BSZ7Z5 COMMENTARY EPISTLES TO THE THESSALONIANS. COMMENTARY ON THE GREEK TEXT 7 EPISTLES OF PAUL TO THE THE S SALOPIANS BY THE LATE JOHN EADIE, D.D., LL.D., PUOFESSOR OF BIBLICAL LITERATURE AND EXEGESIS, UNITED PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH. EDITED BY THE REV. WILLIAM YOUNG, M.A., l'ARKIIEAD, GLASGOW. WITH PREFACE BY THE REV. PROFESSOR CAIRNS, P.D. . \ / own N ,£■0 no on : MAC MILL AN AND 0. 18 7 7. All rights reserved. ROBERT MACLEHOSE, PRINTER, GLASGOW. Xlcbiratefo, TV KIND PERMISSION, TO THOMAS BIGG ART, ESQ., OF DALEY, BY THE AUTHOR'S WIDOW, WITH GRATEFUL APPRECIATION OF HIS PPvACTICAL PROOF OF AFFECTION FOR HER HUSBAND'S MEMORY, AND DEVOTION TO THE INTEP.ESTS OF THE UNITED PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH, IN THE PURCHASE OF HER HUSBAND'S LIBRARY FOR THE THEOLOGICAL HALL. PEE FACE. The Lectures on First and Second Thessalonians here pub- lished were designed by their lamented author for the press ; and they will be found to display in full measure his eminent qualities as an expositor. There is the same extensive and minute scholarship ; the same originality of research and independence of judgment ; the same penetration and saga- city in tracing the course of argument ; and the same un- failing sympathy with the deepest thoughts and lessons of inspiration. Independently of his own understood purpose, these rare excellencies would have required the issue of what is likely to be his final contribution to exegetical literature. Nor is it without interest that a career of exposition, devoted to so many of Paul's epistles, returns upon itself to end with the first that bear his name. The author's manuscript, which presents every mark of being complete, has been most carefully transcribed ; and the (piotations and references have been verified. Special thanks are due to the Rev. William Young, M.A., of Parkhead Church, Glasgow, who has kindly discharged the duties of editorship, ami striven in every way to carry the work through the press, in as accurate a state as possible; and cordial acknowledgments viii PREFACE. are also made to the Rev. Professor Dickson, of the University of Glasgow, who has subjected the proof sheets to a final revision. It is not doubted that this commentary will be welcomed by all lovers of sacred learning, and will tend to foster that exact study of the original Scriptures, the impulse given to which is perhaps the greatest of its author's many services to the church of Christ. JOHN CAIRNS. NOTE BY THE EDITOR. While it is certain that Dr. Eadie regarded the following work as ready for the press, it is much to be regretted that he did not live to give it those final touches which would have rendered it still more perfect and complete. It will be observed that there is no separate Introduction to the Second Epistle, though this will be found to some extent provided for in the Introduction to the First. In the manuscript, too, there are some indications that Dr. Eadie contemplated adding other two Essays to that on the " Man of Sin," — one on the " Re- surrection," and the other on the " Second Advent." With these exceptions, and that noted on page 9(3, the manuscript seems in every respect complete, and carefully arranged for publication. It is hoped that the work, though a posthumous one, will be found to have been well worth publishing; and that the state in which it is issued from the press will not do dishonour to so great and so dear a name. i) LIoslba Drive, (Jctoln r, tSi i . INTEODUCTION. I. — The City of Thessalonica. Thessalonica (Qe&a-aXoviKrj) was formerly called Therm a (Qep/uij or Qepfxa), and the gulf on which it stood was named Thermaicus Sinus, on account of the hot salt springs which abounded in the vicinity. Two earlier legendary names have been handed down, Emathia and Halia, x The origin of the present name has been variously accounted for. According to Strabo, 2 Therma was rebuilt by Cassander, who added to it the population of three small towns near it, and called it Thessalonica, after his wife, a daughter of Philip. Stephen of Byzantium records, that Philip himself bestowed the new appellation in honour of a victory gained by him over the Thessalonians; 3 while in the Etymologicum Magnum* it is said that Philip gave the name in honour of his daughter whose mother had died in childbirth. Xerxes, according to Hero- dotus, paused at Therma, while his fleet cruised in the gulf, and his army lay at a short distance ; and the town is men- tioned by this early name twice at least in Greek history. 5 But the more ancient names have long passed out of view, 1 Zonaras Hist, xii, 26 ; Steph. Byz., sub voce. 2 Strabo, viii, p. 330. 3 GfTTdXoi/S viKi'icra.9. 4 to iraiSiov 'idwKs. Ni/qj Tpltyziv khI ikoXmti Q£crcra\oviKi)v, ii yaf) h>'iti)i> too ttulOiov Nt^acriTToXis E(CSkA.tjto. 5 Herodotus, vii, 128 ; Thucydides, i, 61 ; yEschines de Falsa Leg. A 2 INTRODUCTION. while Thessalonica still survives in the corrupt forms ZaAow/07, Saloniki. The city came first into eminence during the Mace- donian period ; and the new name, from whatever cause, may have been imposed by Philip, his own name being found in the neighbouring Philippi. Thessalonica, rebuilt about B.C. 315, is first mentioned by Polybius and Livy as a great naval station. 1 When Macedonia was divided into four parts under Paulus iEmilius by the edicts of Amphipolis, it was made the capital of the second, or that part which lay between the Axius and the Strymon ; and when, eighteen years afterwards, those four divisions were formed into one province, it became in course of time the metropolis. 2 At the period of the first Roman civil war it was occupied by the party of Pompey (Dion Cass., xli., 20), but during the second it sided with Antony and Octavius, and was on that account made an urbs libera (Appian, B.C., iv, 118). As a seaport on the inner bend or basin of the Thermaic Gulf, 3 and about half- way between the Hellespont and the Adriatic, Thessalonica grew into great importance. It shared largely in the commerce of the iEgean and the Levant, and in the inland traffic of the countiy, for behind it lay the great pass that led away to the Macedonian uplands, and it was closely connected with the large plain watered by the Axius. It was filled, according to Strabo, with a greater population than any other town in the region. Lucian makes a similar statement. 4 Theodoret also styles it 7ro\vav6pocnro$. 5 Thessalonica has passed through many vicissitudes, but it is still the second city in European Turkey. With its history after apostolic times we have no immediate concern. It may, however, be noted that in the third century it was made a Roman colony, and it was the great bulwark of the empire during the Gothic inroads and the six Sclavonian wars. Theodosius executed by barbarian troops a terrible 1 Polyb., xxxiii, 4, 4 ; Livy, xxxix, 27, xliv, 10. 2 Strabo, who calls it Qto-a-aXovLKtia, says of it, v vvv fxtckirrTa t&v a\\wv tuavopii (vii, 7, 4). 3 Medio flexu litoris (Thermaici Sinus). Pliny, iv, 10. Strabo speaks of an isthmus sis toi/ QepfjLctiov oinuwv /iu^oi/. Geog. viii, 1-3. 4 IIoAtujs tusv tv MaxtSovin -r~;s ntyiQri" night into Bercea, a town on the eastern slope of the Olympian range, and five miles 1 Davidson's Introduction, vol. I., p. 26, 1S68. 2 Suetonius. Judajos impulsore Chresto assidue tumultuantes Roma expulit, Tib. Claud., xxv. See Lauge on this. Wieseler and others identify this expulsion with the decree De Mathemnticis Italia pellendis mentioned by Tacitus, Annal. ii, 32. INTRODUCTION. 15 south-west of Thessalonica. The apostles, however, had a strong hope of returning after the popular fury had subsided. The phrase "by night" in verse 10 implies a suspicion of danger and ambush ; for Jewish hostility was sly as well as vindictive, as wily in its methods as unscrupulous in its ends. Thus ended the apostle's brief visit to Thessalonica, but it has borne memorable fruit. The city in subsequent centuries was greatly instrumental in converting savage hordes of Sclavonians and Bulgarians; and, in times of warring heresies, it was called the ' orthodox city.' The legends of Demetrius — a martyr of the fourth century, and the patron saint of the city — have, how- ever, superseded the fame of the apostle. The learned Eustathius was archbishop in 1185; and Theodore Gaza, who came to Italy after the fall of Constantinople, and contributed to the revival of letters in western Europe, belonged to Thessalonica. III. — Genuineness of the Epistle. The Church has been unanimous in holding the Pauline authorship up till a very recent period, and the objections of some German critics scarcely disturb the harmony. In the patristic writings little use is made of this epistle, and the reason is evident, for it is not distinctly doctrinal ; it does not expose serious error ; it does not vindicate either the apostle's office or defend the gospel which he proclaimed. It contains, save on one point, none of those profound arguments which are to be met with in the other epistles. It is a quiet and earnest letter written to encourage a people recently converted by the apostle, and exposed to such trial and persecution as might endanger their firmness and constancy. There is, therefore, little in it that could serve any of the polemical or practical ends which the early church writers had in view. The allusions in the Apostolic Fathers are few and faint. Some of the words and phrases, however, sound like an echo of several clauses in this epistle — though Lardner and Kirchhofer lay too much stress on them. Thus, in the Epistle of the Roman Clement to the Corinthians, " We ought in all things to give thanks unto Him," compared Avith 1 Thess. v, 18, 16 INTRODUCTION. there being some resemblance ; but the second quotation usually given is quite indistinct, " let our whole body, therefore, be saved in Christ Jesus," compared with 1 Thess. v, 23. The quotations from the so-called Ignatian Epistles are as unsatisfactory. " Devote yourselves to un- ceasing prayers " — " Pray also for other men without ceasing," compared with 1 Thess. v, 17 ; but the distinctive epithet aSiaXeliTTog — o>? is wanting in the Syriac version of these epistles. The language of Polycarp is more decided as a reminiscence from this epistle — " making intercessions without ceasing for all," compared with v, 17 ; " abstaining from all iniquity," compared with v, 22. But the allusions in succeeding writers are definite and con- clusive. Irenaeus prefaces the quotation of v, 23, " and for this reason, the apostle explaining himself, has set forth the perfect and spiritual man of salvation, speaking thus in the First Epistle to the Thessalonians." Tertullian quotes i, 9-10 with the remark, " haec tempora cum Thessalonicensibus disce; u and, in quoting v, 1-2, says, " on that account the majesty of the Holy Spirit . . . suggests de temporibus autem et tem- porum spatiis, fratres, non est necessitas scribendi vobis, ipsi enim certissime scitis, quod dies Domini quasi fur nocte ita adveniet, quum dicent Pax, et tuta sunt omnia ; tunc illis repentinus insistet interitus " (1 Thess. v, 1-3). Clement of Alexandria writes, "This the blessed Paul plainly signified, sa}ang," the citation being ii, 8. Such allusions occur often in Origen, as when quoting ii, 14, "and Paul, in the First Epistle to the Thessalonians, says these things." Similar allusions occur in his treatise against Celsus. Eusebius placed the epistle among the 6fj.oKoyoviJ.eva. It is found in the Syriac Peshito version, in the old Latin version, and is named in the Mura- torian fragment ad Thessalonicenses sexta. It was admitted into Marcion's canon as the fifth of the ten Pauline Epistles. Against the genuineness of the epistle, Baur and Schrader threw out suspicions in 1835-3G. Baur's first attack was in his Die Pastoral-briefe ; but in his Paulus, 1845, he has formally argued the point, and ten years after he gave additional reasons in the Theolog. Jahrb., p. ii, 1855. His theory, however, has met nothing but opposition, even INTRODUCTION. 1 7 Hilgenfeld deserts him in defence of this epistle. Baur has been replied to by Koch, Grimm, Lange, Bleek, Reuss, Liinemann, Hofmann. It is needless to reply to an argu- ment which has made no converts, and which Jowett and Davidson have so successfully exposed. A few sentences may suffice. Baur's first objection, that the epistle is unimportant and devoid of doctrinal discussion, is easily mot by affirming that the apostle did not discuss doctrines, save when they were challenged or misunderstood ; and that, even in this epistle, there is one doctrine which occupies a prominent place, because the state of the Thessalonian Church required a full statement of it. The contents of the apostle's letters were suggested and moulded by the circumstances of the churches which he addressed, for they were not abstract or didactic treatises, but living communications made with immediate reference to wants, trials, errors, dangers, or in- quiries, in the churches to which he writes. Though the apostle wrote for all times, he always wrote to meet some present exigency. Profound dogma, chains of lofty reasoning and illustrations of first principles, are not found in this epistle, for they were uncalled for ; but it is full of those encouragements to the believers which they needed, since, as they were recent converts, their courage was sorely tried. It abounds also in practical counsels for Christians living in a heathen society so full of temptations; for it required no common caution, decision, fortitude, and self-denial, to walk worthy of God who had called them. Why should such an epistle be reckoned un-Pauline ? It is surely Pauline wisdom and love to write to a church founded by himself in terms suited to its histoiy and condition. That his epistles vary as the state of the churches differed is one great proof of his authorship ; and that this epistle falls, in fulness and grandeur of material, behind those of the Romans, Corinthians, and Galatians, is no proof whatever that it did not come from his pen. Nor is the fact that the epistle contains so many historical appeals and reminiscences any objection to its Pauline authorship, since any one writing iu the apostle's name might find such materials in the Acts of the Apostles. The reply is, that in the epistles there are allusions not found in 18 INTRODUCTION. Acts, sucli as Timothy's coming to the apostle at Athens (see under iii, 2), and his labouring with his own hands for his support. Nor would any forger venture to characterize the Thessalonian Church as chiefly heathen, when the narrative in Acts might lead us to infer that the members were principally Jews and proselytes. The epistle, therefore, in its historical element is no mere expansion of the narrative in Acts. The apostle had recently been at Thessalonica, and the whole circumstances of his sojourn being fresh in his remembrance, he touches on several of them to show that they were cheering memories, and to assure them of the affectionate interest which he had still in them — ever in the hope not only that this relationship would not be disturbed, but also that their earlier spirituality and fruitfulness, their joy and patience — all the blessed results of their conversion, might remain with them. He appeals to their own knowledge of what they had been in heart and life when he was among them ; and this is no aimless thing, for it is a virtual charge not to let their first impressions fade, but to continue steadfast, and to preserve what the prophet calls " the kindness of thy youth, the love of thine espousals" (Jer. ii, 2). Baur objects, too, that Paul, in chap, ii, holds up Jewish believers as a pattern, which he never elsewhere does. But the reader may compare Gal. i, 22-24. Nor is the reference to the Jews (ii, 14-16) so decidedly out of the apostle's style and manner as to wrest the authorship of the epistle from him. The apostle does certainly stigmatize the Jews with uncommon severity; but he is as unsparing against the Judaists in passages where Baur at once recog- nizes his hand. The description of the Jews is true, as the apostle had already felt at the Pisidian Antioch, at Iconium, at Lystra, Thessalonica, and Bercea. The apostle saw his own people ripening for judgment, and predicted it. In the clause " wrath has come upon them," opy/j does not, as Jowett supposes, mean judicial blindness, but divine punishment ; and the declaration is no narrative of a past event. See on the places. In the Epistle to the Romans they are viewed under another aspect, that of pride and unbelief, and there is expressed a strong desire for their salvation. Another phrase at which Baur stumbles, "to speak to the Gentiles that they might be INTRODUCTION. "1 Q saved," has virtual parallels in Acts xiv, 1 ; xvi, 6-32 ; xviii, 8-9 ; 2 Cor. xi, 7. The language employed to describe the Thessalonian Church, according to Baur, presupposes a longer time to have elapsed since its formation than the history warrants. How could they so soon be patterns to believers in Macedonia and Achaia, the report of their conversion being carried everywhere ? How could the apostle say, after so short an interval, that he longed to visit them, &c. ? We will not reply that the difficulty is lessened by assuming that the Second Epistle is really the First, and that thus we may elongate the interval. But there is nothing very startling in the language i, 7, 8, as Thessalonica was a great centre of maritime and commercial enterprise. Strangers visiting it from all parts of the country, would, on their return, spread the report of that great novelty which had taken place in the city, the wondrous revolution in belief and character which so many citizens had undergone at the bidding of two Hebrew strangers. Some six months might suffice for this circulation of news. The apostle longed to see them, for he had been forced to leave them abruptly, when the Christian community had not been fully consolidated. Baur wonders at members of the church becoming restless and indolent at so early a period ; but the very earliness of the period makes it all the more likely as the result of a mighty change of creed and opinion, which seems to have bewildered them ; not having had any long period of instruction, they had misunderstood the doctrine of the Second Advent. The para- graph on the relation to the Second Advent of those who died before it, on the resurrection of the dead, the change of the living, and the rapture of the saints, is surely not un-Pauline as Baur contends, but is in harmony with 1 Cor. xv, 52. Nor does the anxiety to which the apostle responds imply that a first generation of believers must have fallen asleep. On the other hand, though only one believer had died, or though none had died at all, each had the certainty of coming death ; and it was therefore a natural question among a people who had enjoyed only a brief period of instruction, which on some points could be only fragmentary and partial, and which, being so foreign to all previous thoughts and associations, might not 20 INTRODUCTION. be fully comprehended without repeated illustration and argu- ment. Further, if there are passages in this epistle like some in the other epistle, why should the resemblance be called imitation ? and if a phrase without parallel occurs, why should it be styled nn-Panline ? This hypercriticism of Baur is cpuite unsatisfactory, as it may be thought to serve either point, for or against any document. Unstudied resemblances are usual proofs of unity of authorship, and diction without parallel is usually regarded as a token of originality. More- over, a forger writing after Paul's time would have called him by his official title of Apostle — and how could such make the dead apostle write, " we who are alive and remain unto the coming of the Lord " ? Nor would any one, getting his only materials from the Acts, have ventured to say that Timothy was sent from Athens to Thessalonica, the statement of the Acts being, that Timothy and Silas having been left behind at Bercea, joined the apostle at Corinth. The two statements are not in conflict, but a forger would not have placed them in even apparent contradiction. See under iii, 1. The reference to church officers 1 in v, 12 is objected to by Schrader, because, according to 1 Tim. iii, G, no novices were to be invested with office, whereas all ordained to pastoral work in Thessalonica must have been in that category. There could not, his conclnsion is, have been elders in that church when this epistle is ordinarily supposed to have been written. The objection may be met in various ways. It is not necessary to apply a general injunction given by Paul toward the end of his life, and when churches had been organized for years, to a special case occurring at a time so much earlier. The injunc- tion in the Epistle to Timothy may have been based on expe- rience. It was given to a fellow-labourer connected with a church long established, and where many matured believers could easily be found. In Crete all must have been novices, and no such counsel is given to Titus. The apostle did not himself alwa}^s act on it (Acts xiv, 23). The neophyte in general was one not trained, one as yet devoid of practical adaptation to the work, on account of the recency of his conversion. But in Thessalonica there had been decided and 1 Office-hearers. Davidson, page 440. INTRODUCTION. 21 speedy spiritual advancement, nay, Jason may have been a believer of a date prior to the apostle's arrival. If the apostle set them apart himself, he must have had confidence in their general character ; and if they were appointed after his depar- ture, and before the writing of this letter, then the term novice would scarcely apply to his first converts. A church could not be permanently organized without an ordination of eldei's to preserve the order essential to edification. And the elders are named by no special title — as presbyters, overseers, or deacons — but by the general appellation of presidents. IV. — Time, Place, and Occasion of the Epistle. After the abrupt departure of the apostle from Thessalonica, he went to Bercea, and there leaving Silas and Timothy, he pro- ceeded to Athens, his conductors being enjoined to send Timothy and Silas to him with all speed. After a brief period, he arrived at Corinth where he remained for a considerable time. Timothy rejoined him at Athens, but Silas seems to have sojourned some time longer at Bercea or elsewhere in the Macedonian pro- vince, for the absence of Timothy left the apostle " alone " at Athens. All the three were at Corinth when this epistle was written, their names being in the opening salutation. After the apostle had left Thessalonica, he yearned after his converts — his stay with them being so brief, and their external condi- tion, their exposure to outrage, being so trying. The apostle made also two attempts to visit them in person ; Satan, how- ever, prevented him as he writes to them. But at Athens he could no longer forbear, and from that city, though he was to be left in solitude — Silas, if there, going perhaps on some other unrecorded mission — he despatched Timothy to visit the Thes- salonians, to stablish and comfort them concerning their faith, and to present such truths and hopes as should animate them in the trying circumstances (iii, 1-5). Timothy accomplished his mission and came back to the apostle, now at Corinth (Acts xviii, 5), with a report which gladdened him (iii, 6) ; and the reception of such a report was the immediate occasion of the epistle. Some indeed, as Hug and Hemsen, suppose that Timothy was sent by Paul from Beroea to visit the Thessalonians ; 22 INTKODUCTION. but the supposition is distinctly opposed to the precise state- ment in iii, 1, 2, which speaks only of the mission of Timothy from Athens. This view is held by Theodoret, Hemming, Bul- linger, and Aretius; and a modification of it is held by Calovius and Bottger, viz., that the epistle was written at Athens during a flying visit of the apostle, while his headquarters were at Corinth. The epistle was written during the earlier period ol the apostle's residence in Corinth, probably A.D. 52, perhaps 53, so that it is the earliest of the extant Pauline epistles. Others, however, contend for a later date, but on very insufficient grounds. Wurm supposes a later visit to Athens, from the notion that 1 Thess. iii, 1, 2, 6, is opposed to Acts xvii, 15; xviii, 5 : the argument being that, according to the epistle, Timothy and Silas were with Paul at Athens, while, according to Acts, they joined him at Corinth. But there is perfect harmony in the statements. In ii, 18 the apostle limits the plural to himself, and the following plurals must have a parallel limita- tion. Kochler places the epistle in date near the fall of Jeru- salem from a misunderstanding of ii, 16 ; and Winston assigns it to A.D. 67, or a little before the apostle's death, because it is seldom referred to in the "Apostolic Constitutions," and the persecutions referred to in the second chapter were such as hap- pened under Nero. See Benson's reply. Schrader dates it at the period indicated in Acts xx, 2, but many allusions in the epistle would be totally inapplicable to such an hypothesis. The argu- ment of Schrader, Bottger, and others is that i, 8, implies itinerant evangelistic labours on the part of the apostle in regions beyond Macedonia and Achaia. But the real meaning of the verse simply is, not that that missionary work had been extended, but that the reports of the success of the gospel in Thessalonica had travelled through the provinces and beyond them. Other arguments against the common view are inci- dentally referred to in our remarks on the genuineness of the epistle. Grotius, and after him Baur, Ewald, Benson, and Davidson, invert the common order of the two epistles and assume the shorter one as the earlier — Grotius regarding the Man of Sin as the Emperor Caligula who attempted to have his statue erected in the temple, and, supposing that air upxn? (- INTRODUCTION. 23 Thess. ii, 13) refers to Jewish Christians who had come from Palestine, Jason being one of them, holds that to this party the epistle was written altero anno Cajani principatus. The theory chronologically and otherwise is wholly baseless. The arguments for a later date of the first epistle are taken from i, 8, as to the report of their conversion being circulated everywhere ; from the injunction to submit to their church presidents, v, 12; and from their doubts about the connection of departed breth- ren with the Second Advent. These arguments adduced by Ewald and Davidson have been already referred to. It is alleged, however, that the so-called first epistle is to some extent a correction or fuller explanation of what had already been written in the so-called second one. The doctrine of the Ad- vent had been misunderstood, and it is cleared up in i Thess. iv, 13. But the hypothesis is unnatural ; for the result of the misapprehensions referred to might be indeed tremor, indolence, and dissatisfaction with present things ; but there is nothing that can suggest the second point which the apostle takes up — the sorrow over the holy dead. Nothing is said in the so- called second epistle which could have given rise to such anxiety as the apostle describes and relieves. Nor is there any real argument in the phrase — " The saluta- tion of Paul with mine own hand, which is the token in every epistle, so I write." For the words do not assert that in the first epistle written by him he adopted a mark of authentica- tion which was to characterize all his epistles ; but the refer- ence is to epistles circulated in his name (2 Thess. ii, 2), and his purpose is to guard against such fabrications. The allusion to such forgeries does not prove that he had not written a first epistle himself — it rather presupposes it, and that some one had imitated it. Ewald's admission that the second epistle had been preceded by an earlier one which is now lost is a needless conjecture. It is quite forced to take 2 Thess. i, 4, or iii, 2, as referring to what happened in Beroea — from which Ewald con- jectures that he wrote the epistle. In a word, the two epistles, regarded in the order usually assigned them, naturally fit in to one another. The second epistle is supplementary to the first, and the first sprang naturallv out of the circumstances. It contains the fresh 24 INTRODUCTION. memories of his sojourn in Thessalonica; appeals to their own knowledge and experienee; exhorts them to be steadfast under persecution, which, breaking out during his stay, had not yet subsided; comforts them under bereavement; and enforces many practical counsels. At the time of writing the second epistle the circumstances were different. His doctrine had been mis- understood as affirming the near approach of the Advent ; nay, teaching had been given and letters published in his name which he had not authorized. In 2 Thess. ii, 15, there is an allusion to the previous letter. The exhortations to industry in the first epistle are general: " We beseech you ;" but in the second the charge is more precise : " We command you." The germs of the evil may have been discerned by him during his personal ministry among them, but the mischief had ripened, and beinu - absent during its growth, he writes, " We hear that there are among you some that walk disorderly." That evil warned against in the first epistle, and borne with too, was no longer to be tolerated ; they were to withdraw themselves from the disorderh', and in no way to countenance them. In the first epistle his whole counsels presuppose that they may be accepted, but in the second he is afraid that direct disobedience may be manifested (iii, 14). The ordinary opinion as to the order of the two epistles has highest probability in its favour ; the other may be plausible on some points, but rests on assumption and conjecture. V. — Contexts of the Epistle. The contents of the epistle are simple, but full of interest. The details of his preaching and mode of life are given honestly and with the perfect assurance that the Thessalonians would sanction all his statements, and that every appeal would at once meet an affirmative response. The first part of the epistle is chiefly historical in outline. He touches on his entrance to them, and his success among them, their conversion, and its wonderful results. Then he reminds them how pure, humble, affectionate, and self-denying he had been among them as a preacher of Christianity, and what persecutions in consequence of their faith they had endured. He mentions also his own INTRODUCTION. 25 anxiety about them, his yearnings after them, and his repeated fruitless attempts to pay them a second visit. The mission of Timothy in his room, and the good report with which he had returned, increased his desire to see them, tilled him with thankfulness for their steadfastness, and invited him to prayer for them. Next he warns them against impurity — a promi- nent sin of heathenism ; and exhorts them to brotherly kind- ness and modesty. Now, he opens up the doctrine of the Second Advent : the certainty of the resurrection of the dead and its priority to the change which shall pass over the living, the period, however, being uncertain, and therefore laying- believers under solemn obligation to watchfulness and prepara- tion. The epistle concludes with detached counsels on social duties connected with ehurch membership, and with an earnest prayer for them, and a desire to have an interest in their prayers. It closes with the benediction. \'i. — Works ox the Epistles. The authors whose comments on the epistles are quoted or referred to are principally the following : — The Greek Fathers — Chrysostom, Theodore t, Joannes Dama- seenus, Oecumenius, Theophylact, Theodore of Mopsuestia. The Latin Writers — Jerome, Augustine. Pelagius, Ambrosi- aster, Tertullian, Hilary, Primasius. The Postills of Nicolas de Lyra belong to the fourteenth century. Coming down to the period of the Reformatio u, we have the names of Erasmus, Luther, Calvin, Zwingli, Beza, with those of their followers, Hunnius, Camerarius, Hemming, Bullinger, Hyperius, Zanchius, Victorinus, Marloratus, Bugenhagen. Partly of the same period, and partly later, we have — Among the Catholics — Estius, Vatablus, a-Lapide, Justiniani, Harduin. Among the Protestants of the Continent — Piscator, Cocceius, Crocius, Aretius, Clericus, Fromond, Cajetan, Grotius, Wet- stein, Tarnovius, Er. Schmidiiis, Calixtus, Calovius, Bengel, Wolf, Schottgen, Van Til, Musculus, Vorstius, Jaspis, Heumann, 26 INTRODUCTION. Baumgarten, Koppe, Bolten, Rosenmiiller, Michaelis, Balduin, Storr, Bouman, Reiche. The following are the names of English expositors — Jewell* Cameron, Sclater, Hammond, Chandler, Whitby, Pierce, Ben- son, Macknight, Doddridge, Barnes. The following collectors of annotations may also be named — Eisner, Kypke, Krebs, Loesner, Heinsius, Bos, Raphelius. Knatchbull. The following may be more specially noted — Turretin (1739); Krause (1790); Tychsen (1823); Flatt (1829); Pelt (1830); Hemsen (1830); Schrader (183G); Hug (1817) ; Usteri (1833) ; Schott (1834) ; Bloomfield, New Testament, vol. II, 4th ed. (1841); Olshausen (1844); de Wette (1845); Baumgarten-Crusius (1848); Koch (1849); Peile (1849); Conybeare and Howson (1850); Hilgenfeld (1852); Jowett (1855); Ewald (1857); Bisping (1857); Wieseler (1859); Wordsworth's New Testament, p. Ill (1859) ; Webster and Wilkinson's JS r eiu Testament (1861); Hofmann (1862); Alford's Neiv Testament, vol. Ill, 4th ed. (1865); Ellicott, 3rd ed. (1866); Riggenbach, Langes Bibehverk (1867); Limemann (Meyer) 1867; Lilly (1867). Note. The Grammars referred to are those of — A. Buttmann, P. Buttmann, Matthiae, Kuhner, Winer, Stuart, Green, Jelf, Madvig, Scheuerlein, Kruger, Schmalfeld, Schirlitz, Donald- son, Rost, Alt. In addition to these may be named Plartung's Lehre von den Partikeln der griechischen Sprache, 2 vols., Erlangen, 1832; and Bernhardy's WissenschaftlicJce Syntax der griechischen Sprache, Berlin, 1829. The Lexicons referred to are those of — Hesychius, Suidas, Suicer, Passow (Rost and Palm), Robinson, Pape, Wilke, Wahl, Bretschneider, and Liddell and Scott. COMMENTARY FIRST THESSALONIANS. 20 FIRST THESSAXiONIANS. CHAPTER T. (Ter. 1.) IlauXo? ica) SiXouayo? kcu 'Yifj.u0eo? — " Paul, and Sil- vanus, and Timotheus." Silvanus, so named by the apostle here and elsewhere (2 Thess. i, 1 ; 2 Cor. i, 19) ; and also by Peter (1 Pet. v, 12) ; is called uniformly 2/Xa? Silas, in the Acts, as in xv, 22, 27, 34-, 40. He is first mentioned in connection with the church in Jerusalem and the decrees of the convention, as " a chief man among the nation" (xv, 22), and as being "a prophet" (xv, 32). He became connected with Paul after he parted from Barnabas at Antioch, and he left that city along with him on his second missionary journey. Being the older man, of higher position as a prophet, and as somewhat earlier associated with the apostle, he is placed before Timothy, both by Luke and by Paul (Acts xvii, 14, 15; xviii, 5; 2 Thess. i, 1 ; 2 Cor. i, 19,. That Timothy requested his name to be last, on account of his humility, is the suggestion of Chrysostom. Silas was probably his original or Aramaic name, and Silvanus its Hellenistic or Roman form. The possession of a double name was common — one of them sometimes Hellenic, or Roman, and sometimes only a con- traction : Saul, Paul ; Apollos, Apollo ; Alexas, Alexander ; Ktesis, Ktesias ; Nymphas, Nymphodorus. For Timothy, see under Col. i, 1. These two names are naturally associated by the writer of this epistle with his own, not in any way to authenticate the letter (Piscator. Pelt\ or as if one of them had 30 COMMENTARY ON ST. PAUL'S [Chap. I. written it at the apostle's dictation (Olshausen), but because they had laboured along with him in Thessalonica, and had co-operated in the founding of the church. He does not appropriate all the honours, as he had not monopolized the labours. Neither in this, nor in the Second Epistle to the Thessalonians, nor in that to the Philippians, does he name himself "apostle," or "servant," probably because no one in these churches had called his official prerogative in question. He had been so recently among them that he needed not to assume his distinctive title. This supposition is far more natural than that of Chrysostom and his followers — viz., that the official term is omitted because the Thessalonians had been recently instructed (Siu to veoKarrix>')Tov<; etvai roug avSpas), and had not yet had experience of him. As unlikely is the notion of Cajetan and Pelt — in which Zwingli and Estius, so far asunder in so many things— agree that he withheld his title from regard to Silas we supra eum se extollere videretur (Estius). But he specifies his apostleship in 1 Cor. i, 1, and in 2 Cor. i, 1, though he names Sosthenes with himself in the first case and Timothy in the second, as also in Col. i, 1. On this subject, and on the various ways in which Paul names himself in the epistolary addresses, see under Ephes. i, 1, and Philip, i, 1. The epistle is addressed — 777 €KK\}]ar[a rwv QearcraXopiKecou, " to the church of the Thes- salonians," — see Introduction. It may be noted that only in this epistle and in the second addressed to the same church does the apostle use this form of designation — the church of the population; in other places he writes to the church in the city, as 1 Cor. i, 2; 2 Cor. i, 1; Ephes. i, 1; Col. i, 2; Philip, i, 1; Rom. i, 7, and somewhat differently in Gal. i, 2, Galatia being a province. Compare the addresses prefixed to the letters to the seven churches in the Apocalypse. Why the apostle so varied, it is impossible to say. It could scarcely be that he writes " of the Thessalonians " and not " in Thessalonica," because he had laboured only for a brief period among them, and a church could scarcely be said to be planted among them (Wordsworth). But that a church existed among them the phrase certainly implies ; and a church of the Thessalonians is surely a church in Thessalonica. In this early letter, the Vkr. 1.] FIRST EPISTLE TO THE THESSALONLANS. .11 apostle had not settled down into the use of such introductory formulae as afterwards characterized his style. The €KK\t] — "in God the Father and the Lord Jesus Christ." The full meaning is not belief in God (Vatablus), nor is it simply connection with Him (Storr, Flatt, Pelt), nor is it existence through Him (Grotius), nor subjection to Him (Macknight), nor does ei' mean per Deum pcrductiis ad Jinem, but it is in union with the Father and Christ as the root and ground of their spiritual life and progress. It is not faith objectively which is adduced to characterize them, but this inner fellowship with Father and Son — " I in them and Thou in me — that they all may be one in us." "Mark," says Chrysostom, " ev applied to both Father and Son," as a common vinculum. The phrase is a kind of tertiary predicate (Donaldson, §§ 489, 490) specifying an additional element of spiritual condition. Chrysostom's remark is not without some force that the phrase specially marks out this €KK\t]/cr/at icai 'lovSal'icai kou 'EAA>/w/ca/. The first part of the clause "in God the Father," according to De Wette and Limemann, distin- guishes them from heathen, and the second " in our Lord Jesus Christ" from Jewish assemblies. But the distinction cannot be strictly maintained, for the phrase " in God the Father" is in the apostle's view as truly and distinctively Christian as the other " in our Lord Jesus Christ." Jowett robs the phrase of 32 COMMENTARY ON ST. PAUL'S [Chap. T. all true significance by generalizing it, as when be says "that the actions, feelings, and words of men are in God and Christ," but that this "mode of expression is no longer in use among us." But it is not men generally, it is only believing men, whom the apostle describes as being in union with God and Christ; and the phrase as conveying a truth of primary signi- ficance and of conscious and blessed experience has not fallen into desuetude. There is no need to fill up the construction by supplying t\j, as Chrysostom ry ev 0ew, or with others 77} ooa-j] (Winer, § 20, 2). As needless is the supplement proposed by Schott, xaipeiv \iyova-iv, for the full apostolic benediction imme- diately follows. Worse is the attempt of Koppe to unite the phrase with the x a P'? KCil ^pwn of the next part of the verse — X f ipis vfuv Koi elpijvii, " grace and peace." For the salutation see Gal. i, 3 ; Eph. i, 2. The concluding words, (Wo Qeov 7raTpos yftocv teal Kvp'ov 'lijarov ^LpiG-Tov, are believed not to be genuine. They have certainly good authority as A D K L N, but they are omitted in B F, in the Vulgate, and Syriac, and several of the Greek and Latin fathers, as by Chrysostom in his commentary, and in the Latin of Origen. The omission of the familiar words is striking and not easily accounted for, if they are genuine. Bouman and Reiche vindicate the genuineness very much on account of the similar wording of the previous clause ; but possibly on that very account the usual formula was supplied by copyists from the other epistles. (Ver. 2.) ^jv-^apLv — ''We give thanks to God always concerning you all, making mention of you in our prayers." The second vp.a>v has good authority, though ABN omit it, for many MSS., versions, minusculi, and fathers are in its favour. The vp.a>v before pvelav might induce the omission of vp.wv after it ; similar variations occur in the text of Ephes. i, 10. The apostle begins in a spirit of devout thankfulness, so gladsome had been the good tidings brought to him from Thessalonica. The causes of his thankfulness he gradually unfolds : their election and the proofs and fruits of it ; their hearty reception of the gospel, and Vkr. 2.] FIRST EPISTLE TO THE THESSALONIANS. 33 its signal success among them, so visible in its living power ; their exemplary stability in the midst of persecution ; and the profound impression made and diffused far and near by their conversion. In praising God for them, there is praise conferred upon themselves. As these manifestations dwell in his mind, he gives thanks, the grounds of them being joj^ously enumerated in sentences which, as Jowett says, "grow under his hand." 'EuxapivTov/u.ei' occurs, as in Col. i, 3 ; Philip, i, 3 ; Phile. 4, and in the close parallels of Ephes. i, 10 ; 2 Tim. i, 3, and some- what differently 2 Thess. i, 3; ii, 13; compare also Rev. i, 3. It is not natural in such a context to narrow the plural verb to the apostle himself, as is done by Pelt, Koch, and Jowett. The plural does sometimes mean himself only, as in ii, 18, where there is a corrective clause: probably this idea suggested the singular TroiovpLeros in C 1 , and the faciens in the Claromontane Latin. But the mention in the address of Silas and Timothy, who had been recently and personally interested in the Thessalonian Church, makes it very natural that they should be included with the apostle in the thanksgiving and the state- ment ; 2 Cor. i, 19, warrants it. If in the address in Philippians, Philemon, and Corinthians, other persons besides the apostle are mentioned, and yet he says evxapivTw, we may infer that if after such names he says evxapiaroii/uei', they are purposely included. The occurrence of the plural KapSias (ii, 4) and i/ru^ay(ii, 8) corroborates our opinion. The Greek fathers do not formally pronounce on the point, though they speak of the apostle as giving thanks, he being the primary thanksgiver — a natural mode of reference in their interpretation, which, how- ever, may not exclude the others mentioned in the first verse. YjvxapicrTeh' belonging specially to the later Greek (Lobeck ad Phrynich, p. 18), occurs often in Polybius and after his time ; but is also found in Demosthenes (Pro Corona, 257, p. 1(54, vol. I, Opera ed. Schaefer). The classic phrase was x ( 'tp 11 ' elSevai ; oovvai x ( 'tp iv ^ s t° g ia -tify> ar >d the. apostle has x'ip n ' *X W in 1 Tim. i, 12; 2 Tim. i, 3; Phile. 