An Inconsistent Interpretational Hermeneutic

[Mellontes]

2 Thessalonians 1:1-4 – Paul, and Silvanus, and Timothy, unto the church of the Thessalonians in God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ: 2 Grace unto you, and peace, from God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ. 3 We are bound to thank God always for you, brethren, as it is meet, because that your faith groweth exceedingly, and the charity of every one of you all toward each other aboundeth; 4 So that we ourselves glory in you in the churches of God for your patience and faith in all your persecutions and tribulations that ye endure: 5 Which is a manifest token of the righteous judgment of God, that ye may be counted worthy of the kingdom of God, for which ye also suffer:

Does anyone have any difficulty believing these five verses apply strictly to the first century Thessalonian Christians? Verse one emphatically expresses the church of Thessalonica as the recipients of Paul’s second letter. Verse two offers grace unto them, and verse three expresses thanks to them, speaks of their growing faith, and of their abounding charity amongst themselves. Verse four shows us that Paul glories in them because of their patience and faith in their persecutions and tribulations that they are presently undergoing. Finally verse 5 states that they may be counted worthy of the kingdom of God for their present sufferings. The pronoun “we” reflects the authorship introduced in verse one and refers to Paul, Silvanus and Timothy. Paul is not writing to 21st century Christianity! The original context is 1st century Christianity.

Application may now be made to our present generation from the original interpretation. For example, we should exhibit a thankful spirit for our brethren. Our faith and charity should continually be growing. Our attitude should be that of patience and faithfulness if persecutions should arise. And should we be able to display these godly qualities, to us it is also a token that we may call ourselves worthy of the kingdom of God. These are appropriate applications, but let us understand right now, it was not us who Paul was addressing. We were not the ones who were suffering persecution at the hands of the unbelieving Jews (1 Thessalonians 2:14). This is past history. We did not take part.
However, in the very next three verses the dreaded substitution of our generation into the text is demanded by many present-day exegetes. The three very next verses call immediate attention to the subject at hand:

2 Thessalonians 1:6-8 – Seeing it is a righteous thing with God to recompense tribulation to them that trouble you; 7 And to you who are troubled rest with us, when the Lord Jesus shall be revealed from heaven with his mighty angels, 8 In flaming fire taking vengeance on them that know not God, and that obey not the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ:

In many circles these verses have become a proof text for the future coming of the Lord Jesus. This false interpretation is made possible by two factors: 1) the flawed substitution of today’s individuals for the bolded “you” mentioned twice in the text in spite of the fact that the first five verses dogmatically refer to the first century Thessalonian church, and 2) a wrong view concerning the N-A-T-U-R-E of His second appearing. These were the Christians who were being “troubled” by the unbelieving Jews. The bolded “us” refers to Paul, Sylvanus and Timothy and likely other first century Christians. When shall these Thessalonians receive rest from their persecutions? The clear answer was “when the Lord Jesus shall be revealed from heaven with his mighty angels.” Paul was not expressing concern for their death. Death was not the issue here. The Lord Jesus being revealed from heaven with his angels is clear evidence of His second appearing. The word “revealed” is derived from αποκάλυψις (apokalupsis), Strong’s 602, and has the same identical root as “revelation!”

There appears to be great difficulty in believing that those Thessalonian believers back in the first century were to experience the second coming of the Lord Jesus. We have been taught that His coming is yet in our future. We have ignored the plain teaching of Scripture, as this one example proves, and have adopted the teachings of men. Why is it that the first five verses apply to the Thessalonians, Paul, Silvanus and Timothy, but the next three apply to some far off generation in the future? Do you now see the damage caused by replacing the intended audience with another future group of individuals?

Obviously, if the “end of the world” meant an actual, literal, physical destruction (or refurbishment) of our planet, then it could not possibly have happened. Yet the Scriptures are very clear that the “end of the world” did occur back in the first century. Therefore, if we are to trust Scripture (as we should), then the “end of the world” must have a different meaning (nature) than the one we have been taught. And guess what? It most certainly does!

[mikew]

In reading these letters to the Thessalonians the proper bias is to see that it was a letter pertaining to their problems and the letter contained Paul's recommendation to them in their situation.

I would expect that there would be indications that the material applied to the future, like we see in Rev 20 about the release of Satan after the 1000s years era.

