Exposition of 1 Thes. 1:4-6

Discussion in 'Baptist Theology & Bible Study' started by The Biblicist, Jan 13, 2015.

  1. The Biblicist

    The Biblicist
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 13, 2011
    Messages:
    14,185
    Likes Received:
    207
    1 Thes. 1:4 Knowing, brethren beloved, your election of God.
    5 For our gospel came not unto you in word only, but also in power, and in the Holy Ghost, and in much assurance; as ye know what manner of men we were among you for your sake.6 ¶ And ye became followers of us, and of the Lord, having received the word in much affliction, with joy of the Holy Ghost:



    Verse 1 - introduces the subject - how to tell they are the elect of God. - "knowing.....your election of God"

    Verse 2 - provides the evidence for how they can know their election of God. First negatively and then positively.

    a. Negatively "our gospel came not unto you in word ONLY" - meaning it came with something ADDITIONALLY to word "only" which is "BUT ALSO in....in....in" addition to just the word

    b. Positively "but ALSO in power" thus when it comes in "word ONLY" it does not come in power.


    b. "in the Holy Ghost" thus when it comes in "word ONLY" it comes without the Holy Ghost.

    c. "in much assurance" thus when it comes in "word ONLY" it comes without assurance.

    When it comes "ALSO in...in....in" there is a supernatural transformation that effectual transforms them into the same "manner of men" who proclaimed the gospel unto them so that they "BECAME followers of us" (Aorist passive voice) at the same point of time when they "received the word" (aorist tense passive voice) when and IN THE MANNER DESCRIBED by the three prepositional phrases.


    When the gospel comes "in power...in Spirit...in much assurance" it transforms them into a "new creature" making them into the same "manner" of men who delivered the gospel unto them WHEN they "received the word."

    Both "became" and "received" are Aorist tense verbs showing identical action with each other. Both are PASSIVE verbs showing they are RECEIVING the action rather than involved in producing the action. The action they received is previously defined by the three prepositional phrases.
     
    #1 The Biblicist, Jan 13, 2015
    Last edited by a moderator: Jan 13, 2015
  2. Greektim

    Greektim
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member
    Supporter

    Joined:
    May 22, 2010
    Messages:
    3,143
    Likes Received:
    118
    This is more exegesis than exposition. What truths are you seeking to expose? What is it that you think this passage teaches?
     
  3. Van

    Van
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2011
    Messages:
    9,516
    Likes Received:
    49
    Verse 5 is describing the attitudes and attributes of our Apostle Paul. Then, starting in verse 6, Paul describes the response of the Thessalonians to the Gospel of Christ.

    Rather than this straightforward understanding of the passage, the Calvinist is attempting to claim, they not only heard the message of Paul, but were also enabled by Irresistible Grace.

    This is just another "this is like that, and that is like this other thing," therefore the attributes of Paul becomes Irresistible Grace.
     
  4. The Biblicist

    The Biblicist
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 13, 2011
    Messages:
    14,185
    Likes Received:
    207
    A Combination of both. If you can't figure out what I am trying to show, then I can't help you very much as I state it as clearly as I could. What did I say verse four shows? Answer: that they can know their election. What did I say verse five shows? The evidence whereby they can know. What is the evidence? The gospel did not come to them in "word only" BUT ALSO "in....in....in" three explict effectual characteristic ways as "much assurance" is an effectual product. What was the ultimate effects whereby they can know their election? They "became followers" of the same "manner of men" who preached the gospel when they "received" it - thus the way in which it came was TRANSFORMATIONAL - which is another evidence of their election.

    What conclusions can be drawn?

    1. You can know the elect by these characteristics
    2. The gospel can come in word only non-transformational way - general call
    3. The gospel can come in MORE than word only "in...in...in" which is that is transformational - effectual call because it produces "much assurance" it concludes in becoming followers of those who preached due to when it was "received.""
     
    #4 The Biblicist, Jan 13, 2015
    Last edited by a moderator: Jan 13, 2015
  5. The Biblicist

    The Biblicist
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 13, 2011
    Messages:
    14,185
    Likes Received:
    207
    More personal opinions completely void of any contextual based substance - contradictory to exegetical evidence - pathetic is the word.
     
