OIDA International Conference on Sustainable Development 2011

Bulletin for Biblical Research 19.2 (2009) 249–274

Justification according to Paul’s Thessalonian Correspondence

paul a. rainbow

sioux falls seminary

Admittedly, Paul does not use the special vocabulary of justification in his Thes-salonian epistles, but here he views the Christian life in the light of the comingjudgment and calls on his converts to persevere and grow in faith and love tothat end. This apocalyptic perspective provides a focus around which we canorganize fragmentary references to the future of justification in his other epistles(Rom 2:13, 8:33–34; 1 Cor 4:3–5; Gal 2:17, 5:4–6). What Paul teaches in thisconnection highlights the “work of faith,” alongside Christ’s righteousness im-puted to faith, as a secondary and derivative, but necessary part of the basis(ground) for a favorable verdict on the last day.

Key words: judgment, justification, Thessalonians

What can we learn from Paul’s Thessalonian correspondence about his un-derstanding of justification?1 For this subject, statistics might direct us to

1. Among the standard treatments of justification in Pauline theologies, from differentperspectives, are: Rudolf Bultmann, Theology of the New Testament (trans. Kendrick Grobel; 2vols.; New York: Scribners, 1951–55), 1:270–85; Herman Ridderbos, Paul: An Outline of His The-ology (trans. John Richard De Witt; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1975), 159–81; James D. G. Dunn,The Theology of Paul the Apostle (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1998), 334–89. That imputation is in-deed a Pauline concept is affirmed in John Piper, Counted Righteous in Christ: Should We Abandonthe Imputation of Christ’s Righteousness? (Wheaton, IL: Crossway, 2002); Paul A. Rainbow, TheWay of Salvation: The Role of Christian Obedience in Justification (Milton Keynes: Paternoster,2005), 97–115; Richard B. Gaffin, “By Faith, Not by Sight”: Paul and the Order of Salvation (MiltonKeynes: Paternoster, 2006), 44–52; Brian Vickers, Jesus’ Blood and Righteousness: Paul’s Theologyof Imputation (Wheaton, IL: Crossway, 2006). Although a surge of scholarly interest in 1–2 Thes-salonians since about 1980 has coincided with discussion of a so-called “new perspective onPaul,” the two developments have had almost no impact on each other. A comprehensive bib-liography of 20th-century secondary literature on 1–2 Thessalonians (Jeffrey A. D. Weima andStanley A. Porter, An Annotated Bibliography of 1 and 2 Thessalonians [NTTS 26; Leiden: Brill,1998]) has only two entries by major proponents of the new perspective (none for E. P. Sanders,one for J. D. G. Dunn [from the year 1973], and one for N. T. Wright, neither of these on a themeof the new perspective). Similarly, Michael Bird’s survey of chief contributions to the new per-spective on Paul (The Saving Righteousness of God: Studies on Paul, Justification and the New Per-spective [Paternoster Biblical Monographs; Milton Keynes: Paternoster, 2007], 194–211) has butone entry touching on 1 Thessalonians. Because the “new perspective” took its stimulus fromE. P. Sanders’ reconstruction of Second Temple Judaism (E. P. Sanders, Paul and Palestinian

Bulletin for Biblical Research 19.2250

other letters.2 The Thessalonian epistles are consistently overlooked, andthe reason is not far to seek. Signs of the classic statements on justificationfound in the major epistles are, of course, lacking here. None of the lex-emes dikaiouÅn/dikaiouÅsqai, dikaÇwsiÍ, dikaiosuvnh, dikaÇwma, or dikaiokrisÇaoccurs3; nor does logÇzesqai. Nowhere does Paul inveigh against “works ofthe law”; indeed, the phrase is not found.4 Though Paul commends “be-lieving” (pisteuvein, 8 times) and “faith” (pÇstiÍ, 13 times), never in thesetwo letters does he contrast this activity with works. All four occurrencesof the noun “work” (eßrgon, always singular) set it in a bright light.5 Manyconclude that the Thessalonian letters have nothing to offer on the Paulinekeynote of justification.6

2. Of the 27 occurrences of the key verb dikaiou~n/dikaiou~sqai (“to justify,” “to be justi-fied”) in the Pauline corpus as a whole (including the disputed letters), over 85 percent (23 outof 27) are concentrated in but two epistles, Galatians and Romans (Gal 2:16 [thrice], 17; 3:8, 11,24; 5:4; Rom 2:13; 3:4, 20, 24, 26, 28, 30; 4:2, 5; 5:1, 9; 6:7; 8:30 [twice], 33), while the other fourare scattered (1 Cor 4:4, 6:11; 1 Tim 3:16; Titus 3:7). Romans boasts the one relevant instanceof the noun dikaÇwma (Rom 5:16), and both of dikaÇwsiÍ (Rom 4:25, 5:18). Most uses of logÇzesqai(“to reckon, impute”) having God as (implied) subject and faith or righteousness as (implied)objects are also in Romans (Rom 2:26; 4:3, 4, 5, 6, 8, 9, 10, 11, 22, 23, 24; but note also 2 Cor 5:19,Gal 3:6, 2 Tim 4:16). Together with a handful of rich statements about “righteousness” or“grace” in odd passages elsewhere (Rom 9:30–10:13, 1 Cor 1:30, Eph 2:8–9, Phil 3:9–10), thisbody of data informs most studies of Paul’s concept of justification.

3. Udo Schnelle, “Der Erste Thessalonicherbrief und die Entstehung der paulinischenAnthropologie,” NTS 32 (1986): 207, 218. Two occurrences of dÇkaioÍ (“righteous”) describe Godin the act of judging (2 Thess 1:5, 6); the adverb dikaÇwÍ (“righteously”) refers to the behaviorof Paul and his company during their initial visit to Thessalonica (1 Thess 2:10). These usagesdo not belong to Paul’s characteristic doctrine of justification.

4. Reinhard von Bendemann, “ ‘Frühpaulinisch’ und/oder ‘spätpaulinisch’? Erwägungenzu der These einer Entwicklung der paulinishen Theologie am Beispiel des Geseztesverständ-nisses,” EvT 60 (2000): 223–26.

5. 1 Thess 1:3, 5:13; 2 Thess 1:11, 2:17. The six occurrences of the verb “to work” (ejrgavzo-mai) are mundane, having to do merely with people’s jobs for a livelihood (1 Thess 2:9; 4:11;2 Thess 3:8, 10, 11, 12).

6. Typical: “At the time of the composition of 1 Thessalonians, the doctrine of justificationby faith alone apart from works of the law, as found in different forms on [sic] Galatians andRomans, was not yet a constitutive element of Pauline theology. Otherwise one would expectto find at least hints of this central complex of ideas” (Udo Schnelle, Apostle Paul: His Life andTheology [trans. M. Eugene Boring; Grand Rapids: Baker, 2005], 188–89). This dovetails with W.Wrede’s influential proposal that Paul hammered out his doctrine of justification in polemicswith Judaism and Jewish Christianity, of which there are no traces in the Thessalonian corre-spondence (William Wrede, Paul [trans. Edward Lummis; London: Philip Green, 1907], 122–23). In what follows, I shall differ with Schnelle’s reconstruction of Paul’s early theology. I holdGalatians to be earlier than 1 Thessalonians. Therefore, I can confirm neither the sharp dis-tinction he makes nor the development he finds, from “judgment” according to 1 Thessalo-nians to “justification” according to Galatians and Romans.

Judaism: A Comparison of Patterns of Religion [Philadelphia: Fortress / London: SCM, 1977]; Paul,the Law, and the Jewish People [Philadelphia: Fortress, 1983]), discussion of this approach has cen-tered on the epistles in which Paul argues his views over against Jewish or Jewish-Christianconcerns, i.e., mainly Galatians, Philippians, and Romans, and has largely bypassed the Thes-salonian correspondence. For example, Dunn’s substantial section on justification (The Theologyof Paul the Apostle, 334–89) contains but a handful of references to 1 Thessalonians, in footnotes.

Rainbow: Justification in Paul’s Thessalonian Correspondence 251

But does this lack of surface features make 1–2 Thessalonians irrele-vant? Several factors suggest not. First, justification is rightly defined asGod’s approval expressed in a forensic verdict.7 The Thessalonian epistles,for their part, have plenty to say about God as judge; indeed, they containmore explicit passages about judgment than does Galatians. Paul’s refer-ences to the future outpouring of God’s “wrath” (qumovÍ; 1 Thess 1:10, 5:9)point to a judicial crisis (cf. Rom 2:5, 8; 3:5; 5:9), as does the warning thatGod is an avenger (1 Thess 4:6; cf. Rom 12:19). A full paragraph (2 Thess1:5–10) describes the “righteous judgment” of God in apocalyptic terms (hJdikaÇa krÇsiÍ, v. 5; cf. dikaiokrisÇa, Rom 2:5), at which believers will begranted rest and unbelievers “condemned” (kriqΩsin, 2 Thess 2:12). Withthe prospect of judgment in view, Paul’s concern for himself and his read-ers that they should have cause in that day for “glory” (dovxa) and notshame (1 Thess 2:6 [implied], 20; 2 Thess 2:14), that he should receive his“wreath of boasting” (stevfanoÍ kauchvsewÍ, 1 Thess 2:19) and they be found“blameless” (aßmemptoi, 1 Thess 3:13; cf. ajmevmptwÍ, 1 Thess 5:23)—both ofthese “before” (eßmprosqen) the divine judge (1 Thess 2:19, 3:13)—and thatthey should be “considered worthy” of God’s kingdom (kataxiwqhÅnai, 2Thess 1:5; cf. ajxi∫s¬, 2 Thess 1:11)—all this amounts to a concern that theyshould meet with judicial approval. Here the meaning of justification is ex-pressed in other words.8

Second, the prominence of eschatology in the Thessalonian epistles cor-relates with the apocalyptic nature of justification according to Galatiansand Romans. That Paul understood justification in an apocalyptic frame-work is now widely recognized.9 Not only does Paul speak of justification

7. Paul’s use of the terms dikaiouÅsqai and logÇzesqai is part and parcel of the theologicalmetaphor of man standing before God as judge (Gal 2:16d adapted from LXX Ps 142:2; Rom2:5–16, 26–29; 3:5–6, 19–26; 8:33–34). On the forensic, declarative nature of justification, withbibliographical pointers to the extensive debate, see C. E. B. Cranfield, A Critical and ExegeticalCommentary on the Epistle to the Romans (ICC; Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1975–77), 1:92–93, 95;Rainbow, Way of Salvation, 100–104; Bird, Saving Righteousness, 17–18.

