Introduction
The focus of this article is to
understand the eschatological approach of Albert Schweitzer and major concepts
of Pauline eschatology in Thessalonians, 1 Corinthians and Romans, though the
paper briefly deals the issue of consistency of Pauline eschatological thought
and background of Paul’s eschatological thought.
1. Meaning
of Eschatology and Apocalyptic
The term eschatology derived from the Greek word e,'scata which
means “last thing”. In the nineteenth century, the term used by German scholars
to indicate the branch of theology that deals the last things such as heaven
and hell and judgment and resurrection. Their emphasis was individual. Further,
the twentieth century theologians broadened the meaning of the term by using it
to deal with the destiny of the world in general, Israel
The term apocalyptic derived from Greek word a,pokalu,ptein which
means “to reveal” or “to unveil”. This term has three main uses: literary genre (apocalypse),
a kind of eschatology (apocalyptic eschatology) and a historical religio-social
movement (apocalypticism).[2]
Firstly, Collins define apocalypse as “a genre of revelatory literature with a
narrative framework, in which a revelation is mediated by an otherworldly being
to a human recipient, disclosing a transcendent reality which is both temporal,
insofar as it envisages eschatological salvation, and spatial insofar as it
involves another, supernatural world.”[3] This definition covers a large number of old
Jewish, early Christian, Gnostic, Greek, Latin and Persian books which deals
the present condition in the light of future. Secondly, apocalyptic eschatology
deals with the eschatology that reflects on apocalyptic literature.
Apocaypticism as a movement can be understood as a social spiritual movement of
the minority group in the society who wishes to express their hope in an
alternative universe in the context of persecution.[4]
2. Background
of the Pauline Eschatology[5]
Paul was a Pharisaic Jew born in a Hellenistic city. Thus,
the probable background of his eschatology could be Judaism.[6]
Following are the probable background of Pauline eschatology: 1.The
eschatological concepts in the Old Testamental writings. 2. Eschatological
concepts in apocalyptic writings such as 1 and 2 Enoch, Daniel, 2 Maccabees,
Testament of Judah and Testament of Job. These writings are characterized with
dualistic categories.3. The eschatological ideas in non-apocalyptic wrings of
Palestine Judaism and Hellenistic Judaism such as writings of Philo, Wisdom of
Solomon, The Psalms of Solomon and so on. One of the features of these writings
is authors of these works adopted Hellenistic philosophical categories to
express Jewish eschatological concepts. 4. There are scholars like H.A.A
Kennedy, Otto Pfleiderer finds elements of Hellenism as the background for the
several aspect of Pauline eschatological thought.
3. Issue of
consistency in Paul’s Eschatological Thought[7]
There are two line of thought with
respect of consistency: (a) Paul expected imminent parousia and he interpreted
the future in terms of apocalyptic notions of the resurrection. But in his
later writings, he became sensitive to delay of parousia and started to use
Hellenistic anthropology to depict life after death.[8]
Moreover, this view argues that Paul’s thinking developed, changed and
progressed on view of the time of the end and his understanding on the nature
of eschaton. This question of development involves the discussion of issue of
the integrity of the Corinthian letters, issue of chronological order of the
letters and issue of authorship of Pauline letters.