    #5 The Biblicist, Jan 13, 2015
    Last edited by a moderator: Jan 13, 2015
  6. The Biblicist

    The Biblicist
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 13, 2011
    Messages:
    14,185
    Likes Received:
    207
    No, it is not. It is describing the attributes of the gospel itself in two different manners of coming (1) when it comes in word only versus (2) when it does not come in word only. Only the latter part of verse 5 introduces what "manner of men" preached that gospel.

    No, he is describing the transforming CONSEQUENCES when the gospel was received when it came "in power, and in the Holy Ghost, and in much assurance" denying it came to them in "word only."
     
    #6 The Biblicist, Jan 13, 2015
    Last edited by a moderator: Jan 13, 2015
  7. percho

    percho
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2009
    Messages:
    3,894
    Likes Received:
    37
    Because of the power of the Spirit of Truth they became believers? Were translated from unbelief unto belief?

    Just as Paul was ignorant in unbelief before God through Jesus called him, unto belief, by giving him the Spirit of Truth.
     
  8. Van

    Van
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2011
    Messages:
    9,516
    Likes Received:
    49
    Dr. Dan Wallace says verse 5 refers to Paul, and you say his view is pathetic. Go figure. :)
     
  9. The Biblicist

    The Biblicist
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 13, 2011
    Messages:
    14,185
    Likes Received:
    207
    How clueless can one be?!? Anyone can read verse 4-6 and see a clear development in regard to how one can know they are God's elect. That is explicitly what verse 4 clearly says.

    Only the latter part of verse 5 refers to Paul. The former part refers to how the gospel does not and does come when it is "received." Only a mind poisoned by hatred for truth twists and perverts God's word like you do.

    Why not show a little honesty and quote Dr. Dan Wallace's own words and let us be the judge if he does or not, or are you afraid to do that?? I don't think he must likely is referring to last part of the verse rather than the former part.
     
  10. Van

    Van
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2011
    Messages:
    9,516
    Likes Received:
    49
    Now Dr. Wallace is clueless. Sounds like vile hateful posting to me. "Only a mind poisoned by hatred for truth twists and perverts God's word like you do." Sounds like more of the same.

     
    #10 Van, Jan 16, 2015
    Last edited by a moderator: Jan 16, 2015
  11. The Biblicist

    The Biblicist
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 13, 2011
    Messages:
    14,185
    Likes Received:
    207
    Dr. Wallace did not say what you claim he says. You are perverting Dr. Wallace. You are slandering Dr. Wallace.

    Knowing, brethren beloved, your election of God.
    5 For our gospel came not unto you in word only, but also in power, and in the Holy Ghost, and in much assurance; as ye know what manner of men we were among you for your sake.



    Dr. Wallace said no such thing. Anyone that can understand English can see that the first part of the text is not about Paul but about how the gospel did not versus how it did come to "YOU" it is about the Thessalonians not about Paul - read it!

    For our gospel came not unto you in word only, but also in power, and in the Holy Ghost, and in much assurance;

    Neither is the latter part of the text exclusively about Paul as you claim, as it too is primarily about the "YOU" or the Thessalonians and their knowledge not merely about "Paul" but about a plural group "WE" or can't you read

    as ye know what manner of men we were among you for your sake.


    Can you read English? The latter part continues to be about the Thessalonians primarily and their knowledge of not merely Paul but about the "manner of men" or PLURAL "we" that brought the gospel to them.

    The former part of the text explains about "OUR GOSPEL" and how it came to them, while the latter part of the text speaks about the "manner of men" who brought the gospel unto them.

    Grammatically the subject in the first phrase is "Gospel" while "our" is an adjective modifying the gospel. The verb is "came" and the direct object is "you" while the three prepositional phrases explain how the gospel came to them. Plain-n-simple!

    Dr. Wallace cannot possibly be that clueless as you present him, and that is most likely why you still refuse to show the readers his quotation because you are slandering him.
     
  12. The Biblicist

    The Biblicist
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 13, 2011
    Messages:
    14,185
    Likes Received:
    207
    Verse 4 provides the primary topic that Paul is dealing with in verses 4-6. The primary topic or subject is how they can know they are the elect of God. This is so plainly stated it requires blinders to deny it. Just read it.

    Verse 5 provides the evidence for how they can know their election. It would be stupid of Paul to introduce the topic about KNOWING their election if he did not provide anything by which their election could be known. Yet, that is exactly the thinking of my detractors.

