul predicts in 1 Thessalonians that the end will come suddenly, it is possible that he is already incorporating the intervening events that are described in 2 Thess 2:1-12. Certainly, for the author, the “mystery of lawlessness is already at work” (2:7). Moreover, Paul could have developed the details of his eschatological thinking in light of intervening events. It is also possible that, while Paul wrote the letter, this section was added by an amanuensis, Silvanus, Timothy or even by a later redactor who was influenced by Revelation and thereby the original version of 2 Thessalonians was lost.
Finally, some scholars who advocate Pauline authorship appeal to 2 Thess 2:15, which reads, “So then, brethren, stand firm and hold to the traditions which you were taught, whether by word or through our letter.” The mention of “our letter” is interpreted as a reference to 1 Thessalonians instead of 2 Thessalonians itself. If this indeed is the referent, which is likely, then it strengthens the case for Pauline authorship, but only on the surface. The problem is that it does not eliminate a pseudonymous author who wanted to be perceived as Paul.
F. C. Baur was one of the first modern scholars to critically argue for the pseudonymous authorship of 2 Thessalonians. One of his main arguments was that 2 Thessalonians was influenced by Revelation. For example, he claimed that the “man of lawlessness” in 2 Thess 2:3-10 is modeled after the “beast” in Rev 13:1-9.
16.11 Place and Date of Writing
Since the sequence of the letters is uncertain and the authorship is often questioned, it is difficult to isolate the time and place of the letter’s composition. The proposals have varied widely. Among those who do not attribute the authorship to Paul, some have argued that the author was influenced by Revelation and Christian persecutions at the close of the first century. Others have argued that the so-called forger wrote soon after 1 Thessalonians in order to correct or possibly replace Paul’s depiction of the final events before the return of Jesus.
If Paul is the author, then in light of the Book of Acts, the letter was most likely written from Corinth shortly after the first letter was sent. How long afterward, however, is uncertain. We should probably think in terms of months rather than weeks so as to allow enough time for the issues that are addressed in the second letter to have made their way back to Paul. It is doubtful that Paul wrote both letters at the same time to two different groups in Thessalonica, as is sometimes proposed. While this option can explain some of the differences and similarities between the letters, the likelihood of Paul writing to two separate groups is slim. Throughout his letters, Paul’s policy is to do the opposite. He frequently attempts to integrate groups into a unified fellowship. There is no indication of a shift from recipients that are identified as those who have “turned from idols” in 1 Thessalonians.
16.12 Audience
Whereas 1 Thessalonians seems to be written to Gentile Christians (1 Thess 1:9), 2 Thessalonians does not provide any specific clues concerning its recipients. If the second letter is written by Paul and sent shortly after the first letter, then it is safe to assume that the same audience in view.
Alternatively, a few scholars have proposed that 2 Thessalonians was written simultaneously to the Jewish portion of the congregation, which would account for both the similarities and differences between the letters. The problem with this option, however, is that there is very little evidence to support it. In fact, this proposal runs contrary to Paul’s propensity in the undisputed letters to unify Jewish and Gentile Christians. It is highly unlikely that Paul would have encouraged intra-congregational schisms by addressing separate letters to particular factions within the same church. Furthermore, there is no indication that the false eschatological teaching that has crept into the congregation is somehow connected with either Jewish or Gentile Christians. Others have proposed that originally 2 Thessalonians was not sent to the Thessalonians, but to a neighboring church in Macedonia or perhaps even to the church at Philippi. It is conjectured that a copy wound up in Thessalonica where it found a new home. These options are possible and would likewise explain the similarities and differences in the letters, but unfortunately the evidence for these proposals is currently lacking.
Info Box 16.7: Was 2 Thessalonians initially sent to the Philippians?
We know that it was common for early Christian letters to be copied and sent to other recipients. The identity of the recipients would have been changed, but much of the content would hace remained the same. These are called encyclical letters. The letter to the Ephesians was probably one of these. The suggestion that 2 Thessalonians was originally written to the Philippians would make it 1 Philippians and our canonical letter would be 2 Philippians. What is intriguing about this suggestion is that Polycarp (2nd century bishop of Smyrna), in his letter to the church at Philippi (3:2), refers to more than one letter written by Paul to the Philippians.
16.13 Purpose
Whereas 1 Thessalonians is prompted by Timothy’s report concerning the Thessalonian community (1 Thess 3:6), there is no indication that a report prompted the writing of this letter. Reconstructing the purpose of 2 Thessalonians is complicated by its comparison with 1 Thessalonians. Again, if Paul wrote both letters within a brief timespan, then their similarities and differences raise questions that require answers. On the one hand, why is there frequent overlap and repetition? On the other hand, why are there such contrasting eschatological views? If Paul did not write 2 Thessalonians, then its purpose may be more detectable. In either case, the reconstruction of the purpose of 2 Thessalonians is often associated with the first letter.
Let’s first consider the purpose from the perspective of Pauline authorship. If Paul wrote 2 Thessalonians, then his aim is to correct a misunderstanding. Paul is concerned that the Thessalonians have been led astray by teaching that “the day of the Lord,” which he understands as the return of Jesus, has already arrived (2:2). He assures the Thessalonians that this teaching, which they received “by spirit, or by word, or by letter,” is not from him or his associates. The reference to a “letter” is interesting. Its identification is affected, again, by authorship. If Paul is the author of 2 Thessalonians, then one option is that the “letter” is a forgery, which attempted to misconstrue the eschatological teaching in 1 Thessalonians. Another option is that Paul is referring to 1 Thessalonians, which has been misinterpreted by the community. So, when Paul writes that the Thessalonians should not be deceived about the “day of the Lord,” he is not referring to 1 Thessalonians in general, but to its misunderstanding. That the community misread the first letter is conceivable since it contains eschatological language about the imminent return of Jesus who will “rescue us from the day of wrath” (1 Thess 2:10; 4:15-17). Since Paul repeatedly expresses his desire to visit the Thessalonians, but has not achieved his intention, his delay may have caused some to believe that the end has begun.
