For you yourselves know, brethren, that our coming to you was not in vain, but after we had already suffered and been mistreated in Philippi, as you know, we had the boldness in our God to speak to you the gospel of God amid much opposition. For our exhortation does not come from error or impurity or by way of deceit; but just as we have been approved by God to be entrusted with the gospel, so we speak, not as pleasing men, but God who examines our hearts. For we never came with flattering speech, as you know, nor with a pretext for greed—God is witness—nor did we seek glory from men, either from you or from others, even though as apostles of Christ we might have asserted our authority. (2:1–6)

For nearly half a century, beginning in the 1950s, the world has asked the question, “Where have all the leaders gone?” During that time, society has placed more and more of a premium on leadership, but has found few noble leaders with skill and integrity.

Leadership is not easy. When a sports team does not win, the owner fires the head coach. When a corporation loses its competitive edge or fails in a major way to live up to expectations, the board of directors often fires the president. When a church does not grow according to people’s expectations, the pastor is often forced out.

And because spiritual and eternal matters are involved, the leadership crisis in the world is insignificant compared to the leadership crisis in the church, God’s agency to fulfill His mission on earth (Matt. 28:19–20; cf. 1 Tim. 3:15) until Christ returns.

Those called to be elders in the church, who preach, teach, and lead God’s flock, are entrusted with the unequalled duty of proclaiming the gospel to unbelieving sinners, and bringing those who believe and are baptized into the fellowship of the local church. There the Holy Spirit will sanctify them as they worship God in spirit and truth, submitting to the exposition and application of Scripture. Pastors also must intercede for their people through public and private prayer, oversee the administration of the Lord’s Table so their people will regularly confess their sins and renew their covenant of obedience, equip other teachers and workers within the church, superintend and enforce church discipline, and provide biblical counseling to the congregation. All of this spiritual work is to build up the saints to maturity—“to the measure of the stature which belongs to the fullness of Christ” (Eph. 4:13).

The elder must be a spiritual physician who can capably apply biblical cures to those vices and heresies that might afflict members of his church. He also must be a tender shepherd who, while feeding the flock, also heals their wounds, calms their fears, protects them from spiritual dangers, and comforts them in their distresses. In short, he is to be a champion for biblical truth (2 Tim. 4:2), a provider of spiritual resources (1 Peter 5:1–2), a guardian and protector (Acts 20:28–31), and always a model of spiritual virtue (1 Tim. 4:12), for all of which he is directly accountable to his Lord Jesus Christ (Heb. 13:17; James 3:1).

Even the uniquely gifted apostle Paul asked the question, “And who is adequate for these things?” (2 Cor. 2:16). He realized that no man could effectively discharge the immense obligation of spiritual leadership by human wisdom, effort, and strength alone. He knew that only God could provide the power to be an effective leader, although he struggled with his flesh and found himself not doing the things he wanted to do and doing the things he did not want to do (Rom. 7:14–25). God graciously gave him suffering and pain to continually humble him and make him dependent on divine power (2 Cor. 12:7–10).

False teachers assailed Paul, as they often do other faithful shepherds, by impugning his character and challenging his authority. Thus the opening statement of chapter 2 is a polemic in defense of Paul’s ministry to the Thessalonians. Opponents of his ministry were lying to the church in Thessalonica concerning his integrity and sincerity. They hoped to ruin the new church by destroying its confidence in the person God had used to found it. That group probably included both unbelieving Jews and pagan Gentiles, both of whom were extremely hostile to the gospel. (This was a similar situation to the one later addressed by Paul in 2 Corinthians.) In a negative response to the coming of Messiah and His redemptive work, as well as to the spread of the gospel message, the attacks on the truth of salvation by grace escalated—and Paul was the main target.

