[1] Cf. Dodd, C. H., Gospel and Law. The Relation of Faith and Ethics in Early Christianity (Cambridge: University Press, 1951), pp. 42–5.Google Scholar

[2] 1 Thess. 4. 1–2.Google Scholar

[3] Similarly, the NEB which reads ‘and no man must do his brother wrong in this matter, or invade his rights’, but offers ‘must overreach his brother in his business (or in lawsuits)’ in the footnote. Likewise the Traduction oecumenique de la Bible (Paris: Cerf, 1972) which reads ‘Que nul n'agisse au detriment de son frère en cette affaire’ but notes that ‘D'autres traduisent en affaires.’ The dilemma is also attested by Die Bibel Einheitsübersetzung (Freiburg-Basel-Wien: Herder, 1980) which offers a text similar to that footnoted by the RSV, NEB, and TOB as follows, ‘und dass keiner seine Rechte überschreitet und seinen Bruder bei Geschäften betr¨gt’, and comments in a footnote: ‘Ander Überzetzungsmoglichkeit: und das keiner sich gegen seinen Bruder in der betreffenden Sache übergriffe erlaubt – In diesem Fall ware von Ehebruch die Rede.’Google Scholar

[4] Pertinent to the discussion which follows is only a rarely attested τωιin place of the τω of v. 6.

[5] Cf. Asting, R., Die Heiligtum im Urchristentum. FRLANT 46 (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1930), p. 220.Google Scholar

[6] Cf. Dibelius, M., A Fresh Approach to the New Testament and Early Christian Literature (New York: Scribner's, 1936), p. 39Google Scholar; An die Thessalonicher I–II. An die Philipper (Tübingen: Mohr, 1937), pp. 19–20Google Scholar; Schrage, W., Die konkreten Einzelgebote in derpaulinischen Paränese (Gütersloh: Mohr, 1961), p. 42Google Scholar; Eckart, K. G., ‘Der zweite echte Brief des Apostels Paulus an die Thessaloniche’, ZTK 58 (1961), pp. 30–44, pp. 35–36Google Scholar; Schmithals, W., ‘Die Thessalonicherbriefe als Briefkompositionen’, in Zeit und Geschichte (Bultmann Fs., Tübingen: Mohr, 1964), pp. 295–315, pp. 302–3Google Scholar. Laub, F., Eschatologische Verkündigung und Lebensgestaltung nach Paulus. Eine Untersuchung zum Wirken des Apostels beim Aufbau der Gemeinde in Thessalonike. Münchener Universitäts-Schriften (Regensburg: Pustet, 1973), pp. 51–2Google Scholar; Davis, R. H., Remembering and Acting: A Study in the Moral Life in Light of 1 Thessalonians (Yale Dissertation, Ann Arbor: University Microfilms, 1971), p. 187Google Scholar; Schade, H.-H., Apokalyptische Christologie bei Paulus. Studien zum Zusammenhang von Christologie und Eschatologie in den Paulusbriefen. Göttinger Theologische Arbeiten, 18 (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1981), p. 135.Google Scholar

[7] Cf. Snyder, G. F., ‘Apocalyptic and Didactic Elements in 1 Thessalonians’, in 1972 Proceedings, Society of Biblical Literature, I, ed. by McGaughy, L. C., pp. 233–44, p. 238Google Scholar; ‘A Summary of Faith in an Epistolary Context. 1 Thess. 1:9,10’, Ibid., pp. 255–365, p. 361; Koester, H., ‘1 Thessalonians – Experiment in Christian Writing’, in Continuity and Discontinuity in Church History. Essays Presented to George Hunston Williams on the Occasion of his 65th Birthday. Studies in the History of Christian Thought, 19 (Leiden: Brill, 1979), pp. 33–44, p. 42.Google Scholar

[8] Similarly, Phil., Phlmn. The twenty-fifth edition of Nestle-Aland identified several small citations of the OT in 1 Thess., for example, a citation of Jer. 11. 20 in 2. 4, but those references have all been downgraded in the twenty-sixth edition.

[9] Cf. Bornkamm, G., Early Christian Experience. New Testament Library (London: SCM, 1969), p. 32Google Scholar; Munck, J., ‘1 Thess.i.9–10 and the Missionary Preaching of Paul. Textual Exegesis and Hermeneutic Reflections’, NTS 9 (1963), pp. 95–110, pp. 101–2.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

[10] Cf. Jewett, R., ‘The Form and Function of the Homiletic Benediction’, Anglican Theological Review 51 (1969), pp. 18–34.Google Scholar

[11] 1 Thess. 1. 8.

