A Division Between Jewish and Gentile Christians
A Division Between Jewish and Gentile Christians
A. Harnack tried to solve the problem in terms of destination. He thought that there was tension between the Jewish and Gentile members of the church and that Paul, in recognition of this, wrote two letters, 1 Thessalonians being addressed to the Gentile section and 2 Thessalonians to the Jewish Christians.18 The reference to turning from idols (1 Thess. 1:9) marks the first letter as being directed toward former pagans, and Harnack thought there is a Jewish coloring in the second that makes it suitable for people who know their Old Testament. This Jewish tone, however, has not been apparent to all. Some point out, for example, that in 2 Thessalonians there is not one quotation from the Old Testament.
A related argument depends on accepting the reading "God chose you as his firstfruits” instead of "from the beginning God chose you” (2 Thess. 2:13; the NIV has the "firstfruits” reading in the margin). In what sense could the Thessalonians be labeled firstfruits? They were not the first Christians, not even the first in Macedonia (that honor went to the Philippians). But the Jews could be said to be the first in Thessalonica (Acts 17:4), and this observation has fueled the argument that 2 Thessalonians was written exclusively to the Jewish component of the church. Even if the variant "firstfruits” was accepted, however, it would not necessarily follow that the epistle is so narrowly directed. In James 1:18, all believers are the firstfruits of God’s creation; in Revelation 14:4 faithful witnesses and martyrs are the firstfruits of humankind. In the context before us, it is quite likely that the church as a whole is the firstfruits (if that is the correct reading) of humankind to God.19 But more important, there is every reason to hold that the NIV is right: "from the beginning” should be read and not "as his firstfruits.” 20 Conversely, there is no greater substance in the argument that, since Paul insists in 1 Thessalonians that "all” be greeted with a holy kiss and that the first letter be read to "all” (1 Thess. 5:26-27), it must have been written to both Jews and Gentiles. Such directions are quite natural in a letter to all the church, without concrete reference to groups within the church.
Quite apart from such arguments it is quite unthinkable that Paul would accept a situation in which a church was so divided that it could not even meet as a whole. When he faced division in the Corinthian church, he delayed dealing with everything else until he had made it clear that he was totally opposed to any such division as cliques within the group. Such a division is contradicted by all that we know of the apostolic church. There were differences of opinion, indeed, but not such that believers separated off from one another. Paul’s approval of the Thessalonians is manifestly impossible to reconcile with bitter division. Furthermore, the addresses of the two letters are practically identical; certainly there is no suggestion that they were addressed to different groups of believers within the church. There are other difficulties. On Harnack’s view Paul holds up to Gentile believers the example of Jewish churches in Judea and commends them for being imitators of those churches (1 Thess. 2:14). Difficulties multiply; the hypothesis should be rejected.
There is perhaps more to be said for the idea of Martin Dibelius that the letter "was sent only to a special circle of the church,” 21 or that of E. Earle Ellis that we should take
"the brothers” as a designation of Paul’s Thessalonian coworkers and see the first epistle as sent to the whole church and the second as sent to "the brothers.” 22 Ellis draws attention particularly to the designation "firstfruits,” which is applied specifically to "the brothers” (2 Thess. 2:13), pointing to them as set apart for the work of God. He also sees the "idlers” (2 Thess. 3:6-15) as people "receiving financial support or, at least, communal meals,” and Ellis thinks Paul is urging them to follow his example. 23 But it may be doubted whether Ellis has made out his case. The textual evidence for "firstfruits” is scarcely sufficient, and it is hard to see the strong denunciation of the idlers as referring to a class of church workers.
A problem in the way of all hypotheses that 2 Thessalonians is written for a different group of people than 1 Thessalonians is the address. As it stands, the letter is sent "to the church of the Thessalonians,” an expression that is identical with that at the head of
1 Thessalonians. There is no evidence that this replaces any other form of address.
Two questions arise. First, if the two letters were originally sent to two different groups of Christians, why are they addressed to the same group? Second, if originally there was a different address for one letter, why was it changed? When we add that the contents of both letters are very suitable in epistles to the whole Thessalonian church, it seems that the case has not been made out.