If Paul did not write 2 Thessalonians, then it is likely that the author wanted to amend the eschatological teachings in 1 Thessalonians. While the author makes every effort to replicate the encouragements and admonitions, albeit in a summarized and more impersonal tone, his main goal is to revise the more general eschatological teaching of 1 Thessalonians, which is regarded as a forgery, with a more urgent and specific description of the events preceding the parousia, particularly “the rebellion” and the revealing of the “man of lawlessness” (2:3). The author of 2 Thessalonians agrees with Paul that the end is coming soon, but his primary concern is to refute the belief that the “day of the Lord” has already begun. In his response, the author warns the Thessalonians that in the intervening period, evil and suffering will increase.
16.14 Themes
Since the purpose of 2 Thessalonians is to clarify and develop select concerns raised in 1 Thessalonians, the themes overlap. This does not mean, however, that the content of the themes is the same. In some cases, the themes are less prominent, while in others they are more nuanced.
16.14.1 Perseverance through Persecution
From the beginning of the letter, the writer encourages the Thessalonian community to continue in its endurance under persecution. Acknowledging the weight of their suffering, he expresses his admiration that they have grown in their love for one another and persevered in their faith (1:3). The writer encourages the community that their suffering is not in vain in four ways. First, he tells them that their affliction serves as an example to other Christian communities (1:4). They are a source of pride for the author when he ministers to others. Second, their suffering is explained as a kind of sanctifying process that glorifies Christ and makes them worthy of the kingdom of God (1:5, 12). Third, he assures them that they are loved by God and have been chosen “from the beginning for salvation” (2:13). And fourth, the author’s most emphatic encouragement is that they have placed their faith in a just God, who will soon bring relief to the afflicted and punishment on those who persecute the community when Jesus returns (1:6-10).
16.14.2 Eschatology
The most prominent theme in 2 Thessalonians is its eschatological scenario leading up to the return of Jesus (2:1-12), which is expected to unfold in the author’s time. Whereas in 1 Thessalonians Paul describes that the return of Jesus will be sudden, coming “like a thief in the night” and “as labor pains upon a pregnant woman” (1 Thess 5:2-3), in 2 Thessalonians the author incorporates a series of events that still have to occur in the interim period. These intervening events—which have been mentioned several times already—include a great rebellion that will reveal “the lawlessness one” who will set himself up over all gods, take his seat in God’s temple, and proclaim himself to be God (2 Thess 2:4). During the interim period, which is characterized as “the mystery lawlessness” (2:7), he is already active, but is being retrained. When he is revealed at the return of Jesus, his works will be exposed as those of Satan (2:9-10) and he will be destroyed with the “breath of the Lord’s mouth” (2:8). What is more, God will judge and punish all who “refuse to love the truth” by sending them a “powerful delusion, leading them to believe what is false” (2:11).
Info Box 16.8: The Lawless One
The “lawless one” (2:8) or the “man of lawlessness” (2:3) is a typical apocalyptic figure who is opposed to God. Since he is also called the “son of destruction” (2:3), he is probably best understood as the chief agent of Satan who is responsible for social decline, persecution, and apostasy. Similar figures, who are variously portrayed as deceivers, false-prophets, anti-Christs, false sons of God, and wonder workers who lead people astray are common in Christian apocalyptic texts. For example, Didache 16 (2nd century CE) reads, “For in the last days, false prophets and corrupters will become numerous, and sheep will turn into wolves, and love will turn into hatred; for when lawlessness increases, they will hate and persecute and betray each other, and then the deceiver of the world will appear like the son of God and perform signs and wonders, and the earth will be delivered into his hands, and he will do outrages such as have never happened from eternity.” In 2 Thessalonians, the man of lawlessness, his divine self-exaltation and his destructive activity may be influenced by past subjugations of Palestine by notorious anti-Jewish conquerors. Close parallels are found, for example, in Psalms of Solomon 17:11-22, which calls Pompey “the lawless one,” refers to his destruction of Palestine, and mentions the resulting Jewish apostasy. Further parallels can be drawn from Dan 11:36 which speaks of a certain king at the end of age, most likely Antiochus Epiphanes, who “will do as he pleases, and he will exalt and magnify himself above every god, and will speak monstrous things against the God of gods; and he will prosper until the indignation is finished.” While today we might read these kinds of texts as metaphorical references to evil, the author and his readers would have understood the activities of the lawless one as symbolic acts that will be performed by real people in the context of political persecution that is leading to the imminent end of the existing world order.
The modern reader is faced with at least three challenges when interpreting the events leading up the return of Jesus. First, the author’s eschatological scenario assumes prior oral instructions when he—presumably Paul—was with the Thessalonian congregation. He reminds them, “Do you not remember that I told you these things when I was still with you?” (2:5). All that remains in the letter are reminders of events and entities that appear as trigger designations, including the “mystery of lawlessness,” “lawless one” and “son of destruction.” Unfortunately, we don’t have the benefit of the conversations that took place in relation to these expectations. For instance, while the author briefly describes the works of the “lawless one” (2:9-10) and promises that he will be destroyed (2:8), he does not provide a fuller description of who this person is.
