7. General exhortations (5:12–22)
7. General exhortations (5:12–22)
As his letter draws to its close Paul mentions some other matters briefly. Firstly, there is the attitude of church members to their leaders. The most probable reading of the situation is that, in the prevailing restlessness, the leaders of the church had rebuked some of the members, possibly those who had stopped working. Their exhortation was perhaps not as tactful as it might have been, and it seems not to have been received meekly. Paul thus addresses the church at large, urging members to have a proper respect for their leaders (12–13), then, still addressing the church at large, but clearly with the leaders specially in mind, he counsels consideration and patience (14–15).
12. Now we ask you is the tone of respectful request; while brothers shows that the request is addressed to the whole church. Respect translates eidenai, a verb which means ‘know’ and is rarely if ever used in this way elsewhere. Most understand it in some such way as ‘appreciate’ or ‘respect’, but Moore thinks that ‘acknowledge’ (NEB) ‘is more exact’.
The three following participles are preceded by a common article which indicates that it is one group of persons and not three that is in mind. This points to elders, who alone would exercise the triple function. Frame objects, for ‘we are in the period of informal and voluntary leadership’, and many follow him. But elders were appointed from quite early times (Acts 11:30; 14:23), and, from the model of the Jewish synagogue, elders are to be expected even in very young churches (once an assembly of Christians is called a synagogue, Jas 2:2). It may be possible for an organization to exist without office-bearers of any kind; but it is far from usual, and such evidence as we have does not indicate that the early church made the attempt. We do not know the precise functions of the early elders and at this time these may not have been defined with any exactness. But this passage shows that there were recognized leaders, whatever functions they performed and whether they were called ‘elders’ or not (‘your teachers’, JB, is too definite). Rigaux sees a reference to presbyters.
Of the three terms employed work hard is quite general; it properly means laborious toil (cf. the use of the corresponding noun in 1:3). Some function of leadership is clearly implied in the expression who are over you. The verb (proistēmi) is used of informal leaderships of various kinds, but it is also used of officials, as the papyri plainly show (see MM). Bo Reicke sees a reference here to people whose task ‘is in large measure that of pastoral care’ (TDNT, vi, p. 702). Hort thinks it ‘morally impossible’ that this can be the title of an office, but he can still say, ‘It can hardly be doubted that Elders are meant, though no title is given.’26 The words in the Lord go with this verb and this makes it clear that it is spiritual authority that is in mind. The third participle, admonish, is found in the New Testament only in the Pauline writings and in a speech of Paul’s in Acts 20:31. ‘It denotes the word of admonition which is designed to correct while not provoking or embittering’ (J. Behm, TDNT, iv, p. 1021). It seems to carry a suggestion of blame for wrongdoing (cf. ‘warn those who are idle’, v. 14) and is aimed at correcting the wrong. Best sees it as addressed to the will rather than the mind.
13. The verb hēgeomai is not found elsewhere in the sense ‘hold in high regard’ (it means ‘consider’, ‘deem’, as in 2 Thess. 3:15, ‘regard’), but in this context NIV seems correct. Again, it is not certain whether we should take in love with the verb or with the adverb, i.e. whether the meaning is ‘hold them in love, and do it exceedingly’ (with love the primary idea), or ‘esteem them highly’ (with ‘in love’ a somewhat loose addition). Whatever our decision it is clear that the two ideas of high esteem and love are present (cf. GNB, ‘Treat them with the greatest respect and love’). Some translations have ‘affection’ (e.g. NEB, JB), but agapē is more than this. The adverb hyperekperissou is a very forceful word (see on 3:10), called by Findlay a ‘triple Pauline intensive’ meaning ‘beyond-exceeding-abundantly’ (CGT). Paul then is making a strong plea for the leaders to be held in the highest regard, and this, not for reasons of personal eminence or office, but because of their work. They ‘work hard’ (v. 12) and it is the duty of the rank and file to do all they can to forward that work. Leaders can never do their best work when they are subject to carping criticism from those who should be their followers. Good leaders need good followers.