[12] 1 Thess. 1. 9. On the notion of faith in 1 Thess., see Collins, R. F., ‘The Faith of the Thessalonians’, Louvain Studies 7 (1978–1979), pp. 248–69.Google Scholar

[13] Cf. Collins, R. F., ‘The Church of the Thessalonians’, Louvain Studies 5 (1974–1975), pp. 336–49.Google Scholar

[14] Cf. Eicnrodt, W., Theology of the Old Testament, 2. Old Testament Library (London: SCM, 1967), p. 317.Google Scholar

[15] This notion has been developed by T. Korteweg in a paper, ‘De Wil van God als Religieuze Voorstelling in laat-Joodse en vroeg-Christlijke Geschriften’, delivered at the annual meeting of the Conventus for New Testament Studies, Utrecht, may 15, 1981.

[16] Cf. Bjerkelund, C. J., Parakalô. Form, Funktion und Sinn der parakalô-Sätze in den paulinischen Briefen. Bibliotheca Theologica Norvegica, 1 (Oslo: Universitetsforlaget, 1967).Google Scholar

[17] Thus I would take issue with the point of view expressed by K. P. Donfried in a paper read during the New England sectional meeting of the Society of Biblical Literature, April 5, 1982. Donfried proffered the view that in the ‘response topics’ of 1 Thess. 4. 1–12, there are three topoi, marriage, business, and public life.

[18] Cf. Adinolfi, M., ‘La Santità del matrimonio in 1 Thess.4:1–8’Google Scholar, Rivista biblica italiana 24 (1976), pp. 165–84, pp. 165–6.Google Scholar Although C. Roetzel has identified the judgment form in 1 Thess. 4. 3–8, an argument in favour of the topical unity of the passage can not be drawn from its form since several items can be encompassed within the ‘offense’ element of the form. Roetzel, C., ‘The Judgment Form in Paul's Letters’, JBL 88 (1969), pp. 305–12.Google Scholar

[19] Koester has noted that ‘Paul brackets his interpretation by the traditional term áγιασμόζ “sanctification” (1 Thess 4:3 and 4:7).’ He then sees 4. 8 as an element of ‘sacred law’. Cf. H. Koester, art. tit, pp. 42–3.

[20] In their comments upon this passage, Cullman, O., Walther, G., and Walther, W. F. Orr-J. A. write respectively of a ‘collective holiness’, ‘contagious holiness’, and a ‘kind of uxorial sanctification’. Cf. O. Cullmann, Baptism in the New Testament, SBT, 1 (London: SCM, 1950), p. 44Google Scholar; Walther, G., ‘Übergriefende Heiligkeit und Kindertaufe im Neuen Testament’, Evangelische Theologie 25 (1965), pp. 668–74CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Walther, W. F. Orr-J. A., I Corinthians, AB, 32 (Garden City: Double-day, 1976), p. 213.Google Scholar

[21] Cf. Cambier, J. M., ‘Doctrine paulinienne du manage Chrétien. Étude critique de 1 Co 7 et d'Ep 5, 21–33 et essai de leur traduction actuelle’, Eglise et théologie 10 (1979), pp. 13–59.Google Scholar

[22] Whitton, J., ‘A Neglected Meaning for SKEUOS in 1 Thessalonians 4.4’, NTS 28 (1982), pp. 142–3.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

[23] Cf. Reese, J., 1 and 2 Thessalonians (Wilmington: Michael Glazer, 1979), p. 44. Reese's commentary is based on the translation offered by the NAB, as follows, ‘each of you guarding his member in sanctity and honor’.Google Scholar

[24] Although Whitton argues from the use of σкє¯υοζ as ‘a euphemism for the male organ’, he clearly takes σкє¯υοζ metaphorically and metonymically in the sense of ‘body’.

[25] Thus Hofman, Lünemann, Bornemann, von Dobschütz, Wohlenberg, Frame, Toussaint, Oepke, Rinaldi, Best, Nieder, Marxsen, Vogel, Schümann, Schlier, Friedrich, Laub, and Adinolfi.

[26] Thus Dibelius, Rigaux, Bahnsen, Martín Sánchez, Wolniewicz, Merk, Rossano, and Schade.