8. James Barr warned against identifying a biblical concept with a particular word. JamesBarr, The Semantics of Biblical Language (Glasgow: Oxford University Press, 1961), 206–62. “Thetalk of holiness and sanctification that marks the first letter to the Thessalonians is, however,not far in content from the language of dikaiosuvnh and of dikaiouÅn in the later Pauline letters”(Bendemann, “Entwicklung paulinischer Theologie,” 225 [my translation]). Although Karl P.Donfried accepts a distinction between Paul’s early and late theology, “there is an amazingconsistency between the emphasis on election and sanctification in 1 Thessalonians and justi-fication and sanctification in Romans” (Karl P. Donfried, “1 Thessalonians, Acts and the EarlyPaul,” in The Thessalonian Correspondence [ed. Raymond Collins; BETL 87; Leuven: Leuven Uni-versity Press and Peeters, 1990], 19). Even Schnelle, who finds Paul’s specific doctrine of jus-tification first in Galatians and Romans, has to concede: “The declarations about the lastjudgment in 1 Thessalonians . . . point to the acceptance of human beings coram Deo (beforeGod) as a pervasive theme of Pauline theology. It belongs to the theme of justification” (UdoSchnelle, Apostle Paul, 190). That the judgment was a settled item of Paul’s thought finds freshsupport in Matthias Konradt, Gericht und Gemeinde: Eine Studie zur Bedeutung und Funktion vonGerichtsaussagen im Rahmen der paulinischen Ekklesiologie und Ethik im 1 Thess und 1 Kor (BZNW117; Berlin: de Gruyter, 2003).

9. Geerhardus Vos, The Pauline Eschatology (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1930),54–58; Ernst Käsemann, “ ‘The Righteousness of God’ in Paul,” in New Testament Questions of

spread one pica long


as an inaugurated reality of the “eschatological now” introduced by Jesus’death and resurrection (nunµ dev, Rom 3:21, 24, 26); also the status of God’speople as justified, like all other features of the last things in Paul’s view, un-folds between the present (“already”) and the end of the world (“not yet”).Several passages in the extant Pauline epistles refer to justification as an ac-complished fact, but others, equal to the first group in number and force,make justification an outcome of the last judgment.10

Taking these cues, then, the present essay inquires into justification—not the word, but the theological concept—in the letters to Thessalonica.What Paul has to say to believers menaced by external persecution is espe-cially valuable in complementing what he teaches about justification else-where. The eschatology of the Thessalonian correspondence may serve asas a center around which Paul’s fragmentary teaching about future justifi-cation in other epistles can be integrated. My argument will build in stagesas we review (1) the gist of Paul’s exhortation in these letters, which is toencourage his converts to persevere with Christ to the end despite present

10. Of the 25 instances of dikaiouÅn/dikaiouÅsqai in Pauline contexts having to do withGod’s judgment on human beings (excluding Rom 3:4, 6:7 from the full list of 27 occurrencesin n. 1 above), 6 refer to justification as accomplished (Rom 4:2; 5:1, 9; 1 Cor 6:11; 1 Tim 3:16;Titus 3:7); 5 refer to justification as a future contingency (Rom 2:13, 8:33; 1 Cor 4:4; Gal 2:17,5:4); 11 are found in timeless or categorical statements focusing on how justification comesabout rather than when, though some of their contexts may imply present justification (Rom3:24, 26, 28; 4:5; 8:30 [twice]; Gal 2:16ab; 3:8, 11, 24); and 3 have future tenses that probably re-fer to the future but could be construed as logical or timeless (Rom 3:20, 30; Gal 2:16c). Theparallel term logÇzesqai with God as subject and faith/righteousness as objects can point to apresent imputation (Rom 4:3, 9, 10, 11, 22, 23, 24; 2 Cor 5:19; Gal 3:6) or to a future reckoning(Rom 2:26, 2 Tim 4:16) or may be used in categorical statements (Rom 4:4, 5, 6, 8). On Rom 2:13,which is figuring ever larger in discussions about the future moment of justification, note esp.Klyne R. Snodgrass, “Justification by Grace—to the Doers: An Analysis of the Place of Romans2 in the Theology of Paul,” NTS 32 (1986): 72–93; Thomas R. Schreiner, “Did Paul Believe in Jus-tification by Works? Another Look at Romans 2,” BBR 3 (1993): 131–58; N. T. Wright, “The Lawin Romans 2,” in Paul and the Mosaic Law (ed. James D. G. Dunn; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans,2001), 131–50; Bird, Saving Righteousness, 155–78. On the two moments of justification in Paul,present and future, see Joachim Jeremias, “Paul and James,” ExpTim 66 (1954–55): 368–71;Charles H. Cosgrove, “Justification in Paul: A Linguistic and Theological Reflection,” JBL 106(1987): 653–70; N. T. Wright, “Putting Paul Together Again: Toward a Synthesis of Pauline The-ology (1 and 2 Thessalonians, Philippians, and Philemon),” in Pauline Theology, vol. 1: Thessa-lonians, Philippians, Galatians, Philemon (ed. Jouette M. Bassler; Mineapolis: Fortress, 1991), 197–205; Paul: In Fresh Perspective (Minneapolis: Fortress, 2005), 148; Robin Scroggs, “Salvation His-tory: The Theological Structure of Paul’s Thought (1 Thessalonians, Philippians, and Gala-tians),” in Pauline Theology, vol. 1: Thessalonians, Philippians, Galatians, Philemon (ed. Jouette M.Bassler; Minneapolis: Fortress, 1991), 217–18, 222, 224–25; Dunn, The Theology of Paul the Apostle,386, 467; Simon J. Gathercole, Where Is Boasting? Early Jewish Soteriology and Paul’s Response inRomans 1–5 (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2002), 266; Rainbow, Way of Salvation, 155–74; Gaffin,By Faith, Not by Sight, 79–108.

Today (trans. W. J. Montague; Philadelphia: Fortress, 1969), 168–82; Peter Stuhlmacher, Gere-chtigkeit Gottes bei Paulus (FRLANT 87; 2nd ed.; Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1966);Ridderbos, Paul, 161–66; J. Christiaan Beker, Paul the Apostle: The Triumph of God in Life andThought (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1980), 135–272.


hardships; (2) his belief that their final salvation depends on such perse-verance; (3) the reciprocal relationship between faith and works along theway; and (4) the qualities that God as judge will look for in the charactersand lives of those to be finally approved. The study will raise searchingquestions about the basis for justification in eschatological perspective.

Historical-Critical Assumptions

Paul’s epistles to the Thessalonians, like the majority of his extant letters,are occasional in nature. Written to a church planted not long before(probably in the autumn of a.d. 49) and building on what Paul taught thebelievers in person, they take up urgent pastoral problems at a time whenPaul’s circumstances preclude his paying them another visit. According tothe traditional view, Paul wrote 1 Thessalonians in approximately thespring of a.d. 50, having moved on via Athens to Corinth (Acts 18:5; cf.1 Thess 3:6; Acts 18:12; the “Gallio Inscription,” SIG 801D).11 Those who ac-cept the authenticity of the second epistle place it a few months later.12 Thedate of writing carries implications for our inquiry.

11. For the purpose of this study, I follow the chronology of F. F. Bruce, Paul: Apostle of theHeart Set Free (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1977), 223–34, 475; confirmed in Martin Hengel,“Christology and New Testament Chronology: A Problem in the History of Earliest Christian-ity,” in Between Jesus and Paul (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1983), 30–31; Rainer Riesner, Die Frühzeitdes Apostels Paulus: Studien zur Chronologie, Missionsstrategie, und Theologie (WUNT 71; Tü-bingen: Mohr-Siebeck, 1994), 286. In the early 1980s, Hengel stated: “There is a broad consen-sus over these familiar dates” (ibid., 31). Although Gerd Lüdemann has spearheaded analternative approach since then and has won followers for a date almost a decade earlier (GerdLüdemann, Paul, Apostle of the Gentiles: Studies in Chronology [Philadelphia: Fortress, 1984];Paul: The Founder of Christianity [Amherst, NY: Prometheus, 2002], 22–64), in my view a radicaldependence on the Pauline epistles due to skepticism about the reliability of Acts is too opento the play of historical imagination. This is hardly the place to launch into a defense of Acts.See the opposing surveys of Pauline chronology in I. H. Marshall, The Acts of the Apostles (NTG;London: Sheffield Academic Press, 1990), 83–99 (traditional approach); and Karl P. Donfried,“Chronology, New Testament,” in ABD 1:1016–22 (skeptical of Acts).

12. There is a thorough discussion and defense of the authenticity of 2 Thessalonians inCharles A. Wanamaker, The Epistles to the Thessalonians: A Commentary on the Greek Text(NIGTC; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans / Carlisle: Paternoster, 1990), 17–37. Few have followedhim, however, in supposing that 2 Thessalonians predates 1 Thessalonians (pp. 37–45 andpassim). Abraham Malherbe takes a fair look at the question of authorship from both angles,comes down firmly in favor of authenticity, and judges 2 Thessalonians to be later. AbrahamJ. Malherbe, The Letters to the Thessalonians: A New Translation with Introduction and Commentary(AB 32b; Garden City, NY: Doubleday, 2000), 349–75. The case for 2 Thessalonians as genuine

Table 1. Vocabulary of Justification in Paul

Passage in Thessalonians Parallel Using Vocabulary of Justification1 Thess 2:6 Rom 2:13 (2:6–16); Gal 2:171 Thess 2:19–20 1 Cor 4:4 (4:3–5)1 Thess 3:12–13 Rom 8:33–341 Thess 5:23–24 Rom 8:33–342 Thess 1:11–12 Gal 5:4 (5:4–6)


Earliest Traces of Paul’s Idea of Justification by Faith

Even by this early date vis-à-vis the rest of the Pauline corpus, Paul hadformulated his gospel centering on justification by faith. Aware that “thegospel which was preached by me” (Gal 1:11; cf. 2:2), having essentials incommon with the kergyma of the other apostles (1 Cor 15:1–11), had alsounique accents in need of defense in some quarters, Paul claimed he re-ceived it directly from God shortly after the revelation of Christ to him onthe Damascus road (Gal 1:11–17). At what point did he introduce the lan-guage of “justification”? Acts at first brings out the messianological tenorof his message in the synagogues of Damascus (Acts 9:20, 22), and Paul’sown report in Galatians is vague about the content of his preaching for theperiods in Damascus, Cilicia, and Syria covering some 14 years (Gal 1:18–24; cf. 2:1). But when he presented Titus uncircumcised to the Jerusalemmother church as a delegate from Gentile believers in the north (Gal 2:1–3), he sparked a reaction (Gal 2:4–5), part of which organized itself into arival mission fostered by Torah-observant believers from Judaea (Gal 2:12,Acts 15:1). To check their effect in Anatolia, Paul drafted his epistle to theGalatians, with its emphasis on justification by faith apart from works ofthe law. To take Titus’s uncircumcised state as evidence of Paul’s law-freegospel already at Antioch is simpler than to hypothesize that the epistle tothe Galatians advanced novel arguments to defend a missionary practicebased on some unspecified principle. If so, Paul’s doctrine of justificationby faith took form during the (to us) obscure period prior to his famousjourneys and letters.13

Explicit evidence of Paul’s inviting people to be “justified” by faithrather than by keeping the law first comes to light in a secondary source.Luke’s summary of Paul’s synagogue homily at Antioch of Pisidia in a.d.

47 contains the statement “By him [Jesus] every one that believes is justi-fied (dikaiouÅtai) from everything from which you could not be justified (di-kaiwqhÅnai) by the law of Moses” (Greek Acts 13:38–39; English v. 39).14

If Paul wrote to the Galatians in a.d. 48/49,15 the trademarks of hismature doctrine of justification, borne on the face of that epistle, had crys-

13. Seyoon Kim has even tried to demonstrate the possibility that Paul derived all themain lines of his thought, including the doctrine of justification by faith, from his experienceon the Damascus road. Seyoon Kim, The Origin of Paul’s Gospel (WUNT 2/4; Tübingen: MohrSiebeck, 1981), esp. 269–311. While Kim’s project is necessarily speculative, it does take seri-ously Paul’s own testimony that “his” gospel came to him within the first 14 years after hisconversion/commissioning (Gal 1:11–24).

