Summary of 1 Thessalonians 4:1-12

Paul now urges them to live in the way in which they have been taught to live, so as to grow more spiritually. He asks them to recall the precepts he gave them, especially this: God wills their sanctification. He wants them to stay away from sexual immorality, and to control their vessel in sanctity and honor, not like the gentiles who give in to passions, for they do not know God. They should not sin against others in this matter, for the Lord will avenge such things as Paul had already told them. To live in uncleanness is to spurn not just man but God.

He compliments them that he need not teach them brotherly love -- God Himself has taught them. He wants them to grow still more, and to mind their own business, not being idle busybodies, but working, so outsiders may not criticize the faith.

Comments on 4:1-12

In urging them to live in the way he has taught them, Paul uses Greek paralamabano, which in his usage usually means receiving oral teaching. It had to be so -- when Paul wrote this letter, there was as yet no written Gospel, and this is probably the first of all the Epistles.

His words about controlling one's vessel in sanctity are ambiguous. They could mean either (1) self-control in sexual matters, or (2) keeping one's wife in control. We think definitely the first sense is what Paul intended.

When Paul says the gentiles do not know God what does he mean? In Romans 1 he will insist that people can know the existence of God by thinking on His works in nature. We might try to explain this by thinking of the sense of the Hebrew yada. As we saw in the glossary, it means not only know but love. Yet, since some gentiles do love God -- as we will see in Romans 2:14-16 -- we need something more. This is really an instance of what we will call "focusing" by Paul -- we will see more of it in Galatians 2:15, but now let us say Paul has two ways to look at many things: (1) the focused way, and (2) the factual way. In the focused way he considers what the thing naturally produces --leaving God's grace out of the picture. It is as if we were looking through a tube. Only what is within the circle of the tube will be visible. In the factual way, we remove that artificial limit and take into account that some at least will use the grace offered them. Then the outcome can be very good. For example, often when Paul speaks of the old law of Moses he speaks in the focused way with this result: the law makes heavy demands, it gives no strength, so one surely falls. But in the factual way, he adds that even though the law gives no strength, yet as a matter of fact (factually), divine help was offered even before Christ. Those who used it would have a different, a good outcome. We might also call the focused way the system as system way: then here, the system or setup of being a gentile, as such, produces nothing but sin, sexual and other. In the de facto way, we would note that actually God did offer grace to gentiles even before Christ. Those who used it, did well, could stay out of sin.

Summary of 1 Thessalonians 4:13-18

Paul tells them strongly to pay attention. They should not fail to understand the situation of those who have already died. If they misunderstood, they would be like others who have no hope. Since they believe Jesus died and rose, they should also believe that God will bring with Jesus those who died believing in Jesus. Solemnly Paul tells them as a word of the Lord: we who are still alive when He returns will not get to see Jesus before those who have died. For the Lord Himself will come down from the sky, amid sounds of a cry of an archangel and a trumpet, and those who died in Christ will rise at once, and then we, who will have stayed alive, will be taken to meet Jesus in the air together with those newly risen. Then we will be with Him always. Let them console one another with these thoughts.

Comments on 4:13-18

We took these lines separately from the rest of the chapter because of their special importance. If we read between the lines, we see that some in Thessalonika were worrying about this: Suppose we die before Jesus returns -- then those who have not died will get to see Him before we do. We would say, a foolish worry, as long as they see Him.

But a remarkable implication is present, which so many readers do not notice, namely, those who are still alive at the end, when Jesus returns, will never die at all. Is it not true that all die? Yes, but any general principle has room for exceptions. This is one. Because this exception was keenly felt in the early Church, many were hoping for the end in their time, to escape death. The Didache, which may be very early, has a line of liturgical text (maranatha) which, if we divide the words in one way (marana tha) means: O Lord come. It is a prayer for the end.

