Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-rcrh6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-27T11:33:20.315Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Cults of Thessalonica and the Thessalonian Correspondence*

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 February 2009

Karl P. Donfried
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Despite the relative brevity of 1 and 2 Thessalonians, there is little scholarly consensus today concerning their interpretation. Whether the issue is the integrity of 1 Thess 2. 13–16 or the authenticity of 2 Thessalonians, whether the problem involves the interpretation of the so-called ‘apology’ in 1 Thess 2. 1–12 or that of τὸ κατέχον of 2 Thessalonians, whether the question deals with the eschatology of 1 Thess 4. 13–5. 11 or of 2 Thessalonians, or whether the query involves the form-critical analysis of either document, there is little agreement among contemporary New Testament scholars.

Type
Articles
Information
New Testament Studies , Volume 31 , Issue 3 , July 1985 , pp. 336 - 356
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1985

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Notes

[1] The most recent commentary on 1 and 2 Thessalonians is Marshall, I. Howard, 1 and 2 Thessalonians (NCB; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1983).Google Scholar On the whole it contains a good review of the differing positions on main issues of interpretation. In addition to the bibliography in Rigaux (n. 2), one should consult Collins, Raymond F., Studies on the First Letter to the Thessalonians (Ephemerides Theologicae Lovanienses 66; Leuven: University Press, 1984).Google Scholar

[2] Rigaux, B., Saint Paul: Les Épîtres au Thessaloniciens (Études Bibliques; Paris: Gembloux, 1956)Google Scholar is the last commentary to deal, even though briefly, with the religious cults of Thessalonica.

[3] For a fuller treatment of the importance of audience criticism, see Donfried, K. P., The Dynamic Word (New York: Harper & Row, 1981).Google Scholar

[4] Edson, Charles, ‘Cults of Thessalonica’, HTR 41 (1948) 182CrossRefGoogle Scholar; see also Vickers, Michael, ‘Towards Reconstruction of the Town Planning of Roman Thessaloniki’ in Ancient Macedonia, 1 (Thessaloniki: Institute for Balkan Studies, 1970) 239–51.Google Scholar

[5] Witt, Rex, ‘The Egyptian Cults in Ancient Macedonia’ in Ancient Macedonia, 2 (Thessaloniki: Institute for Balkan Studies, 1977) 324–33.Google Scholar

[6] Edson, , 181.Google Scholar

[7] Ox. Pap. 1380; Witt, , 332.Google Scholar

[8] Edson, , 135.Google Scholar

[9] Edson, , 165.Google Scholar

[10] For a discussion and reconstruction of this testament see Edson, , 165–70.Google Scholar

[11] Nilsson, Martin P., The Dionysiac Mysteries of the Hellenistic Age (Lund: Gleerup, 1957) 44–5.Google Scholar

[12] Strymon.

[13] Nilsson, , 45.Google Scholar

[14] Number 26; we have used the edition by Athanassakis, Apostolos N., The Homeric Hymns (Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press, 1976).Google Scholar

[15] Otto, Walter F., Dionysus: Myth and Cult (Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1965) 81.Google Scholar

[16] Otto, , 178.Google Scholar

[17] Heidland, H. W. in Theological Dictionary of the New Testament, 5, ed. Gerhard Friedrich (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1967) 176.Google Scholar

[18] On the whole we find the cultic background more persuasive than the example cited by Malherbe from the Cynic-Stoic philosophers. See Malherbe, Abraham, ‘Gentle as a Nurse: The Cynic Background to I Thess ii’, NovT 12 (1970) 203–17, esp. 211.Google Scholar

[19] For further details see Edson and Witt.

[20] Hemberg, Bengt, Die Kabiren (Uppsala: Almqvist & Wiksells, 1950) 207.Google Scholar

[21] For other literary references see Hemberg, , 205.Google Scholar

[22] Hemberg, , 208.Google Scholar

[23] Edson, , 192.Google Scholar

[24] Edson, , 192.Google Scholar

[25] Hemberg, , 210.Google Scholar

[26] Edson, , 188–9.Google Scholar

[27] Hemberg, , 209–10.Google Scholar

[28] Hemberg, , 73 ff.Google Scholar

[29] Hemberg, , 75.Google Scholar

[30] Edson, , 180–90.Google Scholar

[31] Edson, , 189–90.Google Scholar

[32] Fraser, P. M., Samothrace: The Inscriptions on Stone (Bollingen Series LX.2.1; New York: Pantheon, 1960) 58.Google Scholar

[33] Edson, , 190.Google Scholar

[34] ‘From the Archaic period onward, admission to the epopteia was preceded by an obligatory confession of sins.’ Phyllis, Williams Lehmann, Samothrace: The Heiron (Bollingen Series LX.3; Princeton: Princeton University, 1969) 54.Google Scholar

[35] Phyllis, Williams Lehmann, The Pedimental Sculptures of the Hieron in Samothrace (Locust Valley, New York: J. J. Augustin, 1962) 17–18.Google Scholar

[36] Lehmann, , Pedimental 18Google Scholar; Plutarch, , Zeus and Osiris, 364 D.Google Scholar

[37] Naphtali, Lewis, Samothrace: The Ancient Literary Sources (Bollingen Series LX.l; New York: Pantheon, 1958) 97; Strabo 10.3.7.Google Scholar

[38] Lehmann, , Hieron 42.Google Scholar

[39] Lehmann, , Hieron 40.Google Scholar

[40] Phyllis, Williams Lehmann and Denys, Spittle, Samothrace: The Temenos (Bollingen Series LX.5; Princeton: Princeton University, 1982) 221.Google Scholar

[41] Hendrix, Holland L., Thessalonicans Honor Romans (Cambridge: Harvard Th.D. Thesis, 1984) 141.Google Scholar

[42] See Marshall, , 107–9.Google Scholar

[43] John, Eadie, Commentary on the Greek Text of the Epistles of Paul to the Thessalonians (New York: Macmillan, 1877) 127.Google Scholar

[44] I A.D. in Anthol. Plan. 4,243; Arndt, W. F. and Gingrich, F. Wilbur, A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature (Chicago; University of Chicago, 1979) 754.Google Scholar

[45] 170–235 A.D.; Hist. Animal. xvii, 11Google Scholar; Arndt-Gingrich, , 754.Google Scholar

[46] Donfried, Karl P., ‘Paul and Judaism: I Thessalonians 2: 13–16 as a Test Case’, Int 38 (1984) 247.Google Scholar

[47] Jack, Finegan, The Archeology of the New Testament (Boulder: Westview, 1981) 108.Google Scholar

[48] Sherwin-White, A. N., Roman Society and Roman Law in the New Testament (Oxford: Oxford University, 1963) 103.Google Scholar

[49] Judge, E. A., ‘The Decrees of Caesar at Thessalonica’, The Reformed Theological Review 30 (1971) 2.Google Scholar

[50] Dio Chrysostom 57 15.8; Judge 4.

[51] Judge, 5.

[52] Judge, 6.

[53] Judge, 7.

[54] Judge, 7.

[55] Frend, W. H. C., Martyrdom and Persecution in the Early Church (Oxford: Blackwell, 1965) 96Google Scholar; see also 124, n. 69.

[56] George, Milligan, St Paul's Epistles to the Thessalonians (New York: Macmillan, n.d.) 145–8.Google Scholar

[57] (HNT 11/3; Tübingen, 1937) 14–15.Google Scholar

[58] Ernest, Best, The First and Second Epistles to the Thessalonians (London: Adams & Charles Black, 1972).Google Scholar See 199 for bibliography.

[59] Adolf, Deissmann, Light from the Ancient East (New York: Doran, 1922) 351–8.Google Scholar

[60] Peter, Stuhlmacher, Das paulinische Evangelium, 1 (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1968) 196–206.Google Scholar

[61] Hendrix, , 41.Google Scholar The inscription reads as follows: [The city? and the] negot[iant and] [resident? R]omans [to M. Antony?] [and C. Caes] ar [b] enefac[tors and saviours?]

[62] Hendrix, , 42.Google Scholar

[63] Hendrix, , 253.Google Scholar

[64] Hendrix, , 336.Google Scholar

[65] Hendrix, , 287.Google Scholar

[66] Hendrix, , 287.Google Scholar

[67] Hendrix, , 62.Google Scholar

[68] Hendrix, , 108.Google Scholar

[69] Hendrix, , 173.Google Scholar

[70] Hendrix, , 170.Google Scholar

[71] Hendrix, , 299, 308.Google Scholar

[72] Hendrix, , 308.Google Scholar

[73] Hendrix, , 310.Google Scholar

[74] Hendrix, , 312.Google Scholar

[75] Hendrix, , 312.Google Scholar

[76] Hendrix, , 311.Google Scholar

[77] Hendrix, , 310.Google Scholar

[78] Bruce, F. F., The Acts of the Apostles (Grand Rapids: Eerdmanns, 1951) 327.Google Scholar

[79] Note also 1 Cor 7. 5 - ‘Satan tempts …’

[80] The choice of this language may well be related to the persecution/affliction theme of the letter.