14. The terminology is somewhat obscured by the rsv: “is freed,” “could not be freed,”v. 39.

15. A date in the mid-50s is more mainstream and has found numerous defenders, fromJ. B. Lightfoot (St. Paul’s Epistle to the Galatians [1865; repr., Lynn, MA: Hendrickson, 1981], 1–56) to Gregory Tatum (New Chapters in the Life of Paul: The Relative Chronology of His Career

and later than 1 Thessalonians is strengthened by Colin R. Nicholl, From Hope to Despair inThessalonica: Situating 1 and 2 Thessalonians (SNTSMS 126; Cambridge: Cambridge UniversityPress, 2004).


tallized well before he undertook his second missionary journey (Acts15:36–18:22; a.d. 49–52). These include a concern about our status beforeGod as judge, use in this connection of the words “righteousness” (dikaio-suvnh) and “to justify” (dikaiouÅn), as well as “to reckon” (logÇzesqai, fromLXX Gen 15:6), a sharp antithesis between “works of the law” and “faith,”and the crisp formula “by works of the law shall no one be justified” (Gal2:16 ~ Rom 3:20).

Paul’s speech at Athens not long after his visit to Thessalonica (Acts17:22–31; a.d. 50), given by Luke to illustrate Paul’s manner of presentingthe gospel to pagans, climactically declares God “has fixed a day on whichhe will judge the world in righteousness” (Acts 17:31). This declarationwould lead hearers to ask what they must do to pass muster, preparing theground for Paul to proclaim justification by faith in Christ. Likewise, Paul’sexposition of his gospel in Romans, so rich on justification, takes off froma statement about the coming judgment (Rom 2:5–16) and returns to it(Rom 8:33–34, 14:10–12), as definitive for “my gospel” (Rom 2:16).

Thus, Paul had been involved in the work of evangelization for thebetter part of two decades before he wrote to the Thessalonians, and thelineaments of his view of justification, worked out in repeated debates,were in place.16

Justification by Faith Part of Paul’s Oral Instruction for Converts

In all likelihood, Paul had inculcated his gospel of justification whilepresent at Thessalonica before he wrote his epistles to the church there.

16. So also G. G. Findlay, The Epistles of Paul the Apostle to the Thessalonians (CGTSC; Cam-bridge: Cambridge University Press, 1904), xxv–xxvii; cf. Hengel, “Christology and Chronol-ogy,” 39–40.

[CBQMS 41; Washington, DC: Catholic Biblical Association of America, 2006]). The earlier datepreferred here represents a minority position in current scholarship, but the cogency of thecase commends it. It seems reasonable to match the two visits to Jerusalem Paul mentions inGalatians (1:18–19, 2:1–10) with the parallel series in Acts (9:26–30 [a.d. 35]; 11:30 = 12:25 [a.d.

46]) so that the arrival of Judean missionaries at Antioch corresponds in the two accounts (Gal2:12 = Acts 15:1–2); and it is reasonable also to assume that Paul’s autobiographical plea in Ga-latians (Gal 1:11–2:14) runs right up to the point when he wrote the epistle, at about Acts 15:2.That the epistle to the Galatians immediately preceded the consultation in Jerusalem (Acts15:6–29) remains the best explanation of the fact that he cites the council’s decision nowhere inthe letter, even though according to Acts he had a hand in forging the decree (Acts 15:12), de-livered it to Antioch (Acts 15:22, 30–31), served to distribute it throughout the southwesternpart of the province of Galatia in a.d. 50 (Acts 16:4, 6), and might be expected to refer to it, asit would have served his purpose admirably, had he written Galatians afterward. On the earlydate for Galatians, see F. F. Bruce, The Epistle to the Galatians: A Commentary on the Greek Text(NIGTC; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1982), 3–18; Colin J. Hemer, The Book of Acts in the Settingof Hellenistic History (ed. Conrad H. Gempf; WUNT 49; Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1989), 277–307; G. Walter Hansen, “Galatia,” in The Book of Acts in Its First Century Setting, vol. 2: The Bookof Acts in Its Graeco-Roman Setting (ed. David W. J. Gill and Conrad Gempf; Grand Rapids: Eerd-mans / Carlisle: Paternoster, 1994), 377–95; Riesner, Frühzeit des Paulus, 350–52; David A.Fiensy, “The Roman Empire and Asia Minor,” in The Face of New Testament Studies: A Survey ofRecent Research (ed. Scot McKnight and Grant Osborne; Grand Rapids: Baker, 2004), 48–50.


According to Acts, Paul spent three sabbaths arguing in the synagogue ofThessalonica before some members slandered him to the secular authori-ties and forced him to flee the city (Acts 17:1–9). Luke’s concise accountmay omit details of a somewhat more extended stay, presumably dissoci-ated from the synagogue, during which the previously founded church atPhilippi (Acts 16:12–40) sent him aid several times (Phil 4:16). Preserved inthe letters are numerous clues that the weeks or months he had there weretaken up with intense oral preaching and teaching (1 Thess 1:5; 2:1–9, 13;2 Thess 2:14, 15; 3:1, 4). Topics addressed, befitting a pagan audience, in-cluded at minimum the unity of God and the folly of idolatry (1 Thess 1:9);Jesus’ atoning death, resurrection, heavenly session and return (1 Thess1:10, 4:14, 5:10); signs of the parousia (1 Thess 5:1–4, 2 Thess 2:1–12); thecoming wrath of God (1 Thess 1:10, 5:9); the hope of God’s glorious king-dom (1 Thess 2:12, 2 Thess 2:14); and ethical imperatives: to lead lives wor-thy of God on the way to that kingdom (1 Thess 2:11–12, 4:1–2; 2 Thess2:13–15), to practice love toward one another (1 Thess 4:9–10), to abstainfrom fornication (1 Thess 4:3–8), to do honorable work (1 Thess 4:11–12,2 Thess 3:6–10), and to endure persecution (1 Thess 3:3–4).17

Justification as such is not an item. But the following considerationsgive us good reason to believe Paul heralded justification in church afterchurch. If Acts 13 is not a literal transcript of what was said on one occasionbut a programmatic summary typical of Paul’s synagogue preaching, theoccurrences of dikaiouÅsqai (Acts 13:38–9), unique in the reported sermonsof Acts, have import. The stress at Athens on eschatological accountability(Acts 17:31) is a comparable feature in an address to pagans. Significantly,it is in introductory encounters that both speeches broach the topics ofjudgment and justification. When Paul was “in travail” a second time tobring the Galatians to birth (Gal 4:19), justification was a prominent theme.Striking parallels between Gal 2–3 and Rom 3–4—an almost identical for-mula negating justification by works of the law (Gal 2:16d ~ Rom 3:20), theappeal to Abraham as a model, special reference to Gen 15:6 (Gal 3:6 // Rom4:3)—look like stock catechetical material. In a letter to the church at Cor-inth that brims with reminders of their catechesis,18 one of these takes themback to their having been justified (1 Cor 6:11). A prophylactic statementagainst the “circumcision,” reminding the saints at Philippi (Phil 3:1–2) that

17. Each passage in the foregoing list is associated with a formula showing that Paul isreminding his readers what he taught them when present with them. For similar summariesof the gospel Paul preached at Thessalonica based on internal indications in the epistles, seeG. G. Findlay, Thessalonians (Greek Text), xxiii–xxxi; André Viard, “L’Évangile de Jésus Christdans la première Épître aux Thessaloniciens,” Ang 56 (1979): 413–27; Riesner, Frühzeit des Pau-lus, 353–58; J. Plevnik, “Pauline Presuppositions,” in The Thessalonian Correspondence (ed. Ray-mond Collins; BETL 87; Leuven: Leuven University Press and Peeters, 1990), 50–61; EarlRichard, “Early Pauline Thought: An Analysis of 1 Thessalonians,” in Pauline Theology, vol. 1:Thessalonians, Philippians, Galatians, Philemon (ed. Jouette M. Bassler; Mineapolis: Fortress,1991), 42–45.

18. 1 Cor 1:13–17; 2:1–5; 3:1–2; 4:15–17; 6:12; 8:6; 9:1–2; 11:2, 23–25; 15:1–10.


our righteousness is from God, in Christ, through faith, not based on thelaw (Phil 3:9) indicates how Paul must have preached to them, also inMacedonia (Acts 16:12–40), only days or weeks before he came to Thessa-lonica (Acts 17:1–9). A “faithful saying”—probably oral material that stillcirculated in some Pauline churches in the 60s—contrasts preconversionmoral striving and justification by God’s grace (Titus 3:5, 7).19 Above all, ifthe epistle to the Romans is a literary specimen of Paul’s proclamation bywhich Paul hopes to persuade the Roman church of his claim to apostle-ship, as his remarks indicate (Rom 1:1–5, 13–15; 15:15–24), it comes closerthan anything in his corpus to supplying the content of the basic catechesispresupposed by his more situationally determined letters. Precisely here,justification factors very large. These facts create a strong impression thatPaul the catechist regularly attracted and nurtured new converts by histeaching about justification.

If justification is not a matter of stress in the Thessalonian correspon-dence, it is not because Paul had no such doctrine as yet but because it wasnot contested in the community there.20

Thrust of the Exhortation to the Thessalonians

Paul’s visit to Thessalonica was cut short by organized opposition whilehis Gentile disciples were still ill grounded in the faith (1 Thess 2:2, 14–17;cf. Acts 17:5–10). They faced repeated outbreaks of local persecution (1Thess 1:6, 2:14, 3:3–4) right up to the time when Paul wrote the secondepistle (2 Thess 1:4, 5). Anxiety for their spiritual welfare in their fledg-ling state led him to deploy Timothy “to establish you in your faith and toexhort you, that no one be moved by these afflictions” (1 Thess 2:2–3).When Timothy brought back a reassuring report of their fidelity, Paul re-joiced (1 Thess 2:6–9), but he noted some severe defects in their doctrinalunderstanding, particularly about points of eschatology (1 Thess 4:13–18,2 Thess 2:1–12), which left them vulnerable. These letters, then, are sub-stitutes for his pastoral presence to “supply what is lacking in your faith”(1 Thess 2:10).

They, having received Paul’s gospel (1 Thess 1:5, 6–8; 2:13; 2 Thess2:14), already know that their deliverance from divine wrath is secured by

19. In this “faithful saying” as quoted by Paul, it is now impossible to distinguish the bitsthat were in general circulation from embellishments added by Paul when drafting the letterto Titus. I. Howard Marshall and Philip H. Towner, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on thePastoral Epistles (ICC; Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1999), 304–8. In all likelihood, the mind of Paulwas decisive for the earlier version as well as the later.