[27] Whitton, J., art. cit., p. 143.Google Scholar

[28] On the importance of the pronoun, cf. Vogel, W., ‘Eidenai to heautou skeuos ktasthai. Zur Deutung von I Thess 4,3 ff. im Zusammenhang der paulinischen Eheauffassung’, Theologische Blatter 13 (1934), pp. 83–5.Google Scholar

[29] Arndt-Gingrich, for example, render κγάομαι as ‘procure for oneself, acquire, get’. Liddell-Scott offers ‘to procure for oneself, to get, gain, acquire’ when the verb is used in the present, imperfect, future, and aorist. Even Béda Rigaux who argued for the interpretation of σκєυοζ in the sense of ‘body’ noted that there is a nuance of taking possession in the use of the verb κτãσθαι, Cf. Rigaux, B., Les Epîtres aux Thessaloniciens. Études bibliques (Paris: Gabalda, 1956), pp. 505–6.Google Scholar

[30] Kid 29b. Cf. Ben-Zion, Schereschewsky, ‘Marriage’, Encyclopedia Judaica, 11 (Jerusalem: Keter, 1971), 1025–1051, col. 1028.Google Scholar

[31] Yev. 63a.

[32] Cf. Phipps, W. E., ‘Is Paul's Attitude towards Sexual Relations Contained in 1 Coi.7.1?’ NTS 28 (1982), pp. 125–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

[33] Murphy-O'Connor, J., ‘The Divorced Woman in 1 Cor 7:10–11’, JBL 100 (1981), pp. 601–6, pp. 603–4.Google Scholar

[34] For earlier interpretations of 1 Cor. 7. 1 along these same lines, see Smith, D., The Life and Letters of St. Paul (New York: Harper & Row, 1920), p. 262Google Scholar; Ford, J. M., ‘Levirate Marriage in St Paul (1 Cor.VIl)’, NTS 10 (1964), pp. 361–5, p. 361Google Scholar; Giblin, C. H., ‘1 Corinthians 7 – a Negative Theology of Marriage and Celibacy’, The Bible Today 41 (1969), pp. 2839–55, esp. pp. 2841–2Google Scholar; Harpur, G. E., ‘A comment on abstinence mentioned in 1 Corinthians’, Journal of the Christian Brethren Fellowship 27 (1975), pp. 38–50Google Scholar; Schrage, W., ‘Zur Frontstellung der paulinischen Ehebewertung in 1 Kor 7:1–7’, ZNTW 67 (1976), pp. 214–34CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Collins, R. F., ‘The Bible and Sexuality. The New Testament’, Biblical Theology Bulletin 8 (1978), pp. 3–18, p. 12CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Puigdellers, R., ‘Notas para una interpretácion de 1 Cor 7’, Revista Catalana de Teologia 3 (1978), pp. 245–60.Google ScholarEcontra, K. Niederwimmer, ‘Zur Analyse der asketischen Motivation in 1 Kor 7’, TLZ 99 (1974), pp. 241–8.Google Scholar

[35] Cf. Papdopoulous, K. N., ‘H σημαοζ τηζ λєξєωζ ‘ακρασια’, єν 1 fop. 7,5' Deltion Biblikon Meleton 8 (1979), pp. 135–7, who argues that the expression δι`α τ`ην `ακρασίαν means a lack of conjugal relations.Google Scholar

[36] Cf.Maurer, C., ‘σκє¯υοζ’, Theological Dictionary of the New Testament, 7, ed. by Friedrich, G. (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1971), pp. 359–67, p. 362.Google Scholar

[37] Cf. Pes 98b, San 22b, Taan 20ab.

[38] Cf. Schade, H.-H., op. cit., p. 135Google Scholar; Laub, F., op. cit., p. 53.Google Scholar

[39] 1 Thess.4. 5.

[40] Arndt-Gingrich cite Demosthenes (41,25) and Orientis Graeci Inscriptiones Selectae (484,27) ed. by Dittenberger, W., 2 vols., 1903–1905.Google Scholar

[41] Even W. Marxsen has drawn attention to the general language of v. 6a. He argues, however, that Paul is speaking about getting rich and that the verse must be interpreted in that sense. Cf. Marxsen, W., Der erste Brief an die Thessalonicher. Zürcher Bibelkommentare, 11/1 (Zurich: Theologischer Verlag, 1979), p. 61.Google Scholar

[42] Thus Plutarch (Marc. 29,7) and Pseudo-Lucian (Amor. 27), according to Arndt-Gingrich.

[43] Cf. Liddell-Scott and Arndt-Gingrich, ad loc.

[44] Arndt-Gingrich write of πρāγμα that it is perhaps ‘a euphemism for illicit sexual conduct’ in 1 Thess. 4. 6.

[45] Cf. Davis, R. H., op. cit., p. 187.Google Scholar