Second, since modern readers usually read 1 and 2 Thessalonians sequentially, in canonical order, they are confronted with a discrepancy concerning the return of Jesus. As we have already mentioned, the portrayal of a sudden return in 1 Thess 5:2-3 does not appear to coincide with the events that are forecast in 2 Thess 2:1-12. If the return of Jesus is to come “like a thief in the night,” how does one account for the events that will precede it? While this is a complicated issue that has received no shortage of explanations, it is best engaged by paying close attention to the context and purpose of each letter. In 1 Thessalonians, the sudden return of Jesus is part of Paul’s response to the misunderstanding about the fate of those who have died in Christ. In 2 Thessalonians, the eschatological events that precede the return of Jesus are part of the author’s response to the misunderstanding that the return has already occurred. While this does not invalidate the discrepancy, it helps us to see the perspective from which each eschatological scenario derives, and opens up the potential for resolution.
The third challenge for modern readers is the author’s use of apocalyptic language in describing the events leading up to the return of Jesus, which is reminiscent of Revelation. Since the use of apocalyptic language, which assumes an apocalyptic worldview that is guided by a belief that God is coming at any moment to destroy all wickedness, is foreign to most modern readers, they tend to interpret it literally, and sometimes in light of recent world events. Reading the Bible in light of the newspaper does not contribute to careful interpretation, however. In the ancient world, apocalyptic language was probably used as code or metaphor so that the persecuting authorities could not understand the writing, especially when it was directed against them. In addition, evil (and much of anti-Christian sentiment) was understood in a personified way because human beings were viewed as porous, meaning that they could be inhabited by spirits. Overall, it is important to recognize that the scenario reflects the concerns of the writer’s day and not those of the twenty-first century. For the modern Christian, the apocalyptic scenario conveys timeless hope that history has meaning, that evil is a reality, that Christ reigns over human destiny, and that justice and love will prevail.
Info Box 16.9: End of the World
The concept of the “end” in ancient Mediterranean society did not mean the same thing that it often does today. The ancients did not think of the “end” as the end of the world, but rather as the end of an age, which will inaugurate the beginning of a new age. It had political implications. For many Jews, it meant the end of oppression by a foreign power and the beginning of an age of national peace and tranquility under the reign of God, when every Israelite could sit “under their own vines and fig trees, and there was none to make them afraid” (1 Macc 14:12). By contrast, today the end of the world is literally imaginable in many different ways from nuclear war to environmental and biological disasters to interstellar bodies colliding with the earth.
16.14.3 Idleness
The problem of idleness that Paul confronted in his first letter (1 Thess 5:12-14) did not appear to resolved itself. In 2 Thessalonians, it is addressed with greater force and urgency. If both letters are addressing the same group of idle people, then it lends support to the letters being written in close proximity to each other, perhaps by the same author even. In 1 Thessalonians Paul couches his admonition to refrain from idleness within a more prominent section on encouragement and appreciation for those who continue to diligently work. However, in 2 Thessalonians he addresses the idleness head on, commanding “in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ” that those who remain idle should be avoided by the rest of the community (2 Thess 3:6). The consequences are clear: “Anyone who is unwilling to work shall not eat” (2 Thess 3:10).
As in 1 Thessalonians, the author appeals to himself (presumably Paul) and his co-authors as examples of self-sufficient workers who avoid being a burden to others (2 Thess 3:7-9; 1 Thess 1:5). Foreseeably, the idleness among some members of the community put a strain not only on the finances of those members who provided support, but also on the broader missionary agenda. Idle converts could have easily been a social embarrassment to Paul and his fellow workers. Within Thessalonian society, working for a living was respectable, whereas idleness could have been associated with the maligned group of extreme Cynic philosophers who abandoned social conventions and relied on begging.
GALATIANS
16.15 Introduction
In the letter to the Galatians, Paul tackles a problem that seems alien to our experiences and sensibilities. Unlike in the Thessalonian letters, which do not go beyond the minimal formulations about the death of Jesus and his return at the end of age, Galatians conveys a more developed understanding of Jesus’ death as the ultimate expression of his faith (pistis), or better “faithfulness,” in the context of a controversy about the role of the Jewish law for Gentile Christians. In particular, Paul’s “gospel” that God justifies the Gentiles based on their faithfulness to Christ was at odds with Jewish (and Jewish Christian) requirements that the people of God needed to be circumcised. Paul’s divergence from the Jewish norm on the one hand and his self-identification as a Jew on the other (e.g. 2 Cor 11:22; Gal 1:14), has raised the question among modern scholars whether Paul remained a Jew or whether he was an apostate who wanted to identify with his converts (Gal 4:12). Whatever the verdict, his reworking of the history of salvation in Galatians makes it one of the earliest and most influential letters about Christian identity.
The Roman province of Galatia was a large area of what is today the central part of Turkey. The term Galatia comes from the Greek Galatai, which was the designation given to the Celts and Gauls from beyond the Rhine who invaded parts of Asia Minor, Macedonia, Greece and Thrace in the early part of the third century BCE. By 232 BCE, a major settlement was established in the area of Ancyra (modern Ankara) under the formidable rule of Attalus I of Pergamum. When Rome expanded its reach eastward into Asia Minor during the early part of the 2nd century BCE, the Galatian expansion was curtailed. Eventually, after the death of the last Galatian king in 25 BCE, the entire region was incorporated into the Roman “Province of Galatia.” In contrast to many other people groups in Asia Minor, the Galatians were not Hellenized to the same extent. The Greek language and Hellenic cultural influences were more recent, stemming largely from Roman expansion that allowed for easier integration with other people groups throughout the Empire. Unlike the cosmopolitan port city of Thessalonica, the Galatian region was agrarian, whose economy was largely driven by the cultivation of wheat and wool.