20. Robert Jewett, “A Matrix of Grace: The Theology of 2 Thessalonians as a Pauline Let-ter,” in Pauline Theology, vol. 1: Thessalonians, Philippians, Galatians, Philemon (ed. Jouette M.Bassler; Mineapolis: Fortress, 1991), 63; Frank J. Matera, New Testament Ethics: The Legacies ofJesus and Paul (Louisville: Westminster John Knox, 1996), 124; Bendemann, “Entwicklungpaulinischer Theologie,” 224; Otto Merk, “1 Thessalonians 2:1–12: An Exegetical-TheologicalStudy,” in The Thessalonians Debate: Methodological Discord or Methodological Synthesis? (ed. KarlP. Donfried and Johannes Beutler; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2000), 113.


Christ’s death for them, resurrection, and return (1 Thess 1:10, 5:9–10; uJpe;rhJmΩn).21 Paul mentions in passing but does not belabor these facts onwhich their relationship with God is founded. Assuming their incorpora-tion and status “in God the Father and the Lord Jesus Christ” (1 Thess 1:1,2 Thess 1:1), he does not have to dwell on the imputative aspect of theirjustification.

The general aim of both epistles, as of Paul’s delegation of Timothy, isto consolidate the fruits of the apostles’ visit and to steel the new convertsto face the rigors of adherence to Christ in unpredictable circumstances.22

Paul seems satisfied that the young converts at Thessalonica are justified byfaith and is solicitous that they now continue as Christians, overcoming thepressures that bear on them.23 Let us now turn specifically to the soteriol-ogy of these epistles.

Final Salvation Dependent on

Persevering Faith in Christ

The salvation of Paul’s Thessalonian readers is under way. Its completionis conditioned on their continuance in faith. Their full salvation lies in thefuture. In describing Jesus as the one “who delivers (to;n rJuovmenon, presentparticiple) us from the wrath to come,” Paul indicates a future delivery al-ready in progress (1 Thess 1:10). In the same vein, in an eschatologicallycharged paragraph (1 Thess 5:1–11) we find the statement that God has“destined” (eßqeto) the readers not for wrath but “to obtain salvation” (e√ÍperipoÇhsin swthrÇaÍ), pointing to a salvation yet to be obtained in the full-est sense (1 Thess 5:9). God’s choice of them from the beginning “to be

21. Henk J. de Jonge, “The Original Setting of the CRISTOS APEQANEN UPER For-mula,” in The Thessalonian Correspondence (ed. Raymond Collins; BETL 87; Leuven: LeuvenUniversity Press and Peeters, 1990), 229–35; Angus Paddison, Theological Hermeneutics and1 Thessalonians (SNTSMS 133; Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2005), 148–66; Bird,Saving Righteousness, 56.

22. Karl Paul Donfried, “The Theology of 1 Thessalonians as a Reflection of Its Purpose,”in Paul, Thessalonica, and Early Christianity (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2002), 119–38. Nichollwould go further and urge that the deaths of a few had created, because of the Gentile com-munity’s poor understanding of the future resurrection of believers, general anxiety (1 Thess4:13–18), which was plunging further toward despair about the truth of the gospel by the timePaul wrote 2 Thessalonians. Nicholl, Hope to Despair.

23. The prayer “May the Lord make you increase and abound in love to one another andto all men” (1 Thess 3:11) has a hortatory edge and leads into parenesis (1 Thess 4:1–12). A pas-sage on the resurrection to come is meant to comfort those who grieve (1 Thess 4:18). A re-minder of the nearness of the day of the Lord (1 Thess 5:1–11) includes a dual invitation tokeep sober (1 Thess 5:6, 8). Likewise, teaching to the effect that the parousia of Christ must fol-low the rise of the antichrist (2 Thess 2:1–12) is followed by exhortations to stand firm (2 Thess2:15) and to continue in good deeds, love of God, steadfastness, daily work, and well-doing(2 Thess 2:17; 3:5–13). On the parenetic function of the prayer reports in Thessalonians, seeI. H. Marshall, “Election and Calling to Salvation in 1 and 2 Thessalonians,” in The ThessalonianCorrespondence (ed. Raymond Collins; BETL 87; Leuven: Leuven University Press and Peeters,1990), 270–71.


saved” (2 Thess 2:13) with the goal “that you may obtain the glory of ourLord Jesus Christ” (2 Thess 2:14) will come to fulfilment “when he comeson that day to be glorified in his saints” (2 Thess 1:10).24

Their salvation, rooted eternally in God’s election of them (1 Thess 1:4,5:9; 2 Thess 2:13),25 founded on Christ’s historic death for them and resur-rection (1 Thess 1:10, 5:9)26 and brought into being by God’s calling throughthe gospel Paul preached to them (2 Thess 2:14; cf. 1 Thess 4:7),27 remainsin some respects a promise to be gained through their ongoing response toGod’s continuing call (1 Thess 2:12, qeouÅ touÅ kalouÅntoÍ; 5:24, oJ kalΩn; bothpresent participles).28 Paul is in no doubt of the authenticity of their con-version (1 Thess 1:5–8, 2:13), though he has won this certainty only after aperiod of quite-genuine fear lest the tempter had rendered his labor amongthem “in vain” (1 Thess 3:2–3, 5 e√Í kenovn, 6–8). The particular point he hadto ascertain was whether their faith was still intact (1 Thess 3:2, 5, 6).

Let us pause to reflect on Paul’s erstwhile distress. The Thessalonianshave turned to God and believed in Christ, but Paul knows that if theygive up believing before the end they will not be saved. The thought thatthey might surrender their faith under duress became intolerable to him,for that would mean eternal ruin for them and Paul’s loss of a badge of hisapostleship (cf. 1 Thess 2:19).29 Faith, as he sees it, is the fundamental con-dition that people must meet to be saved. Faith is not only a past, one-timeresponse to God’s first call but also a present, ever renewed response toGod’s calling until his kingdom arrives.30

24. In Paul’s thought generally, “salvation” often points to the future culmination of aprocess that is under way. Thomas R. Schreiner, Paul, Apostle of God’s Glory in Christ: A PaulineTheology (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity, 2001), 225–29.

25. On divine election in 1 Thessalonians, see Donfried’s remarks in Karl P. Donfried andI. Howard Marshall, The Theology of the Shorter Pauline Letters (New Testament Theology; Cam-bridge: Cambridge University Press, 1993), 28–30. I. H. Marshall extends treatment of thetheme to incorporate 2 Thessalonians but is at pains to avoid an Augustinian-Calvinian con-cept of election (I. H. Marshall, “Election and Calling”).

26. Donfried and Marshall, Shorter Paulines, 58–62.27. Ibid., 51–53.28. On the significance of the present participle “calling,” see George Milligan, St. Paul’s

Epistles to the Thessalonians: The Greek Text with Introduction and Notes (London: Macmillan,1908), 26–27; William Neil, The Epistles of Paul to the Thessalonians (MNTC; New York: Harper,1950), 43–44; Leon Morris, The First and Second Epistles to the Thessalonians (NICNT; Grand Rap-ids: Eerdmans, 1959), 85; Dietrich Wiederkehr, Die Theologie der Berufung in den Paulusbriefen(Studia Friburgensia 36; Freiburg: Universitätsverlag, 1963), 36–75; Ernest Best, A Commentaryon the First and Second Epistles to the Thessalonians (HNTC; New York: Harper & Row, 1972), 108;I. Howard Marshall, 1 and 2 Thessalonians (NCB; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1983), 75.

29. I. H. Marshall, “Election and Calling,” 261–62.30. Paul’s anxiety for them does not imply that some of the eternally elect might fall

short of final salvation by opting out of faith. It demonstrates that perseverance is a necessarycondition for inheriting final salvation, a condition that God will sustain his elect to meet. Di-vine preservation of the elect from the real peril of apostasy operates through their agency.See Thomas R. Schreiner and Ardel B. Caneday, The Race Set before Us: A Biblical Theology ofPerseverance and Assurance (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity, 2001).


Relationship between Faith and Works

In the soteriology of the Thessalonian correspondence, we find a two-wayinteraction between faith and works: perseverance in saving faith mani-fests itself in the practice of good deeds; good deeds, in turn, completefaith. Thus, faith and deeds work together to fulfill the requirement ofperseverance as the outstanding condition for final salvation.

“Works of the Law” versus “Work of Faith”

Unlike Galatians and Romans, where Paul sets “faith” opposite “works ofthe law” as two theoretical ways to seek justification and rules out worksof the law (Gal 2:16; 3:2, 5, 10–12; Rom 3:20–22, 28; 4:2–5; 9:32), the Thes-salonian letters contain no occurrences of the phrase “works of the law” butrather four positive occurrences of “works.” This is theologically important.

Where in other epistles Paul speaks of “works of the law” (or of un-qualified “works” in the same sense), he means deeds done according tothe prescriptions of the Mosaic code.31 This in turn implies the covenantalschemata Paul outlines in Gal 4:21–31, 2 Cor 3:6–18, and Rom 7:4–6. Forhim, the salvation-historical setting of the Mosaic covenant was pre-Christian, the rank and file of the Israelite nation were unregenerate, andthe result of their acceptance of the yoke of the Torah was a tragic saga ofdisobedience landing them in the Babylonian captivity. In other words,behind Paul’s “works of the law” lies an assumption that the human sub-jects who undertake works of this sort are Adamic beings seeking by natu-ral moral effort, apart from the Spirit poured out by God’s Messiah, topresent themselves acceptable to God. Paul robustly denies that anyonecan be justified on that basis.32

In stark contrast, the letters to the Thessalonians twice commend thereaders’ “work of faith” (1 Thess 1:3, 2 Thess 1:11), mention the work ofChristian leaders for which the congregation is to esteem them (1 Thess5:13), and pray that God would confirm them in every “good” word andwork (2 Thess 2:17). Moreover, Paul reminds them to “walk” in a mannerworthy of God (1 Thess 2:12) and so to please him (1 Thess 4:1) and exhortsthem not to become weary “in well-doing” (kalopoiouÅnteÍ, 2 Thess 3:13).Apparently, “works of the law” and “good works” are quite different things.“Works of the law” and faith stand opposed; faith and “good works” arepositively correlated.33

31. Douglas J. Moo, “ ‘Law’, ‘Works of the Law’, and Legalism in Paul,” WTJ 45 (1983):73–100; Stephen Westerholm, Perspectives Old and New on Paul: The “Lutheran” Paul and HisCritics (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2004), 300–321; Rainbow, Way of Salvation, 89–96; Bird, Sav-ing Righteousness, 96–99.

32. Rainbow, Way of Salvation, 89–96.33. For a fuller analysis of all occurrences of “works” in the Pauline epistles, an analysis

that highlights the patent distinction in Paul’s usage between “works of the law” and “goodworks” and shows how these concepts relate to his understanding of the biblical covenants,see my Way of Salvation, 70–96, and the literature there cited.


That is plain to see in the genitive construct “work of faith” (eßrgon[thÅÍ] pÇstewÍ; 1 Thess 1:3, 2 Thess 1:11). “Of faith” here is best taken as asubjective genitive: the work in question is done by faith, springs fromfaith.34 People of faith do good works. If faith is genuine and enlivened byhope, love is inseparable from it,35 as a verb is bound to its grammaticalsubject. No more can faith stand on its own without works than a gram-matical subject alone can make a sentence, having no verb. Faith works.

