Albert Barnes Commentary 1 Thessalonians 2

First Thessalonians Chapter 2

Analysis of the Chapter

The principal subjects embraced in this chapter are the following:

1. A statement of the conduct of Paul and his fellow-laborers when they first preached the gospel at Thessalonica (1 Thessalonians 2:1–12).

   In this statement, the apostle specifies particularly the following things:

   1. That he and his fellow-laborers had been shamefully treated at Philippi and had been obliged to encounter much opposition at Thessalonica (1 Thessalonians 2:1–2).

   2. That in their efforts to convert the Thessalonians they had used no deceit, corruption, or guile (1 Thessalonians 2:3–4).

   3. That they had not sought the praise of men and had not used the weight of authority which they might have done as the apostles of Christ (1 Thessalonians 2:6).

   4. That they had been gentle and mild in all their intercourse with them (1 Thessalonians 2:7–8).

   5. That, in order not to be burdensome, or to subject themselves to the charge of selfishness, they had supported themselves by laboring night and day (1 Thessalonians 2:9).

   6. That the Thessalonians themselves were witnesses in what a holy and pure manner they had lived when there, and how they had exhorted them to a holy life (1 Thessalonians 2:10–12).

2. The apostle refers to the manner in which the Thessalonians had received the truth at first, as undoubtedly the word of God, and not as the word of men (1 Thessalonians 2:13).

3. He reminds them of the fact that they had met with the same opposition from the Jews which the churches in Judea had, for everywhere the Jews had made the same opposition to the messengers of God, killing the Lord Jesus and their own prophets, and forbidding the apostles everywhere to speak to the Gentiles (1 Thessalonians 2:14–16).

4. In the conclusion of the chapter, the apostle expresses the earnest desire which he had to visit them, and the reason why he had not done it. It was because he had been prevented by causes beyond his control; and now his earnest and sincere wish was, that he might be permitted to see them—for they were his hope, and joy, and crown (1 Thessalonians 2:17–20).

It is reasonable to suppose that the statements in this chapter were designed to meet a certain condition of things in the church there, and if so, we may learn something of the difficulties which the Thessalonians had to encounter, and of the objections which were made to Paul and to the gospel. It is often in this way that we can get the best view of the internal condition of a church referred to in the New Testament—not by direct statement respecting difficulties and errors in it, but by the character of the epistle sent to it.

Judging by this rule, we should infer that there were those in Thessalonica who utterly denied the Divine origin of the gospel. This general charge, the apostle meets in the first chapter, by showing that the power of the gospel evinced in their conversion, and its effects in their lives, demonstrated it to be of heavenly origin.

In reference to the state of things as referred to in this chapter, we should also infer the following things:

1. That it was represented by some that the apostle and his fellow-laborers sought influence and power; that they were dictatorial and authoritative; that they were indisposed to labor, and were, in fact, impostors. This charge Paul refutes abundantly by his appeal to what they knew of him, and what they had seen of him when he was there (1 Thessalonians 2:1–12).

2. That the church at Thessalonica met with severe and violent opposition from the Jews who were there (1 Thessalonians 2:14–17). This appears to have been a formidable opposition. (Compare to Acts 17:5 and following). They would not only be likely to use violence, but it is not improbable that they employed the semblance of argument that might perplex the church.

   They might represent that they were from the same country as Paul and his fellow-laborers; that they, while pretending to great zeal for religion, were, in fact, apostates, and were engaged in overturning the revealed doctrines of God. It would be easy to represent them as men who, from this cause, were worthy of no confidence, and to urge the fact that those who thus acted in opposition to the religion of their own country, and to the sacred rites of the temple at Jerusalem, could be entitled to no regard.

   These charges, if they were made, the apostle meets by assuring the Thessalonians that they were suffering precisely the same things which the churches in Judea did; that the Jews manifested the same spirit there which they did in Thessalonica; that they had killed alike the Lord Jesus and their own undoubted prophets, and that it was a characteristic of them that they were opposed to all other men. Their opposition, therefore, was not to be wondered at; nor was it to be regarded as any argument that the apostles, though Jews, were unworthy of confidence (1 Thessalonians 2:15–16).