Like other residence of Asia Minor, the Galatians were pagans. Urban centers contained various temples dedicated to the veneration of particular gods. If Paul visited Pessinus, for example, which was in the north-central part of Galatia, he would have encountered a temple of Agdistis, who according to Greek mythology was a dual-gendered offspring of Zeus and Gaia (the Great Mother), though usually represented in the female form. It is often speculated that Agdistis was one of several androgynous deities that was found in Asia Minor. Their dual sexuality (or non-sexuality in some depictions) may have represented the unruly forces of nature. Several ancient sources identify Agdistis as Cybele, the Great Mother of the gods, who was the supreme deity of Phrygia, even overshadowing her inferior companion, the male god Attis. The temple of Cybele, which was originally constructed under the Attalid kings, was enhanced by the Romans who adorned it with a statue of the goddess. While the cult of Cybele naturally favored women, the goddess oversaw the well-being of all devotees, ensuring health, fertility, protection and prosperity. Devotion in the temple was at times ecstatic, characterized by prophetic speech, oracles, and insensibility to pain.
Parts of ancient Pessinus have been excavated, such as the theatre, but unfortunately, the temple of Cybele remains buried under a mosque.
16.16 Authorship
Galatians is today commonly recognized as one of Paul’s seven undisputed letters, which was not always the case about a century ago. Paul’s claim to authorship at the beginning of the letter (1:1) is supported by literary, rhetorical, and theological themes that are commonly found in other undisputed letters, especially Romans. What is unusual, however, in Galatians is Paul’s claim that his apostleship is divinely ordained.
Another distinguishing feature of the letter is its textual unity, meaning that it seems to be free of interpolations and abnormal variations in the manuscripts. There is also no evidence of large-scale textual development over the centuries. As a result, our text of Galatians is highly representative of Paul’s originally composition.
While Paul is the author of Galatians, he most likely dictated the letter to an amanuensis, which was common practice in antiquity (see 15.5.3). However, toward the end of the letter Paul makes sure to leave a personal imprint, writing, “See what large letters I make when I am writing in my own hand!” (6:11), which implies that the handwriting of this portion of the letter would have been visually discernible. This formula “I am writing in my own hand” is not unique to Galatians. It is also found in the final remarks of some other letters (1 Cor 16:21; Col 4:18; 2 Thess 3:17).
16.17 Audience and Date
While the authorship of Galatians is rarely contested, the same cannot be said about Paul’s audience, which is closely connected with the dating. At the beginning of the letter, Paul clearly identifies the recipients as “the churches of Galatia” (1:2), but he does not tell us where they were located. Most likely, Paul is addressing several house-churches within a restricted area. Many scholars have suggested that since Paul addresses the recipients as “Galatians” in 3:1 (implying ethnicity), instead of the “residents of Galatia” (implying location), he is referring to a particular group of people who were descendants of Celtic tribes in the area of Pessinus (modern Balahissar), which lay in the north-central part of the province. While this is possible, this narrow use of “Galatians” is debatable since the ethnic make-up of Galatia in the first century was fairly complex. The little we know is that they were pagans that Paul converted to Christianity. If there were any Jews among them, he could not have said, “Formerly, when you did not know God, you were enslaved to beings that by nature are not gods” (4:8).
In attempting to identify the audience, we are once again confronted with the complicated task of comparing Paul’s own account in Galatians with Luke’s account in Acts. If we take Luke’s account to be fairly accurate, which is a contentious issue, then we are faced with a problem of Paul visiting the province of Galatia on two separate occasions. During his first missionary journey, Paul evangelized several cities in the southern part of the province (Acts 13:14; 14:1), which may have included Lystra, Derbe, Iconium, and Pisidian Antioch. Several years later, Paul passed through the northern part of Galatia during his second missionary journey, though unfortunately Luke does not mention any specific cities (Acts 16:6; 18:23).
The Jerusalem council, which according to Luke took place between Paul’s first two missionary journeys (Acts 15), is the hinge in the debate. In Jerusalem, Paul met with the other Apostles to discuss the same issues that are addressed in Galatians, namely the role of the Mosaic Law—specifically the requirement of circumcision—for Gentile converts to Christianity. At the end of the meeting, it was decided that since the Gentile converts received the Holy Spirit and were accepted by God through his grace, they did not need to be circumcised. The only stipulation was that they “abstain from what has been sacrificed to idols and from blood and from what is strangled and from fornication” (Acts 15:29).
Info Box 16.10: Circumcision
While circumcision, which is the surgical removal of the foreskin from the penis, is rarely a topic of conversation in churches today, this was not the case in the ancient world. Without anesthetic and modern hygienic conditions, it was a painful and potentially dangerous practice that was most commonly associated with the Egyptians and Jews within the Roman Period. While the Jews, who traced the practice back to the covenant that God made with Abraham (Genesis 17), saw it as a covenantal sign or identity marker, their pagan neighbors often regarded it as mutilation and a cause for ridicule. During the Hellenization of Palestine, especially under the Seleucids, the practice of circumcision was met with strong resistance. Many Jews saw the rite as a badge of identity that preserved and honored their ancestral tradition; whereas those Jews who capitulated with the Seleucids by either omitting the practice or surgically reversing their own circumcision were viewed as abandoning their ethnic identity. Since there is evidence from Jewish sources that some Jews did not undergo circumcision, Paul’s attitude in Galatians was not unique, but it was uncommon.
