to do what it right? Why does he keep silent and invisible? What have I done such that he won’t rescue me?
Paul responds to the Thessalonians’ suffering by pointing to a future hope—God will rebalance the world at the right time. While it is difficult to wait for that right time, it is sure and he can be trusted to work it all out.72 Suffering and wrath are not ultimate things, they are penultimate things. I would like to echo here the point Michael Gorman makes in relation to judgment language in the book of Revelation:
Revelation’s visions of judgment symbolize God’s penultimate (next-to-last) rather than ultimate (final) activity in human history. That is, judgment is a means to an end; the goal being eschatological salvation, the creation of a new heaven and new earth in which humanity realizes its true raison d’etre as reconciled peoples flourishing together in the presence of God and the Lamb.73
Much the same could be said of 2 Thessalonians. All the apocalyptic turmoil that Paul prescribes is far from the end-vision of salvation and God’s redeeming justice. Despite what looks like eschatological chaos, the ultimate hope is harmony. Thus, Justice in 2 Thessalonians should be joined by his brother Peace.74 Paul’s ultimate interest in peace (eirēnē) is demonstrated in how he ends this letter: “Now may the Lord of peace himself give you peace at all times in all ways. The Lord be with all of you.” Peace is not only what will exist in the end, when the apocalyptic dust has settled. Believers can embody and live out lives of peace-making and peace-keeping now.75
Who Wrote 2 Thessalonians?
In the above examination of 2 Thessalonians, we have taken for granted that Paul wrote 2 Thessalonians. However, especially since the early twentieth century, scholars have wondered whether Paul wrote it, or it was written by someone else in his name (i.e., pseudonymous).76 For most of the twentieth century, more and more scholars accepted the arguments for 2 Thessalonians being pseudonymous. The reasons for this are many and vary somewhat from one scholar to the next, but these features tend to be raised when 2 Thessalonians’ authenticity is questioned: copycat, style, historical implausibility, tone, pseudonymous “tells,” and theological differences.77
Against Pauline Authorship
Copycat
A first, and perhaps the most decisive, reason that some scholars believe 2 Thessalonians is pseudonymous is its relationship to 1 Thessalonians, in particular how similar it is.78 Edgar Krentz points to several identical (or nearly-identical) features: identical salutations (1 Thess 1:1; 2 Thess 1:1), both have long thanksgivings, both include a second thanksgiving in the middle of the letter (1 Thess 2:13; 2 Thess 2:13), both have letter bodies which close with “a request to God expressed by a volitive optative.”79 Both letters also ask the “God/Lord of peace” to do something (1 Thess 5:23–24; 2 Thess 3:16). Additionally, both letters use the same rare word kateuthynai, although in different contexts (1 Thess 3:11; 2 Thess 3:16). Krentz’s point here is not to show similarities, but rather what seems like copying or a conscious dependence on the first letter. This leads to the natural question, “Why would Paul copy himself in this almost mechanical way?”80 The implication is that Paul would have no need to copy himself, but this is the kind of thing that a pseudonymous writer would do, having 1 Thessalonians in his possession and wanting to create another letter that appears Pauline.81
Style
Every writer has his or her own writing personality or style. One person (today) says “you know?” at the end of a sentence, while another says “you know what I mean?” Some scholars, examining the “styles” of 1 and 2 Thessalonians, note a difference.82 Second Thessalonians employs certain turns of phrases (such as “good hope” and “eternal comfort”) that don’t resonate with the style of Paul’s other undisputed letters (like 1 Thessalonians, but also Galatians, Romans, 1–2 Corinthians, Philippians, and Philemon).83 Another possible difference in style is the author of 2 Thessalonians’ preference for longer and more complex sentences.84 Christina Kreinecker has argued recently that 2 Thessalonians diverges from 1 Thessalonians in the way that the author makes requests (using the verbs erōtaō and parangelō).85
Historical Implausibility
A third matter involves the discovery of features of a text that simply do not fit into the timeline of a historical Paul. For example, some scholars have noted the two appeals to “tradition” in 2 Thessalonians (2:15; 3:6)—is this not language that is indicative of a more developed age of Christianity, rather than something Paul would have appealed to in AD 51–52?86
Another issue that has raised questions about historical plausibility is the way that the Lawless One is portrayed in 2 Thessalonians 2:1–12 as what appears to be Nero back from the dead (hence, Nero redivivus). Some scholars argue that if this Lawless One is a return of Nero, then the author of 2 Thessalonians must have already thought Nero was dead—and he died in AD 68, a time too late to fit into Paul’s ministry to the Thessalonians.
Tone
Several scholars have raised the issue of the difference in tone between 1 and 2 Thessalonians. It appears that the tone of 2 Thessalonians is impersonal and formal, while that of 1 Thessalonians is more affectionate and intimate.87 The difference is so stark that it seems to some that this is probably not the same Paul.
Pseudonymous “Tells”
Perhaps one of the most important arguments made by those who do not think Paul wrote 2 Thessalonians is that the text features elements that seem like a pseudonymous “tells” or giveaways. The best example of this is 2 Thess 3:17 where the author directly states: “I, Paul, write this greeting with my own hand. This is the mark in every letter of mine; it is the way I write.” Could this be a pseudonymous writer trying too hard to present himself as Paul? As Krentz facetiously comments: “The author of 2 Thessalonians doth protest too much, methinks.”88
Theological Differences
A final matter in this debate specifically relates to theological divergences in 2 Thessalonians compared to 1 Thessalonians. As this argument goes, in 1 Thessalonians, Paul’s eschatological emphasis is on the soon-coming return of Jesus. However, in 2 Thessalonians the point is the opposite. Linda McKinnish Bridges offers this summary of how 2 Thessalonians is different: “The motion slows; the action shifts into low gear. The author of 2 Thessalonians states that a series of selected events must first take place before the end. The list is long, systematic, and highly descriptive, using stock imagery from the world of apocalyptic language.” She summarizes, “In 1 Thessalonians the end is near. In 2 Thessalonians, however, the end is way out of sight!”89
To
