Colin R. Nicholl examines the situations giving rise to each Thessalonian Epistle to determine how the two relate historically. His book presents a compelling hypothesis, arguing that the two letters reflect two stages of a single crisis plaguing a recently formed Greek Church, (which spiralled from hope into despair because of confusion about the "end" time.) This monograph is the most up-to-date and comprehensive account of the Thessalonian Epistles currently available.
Author(s): Colin R. Nicholl
Year: 2004
Language: English
Pages: 336
COVER......Page 1
HALF-TITLE......Page 3
TITLE......Page 7
COPYRIGHT......Page 8
DEDICATION......Page 9
CONTENTS......Page 11
PREFACE......Page 15
ABBREVIATIONS......Page 18
PART ONE......Page 23
Four critical problems concerning 2 Thessalonians......Page 25
The problem of the literary affinities......Page 26
The problem of the apparently incompatible eschatologies......Page 30
The problem of 2 Thess. 2:2 and 3:17......Page 31
The problem of the perceived difference in tone......Page 33
What are the situational criteria for 2 Thessalonians to qualify as a pseudepigraph?......Page 34
The need for a situational study of 1 Thessalonians......Page 35
Method and procedure......Page 36
PART TWO......Page 39
Introduction......Page 41
Does indicate prior ignorance?......Page 42
Does imply a future awakening?......Page 44
Does imply that the Thessalonian community are lacking hope?......Page 45
Why do the protasis and apodosis of 4:14 not correspond?......Page 48
Where is the…to be found?......Page 54
Does indicate relative disadvantage?......Page 55
Did the Thessalonian community know about the resurrection of the dead?......Page 57
What is the source of the…......Page 60
What do 4:16–17a contribute to the argument of the section?......Page 63
How do 4:16–17 relate to 4:14b?......Page 67
Is the source of the Thessalonians’ confusion an erroneous theology of Jewish assumption?......Page 68
Conclusion......Page 69
Introduction......Page 71
Does idle speculation underlie the Thessalonians’ question?......Page 72
The meaning of the ‘Day of the Lord’ in 5:2......Page 73
The import of the thief motif in 5:2......Page 74
The relationship of 5:3 to the thief-in-the-night simile......Page 75
Does 5:3 constitute grounds for judging the Thessalonian community to be guilty of false security?......Page 77
The function of 5:4......Page 79
The significance of the four pronouncements of 5:5......Page 80
The significance of 5:6–8......Page 82
The function of 5:9–10......Page 85
The function of 5:1–11......Page 89
Do 5:1–11 reflect a concrete situation?......Page 91
Do 5:6–8 elucidate the specific situation of the Thessalonian church?......Page 92
Was the delay of the parousia a factor in the problem?......Page 93
Were the Thessalonians worried that they might not be prepared for the Day?......Page 94
A new hypothesis......Page 95
Conclusion......Page 101
1 Thess. 1:10b and c......Page 102
1 Thess. 2:12b......Page 104
1 Thess. 3:10......Page 105
1 Thess. 5:14......Page 106
1 Thess. 1:2–10......Page 107
1 Thess. 2:1–12......Page 112
1 Thess. 2:13–16......Page 115
1 Thess. 2:17–3:10......Page 118
1 Thess. 3:11–13......Page 121
1 Thess. 4:1–12......Page 122
1 Thess. 5:12–22......Page 126
1 Thess. 5:23–4......Page 130
1 Thess. 5:25–8......Page 132
Conclusion to Part 2......Page 133
PART THREE......Page 135
For ‘Paul’ and ‘the Thessalonians’, did mean ‘is imminent’?......Page 137
A complex of events?......Page 139
Spiritually present?......Page 140
A fresh analysis......Page 141
What were the implications of the false claim for ‘the Thessalonians’?......Page 147
2 Thess. 2:2......Page 148
2 Thess. 2:1, 13–14......Page 154
2 Thess. 2:15......Page 158
2 Thess. 2:16–17......Page 159
2 Thess. 3:1–5......Page 161
Concluding summary......Page 164
The significance of the prescript (1:1–2)......Page 166
Why have and been included in the thanksgiving?......Page 167
The absence of from 1:3......Page 168
The implication of in 1:4......Page 170
In 1:5 what is an of what?......Page 171
The function of 1:6–10......Page 172
Do 1:11–12 imply that the salvation of ‘the Thessalonians’ is contingent on prayer?......Page 176
Conclusion......Page 177
Introduction......Page 179
Difficulties of reading 2 Thess. 3:6–15 as an eschatological problem......Page 180
Recent non-eschatological hypotheses......Page 185
An exegesis of 2 Thess. 3:6–15......Page 188
A non-eschatological explanation of the problem of the…......Page 193
The situation underlying 2 Thess. 3:16–18......Page 197
Conclusion to Part 3......Page 200
PART FOUR......Page 203
Summary of the situation underlying 1 Thessalonians......Page 205
Summary of the situation underlying 2 Thessalonians......Page 207
Points of continuity and discontinuity......Page 208
The plausibility of development between the two situations, assuming the Pauline authorship of 2 Thessalonians......Page 209
The literary parallels......Page 220
The irreconcilability of the eschatologies......Page 227
2 Thess. 2:2, 15; 3:4 and 17......Page 230
The difference in tone between 1 and 2 Thessalonians......Page 233
Concluding evaluation of the four arguments for pseudonymity......Page 235
Is 2 Thessalonians an epistolary pseudepigraph?......Page 236
Is 2 Thessalonians a general paraenetic and didactic pseudepigraph?......Page 237
Is 2 Thessalonians a typological pseudepigraph?......Page 239
Conclusion......Page 241
APPENDIX......Page 245
Introduction: 2 Thess. 2:6–7 and the restrainer......Page 247
The restrainer: the options......Page 250
Michael as a restrainer......Page 254
The removal of Michael......Page 258
The use of the neuter…......Page 268
Conclusion......Page 270
Primary sources......Page 272
Secondary sources......Page 277
A Old Testament......Page 309
C New Testament......Page 311
D Dead Sea Scrolls......Page 321
E Pseudepigrapha......Page 322
F Christian and non-Rabbinic Jewish literature......Page 323
G Rabbinic writings......Page 324
H Classical authors and other texts......Page 325
INDEX OF MODERN AUTHORS......Page 327
INDEX OF SUBJECTS......Page 332
