Paul’s suffering and boldness in 1 Thess 2

In the epistle for Trinity 21 in Year A, 1 Thess 2.1–8, Paul and his co-authors explain their approach to ministry, but do so by appeal to what the Thessalonians knew of them.

They distance themselves from itinerant philosophers, who speak out of personal gain, and instead talk of being entrusted with the gospel of God, which they feel compelled to share.

But the motivation is also shaped by remarkable language of affection, continuing the kinship metaphors that we found in chapter 1. Paul and his co-authors reach for unique language in the New Testament (hapax legomena) to express the depth of their feelings and their relationships.

Join James and Ian as they discuss all this. And underneath there are exegetical notes behind the discussion for your own use.

The Grove booklet on Faith in the Early Years can be found here.

And the article on Jesus having breasts in Revelation 1 can be found here.

(The Rowan Atkinson sketch mentioning purposelessness is here!)

1 Thessalonians 2.1–8: A Verse-by-Verse Commentary

Introduction: setting and approach

Chapter 1 ended with the report of how the Thessalonians “turned to God from idols” (1:9–10). Paul now goes back to the εἴσοδος (1:9) and describes its character. The passage is organised as a series of sharp antitheses (οὐ… ἀλλά, οὔτε… οὔτε), and much of the interpretation depends on why Paul writes this way.

• The apologetic reading. Paul is answering real accusations. Weima (BECNT) gives the strongest recent case: during Paul’s abrupt absence (2:17–3:10), hostile outsiders portrayed him as one more itinerant charlatan who took the converts’ money and left them to suffer.
• The paraenetic reading. Malherbe’s “‘Gentle as a Nurse'” (NovT 1970) and his AB commentary showed that the vocabulary closely matches Dio Chrysostom’s portrait of the true philosopher in Or. 32. On this view the antitheses are a conventional topos, not evidence of charges. Paul presents himself as a model for imitation (1:6; 2:14), and the self-portrait supports the ethical teaching of chs. 4–5.

Mirror-reading has the same dangers here as in Galatians, and 1 Thessalonians gives far fewer clear signs of a dispute. A reasonable middle position is that Paul uses a familiar topos because his readers knew the type of the wandering huckster. The persecution of the converts (1:6; 2:14; 3:3–4) gives plausible occasion for doubts about his motives, even without formal charges.

1. Αὐτοὶ γὰρ οἴδατε, ἀδελφοί, τὴν εἴσοδον ἡμῶν τὴν πρὸς ὑμᾶς ὅτι οὐ κενὴ γέγονεν

Αὐτοὶ γὰρ οἴδατε. Paul appeals to what the readers already know, a recurring feature of the letter (2:2, 5, 11; 3:3–4; 4:2; 5:2). The γάρ links back to 1:9: others report the visit, but the Thessalonians themselves witnessed it. The appeal places the readers as witnesses rather than judges, though on the apologetic reading it also asks them to set their own memories against what others are saying.

ἀδελφοί. This is the first of many family terms in the passage. Paul will go on to call himself infant, mother, father and orphan. For converts who may have lost their natural kin through conversion (2:14), the church becomes a new household.

οὐ κενὴ γέγονεν. Κενός can mean:

• that the visit was not fruitless in its results, linking to 1:5, 9 and to 3:5 (εἰς κενόν);
• that it was not empty in character, that is, without substance or integrity.

The verses that follow are about manner and motive, which favours the second sense. Paul may intend both: the visit was not hollow, and so it was not in vain. The perfect γέγονεν suggests that its effects continue.

2. ἀλλὰ προπαθόντες καὶ ὑβρισθέντες, καθὼς οἴδατε, ἐν Φιλίπποις ἐπαρρησιασάμεθα ἐν τῷ θεῷ ἡμῶν λαλῆσαι πρὸς ὑμᾶς τὸ εὐαγγέλιον τοῦ θεοῦ ἐν πολλῷ ἀγῶνι.

