1. Notes on 1Th 1:5 1:5-7 Paragraph divisions: As mentioned before, whether vv. 2-10 should be seen as one sentence, two, or three is an open question. Both the NA27 and the UBS Greek texts put periods at the end of vv 5, 7, and 10. English translations will divide into multiple sentences and separate into one, two, or three paragraphs. Some examples of paragraph divisions include: KJV, ASV, ERV, NASV, NRSV, NAB, TEV, ESV 2-10 NIV, NJB 2, 4 NEB, REB 2, 6 ISV 2, 6, 9 Living Bible 2, 4, 7 Message 5b, 8 Greek commentators vary widely. For example, Malherbe considers 2-10 as one sentence; Morris divides the text into vv. 2-4 and 5-10. And so it goes. This fact alone should alert readers that not even the best Greek scholars in the world agree on how the text is to be precisely understood as a unified block of text. The text can be described as somewhat run on and is open to a variety of interpretations. This should warn readers that a too dogmatic opinion about what this text means or exactly how it should be applied is unwise. When coming to v. 5, every translator or interpreter is confronted with two questions: 1. To what does hoti refer? (Knowing? Election?) 2. Is hoti causal ( because, for )? Or is it epexegetical ( to the effect that ), merely offering a further explanation? These are technical questions, not easily answered; but they have practical implications: Is Paul describing the cause-effect proofs of election (how one knows it)? Or is he merely describing it, commenting further on its nature? Or is there a broader sense? All are grammatically possible, and each means something different. This explains the variety of practice among translations. In the end, 1
the question is not so much what the text says? but what is most contextually plausible? The position adopted by the CWPT is that hoti follows generally from knowing, but also from we give thanks back in v 2, and that it is not causal, but epexegetical, offering a general explanation of what Paul knew of them, but only in the service of giving thanks for them. This is best shown as follows: 2 μεν ε πάν ε πε ὶ πάν ων μω ν a) μνεί ν π ύμεν ἐπὶ ων π ε ω ν μω ν, b) ἀδ λείπ ως 3 μνημ νεύ ν ες μω ν ἔ γ η ς πί εως κ ὶ κόπ η ς ἀγάπης κ ὶ η ς π μ νη ς η ς ἐλπίδ ς κ ί μω ν ʼ η ἔμπ εν ε κ ὶ π ὸς μω ν, c) 4 εἰδό ες, ἀδελφ ὶ ἠγ πημέν πὸ [ ] ε, ὴν ἐκλ γὴν μω ν, d) 5 ὅ ὸ ε γγέλ ν μω ν a) κ ἐγενή η εἰς μ ς ἐν λόγ μόν ν ἀλλὰ κ ὶ ἐν δ νάμε κ ὶ ἐν πνεύμ ἁγί κ ὶ [ἐν] πλη φ ίᾳ π λλ, b) κ ὼς ἴδ ε ἐγενή ημεν [ἐν] μ ν δ ʼ μ ς, c) 6 κ ὶ με ς μ μη ὶ μω ν ἐγενή η ε κ ὶ κ ί, δεξάμεν ὸν λόγ ν ἐν λίψε π λλ με ὰ ς πνεύμ ς ἁγί, 7 ὥ ε γενέ μ ς ύπ ν π ν ς π εύ ν ἐν Μ κεδ νίᾳ κ ὶ ἐν ʼΑ ΐᾳ. 8 ἀφʼ μω ν γὰ ἐξή η ὁ λόγ ς κ ί μόν ν ἐν Μ κεδ νίᾳ κ ὶ [ἐν ] ʼΑ ΐᾳ, ἀλλʼ ἐν π ν ὶ όπ.... etc. Attempting to understand the text contextually (before conceptually), several things stand out: 1. The main verb ( We give thanks ) is followed by three adverbial participles ( making, remembering, knowing ). 2. The ὅ clause incorporates all of vv 5-7 and has three main verbs (plus an infinitive) used progressively: it became, we became, and you became. The final infinitive, with a 2
result that you became, is the climax of vv 2-7. (All of this speaks powerfully for keeping vv 5-7 together.) 3. The ὅ clause does not merely follow upon knowing or election in v 5 (i.e., it is not primarily a subset of, or parenthetical statement about, those things). Vv 6-7 are rather very much a part (if not the very denouement) of why we give thanks in v 2. In other words, in this text, election is not spoken of for its own sake, but only in the context of thanksgiving. 4. The phrase εἰδό ες... ὴν ἐκλ γὴν... ὅ is best translated as knowing... your election, to the effect that... This is not cause and effect, but further explanation. The entire clause is epexegetical, meaning that it explains or clarifies or completes a previous word or phrase (Wallace, 459, although he does not list 1Th 1:5 anywhere in his grammar). 5. Even though a number of prominent commentators support the causal use of ὅ in this text to show cause and effect (e.g, Alford, Morris, et. al.), this is strongly disputed by others (Lightfoot, Malherbe, et. al.) and ignores the fact that in no case in the NT is oi)=da + o(/ti ever causal. (In other words, the causal use of ὅ here is derived by commentators conceptually rather than by demonstrated usage.) For example, a careful check of the Greek text of the following verses from the LXX and NT will show the exact same construction as 1Th 1:5, namely oi)=da + direct object + o(/ti not one is causal. 2 Sam 3:25 ἠ οὐκ οἰδας τὴν κακίαν Αβεννηρ υἱου Νηρ, ὅτι ἀπατησαί σε παρεγένετο... Or do you not know the wicked Abner, son of Ner, that he came to trick you 1 Kings 5:17 Σὺ οἰδας Δαυιδ τὸν πατέρα μου ὅτι οὐκ ἐδύνατο οἰκοδομησαι οἰκον... You know David my father, that he was not able to build a house 2 Sam 17:8 Σὺ οἰδας τὸν πατέρα σου καὶ τοὺς ἄνδρας αὐτου ὅτι δυνατοί εἰσιν σφόδρα... You know your father and his men, that they are able quickly 3