4, according to one read- ing. The object of thanksgiving is He to whom all thanks are due for all spiritual change— for all spiritual grace. As the other epistles show (Col. i, 3 ; 2 Thess. i, 3; 2 Tim. i, 3), by tv»> Bew God the Father is referred to, since He is the living < ■ 34- COMMENTARY ON ST. PAUL'S [Chap. I. and unwearied benefactor, "the Father of mercies and the God of all comfort." After mentioning Father and Son as sources of blessing in the opening benediction of his epistles, the apostle often and immediately turns himself to the Father with a special thanksgiving (2 Cor. i, 2-3 ; Ephes. i, 2-3 ; Col. i, 2-3). In Rom. i, 7-8 ; 1 Cor. i, 4 ; Philip, i, 3 ; 2 Thess. i, 3 ; 2 Tim. i, 3, the Father is simply named Geo'?, as in this phrase ; and in some of the verses where Father is not used, the apostle adds the equivalent p.ov — " my God," indicating that tender and confiding relation which the apostle instinctively felt in looking up to God, " whose I am, and whom I serve." The thanksgiving was offered " concerning you all." Instead of 7rep}, vwep is found in similar phrases, as in Rom. i, 8 ; Ephes. vi, 19 ; 1 Tim. ii, 1. See under Ephes. vi, 19, and Gal. i, 4. It is difficult to point out any substantial difference of sense between the two particles. See Ellicott on Philemon 7. To give thanks "about you" is apparently a wider or more com- prehensive phrase than to give thanks " for you," and it is here so far emphatic from the position of iravroyv, " all of you," the entire community, the fulness of the members deepening the thanksgiving which was at the same time iravTOTe, " always," continuous thanksgiving, there being no intrusion of per- plexities about them. This adverb is not, with Koppe, to be diluted into iroWaKig, nor is the phrase to be explained away as if it only meant non acta sed affectu. From its position here the adverb is not connected with the verb, but is bound up with the participle, as in Philip, i, 4, Col. i, 3, the first con- nection being impossible, inasmuch as fxvelav -TroteirrOai Trepirivo? is not a Pauline formula. The parallel participial clause, fxvelav v/xav iroiovixevoi eir\ tosv irpocrevxcov tj/ulcov, " making men- tion of you in our prayers," is not a limiting assertion as in the alternative opinion of Jowett, and that of Baumgarten-Crusius, and Bisping, as if in effect the meaning were, " We give thanks so often as we make mention." But the sentence is modal, and describes not when, but how, the thanksgiving was offered ; and that was by bearing them on his heart, and up before God in his earnest prayers (Rom. i, 9; Ephes. i, 16; Phile. 4). The phrase fxvelav Tro'ieicrOai does not signify to remember (Jowett, Koch, Ellicott), but to make mention of: "making mention of Vbr. 3.] FIRST EPISTLE TO THE THESSALONIANS. 35 you in our prayers we alwa}^ give thanks for you all." Such mention was made eirl tcov irporrevx^v i)/ulwv, on occasion of my prayers. 'EttI roov Senrvoov (Diodorus Sic, iv, 3). ForexJsee under Ephes. i, 10. (Ver. 3.) aSiaXeiTTTw? p.viip.ovevovTe<; — "without ceasing remem- bering." Not a few connect the participle with the preceding clause, as if it referred to ceaseless mention of them in his prayers (Balduin, Benson, Bengel, Ewald, Hofmann, Alford). Alford refers in proof to Rom. i, 9 ; but his admission that there the order is slightly different destroys the validity of the reference. That connection, too, would enfeeble the previous verse, by throwing in a statement at the end of it which yet really underlies it; but, taken with the present verse, it emphatically resumes and carries on the thought. The continuous and un- exceptional thanksgiving found its utterance in his prayers, and was sustained in its fervour and continuity by unceasing remembrance. The participle may not be properly causal, or, as Ellicott says, " it may define the temporal concomitants," yet these temporal concomitants imply a reason ; for, as he admits, the thanksgiving owed its persistence to the necessary continuance of the pvi)pi]. The clause is thus an explanatory aspect of the previous one, showing how natural this making mention of them was ; for, as he had unfading memory of them, he could not but make mention of them, so that his thanks- giving for them was unbroken. The adverb is used only by Paul, and in reference to religious exercise (ii, 13; v, 17; Rom. i, 9). The participle is sometimes followed by an accu- sative (Matt, xvi, 9 ; Madvig, § 58) ; and sometimes by on, and other particles. It sometimes means commemorantes (Liine- mann, after Beza and Cocceius) ; but here it signifies as in the Vulgate memores. The following genitive implies this latter sense, and, with the exception of Hebrews xi, 22, it is the uniform signification of the verb in the New Testament, as Gal. ii, 10 ; Col. iv, 18 ; Heb. xi, 13. Winer, § 30, 10 c. v/jlwv tov epyov t>7? 7rlj/9, kul Ttj? uiropov?^ Trj? eA.7r/cJo9 tou ~Kvpiov fjpcov 'L/crou Xpicrrov — "your work of faith, and labour of love, and patience of hope." The genitive vpwv is taken by some objectively, " remembering you," and eveica is supplied to the following genitives by GEcumenius, 3G COMMENTARY ON ST. PAUL'S [Chap. I. Vatablus, Calvin, Zuingli, Hunnius, &c, but such a construction is clumsy and unwarranted. Winer, § 22, 7, 1. For the geni- tive pronoun, placed emphatically, is governed by all the three following nouns — epyov, kowov, v7ro/ut.ovrj? — each of them emphatic and in turn governing another genitive. For the order, see v, 8 ; Col. i, 4. "Work of faith" is a work springing out of faith (Koch, Schott, Jowett), or, rather, belonging to faith, and therefore characterizing it — your faith's work. It is not in contrast with Ao'yo?, as if signifying reality, fidei Veritas; nor is it active, cures thatigen Glaubens; epyov is not pleonastic (Koppe and Rosen- rauller) ; nor can the phrase be twisted to mean " faith wrought by God" (Calvin, Calovius, and Wolf); nor is it epexegetical, your work — to wit, that you believe (Hofmann) ; nor can the sense assigned by Chrysostom and his followers be sustained, which limits it too much to the endurance of suffering — el Trirrrevei? iravra iracrxe. Compare under Gal. v, 6. Their living- faith was clothed upon with work ; it was not a belief dead, barren, and alone. No principle of action is so powerful as genuine faith, and these believing Thessalonians were noted as active workers. kou tov K07rov rijs a.ya.7rtjs, theforce of vfiMv being still recog- nized, "your love's labour," the relation expressed by the genitive being, as in the previous clause, labour which belongs to your love and characterizes it. KoVo? is earnest and toilsome service, into which the whole heart is thrown, travail of soul, often self-denial and exhaustion. 'Ayrt7r>; is not specially love towards Christ, as if the following words " our Lord Jesus Christ" belonged to it (a-Lapide) ; nor is it love to God or to God and our neighbours, but love to fellow-Christians, as in Col. i, 4, which is shown, not simply in overlooking errors and weaknesses (Theodoret), or in doing the work of a Christian pastor and teacher (De Wette), for such a meaning limits the reference in ttolvtcov vjulwv, which includes the entire community; nor does kottos expend itself merely in tending the sick or in caring for strangers, which is only one sphere of its operation (Acts xx, 35). The noun koto? comprises all the labour which belongs to Christian love. This love, the image of Christ's, is no ordinary attachment, resting on the slender basis of mere Ver. 3.J FIRST EPISTLE TO THE THESSALONIANS. 37 professional fellowship, but is embodied in travail, and busies itself in kindnesses of all shapes, in the doing of which it spares no pains and grudges no sacrifice (2 Thess. i, 3). The third element of their character ever remembered by the apostle was — KOU TW V7ropOl'ij/? eAxi^O? TOV lvvplOV t'jfXWV IrjCTOU \pi ecrriv 6 tow oXojv Geo?, and so Theophylact, and CEcumenius in an alternative explanation, with a-Lapide, Baumgarten-Crusius, Turretin, Wordsworth, and Jowett; while Doddridge apparently confines the connection to the last clause, 38 COMMENTARY ON ST. PAUL'S [Chap. I. "the hope of -our Lord Jesus Christ in the view of our God and Father." But in such a case, a connective article would have been necessary to give the phrase the power of an adjective, asserting the genuineness of these Christian graces. The exegesis, besides, is awkward and unnatural. (3) The phrase rather belongs to /u.i>r]jui.oveuovT£?, showing where the remembrance of these graces was experienced, " in the presence of God and our Father," in solemn prayer and in earnest thanksgiving. Compare Rom. iii, 20; xii, 17; 2 Cor. viii, 21, where evuiriov is used. The phrase occurs often in the Septuagint, representing the Hebrew ^b (Frankel, Vorstiulien zu cler Sept., p. 159). For the formula Geo? icai irar^p see under Ephes. i, 37; Gal. i, 4. These three graces are placed together by the apostle in natural order and development — faith, the spring of all spiritual ex- cellence ; love, allied to it and vitalized by it, for it worketh by love ; and hope, based on that faith which is the substance of things hoped for, and stretching onward to the " glorious ap- pearing " of Jesus Christ. Faith respects especially one's own salvation ; love glows for the spiritual well-being of others ; while the future, containing so much in reserve for us, is firmly grasped and realized by hope. When the apostle values these three graces, he sets them in a different order. Thus, in 1 Cor. xiii, 13, "Now abideth faith, hope, love, these three, but the greatest of them is love." Compare v, 8 ; Heb. v, 10-12 ; Col. i, 4, 5. Faith is child-like, hope is saint-like, but love is God- like. (\ er. 4.) ei8oTe$, aSe\]ya7r)]/UL€voi vtto Oeov, ty\v e/cAoy>/r ufxwv — " knowing (as we do), brethren beloved by God, your election," as in the margin of the English version. To apply this participle to the Thessalonians themselves mars the harmony of thought, the thanksgiving being founded on what the apostle knew of them, not on what they knew of themselves. Some, however, take the participle as a kind of nominative absolute, resolved into o'lSuTe yap (Erasmus), or elSore? eo-re (Theodoret, Homberg, and Baumgarten-Cru- sius). Grotius regards it as the beginning of a new sentence stretching down to eyev)']OijTe in verse ; Pelt attaches it to juvelav iroioviJ.evoi, which is a needless narrowing of the connection. Ver. 4.] FIRST EPISTLE TO THE THESSALONIANS. 39 E/'JoVep, like fxvtHJioveuovTes, belongs to the first and leading verb evxapto-Tov/uLei', which is followed by three participles, the first defining the occasion on which the thanksgiving was offered, " making mention of you in our prayers," the second specifying its manner and the immediate prompting motive, " remember- ing your work of faith," and the third giving the ultimate grounds, " inasmuch as we know your election." The participle Uas a causal signification distinctly expressed in the Syriac. The translation of the Authorized Version — "your election of God," which is found also in Theophylact and CEcumenius, in Justiniani and Zanchius — is against the order of the Greek, and supposes an ellipse of the substantive verb (2 Thess. ii, 13; Rom. i, 7). The connection then of viro Qeou is not, knowing of God your election, nor your election of God, but beloved of God ; not, however, as Estius is inclined to suppose, coutinet ea pars, dilecti a Deo, causam scquentis, electionem vestram. They were not only dear to the apostle and his colleagues, but he styles them in the highest sense, beloved by God, the objects of divine complacency, in silent contrast to the hatred and malignity of their persecutors. Compare 2 Chron. xx, 7 ; Ps. lx, 0, repeated in Ps. cviii, 6. 'E/cXoy?/ is not election simply to external privilege (Whitby), but out of the world into eternal life by an eternal purpose, eh croor^piav, and is not to be identified with that /cXj/o-t? el$ 7repi7roui)fxwv oik eyevt'jOi] els v/u.a$ ev \6yca /uloi'ov, — " because our gospel came not unto you in word only." For elf vjuas we have BKLX and some of the Greek fathers ; for 40 COMMENTARY ON ST. PAUL'S [Chap. I. 7rpo? ufxixs we have A C- D ¥, and also some of the Greek fathers. The words are so like in meaning that little stress can be laid on their quotation, so that the authorities being so nearly balanced, the reading is doubtful. There could not be any great temptation to change 717)09 into els; though, as the context depicts not the mere arrival of the gospel to them, but the cir- cumstances in which it came among them, eiV might be changed into -n-pos or the words might appear so close in meaning that careless copyists might unconsciously exchange them. Some give on its demonstrative meaning " that," or to wit, class namlich. Ewald has wie, and some editors, as Lachmann and Tischendorf, prefix a comma, to show the expository connection and the grammatical dependence on eiSores. Thus Bengel, Schott, and Hofmann regard the following clauses as simply ex- planatory of the etcXoyi'}, as pointing out its feature or wherein it consisted. But these verses do not describe election in any view, and are not in any real sense doctrinal, though they might apply to effectual calling. They refer to past historical facts, to certain elements of their history which assured the apostle of their election. His object is not to show what it was, but to adduce the grounds on which he and his colleagues were self-persuaded of it. The conjunction is therefore rightly rendered quia in the Vulgate and Claromoutane, and in the Syriac by ? v^O (Winer, § 53, 8). The objective Bti thus inti'oduces recognized facts in proof of the previous statement (De Wette, Koch, Luneniann, &c). And he knew it on two grounds — first, a subjective ground, from the memory of his own consciousness in preaching ; his own recol- lections of divine assistance poured in upon him as he pro- claimed the truth — a token to him that he was not labouring in vain. Secondly, an objective ground, their immediate and cor- dial reception of the truth, " and ye became followers of us and of the Lord, having received the word in much affliction and in joy of the Holy Ghost." The first ground is that " our gospel came not unto you in word only." " Our gospel " is the gospel which we preach and are known to preach, the genitive being vaguely that of posses- sion or of instrumental origin. They had it, and by them it was published. The passive form eyev/jOrjv, originally Doric, occurs Ver. 5.] FIRST EPISTLE TO THE THESSALONIANS. 41 often in this epistle in its middle sense, eytvero. Its passive form has never the mere sense of elvai (Lobeck ad Phrynich., p. 108 ; Kiihner ; Winer, § 13). It is therefore rightly rendered "came." It means that something has been brought about or has come to be " by divine grace," as Liinemann gives it. The word may not express this idea of itself, but it is really im- plied. If we adopt the reading etV vfias, the meaning is simply ad vos as in the Vulgate, the Claromontane having apud, which is liker 7rpo9 and not unlike irapa with a dative. Fritzsche in Marc, vi, 3, p. 201-202 ; 1 Cor. ii, 3; 2 John, 12. The gospel came not " in word only," ev denoting sphere, and not simply that the gospel was aanere word. The gospel was in the word, as ov /ulovov implies, but it did not remain in it; it burst beyond it. Language was the vehicle of communi- cation, but the message passed beyond the mere vehicle. It would have been a lifeless thing if it had been only ev \6yw as a kernel in an unopened husk ; but vitality and power were in the truth so spoken — «XXa kui ev Suva/xei /cca ev llvevjuaTi ayuo, kui ev ir\y]po(j)opia 7roX\fi — "but also in power and in the Holy Ghost, and in much assurance." 'Ev points again to the medium or manner in which the preaching was carried out. Now first these terms are subjective, or they characterize the emotions of the preachers, not those of the hearers (Koppe, Pelt), or of speakers and hearers both (Vorstius and Schott). How the hearers felt and acted under their preacher is told in the next verse ; but this verse refers to the apostle's own remembrance of his preaching, what it was in his own consciousness, or when he was engaged in it, appealing in the next clause to themselves for the truth of his assertion — " As ye yourselves know what kind of persons we proved to be for your sakes." In short, the verse tells how the gospel came, or the manner of its advent, and not the results produced by it. It came ev Swd/uei, " in power," on the part of the preachers. iluva/uus does not mean here miraculous energy — as is supposed by the Greek fathers, followed by a-Lapide, Grotius, and Tur- retin. The plural is usually employed when such is the reference; but here, standing in contrast to ev Ao'yw, it denotes the mighty eloquence and the overwhelming force with which 42 COMMENTARY ON ST. PAUL'S [Chap, I. they preached (1 Cor. ii, 5), and not the external impression made by accompanying - miracles. There had been an unusual outburst of mental and spiritual energy in the preaching; they had been carried beyond themselves; they argued, insisted, and urged. The second koi is not epexegetical, but in the phrase Kai ev Ilvev/maTi aylu> it has an ascensive force, and the second clause says something fuller and higher than the first. They preached in the Holy Ghost; no wonder that such power was possessed by them and showed itself in their mighty utterances. The power was inwrought by the Holy Spirit, and could from its nature be ascribed only to Him. When Jowett explains the phrase as the inspiration of the speaker wrought by the hearer; the statement may not be a denial of the personality of the Divine Agent, but it reduces the result to that of ordinary human oratory in which no divine element is involved. It is slovenly and inaccurate to take the clauses as a hendiadys, h owapei Uvev/uaTos aylov, as Calvin, Piscator, and Conybeare. On the want of the article with Ilyetyxa, see under Ephes. i, 17. The third conjunct characteristic of the preaching was — ko.\ ev 7r\tjpo(pop[a 7roW}] — "and in much assurance." The repetition of /ecu and of ev gives a separate and distinct prominence to each of the three clauses in succession. IT\}]po(popla, " assured persuasion," is a noun found only in the New Testament and the ecclesiastical writers (Suicer, sub voce; Rom. iv, 21; xiv, 5; Col. ii, 2; Heb. vi, 11 ; x, 22). It does not mean certainty of the truth and of its divine original produced in the Thessalonians (Musculus, Mncknight, Benson), nor fulness of spiritual gifts and instruction (a-Lapide, Turretin), nor fulfilment of the apostolical office, id plene a/pud eos officio satisfecisse non dubitaretur (Estius). But the mean- ing is that they preached at once in the full persuasion of the truth of the gospel, and that, in presenting it at the moment, they were doing the Master's will. This inborn assurance, combined with the Spirit's inworking and the powerful utterance vouch- safed to them, were to them a token that there were in their audiences those whom they could soon recognize as God's elect, and these characteristics of their early labours in Thessalonica, showing that they were divinely owned and strengthened, are now adduced as one ground of their knowledge that those ad- Ver. 5.] FIRST EPISTLE TO THE THESSALONIANS. 43 dressed in the epistle are the elect. Olshausen puts it somewhat dogmatically and sternly : " Paul means to show how from the way in which the Spirit operated in him at a certain place, he drew a conclusion as to the disposition of the persons there — where it manifested itself powerfully, there, he argued, there must be elect. Thus the Spirit suffered him not to travel through Bithyuia because there were no elect there." But there were Christians in that province very soon afterwards (1 Pet. i, 1), and what then of their election ? Was it a divine act subse- quent to the interdict laid on the apostle as told in Acts xvi, 7 ? And for the truth of what he had been writing he now ap- peals to themselves — - Ka9oo$ o'iSaTe 0T01 eyevr'/Oij/uev ev v/niv Si v/nas — " even as ye know what manner of men we were found to be among you for your sakes." The rendering of the Authorized Version "we were" does not give the full sense. Conybeare's trans- lation is not correct, " behaved myself," nor yet is that of the Vulgate, quales fuerimus. The appeal is to themselves — to their own knowledge ; it corresponded (kuOco?) with the apostle's statement in the previous part of the verse. It witnessed that the gospel was preached to them " in power, and in the Holy Ghost, and in much assurance ;" and these elements of character and labour proved what manner of men the apostle and his colleagues were really found to be. The first part of the verse describes the preaching, what it was, and this clause describes the preachers, what they were. As no one who had heard such preaching would forget it, every one would be eager to verify the apostle's statement from his own recollection. The oTol eyevi'iOrjixev therefore includes alone what we have just said, and to give it a reference to disinterestedness and self-support by manual labour, is going wholly astray from the text ; and an appeal, as by Estius, Macknight, and Pelt, to ii, 7-9, is at this point wholly irrelevant. As remote from the apostle's immediate purpose is any allusion to dangers and persecutions — kivovvous ou? inrep avrcov inreicruv (Theodoret). 'Ej/ v/juv is simply " among you," in your society ; and Si v/mas points to the final purpose of the whole procedure, which was prompted and fashioned from a regard to their 44 COMMENTARY ON ST. PAUL'S [Chap. I. eternal interests — kuSws o'lSure, the appeal is honest, and he felt that they would respond to it. It is no self-eulogy born of conceit — no flattering self-drawn picture — "ye yourselves know." This, then, is the first or subjective portion of the grounds on which Paul and his colleagues knew the election of the Thessalonian believers. " Our transcendent energy, earnestness, and confidence — all inwrought by the Divine Spirit, and felt and manifested in our preaching — were proof to us that God was by us doing His work among you and marking you out to us as His own chosen ones." To begin a new sentence, as Koppe does, with KaOtos o'lSare, and to give it this meaning, qualem me vidistis qnum apud vos essem tales etiam apud vos nunc estis, breaks the coherence, gives a past sense to o'lSare, and a wrong meaning to eyeii'ftiiiJLev, and would need ourwg vjuei? to be expressed in the next verse. Now follows the objective ground of his knowledge of their' election. (Ver.,6.) kui v/ueis /ow/x;;tcu fj/nwv eyei/jOr/Te kgu tov lvvpiov — "and ye on your part came to be followers of us and of the Lord." The connection is still unbroken, and hangs virtually on on be- ginning the fifth verse and signifying "for " or " because." ' Y/ueis is emphatic and in contrast to rj/ioov in the previous verse — our gospel on the one side — your reception of it on the other. The verb eyevi]6r]Te has the same sense as in the previous verse — not ye were, but ye came to be (1 Cor. iv, 16 ; Ephes. v, 1). The additional idea durch die Leitung Gottes of Liinemann is a theo- logical inference, for it does not lie in the words. The apostle brings out the result without touching the process, by his pre- ference of this compound formula to the simpler verb fxifxelaOai. The first kou is copulative, and the second is rather climactic, not exactly corrective, as Bullinger, who says that we ought to be followers of the apostles, eatenus quatenus Mi Christi imitatores sunt. Their imitation of the apostle and his colleagues was, in its spirit and results, an imitation of Christ; for it was imitation of the apostles in their connection with Christ, in His truth and His life C\ Cor. iv, 16: xi. 1 ; Philip, iii, 17). Koppe destroys Ver. 6.] FIRST EPISTLE TO THE THESSALONIANS. 4,5 the cogency of the argument altogether, by holding that the points of imitation on the part of the Thessalonians were the power, the Holy Ghost, and the great confidence mentioned in the previous verse, as characterizing the preaching of Paul, Silas, and Timothy. But the point of imitation is plainly not the mere reception of the word, as that could not apply to Xoyop, but the spirit and circumstances in which they received it — " in much affliction with joy of the Holy Ghost," as is now stated. Se^d/uevoi tov \oyov, ev 6\i\fsei 7roXX)j /uera x a P'^ T^peo/muTO? ay'ov. The participle seems to denote inner conscious acceptance (ii, I3),amplexi estis (Calvin), excipientes (Vulgate); and it is in the same tense or point of time with the verb — implying simultaneous action — ye became followers at the moment when, or in that, ye received the word. '0 \0y09 is the gospel as preached (Luke viii, 13; Acts xvii, 11; Gal. vi, 6) : tov Kvpiov being added in verse 8. Other genitives are used in Ephes. i, 13 ; 2 Cor. ii, 17. The affliction in which they received it was great, as may be learned from Acts xvii, 5, 9, compared with ii, 14, and from iii, 2, 3. These afflictions seem to have continued after the violent outburst at the first preaching of the apostle. The Master had foretold tribulation to his followers, and the apostle had echoed the prediction during his residence in Thessalonica. The 6\l\fsis is therefore not that of the apostles, ■praecones graviter affligebantur, but that of the Thessalonians themselves. Compare iii, 7. They received the word, however, not only in affliction, but juera Xapas Ilvev/ixaTo? uyiov, " with joy of the Holy Ghost," the genitive being that of origin, and as Ellicott calls it " origin- ating agent" (Scheuerlein, § 17, 1). The phrase does not mean merely spiritual joy (Jowett), but joy inwrought by the Holy Spirit, and is therefore connected with the present conscious possession of spiritual blessings and hopes (Rom. xiv, 17 ; Gal. v, 22). See under Philip, iii, 1. This joy is no unnatural emotion, as if in stoical apathy they did not feel their suffer- ings, or pray that they should cease ; but it is a grace of the Divine Spirit which exists independently of them, though it may be increased by means of them (Acts v, 41) ; the joy of livino- in Christ and of loving- Him, — all that gladness of 4G COMMENTARY ON ST. PAUL'S [Chap. I. position and prospects which faith in the gospel brings, and which in Christ and his apostle coexisted with the endurance of great sufferings. The Lord "for the joy that was set before Him endured the cross, despising the shame," and His early- servants passed through a similar experience of outer sufferings and inner gladness, so that they who, in receiving and holding the truth, are yet supported under affliction by the joy of the Holy Ghost, are followers both of the apostles and of the Divine Master. Now the circumstances of the Thessalonians in receiving the word which are so briefly described, were so striking and so Christlike, that they were typical — (Ver. 7.) axrre yeveuQai iifias Tinrovg — "so that ye became an en- sample." The reading is doubtful, the plural tvttovs being found in A C F K L X and many fathers; but the singular in B D 17, 67, in the Latin vei'sions (Vulgate and Claromontane), as also in the Syriac and Coptic. The Syriac has ]2&P>. D 3 and49have TU7TO?, conjectured by Mill to be a neuter form like tt\outo$. It is more likely that tvttov should be changed into tuttovs on account of the v/mas, than that the reverse should take place. The singular is accepted by Lachmann and Tischendorf, and is, moreover, grammatically correct, the believers being taken as a collective unity, als ein Einheit-begriff (Bernhardy, p. 58). Chrysostom in his exposition uses, in consecutive clauses, both the plural and singular form (Winer, § 27 ; Kiihner, § 407). They became an ensample. There is a binary process — first, they followed their preachers as a living pattern or example, /uu/ui]tcu, and then they became in turn an example, rv-rrog, a pattern for the imitation of other churches ; from being fxifxrjral, they became Tinrog. iruaiv tois Trio-rev over iv ev Tfl Mce/ceoW/a icai ev t\i Kyjiia— " to all the believers in Macedonia and in Achaia," the second iv hav- ing preponderant authority. The present participle with the article is used substantively, all idea of time being excluded. Compare Ephes. iv, 28 ; Matt, iv, 3 ; Gal. i, 23. Winer, § 45, 7. In his exposition Chrysostom virtually changes the tenses of the participle — ye became an ensample toF? >/$>; TziuTevovm, " ye so shone that ye became instructors of them who received the gospel before you." Chrysostom is followed by GEcumenius and Theophylact, who has iria-reixjacri two?, and among many Ver. 8.] FIRST EPISTLE TO THE THESSALONIANS. 47 others by Pelt and Schott. But the Philippian Church was the only earlier church in Eastern Europe, as the apostle did not tarry at Amphipolis or Apollonia, and the language is scarcely applicable to it. Macedonia and Achaia, as two Roman provinces, are equivalent to northern and southern Greece, the entire territory. The Grecian churches could look upon the Thessalonians as a typical or representative community, whose example was worthy of universal imitation. But Theodoret's addition that the apostolic encomium is the more expressive, because the nations referred to were great and wise, ew\ cro/« Otw/ua^o/mevoi^, is simply not in the text. The apostle now gives the foundation for the previous eulogistic statement. (Ver. 8.) acp' u/iAcov yap e^i'i^Tai o Xoyo? tov Ivvpiov — "for from you has sounded forth the word of the Lord." We cannot give v/jlwv here a wider reference than the previous vju.a$, so that Baum- garten-Crnsius is wrong in including the Philippians under it. The natural sense of ac/>' u/jlcov is the local one, from }'ou as the point of departure (1 Cor. xiv, 30). It cannot well mean v vfxSiv, by you, as the preachers of it (Riickert), nor SI vfimv, by your means as having saved our lives (Storr), nor are the two meanings to be combined as by Schott and Bloomfield. The "word of the Lord" is very plainly the gospel, as in the 6th verse, and not, as De Wette makes it, the fame of their recep- tion of the gospel. Compare 2 Thess. iii, 1 ; and often and naturally in the Acts, as viii, 25 ; xiii, 48 ; xv, 35, 36 ; xvi, 32 ; xix, 10, 20. A word having the Lord for its origin, its centre, and its end ; His life in its purity and sympathy ; His death in its atoning fulness — told in man's language. The verb eg/jxirai (has been sounded out uxrirep crd\7nyyog Xa/uarpou qx°v (Tt 1 < >> Chrysostom) occurs only here in the New Testament, but it is found in the Septuagint (Joel iii, 14; Sirach xl, 13). The meaning is, that their conversion and its circumstances were so noted, that they carried the gospel through the province as if by the ringing peal of a trumpet. The rumour of what had happened at Thessalonica sped its way through Greece, and carried with it the gospel — sounded abroad loudly, fully, distinctly, the blessed message. ov fxovov ev tii Ma/ce/ is necessary, and must therefore be genuine ; but, as Ellicott replies, the want of the ev T}i is not only permissible, but grammatically exact, as Macedonia and Achaia are here regarded as a whole, and put in antithesis to all the rest of the world (Winer, § 19, 4). Between grammatical nicety on the one hand, and diplomatic authority on the other, the point cannot well be decided. The difference of reading involves a difference of meaning, ov fxovov .... aXka being used, ubi posterior notio ut major vel gravior vel latior in prioris notionis locum substituitur quidem sed prior lion plane tollitur : Kuhner ad Xenoph. Memor. ii, 6, 2, p. 159. See examples in Stallbaum's Plato, vol. I, 210; Phoedo, 107 b; and in ninth excursus of Bremi ad Isocr., p. 212. uWa ev Travel tottw t] 7r/crTt? v/nwv r) 7rpo? tov Qeov e£e\i'i\v6ev — "but in every place your faith which is toward God has gone forth." The kou of the Received Text has no proper authority. The structure of these words is somewhat difficult. Were the sentence thus — " From you has sounded out the word of the Lord ; " and were it to end thus, " not only in Macedonia and Achaia, but also in every place," it would appear natural and complete. But ev iravTi tottu), so far from concluding the clause, is connected with a new subject and predicate, " in every place your faith which is toward God has gone out." Some propose a transposition of ov fxovov, ov fxovov e£/ix>iTai. Not only has the word of the Lord been sounded out in Macedonia and Achaia, but in every place your faith also has gone out. Such is the violent proposal ofBeza, Piscator, Zanchius, Grotius, Rosen- muller, Storr, Schrader, Koppe, Schqtt, and others. It cannot be entertained for a moment, for it is tantamount to rewriting the verse. Others, as Olshausen and De Wette, hold that the two sub- jects and their predicates are equivalent in meaning — the word of the Lord, the report of your faith in the Lord has sounded Ver. 8.] FIRST EPISTLE TO THE THESSALONIANS. 49 out, very much the same as, your faith God ward, has gone out (Olshausen). Lunemann proposes to put a colon after Kvpiou, and begin a clause with 01} /ulovov, the sentence then being thus — "for from you has sounded out the word of the Lord." But this punctuation gives the clause a feeble and spiritless aspect, which is at the same time contradicted by the sonorous e£iJx>iTai, while aWa ev iravri tottu> stands in direct antithesis to oil /ulovov ev 77/ M-, and is, apparentl}", the natural and necessary comple- ment of the sentence. It is probable that the apostle has mixed two constructions. In writing the sentence, the thought of a stronger climax came into his mind, and he puts a whole sentence in antithesis to ov fxovov ev 77/ Ma/cecW/a Ka\ 'kxal'a, in- stead of, as first intended, a merely local phrase, such as ev iravri roircp, or, as he has said in Rom. i, 3, ev o\w tw k69 €7T€crTpe^raTe irph<; tov Oeov a.7ro tcov ctSwXow — " how ye turned from idols to God." IK>? introduces an objective sentence, and though it may not involve et'/co'Xw? (Chiysostom), or mit welclter Freudigkeit (Liinemann), still all notion of manner is not to be excluded — mode as characterizing the fact. They could not report the fact without some detail of the circumstances, 7rw? to some extent corresponding to the modal adjective oirolav of the previous clause. The notion of return is not necessarily in- volved in the compound verb, e7rto-Tpe(f>eiv, for oirlrrw and elg to, o-la-co are used with it. Compare Acts xiv, 15 ; xv, 19 ; Matt, xxiv, 18 ; Mark xiii, 1G : Luke xvii, 31 ; and see under Gal. iv, 9. Cut idolatry being apostasy from God, turning from idols may be regarded as a return to God. The idea of return to God in conversion, or from apostasy, is familiar to every reader, of the Old Testament, and it underlies the epithets " living and true" applied to God, that these idols are dead and false (Heb. ii, 19). Idols are also called vanities (Deut. xxxii, 21 ; Ps. xxxi, 6; cvi, 28; cxv, 4; Jer. viii, 19; Acts xiv, 15; 1 Cor. viii, 4). See under Gal. iv, 8. SovXeveiv Gew fcvrt kv in contrast with these dead inanities. He is Life and the source and substance of all life. He is also aXtjOivos, true or real ; not aXrjdi]?, verax, but aXyjOivo;, verus — this latter terra becoming in old English very, as in the phrase of the Nicene creed, " very God of very God " (Oeov aXrjOivov e/c Qeov aXtjOivov); or in Wycliffe's translation of John xv, 1, "I am the verri vine." 'A\>70»/? characterizes God ethically (John iii, 83 ; Rom. iii, 4) as He is true to Himself and all His promises, a\fsevS}i$ (Titus i, 2) ; but aXfjOivo? characterizes His essence — He is what He professes to be (John i, 9 ; xvii, 3). See the epithet with the same sense and a different reference, John vi, 32 ; Heb. viii, 2 ; ix, 24; Sept., Isaiah lxv, 16. Trench, Synon.,§8. The clause by itself might describe a departure from heathenism ending simply in proserytism — the change of a heathen from polytheism to monotheism. But in this case it was more, it was specifically a Christian conversion. (Ver. 10.) kul avafj-eveivTOV vlov uvtov e/c toov ovpavoov — "and to wait for His Son from heaven," or " from the heavens," as the phrase is sometimes rendered in the English plural, but most fre- quently in the singular. The verb ava/ueveiv occurs only here in the New Testament : u-Tre/coYxea-Out is used in 1 Cor. i, 7 ; Philip, iii, 20 ; and TrepijjLeveiv is similarly found in Acts i, 4. The ava cannot give the additional sense of with joy (Flatt). Winer says it does not mean rediturum exspectare (Bengel), nor avide ex- spectare. Natura sua habet admixtam . . . patientiae etfiduciae notionera. (De verborum cum praepositionibus cornpositorum usu. Particula, iii). On the name " Son," see under Ephes. i, 3. The somewhat elliptical phrase, "to wait for His Son from heaven," implies that He is in heaven and that He is coming from it. He, in the fulness of humanity, has gone up to plead, to reign, to sympathize, to prepare a place, and He will return, according to promise, to complete His work, to raise His people, to invest them with spiritual bodies, and to confer on them the crown and totality of redemption. This distinctive Christian grace of hope is based on faith. There must be faith in Him as Saviour ere there can be the quiet and patient expectation of His advent. Compare Matt. Ver. 10.] FIRST EPISTLE TO THE THESSALONIANS. 53 xvi, 27; xxvi, 04; Luke ix, 20 ; Acts i, 11 ; Rom. i, 7 ; 1 Cor. xi, 2g-. ov ij-yeipev e/c rwv vefcpccv — "whom He raised from the dead." The insertion of tow rests on preponderant authority both of MSS. and fathers, BDFL N — its omission being due probably to the common form of the phrase without the article. The theo- logy of Paul is, that the Father raised the Son from the dead, and this resurrection has an evidential connection with the Sonship and the completion of His earthly work (Rom. i, 4). See under Gal. i, 1. There could have been no faith, had He still been one of the venpo'i, but He comes as a living man, who has triumphed over death, and He is now 6 £cov (Rev. i, 18). The apostle emphatically names Him — 'Iijo-ouy tov pvo/uLevov >//jici9 airo t>/9 6py>]s r^? epyo/J-ev^ — " Jesus who delivered us from the coming wrath." The first participle is present, and is not on the one hand to be rendered as aorist (Vulgate qui eripuit — Grotius, Pelt, the English version : Tyndale, Granmer, and the Genevan preserving the present) nor is it on the other hand to receive a future sense, as in the Claromontane Latin, qui eripiet, res certo futura (Schott ; Bernhardy, p. 371). Christ redeemed us once, says Bengel, but He is always delivering us. " Jesus who is de- livering us " gives the full force of the present tense, and by this work therefore He may be characterized. The combina- tion of the article and participle may point Him out as our De- liverer. So Liinemann, Alford, Ellicott, Koch, and Conybeare ; Winer, § 45, 7. Our deliverance was achieved by that act of self- sacrifice which placed Him among the dead, and He the risen Redeemer is ever applying its gifts and power. The present participle epxo^epi]? maintains its proper meaning — that wrath is coming, certainly coming, at the period of the judgment. But from it Christ delivers us, now, through faith in Him ; and as the Deliverer is coming again from heaven believers wait for Him, that He may raise their bodies from the dead and confer upon them full and final blessedness. It is plain from this state- ment that these truths had occupied a prominent place in the Apostle's preaching at Thessalonica. He had preached Christ the Deliverer, a divine person, " the Son of God " who had given Himself for them and cone down to the dead, but who had been 54 COMMENTARY ON ST. PAUL'S [Chap. II. raised again — Christ who was now the Governor (Philip, iii, 20), and who was to be the Judo-e and Rewarder at His coming. These primary and prominent doctrines had been proclaimed to them " in power, in the Holy Ghost, and in much assurance," and their acceptance of them produced an immediate and cor- respondent revolution in their worship and life. Compare 1 Cor. xv, 34. See Introduction. CHAPTER II. (Ver. 1.) Avrol yup o'iSaTe, aSeXcpo), Ttjv eicrooov ijjmaiv Ttjv 7T/oo? vjuag, oti ou kcvi) ylyovev — "For ye yourselves know, brethren, our entrance to you that it was not vain." The yap is certainly something more than a mere particle of transition — audi as Krause, ja as Flatt and Pelt, " yea " as Conybeare, "nay" as Peile, or simply "and" as in the Syriac version, while others do not translate it at all. The connection is not so difficult as these exceptional senses given to yap would lead us to suppose. Bengel, Flatt, and Schott connect this verse with i, 5, G ; the intermediate verses being taken as forming a species of parenthesis. But such a connection is pointless and obscure. Grotius joins it to the 10th verse, and with this mean- ing, merito Mam spem vitae aetemae retinetis ; vera enirn su nt quae vobis annuntiavimus. But the following verses are not doctrinal, they are merely historical in nature. They contain no direct pi*oof of the statement put forward by Grotius. The phrase " ye yourselves " is in contrast to those beyond them — to the avToi in i, 9, who told of the entrance of the apostle to them. This paragraph is thus connected with i, 9 : " not only strangers in the province told about our entrance in to you ; not only are such statements about your conversion current everywhere; but you yourselves know what our entering in to you was. We appeal not to such reports in universal circulation ; we appeal now to yourselves, to your own personal know- ledge." The paragraph down to the end of the twelfth verse is a detailed and confirmatory explanation of what is said in the first half of i, 9 — " the kind of entrance in to you which w r e had," o-rro'iav e'icroSoi> eaxofxev; and verses 13, 14, 15, 1G, of this Ver. 1.] first epistle to the thessalonians. .55 chapter in a similar way take up at length the second half of i, 9 — their instantaneous reception of the gospel, 7r«? e-jrea-Tpl- \JsuTe xpo? tou Qeou uiro tmv eiSooXwv, and the mighty change resulting from it which still endured in spite of persecution and suffering. The yap thus introduces an explanatory vindi- cation (Hartung, p. 463). The form of the sentence is common in Greek, in which, especially after 6lSa, there is an anticipation of the object — not, ye know that our entrance was not vain ; but ye know our entrance — that it was not vain (Kriiger, § 61, 6, 2; Bernhardy, p. 466; Luke xii, 24; Acts xvi, 3 ; 1 Cor. iii, 5; vii, 17; 2 Cor. xii, 7. See under Gal. i. 11.) Avto\ expressed is emphatic— a direct appeal to themselves. " Brethren," a name of endearment. The epithet neiv} has been variously taken; some give it an ethical sense — fxaraia (CEcumenius), mendax (Grotius), tioti inanis, sed plena virtutis (Bengel, Schott), vani honoris studio (Rosenmuller), non otiose (Koppe). The apostle does not say e/? Kevov, as in iii, 5; and the reference in the following verse is not to the fruit of his labours — for this idea does not come in till verse 13 — but to the character of them. The following aX\a is in contrast to ov Kevh and introduces an explanation : his entrance was not vain ; it was, as already described, preceded by suffering, but it was characterized by boldness of utterance, irappija-la, by absence of deceit, of uncleanness, and of guile ; by fidelity, by gentle- ness, and disinterested self-denying love, by continuous and affectionate industry ; all these features of his ministry explain ov Kevi'i. Chrysostom says, ov kcv>] tovt€ctti, otl ovk avOpwirivii ovSe n tvxovctu. Kev>/ refers then to the character of the en- trance, not to the fruits; to its fulness of power and purpose and reality (Ellicott). This entering in was not empty or unsub- stantial, but was marked by a living reality, by power, con- fidence, and spiritual manifestation. And that character remained (ylyovev) Some, however, combine both ideas, the nature of the entrance with the results (a-Lapide, Pelt, Schott, De Wette, and Benson); but the second reference is against the context. Some of the Greek fathers suppose a special allusion to persecution and dangers ; but these come into view first in the next verse, and are referred to also in i, 9, of which this is an expansion. 56 COMMENTARY ON ST. PAULS. [Chap. II. (Ver. 2.) 'AXXu 7rpo7ra66vTe](Tiao9 u//as' to evayyiXiov tov Oeov ev 7roXX« ayoavi — "But after having suffered before and been injuriously treated, as ye know, at Philippi, we were confident in our God to speak unto you the gospel of God in much conflict." The ica\ of the Received Text after aXka is a gloss with- out any authority. 