προπαθόντες καὶ ὑβρισθέντες… ἐν Φιλίπποις. This is one of the clearest points of contact between Paul’s letters and Acts (16:19–40: beating, imprisonment, humiliation of Roman citizens). Ὕβρις carries the sense of shameful, degrading treatment, not only physical suffering. The argument runs like this: a charlatan in search of profit would not move straight from public disgrace in one city to risk the same in the next.

ἐπαρρησιασάμεθα ἐν τῷ θεῷ ἡμῶν. Παρρησία, frank and bold speech, was a key virtue of the philosopher in the moral tradition Malherbe traced. Paul relocates its source: the boldness is ἐν τῷ θεῷ, given by God, not produced by rhetorical skill or personal temperament.

τὸ εὐαγγέλιον τοῦ θεοῦ. The phrase recurs in vv. 8 and 9. The gospel belongs to God. The messengers are its stewards, which prepares for the language of entrustment in v. 4.

ἐν πολλῷ ἀγῶνι. The phrase could mean:

• external opposition, which fits the immediate context and Acts 17:5–10;
• inner struggle or exertion, drawing on the athletic imagery of ἀγών.

Context favours opposition, though the athletic image of costly effort is probably still present.

Theological note: Suffering does not interrupt the mission; it is the setting in which divinely given boldness becomes visible. This anticipates the converts’ own experience (1:6; 3:3–4): what happened to the apostles is what happens to the church.

3. ἡ γὰρ παράκλησις ἡμῶν οὐκ ἐκ πλάνης οὐδὲ ἐξ ἀκαθαρσίας οὐδὲ ἐν δόλῳ,

ἡ παράκλησις ἡμῶν. The word means “appeal” or “exhortation.” It covers the whole of the preaching, both the summons to conversion and the instruction that followed.

The three negations probably move from source to motive to method:

• οὐκ ἐκ πλάνης. Not from error in content, or not from deception. Πλάνη can mean either, and in a passage concerned with integrity, deception is the more likely sense.
• οὐδὲ ἐξ ἀκαθαρσίας. This is debated. It may refer to sexual impurity: the word has that sense in 4:7, and charges of sexual exploitation were made against cultic itinerants. Or it may refer more generally to impure motives, especially greed, which would anticipate v. 5. Most commentators prefer the broader sense; the sexual sense remains possible.
• οὐδὲ ἐν δόλῳ. Not by trickery. Δόλος originally meant bait for fish, so the picture is of the trickster who lures his victims. This will matter again if νήπιοι is read in v. 7.

4. ἀλλὰ καθὼς δεδοκιμάσμεθα ὑπὸ τοῦ θεοῦ πιστευθῆναι τὸ εὐαγγέλιον, οὕτως λαλοῦμεν, οὐχ ὡς ἀνθρώποις ἀρέσκοντες ἀλλὰ θεῷ τῷ δοκιμάζοντι τὰς καρδίας ἡμῶν.

This is the positive centre of the passage.

δεδοκιμάσμεθα… πιστευθῆναι. Δοκιμάζω means “to test and approve,” as metals are assayed. The order matters: being tested comes before being entrusted. Paul’s authority depends on God’s prior scrutiny and approval, not on his own claims or public acclaim. The perfect tense describes a settled state of approval.

οὕτως λαλοῦμεν. The way they speak follows from the commission they received.

οὐχ ὡς ἀνθρώποις ἀρέσκοντες. Compare Gal 1:10. Pleasing people was the fault typically charged against flatterers and demagogues. Paul is not opposed to accommodation as such (1 Cor 9:19–23; 10:33). What he excludes is shaping the message to win approval.

θεῷ τῷ δοκιμάζοντι τὰς καρδίας ἡμῶν. The language recalls Jer 11:20; 12:3 LXX (God who tests the heart and the inner parts). The same verb in present tense frames the verse: God approved them once (perfect) and goes on testing their hearts (present). The approval is not a permanent licence; ministry stays under continual divine scrutiny.

Theological note: The verse establishes ministerial accountability coram Deo. The final test of ministry is neither its results nor its reputation but the hidden motives of the heart, which only God sees.

