Introduction

Historical criticism's assumed control over the reading of 1 Thessalonians is best challenged as it is actually practised, deployed and defended. Throughout this chapter, therefore, we shall analyse and critique instances of historical criticism, especially as they pertain to scholarship on 1 Thessalonians. Through these critiques, I hope that my distinct theological perspectives will begin to emerge. It is these theological perspectives, only partly forged in negative reaction to historical criticism, which will be worked out practically in the readings of 1 Thessalonians that comprise the remainder of the monograph.

This chapter will be composed of the following sections. To prepare ourselves theologically and hermeneutically for the ensuing critiques and proposals, we shall initially examine three important concepts implied throughout our work: historicism, revelation and conversation (section 1). We shall then be ready to launch our theologically driven critique of historical criticism by examining the work of two distinguished historical-critical scholars, James Dunn and Karl Donfried (section 2). The burden of section 3 will be to set out three specific charges that will be made against historical criticism. These critiques will be advanced in relation to specific instances of 1 Thessalonians scholarship and should be understood as something of a triad, as each belongs closely with the others. The first charge is that historical-critical studies operate with a limited notion of meaning and truth (section 3.1).