Here it is noticeable that C. L Mearns’ argument about development of
eschatological thought within the Paul’s earliest writings.[9]
(b) It is, on the other hand, viewed that Paul’s understanding of eschatology
has no major modification and it is coherent. He did not abandon his
expectation of imminent parousia and he looked death as natural possibility at
the any stage of life.[10]
4. Albert
Schweitzer: Consistent Eschatology
J. Weiss
acknowledged the importance of eschatology in New Testament in 1892.[11]
Schweitzer took this insight further. Schweitzer perceived consistent
application of the eschatology as a key of methodological approach to New
Testament to interpret and understand biblical theology which could be unified
the Christian thought until Greek theology.[12]
This is known as consistent eschatology or thoroughgoing eschatology. For him,
eschatology is the central theme of New Testament. His main thesis in his book The
Quest of the Historical Jesus is
that Jesus should be understood on the basis of eschatological concept of Jesus
in the framework of Apocalyptic Judaism[13] rather than liberal scholars’
tendency to understand Jesus with their imagination as moral teacher who taught
timeless truth. The same
methodology is proposed to understand Pauline theology in his book Paul and
His Interpreters. He analyzed various scholarly approaches to Paul and
found out that their understanding of Paul was not
derived from a single line of thought of Paul.[14] So he proposed
eschatology as methodological key to understand Paul. In this book, he rejected
the argument that Paul Hellenized Christianity by using Greek philosophy of
mystery religion and he argues Paul’s doctrines are based on the Jewish
primitive Christianity.[15] Thus, Paul’s
system of thought is based on primitive eschatological premises of Christianity.[16]
Further, he observes that Paul shares the eschatological world view of Jesus.[17] Thus, Schweitzer
identified that commonality of Paul with early Christianity and the background
of Judaism particularly Apocalyptic Judaism are two main helping devise to
understand Paul.
Schweitzer applied his methodology to
Paul in his work The mysticism of Paul
the Apostle which brings out his idea of Christ mysticism or redemptive
mysticism. The character of the doctrine of
redemption, mystical doctrine of new creation and sacraments in Paul are
conditioned with eschatology. With Christ event, redemption began to come in
operation.[18]
Consequently angels have no power over elect.[19]
Further, he says “as is implied in the eschatological doctrine of redemption,
Paul expects that in this Messianic time the whole of nature will pass through
a transformation from mortality to immorality.”[20]
Thus, according to Schweitzer, Paul understood redemption with present
implication. Moreover, there were two streams of eschatological thought before
Jesus and John the Baptist such as eschatology based on prophets and Daniel’s
Son of Man and eschatology based on Apocalypse of Baruch and Ezra. Jesus carries
the eschatological ideas of Daniel while Paul used ideas of the other one which
also used by scribes.[21]
Having followed the two fold eschatological view of scribes, Paul brought out
idea of two resurrections: “first in which believers in Christ attain to a share
in the Messianic Kingdom, and a second which all men who have ever lived upon
earth, at the end of the Messianic Kingdom, appear for final judgment ….”[22]
Messianic Kingdom dawn with the Christ event and the resurrection of Jesus
manifested the resurrection power –the powers of the supernatural world –
already at work in this world.[23]
Resurrection of the elect already
started with Messianic event and they already came into a resurrection mode of existence
(thus believers get an advantage of special mode of existence in comparison
with others).[24] Thus,
the supernatural and natural worlds are intermingled during the period between
the Resurrection of Jesus and His coming again.[25]
This creates the room for mysticism: mystical being in Christ and mystical
doctrine of dying and raising again with Christ.
The relationship of eschatology with
the doctrine of the Messiah brought the ideal concept of “Community of God” -
predestined saints of God - in Paul.[26]
This relationship between the elect and Christ and the relationship with one
another among the elect gave room for Christ Mysticism – concept of fellowship
with Messiah that would realize in this natural world.[27]
The solidarity of the elect with Christ implies that “the elect are no longer
natural men, but, like Christ himself, are already supernatural beings, only
that in them this is not yet manifest.”[28] This concept of
solidarity with Christ and one another lead one into mystical body of Christ. In
another words, the corporeity between the elect and Christ brings the mystical
body of Christ. Further, he argues that the mystical
body of Christ and concept of being in Christ are rooted in eschatology[29]
and thereby he rejects any Hellenistic influence on Paul’s thought.[30]
The being in Christ means union with Christ and being partakers in the Mystical
body of Christ.[31] From
this Pauline mysticism, three sins are recognized: un-chastity, circumcision
after baptism and partaking in heathen sacrifice. One can have resurrection at
the return of Christ if one can remove these sins through being in Christ.