In Gal 2:1-10, Paul recounts a meeting with the Christian leaders in Jerusalem, which likewise concerned the topic of circumcision of the Gentile converts. In addition to several differences, Paul does not refer to this meeting as the “Jerusalem council” or as an official meeting with the “apostles and the elders” (as in Acts 15). Instead, he refers to it as a “private meeting with the acknowledged leaders” (Gal 2:2). Nevertheless, as in Luke’s account, Paul is accompanied by Barnabas and discusses the same topic. Here is the heart of the issue: if Gal 2:1-10 represent Paul’s recollection of the Jerusalem council, then his audience would most likely be those whom he evangelized during his second missionary journey. This option has come to be known as the “North Galatian Theory.” Since Paul is surprised that the Galatians are “so quickly deserting the one who called you” (1:6), the letter could have been written shortly after Paul’s visit, perhaps as early as 52 CE before the weather made the high country impassable. If his use of “quickly” is broader, then the upper limit would be 55-56 CE, before the composition of Romans.
However, if the events recalled in Gal 2:1-10 are simply coincidental and do not represent the Jerusalem council in Acts 15, then it is most likely that Paul is addressing the communities he visited during his first missionary journey. Otherwise, he would have surely included his endorsement by the apostles and elders in Jerusalem. This option has come to be known as the “South Galatian Theory.” If, again, we take Paul’s use of “quickly” in 1:6 as a reference to the brevity of time between the Galatians’ conversion and their “deserting” of his gospel, Paul could have written the letter shortly after his visit, as early as 48 CE, which would make Galatians, instead of 1 Thessalonians, the earliest extant Christian writing. If Paul’s use of “quickly” has a broader meaning, then the upper limit would be fixed at 51 CE, just prior to the Jerusalem council.
The “North Galatian Theory” has been more prominently held historically, but adherents to the “South Galatia Theory” have provided formidable arguments that cannot be ignored. The debate is ongoing. For the novice who is approaching this issue for the first time, this debate is an apt example of how historians and biblical scholars interpret and evaluate texts as evidence in support of one theory over and against another.
16.18 The Occasion and the Opponents
The problem that Paul addresses in this letter did not arise from internal tensions among the converts, but rather from outsiders who opposed Paul’s teachings. Paul did not confront his opponents in person, however. At some point when Paul left Galatia, his opponents, who were Christian missionary teachers, made their way into the house churches and began to spread a different message. When Paul heard about this infiltration, he wrote the letter, which is a swift, personal and fiery response. While Paul expresses bewilderment, despair, and frustration, the dominant emotion is anger. Paul is not only angry with the missionary teachers that have been undermining his gospel and disturbing a seemingly peaceful situation, but he is also angry with the Galatians themselves for listening to their teaching (3:1, 10). Paul’s disposition is immediately noticeable since the beginning of the letter does not include the customary thanksgiving prayer for the community.
What kind of teaching precipitated such a response? Broadly, it emerged out of the issue that concerned the relationship between the Jewish law and the inclusion of the Gentiles into the community of the people of God. As Christianity began to expand outside its Jewish matrix into the pagan world, a prominent question that would forever alter Christianity emerged: Should the pagan converts practice Jewish legal and ethnic requirements? More specifically, the missionary teachers were trying to convince Paul’s converts that they needed to complete their new faith by observing Jewish legal requirements, particularly circumcision.
The information about the identity of these missionary teachers is minimal. They were certainly Christians, since they believed that Jesus was the Messiah and that he rose from the dead. We can also affirm that they vigorously promoted Jewish legal and ethnic practices among Gentile converts to Christianity, but we cannot say with certainty where they came from, where they derived their authority, and what their other beliefs may have been. Some scholars have speculated that they came from Jerusalem and were disciples of James and/or Peter. Others have suggested Antioch, which probably already had a Jewish Christian community (Gal 2:11-21). While there were certainly theological and ethnic fractions among the early Christians, we have little in Galatians that would confirm any specific affiliation. It has also been proposed that the opponents were not missionaries at all. Rather, they were members of the fledgling Christians community that may have been influenced by outside groups. Whoever they were, there probably were not many of them, at least not in Galatia, since Paul metaphorically refers to them as “a little yeast” that affects the “whole batch of dough” (5:9). Many scholars have referred to these opponents of Paul as “Judaizers.”
Info Box 16.11: Judaizers
Although “Judaizers” is a widely-used designation for Paul’s opponents, it is a nebulous term because it can be used of any group that promotes the practice of Jewish laws, customs, and rituals. In Module 13 (Acts), the designation was used of Christian Jews. However, it can be a catch-all term that can refer to non-Christian Jews and even to Gentile Christians who have adopted Jewish customs, which is how the term is used in ancient sources. Notice that Paul does not identify his adversaries by name, which was customary in antiquity in order to avoid free publicity. He simply calls them “some people” (1:7), “anyone” (1:9), and “they” (4:17; 6:13).
While Paul identifies his adversaries as belonging to “the circumcision” (6:13), it is not clear whether they were born Jews who had converted to Christianity or whether they were Gentiles who had fully submitted to Jewish practices as part of their newfound Christian identity. Paul’s sarcastic comment that they would “go the whole way and emasculate themselves” (5:12) may indicate that they were Gentiles who underwent circumcision as part of their conversion process, though it is by no means definitive. Since the rhetoric functions to create shock value, either option is possible.
