Thessalonica was an important city. Cassander, the Macedonian king, founded it in 315 B.C. and named it for his wife, who was a half-sister of Alexander the Great. It was the capital of the Roman province of Macedonia, and it stood on the Via Egnatia, the Roman highway to the East. It was a self-governing community with enough Jews in residence to warrant a synagogue (Acts 17:1).
Paul first visited Thessalonica during his second missionary journey with Silas and Timothy. They had just left prison in Philippi and made their way southward to Thessalonica. For at least three Sabbath days Paul reasoned in the synagogue with those present, and many believed the gospel (Acts 17:2). However, he probably ministered in Thessalonica for a longer time than just three weeks in view of what he wrote that he had done there (e.g., 1 Thess. 2:9; cf. Phil. 4:15-16).1Those who responded to the message of Christ's sufferings and resurrection (Acts 17:3, 7) were Jews (Acts 17:4) and God-fearing proselytes to Judaism. There were also some leading women of the city and many idol-worshipping pagans (Acts 17:4-5).
"If Macedonia produced perhaps the most competent group of men the world had yet seen, the women were in all respects the men's counterparts; they played a large part in affairs, received envoys and obtained concessions from them for their husbands, built temples, founded cities, engaged mercenaries, commanded armies, held fortresses, and acted on occasion as regents or even co-rulers."2
When the unbelieving Jews heard of the conversion of the proselytes, whom they were discipling, they stirred up a gang of roughnecks who attacked the house of Jason. Paul had been staying with him. Unable to find the missionaries the mob dragged Jason before the magistrates who simply charged him to keep the peace. Convinced of the danger for Paul and Jason the Christians sent Paul and Silas away from the city by night to Berea (Acts 17:10).
Paul and his party began their evangelistic work in Berea in the synagogue, as was their custom. However when many Jews there believed, the Thessalonian Jews came down to Berea and stirred up more trouble (Acts 17:10-13). The Berean Christians sent Paul away to Athens, but Silas and Timothy remained in Berea (Acts 17:14). Having been sent for by Paul, Silas and Timothy joined Paul in Athens, but he soon sent Silas back to Philippi and or Berea, and Timothy back to Thessalonica (1 Thess. 3:1-3; Acts 17:15). Later both men returned to Paul while he was practicing his trade in Corinth (Acts 18:3, 5) with a gift from the Christians in those Macedonian towns (2 Cor. 11:9; cf. Phil. 4:15).
Timothy's report of conditions in the Thessalonian church led Paul to write this epistle. Some of the Thessalonians apparently believed that Jesus Christ was about to return momentarily and had consequently given up their jobs and had become disorderly (cf. 1 Thess. 4:11; 5:14). Some worried about what had happened to their loved ones who had died before the Lord had returned (4:13, 18). Persecution from the Gentiles as well as the Jews still oppressed the believers (2:17-3:10) who were nevertheless holding fast to the truth and eager to see Paul again (3:6-8). Some outside the church, however, remained hostile to Paul (2:1-12). There appears to have been some misuse of spiritual gifts in the assembly as well as an unfortunate tendency on the part of some to return to their former habits involving sexual impurity (4:1-8; 5:19-21).
It seems clear that Paul wrote this epistle shortly after he arrived in Corinth (1:7-9; 2:17; 3:1, 6; Acts 18:5, 12), about 51 A.D. If one follows the early dating of Galatians, as I have suggested, this epistle would have been Paul's second inspired writing. If Paul penned Galatians after the second missionary journey, 1 Thessalonians could have been his first inspired epistle.3However the first option seems more probable.4
A few scholars have suggested that Paul wrote 2 Thessalonians before he wrote 1 Thessalonians.5This is not as improbable as may appear at first since the traditional sequence of Pauline letters to churches rests on length rather than date. Nonetheless this theory has not convinced most scholars.6