These lines are of capital importance in another way: We notice that twice Paul speaks of "we the living." Does this imply he believed he would live to see the end? That deduction need not follow. Many teachers speak in the first person, singular or plural, as a way of making things concrete. For example, in explaining Philippians 2:13, I often say to a class: "When God sends an actual grace to me, that is, one to lead me and enable me to do a particular good thing at a certain time, the first thing the grace does is to put the good thought into my mind -- we gather this from 2 Corinthians 3:5. This almost automatically makes me favorably disposed to the idea -- though there is still no decision. At that point, what things are possible for me? . . ." And I go on to fill in the rest. I am not in such a case giving any information about myself -- just using myself as a means of making it concrete. Paul in l Corinthians 3 speaks much about himself and Apollo. But then in 4:6 he tells them explicitly that he has just used the names Paul and Apollo as an illustration. So also it could be here. Hence there is no proof at all that Paul believed he would be alive at the end. Sadly, many commentators think it is proved -- we admit such an implication is not entirely impossible -- then they make many deductions on that unsolid basis: they say, for instance, that Paul could not have written Second Thessalonians, because there, in chapter 2, it is quite clear he does not think the end is near. They want to use such an unsolid deduction to outweigh explicit testimony of early writers that Paul really did write Second Thessalonians. Again, they think they see other echoes of such a belief on the part of Paul in 1 Corinthians 7. We will see these as they come up. (In Galatians 3:23-4:3 Paul uses we several times in a similar way.)

Still another important point: many today, especially fundamentalists, claim that here Paul is teaching that there will be a "rapture" -- that some day, without warning, God will take all good people out of the world to reign with Christ. Only the bad people will be left. More than once I have seen bumper stickers: "In case of rapture, this car will be unmanned."

Those who hold this rapture idea point out that in the passage we are looking at, people are taken in the air to meet Christ -- but in the Gospel description of the Last Judgment, the things happen on the earth -- so, two different events, they claim.

But the Church does not teach such a thing, and with good reason. Those who make this mistake do not notice the genre of the two passages. Genre means the pattern of writing. For example, in English literature today we have such a thing as a historical novel, e.g., one about our Civil War. Such a novel is a mixture of history and fiction -- the main line of the story is historical, and so are the background descriptions. But fictional elements are added, e.g., word for word conversations of Lincoln with Grant.

The essential question is this: What does the writer mean to assert or claim? He asserts that the main line and background are historical -- he does not assert that the fictional elements are true. We do not charge him with error or deception for having those fictional elements -- no, this is the right way to write a historical novel.

We have in English many of these genres, almost all inherited from Greece and Rome, with rather little change. So as long as we read things in that large culture stream, our instinctive adjustments, as natives, serve well. We know how to take things. But if we start to read a writing from a very different culture stream, can we reasonably say: I am sure they write just like modern Americans? Of course not, it would be silly.

But Scripture belongs to a very different culture stream: ancient Semitic. They have rather different patterns, even though some overlap ours at times. Among the especially strange genres of Scripture is one called apocalyptic. It first appeared in full form about 2 centuries before Christ, and ran for about 4 centuries. In it the writer describes visions and revelations -- without necessarily asserting they really happened. This may be just a vehicle of expression. There is highly colored imagery, and secret things are revealed.

Of course, the original readers knew enough not to take all the highly colored images as if they were sober narrative. They knew they must reduce these things much to get at what the writer really meant to convey. (For a strong case of apocalyptic writing, read Daniel 7:7-14).

Now it is clear that the description of the Last Judgment, and the present lines 13-18, each contain apocalyptic elements -- without being full-blown apocalyptic. For example, all humans of all ages must come for judgment -- but the earth does not have enough space, even if they stood over the entire globe, for all people of all ages to appear. So we see that we must take it differently: there will be a judgment, but not precisely in that form.

Once we realize these things, we see how foolish it is to press a detail of the imagery, saying that one takes place on the earth, the other in the air. No, this is all part of the description of one and the same event, the return of Christ followed by the judgment. So there is simply no teaching here that there will be such a "rapture" as some like to imagine.