In responding to his opponents, Paul focuses on defending his initial teachings, which he calls his “gospel,” and his apostolic authority. His defense takes the form of a long autobiographical section, which recounts his former status in Judaism, his persecution of Christians, and his new life as an apostle of Christ. The details should probably be viewed as responses to the undermining of Paul’s authority by his opponents. Paul sets the defensive tone immediately in the first verse by writing, “Paul, an apostle—sent not with a human commission nor by human authority, but by Jesus Christ and God the Father” (1:1). The same posture is reiterated in 1:11-12, with Paul saying “I want you to know, brothers and sisters, that the gospel I preached is not of human origin. I did not receive it from any human source, nor was I taught it; rather, I received it by revelation from Jesus Christ.” Statements like these effectively undermine the authority of his opponents, who may have argued that, unlike the other apostles, Paul had no contact with Jesus during his ministry.
Since his authority, and teaching, came directly from God, Paul felt no compulsion to consult with, or receive authority from, the other apostles (1:16-17). His accounts of sporadic meetings with them clearly indicates that he did not approach them as a subordinate, but as a fellow apostle and evangelist. He recounts that his first meeting, which took place three years after his conversion, was only with Cephas (probably Peter) and James (1:18-19). The second meeting, which focused on the circumcision of Gentile converts, occurred in Jerusalem fourteen years later. Paul deliberately undermines his opponents by conveying that his teaching was endorsed by the leaders in Jerusalem, whom he calls “pillars” (2:2-3; 6-9).
16.19 Paul’s Argument Against the “Works of the Law”
Despite its ethnic import, Paul’s central argument in Galatians is theological in nature because its ultimately goal is God’s plan for humanity. However, Galatians is not a theological treatise. It is an occasional letter whose theology is embedded within particular social and rhetorical matrices that concern covenant identity.
Since the Judaizers’ insistence on circumcision was symptomatic of a larger problem that concerned the role of the Jewish law for Gentile Christians, Paul broadens his approach by addressing the original intent of the law and its function in relation to Jewish identity. His main concern is not the specifics of the Leviticus laws or the Ten Commandments, despite their inference in 3:17 when he specifies that the “law” came 430 years after the promise was given to Abraham. Rather, Paul’s concern is with the “works of the law,” which primarily refers to religious practices that separated Jews from Gentiles, namely circumcision, Sabbath, and dietary restrictions. These practices took on a particularly important ethnic role during the Seleucid period when Hellenization challenged and sometimes threatened Jewish identity. However, the “works of the law” is not a category that is simply restricted to these practices, despite their overt role in the letter, especially circumcision. The category is broader, including values, traditions, perspectives, and can imply the entire law given to Moses (3:10; 5:3).
The root of Paul’s argument is based on the righteousness of Abraham in the Genesis story. Since God deemed Abraham righteous because of his faithfulness, and not because of his subsequent circumcision of Isaac (which Paul omits), so also the Gentiles are deemed righteous based on their faithfulness and not the ethnic requirements of the Jews.
Info Box 16.12: 4QMMT and the “Works of the Law”
Although the term “law” occurs thirty-two times in Galatians—referring to the Mosaic code, the broader story of Abraham in Genesis 16-21, and the law of Christ—it is the phrase “works of the law” that is of particular importance. Until the discovery of the Dead Scrolls, the phrase “works of the law” was only found in Romans and Galatians. In the Scrolls there is one document, which has been named 4QMMT, that contains the same phrase in Hebrew where it refers to the boundaries between purity and impurity within the broader scope of Judaism. (“MMT” stands for the first letters in the Hebrew phrase “works of the law.” The “4” represents the fourth cave where the document was found, and the “Q” stands for Qumran.) Unlike Paul, however, the author of 4QMMT argues that righteousness is achieved on the basis of the works of the law. Moreover, both Paul and the author of 4QMMT appear to rely on the paradigm of cursings and blessings in Deuteronomy 27-28, but use them in opposing ways. For Paul, the law brings the curse; whereas for the author of 4QMMT, it is the source of blessing. Although we do not know who wrote 4QMMT, and it is doubtful that Paul knew the document, it nevertheless may have been representative of the views that were held by Paul’s opponents.
16.19.1 Covenantal Nomism
Paul’s response to the Judaizers is best viewed from the perspective of what E. P. Sanders has coined “convenantal nomism.” While the term “covenantal” is a well-known category that refers to an agreement or contract between two groups or individuals in relationship with each other, which in this case is Israel and God, the term “nomism” is less known. It stems from nomos, the Greek word for “law,” and here refers to the legal observances of Jews in Paul’s day who wanted to remain in right relationship with God. Sanders’ concept of covenantal nomism has changed the landscape in how many scholars view the role of the law in Second Temple Judaism. Instead of viewing the legal observances as acts or works of righteousness that earned God’s acceptance—as has largely been the Christian view for centuries, Sanders showed that the legal practices should be viewed as responses to God’s acceptance and redemption that is established on the basis of his grace. Therefore, the practice of legal observances is not about getting into covenant relationship with God, but rather it is about staying in covenant relationship with God.
Since Paul distances himself so much from Jewish observance in Galatians, it is no wonder that many scholars have questioned his Jewishness. Despite his strong claim to Jewish identity in other letters (e.g. Phil 3:5), he would have been clearly viewed as suspect by the majority of his Jewish contemporaries. It is important to note, however, that Paul wanted to identify with his Gentile converts who were strongly instructed that they did not need to become ethnically Jewish to remain Christian. The covenantal acceptance of the Galatians was based on their faithfulness to Paul’s gospel, which was confirmed by their reception of the Holy Spirit (3:2, 5). Like Abraham, their faithfulness was credited to them as righteousness. Therefore, Paul vehemently argues that the practice of circumcision and other ethnic observances nullify the sufficiency of their faithfulness and God’s gift of the Spirit. His argument has three major points: (1) faithfulness is sufficient, (2) God’s covenantal promise always included the Gentiles, and (3) the law served a temporary function.
