5. RESULTADOS Y DISCUSIÓN
5.3 Modelo de enseñanza, aprendizaje y evaluación (EAE), para promover la argumentación en
5.3.8 Aspectos de evaluación
b) The cross, defined as "for us", appears in other places in the Pauline writings, Rom. 5:6,8; I Cor.1:13? 8:11? II Cor. 5:14? Gal- 2:20, but with an application to the present time and past sins. Here however, the redemption is eschatological.
A
On the basis of these striking features, Dibelius suggested that I,l:9f. was typical of the Pauline message and that the Apostle had used words which were common to a missionary's vocabulary. We must recognise that a group of people in the same profession or occupation would today use a specialised vocabulary, but if in this case Paul is drawing upon a common-word fund, why does he not use these words elsewhere and/or with similar nuances? It seems a . real possibility that we have here a pre-Pauline formula which sets out to show' in theological terms what missionary work achieves and brings. An absence of any reference to the cross strengthens this possibility, for we must surely believe that if Paul composed these verses himself, he would have brought in some direct reference to it, i.e. in
5
association with the resurrection . On the other hand, Paul could hardly have used a formula which excluded the cross, which he regarded as central to his theology and preaching. Gal. 1:4? I Cor. 1:23. No doubt mention of eschatological salvation implied the cross in the Apostle's mind.
The way this (confessional?) assertion of faith is expressed strongly suggests that it was intended by
(Hellenistic?)^ Jewish Christians for the Gentiles,
used by itself (cf. its Jewish setting in Mt. 1:21), idols are contrasted with the living and real God (typical O.T. thinking), and there is the possibility of a pun, assuming an Aramaic or Hebrew Vorlaae, on the name Jesus and the verb deliver. These points would suggest characteristic
7
Jewish traits and hence Jewish origin .
If these arguments are correct, it is evident that Paul is not to be regarded as the creator or even principal exponent of the Parousia idea. Parousia may be a Pauline word, but the concept will belong to the belief of the church before Thessalonians was written. That Jesus was to appear
"from heaven" was an expectation eagerly awaited. Perhaps this arose from such simple assertions as, 'Jesus is coming',
8
'Jesus is coming from heaven' or'Jesus will appear' . From these affirmations would arise the eager expectation of the eschatological Saviour, cf. 1.1:10. It would appear to us that Paul has incorporated a formula in I and lent personal authority to it by the mere fact of re-iteration.
This understanding of I.l:9f. may help to explain 9
the use of the first person singular in 11.2:5 . All scholars have noted Paul's desire to stress his own
personal involvement and interest at this juncture in II.
10
He had often told them himself about these things, i.e. verses 3 and 4 particularly, but probably v.6ff. as well. Yet we are left wondering if that is the only reason. Why could he not have associated his co-workers in this mild rebuke? Why did he need to emphasize his own
activity? It cannot be that he alone gave the teaching, since 1.3:2 shows that he had confidence in the ability
of Timothy to establish the young community in its faith. 1.1:9a suggests that 1.1:9b,10 was used by Paul, Silvanus and Timothy so it is unlikely that Paul gives apostolic authority to II,2:3ff. apart from these two who were them selves termed apostles, 1.2:6. We may suggest rather,that Paul wanted to lend his personal authority (11.3:17) and touch to the eschatological traditions which he had handed on to them. In other words reference to the Apostasy, the Anomos and the Katechon were part of the apocalyptic
tradition passed on to them at the mission time, and could not be discarded, misinterpreted or forgotten at will.
He is saying 'I, Paul, told you often,- do you not recall this?'
Since Paul is the sole author of I Corinthians,. we cannot find a similar change of person in that letter. We can, though, see the same attitude reflected in chapter
11
15, in connection with the handing on of earlier tradition The build up of first person singular verbs is very impres
sive? (bis), Kd/
ov/ , 15:1-3. Paul's indebtedness to tradition
12
is not to be under-estimated « /
Another indication of his use of tradition is found in I,2:15f. Chapter 2:1-16 continues the thought of the original mission work. It culminates in a reminder that present sufferings at the hands of fellow-countrymen are paralleled by the Jewish persecution of Judean churches. This leads to a violent accusation of the Jews, who are only completing their history of guilt, and in consequence are lying even now under the wrath of God. This is in
very sharp contrast, to 2:13f. Why Paul chose to use such forceful language at this point, remains unclear.
