Introduction to 1 Thessalonians:
The city of Thessalonica (or Salonika) was founded in 297 B.C. and was the chief seaport of ancient Macedonia and an important commercial and military center. After Paul and Silas were forced to leave Philippi, they traveled along the Via Egnatia, the great Roman highway to the East, to Thessalonica (Acts 16:39-17:1) where Paul taught in the synagogue for the Sabbath. The Jews did not take kindly to losing a considerable number of adherents and stirred up the locals to bring them to the city officials and accused them of promoting treasonous ideas (Acts 17:5-10). It was not clear whether Paul jumped bail, but he left quickly at night to Berea. As a result, Paul felt that he did not have enough time to ground the new believers in Thessalonica in doctrine and desired to return there, but was hindered by Satan (1 Thess. 2:17, 18). Consequently, he sent Timothy to complete the work he had begun while he headed to Athens.
1 Thessalonians was likely written by Paul around AD. 50-51 when Timothy returned to him in Corinth (Acts 18:5), bearing good news about the strong faith, love and hope of the church, except that there appeared to be some moral problems (which were not atypical among churches within the Roman empire), and also some erroneous concepts concerning the return of the Lord. So we find that this letter is neatly divided into two parts: Chapters 1-3 which contain words of encouragement, recounting their time in Thessalonica, ending with a benediction in 3:11-13; and chapters 4-5 which address problems likely reported by Timothy.
For more detailed background, you may wish to consult other fine biblical commentaries.
Before our reflection today, apart from reading the above “Introduction”, it is also helpful to read Acts 17:1-10 to get a sense of how the church in Thessalonica was started. If you were those first converts in Thessalonica, what kind of a relationship would you have with Paul, Silas and Timothy—the three greeters of this letter?
(1) Have you noticed that Paul did not address himself as an “apostle” here (as he did, say, in his letters to the Corinthians). What might be the reason?
(2) What emotions might you have (as one of the first converts) while reading this letter?
(3) This letter opens with two thanksgivings: One in 1:2-3, and the other one in 2:13. Let’s pause for a moment and reflect on the first thanksgiving and see whether your life and that of your church (and in that order) are marked by the following:
a. Work produced by faith (i.e. does the way you live have anything to do with faith)?
b. Labor prompted by love (i.e. is any of the ministries you are involved in girded by love—for God and love for the people you serve)?
c. Endurance inspired by hope in our Lord Jesus Christ (i.e. if you are not giving up, why? Or, if you are quitting, why?)
(4) With this thanksgiving, what kind of a church in Thessalonica is being portrayed?
(5) How much might it have meant to these Thessalonian believers when Paul reminded them that they were loved by God (1:4)? What would it mean to you?
(6) According to Paul, what was the proof that they had been chosen by God? (1:5)
(7) Does the same proof apply to you? Why or why not?
(8) According to Paul, what did they have in common with him (1:6)?
(9) Do you share the same commonality with Paul and the Thessalonians?
(10) What is the main message to you today and how may you apply it to your life?
“Paul, Silas and Timothy. To the church of the Thessalonians in God the Father and the Lord Jesus Christ.” (1 Thess. 1:1)
In most of the epistles of the Apostle Paul, he did not hesitate to call himself an “apostle” because that’s who he was and he wrote under such an authority. It had nothing to do with pride or ego, but with the acute awareness of the awesome responsibility entrusted to him, not only in the actual verbal delivery of the Word of God, but also in his writings which served to etch the Word of God for eternity.
So, it is rather unusual and surprising to read the salutation in both his letters to the Thessalonians in which he does not mention his “title” as an “apostle”. Even his other familiar self-address, the “servant of Christ Jesus” (Phil. 1:1) is absent.
John
Chrysostom does have a point when he says,
“he gives himself no title—not ‘an Apostle’, not ‘a Servant’; I suppose, because the men were newly instructed, and had not yet had any experience of him, and he does not apply the title; and it was as yet the beginning of his preaching to them.” (NAPF, Chrysostom, I Thessalonians, Homily I, p.323)
But I believe it has less to do with their being “newly instructed”, but more to do with their proper understanding of who Paul was and that they already accepted his teaching “not as the word of men, but as it actually is the word of God.” (1 Thess. 2:13). In other words, they were very mature in Christ even in their infancy as Christians.
I am sure, if not for the immaturity of the rest of the churches, especially the church in Corinth and their readiness to succumb to heresies, Paul would rather not use any title at all. This is quite contrary to some servants of God today who would not hesitate to call themselves “apostles” or use other titles to boost their sense of self-importance.