3. It was very probably represented by the enemies of Paul and his fellow-laborers that they had fled from Thessalonica on the slightest danger, and had no regard for the church there, or they would have remained there in the time of peril, or, at least, that they would have returned to visit them.

   Their continued absence was probably urged as a proof that they had no concern for them. The apostle meets this by stating that they had indeed been taken from them for a little time, but that their hearts were still with them, and by assuring them that he had often endeavored to visit them again, but that Satan had hindered him (1 Thessalonians 2:17–20).

   He had, however, given them the highest proof of interest and affection that he could, for when he was unable to go himself, he had, at great self-denial, sent Timothy to establish them in the faith and to comfort their hearts (1 Thessalonians 2:1–3). His absence, therefore, should not be urged as a proof that he had no regard for them.

For yourselves, brethren, know our entrance in unto you. Paul appeals to them for proof that they had not come among them as impostors. They had had a full opportunity to see them and to know what influenced them. Paul frequently appeals to his own life, and to what they, among whom he labored, knew of it, as a full refutation of the slanderous accusations of his enemies (1 Thessalonians 1:9; 1 Corinthians 4:10–16; 1 Corinthians 9:19–27; 2 Corinthians 6:3–10).

Every minister of the gospel ought to live in such a way as to be able, when slanderously attacked, to make such an appeal to his people.

That it was not in vain. kenh. This word means:

1. Empty, vain, fruitless, or without success;

2. That in which there is no truth or reality—false, fallacious (Ephesians 5:6; Colossians 2:8).

Here it seems, from the connection (1 Thessalonians 2:3–5), to be used in the latter sense, as denoting that they were not deceivers. The object does not appear to be so much to show that their ministry was successful as to meet a charge of their adversaries that they were impostors. Paul tells them that, from their own observation, they knew that this was not so.

But even after that we had suffered before. Before we came among you.

And were shamefully entreated, as ye know, at Philippi (Acts 16:19 and following). By being beaten and cast into prison. The shame of the treatment consisted in the fact that it was wholly undeserved, that it was contrary to the laws, and that it was accompanied with circumstances designed to make their punishment as ignominious as possible.

The Thessalonians knew of this, and Paul was not disposed to palliate the conduct of the Philippians. What was "shameful treatment" he speaks of as such without hesitation. It is not wrong to call things by their right names, and when we have been abused, it is not necessary that we should attempt to smooth the matter over by saying that it was not so.

We were bold in our God. By humble dependence on the support of our God. It was only his powerful aid that could have enabled them to persevere with ardor and zeal in such a work after such treatment.

The meaning here is that they were not deterred from preaching the gospel by the treatment they had received, but at the very next important town, and on the first opportunity, they proclaimed the same truth, though there was no security that they might not meet with the same persecution there. Paul evidently appeals to this to show them that they were not impostors and that they were not influenced by the hope of ease or of selfish gains. Men who were not sincere and earnest in their purposes would have been deterred by such treatment as they had received at Philippi.

With much contention. Amidst much opposition, and where great effort was necessary. The Greek word here used is agwn (agony), a word referring usually to the Grecian games. See the notes on Colossians 2:1.

It means the course, or place of contest; and then the contest itself, the strife, the combat, the effort for victory; and the apostle here means that, owing to the opposition there, there was need of an effort on his part like the desperate struggles of those who contended for the mastery at the Grecian games. Compare the notes on 1 Corinthians 9:24–27. The triumph of the gospel there was secured only by an effort of the highest kind, and by overcoming the most formidable opposition.

For our exhortation. That is, the exhortation to embrace the gospel. The word seems to be used here so as to include preaching in general. The sense is that the means they used to induce them to become Christians were not such as to delude them.

Was not of deceit. It was not founded on sophistry. The apostle means to say that the Thessalonians knew that his manner of preaching was not such as was adopted by the advocates of error.

Nor of uncleanness—that is, not such as to lead to an impure life. It was such as to lead to holiness and purity. The apostle appeals to what they knew to be the tendency of his doctrine as evidence that it was true. Most of the teaching of the heathen philosophers led to a life of licentiousness and corruption. The tendency of the gospel was just the reverse.

Nor in guile. That is, not by the arts of deceit. There was no craftiness or trick that could not bear severe scrutiny. No point was carried by art, cunning, or stratagem. Everything was done on the most honourable and fair principles.