Since the first-century world was full of false spiritual leaders and charlatans, it was easy for the apostle’s foes to lump him in with those charlatans who traveled around and ministered merely to gain personal power, wealth, and prestige. W. Neil writes about those times:

In spite of the purity of Paul’s life and the transforming power of his message (sufficient and convincing proof of his legitimacy as an apostle of Jesus Christ), the enemies of the gospel were having some success in convincing the Thessalonians that Paul and his companions were men of wicked intentions, nothing more than self-seeking frauds like so many other “spiritual teachers” of that time. Therefore, as distasteful as it was for Paul to have to defend himself, he answered his detractors directly and concisely for the sake of the truth.

PAUL’S OPENING REMINDER

For you yourselves know, brethren, that our coming to you was not in vain, (2:1)

Paul opened the defense of his spiritual leadership with a general statement about the effectiveness of his ministry: For you yourselves know, brethren, that our coming to you was not in vain. The apostle immediately urged his audience to remember their own experience with him and his companions—what had occurred was obvious and self-evident. Awareness of how Paul ministered among the Thessalonians did not come from a secondhand report (cf. 1 Thess. 1:9) but from their own firsthand involvement.

The phrase our coming to you refers to the missionaries’ arrival in Thessalonica with the message of the gospel. Vain translates kenos, which means “empty.” The term also could denote something that was without purpose, effect, or importance and was thus inconsequential. But the ministry of Paul, Silas, and Timothy in Thessalonica was not so insipid. On the contrary, it had a powerful impact because it produced deep and far-reaching effects in the lives of the Thessalonians—the marks of genuine faith recollected in 1:1–10. The strength of the Thessalonian church, even after Paul’s leaving, was evidence that he had not labored in vain. As he continued the defense of his ministry in this section of the letter, Paul expressed five ingredients that opened his ministry to divine power: his confidence in God’s power, his commitment to God’s truth, his commissioning by God’s will, his motivation by God’s knowledge, and his dedication to God’s glory.

PAUL’S CONFIDENCE IN GOD’S POWER

but after we had already suffered and been mistreated in Philippi, as you know, we had the boldness in our God to speak to you the gospel of God amid much opposition. (2:2)

Paul’s confidence in the power of God, both to energize his ministry and protect him from harm, gave him boldness, courage, tenacity, and fearlessness in the face of his enemies.

Paul was thinking of those enemies when he reminded the Thessalonians that he and his companions had already suffered and been mistreated in Philippi. Luke recorded that episode in Acts 16:16–24:

Paul and Silas were actually harmed in two ways at Philippi, as indicated by the two words suffered and mistreated. They were treated brutally, being beaten and imprisoned in stocks, falsely accused, and illegally punished. Suffered refers primarily to the physical abuse, whereas mistreated refers to public disgrace, or even legal abuse—they were unjustly judged and made prisoners when they had committed no crime. In the first century, hubrizō (mistreated) meant to treat shamefully, insultingly, or outrageously in public—all with intent to humiliate.

Paul declared that even after they had experienced such bad treatment in Philippi they continued to preach the gospel in Thessalonica, where they were falsely accused of treason (Acts 17:7) and unfairly assaulted by a mob (17:5–6). The word rendered but after (alla) by the New American Standard Bible is a strong adversative that in this context might better be translated “but on the other hand” or “although.” Even though the missionaries encountered such a terrible reaction in Philippi when they proclaimed the gospel, they came to Thessalonica committed to the same privileged duty of preaching the gospel of God. In fact, Paul reasoned that the pagan Philippians’ hostile reaction was a sure indicator he and his friends were preaching the truth. Paul’s statement here makes it clear that confident, bold, biblical preaching does not lead to popularity. Rather, it leads to conflict that requires courage and renewed boldness.

Paul’s confidence was not in himself. On the contrary, his confidence or boldness was solely in God. Paul wholeheartedly trusted that God would sustain him. As he would later write to the Ephesians, he was “strong in the Lord and in the strength of His might” (Eph. 6:10). His human weakness was the best tool for God’s power (2 Cor. 12:9–10).

The term gospel of God appears two more times in chapter 2 (vv. 8, 9) as well as in Mark 1:14; Romans 1:1; 15:16; 2 Corinthians 11:7; and 1 Peter 4:17. It describes the gospel from the perspective of God as the source. It is the good news designed by and revealed from God about what He has done to redeem sinners through His grace and by His Son Jesus Christ.