    1. They can know their election by how the Gospel DID NOT COME to them or "in word only."

    2. They can know their election by how the gospel DID COME to them:
    "but also in.....in....in..."

    3. They can know their election by how the gospel DID COME to them in transforming power so that they "became followers of us" or "became" like the "manner of men" who brought the gospel to them when it came that way.

    This is the simple and easy and clear meaning of this passage. One must put on blinders intentionally due to hatred of the truth to avoid this clear meaning.
     
  13. Van

    Van
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2011
    Messages:
    9,516
    Likes Received:
    49
    There is no point is discussion with people who say Dr. Wallace did not say "Verse 5 reflects on the experience of Paul and his fellow preachers."

    Then after quoting the NET footnote, the Calvinist says, "Dr. Wallace cannot possibly be that clueless as you present him, and that is most likely why you still refuse to show the readers his quotation because you are slandering him." Nuff said.
    __________________
     
  14. The Biblicist

    The Biblicist
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 13, 2011
    Messages:
    14,185
    Likes Received:
    207
    As I predicted correctly, Dr. Wallace made his statement concerning the latter part of verse five not the former part. Van purposedly has tried to deceive the readers, and Dr. Wallace was not as clueless as Van represented him.
     
  15. Van

    Van
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2011
    Messages:
    9,516
    Likes Received:
    49
    "Dr. Wallace = Verse 5....

    "Dr. Biblicist = Dr Wallace meant to say the first part of verse 5....

    Nuff said. :)
     
  16. The Biblicist

    The Biblicist
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 13, 2011
    Messages:
    14,185
    Likes Received:
    207
    Verse 5 contains two different segements dealing with two different things. This is obvious to a person who knows no Greek at all. The first phrase deals with "our gospel" and how it came to the Thessalonican's while the second segment deals with what "manner of men" who declared that gospel to the Thessalonicans.

    This is so obvious to even non-Greek bible students, it is amazing that you would think that Dr. Wallace or other readers on this forum are so stupid to believe that he is referring to the first segment of the verse when it is obvious it is the second segment he is referring to. You are intentionally perverting Dr. Wallace and making him look like an uneducated idiot. Dr. Wallace would laugh you off this forum. Dr. Wallace is a grammarian and the subject in the first segment is "our gospel" not Paul or his companions. The word "our" is not the subject but the adjective that modifies the subject "gospel." Dr. Wallace is not so stupid he would claim the first segment is about Paul or Paul's companions as that would be intentionally perverting the Greek grammar as well as the English grammar. Grow up and use your quotes honestly.
     
    #16 The Biblicist, Jan 17, 2015
    Last edited by a moderator: Jan 17, 2015
  17. The Biblicist

    The Biblicist
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 13, 2011
    Messages:
    14,185
    Likes Received:
    207
    Any student of scripture can easily see on the basis of the English translation or Greek text that verse 5 is composed of two complete sentences:

    For our gospel came not unto you in word only, but also in power, and in the Holy Ghost, and in much assurance; as ye know what manner of men we were among you for your sake.

    The first aspect does not talk about "what manner of men we were among you" but HOW "our gospel came...unto you"

    Paul does not say in the first phrase how "our WE came unto... you...." but how "our GOSPEL came unto....you"

    However, Van would have you believe that Dr. Wallace is perverting the first phrase to say how "WE came unto you" or the "manner of men we were among you."

    Furthermore, the subject introduced is "knowing....your election of God" (v. 4). The Thessalonicans could not know their election of God by how "we came unto you" or "the manner of men we were among you." That might provide a basis for the preachers knowing their own election but it does not provide the Thessalonicans anything about knowing their own election.

    Verses 5-6 is the basis for what verse 4 says they can know - "their election of God." They can know their election by how "our gospel came..unto you"!

    1. It did not come unto you "in word only"

    2. It did come to you "in power" and "in the Holy Ghost" and "in much assurance."

    3. This does not describe how "WE" (Paul) came but how the "GOSPEL came" unto them.

    4. These three prepositional phrase demand the gospel came to them in TRANSFORMING POWER and that is the basis for knowing your election of God.

