Featured Exposition of 1 Thes. 1:4-6

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.

Let us just identify the four basic grammatical parts of the first clause in this verse.

1. The Subject - "Gospel"
2. The verb - "came"
3. The Direct object "you"
4. Prepositional phrases - "in....in....in....in."

Now let us identify the four basic grammatical parts of the second clause in this verse

1. Subject "ye"
2. verb "know"
3. Direct object - "what"
4. Prepositional phrases "among you....for your sake"


Now, Van claims that Dr. Wallace supports his view that the first clause is descriptive of Paul instead of descriptive of the manner in how the gospel of Paul came to the Thessalonican's.

We can agree with Dr. Wallace that in the general sense verse five relates to the gospel and Person of Paul. We feel that it is in this general sense is in view by Dr.Wallace.

However, it is indisputable that both clauses do not refer to Paul in the same sense. The first deals with the GOSPEL of Paul and how it came to the Thessalonican's and that is purely a matter settled by grammar and terms. The second clause deals with the PERSON of Paul and His associates and that is a matter of grammar and terms.

So we can agree with Dr. Wallace in a GENERAL sense that verse 5 refers to Paul and his associates, but we cannot agree with Van's use of Dr. Wallace's GENERAL statement to be proof that both clauses refer to Paul in an EQUAL sense. Van is attempting to invalidate the grammar and meaning of the first clause by taking Dr. Wallace's GENERAL comment about verse five and claiming Dr. Wallace is referring to both clauses equally in the same sense. As a grammarian Dr. Wallace would never make that kind of application to verse 5 as that would demonstrate pure ignorance of both English and Greek Grammar.

So, until Van can produce a SPECIFIC statement by Dr. Wallace that both clauses EQUALLY refer to the Person of Paul and his associates he is abusing Dr. Wallace. Perhaps that is why Van refuses to provide the source document from which he is drawing Dr. Wallace's statement. We would ask him to provide the source document so that readers on this forum can see if Dr. Wallace is merely making a GENERAL statement or applying this specifically to the first clause EQUALLY with the second clause.

 

No one has been able to read what Dr. Wallace said on this subject because you continue to refuse to properly cite your reference. So why should anyone believe you are quoting him???? Especially when it is quite apparent you lack even the common sense to understand English, much less Greek.

 

Where is Dr. Wallace's quotation to be found, located? Where is the source of this quotation taken from? Where?

However, once again there is nothing in the quotation that contradicts a single solitary word of my interpretation, as I freely admitted verse 5 is about how Paul's gospel came unto them and what manner of Paul's Person was among them. However, Van is attempting to make Dr. Wallace deny it is about how Paul's gospel came unto them IN ADDITION TO Paul's person among them. Verse 4 provides the subject, verses 5-6 complete the subject introduced. Go figure!

 

tn Grk “just as you know what sort of people we were among you for your sakes.” Verse 5 reflects on the experience of Paul and his fellow preachers; v. 6 begins to describe the Thessalonians’ response. - Emphasis mine

As I predicted, the full note shows that he is commenting on the final phrase as it is ONLY the final phrase that is quoted in the footenote.

Hence there is no issue between my interpretation and Dr. Wallace's specific application of this footnote. CASE CLOSED

 

If you go online and read the entire commentary on 1 Thessalonians 1:5 it is subdivided into three different commentary notes (notes 11-13). Notes 11-12 deal with the first clause (BTW both notes are consistent with my interpretation of the first clause). Note 13 deals with the last clause and leaves no doubt to the reader exactly what words Dr. Wallace (I assume is the commentator) is referring to as note 13 quotes verbatim the actual part of verse 5 he refers to and it is that part I predicted he was commenting upon. So Dr. Wallace DOES NOT contradict a word I have said.

However, Van has quoted Dr. Wallace with the very intent to convey that Dr. Wallace was commenting upon the whole verse, which he was not, and that Dr. Wallace's comments were contradictory to my commentary on the former part of verse 5, which again perverting the intent of Dr. Wallace's comment.

So Van is guilty of perverting Dr. Wallace's words by making his comment appear, and by literally stating that Dr. Wallace's comment was proof that my commentary, grammar were incorrect. That was and is a lie, pure and simple as this footenote does not even address the former part of the verse at all.

 

Either you cannot read English, or have not read my previous post

First, you quoted and wrongly applied Dr. Wallaces comment by falsely claiming they repudiated my interpretation of 1 Thessalonians when they do not.

Second, you quoted and wrongly applied Dr. Wallaces comment to apply to the whole verse when he explicitly quotes in his comment right at its beginning what aspect of verse 5 he is referring to.

Third, any reader can go on line to NET 1 Thessalonians 1:5 where all can plainly see the verse is divided up under three different comments and Van ignored the previous two comments dealing withe first half of the verse and selectively chose the third comment explicitly applied to the final clause of the verse and then lies to everyone saying it referred to the whole verse.

[snipped - calling another a "liar" is not allowed]

Finally, here is the whole verse with its footenotes for the readers to see for themselves who is really telling the truth:

1:5 in that 11 our gospel did not come to you merely in words, 12 but in power and in the Holy Spirit and with deep conviction (surely you recall the character we displayed when we came among you to help you). 13

Note that footnote "13" is found at the end of the text not the beginning or middle. There are other footenotes dealing with the beginning and middle of the text.