Moreover,
Paul’s views of sacraments, ethics, the law and justification were all a function
of his eschatology. Eschatology is the foundation of ethics and dogma of Paul.[32]
Schweitzer could give serious note on Jewish apocalyptic literature
in interpretation of Paul. However, he denied the role of Hellenistic
world. H. Ridderbos comments that “the
use Schweitzer makes of various Jewish eschatological themes is also highly
artificial, and the antithesis he constructs in this respect between Jesus and Paul
certainly cannot be maintained.”[33]Hamilton
5. Eschatological Thought of Paul
5.1 First Thessalonians 4:13-18
Paul’s first letter might be written in ca.50 CE. Macedonia
First Thessalonians 4:13-18 deals eschatology. Paul used the word koimwmevnwn (asleep) in 1Thes. 4:13 to refer the dead one. It is a common usage
in antiquity and Judaism. F.F Bruce viewed that “Christians
took it up as a congenial mode of expression, death being viewed by them as a
sleep from which one would awake to resurrection life.”[39]
However, the contemporary non Christians hardly had such hope. But for
Christians have a hope of resurrection with respect to death. Such hope is
based on the resurrection of Jesus. Moreover, the pre-Pauline formula ‘we believe
that Jesus died ad rose again’ implies that the resurrection of Jesus is the
basis for the belief that Christian will be united with Christ at parusia of
Jesus[40]
(1Thes. 1:9; 4:14). Here, Jesus death interpreted soteriologically, that is,
one who gives life (Confer 1Thes. 1:9). This hope will share by those who have ejn Cristw`/ (1Thes. 4: 16) experience
and “those who have fallen asleep
through Jesus” (1Thes. 4:14)
that leads believers to join with Christ at Parousia. Both phrases
indicate a relationship of believers with Christ when they died, which is
essential for their resurrection[41]
The Christological references in 1Thes. 2:19; 3:13; 4:15,16,17; 5:2 indicates Parousia.[42]
This hope will enable the believers to endure in the midst of persecution and a
solid basis against their grief concerning the death of believers.
The term parousiva is used in 1Thes. 4:15.[43]
The term uses in Greek context to indicate the coming of a deity to help people
in need and ceremonial arrival of a king or a high official with honours.[44]
In New Testament, it denotes the future coming of Christ.[45]
1Thes. 4:15 implies imminent return of Christ and Paul might have expected to
be alive. In 1Thes. 4:15–17, parousia associated with few aspects: Firstly, parousia
of Christ happens with cry of command, voice of the archangel and the trumpet
of God. Scholars interpret these in connection with resurrection in the light
of ideas such as theophany, arrival of Hellenistic king and apocalyptic
features.[46]
These denote the divine initiatives in the event of parousia. Secondly, at parousia, dead believers may resurrect
and believers who are alive may catch away in the cloud. It is noticeable that
Paul talks about succession of the resurrection, that is, dead first and then
alive; the nature of the event associated with alive indicated with the word aJrpavzein suggests violence, haste, suddenness and
power[47]
and simultaneous rapture of resurrected ones and alive ones. Best views that
Paul might not have thought about the resurrection of body or he might not
refer it here.[48] Thirdly,
believers will have an eschatological meeting of with Christ in the air and
later they will be with him always. Thus, the living ones, dead ones who
resurrected and Christ will meet together. It implies the community dimension.
Paul also connects parousia with sanctification (1Thes. 4:3,7; 5:23)
and he also encourages believers for being blameless (1Thes. 3:13; 5:23). Thus,
here ethics and parousia are connected together.
5.2 First Corinthians Chapter 15
Though several scholars generally agree the issue of resurrection in
Corinthian church, there is no unanimity among scholars about the nature of denial
of resurrection. The scholars’ arguments about the reason to deny the
resurrection by Corinthians can be summarized as follows: 1.They did not
believe in life after death. 2. Many believed that resurrection already
happened which might have developed on the ground of theology of baptism,
gnostic influence or mystery religion. 3. They were incapable to accept the
somatic character of the resurrection. 4. Paul misunderstood the Corinthians.[49]
Paul includes the pre-Pauline creed in 1Cor. 15:3-4 to attest the
resurrection of Christ. He gives the list of witnesses who attested the bodily resurrection
of Jesus (1Cor. 15:5-8). Further, in 1Cor. 15:4-8, Paul emphasized the
physicality of Jesus’ resurrection. Thus, Paul established the fact of the
resurrection of Christ on the basis of traditional creed in Cor. 15:1-11 as a basis
of his argument for the resurrection of the dead in following section.
Beker suggests that the main arguments of 1Cor. 15:12-19 are as
follows: 1.The resurrection of Christ is from the realm of dead bodies implies
the resurrection of dead ones. 2. If there be no resurrection of the dead, then
Christ is not raised. 3. If there is no resurrection, then there is no gospel
or faith.[50] Conzelmann
comments that “the resurrection of Christ can not be isolated. It is believed
only when it is grasped as a saving act.”[51]
It is the stereological dimension of the resurrection. Berker thinks that
resurrection of Christ is not complete in its full sense, though it is once for
all and the completeness connected with the resurrection of the dead ones.[52]
Thus, like in I Thessalonians, here the resurrection of Christ is the basis for
the future resurrection of believers who died in Christ.
Paul uses the metaphor ‘first fruits’ for resurrection of Christ (1Cor.
15:20,23). It indicates that the relationship Christ’ resurrection in relation
with the resurrection of the dead. In 1Cor. 15:20-23, Christ stands for
resurrection and Adam stands for death. Here Adam represents collective
humankind.[53] Further,
J. D. G. Dunn points out the two application of Adam Christology in 1Cor.
15:20-23: firstly, the resurrection of Jesus is general pattern for other
resurrection of the dead ones; and secondly, God’s original plan for humans has
fulfilled by risen Christ and in that Christ will subjugate all things under
his feet (1Cor. 15:27).[54]
These two applications further indicate future resurrection of believers and
subjugation of all authority and power including death by Christ in future.
Paul talks about the nature of the resurrected body in 1Cor.
15:35-58. From the analogy of seed (1 Cor. 15: 36-38), Fee derives meaning that
“Paul’s concern is with death as the precondition of life, not in the sense
that all must die but in the sense that the seed itself demonstrates that out
of death a new expression of life springs forth.”[55]
It is noticeable here that the possible
transformation and new life that can happen in resurrection even the case of
death happened to one. On the basis on this analogy and the resurrection of
Jesus, Sanders assumes that there will be continuity of present with respect to
resurrected body.[56] Further, the resurrected body will be given
by God (1Cor. 15:38).
In 1Cor.15: 39-41, Paul’s use of sa,rx-sw/ma-do,xa shows,
according to Conzelmann, that resurrection is ontologically possible.[57]
This is supported by Paul’s understanding of different kinds of flesh and body
in earthly and heavenly realm and glory of such existence is different from one
another. Further, Conzelmann and Lietzmann understood sa,rx as substance which constitutes
earthly creatures, sw/ma as form and do,xa
as substance of light which constitute heavenly beings.[58]
In fact, several scholars like Kummel understood these categories indicate
different body.[59] It
is clear from these terms in 1 Cor. 15: 39-41 that there is difference between
earthly and heavenly bodies which is especially connected with resurrection. This
fact is supported by the implication of celestial images in 1 Cor. 15: 42-44.
The earthly body characterized with corruption, weakness and dishonour, whereas
resurrection body will be characterized with incorruptibility, glory and power.
As a conclusion in verse 44, Paul differentiates clearly between earthly body
and spiritual body (sw/ma
pneumatiko,n). The adjectival use of pneumatiko,n here
understood by scholars mainly as substance of heavenly body (substantial or
material sense) and as governing spirit (ethical or functional sense).[60]
However, when one consider the verse in the context of this pericope, sw/ma pneumatiko,n may understood as
resurrection mode existence. This thesis further elaborated by Adam-Christ
typology (representative in character) which implies that the spiritual body is
higher than the earthly body.[61]
The first Adam is a living being, physical and made of earth, where as the last
Adam is life giving spirit, spiritual, and from heaven (1 Cor. 15:45-47). The
former are those who are of the earth with earthly image, whereas the later are
those who are of heaven with heavenly image (1 Cor. 15:48-49). This Adam-Christ
thesis may imply that resurrection body will be in the pattern of Second Adam. This
resurrection body can be achieved only by the transformation of dead and living
ones from perishable or mortal status to imperishable or immorality status
which coincides with the victory over death and thereby sin (1 Cor. 15:50-56).