'AXXa is opposed to Kevrj (1 Cor. xv, 10) ; it was not vain ; on the other hand its reality was manifested as follows. The participles might be taken as concessive if the kui had been genuine as Pelt sup- poses, "though we having suffered before" (LiAnemann); but the simple temporal sense is more in harmony with the historical statement which follows. The reference is to the sufferings already endured, and described in Acts xvi. The participle TrpoiruOovTe*? occurs only here in the New Testament, but is found in Herodotus, vii, 11; Thucydides, iii, 67; Plato, Rep., ii, 376. The apostle adds koli v/3pia6evTeg, "and injuriously treated," the treatment expressed by the verb being insolent and wanton outrage such as the scourging to which, though a Roman citizen, he had been subjected, a punishment forbidden by the Porcian and Valerian laws (Matt, xxii, 6 ; Luke xviii, 32 ; Acts, xiv, 5 ; Trench, § 29). If the first compound verb might have a medial sense like the simple one (Xenoph., Mernor., ii, 2, 5), the second verb in the clause effectually forbids it. Kat9ct>? o'lSaTe is repeated — they knew it well, as they had seen him immediately after the flagellation, and may have done on him such a work of kindness as did the jailer. The verb e-Kappr]maaaixSa means literally "we were bold of speech," as its composition indicates (De Wette, Ellicott). But the word signifies also to be confident (Job xxvii, 10; Ephes. iii, 12; vi, 20; 1 Tim. iii, 13; 1 John ii, 28; iii, 21). The following XaX^crat would be somewhat tautological if we give €7rappr]v indicates close relationship — God of our choice, our service, whose Vkr. 2.] FIRST EPISTLE TO THE THESSALONIANS. 57 graces sustain, whose spirit cheers, whose presence is our reward. The infinitive \a\fj]criu. of this verse. He proclaimed the good news of God's grace, no earthborn scheme, no human speculation or conjecture as to the probabilities of the divine purpose in itself or its results. He spoke this gospel ev 7toXXm dywvi as referring chiefly, if not solely, to outward circumstances, and not to inner care and sorrow (Fritzsche). The former is the view of the Greek fathers, and the subsequent verses confirm it. Compare Philip, i, 30 ; Col. i, 29. Some, as Schott, combine both ideas — our entrance was not vain, and our history shows it. After we had suffered indignity and cruelty for preaching the gospel at Philippi, we still had confidence to preach the same gospel to you in the midst of conflict. It was instigated by unbelieving Jews, "who took unto them certain lewd fellows of the baser sort and gathered a great company and set all the city in an uproar." Such confident persistence in spite of past sufferings, and in the midst of present perils among you, proves that our entrance was not vain, but full of honest, hearty, and unfear- ing energy. The conflict must have lasted some time, and its culmination is told in Acts xvii, 9. (Ver. 3.) 'H yap 7rapuKX>]v oi'/c e/c Tr\ai>t]$ — "For our exhortation was not of error." Tap explains and confirms. It does not knit the verse to the mere phrase, gospel of God (Flatt), nor simply to €7rapprjcria(rup.e9a (Olshausen, De Wette, Koch), nor yet to XaXTjcrai (Liinemann), but to the whole clause. We were bold to speak the gospel to you in much conflict, for our teaching has not its source in error; and larnv, not ?iv, is to be supplied on this negative side of the state- ment, as is evident from XaXov/uev in verse 4 on its positive side. He is not telling simply what he did, but what his 58 COMMENTARY ON ST PAUL'S [Chap. II. habit was. His preaching was characterized by none of those qualities, and therefore he was not backward or cow- ardly in it. He was so assured of the truth of the gospel and of the integrity of his own motives, that he proclaimed it everywhere and at all hazards. Ilapa/cA?/o-t? is in effect what the Greek fathers render it — teaching, SiSaxv ', hut specially it is rather persuasive than didactic instruction, hortatory rather than expository preaching. It does not mean here consolatio (Zuingli), nor is it docendi ratio, but rather what Bengel calls totum praeconium ecangelicum, jtussionum dulcedine tinctum. It is the earnest practical preaching of the apostle bringing every motive to bear upon his audience, plying them with every argument, and working on them by every kind of appeal, in order to win them over to the gospel and to faith in Him who delivers from the wrath to come. IlXdvf] is probably not imposture (Erasmus, Calvin, Turre- tin), for the following ev SoXtp has that meaning; nor seda- cendi stadium (Grotius), Verfilhrungs-lust (Baumgarten- Crusius). Lunemann renders it Irrwahn, " delusion," and so De Wette and Koch. We are not in error ourselves, neither self-duped, nor the dupes of others. TLXavrj, as Lunemann re- marks, is opposed to aXyOeia either subjectively (1 John iv, (j) or objectively (Rom. i, 25). Compare Matt, xxvii, G; Ephes. iv, 14 (Ellicott.) ovSe . eg aicaOapo-ias " nor of uncleanness," the genitive of origin, and the word is used in its widest sense — excluding impurity of all kinds in motive, relation, and act. Whatever could be deemed impurity in a public teacher — selfishness, lust of gain, insincerity, or craft of purpose — all is expressly denied or repudiated. The apostle may allude to charges which his enemies may have been in the habit of preferring against him, as in 2 Cor. xi, 8, where he rebuts a charge of pecuniary interest; and perhaps the same inference may be gathered from the counsels given to deacons (1 Tim. iii, 8) and bishops (Titus i, 7). ovoe ev SoXcp — "nor in guile," the preposition marking the sphere in which the exhortation is denied to have taken place. Oi/oe has high diplomatic authority (A B C D F ti), though Veil 4.J FIEST EPISTLE TO THE THESSALONIANS. .51) ouTe occurs in the Greek fathers, and is preferred by Teschen- dorf in his 7th edition. Compare 2 Cor. ii, 17; iv, 2; xii, 1(3. " We were not self-deceived or imposed upon ; our exhor- tation was not of error, but of truth ; it was not of impurity, but of disinterested and holy motive ; nor was it carried on in or by means of guile, but in simplicity and godly sincerity. Truth and truthfulness, light and purity, openness and in- tegrity characterized us." (Ver. 4.) 'AAAa /ca0a>? SeSoKifxacrfxeOa viro rov Geou Tiiarrev- Qr\vui to evayyeXiov, ovtcos XaXovpev — " But according as we have been approved of God to be put in trust with the gospel even so we speak." The KaQia? and ovtw correspond — "according as "..."even so," the speaking being quite in harmony with the divine approval and the consequent trust. KaOw? is therefore not causal quoniam (Flatt), nor "seeing that" (Conybeare), nor "inasmuch" (Peile). The verb SoKifiafav is to test as metal by lire (1 Cor. iii, 13; Ephes. v, 10; 1 Tim. iii, 10); then to distinguish or select after testing (Philip, i, 10) ; and then to approve what has been so tested (Rom. xiv, 22 ; 1 Cor. xvi, 3). The second and third meanings insensibly blend, so that the rendering "have been thought fit" represents the general meaning (agiouu, 2 Thess. i, 11), and it does not much differ from kKXeyeo-Oai. Any idea of innate fitness in the men them- selves must be discarded. Theophylact puts Chrysostom's notion into briefer phrase — "He would not have chosen us if he had known us to be unworthy." Nor is the idea of CEcumenius more tenable "that God foresaw their fidelity to Himself, and so chose them " — f/fia$ p.r]Sev 7rpo? ou^av XaXeiv avOpuirwv piXXourag (1 Tim. i, 12). Better is an explana- tory clause of Theodoret — avri rov e-ireiStj eoo^ev aura) kui eOuKi/xacre iricrTedcrai tjfj.iv. The phrase iria-revdrivai to evayyeXiov is the leading- thought, that for which the SoKifxacria prepares (Winer, § 44, 1). For the idiom by which the passive verb retains the accusa- tive of the thing, see Winer, § 32, 5. Compare 1 Cor. ix, 17; Gal. ii. 7; 1 Tim. i, 11; Titus i, 3. Our work as preachers is in unison with the divine approval and choice of us. Ovrws XaXov/uev, " so we speak, CO COMMENTARY ON ST. PAUL'S [Chap. II. our speaking has been and is still thus characterized, now at Corinth, then in Thessalonica. And the proposition is still further explained — ovx w? a.v6pu)7rois aptcTKOires, aWu Qew rw Sokijulu^ovti tu? Kupo'as jJ/Aftjj/ — " not as pleasing men, but God which trieth our hearts." 'Q? does not look back to ovtws, but characterizes the action or the actors engaged in it as persons who are not pleasing men. The present participle has its widest sense. Laying ourselves out, presenting as our work and aim not to please men. See under Gal. i. 10; Stallbaum, Protag., p. 56; Scheuerlein, p. 313. Their life's labour did not lie in pleasing men: they were too faithful to their trust, too noble in purpose to be men- pleasers. They had none of that mixed motive, astute self- adaptation and versatility of address, discovered in men-pleas- ing. Their aim in preaching was to please God, to gain his approval by cordially and unfeignedly doing His work be- cause it was His work and they bore His commission (2 Cor. v, 9). They wrought so as to please Him in this special aspect — aAXa Oew tw Sokijuu^opti ra? KapSias i]/uwv — "but God that proveth our hearts." The tm before Gew in the Received Text has good authority; but BCD 1 ^ omit it, and it may have been inserted, as it often occurs before a noun when so followed by an article and adjective or participle. The par- ticiple making a kind of paronomasia, has its literal meaning, and })p.wv is not to be generalized (Pelt and Koch), as in some general statements (Ps. vii, 10 ; Rom. viii, 27), but it has the same reference as the leading nominative >)p.els — Paul, Silas, and Timotheus — as is also indicated by the plural KapSia?. It is in vain to appear other than we are in motive or work before Him who tests not only outer actions, but knows and tries the heart (Acts i, 24 ; xv, 8 ; Rom. viii, 27.) There is in the clause a tacit appeal to God for the truth of what is uttered, as there is a direct and formal appeal in, the end of the following verse. (Ver. 5.) QuTe yap irore ev Xo'yo) KoXaKeia? eyeio'iOij/ucv, KuQag o'lSure — "For neither at anytime used we speech of flattery, as Ver. 5.] FIRST EPISTLE TO THE THESSALONIANS. 61 ye know," that is, in pleasing men. This is a further assertion, probably expounding what is meant by ovSe ev SoXm. The verb, as already said, means to come to be, to turn out to be, and here, as followed by ev, " found to be in " or " to take part in " or " to have our being in " (Hofmann) ; or it denotes characterizing habit, in aliqua re versari. Jelf, § 622. Com- pare Herod, ii, 82, ol ev ttoojo-ci yevojuevoi ; Plato, Pluieilo, p. 59 a, ev (JjiXocrofp'a elvat ; 2 Cor. iii, 7, 8. See Kypke in loc. As Ellicott remarks, " When the Greek fathers render the phrase by the simple verb eKoXaKevcra.uev, they do not express this full idiom, and fail to mark the entrance into and exis- tence in the given thing or condition." Ao'yo? KoXaK€ia u/ulow outc dir dXXow — "neither seeking of men glory, neither of you, nor of others " — still a negative description of his ministerial work, repeating more fully and pointedly what he had said in verse 4, ,: not as pleasing men." Glory from men, the apostle did not covet; he knew it in its fickle worthlessness. Zr/TOWTes depends still on eyev^Orjfiei/. The emphasis lies on di'0pco7ro)v — the sense being, not as Chrysostom explains, " not that they did not obtain glory, that were to reproach them, but that they did not seek it." CEcumenius puts it more correctly — "they sought not glory of men ; but the glory that is from God they both sought and received." The difference if any between eV and diro has been explained variously. The notion of Ellicott after Koch is scarcely probable, that the two prepositions are synonymous — especially when we regard the apostle's distinctive use of them even in an accumulated form. The examples given by Winer, § 50, 2, will not bear out such an exegesis here ; nor can the common distinction be adopted, as by Schott and Olshausen, that e'/c marks the primary source and diro the secondary or intermediate, for the clause describes a uniformity of source, with this difference, that the first general relation is separated in the next clause, into two special ones. See under Gal. i, 1 ; Winer, § 50, 6. But as Lunemann suggests, after Bouman, Soga eg dvOpunroov universe est dvB punrlvrj quae humamam originem habet, ex hominibus exsistit ; S6£a ddj' vp.coi> quae singulatim a vobis, vestro ab ore manat ac prqficiscitur. Alford thus expresses it, "eV belongs Ver. 6.] FIRST EPISTLE TO THE THESSALONTANS. 63 more to the abstract ground of the Soga, diro to the concrete object from which it was in each case to accrue." 'E/c, we may say, is used with the more general, diro with the more special- ized soui'ces. They were not seeking glory from men in any aspect, neither from you when we were with you, nor from any others among whom we happen to be labouring. Human glory is never, and in no sphere of our work, an object of ambition. And this — Svvapevoi iv (Sapei eivai, w; uLpicrTov aTrorrToXoi — " when we might have been of weight as Christ's apostles." The participle is concessive and subordinate to fyrovvres. It is not natural to begin a new sentence with this clause, supplying %/iev, as Flatt; or making the clause a protasis to eyevr'fitjpev in the following- verse, as Calvin and Koppe; or connecting it, as Hofmann, with verse 8 ; or, with Schottgen and Griesbach, marking it as a parenthesis. Two very different interpretations have been given of iv ftdpei eivai. The first which has been suggested by irKeove^'ia is adopted by the Vulgate, oneri esse, and by our English version, " when we might have been burdensome to you," in the matter of our temporal support — that is, we might have demanded carnal things in return for spiritual things, but we did not, for we earned our sustenance by our manual labour. So Wj^cliffe, " whanne we mygten haue bene in charge." A good deal may be said on behalf of this view, which is supported by Theodoret, Estius, Beza, Grotius, Turretin, Koppe, Flatt, Ewald, Hofmann, Webster and Wilkinson, and virtually Jowett. Similar phraseology is used by the apostle of minis- terial support, eTTifiapfjcrai in verse 9, and in 2 Thess. iii, 8 ; Karafiapeiv, 2 Cor. xii, 16. Similarly too the simple verb /3apei/x*ot eu jnecrtp v/jlwv — "but we were (were found to be) gentle in the midst of you." The readings ')]-kiol and v7)7rioi are nearly balanced in regard to authority — the last having perhaps the higher, B C 1 D 1 F tf, the Latin and Coptic versions, and several of the fathers — 'ijitiol having A C 2 D 3 K L N :5 , and the majority of manuscripts. But the v may have come from the last letter of the previous word. Nj/7t*o? also is the more familiar term, and may for either reason have been inserted ; but its use here destroys the figure — we were first as " children," then " as a nurse." The negative description is continued down to aXXa, which introduces a strong contrast to the entire preceding verse, and not merely to the previous clause (Heinsius, Turretin), and begins the positive account of their deportment. The term ^-n-iog, " mild," occurs only twice in the New Testament — here and in 2 Tim. ii, 24, connected probably with eira, elirelv. It occurs in classic writers with some frecmency, and is applied in a variety of ways to persons and things. Thus it is opposed to ru juuXicTTa Qv/xw Yjoa'yue^oi/ in Pausanias, (Eliac., ii, IS, 2, p. 434, vol. II, ed. Schubart) ; applied to a God >/7notrraTo? Oetov (Euripides, Bacchae, 861) ; to a father (Odyssey, ii, 47) ; to a ruler and father (Herodian, iv, 1); to Cyrus, in contrast to Cambyses (Herodotus, iii, 89), tj7ritoraTos 6 ev Xoyoi? irpaoraroq K/7ria fyapixuKa (Iliad, iv, 218). Ety- mologicum May., sub voce; Tittmann, Synon., p. 140, &c. So far from seeking human glory, so far from insisting on official standing and prerogative, and exacting recognition and service, we were "gentle in the midst of you"; " we were each of us as one of yourselves;" and so G^cumenius adds, ovk Ti]i> uvoorepco Xafiovres tcl£iv. Our deportment was mild, quiet, unassuming, and affectionate. a>i eav Tpotjibs OaX-mj ra. eavTtjs tIkvu — " as a nurse cherishes her own children." The fuller eav has the authority of B C D E 66 COMMENTARY ON ST. PAUL'S [Chap. II. F N 3 . 'Qg is a particle of comparison, tartquam si; and the verb, akin to 6d\\co, OtjXvs, denotes fostering warmth as applied to a bird (Deut. xxii, 6 ; Job xxxix, 14 ; Ephes. v, 29 ; Josephus, viii, 14, 3). Tpov, eKripv^afxev et? vp.a.9 to evayyeXiov tou Qeou — "night and day working, in order not to burden any one of you, we preached unto you the gospel of God." Tup in the common text, after wkto?, is rightly rejected as a correction. The genitives are emphatically placed, and the apostle always places wkto? first (Acts xx, 31 ; 1 Thess. iii, 10; Ver. D.J FIRST EPISTLE TO THE THESSALONIANS. 69 2 Tim. i, 3 ; 1 Tim. v, 5). Night may stand first, as the Jews reckoned from sunset to sunset — the evening preceding the morning, as we speak yet of a fortnight; or the order may depend on some suggestion of the apostle's own mind, the most striking part of the expression being put first, the period of common rest becoming to him one of heavy toil. The order is reversed in Luke xviii, 7 ; Acts ix, 24 ; and five times in the Apocalypse, for Hebrew rfrfe\ np'v (Jer. viii, 23 ; xvi, 13; xxxiii, 25). It may be remarked that Luke places vvkto. first when he uses the accusative, but i)p.epa? first when he uses the genitive. The temporal genitive is explained by Donaldson (§451) as "out of," "within the limit of;" and examples of this and of other formulas, with varying order, may be seen in Lobeck's Paralvp., p. 62. The participle epya- £o/uevoi here refers to manual labour (Acts xviii, 3 ; 1 Cor. ix, 6 ; 2 Thess. iii, 10; Xenoph., Mem., i, 2, 57). In 1 Cor. iv, 12, rah iSlais x e P (T ' LV i s added. Compare Ephes. iv, 28. This continuous physical toil was carried on irpbs — with this end in view (Winer, § 44, 6). The verb eirifiaptiv is used only tropically in the New Testament (2 Cor. ii, 5; 2 Thess. iii, 8). See Appian, B. C, 4, 15. That we might not overburden any of you, by claiming tem- poral support from you, we supported ourselves by unremitting labour. Et? u/xa? is neither among you nor in vobis (Vulgate), but unto you. E/9 implies the direction of the preaching (Mark xiii, 10 ; Luke xxiv, 47 ; 1 Peter i, 25), the epya^op-evoi being parallel in time to the eKrjpu^ajuev — all the while they were preaching they were winning wages by daily and nightly toil. It is beyond proof in Balduin, Pelagius, and Aretius to make vvkto? the period of working, and ij/mepa? that of preaching. For we have no means of making such a distinction, as probably teaching and working might alternate at shorter intervals, as opportunity offered or necessity required. No anxious inquirers would be put off during the clay because the apostle was at work, and the work laid aside for such a purpose would be resumed during the watches of the night ; or disciples like Nicodemus might visit him during the night, and the toil so interrupted would be taken up during the day. Why the apostle gave up his claim for pastoral maintenance, and lived and wrought in this independent spirit in Thessalonica, we do 70 COMMENTARY ON ST. PAUL'S [Chai\ II. not know; but the probability is, that he was anxious that he might not be misinterpreted or the purity of his motives challenged, and that he might not be likened to a selfish and grasping sophist to whom hire was everything, and therefore he would take nothing in compensation, but toiled to support himself, that the gospel without hindrance, and in an unselfish and disinterested form, might win its way among the Gentiles. Chrysostom supposes that the Thessalonians were poor, and that the apostle compassionated their poverty. We read, how- ever, of " honourable women not a few" among the converts, and the abstinence of the apostle from support is to be ascribed to a higher motive (Jowett; Philip, iv, 15). The apostle abruptly, and without any connecting particle, now solemnly summarizes what ho had previously said in detached clauses about the behaviour of himself and his col- leagues at Thessalonica. (Ver. 10.) ' Y/xeis pciprvpe? Ka\ 6 Geo? — "Ye are witnesses and God is witness." Much they could judge of, and on such points he appeals to them ; much they could not judge of, and on such points lying beyond their cognizance he appeals to God. He submits himself unconditionally to their judgment and to that of God, and has no doubts of the decision which would be given by them and ratified by Him who trieth the heart. to? o eyew'/- 6}]/u.ei' — " how holily, and righteously, and unblameably we be- haved ourselves in the judgment of you who believe." The apostle does not employ adjectives, for he is not bringing out the elements of his own personal character, but is describing his deportment or dealing toward believers (Luke i, 75 ; Ephes. iv, 24; Titus i, 8 ; Jcsephus, Antiq., vi, 5, 5). The accumulation of epithets intensifies the meaning. The three words are not to be taken as adjectives (Schott), but the}^ are a species of secondary predicates (Donaldson, § 436 ; Winer, § 54, 2). The epithets are to be distinguished at the same time, though not perhaps with decided discrimination of meaning. The first two adverbs assert with a positive aspect, and the third puts forward a negative statement. The first epithet, ocruo?, is defined in Plato, 7rep* Se 6eou? ocria (Gorg , 57, A. B.), and so in Polybius, t« tt/?o? tov]pev. Still closer and more individualizing appeal — (Ver. 11.) KaOdirep olSare, "even as ye know." KaOdo? is the term commonly employed ; kuOo. occurs only once (Matt. xxvii, 10) ; in the word before us it is strengthened by 7rep, and is perhaps employed because KaOoo? immediately follows. They had conducted themselves holily, righteously, and un- blameably, and all this in accordance with the universal and the individual experience of the Thessalonian believers : — <09 eva eKacrTOv vpm 1 , to? iraTijp TeKva eavrov, 7rapaKa\ovi>Tes vp.a$ kou 7rapap.v60viJ.ev01 — " how every one of you, as a father his own children, we were exhorting you and encouraging you." There are two accusatives — first, eva ckucttov, and then vp.u$ — both governed by the participles ; " every one of you " placed em- phatically, "each one of you," individualized, and "you" collec- tively or in the mass, not a mere pleonasm. Ei? eKaarrog is found in Plato, So})h., 223 D ; Protag., 332 c ; Luke iv, 40 ; xvi, 5 ; Acts ii, 3, 6 ; 1 Cor. xii, 18 ; Ephes. v, 7, corresponding to the Latin unus quisque, ita at nemo excliidatur (Pelt). The two participles may either be a broken construction — modal clauses — with a finite verb omitted ; " ye know how we did so — exhorting you " (D(e Wette, Ellicott). Thig is a common form of idiomatic construction with the apostle. The simpler way, however, is to supply eyevijOvpev, which has been already employed (Liinemann, Alford, Hofmann). Other resolutions of the difficulty have been proposed. Beza, Grotius, and Flatt propose rjpev, which is not in the context. Schrader, Ewald, and Riggenbach make KaOdrrep o'lSare a parenthesis, and con- nect the participles with eyevijOtjpev in ver. 10, an awkward connection. Others, perplexed with the double accusative eva eicao-Tov, vpa$, propose to connect vpag alone with the participles, and supply a finite verb to eva eKaa-rov. Thus, Vatablus, Er. Schmid, Ostermann propose riyairijuapev. Whitby and others propose that, or e6d\\p-ap.ev from ver. 7. Pelt introduces owe Ver. 11.] FIEST EPISTLE TO THE THESSALONIANS. 73 acp/lKa/uev; and Schott prefers a verb in which is notio curandi aive tractandi sive educandi. The three participles are closely connected in sense and in relation with the following ei$ — irapaKaXovvTe? vpa$ kui TrapapvOoupevoi ku\ papTvpopevoi — " exhorting you and encouraging and adjuring you." The Re- ceived Text has papTupovpevoi, with D X F, and most manuscripts, but the other reading has in its favour B D 3 K L N. A omits teal fxaprupojueuoi altogether. The first is the more general, appealing to you by every argument and motive ; the second is suggested by the peril and persecutions around them, on account of which they needed to be animated and consoled (v, 14; John xi, 19, 31; Philip, ii, 1; Plato, Leg., ii, 6GG ; the Syriac has ^onnV") _»ooi v » V-h) ; and the third is of special strength, laying charge on them as if in presence of witnesses, solemnly adjuring them to walk worthy of God (Gal. v, 3 ; Ephes. iv, 17 ; Polybius xiii, 8, 6 ; Thucydides, vi, 30 ; viii, 53 ; Raphel. in loc.) As the three participles are connected with el$ to TrepnraTeiv as the purpose, it is wrong to give any of them a special supplement, such as Chrysostom and Theophylact give to the first, irpos to -waiSl Odyss., i, 308. (Ver. 12.) /ecu paprvpopevoi eig to TrepnraTeiv vpus u^tcof tou Qeou tov kuXovvtos vpas eis Tr\v eavTod /3ao-i\eiav kul So£av — " and testifying that ye should walk worthily of God, who is calling you into His own kingdom and glory." The present TrepnraTeiv has preponderant authority over the common reading of the aorist TrepnraTija-ai, and the KaXecravTo? of the 74 COMMENTARY ON ST. PAUL'S [Chap. II. Received Text has only in its favour A N and eight manu- scripts, the Vulgate (qui vocavit), and some of the fathers. E/V to with the infinitive denotes the purpose of all their exhorting, encouraging, and attesting (Winer, § 44, 6), and does not indicate merely direction or subject (Lunemann, Bisping; 1 Cor. ix, 12; 2 Cor. iv, 4). The adverb a£lo)$ is similarly used with the genitive (Rom. xvi, 2; Ephes. \v, 1; Philip, i, 27; Col. i, 10; 3 John 6; Demosth., OlyntJi., i, 5, 2; Thucyd., iii, 39, 5). For the divine KXrjcri?, see under Gal. i, 6. The present participle indi- cates the call as ever present, while it is reaching to the future. The call is ever ascribed to God, whatever be the instrumentality ; el? points to that into which they are being called (Matt, xviii, 9; xix, 17; John iii, 5), "His own kingdom and glory," the article rrjv being common to both nouns, though omitted before the second one, on account of the pronoun eav- toO (Winer, § 19, 4). The Syriac reads oi^oklo giLq2^&&. His kingdom and glory is not His glorious kingdom, fiao-iXela evSogog (Koppe, Olshausen). BacriXela rod Qeov is the king- dom which God sets up in His grace and which is founded in the merit and mediation of His Son, into which believers enter now by a second birth, and which reaches its full and final development at the Second Advent. His glory is His own perfection and happiness which He confers upon His people, His own image reimpressed on the hearts of those who have been made meet for beholding Him and enjoying fellow- ship with Him (Rom. v, 2 ; viii, 13; 2 Cor. iii, 7. See under Ephes. v, 5; Col. i, 13). Baa-tAe/a rod Qeou is not the kingdom in its earthly aspect, glory being its heavenly form (Baum- garten-Crusius). To walk worthily of God, who is calling us to His kingdom and glory, is to have one's whole course of life preserved in harmony with God's gracious work upon the soul, and with the high and hallowed destiny with which that work is lovingly connected, and into which it is ever ripening. And such being the propriety and necessity of this " worthy" walk, the apostle and his fellow-labourers laid themselves out in exhorting, encouraging, and conjuring the Thessalonian be- lievers — all of them as a body, each of them by himself — to maintain it (1 Peter v, 10). Visr. 13.] FIRST EPISTLE TO THE THESSALONIANS. 75 (Ver. 13.) Kcu cua tovto — "and on this account" the kcu is omitted in D F K L and in the Latin fathers; but is found in A B, in the Syriac and Coptic Versions, and it is inserted by Teschendorf and Lachinann. The authority fur kcu is thus good, but it may have been added for the sake of connec- tion. kcu fiiuiei? ev^apiUTOv/Jiev T///(* tov Qeov, eSegacrOe ov Xoyov av6pdo7rot)v — " that having received from us the word of preaching — itself of God — ye accepted not the word of men." "Otc introduces the contents and reason of the thanksgiving. The participle irapahafiovTe? is temporal, describing the act which was necessarily connected with iSegacrOe, and prior to it, or all but coincident in time with it. The two verbs are not synonymous (Baumgarten-Crusius), as the Vulgate in its repetition of accipere would imply, or as the English Version, which renders both words by the same term, " receive." The verbs have been thus distinguished — the first as being more ob- jective in its nature, and the second more subjective ; the first describing the reception of the truth as external matter of fact, and the second the inner acceptance of it as matter of faith. Bengel distinguishes thus, 7rapa\a/xj3uvu> dicit simplicem ac- ceptionem, Sixop.ou connotat prolubium in accipiendo. See under Gal. i, 9, 12. Compare Luke viii, 13; Acts viii, 14; xi, 1; Ver. 13.] FIRST EPISTLE TO THE THESSALONIANS. 77 xvii, 11; 1 Cor. ii, 14 ; xi, 23 : xiii, 1; 2 Cor. viii, 17; Col. ii, 6 ; Raphelius in loc. ; Thucyd., i, 95. In the first act described they received it as a divine message orally conveyed to them. \6you aKorj? irap' fj/uLcov. Aoyo? is the doctrine or the gospel, and aKorjs is used in the passive sense which it has so often in the New Testament (John xii, 38; Rom. x, 16 ; Heb. iv, 2. See under Gal. iii, 2). 'A/coJ/f may virtually be the genitive of apposition (Ellicott), or it may be the characterizing genitive, the word distinguished as being heard, not read, nor the result of mental discovery. It was preached, and they on listening received it. The notion of Theophylact adopted by Pelt is overstrained : the word of hearing is Ky'ipuy/ma co? Sia tou aicovcrQrivai iricrTevo- juevov — verbum quod audiendo creditur. 'Ako// may mean actively, the hearing; or passively, that which is heard. 'A/co>/ Tri<; may mean the hearing or recep- tion of that doctrine of which faith is a distinctive principle ; or, in a passive sense, that which is heard of faith, that report or message which holds out faith as its prominent and charac- teristic element. This passive sense is perhaps uniform in the Septuagint. The connection of wap' rj/uMi/ has been variously taken, as the phrase may be joined either immediately to olko?^ (Schott, Olshausen, Lunemann, Hofmann, Bisping, Pelt), or to the parti- ciple 7rapuAa/3oVT69 (Turretin, De Wette, Koch, Baumgarten- Crusius, Auberlen, Ellicott). The first construction is admis- sible, as in John i, 41, and as (Lunemann) substantives and adjectives retain the force of the verbs from which they are derived. It is no objection to the second connection that irap' t)[Awv is separated by some words — the accusative of object — from the participle ; for it is a form of syntax by no means uncommon, and such a sense would not necessitate the order 7rapa\a(36vT€? trap rjp.cov \6yov. Such is the connection indicated by the Vulgate acc&pistis a nobis, and so the Syriac Nor in this case is aKOtj? superfluous, as is alleged by Lune- mann ; for not only does it characterize the mode of convey- ance as an oral communication, 7r«pa denoting the more im- mediate source, but it forms a contrast to the following tov 78 COMMENTARY ON ST. PAUL'S [Chap. IT. Qeou — from us the word of hearing, but that word in its ultimate origin from God — we preaching it, you hearing it, but God the giver of it. Compare iv, 1 ; Gal. i, 12 ; 2 Thess. iii, 6. This Xoyo? aKOtj? is at the same time rou Qeou, " of God," the genitive of origin, as the contrast in the following dv6pu>7ru)v plainly indicates. It is not the genitive of possession, nor of object (Vatablus, Hunnius, Balduin, Grotius). Gal. ii, 9 ; 2 Peter iii, 1 ; Heb. vi, 1. The too Qeou, appended abnormally and on purpose, qualifies the preceding clause, \6yov aKorjs Trap i'hjlwv, its human source near and immediate to them, as contrasted with its true divine origin. Chandler needlessly supplies 7rep\ before tov Qeou. eSe^acrOe ov \6yov avQ pwirodv , dXX' (icaOoo? ecrTiv aX/yOco?) \oyov Qeov — "ye accepted not the word of men, but, as it is in truth, the word of God." The difference between this verb and the previous participle has been already referred to, it being the inner reception by faith which is now being described. The genitive dvQpwTrwv is again that of origin. The English version inserts a supplemental " as," and Pelt says ante \6yov vero quasi w? supplendum esse, res ipsa docet. But the res ipsa teaches the opposite. Were the apostle's thankfulness based not only on the fact that the Thessalonians had accepted the message, not from man but from God, but also on their estimate or appreciation of this difference, and their consequent mode of acceptance, then " as " might be more naturally interpolated. But it is superfluous, for the apostle simply states the fact of their acceptance, saying nothing about its manner (Kiihner, § 560). The parenthetical clause also states the apostle's opinion — they accepted not the words of men, but the word of God, which it really is, d\r]6w$ (Matt, xiv, 33; John i, 48). As a message spoken to them and heard by them, it was a word from men ; but when they accepted it, they accepted it in its divine character, the word of God. Men were but the instru- ments, God was the primary author and origin. To accept a human word is ordinary credence; to accept a divine word is saving faith, accompanied in them that believe with joy in the Hol} r Ghost. The first part of the process, the hearing and comprehension of the message, may exist without the second ; but the second, the belief, ever implies the first (Rom. xi, 14). Ver. 13.] F1EST EPISTLE TO THE THESSALONIANS. 79 09 ku\ evepyelrai ev vij.Iv to?? TriarTevovaiv — " which worketh also in you who believe." The Vulgate (by its verbum Dei qui), a-Lapide, Bengel, Koppe, Auberlen, take Qeov as the antecedent. Peile apparently understands by Xoyo? the Son of God (John i, 1). Whitby, with the same antecedent, thinks the reference is to the primitive gifts or x a P^ called evepyi'ipara (1 Cor. xii, 6, 10), a far-fetched and groundless explanation. But the reference to \6yo? is decidedly to be preferred. (1) For the "word" is the special theme, and their acceptance of it the special ground of the apostle's continuous thanksgiving. (2) Geo'9 is never used in the New Testament with evepyelaOui, but uniformly with the active (1 Cor. xii, 6 ; Gal. ii, 3 ; iii, 5 ; Ephes. i, 2 ; Philip, ii, 13). (3) Keu points to the same conclusion — the word of God which also, in ac- cordance with, or because of, its divine origin, worketh in you. So the Claromontane Latin (quod opevatur), and the Syriac (_b01) Theophylact, CEcumenius, and very many expositors. 'Ytvepye'iTai is not to be taken as passive (Estius, Hammond, Schott, Bloomfield), but as a kind of dynamic middle, evolving energy out of itself (Kruger, § 52, 8), and is usually spoken of things (Winer, § 38, 6). The ascensive koi does not belong to the relative (De Wette, Koch), but to the verb (Klotz, Devarius, vol. II, p. 6Qj6). That working is experienced — ev vp.lv iriuTevovariv — " in you who believe." The Latin versions erroneously have the past tense, qui credidistis. The meaning is not temporal, ex quo tempore religionem suscejristis (Koppe), for that would require the past tense ; nor is it causal, quum susceperitis (Pelt) ; nor is it propterea quodfidem habetis, for, as Ellicott remarks, that would necessitate the omission of the article (Donaldson, § 492). Faith was the present char- acteristic of those to whom the apostle wrote, and only in them did this working manifest itself, and not in those who heard merely, or gave but an outer credence to the word in its human medium and aspect. The word shows its power through the believing acceptance of it as an enlightening, elevating, guiding, sanctifying, comforting, and formative principle (2 Tim. iii, 15). (Ver. 11.) 'Ypel? yu-p pipr^rai eyevi'jQqre, udeXcpol, twv €kk\t]- (Tim> tov Qeov tccv ovanov ev t>/ 'lovSaia ev HpicrTM '[>]]TCU. 2vjUL(f)v\eTr]s (contribidis, Vulgate) is defined by Hesychius as 6/ui.oe6i>i}9. Herod ian remarks that the word v ev Trj 'lovSala, the believers in Palestine (Winer, § 22, 3). See especially Gal. i, 22, 23. That the Judaean churches suffered no little persecution from their fanatical unbelieving brethren, is plain from several sections of the Acts. The apostle Paul at an earlier period of his life had himself a prominent hand in it. They who stoned Stephen " laid down their clothes at a young man's feet whose name was Saul." " Saul yet breathing out threatenings and slaughter against the disciples of the Lord." " Saul made havock of the church, and entering into every house, and haling men and women, he committed them to prison." " I have heard by many of this man, how much evil he has done to thy saints at Jerusalem," was the reply of Ananias. He himself says, " Many of the saints did I shut up in prison, and when they were put to death I gave my voice against them." " I punished them oft in every synagogue, and compelled them to blaspheme, being exceedingly mad against them." Saul was but a prominent and resolute associate or leader of the persecuting Jews, not doing the work of ferocity and blood single-handed, but having hosts of coadjutors and sympathizers in the Sanhedrim and among the popular masses. Many must have felt as he felt, though they might not have his daring and enthusiasm, and their malignant hostility did not cease with his conversion. The martyrdom of Stephen led to a more general onslaught, which scattered abroad the disciples. Herod slew James and imprisoned Peter, because he saw it " pleased the Jews." The apostle himself was in danger from the Jewish mob; and fort} r of them banded together, and bound themselves under a curse to kill him, as a representative of Christian zeal and enterprise. Compare Acts viii, ix, xi, xii, &c. These indications of feeling prove the profound enmity which the Jews cherished toward believers in Christ among them. Paul was only an intensified type of them, and their conduct toward him indicates their hatred of all who, though in humbler position and in a nar- rower sphere, held his doctrines and stood by them. In Thes- salonica the unbelieving leaders took to them that excitable and profligate rabble which in such towns lounge about the market place, and with these worthless allies easily creat- Ver. 14.] FIEST EPISTLE TO THE THESSALONIANS. S3 ing , emphatic from its position, and separated from the human name 'Iriv /ecu tu revyj] 7repi^)epovcri. De Wette and Koch join 7rporJTas to eicSuio^avTcov, but without reason. The majority of expositors naturally connect it with the previous a-woKTeivavrwv. De Wette's objection that all the prophets were not killed is met by a similar statement that all the prophets were not persecuted. The phrase is used in a popular sense. The Jewish nation, by an act of its high court in which the people acquiesced, put to death the Son of God, but it was only the culmination of many previous similar acts, as is portrayed in the parable, Matt, xxi, 34, 39. Compare Jer ii, 30; Matt. v. 12; xxiii, 31-37; Luke xiii, 33, 34; Acts vii, 51, 52. Chrysostom brings forward the second state- ment to destroy the excuse of ignorance on the part of the Jews, for they could not but know their own prophets, and yet they put to death those messengers who came to them in God's name. The apostle adds — Kai was eKSicogavTwv — "and drave us out," The e/c is not without force in the verb (Koppe and De Wette), and it does not so much strengthen the meaning (Lunemann) as retain a sublocal signification (Luke xi, 49 ; and in the Sept., Deut. vi, 19 ; 1 Chron. viii, 13; xii, 15; Ps. cxix, 157; Dan. iv, 22, 29, SO COMMENTAEY ON ST. PAUL'S [Chap. II. 30 ; Joel ii, 20 ; — Tliucyd., i, 24). The j/yua?, as found in the con- text, is naturally Paul, Silas, and Timothy — the //^ei? through- out the previous verses. To restrict the reference to Paul (with Calvin) is wrong; and to stretch it so as to include all the apostles (with Liinemann and Ellicott, Pelt and Schott) is true in fact, but not warranted by the immediate narrative before us. Does the apostle mean " drave us out " of Palestine or out of Jewish society ? or is it not simply out of the city in which dwelt those whom he was addressing and who were aware of his expulsion ? (Acts xvii, 5.) icou Bew fx>] apeo-KovTcov — " and please not God," not non placwerant, as the Claromontane — for, though the preceding participles are aorists referring to past acts, this is present marking out a continued condition (Winer, § 45, 1). Nor is the sense placere non quaerentium(Ber\gel and others),or Oott nicht zu Gef alien leben (Hofmanu). See under Gal. i, 10. Liinemann makes it a meiosis for deoo-rvyeis. The subjective /urj is not to be unduly pressed, as it is the usual combination with par- ticiples in the New Testament, and the shade of subjectivity is to be found in the aspect under which facts are presented by the writer and regarded by the reader (Winer, § 55, 5 ; Her- mann ad Viger, No. 207, p. ii, p. 640, Londini, 1824 ; Gayler, p. 274). What they did to the Son of God, to the prophets, and to the apostles representing Jesus, was of such a nature that it brought them into this position — they were not pleas- ing Him, and therefore a terrible penalty was to fall upon them. Still further they are characterized as — /ecu Traariv avBpunrois evavrloov — " and are contrary to all men." It is natural at first sight to find in this clause a description of the sullen and anti-social elements of character ascribed to the Jewish race. Such is the view of Grotius, Turretin, Olshausen, De Wette, Baumgarten-Crusius, Koch, Jowett, &c. They were regarded as haughty and heartless bigots, who looked down with insolence and scorn on all other nations. The Gentiles repaid their hatred with indignant and contemptuous disdain. Hainan in his day when he wished to destroy the Jews impeached them as a "strange people, whose laws are diverse from all people " (Esther iii, 8). Tacitus writes, " Moyses quo sibi in posterv/m gentem Jirmaret, novos ritus contmviosque Ver. 15.] FIRST EPISTLE TO THE THESSALONIANS. 87 ceteris mortalibus indidit, . . . Profana illic omnia quae apud nos sacra; cetera instituta sinistra foeda, pravitate valuere . . . apud ipsos fides obstinata, sed adversus omnes alios hostile odium (Hist., v, 4, 5). Diodorus Siculus records, . . . kul vo/uu/ua 7ravTe\w$ e£>]\\ay/ui.eva . . . Mowcreco? vo/uoOeTi'r (Tuvtos tu /uicraiS panra koi irupavop.a e'0>] toi? lovSaiois (Ex- cerpta Photii, xxxiv, 1). Josephus Cont. Apion, ii, 11. The sneer of Horace is . . Memini bene, sed meliore Tempore dicam ; hodie tricesima sabbata : vin' tu Curtis Judaeis oppedere? Nvlla mild, inquam, Religio est (Lib. i, Sat. ix, 70). Juvenal's account is — Quidam sortiti metuentem sabbata patrem, Nil praeter nubes, et coeli numen adorant *, Nee distare putant humana came suillam (Sat xiv. 96). He complains too, Nunc sacrifontis nemus, et delubra locantur Judaeis, quorum cophinus, foenumque supellex (Sat. iii, 12). Martial deals out scornful vituperation (iv, 4 ; vii, 30, 35, 82 ; Statius, Silvae, i, 14, 72). But the isolation enjoined on the Jew by the Mosaic institutes, his fierce hostility to other na- tions, intensified by disasters, persecution, and gross idolatries, cannot be the reference of the apostle. For, first, much of this spirit of particularism originated in and was cherished by their monotheism and by their observance of their national statutes; and this opposedness to all men, in so far as it did not deepen into morose malignity, the apostle could not condemn. See the tract Aboda Sara in the Talmud (Milrnan, II, p. 460). Secondly, the apostle observed " the customs " and great feasts himself, and, as a consistent though enlightened Jew, he was in this state of separation from polytheism, with its impurities, and from the characteristic elements of heathen society. Thirdly, the clause is to be taken in a more pointed and speci- fic sense, for it is explained by the following assertion or rather identified with it, kuiXvovtwv rj/u-a? tois eOvemv \a\rjcrui. No additional fact is brought out by it, as no ku) connects the two clauses as it does the previous ones; so that the anarthrous SS COMMENTARY ON ST. PAUL'S [Chap. II. K(t)\vovTO)v explains the ivavrlwv. They are contrary to all men in that they are hindering us from speaking to the Gentiles (Donaldson, § 492). This obstruction of the apostle in preach- ing to other races was on the part of the Jews a special mani- festation of contrariness to all men — the result of a selfish and haughty exclusiveness. Such is the view of the Greek fathers. Thus Chrysostom, " if we ought to speak to the world and they forbid us, they are the common enemies of the world." (Ver. 16.) kcoXvovtwv f}[J.a$ to?? eOverrtv XaXijrrai 'iva arcodaxriv — " hindering," or " in that they are hindering us to speak to the Gentiles, that they may be saved." Pelt, De Wette, Schott, and Koch find in the verb what does not belong to it — the idea of endeavour, conatus. They were not simply striving to hinder, but, as the participle expresses it, they were outwardly hindering so far as they were able, though they could not stop it altogether. The pronoun has the same reference as in the previous verses. Tot"? eOvecriv, the same in meaning with " all men " of the previous verse, or non- Jewish men, has the stress, as it was not preaching, but preaching to the heathen— preaching under this special aspect and to this special class, which they prevented. Compare Acts xi, 3; xiii, 45; xvii, 5; xviii, 6; xxii, 22; xxvi, 21. See the Martyrdom of Polycarp, xii, xiii, xiv. The Xa\r}j rj/txeov — in Christ's time and ours, by putting Him to death and chasing out His apostles, the measure of their iniquity was at length filled up. e], the wrath is characterized in its prominence and terribleness, either as merited or predes- tined and foretold (Cbrysostom). The noun does not mean punishment (Lapide, Schott, De Wette, Ewald), but wrath, the opposite of x^P'f- I n Qdveiv the idea of anticipation is not to be thought of, for it has this meaning in later Greek only when followed by an accusative of person, as in iv, 15. 