A literal translation of the first part of this verse would be “and for this (reason) also we give thanks to God unceasingly.” “And” and “also” represent the same Greek word, here used twice. Most translations omit the first “and,” but Revised Standard Version and Good News Translation retain it. Some New Testament writers, under Hebrew influence, begin sentences frequently with “and.” Mark is an extreme example of this tendency. Paul begins with “and” less frequently, but he does it more often than modern writers of English do. When Paul uses “and,” it is likely to have more significance that when Mark uses it, and therefore a greater impact on his original readers. Where he does begin sentences with “and,” his purpose is often to indicate a division of medium importance, to introduce a new development, but one which is nevertheless related to what has gone before. He is saying, in effect, “Don’t forget what I have just told you, but bear it in mind while I tell you something more.” Compare Romans 13.11; 1 Corinthians 2.1; 3.1; also 1 Corinthians 12.31b (though here there is an implied contrast with what precedes, and Bible en français courant and Die Bibel im heutigen Deutsch translate “but”). In modern English, “and” sometimes has a similar function of marking a transition within the treatment of a given theme, and that is how Good News Translation uses the word here.
A related question is whether the words “for this (reason)” refer back to a reason for thankfulness which Paul has already mentioned, or forward to a fresh reason he is about to state. It is curious to note that the French Bible de Jérusalem takes the phrase as backward-looking (“that is why, on our side, we never stop thanking God that…”), and the parallel English Jerusalem Bible takes it as forward-looking (“another reason why we constantly thank God for you is that…”). The context does not provide an easy answer to the problem. It would be difficult to relate Paul’s thanksgiving to what he has been discussing immediately before, since 2.1-12 has been concerned with Paul’s own activity, and not with the Thessalonians’ response. It would be quite possible, on the other hand, for Paul to be recalling and summing up the reasons for thankfulness which he has mentioned in 1.2-10. There are certainly points of contact between 2.13-16 and earlier passages; the references to the effectiveness of the Thessalonians’ faith (1.3, cf. 2.13b), to the warmth of their response (1.6, cf. 2.13), to the theme of imitation (1.6, cf. 2.14), to the power of the Christian message (1.5, cf. 2.13), and to the persecution experienced by the Thessalonians (1.6, cf. 2.14) and by Paul himself (2.2, cf. 2.15).
Together with these similarities, however, there are differences of both content and emphasis. The passage beginning when we brought you God’s message is more than a summing up of what has gone before. Paul has not said earlier that the Thessalonians received the Christian message as the word of God (God’s message), nor has he draw the parallel with the sufferings of Christians in Judea (v. 14). It is therefore probably better to understand “for this (reason)” as pointing ahead to the words which follow.
The problem then becomes one of making it clear to the reader of the translation that the reference is forward-looking The English pronoun “this” is frequently backward-looking. Good News Translation (cf. Translator’s New Testament Bible en français courant Bijbel in Gewone Taal) tries to override this tendency by replacing “this” with there is and by adding another (there is another reason), at the cost of perhaps over-emphasizing the differences between verses 13-16 and the preceding passage. Die Bibel im heutigen Deutsch makes the forward reference unambiguously clear by reversing the order of 13a and 13b; “When we brought you God’s message, you received it … as God’s word…. For this we thank God unceasingly.” Because of the difficulty in indicating the direction of reference in the phrase “for this (reason),” the solution adopted in the German translation Die Bibel im heutigen Deutsch is highly recommended, that is, “When we brought you God’s message … you heard and accepted it…. Therefore, we thank God…,” or “… because of this we thank God,” or “… because of what you did we thank God.” Many languages lack a noun such as “reason” (as used in the present context), but they can always express a causal relation by some type of conjunction or arrangement of clauses.
The second “and” of verse 13 has been understood in at least three ways. The first interpretation, suggested by the order of the Greek words, is to take we and “and” (“also”) closely together, suggesting “we, like other people, give thanks,” but the context does not support this interpretation. Many translations (including King James Version Luther 1984 Bible en français courant) render the second “and” as “also,” but relate it to “for this reason.” This rendering fits well with taking “for this reason” as forward-looking and with emphasizing the distinction between the present passage and what has gone before. However, Moule (167) gives reason for suggesting the translation “that is in fact why we give thanks,” linking the Greek “and” with “we give thanks.” New English Bible follows this interpretation with its “this is why we give thanks.” It is probably the most satisfactory of the three solutions.
When we brought you God’s message, you heard it and accepted it. The text expresses very concisely the following basic structures: (1) you received the word, (2) you heard the word, (3) we brought the word, (4) the word came from God, (5) you accepted the word. The logical order would appear to be (4), (3), (2), (1), (5). The structure of the Greek emphasizes (5), which is technically “new information,” while (1), expressed in a subordinate participle, is assumed or old information. But what precisely is the distinction in meaning between (2), (1), and (5) and what is the relation between them? The relation is not contrastive (the contrast is expressed later in the verse) but unfolding: each statement in the series is defined more clearly by the one which logically follows it. To hear the word (2) does not imply any response, positive or negative: (1) and (5) make it clear that the response was active and positive. (1) in Paul’s vocabulary is a technical term for receiving something that is handed on, in this case the Christian message. Among the first Christians, as in Judaism, a close personal relationship was set up between the teacher or rabbi and his pupils, as living links through which a tradition was handed on. Much more is involved than the passive receiving of information. The use of a word evoking this relationship is a point of contact with 2.7b-12. Between (1) and (5) there is considerable overlap of meaning, but in (5) the implied setting is that of a host welcoming a guest, rather than that of a pupil receiving wisdom from a teacher. The two verbs reinforce each other. Good News Translation (cf. Bible en français courant Die Bibel im heutigen Deutsch) combines them in the one word accepted.