Lightfoot thinks that Paul glides off at this point ‘from special precepts into a general and comprehensive one’. But it is better to see the same situation as dictating the next words. It seems clear that the leaders in the church had not been sufficiently highly regarded and their authority had been resisted. In all probability they had not exercised their authority as tactfully as they might have done, and in this situation the injunction Live in peace with each other is very much in place. The exhortation applies to all (each other), including the leaders; it is not simply a counsel of submission on the part of the rank and file. The pursuit of peace is an Old Testament injunction (Ps. 34:14), and one taken seriously in the New Testament (Mark 9:50; Rom. 12:18; 2 Cor. 13:11).
14. The counsel given in this verse is best understood as applying specially to the leaders. But it is not specifically addressed to them, but to the church as a whole. This means that, while the officers have a special responsibility in the matters named, the duties are not confined to them; they are the responsibility in due measure of all believers. All must be ready to help the idle, the timid, and the weak.
Warn translates the verb rendered ‘admonish’ in verse 12 (where see comment). Idle (ataktous) is a military term for the soldier who does not keep in rank. It is found only here in the New Testament and the corresponding verb and adverb are confined to 2 Thessalonians (3:6, 7, 11). Evidently the problem was unusual and confined to the Thessalonians. G. Delling says that the word group ‘characterises a man as one who sets himself outside the necessary and given order’ (TDNT, viii, p. 48). Milligan has a long note in which he shows that in the papyri these words are used of being ‘idle’. Frame quotes a later letter from Milligan with further supporting evidence, but he himself thinks it is not idleness as such but culpable idleness (‘loafing’) that is meant. Such conduct is not to be tolerated in a Christian community.
For encourage see on 2:11–12. The timid (oligopsychous; here only in the New Testament) may be those who naturally lack courage or those who had become discouraged by particular circumstances (like believers becoming despondent when friends died before the parousia, 4:13). Bruce sees the meaning as the ‘inadequate and diffident’, Best as the ‘worried’. Such need encouragement from their Christian comrades. The weak must refer to the weak spiritually, not physically (cf. Rom. 14; 1 Cor. 8). The verb antechesthe (help) is used of holding on to something, cleaving to a person (cf. Luke 16:13). The weak need to feel that they are not alone and strong Christians should ‘hold on to them’ and give them the support they require.
Following the injunctions for particular classes we have one for everyone. The verb makrothymeō, be patient, is the opposite of oxothymeō, ‘to be short-tempered’ and gives the idea of steady patience. Impatience is easy (for good reasons as well as bad), but for the Christian the rule is long-suffering, and that towards all, not just Christians. This is part of what love means (1 Cor. 13:4).
15. Paul changes from the second to the third person, ‘see that no-one renders …’. Not only has each one a responsibility for his own conduct, the whole community has a responsibility for each of its members. This applies to leaders, but also to others; every Christian must give attention to the conduct of the whole group.
The prohibition of retaliation is found elsewhere with the same Greek verb and the same words wrong for wrong (Rom. 12:17; 1 Pet. 3:9; NIV has ‘evil for evil’ in both). It may go back to some saying of Jesus (cf. Matt. 5:43–44), or to the Old Testament (Prov. 25:21). Faced with opposition from both Jews and Gentiles, retaliation must have been a strong temptation to the Thessalonians. But Christian teaching is not meant to be applied only when circumstances are easy. Christianity is a robust faith, empowered with a divine dynamic, and is to be lived out even under the most trying circumstances.
The negative is followed by the positive, always try to be kind (or ‘good’, RSV; agathon). This last word stands over against ‘evil’ and thus denotes what is helpful to others rather than the pursuit of the moral ideal. It is the attitude of returning blessing for cursing, of being actively friendly in the face of hostility. This is more than occasional small acts of kindness; it is a life lived in an attitude of Christian love (always try). The verb try (diōkete) means something like ‘pursue vigorously’ and is the usual word for ‘persecute’. It is interesting to find Paul the ‘persecutor’ (1 Tim. 1:13) using this strong term for the Christian duty of doing good (cf. the pursuit of love, 1 Cor. 14:1; righteousness, 1 Tim. 6:11; peace, Heb. 12:14). It is a duty to be exercised within the brotherhood (to each other), but also to outsiders (to everyone else). Christian love is not to be restricted; it is to be our attitude to all.