Now here are the full comments to all three footnotes:

11 tn Or “because.”

12 tn Or “speech,” or “an act of speaking.”

13 tn Grk “just as you know what sort of people we were among you for your sakes.” Verse 5 reflects on the experience of Paul and his fellow preachers; v. 6 begins to describe the Thessalonians’ response.

Now, notice that comment #13 plainly and explicitly cites verbatim that part of verse five it is commenting upon! Verse 5 does reflect on the experience of Paul and his follow preachers" but it reflects on other things as well, as footenotes 11-12 show. However, Dr. Wallace is not speaking about the aspects of verse 5 that speak on other things but cites the very part of verse five that does speak on Paul's experience and his fellow preachers. This is so simple and so clear that only a biased interpreter intent on making scripture fit their own agenda could miss.

Reader, YOU JUDGE who is lying and perverting and attempting to use Dr. Wallace deceptively. If the evidence proves someone is lying then they have lied. You judge what the evidence demands. When someone willfully and repeatedly lies it speaks volumes of their character. He should not be allowed to get away with this, as there are others on this forum who are not as capable of exposing such perverse use of data and such a person should not be allowed to repeatedly use such obvious deception and get away with it.

 

Verse 4 introduces the subject and that is how a person can know their election of God. This is so clearly stated that it is impossible to deny it without looking foolish!

Verses 5-6 provide how they can know their election of God. Even Dr. Wallace's commentary on verse 5 in his first two footenotes (#'s 11, 12) acknowlege that the gospel did not come to them just in verbalized form, but came in POWER and in the HOLY GHOST and in MUCH ASSURANCE.

If it came to all human beings this way then that would then prove that all human beings are the elect of God. However, Paul is explaining how they can know they are the elect of God, and thus this is how the gospel comes to the elect of God.

In the latter part of verse 5 and in verse 6 it comes to them in TRANSFORMING POWER as they "became" followers of the "manner of men" when the gospel came this way. The whole purpose of bringing into this context "what manner of men" Paul and his fellow preachers were is to show one more characteristic they can know their election of God - the gospel came with transforming power to change them into the same "manner of men."

The gospel does not come to all human beings in this manner or else all human beings would be the elect of God.

 

Ok, I will let the above facts speak for themselves.

I apologize to Van for calling him a liar in writing on this forum.

 

Getting back on tract concerning what the text says.

 

However, any reader can see that these comments deal ONLY WITH ONE ASPECT OF THE VERSE, just as verse 13 deals with ONLY ONLY ASPECT OF THE VERSE and it is the part explicity spelled out at the beginning of the comment. If he had any other aspect of the verse in mind, there would be no need to only quote ONE ASPECT of the verse.

I think you are the only one on the forum that believes that! If not, let any other reader come to your defence! The facts are obvious and they speak for themselves.

If what you say is true, then the grammar should reflect that. Paul and his associates should be the object of the verb "came" if that were true. However, the object of the verb is "YOU" not Paul or his associates. Who is the contextual "YOU" Van? It is the thessalonican's addressed in verse 4.


For our gospel [subject] came [verb] 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 subject is "Gospel" while "our" is an adjective modifying "gospel."

Second, neither does the text says "our attributes" came in power, and in the Holy Spirit, etc. but that is what your interpretation would demand.

Third, such an interpretation might demonstrate to Paul and his associates that they are the elect of God but how would their attributes prove the Thesalonican's were the elect of God. Your interpretation makes no common sense and is contradicted by the facts of grammar.

 

The text does not support or demand that it should be interpreted or read as Van demands and that is:

"For OUR ATTRIBUTES came unto you, in power, in the Holy Ghost and in much assurance"

Paul's point is that how the gospel came to them (in...in...in) proves their election AND in addition it proves the "manner of men" who delivered that gospel to them are also the elect because the Gospel transformed them TO BE LIKE those who preached it to them.

 

Literal translation of the Greek WHAT????? If the second sentence had to do with the WHOLE verse than the first sentence would be a translation of the Greet text for the WHOLE verse but it is not! He gives a translation of PART of the verse because it is THAT PART the second sentence makes a commentary on which is OBVIOUS because of what the text quoted speaks about.

However, neither "we" or "our attributes" are the subject of the first part of the verse. So your interpretation of Dr. Wallace's footenote, as well as your interpretation of the whole verse is grammatical false! If Dr. Wallace or you were arguing that the former part of the verse referred to Paul and his associates or their attributes the subject of the sentence would not be "gospel" but "we" or "our character" etc. BUT IT IS NOT.

Deal with the FACTS of the text instead of READING INTO the text what it does not say and CANNOT mean.

YOUR INTERPRETATION REQUIRES THE SUBJECT IN THE FIRST SENTENCE OF THE VERSE TO READ "WE" OR "OUR ATTRIBUTES/CHARACTERISTCS" but it does not read that way and therefore cannot be interpreted that way. The subject is "gospel" not the attributes of Paul or his associates.

The object of the verb "came" is "YOU" whereas the prepositional phrases define HOW it came to "YOU". The prepositional phrases are adverbial as they define HOW the gospel came to YOU. You cannot simply ignore the grammatical structure of the text and rewrite it to suite yourself!

Paul's point is that how the gospel came to them (in...in...in) proves their election AND in addition it proves the "manner of men" who delivered that gospel to them are also the elect because the Gospel transformed them TO BE LIKE those who preached it to them.