For this reason, Paul’s mind habitually moves straight from faith to itsethical fruits. Everyone everywhere knows of the faith of the Thessalo-nians because they welcomed the apostles, turned from idols, and beganto serve a living and true God (1 Thess 1:8–9). When Paul dispatched Tim-othy to strengthen and ascertain the Thessalonians’ “faith” (1 Thess 3:2, 5),Timothy came back with a report about their “faith and love” (1 Thess 3:6).The same collocation pops up again where Paul enjoins that they put onthe breastplate of “faith and love” (1 Thess 5:8). Likewise in the second let-ter, Paul is thankful because their faith is growing and their love increas-ing (2 Thess 1:3).

Theocentric Orientation of Good Deeds

Provided we inquire into the contexts in which Paul sees specifically goodworks or works of faith functioning, they have a soteriological role, to-gether with and subordinate to faith as their source. The Thessalonians’work of faith, labor of love, and endurance of hope are done “before ourGod” (eßmprosqen touÅ qeouÅ . . . hJmΩn, 1 Thess 1:3).36 The prepositional phrase

34. The phrase “work of faith” is parallel in this respect to the subjective genitive con-structs that follow in the same verse: “labor of love” and “steadfastness of hope.” Hope en-dures; love labors. So, among many others, Wanamaker, Thessalonians, 75.

35. Donfried and Marshall, Shorter Paulines, 54–56.36. rsv, niv, nrsv, tniv (to mention four widely used translations), and many commen-

tators construe “before our God” from the end of the Greek clause in 1 Thess 1:3 with the par-ticiple “remembering” at the beginning. On this view, Paul would be remembering before Godin his prayers their work of faith, etc. That he is recalling rather their work of faith, which theydo before God, is established by four converging considerations. (1) Paul has no need to repeatin v. 3 that his prayer for the Thessalonians is before God, since in v. 2 he has already said hegives thanks “to God” for them and “makes mention [of them] in our prayers.” To take “re-membering” in v. 3 as making the same point creates redundancy. (2) “Remember” (mnhmoneuvw)in all seven of its occurrences in Paul denotes recollection of past (Eph 2:11; 1 Thess 1:3, 2:9; 2Thess 2:5; 2 Tim 2:8) or distant (Gal 2:10, Col 4:18) matters, and is never found embedded in aprayer-report, unlike “making mention” (mneÇan poiouÅmenoi) which occurs in prayer languagefour times (Rom 1:9; Eph 1:16; 1 Thess 1:2; Phlm 4). Therefore, the logical relationship between“making mention” (v. 2) and “remembering” (v. 3) is temporal or causal—“making mention [ofyou] in our prayers . . . when we remember (or because we remember) your work of faith,” etc.—not coincidental or modal. (3) The prepositional phrase “before our God” falls at the very endof the Greek clause in 1:3 with 20 words separating it from “remembering.” It is natural to readit as a qualifier of the triad faith, love, and hope rather than of the introductory participle. (4)Turning again to the concordance, we find that “before” (eßmprosqen) with a divine object isfound but once in prayer language (1 Thess 3:9) but occurs thrice in judicial contexts (2 Cor 5:10;1 Thess 2:19, 3:13). He makes mention of them in his prayers because he remembers their work


“before our God” here brings out the theocentric orientation of Christianbehavior.

A similar theocentricity is evident where Paul pleads the integrity ofhis apostolic ministry, a subset of Christian deeds in general. Paul and hiscompanions have been “approved by God” (dedokimavsmeqa uJpo; touÅ qeouÅ)and seek to please God “who tests (tåÅ dokimavzonti) our hearts” (1 Thess 2:4).During this life, God continually tests his people with a view to approvingthem, in an ongoing evaluation that will culminate at the last assize. Workscount before him.

Soteriology and Ethics Mutually Integral

Seamlessly, Paul connects a Christian lifestyle with entrance into futureglory: “We exhorted each one of you and encouraged you and charged youto lead a life worthy of God, who calls you into his own kingdom andglory” (1 Thess 2:11–12).37 God “who calls (touÅ kalouÅntoÍ) you” is in thepresent tense, while God’s “kingdom and glory” points to a future real-ity.38 It is not the case, then, that God’s call summoned the believers to asaved state that serves as the platform for Christian action in a separate,ethical sphere. It is by leading lives worthy of God that they respond toGod’s continuous calling in the present designed to lead them all the wayto glory.

The triad faith, love, and hope reappears in 5:8, “Let us . . . put on thebreastplate of faith and love, and for a helmet the hope of salvation.” Whyshould we? Paul answers in terms of God’s soteriological purpose: “For(o§ti) God has not destined us for wrath, but to obtain salvation throughour Lord Jesus Christ” (1 Thess 5:9). From the juxtaposition, we see thatlove (implying labor, 1:3) is the way they will reach the goal. Precisely be-cause God has destined the readers, having Christ’s death and resurrec-tion for their foundation (1 Thess 5:10), not to suffer God’s wrath, Paul callson them to busy themselves in deeds of love flowing from faith and hope,for by producing these they will “obtain salvation.”

A dense paragraph in 2 Thess 2:13–17 makes sanctification the path tofinal salvation. An overriding soteric concern is signalled by the statement,“God chose you from the beginning to be saved” (2 Thess 2:13), for theeschatological end stated in the next verse, “so that you may obtain (e√Í

37. “His appeals, consolations, and protestations . . . point to the sublime issue of theiradmission into the perfected kingdom of God” (G. G. Findlay, Thessalonians [Greek Text], 49).

38. Merk, “1 Thess 2:1–12,” 111.

of faith, etc., that they do before God. So Ernst von Dobschütz, Die Thessalonicher-Briefe (ed.Ferdinand Hahn; KEK; Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1974; repr. from the edition of1909), 64–67; James Everett Frame, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Epistles of St. Paulto the Thessalonians (ICC; New York: Scribners, 1924), 73, 77; Neil, Thessalonians, 12–13; CharlesMasson, Les Deux Épîtres de Saint Paul Aux Thessaloniciens (CNT; Neuchatels: Delachaux & Ni-estlé, 1957), 19 n. 1; F. F. Bruce, 1 and 2 Thessalonians (WBC 45; Waco, TX: Word, 1982), 12–13.Malherbe has it both ways (Thessalonians, 107).


peripoÇhsin) the glory of our Lord Jesus Christ” (2 Thess 2:14). A twofoldmeans is indicated: “through (ejn) sanctification by the Spirit and belief inthe truth” (v. 13). “Belief in the truth,” illumined by the following clause(“To this he called you through our gospel” [v. 14]), designates faith di-rected to the great facts of Christ’s death for sins and resurrection (cf.1 Thess 4:14, 5:10; 1 Cor 15:1–5). But side by side with faith toward Christis the interior work of the Holy Spirit. Whether the ambiguous “sanctifi-cation of the spirit” (aJgiasmåÅ pneuvmatoÍ) is a reference to the Holy Spirit asthe subject who sanctifies, as is probable, or (conceivably) to the humanspirit as the object sanctified and whether, moreover, “sanctification” isviewed as taking place in a definitive moment (say, at baptism; cf. 1 Cor6:11)39 or in the course of a progressive transformation, according to anyand every possible set of exegetical choices an internal change in the be-liever is denoted, or at least implied. Seeing that a single, instrumental ejngoverns “sanctification of the spirit” and “belief in the truth,” this internalchange cannot be dissociated, even if it can be distinguished, from the ex-trinsic or imputative aspect of believers’ corporate union with Christ assavior. When Paul, then, passes on without a pause (aßra ou®n) to an imper-ative, “Stand firm and hold to the traditions” (v. 15), and concludes witha prayer that God might establish their hearts “in every good work andword” (v. 17), he is not shifting from soteriology to ethics so as to exhortthe readers to act well because they have been saved but is including theethical within the soteric as the outworking of the Spirit-driven transfor-mation, by means of which they are are to complete their journey into theglory appointed by God for them.40

Preliminary Summary

To sum up this section: A disjunction between faith and works character-izes Christian initiation, when the “ungodly” have no truly good works inthe sight of the holy God and can approach only through a faith that layshold of Christ and what he has done for them (cf. Rom 4:5). Nevertheless,as soon as what was unregenerate has become the new creation imbuedwith the Spirit, a dynamic conjunction of faith and works becomes opera-tive to carry them forward on the Christian pilgrimage. Faith remains thefundamental mode by which we appropriate all that Christ is to us, butworks, the fruit of the Spirit of Christ, accompany faith all the way. The

39. Holy Spirit: Milligan, Thessalonians, 107; Frame, Thessalonians, 281–82; Neil, Thessalo-nians, 182; Morris, Thessalonians, 238; Best, Thessalonians, 314–15; Bruce, Thessalonians, 190–91;I. Howard Marshall, Thessalonians, 207; Maarten J. J. Menken, 2 Thessalonians (New TestamentReadings; London: Routledge, 1994), 120–21; Malherbe, Thessalonians, 437. Human spirit: JamesMoffatt, “The First and Second Epistles to the Thessalonians,” in The Expositor’s Greek Testament(ed. W. Robertson Nicoll; 5 vols.; London: Hodder & Stoughton, 1897–1910), 4:50; G. G. Findlay,Thessalonians (Greek Text), 189–90. Sanctification in a definitive moment: John Murray, “DefinitiveSanctification,” CTJ 2 (1967): 5–21.

40. Wanamaker, Thessalonians, 265.


imputed righteousness of the Last Adam is the corporate quality, of whichbelievers’ concrete deeds, empowered by the indwelling Christ, becomeparticular instances. Paul, assured his Thessalonian readers have a grip onChrist by faith, praises them for their works and enjoins that they increaseand abound in the latter to insure their progress toward the terminal stateof salvation.

Approval at the Judgment, or Final Justification

After pursuing faith, hope, and love throughout their Christian walk, be-lievers will finally stand before God in Christ to receive a verdict of“blameless” and appropriate praise. This event will cap their justification.

Apostolic Labor with a View to Final Approval(1 Thessalonians 2:4, 6, 19–20)

A subdomain of Paul’s own Christian walk is his service as an apostle ofChrist. When Paul protests that on his visit to Thessalonica he and hiscompanions did not “seek glory (zhtouÅnteÍ . . . dovxan) from men, whetherfrom you or from others” (1 Thess 2:6), he implies they were seeking gloryrather from God.41 Elsewhere, Paul can speak of “seeking” (glory) wherefinal justification is at stake or otherwise associate glory with justifica-tion.42 “Glory” receives semantic coloring from the preceding context,where Paul has stated that he speaks “not to please men, but to please(ajrevskonteÍ) God who tests (dokimavzonti) our hearts” (v. 4). He wants toconduct his ministry in such a way that he will cut a fine profile beforeGod and men when at last the findings of the ongoing divine assessmentof his life are announced.

What is implicit at 1 Thess 2:6 becomes explicit in vv. 19–20: “For whatis our hope or joy or crown of boasting (stevfanoÍ kauchvsewÍ) before ourLord Jesus at his coming? Is it not you? For you are our glory (dovxa) andjoy.” The phrase “before (eßmprosqen) our Lord Jesus at his coming” indi-cates the scenario of the coming judgment.43 To the extent that Paul faith-fully carries out his apostolic commission, he will be able to point on thatday to those whose conversions resulted from his labors. That there will beconverts of this sort including some Thessalonians will constitute his“boast” and “glory.” This boast before the Lord will not contradict Paul’s

41. G. G. Findlay, Thessalonians (Greek Text), 40; B. Rigaux, Saint Paul Les Épitres aux Thes-saloniciens (EBib; Paris: Gabalda / Gembloux: Duculot, 1956), 415; I. Howard Marshall, Thes-salonians, 67; Traugott Holtz, Der Erste Brief an die Thessalonicher (EKKNT 13; Zürich: Benziger/ Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener Verlag, 1986), 77 n. 305; Malherbe, Thessalonians, 143.

42. “To those who by patience in well-doing seek for (zhtouÅsin) glory (dovxan) and honorand immortality, he will give eternal life. . . . The doers of the law will be justified (dikaiwqhv-sontai)” (Rom 2:7, 13); “seeking (zhtouÅnteÍ) to be justified (dikaiwqhÅÅnai)” (Gal 2:17). Romans 5:1–2, 8:30; 1 Tim 3:16. To fall short of God’s glory and to be justified are opposed at Rom 3:22–23.

43. Traugott Holtz stands out from all other commentators in denying a reference to thelast judgment both here and in 1 Thess 3:13 (Holtz, 1. Thessalonicher, 119, 145 n. 734).


prohibitions of boasting elsewhere, because the ground for it will be whatGod’s power has done in and through his apostle,44 not what Saul has doneover against God. Therefore, it will be a good and proper boast “in theLord.”45 Even as works of the law have no value in God’s sight, but worksof faith do, so the harvest of Paul’s evangelistic efforts will be a firmground for boasting on judgment day.46

“Blamelessness” before God at the Judgment (1 Thessalonians 3:12–13, 5:23–24)

Twice in 1 Thessalonians, Paul looks for his readers to be found “blame-less” (aßmemptoi, ajmevmptwÍ) in the end (1 Thess 3:12–13, 5:23–24).47 The firstpassage reads as follows: “May the Lord make you increase and abound inlove to one another and to all men, as we do to you, so that he may estab-lish your hearts unblamable (ajmevmptouÍ [constructio ad sensum]) in holinessbefore our God and Father, at the coming of our Lord Jesus with all hissaints” (1 Thess 3:12–13). Mention of the coming (parousÇa) of the Lord de-mands an eschatological setting. Knowing they will be summoned “before(eßmprosqen) our God and Father” for judgment,48 Paul’s desire is that theybe found free of blame. This concern parallels the rhetorical questions atRom 8:33–34: “Who shall bring any charge against (ejgkalevsei) God’s elect?It is God who justifies (oJ dikaiΩn); who is to condemn (oJ katakrÇnwn)?” Butwhereas Romans goes on to highlight Christ Jesus’s death, resurrection,and heavenly intercession for believers as their ground of confidence, in

44. Prohibitions of boasting: Rom 3:27, 4:2; 1 Cor 1:29, 3:21, 4:7; Gal 6:14; Eph 2:9. God’spower: 1 Cor 15:10; Col 1:29.

45. For positive boasting, see Rom 5:2, 3, 11; 15:17; 1 Cor 1:31; 13:3; 2 Cor 1:12; 10:17; Gal6:4; Phil 3:3. On the “resurrection” of boasting in Christ, see Gathercole, Boasting, 252–60.

46. “When Paul looks ahead to the future and asks, as well one might, what God will sayon the last day, he holds up as his joy and crown, not the merits and death of Jesus, but thechurches he has planted who remain faithful to the gospel.” Wright, Paul, 148. Cf. 1 Cor 9:15–18; 2 Cor 1:14; Phil 2:16 [Greek], 4:1. See also 1 Corinthians 4:4–5, where Paul uses dikaiouÅsqaiin an exactly parallel judicial context. “I am not aware of anything against myself, but I am notthereby justified (dedikaÇwmai [rsv: ‘acquitted’]). It is the Lord who judges (oJ ajnakrÇnwn) me.Therefore do not pronounce judgment (krÇnete) before the time, before the Lord comes, whowill bring to light the things now hidden in darkness and will disclose the purposes of theheart. Then each man will receive his commendation (eßpainoÍ) from God.” Compare also 2 Tim4:7–8, “I have fought the fight, I have finished the race, I have kept the faith. Henceforth thereis laid up for me the crown of righteousness (dikaiosuvnhÍ), which the Lord, the righteous judge(oJ dÇkaioÍ krithvÍ), will award to me on that day.” Exegesis and discussion of these passages ap-pears in my Way of Salvation, 163–65, 171–72, 196–97, 200.

47. The adjective aßmemptoi points to a “verdict” in “the eschatological judgment of Godon His day.” W. Grundmann, “mevmfomai,” TDNT 4:573. The legal heritage of the word is seenin a marriage-contract of the second century a.d. that reads aujthÅÍ de; thÅÍ Q. aßmempton kaµajkathgovrhton parecomevnhÍ (cited by Milligan, Thessalonians, 44; from Corpus Papyrorum Raineriarchiducis, I. Griechische Texte [ed. C. Wessely; Vienna, 1895]).

48. That the passage concerns the last judgment is acknowledged by most commentators.See, for example, Rigaux, Aux Thessaloniciens, 490; Bruce, Thessalonians, 72; I. Howard Mar-shall, Thessalonians, 101–2; Wanamaker, Thessalonians, 144–45; Malherbe, Thessalonians, 213.


1 Thessalonians Paul prays that God will “establish” (sthrÇxai) the readers’hearts before him by making them now to increase and abound in love.Romans 8:33 and 1 Thess 3:13 are complementary. The one names the re-demptive work of Christ, the other his production in them of virtue, as thedual realities—or, more precisely, as the two aspects, Christic and pneu-matic, of the single quality of righteousness—on the basis of which Godwill predicate their final blamelessness in his sight. Apart from the righ-teousness of Christ imputed, our imperfect love and good deeds wouldfall short of the standard for God’s commendation; apart from the work ofthe Spirit in us as individuals, the achievement of the Last Adam wouldremain a universal begging for instantiation in the “many” severally.

The other passage on blamelessness is also a benediction: “May theGod of peace himself sanctify you wholly; and may your spirit and souland body be kept sound and blameless (ajmevmptwÍ) at the coming of ourLord Jesus Christ. He who calls you is faithful, and he will do it” (1 Thess5:23–24). Here again, the prepositional phrase “at the coming (parousÇa) ofour Lord Jesus Christ” points to the last day, and Paul expresses his wishfor his converts to be without blame. Their blamelessness will consist atleast in this, that God will have sanctified them completely (oJlotele∂Í),with a sanctification that reaches every aspect of their being—spirit, soul,and body. God’s sanctifying work is already under way; the prayer is forsteady progress and safekeeping till they are complete (oJlovklhroÍ) andeven free of blame (ajmevmptwÍ).49 The aorist tense of the optatives aÒgiavsaiand thrhqeÇh views the entire process of their sanctification and safekeep-ing from beginning to end as one whole.50 God, not the Thessaloniansthemselves, is the grammatical subject who perfects them; this is under-scored by Paul’s solemn affirmation of the divine faithfulness and agency(v. 24).51 Just as clearly as in 1 Thess 3:12–13, the transformative work ofGod in their persons is not only consequential to their being initially de-clared without blame for Christ’s sake, but is, together with imputed righ-teousness, integral to the total righteousness denominated in God’s finaldeclaration.52

49. The rsv is probably right to translate the Greek adverb as an adjective equivalent. Itcertainly describes the Thessalonians’ spirit, soul, and body, not God’s act of keeping them. ForPaul to write kaµ aßmempton at this point in the sentence, following the string of previous co-ordinations with kaÇ, would be awkward, so the author substitutes the adverb. Frame thinksthe adverb “lays stress not so much on the manner of God’s activity as on the result; hence theadverb may be interpreted as an adjective” (Frame, Thessalonians, 214).

50. Bruce, Thessalonians, 129–30.51. P.-E. Langevin, “L’Intervention de Dieu Selon 1 Thes 5,23–24,” in The Thessalonian Cor-

respondence (ed. Raymond Collins; BETL 87; Leuven: Leuven University Press and Peeters,1990), 236–56.

52. In this respect, 1 Thess 5:23–24 is comparable to Rom 8:33–34. The latter, set in a con-text looking to the end of all things (Rom 8:18, 21, 23–25, 30, 32), resumes the theme of the lastjudgment broached in Rom 2:6–16 and affirms the incontrovertibility of God’s intent to justifythose he has chosen (Rom 8:29–30). But this final occurrence of dikaiouÅn in Romans, following


A Positive Final Verdict Based on Fruits of the Heart Produced by God

The remaining passage to be dealt with is 2 Thess 1:11–12, “To this end wealways pray for you, that our God may deem you worthy (ajxi∫s¬) of hiscall, and may fulfill every good resolve and work of faith by his power, sothat the name of our Lord Jesus may be glorified in you, and you in him,according to the grace of our God and the Lord Jesus Christ.” This sentenceconcludes the prayer-report of the second Thessalonian epistle (1:3–12)and must be interpreted in that context. “To this end” (e√Í o§) refers to thepreviously mentioned glorification of Christ in his saints at the parousia,when he will grant them rest, though he will deal out everlasting punish-ment to the disobedient, who do not know God (vv. 6–10).53 The scene is anapocalyptic one. At its center is “the righteous judgment of God” (hJ dikaÇakrÇsiÍ touÅ qeouÅ, v. 5). God’s adjudication will bring justice by vindicatingthose who suffer for his name now and taking vengeance on their oppres-sors. The dikaÇa krÇsiÍ of v. 5 will entail a reversal of fortunes (introducedby dÇkaion in vv. 6–7a). Paul’s prayer for the Thessalonians is that they,whose present persecutions and afflictions (or whose steadfastness of loveand growing faith therein, v. 4) are a token (eßndeigma, v. 5) of God’s intentto exalt them in due course,54 will be among those vindicated and glorifiedat the judgment.

The clause bearing directly on justification is “that our God may deemyou worthy of his call” (v. 11). “Deem worthy” (ajxiouÅn) is, in this judicialcontext, a quite exact linguistic equivalent to “justify” (dikaiouÅn). Greekfactitive verbs in -ovw often have the effective force “make to be,”55 but thosederived from adjectives of moral quality connote “treat as,” “consider tobe.” In this latter group belongs “deem worthy.”56 God’s call (klhÅsiÍ)

53. Virtually all commentators; note esp. Milligan, Thessalonians, 93; Morris, Thessalonians,209; I. Howard Marshall, Thessalonians, 181; Menken, 2 Thessalonians, 92.

54. Assuming Christian experience conforms to the Christological pattern of passion fol-lowed by glorification: Phil 3:10–11; cf. Matt 16:24–8, 19:30, 20:16; Acts 14:22; Rom 5:3–5; 2 Tim2:11–12a; 1 Pet 5:9–10.

55. So the rsv here: “make you worthy.” A few commentators agree with the rsv. SeeWerner Foerster, “◊AxioÍ,” TDNT 1:380 (sense 1 pertains to 2 Thess 1:11); Best, Thessalonians, adloc.; Malherbe, Thessalonians, 410.