16. The injunction Be joyful always is at first sight a little surprising coming from one who had had to suffer as much and as continually as Paul. But he learned that affliction and deep joy may go together (2 Cor. 6:10; 12:10), and he rejoiced in tribulations (Rom. 5:3; Col. 1:24; cf. Acts 5:41; 16:25). So he counsels perpetual rejoicing to a suffering church (cf. 1:6). The note of joy is often struck in his other letter to a Macedonian church, that to the Philippians (cf. Phil. 4:4). Indeed, few things about the New Testament church are more remarkable than this continual stress on joy. From an outward point of view there was little to make believers rejoice. But they were ‘in Christ’; they had learned the truth of his words, ‘no-one will take away your joy’ (John 16:22). Now joy is part of the fruit of the Spirit (Gal. 5:22; cf. Rom. 14:17); it is not something Christians work up out of their own resources. The various derivatives of joy occur with startling frequency throughout the New Testament. The word for ‘grace’, for example, is from this root, as are one of the words for ‘to forgive’, one for ‘to give thanks’, and another for ‘gifts of the Spirit’. New Testament Christianity is permeated with the spirit of holy joy.
17. ‘It is not in the moving of the lips, but in the elevation of the heart to God, that the essence of prayer consists’ (Lightfoot), and it is this that enables us to put into practice the injunction pray continually (cf. Luke 18:1; Rom. 12:12; Eph. 6:18). It is not possible for us to spend all our time with the words of prayer on our lips, but it is possible for us to be all our days in the spirit of prayer, realizing our dependence on God for all we have and are, being conscious of his presence with us wherever we may be, and yielding ourselves continually to him to do his will. Such an inward state will of course find expression from time to time in verbal prayer (notice the frequent ejaculatory prayers throughout Paul’s letters; prayer was so natural to Paul that it inevitably found its way into his correspondence).
18. Paul had learned that ‘in all things God works for the good of those who love him’ (Rom. 8:28). Even in our difficulties and trials God is teaching valuable lessons (Rom. 5:3–5), and they are to be welcomed and used accordingly. This conviction of the divine sovereignty and providence leads to the command, give thanks in all circumstances. It may not be easy to see the bright side of a particular trial, but if God is over all, then his hand is in that trial; his own cannot but recognize his goodness and make their thanksgiving. Perhaps we should notice that in all circumstances is not quite the same as ‘at every time’ (the two are differentiated in 2 Cor. 9:8).
For this is God’s will almost certainly refers to all three injunctions, even though this is singular. They form a unity and belong together. Will has no article; as in 4:3 it is not the totality of the divine will that is in mind. God would have us do other things, but this triad is certainly part of his will for us. The addition in Christ Jesus is characteristically Pauline. God’s will is made known in Christ, and it is in Christ that we are given the dynamic that enables us to carry out that divine will.
19. The verb put out (AV ‘quench’) is the proper word for putting out a fire (cf. Mark 9:48, etc.); it is an appropriate word to use of the Spirit, whose coming was with ‘what seemed to be tongues of fire’ (Acts 2:3; cf. Matt. 3:11), and who brings warmth and light to the Christian life. The negative mē with the present imperative may be a command to cease from something already in progress (though Bruce has his doubts; he prefers the thought of habitually refraining from the activity).
Most commentators take the injunction to refer to the ecstatic gifts of the Spirit (such as speaking in tongues), and see a contrast with the situation in Corinth. There Paul had occasion to curb an exaggerated dependence on the gifts; here, it is said, there is the opposite; some of the more conservative believers were frowning on enthusiasts who eagerly pursued the more spectacular gifts. This is possible, but the evidence is not strong and the words are very general. ‘Do not grieve the Holy Spirit of God’ (Eph. 4:30) is a similar general statement, and most agree that there is no reference in that passage to the ecstatic gifts. It is possible to ‘quench’ the Spirit (or to ‘grieve’ him) by such matters as those mentioned earlier in the epistle—despondency, idleness, immorality and the like—and it is best to take the word in such a general sense. Masson acutely points out that the words refer to the Spirit, not the inspired!
