PAUL'S FIRST LETTER TO THE THESSALONIANS
PAUL'S DEFENSE OF HIS CONDUCT
1 Thess. 2:1-16
INTRODUCTION
How do you destroy the message? When you look at politics you see that one of the major ways you destroy the message is to destroy the messenger. During this last campaign the conservatives attacked Obama on the basis of his associations. Liberals attacked McCain saying that his term in office would actually be George Bush's 3rd term in office. Neither party really addressed the issues; they just attacked the messengers. By defeating the messenger though, some were able to defeat the message of that messenger.
Paul is facing a similar situation in Thessalonica. The Jews feel threatened by Paul's message. Although Christianity is NOT an attack on true Judaism, it did seriously threaten the Judaism of Paul's day (and of our day as well). In order to destroy Christianity, the Jews attempted to destroy Christianity's main messenger, Paul.
That attack is still going on today. In one of my classes I had a student who claimed that Paul and not Jesus was really the founder of Christianity, that Paul actually perverted the life and teachings of Jesus to create Christianity. Only a superficial analysis of Paul and Jesus would produce such a claim.
Be careful whenever you listen to people attacking other people. Most of the times whenever somebody attacks another person, he demonizes that person, just like Paul's Jewish opponents were demonizing him. Although some people really are that bad, the truth is that most people are not. When you hear people viciously attack others, you might want to step back from that person for a little while to get some perspective. Remember that whenever some people viciously attack others, they probably have some personal beef with that person. That person is basically just trying to enlist your aid in destroying that person for personal reasons and NOT for the reasons he gives you. You might want to think twice before getting involved.
Now look at the way the Jews went after Paul. They did not attack him with a rifle but with a machine gun. The rifle takes one shot and either hits the mark and kills the prey or misses the mark and the prey lives. The machine gun approach fires many bullets rapidly hoping that at least one of the bullets hits and kills its target. Paul's opponents are just throwing attack after attack at Paul. They are hoping that at least one of their bullets hits the mark. For this reason Paul has to defend himself on a whole variety of issues.
Look at how ingenious Paul's opponents were. They ran him out of town, made it almost impossible for him to return to Thessalonica, and then attacked him because he did not return to Thessalonica. The saying that all things are fair in love and war was operating in this situation. Paul's Jewish opponents were using everything in their arsenal to destroy him and therefore also his message, the gospel.
PAUL'S DEFENSE AGAINST HIS OPPONENTS (2:1-12)
Paul's Mission to Thessalonica a Raging Success (2:1-2)
Before defending himself and his conduct in Thessalonica, Paul clearly and loudly declares that his ministry in Thessalonica was a raging success: "For you yourselves know, brethren, that our coming to you was NOT in vain!"
How could Paul make such a claim? He had been able to stay there for only a short period of time before being run out. His opponents had successfully prevented him from returning. In what way was Paul's ministry successful there?
"But after we had already suffered and been mistreated in Philippi, as you know, we had the boldness in our God to speak to you the gospel of God amid much opposition!" Paul had not only suffered physical abuse in Philippi by being beaten with rods, he had been humiliated. He a Roman citizen had been arrested, beaten, and thrown into prison without so much even a trial, which was his right as a Roman citizen. Such treatment would have broken down many people. After experiencing such treatment, many people would have snuck into Thessalonica and maybe quietly shared the gospel with a few people. Not so Paul! Even after experiencing all that abuse in Philippi and even realizing that he would probably meet with the same treatment in Thessalonica, he entered Thessalonica and spoke God's word boldly!
The only explanation for such boldness? God Himself! The fact he spoke with so much boldness was evidence God was with him. Maybe Paul didn't have thousands come to Jesus for salvation in Thessalonica. Maybe the churches weren't as strong as he would have liked them to be. From a human standpoint maybe Paul was not all that successful in Thessalonica; HOWEVER, and this is a huge however, the fact that God was with him during his ministry there (as seen in his God-given boldness) made his mission a raging success!
How do YOU gauge what is or what is not successful? Do you gauge it by human standards or divine standards? We need to keep what Paul says here in mind. The presence and working of God in the situation is the true standard by which we judge whether or not something was successful.