Not as man’s message but as God’s message, which indeed it is. So far, the different elements in the transmission of the Christian message have been closely intertwined in Paul’s thought. Now Paul makes two closely related statements, the first of which includes a subordinate contrast:
(1) you received it
(a) as a message from God,
(b) not as a (mere) message from men:
(2) it really is a message from God.
In (1) the emphasis is on the Thessalonians’ welcoming response to the message. Paul is not here concerned to deny what he has just affirmed, that the message did in one sense come from or through human messengers. There is no corresponding negative statement in (2), such as “it really is not a message from men.” Nor does (2) mean merely “what I am telling you is true: it is a word of God,” but “it is in reality a word of God.” Indeed, as most translations make clear, refers to the truth of the Christian message itself, and not to Paul’s statement about it.
A more literal translation, “you received not a word of men but … a word of God,” would be misleading, as even King James Version realizes (“ye received it not as the word of men”), since Paul is here speaking of the Thessalonians’ response.
It is extremely difficult in some languages to render this second sentence of verse 13 in such a way as to do justice to the intricate interrelations. The problems are made more complex by some of the lexical difficulties which may be encountered. For example, in some languages one cannot speak of “bringing a message.” Rather, it is necessary to say “to come and speak a message”; obviously, “to bring a message” involves both coming and speaking. Furthermore, it is often difficult to speak of “a message from God,” since it must be more clearly indicated that God is the original source of the message. Therefore, when we brought you God’s message must be rendered in some languages as “when we came and told you what God had told us to say.” At the same time one should avoid a translation which would imply that Paul and his colleagues were simply repeating verbally what God had dictated to them.
You heard it and accepted it. In many languages to “accept a message” is equivalent to “believe a message.” Hence, “you heard what we said and believed it.”
In order to make clear that this message was “not man’s message,” it may be necessary to be more specific, since a literal translation of this expression may seem to be a denial of Paul and his colleagues as human messengers. It may be necessary to introduce the positive statement about the message being God’s message, before introducing the negative statement, not as man’s message. Hence, one may be required to translate “you believed it as a message which God spoke, and not as words which just came from people.”
Which indeed it is may be added directly to God’s message (as in Good News Translation), or it may be made a separate sentence, for example, “Indeed these words do come from God.”
For God is at work in you who believe can also mean “for it (the message) is at work in you who believe.” Most translations follow this second interpretation, though New English Bible mentions the first in a footnote. The idea of a word having an active power of its own is common in both Old and New Testaments (e.g. Jeremiah 23.29; Isaiah 49.2; Ephesians 6.17; Hebrews 4.12; Revelation 1.16). The difference of meaning between the two interpretations is slight, since Paul has just said emphatically that the message comes from God. However, if the second interpretation is chosen, this will have consequences for the translation of “word” or message. The idea of a “word” acting or working is strange in English outside of church circles. The reference is (1) to a spoken, not to a written message; (2) to a complete message, not to an individual word; (3) to a message which produces effects (Biblia Dios Habla Hoy “gives its results”). Bijbel in Gewone Taal links the last part of this verse closely with what precedes, making explicit a logical relation which is implicit in the Greek: “That it [the word] is indeed [from God] is proved by the effect is has on you believers.”
The verb translated is at work regularly refers to the activity of God or a supernatural power. The Good News Translation translation is almost certainly correct. The Bible de Jérusalem note “is made active” (explained as God acting by his word in the believers) and Moffatt “proves effective” follow a less natural understanding of the Greek, and it is significant that the translators who follow this line either feel the need to add an explanation (like the note in Bible de Jérusalem) or to phrase their translation in such a way that it becomes almost indistinguishable from the first interpretation (like Moffatt).
If one adopts the interpretation “the message which is working in you who believe,” it may be rendered as “the message is producing results in you who believe,” or “… has an effect…,” or “… is influencing you….”
However, the interpretation which makes God the agent of the activity within the believer is usually easier to translate, since God as an agent “who works in people” is far more understandable than “the message working in people.” Because of the indefiniteness of this activity, it may be necessary to say “for God is doing something in you who believe,” or “for God is changing you who believe.” It may be impossible to use here a word meaning literally “to work,” since this might imply physical labor. It is God’s activity to change and modify people’s thoughts and behavior that is referred to.
Quoted with permission from Ellingworth, Paul and Nida, Eugene A. A Handbook on Paul’s First Letter to the Thessalonians. (UBS Handbook Series). New York: UBS, 1976. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .