rel="nofollow" href="#ulink_11b5dc8f-88a8-5e46-876d-f32d7d2e4cfd">31
With this kind of context in mind, most scholars presume that the persecutors were Gentiles, not Jews. Such a view, though, would discount Luke’s information in Acts 17 where it would seem Jews played a major role in the hostility against Paul’s ministry and local allies. Again, the scholarly tendency is to put doubt on Luke’s account for two reasons. Firstly, some argue that Luke has certain theological and narrative habits that shape how he presents Paul’s ministry, in this case leading to doubts regarding the historicity of his version of the situation in Thessalonica. Secondly, such a view seems to contradict what Paul writes in 1 Thess 2:14, that the Thessalonian believers “suffered the same things from your own compatriots as they [the Judean churches] did from the Jews.” The implication here seems to be that the Thessalonians were persecuted by Gentile Thessalonians while the Judean believers were persecuted by Jewish neighbors. However, the meaning of the word for compatriots here (symphyletēs) is contested.32 Again, many scholars assume that Paul is referring to Gentile Thessalonian “compatriots,”33 but when Paul proclaims that the Jews “drove us out” (1 Thess 2:15), why could not the same Jews that drove Paul out of Thessalonica also persecute the Thessalonians believers?34 First Thessalonians 2:14–16 makes good sense in Paul’s argument if Paul is connecting Jewish persecution in Judea to Jewish persecution in Thessalonica.35
My inclination is to find a way to bring Acts 17:1–10a together with what Paul writes in 1 Thessalonians. While the implication of 1 Thess 1:9–10 is that the Thessalonian believers were largely Gentiles (forsaking idol worship), it very well may be that they were Gentile god-fearers prior to meeting Paul (see above, The Church in Thessalonica, 6–7). Again, some scholars consider it incredible that Paul might assert this about Gentiles who had already turned to the God of Israel.36 However, this assumption is misguided. Paula Fredriksen explains that Gentiles who chose to “visit with” Jews and their God felt “free to observe as much or as little of Jewish custom as they chose—free, indeed, to continue worshiping their own gods.”37 Shaye Cohen makes the same case about the possibility of god-fearers as polytheists, and seeks to help moderns understand how ancient Greeks and Romans thought.
Those who see Judaism and Hellenism as discrete entities are perplexed by the phenomenon of the God-fearers. Some have even questioned their existence. After all, how can gentiles become a “little bit Jewish”? And why would they want to? The explanation is to be sought in the other conception of Hellenism discussed above. Many Greek and Romans adopted the gods (e.g., Isis, Cybele, Mithras, Jupiter Dolichenus) and practices of various “barbarian” nations without converting or losing their identity. Similarly, thinking that the God of the Jews was like the god of other nations, they added him to their pantheon.38
The theory that I find most plausible related to the Thessalonian church is this: a group of Gentiles were attracted to Jewish life and became associated with a synagogue (hence Acts 17:4). They maintained an interest in multiple gods, but also honored the god of Israel. Perhaps it was not too long after this interest that Paul introduced them to Messiah Jesus and many of them came to believe Paul’s gospel. This situation would, indeed, anger certain Jews in just such a way as we see in Acts 17 and also in 1 Thess 2:14–16, if symphyletēs refers to Jewish Thessalonian compatriots. Paul could write that they had turned from idols to serve God because they had not done so as god-fearers despite their prior interest in Israel’s god.
Excursus: Gentile Believers Incorporated into Israel’s Story through Jesus
It is often pointed out that Paul does not quote the Old Testament (LXX) in 1 Thessalonians, and that this fact probably means that the Thessalonian believers were Gentiles who did not know the Jewish Scriptures.39 That they were mostly Gentiles is almost certain, but the assumption that Paul consciously avoided quoting Scripture for that reason is hasty. First Thessalonians is saturated with Old Testament imagery, motifs, expressions, and ideas. Paul clearly crafts their identity in such a way as to draw them into the story and even the identity of Israel. They are ekklēsia as the people of God (1:1). They are beloved of God (1:4), as Israel is; they have been made precious to God (1:4). They are recipients of Israel’s good news (1:5), the “word of the Lord” sounded forth from them (1:8), they will be rescued from Yahweh’s wrath (1:10). They are taught how to “walk” with God (4:1), to obey his will regarding holy consecration (4:3, 7). They are identified as those separate from “the Gentiles who do not know God” (4:5). They are true light (5:5), those destined for salvation (5:9). If Paul was trying to communicate in a non-Jewish style, he failed.40 While Paul did not feel the need to make explicit arguments from Scripture, he was clearly drawing these Gentiles into the story and identity of Israel through Messiah Jesus.41
It is possible that Jews from the synagogue where these Gentiles once worshiped (as god-fearers) tried to maintain an ongoing relationship with them, hoping to “win them back,” so to speak, even if through fear. Perhaps they urged, “We cannot ensure you will survive the wrath of God if you continue on following this Jesus.” The fear of wrath may have scared the Thessalonians enough they lost some security in their identity in Jesus. Paul, then, wrote 1 Thessalonians as a form of subversive rhetoric, trying to undo any of the damage done by fear-inducing words from opponents. His clear message to them in 1 Thessalonians is that their hope is found in Jesus alone; through him they are secure as God’s beloved, his chosen people. Paul would not have been saying this over and against Jews, but rather in affirmation of Gentiles incorporated into the people of God through Messiah Jesus. Thus, Paul can argue that he wants Gentiles saved, while the Jews (particularly those hostile to believers in Jesus) displease God by preventing this (1 Thess 2:15).
Knowing of the Thessalonians’ persecution (1 Thess 3:1–6), Paul and his apostolic associates were concerned about the Thessalonians’ pistis. Typically this word is translated “faith” (1:3, 8; 3:2, 5–7, 10; 5:8). However, pistis is a polyvalent Greek noun and can cover a range of meanings from belief to trust to faithfulness and loyalty. The way that Paul talks about the strength of the Thessalonians’ pistis he is almost certainly not referring to their beliefs as such. Rather, pistis was a term used in the Greco-Roman world especially in relation to loyalty.42 Also, around the time of Paul, Jews in particular were using pistis as a way of referring to pledges of loyalty within a covenantal relationship.43 Particularly in chapter 3 of 1 Thessalonians, Paul refers to his concern for their pistis in the context of affliction. Timothy was dispatched to see about their pistis lest the tempter overwhelm them (3:5). Paul was not worried about their belief per se, but the “whole package” of their commitment to the Messiah and their complete trust in him. The best terms to translate pistis, then, are probably “trust,” “loyalty,” or “faithfulness.”44
Sexual Purity
A second matter that Paul addresses in the letter relates to sexual purity. Paul calls for control over the body, lest they succumb to heathen lust (4:3–4). The Greco-Roman lifestyle was highly permissive when it came to male sexuality. Men often had sex with multiple people, though it was considered especially inappropriate to commit adultery by sleeping with another man’s wife. Paul called for a strict kind of holiness and purity that sought to honor one another and God (4:6).
The