In praising the faith of the Thessalonians, Paul highlights several aspects of their faith that are worth noting and imitating:
(1) They have become a model (or pattern) to the believers in their own region (Achaia) and beyond (Macedonia). In what way(s) can your faith be a model or pattern to those around you?
(2) In what way(s) can your faith NOT be a model or pattern to those around you?
(3) Their faith was such that it was “the Lord’s message” that rang out from them. What was the message that Paul referred to in vv. 9-10?
(4) “Turning from idols to serve the living and true God”: What price did they have to pay according to Acts 17:1-10 (the passage referred to in yesterday’s devotion)?
(5) What idols have you turned away from?
(6) What price did you have to pay, if any?
(7) “To wait for His Son from heaven—Jesus”: Can you think of way(s) that these Thessalonians would have to demonstrate such an attitude of waiting?
(8) In what ways are you demonstrating that your faith is also marked by such a waiting? Or, does your life have any mark of such a waiting? Why or why not?
(9) What kind of wrath have you been rescued from by the Lord? (For the wrath of God, you may want to read Mal. 3:2, Rev. 14:10; 15:1; 16:1, 19 and 19:15)
(10) What is the main message to you today and how may you apply it to your life?
“and to wait for His Son from heaven, whom He raised from the dead—Jesus who rescues us from the coming wrath.” (1 Thess. 1:10)
It this day and age, it is really infrequent that the wrath of God is being preached either from the pulpit or shared as we seek to evangelize the non-believers. We choose to talk about joy and peace and the other blessings that come from our belief in God. However, one of the fundamental truths of the good news in Jesus Christ remains that He “rescues us from the coming wrath” (1 Thess. 1:10).
One of the reasons that we tend to shy away from talking about the wrath of God might have to do with our misunderstanding of God’s wrath. Allow me to share a proper perspective of God’s wrath as explained by Thomas Oden:
“Wrath (orge) differs from passionate anger, which is immediate and strong; wrath is more settled in the long term. The wrath of God suggests the continuing revulsion of the holiness of God against sin. The holy God cannot abide injustice, pride, deception, and willful diminution of the good. God’s righteous wrath is directed against sin…
“His anger, to speak metaphorically, is vented against ‘all godlessness and wickedness’ (Rom. 1:18). Anger is the divine response to persistent, self-chosen human alienation, a response motivated by love. Forgiveness is made a nonevent if this deep sense of alienation is overlooked.
“One cannot think of a serious parental love that makes no effort to protect the child against evil. The parent who is not revulsed by the evil that might overtake the child is not a good parent.
“A remarkable reversal, however, happens in the story of the resistance of the holy God to sin. What happened in Christ was an act of substitution by which God demonstrated that His wrath had been turned aside so as to enable an entirely new relationship with humanity, not yielding to sin, but binding it up so as to make a new start.
“This is quite different from the prevailing forms of conciliatory rituals in the history of religions, wherein, men and women offer sacrifices to try to change a god’s attitude from wrath to friendship…Rather here it is God who is taking the initiative to change the broken relationship with humanity. The picture of a human being placating an angry deity is not characteristic of New Testament teaching. More characteristic is the picture of God’s quiet, costly approach to alienated humanity to overcome sin through sacrificial suffering.”
(Thomas Oden, The Word of Life, 395-6)
(1) As you were reading the first 6 verses of this chapter, have you noticed the repetition of words like “not” and “nor”? Try to highlight these or similar words of a negative connotation.
(2) What do you think might be the reason for Paul’s defense?
(3) Why did Paul bring up his suffering and insult in Philippi (Acts 16:11ff), the city they visited prior to Thessalonica? Did his suffering in Philippi have any impact on his endeavor or ministry in Thessalonica?
(4) Paul’s defense was basically about his character. What characteristics, according to Paul, should mark the essence, motive and approach of a man (or woman) “approved by God to be entrusted with the gospel”? (2:3-5)
(5) In particular, what should mark the message of such a person?
(6) What should mark the motive of such a person?
(7) What should mark the approach of this person’s ministry?
(8) What analogy did Paul use in v. 7 to refer to his relationship with the Thessalonian believers?
(9) What marks such a relationship (as a mother) according to v. 8?
(10) What is meant by “not only sharing the gospel but our lives as well”?
(11) What is the difference between sharing the gospel only and sharing both the gospel and our lives?
(12) What is the main message to you today and how may you apply it to your life?