90 COMMENTARY ON ST. PAUL'S [Chap. II. It signifies " to come to," " to reach to," with els ti (Rom. ix, 31 ; Philip, iii, 16), or eirl tivo. (Matt, xii, 28; Luke xi, 20), or axpi tivos (2 Cor. x, 14). The construction with els occurs in Dan. ii, 17, 18; with e-n-l in Dan. iv, 21; Xenophon, Cyr., v, 4, 9. The meaning of the verb therefore is not poena divina Judaeos vel citius quam exspectaverint, vel omnino praeter opinionem eorum super ueniente, for the verb is not praevenit, as the Claroinontane, Beza, Schott, Pelt. See Fritzsche ad Morn, ix, 31. The aorist is idiomatic and cannot stand for the present (Grotius, Pelt), nor yet is it used as a prophetic term (Koppe), nor does it mark of itself the certainty of the event. It has its proper sense, which cannot be wholly transferred into English. The apostle places himself close by the divine purpose which Preappointed that wrath in the indefinite past, and he uses the aorist, identifying that divine purpose with its fulfilment. The wrath reached them at the past period when they had filled up their sins ; the aorist does not say that it is over, for its most awful manifestations were still to come. Ei? reXos does not mean penitus, ganz und gar (Koch, Hofmann), as if it were TeXecos ; nor is it postremo (Wahl), or tandem (Bengel). In this sense it occurs by itself in Herodotus, i, 30 ; yEschylus, Prom., 665. Nor is the meaning, to the end of the Jews, i.e., to their final destruction (De Wette, Ewald, Peile) in contrast to Jer. iv, 27 ; v, 10. In that case avrwv would need to be supplied, and De Wette's quotation of eco? els reXos, from 2 Chron. xxxi, 1, is not to the point. Nor does the phrase qualify ?/ opyi), wrath which shall continue to its end, or to the end of the world. Thus the Greek fathers G^cumenius and Theophylact explain els reXos as a\pi TeXovs, an inadmis- sible explanation. This defining connection would require the repetition of the article before els ri\os. Grotius, Flatt, Olshausen, refer to the full magnitude of the divine chastise- ment — the wrath will work on to its full manifestation. The phrase els reXos is connected with the verb and by its usual construction ; it had reached its end and would exhaust itself in palpable infliction. The coming miseries of the Jewish people are plainly alluded to in this verse : the destruction of their capital and their dispersion ; the slaughter of myriads and the subjection of many others to servitude, blood, bonds; Vek. 17.] FIRST EPISTLE TO THE TIIESSALONIANS. ]p.els of verse 15 under a somewhat different aspect, and the apostle places himself at the same time in contrast with the Jewish persecutors. " We, on the other hand" (Klotz, Devarius, vol. II, p. 353 ; Winer, § 53, 7, b). 'A8e\(f)oi, his usual term of affectionate address. According to De Wette, Koch, Hofmann, })/uei? is in contrast to the u/ueis of verse 14, but this connection is rendered exceedingly doubtful by the structure and course of thought in the verses. Nor is there any ground for the idea of Calvin, followed by Hunnius, Piscator, Vorstius, and Benson, and more recently acquiesced in by Pelt, Hofmann, and Auberlen, that the verse is an apology for the apostle's absence, lest they should think that he had deserted them while so momentous a crisis de- manded his presence. " It is not the part of a father to desert his children in the midst of such distresses." But the apostle was forced to leave Thessalonica, as the city and church well knew, and needed not therefore to offer any explanation of his involuntary absence (Acts xvii, 9, 19). He had said that he thanked God unceasingly for their willing reception of the divine word, and he now expresses his profound interest in them and his yearning once more to visit them. Those feel- ings he would have uttered immediately after the record of his thanksgiving, but his mind was taken off in an allusion to the 92 COMMENTAEY ON ST. PAUL'S [Chap. II. Jews, their great sins for ages, and their accumulated penalty. He keenly felt his enforced separation from them, though he does not need to make any excuse for it. This state of heart is described by a very expressive participle, a7rop(ftavicr6evTe?, desolati (Vulgate). 'Qp(pai>6$ is defined by Hesychius 6 yovecov ej-Tepfifxevos ical t£kvwv. Thus it is properly a child bereaved of its parents, a word often occurring ; reversely, it is also followed by a genitive of parents bereaved of their children — 6p(f>apbs 7ruiS6? (Euripides, Hecuba, 150); optpavol yeueag (Pindar, Olum., ix, 92). It is employed in the sense of "bereaved," in reference to relationship still more remote — 6p(f>ai>os eralpcov (Plato, Leg., v, 130, D) ; and then in a sense more tropical, tw * Ararat KT)]p.aT(t)v 6p/3/o«o? (Pindar, lsthm., 4, 14) ; 6p vp-cov, and the Syriac tGOilo £oAj, Chrysostom explains, " as children after an untimely bereavement are in great regret for their parents, so really do we feel." But this reverses the meaning and application of the words. This orphaning separation had been 7rpo? xuipov copag — " for the season of an hour" only, when that strong desire filled his heart. The temporal participle expresses a time before that of Ver. 17.] FIRST EPISTLE TO THE THESSALONIANS. 03 the verb. When wo had been bereaved and separated only for a briefest period, we were the more abundantly longing to see you again. LTpo? Kaiphv wpas belongs to the participle, and expresses a very brief space of time, more vividly and dis- tinctly thau Trpoj w$ eiKo? >jv rou? 7rpo? iopav airoket- (f>6evras. But regrets and longings are all the keener soon after the separation. On the other hand the view of Lunemann, adopted by Afford, is that the regrets were the more bitter just on account of the very recency of the bereavement, the com- parative referring to 717)09 icaiphv wpa? ; or, as Schott had given it, ea ipsa de causa, quod temporis intervallo haud ita longo ab amicis Thessal. sejunctus fuerat. This statement would imply that the apostle was conscious that mere lapse of time would diminish his love for his converts and his interest in them. But the apostle would surely not base the greater abundance of his zeal either on the more or fewer weeks of the interval. The reference then seems to be to ov icapSia — to the fact that the separation was one only of person, not of heart ; and on account of this unbroken affection, the desire to see them again was the more ardent. Lunemann objects that if the separation had been in heart there would have been no (TirovSd^eiv at all. Granted; but that does not hinder the apostle from saying that his unbroken oneness of heart with them, in spite of his personal absence, made him all the more desirous to revisit them ; had there been less of love, there would have been proportionately less endeavour to be present again with them. So Musculus, Zanchius, De Wette, Baumgarten-Crusius, Koch, Ellicott. But as aTrop^avicrOevTes is also closely con- nected with KapSia, the violent mode of the severance might mingle itself with his thoughts and help to intensify the desire again to see those from whom he had been so rudely torn away. The ea-TrovSacrap.ev implies that he had put forth actual effort to return to them — had taken measures to bring it about. The more abundant endeavour was — to Trpoa-osTTov v/jlwv ISeiv — " to see your face," not simply your- selves (Schott), but yourselves in person "face to face " (iii, 10 ; Col. ii, 1). Compare 2 John 12; 3 John 14. The last clause ev 7roW?] €7ri0v/nla, "with much desire," points Ver. 18.] FIRST EPISTLE TO THE THESSALONIANS. 95 to the sphere in which the action of the verb showed itself. In no listless spirit did he make the endeavour to reach them; the desire to return to them was little less than a passion. The noun is generally used in a bad sense, sometimes with a qualifying epithet or genitive attached to it, and is usually translated lust or concupiscence. It bears a good sense here, as in Luke xxii, 15 ; Philip, i, 23 ; Sept., Ps. cii, 5 ; Prov. x,24. (Ver. 18.) Aioti i)Be\i)ai>os Kau^'ja-euii ; 5; ovxji tcai v/meis ep-irpoa-dev tov livpiov >]p.coi> L/crof ev ry uvtov irapovaricy, — "For what is our hope or joy or crown of rejoicing ? or is it not also you in the presence of our Lord Jesus at his coming ? " Xpi"> "joy" in them as the trophies of his toil and warfare, not only X«/oa, but higher still, o-t^mvos Kavxweco?. The phrase is very 1 A blank page in Dr. Eadie's manuscript here would probably have been tilled with an exposition of the words " Satan hindered us." Ver. 19.] FIRST EPISTLE TO THE THESSALONIANS. 97 expressive ; it is a chaplet of triumph worn by the victor, the genitive not being that of apposition (Koch), but either of material, or, rather, of what Winer calls remote internal rela- tion (§ 30, 2 (3). The Hebrew phrase is rq«Bn rnt?j?, " crown of glory" (Sept., Ezek. xvi, 12; xxiii, 42; also Prov. xvi, 31, referring to the "hoary head"; Philip, iv, 1). Compare 2 Tim. iv, 8; Rev. ii, 10. As the victor boasts of his crown, the apostle might rejoice in the salvation of his converts through God's grace and Iry his preaching. The epithets are natural, and are found in Greek and Latin writers — rw 7roX\tiv eX-rlSa TXiKoreXtjv {Antholog., vol. I, p. 225, Lips. 1794) ; sjies reliqua nostra (Cicero, Ep. Fam,, xiv, 4) ; C. Marium, spem subsidiumque patriae {Pro Sextio, 17, 58); vitae milti pariter dulcedo et gloria (Macrob., Somn. Scip.,1, 1); Scvpionem, spem omnem salutemque nostroim (Livy, Hist., xxviii, 39) ; a-re^avov evK\ela/ as a mere mark of interrogation, Pelt regards 3/ oi>xi as meaning nisi. The kcu. with its ascensive force is " also," not " even," as in our version, reference being to his other converts, who were also at the same time his hope and joy — ku\ v/uieis /meru tcov aXXw, as Chrysostom explains it, and CEcumenius after him. The Vulgate and the Peshito omit kui; the Claromontane has ctiam. efiirpouOev tov Kvpiov ij/awv Iqcrov kv T77 clvtov irapovcria — " in the presence of our Lord Jesus at His coming." ~KpicrTov of the Received Text has little authority, and is rightly rejected. Some propose a close connection with the previous clause, as in the English version, "are not even ye in the presence of our Lord Jesus Christ." Thus Olshausen says that this expresses a G 98 COMMENTARY ON ST. PAUL'S [Chap. II. doubt which is plainly put an end to in the last verse, and his meaning is, or " do not ye also (as I myself and all the rest of the faithful) appear before Christ at His second coming " (Bis- ping)? But such an exegesis mars the full sense of the double question. It is also partial to connect the clause immediately with the first part of the verse, " for what is our hope and joy and crown of boasting in the presence of the Lord Jesus?" For the clause belongs to both questions, and characterizes place and time. "What is our hope, joy, and crown of gloria- tion? or are not ye also in the presence of the Lord Jesus?" and the period is — at His coming. The two clauses are not very different in meaning : irapovcria is presence, or a being present (iEschylus, Persae, 167; Sophocles, Electva, 1232; 2 Cor. x, 10; Philip, i, 26; ii, 12). Appearance often implies advent or arrival as preceding or producing it, so that advent is a frequent meaning (1 Cor. xvi, 17; 2 Cor. vii, 6, 7 ; 2 Mace, xv, 21; Diodor. Sic, i, 29). The term is often, as here, employed to denote the appearance or coming of Christ, which are iden- tical, as in Matt, xxiv ; 1 Cor. xv, 23; 2 Pet. iii, 4; 1 John ii, 28, fcc. Instances in Abdiel's Essays, p. 166. In presence of His glorified humanity, seated on His throne, the work of redemption being finished on earth, the human species no longer, at least in present organization, living on it, but having completed its cycle of existence, specially and formally are believers accepted by Him. His coming — per- sonal, public, and glorious — is the great hope of the church, which it ever cherishes as the epoch when it shall be full in numbers and perfect in felicity. The apostle's hope was that when he and they stood in the Master's presence, they would not be " ashamed at His coming," and he anticipated a "joy and crown of rejoicing" in their final salvation, in their rescue from temptation and suffering and death, and in their spiritual change which had ripened into glory — a change of which he by God's blessing had been the human instrument (2 Cor. i, 14 ; Philip, ii, 16). (Ver 20.) 'Y/ytei? yap ecrre t) So£a i'i/how k. There is stress from its position on jtxouoi, not simply, alone in Athens, in urbe videlicet a Deo alienissimd,but perhaps also the feeling of solitude was deepened from his intense craving for human sympathy and fellowship. The statement is supposed to clash with Acts xvii, 14, 15. Jowett accuses the writer of the Acts of ignorance that only Silas was left behind, and Schrader supposes two visits to Athens. One theory is, that the apostle sent Timothy away prior to his own arrival in Athens— that is, as Alford expresses it, " the apostle seems to have determined during the hasty consultation previous to his departure from Beroea to be left alone at Athens, which was the destination fixed for him by his brethren, and to send Timothy back to Thessalonica to ascer- tain the state of their faith" (Prolegom.). Such is also the view of Wieseler (Chronol. des Apod. Zeitalt., p. 249), and of Koppe, Hug, and Hemsen. But the natural view is that Timothy was despatched to Thessalonica from Athens. (1) For this verse plainly implies that Paul in Athens had Timothy with him, and, sending him off from Athens to Thessalonica, became himself "alone," Silas being probably absent somewhere else. The order of thought and the verbs KaTaXeKpOrji'at, e7re/x\/ra/xei/, lead without doubt to such a conclusion ; the two verbs indi- cate a mission personally enjoined by the apostle himself, and that Timothy was with him in Athens. (2) When Paul left Beroea he went away alone, but left commandment for Silas and Timothy to rejoin him, and he waited for them at Athens. Is there, then, any improbability in the supposition that Timothy obeyed the order with all speed, and that on his arrival at Athens the apostle deprived himself of his company and sent him off at once to Thessalonica ? (3) The apostle, before the return of Timothy and Silas from Macedonia, had gone to Corinth, where his colleagues at length joined him, so that he writes in the beginning of the letter from the same cit}% " Paul and Siivanus and Timotheus." (4) The apostle could not say that it was his pleasure to be left alone at Athens, if he had been always alone during his sojourn in that city and no other had been in his company. The phrase, therefore, implies the arrival and presence of 102 COMMENTARY ON ST. PAUL'S [Chap. 111. Timothy prior to his departure to Thessalonica. There is really nothing in the narrative of the Acts, which omits this mission of Timothy altogether, to contradict this view, which is held by Schott, Koch, De Wette, Luuemann, and Ellicott. (Ver. 2.) Kcu eire p\frap.ev Ti/uoOeov tov aSeXcpov i]pwv kui crwepyov rod Qeov — " and sent Timothy our brother and fellow- worker with God." There is a confusing variety of readings, showing that the copyists stumbled at some word or phrase. Though crwepyov rod Qeov, which has been conjectured by Luuemann and Alford as furnishing the occasion, is a Pauline phrase (1 Cor. iii, 9), yet perhaps the application of the phrase to one not an apostle might originate some difficulty. So B omits tov Qeov, and D 3 E K L supplant it by fowv, " our fellow- labourer," with the Syriac and Chrysostom ; tov Qeov is placed after tov Siukovov, which supersedes crwepyov iu An and 67~ ; the Vulgate has et ministrum Dei, and so the Coptic ; F has diuKovov koi crwepyov tov Qeov ; the Received Text having Siukovov tov Qeov kui crwepyov f/pwv, which is vindicated by Bouman and Reiche. Amidst all this variety it is hard to come to a decided conclusion. The text as we have given it is found in DU7, in the Claro- montane, Sangerm., and Ambrosiaster, fratrem nostrum et adjutorem Dei. It may be said that Siukovov is an emendation for crwepyov more humbly fitting to tov Qeov, and if this be admitted, then the reading of Lachmann, Teschendorf, and many modern editors may be safely preferred. The phrase crwepyov tov Qeov does not mean, one who wrought as a fellow with the apostle, while both belonged to God, as Flatt, Hey- denreich, and Olshausen contend on 1 Cor. iii, 9; but is a fellow- worker with God, as aw distinctly belongs to the following genitive, He being the chief and primal worker himself. Bern- hardy, p. 171. Compare Rom. xvi, 3, 9, 21 ; Philip, ii, 25 ; iv, 3, in all of which cases crw is connected with the associated genitive (2 Cor. i, 24 ; Demosth., G8, 27 ; 884, 2). It has been supposed by some that the apostle so eulogized Timothy to make the Thessalonians aware of the sacrifice which he made in sending such a colleague to them, and in deciding to remain in Athens alone (Theophylact, Musculus). Such a purpose is not in the context, nor can it be safely ascribed to the large- Ver. 2.] FIRST EPISTLE TO THE THESSALONIxVNS. 103 hearted apostle. As little ean Chrysostom's idea be adopted, that the object of the apostle in so eulogizing his representative was to show them the honour which in this way he put upon them, lest they should be tempted to depreciate him (Hofmann). It is probable that the apostle wrote simply in the fulness of his heart, Timothy being specially dear to him, and specially useful in promoting the great work. Compare Philip, ii, 19- '2o. See under Col. i, 1 ; v, 7. Timothy was a brother beloved in many ways — the child of a pious ancestry on the female side ; a convert of the apostle ; an active, sympathizing, and indefatigable colleague — " working the work of the Lord, as I also do " ; a fellow-worker with God himself, for the sphere was — ev tw evayyeXlta rod Xpia-Tov — "in the gospel of Christ" — God's great sphere of operation among men. Timothy preached it, and God rendered it efficacious (Rom. i, 9; 2 Cor. x, 14; Philip, iv, 3). And Timothy was sent for this purpose — ei$ to (TTtjptgai v/uu? Kut irapaKuXecrui uwep t>}s 7n, irpoeXeyopev vp.lv on plWopev OXlfieo-Oai — " For verily when we were with you, we told (or, were telling) you before that we were to be afflicted." Yup assigns the reason for the avro) yap oiSare — /cut laying moment upon it : for ye know because we told you before when we were with you. Winer, § 53, 8. In the phrase 7T/309 upas, the original notion of direction disappears after verbs implying rest, and the sense is not different from irapa with the dative or the Latin apud. Fritzsche on Mark i, 18. The phrase peXXopeu OXtfiearQai is no mere dilution of the simple future, but repeats the idea on the divine side of «s tqvto Ke'peOa — that these sufferings are a portion of God's allotment which we cannot escape, as they are the characteristic and inevitable lot of believers. MeXXopev expresses the cer- tainty, and implies the soonness of the sufferings. Ka6u>s icat eyeVcro k]K€ti areyoov, "no longer forbearing," is explained under the first verse. €7re/uL\fsa evcu, the infinitive of purpose, specifies the design of eVe^n/rct, and the meaning plainly is not, that Timothy the sent one, but that Paul the sender, might know — the subject being the same in both verbs. The theme of information was t>jv ttIutiv v/jlwv, "your faith," what its aspects and stability were, and if it had passed through the ordeal in safety. The apostle's anxiety was — ya)/7rw9 eTretpaaei' v/ulus o weipa^v kul «? nevov yevjjrai o /cotto? r[[jL$>v — " lest perchance the tempter have tempted you, and our labour might prove or turn out to be in vain." lsh)iru)$ depends naturally on yvwvui, and not on ewefx^a, and introduces an indirect question, as Lunemann states. Not a few connect it with the idea of fearing ((pofiov/uLevos), fearing lest the tempter, *.V:c. Beza, Pelt, Turretin. The aorist indicative eirelpuuev specifies the tempting as having actually taken place, while the subjunctive yevrfrai represents the results of the temptation as conditional or doubtful, it being a possible thing that the apostle's labours should, as the result of the temptation, turn out to be fruitless. As the apprehension might be verified, or might prove groundless, the apostle's anxiety was to ascertain the actual state of things, or whether the temptation which was intended to shake them had done so. Winer, § .56, 2; Gayler, p. 323. Winer justly objects to the harsh view of Fritzsche in taking /x>/7rco? in the first clause as an forte — an forte Satanas vos tentasset — and in the second clause as ne forte — ne forte labores mei irriti essent — making it in the first clause an interrogative particle, and in the second an expression of fear 108 COMMENTARY ON ST. PAUL'S [Chap. III. or apprehension. See also Ellicott ; Matthiae, § 519, 7. The verb eire'ipaa-ev, as the following clause shows, does not mean " may have succeeded in tempting you," the cause for the effect (Macknight),or, mitErfolg versucht (Baumgarten-Crasius). The tempter's purpose was obvious, and the apostle was only in doubt as to the result. The agent of the temptation is named in harmony with his work, as expressed by the verb eirelpacrev 6 ireipdfav (Matt, iv, 3 ; 1 Cor. vii, 5). All notion of time is excluded from the present participle used as a sub- stantive. Winer, § 45, 7 ; Bernhardy, p. 31G. For eh icevbv yev)]rui, see the similar phrase under Gal. ii, 2. (Ver. G.)"ApT* Se eXvovros TipoOeov 7rpo? tjp.a$a(f> vp.£>v — "But Timothy having just now come' unto us from you." The adverb of time is most naturally connected with the participle eXOovros, which in itself implies time, and not with a verb so remote as 'Tra.peKkriBrip.ev of the following verse, which has its ground prefixed to it in Sia rouro. Liinemann's arguments for the last connection are of little weight. Not only did the return of Timothy bring comfort and that comfort prompt the writing of the epistle, but he wishes specially to connect the two things. Timothy had been sent away — his good tidings on his return cleared up perplexities, and that at once. The apostle reverts to his position in the mission of Timothy, and virtually affirms by the cipri eXOovros that no sooner had he come back than all doubts were cleared up, and at once his relieved and rejoicing heart gave utterance to its emotions in the epistle. The adverb apri, though originally different from vvv, often in the later Greek represents present time. See under Gal. i, 9. hull evdyyeXi]V ttmttiv kui tijv aya.irtiv vpwv — "and having brought good news to us of your faith and love." The participle is used in its original meaning — ayadbv fjydro (Chrysostoin), and has its common construction, dative of person and accusative of thing (Luke i, 19; Lobeck ad Phrynich., 26GrS). The subjects of the good news, tt'ktti^ and ]v irpaKTiKijv dpeT>]v. Their condition delighted him, as it proved the continued existence of unshaken faith and active love among them, and he was no less rejoiced with a third element of their character, their unfacled remem- brance of himself — rpla reOeiKcv dgcepao-ra (Theodoret). For he adds — Kai oti e\€Te pveiav yjpoov dya9>]v iravrore — " and that ye have good remembrance of us always." For pvela see under i, 2 ; its meaning differs according as the verb by which it is fol- lowed is TTOieia-Oa, or e'xeiv. Udvrore belongs more naturally to the clause before it than to the participle after it (Koch and Hofmann). i, 2 ; 1 Cor. i, 4; xv, 58 ; Gal. iv, 18 ; Ephes. v, 20 ; 2 Thess. i, 3. Not only was the remembrance good, but it was continuous, the result being that they were — eirnroQovvres, t/pd? toeiv KaQ aire p kui qfieig vpds — "longing to see us as we also (ISeiu €7rnro6ovpev) to see you." The simple verb ■n-oOeo) does not occur in the New Testament, and e7n in the com- pound is not intensive, greatly desiring, but retains its primary directive meaning. '"ETrnroOeiv n, as Fritzsche says, idem valet quod iroOov e'xeiv eiri ti (ad Rom., i, 11 ; Sept., Ps. xli, 1). For icat see Klotz, Devar ins, vol. II, G33 ; Winer, § 53, 5. They longed to see the apostle just as the apostle longed to see them. The longing was therefore mutual, for there was earnest attach- ment on both sides. (Ver. 7.) Aid tovto TrapeKXyOtjpev, dde\ vp.IV €7Tl 7T(l]? VflCOV 7nVreft>? — comforted " over you in all our necessity and afflic- tion through your faith." The first e-rr] has virtually its literal 110 COMMENTARY ON ST. PAULS [Chap. III. sense of "on" — you being the foundation on which the com- fort rested (Winer, § 48, c). Alford, after Luuemann and Pelt, renders the preposition " with reference to } 7 ou," but this is somewhat inexact. It is far wrong on the part of Koppe and Pelt to regard hf vfA.iv as superfluous (jyraprw vcdundat), because of the following Sid t>i? v/uloov iri//cere. If the subjunc- tive form be adopted, the meaning is that he did not know after all whether they would stand fast; and he states the matter hypothetical^ — assumes the possibility; whereas, if the indicative a-r/jKere be adopted, the apostle assumes as a fact that the}^ would stand fast. Donaldson, § 502 ; Klotz, Devarius, ii, 455. See under Gal. i, 8, 9; Winer, § 41. The verb (m'lKeiv is used in Mark xi, 25 in the literal sense of to stand ; and tropically in Rom. xiv, 4; Gal. v, 1 ; Philip, iv, 1 ; and it derives its specialty of sense from the context, " stand fast." 'Ey Kvp/o) describes the element of their stability, in union with the Lord and in fellowship with Him. The apostle had been in hard and heavy circumstances, which weighed him down to death. Opposition, unbelief, peril, disappointment, physical labour, and debility so preyed upon him that he felt as one enveloped in the shadow of death ; but Timothy's news from Thessalonica so revived him, so lifted him out of the gloom, that he lived again ; his soul was so joyful over the stability of his converts, that he triumphed at once over surrounding- dangers and persecutions. And that conditional sentence was a warning to them for the future ; the continuance of that life depended on their continuous stability. (Ver. 9.) Ttva yap ev^apiarTiav Svva/ueBa tw Qe

v €7rl — "for what thanksgiving can we render God for yon in return for." Some MSS.— D 1 F N 1 — insert Kyp/w. Tap, not a mere particle of transition (Pelt), confirms what has been said, and brings out one special manifestation of the power and fulness of the &>]. Tlva, interrogative, implies what sufficient thanks; or, as Theophylact quaintly paraphrases, Sto Kai avTco o — " for all the joy which we joy on your account in the presence of our God." 'Ex/, " over," " on," gives the "ethical basis." Winer, § 48, c. See under verse 7. That basis is irua-a }) x«P«> " a ^ the joy," the joy regarded in its whole extent — iraa-ij being extensive, not intensive save by inference (Pelt, Schott), in ihrcr Summe and Totalitat. Winer, § IS, 4. The attraction y for rjv x'^P ^ 1 '* found also in Matt, ii, 10, gives the sentence a kind of periodic compactness. Winer, § 24, 1. The use of the correlative noun extends the meaning of the verb. Winer, § 32, 2; Bernhardt, p. 10G ; TT 114 COMMENTARY ON ST. PAULS [Chap. III. Lobeck, Pavalipom,, p. 501. Many examples are found in the Septuagint, New Testament, and classics. Jelf, §§ 548-9. The apostle has written -wept vfxwv, " concerning you " ; and to be more specific he adds Si vp.av Trpoaevx^v ))pu>v, as if he meant that the emotion of joy ever brought him into the divine presence (Webster and Wilkinson); nor are they to be joined with what succeeds (Ewald, Hofmann, and the Peshito); nor is the connection with X^pa (Koppo, Pelt), but with ^a/po^tei^, we joy in the presence of God ; our gladness is pure and unselfish ; it bears God's inspection, and has His approval. The reference is not to God as the author of that joy, avro$ ical ravr^ rjfuv t>]$ x a P'^ clitios (CEcumenius). (Ver. ^-0.) pvkto? kcli ij/uepag vTrepeKire purer ov Seop-evot «? to ioeiv vfxwv to Trpocromrov — " night and day praying very abund- antly, in order to see your face." The participle Se6p.evoi is not absolute " we pray " (a-Lapide, Baumgarten-Crusius), but is closely connected with the preceding verb — what thanks can we return for the joy which you give us in our separation, praying as we do night and day to see your face ? The inten- sity of the prayer to revisit them and perfect their faith was in proportion to the thanksgiving for the gladness which in the interval Timothy's report had produced. Schott, De Wette, Koch, and Riggenbach take oeop.evoi in apposition with x'dp ' p.ev, which is only a subordinate thought in the verse. Luther and Von Gerlach regard the verse as an answer to the question in verse 9 ; but the connection is artificial, and might require a finite verb instead of the participle. The double compound v7repeK7repi(r(rov, "more than abundantly," expresses the fulness of the apostle's emotion. Compare 1 Thess. v, 13; Ephes. iii, 20 ; Sept., Dan. iii, 23. See under Ephes. iii, 20. It belongs to osopei'oi, and not by a trajection to iSeiv (Clericus). Night and Vkr. 10. j FIRST EPISTLE TO THE THESSALONIANS. H5 day is an idiom not to be so measured as if night were specially referred to for its solitude and silence as the most fitting season for prayer (Fromond); but " night and day praying more than abundantly " is the utterance of profoundest love and longing. The purpose or object of the prayer is then given — els to tSeiv v/jluiv to irpocrw-KOv — " in order to see your face," ut videamus (Vulgate), the prayer being heard, that end would be obtained See under ii, 12, 10, 17. Not only to see them but in seeing them — kcli KarapTicrai tu ixTTepi'ifiaTa Ttj? 7ricrTeo)$ vp.u>v — " and to supply the lackings of your faith ; " et complearnus ea quae de- sunt (Vulgate), et suppleamus quae desunt (Claromontane) ; tu eWetTroi'Tu 7r\}]pcocrai (Theodoret). The verb Karapri^w signifies to refit or readjust literally (Matt, iv, 21 ; Mark i, 10 — Wetstein in loc. ; and Polybius, i, 1, 24) ; then, ethically, to restore (Gal. vi, 1 ; Herodotus, v, 10G) ; then to fill up, to sup- ply, or to finish thoroughly ; the meaning of the simple ciprio? being distinctly preserved, and Kara being intensive in force (Eisner in 1 Cor. i, 10). Philip, ii, 30 ; Col. i, 24. Their faith was not perfect, it was lacking in some elements. It needed to grow in compass, to embrace yet more elements of doctrine, and have a firmer and more harmonious hold of truths already taught, such as the Second Advent. Their faith was also lacking in power; it had not led them to a universal obedience, or given them strength to surmount all heathen propensities and impurities, as is implied in the following chapter. Nor had its influence descended to every-day life in its secular aspects, enforcing honest industry and ennobling it. The visit which he so longed to make would have been im- proved for this purpose — to give them careful and earnest teaching and guidance on all points in which their faith needed invio-oration or enlargement. Confirmation was a work which the apostle loved, it was so necessary and so beneficial. Thus he longed to visit the church in Rome, that he might impart to its members " some spiritual gift," to the end that they might be established (Rom. i, 10, 11). In a similar spirit he writes to the church of Corinth, " I was minded to come to you before that ye might have a second benefit" (2 Cor. i, 15). Calvin's practical reflection is, ll(i COMMENTARY ON ST. PAUL'S [Chap. III. — Hinc etiam patet qiiam necessavia nobis sit doctrinal assiduitas: neqwc enim in hoc tantu/m ordinati sunt doctores, nt una die vel mense homines adduccmt ad fidem Christi, sed ui l fid em incltoatam perficiant. (Ver. 11.) Atrro? Se o Geo? kcu irar^p fj/ULOov kcu 6 Kv/oto? ypm' 'hj/0-oi?? also), and in the Claromontane Latin, the insertion being probably a conformation to the more common and familiar formula. By Se he passes to another aspect of the same subject, and avTO?, emphatic in position, is not in contrast with the persons characterized as Seo/uevot (De Wette, Koch, Bisping), but it means God himself — He and none other — for He alone can fulfil such a prayer. The apostle had proposed to visit them once and again, and Satan had hindered him ; but if God Himself would be pleased to direct the way to them, no hind ranee would be permitted. 'H/awi/ may belong to Geo? kcu irarhp (Hofmann, Riggenbach), or simply to -irari'ip. That ij/uidov is connected with irariip is probable, Geo? being absolute and irarhp relative, the relation being indicated by the pronoun, and 7to:t>//3 is often followed by a genitive (Rom. i, 7 ; 1 Cor. i, 3 ; 2 Cor. i, 2, airo Qeov irarpos >)p.u>v). God our Father — believers have a community of Fatherhood in Him, as they are His children, bearing His image, enjoying His guardianship, and being prepared for His house of many mansions. The words kcu Kt'/oto? r)p.wv 'hjcrovg are in direct apposition with 6 Geo? kci) irarhp, and form with it the nominative to narevdvvat. For the meaning and use of the names see under Ephes. i, 2. The verb KUTevOvvai is the aorist optative, not the infinitive, as such usage, though found in epic and other poets, and also in prose authors, is not found in the New Testament. Winer, § 43, 5 ; Jelf, § 671. It means literally to make straight so that one may pass, then to guide or direct — irpos vp.as — the preposition indicating the direction. It is plain that o Geo? Kat ttht^p and o Ki'yoto? ijpwv L/croi"? are Ver. 12] FIRST EPISTLE TO THE THESSALONIANS. I] J parallel in thought, both being related to the emphatic uvtos, and both being nominative to the singular verb KaTevdvvai. To the mind of the apostle, therefore, God the Father and the Lord Jesus were so one that the same prayer is presented to both without distinction — there being, as the singular implies, equality of power and oneness of operation, or what Lunemann calls unity of will. But equality of power and unity of will imply a higher unity — even unity of essence ; for only to one possessed of divinity can the worship of prayer be presented. It is superficial in Koch to say that the apostle here " regards Christ as the Wisdom and Power of God," for the language is directly personal in nature — the Lord Jesus is addressed as God, and the thing prayed for is to be done by Him and God as one divine and indivisible work — Karevduvai. See under Ephes. i, 2. The Lord Jesus, though man, as the name Jesus indicates, is also Lord — at the right hand of the Father — and Governor of the universe ; but this government is proof of His possession of supreme divinity, as it necessitates the possession of omnipotence and omniscience, attributes with which no creature can possibly be endowed. Who but God can roll on the mighty and mysterious wheels of a universal providence without halting or confusion ? — who but He can know all hearts in their complex variety of motive and purpose, so as to be their Judge \ Athanasius presses the argument derived from the singular form of the verb. After quoting the verse, he says, ttjv kvor^ra rov -arpos kui tov viov evXa£ev. uv yap eiwe KarevOvvoiev a>? 7r«pa Svo Swop-ivr}^, irapa tovtov tcai tovtov, SnrXrjs \apiTO, or ttoXXP/i/ dyux>/y e'xopeu (Pelt, Schottj, affecti sumus (Calvin), or simply ea-fxev (Grotius). Theoph}dact explains, "ye have us as the measure and example of love," p.erpov tea) irapaSeiyp.a. The prayer is directed to the Lord — 6 Kvpio?. The name may refer either to the Father or the Son (Alford). That it refers to the latter in this place is extremely probable. For (1) it is the common usage of the New Testa- ment in Paul's Epistles. (2) The reader will naturally take the Kupios of this verse to be the Kvpios of the previous verse (3) The Kvpio?oi' this verse is also naturally the same with the \\vplov of the following verse. (4) In the paragraph the Father is twice called 6 Oeo? ical Trar.'ip >)p.m'. The very distinctness of this appellation would lead one to suppose that Kvpios by itself docs not refer to the Father, but to Jesus, who is twice mentioned by the same epithet in connection with Him. Basil, in his Treatise de Spiritu Sando, cap. xxi, affirms that Kupios means in this place the Holy Spirit, referring in proof to '2 Cor. iii, 17, with which it has no analogy (Opera, vol. II, p. 01, Migne). The last purpose of this prayer is next given — (Ver. 13.) eig to (TTijpi^aL vp.oov ra? tcapSius ap-tpurTOv^ ev ayuoarui'u ep.7rpov — "in order to con- firm your hearts unblamable in holiness before God and our Father." E/9), but the condition (Lobeck ad Phrynich, p. 350), or the sphere in which blamelessness was to evince its power as the result of the divine confirmation. It is a holy disposition or state in which the soul is freed from all disturbing and opposing elements of evil, possessing a purity which is the image of God's, and every element of which will stand His inspection and meet His approval, for it is c/uTrpocrOev tov Oeov kui 7rarpo9 iip-wv, " before God and our Father." See under i, 3 ; iii, 9. The phrase brings out the genuineness of the holiness and the final acceptance of him who possesses it, and in whom this prayer is fulfilled. On the relation of rj/mcov to the two preceding nouns, see under Gal. i, 4. The phrase is not to be connected solely with the word ayiaxrvvu (Koppe, Pelt), nor solely with afxep-Trrov? (De Wette, Koch), but with the entire verse. ev Tfl Trapovma tov iivpiov tj/u-wv hjcrov p.era ttuvtcjov tcov ayuov uvtov — " at the coming of our Lord Jesus with all His saints." Xpia-rou, occurring after 'Itjaov in the Received Text, has in its favour F L, the Vulgate, Syriac, Coptic, and Gothic versions. But A B 1) K M, and 20 mss. omit it, as also the Claromontane and some of the fathers ; and it is therefore rightly rejected by Lachmann and Tischendorf. For the first part of the clause see under ii, 19. The main question is, who are included under the oi dyioi, with whom or in whose company the Lord comes ? (1) Some restrict them to the saints or earlier believers, sanctified and perfected (iv, 14 ; 1 Cor. vi, 4). So Flatt, Olshausen, Hofmann. The word is often employed in this narrower sense. See under Ephes. i, 1. (2) Others understand by the term the holy angels. Ver. 13.] FIRST EPISTLE TO THE THESSALONIANS. 