In tried to stop us, “tried to” is implied. The verb Paul uses means to prevent or hinder, either by words (cf. the English “forbid”) or by actions. Phillips‘ “refused to allow” limits the reference to verbal pressure, but more is probably included here. In English, “prevent,” like its more common equivalent “stop,” includes the idea that the pressure is effective. This suggestion should be avoided here, since the Jews clearly did not succeed in preventing Paul from preaching to the Gentiles. That is why Good News Translation inserts tried to. Revised Standard Version and New English Bible have “hindering.” The Greek implies continual pressure over a period of time.

In some languages an attempt which does not succeed must be clearly marked as such, for example, “they tried to stop us from preaching … but they could not.”

Gentile is a technical word which the TEV word list defines as “a person who is not a Jew.” (The Greek word can sometimes mean “peoples,” but here there is an explicit contrast with Jews.) “Pagans” (cf. Luther 1984 La Sainte Bible: Nouvelle version Segond révisée Le Nouveau Testament. Version Synodale) emphasizes the religious aspect of the distinction between Jews and non-Jews, to the exclusion of the racial aspect. It also has bad overtones which were far from Paul’s mind. Biblia Dios Habla Hoy (cf. Phillips) avoids the need for an explanatory note by translating “those who are not Jews,” while Bible en français courant has “non-Jews” and Die Bibel im heutigen Deutsch “the other peoples.”

Preaching to the Gentiles the message that would bring them salvation. The more literal Revised Standard Version (cf. New English Bible) “speaking to the Gentiles that they may be saved” fails to express an implied but quite specific reference to the communication of the Christian message. Good News Translation accordingly inserts message (cf. Bible en français courant), Die Bibel im heutigen Deutsch “the Good News”; Moffatt has “words of salvation” and Phillips “the message by which they could be saved.” “Speak” (Good News Translation preaching) does not, however, suggest a formal discourse within the setting of public worship, usually in a church building. Phillips avoids this misunderstanding by translating “tell”; Translator’s New Testament, similarly, has “telling the Gentiles how they may be saved”; Bible en français courant and Die Bibel im heutigen Deutsch have “announce” (cf. Bijbel in Gewone Taal “make known to the Gentiles how they can be saved.”)

In many languages it is impossible to talk about “bringing people salvation.” This would be especially true of the activity of a “message,” since the real agent of salvation is always God. Accordingly, the last part of this first sentence in verse 16 may be recast as “the message by which God would save them,” or “the words that told them how God would save them.” In some languages “save” is translated “to be given a new liver by God,” or “God has given them new hearts.” Another possibility is “to receive new life from God.”

In this way they have completed the full total of the sins they have always committed. The difficulties here are cultural as well as linguistic, so that even the clearest translation will not solve all the problems of understanding. In speaking of a full total, Paul may have in mind the rabbinical idea of God’s keeping a record of a person’s good and bad deeds and judging the total. Genesis 15.16 suggests a similar idea, but Bible de Jérusalem and Jerusalem Bible seem to go too far in labeling Paul’s words as a direct quotation of this passage. The expression total is not explicit, and some translations remove or change it. Bible en français courant has “sum,” Bible de Jérusalem “culmination,” Phillips “finishing touch.”

It is difficult to decide whether the “filling up” or “completing” refers to the whole series of the Jews’ misdeeds, or only to the last sin mentioned, that of trying to keep the gospel from reaching non-Jews. The form of the Greek verb suggest action(s) at one or more specific points in time, and the idea of repeated action is emphasized by the word always. Good News Translation‘s image of a total amount being filled or completed again and again makes sense of this text, but it does not seem to have any parallel. New English Bible‘s “have been filling up the full measure of their guilt” is ambiguous, since “have been filling” could (in this context wrongly) suggest a process rather then repeated action. Jerusalem Bible‘s “they never stop trying to finish off the sins they have begun” conveys well the idea of repeated action, but unfortunately implies that their sinning was interrupted! Paul’s thought, here as in many other places, is compressed and therefore not entirely clear, but the main elements are: (1) the Jews have sinned repeatedly in the past, and (2) now the total of their sins has been completed. In (2) Paul is probably referring to the last sin in his list, as being the last sin, or at least the last type of sin, for which there will be time before the End. As the last part of the verse will show and many other passages in 1 and 2 Thessalonians confirm, Paul’s mind is full of the nearness of Christ’s coming and the judgment which will accompany it.