56. James Hope Moulton and Wilbert Francis Howard, A Grammar of New Testament Greek,vol. 2: Accidence and Word-Formation (Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1928–76), 397. So also Foerster,TDNT 1:380 (sense 2 pertains to Luke 7:7; 1 Tim 5:17; Heb 3:3, 10:29); P. Trummer, “aßxioÍ,” inEDNT 1:113; most commentators (e.g., Ellicott, Findlay, Milligan, Frame, Moore, Bruce, Mar-shall, Morris, Wanamaker).

the rhetorical question “What then shall we say to these things (tauÅta)?” in v. 31, subsumesall that Paul has taught about the vivifying, sanctifying, and resurrecting work of the risenChrist through the Spirit in Rom 5:19–8:28, in addition to the teaching about initial justifica-tion in 3:21–5:18. As justification is initially predicated on the finished work of Christ, so finaljustification is predicated on Christ’s righteousness as actualized in believers through the thecompleted work of the Spirit. Rainbow, Way of Salvation, 175–87, 233–39.


summons people to salvation and glory (2 Thess 2:13–14) in his eschato-logical kingdom (cf. 1 Thess 2:12). Hence “that our God may deem youworthy (ajxi∫s¬) of his call” (2 Thess 1:11) repeats what was stated in anequivalent clause a few verses earlier, “that you may be deemed worthy(kataxiwqhÅnai) of the kingdom of God” (v. 5),57 itself the immediate upshotof God’s “righteous judgment” (dikaÇa krÇsiÍ) on that future day. To bedeemed worthy of salvation, glory, and entry into God’s kingdom, overagainst “the punishment of eternal destruction and exclusion from thepresence of the Lord and from the glory of his might” (2 Thess 1:9), in a fo-rensic context highlighting God’s righteous judgment, is indistinguishablein substance from being justified.58

So how are the Thessalonians to receive a positive decision before thedivine tribunal? To that end, Paul prays specifically that God “may fulfillevery good resolve (eujdokÇan ajgaqwsuvnhÍ) and work of faith (eßrgon pÇstewÍ)by his power” (2 Thess 1:11).59 Clearly, “work of faith” is a human act(cf. 1 Thess 1:3); therefore, “resolve of goodness” is also a human act.60 Bothgenitive nouns are subjective, as was the case with “work of faith” and re-lated phrases in 1 Thess 1:3. Goodness resolves how to act, and faith carriesout the work.61 Therefore, it will be on the basis of their having made goodresolutions and carried them out by faith during their present walk thatthe Thessalonians will be deemed worthy by God on that day.62 This is tan-tamount to saying God will ascribe to them the worth of their deeds; theirjustification will have their works in view.

But redeemed human agency operates within the field of divinepower (ejn dunavmei) that alone can fulfill (plhr∫sei, with God as subject) ev-ery good resolve and work of faith. Grace accomplishes all, for God’s pur-pose is that Christ and the readers may be mutually glorified in each other,according to his grace (kata; th;n cavrin).

57. The verb kataxiovw in v. 5 “is a judicial term, like the Pauline dikaiovw, specifying a kindof krÇsiÍ” (G. G. Findlay, Thessalonians [Greek Text], 144; Milligan, Thessalonians, 88). BDAGlikewise gives the sense “to consider someone worthy to receive some privilege, benefit, or rec-ognition, consider worthy,” pass. “be considered worthy.”

58. According to Frame, Paul’s prayer in 2 Thess 1:11 is “that our God may deem youworthy (that is, acquit you at the judgment)” (Frame, Thessalonians, 238).

59. Frame continues: Paul prays for God to bring to completion in the readers every re-solve after goodness and every work inspired by faith “that the acquittal may follow” (Frame,Thessalonians, 238).

60. As in Rom 10:1, Phil 1:15. On this linguistic parallelism, there is virtually universalagreement among recent commentators. Rigaux, Aux Thessaloniciens, 639–40. Older commen-tators often construed eujdokÇa as a reference to God’s good pleasure, on the analogy of its pre-dominant use in the LXX, together with Eph 1:5; Phil 2:13. Ellicott cites Oecumenius,Theophylact, and Bengel for the divine reference. Dobschütz is the only 20th-century com-mentator I have found who agrees: Dobschütz, Thessalonicher, 256.

61. So Menken, 2 Thessalonians; Malherbe, Thessalonians, 144; Wanamaker, Thessalonians.62. “Only those who respond in a worthy manner will eventually be admitted.” I. H.

Marshall, “Election and Calling,” 272.


2 Thessalonians 1:11–12, at the level of ideas, presents striking simi-larities to Phil 2:12 (tab. 2, p. 270). Taken as a whole in its eschatological, ju-dicial context, 2 Thess 1:11–12 reaffirms what Paul teaches about the futureaspect of justification at Gal 5:4–6. The marrow of Paul’s corrective to Ju-daizing tendencies in the Galatian churches focuses on righteousness as astatus conferred freely by God on those who are “in Christ Jesus” (Gal 3:26,28) by faith, without reference to works of the law (Gal 2:16). But if “not byworks of the law” excludes justification by the moral striving of pre-eschatological, sin-bound humanity, in no way does it exclude from thesphere of grace the new, indwelling presence of the Risen One in those whohave been crucified with him (Gal 2:20) or the Spirit who does miracles(Gal 3:2–3, 5) and produces the fruit of virtues (Gal 5:22) or regeneration(Gal 5:25) as what enables people to perform righteousness (Gal 3:21). In-sofar as God has yet to fulfill his promise, we are still “seeking to be justi-fied” (zhtouÅnteÍ dikaiwqhÅnai) and are in grave danger of falling short if werely on an outmoded covenant (Gal 2:17–19, 24) rather than on God’s in-tervention in the fulness of time (Gal 4:1–7). Therefore, turning to face theend, any who “would be justified by the law” (ejn novmå dikaiouÅsqe, conativepresent) have fallen from grace (Gal 5:4). It is by the Spirit (pneuvmati)through faith that we wait (ajpekdecovmeqa) for the hope (ejlpÇda) of righ-teousness (Gal 5:5). And what sways (√scuvei) is “faith working throughlove” (pÇstiÍ di∆ ajgavphÍ ejnergoumevnh, Gal 5:6). Here, as in the Thessalonianletters, faith and ethical conduct, driven by the Spirit, are totally inter-twined in realizing believers’ hope of a happy verdict in the last day. ButGalatians uses the explicit vocabulary of justification, in that it makes faithworking through love the formula for securing hoped-for righteousness(dikaiosuvnh, v. 5), for getting justified (dikaiouÅsqai, v. 4).63

Summary

Taken together, the passages considered in this section highlight Paul’s be-lief that, for people to be declared righteous at the last judgment—that is,to “please” God (1 Thess 2:4), receive “glory” from him (1 Thess 2:6), havea “wreath of boasting” before him (1 Thess 2:19), be found “blameless” inhis presence (1 Thess 3:13, 5:23), enter into God’s “rest,” glorify Christ, andbe “deemed worthy of the calling” to God’s kingdom (2 Thess 1:7, 10, 11–12)—God must be able to point to a basis in their conduct for a positive ver-dict, whether it be their manner of service (1 Thess 2:4, 6) or the gleaningsof their ministry (1 Thess 2:19–20) or a steady increase in love for one an-other and for others (1 Thess 3:12) or the completed course of sanctification(1 Thess 5:23) or the completion by God’s power of every good resolve andwork of faith (2 Thess 1:11). If indeed saving faith shows its vitality by

63. On Gal 5:4–6 and its bearing on future justification, see my Way of Salvation, 159–61,183–84, 194–95.


working (1 Thess 1:3, 2 Thess 1:11), then it stands to reason that God shouldmake ultimate salvation contingent not only on faith in Christ as its pri-mary condition but also on the praxis that springs from union with himand that the divine judge should advert to deeds as the index of this.64

Conclusion and Theological Reflection

Paul’s epistles to the Thessalonians underscore a future aspect of justifica-tion that has often been underemphasized or neglected. My method hasbeen to synthesize what Paul teaches about the final judgment in 1–2 Thes-salonians with select passages about future justification in the major epis-tles, thus bringing into clear view its culminative moment. Paul, withoutreiterating what he taught the Thessalonians orally (which very probablyincluded the way to be justified now by faith alone), encourages them de-spite their current adverse circumstances to persevere in faith and to in-crease in love so that, when Christ returns, they can be commended andwelcomed into the eternal kingdom of God. Though the quasi-technicalvocabulary and motifs of Paul’s doctrine of justification are wanting, hisconstant concern for a positive decision from God when God judges the

64. Paul speaks of a judgment “according to deeds” (Rom 2:6–10, 1 Cor 3:8, 2 Tim 4:14; cf.Rom 14:10–12; 1 Cor 4:1–5; 2 Cor 5:10, 11:15; Eph 6:8). How to reconcile this fact with hisdoctrine of justification by faith is an unresolved conundrum of Pauline theology. From theimmense literature on this topic, note especially Ridderbos, Paul, 178–81; Lieselotte Mattern,Das Verständnis des Gerichts bei Paulus (ATANT 47; Zürich: Zwingli, 1966); Karl Paul Donfried,“Justification and Last Judgment in Paul,” ZAW 67 (1976): 90–110; “Justification and Last Judg-ment in Paul: Twenty-Five Years Later,” in Paul, Thessalonica, and Early Christianity (GrandRapids: Eerdmans, 2002), 279–92; Ernst Synofzik, Die Gerichts- und Vergeltungsaussagungen beiPaulus: Eine traditionsgeschichtliche Untersuchung (GTA; Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht,1977); Nigel M. Watson, “Justified by Faith; Judged by Works: An Antinomy?” NTS 29 (1983):209–21; David W. Kuck, Judgment and Community Conflict: Paul’s Use of Apocalyptic JudgmentLanguage in 1 Corinthians 3:5–4:5 (NovTSup 66; Leiden: Brill, 1992); Kent L. Yinger, Paul, Juda-ism, and Judgment according to Deeds (SNTSMS 105; Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,1999); Konradt, Gericht und Gemeinde; Christian Stettler, “Paul, the Law, and Judgment byWorks,” EvQ 76 (2004): 195–215; Rainbow, Way of Salvation, 16–19, 193–201; Chris Vanlanding-ham, Judgment and Justification in Early Judaism and the Apostle Paul (Peabody, MA: Hendrick-son, 2006); Bird, Saving Righteousness, 155–78.

Table 2.

2 Thessalonians 1:11–12 Philippians 2:12“To this end we always pray for you, “Work out your own salvation. . . ,that our God . . . may fulfill . . . by his power for God is at work in you,every good resolve both to willand work of faith.” and to work for his good pleasure.”a

a. Menken speaks of a “double causality,” divine and human (2 Thessalonians, 93). I wouldadd that the divine element is primary and the human secondary and dependent.


world is very much in evidence, and there are resonances between theweightier epistles and the language in which he clothes that thought here.These echoes make it hard to deny that the two Thessalonian letters con-tain healthy doctrine about how to receive God’s final declaration that oneis righteous.

