In spite of the close relationship between the two Thessalonian letters, some liberals have questioned the Pauline authorship of the Second Epistle. First of all, they have claimed that the apostle would not have written two letters with so many similarities within such a short time of each other. However, in the second letter Paul did not deal with every subject discussed in the first (e.g., sexual purity, state of the Christian dead). The similarities are only partial; certainly the author of both should be granted permission to repeat some truths for further clarification and emphasis. Second, they point out that the teaching on the Second Coming is somewhat different in the two Epistles. However, in the first letter he emphasized the relationship of His coming to believers, both dead and living; whereas in the second he characterized the relationship of His advent to "them that know not God, and that obey not the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ" (1:8) and to the destruction of the antichrist (2:8). Third, they state that the extended section on the man of sin (2:1–12) is not mentioned in the first letter. The inconsistent reasoning of the critics can be clearly seen in this charge. They try to build a case for their position from the abundance of similarities on the one hand and from the uniqueness of a passage on the other. Actually, the Thessalonians’ misconceptions about the Day of the Lord necessitated such an exposition of the key concept of that period. Fourth, they feel that the tone of the two Epistles is very different; to them the first is warm and commendatory, while the second is cold and severe. However, the personal warmth that existed between Paul and the church was still there (1:1–4; cf. 1 Thess. 1:1–3). Paul did manifest his apostolic authority in the second to discredit the false teaching and to repeat his commands to the disorderly.

On the positive side, he did call himself "Paul" twice (1:1; 3:17). He again associated himself with Silas and Timothy (1:1; cf. 1 Thess. 1:1). The opening salutations and prayers of thanksgiving found in both Epistles are almost identical. Paul’s familiar trio of faith, love, and hope is again seen (1:3–4; cf. 1 Thess. 1:3; 5:8). Some problems, introduced in the first letter, are developed further in the second: lack of work (1 Thess. 4:9–12; cf. 3:6–14) and the Day of the Lord (1 Thess. 5:1–11; cf. 1:5–2:12).

Not only was this book listed among the Pauline Epistles in the Muratorian Canon, but it was also recognized as a Pauline original by these Church Fathers: Irenaeus, Tertullian, Clement of Alexandria, and Marcion.

Very little time, perhaps a month or two, elapsed between the writing of the two Epistles. Paul heard (3:11) that the disorderly had not followed his exhortation to return to work (1 Thess. 4:10–12). Either the messenger who took the First Epistle to Thessalonica or else a recent visitor to that city brought back this report. Paul was also told about a doctrinal discrepancy that was disrupting the church: "That ye be not soon shaken in mind, or be troubled, neither by spirit, nor by word, nor by letter as from us, as that the day of Christ [Lord]³ is at hand. Let no man deceive you by any means …" (2:2–3a). In the First Epistle Paul had charged: "Quench not the Spirit. Despise not prophesyings" (5:19–20). Apparently some teachers, either from within or without the church, had preached that the persecutions which the Thessalonians were receiving proved that they were in the Day of the Lord. Also, there was a forged letter, purported to be from Paul (note "as from us"), that declared that believers would go into the Day of the Lord or the Tribulation. Since Paul had preached and written differently, the church membership was confused. Since these problems were very real and personal, Paul deemed it necessary to write another Epistle to them to clarify their misunderstandings. Thus the Second Epistle was written also from Corinth (a.d. 51), one to three months after the sending of the first letter.

First, Paul wanted them to know that he continued to thank God for their increasing faith, love, and patience (1:1–4). Second, he wanted to assure them that Christ’s second advent would not only deliver them from their persecutions but that it would also cause the destruction of the unsaved (1:5–12). Third, he attempted to calm their anxiety caused by the false teaching that they were actually in the Day of the Lord (2:1–12). Fourth, he exhorted them to obey his commands, whether oral (by himself or Timothy) or in the two Epistles (2:13–3:5). Fifth, he wanted to give further instructions about the discipline of the disorderly (3:6–15). Finally, he gave them a sign whereby they could distinguish his correspondence from forgeries (3:16–18).

The dominant theme of the First Epistle, the return of Christ, was carried over into the second letter. Each chapter has at least one reference to it (1:7–10; 2:1, 8; 3:5). The first passage contains a graphic description of the judgment aspect of His return.

In his discussion of the Day of the Lord, Paul revealed more truth about the person and work of the coming antichrist. He entitled him as the man of sin, the son of perdition, and that Wicked one. Through Satanic enablement, he will perform "all power and signs and lying wonders" (2:9) to deceive men and to cause them to worship him as God. He will not only oppose the real God but any other object of worship. From the temple in Jerusalem he will rule as God. He eventually will be destroyed by the coming of Christ to the earth.