The translation of in this way they have completed the full total of the sins they have always committed is perhaps even more difficult than the interpretation, especially if the translation must be done in a language which employs only a verb for sins. One can sometimes say “this is only the last of all the sins that they have always been committing.” The use of “all” is one way of reproducing the concept of “full total.” If a language requires a verb for “sins,” one may translate such as “and this finally is how they have sinned, just like all the other times that they have been sinning.”

The last sentence in verse 16, and now God’s anger has at last come down on them, is abrupt. The abruptness is reinforced by the verb has come down, which suggests a sudden event. Best translates “has caught up with them.” For the meaning of anger, see the notes on 1.10. God’s is implied by the use of the definite article (King James Version cf. Luther 1984 “the anger”). In using this expression, Paul, like a good Jew, commonly omits the name of God. For the reader of today, “the anger” would be at best too general, and at worst unclear. Accordingly, Revised Standard Version Bible en français courant Biblia Dios Habla Hoy Die Bibel im heutigen Deutsch Bijbel in Gewone Taal Barclay (cf. Phillips) like Good News Translation add “God’s.” Bible de Jérusalem has “the wrath” with an explanatory note, and Moffatt has “the Wrath” (capital W), but neither solution is appropriate for a translation intended to be read aloud. Jerusalem Bible and New English Bible have “retribution.”

In some languages God’s anger must be translated as “God is judging them harshly” or “God is angry with them and judging them.” As already noted in 1.10, anger includes the concept of judging.

The translations of at last vary. Moule (70) suggests “completely,” under Hebrew influence. Most translations, on the other hand, see some kind of a reference to time, which would fit in well with the preceding always. Two kinds of time reference are possible: (1) backward: at last (Good News Translation cf. Jerusalem Bible Bible en français courant; Phillips “finally,” cf. Bible de Jérusalem La Sainte Bible: Nouvelle version Segond révisée Le Nouveau Testament. Version Synodale Bijbel in Gewone Taal), contrasting a single recent event with a preceding period: ——>——|- and (2) forward: “to the end” (cf. Luther 1984 Moffatt; New English Bible “for good and all”; Die Bibel im heutigen Deutsch “God’s irrevocable anger”), linking a decisive event with its future consequences: -|——>——. The backward reference seems to suit better both the immediate context and Paul’s general view of time.

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 .

The emotive tone becomes stronger in verse 15. The reading the prophets is certainly better than “their own prophets” (mentioned in New English Bible in a note). The punctuation of the UBS Greek New Testament: “killing Jesus and the prophets, and persecuting us” is generally accepted, though one or two commentators have argued for a punctuation which would give the meaning: “killing Jesus, and persecuting the prophets and us.” Hostile translates a word usually applied to such objects as the wind blowing against someone.

The participles translated killed and persecuted refer to action at a specific point in time. Displeasing, on the other hand, refers to a permanent or at least a long-lasting state.

Note that Paul here uses the word killed rather than “crucified” to show that the Jews were as much responsible for the death of Jesus as were the Romans, even though it was the latter who directly condemned and crucified him. Since the killing of the prophets preceded the killing of Jesus, it may be necessary to introduce a temporal distinction, for example, “and had earlier killed the prophets.” The persecution of Paul and his colleagues represents still a different period of time, and a temporal distinction may be required here also, for example, “and more recently they have been causing us to suffer,” or “… have been persecuting us.”

Since the historical order of the events mentioned in the first clause of this verse differs from the linguistic order, it may be necessary in some languages to rearrange the linguistic order, for example, “who long ago killed the prophets, and then caused the Lord Jesus to be killed, and recently have been persecuting us.” It may not be possible, in some languages, to use the one pronoun “they” to refer to those who killed the prophets, caused the Lord Jesus to be killed, and persecuted the apostle and his companions, because different groups of people performed these various acts. In may be necessary to mention three distinct groups, for example, “long ago some of them killed the prophets, and then others caused the Lord Jesus to be killed, and now some of them have been persecuting us.”

The exclamation How displeasing they are to God! may need to be made an emphatic statement such as “They displease God very much!”, “They cause God to be very angry!”, or “God is surely very angry with them!”

It is not easy to find a term which can readily translate hostile. The closest equivalent is normally an expression such as “enemy,” for example, “they are very much enemies of everyone,” or “they are very much against everyone.”

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 .

Verses 14-15 and most of verse 16 (down to always committed) form a single sentence in Greek. Such long sentences in Paul’s letters often indicate high emotive content. Different but equivalent ways of doing this should be found in translating. Other formal indications of emotive content in this sentence include (1) the emphatic you which begins the sentence and is repeated later in verse 14; (2) the use of the word brothers; (3) the rhetorical repetition of and in verse 15 (more prominent in the Greek than in Good News Translation); (4) the piling-up of participles in verses 15-16a; (5) the abruptly contrasting short sentence in 16b. It is also significant, though not a formal feature, that Paul refers here to the Jews as if he were not a Jew. Formal features in Good News Translation which go some way toward conveying the emotive content include (1) the exclamation How displeasing…! and (2) the insertion of even before tried to stop us.