Note:
Wherever Paul went, as we learn from the Acts of Apostles and from his epistles (and even from that of Peter), he encountered fierce opposition from without and within. Although no details are available about who the attackers were in Thessalonica, this passage offers us a glimpse of the criticisms he received.
“but we were gentle among you, like a mother caring for her little children.” (1 Thess. 2:7)
In his first letter to the Thessalonians, the Apostle Paul used two analogies to express how he ministered to the Thessalonians: One is like a mother (2:7) and the other one is like a father (2:11). I am not that surprised by the second analogy, but am truly touched by the former.
The mark of a mother, as Paul points out, is gentleness. As I think of a minister of the gospel—of a pastor as a mother, I could not help but search my memory: In all the pastoral recruiting processes of which I have been part, was this one of the criteria or trait that we looked for in a candidate? Honestly, I have to say, no. Academic qualification, yes; giftedness in teaching, preaching and discipleship, yes! But gentleness as a mother? Who wants a motherly like pastor! But surprisingly, that’s what the Apostle was.
And in his motherly gentleness, the Apostle Paul seeks not only to be faithful in the sharing of the Word of God, but the sharing of his life as well (2:8). That’s what a mother does. Apart from teaching her children the way of being a decent human being, her life is marked by sleepless nights caring for her sick children, early mornings waking up to cook for them, the never-ending washing of their clothes, the constant cleaning up of the messes left by the children, and the nightly reading of stories to send them to sleep.
In other words, her entire life is devoted to the children. This is a mother. This is love. That’s what the Apostle Paul was to the church of Thessalonica, and they knew it, they felt it. No wonder the Apostle Paul did not have to address himself as “an Apostle of Christ Jesus” in his opening salutation.
(1) As apostles of Christ, Paul and his companions could have taken financial support from the Thessalonians, but why didn’t they?
(2) Instead, how did they manage to survive?
(3) What was the second analogy Paul used in v. 11 to refer to his relationship with the Thessalonian believers?
(4) What marks such a relationship (as a father) according to v. 12?
(5) How did Paul demonstrate his credentials in urging the believers to live lives worthy of God, according to v. 10?
(6) Can you say the same about your own life? Why or why not?
(7) Now Paul expressed his second thanksgiving about the church in Thessalonica. What was it?
(8) As we listen to the preaching from the pulpit every Sunday, how should we demonstrate that we accept the message “not as the word of men, but as it is the word of God”?
(9) Try to compare the suffering of the churches in Judea (as detailed by Paul) with that of the Thessalonian church. How similar were they? In what way might they be different? How should the Thessalonian church be encouraged, as a result?
(10) What is the main message to you today and how may you apply it to your life?
“…you accepted it not as the word of men, but as it actually is, the word of God which is at work in you who believe.” (1 Thess. 2:13)
Paul gave thanks for the church of Thessalonians for their work of faith, their labor of love and their endurance of hope (1:3), and also for their attitude in listening to his preaching (2:13). While the former is indeed very admirable, the latter is very foundational to a church that pleases God, because belief or faith comes from hearing (Rom. 10:14). How we hear, therefore determines if faith, love and hope can germinate in our lives. And, the Thessalonian believers had the correct attitude in listening to the preaching of Paul, because they accepted it as the word of God and not as the word of men.
It is what today’s Christians lack in their hearing of preaching today. Many Christians pick and choose whom they would listen to on Sunday to the point that some would demand the church to publish in advance who the speaker will be the following Sunday, so that they could decide whether they would come or go to another church. In essence, they hunger and thirst not after the word of God, but after the word of men.
Over the years, whether as a layman or a minister myself, irrespective of who the preacher is, as long as he “divides the word correctly” (2 Tim. 2:15), I have learned to seize the chance to draw close to God, feel the warmth of the word of God and be nourished. Regardless of whether the preaching is eloquent or not, I am aware that I am in direct contact with the very word of God. The preacher is only the messenger, the word of God remains always the meat, the Word of Life.
I still remember a time when I was still a layman, there appeared to be a misunderstanding by the pastor about me. He appeared to be directing his message against me repeatedly. Although I had learned that I could be over-sensitive, the illustrations were getting so obvious that one elder of the church came and asked me how I could continue to sit there and listen to his “attack”. Honestly, even after being so questioned by the elder, I continued to get a lot out of the pastor’s preaching, because as long as he was dividing the Word correctly, and it happened to be applicable to me, I listened as not the word of men, but the very Word of God.