It is a great thing when a man can say that he has never endeavoured to accomplish anything by mere trick, craft, or cunning. Sagacity and shrewdness are always allowable in ministers as well as others; trick and cunning never are. Yet stratagem often takes the place of sagacity, and trick is often miscalled shrewdness. Guile, craft, and cunning imply deception and can never be reconciled with the entire honesty that a minister of the gospel, and all other Christians, should possess. (See Barnes on 2 Corinthians 12:16).

Compare Psalm 32:2; Psalms 34:13; John 1:47; 1 Peter 2:1, 22; Revelation 14:5.

But as we were allowed of God to be put in trust with the gospel. (Compare to 1 Timothy 1:11–12).

Since an office so high and holy, and so much demanding sincerity, fidelity, and honesty, had been committed to us, we endeavored to act in all respects in conformity with the trust reposed in us. The gospel is a system of truth and sincerity, and we demonstrated the same.

The gospel is concerned with great realities, and we did not resort to trickery and illusion. The office of the ministry is most responsible, and we acted in view of the great account which we must render. The meaning is that Paul had such a sense of the truth, reality, and importance of the gospel, and of his responsibility, as effectively kept him from anything like craft or cunning in preaching it.

An effective restraint from mere management and trickery will always be found in a deep conviction of the truth and importance of religion. Artifice and cunning are the usual accompaniments of a bad cause; and, when adopted by a minister of the gospel, they will usually, when detected, leave the impression that he feels that he is engaged in such a cause. If an object cannot be secured by sincerity and straightforward dealing, it is not desirable that it should be secured at all.

Even so we speak. We do so in accordance with the nature of the gospel, with the truth and sincerity that such a cause demands.

Not as pleasing men. That is, not in the manner of impostors, who make it their object to please men. The apostle's meaning is that he did not aim to teach doctrines that would flatter people, win their applause, or gratify their passions or fancy. We are not to suppose that he desired to offend people, or that he regarded their esteem as of no value, or that he was indifferent whether they were pleased or displeased. Rather, the direct object of his preaching was not to please them; it was to declare the truth and to obtain the approval of God, whatever people might think of it.

(See the notes on Galatians 1:10).

Which trieth our hearts. It is often said to be an attribute of God that he tries or searches the hearts of people (1 Chronicles 28:9; 1 Chronicles 29:17; Jeremiah 11:20; Jeremiah 17:10; Psalms 11:4; Romans 8:27).

The meaning here is that the apostle had a deep conviction of the truth that God knew all his motives and that all would be revealed on the last day.

For neither at any time used we flattering words.

The word here rendered "flattering"—kolakeia—occurs nowhere else in the New Testament. The meaning is that the apostle did not deal in the language of adulation; he did not praise them for their beauty, wealth, talent, or accomplishments, and conceal from them the painful truths about their guilt and danger.

He stated simple truth—not refusing to commend men if truth would allow it, and never hesitating to declare his honest convictions about their guilt and danger. One of the principal arts of the deceiver on all subjects is flattery, and Paul says that when preaching to the Thessalonians he had carefully avoided it. He now appeals to that fact as a proof of his own integrity. They knew that he had been faithful to their souls.

Nor a cloke of covetousness. The word rendered "cloke" here—profasis—means, properly, "what is shown or appears before anyone;" that is, show, pretence, pretext, put forth in order to cover one's real intent (Matthew 23:14; Mark 12:40; Luke 20:47).

The meaning here is that he did not put on a pretence or appearance of piety for the sake of promoting the schemes of covetousness. The evidence of that was not only what they observed of the general spirit of the apostle, but also the fact that when with them he had actually laboured with his own hands for a support (1 Thessalonians 2:9). It is obvious that there were those there, as there sometimes are now, who, under the pretence of great zeal for religion, were really seeking wealth. And it is possible that it may have been alleged against Paul and his fellow-labourers that they were such persons.

God is witness. This is a solemn appeal to God for the truth of what he had said. He refers not only to their own observation, but he calls God himself to witness his sincerity. God knew the truth in the case. There could have been no imposing on him; and the appeal, therefore, is to one who was intimately acquainted with the truth.

From this, we learn:

1. that it is right, on important occasions, to appeal to God for the truth of what we say.
2. We should always so live that we can properly make such an appeal to him.