What does become clear from a study of the passage is that we have once more hints of pre-Pauline tradition in 2:15,16. The use of words in these two verses suggests ^ this
opinion. Instead of the expected verb for the death of
Jesus, cTTo(upooo we have ^TvoKTe-iVto Only in
Acts 3:15 is this word used again in connection with Christ's death. It could be that Paul chose it as the most apro- priate word for this context in which it becomes virtually equivalent to 'murder'. On the other hand Paul could have received it from earlier tradition and belief, which had, by the use of & K o KTeiVyO , interpreted the action of
the Jews against Jesus - perhaps for apologetic reasons,. Then we have ê k^icov<oo , haoax legomenon,
although two codices D and A have it in Lk. 11:49. Whether we translate it (from the context) "drove out", or '.'per
secuted", it is a strong word for Paul to use and shows how intensely he felt about Jewish opposition towards his missionary work. Could it not indicate also that others shared his feelings? However, it is not the only word used once by Paul in these verses. Opposed,
appears nowhere else^^. Finally, we should note that 15 some Greek MSS, of the Testament of Levi parallel v.16c This has led to the suggestion that v.l6c is a post-Pauline addition . Such an explanation is not necessarily
required. It is quite possible to envisage both sources 17
using common apocalyptic material . V.16c has an integral link with v,15 and v.l6a,b, which certainly suggests an
original unity. So as.vv.15,16 are.not typically
Pauline, they can be regarded as pre-Pauline tradition . In view of these unusual features and the
similarity with Mt. 23:29-38,^it has been proposed that Paul is using material from earlier tradition^^. This does not mean literary dependency but a borrowing from common oral sources. The similarities between I.2:15f, and Mt. 23:29ff, are quite striking. Similar ideas relate to the prophets having been killed, persecution, completing the guilt of the Jewish sins and future condemnation. In
both places, similar words are used, ^
( 6K - ) w K w y ( à'i/oi -) K'l p/oJ . Moreover, in spite of Rigaux's denial , both passages have eschatological
overtones. True, Matthew may aim a series of Woes against k
the ï^risees, but v.36 seems to point to an apocalyptic judgment. The purpose and setting of the pericope in Matthew are due to the Evangelist, but this does not hide earlier material which has been used and developed by Paul in 1.2:15,16.
In conclusion we can make four points,
1. Behind the violent accusation of 1.2:15,16 lies earlier tradition.
2. This tradition is reflected in material contained in Matthew's gospel but used differently,
3. The early church, perhaps for apologetic reasons, passed judgment on the Jews and found them guilty of the crucifixion, cf. Acts 2:23.
4. An apocalyptic judgment was the inevitable conclusion to such Jewish attitudes and practices. Matthew
sees this fulfilled in the Fall of Jerusalem, A.D.
90 91
70 , whilst Paul leaves it undetermined
The roots of Pauline eschatology once again 22 reach back into an earlier part of the church’s life
From 2:17 - 3:13, Paul explains how much he has missed seeing the new converts and outlines the lengths to which he has been to find out about the situation he had
23
so hurriedly left behind . Timothy’s good news of con
tinued faith has reassured him and so he can conclude this ;
Î
section with a prayer that he may be able to visit them j 1
soon. Meantime they must stand firm in their faith, ready | for the coming of Je,sus with his saints, 3:13. In chapter 4, j
! the Apostle reaffirms the mode of conduct that is becoming i to the Christian. We can probably detect in this passage |
i
a hint of the sexual and ethical problems which were , facing the young community. New moral standards brought ] moral problems. Paul then makes an appeal for mutual love towards each other, (is there a suggestion that the community was still a group of individuals, or that the tendency to i individualism was very and an effort to demonstrate
this and the respectability of Christianity to the outside pagan community.
In a rather abrupt manner Paul alters his thought. An eschatological problem had arisen which demanded an
immediate answer. Certain members of the community were worried about the state of the dead in Christ. This was pressing, in view of the near arrival of the Parousia. The basic problem does not concern the non-arrival of the Parousia and the death of Christians^^; nothing in 4:13ff.
warrants this explanation. Rather, some have died, (although this is not explicitly stated), and relatives and friends are worried about the status of their dead kinsmen and friends. It seems that anxiety over this question was serious, because Paul writes that they were
25
sorrowing just as if they had no hope, v.l3 . The problem does not concern the fact of the resurrection. Paul would surely have discussed it in detail, if that were the basic concern, cf. I Cor.15. The problem is high-lighted in the
words of V.15, of of I
"7{o(pOU(T/ok\/ TOv K vpiO U Ou yij KOijUi/j
It appears that some considered that the dead would not share in the joy of the Parousia^^- Paul counters this by saying that the dead will not be at a disadvantage? on the contrary,
they rise first, to meet their Lord.
All of this Paul declares by "a word of the Lord", Xoyto KyJpfou . Two questions immediately confront us : (a) What is the extent of the word?
(b) What does the expression mean?
Question (a) need not detain us long since whether the word relates to 15b or beyond will not affect our thesis.
Suffice it to say, that v.lSb contains in brief what is 27
expanded by various images in v.l6f . This makes it very difficult to recover the exact words of the logion. There are three elements in v.lSb,
i) The coming of the Lord
ii) The premier position of the dead
iii) The subsequent position of those who are alive at the Parousia.
With apocalyptic imagery i) is described in detail in
V.16? ii) is briefly mentioned at the end of that verse, "and the dead in Christ shall rise first"? iii) is refer red to in v.lTa, with 17b relating to ii) and iii), "to meet the Lord in the air".