5.3
Romans 8:19,23
The noun ajpokaradokiva in verse 19, according to
D.G.J.Dunn, implies a sense of eschatological tension- “a straining forward for
an eagerly (or anxiously) awaited event.”[62] ktivsi" may include the non human material world.[63]
This implies the creation is being under frustration and corruption or decay
because of Adamic sin. So it eagerly waits for revelation of sons of God.
According to D.G.J.Dunn, the word ajpokavluyi" denotes “eschatological unveiling from heaven”[64]
(confer 2 Thes.2:8). This verse implies the solidarity of human with entire
creation in the eschatological redemption. Ka?semann views that Paul here
explains the eschatological freedom as salvation with cosmic scope from an
anthropological point of view.[65]
Thus, it implies that ecological
dimension of eschatological redemption which mutually correlated with human
redemption.
Moo thinks the first fruits in verse
23 “alludes to both the beginning of a process and the unbreakable connection
between its beginning and the end.”[66] The phrase applied to
Spirit to indicate the eschatological redemption work which has begun and it
will culminate in parousia. In this line
Dunn also thinks almost same about the ‘first fruits’. According to Dunn, the
phrase ‘first fruits’ implies that the gift of the
Spirit that already works in the believer and its final product is
resurrection—sw`ma pneumatikovn.[67] In other words Spirit starts to work in humans as part of a larger
process and which ends in resurrection.[68]
It clearly indicates already and not yet tension. The term “redemption” denotes
“not yet” completed the process of redemption and it will complete with bodily
resurrection (confer 1Cor. 15:44-46). Further, this period is characterized with
groaning within humans which denotes the frustration of humans in
eschatological tension and also echoes the groaning of creation.[69]
Further, Dunn reflects “The groaning is a sign of the Spirit’s presence (v 26),
the Spirit of God drawing the believer into harmony with the deeper rhythms of
a creation longing for its own eschatological fruition.”[70]
It again indicates the human role in the redemption of the creation. Moreover,
believers already received spirit of adoption (Rom. 8:15) and verse 23 implies
that the future culmination of adoption will be at parousia when believers
receive their resurrection body. It denotes the already and not yet
eschatological tension. In sum, humans and cosmos waits for their
eschatological redemption as culmination of their redemption which already has
begun and thus they are in eschatological already-not yet tension where Spirit
is active in them.
Conclusion
(a)Paul found his foundation of eschatology on Christology. (b) Resurrection
of believers finds its basis on the resurrection of Jesus. (c) There is
realized eschatology and futuristic eschatology in Pauline thought. (d) Pauline
eschatology mainly was influenced by Jewish background. (e) Paul’s eschatology
is inclusive, that is, it includes cosmic and anthropological dimensions and
which are interconnected. (f) Paul acknowledges the role of Spirit in the
eschatological tension and redemptive work. (g) Resurrection means
transformation which enables mortal humans to become immortal. The resurrection
body will be different from earthly body but there might be continuity between
earthly and resurrection body. (h) Parousia is the culmination of hope of
believers with cosmic scope. This eschatological hope has social implication to
believers’ life. (i) Albert Schweitzer contributed the eschatological approach
as a devise to understand Pauline eschatology, though his method is not absolutely
perfect. Moreover, Pauline eschatology is not issue free in current scholarship
since several issues like consistency of Pauline eschatological thought are
under the debate and discussion.
Bibliography
Allison, D. C. “Apocalyptic,” Dictionary of Jesus
and the Gospels. Edited by Green,
Joel G.; McKnight, Scot;
Marshall, I. Howard.
Downer’s Grove, IL: Intervarsity Press 1998.
Baird, William. “Pauline Eschatology
in Hermeneutical Perspective.” New
Testament Studies 17/3(April,
1971):85-95.
Barrett, C.K. A Commentary on the First Epistle to the Corinthians. London
Beker, Christiaan .The Triumph of God. Translated by Loren
T. Stuckenbruck.Minneapolis: Fortress
Press,1990.
Best,
Ernest.The First and Second
Epistles to the Thessalonians.London: Adam and Charles Black, 1972. .
