Steven Carr

If Jesus's message was that Jerusalem was going to fall, why
does Paul not say anything about it?

CJD

I'll throw down 1 Thessalonians 1:9–10 as a possible reference to the coming destruction. Why not associate Saint Paul's "wrath" with a general, future wrath? Because it possibly fits in to the same category as the Baptist's coming wrath (Luke 3:7), as well as Jesus' prediction of the coming wrath upon God's people (Luke 21:23).

Could the destruction of Jerusalem have been seen by Saint Paul and others as a visitation of vengeance by the Son? (1 Thess. 2:19). After all, who were Paul's most vicious persecutors? God's very own chosen people?

I certainly don't think this is conclusive. I'm just thinking out loud.

Regards,

CJD

YHWHtruth

Last Days of the Jewish System of Things


It must have been also with reference to the end of the Jewish system of things that Christ Jesus was spoken of as appearing and carrying on his activity “at the end of the times” or “at the end of these days.” (Heb 1:1,_2) This is confirmed by the words of Hebrews 9:26: “But now he [Jesus] has manifested himself once for all time at the conclusion of the systems of things to put sin away through the sacrifice of himself.”

Max

Toto

When was 1 Thess written, and is it really Pauline?

Darrell J. Doughty in Luke's Story of Paul in Corinth:Fictional History in Acts 18 provides some indication that 1 Thess. was written after Acts, which would put it after the fall of Jerusalem. (scroll down to the section "Excursus: Acts and 1 Thessalonians".)

Peter Kirby's review of 1 Thess. claims that "The epistle to the Thessalonians is certainly one of the most ancient Christian documents in existence. It is typically dated c. 50/51 CE. It is universally assented to be an authentic letter of Paul." The assent is not really universal, since some scholars consider the entire Pauline corpus to be inauthentic, and Peter then goes on to list authorities who consider various sections within 1 Thess. to be the work of later redactors (making it not completely authentic in any case.)

As to the OP,

If you accept the conventional dating of Paul's letters and the gospels, this would be an indication that Jesus did not predict the fall of Jerusalem, at least not with the specificity of the gospels. Jesus and Paul (if either existed as depicted) do seem to have predicted the end of the world (and we're still waiting for that.)

CJD

Toto, to avoid a significant tangent, I'll answer the questions succintly (BTW, thanks for the Doughty link):

I'll go with Kirby (and the rest of traditional orthodox scholarship) and stake the date c. 51–2. As to its authorship, I think it is arbitrary at best to argue that 1 Thess. is unauthentic based on any disagreements it might have with the book of Acts. The content might be applicable to a post-70 AD date, but this is one of the letters in the Pauline corpus that for the life of me, I cannot see the seriousness of the objections to the contrary (when scholars from all angles, as Kirby notes, consider the letter authentic). I think Tubingen got this one wrong.

As for the book of Acts, I can only wonder why it ends so abruptly, and I am therefore comfortable dating it c. 62–5 AD.

Based on this scheme, then, there might be something in 1 Thess. that speaks of the coming destruction of Jerusalem. But keep in mind, if you have been following the posts on prophecy, I don't think anybody in the OT or NT knew of a necessary future—only of a potential one. This makes a lot more sense out of the content of 1 Thess., and the Apostle's attempt to make sense out of the current situation and how it related to the Second Advent and the fact that the long-awaited Messianic age had not begun physically upon the earth, etc.

If so-and-so denies that there is not even one authentic Pauline pericope, how could I ever offer an answer to the opening post?

Regards,

CJD

Toto

The argument for inauthenticity is based more on linguistic agreements with the Book of Acts, rather than disagreements.

Good question.

CJD

Yes, I see that Doughty argues this way, but I was referring to the tired arguments over the period of time Paul stayed in Corinth, etc. The following comes from Doughty:

Evidence for the dependence of 1 Thess on Acts would be the language in 1 Thess 3:2: kai epempsamen Timotheon... eis to stêrizai humas kai parakalesai. The word stêrizein ("establish") is used in Acts 14:22; 15:32, 41; 16:5; 18:23 (also 1 Pet 5:10; 2 Pet 1:12). The verbs stêrizein and parakalesein appear together in Acts 14:22 and 15:32. On the other hand, stêrizein (or epistêrizein) appears elsewhere in the Pauline writings only in Rom 1:11f (cf 16:25).

I'll be first to admit NT studies are off my radar, but this does anything but prove intertextuality or reliance.

(sigh) Is the traditional scheme really that inconceivable?

CJD

Steven Carr

1Thess. 1:9-10 '8The Lord's message rang out from you not only in Macedonia and Achaia--your faith in God has become known everywhere. Therefore we do not need to say anything about it, 9for they themselves report what kind of reception you gave us. They tell how you turned to God from idols to serve the living and true God, 10and to wait for his Son from heaven, whom he raised from the dead--Jesus, who rescues us from the coming wrath.'

To be honest I cannot see a reference to jerusalem here.

1 Thess. 2:14-17 '14For you, brothers, became imitators of God's churches in Judea, which are in Christ Jesus: You suffered from your own countrymen the same things those churches suffered from the Jews, 15who killed the Lord Jesus and the prophets and also drove us out. They displease God and are hostile to all men 16in their effort to keep us from speaking to the Gentiles so that they may be saved. In this way they always heap up their sins to the limit. The wrath of God has come upon them at last.'

Again it is hard to see this as a prophecy about Jerusalem, especially if Paul wrote it 20 years before this wrath happened.

'has come' is past tense.

Gooch's dad

Where does Paul describe any prophecy of Jesus at all?

CJD

1 Thess. 1:9–10 would only work as a reference if the "wrath" was being used technically in the same way the Baptist and Jesus supposedly spoke of it. Don't get me wrong, I also fail to see Jerusalem in there. But what else could the author be referring to? (given traditional dating). The end of time? Sure. Maybe he thought that what Jesus taught about the destruction of Jerusalem would be the end of all time (as opposed to just an "age")? At any rate, we should refrain using the word "prophecy," as it seems clear most folks consider them to be single, specific prognostications. If that was the case, why do we see a shift in Pauline theology on the eschaton from "imminent" to "now/not yet"? Because he, like every other apostle and NT writer were scrambling to make sense of the whole situation, given that the Messiah had come (and gone) in a way entirely unanticipated. It could also be that the "immanence" theme of the NT was satisfied in the destruction of Jerusalem, and then when the early church realized that that was not the finale, they began articulating the "not yet" of the eschaton.

As far as 1 Thess. 2:14–16 is concerned, while the wrath "has come," there is no reason to assume that the present wrath would not continue into the future, escalating from personal judgment to national judgment. I mean, the bible is anything but pedantic. Maybe Saint Paul uses the past tense to assure his readers that the ensuing judgment was as good as done? Again, maybe Paul saw the destruction of Jerusalem as a coming of the Son (2:19)?

At any rate, I agree that neither of these texts satisfy the opening post. A remote possibility? Maybe. What about 1 Cor. 7:29–31 (assuming traditional authorship and dating)? Would you say "short" is a decade or 2,000 years? Or 1 Cor. 10:11? What "ages" are ending? Possibly the age of Israel as the majority in God's kingdom? If this refers strictly to the end of the world (as was earlier mentioned), then an obvious incongruity comes to the fore: How could the end of a period be longer than the period of which it is the end?

It seems anything but clear.

*edited in response to Gooch's Dad: Nowhere to my knowledge, at least directly.

CJD