2 Thessalonians is a forgery. See the corresponding chapter in Ehrman, Forgery and Counterforgery.

I usually don’t bother writing on forgeries because they are by definition lies, and too late to be very informative of Christian origins. For complex reasons I believe 2 Thess was forged before or at the same time of Marcion but it could have been close to the Bar Kochba revolt and referring thereto. Or it could be referring to earlier rumors about the rebuilding of Jerusalem that no longer survive for us to know about them. But either way, it’s referring to recent affairs of the early 2nd century. Not two thousand years later. I discuss that aspect of biblical apocalypticism in Behold Babylon USA!

I did notice what you wrote but it strikes me as implausible. In the context of what is actually written, “It” refers to severe suffering along with joy in the holy Spirit, whereby the Thessalonians became recognizable as imitators of Paul and Jesus and as examples for others to follow.

Read the text:

You became imitators of us and of the Lord, for you welcomed the message in the midst of severe suffering”

In. The. Midst. Of. (1 Th. 1:6, in Greek: participle + condition-when, dexamenoi ton logon en thlipsei pollê; indeed the aorist participle means a singular past event, not a future or ongoing event).

Hence the only suffering Paul references was ongoing before he even arrived to preach the gospel at all; the gospel was what alleviated that suffering.

It therefore cannot have been a post-gospel persecution. Paul has no knowledge here of any such thing happening. He is describing the opposite.

The imitation verses, meanwhile, refer to their ready acceptance of the Gospel (1 Thess. 14a, if authentic, recapitulates 1 Th. 1:6, which says they became imitators for welcoming the gospel so generously, and not for suffering anything).

…why would Paul be so terribly worried about them

Read the text:

…we kept telling you that we would be persecuted. … [So] I was afraid that in some way the tempter had tempted you…

1 Thess 3:4-5 (and so on). Read all of 1 Thess. 1 and 2: Paul’s worries are that they are losing faith in Paul (he repeatedly is defending himself against charges of embezzlement and exploitation and insincerity; nothing about them having to endure anything), and that his absence (caused by his being persecuted, not them) may have tempted them thereby to backslide. So he sent Timothy, and then wrote this letter (no doubt to answer all the arguments Timothy brought back to Paul as their concerns he needed to address in this very letter; none of which are their persecution, which he never addresses—even the interpolation only mentions it, it does not answer it as an argument he needs to respond to, another sign its author was not Paul).

Thank you for responding to my criticism.

You assert that:
“in Chapter 1 it* refers to a suffering that preceded their evangelism altogether (and probably refers to Paul’s persecution, hindering his evangelizing them; that’s otherwise the only persecution he mentions: e.g., 2:1–2, 17–18).

I did notice what you wrote but it strikes me as implausible.
In the context of what is actually written, “It” refers to severe suffering along with joy in the holy Spirit, whereby the Thessalonians became recognizable as imitators of Paul and Jesus and as examples for others to follow.

If you are right, why would Paul be so terribly worried about them – so worried that he sent delegate to them, when he himself was unable to come? – see the quote from cha 3 later.

Paul wrote this in the introductory praise of the Thessalonians (RSV):
The order of what Paul mentions is not insignificant:

1: The signs of election
For we know, brethren beloved by God, that he has chosen you;

2: Recap of the evangelization of the Thessalonians
“for our gospel came to you not only in word, but also in power and in the Holy Spirit and with full conviction. You know what kind of men we proved to be among you for your sake.”

3: The response of the Thessalonians: They became imitators of the missionaries and Jesus
“And you became imitators of us and of the Lord,”

4: The signs of becoming imitators:

“for you received [or rather – receptively welcomed] the word in much affliction, with joy inspired by the Holy Spirit;
so that you became an example to all the believers in Macedo′nia and in Acha′ia.
FOR not only has the word of the Lord sounded forth from you in Macedo′nia and Acha′ia, but your faith in God has gone forth everywhere, so that we need not say anything.

Comment: This above summary is clear:
The Thessalonians themselves became evangelists, according to the pattern of Paul, Silas and Timothy – and according to the pattern of Jesus himself.

5: How did Paul receive this news about the Thessalonians?

“For they themselves report concerning us what a welcome [really “entrance” ~ impact] we had among you, and how you turned to God from idols, to serve a living and true God, and to wait for his Son from heaven, whom he raised from the dead, Jesus who delivers us from the wrath to come.”

Comment:
The news has reached Paul through other churches, the the Thessalonians responded admirably to the example of Paul and his colleagues, even after Paul had to leave them much sooner than he had wanted. They too wanted to serve the living and true God – an emphasis that Paul later says is characteristic of the way he evangelized them: not with pretense but with humility and self-giving service, like a loving caretaker.

Not let’s look at chapter 2 – the chapter division of of course artificial and not by Paul:

Paul’s history immediately before he evangelized the Thessalonians:

“For you yourselves know, brethren, that our visit to you was not in vain;”

“but though we had already suffered and been shamefully treated at Philippi, as you know, we had courage in our God to declare to you the gospel of God in the face of great opposition.”

Comment: is this not an obvious parallel to

“you became imitators of us and of the Lord, for receptively welcomed the word (from God) in much affliction, with joy inspired by the Holy Spirit; so that you became an example to all the believers in Macedo′nia and in Acha′ia.”