Brown, R.E, J. A Fitzmyer and R. E
Murphy,eds. The New Jerome Biblical
Commentary. Bangalore
Theological
Publication in India
Bruce, F.F. 1 and 2 Corinthians. London
_____,
F.F. Word Biblical Commentary,
Volume 5: 1 & 2 Thessalonians. Texas
Conzelmann,
Hans.1 Corinthians. Translated
by James W. Dunkly. Pliladelphia: Fortress Press,1975.
Donfried, Karl P. The Theology of I Thessalonians in New
Testament Theology. Edited by James D.G. Dunn.
Dunn, James D.G. Word Biblical
Commentary, Volume 38a: Romans 1-8.Texas: Word Books Publisher, 1998.
, eds. 1 Corinthians. Sheffield :
Fee, Gordon. The First Epistle to the Corinthians New
International Commentary of New Testament. Grand
Rapids:Eerdmans,1987.
Guthrie, Donald. New Testament Theology. Secundrabad: OM
Books, 2003
Hamilton, Neil Q. The Holy Spirit and Eschatology in Paul.
Edinburgh
Harris, Murray Michigan
Kreitzer, L. Joseph. Jesus and God in Paul’s Eschatology.
Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1987.
Ka?semann, Ernst. Commentary on Romans. Translated by
Geofferey W. Bromiley. Michigan
Eerdmans
Publishing Compqany,1980.
Longencker, Richard N. “The Nature of Paul’s Early
Eschatology.” New Testament Studies 31/1(January,
Moo, Douglas J. The Epistle to Romans .Michigan: William B Eerdmans Publishing
Compqany, 1996.
Sanders, E. P.Paul. Oxford : Oxford University
Schnelle, Udo. Apostle Paul His Life and Theolog. Translated by Eegne Boring. Michigan
2005.
Schoeps, H.J. Paul. Translated by Harlod Knight. Philadelphia :
The Westminster
Schweitzer, Albert. The Quest of Historical
Jesus. London
, Albert.Paul and his Interpreters .London: Adam and Charles Black, 1912. , Albert. The mysticism of Paul the Apostle.
Sobanaraj, S. Diversity
in Paul’s Eschatology.Delhi: ISPCK, 2007.
Woodbridge, Paul. “Did Paul Change his Mind?” Themelios28/3(Summer,2003):7-18.
[1] R.E Brown, J. A Fitzmyer and R. E Murphy, eds., The New Jerome Biblical Commentary (Bangalore : Theological Pubication in India
[2] S. Sobanaraj, Diversity in
Paul’s Eschatology (Delhi
[3] D. C. Allison, “Apocalyptic,” Dictionary of Jesus and the
Gospels, edited by Green, Joel G.; McKnight, Scot;
Marshall, I. Howard (Downer’s Grove, IL: Intervarsity Press 1998),17.
[4] Sobanaraj, op. cit.,17.
[5] Having considered the scope of this paper, here the paper gives
only a very brief outline of the probable background.
[6]H.J. Schoeps explains the influence of Judaism in Paul’s
eschatology. See H.J. Schoeps, Paul, translated by Harlod Knight
(Philadelphia: The Westminster Press, 1959), 88-125.
[7] The scope here is only to bring attention to the issues not a
detailed discussion. For detailed discussion, see, William Baird, “Pauline
Eschatology in Hermeneutical Perspective,” New
Testament Studies 17/3(April, 1971):314-327.
[8] Ibid., 314.
[9] L. Joseph Kreitzer, Jesus and
God in Paul’s Eschatology (Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1987), 177.
[10] Paul Woodbridge, “Did Paul Change his Mind?,” Themelios28/3(Summer,2003):17.
[11] Richard N Longencker, “The Nature of Paul’s Early Eschatology,” New Testament Studies 31/1(January,
1985):85.
[12] Neil Q. Hamilton, The Holy
Spirit and Eschatology in Paul (Edinburgh: Oliver and Boyd Ltd, 1957), 44.
[13] Albert Schweitzer, The Quest of Historical Jesus (London: Adam
and Charles Black, 1910), 58.
[14] Hamilton
[15]Albert Schweitzer, Paul and
his Interpreters (London: Adam and Charles Black, 1912), 240.