As in Philippi and so many other places, the apostle ministered the gospel in Thessalonica amid much opposition. The Greek word translated opposition is agōn (“struggle,” “conflict,” “fight”), from which the English word agonize derives. It referred to an agonizing life and death struggle. In the ministry, there is always pressure to mitigate the message, to be inoffensive to sinners, to make the gospel acceptable to them. But such a compromise had no place in Paul’s strategy. Instead, he had full confidence in God’s power to overcome all opposition and achieve His redemptive purpose. The servant of God preaches the true, unmitigated message God has laid out in His Word, not some other message. He does so for the sake of truth, not for personal popularity. And when opposition comes, he trusts in the power of God and stays obedient to his calling. All that was true of Paul and his companions. As with all dedicated preachers of the gospel, they counted the cost of faithfully confronting sinners with the truth and rested boldly in the sovereign, supreme power of God.

PAUL’S COMMITMENT TO GOD’S TRUTH

For our exhortation does not come from error or impurity or by way of deceit; (2:3)

The apostle Paul knew he could be confident in God’s power because he was committed to God’s truth, not only in his preaching but also in his living. Enemies of the truth often try to destroy ministers of the gospel by persecution. But when that does not work, as it did not with Paul, they try to undermine people’s trust in the spiritual leader’s message or his personal integrity.

That often happened to Paul and his associates. He believed it necessary to defend his integrity by affirming his unwavering commitment to God’s truth, in both speech and conduct. First he declared, our exhortation does not come from error. The word exhortation (paraklēsis) means an urgent cry, appeal, or call, with an emphasis on judgment. Such usage stressed for Paul’s readers the urgency and directness of his preaching. He did not stray from the truth or operate apart from the standard of divine revelation. Paul assured them there was no false teaching or living—in other words, error—in his ministry.

Paul’s critics must have accused him not only of error but of outright heresy. Perhaps the antagonistic Jews accused him of ignorance regarding the Old Testament. But such charges were completely false (cf. 2 Cor. 2:17). From the time of his conversion, Paul was a guardian of God’s truth and he would later admonish Timothy about the importance of being such a guardian:

As noted, Paul was committed not only to speaking and guarding the truth but also to living the truth. Thus he affirmed that his message did not originate from impurity (akatharsias), a compound word composed of katharos, which means “pure” or “clean,” and the prefix a, which gives the expression a negative meaning, literally “without purity.” (Katharos is the source of the English word catharsis, meaning purifying or cleansing.) Although the word could refer to physical uncleanness and social uncleanness (stigma), it primarily referred to sexual uncleanness.

In Paul’s day many of the mystery religions and Greek cults practiced and even exalted sexual perversion. Those religions were very popular because in most of them the primary religious experience centered on the cult adherents having sex with a ritual temple prostitute or the cult leader. Temple orgies were not uncommon. Sexual intercourse had such a central role in those pagan religions because the members believed that when one had sex with a male leader or female prostitute—those supposedly closest to the gods—the individual connected with the deities. Therefore, through fornication they supposedly achieved some sort of mystical or metaphysical union with the gods. Thus wicked, unscrupulous leaders would seek converts for the purpose of having a sexual encounter with them.

So it was typical for religious charlatans to enter a locale and seek women for personal sexual satisfaction under the pretext of offering them a deeper, more complete, more intimate religious experience. Those unscrupulous teachers even enlisted women to pass those “religious experiences” on to other men. Other New Testament references to those practices imply how commonly such perverse teaching was promoted in Paul’s day. The apostle Peter wrote, “Many will follow their [false prophets’] sensuality, and because of them the way of the truth will be maligned; and in their greed they will exploit you with false words” (2 Peter 2:2–3; cf. vv. 12–15). Later, the apostle John, in conveying the Lord’s warning to the church in Thyatira, said, “But I have this against you, that you tolerate the woman Jezebel, who calls herself a prophetess, and she teaches and leads My bond-servants astray so that they commit acts of immorality and eat things sacrificed to idols” (Rev. 2:20).