121 That these are to accompany Christ is evident from many pas- sages (Matt. xvi, 27 ; xxv, 31 ; Mark viii, 38 ; Luke ix, 26 ; 2 Thess. i, 7). So Musculus, Benson, De Wette, Olshauseu, Mac- knight, Bisping, and Liinemann. But ol uyioi never by itself alone in the New Testament signifies angels ; and the word here cannot denote them exclusively, for it is continually or uniformly applied to human believers. (3) Some take the noun as signifying both hoty men and holy angels, " with all His holy ones." In favour of this supposition there are several arguments : (a) For, as a fact, saints will be there (iv, 14), and angels too, as is fully told in the passage already quoted. (6) If the apostle had wished to exclude the angels to whom he makes special reference in the second epistle, he would have employed some umnistakeable epithet. But he uses a term that may comprehend both, according to the usage of the Hebrew and Septuagint (Dent, xxxiii, 2, 3 ; Ps. lxxxix, 7) ; o'HR, and ol ayioi, without any addition, denote angels in Dan. iv, 10; vii, 13 ; Zech, xiv, 5. Compare Heb. xii, 22, 23. (c) The addition Travraov gives some weight to this opinion. (4) Angels as well as saints are called His ; for the avrov refers to Him and not to Qeov (Liinemann) : Matt, xiii, 41 ; xvi, 27 ; xxv, 31; 2 Thess. i, 7. So Bengel, Baumgarten-Crusius, Riggenbach, Alford, and Ellicott. True, indeed, some raise an objection from -ku.vtu>v. Musculus objects that Jesus does not come with all His saints ; or, in the words of Conybeare, " our Lord will not come with all His people, since some of His people will be on earth." But ttuitcou embraces the angels too; and iv, 14, tells us that both the dead who are raised and the living who are changed will together meet the Lord in the air. Angels, the unfallen ones so near God and so like Him, and saints redeemed and perfected, and made equal to the angels, \uay- yekoi, are with Him when He comes — those who owe to Him existence and glory, and those who owe to Him restoration and blessedness. Flatt proposed to join the clause d/uL€jU7TTov? . . . with jueTa iravTwv ..." that he may stablish you blameless in holiness, along with all His saints at the coming of the Lord Jesus" ; as Peile paraphrases, that "you may take part in"; or as Conybeare translates, " and so may He keep your hearts stead- fast and unblameable in holiness and present you before our 1-22 COMMENTARY ON ST. PAUL'S [Chap. IV. God and Father with all His people at His appearing." So also Musculus and Flatt, Aretius, Estius. Hofmann adopted this connection in his Sckriftbeweis, II, 2, 1st ed. ; but in the second edition and in his //. Schr, JS r . T. he has abandoned it. The connection is unnatural, and of course restricts ol dyioi to the saints. The word 'A/aj/j/, found at the end of the chapter in some codices and versions, is apparently an addition from some church lectionary, the lesson for the day ending at the place ; or it may be a liturgical response. CHAPTER IV. The apostle commences now the practical part of the Epistle. He introduces exhortations to personal and sexnal purity and to industry, in order that the believers should present a salutary and an impressive contrast to the heathen round about them. (Ver. 1.) Aonrov ovv, dSe\(j)oi, epioTwp.ev vpug kgu Trapa- KnXov/jLev ev Kvpiw 'hjcrov — "Finally, therefore, brethren, we be- seech you and exhort in the Lord Jesus." The to before \onrbv in the Received Text has no uncial authority save B 2 ; on the other hand, the ovv is omitted by B 1 , a few manuscripts, the Syriac and Coptic versions, with Chrysostom and Theo- phylact, but it is certainly to be retained. Koiirov, de caetero, Vulgate, denotes that what follows is not only additional to what has been said (furthermore, Ellicott), but is at the same time the concluding portion of the epistle (2 Cor. xiii, 1 1 ; Philip, iv, 8; Ephes. vi, 10; 2 Thess. iii, 1). It does not signify ilberhaupt (Baumgarten-Crusius). Chrysostom lays undue stress upon it when he paraphrases it, ae\ pev ku\ eh to SirjveK.es ; and Theodoret errs too in writing to Xonrbv uvti tov diroxpuovToos vpiv t>jv )]perepav TrapuKKijcnv. See under Philip, iii, 1. The alternative explanation of CKcumenius gives the sense, though not the exact meaning — to el$ Ttapalvecriv eXOelv. The ovv introduces a conclusion based on the statement of the previous verse. As the apostle had prayed for them that they might be so confirmed as to be found spiritually perfect at Vjsr. l.J FIRST EPISTLE TO THE THESSALONIAN.S. 123 Christ's coming, on this account he sought and exhorted them to live in harmony with the divine will, or so as to please God. They should strive that their life might be in unison with his prayer. It restricts the sense unnecessarily to refer' ovv simply to the second coming (Calixtus) ; and it takes away from the point to give it a vaguer and remoter allusion to the report carried by Timothy to the apostle (Musculus). The first of the two verbs, epooTuv, is used by classical writers only in the sense of asking a question. Here, however, as also in v, 12 ; 2 Thess. ii, 1 ; Philip, iv, 3, it means to entreat. The Hebrew %& f though often rendered in the Septuagint by alrelv, as when followed by nan or na applied to a person (1 Sam. viii, 10; Ps. ii, 8), is sometimes also rendered by epwrdw. In the New Testament the verb has both a classical and a Hellen- istic sense. Compare Matt, xvi, 13, " He asked them, saying," (iipurra) ; John i, 19, Iva epcoTijcrtocriv, on the .one hand; and on the other, in addition to the texts already quoted, Matt, xv, 23; Luke xiv, 18, 19; John xii, 21. With the second sense it is followed by Trepi or vir'ep, and sometimes by the con- junctions Iva and oVco?. This verb, according to Lunemann, is the entreaty of a friend; while the second, TrapaKoXovpev, is more official in its nature — the charge enjoined by an apostle. The exhortation is ev Kvpiw 'lycrou, in the Lord Jesus ; not by Him (Siu, per), as a formula of adjuration (Beza, Estius, Grotius, Pelt, Schott), but in Him, in fellowship with Him — He being not the source only, but also the element of our exhor- tation ; in Him it is formed, in Him it is tendered — in Him lies its vitality and power. What the charge was is now told — 'Iva kuOws —upeXafieTe Trap s'jpcov to 7t&>? oVi v/xas 7repnra- reh' kuI apicriceiv Qew — " that as ye received from us how ye ought to walk and please God." "Iva is omitted in the Received Text, and is not found in AD 3 K L a, and in some of the Greek fathers ; but it is found in B D 1 F, in both Latin versions, and in the Syriac Peshito. The repetition of Iva in the next clause has probably originated the omission. See Reiche on the verse. If the Iva be genuine, it blends the purpose of the charge with its contents. See under Ephes. i, 17: and for the verb, see under ii. 13; Gal. i, 12; the refer- 124 COMMENTARY ON ST. PAUL'S [Chap. IV. ence being to the personal teaching of the apostle during his brief sojourn among them. The verb refers simply to oral instruction, and not, as the Greek fathers, to example also. What they received is specified under one aspect by to tos, the how; and thus the entire clause has given to it a substan- tival character. Winer, § 18, 3. Rom. iv, 13 ; viii, 20 ; Gal. v, 14 ; Philip, iv, 10. For 7repnruTeh>, see under Ephes. ii, 2. Kal has a common consecutive force — how ye ought to walk, and by this walking as its medium to please God. The pleas- ing is the result of the walking. To walk so as to please God is to act according to His will, to live the life of His Son on the earth ; and, though one may come far short of the divine ideal, yet the perfect and paramount desire so to live will enjoy the divine acceptance. The charge is not that they should begin so to walk, for he adds — Kadws Kai 7repi7rur€ire — "as ye also are walking." The clause, though omitted in the Received Text and also in D 3 K L, the Syriac version, and the Greek fathers, is found in A B D 1 F M, the Vulgate, and some other versions, and has therefore high authority, besides being a naturally interjected thought in unison with the following 7re piarcreu^re. They had been already so walking, and in such walking they are exhorted to abound — iva 7repiarcr€U)]Te paWov — " in order that ye would abound still more." Ka0 vp.lv of this verse. Compare Gal. iv, 13; 1 Cor. xv, 1. The plural irapayyehlai is not " preaching of the gospel," but means precepts (Acts v, 28 ; xvi, 24 ; 1 Tim. i, o, 18; Polybius, vi, 27). These ethical commands were based on the gospel, and are in harmony with its spirit, true obedience being- prompted by those motives which it alone supplies. The stress is on Tivas, to which the specific tovto in the next clause corresponds. The preposition Sta in the last clause is not to be confounded with ev (Pelt), but means through the Lord Jesus, as the living medium through whom the apostle was enabled to deliver them, the precepts being in origin not his own, but Christ's. Bernhardy, p. 236 ; Winer, § 47, 1. Before Sid Grotius needlessly inserts the participle -irapaXapfia- vopeva? ; find Sid has not so loose a signification as Schott gives it, auxilio sea benefido Ghristi, as if it referred to the revela- tions connected with the apostleship, Si cnroKaXvifseoo? Xpicrrov. Nor is the immediate purpose of the words that which Olshausen gives, to maintain his investment as an apostle with full powers to issue moral commandments ; for its object is rather to turn attention to the momentous character and obligation of the precepts so enjoined. (Ver. 3.) Tovto yap ccttiv deXqpa tov 0eoi~, 6 ay lacr/Ao? v/Jxav — " For this is God's will — your sanctification."' Tdp intro- duces an illustrative reason ; and tovto, emphatic in position, is not the predicate (De Wette), but the subject, and refers back to rlvas, it being specially included among them ; for this, about to be uttered, is the will of God — to wit, your sanctification. The omission of the article before OiXtj/ua has been accounted for in various ways ; either because what follows as a special injunction does not exhaust the whole will of God (Liinemann), or because after verbs substantive and nuncupative it is frequently omitted (Ellicott). Nam pronomen ubi pro subiecto habendum est, substantivum aut&m praed/icati locum obtinet, articulus omittitur (Stallbaum, Plato, Apolog., p. 57). What comes Sta. tov Kvplov is in true 126 COMMENTARY ON ST. PAUL'S [Chap. IV. and ultimate source and authority the will of God. ' Aytao-yuo?, in apposition to rovro, preserves, according to its derivation, its active force (see under iii, 13) ; and v/ulwv is the genitive of object — the sanctification of you. Estius, Koppe, Usteri, Olshausen, and Hofmann take it wrongly, with a passive meaning, as equivalent to ayiaxrvvi], which, however, does not mean (roo^pocrvvi], as (Ecumenius and Theophylact give it. But " the termination pog is generally found with a class of nouns which represent the action of the verb proceeding from the subject; and may be expressed by the infinitive active used as a noun" (Donaldson, Cratylus,% 253). On account of the to /ul}] before inrepftaivetv of ver. C, taken as parallel to tovto, some give ayiacrp.6? the more limited meaning, which that verse would suggest, of purity from sexual sin ; " this is the will of God " airexea-Qai . . . eiSevat eKauTOV . . . to pi] virep- fimveiv. So Turretin, Pelt, Schott, Olshausen, Lunemann. But there is another and better method of explanation. (1) The explanatory infinitive cnrexitrOai, without the article, de- fines negatively the ayiacrpo?, or, at least, a portion of it requiring immediate enforcement. (2) Then clStvai, also with- out the article, gives a positive explanation in continuance of the negative statement. (3) But in to virepfiaiveiv, the article brings it into a line with 6 ayiacrpo?, and as a dis- tinct exemplification suggested by the second clause of ver. 4. a.'rrexeo'Oai vp.a7? 7ropveia$ — " that ye abstain from fornication." The infinitive is explanatory of the more general ayiacrpos. Winer, § 44, 1. Your sanctification is God's will ; and His will for you under this aspect, and in your present position in Thessalonica, is that you abstain from fornication, which the heathen around you scarcely reckon a sin, and to which previous habits, beliefs, and surrounding temptations may be ever tempting you. The preposition airo is repeated after the compound verb with which it is incorporated, as in v. 22, though it is sometimes omitted, as in 1 Tim. iv, 3. In Acts xv, 20 the preposition is inserted, and in v, 29 it is omitted, with the same construction and references. There is therefore no substantial difference of meaning, though with a7ro, according to Tittmann (De Synon., I, p. 225), the separa- tion looks more ad rem. Uopvela may be taken in a wide Ver. 4.] FIRST EPISTLE TO THE THESSALONIANS 127 sense ; and, indeed, some manuscripts and fathers read 7ra'en/? t»7?- The Syriac and some of the fathers give iraui^ for the article. In every sense and aspect the sin referred to is to be abstained from, and all the more as it was reckoned among things indifferent, and was commonly practised (Terence, Adelphi, i, 2, 21). In Horace, Sat., I, 2, 33, occurs a sententia dice Catonis in praise of 7ropvela. Cicero says of any one who speaks as the apostle has done here, est Me quidem valde sever us ; and that the sin is not only not abhorrent ab hujus seculi licentia, verum etiam a majorum consuetudine, atque concessis — quando enim hoc non factum est ? quando repre- hensv/m? quando non permissuml (Orat. pro M. Gaelio, 48, p. 285, vol. II, pars ii, Opera, ed. Orellius.) Consult Grotius on Acts xv, 20; Becker's Charicles, p. 241. (Ver. 4.) eioevai eaacrTOv v/urn* to eaurov crKeuos KTaaOai ei ayiaa-jUM tcai ti/j.}] — " that every one of you know how to get himself his own vessel in sanctification and honour" — another explanatory infinitival clause, without the article, and parallel to arrex^crOai (Philip, iv, 12). There has been no little debate on the meaning of cr/ceyo?. One may dismiss at once the more special meanings assigned to it, as membrum virile — the view of Er. Schmidt and others, mentioned in Wolf. The word, certainly, has such a sense in iElian (Hid. Animal, xvii, 11, p. 379, vol. I, ed. Jacobs), but not in the New Testament. A great many expositors give o-fcevos the sense of body — one's own body, and as many take it in the sense of wife — one's own wife. Thus Theodoret says, rives to eavrov encevos ryv o/u6£vya ijpfxi'ivevarav, eyo? Se pojuic^u) to eKa ]K€i>ai. Theodoret had been preceded in his view by Chiy- sostom, and it is held by (Ecumenius, Theophylact, Tertullian, Ambrosiaster, Pelagius, Calvin, Musculus, Zanchius, Hunnius, Drusius, Piscator, a-Lapide, Beza, Grotius, Hammond, Tur- retin, Bengel, Flatt, Schrader, Pelt, Olshausen, Baumgarten- Crusius, Macknight, and Wordsworth. Primasius explains mum corpus castum servando sanctificet et honor et, vel certc taut am propter Jilios uccorem cognoscat. But there are several objections to this view. (1) It is questioned if cr/ceuo?, of or by itself, can ever mean the body. It is, indeed, employed in this sense, but usually the metaphor has some distinct ad- 128 COMMENTARY ON ST. PAUL'S [Chap. IV. junct, or is explained in being used. Thus in 2 Cor. iv, 7, the epithet oorpa/aWs is added — the body being called an "earthen vessel." So in the other passages commonly quoted as to a-Keuos tou irvev/j-uroq (Barnabas, Ep., vii, 4; xi, 1(5; xxi, p. 13, 24, 42, ed. Hefele) ; ayyelov is used of the body in its in- strumental connection with the soul in Philo (De Migration?. Abraham, p. 418, &c). See Loesner. Cicero says too, "corpus qv. Idem quasi vas est aid aliquod. animi receptaculum" (Tuscul. Disput., i, 22) ; corpus, quod vas quasi constitit ejus (Lucre- tius, iii, 441). But in these cases the figurative meaning is brought out by an epithet, or by the contextual phraseology. Nor can any proof be taken from the uses of the Hebrew £?, which has so many various significations, and which does not simply signify body, even in the phrase " the vessels of the young men are holy " (1 Sam. xxi, 5). The tropical uses of o-Kevo? in Acts ix, 15 ; Rom. ix, 22, 23 ; 2 Tim. ii, 21, have no relation to the clause before us. It cannot be proved, then, that a-Kevos ever means by itself the body, and the instances adduced by Vorstius are not to the point (De Hebr. N. Test., pp. 24, 25, 1705). (2) Nor can to eaurov o-Kevo? Kraadai mean to possess his own body, for KTacrOai means to acquire, not to possess. That each one of you should acquire his own body, yields no tolerable meaning. Some of the Greek fathers, how- ever, attempt to evade this by the paraphrase, foeis avro KTw/meOa orav fxevy naOapov, " we acquire it when it remains pure " (Chrysostom). " Sin takes possession " (ktutcu), Theo- plvylact says, " of the body when it is tainted by sin, but when it is purified we make it our own" (///xef? avro KTw/ueOa). But this is only repeating the verb without explaining it, and this verbal sense is rendered impossible by the negative clause fxrj ev iraOei, which implies another party or person. The same objection applies to the " sole admissible " explanation of Olshausen, who makes the verb signify dominion over the body — " to guide and master his body as a true instrument of the soul." Wordsworth also eludes the lexical difficulty, by rendering the verb to acquire and hold, quoting the Pharisee's boast (Luke xviii, 12), "I give tithes," iravra ocra KTU>/xai, but the verb has in the quotation its proper meaning, "I get" or " acquire," i.e., " of all my increase." So Matt, x, 9, where the Ver. 4.] FIRST EPISTLE TO THE THESSALONIANS. 12!) verb is vaguely rendered " provide," but wrongly " possess " in Luke xxi, 19; "purchased," in Acts i, 18; viii, 20; in the last instances the version is coloured by the context ; the word is rightly rendered " obtained " in Acts xxii, 28. (3) Nor can eauTov tit into that interpretation, as from its position the stress is on it. It cannot stand as the equivalent of a mere possess- ive pronoun; nor can it in any way denote the individuality, die Tchheit, by which the \Jsvx>'i is distinguished from the a-Kevo?. It simply denotes his own in special possession. Neither noun, verb, nor pronoun can thus sustain the interpre- tation which we have been considering. 2«reuo? does not, with- out any adjunct or defining genitive, signify body ; nor does Krdojuai denote to possess; nor does euvrov mark any distinc- tion. The other interpretation gives ovcet/o? the meaning of wife, a meaning which the substantive may have, while the true sense of the verb and pronoun is also preserved. Theo- dore of Mopsuestia has given this sense, o-Keuos ri]v iS'iav eKacTTov yajU€T>]v ouo/ud^ei {Opera, p. 14>5, ed. Fritzsche). Augustine explains the noun by uxor (Serm. 278, Opera, vol. V, p. 1G54, Gaume) ; and again, qui suum vas possidet, id est, eonjugem suam {Opera, vol. X, p. 613; Cont. Julian., xxxix, p. 1125, Gaume). And in favour of this view it may be noted that (a) The noun, as in Hebrew usage, may mean a wife. Thus the examples from Schottgen : In convivio illius impii regis Ahasuerus aliqui dicebant; Mulieres Medicae sunt r pulchriores : alii vero ; Persicae sunt pulchriores. Dixit ad eos Ahasuerus ; vas meum, quo ego utor « vnnm »w» • f ?2 } neque Medicum, neque Persicum est, sed Chaldaicum. An vultis illam rid-/ re? Illi responderunt : Volumus. Quicunque enim semen suum immittit k-ieo k^i nnc3, In vas nonbonum tile semen suum deturpat {Horae Hebr., p. 827). Compare I, p. iii, 7. (2) The verb Kraa-dai is often used in this connec- tion — ktu'i(reu)! (Ecclus. xxxvi, 29) ; Ti]v yvvalica MaaXwi/ KeKTi][xat e/xavrip (Ruth iv, 10) ; ravrrjv /a'/cr^at, Socrates speaking of Xantippe (Xenoph., Symp., ii, 10, p. 9, ed. Bornemann). (3) The pronoun euurou preserves its proper significance and emphasis — his own — her who specially is his own, as his wife. (4) The context points very distinctly in this direction. There is the decided I 180 COMMENTARY ON ST. PAUL'S [Chap. IV. prohibition or negative aspect, to abstain from fornication, and there is now the positive and permitted aspect — the divinely appointed remedy against that sin. Com p. 1 Cor. vii, 1, 2. See Ellicott. This view has been maintained by Thomas Aquinas, Zwingli, Estius, Balduin, Wetstein, Schottgen, Koppe, Schott, De Wette, Koch, Bisping, Ewald, Hofmanu, Riggenbach, Liinemann, &c. De Wette would take the tropical a-Kevos more directly, and understands it vom Wcrhzeuge zur Bcfi'ledhjiing des Geschlechtstriebes, an interpretation which would include both sexes, as the woman has power over the man (1 Cor. vii, 4). Besides, in warning against iropvela, the man is usually addressed, but the woman is implied ; and so here the counsel to the husband is mutatis wiutandAs for the wife (1 Cor. vi, 15-18). This virtual comprehension of both sexes gets rid of the objection of Calvin and Olshausen to the view which we adopt, to wit, that the exhortation to purity would not apply to unmarried men or widowers, and not at all to women (1 Cor. vii, 2-9). The last phrase, ey dyiao-juM kcu ti/u?], " in sanctification and honour," is connected with KTaaQai as its sphere or ethical element, the active sense of the first noun being so far shaded by its connection with the abstract ti/luj. The Thessalonian believers were to abstain from all forms of illicit sexual intercourse, and were in one way to preserve them- selves from it, by each not simply getting a wife, but getting to himself his own wife according to God's ordinance in purity and honour (Heb. xiii, 4; Gen. i, 28; ii, 24). The objection to this view that it degrades woman under the appellation of a-Keuo? is met by quoting the words of Peter, co? acrQevea-repM (riceuei tu> ywaiKeiM (1 Peter iii, 7), and bearing in mind that it is only in one special aspect of relation that the epithet is given. (Ver. 5.) fxr] ev irdOei €7ri6vfxlag — "not in lustfulness of desire." The second noun e-jnQvfxia is the general term, and is sometimes used in a good sense in the New Testament and Septuagint, but it has often epithets and genitives attached to it which show its evil nature. See under Col. iii, 5 and Gal. v, 24. It is rather the irdQos than the e-rnQu^la which is here condemned. The word occurs twice besides in the New Testament (Col. iii, 5; Rom. i, 26). Cicero says, "quae Gfraeoi iraOn vocant, nobis 'perturbationes appellari magis placet quam morbos" (Tusc. Ver. 6.] FIRST EPISTLE TO THE THESSALONIANS. 131 Disput,, iv, 5). It is according to Zeno rj aXoyo? /ecu irapu <\>v>](tis, ?/ op/j.}] Tr\eova^ovj fillet (Theophylact), or to say with Estius, -wpay/xa verecunde dixit Apostolus pro concubitu. (4?) It is no objection to affirm that the two verbs irapa- fialveiv Kai 7r\eoveKT€?v should have their simple commercial signification, for the context demands a modified ethical sense and application. One may set at nought and defraud his brother more deeply and basely in matrimonial than in mer- cantile life. UXeoveKTelv does not indeed in itself contain the idea of unchastity, any more than the clause in the tenth commandment (Exod. xx, 17), " Thou shalt not covet thy neighbour's wife ; " yet Theodoret says, irXeove^lav t>V p.oiyeiav eKaXecre, which only gives the desire a different object from money. Hopvela and irXeove^ia occur together in Rom. i, 29 ; 1 Cor. v, 10 ; vi, 9, 10; Ephes. v, 3, 5 ; Col. iii, 5. Compare Wisdom xiv, 12, 2G. The apostle's residence in Corinth at the moment may have laid upon him the necessity of the injunc- tion. Compare 1 Cor. v, 9 ; vi, 9-10; 2 Cor. xii, 21. Of such impurities Burns has said — " They harden a' within." (5) Nor does the occurrence of the phrase irep\ iravrwv tovtooi', adduced by Koch, Lunemann, and De Wette, present any real objection, as if it implied that more sins than one are reprimanded, whereas in our exegesis only one is thought of. But both iropvela and poiye'ia are included; and, as Alford observes, it is not ravra -wavra which the apostle uses, and the phrase only generalizes from the sin mentioned to a wider range. (G) One might perhaps hint, too, that in cases of grasping and over-reaching, human law sternly interferes ; but in the cases specified, law was in those days inoperative, and God Himself, as we are told, assumes the vindication. Chrysos- 134? COMMENTARY ON ST. PAUL'S [Chap. IV. torn thus illustrates — "He has well said to p>j virepfiaiveiv. For to each man God has assigned a wife, and has set bounds to nature, that there may be intercourse with one only ; there- fore, intercourse with another is transgression and robbery, and the takiDg of more than belongs to one — 7r\ecu'ef/a — or rather it is more cruel than any robbery, for we grieve not so much when our wealth is carried off, as when marriage is invaded. Dost thou call him thy brother and defraudest him, and that in things which are forbidden ? Here he speaks concerning adultery, but above also concerning all fornication." The earnest and plain-speaking peroration of the Golden-mouth which follows, discloses a sad state of society, and the strong terms are, alas, not inapplicable to the present day. The difficulty of the interpretation has arisen from the fact that on this subject the apostle, as Joannes Damascenus says, €v9, used only here and in Rom. xiii, 4, has passed away from its original meaning of " without law," to signify one who main- tains law, one who avenges (Wisdom xii, 12; Ecclus. xxx, C). The verb e/ccW]/u.us 6 Oeo? eiri aKaOapaia, u\\ ev ayiaafiM — "for God called us not for uncleanness, but in sancti- fication." By yap the reason is assigned for the statement just made, that the Lord is avenger of all such things. For the act ascribed to God in calling, see under Gal. i, 6, and compare ii, 12. 'Ett/ denotes purpose, as in Gal. v, 13; Ephes. ii, 10 (Winer, § 48, c; Kruger, § 68, 41), and ev marks the spiritual element in which they were called. Nor is there any brevilo- quence — um zu sein in, ut essemns. ^7rl,Jinem, ev, indolent rei magis exprimit (Bengel). 'A/ca0«yoV K\>jcriv (Pelt), e^e (Flatt), hoBG (Vul- gate and Beza). The real objective is of course the precepts already given— not repeated, particularized, or summed up. but so present to the mind of the reader that he can be at no loss 136 COMMENTAEY ON ST. PAUL'S [Chap IV. about them, while the emphasis is put on the person and on the act which is shown to involve a heinous sin and an awful peril. The phrase ovk avOpunrov aWa tov Qeov presents a direct and absolute antithesis, and is not to be softened into "not so much man as God" (Estius), or " not only man but also God" (Macknight, Flatt). Winer, § 55,8. As ai>9pto7ro? has no article, the meaning is general and may include as well the apostle himself, who has given the solemn charge (Pelagius, Beza, Schott), and the brother tov 7rXeoveKT>]0ii'Ta (CEcumenius, Pelt). Hofmann takes the refer- ence to be, the misused woman. The article before Qeov may not be translated, but it has a specializing power — almost as Ellicott says, ipsum Deum. Whatever may be the refer- ence in avQpwwo?, the apostle fixes down the sin as one against God, who has forbidden sexual impurities, and who has ordained the marriage relation, so that whoever lawlessly indulges in the one, or wilfully invades the other, throws off the authority of God — of God — tov kou Sovtu to Hveu/ua avTOv to dyiov eig vp.as — " who also gave his holy Spirit unto you." There are several various read- ings. ABU 3 , the Claromontane Latin, the Peshito, and the Gothic version, with several of the Greek Fathers, omit kou; but it is found in D 1 F G K L ^, the Philoxenian Syriac, the Vulgate, and others of the fathers, and may therefore be retained, though Lachmann omits it and Alford brackets it. The similar appearance of tov to Sovtu may have led some copyist to omit it, and its insertion could not well be accounted for. Then BDF^ 1 read SiSovra, but Sovtol is read in A K LN 3 , most mss., very many versions, and some fathers. It is difficult to decide, only SiSovtu may be a correction in order to represent the gift as a present one. The Received Text has ;/yua?, but on the slender authority of A, some mss., the Vulgate, &c. ; but vjua$ is found in BDFKLN and not a few of the fathers. The change to fnuas may have been made under the impression that av9pco7rov meant the apostle, while this clause, taken to assert his inspiration, thus aggravates the sin of despising him. The kou introduces a new idea — God who called us in sanctification and also, that we might fully reach it, gave unto us His Holy Spirit. Bengel well says novum hie additur momentum. The Ver. 9.] FIEST EPISTLE TO THE THESSALONIANS. 137 sin is shown in its heinousness as the despisal of God, who to enable us to reach this ayiacrpos in which he called us, has in addition conferred upon us His Holy Spirit. He then who indulges in the sins forbidden and falls into aicaOaparia, — as he frustrates the end of the divine call, and has nothing of its spiritual element — despises not man but God, who to elevate men above that impurity and to provide for their sanctification, gave them the Holy Spirit to do His work in securing the final perfection of His people. This divine gift is named solemnly and emphatically to ILvevpa to dyiov, the third person of the Ever-blessed Trinity; to LTi/eu/xa, the life of believers; to ayiov, not only in essence but because His gracious function is to implant and sustain holiness — uvtov, His, proceeding from Him, carrying out His blessed purpose in those who believe. And He is a gift (Sovto) conferred on true believers, as really as the Son is a gift, for we are utterly unworthy ; and a gift through Christ applying what He has provided in His incarna- tion and death. See under Ephes. i, 13. The concluding- words el$ v/j.a$ are not equivalent to vp.iv (Koppe, Pelt), but in vos, the idea of direction being implied, not of Raumlichlceit (Liinemann). ii, 9 ; Gal. iv, G. In this paragraph we have the Lord Jesus, God who calls, and the Spirit who is given — Father, Son, and Holy Ghost — a triune interest in those who have accepted salvation. Compare Luke xi, 13 ; John iii, 34 ; Acts v, 32 ; viii, 18 ; xv, 8 ; Rom. v, 5 ; 2 Cor. i, 22. (Ver. 0.) Uepl Se t>}$ {Aa6V\/a is the love of a brother, that is, a fellow-believer or Christian brother. The last part of the compound word is the object of the love and does not characterize its name — brotherly, not because I feel that I am his brother, but because I know that he is my brother — (ptXapyuplu, ^CKavQpunr'ia, ipCkavSpia. The next clause creates some difficulties. The ordinary construction is according to Liinemann inadmissible, because this use of the active infinitive is confined to cases in which 138 COMMENTARY ON ST. PA l'1/S [Chap. IT. no special personal reference is attached to the verb; but here vp.?v belongs to ypdetv, and he affirms that either epe would be used, or the passive ypdfacrOai as in verse 1. Bournan and Reiche have no objections to rjpa. They did not need to be written to on brother-love, for they knew its nature and obligation (verse 10); but their practice was not cpaite so full as their knowledge. Compare the spirit and wording of the first verse of the chapter. There is no contrast like that assumed by Estius and Benson ; they needed specially to be taught purest chastity as in the previous verses, but there was less occasion to say much about what follows — - uvtoi yap vpecg OcoSlSuktol eare ei$ to ayu7rav uAA?/- \ou$ — " for you yourselves are taught of God to love another." Tap gives the reason why there was no need for him to write to them, for they themselves are taught, Vek. 10.] FIRST EPISTLE TO THE THESSALONIANS. 139 and that by God — the stress lying on ctvrql vfxeh, coupled with SiSuktoi. They who were taught had no need of farther teaching; but 6eo in the compound term, which has been coined for the occasion, cannot be so subordinate as Ellicott seems to regard it. The contrast is not indeed — when God teaches, the apostle may be silent — wo Gott lehrt, kavn ich schweigen (Olshausen) ; but the fact that the teaching is of God, a fact too which is expressed by a significant compound employed only here, surely gives emphasis to the entire clause, is a weighty addition to the statement— not only taught, but taught of God — though there is no formal contrast to any other teaching, irapa avOpco-rrou p.a6eiv (Chrysostom). In avroi does not lie the idea of vos ipsi or of sponte (Schott) which is con- tradicted by OeoSlSuKToi (John vi, 45 ; Isaiah liv, 13; Barnabas, Ep'tst., § 21, p. 44, Pair. Apost., Opera, ed. Dressel; Schottgen, Hot. Heb., p. 829). The allusion is not to the precept as uttered by Jesus in John xiii, 34 (Pelagius, Schott, Baumgarten-Cru- sius), nor to the divine compassion manifested towards us, and of which we should be imitators (Ambrosiaster, Pelt). The last clause with eh to ayairav expresses under the purpose the contents also of the teaching (iii, 10). The compound verbal noun is not to be taken absolutely in the sense of deoirvtva-Toi, and this clause regarded as describing the result. This mutual love, the tendency and purpose of the divine teaching, was an earnest actual affection, manifesting itself in such forms and spheres as the state and wants of the churches around them opened up for them. Docti estis noil modo intel- lectiv, ut sciatis, seel etiam affect u, ut facialis (Estius). To be God-taught is to have divine teaching as a divine power and life. Brother-love has a special prominence, (1) for it is a testing fruit of regeneration (1 John iii, 14 ; iv, 8) ; (2) its visible existence is a condition of the world's conversion (John xvii, 21); (3) a token also of true discipleship (John xiii, 35); (4) wdiile it is obedience to Christ's new commandment, and enforced by his own example (John xiii, 34 ; xv, 17 ; Eph. v, 2) ; and is essential to the spiritual growth of the church (Ephes. iv, 1G). (Ver. 10.) kul yap iroielTe avTO eh wavTa? tov$ aSe\oi, ire pia rreveiv paWov — " But we exhort you, brethren, to abound still more." The apostle incul- cates an increase of this love which, according to the previous verse, they already possessed, Se implying a slight contrast between the fact and the exhortation. Their love was not per- fect, but was capable of increased intensity, guided by a grow- ing Christian intelligence and experience. The infinitive present denotes the permanence of the act. Winer, § 44, 7. What the manifestations of this brother-love were we do not know, only from the use of the verb -woieiTe we may infer that their love had embodied itself in some acts of substantial Christian benefi- cence — perhaps of hospitality, liberal relief of the poor, or kind refuge afforded to such as might be the victims of persecution. Calvin finds an argument — a major e ad minus ; if their love spread through the whole of Macedonia, he infers that it is not to be doubted that they loved one another — quln ipsi mutuo inter se anient. We know that afterwards the apostle bears high testimony to their grace of liberality in the Macedonian province (2 Cor. viii, 1, 2). They are warned still further — (Ver. 11.) kol J? epyacrlas. That is, the brother-love was abused, and the abuse was restlessness and idleness, which, as it had a bad effect on onlookers, was rebuked by the apostle, both in itself, and on account of its deleterious results. There were of the chief women not a few who believed, and they might be imposed upon by these idlers (Acts xvii, 4). This is also the view of Estius, Benson, Flatt, Koch, De Wette, Alford, and Ellicott, and it is at least probable, when other elements are taken into account. One objection of Liinemann, that in such a case two distinct parties must be addressed by the apostle, whereas there is no trace of such division in the paragraph, is of no great moment, for often the apostle puts into general terms as if speaking to the whole church what is really applicable to one section of it. His other objection, that in this case the stress would only fall on epya^eo-Qai raff x € P }cn Trap}]yyei\apev — " and to work with your hands as we enjoined you." The iSiau of the Received Text, though it is found in AD 3 KL K 1 and many mss., is probably a correction to suit the previous to. 'tSta, and is omitted in B D l F N 3 , and probably all the versions and the Latin fathers, the Greek fathers being divided. The infinitives are all in the present, denoting continuous action. According to Pelt, Schott, and Hofmann, the phrase means qucvvis indiistria, any kind of industry ; but the words are to be taken in their plain literal significance, and no doubt the majority of the Thessalonian Church belonged to the working- classes. They were not to cease manual labour, and by their idleness mulct the generosity of others ; but they were to be as assiduous at their daily toil as they may have been before the Gospel came to the city. At his visit to Thessalonica the apostle had noticed the germs of the same evil, and warned against them, kuOco? vplv -Trap^yyelXapev, " as we commanded you." The reference is to the period of his personal labours among them. Their minds were getting unhinged by the novel and momentous truths laid open to them, of some of which they were forming a wrong conception. The clause underlies all these previous charges. The forewarning was suggested by tendencies which began to crop out during his sojourn. Minds intoxicated by new expectations, became unsettled and specu- lative, industry was forsaken or despised, and habits of gadding 144 COMMENTARY ON ST. PAUL'S [Chap. IV. about in listless laboriousness began to show themselves. The purpose of all this instruction being — (Ver. 12.) "ivu 7repi7raT>]T€ evar^/moi'cog 7rpu? TOvse^oo — " in order that ye may walk becomingly toward them that are without." The verb is often used for the general tenor of one's life. See under verse 1. The adverb ev]povcos is "honourably," or "in a becoming manner," " decently," according to the original mean- ing of the term (Rom. xiii, 13; 1 Cor. vii, 35; xiv, 40), the " honestly " of the English version having now changed its meaning. The opposite seems to be araKTovg, verse 14, and utuktw? in 2 Thes. iii, 6. The want of seemliness here referred to is plainly what is characterized in these clauses that enjoin them to study quietness and do their own business. As Theo- phylact says, evrpeirei to. o-wpaTiKU epya avaipovvTas /ecu povov to irvevpaTiKov fyiTovvras, or, as (Ecumenius briefly puts it, pi; acrx'llJ-ovriTe eiraiTovvTes. LT/oo? signifies direction in reference to or towards, not coram (Schott, Koch). Those without ol e£(o are those without the Christian community — the non-Christian population around them (1 Cor. v, 12, 13; Col. iv, 5); and in 1 Tim. iii, 7, the phrase is ol e£w6ei>. The term had been used among Rabbinical writers, Q'xwvn (Schottgen's Hor. Heb., p. 5G0- 599). The want of this decent behaviour towards unbelievers induced disparaging views of the gospel, created prejudice against it, and hindered its reception. Not only is our relation towards those within to be consulted, but our relation toward those without is also to be studied, lest by any inconsistency they should be repelled. ku\ pt]Set/o? XP eiuv eX } l T€ — " an( ^ that J e ^ iave nee ^ °f no one " or of " nothing." This clause is connected with the previous charge to work with their hands, for they would thus earn the supply of their wants, and stand in need of assistance from nobody. The Authorized Version reads in its text "of nothing," but in the margin " of no man." The neuter is adopted by many. Liinemann's argument, repeated by Alford, goes for little, " to stand in need of no man is for man an impossibility," for it may as truly be said in reply, " to stand in need of nothing is equally for man an impossibility." A general saying- is rightly limited by its context. The dependency of those that do not work on their fellow-men is the underlying Ver. 13.] FIRST EPISTLE TO THE THESSALONIANS. 145 thought, and therefore fitjSevos is better taken in the mascu- line as by many commentators, and the Syriac reads *aJ) \^> the allusion perhaps being general, not to Christians specialty or to non-Christians, though if there be specialty in the refer- ence, dependence for support on Christian brethren may be the special idea. Chrysostom says, "he had not said that ye may not be shamed by begging, but he insinuated it ; if our own people are stumbled how much more those who are without, when they see a man in good health and able to support him- self begging and asking help of others"; "wherefore," he adds, " they call us xP^^^P-^opov? — Christmongers "; or as Theodoret, " it is disgrace to live in idleness and not acquire things necessary from labour — d\\a -rrpoo-aiTov [31 ov ulpecrOai kui toov aXKwv 7r poo- fj.lv eiv (jiiXoTi/uiai'." This dependence of one class upon another and wealthier class might soon have introduced the unnatural distinction of patron and client into the earl\ T Christian church. •« — (\ er. 13.) Oi' Ot\op.ev Se vp.a$ ayvoeiv, Such is one opinion of Chrysostom, Theoplrylact, (Ecumenius ; and it is held by Ambrosiaster, Calvin, Hemming, Estius, Balduin, a-Lapide, Beza, Grotius, Bengel, Koppe, Jowett, Hil- genfeld, Riggenbach, Ellicott, Alford. The aorist is used from the standpoint of the resurrection — all that have gone to sleep prior to that period. Now (1) it is not necessary to give Sia, the sense of eu, as Liinemann objects ; nor is it needful to take it as referring to the condition or circumstance in or out of which anything is done, as Koch, who quotes in support Rom. iv, 11 ; 2 Cor. ii, 4 ; iii, 4; 1 John v, 6. Winer, § 47 i. (2) It is forced and unnatural to give the strong sense that " laid to sleep by Jesus " means, put to death by Jesus — He being the cause of their death, the reference being to the martyrs. Such is the view of Salmeron, Hammond, Joseph Mede, and Thiersch. The view is untenable. The participle is too gentle a term to express a violent death. It is used indeed of the first martyr, but it could not be employed to designate the act of his murderers; besides, the context involves no reference to persecutions or to martyrdom under them, and is not in any way intended to comfort either those who are sorrowing over martyred friends, or who may expect to be put to death for their Christianity ; and, lastly, the reference of the apostle is to all the sainted dead, and not merely to a section or minority of them, such as the martyrs, or to the First Resurrection of the book of the 152 COMMENTARY ON ST. PAUL'S [Chap. IV. Revelation. (3) Nor is it necessary, in the third place, to give the phrase Sin rou 'L;cro?/ any theological meaning as Chrysostom, who explains as an alternative 3y rovro Xeycou on Tfl irla-rei tou 'lijcrou KotfXijOevTa^, and similarly GEcumenius and Theophylact, and the scholiast in Matthrei. Subsequently Chrysostom vir- tually quotes the clause, giving it this connection. Ambrosiaster writes, per Jesum, i.e., mbspefidei hujus; and Calvin, dormire per Christum, est retinere in morte conjunctionem quam habemus cum Christo. Webster and Wilkinson say the idea conveyed undoubtedly is, that " by Him they died in peace," " those who through Jesus entered into rest." A simpler mean- ing is more natural. The phrase Sia. tou 'Ljcrov is to be taken as closely con- nected with Koiat]6epra?, "laid to sleep by Jesus," the stress being on Sia, which is so often used of the mediatorial instru- mentality of Christ (Rom. ii, 10 ; v, 1 ; 2 Cor. i, 5; Gal. i, 1 ; Ephes. i, 5 ; Philip, i, 11 ; Titus iii, G). The words will bear this interpretation, though, as Ellicott says, the examples adduced by Alford are scarcely in analogy (Rom. i, 8 ; v, 1 ; v, 11), since in these instances an active verb is employed. Lihiemann objects that the extent of the idea expressed by Koi/m.t]Oevrag here is to be taken from the relation which the apodosis in this clause bears to the previous one. The objec- tion is not strong, for 'L/o-ot^ in the first member stands in direct contrast to Koi^jOei'TUf Sia tou hjrrou in the second member, the noun being repeated, and the article being inserted. Jesus dead and raised is the prime subject of the first clause as an article of belief, and those laid to sleep by Jesus and awakened are the distinctive and correspondent subject of the second clause. They are called in the opening verse of the section simply koi/ulco/ui.€voi, but now the connection of that sleep with Jesus is more specially indicated, as through Him it is a sleep, and through his victory over death those in their graves are only lying in their beds, and are laid there in the sure and certain hope of a blessed awakening. The comfort and expec- tation implied in the clause, and the tender and beautiful con- ception of death which it conveys as a time of repose with the prospect of resuscitation, are all owing to Jesus, and to Him be- cause He died and rose again. Those who are laid so to sleep — Veil 15.] FIRST EPISTLE TO THE THE8SALONIANS. 153 o 6eo? aga (tvv ax/rep — " God will bring with Him," that is, " with Jesus," not avr/2, secum, as some would read it. The apostle does not use eyepei, as he wishes to say more than that He will raise them, for he associates their resurrection with the Second Advent, the point on which there had been perplexity and doubt among the Thessalonian believers. The words avv uvtw are not for ob? avrov (Zachariae, Koppe) — " God will raise them as He raised Him " (Turnbull), but " with Him." The pregnant clause implies that they are raised already, as told in the end of verse 1G, and are then brought with Him. The verb is not used of bringing from the dead, though a compound is used of Christ (Heb. xiii, 20) ; yet the sense is not exactly, brought to glory in heaven, as many take it, but rather, brought in Christ's train at His appearance and coming (Schrader). The reference is not so precise as Hofmann gives it — God will not bring Jesus aoain into the world without His brethren who sleep coming with Him. The statement is true, but the apostle, as Liinemann observes, is not teaching about Christ's coming and its mode, but only of the departed and their coming again with Christ. The signification, therefore, is not what is often given — will bring their souls from heaven that they may be reunited to their bodies ; for to their souls there is no allusion, nor could their souls as such be said to be laid to sleep by Jesus. The Resurrection, as this clause asserts, is the work of God (Acts xxvi, 8; 1 Cor. vi, 14- ; 2 Cor. i, 9 ; Heb. xi, 19) ; but the same word is often assigned to the Mediator (John v, 21, 29 ; vi, 40 ; xi, 25 ; 1 Cor. xv, 22 ; Philip, iii, 21 ; in another form 2 Cor. iv, 14). The doctrine of the Resurrec- tion occupies a prominent place in the New Testament. (Ver. 15.) Tovto yap vfiiv Xeyo/mev iv Xoyto Kvplou — " For this we say unto you in the word of the Lord." Tap. refers to the previous verse and to the statement, " them laid to sleep by Jesus God will bring with Him." Though they die before the Advent they are certainly to share in its glories, and are in no way to be anticipated by those who may happen to be alive at that momentous period, this being what so perplexed the church in Thessalonica, so that Koppe, Flatt, and Koch are in error when they refer yap to verse 13, and regard this verse as giving an additional reason why believers should not sorrow, 154 COMMENTARY ON ST. PAUL'S [Chai\ IV. taking verses 14 and 15 as parallel in tlie argument. But this verse is plainly an advance on the previous one, and not col- lateral with it. As to the destiny of the departed, there is first a negative statement, they " who are alive shall not prevent them who are asleep," and then follows a positive statement, " the dead in Christ shall rise first," &c. The previous verse affirms only that God shall bring them with Christ, and this verse and the one after it show how and in what order. Tovto, emphatically placed, refers to the next statement introduced by on. What follows is of special moment, being matter of direct revelation ev \6yu> Kupiou — Kvpios being the Saviour. The phrase occurs in 1 Kings xx, 35, n'yr -a-ja, rendered in the Septuagint ev \6yw Kvplou, "in the word of the Lord" in the Authorized Version, and compare Esther i, 12 ; 1 Kings xiii, 2 ; Hosea i, 2. The preposition may bear its usual meaning, "in the sphere of" (Winer, § 48 a), that is, the following declaration is a repetition of what the Lord had revealed, and has all its truth from this correspondence. " In the word of the Lord" is, therefore, " in it" as to contents, and virtually and iuferentially "by it" as to authority. None of the nouns has the article. 