16.19.2 Faithfulness is Sufficient
The first part of Paul’s argument against the Judaizers emphasizes that the life of faith should be consistent with its initial reception. Since the Galatians were incorporated into God’s covenant on the basis of their faithfulness to the gospel, and in turn have been given the Holy Spirit, Paul encourages them to remain in the assurance of God’s grace. The Judaizers thought otherwise. While they may not have been directly opposed to Paul’s preaching that Jesus is the crucified Christ or that God has given his Spirit to the Galatians, they insisted that the life of faith as Paul preached it was not sufficient, but required completion. In contrast to Paul, they preached a “gospel” message that included the practice of the works of law, specifically circumcision, presumably because they believed that such practices were commanded by God. For Paul, this simply undermined the Galatians’ faithfulness and gift of the Spirit.
Although Paul is furious with the Judaizers, he does not turn his argument into a clash of personalities that incites alliances. Rather, his argument focusses on a clash of teachings, or “gospels” as he calls them (1:6-7). Paul fervidly defends his original teaching as the true gospel that he received from God. By contrast, anyone who advocates for a variation—be it angels, his adversaries, or even himself—should be rejected and deemed “anathema” (1:8-9).
16.19.3 God’s Covenantal Promise Included the Gentiles
In the second part of his argument against the Judaizers, Paul appeals to scripture, insisting that God’s covenantal promise to Abraham always included the Gentiles. Because Abraham responded to God, he was blessed and was promised that “all nations will be blessed in you” (Gen 12:1-2, 7; alluded to in Gal 3:8). As a result, the Gentiles did not need to become ethnic Jews in order to receive the promise. Paul reinforces this claim by appealing to the covenant that God established with Abraham, which predates the giving of the law by 430 years (3:17). However, he unexpectedly omits the enactment of circumcision as a sign of an “everlasting” covenant between God and Abraham in Gen 17:9-14. Nevertheless, since the law was not a replacement, the original covenant made with Abraham on the basis of his faithfulness is still binding (3:6). At this point, Paul boldly points out that the promise was given to both Abraham and his “descendent,” namely Christ (3:16). This singular reference ran contrary to the conventional reading of “descendent” as a collective—that the Judaizers probably forced—because the Genesis accounts refer to the plural “descendants.” Thus, those who are faithful to Christ reproduce his faithfulness and become Abraham’s children (like Isaac) and heirs of God’s promise (4:28).
Info Box 16.12: “There is neither Jew nor Greek” A New Ethnic Identity?
One of the most well-known verses in Galatians is 3:28 where Paul breaks down the ethnic boundaries between Jews and Gentiles (as well as social status and gender), writing, “There is neither Jew nor Greek.” Philip Esler in his commentary on Galatians raises interesting questions about the new identity that Paul assigns his converts. If they were no longer members of their respective ethnic groups, how did they distinguish themselves from their heritage, traditions, and families? Did they actually abandon the practices that characterized them as Jews or Gentiles? How were they perceived by the non-Christian members of those ethnic groups? And, did Paul’s coverts constitute a third kind of ethnic group that had a stable and even desirable social identity? All of these questions, however, must be filtered through Paul’s apocalyptic mind-set. Since Christ was returning very soon, there was no time for changing the Empire’s social structures. As a result, Paul’s statement on equality identifies a third ethnic group, the eschatological followers of Christ who are awaiting the end of the age.
16.19.4 The Law Served a Temporary Function
The last part of Paul’s argument against the Judaizers addresses the inevitable question about the purpose of the law. In 3:19-29, Paul argues that the law was never part of God’s original plan. It was ordained, not by God, but by angels as a temporary means of guidance and discipline for Israel until God fulfilled his direct promise to Abraham by sending Christ (3:19). The law was intended to communicate God’s divine will and to place parameters on the behavior of his people, though strict observance of the law could not itself place someone in right standing before God. Only faithfulness, as initially exemplified by Abraham and ultimately by Christ, could bring about the kind of righteousness and justification that fulfilled the original promise. So, the law is not particularly negative, but Paul certainly wants to emphasize that it was not given to Israel in the same way or for the same purpose that the promise was given to Abraham.
Paul was clearly fearful of the law getting a foothold in the local churches because it would ultimately take over as it did in Antioch. Ultimately, if Paul allowed the law (even as a whole) to have the authority that it once did when he was a Pharisee, it would deny the faithfulness of Christ (his suffering, death, and resurrection) in whom both Jewish and Gentile Christians find their new identity as the covenant people of God. (2:20). So, the law was temporary and preparatory, but it no longer speaks for God; only Christ does. Paradoxically, Paul appeals to scripture to show that the law itself plays no role in righteousness; it only makes one a transgressor (2:18). In contrast to those who depend on faith, he draws on a modification of Deut 27:26 to show that any dependence on the law only leads to a curse (3:10). In short, the law simply offers no grace. The details of his criticism of the law in relation to the Christian life is described in more detail several years later in his letter to the Romans.
