Second Thessalonians: Introduction-Canonicity and Literary Genre of Second Thessalonians

Second Thessalonians is one of the shortest of the thirteen letters which are traditionally attributed to the apostle Paul since it contains approximately 823 words in the Greek text with only Philemon and Titus being shorter since the former contains 335 words and the latter 659.

Therefore, this epistle has little more than half the words of 1 Thessalonians which contains 1,481 words.

As we will note, Second Thessalonians was written within six months of First Thessalonians.

Therefore, the former like the latter is one of the earliest epistles the apostle penned since the latter is also considered by many scholars to be written by Paul in approximately 49 A.D.

Consequently, the issues related to the historical background of Second Thessalonians as well as the date, place of origin and recipients of this book are the same as that of First Thessalonians with only a few slight additions.

Like First Thessalonians, the canonicity of Second Thessalonians is supported by the fact that it was included in the earliest collections of New Testament writings which circulated in the early centuries of the church.

These two epistles appear in the list of New Testament books compiled by Marcion.

They also appear in the Muratorian Canon.

The Muratorian canon listed all the books of the Bible including First and Second Thessalonians except for 1 John, 1 and 2 Peter, Hebrews, and James around A.D. 180 (Hannah, Notes, 2.5).

Irenaeus, as bishop of Lyon, mentions all of the books except Jude, 2 Peter, James, Philemon, 2 and 3 John, and Revelation.

The Syriac version of the canon, from the third century, leaves out Revelation.

It should be noted that although these early church leaders differed on which books should be included in the canon, they were quite sure that the books were inspired by God.

First and Second Thessalonians also appear in the lists compiled by Eusebius.

He classified these two letters as “homologoumenos” which means that they were “acknowledged” books or in other words, they were undisputed in the church during his day and age.

Eusebius (270-340) who was the bishop of Caesarea, is commonly referred to as “the father of church history” because of the writing of his Ecclesiastical History.

Eusebius’ list is composed of the following: (1) Homologoumena(the “acknowledged” books): The four Gospels, Acts, the letters of Paul (presumably including Hebrews), 1 John, 1 Peter and, “if it seems desirable,” Revelation; (2) Antilegomena (the “disputed” or “spurious” (notha) books: James, Jude, 2 Peter, 2 and 3 John, Acts of Paul, Shepherd of Hermas, Apocalypse of Peter, Epistle of Barnabas, Didache, and, “if this view prevail,” Revelation and the Gospel of the Hebrews; and (3) Pseudepigrapha (the “fabrications of heretics”) namely, the Gospels of Peter, Thomas and Matthias and Acts of Andrew and John.

In the past several decades, the study of Graeco-Roman rhetoric has been viewed by many scholars such as Witherington and Wanamaker as useful for interpreting Paul’s epistles.

However, before the advent of this approach, most interpreters have viewed epistolary rhetoric as more appropriate and I am in agreement with them.

The study of Graeco-Roman rhetoric is useful for several reasons.

The first is that Paul intended his letters to be read aloud like a speech.

Secondly, the majority of people in the Roman Empire were very familiar with rhetoric and plus many were trained in rhetoric.

However, I am of the opinion that one must not embrace this approach to interpretation of Paul’s letters too rigidly so as to force his letters into a particular pattern which cannot account for the extent of their content or structure.

A.R. Talbert has an excellent comment, he writes “the early church fathers (such as John Chrysostom, Theodoret of Cyrus, and Theodore of Mopsuestia) were trained in classical rhetoric and taught on Paul’s letters. None of them read Paul according to the pattern of Graeco-Roman rhetoric, though they frequently made rhetorical observations.”[1]

Like First Thessalonians, Second Thessalonians is written according to the pattern of letter writing found in the ancient world during the first century called the “epistle.”

The epistle is among the oldest forms of communication.

In fact, the epistle is among the oldest and most abundantly preserved types of texts that we have today from the ancient world.

These extant documents are extremely important to us today for historical, literary and biblical research.

The general form of a first century letter contained the following elements: (1) The author identifies himself (2) The author identifies the recipient (3) The greeting (4) Main body of the epistle (5) Closing greeting (usually a simple word wishing the recipient good health) (6) Final signature of endorsement by the writer of the letter.

The final signature of endorsement authenticated the letter’s contents and served as protection against fraudulent correspondence.

The final signature was also important because frequently an amanuensis was employed to write the letter.

Today, we begin our letters by addressing the recipient first and identifying ourselves at the end of the contents of the letter which is the exact opposite to what the ancient letter writer would do.

Paul’s letters in the New Testament generally followed the same pattern of letter writing found in the first and second centuries.

Like First Thessalonians, Paul in Second Thessalonians follows the correct chronological order of a first century letter’s introduction: (1) The author identifies himself first (verse 1) (2) Then he identifies the recipient of the letter (verse 1) (3) Then he gives a greeting (verses 2-12).

Like First Thessalonians, Second Thessalonians also follows the usual Pauline letter structure (1) Opening (1:1) (2) Thanksgiving (1:2-12) (3) Body of letter (2:1-3:15) (4) Closing (3:16-18).

There was a constant exchange of letters in the early first century churches.

This was by apostolic command.

A good example of this procedure is found in Paul’s first letter to the Thessalonians (cf. 1 Thess. 5:27).

Thus, Second Thessalonians like First Thessalonians was meant not only to be read by the believers in Thessalonica but also by all the churches Macedonia.

Philip Comfort writes “Both 1 and 2 Thessalonians are among the earliest and most pristine examples of what has come to be known as the New Testament epistles. The epistle was a well-known literary form in Hellenistic times. It was used for both simple friendly letters and formal treatises. The New Testament writers used it in both ways, such that their epistles conveyed messages between friends as well as comprehensive Christian teachings. Indeed, much of New Testament doctrine comes from what the apostles wrote in their epistles.”[2]

[1] Talbert, A. R. (2016). Thessalonians, First Letter to the, Critical Issues. In J. D. Barry, D. Bomar, D. R. Brown, R. Klippenstein, D. Mangum, C. Sinclair Wolcott, … W. Widder (Eds.), The Lexham Bible Dictionary. Bellingham, WA: Lexham Press. [2] Hoehner, H. W., Comfort, P. W., & Davids, P. H. (2008). Cornerstone biblical commentary: Ephesians, Philippians, Colossians, 1&2 Thessalonians, Philemon. (Vol. 16, pp. 326–327). Carol Stream, IL: Tyndale House Publishers.