'Ey is not directly "by," as in the Authorized Version — that is, by divine commis- sion, nor is it secundum, as Flatt and Pelt, under reference to Rom. i, 10. What the apostle is about to utter was specially revealed to him, and in that revelation his utter- ance had its contents and authority, the reception of it con- veying the commission and the crualification to tell it. It came iic Oelas axo/caA^ao? as Theodoret says, or as Theophy- lact, irapa rod Xpicrrou p.aBwv. The formula of the old prophets was " thus saith the Lord," and the apostle uses kcit eirirayi'iv (1 Cor. vii, 6), and ev a-KOKoKv^ei (1 Cor. xiv, G). There has been no little speculation as to the oracle referred to. (1) Many refer it to some portion of the New Testament which records Christ's eschatological sayings. Thus Pelagius, Musculus, Schott, and Pelt refer it to the twenty-fourth chapter of Matthew. Evvald unites Luke xiv, 14. Hofmann points to the special promise of Christ in Matt, xvi, 27, 28, and John vi, 44. Zwingli, as also Luthardt, selects Matt, xxv, the parable of the wise and foolish virgins, on account of the phrase eij Ver. 15.] FIRST EPISTLE TO THE THESSALONIANS. 155 cnrdvTrjariv, which occurs in the first verse of that chapter, and also here in verse 17. But the apostle nowhere quotes our present gospels, and those places have not the fulness and speciality of revelation which are found in this paragraph, and they say nothing out of which one might conjecture the relations of the dead and the living to the Second Advent. (2) Others again imagine that the apostle refers to some sayings of Christ, preserved by tradition, or perhaps spoken, according to v. Zezschwitz, during the forty clays between the resurrection and ascension. Calvin and Koch hold this view — the first saying generally that the utterance is taken from Christ's discourses, and the latter, that it is taken from some collection of his sayings. Theophylact compares the utterance to that (wcnrep KaKeivo) given in Acts xx, 35. But this supposition is quite precarious, though many sayings of our Lord must have been preserved that are not found in the canonical gospels. Compare Acts xx, 35 ; 1 Cor. vii, 10. The opinion, if not baseless, is at least beyond all proof. No saying has been pre- served to us that could, by the widest construction, form the basis of this declaration. (3) It follows, then, that we accept the clause in its simple significance, as asserting an immediate revelation from Christ to the apostle on this point. Such is the view of the majority of expositors. It is needless to inquire when, where, or how the revelation was vouchsafed to him, and it is erroneous in Jowett to affirm that Paul nowhere speaks of an} T special truths or doctrines as imparted to himself, for he had many direct revelations, though he does not always unfold the special subject of them — as about his special mission field (Acts xxii, 18-21) ; as to the position of believing Gentiles (Ephes. iii, 3) ; as to the Lord's Supper (1 Cor. xi, 23); and as to the reality, proofs, and results of Christ's resurrection (1 Cor. xv, 3 ; 2 Cor. xii, 1). See also under Gal. i, 12, and especially i, 16. On this point before us, of which no man can know anything of himself, and on which mere hypothesis would be alike audacious and vain, the apostle enjoyed an immediate revelation which he proceeds to unfold. This is, however, denied by Usteri, and the revelation is described as subjectivity, this especially being said to rest auf dem aUgemeinen Glauben and der Fortbildung der Tradition vcrbnnden mit einer 156 COMMENTARY ON ST. PAUL'S [Chap. IV. lebendigen combinatorischen Imagination (p. 341). The reve- lation is — on >)fJLeis ol fovTeg ol TrepiXenro/meroi eoi occurs only here and in verse 17 in the New Testament — the inclusive pre- position signifying "around" and then "over," the idea being that of overplus — and means "remaining over" or "behind." It is an epithet applied to the water left over after a sacrifice, to ■jrepikenrofxevov vSoop (2 Mace, i, 31). Orthryades is called tov ■7repi\€i(j)9evra, the only surviving one of the three hundred Spartans. Herodot., i, 82; Herodian, II, 1, 10; Plato, De Legi- bus, III, 677 E, p. 295, Opera, vol. X, ed. Stallbaum. These words naturally suggest the idea that the apostle by his use of >)p.el}i wacrTacrews p.eveiv, aXXu tov; it arrow; \eyei. A modification of this view may be held. When the apostle says, we the living and remaining behind, he means himself and includes those addressed by him. Did he then affirm that he and they with- out exception would survive till the second coming, or that he and they so surviving would without exception be caught up to meet the Lord in the air, every one of them being a genuine believer ? Certainly not. It seems best therefore Wsuppose that as Paul distinguishes the two classes, the living and the dead, he naturally puts himself among those to whom at the i moment he belonged, and who as the living and surviving are 158 COMMENTARY ON ST. PAUL'S JChap. IV. contrasted with those who had fallen asleep or died. /For there will be a like distinction when the Saviour comes ; and to describe the one class the apostle employs the present time and says, "we who are alive and remain." If the Advent were to take place just now, the classification would be literally correct. To the mind of the apostle the second coming was ever present, and under this aspect he puts himself and his contemporaries in the one category without actually intending to affirm that they should not taste of death till the Redeemer should appear. The clause is thus a vivid way of characterizing all the living as represented by himself and the Thessalonians to whom he writes, while the deceased Thessalonian believers represent all who have died before His appearance and coming. Alford says, " Doubtless he expected himself to be alive together with the majority of those to whom he was writing at the Lord's com- ing." Must not the declaration on which this inference is based be a portion of the Xoyo? Kvplov, " this we say by the word of the Lord, that we living and remaining over"? Dean Alford, however, quite neutralizes his argument when he says, " at the same time, it must be borne in mind that this inclusion of himself and his hearers among the £toi/re? and -7repi\enr6p.evoi does not in any way enter into the fact revealed and here announced, which is respecting that class of persons only as they are and must be, one portion of the faithful, at the Lord's coming, not respecting the question who shall or who shall not be among them in that day." This is in other words the con- clusion we have come to, and the exegesis does not compel us on the Dean's own showing to hold the strict belief that Paul expected himself and his contemporaries to survive the Second Coming. The apostle's use of " I " and " we " for argument's sake may be seen in Rom. iii, 7 ; 1 Cor. iv, 6 ; xiv, 14.y^fhere ia no dLLilicti or independent prrW' fhnt the npWle really K expected to live till the Second Advent; nay, he says (1 Cor. vi, 14), " God hath both raised up the Lord, and will also raise up us by His own power;" and again (2 Cor. iv, 13), "knowing that he which raised up the Lord Jpsnw sWjj_mi^ pp nsalgojjy Jesus, and shall present us with yojx ^/^ThQ declaration (1 Cor. -" x v", ' fl l'J,' " WU sTta TTnoTall sleep, but we shall all be changed," can be satisfactorily explained without supposing that the Ver. 15.] FIRST EPTSTLE TO THE THESSALONIANS. 159 apostle expresses his belief that he would not die, and the para- graph adduced by Alford (2 Cor. v, 1-10), if this belief be supposed to underlie it, contradicts itself; for how could the man who believed that he was not to die and who longed to be clothed upon without mortal change, declare in almost the same breath that he was willing rather to be absent from the body and to be present with the Lord. These Corinthian epistles were written not more than four or five }^ears after those sent to Thessalonica. Towards the end of his life indeed the apostle says very decidedly, "to die is gain," and that he "had a desire to depart and to be with Christ " — not a word of any hope that Christ was coming in his lifetime, and that therefore he should not die ; or should be still among living men when the Master returned. This longing for the day of the Lord might work itself into a belief that it was near, and this was the common impression, for its period had not been revealed, and it was ardently hoped for. But the apostle in the midst of such fervent expectations, warns this church a few months after writing the clause before us, that the belief " that the day of Christ is at hand " is a serious delusion, for prior to it there must be the development of the mystery of iniquity. He might regard the Advent as possible in his lifetime, but never apparently as certain. He never distinctly teaches that it would either be or not be before his death. He was not so presumptuous as to fix a date for an event known to the Father only, and not revealed to angels or even to the Son Himself. If he taught its nearness, he assigned it to no year ; if he taught its certainty as a fact, he also dwelt on the uncertainty of its time. In a word he never expresses sur- prise that the day had not come so soon as he had anticipated, never utters a word of disappointment that it seemed more than ever at a great and indefinite distance. For irapovma see ii, 19 ; and the phrase «? rrjv -wapovarlav belongs, by the arrangement of the sentence, to TrepiXenrofxevoi, and not to the following verb (pOao-oo/JLev. ov fx?j (pOdo-wfxev rovi Koi/uDjOevra? — " shall in no wise antici- pate them that are laid to sleep " — "prevent " in the old English sense, and according to its Latin derivation, meaning " go before." You may go before one to help or to hinder him ; the 1 60 COMMENTARY ON ST. PAUL'S [Chap. IV- latter being so common an impnl.se in our poor fallen nature, the word has now sunk into the second sense exclusively. The verb (pOaveiv — sometimes followed by els ri, the object, sometimes by ex/ tivu, the person, and sometimes by the par- ticiple of another verb — here governs the simple accusative. Jelf, § 094. For ov p.//, as a strengthened negative, see Winer, § 56, 3, where he remarks that Hermann's rule, given under (Edip. Col., 853, as to the difference of those negatives with the future and the aorist, must not be pressed in the interpretation of the New Testament, as the mss. vary so much in so many passages, and the subjunctive is the pre- dominant usage. The two negatives occur often similarly in the Septuagint. Gayler, p. 441. Strengthened negatives, like compound verbs, characterize the later Greek. The idiom is supposed by many to be elliptical, and thus to be resolved, " there is no fear that," or as Alford, " there is no reason to fear that." See also Ellendt, Lex. Soph., II, p. 409, sub voce ov. The meaning is, that they who are found alive when the Saviour comes shall have no priority in any sense over those who have died — shall not, because they survive and need not to die, start sooner into the Master's presence, or come into participation of His glory and honour earlier than those who have gone down to the bed of rest. The living shall in no privilege or blessing forestall the dead, and the dead lose nothing by their earlier decease. The Thessalonian believers need not sorrow over the deceased as if they had in any degree fallen short of the prize, or were in any way to come behind the others who shall be alive, and remaining over at the Second Advent. So far from being anticipated by this class, the dead anticipate them — " the dead in Christ shall rise first," or before the living are changed (1 Cor. xv). It is a strange thought that some shall outlive all history, and see the end of all kingdoms, of all scientific development, and of all human affairs ; shall see the world at its last moment, and humanity in its final phase, as it ceas es as a species to exist upon earth. (Ver. 10.) oti avTO? 6 Kvpios . . . KarafiricreTai air ovpuvov — "because the Lord himself . . . shall descend from heaven." "On might be taken as parallel to the previous, on, and as intro- ducing another portion of the \6yog Kvplov, and as dependent Ver. 16.] FI'RST EPISTLE TO THE THESSALONIANS. 101 on Xeyo/uev (Koch, Hofmann). But it develops the order and the proof more distinctly to take it as the ancient versions do, quoniam in the Vulgate, quia in the Claromontane Latin. The Syriac has ?^£°, and some of the Greek fathers interpret by yap — kcu yap cu'to? (Theophylact), avros yap 7T/3WTO? (Theodoret). The phrase avros 6 Kvpio? is not "He the Lord," as De Wette and Hofmann, which is, as Alford says, to the last degree flat and meaningless. Nor is the reference expressly to His holy person, to His glorified body, for the purpose of excluding any meaning of mere operation or influence, as Olshausen and Bisping, after Estius and Fromond. This interpretation does not brine out the whole truth. The sense is also fuller than Alford gives it, " the words being," he says, " used for solemnity's sake, and to show that it will not be a mere gathering unto Him, but He himself shall descend." For the meaning is that Himself and none other, Himself in person and glory will descend — not Himself as the principal person, and as in contrast to believers (Lunemann) — not Himself as the first of all the host of heaven to come down — but Himself in proper person. The work is delegated to no substitute, but Himself, the same Jesus who ascended into heaven, will return from it, Kara^i'io-era: air ovpavov. He went up in person, and in person He descends (Mark xvi, 19; Acts i, 10, 11; ii, 33; Ephes. i, 20 ; iv, 8, 10). 'E/c is usually employed in the con- nection, save here and in Luke ix, 54. Compare Sept., Dan. iv, 10. He shall descend — ev KeXeva-p-aTi — "with a signal shout," the Latin versions having in jussu. The noun KcXeva-p-a, which occurs only here in the New Testament, is the word of command, or any sounded signal. It is used of the shout of a huntsman to his dogs (Xenoph., Veil., vi, 20) ; of the shout of a chariot-driver to his steeds, a7rA>//cT09, KeXevp-ari p.6vov . . . })vioxe~iTai (Ptuedrus, p. 253 d) ; of the cry of the captain to the rowers, by which they kept stroke, €7ratcrav aX/mt^ ... e/c Ke\eucr/ui.aTo? (iEschylus, Persae, 403); e/c KeXeuarfxaTog (Euripides, Ipkig. in Taur., 1405 ; Silius Italicus, vi, 3G0 ; Ovid, Mctam., iii, 10) ; of the word of military command, a0' eVo? neXevarp-aros . . . iopp.)](Tav (Thucy- dides, ii, 92). It is also used of the shout of a man with a I. 162 COMMENTARY ON ST. PAUL'S [Chap. IV. stentorian voice, (pcoveoov /meyia-rov, who hailed another across the Ister, and that other heard tw 7t/)cot i »V)0 ). The connection of iv Xpicrr^ with the verb would therefore leave the character of the veKpoi undefined, and by putting the stress on ev XpuTTw would introduce confusion into the sentence, as if it were meant that the dead, all the dead, would rise through Christ, an idea quite foreign to the context, and the apostle's immediate object. 'Ei/ XpiaT<2 has the common meaning — in union with Christ; that union is not dissolved by death ; they were in Christ — the source of their spiritual life when in the body, in Him when they died, and they are in Him still ; yea, so in Him that His resurrection secures theirs. He cannot rise without raising all included in Him, and livingly and organically united to Him as the members to the Head. HpCorov has its distinct and momentous position in the clause, for it solves the perplexity which was felt in the Thes- salonian church. Not only shall the dead share in the glories of the Advent, but they shall share first; its first result is their resurrection. They lose no privilege by dying before the Advent, they even win this priority over those who shall then be alive. Upwroi* corresponds to eireiTu, the dead rise first, and then the living are with them caught up. Upwrou has no reference to the resurrection of unbelievers ; it is simply first, or before the rap- ture of the living and surviving saints. The apostle thus refers to the two great results of the Advent — first, the resurrection of the dead saints ; and, secondly, the assumption of the living saints. To identify the resurrection asserted in this verse with the " first resurrection " of Rev. xx, 6, is quite unwarranted. The view is held by the Greek expositors with Pelagius, Ambrosiaster, Estius, Turretin, and Olshausen. For, 1st, if the TrpCcTt] avdo-Taais, the prophetic picture in the Apocalypse, be a literal resurrection, it is confined to the martyrs ; 2nd, the first resur- rection is that of "souls" — said to live, not to be reclothed — and it is in contrast to the "second death," which is explained to be l(jS COMMENTARY ON ST. PAUL'S [Chap. IV " the lake of fire." Are the martyrs only to escape the second death ? Is not that death, the death of a soul severed for aye from God, the source of life ? Of a general resurrection there is here no mention, as there is no allusion to the resurrection of unbelievers; their destiny is here undisclosed and is left under awful shadow. Three reasons are adduced in (Ecume- nius for the omission, but only one of them is of any weight, viz., that any allusion to the fate of unbelievers was foreign to his immediate purpose of enlightening and consoling the Thessalonian church. Mackuight is verbose and tenacious in expounding his theory that the wicked shall be raised with their present bodies, and that as, after the righteous ascend, the earth is to be burned, they will, in all probability, remain on it to be consumed in the oreneral conflagration. But this passage is totally silent as to such a fate, and it cannot be found in it even by implication. Nor does any other Scripture give any countenance to the conjecture. On the other hand Karsten (die letzten Dinge) supposes, with as little proof, that the wicked are raised in order to be disembodied. The apostle does not say where the souls of the dead are. The thief went to Paradise, not to Heaven. Hades represents generally the world of spirits, both good and bad, and Hades ceases to exist at the last day. They themselves — that is, their bodies — shall be raised, personality being attributed to them though one portion is wrapt in unconsciousness. (Ver. 1/.) ' E7retra tj/meh oi £un>Tes oi irepiXeLirop-tvoi d/xa (tvv avTOis ap7ray>](TO,ae0a ev ve(fie\(uo?, signify in clusters or a great multitude (Koppe, Rosen- miiller, Macknight). Clouds are often associated with the divine presence — " He maketh the clouds his chariot " (Psalm civ, 3); "the clouds are the dust of his feet" (Nahum i, 3); Jesus went away in a " cloud " ; "a cloud received Him out of their sight" (Acts i, 9); and in the clouds he returns, cttI tcov vee\wv (Matt, xxiv, 30 ; xxvi, 64); ev ve;?, quantity, and the second ttoioti^, quality; or, the first means simple or inde- finite duration, while the second carries with it limitation and character, and thus comes to denote epoch, season, or opportunity — involving the notion of transitoriness. Tittmann, Be Syiwn., I, p. 39 ; Trench, II, p. 27. Kcupo? is probably allied to Ketpco as tempu8 to re/uvui, a special period cut out of time, for time comprehends all seasons, or as Bengel says, Y/>oVaw partes Kfupoi Hence the phrase xP^vov Kaipbv (Sophocles, Electro, 1292). Xpovo? may stand generally for Kaipo?, but not the reverse (Luke i, 20; Acts iii, 20, 21 ; Gal. iv, 10). The Latin tongue, as Augustine acknowledged, has no special term to 174 COMMENTARY ON ST. PAUL'S [Chap. V. represent Katpo?, as opportanitas has in it the idea of fitting- ness or favourableness, whereas Kaip6$ may bear the opposite meaning. The Vulgate renders here de temporibus autem et momentis as in Acts i, 7; ilber Zeit und Stunde (Lunemann). The same Greek terms are used in Acts i, 7 ; Wisdom, vii, 18 ; viii, 8; and in the singular in Eecles. iii, 1 ; r'umepa. and copa, general and special, occur in Matt, xxiv, 3G; Mark xiii, 32. The plural is employed here in reference to the number of times and seasons, not to their absolute length, though it does imply some extent of duration. The object is the Second Advent, the period of which may comprise a variety of times and seasons preparing for it, characterizing, and fixing it. ou xP eluv e'x eTe vi x ~ lv ypufevOai — " ye have no need that it or anything be written to you." See under iv, 9. This version is more in accordance with the Greek idiom than the common ones, " that I write unto you," or " to be written unto," as it preserves the force of the dative and the infinitive passive. The ground of the statement has been variously given. (1) The Greek fathers suppose that the apostle regarded information on the point as superfluous and unprofitable, oo? irepirTov, kui w? aarvp.opov (Chrysostom). (2) Others imagine the reason to be, that no one can know these things. Fromond, Koch, Pelt, Estius, Baumgarten-Crusius. (3) Bengel assigns a moral reason — qui vigilant, his non opus est dici, quando futura sit hora, nam semper parati sunt. (4) The true and simple reason probably is that the apostle had already instructed them during his sojourn among them, and as he had taught them orally, he did not need to write now to them. For he affirms in the following verse that they know with perfect accuracy, not indeed the times and seasons, but they knew this — that the Second Advent would take men by surprise. They had been taught not its period, that being undisclosed, but its suddenness. (Ver 2.) avrol yap a/cp? o'lSare — " for ye yourselves know perfectly." This verse assigns the reason (yap) why they had no need to be written to on the times and seasons — they themselves had correct information ; the emphatic avrol in contrast with the writer himself as in iv, 9. The adverb dicpi/3a)? occurs only once more in Paul's epistles, and is rendered " circumspectly " Vku. 2.] FIRST EPISTLE TO THE THESSALONIANS. 175 (Ephes. v, 15). It is rendered " diligently " in Matt, ii, 8, and in Acts xviii, 25, "perfect," (Luke i, 3), "having had perfect under- standing"; the comparative adjective is used in Acts xviii, 2G; xxiii, 15, 20, and the superlative in Acts xxvi, 5. Their know- ledge of what he is going to state was not dim, uncertain, or fluctuating, but precise, clear, and accurate. on tj/Liepa l\.vp:ou to? /cAe7rr>/? ev vvkti, ovtu>$ ep^crut — " that the day of the Lord as a thief cometh in the night, so it cometh." The article which the Received Text places before t)p.'epa is omitted in BDF N, but is found in AKL and many mss. and fathers. It may have been omitted, as % stands so close to ?)juepa succeeding it, but its insertion may have been owing to grammatical precision. It is not needed, for the sense is not affected by the omission, " the day of the Lord " being a definite and unique expression. Compare Philip, i, G, 10; ii, 16; 2 Peter iii, 10. Winer, § 19, 1, 2 b. The phrase in the usage of the Old Testament, n i~\ ai', is used in the prophets to denote the appearance of Jehovah's direct and glorious self-manifesta- tion in his awful rectitude and power (Is. ii, 12 ; Ezek. xiii, 5 ; Joel i, 15; ii, 11; iii, 14; Zeph. i, 14; Mai. iv, 5). Here the Lord is Jesus Christ, who returns on this day, specially His as fixed by Him — His, as showing His glory and crowning His mediatorial work, as declared in the previous paragraph. On Kvpios, see Ephes. i, 2. The day of the Lord is the period of the Second Coming, as may be seen by comparing Luke xvii, 30 ; 1 Cor. i, 8; v, 5; 2 Cor. i, 14; Philip, i, G, 10; ii, 16; 2 Thess. ii, 2. (1) The phrase, as it is suggested by the 14th, 15th, 16th verses of the previous chapter, cannot refer to the destruction of Jerusalem as Schottgen, Hammond, Harduin. See Whitby's reply to Hammond in loc. (2) Nor, for the same reason, can it refer to each man's death, or to this and to the end of all things (Zwingli, Bloomfield, and Riggenbach). Chrysostom writes oi>x rj Koivh fxovov dXka ku'i >] eKacrrov ISia," for the one resembles the other." That may be the self-application for each one, since death to him is the day of the Lord, but it is not the true meaning and reference of the clause under review — co? /cAe7TT>79 ev vvkti . . . epx^Tai — " ? being resumed in ovrco?, not as Bengel puts it, uti dicetur versa sequente. The present is not for the future (Koppe, Flatt, Pelt), nor does it express the suddenness of the event (Bengel, Koch), but its absolute certainty. Bernhardy, p. 371; Winer, § 40, 2. Though the Advent be future, the present gives it an abiding characteristic. There is no need of saying with Riggenbach, das Bild des Diebes scheint unedel zu sein ; or with Schott, si quid parum decor i Jtuic cojnparationi inesse videatur perpendamas necesse est, minime personam Christ I redituri cum fare adventante, sed rein ipsam cum Juris adventu conferri. Such a distinction serves no purpose. The figure in its suggestiveness is easily understood. He comes as the thief comes without warning, in such an hour as men think not, and when they are not looking for him. Theodoret says, to ailSiov tj/? SecnroTiKijg irapovata^ aire'iKaa-e AcXe7TT>/. The suddenness of the event is therefore the idea specially sug- gested by the image, so far as dead saints and the surviving ones are concerned. The terribleness of the event which Schott, Hofmann, and Alford find in the figure is brought out only in the following verse, and as regards unprepared unbe- lievers, as has been remarked. There is no doubt that this verse and others having a similar figui'e originated in the earl}' church the opinion that the Lord would come in the night, and especially on Easter Eve, as He came when the first pass- over was held in Egypt, and solemn vigils were kept in expectation of the event. Lunemann. Bingham, vol. VII, p. 23(>. The language employed by the apostle has a strong resemblance to that of our Lord in Matt, xxiv, 43 ; xxv, G; and he ascribes to his readers a perfect knowledge of the statement. Most probably the information was acquired through the apostle's Ver. 3.] FIEST EPISTLE TO THE THESSALONIANS. 177 own personal teaching when he was with them. There is no proof of Ewald's supposition that he had left with them a written document, Urhunde, a so-called gospel referred to in the previous words Aoyo? Kvplov (iv, 15). Nor is there any foundation for Wordsworth's hypothesis that they might have had a written gospel, " either Matthew or Luke, probably the latter." The apostle had in his preaching at Thessalonica dwelt on the suddenness of the Second Advent ; the ignorance of its period imposing constant preparedness and watchfulness. And they knew this correctly. What they knew was that they did not know the time, but only the solemn suddenness, of the Lord's coming (Luke xii, 39). (Ver. 8.) oral' Xeyoocriv Etp'/w/ koi a/j/>/ Kai aa-cpaXeia — " peace and safety," that is, are on all sides, perhaps a reminiscence of Ezek. xiii, 10, 10, " saying peace and there was no peace." The first term may be inner quiet and the second outer tranquillity, nothing within or M 178 COMMENTARY ON ST. PAUL'S [Chap. V. without disturbing or menacing their ominous repose, which is so fallacious and so soon to be sternly and suddenly broken and destroyed. The unheralded storm dashes on them in a moment, as if from a clear and unclouded sky, or, in the apostle's figure — ■ rore a!(pi'lSiog avroig ecplcrrarai oAeOpo? — " then suddenly on them does come destruction." The adjective aiv!Sto?, " unforeseen," from its position emphatic — a species of predicate of manner — is more, as Ellicott says, than a mere epithet, and may be rendered by an adverbial phrase, repentinus eis super- veniet interitus (Vulgate), the Syriac having i»OQQJ jl^AiLo Kiihner, § 685 ; Winer, § 54, 2 ; Ellendt's note, Arrian, vol. I, p. 174 ; Thucydides, vi, 49 ; viii, 28. The same happens often in Latin — as subitus irrupit (Tacitus, Hist., iii, 47); Kritz, Sal- lust, note on the phrase aspera fcedaque evenerant, i, p. 125, compared with do., ii, p. 174. The present verb e^la-rarai is to come upon by surprise (Luke xxi, 34 ; Acts iv, 1 ; xvii, 5) ; to alvywa-iv — " and they shall in no wise escape." 180 COMMENTAEY ON ST. PAUL'S [Chap. V. There is no accusative expressed, and it narrows the sense to supply one, so that the verb is to be taken in its fullest signifi- cance (Heb. ii, 3 ; xii, 25 ; Ecclus. xvi, 13). A direct accusative is, however, sometimes added (Rom. ii, 3 ; 2 Mace, vii, 35 ; vi, 2G). Whatever is threatened, whatever they merit, they shall not escape, but shall meet with the opposite of peace and safety. For the double negative ov p.7'1, see under iv, 15. Compare Ps. lxxiii, 18, 19. (Ver. 4.) 'Yp-ei^ Se, dSe\] — " that the day should overtake you as a thief." The order >; foepa vjuu? is supported by BKLN, nearly all mss., and by the Greek fathers Epi- phanius, Chrysostom, Theodoret, Damascenus ; while the order vfxus i] foepa is found in A D F, both Latin versions, and many Latin fathers, and is adopted by Lachmann, Tischendorf in his first edition, and Ellicott. The authority is not very decided either way, and it may be said on the one hand that vfias was emphasized purposely by putting it first, or, on the other hand, that it was put after foe pa according to the simpler order which is preferred by Tischendorf in his 2nd and 7th editions, and by Alford. The reading K-AeVra?, received by Lachmann, and found in A B and the Coptic version, is favoured by Grotius, De Wette, and Ver. 4.] FIRST EPISTLE TO THE THESSALONIANS, lSl Ewald, but cannot be sustained, for though it be the more difficult reading, it wants the authority of manuscripts, ver- sions, and fathers, "ha is not to be rendered ecbatically as iorrre (Pelt, Schott, Olshausen, Baumgarten-Crusius, Bisping, Jowett), but with its usual telic signification so far modified that result is combined with purpose (Winer, § 53, 6), or pur- pose is viewed as embodied in result. Liinemann states the connection thus, " the penalty which falls on the unbelieving and God-estranged, may that not fall upon you." Hofmann regards it differently — " the being in darkness would be indis- pensable in order to such a surprise." The sense then is, ye are not in darkness, for this blessed purpose, that the day may not overtake you as a thief. The purpose of your enlightenment is that the day may not surprise you, as it must and will those who are still in darkness. The verb KaraKafiy has from Kurd an intensified meaning, that of eager or sudden seizure, and not necessarily that des feindlichen Ergreifens (Koch). A similar sense modified by the context is found in Mark ix, 18 ; John viii, 3, 4; xii, 35 ; Philip, iii, 12. The phrase r) yifxepahas been taken by many as synonymous with ;; i]pkpa Kvplov. Hence F adds eKelvrj, the two Latin versions have ilia, and the Syriac reads psOQj ooi. But the reference is wrong, as the following verses show in the phrases, "children of the day," " not of darkness," " let us who are of the day." The noun >']/u.epa is now used as in contrast with ct/co'to?, and is the period of light, that light which, breaking in upon the soul, so benignly fills it that it is no longer ev a-Korei, and which shineth more and more unto the perfect day — the day of the Lord. The day — the period of light, the day-spring from on high — should not surprise them like a thief stealing suddenly upon them, for they were not in darkness, they were already children of light, familiar with it, and prepared for the fuller light of "that day." If the reading K\e7rrashe adopted,the mean- ing would be — The day bursting upon the thief surprises him in his nocturnal prowling, or seizes him unawares when not suspecting the dawn to be at hand ; but ye are not in that predicament, ye are not like thieves " who ply their work in the night" (De Wette) The inference or lesson is given by Ambrose, nobis cn'nn nun scire proderat ; ut dum certa 182 COMMENTARY ON ST. PAUL'S [Chap. V. futuri judicii momenta nescimus, semper tanquam in excubiis constituti, et in quadam virtutis specula collocati peccandi consuetudinem declinemus ; ne nos inter vitia dies Domini deprehendat; non enim prodest scire, sed metuere quodfuturum est (De Fide, v, 14, Paris, 1845). (Ver. 5.) Travres yap vueis viol (pcoros eto? 7rpdrrovTe?, or ol to. SiKcua K(u ire^idTKTjxkva TrpaTTOVTes (CEcumenius), though such is the result. The " light " and " the day " are so far synonymous, as the day is the period of the light, which puts an end to the darkness. Divine enlightenment fills the believer — the light is his life, the birth and growth of his spiritual existence. ovk ea-p-ev vvktos ovSe cr/coroy? — " we are not of the night nor of darkness." 'Ecr-re, found in a few codices, is a conformation to the previous clauses. It is wrong in Estius, Pelt, and Schott to supply viol ; the genitive by itself rather denotes the sphere to which one belongs. Acts ix, 2 ; xxiii, 6 ; 1 Cor. vi, 19 ; Heb. x, 39 ; Winer, § 30, 5 ; Ast Lex. Platon., sub voce ei/xi ; Bernhardy, p. 165. We believers in general belong not to the night nor to darkness ; night being the period of darkness, it is not our Ver. 6.] FIEST EPISTLE TO THE THESSALONIANS. 183 sphere of origin or action. The night has passed away ; the darkness is gone ; and we are light in the Lord. The apostle passes from the meaning of t)p.epa, as the point of time when the Lord comes again, to its more common meaning of day- time as the period of light in contrast with night-time and darkness, these being taken at the same time as symbols of spiritual states. Being now sons of the day, we live in its light, which is only brightened by the clay of the Lord when it comes, for it brings fuller and endless radiance. In Rom. xiii, 11, 12, 13, the apostle makes a similar transition from the use of day, as meaning the Advent, to its natural or spiritual significa- tion. The startling reverse of the picture is given in Amos v, 18, 19, 20. (Ver. 6.) " Kpa ovv p.i] fca.6ev8cop.ev ws /ecu ol Xonroi — " So then let us not sleep even as the rest." After go?, tcdi is wanting in A B N 1 and in the Vulgate (Codex Amiatinus); but it is found in DFKL N 3 , in the Vulgate, Peshito, and several of the fathers. It is found in similar clauses, 1 Cor. ix, 5 ; Ephes. ii, 3 ; 1 Thess. v, 13. The authorities for the omission are about as valid as those for the insertion. "A.pa is inferential, such being the case, and ovv is collective and argumentative ; then, therefore, as things are, let us in consequence of our being so. Klotz, Devarius, ii, pp. 181-717 ; Donaldson, Cratylus, § 192. As we are sons of the day, and are not sons of the night, let us, I and you, not sleep — sleep and night go together, but sleep and day are incompatible. Sleep is the image of spiritual lethargy and indifference, with- out earnestness or activity. " The others " are the unbelieving world around them, that cared for none of these things, wrapped in a profound slumber, never awakened to the reality of the soul's condition and prospects, and the spiritual consciousness so wholly sunk into torpor and death as to be unsusceptible of saving impressions. See under Ephes. v, 14. Compare Matt, xiii, 13, 14, 15. aWa yp>jyopwp.ev /ecu vij(j>wp.ev — " but let us watch and be sober." The clause is the direct positive contrast to the previous negative one. The verb yp^yopkoo, used as a present, is from the perfect of the verb eyeipco, eypijyopa. Buttmann, vol. II, pp. 114, 115; Phrynichus, ed. Lobeck, p. 118. For 184 COMMENTARY ON ST. PAUL'S [Chap. V. the use of the subjunctive, see Winer, 41, 4. Wakefulness is enjoined by the apostle, on himself, and all his fellow-believers. The verb v)'i(pcop.eu may be from v>) + e = eb, Sanscrit wp, water, der nocht nicht getrunken hat, connected with ebrius and x/wb. (Benfey, Wurzellcx., vol. II, p. 75). Thomas Magister says u/i/yo/))/cre«9 €7riTa, " sons," and some expositors, as Estius, Whitby, Schott, &c, needlessly do the same, and mar the idiom. See under verse 5. It would seem that $ /jfxepa and rj/jiepa are kept distinct in the para- graph, the first being the definite day of the Lord, and the second the present period of illumination and activity. This sobriety, in which the mental powers are preserved in strict discipline, is necessary, and yet it is not enough to be never off our guard, there must also be the assumption of armour — aWa Se'i Kul Ka9o7r\c£epaica, irepiKec^oXaiav, also to want the article, and that in cases " where the governing noun might seem to require the definite form." Winer, § 19, 1 ; Middleton, Greek Article, p. 48, ed. Rose. For the use of the verb euSveiv, compare Herod., vii, 218 ; Xenoph. Cyrop., vi, 4, 2; Wisdom, v, 17; Ephes. vi, 11 ; Rom. xiii, 12. In the phrase OdopctKu wlo-recDs koi ayair^, the genitives are those of apposition. Winer, § 59, 8. Faith and love are the defence of the person. The breast-plate or coat of mail covers the heart, the helmet or military cap defends the head. Il/o-rt? is a Owpag, for it is a faith which realizes one's position, its dangers and its means of safety ; which grasps the truth, and is filled with its living power ; steady in its dependence on the Master, and in its conscious union with Him ; heroic from His example, and self-sustained by His presence. 'AyaVj/, which with 7t[(tti9 forms the KapSicxpvXag, is a love which lives in self-consecration ; which does all duty, and bears all trial from paramount affection to Him ; being knitted to Him, and, through Him, to all that bears His image. These in their combination form an armour of mail tempered so that no weapon can pierce it; a harness through whose joints no arrow can find an unsuspected entrance (1 John v, 4, 5). "And for an helmet the hope of salvation." The genitive crwrj/yo/a? may be taken as that of object, not the basis on which hope rests, but the object which it embraces, or what it desires and expects. See under i, 3. Hoor^pla, used in the abstract, has its most comprehensive meaning, of deliverance from sin and death, from all the penal and polluting effects of the fall — a deliverance incipiently and partially enjoyed now, and to be fully and finally possessed at the Second Advent. The hope of such salvation covers the head in the day of battle, preserves from despondency, nerves to face danger, and braces up under fatigue and difficulty by fixing the gaze on the glorious issue which is no uncertainty, as is told in the following verse. " It is not possible that one fortified by such armour as this should ever fall" (Chrysostom), or as Theodoret pithily puts it, yeveaOa) ipia? eATrt?. What keeps believers sober, vigilant, armed, and thus pre- 188 COMMENTARY ON ST. PAUL'S [Chap. V. pared, is the possession of the three primary graces, faith, love, and hope, arranged as in i, 3. See under it. When these are in lively exercise, the soul is ever wary and watchful, ever prepared for the Master's coming, nay, longing for it — faith believing it, love embracing it, hope ardently anticipating it — and then the day will not overtake us unawares or as a thief. Between this and the somewhat corresponding passage in Ephes. vi, 13, &c, there are some points of difference. First, in the Epistle to the Ephesians, there is a fuller description of the defensive armour — the girdle, the sandal, and the shield, omitted here, are there mentioned. Secondly, there is also mention in that epistle of an aggressive weapon — the sword. And, thirdly, there is some variation in the explanatory terms — there it is the breast-plate of righteousness, but here the breast- plate of faith and love, the distinction between them being that of process and result ; there it is the helmet of salvation, but here the hope of salvation ; and the shield, not enumerated here, is there called the shield of faith. Heart and head being such vital organs are selected as needing special and fitting defence, the shield as well as the breast-plate being said to be faith ; the idea of self-defence is common to both. " Salvation " is also exchanged for the "hope of salvation," the difference being that between salvation, partial now but consciously enjoyed, and the prospect of a perfect salvation in heaven, so that the various figures are not to be pressed too closely, as in Chandler's paraphrase or Gurnall's Christian Armour. For the meaning of the military terms see under Ephes. vi, 14, 17. (Ver. 9.) uti ovk eOero rjixas 6 Geo? ety opyi'jv — " because God did not appoint us to wrath." Alford calls this verse epexe- getical of eXirlSa o-cortiplas, but it rather assigns the ground of that expression — the basis of the "hope" — given first in a nega- tive and then in a positive form. It is not a new motive for watchfulness (Musculus), nor yet generally a motive to assume the armour mentioned, as the Greek fathers, (Ecumenius and Theophylact. Nor is on to be rendered " that " as if it intro- duced the contents or object of the hope (Hofmann). Rom. viii. 20, 21, is not in analogy, for there eV eX-rlSi has no object genitive attached to it as here. In this use of the verb riBivai, Ver. 9.] FIRST EPISTLE TO THE THESSALONIANS. 189 that with an accusative of person followed by ei or jtu are used similarly with \ m Thus in Sept., Ps. lxvi, 9; Is. xlii, 15; Jer. ix, 11; xiii, 1C; Ezek. xiv, 8 ; John xv, 16 ; Acts xiii, 47 (reScuca / is divine wrath against sin, the con- verse of eXeo?. The one implies the other, love to the sinner, opyi'i to his sin. aAX' «9 7repi7roit]/?. The meaning of conservatio is sometimes attached to the word, as in 2 Chron. xiv, 13, where it represents the Hebrew TP9; in Heb. x, 39, "to the saving of the soul" ; but it is needless here to give this meaning and make the following genitive that of apposition. Acquisition therefore is the probable meaning of the noun, as in 2 Thess. ii,14, "Whereunto he called you by our gospel els Trepnrouja-iv Sogtjs" • Heb. x, 39. Hesychius defines it by 7r\eouaa-ju6?, Krtjcri?. In Ephes. i, 14; 1 Peter ii, 9, the word represents the Hebrew n^D : , and the noun is collective in sense (Exod. xix, 5 ; Deut. vii, 6 ; xiv, 2 ; Matt, iii, 17). The Latin versions rightly and simply have in acquisitioncm salutis. See under previous 190 COMMENTARY ON ST. PAUL'S [Chap: V. verse. God's appointment was that we should obtain salvation, deliverance from the opyy, with final acceptance and perfection. The Greek fathers do not give any definite assistance as to the precise shade of meaning. Generally, Chrysostom and CEcume- nius give the result, " that he might save us." Theodoret has 'Iva acbTrjplag a{ft&>i> — " who died for us." inrep has preponderant authority, irepl being found in B N 1 , 17, a similar difference of reading occurring in other places. The clause points out the process by which salvation is obtained, through His death — not His teaching or example, but His death. Not that the clause is properly causal, as the participle in that case would have wanted the article. Donaldson, § 492. It simply describes the death of Christ in immediate connection with our obtainment of salvation, and as showing its precious- ness and certainty. Iva e'cre yprjyopwpev erre KaOevSoo/uev ap.a aw avrco ^crcopev — " in order that whether we wake or sleep, we should together live with Him." "Iva points out the great purpose of His atoning death. The compound e'/re follows generally the con- struction of the simple el, and it may be connected with a Ver. 10.] FIRST EPISTLE TO THE THESSALONIANS. 