Will men who have rejected Christ in this church age have a second chance to accept Him? This question, raised quite often in prophetic conferences, is difficult to answer. If there is any passage that seems to give the answer, it is found in this book:

The answer revolves around the three italicized verbs. When did they not receive and believe? When did they have pleasure in unrighteousness? It does not say whether the action took place during the church age or after the rapture. Either position could suit the context; for that reason, no one should be dogmatic in his answer.

The use of "traditions" (Greek, paradoseis) is unique (2:15; 3:6). The verbal equivalent of this noun is found elsewhere, translated as "delivered" (Luke 1:2; 1 Cor. 15:3). Paul delivered or communicated in two forms that truth which he himself received from Christ: his oral teaching and his written Epistles. He did not regard them as man-made traditions, but as authoritative pronouncements from God (1 Thess. 2:13; 5:27; cf. 2 Thess. 3:14); thus obedience or disobedience toward his letters was actually directed at God rather than at him. This demonstrates that the apostles wrote with a conscious recognition of divinely invested authority.

Paul’s exaltation of the person of Christ, as seen in the first letter, is also emphasized in the second. He identified Him mainly as the Lord Jesus Christ (1:1, 2, 8, 12 [twice]; 2:1, 14, 16; 3:6, 12, 18), as the Lord Jesus (1:7), as Christ (3:5), and as the Lord (1:9; 2:8, 13; 3:1, 3, 4, 5, 16). Once He is named as the Lord of peace (3:16).

Salutation (1:1–2)

Conclusion (3:16–18)

In his opening remarks Paul gave thanks for their growing faith, abounding love, and patient endurance in the midst of their persecutions and tribulations. This referred to the time period between Timothy’s ministry (1 Thess. 3:1–6) and the writing of the Second Epistle. He told them that he continued to use them as an illustration of the model church.

He assured them that God was not unfair in permitting them to experience these tribulations and that their behavior demonstrated that they were worthy of the kingdom of God. He then explained that their persecutors would go into the Great Tribulation (1:6) and that Christ would take vengeance on them at His coming to the earth. Not only would they be killed physically, but they also would be punished with everlasting separation from God. He further stated that in that day Christ would be glorified in them and admired by them. He then prayed that God would continue to work out His will in their submissive lives and that He would be glorified in them now in the midst of their persecutions.

Through various means, the believers had become mentally and emotionally disturbed over the possibility that they might be in the Day of the Lord. They believed that Christ could come at any moment, but some had equated their persecutions with those to be committed in the Great Tribulation. They wondered whether they had missed the Rapture because they had not been watching or whether they were wrong about the time of the Rapture.

Paul informed them that they could not be in the Day of the Lord because two major events of that day had not yet occurred: the moral, doctrinal apostasy and the revelation of the man of sin. He pointed out that the antichrist would set himself up in the temple at Jerusalem as an object of worship; since this had not happened, they could not possibly be in the Day of the Lord. He wanted them to remember his original teaching on this subject.⁶ He acknowledged that the program of sin was already active in the world, but he argued that the man of sin could not be revealed until the Holy Spirit removed His restraining influence. He claimed that the world would be deceived by his Satanic miracles, that they would believe the lie that he, a man, was actually divine, and that he would be destroyed at Christ’s second coming.

Paul then gave thanks for their spiritual standing as seen in contrast to the deceived world. They were chosen to salvation from the beginning; they were set apart by the Spirit for His convicting, quickening ministry; they believed the truth when God efficaciously called them through Paul’s preaching; and they were destined to share Christ’s glory (2:13–14). He then encouraged them to stand and to hold the doctrinal positions that he had taught them, to be comforted by God, and to pray for his ministry at Corinth that was performed in the midst of constant peril.

Whereas in the first letter Paul exhorted (4:10), in the second he commanded concerning the disorderly brother (3:6, 10, 12). He advised the church to withdraw fellowship from a professing believer who refused to work. He cited himself as an example of one who believed in the imminent coming of Christ and who at the same time gave himself to secular work. He pointed out that as an apostle he did not need to work but he chose to do so to provide an example for the Thessalonians. If the disorderly did not obey the Second Epistle, Paul charged the church to have no company with him—not to count him as an enemy, but to admonish him as a brother.

Paul closed the short Epistle with the prayer that they would be conscious of God’s presence, peace, and grace. He then indicated that he signed off each of his Epistles with his distinctive signature; this would guard them against any future forged letters.