20. One manifestation of the Spirit’s activity is singled out for special mention, do not treat prophecies with contempt (cf. 1 Cor. 14:1). Like some Corinthians, some Thessalonians may have thought more of spectacular gifts, like tongues, than of prophecy (see 1 Cor. 14), and Paul may be seeking to redress the balance. But there is no evidence, and a more likely conjecture is that there had been prophetic outbursts in connection with second advent speculations. At all times in history the two have tended to go together, and at all times one result has been that those not caught up in the advent speculation tend to regard prophecy lightly. Some of the Thessalonians seem to have been over-enthusiastic in their views on the parousia and others seem to have rebuked them rather tactlessly (see on vv. 12ff.). There is nothing improbable in the idea that, in the process, they had come to look slightingly on prophecy.
The New Testament clearly regards the prophets as important. They are classed with apostles (Eph. 2:20; 3:5), and, more formally, ranked second to them (1 Cor. 12:28; Eph. 4:11). Prophecy is the gift of God (1 Cor. 12:28; Eph. 4:11), or of the Spirit (1 Cor. 12:10–11). Commentators regularly point out that prophets were forth-tellers rather than fore-tellers; their characteristic function seems to have been exhortation (Acts 15:32, and cf. the notable discussion in 1 Cor. 14, especially vv. 29–40). Essentially the prophet was someone who could say, ‘Thus saith the Lord’. But it should not be overlooked that this might, and sometimes did, involve foretelling the future (Acts 11:27–28; 21:10–11).
21. Paul does not advocate an uncritical acceptance of anything uttered by one who claimed to be a prophet (the verse begins with de, ‘but’, which NIV omits). He proceeds Test everything (cf. Phil. 1:9–10). This is a general precept, not one limited to testing spiritual gifts (as NEB ‘bring them all to the test’), though it has its application to that problem. The verb is dokimazō, which is often used of testing metals, and may derive from this practice. It comes to mean testing in general and has the secondary meaning of approving as a result of test. Here it plainly means ‘avoid gullibility’, ‘apply spiritual tests to all that claims to be from God’.
Most of the early Greek commentators connect the words with a saying attributed to Jesus, ‘Be ye approved money changers.’27 If this is a genuine saying of Jesus (and the evidence makes it likely), it may have been in Paul’s mind as he wrote these words. At any rate he is advocating the same kind of attitude; M. R. James holds that his words ‘are really a comment on the saying, and show its meaning’.28 But it is not enough to apply the test: that which the test approves must be held fast. Hold on to the good, writes Paul, and his word for good (kalos) is sometimes used of coins that ring true; they are genuine as compared with counterfeit coin. The Thessalonians should not take all claims at face value; they should test them and hold fast only (but always) to what is good.
22. They should also Avoid every kind of evil. The preposition ‘from’ is used to emphasize the complete separation of the believer ‘from’ evil (LB ‘Keep away from every kind of evil’; there is a similar ‘from’ in 4:3, referring to unchastity). There is some doubt about the meaning of eidous (kind), and again whether evil is a noun or an adjective. Not much depends on the latter point, for, as Calvin pointed out, the meaning is much the same. Eidos may mean the outward appearance (Luke 3:22, ‘form’), or ‘sort, species, kind’, which appears to be the meaning here. Some think it means ‘semblance’ (AV ‘appearance’), but this sense is not attested and in any case it seems unlikely that Paul would be concerned only with the outward appearance. Our choice seems to be between ‘every visible form of evil’ (with no notion of unreality) and ‘every kind of evil’. The use of the word elsewhere in the New Testament favours the former, but there are enough examples of the term in the latter sense in the papyri (see MM) to make it quite possible, and in view of the context, this seems to be the right meaning. Paul is urging his friends to avoid evil of every kind (cf. Rom. 12:9).
The change from ‘the good’ (v. 21) to every kind of evil may well be significant. The good is one, but evil is manifold; it is to be avoided in all its forms.