Incredibly, Paul’s enemies were accusing him of the same kind of impurity as the false teachers—seeking converts for sexual favors. But that is unimaginable, as seen by his categorical denial of such accusations. In fact, in denying his foes’ wicked allegations, Paul specifically chose the word akatharsias because the wider connotation for that word likely indicated a lecherous love for the sake of fornication. The apostle and his companions had no impure ulterior motives, nor were they sexually immoral spiritual leaders. They spoke the truth out of pure lives.

Finally, Paul affirmed his commitment to God’s truth by declaring that he had not come by way of deceit. With those words he elevated the argument to the realm of motives and asserted the honesty and straightforwardness of his intentions. Deceit translates dolos, literally, a fishhook, trap, or trick (forms of deception). False teachers often used sorcery, magic, and theatrics to appear as if they had supernatural power and thereby gain converts, both for sexual favors and for money (cf. Acts 8:9–11; 2 Peter 2:15–18; Jude 11). But Paul’s motives were righteous, and he lived and ministered with the utmost integrity (1 Cor. 4:1–5; 2 Cor. 3:1–3; 4:1–6). Paul—and by extension, his colleagues—wanted nothing more than to discharge his responsibility of speaking and living the truth, without deception of any kind.

Paul was the opposite of a false teacher: his message was the truth; his life was pure; and his ministry was honest, without hypocrisy or deception.

PAUL’S COMMISSIONING BY GOD’S WILL

but just as we have been approved by God to be entrusted with the gospel, (2:4a)

A third and essential element in Paul’s powerful impact was that his ministry was approved by God. With this point, the discussion moved from the apostle’s commitment to the truth to his commission from God, from which he derived that commitment to truth.

The perfect tense of the verb dedokimasmetha (have been approved) means Paul was tested and found valid, he was given a lasting approval. God had validated and continued to approve Paul’s ministry.

Clearly God had called Paul to be an apostle; he was not self-appointed (Acts 9:1–18). He was not ministering on his own authority, but he had been entrusted with the gospel. Shortly after Paul’s conversion, the Lord said to Ananias about him: “Go, for he is a chosen instrument of Mine, to bear My name before the Gentiles and kings and the sons of Israel” (Acts 9:15). Paul reiterated the truth of that concept a number of times in his other epistles:

Thus the apostle Paul was a man under God’s call, command, and authority, to whom God had given massive responsibility for preaching the gospel, establishing the church, and writing Scripture. For such noble services, Paul was approved by God, and he labored under that calling as one who had divinely delegated authority and was promised supernatural blessing.

PAUL’S MOTIVATION BY GOD’S KNOWLEDGE

so we speak, not as pleasing men, but God who examines our hearts. For we never came with flattering speech, as you know, nor with a pretext for greed—God is witness—(2:4b–5)

While he rejoiced in the privilege of his high calling, a strong sense of accountability to God balanced Paul’s authority to preach the Word. That accountability came from the constant realization that the omniscient Lord knew and examined everything in his heart and life.

Paul was keenly aware that he was not merely accountable to men. He assured the Thessalonians that when he spoke God’s Word, he did so not as pleasing men. Nowhere did he make that more clear than when he responded to the allegation from false teachers in Galatia that he was nothing but a men pleaser. After attacking them with a powerful denunciation and curse, pronouncing anathema on those false teachers and all who corrupt the gospel (Gal. 1:6–9), he then said, “For am I now seeking the favor of men, or of God? Or am I striving to please men? If I were still trying to please men, I would not be a bond-servant of Christ” (v. 10; cf. Heb. 13:17; James 3:1).

The apostle Paul was consumed with pleasing God because he knew that only God truly examines the hearts of those who serve Him. Here hearts refers to the inner self, the real person, where thought, feeling, will, and motive converge. God scrutinizes all those factors and knows with certainty whether His servants are seeking to please Him or people. Paul’s recognition of that omniscience was what motivated his service.