And does not this comment ch 3 (an artificial division of the text that disrupts the flow) testify to the fact, that the sufferings mentioner in chapter 1, as evidence of imitation of Jesus, come after Paul was forced to leave them?:

“when we could bear it no longer, we were willing to be left behind at Athens alone, and we sent Timothy, our brother and God’s servant in the gospel of Christ, to establish you in your faith and to exhort YOU, that no one be moved by THESE AFFLICTIONS. YOU yourselves know that this is TO BE OUR LOT. For when we were with you, we told you beforehand that WE WERE TO SUFFER AFFLICTION; just as it has COME TO PASS, and as you know. FOR THIS REASON, when I could bear it no longer, I sent that I might know your faith, for FEAR that somehow the tempter had tempted you and that our labor would be in vain.

Conclusion:

Paul here openly states that he was afraid, that the afflictions that had befallen the Thessalonians after he was forced to leave them, was too much for them to bear, and that they might not continue to imitate Paul’s Christ-like pattern.

This offers itself as the natural interpretation, when the text is read as a hermeneutic unit.

Why do you not treat the text a hermeneutic unit, and read it atomictically?
Why do you think it legitimate to dissociate the afflictions of the Thessalonians, that Paul had told them would be their lot as fellow Christ-followers (ch 3) from the suffering that Paul referred to in chapter 1 as positive evidence for their imitation of Christ?

Kind regards,
Christian

Becoming imitators of the Lord (Jesus) and of Paul through accepting and practicing the Gospel of God in the midst of severe suffering () is a parallel that is obvious to me, after reading Hurd and studying Paul in depth for many years..

You must not be paying attention.

Please read the article you are commenting on. To wit:

We see this happen as well with element J: in Chapter 2 it refers to a persecution of the same people supposedly being successfully evangelized in Chapter 1; but in Chapter 1 it refers to a suffering that preceded their evangelism altogether (and probably refers to Paul’s persecution, hindering his evangelizing them; that’s otherwise the only persecution he mentions: e.g., 2:1–2, 17–18). The author of verses 14–16 is accidentally or intentionally twisting Paul’s reference to something else into a claim of persecution of the Thessalonians. Paul would not do that. He would mention their enduring a persecution in his list of thanks and praises in Chapter 1. He would make an actual parallel. The same goes for element I, which in Chapters 1 and 2 are unrelated: in 2 it’s persecution after conversion; in 1, it’s trouble occurring before they were even evangelized.

Hence when you note:

The virtues of the Thessalonian (gentile) response to the gospel also neatly parallel the vices of the Jewish response to the gospel.

This is a design of the interpolator. That’s the problem. Paul has no mention of any of this elsewhere. There is no persecution of the Thassalonians in Chapter 1 or the rest of Chapter 2. The interpolator is creating that by creating a parallelism from the material in the real letter. We therefore cannot argue Paul did that. The interpolator could just as well. And the evidence entails he did.

Hence as I said: “The interpolator certainly has taken up a theme from Paul here; but he has done something completely different with it.”

The folly is assuming that parallelisms can only come from Paul and not the interpolator using this letter to expand it. That is why you need evidence other than that to argue they don’t come from the interpolator before you can claim they must come from Paul.

I go into this in some detail in the article, so I can only assume you only skimmed it and didn’t read it carefully.

As for Schlueter and Grindheim, those are just repeating standard apologetics already refuted by the scholars who disagree with them. So they aren’t adding anything new to the debate. Note the article here that you are commenting on is not a comprehensive treatment of the case for interpolation. It only addresses two specific parallelist and chiastic arguments. If you are interested in the whole debate, you need to start at my other article, There Is No Logically Sound Case Against Interpolation in 1 Thessalonians 2. Even that does not cover everything. But it covers Schlueter-style apologetics.

(Grindheim isn’t pertinent to this debate; but for refutations of his approach too, see my treatment of the standard apologetics his is just another instantiation of in On the Historicity of Jesus, via the scripture index.)

Example:

Becoming imitators of the Lord (Jesus) and of Paul through accepting and practicing the Gospel of God in the midst of severe suffering () is a parallel that is obvious to me, after reading Hurd and studying Paul in depth for many years..

The virtues of the Thessalonian (gentile) response to the gospel also neatly parallel the vices of the Jewish response to the gospel.

The Thessalonians received the gospel messengers (Paul and Silas and Timothy and by their proxy also Jesus) and they respond by turning from ungodliness to serve and please God by promoting his gospel.

The Judeans in contrast oppose God’s gospel-messengers (the prophets and Jesus and Paul and his colleagues = ‘us’) and they consequently displease God – they hinder his gospel.

Your case for interpolation will remain weak if you fail to address good exegetical arguments.
You really ought to do yourself a favor a read all of Hurd’s little collection of essays in “The Earlier Letters of Paul – and Other Studies”, and read it with an i tension to learn something. Hurd is a very insightful exegete who is careful in his methodology – unlike a lot of mainstream scholars.

Do also read ‘Filling up the Measure” by Carol Schlueter (a ‘polemical hyperbole’ interpretation) and the tangential article on 1 Corinthians 2 by Sigurd Grindheim. Grindheim shows by careful attention to literary structure of repeating patterns that the “debaters of this age” (1 Cor 1:19-20) “archons of this age” (1 Cor 2:6,8) and “‘wise’ in this age” (1 Cor 3:18) are all human.

Kind Regards,
Christian Michael

That would be very appreciated! My email address is richard.carrier@icloud.com.

But if it would be easier to loan me the book by regular mail, I will gladly cover postage to me and back to you.

But do what is easiest for you. Either would be fantastic.

Do you have access to a copy of that?