As a result, we can see all the more clearly that justification, like everyother aspect of Paul’s eschatology, has both an “already” and a “not yet.”65

Works of the law play no part in God’s initial acceptance of a person, butgood works wrought in the Spirit express and complete faith and will bethe criterion for the final scrutiny.66 Christ inaugurated our state of righ-teousness by what he did “for us,” but that state will not be consummatedwithout God formally recognizing what Christ pneumatically “in us” andwe “with him” have done. The primary and essential ground on whichGod justifies people is what Christ did: Christ’s is the perfection that Godascribes to those in solidarity with him by faith, and on that ground theyknow their communal righteousness to be sufficient to meet the require-ment of God’s law. But righteousness must also exist concretely in indi-viduals. When God’s impartial fire will have burned away the dross oftheir deeds (1 Cor 3:12–13), he will find a residue of worth produced by theSpirit that he can also accept in its own right (1 Cor 3:14, 4:4–5).

If the apocalyptic dimension of Paul’s view of of justification be ad-mitted, we cease hearing the apostle of grace as a lone voice crying sola fideamong authors of the NT, or as a “canon with the canon.” The MattheanJesus speaks of a future moment when people will be justified by theirwords as the fruit of their hearts (Matt 12:33–37), when their eternal des-tinies will be decided with reference to their service to the least of hisbrethren (Matt 25:31–46).67 James teaches pointedly, with an eye to the

65. This is perhaps nowhere plainer than in Rom 5:1, 9–10, where justification is both ac-complished (dikaiwqevnteÍ, vv. 1, 9; cf. katallagevnteÍ, v. 10) and awaited (swqhsovmeqa . . . ajpo;thÅÍ ojrghÅÍ, v. 9, where the wrath refers to God’s coming judicial wrath broached in 2:5, 8). Thesame duality is implied at Rom 5:18–19 (where, however, I take dÇkaioi katastaqhvsontai in v. 19to denote the future terminus of the process of sanctification rather than to be an exact synonymof the forensic dikaÇwsiÍ zwhÅÍ of v. 18; discussion is in my Way of Salvation, 129–30, 184–85).

66. E. P. Sanders, comparing Palestinian Judaism and Pauline Christianity, found that inboth “patterns of religion” people “get in” by elective grace and “stay in” by obedience (Pauland Palestinian Judaism: A Comparison of Patterns of Religion, 511–18; Paul, the Law, and the JewishPeople, 93–122). An important qualification (neither emphasized nor denied by Sanders fromhis religio-historical angle) would be that, in Paul’s view, the obedience by which believers aremaintained in the covenant is itself an effect of divine operation through the redeemed humanwill, and not of human nature independent of God’s power. N. T. Wright observes that for Paul“present justification” is correlated with faith alone and “future justification” with “the total-ity of the life lived” (“Law in Romans 2,” 144) and puts it all together in this way: “The Spiritis the path by which Paul traces the route from justification by faith in the present to justifi-cation, by the complete life lived, in the future” (Paul, 148).

67. Alan P. Stanley, Did Jesus Teach Salvation by Works? The Role of Works in Salvation in theSynoptic Gospels (The Evangelical Theological Society Monograph Series 4; Eugene, Oregon:Pickwick, 2006), 294–314.


coming judgment (Jas 2:12–13), that faith and works operate together, sothat one is justified by works and not by faith alone (Jas 2:14–26).68 Ac-cording to John, our boldness in the day of judgment consists in the per-fecting of our love as we imitate Christ in this world (1 John 4:17).

In view of the whole of Paul’s teaching, not to mention other contrib-utors to the NT, does the resolutely extrinsic theory championed by theProtestant reformers incorporate all the data of Scripture bearing on thedoctrine of justification? The 16th-century reformers, deeply persuadedthey were following Paul, barred believers’ works from the rubric of so-teriology and directed trust to the unique justice of Christ. Not only for asinner at faith’s first dawning, who has no personal deeds acceptable inGod’s sight, but also looking to the judgment, when the fruit of the Spiritthat will have accumulated in the subject’s actual life-record will be founddefective and tinged with unhealed corruption, they insisted Christ’srighteousness avails for justification apart from any and all human works.The role of the fruit of the Spirit in finalizing justification they minimizedor stoutly denied in their polemics with Rome.69

In the Luthero-Reformed dogmatic tradition we learn that the “effi-cient cause” of justification is God’s grace (indicated by the dative cavriti atEph 2:8, “by grace you have been saved”); the “instrument” by which weappropriate it is faith awakened by the Spirit and directed to Christ (dia;

68. W. Nicol, “Faith and Works in the Letter of James,” Neot 9 (1975): 7–24; Rainbow, Wayof Salvation, 213–23.

69. The Reformers maintained there will be a judgment according to works but deniedthat this future judgment has any bearing on believers’ standing as justified or on believers’ fi-nal entry into glory, since salvation in their view depends wholly on what Christ did “for us”and in no way on what the Spirit does “in us.” See my Way of Salvation, 28–39. Typical in thisregard are Calvin’s comments on two passages in the Thessalonian letters. On 1 Thess 3:13 (“sothat he may establish your hearts unblameable in holiness before our God and Father”), Calvinwrites as follows. “But it is asked, whether by means of holiness we stand at God’s judgment-seat, for if so, to what purpose is remission of sins? Yet Paul’s words seem to imply this—thattheir consciences might be irreproveable in holiness. I answer, that Paul does not exclude remis-sion of sins, through which it comes that our holiness, which is otherwise mixed up with manypollutions, bears God’s eye, for faith, by which God is pacified towards us, so as to pardon ourfaults, precedes everything else, as the foundation comes before the building” (John Calvin,Commentaries on the Epistles of Paul the Apostle to the Philippians, Colossians, and Thessalonians [ed.and trans. John Pringle; Edinburgh: Calvin Translation Society, 1851], 271). In other words,Paul’s statement cannot be left to stand so starkly but must be qualified by introducing and ac-centing a truth extraneous to the context, that God accepts us fundamentally for faith’s sake.Calvin never returns to give Paul’s inescapable statement, which Calvin is commendably un-willing to deny outright, its due place in a properly nuanced view of justification. Commentingon 2 Thess 1:11 (“that our God may count you worthy of his call, and may fulfill every goodresolve and work of faith by his power”), Calvin interprets the eujdokÇa ajgaqosuvnhÍ to be God’smonergistic good pleasure that is the cause of our salvation, and the eßrgon pÇstewÍ to be God’sworking that produces faith in those he has chosen (Thessalonians, 320). Rigaux comments: “Cesens reste un peu forcé” (“This sense remains somewhat forced”; Aux Thessaloniciens, 639).Thus, where the future of justification is concerned, Calvin allows solifidianism, if not to ne-gate, nevertheless to eclipse the sacred text.


pÇstewÍ, “through faith”); and its sole and exclusive “ground” is Christ’s fin-ished work, opposed to our own works (oujk ejx eßrgwn, “not because ofworks”). That judgment will proceed according to works (kata; eßrga) makesour good deeds that follow (Eph 2:10) corroborating “evidence” ratherthan a “ground” of righteousness. Setting out from the reformers’ inter-pretation of faith and works, popular Protestantism has sometimes trans-muted Paul’s polarity between “works of the law” and “faith” into anabsolute antithesis between human activity and passivity, such thatworks, simply because they are human, are supposed to have no sotericvalue in God’s sight, while inert receptivity to the divine monergy is thelone instrument of salvation.70 That we are justified “for Christ’s sake”(propter Christum) “by faith alone” (sola fide) has become a tenet of manywho value the Reformation heritage.

But if God’s final pronouncement will take deeds into account, whatholds us back from saying works will indeed form part of the “ground” forthat predicate? Precisely because justification is a forensic act by whichGod applies to human subjects the predicate “righteous,” how else are weto conceive of its “ground” if it is not the reality of an existing righteous-ness to which God’s judgment corresponds, whether located in Christ or inthem?71 If God ratifies what his Spirit does in them, how does that under-mine the definitive accomplishment of his Son on their behalf—any morethan the deity of the Spirit undermines the deity of the Son, or the deity

70. The Protestant reformers taught with vehemence against libertines and antinomiansof their day that works necessarily follow saving faith. But they impaired the unity of faithand works by carefully circumscribing the sphere of each. For them, faith is the way to justi-fication in the eyes of God, works demonstrate our righteousness in the eyes of men. Faithplays an instrumental role in soteriology, works belong to the realm of ethics. There are twokingdoms, that of heaven and that of the world; they intersect but in themselves are quite dis-tinct. Faith and justification pertain to our standing in the kingdom of heaven; God commandsus to do works for the good order of his world and society. Documentation is in my Way of Sal-vation, 35–36. So if the reformers held that “faith alone is what justifies, but the faith that jus-tifies is not alone” (in that it is mingled with works flowing from a good Christian heart), theywere equally emphatic that faith is indeed strictly alone where justification is concerned. Thecelebrated quotation is taken from Calvin, Acta Tridentum cum Antidoto, Opera VII, 488 = “Actsof the Council of Trent with the Antidote,” in Tracts and Treatises in Defense of the Reformed Faith(ed. Thomas F. Torrance; trans. Henry Beveridge; 3 vols.; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1958),3:152, “Antidote” to the Sixth Session of Trent, Canon XI. Calvin went so far as to say that goodworks are the necessary path we must tread on the way to final salvation (Institutes 3.14.21;16.1; 17.5; 18.1), but, like Luther, he refused to admit them into the formula for justification(3.11.14; 13.5; 17.1).

71. The norm of God’s judgment, that is, the standard to which he will hold human be-havior, will be his own character and will as expressed in the law, whether written or unwrit-ten (Rom 2:12–16), and embodied in the Incarnate One. Judgment “according to deeds” (Matt16:27; Rom 2:6; 2 Tim 4:14; Rev 2:23, 20:12–13) means that deeds will be the data with whichGod’s verdict will accord, the empirical basis for his impartial pronouncement. In this latterusage, katav specifies the ground, not the norm, of judgment. In giving the sense “the norm ac-cording to which a judgment is rendered” for the construction katav + accusative, BDAG con-fuses these two logically distinct ideas (s.v. katav 5ab, p. 512).


of either threatens the indivisibility of the divine unity? If, in turn, part ofthe ground for future justification will be our deeds, does the imputationof Christ’s righteousness to faith alone comprise, in itself, a biblicallyadequate theory of justification?72

72. Lest any reader be inclined to react to my argument with the same charge Protestantthought has traditionally levelled against the Augustinian-Tridentine doctrine of justification,namely that it confounds justification with sanctification, may I reiterate here at the end, em-phatically, categorically, and unmistakably, that for Paul justification is no process. Justificationis God’s forensic declaration that a person is righteous. This punctiliar saving word comes tothe believer at two moments: on the one hand it precedes and on the other it follows the pro-cess of sanctification. The righteousness God ascribes to faith alone (sola fide) at Christian ini-tiation is based solely on Christ’s finished work (propter Christum) and so is denominatedexternally from the standpoint of the believer (iustitia aliena). The righteousness God ascribesto deeds at the last judgment will be denominated internally as well and will take into accountthe fruit of the Spirit as instantiating in the particular life the righteousness an individualshares through faith-union with Christ, our corporate head. I repeat: justification, even if con-summated at the last Assize as the data of Paul’s epistles drive me to propose, is distinct fromthe process of sanctification, though inseparable from it, and is, in itself considered abstractly,a verdict and not a process.

Date post:	18-Feb-2022
Category:	Documents
Upload:	others
View:	4 times
Download:	0 times

OIDA International Conference on Sustainable Development 2011

Documents