191 subjunctive. Nor may such a connection be called unclassical, though it is not the ordinary usage, at least among Attic prose writers, paucis admodum locis. Klotz, Devarius, ii, 501. The usage is admitted by Thomas Magister, ov p.era inroraKriKov Se, ir\t]v art twv avdviroTOLKTOdv olov el \d/3cojuai (p. 2G7). In Plato occurs the phrase elre -n? apprjv ehe rig 6>}\v$ y {De Legihis, xii, 9 D, p. 958). See the first note of Stallbaum on the point, vol. X, p. 399; that of Wex, Antig., vol. II, p. 187; and that of Poppo (Thucydides, i, 139) ; Hermann De Parti- cula av. Though the optative in such a case be commonly employed, the subjunctive in the secondary clause may, as Winer suggests, be the result of conformity to the subjunctive in the principal clause (§ 41, 2 c, note 2). The purpose of Christ's death is our life, and that life is independent of the states implied in yp^yopcopev and KaOevSoi/xev ; we may be in the one condition, or we may be in the other, it matters not, we shall together live with him, for on the certainty and reality of this life waking or sleeping has no influence. But what is the meaning of the alternative clauses, " whether we may sleep, whether we may wake"? (1) The opinion of Musculus, Aretius, Whitby, and Fell, which is, whether He comes during the day when we are awake, or during the night when we are asleep, cannot be entertained. This explan- ation is wholly meaningless and unsatisfactory, and is also out of harmony with the solemn statement, and it does not relieve us from the difficulty of a change of meaning in the verbs. (2) Nor can the verbs be taken in an ethical sense, as in the previous paragraph, verses 6-8. For the declaration is that they who being in darkness are asleep, shall be overtaken by the day of the Lord as a thief in the night. To be asleep in this spiritual sense is to be in death, and such a state is wholly incompatible with the possession or prospect of the life described in ha £r'icrcop.ev. (3) The opinion proposed but not adopted by Alford is sufficiently refuted by himself. His statement is, " To preserve the unity of metaphor we may interpret in this sense, that our God died for us, that whether we watch, are of the number of the watchful, that is, already Christians ; or sleep, are of the number of the sleeping, that is, unconverted — we should live." Thus it would be 192 COMMENTARY ON ST. PAUL'S [Chap. V. " who died that all men might be saved," " who came not to call the righteous only, but sinners to repentance." There is to this interpretation the great objection that it confounds the ol Xonroi with the tj/uag, who are definitely spoken of as set by God, not to wrath, but els irepnro'irjcriv o-ooriipia?. And the ex- pression would be a rough and somewhat misleading statement of the general purpose of Christ's death; but its special purpose toward himself and his fellow-believers is the aspect of it present to the apostle's own mind. (4) The words are to be taken in their figurative sense, the first as descriptive of plty- sical life, and the second of physical death. The meaning of the first verb is changed from its ethical sense, and the second is equivalent to Koi/xaa-dai in chap. iv. Compare Matt, ix, 24; Sept., Ps. lxxxviii, 6 ; Dan. xii, 2. Chrysostom says, aXX' erepov eKei tov v7rvov (f)i]cr\ koI eTepov evravQa. The first verb will thus correspond with " we who are alive and remain," and the second with those " who are fallen asleep." The verb ypvyopeh, how- ever, is nowhere found in the sense of to live, and it gets such a meaning here only from its immediate contrast with KaOevSew, and the employment and meaning of both are shaped by the following fyjcrco/mei'. Besides, the two verbs do not simply signify living and dying in themselves, but the first expresses life in its spiritual attitude of watchfulness and preparedness for the Lord's coming, and the second describes that condition or form which death has assumed through the mediation and atonement of the Lord Jesus (iv, 14). Compare Matt, xxiv, 42; xxv, 13 ; Rev. iii, 2, 3 ; Titus ii, 13. There is, as has been said by De Wette, a want of per- spicuity in this necessary change of sense, but the signification is apparent. Von Gerlach's observation, that the sleep of death is itself a portion of the curse of the sleep of sin, however true, does not explain the change of meaning in the two verbs, and would introduce a confusing reference. The final cause of Christ's death is wholly uninfluenced by these two states, living or dying ; they who survive have no advantage over those who sleep, they who sleep are waked up to a higher life. ajuia avrw ^'/crcopev — " we should together live with Him." The connection of d/xa has been variously given. (1) Hofmann Vek. 10. J FIRST EPISTLE TO THE THESSALONIANS. 193 and Riggenbach take the whole clause as one thought, "together with Him," that is, in closest union with Him. Such is pro- bably the purport of the Authorized Version, and the other earlier English ones. But it does not need d/xa to express this idea. (2) Bengel takes djua in a sort of temporal sense — simul,ut Jit adventus. Tot urn institutum est, irepi tcov xP^ vu>v — but ^is idea neither suits the train of thought nor the connection. (3) The adverb d/u.a is suggested by the two states described in the previous clause. They who die before the Advent are severed from them who survive till that period, but both parties in spite of this separation shall be in company as a band of con- temporaries living with Christ (iv, 17). "A//a is together, that is, "in one society" (Rom. iii, 12). It refers immediately to the connection of believers with one another, and not to their union with Christ, which is expressed by arvv avrw. That we should live is the great purpose of His death, and the life is plainly an existence above and beyond the life that ends in sleep. The waking and sleeping have immediate reference to the Second Coming, and the life purposed (W) for us is in con- nection with the same period. The entire paragraph points to this grand destiny, it underlies all the teaching from verse 13 of the previous chapter; the dead rise and the living are changed when the Lord descends, and both together shall be for ever with the Lord. So that the notion of Moller and Hofmann, that the living with Christ is that which is enjoyed now — the living being united to Him, and the dead being asleep in Him — though true in itself, falls short of the full meaning of the declaration before us. The starting-point was the relation of the dead and the living to Christ's Second Coming, ignorance or misconception of that relation having filled the Thessalonian church with sorrow over departed friends and kindred, and the paragraph now closes with an annunciation of the comforting- truth that the dead and the living, though severed in the meantime, are so comprised in the final purpose of our Lord's atoning death that both of them at His return are united, live as one company, and in fellowship with Him. As the result of His death for them the}' - live, life in every form and in every sphere of their nature being secured for them by the surrender of His life for them; they shall together live for ever with Him N 194 COMMENTARY ON ST. PAUL'S [Chap. V. — in His presence, and in communion with Him. Of that life, so blessed and unending, His presence is the primal element and the " chiefest joy" (Rom. xiv, 8, ; 2 Cor. v, 9). Z)}/Xou? — "wherefore comfort one another." This verse is the inference from the foregoing- section — Sio. ovv = quod quum ita sit, Si6 = quamobrem,ut etiam hoc aptius ducts res conjungat Klotz, Devarius, II, p. 173. See under Gal. iv, 31. The Claromontanc Latin has exhorta- mini, the margin of the English version has " exhort," and this rendering is allowed by Turretin, Pelt, De Wette, Peile, Koch, Conybeare, Hofmann, kc. It is a favourite word of the apostle, and its precise meaning in any place can only be gathered from the context. As the exhortation in this place has comfort for its theme, the verb is better taken, as in iv, 18, as meaning " comfort," and the entire preceding context necessitates or at least suggests such a meaning. Even the edification com- manded in the following clause requires this meaning of comfort, as Pelt supposes, ut ejus sit effectus. Baumgarten, Rosen- muller, and Schott would combine both meanings. Theodoret explains by xfyvxaytoyelre. The hortatory part begins in verse 6, passing, as Liinemann remarks, into the consolatory, and the 10th and 11th verses are parallel to iv, 17, 18. The discussion of these momentous themes was brought on by the perplexity and sorrow of the Thessalonian church : they were not to grieve over departed fellow-believers, and the grounds of com- fort are then distinctly set before them. The first portion of the paragraph ends with "wherefore comfort one another;" while the second portion, prolonging the illustration on some points in a more ethical form, leads to the same result, followed up by a similar practical inference, " wherefore comfort one another." There is need of comfort under bereavement, but all true comfort lies in these utterances of the apostle, and they were to ply one another with them. In a word, this wonderful paragraph starts with the monition " that ye sorrow not," and, after opening up the grounds of consolation in the death, re- surrection, and final return of Jesus — securing the union of His people with Him as Saviour, representative, and pledge, and Veb. 11.] FIRST EPISTLE TO THE THESSALONIANS. 195 their communion with one another — it ends with the charge, «' comfort one another." This is the only place where the authorized version renders aXXj/Xoi;?, " yourselves together," Luke xxiii, 12, and xxiv, 14, being somewhat similar; the usual translation is " one another," or " among themselves " or " yourselves," &c. kcu oiKoSofjieiTe eh tov eva, KaOws kol 7roielre — " and edify one another, even as also ye are doing." The figure in the verb is common with the apostle. See under Ephes. ii, 20, where the figure of vaog Qeou is developed at length. Compare 1 Cor. iii, 9, 10; viii, 1 ; x, 23 ; 2 Cor. vi, 16. The phrase eh tov eva, " the one the other," is not without parallel in later classical writers, as Lucian, Dionysius Halicar., Plutarch, Arrian, and also in Theocritus, Idyll, xxii, 05. Examples may be found in Kypke, vol. II, p. 339. Compare Plato, Be Leg., eh Trpo? eva (I, p. 020 c), and see the remarks of Winer, § 20, 2 b. The phrase is in meaning equivalent to u\\)'i\ov; may be joined more closely to the verb, as the Vulgate, hoheatis illos abundantius in charitate, " esteem them in love very highly." So several Greek fathers, Beza, Pelt, Schott, Olshausen, Hofmann, Riggenbach. Neither con- nection is free from difficulty, for, in the first mode, the neutral verb which means to reckon or hold must signify emphatically to regard with esteem, and would require, therefore, some sup- plement as 7repl -TrXeiovo?, Theodoret changing it in explanation into 7r\eiovos avrovs dgiovre rifxrjs') and, in the second mode, a supplement is also indispensable, which GEcumenius inserts thus, ijyeio-Qcu avrovs agtovg rov ayairaaOai; Chrysostom simply saying, fx>] awXcos ayairare aXX InrepeKirepKraov uxravei 7ralSes irarepas. There is, however, no strict example of such a construction. Some quote rl rovro ijyi'jario ev Kplcrei (Job xxxv, 2), and the phrase ev roiavry opyii elxev occurs (Thucydides, ii, 18), but neither of these instances is analo- gous. The sense, however, seems to be what the second mode indicates. The reading of the Received Text, vwep eKirepi]vevcre iv eavrots — " be at peace among yourselves." The English version and the Syriac Peshito, with codex n\ supply an unauthorized "and." This verb, with the exception of Mark ix, 50, is found only in the Pauline writings. Though there is no connecting particle, the clause is not so wholly dis- connected from the previous part of the verse as Liinemann supposes. Next to knowing and loving those who were over them in the Lord was the duty of preserving internal peace, and the injunction prepares the way for the more detailed and special inculcations of the following verses. The reflexive eauroh is used for the reciprocal a\\ij\oi$ (Col. iii, 13 ; Ephes. iv, 32 ; 1 Peter iv, 8). The permutation, as Kuhner remarks, has no other cause quam ut varietur oratio. Gr. Gr., vol. II, § G28 ; Winer, § 22, 5. Xen. Mem., ii, 6, 20, (frdovovvres eavrots pacrovariv aAA^Aot;?. A different reading, ev avroh, is found in D 1 F N and some minuscules, in the Syriac, Vulgate, and some of the Greek fathers ; but eavrois is warranted by A B D 3 K L, in ipsis being employed in the Claromontane Latin. The other reading is not therefore to be adopted, though Theophylact says ypdcperat koi ev avroi?. It was probably felt that the very short injunction appeared awkwardly between the larger entreaties immediately before and after it in verses 11, 13, and 14. Nor could even that reading bear the inter- pretation of the Syriac ^OQiV).\ Ql^A*}, or of the Vulgate, pacem habete cam eis, that is, " be at peace with the presi- sidents." So also Theophylact and Luther, Calvin, Zuingli, Balduin, a-Lapide, Fromond, and others, guided by the Latin version. Chrysostom, like the Peshito, apparently connects the clauses, " for their work's sake be at peace with them." Theodoret puts it, kou p.>] avriXlyeiv rots Trap avrwv Xeyo/xc^ot?. But to sustain such a meaning p.er avroov would be requisite (Rom. xii, 18) ; and the injunction of peace in regard to the presbyters would not be suitable, for submission would be enjoined, as in Heb. xiii, 17. Zuingli proposes another rendering, " in or through them ye have peace" ; but even allowing the reading avrols, this version would require a different order of the words. Peace was a Ver. 14.] FIRST EPISTLE TO THE THESSALONIANS. 201 blessing essential to growth and usefulness; the want of it destroyed edification ; jealousies, alienations, turmoil lead to ultimate extinction (1 Cor. vii, 15 ; xiv, 33 ; Gal. v, 15 ; Ephes. iv, 31 ; 2 Thess. iii, 10; 2 Tim. ii, 22 ; James iii, 14, 10). (Ver. 14.) TrapaKaXovjueu Se vjuag, aSeX^ol — "Now we exhort you, brethren ;" Se being transitional. This address is to the brethren, believers in general. The apostle has alluded to those who held office and wrought and counselled ; but his mind is not wholly occupied by them, or their official preroga- tive. The church itself must act as well as its officers; the presbyters do not so represent the church, or are not so identi- fied with it, as to preclude congregational industry and co-operation. Duty lies on them which they cannot devolve on their rulers. From the time of Chrysostom, however, who says without any argument 717)09 tovs apxovras SiaXeyerai, this charge has been taken as addressed to the office-bearers. The Greek fathers have been followed in this interpretation by Estius and Fromond in the Catholic church, and by Benson, Bloomfield, Macknight, Conybeare, and Peile. But the words are addressed to the a8e\ol, parallel to the aSe\(poi in verse 12, or generally to the members of the church. Conybeare lays a wrong emphasis on t^xa?, " but you, brethren (that is, rulers) I exhort." The order of the words will not bear that exegesis, and the repetition of vovQerelre, and the charge in verse 27, will not sustain it. The allusion to the rulers comes to an end when a new clause intervenes — be at peace among yourselves, you, the people — and the address in this verse has the same continuous congregational reference. Nor is the verse to be regarded as taking up what had been said in verse 11, which is the fitting inferential conclusion (Sio) to the previous sec- tion. The first injunction is — vovQerelre rovs aruKrovg — "admonish the unruly." For the verb see verse 12 and under Ephes. vi, 4. 'AraVro? is found only here in the New Testament, but the adverb and verb occur in the second epistle — the adverb (2 Thess. iii, 0, 11), and the verb (2 Thess. iii, 7). It means out of rank; a soldier in rank is rerayfxevog; uraKroi are ov ra^Qevreg, inordinati (Xenoph., Mem., Ill, 1, 7; Plato, Be Leg., vii, 800 c). See Sturz, Lex. Xenoph., nub voce, vol. I, p. 455. 202 COMMENTARY ON ST. PAUL'S [Chap. V. The term naturally came to denote men lawless in life or disor- derly (Plutarch, Be Puer. Educ., 7). See Ast's Lex. Platon., sub voce, vol. I, p. 298. The translation of the Peshito is too vague, and so is the explanation of Chrysostom and his followers, who class under the epithet all who do contrary to the will of God — as the drunken, the riotous, the covetous, ku\ Travres ol a/uLaprdvovTes. But it is plain that the apostle does not include all sinners under the epithet, which is intended to specify a certain class. From the use of the word in the second epistle, " the disorderly " appear to be those whose minds and habits had become unhinged from their misapprehension of the near- ness of the Lord's coming; those who were ne^lectim; the duties of common life, and had ceased to maintain themselves by such honest labour as characterized the apostle himself when he sojourned among them. See under iv, 11, 12; 2 Thess. iii, 6, 12. irapaiJ.vde'iaOe tovs 6\iyo\fsvxov? — " comfort the feeble- minded." For the verb see under ii, 11. The compound adjective occurs only here in the New Testament, though it is found in the Septuagint, Is. liv, G; lvii, 15; Prov. xviii, 14 ; in Artemidorus, iii, 5, Sia to 6\iyo\Jsuxoi>- The verb occurs also in Isocrates (p. 392 b). Who the feeble- minded are has been disputed. One can scarcely apply the epithet to those who from a sense of sin despaired of divine mercy, or, with Theodoret and Theophylact, to those who had not courage to endure trial or persecution, the latter, after Chrysostom, comparing them to the seed that fell on the rocky ground. The reference, considering the strain of the previous context, is to the class who were inclined to " sorrow as those who had no hope," who had not grasped the great truth of the safety of the dead as propounded by the apostle — so Theodoret in one of his explanations — and they are distinguished from the weak generally in the following clause. Hofmann's objection that theirs was a case of error and not of faint-heartedness, nicht Kleinmuth sondem Irrtkum, is of no weight, as Riggenbach remarks, for the error led to feeble- mindedness. They, then, who were faint-hearted and could not realize the hope of immortality and resurrection at the Master's return, so as to be filled with the sure and certain \ i:n. 15.] FIRST EPISTLE TO THE THESSALONIANS. 203 prospect, were to be comforted — not to be chidden as dull, or rebuked as sceptical, but to be encouraged. uvre-^eaOe twv dcrOei'cov — "support the weak" — sustinete in- Jlrmos (Claromontane). The verb is used only in the mid- dle in the New Testament (Luke x, 9; Acts iv, 9; v, 15; 1 Cor. xi, 30 ; Sept., Prov. iv, G ; Is. lvi, 2, 4, G). From signifying " to hold against " literally, or " stand firm against," it came to signify " to hold on by " or " to keep close to," and thus " to care for, to assist." Thus the Greek fathers generally understand it (1 Cor. xi, 30). The weak are not the physically infirm, but the weak in faith or in other Christian graces, roh daOepouvrag irepl rrjv -k'kttiv (Theophylact). Rom. xiv, 1; xv, 1 ; 1 Cor. viii, 7, 11, 12. Pelagius explains by sustinete uuper eredentes, qui nondum sunt confirmati. Those whose faith had not risen to that ascendency which governs and inspires the whole nature, or whose knowledge had not acquired clearness and symmetry, who had not come to the riches of the full assurance of understanding, or a perfect and unshaken confidence and hope, were to be helped and not frowned upon; were not to be neglected, but cherished with assiduous and kind painstaking — /muKpoOvmeiTe -trpbs iravTas — " be long-suffering towards all." The verb is opposed to o^vOv/ueiv, and denotes that mild and patient temper which does not easily take offence, which is not excited to immediate anger by hasty words or deeds, which does not fly into a rage when one's zeal is thwarted or his motives disparaged, but bears and forbears in the midst of pro- vocation. And this spirit was to be exercised 7rpo? 7rarra?. The reference is limited to the three classes specified in the verse — the unruly, the faint-hearted, and the weak — by Chry- sostoni and Theophylact, Koppe, De Wette, Hofmann, and Jowett. But it is better to take it as unrestricted — all men and not all fellow-believers. Long-suffering towards all with whom one is brought into contact in the church and out of it is enjoined. See under Ephes. iv, 2. (Ver. 15.) )opare /x»/ -n? kclkov avri koikovtivi uttoow — "see that no one render evil for evil to any one." The optative form dirocxn is found in some codices ; airooo'u] is read in D 1 , but there is no ground for accepting it. BXexeti'//)/ is commoner in the New 204 COMMENTARY ON ST. PAUL'S [Chap. V. Testament than the formula commencing this verse, which is found, however, in Matt, xviii, 10 ; Mark i, 44, and also among classical writers. Gayler, p. 316, 17; Phrynichus, ed. Lobeck, p. 345. 'A.7roS(ti is explained at length by Winer, De Verborum cum Praepositionibus Compositovum in N. T. Usu, part IV, which treats of verbs compounded with airo. The original reference is to what one possesses, kcckov, and out of which he gives, in return for what he got, kukov. The exhortation is general, and with an individualizing application to the church and to every member of it without exception. The cautionary form of the charge shows that it was needed, that they were living in the midst of inducements to cherish retaliation. De Wette argues that because the apostle does not write rt? v/jlwv, he implies that revenge could not be imputed to believers, and enjoins that the better among them were to labour to prevent its outbreak in others. But the apostle is writing to the church, v/xwv being implied, and what power could they have to restrain vengeful words and acts in the case of others around them ? The recency of their conversion made it possible, if not probable, that, on the part of many, the habits of heathen times had not been wholly surmounted. Compare Matt, v, 30, &c. ; Rom. xii, 17 ; 1 Pet. iii, 9. All retaliation is forbidden, and the prohibition is peculiar to Christianity (Koch). See under Ephes. iv, 2G, 27. It is needless to say with Schrader that the prohibition refers to the heathen from whom believers had so much to endure, though they are also included. The negative is followed by the positive inculcation — uXXa iruvrore to ayuOov Sito/cere — " but always follow after what is good." The precise meaning of ayaOov has been dis- puted. Liinemann and Riggenbach take it to mean morally good, sittlich Gute ; Koppe, Flatt, Schott, and Olshausen regard it as the beneficial or the useful; Hofmann and Moller, " what is good for one " ; Beza, Piscator, Pelt, and Baumgarten-Crusius view it as special beneficence. As it is opposed to kukov, evil embodied in word or act, it will naturally mean the opposite, or good embodied in word or act, and this comprises all the other opinions, for it is what is morally good according to the divine law, and must from its Ver. 1G.J FIRST EPISTLE TO THE THESSALONIANS. 205 nature tend to his good who receives it. See under Gal. vi, 10; Ephes. iv, 28. And this good was not to be studied accidentally or periodically, they were not to be surprised into it, nor yet driven away from it by provocation — iravrore SicoKere, pursue it always, neither intermittently nor languidly — they were to set their soul upon it. This verb is often followed by an abstract noun (Rom. ix, 30, 31 ; xii, 13 ; xiv, 19 ; 1 Cor. xiv, 1 ; Heb. xii, 11; Sept., Ps. xxxiii, 15; Pro v. xxi, 21). It is similarly used in Plato, and sometimes with the contrast ovre Sicokciv ovre /? in the New Testament, see under Ephus. ii, 20, and iv, 11. The prophet was next in honour and position to the apostles ; he was a teacher directly inspired by the Holy Ghost, uttering, suddenly and consciously, and with strange power, revelations which had not of necessity in them any disclosure of the future. The prophet's impulse was under his own control, and his teaching was to "edification, exhortation, -and comfort." His special function was toward them which believe — it was not to win converts, but to promote spiritual progress, though not specially or exclusively, for there belonged to him the awful power of laying bare men's hearts and character by flashing a sudden light upon them; and a plain man (ISuirrijs), or an unbelieving man (airia-Toi), who felt his nature so read would be so struck that, " falling down on his face, he will worship God, and report that God is in you of a truth " (1 Cor. xii, 14). Prophecy, therefore, in the primitive church, served a vital and momentous purpose. Compare Acts xi, 27 ; xiii, 1 ; xv, 32 ; xix, 6 ; Rom. xii, G. Teaching, as distinct from prophe- sying, was more human and equable in its character " as the reflective development of thought," was not so original, and might not produce those instantaneous and alarming results. These prophesyings they were not to despise, but were ever to welcome them as divine manifestations. The apostle gives direction to the prophets themselves in 1 Cor. xiv, 2G-33. A proneness to set prophesyings and all such uncommon charis- mata at nought might originate in the church, because either impostors might make pretensions to the gift and lead the simple astray by their false lights, or because fanatics might become their own dupes, and give out for supernatural utterances their own wretched delusions. But there is no ground for supposing that in Thessalonica prophecy was depreciated in comparison with the more dazzling gift of tongues, as was the case at Corinth (1 Cor. xiv, 1, 5). We find Paul disobeying prophecy, and the earnest dissuasives based upon it (Acts xxi, 4,14). " (Ver. 21.) -Trdi'Ta Se SoKifxa^ere — " but prove all things." The particle Se is omitted in the Textus Receptus, and is not found in A N 1 and many mss., nor in the Peshito or Coptic versions, nor in many quotations in the fathers. But it is Ver. 21.] FIEST EPISTLE TO THE THESSALONIANS. 211 found in BDFKL S* in both Latin versions, in the Philoxe- nian Syriac, in the Gothic version, and in several patristic citations. The genuineness is thus amply supported. Some of the fathers might omit it pro libertate citandi, and it might fall out from being next to So in the following word, or be left out from a desire to make the verse a terse and disconnected maxim. The reading SoKi/uLa^ovTe? has no real authority, nor has Kal in connection with the next clause. The verb means, to put to the test, to try whether a thing should be accepted, " the proved becoming the approved." See 1 Cor. iii, 13. The injunction, begun by oe after a negative clause, stands in anti- thesis to the previous command, and Travra is thus restricted b}^ the context. The clause by itself is an excellent maxim of general significance and application, but the sense is fairly limited to the subject in hand. "Do not put down the pro- phesyings, but subject them to the proof — ru? ovrcag irpo(p}j- relaipov is a substantive ; but Bengel, Pelt, Schott, and Lasch take it as an adjective, von jeder Boxen Art; ah omni specie mala (Vulgate), and the Syriac has )m » n as . ^i> ^1d. Bengel, Middleton, Tittmann, and Schott contend that if irov^pov were a substantive, it would have the article prefixed to it. But, first, the article would be necessary if irovt\pov referred to some distinct element of the iravra in the previous verse ; and, secondly, the article is not necessary to abstract adjectives when the totality of what is specified is not intended, but only a part (Kuhner, § 48G) ; kuku kcu cuV^/xt eirpa^ev : TpiTov . . . clSos uyaOov (Plato, Rep., II, 357 c). Heb. v, 14. Chrysos- tom, in one of his Homilies, has ovSiv eo-riv kukiu? etSos oirep ar6\p.j]Tov. Then, thirdly, if irov^pov were an adjective, the antithesis to to kuXov would be greatly weakened ; and, lastly, an adjective would scarcely agree with eloos as signifying kind or species. From every kind or form of evil were they to abstain in thought and deed ; from whatever would prompt them to retaliate, chill their joy, hinder their prayers, inter- rupt or limit their thanksgivings, or lead them to frown on spiritual utterances ; from everything " in doctrine or in conduct " (Theodoret) which might bring them spiritual injury in their individual or ecclesiastical capacity. The commentators have remarked that some of the fathers use a peculiar quotation which has been thought to throw some light on these clauses. The phrase is ylvecrOe Sokijuoi Tpaire^lraL, "become 3^0 approved money-changers." The clause is connected immediately with this verse, and quoted as if it formed a portion of this epistle by Clement of Alexandria, Basil the Great, Ambrose, and Athanasius ; the citation of the Alexandrian Cyril and that of the apostolical constitutions are somewhat different, and do not directly connect themselves with the verses before us. Various sources have been assigned to it by those who have employed it. Clement of Alexandria assigns it generally to Scripture, rj ypafyi] ; Cyril of Alexandria ascribes it to Paul, and after quoting it adds verses 21 and 22 of this chapter. Similarly, and without quoting these verses so fully, Origen, Jerome, and Epiphanius ascribe it to Christ. Usher thought that it was taken from the Apocryphal Gospel 214 COMMENTARY ON ST. PAUL'S [Chap. V. according to the Hebrews. The probability is that it is one of Christ's unwritten utterances, many of which must have been preserved and handed down in the early church. Compare 1 Cor. vii, 10 ; Acts xx, 35. But the connection of this prjpa ov with the verses under discussion, though somewhat striking in the patristic writings, is in reality very slender. It is but the echo of Soki/uloi in SoKipd^ere, with some slight re- semblance of thought which might be imaged in the work of a nummular ius. Hansel, however, imagining that the apostle had the utterance before his mind, has wrought out the idea to its full extent, in the belief that it throws a new light upon verses 21 and 22. His paraphrase is, "The good money keep; with every sort of bad money have nothing to do ; act as expe- rienced money-changers ; all the money presented to you as good, test." The illustration is artificial and far-fetched, though it is adopted by Baumgarten-Crusius, and allowed by Neander. But if such were the usage, the wording must have been different, as Liinemann. Besides, elSos cannot of itself mean money — elSo$ vopia-paros — nor would the verb a7re'xecr#e be at all applicable, for the turn of thought would be, not keep away from it, but put it away from you. The quota- tions from the fathers referred to in this paragraph may be found in Suicer's Thesaurus, sub voce rpa-Tre^irw ; and a list of the supposed unwritten utterances of Christ may be seen in Fabricius, Codex Apocr. Novi Testamenti, pp. 321-335, with a long note on the one in question. (Yer. 23.) Avtos <5e o Geo? T>j? etprjvijs ayiacrai vpas oXoreXei? — " Now may the God of peace Himself sanctify you wholly." Ae is transitional to another theme — not in full contrast to what has been stated, but rather complementary. They are enjoined to abstain from vengeful acts, and to cherish beneficent feelings ; to act towards those among them as their condition and character sug- gested and required ; to be continuous in spiritual gladness, in prayer and thanksgiving; not to repress spiritual manifesta- tions, but to apply a spiritual discernment to them ; to appro- priate what was good in them, and to abstain from every species of evil. These are so many detached elements of sanc- tification, which are pressed upon them, and which only Vjsb. 23. J FIRST EPISTLE TO THE THESSALONIANS. 215 through divine grace they could possess or exhibit, and through frailty often only in an imperfect degree. His heart's desire for them is now summed up in this concluding and comprehen- sive prayer. It can scarcely be said to be in contrast with them and the efforts which they might be able to make, as De Wette, Ellicott, Alford, Liinemann — for though in form, indeed, prayer is in contrast with precept, yet this is rather a prayer to God to strengthen them for all those duties which had been set before them, by developing their perfect sanctifi- cation. They are bidden to do those duties, and God himself is implored to sanctify them. Ae implies that the subject, though connected, is different from what precedes; they are enjoined to do, but He is implored to give. Auto? is emphatic — Himself and none other; and indeed none other than He can be so appealed to, or can answer such an appeal. Winer, § 24, 5. The genitive eipi'ivrj? points to Him as its continuous giver or producer, and thus characterizes Him, die domlnirenden Eigenschaften (Scheuerlein, p. 115). Peace is that inner tran- quillity resulting from divine acceptance and growing assimila- tion to the divine image, which is inwrought by God,and sustained by His Spirit. See under Ephes. i, 2; Col. iii, 15; and especially under Philip, iv, 7. It is out of the question to refer the noun to the distant cognate verb in the 13th verse. ' Aytdaat, not used by the classics, occurs often in the Septuagint and New Testament, and means to make ciyios ; hence believers are called oi I'lyiao-fxevoi (Acts xx, 32; xxvi, 18; 1 Cor. i, 2; Jude 1). See under Ephes. i, 1. The adjective oAoreXe*? occurs only here in the New Testament, though it is sometimes found in later Greek writers ; and the adverb occurs in the version of Aquila (Dent. xiii. 17). It signifies, complete in reference to amount, that in which nothing is wanting essential to aim or end. Thus the Vulgate, per omnia, or as OEcumenius explains it, tovtccttl oXoug Si' oXtov. The emphatic order of the words is thus preserved, and the pronoun and adjective kept in natural concord. Others, however, take oXoreXeis in an ethical sense, and as the accusative of result — sanctify you so that you become entire or perfect. So the Claromontane Latin, ad perfectionem ; Jerome gives us the alternative, per omnia vel 216 COMMENTARY ON ST. PAUL'S [Chap. V. in omnibus sive plenos et perfectos; and this last view is adopted by Ambrosiaster, Erasmus, Estius, Koppe, Pelt. But the other interpretation is preferable, as being the simpler, and as it keeps distinct the meaning of the two compound adjectives — kcli o\6ic\i]pov vpwv to 7rvev/ULU kul i) \tsvx>] K(u TO (r^P-U- afiifiTTToos . . . Ti]p)j6eii] — " and entire may your spirit and soul and body be preserved blameless." B}- Ka) he passes on to the particulars, annexing to the more general prayer the specific petition. Winer, § 53, 3. The adjective oXoKXypog is, whole in all its parts, explained in James i, 4, as kv pqSevl Xenropevoi, " wanting in nothing," and this is the only other place of the New Testament in which the word occurs. The cognate noun, 6\oK\tjpiai> — "his perfect soundness " — is applied in Acts iii, 10, to the state of the lame man after being- healed, and the adjective describes the unchipped or unbroken stones of which an altar might be built, in Deut. xxvii, 6. In Ezek. xv, 5, it represents the Hebrew dw, and similarly in 1 Mace, iv, 47, XlOovs oXo/cXj/poi/? /caret top vopov ; applied also to a full week in Lev. xxiii, 15 ; and in Deut. xvi, 6, in the Alexandrian Recension. Is. i, 6 ; Wisdom xv, o. Josephus employs it to denote the physical symmetry of the priests (Antiq., iii, 2, 2) ; and Philo uses it both of priests and victims {Be Vict, 2; De Of., 1). Plato, Leg., vi, 759 c; Stallbaum's Note, vol. X, § 2, p. 140 ; Phacdrus, p. 250 c ; Ast., Lex. Platon., sub voce; Trench, 8ynon., § 22; Wetstein,m loc. The adjective standing here as a secondary predicate belongs to all the substantives, irvevp-a, V^X'?' o-wp-a, though agreeing in gender with the nearest one, to which the Autho- rized Version wrongly confines it. Winer, § 59, 5. It describes a sanctification in which no element of God's purpose is unrealized, or of a believer's perfection is absent or defective, and that in every part of our nature. The verb Tijpcco is used of divine guardianship (John xvii, 11, 12, 15; Rev. iii, 10; Jude 21). The preservation of spirit, soul, and body, is characterized as up.ep7rTW, the adverb qualifying the verb. Compare ii, 10 ; iii, 13. The preservation is embodied in this holiness which shall incur no censure, as being perfect in nature (oAoreXe??), and complete in extent (6\oK\ypoi>) ; and the period is — Ver. 24.] FIRST EPISTLE TO THE THESSALONIANS. 217 ev t) l i irapoutTia tov Ivupiov ij/uuov 'hjcou \pio<, ir poarevx^o-Qe irep) t)pwv — " Brethren, pray for us." The same request is made in other epistles (Rom. xv, 30; Ephes. vi, 19; Col. iv, 3; 2 Thess. iii, 1; Heb. xiii, 18. Compare 2 Cor. i, 11). The verb is sometimes followed by virlp, and for the distinction, if any, between the two preposi- tions, see under Ephes. vi, 19. For their use in another con- 218 COMMENTARY ON ST. PAUL'S [Chap. V. nection, see under Gal. i, 4. The Greek commentators call attention to the request as a proof of the apostle's humility. That Timothy and Silvanus are included is quite likely as they are comprised in the opening salutation. Prayer for them on the part of the church would prove its living interest in them, and a sympathy with their labours and trials, and would doubtless comprehend earnest petition for divine blessing on them in person, and in all the arduous evangelical toil in which they were engaged. A second injunction is — (Ver. 20.) 'A? orav \eyw/j.ev (frlXtjcrov uvtov uvt e/m.ov (Chrysostom). The verse plainly implies that those who received the epistle were to salute all the others. Hofmann, approved by Riggen- bach, wrongly holds, on the other hand, that as verse 25 is ad- dressed to all the Thessalonians, this verse also has the same application, the meaning being — " Deliver my salutation in connection with the holy kiss to all the brethren ; and this the Thessalonians did collectively, when on hearing these words they kissed one another." But the simple terms will not warrant such a deduction. The greeting was to assume a special form — ev (piXi'ifxari, ep being instrument; the kiss conveyed the salutation. It is called holy, aylw, as being the token and symbol of Christian affection, and not the form of mere civility or worldly courtesy. The same epithet is employed in Rom. xvi, 16; 1 Cor. xvi, 20 ; 2 Cor. xiii, 12, where also aXXyXov? is employed. In 1 Peter v, 14, the phrase is ev (piX/i/nari ay('nrt^. The apostle sometimes reverses the position of the noun and adjective, as in some of these passages — the difference being, according to Fritzsche, as between osculum Christianum, and Christianum osculwm (Ad. Rom., vol. Ill, 310). Theodoret from the epithet dyiov Ver. 26.] FIRST EPISTLE TO THE THESSALONIANS. 219 infers that the kiss was not to be a SoXepov (plXy/ma like that of Judas. As may be seen from many passages in the Old Testament, not only near relations of both sexes kissed one another, as parents and children and members of the same household, but also persons unrelated, in token of friendship or under the guise of it. Among the Greeks and Romans the custom prevailed ; and, among Persians and Arabs, the mode of kissing part of the person and dress was indicative of rank. The Christian kiss here enjoined was continued in the early church — both in the East and West. It was apparently observed at first without distinction of sex, as the verse before us would seem to imply. The Apostolical Constitutions say—" Then," that is, at the end of the service, " let the men give the men, and the women the women, the Lord's kiss, but let no one do it in deceit, as Judas betrayed the Lord with a kiss " (Lib. ii, 57). Again, at the end of a form of prayer for the faithful, " let the deacons say to all, Salute ye one another with a holy kiss " (Lib. viii, 11). In the Eastern churches the men and women sat on opposite sides of the building. Justin the martyr records, that after the administration of baptism and the prayers accompany- ing it, " we salute one another with a holy kiss " (Apol., i, 65). Thus Tertullian argues that a Christian woman should not marry a heathen, as he would be unwilling to allow her to go to the prisons to embrace the martyr in his chains, or at other times to give the kiss of peace to a brother. The kiss was also given to persons newly baptized, as is mentioned both by Cyprian and Augustine (Cyprian, Ep. 59 ; Bingham, iv, 49). Tertullian says, Jejunantes habita oratione cum fratribus subtrahunt osculum ixicis,quod est signaculum orationis (Be Oratione, xviii, vol. I, p. 5G9, Opera, ed. (Ehler). The kiss was given before the distribution of the elements at the Eucharist, and it was also given to the bishop and to the presbyter on their conse- cration (Bingham, Antiquities, ii, 11, £ 10; ii, 19, § 17; iv, 6, § 15). It was called eiprjvtj, pax, and oscidum pads — hence the phrase dare pacem, rhv apyvtjv SlSocrOai; and Clement of Alexandria gives it the epithet pv Irjcrov jZ.pi] eV/cA>/o-/a OccTcraXoi'iKecou ev Qeo> iraTpi })[xm> kui YLvpiw Itjarov X/j/rrrw — " Paul and Silvanus and Timotheus to the Church of the Thessalonians in God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ." The address is the same as in the First Epistle, with the addition of tj/utov after -n-arpi See under i, 1, for some of its peculiarities. There are some minor variations and corrections in the reading which need not be recounted. (Ver. 2.) X"/° i? l V^ Kai &PW } ] otto Geo? irarpos ij/uan' Kat Kvplou lijcrov Xpia-rov — " grace to you and peace from God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ." The rnxwv after 7raTpo9 is doubtful, though it has in its favour A F K L N, the Vulgate, both the Syriac versions, and the Coptic version, with Chrysostom, Theodoret, &c. It is omitted in BD, in the Claromontane Latin, and in Theojihylact. The external authority is great, and probably prevails over the conjecture that ))/ul(ou may have been inserted for the sake of conformity to the opening salutations in many other epistles (Rom. i, 7 ; 1 Cor. i, 3 ; 2 Cor. i, 2 ; Ephes. i, 2 ; Philip, i, 2 ; Col. i, 2 ; Phile. 