5. οὔτε γάρ ποτε ἐν λόγῳ κολακείας ἐγενήθημεν, καθὼς οἴδατε, οὔτε ἐν προφάσει πλεονεξίας, θεὸς μάρτυς,

ἐν λόγῳ κολακείας. Κολακεία, flattery, was the stock vice of the false friend and the sophist, and a standard theme in the moral philosophers (Plutarch’s essay on telling a flatterer from a friend is the classic text). Flattery aims at the speaker’s own advantage, not the hearer’s good.

ἐν προφάσει πλεονεξίας. A πρόφασις is a pretext or cloak: here, a show of virtue covering greed. Πλεονεξία, the desire for more, will connect to Paul’s refusal of financial support in v. 9.

καθὼς οἴδατε… θεὸς μάρτυς. Paul uses two kinds of witness. For outward behaviour, flattery, the readers can testify. For inward motive, the hidden pretext, only God can testify. The distinction is precise: Paul calls on each witness only for what that witness can know.

οὔτε ζητοῦντες ἐξ ἀνθρώπων δόξαν, οὔτε ἀφ᾽ ὑμῶν οὔτε ἀπ᾽ ἄλλων,

The third disavowal is the pursuit of glory, meaning honour and reputation. In an honour-shame society this was the itinerant orator’s main currency. “Neither from you nor from others” excludes both local admiration and wider fame. The verse completes a triad of vices that the philosophical tradition linked together: flattery, greed and vainglory.

7a (or 6b) δυνάμενοι ἐν βάρει εἶναι ὡς Χριστοῦ ἀπόστολοι.

Verse numbering differs: some English translations number this clause 6b.

ἐν βάρει εἶναι. This is probably a deliberate double meaning:

• being a financial burden (compare ἐπιβαρῆσαι in 2:9 and 2 Thess 3:8);
• standing on one’s dignity or making one’s weight felt, which picks up δόξα in v. 6 (the Hebrew כָּבוֹד carries both “weight” and “glory”).

Paul had a legitimate right to support and to the honour due to an apostle, and he chose not to use it. The parallel is 1 Cor 9, where he argues at length for the right of support and then waives it.

ὡς Χριστοῦ ἀπόστολοι. The plural presumably includes Silvanus and Timothy (1:1). That suggests Paul uses “apostle” here in a broader sense, of commissioned envoys, than the Twelve-plus-Paul model. The authority is real, but it belongs to Christ and is held as Christ’s agents.

Theological note: Authority is shown by being laid aside. Some see here a cruciform or kenotic pattern similar to Phil 2:6–8: the one who has the rights does not exploit them.

7a or b. ἀλλὰ ἐγενήθημεν ἤπιοι / νήπιοι ἐν μέσῳ ὑμῶν.

This is the best-known text-critical crux in the letter.

• νήπιοι, “infants.” The external support is strong: P⁶⁵ א* B C* D* F G I Ψ* and others. NA28 adopted this reading, reversing NA27. Fee, Weima and Gaventa all read it.
• ἤπιοι, “gentle.” This is the reading of SBLGNT and most English translations. It gives smoother sense and fits Malherbe’s evidence, where the gentle philosopher is contrasted with the harsh one.
• Transcriptional probability cannot settle the question. The preceding ἐγενήθημεν ends in ν, so dittography (producing νήπιοι) and haplography (producing ἤπιοι) are equally possible.

Punctuation affects the decision. If a full stop comes after ἐν μέσῳ ὑμῶν, as in NA28 and Weima, then “we became infants among you” concludes the argument of vv. 3–7a. Infants are without guile, the exact opposite of δόλος (v. 3), flattery and pretext (v. 5). A new sentence then begins with ὡς ἐὰν τροφός, and most of the supposed clash of metaphors disappears.

The objection from mixed metaphor is weak anyway. Paul changes images freely within this one chapter: infants (v. 7b), nursing mother (v. 7c), father (v. 11), orphaned (ἀπορφανισθέντες, v. 17). Compare Gal 4:19, where he is a mother in labour with children in whom Christ is being formed.

If νήπιοι is right, the infant image works as the opposite of ἐν βάρει: instead of throwing their weight about, the apostles became like children, powerless, guileless and unthreatening.

