Second Thessalonians Introduction: Purpose of Second Thessalonians and Was It Written Before First Thessalonians

Paul wrote Second Thessalonians for many of the same reasons he wrote First Thessalonians since he writes to encourage the Thessalonians in the face of the persecution they were experiencing at the hands of the unregenerate Gentiles of Thessalonica (1:4, 5-7).

Like First Thessalonians, Paul in Second Thessalonians once again addresses the Thessalonians relationship to the eschatological day of the Lord.

In the first letter to the Thessalonians, Paul reassures them that they will not be experiencing the Lord’s wrath during the seventh week of Daniel and Second Advent of Christ which composes the eschatological day of the Lord.

He asserts that they were appointed to experience the perfection of their salvation at the rapture and were emphatically not appointed to experience the Lord’s wrath during the eschatological day of the Lord (cf. 1Thess. 5:9).

But in the second letter to the Thessalonians Paul reassures them that this eschatological day of the Lord which follows the rapture has not arrived when he wrote this epistle since it appears some false teachers were proclaiming otherwise.

He then goes on to remind them about what must take place first before the day of the Lord can take place.

In 2 Thessalonians 2:1-12, Paul describes the Antichrist and then the blasphemous actions he will perform during the seventieth week of Daniel.

Then, he asserts that Antichrist cannot appear until the thing which is restraining his being revealed to the world has been taken out of the way (cf. 2:7).

This is a reference to the Holy Spirit being removed from planet earth at the rapture since He permanently indwells every member of the body of Christ.

Thus, the implication is that when the church is gone, Antichrist will then be revealed.

The apostle Paul also writes Second Thessalonians because he wants to encourage them to continue to hold fast to his apostolic teaching (2 Thess. 2:13-17).

He also requests that they intercede in prayer for him and his ministry in that he would be delivered by God from wicked, evil people (2 Thess. 3:1-5).

Lastly, in 2 Thessalonians 3:6-15, Paul exhorts the Thessalonians to practice church discipline in regard to those in their community who reject his apostolic teaching by refusing to work for a living.

Paul anticipated this taking place among the Thessalonians in his first letter to them.

In 1 Thessalonians 4:11, he commanded the Thessalonians that they must continue to make it their habit of working to support themselves, rather than being a burden to each other financially.

The reason why Paul exhorts the Thessalonian Christian community to work in both 1 and 2 Thessalonians is that the Greek culture despised work or manual labor in general because of their use of slaves, unlike the Jewish community which embraced the concept of working.

When Paul wrote First Thessalonians, they were not guilty of not working.

However, the contents of 2 Thessalonians 3:6-15 reveals that this was no longer the case in that some were reverting back to their pre-conversion days when they did not work.

Thus, the command in 1 Thessalonians 4:11 was preventative maintenance and prophetic.

Some scholars have argued that Second Thessalonians was actually written before First Thessalonians.

D.E. Hiebert writes “Harnack, impressed by the views of Wrede, sought to save the Pauline authorship of 2 Thessalonians by postulating that ‘alongside of the Gentile community implied by the First Epistle there was a smaller and earlier Jewish community to which the Second Epistle was directed.’[1]He thought that this division of the Thessalonian church was hinted at in 1 Thessalonians 5:27, where Paul asked that the ‘epistle be read unto all the brethren,’ as though there was another group besides the one being addressed. For further support he appealed to the questionable rendering of 2 Thessalonians 2:13 as, ‘God chose you as first fruits.’ The statement obviously could not be made of the Gentile church at Thessalonica since they were not the first converts in Macedonia, but it did point to the Jewish section since they were the first Jewish converts in the province.

But this reading of the situation is highly unlikely Guthrie well points out that ‘it is inconceivable that Paul the universalist would foster such a division by separate letters to the rival sections.’[2]His strong condemnation of disunity within the local church at Corinth makes it unthinkable that he would condone it at Thessalonica. The existence of such a division in the Thessalonian church is inconsistent with the fact that in 1 Thessalonians 2:14 Paul holds up the Judean churches as models for the assumed Gentile section at Thessalonica.

The identical superscription in both epistles points to the logical conclusion that both were addressed to the same group. Harnack’s conjecture that the address of 2 Thessalonians originally read ‘to the church of the Thessalonians, those of the circumcision,’ and that the last four words were later dropped, only demonstrates the weakness of his case.[3]

There are other reasons why one should reject this theory postulated by Harnack.

First, 2 Thessalonians 2:2, 15 and 3:17 makes a reference to a previous letter written to the Thessalonian Christian community by Paul, Silvanus and Timothy while on the other hand, First Thessalonians does not.

The reference to a previous letter is more than likely to be First Thessalonians.

Secondly, 1 Thessalonians 3:1-8 reveals that Paul and Silvanus sent Timothy to visit the Thessalonians in order to ascertain whether or not the Thessalonians were remaining faithful to the gospel.

This would make it unlikely that another letter was written to the Thessalonians by these three men.

Thirdly, the traditional understanding of the church throughout almost two thousand years has been that First Thessalonians was written first followed by Second Thessalonians.

Lastly, the apostle Paul in 1 Thessalonians 1-3 takes great pains and defending his ministry and love for the Thessalonian Christian community because he was greatly concerned that they had departed from his apostolic teaching after he was forced to leave the city because of intense persecution.

However, there is no hint of this concern in Second Thessalonians.

This is an indication that Paul wrote First Thessalonians first and then Second Thessalonians because this order makes the only sense in light of Paul’s abrupt departure from Thessalonica.

In other words, if Paul wrote Second Thessalonians first, then why doesn’t he express his concern about the Thessalonians departing from his teaching in light of his abrupt departure from them?

We would only expect him to express this concern in a letter which immediately follows this abrupt departure.

Another argument put forth by scholars in support of the theory that Second Thessalonians was written before First Thessalonians is that Paul’s reference to his signature as the sign of genuineness in 2 Thessalonians 3:17 is that it only makes sense to do this in the first letter.[4]

However, there was no problems in the Thessalonian Christian community which called for such actions on the part of Paul when he wrote First Thessalonians.

Contrary to this, in 2 Thessalonians 2:1-2 Paul does reveal there was a problem which called for him to take such measures.

In these verses, he orders the Thessalonians to not be easily unsettled or alarmed by the teaching allegedly from him, Silvanus or Timothy or by prophecy or by word of mouth or by letter asserting that the day of the Lord has already come.

Thus, it is clear that he was concerned that someone might have given them a letter or had already done so teaching this false doctrine.

Therefore, one can see why Paul would feel a deep need to make a reference to his signature which authenticates that Second Thessalonians came from him and not from a false teacher.

Another argument put forth by those who argue Second Thessalonians was written before First Thessalonians revolves around a comparison of 1 Thessalonians 4:10-12 and 2 Thessalonians 3:6-15.

They argue that in the former Paul, Silvanus and Timothy seem completely familiar with some in the Christian community in Thessalonica not working contrary to Paul’s apostolic teaching while in the latter this appears to be a new development.

However, Paul affirms in 1 Thessalonians 4:10-12 that the Thessalonians were not guilty of this, but in 2 Thessalonians 3:6-15, some of them were.

Thus, it makes no sense that Paul would write Second Thessalonians first and then First Thessalonians when the former describes a situation which is not described in the letter.

[1] Lake, p. 237. [2] Donald Guthrie, New Testament Introduction, The Pauline Epistles, pp. 189–90. [3] Hiebert, D. E. (1996). 1 & 2 Thessalonians(Revised Edition, p. 289). Winona Lake, IN: BMH Books. [4] Manson, Studies in the Gospels and Epistles, page 273