Peace, Security, and Labor Pains in 1 Thessalonians 5.3

Leaven Volume 23 Issue 1 Thessalonian Correspondence Article 8 1-1-2015 Peace, Security, and Labor Pains in 1 Thessalonians 5.3 Daniel M. Yencich [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.pepperdine.edu/leaven Recommended Citation Yencich, Daniel M. (2015) "Peace, Security, and Labor Pains in 1 Thessalonians 5.3," Leaven: Vol. 23 : Iss. 1 , Article 8. Available at: https://digitalcommons.pepperdine.edu/leaven/vol23/iss1/8 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Religion at Pepperdine Digital Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Leaven by an authorized editor of Pepperdine Digital Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected], [email protected], [email protected]. Peace, Security, and Labor Pains in 1 Thessalonians 5.3 Daniel M. Yencich ll of Paul’s letters, to one degree or another, feel like they are expecting something. If there is a sense of unfinished business in Paul’s writing it is because his story of salvation is incomplete: Christ came, Adied for our sins, and was raised from the dead, but the resurrection of Jesus is just the first fruits—a symbol, a signpost of the fullness of the kingdom to come. For Paul, it is on the future day of the Lord when the kingdom of God will come in its fullness and God will finally be all in all (1 Cor 15). Paul preaches from this liminal place between the now and the not yet of the kingdom: Paul proclaims this kingdom just as he awaits this kingdom. In the midst of his preaching, teaching, and letter-writing, the Apostle Paul is expecting something. This sense of expectation is not divorced from reality for Paul. Expecting the advent of a new world does not induce Paul to simply check out of this one. Paul’s apocalyptic worldview of expectation does not simply give him a lens through which to see the coming end. Rather, it affords Paul and his churches a uniquely Christ-centered way of living in this world while waiting for and expecting its transformation. Paul’s apocalyptic outlook is an active expectation and thus not without its own unique set of politics and way of being in the world. In Paul’s worldview, the present and coming kingdom of God has radical and concrete implications for the present world and its kingdoms. According to the Pauline teaching, Christ disarmed the powers by his death (Col 2.15) and will abolish all rulers and powers and place all enemies beneath his feet when his kingdom comes in its fullness (1 Cor 15.24). In light of the victory of Christ, the assurance of his coming kingdom, and the social context of living as Roman subjects in conquered territory, a key question animates Paul’s ministry: How are we to live faithfully within the earthly kingdom of Rome as we expect the coming of the kingdom of God? Throughout the history of its interpretation, 1 Thessalonians 4–5 has largely been understood as having only to do with the not yet of the kingdom. This is indeed understandable, since these chapters explicitly detail the future coming of the Lord and the resurrection of the dead. Yet woven into this eschatological expectation is a concretely this-worldly and political statement in verse 5.3: “When they say, ‘There is peace and security,’ then sudden destruction will come upon them, as labor pains come upon a pregnant woman, and there will be no escape!” (NRSV). In a cultural climate that values the separation of church and state and eschews talk of religion and politics at the dinner table, it is unsurprising that the politics of Paul’s expectation in 5.3 have typically been missed. Yet, as a close reading of this verse shows, there is good reason to interpret it as a carefully crafted Messianic critique forecasting swift destruction for all who would place faith in the peace (eirene) and security (asphaleia) of Rome and its rulers. This destruction will come upon Rome, its rulers, and its manifold governing structures present at Thessalonica and in every territory conquered by Rome. God’s justice will come upon the Roman Empire, just as labor pains (odin) befall a pregnant woman, and “there will be no escape!” Although much of what follows will focus on those two words in 5.3— peace and security —the ultimate aim is to root 5.3 more firmly within the wider literary context of the letter and the social world in which 1 Thessalonians was composed and received. Following a sketch of the debate over whether 5.3 represents false prophecy or a Roman slogan, I will present the case for reading eirene and asphaleia as separate but 38 LEAVEN First Quarter 2015 complementary qualities that Rome proclaimed of its imperial identity, power, and rule. From this follows the conclusion that 5.3 is part of Paul’s salvation narrative in which God’s kingdom eclipses