2Cor 9:2 οἰδα γὰρ τὴν προθυμίαν ὑμων ἣν ὑπὲρ ὑμων καυχωμαι Μακεδόσιν, ὅτι Αχαΐα παρεσκεύασται... For I know your good will, which I boast about for you in Macedonia, that they will prepare Note Especially: 1Thess 2:1 Αὐτοὶ γὰρ οἴδατε, ἀδελφοί, τὴν εἴσοδον ἡμων τὴν πρὸς ὑμας ὅτι οὐ κενὴ γέγονεν... For you yourselves know, brothers, our entrance to you, that it did not happen in vain Rom 13:11 Κ ὶ εἰδό ες ὸν κ όν, ὅ ὥ ἤδη μ ς ἐξ ὕπν ἐγε η ν... And knowing the time, that it is already the hour for you to rise up from sleep 1Cor 16:15 κ λω δὲ μ ς, ἀδελφ ί ἴδ ε ὴν ἰκί ν εφ ν, ὅ ἐ ὶν ἀπ ὴ η ς ʼΑ ΐ ς... I exhort you, brothers: you know the house of Stephen, that it is the first fruits of Achaia 2Cor 12:3-4 3 κ ὶ ἰδ ὸν ν ἄν ωπ ν, εἴ ε ἐν ώμ εἴ ε ω ὶς ώμ ς κ ἰ δ, ὁ εὸς ἰ δεν, 4 ὅ πάγη εἰς ὸν π άδε ν... I know a certain man, whether in the body or apart from the body I don t know, God knows, that he was taken away into Paradise 6. The γὰ in v 8 does not merely grow out of v 7 (clearly it does that), but also changes direction for the entire block of text up to that point. This is a marker in the text showing a relationship, still, to the we give thanks of v 2. So, this can be summarized as a focused thanksgiving: 2 We give thanks for you, making mention, 3 remembering, and 4 knowing your election, 5 to the effect that our Gospel was brought, that we acted, and 6-7 that you responded, and with a result that you became imitators and an example for others. This is less a definition of election than a thanksgiving for it. For that reason, vv. 5-7 are made (in this translation) a paragraph of their own, altogether reading like this (as one sentence): 5 The fact is, our Saving Message was presented to you, not merely as talk, but in power and in the Holy Spirit and with overwhelming proof; just like (as you know) how we presented ourselves among you and for you, 6 so that you, in turn, presented yourselves as 4
committed to our path, and the path of the LORD Jesus, in that you received the delivered Word with a joy produced by the Holy Spirit, even in the midst of terrible distress from our enemies, 7 and in this way presenting yourselves as an example for all the believers in the regions of Macedonia and Achaia! 1:5 here begins with, The fact is, an interpretation of the epexegetical ὅ for what was just described. Surely, vv. 5-7 are related to and lead into vv. 8-10, yet, they develop a tightly knitted thought-string of their own (details follow). v. 5 Elements: This verse contains several important concepts for setting up 1:6-2:16. (1) the Saving Message; (2) the use of the word to happen, bring about ; (3) the strong adversative, but instead ; (4) the notion of how we conducted ourselves among you, especially in power and in the holy Spirit ; (5) the phrase, just as you know ; (6) the emphasis on the word you ; and (7) a re-emphasis on how we acted among you. (1) our Saving Message to euaggelion hēmōn, our Gospel, a favorite word of Paul s, occurring 6 times in this his first letter (1:5; 2:2, 4, 8, 9; and 3:2). The word is well known to mean literally and generally, good news, but Paul uses the word in this letter, more specifically to mean, God s Saving Message about Jesus that we preached to you, where the saving had been accomplished through the cross (cf 1:6, 8; 4:15; and 2:9). (2) was presented egenēthēn, was brought, came, came about, happened, was. This word (ginomai) occurs nearly 700 times in the NT and has such a wide variety of meanings that BDAG devotes 6 columns to detailing 9 over-arching meanings, with numerous submeanings for this word. Context is always determinant for how this word is used in any given place. In 1 Thessalonians, this is the first of 10 uses of the verb between 1:5 and 2:14. They refer to how the Gospel was brought (1:5), how Paul conducted himself, (1:5; 2:5, 7, 10, 14), and how they conducted themselves (1:5, 6, 7; 2: 8, 14). In this translation, 1:5-7 uses presented to show both parallel thought and progression: 5 Because... 5
