Reversal of Order
Reversal of Order
Some have suggested that 2 Thessalonians preceded 1 Thessalonians. 25 There can be no a priori objection to the reversal of order; it is a matter of evidence. Neither letter claims to be before or after the other, and the traditional order could have arisen for no more profound reason than the greater length of 1 Thessalonians. There was a tendency in the early church to arrange letters in order of length, with the longer ones first. So we must look at the arguments adduced.
Some scholars think our problems arise mainly because we read the letters in the traditional order, assuming that 2 Thessalonians is overshadowed by 1 Thessalonians. But 2 Thessalonians is much more appealing as a first letter, and as it leaves quite a few things unsettled, it calls for a fuller letter to follow. The contention is supported by a number of considerations. Thus the tribulations that are at their height in 2 Thessalonians are over in the first letter (see 1 Thess. 2:14). The church’s internal difficulties are a new happening in the second letter, but familiar in the first. The directions about the autograph (2 Thess. 3:17) are useful in a first letter, but not in a later one. 26 That the believers need not be instructed about dates (1 Thess. 5:1) would follow the teaching given in the second letter. Paul would have sent a letter with Timothy when he sent him to Thessalonica (1 Thess. 3:2). This letter, it is urged, must be 2 Thessalonians.
These and other considerations are not sufficiently persuasive. It is not at all certain that the trials were over when 1 Thessalonians was written (see 1 Thess. 3:3). Guthrie makes the point that "since 1 Thessalonians was designed partly to encourage, some trials were still expected in the future.” 27 Again, there is no real evidence of new internal difficulties in 2 Thessalonians. And that an autograph need not be explained in a first letter is shown by the fact that no such explanation is found in any of Paul’s other letters (most of which are first letters). 28 Its use here argues for unusual circumstances at Thessalonica (see 2 Thess. 2:2). The argument from eschatology amounts to little; it could be worded to support the priority of either letter. Timothy would scarcely have been the bearer of a letter of which he was one of the authors.
Against the view that the Thessalonian epistles must be inverted, it is urged that the problems arising from persecution, the parousia, and idleness all seem to be more urgent in 2 Thessalonians. 29 It is also pointed out that there are references in that letter to a letter of Paul’s (2 Thess. 2:15; 3:17), which seem to point us to 1 Thessalonians. The warmer tone of the first letter would be a natural result of the news Timothy had just brought, and the somewhat cooler tone of 2 Thessalonians would be natural later. Wikenhauser is impressed by the strength of Paul’s expressions when he speaks of his being separated from the Thessalonians (1 Thess. 2:17-3:6); he says forthrightly that according to this passage 1 Thessalonians "is his first Epistle to the community.” 30 It certainly reads like this.
It appears, then, that no sufficient reason has been given for reversing the order of the two letters. It is better to retain the traditional order.