    The proof the gospel came in TRANSFORMING POWER is not merely the explicit statements that it did ("in power....in the Holy Ghost") but especially the last prepositional phrase "in much assurance." Multitudes of listeners of the gospel go hear it with the physical ear and walk away without ANY ASSURANCE of their salvation. ASSURANCE is an INWARD reality produced by the power of God when saving a person. No person is saved without knowing it. Salvation is a TRANSFORMATION into a new creature that cannot occur with experiencing a complete inward transformation.

    5. The final proof that the gospel came unto them in TRANSFORMING power is that they "became follower of us" or were transformed into the same "manner of men" that brought the gospel to them.
     
  18. The Biblicist

    The Biblicist
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 13, 2011
    Messages:
    14,185
    Likes Received:
    207
    Any student of scripture can easily see on the basis of the English translation or Greek text that verse 5 is composed of two complete sentences:

    For our gospel came not unto you in word only, but also in power, and in the Holy Ghost, and in much assurance; as ye know what manner of men we were among you for your sake.

    The first aspect does not talk about "what manner of men we were among you" but HOW "our gospel came...unto you"

    Paul does not say in the first phrase how "our WE came unto... you...." but how "our GOSPEL came unto....you"

    However, Van would have you believe that Dr. Wallace is perverting the first phrase to say how "WE came unto you" or the "manner of men we were among you."

    Furthermore, the subject introduced is "knowing....your election of God" (v. 4). The Thessalonicans could not know their election of God by how "we came unto you" or "the manner of men we were among you." That might provide a basis for the preachers knowing their own election but it does not provide the Thessalonicans anything about knowing their own election.

    Verses 5-6 is the basis for what verse 4 says they can know - "their election of God." They can know their election by how "our gospel came..unto you"!

    1. It did not come unto you "in word only"

    2. It did come to you "in power" and "in the Holy Ghost" and "in much assurance."

    3. This does not describe how "WE" came but how the "GOSPEL came"

    4. These three prepositional phrase demand the gospel came to them in TRANSFORMING POWER and that is the basis for knowing your election of God.

    The proof the gospel came in TRANSFORMING POWER is not merely the explicit statements that it did ("in power....in the Holy Ghost") but especially the last prepositional phrase "in much assurance." Multitudes of listeners of the gospel go hear it with the physical ear and walk away without ANY ASSURANCE of their salvation. ASSURANCE is an INWARD reality produced by the power of God when saving a person. No person is saved without knowing it. Salvation is a TRANSFORMATION into a new creature that cannot occur with experiencing a complete inward transformation.

    5. The final proof that the gospel came unto them in TRANSFORMING power is that they "became follower of us" or were transformed into the same "manner of men" that brought the gospel to them.

    The silly idea or silly interpretation that verses 5-6 is all about how the preachers came to them, may supply evidence for knowing the election of the preachers by God but it certainly provides no basis for the Thessalonican's to know their own election of God, which is the point being made by Paul in verse 4.

    The only excuse for interpreting verses 5-6 as having its primary reference to the preachers is ignorance or inability to properly interpret scripture or simple hatred for the truth. One characteristic of a false teacher is that they use a secondary truth found in a text to deny the primary truth of the text. This is exactly the method being used in regard to verse 5 by those who claim the primary truth of the text is about Paul and his preaching companions when verse 4 introduces the primary subject while verse 5 provides the primary response to that subject.
     
    #18 The Biblicist, Jan 18, 2015
    Last edited by a moderator: Jan 18, 2015
  19. Van

    Van
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2011
    Messages:
    9,516
    Likes Received:
    49
    Dr. Wallace did not say or mean, in the first part of verse 5, or in the last part of verse 5.

    I think Dr. Wallace, who is sometimes mistaken, got it right in his reading of 1 Thessalonians 1:5
     
  20. The Biblicist

    The Biblicist
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 13, 2011
    Messages:
    14,185
    Likes Received:
    207
    Who says he did not? YOU??? Some final authority you are about his words. Why don't you quote his words in their full context and let the readers of this forum be the judge of that? If fact, you are so afraid of being exposed you wont even give the reference or location of your quotation of Dr. Wallace. He who hides has a good reason to hide and you are hiding the source of your quotation.

    Anyone who can read English can easily see that the subject introduced in versre 4 and your application of Dr. Wallace's NON-SPECIFIC application is pure nonsense.
     

Share This Page

Loading...