Negative Defense of Paul's Conduct in Thessalonica (2:3-6a)
So what were Paul's opponents accusing him of? When you read his response, you can determine what the attacks were. They accused him of "error . . impurity . . . deceit." They will go on to accuse him of "pleasing men . . . flattering speech" and "greed."
You've got to be very careful about attacking people's motives, about reading "between the lines" like Paul's opponents were. I have a good friend who once told me that he had the gift of discernment, that he always knew people's motives. He was confident that he was able to read between the lines. Although people might say one thing to him, he really knew what they meant. So I asked him how often he was right whenever he read between the lines. As serious as he could be and as proud of himself as he could be, he said: "50% of the time." I about died laughing. Those odds are no better than the ones you would get flipping a coin. I like what pastor David says: "You might be able to judge my actions, but don't ever judge my motives!" We may all mess up at times; HOWEVER, that does not mean that we are acting out of evil intentions. Be careful judging people's motives.
Rather Paul states: "But just as we have been approved by God to be entrusted with the gospel, so we speak, not as pleasing men but God who examines our hearts" (2:4). The word translated "approved" and "examines" are the same words in the Greek--dokimazo (dah-kee-MAHD-zew). It has the idea of a scientist testing an object to see if it is any good or not. In this case, God has tested Paul and the other 2 apostles and have found them good. He has approved of them. Why? Because they seek to please God rather than men.
Positive Defense of Paul's Conduct in Thessalonica (2:6b-12)
So how DID Paul conduct himself while among the Thessalonians? As an apostle of Jesus Christ he had distinct rights and privileges. As an apostle he spoke authoritatively for Jesus Christ. He could have justifiably come into Thessalonica and demanded that they all start obeying his message about Jesus immediately and completely. But he doesn't. Instead he practiced SPIRITUAL PEDIATRICS.
First, he proved to be gentle among them as a "nursing mother tenderly cares for her own children." He was not just a nurse maid who nursed just anybody's child (a custom until modern times). Rather he was like the mother who tenderly cares for her own child while nursing him. It's one of the most gentle pictures of a person found in the Bible. Instead of being deceitful, lustful, greedy, etc., he was as tender towards them as humanly possible.
Is this true of the way we treat others? Are we gentle, or are we harsh? Quit asking if people are being gentle towards you. The question is whether or not you are being gentle towards them. Is this true of your ministers, your church leaders, your Bible Fellowship teachers and leaders?
Instead of being greedy and milking the Thessalonians for all they were worth, Paul claims: "having thus a fond affection for you, we were well-pleased to impart to you not only the gospel BUT ALSO OUR OWN LIVES!" It is so distressing today to see so many Christians worrying about THEIR BOUNDARIES! "I've got to protect my time!" "I've got to draw the line!" What a way to devalue people! Dr. Milton Cunningham one time gave the staff some of the best advice I have ever heard. "Keep a pretty loose schedule because many times the interruptions are where true ministry takes place." Our attitude is that people are interruptions; Milton's attitude was that these interruptions are the main purpose of ministry.
Instead of being greedy, instead of even exercising his apostolic prerogative by receiving financial support from the Thessalonian church he had established, Paul actually worked for his own living while in Thessalonica (most likely making tents). "For you recall, brethren, our labor and hardship how working night and day so as not to be a burden to any of you."
Apparently Paul had to deal with the accusation of "doing it for the money" throughout his ministry (this is a huge charge leveled against him by Christians in Corinth). Even though as an apostle of Christ he had the distinct right and privilege of being supported by the churches he ministered to, in several cases he forewent that right. His own comfort and his own rights always took back seat to his desire that people come to know Jesus. If receiving money from the churches created a stumbling block, then he would work for his own living. That is how much he wanted them saved.
Paul now changes the metaphor. He had been speaking about treating them like a nursing mother. Here he says while among them he was like a caring father. Mothers are tender. Sometimes fathers have to play the disciplinarian in family. He has to exhort or correct the child. He does it though out of love.