-- the Gospel came (egenēthē) in power, HS, assurance -- just as we came (egenēthēmen) among you, for you, -- 6 so that you became (egenēthēte) imitators -- 7resulting in your becoming (genesthai) an example. It is this parallelism that holds vv. 5-7 together, Paul saying to them that the Gospel message and his life among them were consistent and they knew it, resulting in their becoming imitators of the suffering path and an example for others. This concept of how I or my message came to you is linked with the word entrance in 1:9 and 2:1. (3) but alla, but instead. This is the first of 12 occurrences in this letter of this strong adversative. Here it contrasts the manner of how Paul brought the Saving Message. Further on, it is especially used to describe Paul s exemplary conduct among the Thessalonians (see 2:2, 4, 7, 8, 13). (4) in power and in the Holy Spirit and with overwhelming proof en dunamei kai en pneumati hagiōi kai en plerophoria pollēi. The contrast of in Spirit and power with not by word only in this, Paul s earliest letter, reveals the notion of demonstration, an apparently standard operating procedure for Paul early on. When coupled with the concept overwhelming proof or demonstration (i.e., en plerophoria pollēi lit., much full assurance, much certainty, or what has been much demonstrated as accomplished, cf. the verb in Rom 4:21; 14:5; Col 4:12; 2Tim 4:5, 17; and the noun in Col 2:2), Paul s claim is that We didn t just talk a good game, we demonstrated our message at every turn through God s power. The exact nature of this demonstration is not specifically stated in this letter, but is assumed as a matter of first-hand knowledge of the readers as witnesses of it. No doubt this included detailed proofs from scripture and argumentation, as well as the use of spiritual gifts (e.g., 1Cor 12-14). However, the use of kathōs...kai (along with the three verbs of this section) in the following lines implies that just as power and the Holy Spirit and full assurance were active in the presentation of the gospel, so also in my own presence among you, and in your own response and conduct. Their election was borne out in all. (5) As you know kathōs oidate, lit., just as you know. Here is the first of nine occurrences of the form oidate (pf act ind 2 nd pl) in this 6
letter (1:5; 2:1, 2, 5, 11; 3:3, 4; 4:2; 5:2) stating a knowledge of something by reason of being intimately acquainted with it or standing in a close relation to it (i.e., this is not a theoretical knowledge). In 1:5, they have first-hand knowledge of Paul s conduct. Below, they know the situation for his initial entrance (2:1); how he was previously mistreated (2:2); how he did not preach a message of flattery (v. 5); how he came among them devoutly, uprightly, and blamelessly (v. 11); how he had forewarned them about coming persecution (3:3-4); and how they knew (presumably from his personal teaching) that the day of the Lord would come like a thief in the night (5:2). When taken with 2:9, 10, you remember and you yourselves and God are witnesses, Paul comes across with strong insistence that they themselves already are intimately aware of the genuineness of his life, conduct, and approach among them, and that the message he brought is genuine and from God. (6) you know... among you and for you. 6 So you oidate [en] humin di humas. Kai humeis, lit., You know among you, for you, and so you (See notes above at 1:5-7) This is very emphatic for the word you, here, showing that Paul is reminding them of what they already know by having seen it with their own eyes (see also note 5 just previous). This is all the more noteworthy since, in the handwritten original manuscript (which would have had no punctuation or word division), this would have looked something like this: ENHUMINDIHUMASKAIHUMEIS and would have been read without stopping and with emphasis like this: en humin di humas kai humeis (meaning, in you, because of you, so that you ), where the final you is both the emphatic form of you plural, and is in the emphatic position, standing ahead of its verb egenēthēte, you became. All of this to say that the word you is being emphasized in a way that is somewhat difficult to bring out in English without a bit of labor. (7) how we presented ourselves egenēthēmen, lit., how we were or became. See above. 7
8