[TK]

mellontes wrote:

We have ignored the plain teaching of Scripture, as this one example proves, and have adopted the teachings of men. Why is it that the first five verses apply to the Thessalonians, Paul, Silvanus and Timothy, but the next three apply to some far off generation in the future? Do you now see the damage caused by replacing the intended audience with another future group of individuals?

i dont want to get drawn into a big debate about this, but your comment is only relevant if you can prove that the second coming of Christ DID occur way back then, during the lifetime of those Paul was writing to. If the second of coming of Christ did not occur way back then, and i certainly believe it did not, then obviously it is necessary to see it as something that has yet to happen. You insist that Paul's language in this letter is "mandatory." I view it more as language of hope, and perhaps expectation, but not absolute certainty.

TK

[Mellontes]

Paul's answer to those first century Thessalonians should be proof enough. They were the ones suffering persecution at the hand of the Jews. The "rest" from this first century persecution would come when

the Lord Jesus shall be revealed from heaven with his mighty angels,
8 In flaming fire taking vengeance on them that know not God, and that obey not the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ:
9 Who shall be punished with everlasting destruction from the presence of the Lord, and from the glory of his power;
(2 Thessalonians 1:7-9)

The only reason audience relevance is not desired to be retained is to support a faulty N-A-T-U-R-E of the Lord's second appearing. But we don't want to be drawn into a long debate about that, now do we? We won't question the nature in the least...

[Conquest]

Mell,

I'm a bit confused, is it your position that the 2nd Coming in 70AD only applied to those churches in Thessalonica? Do you think the church in Rome have been beneficiary of the 2nd Coming in 70AD as well?

Conquest

[Mellontes]

Mell,

I'm a bit confused, is it your position that the 2nd Coming in 70AD only applied to those churches in Thessalonica? Do you think the church in Rome have been beneficiary of the 2nd Coming in 70AD as well?

Conquest

Paul is writing to the church at Thessalonica for their specific needs. The second appearing applied to all churches. Just as Paul wrote to other churches handling their situations and talked about the second coming to them as well. I suppose it would have been a lot easier to have just written one epistle entitled "To all the churches in the first century" and then address the specific concerns to each smaller assembly in a similar fashion that John addressed to the seven first century churches in Asia...but that would have meant that all the churches would have received one answer at one specific monent in time - and no doubt some answers would have been too late to provide any relief. Paul established these churches in different time frames and wrote to them in different time frames...

[Mellontes]

mellontes wrote:

We have ignored the plain teaching of Scripture, as this one example proves, and have adopted the teachings of men. Why is it that the first five verses apply to the Thessalonians, Paul, Silvanus and Timothy, but the next three apply to some far off generation in the future? Do you now see the damage caused by replacing the intended audience with another future group of individuals?

i dont want to get drawn into a big debate about this, but your comment is only relevant if you can prove that the second coming of Christ DID occur way back then, during the lifetime of those Paul was writing to. If the second of coming of Christ did not occur way back then, and i certainly believe it did not, then obviously it is necessary to see it as something that has yet to happen. You insist that Paul's language in this letter is "mandatory." I view it more as language of hope, and perhaps expectation, but not absolute certainty.

TK

And since the Thessalonian church that Paul was writing to NO LONGER EXISTS, either Paul's promise to them came true or he lied. Which would you like to uphold?

[TK]

mellontes wrote:

And since the Thessalonian church that Paul was writing to NO LONGER EXISTS, either Paul's promise to them came true or he lied. Which would you like to uphold?

false dilemma- there are other legitimate possibilities.

TK

[Mellontes]

mellontes wrote:

And since the Thessalonian church that Paul was writing to NO LONGER EXISTS, either Paul's promise to them came true or he lied. Which would you like to uphold?

false dilemma- there are other legitimate possibilities.

TK

It is only a dilemma for those who refuse to accept audience relevance in accordance with the inspiration and authority of Scripture. I suppose you have Scripture to prove the offering of "other legitimate possibilities." Quotes by fallible men will not suffice...and nor should they be accepted as proof...ever!

[TK]

why must one assume that Paul had the entire mind of God when he was writing his letters? he even admits in some that he did not. that is not to say his writings are not inspired, but like I said I think his letters are allowed to have language of hope or expectation (but not certainty) and not lose their inspiration.

i am not sure what I am missing about this, specifically.

TK