The first words of verse 14 are literally “for you became imitators” (Revised Standard Version). There are two objections, however, to the English word “imitators” in this context. First, it carries the suggestion, foreign to the text, of something not genuine or authentic (see the notes on 1.6). Second, it suggests that the Thessalonians took the initiative, “began to copy” (Moffatt) the churches in Judea. The context makes this meaning most unlikely. The idea is rather that, just as the Thessalonians have listened eagerly to Paul’s message (v. 13), so (Revised Standard Version‘s “for” makes the connection with v. 13 clear) the churches in Thessalonica have become like those in Judea. The point of comparison is not subjective: the courage or faith of Judeans and Thessalonians under pressure, but objective: the fact of undergoing persecution from their fellow countrymen. Their situation is similar: the same things happened to them, as Good News Translation (cf. New English Bible) puts it; they became “companions-in-distress” (Bijbel in Gewone Taal). The kind of suffering they have endured has given them the honorable status of disciples, close followers of the mother churches in Judea.

The order of the expressions the same things happened to you and happened to the churches … in Judea will need to be inverted in many languages so that the prior happening will be mentioned first and the latter happening afterwards, for example, “what happened to the churches of God in Judea also happened to you,” or “what the churches of God in Judea already experienced, you yourselves have also experienced.” In both cases, that of the churches in Judea and the Christians of Thessalonica, these persons were the objects of the persecution. Therefore it may be necessary, in some cases, to place the reference to them in the predicate of a verbal expression, for example, “The way people persecuted the churches of God in Judea is the same way in which people have persecuted you” (“people” referring to an indefinite subject). It is possible, however, to make the churches in Judea and the people in Thessalonica the subject if one uses a verb such as “suffer,” for example, “In the same way that people in the churches of God in Judea suffered, so you have also suffered.”

“The churches of God in Judea which are in Christ Jesus” (Revised Standard Version; cf. Galatians 1.22) illustrates the fact at this early date the word translated “church” had not yet narrowed its meaning to the local Christian community (still less to the meaning of the whole body of Christians, which is not in question here). The word still has many of its secular associations, like the ordinary English word “assembly.” Paul feels the need to specify, first that these communities belong to God, and secondly that, in contrast to Jewish synagogues, they belong to Christ Jesus. Since churches is sometimes translated as “groups of believers” or even “groups of believers in Christ,” churches of God may be rendered as “groups of believers in Christ who belong to God.”

Despite the order Christ Jesus, it is probable that Paul is here, as usual, is thinking of Christ as a name rather than a title. The translation “the Messiah Jesus” should be avoided.

The phrase in Judea is often related directly to an expression for “groups of believers,” for example, “groups in Judea who believe in Christ and belong to God.” The name Judea commonly included the neighboring areas of Galilee and Samaria.

A complication is involved in translating churches of God and the people there who belong to Christ Jesus, since churches of God would indicate some kind of possessive relation and the believers would be spoken of as people who … belong to Christ Jesus. Both possessive relations are true, but stylistically it would be important to express them in different ways, even as is done in Good News Translation.

Countrymen means primarily those belonging to the same ethnic group, rather than those living in the same area. At Thessalonica (cf. Acts 17.5, 13) the Jews had been the first to stir up trouble for the Christians, many if not most of whom were no doubt of Jewish origin themselves. Your own countrymen reflects an accidental similarity in form between Greek and English. In New Testament Greek, own is not emphatic. Some French translations, for example, have simply “your compatriots” (Bible de Jérusalem Bible en français courant), while others have “your own compatriots” (La Sainte Bible: Nouvelle version Segond révisée Le Nouveau Testament. Version Synodale), which is too emphatic. In English, expressions like your own countrymen tend to become set phrases in which own loses much of its usual emphasis. (The reason for this is probably the need to distinguish between “countrymen” in the sense of “compatriots,” and “countrymen” in the sense of “inhabitants of rural areas.”) Perhaps for that reason, New English Bible‘s “your countrymen” seems too weak.

Since the countrymen are really agents who cause the suffering, it is often necessary to shift the relation, for example, “your own countrymen have caused you to suffer in the same way that the Jews caused those in Judea to suffer.” The equivalent of countrymen in many areas of the world is “fellow tribesmen,” “people who are one with you,” or even “people who talk as you do.”

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 .

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 .