16.20 Themes
16.21.1 The Faith(fullness) of Christ
One of the most important features in Paul’s theology is his use of the phrase, “faith of Christ.” It is expressed in various ways in Galatians (2:16, 20; 3:22), Romans (3:22) and Philippians (3:9, 26), such as “the faith of Jesus Christ,” “the faith of Christ,” “the faith of the son of God,” and “the faith of Jesus.” The interpretation of this phrase has been highly contentious for two reasons. First, Paul’s use of the word pistis, which is usually translated as “faith,” can refer to “belief” or “fidelity/faithfulness.” And second, the genitive case which we often translate into English as “of Christ,” can be taken either as an objective genitive, conveying “faith in/about Christ,” or a subjective genitive, conveying “Christ’s faith.” Traditionally, scholars have understood the word pistis as “belief” and coupled it with the objective genitive. Thus, the resulting phrase, “faith in Christ,” refers to Christian belief in Jesus. In the early part of the twentieth century arguments began to emerge in favor of translating pistis as “fidelity/faithfulness” in conjunction with a subjective genitive, thus rendering the phrase as “Christ’s faithfulness,” which is how it has been interpreted here. However, Christ’s faithfulness, which is love expressed in self-sacrifice, is not simply a description of Jesus’ obedience, but it is both the cause of and model for the faithfulness of his followers (Gal 2:20), who take on a new human identity. Jerome Murphy O’Connor well-captures Paul’s understanding of Christian identity when he writes, “In opposition to those under the Law, who acquire a functional unity through obedience to commandments, the Christian community is an organic unity; its members are the integral parts of a living being (Gal 5:4)” (205).
16.21.2 Freedom in the Spirit
Since, for Paul, the law could only identify behavior that was contrary to God’s will, it was powerless in fulfilling the promise of covenantal inclusion, which could only be achieved through faithfulness and God’s gracious giving of his Spirit. It is by “walking in the Spirit,” and not according to the law, that the Galatians can successfully combat the desires of the flesh (5:16). Though life under the Spirit is contrasted with life under the law, the Spirit and the law are not seen as opposing each other. Instead, the Spirit is the empowering presence from God that allows his people to overcome the very evil that the law was only able to identify as sin. Thus, the Spirit is able to bring about freedom from the law, but a freedom that does not lead to greater expressions of sin and selfishness. Instead, the Spirit ushers in a freedom that actively seeks to bring about God’s will in the face of adversity and temptation. Paul uses allegory to describe the new community as the free children of Sarah as opposed to the enslaved children of Hagar (4:21-5:1). For the modern reader, it is important to point out that freedom was the property of the community, not the individual. Belonging to the community made the individual free.
This gift of the Spirit was given as a response to the Galatians’ faithfulness to Paul’s proclamation of the gospel of Christ. Any attempt to become righteous by keeping the law, or simply through human endeavor, is considered by Paul to be a rejection of the gift and the work of the Spirit. Instead of living in freedom, the only other alternative is to live in slavery under the master of the law and the “elements of the world” (4:3, 9), by which he probably means the common understanding of daily life under the influences of oppressive societal and spiritual forces.
Info Box 16.13: Ethical Behavior without Law?
If the law is no longer valid for the Christian, then how is ethical behavior prescribed or regulated? Although Galatians does not directly address this question, it clearly emerges from Paul’s view of the law. From other undisputed letters, Paul grounds all ethical behavior of Christians in the faithfulness of Christ, enacted in his sacrificial love. Since Christian identity is defined by the life of Christ, it is governed by sacrifice, faithfulness to God, and love. While Paul does not shy away from ethical directives when they are required, they should be freely chosen and not imposed. Perhaps in response to the allegation that without the law his converts would have no moral guidance, he sums up the whole law into a command to love one’s neighbor (Gal 5:14), which does not mean that he now endorses the law, but rather that law is realized by means of the Spirit. What this actually looks like in action is listed in 5:22-23. As the church expanded and became more institutionalized toward the end of the first century, the unregimented approach to ethical behavior inevitably began to face increasing challenges.
16.21.3 The Gospel for Everyone
The controversy with the Judaizers most likely led Paul to deeply reflect on the role of Jesus in the drama of salvation. While Paul had long believed that Jesus was appointed the agent of salvation, the controversy in Galatia forced him to articulate how Jesus’ death, as the ultimate act of human faithfulness, affects the nature of the Christian community. Paul’s main claim is that Christ’s faithfulness fulfills the promise given to Abraham that all nations will be blessed and included among the people of God.
Christ’s faithfulness (to the point of death) destroys pending death which the law at Sinai threatened. This is the “curse” that Christ became and from which he redeemed his followers (3:13; 4:4). Its impact was not only one ethnic people, or one geographical area, but the whole world. This, for Paul, is the gospel that breaks down deep-seated barriers between people groups. While Paul is primarily addressing the concerns that distinguish Jews from Gentiles, his principle of inclusion is much more comprehensive as it is classically expressed in the phrase, “There is neither Jew nor Gentile, neither slave nor free, neither male nor female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus” (3:28). The gospel’s subversion of social, ethnic and gender barriers testifies to the scope of God’s redemptive work through Christ’s faithfulness, but it also places often uncomfortable demands on the church, both then and now.
Further Reading
1, 2 Thessalonians
Donfried, Karl P. and Johannes Beutler, eds. The Thessalonian Debate. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2000.
Furnish, Victor Paul. 1 Thessalonians, 2 Thessalonians. Nashville: Abingdon Press, 2007.
Jewett, Robert. The Thessalonian Correspondence: Pauline Rhetoric and Millenarian Piety. Foundations and Facets: New Testament. Philadelphia: Fortress, 1986.
Malherbe, Abraham J. Paul and the Thessalonians: The Philosophic Tradition of Pastoral Care. Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1987.
Galatians
Dunn, James D. The Theology of Paul the Apostle. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1998.
Esler, Philip. Galatians. New Testament Readings. London: Routledge, 1998.
Meeks, Wayne. The First Urban Christians. The Social World of the Apostle Paul. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1983.
Murphy-O’Connor, Jerome. Paul: His Story. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2004.
Nanos, Mark D., ed. The Galatians Debate. Peabody: Hendrickson, 2002.
Sanders, E. P. Paul and Palestinian Judaism: A Comparison of Patterns of Religion. Philadelphia: Fortress, 1977.