7c. ὡς ἐὰν τροφὸς θάλπῃ τὰ ἑαυτῆς τέκνα,

τροφός. The word can mean a hired wet-nurse, a familiar figure in Greco-Roman households. But τὰ ἑαυτῆς τέκνα, “her own children,” suggests a nursing mother caring for her own. The reflexive adds intensity: this is not paid care but a mother’s love.

θάλπῃ. The verb means “to cherish” or “to keep warm” (compare Eph 5:29; Deut 22:6 LXX, of a bird on her young). It suggests physical closeness and tender protection.

The ἐάν with subjunctive generalises: “as a nursing mother would cherish.”

Theological note: Paul is comfortable describing his ministry in maternal terms (see Gaventa, Our Mother Saint Paul). Whatever the reading in v. 7b, the passage presents pastoral leadership as nurture, not domination. That has implications for the theology of ministry and for how gendered imagery is used of it.

8. οὕτως ὁμειρόμενοι ὑμῶν εὐδοκοῦμεν μεταδοῦναι ὑμῖν οὐ μόνον τὸ εὐαγγέλιον τοῦ θεοῦ ἀλλὰ καὶ τὰς ἑαυτῶν ψυχάς, διότι ἀγαπητοὶ ἡμῖν ἐγενήθητε.

ὁμειρόμενοι. This is a NT hapax and very rare elsewhere (Job 3:21 LXX in some witnesses; Ps 62:2 in Symmachus). It may be connected with a funerary inscription describing grieving parents’ longing for a dead child. The sense is deep, yearning affection, and it continues the maternal image.

εὐδοκοῦμεν. The verb expresses glad willingness, not reluctant duty. The imperfect sense (“we were delighted to”) is clear from context.

μεταδοῦναι… οὐ μόνον τὸ εὐαγγέλιον… ἀλλὰ καὶ τὰς ἑαυτῶν ψυχάς. “To share not only the gospel of God but also our very selves.” Ψυχή here means the whole self or life, not a “soul” separate from the body. The phrasing deliberately sets alongside each other the most valuable thing Paul has to give, God’s gospel, and his own life. The message and the messenger are not separable: the gospel of a self-giving God is passed on through self-giving lives.

διότι ἀγαπητοὶ ἡμῖν ἐγενήθητε. “Because you had become dear to us.” The relationship explains the self-giving. The aorist ἐγενήθητε matches ἐγενήθημεν in vv. 5 and 7: the apostles “became” infants among them, and the Thessalonians “became” beloved.

Synthesis: theological themes of 2.1–8

1. God’s gospel, held in trust. The repeated “gospel of God” (vv. 2, 8, 9) grounds the passage. The message belongs to God; the messengers are tested, approved and entrusted with it. This explains both their boldness and their accountability.
2. Integrity as part of the message. Ministry driven by flattery, greed or the pursuit of glory would contradict the gospel it preaches. The messenger’s character is not an optional addition to the message.
3. Accountability before God. God is both the one who tests hearts (v. 4) and the witness (v. 5). Ministry is judged by its hidden motives, not by success or reputation.
4. Authority shown by laying it aside. Paul has a real claim (δυνάμενοι ἐν βάρει εἶναι, v. 7a), and he expresses it by giving it up.
5. Family and nurture. Brothers and sisters, infants, a nursing mother, and soon a father and orphans: the church is a household, and ministry within it is nurture.
6. Suffering and boldness. Persecution is where God-given παρρησία is shown, and the apostles’ experience anticipates the church’s.
7. Contemporary relevance. The passage gives positive criteria for authentic ministry and negative markers for recognising its counterfeits: manipulation, flattery, financial motives, celebrity, and the abuse of authority. It speaks directly to current concerns about spiritual abuse and the safeguarding of the vulnerable.

Further reading: Malherbe (AB) for the philosophical background; Weima (BECNT) for the apologetic reading and the case for νήπιοι; Fee (NICNT); Wanamaker (NIGTC) for rhetorical analysis; Green (PNTC); Gaventa (Interpretation).