[81] Nils Dahl in reflections made to the Society of Biblical Literature Paul Seminar in 1972, p. 2.

[82] Ramsay, MacMullen, Paganism in the Roman Empire (New Haven: Yale University, 1981) 55.Google Scholar

[83] Bruce, , Acts 327–8Google Scholar; unfortunately, Bruce does not mention this suggestion in his new commentary, 1 & 2 Thessalonians (Word: 45; Waco, Texas: Word, 1982).Google Scholar

[84] Perhaps Frend, 83.

[85] Donfried, K. P., ‘Paul and Judaism’, 242–53.Google Scholar

[86] Joachim, Gnilka, Der Philipperbrief (HTKNT:X,3; Freiburg: Herder, 1968) 154–5Google Scholar; Lightfoot, J. B., Saint Paul's Epistle to the Philippians (London: Macmillan, 1891) 118–19Google Scholar; Ernst, Lohmeyer, Die Brief an die Philipper, an die Kolosser und an Philemon (MeyerK: Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1964) 111–14.Google Scholar

[87] Lohmeyer, , 111.Google Scholar

[88] See also 2 Thess 1. 4.

[89] We certainly do not wish to imply any systematic persecutions.

[90] Otto, Michel, Der Brief an die Römer (MeyerK; Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1963) 217.Google Scholar

[91] ‘Gentle as a Nurse’; see n. 18 above.

[92] The reference to three weeks in Acts 17 deals with Paul's activity in the synagogue and not necessarily his total stay. Note Bruce, , Acts, 324Google Scholar: ‘We are not told what space of time elapsed between his leaving the synagogue and leaving the city.’ See also Gerd, Lüdemann, Paulus, der Heidenapostel, 1 (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1980) 203–4Google Scholar, for a brief discussion of his and other positions. We are inclined to stress the brevity of Paul's visit to Thessalonica.

[93] There has always been a significant Jewish community in Thessalonica and now there is evidence for a Samaritan synagogue dating to the fourth century B.C. See Lifshitz, B. and Schiby, J., ‘Une Synagogue samaritaine à Thessalonique’, Revue Biblique 75 (1968) 368–78.Google Scholar

[94] Chrysostom, Dio, Oration 32, 11Google Scholar; see Malherbe, , 208.Google Scholar

[95] See our previous discussion above, p. 338

[96] These comments taken together with 1 Thess 4. 10–12 ‘imply non-participation in public life. It is tempting to suggest that Paul's readers might have heard him taking a stand against the kind of political action that the philosophers were carrying on in Rome. They might understand that Paul was distancing himself from radical political activity.’ (Edgar Krentz, ‘I Thessalonians: a Document of Roman Hellenism’, 15, a paper presented to the 1 Thessalonians seminar of the Society of Biblical Literature, 1979).

[97] Helmut, Koester, ‘1 Thessalonians - Experiment in Christian Writing’, in Continuity and Discontinuity in Church History (Essays presented to George H. Williams; Leiden: Brill, 1979) 44.Google Scholar

[98] Koester, , ‘Experiment’, 44Google Scholar; equally in error is Krentz's (14) conclusion that ‘the political tone triumphs over the apocalyptic’.

[99] Willi, Marxsen, Der erste Brief an die Thessalonicher (Züricher Bibelkommentare 11.1; Zürich: Theologischer Verlag, 1979) 63–7.Google Scholar

[100] Wolfgang, Trilling, Der zweite Brief an die Thessalonicher (EKK XIV; Zürich: Benziger, 1980).Google Scholar

[101] Helmut, Koester, History and Literature of Early Christianity, 2 (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1982) 242–46.Google Scholar

[102] Giblin, Charles H., The Threat to Faith (AnBib 31; Rome: Pontifical Biblical Institute, 1967) 201.Google Scholar

[103] Ernst, Koeberlein, Caligula und die aegyptischen Kulte (1962)Google Scholar; see also Witt, , 331.Google Scholar

[104] Witt, , 331.Google Scholar

[105] Witt, , 328Google Scholar; (έκκλησία: 1 Thess 1. 1; 2. 14; 2 Thess 1. 4. εύχαριστέω/εύχαριστία: 1 Thess 2. 13; 3. 9; 5. 18).