[16] Ibid .,241,249.
[17] Albert Schweitzer,
The mysticism of Paul the Apostle
(London: Adam and Charles Black, 1953), 113.
[18] Schweitzer, The mysticism…,66.
[19] Ibid.,67.
[20] Ibid.,66.
[21] Ibid.82,90.
[22] Ibid.,93.
[23] Ibid.,99.
[24] Ibid.,100.
[25] Ibid.,99.
[26] Ibid.,104.
[27] Ibid.,105.
[28] Ibid.,110.
[29] Ibid.,118.
[30] Ibid.,140.
[31] Ibid.,123.
[32] Schweitzer, Paul and his…58.
[33]H Ridderbos, Paul: An Outline
of His Theology, translated by J.R. De Wittt(London:SPCK,1982),31, cited by
Sobanaraj, op. cit.,33.
[34] Hamilton
[35] Karl P. Donfried, The
Theology of I Thessalonians in New Testament Theology, edited by James D.G.
Dunn (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,1993),17.
[36] Ibid.,19.
[37] Ibid.,62.
[38] Sobanaraj, op.cit.,136.
[39] F.F. Bruce, Word Biblical Commentary, Volume 5: 1 & 2 Thessalonians,
(Texas: Word Books Publisher,1998),96.
[40] Donfried,op.cit.,37.
[41] Bruce,op.cit.,97-98.
[42] Donfried,op.cit.,45.
[43] Several scholars like E. P Sanders think that 1 Thes. 4:15–17 is a
modified version of early tradition by Paul. See E. P Sanders, Paul (Oxford: Oxford University Press,
1991), 27.
[44] Sobanaraj, op.cit.,145.
[45] Donald Guthrie, New Testament
Theology (Published in India by Secundrabad: OM Books, 2003, First
published by IVP in UK in 1961), 803.
[46] Ernest Best, The First and
Second Epistles to the Thessalonians (London: Adam and Charles Black,
1972), 197; Sobanaraj, op.cit.,149; Reymond F . Collins The First Letter to the Thessalonians in The New
Jerome Biblical Commentary, edited by R.E Brown, J. A Fitzmyer and R. E
Murphy (Bangalore : Theological Publication in India
[47] A.L Moore,ed., The Century
Bible(London: Thomas Nelson and Sons Ltd,1969),71; Best, op.cit.,198.
[48] Best, op.cit.,197.
[49] Murray
[50] J. Christiaan Beker, The
Triumph of God, translated by Loren T. Stuckenbruck (Minneapolis: Fortress
Press,1990),72.
[51] Hans Conzelmann, 1 Corinthians, translated by James W. Dunkly(Pliladelphia: Fortress
Press,1975),265.
[52]Beker, op.cit, 73.
[53] F.F. Bruce, 1 and 2
Corinthians (London: Oliphants, 1971), 146.
[54]J. D. G. Dunn, 1 Corinthians (Sheffield
:Sheffield Academic Press Ltd.1995),88.
[55] Gordon Fee, The First Epistle
to the Corinthians New International Commentary of New Testament(Grand
Rapids:Eerdmans,1987),781, cited by Sobanaraj, op.cit.,225.
[56] Sanders,op.cit,29.
[57] Conzelmann,op.cit,281.
[58] Ibid.,282.
[59] Ibid.
[60] Harris., op.cit.,120.
[61] Udo Schnelle, Apostle Paul
His Life and Theology, translated by Eegne Boring (Michigan
[62] James D.G.Dunn, Word Biblical Commentary, Volume 38a: Romans 1-8,
(Texas: Word Books Publisher, 1998),469.
[63] Ernst Ka?semann, Commentary on Romans,
translated by Geofferey W. Bromiley (Michigan: William B Eerdmans Publishing
Compqany,1980)233.
[64] D.G.Dunn,op.cit.,470.
[66] Douglas J. Moo, The Epistle
to Romans (Michigan: William B Eerdmans Publishing Compqany, 1996), 519-520.
[67] Dunn, op.cit.,473.
[68] Ibid.
[69] Ibid.,490.
[70] Ibid.