The basic content of the logion is clear, but what does "the word of the Lord" mean? A number of answers have been given,
1. Paul is quoting from or alluding to a saying or thought in the Gospels.
Mk. 9:1 and Mt. 22:32 have been suggested as sources, or, and more likely, Mt. 24:30
28
and Jn. 6:39f. . However, none of these really relates to the problem troubling the Thessalonians. Unless we argue that Paul modified the texts considerably, we
29
can dismiss this view. A variant of this view, but equally inappropriate is the idea
30 that Paul is summing up the teaching of Jesus
2. Paul is basing what he says upon an agraphon, 31
cf. Acts 20:35 , This will always remain a possibility since we have no way of proving or disproving such a claim and we must suppose
that many agrapha, (irrespective of authenticity), circulated in the early churches. It is
certainly possible to see v.lSb as a statement of Jesus in some such form as, "Those who remain
alive at the Coming of the Son of Man, (altered by Paul to his then favourite expression "Parousia of the Lord")# will not precede those who have tasted death.”
The terms and expressions of v.l6f. preclude, it would seem, that they were part of the authentic logion.
3- Paul believes that what he says is in accordance 32
with the mind of the risen Christ „ We have an illustration of this in I Cor. 2:16 and 7:10,12. In the latter case, Paul dis
tinguishes between his own word and that of the Lord, cf. too vv.25,40. We must notice however that Paul does not explicitly say that he has the mind of Christ, i.e. that by living so close to his Lord he can pass on what he believes
Christ would say or have him say. V.IO implies this, yet at the same time infers a specific
charge or command from the Lord. In Corinthians he is dealing with ethical problems, whereas in Thessalonians he is encountering a theological —_probXem. However this^ idea, of Paul's living
contact with Christ enabling him to speak a "word from the Lord", could be linked to either the first or second view^. The strongest
argument against this suggestion is that Paul would have made clear that he had no specific word, as he did in Corinthians. Indeed the
way Paul expresses himself in 1.4:15 suggests he is thinking of a definite word.
33
4. Paul is using a prophetic word . Prophecy was well-known in the early church. In Acts prophets are frequently mentioned, ll:27ff; 13:1; 15:32; 21:9ff. In I Cor. 14 rules are laid down to govern its function within the community. It was certainly rated very highly by Paul, since unlike tongues, it was
extremely profitable and edifying, I Cor. 14:3,31. It is clear that it is not to be equated with preaching but is the utterance of a specific revelation, 14:26. This revelation could be in the form of fore-telling. Acts ll:27ff. or relating apocalyptic truth. Rev. 1:3; 22:7.
ok
The roots ^or this N.T. phenomenon must be located in O.T. prophecy, where the word of the Lord was spoken through God's servants, Ezek. 34:1; Amos 5:1. The phrase,,"in a word of the Lord", expresses the revelatory message, II Chron. 30:12; cf.Ecclusw48:3.
If the word was prophetic, was its author Paul^^ or someone else? If it was Paul we would have expected him to have used the first person
singular, cf. 11.2:5; 3:17. so perhaps we should look for some nameless prophet. Whatever be the truth about the origin of the logion we can be sure that to Paul it was
a revelation from the Lord. The authority for what he has to say was from Christ.
5. It is possible that Paul is quoting from or 35
alluding to some apocalyptic source . If a Jewish source we must presume that any statement has been translated into Christian terms. As we have no knowledge of any such work though we are left to useless speculation. The most likely origins of the logion are those suggested in 1. and 4. It is conceivable that Paul
considers that what is said in v,15 is based on what Christ actually said as reported to him. Alternatively the logion's source could be a prophecy but recently Hill has quite
rightly queried the creative role ascribed to the prophet in the early church^^. What does emerge from this dis cussion is that whether the logion is a prophecy or linked
37
to an earthly word of Jesus in some way , we do have an
indication of pre-Pauline material, since we think it unlikely that Paul is using his own word or prophecy.
As "a word of (from) the Lord" Paul uses it to comfort and calm fears which had arisen in the community. The apocalyptic imagery of v,16f, (if part of the logion,
this must indicate a Jewish-Christian background), heightens the expectation of the Parousia. Coming, descent, trumpet, gathering of the elect,,archangel and the meeting in the air encourage a very literal hope. More important than the details, however, is the underlying belief (which has come
via the church) of the death, resurrection and coining
of the Lord who will raise the dead and living to meet him in the air. Such hope and faith has gone a long way beyond the Jewish idea of the visitation of God at the End, to
centre in the personal coming of Messiah who will bring the dead to life and unite them to himself, together with the transformed living. After this event, they would be forever with their Lord. Such was the comfort Paul gave the com munity.
Paul has not yet finished with eschatology. He now broadens his perspective to relate ’the Day of the Lord* (1.5:2) to daily living (1.5:1-11)^®. We have
already mentioned that Paul is not saying here, "the Day can 39
come at any moment" . He is insisting that believers ought to be so alive to the possibility of its coming that they read "the times and seasons" (5:1)^^ about which they had been instructed earlier. To the "sons of darkness
the Day will be unexpected and come as a "thief in the night" (5:4). Yet the possibility remains that some of the "sons of light" will also be unaware of and unprepared for the Coming Day. Against this danger Paul urges them to