and destroys the unjust kingdoms of the present age, of which Rome was chief in Paul’s lifetime. Lastly, I will make suggestions for how Paul’s unique apocalyptic politics can enliven and enable the ministry of the church today as we, too, await in active expectation the coming of the kingdom of God. Prophetic Peace or a Roman Slogan? Abraham J. Malherbe, a noted New Testament scholar with roots in the Stone-Campbell tradition, represents the majority view concerning the subjects of 1 Thessalonians 5.3—those who say there is peace and security. In his commentary, Malherbe argues that the subjects of 5.3 are false teachers proclaiming an inappropriate sense of peace and security to the Thessalonian church. Eirene and asphaleia are meant to echo the false prophets who cried out “Peace, peace!” when there was no peace (Jer 6.14).1 Although this interpretation is plausible and recognizes Paul’s indebtedness to the Old Testament, it falters upon closer inspection. First, while eirene is indeed the same word used for the Hebrew shalom (peace) in the Greek version of Jeremiah 6.14, asphaleia is not attested in the prophecy—nor is asphaleia ever rendered as the Greek equivalent for shalom elsewhere in the Septuagint.2 Lacking a firm parallel, a connection between 1 Thessalonians 5.3 and Jeremiah 6.14 is difficult to sustain. Second, Malherbe simply does not take seriously enough the political character of biblical prophetic and apocalyptic literature.3 While Malherbe does contend that Paul is forecasting judgment upon God’s enemies, he leaves the identity and character of these enemies ambiguous by describing them simply as “the unjust, unholy, and proud.”4 Furthermore, Malherbe wishes to disconnect apocalypticism from concrete political circumstances, contending that “the apocalyptic context in which the ‘slogan’ is set” is reason enough for doubting a political reading of the verse.5 In other words, in Malherbe’s reading, apocalyptic and prophetic literature cannot be political. Yet prophecy and apocalypticism do not—indeed cannot—negate a political reading. The Old Testaments prophets often proclaimed oracles against foreign nations and rulers who would be judged upon the day of the LORD.6 Indeed, Jeremiah 6 itself is broadly political in nature, inasmuch as its prophecy concerns the invasion of Israel by a conquering nation. Furthermore, apocalyptic literature in the Second Temple era often arose from political crises.7 As Lee Magness points out, biblical prophecies and “apocalypses should be read as texts written by and for real people, suffering real turmoil, in their very real lives.”8 While Malherbe is surely correct that Paul is writing in an apocalyptic key, he misses the mark by 1. Abraham J. Malherbe, The Letters to the Thessalonians: A New Translation with Introduction and Commentary, AB 32B (New Haven: Yale University Press, 2004), 287; 292; 304. Cf. Charles A. Wanamaker, The Epistles to the Thessalonians: A Commentary on the Greek Text, NIGTC (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1990), 180; F.F. Bruce, 1 & 2 Thessalonians, WBC 45 (Waco: Word Books, 1982), 110. 2. Helmut Koester, “Imperial Ideology and Paul’s Eschatology in I Thessalonians,” in Paul and Empire: Religion and Power in Roman Imperial Society (Harrisburg: Trinity, 1997), 161. 3. For a recent and well-researched exploration of the political aspects of early Jewish apocalypse, see Anathea Portier-Young, Apocalypse Against Empire: Theologies of Resistance in Early Judaism (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2011). 4. Abraham J. Malherbe, The Letters to the Thessalonians, 290. 5. Ibid., 304. Emphasis added. 6. See, for example, the prophetic day of the LORD oracles against Babylon (Isa 13.1–8, 19–22; Jer 50.1–51.58); Egypt (Jer 46); the Philistines (Jer 47); Moab (Jer 48); Ammon (Jer 49.1–22); Damascus (Jer 49.23–27); Kedar and Hazor (Jer 49.28–33); and Elam (Jer 49.34–39). For Paul, the day of the Lord refers explicitly to the Parousia of Christ. Ibid., 291. 7. “Generally speaking, Judean apocalyptic literature was the product of and was addressed to certain crises that emerged from the imperial situation that prevailed in Judea under the Hellenistic and Roman empires.” Richard A. Horsley, “The Kingdom of God and the Renewal of Israel: Synoptic Gospels, Jesus Movements, and Apocalypticism,” The Encyclopedia of Apocalypticism: The Origins of Apocalypticism in Judaism and Christianity (New York: Continuum, 2000), 305. Cf. Daniel 1–7; 1 Enoch. 8. Magness, “Apocalypse Now,” 21. Prophesy, likewise, should be read as responses to concrete situations rather than simply foretellings of a distant future. THESSALONIAN CORRESPONDENCE LEAVEN 39 depoliticizing the prophetic and apocalyptic character of 1 Thessalonians 5.3.

Load more