Paul addressed the matter of motivation and accountability at greater length in a critically instructive section of his first epistle to the church at Corinth:

Paul, though leaving the final assessment of his faithfulness to his omniscient Lord, nevertheless kept his own heart clean. His personal testimony in 2 Corinthians 1:12 is remarkable: “For our proud confidence is this: the testimony of our conscience, that in holiness and godly sincerity, not in fleshly wisdom but in the grace of God, we have conducted ourselves in the world, and especially toward you.”

Since the Lord is the true Judge, the apostle called upon God as his witness in the care of this church and asked Him to confirm that he and his friends had not come to exploit the Thessalonians with flattering speech. The person using flattering speech compliments someone else merely as a ploy to win favor with that person or to gain power over him. Paul did not stoop to the sin of flattery, no doubt remembering the Old Testament words: “May the Lord cut off all flattering lips, the tongue that speaks great things” (Ps. 12:3; cf. 5:9; Job 32:21–22; Prov. 20:19; 28:23; Rom. 16:18).

False teachers not only seek to gain power and influence through their flattering words, but also their underlying motivation is usually greed. This was common for false religionists in Paul’s day, and it is now. Therefore, Paul also asserted that he had not come with a pretext for greed. Pretext is from prophasis, which means “cloak.” Paul and his companions did not come to Thessalonica with a cloak hiding greedy intentions. They were not at all like the spiritual deceivers who come cloaking their real desires for sexual favors and money, using flattery to win over their audience, and then exploiting them for all sorts of personal satisfaction and gain.

In contrast, Paul’s ministry was consistent with his later words to the Ephesian elders: “I have coveted no one’s silver or gold or clothes. You yourselves know that these hands ministered to my own needs and to the men who were with me” (Acts 20:33–34). Unlike most false teachers, he worked with his hands, demonstrating that he did not preach the gospel for crass monetary reward. God knew his heart and his motives, and He was the One to whom Paul was accountable.

PAUL’S DEDICATION TO GOD’S GLORY

nor did we seek glory from men, either from you or from others, even though as apostles of Christ we might have asserted our authority. (2:6)

Also unlike typical spiritual deceivers, Paul did not seek glory—esteem, honor, or praise—from men. The present tense of the Greek participle zētountes indicates that Paul did not habitually seek accolades, applause, awards, recognition, and prestige either from the Thessalonians or from others. The only glory Paul ever sought was eternal. To the Ephesians he wrote: “Now to Him who is able to do far more abundantly beyond all that we ask or think, according to the power that works within us, to Him be the glory in the church and in Christ Jesus to all generations forever and ever. Amen” (Eph. 3:20–21). Paul was not in the ministry because of his own ambition. God had gifted, prepared, and placed him there, and therefore he did not deserve any human commendation (cf. 1 Cor. 9:16–18; 10:31; 2 Cor. 4:5).

Even though as apostles of Christ Paul and his associates might have asserted their divinely delegated authority and thereby gained some prestige, they were preoccupied with giving all the glory to God. Apostles refers to specially called messengers. In the strictest sense, the plural apostles was likely intended to link Paul (as one who had seen the risen Christ and been personally commissioned by Him) to the Twelve so as to identify his unique authority. In a less specific sense, it could designate Silas and Timothy as apostles of the churches, chosen not directly by Christ but by the churches (cf. Rom. 16:7; Phil. 2:25).

Paul never abused his authority as an apostle but always balanced it with accountability and humility. And he knew that God’s omniscience discerned every thought and intention of the heart, so he was careful not to desire praise from men but always to seek to give all the glory to God. “For from Him and through Him and to Him are all things. To Him be the glory forever. Amen” (Rom. 11:36) expresses the divine doxology of the apostle.

This passage sets forth five key qualities of fail-proof spiritual leadership: tenacity, because the leader trusts totally in the power of God; integrity, because the leader is fully committed to the truth of God; authority, because the leader is commissioned by the will of God; accountability, because the leader knows the omniscient God examines his heart; and humility, because the leader is consumed with the glory of God. If he has these qualities, he will be well on his way to exercising fail-proof spiritual leadership.