I told Nancy that I never want to fight my kids. (Some parents may think that is irresponsible.) Rather I want to fight for my kids. My children may think I am against them, but I am not. I am fighting them for THEIR OWN SAKES. In the same way sometimes Paul might have looked like he was fighting the Thessalonians; rather he was actually fighting FOR them.
Why was Paul treating them like a nursing mother or an admonishing father? So that they might walk in a manner worthy of the God who calls you into His own kingdom and glory. We so seldom talk about heaven these days. Everything is about the here and now. By deleting references to heaven, we cut out one of the major motivations for living the Christian life. Just take a moment to reflect on how absolutely glorious not only is heaven going to be but you are going to be. God promises to make us just like Jesus (Phil. 3:21). Something huge and great is coming down the pike. The question is whether or not I am living a huge and great life in light of what God is going to do for me. Or am I, who am about to inherit something far more wonderful than I can conceive of, am I living a petty, personal life which contradicts the greatness of God and the greatness of the kingdom?
How would you evaluate your life? Is it great or petty? Is it worthy of what God has in store for you, or is your life a contradiction of the incredible future God has in store for us?
THANKSGIVING (2:13-16)
Normally Paul will start his letter with a note of thanksgiving and go on from there. First Thessalonians is unique among Paul's letters because it has not ONE passage of thanksgiving but THREE (chapter 1, here, and 3:9). Paul's Jewish opponents had claimed he did not really care for them because he had hightailed it out of there whenever the going got rough. Instead they claimed that he had left THEM to face persecution. Paul's persistent giving of thanks though showed that he really did care for the Thessalonians.
Why did he thank God for the Thessalonians? "That when you received the word of God's message, you accepted it not as the word of men but for what it really is, the word of God." The gospel Paul preached was not his description of what God had done through Jesus; it was GOD'S word about Jesus. True religion is not from men (as some would have you believe); it is actually from God. For this reason we are not entitled to change what our religion says.
The other day a young man from the Jewish faith asked me if I as a Christian believed he was going to hell. I told him first that I was in no position to judge any person. Second though I told him that as a Christian I had no right to change what Christ said. Jesus claimed that eternal life is only in Him. As long as I profess to be a Christian and believe Christ is God the Son, then I have ABSOLUTELY NO RIGHT AT ALL TO CHANGE WHAT GOD HAS SAID. It is HIS religion, NOT MINE. To change Christianity because some of its teachings are politically unacceptable today is not only arrogant, it is extremely unwise IF CHRISTIANITY HAS COME FROM GOD HIMSELF. How would YOU have responded in such a situation?
What proof did Paul have that this word was from God? The proof that it formed its work in the Thessalonians who believed. Man's word does not have the power to transform others. God's word does though.
In what way was God's word working in the Thessalonians? It made them "imitators of the churches of God in Christ which are in Judea. For you also endured the same sufferings at the hands of your own countrymen even as they did from the Jews."
The word "audacity" has become very popular these days because of President Obama. The concept though is an ancient one. The apostles audaciously claimed that followers of Jesus were to imitate not only Jesus but THE APOSTLES THEMSELVES!
How could the apostles even dare claim that Christians should imitate them? First, we all need to admit that we ALL imitate somebody. It may be mom and dad, it may be the spirit of the times (do you really think young people voted for Obama because they had studied his positions?), it may be some friend, etc. When it is all said and done, none of us are that original; we are imitating somebody.
The apostles though claimed that we should imitate them because they were imitating Jesus. As apostles they were fully aware of their status in Christianity. They spoke authoritatively on behalf of Christ. To imitate them was to imitate Christ (1 John 1:3)
That was not only the responsibility of the apostles and the early Christians to act like Christ so that others would imitate them. It is our responsibility too. One of the saddest commentaries on modern Christianity came from Mahatma Gandhi, one of the most influential men of the 20th century. He said: "If Christians would really live according to the teachings of Christ, as found in the Bible, all of India would be Christian today." In other words, because Christians in the 20th century did not live like Jesus, we lost nearly 1 billion people to Hinduism. How very sad.