The Thessalonians Debate Revisited

Abstract

The Book The Thessalonians Debate (Eerdmans, 2000) defined the Thessalonian problem, but without a real resolution except for showing that the central issue is 1 Thessalonians 2, which seems to contradict all the conventional rules of epistolary analysis. We see here that the solution is to be found in correcting a deficiency in the conventional methods of epistolary analysis. In 1 Thessalonians 2 the thanksgiving is interrupted by a reminder of Paul’s previous actions. This is followed by two more cycles of thanksgiving and reminders of Paul’s past actions. These cycles are seen as essentially defensive, and this interpretation is further supported by repeated appeals to God and also to the addressees themselves as witnesses to Paul’s integrity. The conclusion is that all of the peculiarities of 1 and 2 Thessalonians can be explained by the hypothesis that both epistles are authentic, but 2 Thessalonians is the earlier epistle. This hypothesis has previously been defended by numerous writers and a commentator. A recent analysis of the Thessalonian epistles by Bart Ehrman (2013) proposes an alternative explanation, but it is not tenable.