3). There is little probability that the pronoun was omitted in this verse on account of its occurrence in the first verse. Tischendoi-f omits it, Lachmann brackets it, Griesbach prefixes his mark of omissio minus probabilis. Harpos is used absolutely in Gal. i, 3, and in the pastoral epistles, 1 Tim. 228 COMMENTARY ON ST. PAUL'S [Chap. I. i, 2 ; 2 Tim. i, 2 ; Titus i, 4- ; but in the two first citations there is a various reading, not, however, of preponderant value. For the sense of the terms see under Ephes. i, 2 ; Gal. i, 1, 3. The apostle, as is his wont, now thanks God for them — for their spiritual progress, and for their patience under persecution and afflictions, those afflictions being tokens of God's righteous judgment, which will reward them and punish their enemies ; and the period of retribution is the personal revelation of the Lord Jesus from heaven in glory at the final day. (Ver. 3.) YiV)(apiv, dSe\oi — " We are bound to give thanks to God always for you, brethren." See under 1 Thess. i, 3; Ellicott on Col. i, 12. Not only does he give thanks, but he feels a profound and irrepressible obligation to give thanks. Not that he was ever reluctant or forgetful to bless God ; not that his thanksgiving needed a special impulse to express itself ; but that in this case there sprang up, from all the circumstances, a sense of duty so profound that the thanksgiving is not simply a becoming form at the opening of the epistle, but a devout act which, from the healthy condition of the Thessalonian Church and his intense paternal interest in it, had become to him a holy necessity. And he adds — icadois a£tov €, oti inrepav^avei >/ 7tiitti<; v/jlwv, k vfxwv ei<; aWyXov? — " as it is meet, because your faith groweth exceedingly, and the love of every one of you all to each other aboundeth." By not a few the clause KaOm d^iov earw is taken as a paren- thetical insertion — uti par est (Beza) — and ore is joined to , " we are bound to give thanks (as is meet and right) — bound to give thanks, that your faith," &c. Others, who hold the same connection, regarding such a sense as flat and pointless, infuse other thoughts, as in one of Theophy- lact's explanations, \va p.t]Se ewi Tfl ev\apie/Aoyuei', the intervening clause, kuOws a^iov eo-Tiv, is superfluous. (2) The insertion of aSeX^oi breaks the connection,and, making the clause independent, severs 6e[\ojtjL€v from on, &C. (3) As Limemann remarks against Schott's exegesis, kuOws does not signify measure or degree, as is implied in modani eximium. (4) The clause KaOcos a£i6v ccrriv does not gather the stress upon it, but only carries forward the thought to the distinct and enumerated grounds of thankfulness, and therefore the clause connected with the first words of the verse is specially linked to what follows. We are bound to give thanks as is most due, because your faith groweth exceedingly — the brief assertion of the meetness of the thanks- giving leading so naturally to the production of the reasons for it. Nor is there in the clause any pleonasm (Schott), or that tautology which Jowett imagines — "tautology which with the apostle is often emphasis, a£ioy expressing a higher degree of the same notion than o^e/Xo^ei'." Such an exegesis, however, does not create tautology—" it is not merely an obligation, but a noble and worthy thing," is his own paraphrase. The tw r o thoughts are quite distinct — duty in itself and in the character of the deed comprised in it. Nor is the connection so poor and unnatural as Jowett asserts, for in o^e/Ao/xey the duty is repre- sented in its subjective aspect, as obligation felt by the apostle and his colleagues, our " bounden duty," and KaOcos a£iov ecrriv introduces its objective basis — the spiritual experience and progress of the Thessalonian Church. The clause, there- fore, is followed by otl — quoniam in both Latin versions — because your faith groweth exceedingly. Winer, § 53, 8. Though verbs compounded with- vir'ep are favourites with the apostle, the verb inrepavgdvei occurs only here. Fritzsche, Rom., vol. I., p. 351, who, besides Rom. v, 20 — the verse commented on — refers to Rom. vii, 37; 2 Cor. vii, 4; xi, 5; Philip, ii, 9 ; 1 Tim. i, 14. The simple verb is used transitively in other places, but intransitively, as here, in Acts vi, 7. Their faith w r as growing 230 COMMENTARY ON ST. PAUL'S [Chap. I. exceedingly ; expanding out of its original germ, as a tree from its seed ; increasing in the intensity of its confidence, and of its regulating and ennobling power ; and opening up so as to embrace a wider cycle of truths. It would not have been a living faith if it had not grown. And as it had increased so much (Inrep) — not merely bej^ond expectation (Riggenbach), but beyond measure — the apostle felt bound to give thanks to God. Olshausen finds in the verb an indulgent reference to too great an eagerness of belief or credulousness by which they afterwards brought reproof upon themselves. So also Baum- garten-Crusius. But surely the apostle could not make such a faith the ground of thanks to God, nor can v-wep have in it what is really a satirical allusion. Not only their faith in its growth, but their love also in its enlargement, formed the ground of the apostle's thanks- giving. That love is specified in no vague terms, but is individualized — not simply your love of the church as a mass, but the love of each one of you all toward one an- other — the whole body of believers in Thessalonica. It is a freak of Hofmann to take iravrwv v/uloov as in apposition with evos eicacrTOv. The love, ;/ ayuiri] eh «\A>/Aou9, is brother-love — not man-love, or love of all (Pelt), but the love of fellow-Christians — there being no reference to those without the church, as in 1 Thess. iii, 12, or to any supposed antipathy to the heathen unbelievers (Schrader). While virepav^avei characterizes their faith in its growth, irkeovd^ei characterizes their love in its extension, or, not only in its increasing fervour, but specially in the enlargement of its sphere ; every one loving, every one conscious of being beloved — universal reciprocal affection — "equal," as Chrysostom says, " on the part of all." Chrysostom notices the distinction in the use of the two verbs, but the figure employed by him fails to explain it. See under 1 Thess. iii, 12 ; Ephes. i, 15. There might be, as Olshausen remarks, some differences in the church, as the third chapter indicates; but they were so merged in universal attachment that the eulogy of the apostle was warranted. Faith, hope, love, and patience already charac- terized them, as is said in 1 Thess. i, 3 ; iii, G ; iv, 9 ; the apostle had prayed for an increasing abundance of love among Ver. 4.J SECOND EPISTLE TO THE THESSALONIANS. 2:31 them, and in this clause he thanks God virtually that his prayer had been heard. For the signal spiritual progress of the Thessalonian Church the apostle felt bound not only to thank God, the source of all good, but he always had peculiar pleasure in Thessalonica, and he gave it an honourable and prominent place in his addresses and ministry among the other churches — (Ver. 4.) lo(tt€ fjixas auTOvs ev vfxh eytcavxuo'Bai ev tuis extcXqcriais rod Oeou — "so that we ourselves glory in you in the churches of God," "make a boast of you" (Coverdale). There are some various readings — B tt, and a few minuscules read avrovs iifAas, and this order is preferred by Alford. These are two old and high authorities. C is here deficient. The Received Text has kuuxuctOul after D K L, and many of the fathers, F having Kauxtjcraa-Oai ; but A B tf have eyKuv^acrOai, the more unusual form, which is therefore to be preferred. It is found in the Sept., Ps. li, 3 ; Ps. cvi, 47. The first pronouns are emphatic — we ourselves, not we of our own accord (Hofmann), but we as well as others, who know you, and honour, appreciate, and praise you for }^our spiritual pros- perity ; we ourselves who prayed and laboured for you, and have a tender and abiding interest in you, as being the instru- ments by which God has brought you into this happy condition. The insertion of kcu is not needed for this meaning — 1 Thess. iv, 9, where, however, it is aurol ujuLel? with a slight change of emphasis. But (1) it is to be questioned if the clause can sustain the contrast in Ellicott's paraphrase — " ourselves, as well as others, who might call atten- tion to your Christian progress more naturally and appropriately than those who felt it, humanly speaking, due to their own exertions, but who, in the present case, could not forbear." Such an expression of feeling is in no way opposed to what the apostle says in 1 Cor. i, 31 ; iii, 21. The apostle felt himself so wholly an instrument in the Master's hand that he never scrupled to mention his services — ever ascribing humbly and gratefully to Him the strength to do them, and any success which might attend them (1 Thess. i, S, 9 ; ii, 11), 20). (2) The contrast is not that presented by Jowett — " so that it is not only you who boast of yourselves, but we ourselves who boast 232 COMMENTARY ON ST. PAUL'S [Chap, 1. of you." Similarly Chrysostom — " if we give thanks and glory to God for you among men, much more ought you to do so for your own good deeds." "We ourselves" is not in opposition to you — "your self-gloriation " is in no sense hinted at — but is in opposition to others who also glory in you. Surely this refer- ence of the apostle to the exultant feelings of himself and his colleagues is so natural in the circumstances that the language has no " semblance of a false emphasis, or of awkwardness of expression." (3) Nor is the contrast that indicated by Schott and Pelt, de se potissimum Apostolo intelligi valt, >)/ixus avrov? being equivalent to e/mavrov — for verse 3 refers to himself and his companions. Such a contrast would be abrupt and un- natural, and it is disproved by the close logical connection of the verses. The boasting is ev vjuliv, " in you," you being its object and sphere. Winer, 48; Bernhardy, p. 210. Comp. Exod. xiv, 4 ; Isaiah xlix, 3. The churches of God in which this boasting had taken place must be those which the apostle visited and addressed — those in Corinth and its neighbourhood, the Achaian capital being his headquarters. The inference of Chrysostom that patience is shown by much time, and not in two or three days, must not be unduly pressed as settling in any way the date of the epistle. Still further — inrep r^? v7ro/uov>}s v/uloov kui 7ncrreco9 ev iracnv tois 6tooyju.oh' vfxwv kui ruig OXixjyeaip eu? avtxeoSe — " for your patience and faith in all your persecutions and the afflictions which ye endure." 'Yirip points out the elements of spiritual character, over or on account of which he boasted. Ben- gel's connection of the preposition with evxapivTeiv is too remote and unnatural. The Hendiadys supposed by Pelt and others is not to be thought of, vwoiuoi'ijs tijs iri(TTeicj$ vtto/uloi'ijs ev 7ri — the ease regularly governed by the verb. A. Buttmann, p. 14-0. Timothy had been sent to them for the purpose of comfort- ing them concerning their faith, that no man should be moved by those afflictions, and the clauses before us assert the success of that mission. The apostle's heart poured itself out in thanksgiving to God, and he had gloried in the Thessalonian church and held it up as a model to other Christian communi- ties. But there were ethical lessons in those afflictions, and these the apostle proceeds to unfold and apply. (Ver. 5.) ci'Seiy/uu tJ/? Sikuius Kpicrecos tov Qeou — " which is a token of the righteous judgment of God." In a similar connection (Philip, i, 28) rjris ccttiv is expressed, and similarly 6 tl early may be supplied here. Compare Bom. viii, 3. The clause is not to be resolved into els evSeiy/ua, as is read in Cod. 73, and explained by Theophylact, supported by Koppe, Flatt, and Olshausen, the Vulgate having also in exemplum. The noun occurs only here, but the other verbal, evSeigis, is found in Rom. iii, 25 ; Philip, i, 28. The apposition is nominatival. Winer, § 59, 9. The reference or connection has been vari- ously taken ; what is declared to be the evSeiy/ma ? (1) Some take it to be the Thessalonians themselves — the v/meis in- volved in dvexeffOe (Erasmus, Camerarius, Estius). Such a connection is simple indeed, but it would have required the participle optcs to be expressed ; nor does it yield a sense at all in harmony with the context. Estius finds in it an argument for adhuc htenda poena temporalis. (2) Some take the refer- ence to be to -rraa-iv Siooy/tAois, &c, as Calvin, Bullinger, Aretius, Pelt, Schrader, Ewald, Bisping. But the afflictions themselves, apart from their nature and source, and apart from the character and spirit of those who endure them, cannot be the evSeiy/nu. (3) The connection is better taken with the entire clause, not themselves simply, or their afflictions, but themselves so conditioned — "your patience and faith in all your persecu- tions, and the sufferings which you are enduring." The patience and faith manifested by you in severe suffering — Vkr. 5.] SECOND EPISTLE TO THE THESSALONIANS. 235 not the suffering, but the noble spirit in which it had been borne, forms the evSeiyfia. The phrase ij'Sucala Kpicri? rod Seou presents in itself an undoubted and universal truth — God judges, and He "judges righteous judgment." But in its present connection the phrase presents difficulty. There are two extremes of opinion. Olshausen, on the one hand, followed by Riggenbach, restricts the judgment to the present time, while Ellicott, on the other hand, confines it to the future judg- ment. The use of the articles proves nothing on either point. That it is not wholly present judgment the entire coming con- text shows — on from the following verse where the revelation of Christ from heaven with angels and in fire is brought into view, and, by the very terms, into immediate relation with the verse before us — "the righteous judgment of God," "seeing it is a righteous thing with God to recompense tribu- lation," on the one hand, and " rest with us," on the other. Nor is the reference wholly to the future tribunal, for the just judgment begins now, not simply by the effect of such suffer- ing in purifying and perfecting them — the judgment is for condemnation to enemies and unbelievers — but because the patient sufferings of believers demonstrate that there is now righteous judgment on the part of God ; the grace that so sustains them is from Him ; He as Judge accepts and ap- proves them by the bestowal of such gifts of patience and faith ; and this experience is a further token or presage that a period of fuller manifestation is coming when the persecutors shall receive condign retribution, and their victims shall be brought into perfect and eternal repose. Their condition, and that of their persecutors, both here and hereafter, were in contrast; but there is a mutual reversal in the world to come — the future compen- sating the present (Luke xvi, 25). Suffering here, especially the suffering of the good at the hand of wicked oppressors, implies under God's righteous government a future state of balancing and compensation, of reward and penalty, equitably adminis- tered. Compare De Wette, Liinemann, Hofmann. et? to KaT(i£ieoQ)jvai u/ut-dg T*js (3a/9 koi 7racr^eTe — " on behalf of which ye are suffering." The preposition Wep means "on behalf of," as in Acts v, 41 ; ix, 16 ; Rom. i, 5; xv, 8 ; 2 Cor. xii, 10; xiii, 8. Winer, § 47, 6. Vrr. ■(».] SECOND EPISTLE TO THE THESSALOXTAXS. 237 The Kai points out the connection, as in Rom, viii, 17 — Alford making it equivalent to "ye accordingly" — Ellicott saying, " it has a species of consecutive force, and supplied a renewed hint of the connection between the suffering and the being counted worthy." Suffering gave them no claim on the kingdom, but it separates the two classes, and by God's grace inworks or develops those elements of character which enable and induce believers to suffer for the kingdom, and prepare them for the ultimate enjoyment of it. '• The path of suffering, and that path alone, Leads to the land wheie sorrow is unknown." John xvi, 33 ; Acts xiv, 22; Rom. viii, 17. (Ver. G.) e'nrep SiKaiov irapu 0ew avTairodovvai toi 68pa op.o\oyovpevoov Kai )]p.ei9 TiOe/uev teat IWaVTtppUTOH' . . . TlU>l\ao\oy)]/uei'toi'. So Theodoret — ovk et! aiMfrifioXlas . ■ . aW e-rrl fiefiaiwcreo*? — according to a familiar idiom. In the phrase ~apu Oeio, there is a quasi-local reference to the divine tribunal and judgment (Rom. ii, 13 ; 1 Cor. iii, 10 ; Gal. iii, 11 ; 1 Peter ii, 3; Herod, iii, 160). Winer, § 48, d; Rost and Palm,s?t6 voce irapu. The term SUaiou takes up the Sikuiu Kpicri? of the previous verse — the characteristic element of justice in the divine judgment being the foundation of the argument, which is pre- sented under a human aspect and analogy, " if such a course with men much more so with God" (Chrysostom). In order to substantiate his statement the apostle appeals virtually to our innate sense of justice, which by analogy declares that it is a right thing with God, and the hearer cannot but respond, aAXu p.)ji' SiK-aioi'. For the verb see under 1 Thess. iii, 0. What is 238 COMMENTARY ON ST. PAUL'S [Chap. I. just or righteous is the divine retaliation, " affliction to those who afflict you," like sin like penalty. " with what measure ye mete " (Ps. xviii, 47 ; lvii, 6 ; Rom. ii, 5). See under Col. iii, 24, 25. By this jus talionis, the penalty in kind is not only entailed by the sin, but also fashioned by it as a reproduction of itself. Totally wrong is the remark of Pelt, that the phrase makes mention non de essentiali Dei justitia, sed de gratia potius ; and that of Hunnius — justitia Dei, quemadmodum ilia in Christo est misericordia erga nos affectu tincta atque temperata. But there is another aspect — divine rectitude is not one-sided — (Ver. 7.) Kal v/xlv toi? OXiBo/mevotg aveariv /meO fj/ULcbv — " and to you who are afflicted rest with us." The participle is passive, not middle, as in Bengel's explanation, qui pvessuram toleratis. The noun avea-i$ is used in the classics in contrast to ewiraa-19 — tightening and slackening rwv x°P^ v (Plato, Rejx, I, p. 349 e) ; Ttjs 7roXtTe/«9 (Plutarch, Lycurg., 29 ; Vitae, vol. I, p. 94, ed. Bekker). It signifies also relief, as from labour (Joseph., Antiq., iii, 10,6); from immediate execution (2 Chron. xxiii, 15) ; from close confinement (Acts xxiv, 23) ; from moral obligation, and in contrast to 6Xi\Jsi$ (2 Cor. viii, 13); and then generally it denotes rest — Hesychius defining it by uvd-Travcri?. In 2 Cor. ii, 13 ; vii, 5, it is in contrast again with OXixfsis. It is rest from all that persecution which they were suffering from the fury of unbelieving Jews and heathens — rest jxeff ww — with us, Paul, Silvanus, and Timothy, for we have suffered from persecution, and hope for rest (1 Thess. ii, 2). Turretin and De Wette err in giving the ] thrase a wider reference to all believers, for all of them are not exposed to such sufferings. Bengel similarly errs in rendering nobiscum, i.e., cum Sanctis Israelitis, and after him Macknight, and virtually Ewald. This aW<9 is the immediate aspect of heaven to the suffering, rest to the weary and worn-out, release from all the disquiet, pain, and sorrow of the earth, stillness after turmoil, the quiet haven after the tempest. This view of heaven was specially natural and welcome to them, who were suffering for its sake, for it was a complete reversal of their present condition (Luke xvi, 25 ; Acts iii, 19 ; Heb. iv, 3, 11 ; Rev. xiv, 13). " Kvea-iv is governed by the double Ver. :.j second epistle to the thessalonians. 230 avTcnroSovvai, for which see under 1 Thess. iii, 0. The period of introduction to the " rest " is — ev Tjj n|1v>» |1 . 1, ^OL, — r ' y with the power of His angels, that is, with the host of them ; and the view has been followed by Drusius, Michaelis, Koppe, and Hofmann who for this purpose attaches avrov to the following Sidoi'rog — Swa/uus being taken as representing the Hebrew N3>\ But, first, duvapis has never this meaning in the New Testament, and Hofmann's reference to Luke x, 19 ; xxi, 26 ; Matt, xxiv, 29, will not sustain him ; second, the order of the words with this sense would require to be pera. Svvapeoo? ayyeXaw avrov. The next clause is read in the Textus Receptus — (Ver. 8.) ev irvp\ (pXoyog, after AKLN, with nearly all mss., Theophylact, Ambrosiaster, Ghrysostom, Theodoret, and Dama- scenes. It is also preferred by Keiche, Tischendorf, and Alford. The other reading, ev AoyoV Compare in the Septuagint Ps. xxix, 7 ; Is. xxix, 6 ; Joel ii, 5 ; Dan. vii, 9 : also Sirach xlv, 10 ; Heb. i, 7; Rev. xix, 12. The former is appar- ently the more usual form. The clause specifies another element or accompaniment of the diroKoXv^-iq. He is revealed in, or enveloped in, a fire of flame — no dulled or veiled glow, but a radiance, bright, pure, and flashing; a fire burning with intensest brilliance. That was a familiar symbol of the divine presence and glory — the cloud that guided Israel being as the veil by day of the inner brightness, which shone out in the night as fire. Compare Gen. xv, 17 ; Exod. iii, 2 ; xiii, 21, 22 ; xix, 18; Ps. xcvii, 3, 4; Is. xxx, 30; and the other passages already quoted. What characterizes the Theophanies of the Old Testament characterizes the Advent of the Son in our nature — similar majesty of manifestation betokening the God- head of the Redeemer, Jehovah-Jesus (1 Cor. iii, 13). It serves no good object to attempt any minute detail of the meaning and purpose of the phenomenon, either as Zachariae and Koppe, to refer it to thunder and lightning, or to say that the fire is meant to consume the world of unbelievers, as Zuingli, Aretius, a-Lapide, Fromond, for the context does not assert any such purpose, though the punctuation of the English version would seem to imply it. Some connect this clause with the following one, SiSovto? €kS!k7](tip, "in flaming fire awarding vengeance." So Estius, a-Lapide, Macknight, Hofmann, Hilgenfeld, regard the previous words as instrumen- tally connected with the judgment to which, according to Hilo-enfeld, the flamingf fire belono-s. Hofmann's exegesis is strained and unnatural ; he connects avrou with SiSoyro?, referring the pronoun to God, and begins the sentence with ev t# (X7roKa\v\p-ei. But. as Lunemann remarks, in that case avrov would require to be left out, and the genitive Siodvros changed into SiSovri, with the article prefixed. Theodoret regards the fire as rrjs Ti/muipias to eISo$, and similarly Theophylact in the first of his explanations. Jowett needlessly combines both references, expressing at once the manner of Christ's appear- ance, and the instrument by which he executes vengeance on His enemies. It is best to keep the clause iv 7rvp\ (p\oy6i by itself, and as parallel to it, /ulct dyyeXoov Suvd/dcwg Q 242 COMMENTARY ON ST. PAUL'S [Chap. T. avTov, and to regard the words as descriptive of the awfulness and sublimity of the airoKa\v^n evayyeXlu) tou Kvplov >)/ulcov 'Irj]$ tyjs icryyos avTov — " who shall suffer punishment, everlasting destruction away from the presence of the Lord, and away from the glory of His power." The qualitative and generic pronoun o'lrtve? characterizes the persons referred to as being of a class just s]H'ciried. This relative may sometimes bear a causal sense, saepissime rationi reddendae inservit, according to Hermann (Praef. ad Soph. (Edvp., Tyr. } p.xiii). Such a sense, advocated by Liinemann and Alford, is not formally needed here. The two parties referred to are men who as a class have been already characterized. The phrase SiKtjv tictovo-iv, " shall pay the penalty," occurs only in this place. Compare Jude 7. But its meaning is clear, as it is often employed in classical writers, 244 COMMENTARY ON ST. PAUL'S [Chap. T. the verb being sometimes followed by the accusative of that for which penalty is borne, or atonement is made — cjiovov {Iliad, xxi, 134), vj3piv (Odyss., xxiv, 350); and often as here it is fol- lowed by SiKtjv — Tiarovcrd y agiav SUrjv (Soph., Electra, 298). A long list of instances is given by Wetstein from the tragedians, and from Plato, Thucydides, Lucian, vElian, Arrian, Plutarch. The noun is also used with SiSovai, when the meaning is, punishment awarded or legal penalty. The sinners referred to not only feel the inner ruin wrought by ignorance and dis- obedience—for all sin punishes as it degrades, and hardens, and widens the distance from God — but a positive penalty is laid on them, Slier]. And that SiKt] is declared to be oXeOpov aidoviov, " everlasting destruction." The reading 6Xe6piov has but very slender support. "OXeOpo? (oXXv/mi) means death in the Homeric poems, and then destruction in a general sense ; ruin as the result of a sinful course, or inflicted as a divine penalty. For the word see under 1 Thess. v, 3. The words are awful ; and the next clause deepens the awe — a.7ro 7rpocroo7rov roy Ivvplov — " from the face of the Lord." (1) The simplest and most natural meaning of u-k'o is local, in separation from the face of the Lord, the source of joy (Rom. ix, 3; 2 Cor. xi, 3 ; Gal. v, 4). So Schott, Liinemann, Lisping, Riggenbach. His face or countenance throws its benign radi- ance over his saints, who in their nearness worship Him, and are ever in fellowship with Him. His personal presence is the life and joy of heaven, and to see His face is supreme blessed- ness, so that to be severed from it is gloom and death, and in that sad severance (diro) is the penalty to be endured (Ps. xi, 7; xvi, 11; xvii, 15; Matt, v, 8; xviii, 10; Heb. xii, 14; Rev. xxii, 4). Compare Septuagint, KpinrrecrOe . . . airo 7rpocroo7rov tov ]s ti] and as airo in this sense is used to denote a personal source, such a meaning would be more plausible if only airo tov JLvplov had been written, and for this the phrase, as we have it, is merely a circumscriptio according to Pelt. Winer, § 47. Besides, it would with this sense be a mere repetition of the previous statement, " awarding vengeance." De Wette lays stress on the following lax^os, a s if it threw back into this clause the idea of power yjut forth, and so far suggested or corroborated the causal signification of airo. But tcr^o? belongs to So£)]s as its source, and that So£a is repeated in the verb of the next verse, evSo£ao-Q?ivai. — kui airo tJ/s" <5o^/? tJ/? Icrx^og avrou, " and from the glory of His power." The preposition has the same local sense, the glory being that glory which springs from His power, and which may be conceived of as a visible splendour, gathered up like the old Shechinah into one spot. The phrase is therefore not to be diluted either into icrxvs evSo£o$ or So£a icrx v pu> " mighty glory " (Jowett). The glory is so connected with His might that, as it is originated by it, it characterizes and envelops it — all its outgoings are ever encircled with glory. That power manifests its glory in the perfection and happiness of His saints, who have been rescued and blessed by Him, and lifted at length beyond death to 246 COMMENTARY ON ST. PAUL'S [Chap. I. supreme and immortal felicity. This glory so won by His power is reflected upon Him from His glorified ones, as the next verse intimates, and from such living splendour surrounding- Christ's and Christ are the unbelieving for ever exiled. (Ver. 10.) OTO.V eXOi) evSo£a {/[/.us, and the absence of the article gives to the clause unity of conception, connecting ecj> u/ulus immediately with fxaprvpiov. Winer, § 30, 2 ; § 49, I. " Our testimony " is the testimony borne by us, fj/uoov being the genitive of efficient or proximate origin, and that testi- mony in itself was the divine message of the Gospel, which they are said in the First Epistle to have " received in much affliction with joy of the Holy Ghost." The apostle and his colleagues brought and delivered the testimony. The Thessa- lonians heard and believed, remained firm in the midst of trials and persecutions, and are commended by the apostle for their patience and faith ; their spiritual growth and their afflictions being a token of the righteous judgment of God, when the solemn scenes now described shall take place ; and they take place — ev t[j >]/u.epa eKe'ivy — " in that day," the previous clause being parenthetical. This clause is thus to be joined to Oavjuao-Oijvai, defining the period, and put last to gather up the whole from otuv eXO}] into a solemnity of emphasis. " That day " must have been the theme of his earlier lessons to them, and the manner of this allusion shows their familiarity with it. Cal- vin's note is that the day is so named to check impatience — ne ultra modam festinent. Some, however, propose for the clause a different connection. Bengel takes the connection back to eXOy, and Webster and Wilkinson to SIkjju tljvai, the words should have stood kui v/meis -Trpoa-evxop-eOa. For rrepi after this verb, see under Ephes. vi, 18. The prayer was continuous, iravTOTe, as there was need of continuous grace. And its object was — Iva vp.u$ a^uhat} rt]i firX?)creco? 6 Geo? tj/mcov — -" that our God may count you worthy of your calling/' vfias having the stress upon 250 COMMENTARY ON ST. PAUL'S [Chap. I. it. The els o at the beginning of the verse is so far different from ?va that the former refers back to what had just been written — the glorification of Christ in His saints; and the latter points for- ward to blessings needed by the Thessalonians in the prospect of it, and to qualify them for it. In Iva the purpose and theme of the prayer are blended, as sometimes. See under Ephes. i, 17. The verb a^iouv means to count or reckon worthy, followed here by the accusative of person and genitive of object, though sometimes by the accusative and the infinitive (Luke vii, 7); in the passive by the simple genitive (1 Tim. v, 17; Heb. iii. 3 x, 29 ; Sept., Gen. xxxi, 28) ; and by the infinitive (Xen., Mem., i, 4, 10). Compare Joseph., iii, 8, 10. Luther, Grotius, Flatt, Bengel, Olshausen, and Ewald give the verb the meaning of "to make worthy" — a meaning which, as the passages cited show, does not belong to it. See Liddell and Scott, sub voce. There is some difficulty about k\/]ipco] TTOLaav evSoKiuv dya6co(Tuvi]g kou epyov 7rijpwv 'lyo-ov ev vp.iv Kai vpeh ev avrw — " in order that the name of our Lord Jesus may be glorified in you, and ye in Him " or " it." The jVpia-Tou of the Received Text rests on the rather slender authority of A F, the Vulgate, both Syriac versions, and Chrysostom, but it is wanting in BDKLN, the Claromontane Latin, the majority of mss., (Ecumenius, and Damascenus. "Q7rto9 indicates the final purpose, and does not differ materi- ally from %a in meaning, though it does in construction (Klotz, Devarius, II, p. 629). "Ovopa is certainly not a periphrasis for Kvpio? (Turretin, Koppe). The " name " is not Himself, but Himself as made known to men in those elements of character, relation, and glory which ovopa contains and implies — the name which he has made for Himself. See under Phil, ii, 10. That name wins for itself a new lustre in the salvation of the Thessalonian believers, ev vp.?v — as He is glorified in all His saints in that day (verse 10). And the glorification is reciprocal — Krai vp.eU ev cu'tm. The pronoun may refer to ovopa (Liinemann and Hofmann), but though in that case the reciprocity would be more formally balanced, the meaning is not so expressive, as our glorification in His name is not so significant as glorifi- cation in His person. The familiar but expressive phrase ev avroi is that union with Him, which so identifies His people with Himself that the}^ are glorified in Him, are " partakers Ver. 12.] SECOND EPISTLE TO THE THESSALONIANS. 253 of His glory." His, the glory of Saviour ; theirs, the glory of being saved in Him, and of being; with Him for ever (I Thesp. iv, 17). kcxtu Tt]v X a P 11 ' TOU t/eoy )]/utov kcu ls.vptov Itjctou Hpicrrov — " according to the grace of our God and the Lord Jesus Christ." Kara passes, as Winer remarks, §49, "from the idea of norm into that of result," or the signification " in con- sequence of" naturally springs out of "according to," or is blended with it. For x^P 1 ?' see un der Ephes. ii, 8. Though there is no rod before ~Kvpiov, it would be wrong to identify it immediately with Oeov, as is done by Hofmann, Riggenbach, and others, for Kt/p/o? had become as a proper name, and therefore may want the article when it is joined to a preposition, or is used in the genitive, or precedes 'L70-0U? Xpia-To'9 (Winer, § 19, 1). See especially Middleton's remarks on the non-applicability of Granville Sharpe's rule to this clause, p. 379, «fcc. See also under Ephes. v, 5. But it is plainly implied that this grace has a unity of origin, both in God and Christ ; it is a possession common to both, and equally charac- terizing both. The final aim indicated by oiruxs recognizes both equally as answering the prayer which includes such a purpose kuto. t>]v x^P lv - Such oneness of attribute and gift implies the divinity of the Saviour, and His oneness of essence with the Father. Nor is such theology at all un-Pauline, though Hilgenfeld adduces it as a proof of the spuriousness of the epistle. It is found in the common benedictions at the beginning of many of the epistles. See under Gal. i, 1, 3. CHAPTER II. The apostle now passes to one special purpose of the epistle — to check and correct those erroneous and premature anticipa- tions of the Second Coming which had become prevalent in Thessalonica, and were doing damage, and producing an unsettledness of mind which led to various irregularities. The apostle therefore tenders to them reassuring prophetic instruc- tion — 254- COMMENTAEY ON ST. PAUL'S [Chap. II. (Ver. 1.) 'JLpooTcoiuLev Se (',««?, aSeXcpo'i, V7rep Trj? Trapovcriwi tov Ivvpiov >)p.ooi' It]^ ai? Si rj/uLoov — "neither by spirit, nor by word, nor by letter, as by us." The clause is divided into three co-ordinate and connected negations (Matt, v, 34, 35 ; Luke ix, 3 ; Acts xxiii, 8, 12, 21 ; 1 Tim. i, 7; James v, 12). Winer, § 55, 6; Wex, Antig., ii, 156, &c. ; Klotz, Devarius, II, p. 715 ; Hermann, Opuscwla., vol. Ill, p. 151, &c. Wire Sia TrveufxaTo?, " neither by spirit," some oracle or saying embodying or professing, but falsely, to embody spiritual wisdom and foresight on the doctrine, or rather the period of the Second Advent. Theophylact explains it by Sia 7rpo(p)]Te!as. The phrase cannot mean signa quasi per Spiri- tual facta, nor the prophecies of the Old Testament falsely understood (Krause), " nor delusive spiritual apparitions " (Schrader). Some take irvevfj-a as the abstract for the concrete Ver. 2.] SECOND EPISTLE TO THE THESSALONTANS. 257 TrvevjuariKog (Chrysostom, Koppe, Storr). Compare 1 John iv, 1. This meaning would yield (mite a good sense — the man who framed the false oracle under assumed spiritual influence, for some human agency is implied ; but it is out of harmony with the words that follow, \6y6v and e7r*/?, which cannot be taken as abstract, but are definite terms. There had been some one in the Church at Thessalonica that, under assumed spiritual influence, uttered the false and alarming- doctrine. fju'jTe Sia \6you, " nor by word." Ao'yo? has been understood in different ways. (1) Some take it in the sense of calculation, as if the reference were to some wrong computation based on the prophecies and " times " of Daniel, and bringing out the result that the day of the Lord was immediately imminent (Michaelis, Tychsen). Such a meaning is groundless and artificial to the last degree, and Xo'yo? by itself could not convey such a sense. (2) Some regard it as a word of Christ, some falsified saying of His on the last day, resting on the prophecies of Matt, xxiv, Mark xiii, and Luke xxi (Baumgarten-Crusius, Noesselt). But such a ref rence would have required from the apostle some more definite expression. (3) Macknight would give it the sense of verbal message, as if sent from the apostle to the Thessalonians; and Grotius similarly renders it rumores de nobis, to this effect, that Ave are now speaking otherwise than we had done formerly. Both conjectures need no refutation. (4) Others put Xoyou in contrast with 7rvev/j.aTo?, and regard it as a teaching (8iSax>'i)> which did not deliver itself in prophetic rapture, but perhaps rather took its proofs from Scripture. Chrysostom explains by 7ri6av6\oyia, Theophylact by 8iSaa-ica\ia$ £007/ ? 67 fjfjuav implies. For Siu \6yov is not to be taken as an independent statement, or as connected simply with Si e7rtcrTo\rJT, but the meaning is that 258 COMMENTARY ON ST. PAUL'S [Chap. II. both utterances and letters of a fictitious character were ascribed to the apostle. The last phrase, fxrfre Si eTTLUToXris, has been strangely supposed by not a few to refer to the first epistle and to some misinterpretation of it — so Jerome, Kern, Hilgenfeld, Ham- mond, Krause, Paley, Reuss, Bleek, and Webster and Wilkinson — his former letter, but comprehended under the general signi- fication "any communication by letter"; hence the omission of the article. But a reference to his former epistle would have necessitated the article or some phrase equally definite, and the epistle would not as here have been disowned. Com- pare 1 Cor. v, 9-11 ; 2 Cor. vii, 8. The last words, co? Si })fxwv, have been connected in various ways. Some join them to all the preceding words, as Erasmus, Reiche, Noesselt, Jowett, Web- ster and Wilkinson. Not to repeat that Ao'yo? and ema-ToX)) are connected closely in verse 15, and are taken so here, it may be replied that co? Si rjfxwv cannot apply to itvev/xa, as it could not be feigned for him in his absence; the TrvevfAa must have been in the midst of themselves — the immediate witnesses of its manifestations. It could in no way be said to be by our agency, Si t]/ulccv, as are the "word" and "letter" supposed to have the apostle for their medium. The particle - This warning apparently implies that forgery was early at work, and that during the few months elapsing from the date of the first epistle a fictitious utterance and a letter had been circulated in the apostle's name, teaching what the apostle intimates in the last clause of the verse. Nothing farther do we know of them. Jowett says that the apostle refers only to the possibility of such a speech or epistle being used against him, but the language describes an actual occur- rence. The 15th verse of this chapter places the genuine word and letter in contrast with the spurious, and the 17th verse of the third chapter describes a guard against a forged epistle, by showing the token of a true one — " the salutation of me, Paul, with mine own hand, which is the token in every epistle. So I write." It is needless to wonder why any men at that early Ver. 2.] SECOND EPISTLE TO THE THESSALONIANS. 259 time could be so audacious as to attach to any forgery, written or oral, the apostle's name and authority, for we know nothing of the motive and almost nothing of the contents save in the one point. Nor can we now say why the apostle treated the matter so leniently, Iry averring that the deception was inno- cent in motive, or that the letter was anonymous. The apostle could not prevent sayings being put in his name — he could only deny or disclaim them ; but he took precautions against the repetition of such literary forgery. w? oti eve&Tt]Kev i) ijpepa tov lvvplov — "as that the day of the Lord is come." For Ivuplov the Received Text has Xpta-Tov, with D 3 K, most mss., and the Gothic ; but Kvplov is read in A B D 1 F L iV, both Latin and both Syriac versions, with the Greek and Latin fathers. The o>? introduces the statement not as actual, but as so represented, its falsehood being implied. The " day of the Lord " is the day of the Second Advent — His, as He appears as Judge, His last and loftiest function — His, as on it He crowns His work, and His church becomes complete in happiness and in numbers — His, as then He is glorified in His saints and wondered at in all them who believe. On that day He rises into a pre-eminence hitherto unwitnessed. The true meaning of the verb evea-Tt^ev is not " is at hand," but " is come," or " is present." The rendering of the English version, "at hand," has been adopted by many — Calvin, Jowett, &c. Thus Hammond, "were instantly a-coming;" Benson, "just at hand, and will happen shortly;" Bloomfield, Conybeare, Webster, and Wilkinson, "near or close at hand;" Wordsworth, " instantaneously imminent." (1) Now the verb is used in six other places of the New Testament, and in all of them it bears the sense of "present." Rom. viii, 38, ovre eve(TTu>Ta out€ peWovra, "neither things present nor things to come;" 1 Cor. iii, 22, e'lre evearr^ra e'/re p.e\\ovTa, "whether things present or things to come;" 1 Cor. vii, 2(3, Sia tw evea-Twcrav avuyK^v, " on account of the present distress ; " Gal. i, 4, etc tov aiwvos tov evecrTWTO? irov^pov, " out of this present world, an evil one ; " 2 Tim. iii, 1, evvTijo-ovrai icaipoi xaXeirol, "grievous times shall be present," i.e., the grievous times are not to follow the last days, but to be included in them ; Heb. ix, 9, 7rapa/3o\t] et? tov Kaipov tov €ve]KOTa, "a figure for the 260 COMMENTARY ON ST. PAUL'S [Chap. IT. time now present," spoken of the Jewish economy. In all these cases, except 2 Tim. iii, 1, for which there is some apology, the Authorized Version renders by "present"; and there was no reason, therefore, to deviate from the true sense in the verse before us. The translation "is come," "has arrived," is fully justified by the uniform meaning of the verb in the New Testament, and is the rendering also, save in two cases, in the Authorized Version. (2) To show that our translators were swayed by other than philological reasons, it may be remarked that the rendering " is at hand " occurs in twenty other places in the New Testament, and in none of these, of course, does that rendering represent the Greek verb before us. It rightly stands for ;/yy«re nine times, ten times for eyyu?, and once for eipecrrrjicev (2 Tim. iv, 6), where Luther renders ist vorhanden. (3) The Septuagint usage is similar to that of the New Testament. In Dan. vii, 5, eh pepo? ev ea-Tadt], the simple verb has a different meaning, where it represents the nn'pn, stare facta, constitute est. But we have in the Apocrypha, 1 Esdras v, 46, ivcrTavTO? Se tov e/3S6fxov /uLtjvos, " the seventh month being come," not " being at hand," as in the Authorized Version; ix, 6, Tpsp-ovTes Sia top evecrTcoTa Xeip-wva, "trembling on account of the present foul weather;" 1 Mace, xii, 44, iroXipiOv /mi] evecxT^KOTO? fj/juv, " there being at present no war between us;" 2 Mace, iii, 17, to kuto. KapSlav eveo-To? a\yo?, "the sorrow at present in his heart," oi', as in the Authorized Version, " what sorrow he had now in his heart ; vi, 9, Tr\v eveo-Twcrav TaXanrcopiav, "the present misery;" xii, 3, u)]\v0oTa /ecu eveaTWTa Kai peWovTa, "it is of the nature of time to be divided into the past and the present and the future" {Opera, vol. Ill, p. 136, ed. Pfeiffer). (4) Nor does the classical usage differ. Xenoph., Hellen., ii, 1, 6, irep\ rw evecrTtjKOTcov irpaypaTWv, " concerning the present state of affairs;" Polybius, i, 60, tov evea-TWTa icaipov; do., 7-5, eis tov evccrTioTa 7ro\epov; xvm, 38, kcxtii tov evearTOSTa Yer. 2.J SECOND EPISTLE TO THE THESSALONIANS. 201 fJaaiXea, "against the present king." Examples from yEschines and Demosthenes, as applied to Kuipos, -n-oXepog, are given by Host and Palm. There may be some cases where it may bear the sense of, impending, as good as come, ideally present; but the prevailing temporal meaning is what we have given. Nay, Hesychius defines evecrrwra by irupovra. Xpovos euecrr^KW? is the grammatical name of the present tense, and peroxh evea-ruxra is the present participle. Sextus Empiricus divides time into tov 7rapipx i ll UL ^ l ' ou Kai T0V evecTTWTa nai tov /meWovTa. iheodore defines the term by irupuiv. Not simply "at hand," but "is present" or "has begun," is the coiTect translation, even taking the classical usage which Webster and Wilkinson assume, though they wrongly render it " imminent." (5) How could the doctrine that the day of the Lord is at hand be treated by the apostle as an error ? That the day of the Lord is at hand is the uniform teaching of the New Testament (Matt, xxiv; Rom. xiii, 12; Philip, iv, 5; Heb. x, 25, 37; James v, 8; 1 Peter iv, 7; 1 John ii, IS; Rev. xxii, 20). Could the apostle disclaim the teaching of such a doctrine as that " the day of the Lord is at hand," or warn the Church against it as an error and a species of deception ? The rendering " at hand " cannot there- fore here be the correct translation of evecrTrjKev. (6) Were the doctrine against which the apostle warns, and which he so solemnly disowns, only that the day of the Lord was at hand, how could such a doctrine throw the Church into panic and confusion — how could they be driven from their sense and alarmed, as he calls it ? For they were familiar with it ; they were waiting for His Son from heaven, and His Coming is again and again referred to in the first epistle. The imminence of the Advent was no new theme to them, and they could not be so startled by it. Nay, such was their spiritual condition and temperament, that such a doctrine, if disclosed for the first time to them, would have filled their spirits with unutterable glad- ness. They were waiting for His Son from heaven; they were meanwhile characterized by works of faith, labours of love, and patience of hope ; the word had wrought effectually in them ; their faith had grown exceedingly, and their mutual love abounded; they were children of the light; they were the apostle's joy, hope, and crown of rejoicing in the presence of 262 COMMENTAEY ON ST. PAUL'S [Chap. II. our Lord Jesus Christ at His coming. His prayer for them was, that "God would establish their hearts unblameable before Him at the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ with all His saints," and that " their whole spirit, soul, and body might be preserved blameless unto the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ." He " comes to be glorified in His saints," and He comes sud- denly,*" as a thief in the night;" and how, in such a spiritual state, could they be filled with consternation at the thought that the period was near when all their own anticipations and all these prayers for them should be fully realized. As the nearness of the Advent was no new doctrine, it could not have so alarmed them; and as their character was such as to lead them to love His appearance and to lift up their heads as their redemption drew nigh, it could not have so excited and con- founded them, nor could the apostle have branded such a doc- trine as false, or have ascribed it to some spurious spiritual manifestation or to some utterance or some letter forged and circulated in his name. Thus, both philologically and doctrin- ally, the rendering " is at hand " cannot be sustained. Lastly, the translation we give seems to be the oldest one. The Syriac has «£o? Global Oil *.*^Lq 2*qS )aiy "Lo the day of our Lord is come." At all events the same Syriac term, which is but the Syriac form of the Chaldee hod, stands for ?j\6ov in Acts viii, 36; for eireo-nia-civ, Acts x, 17, "were arrived and standing at the gate;" for KaTi)vTi}]? 7rapouTia? evcrTacrtfi — f/Srj irapeivai avn'jp ', and in the same preface, Theodoret is emoted as asserting that some seducers eXeyov irapuvai Xolttov tjjv irapovcriav tou I^vpiov; Ver. 2.] SECOND EPISTLE TO THE THESSALONIA.NS. 263 Pelagius, ne quis vos seducat ullo modo, dicentes : hie Christ Ltb; ecce illic ; and Ambrosiaster has de adventu quasi imminentis Domini. But it may be asked — how could these early believers persuade themselves that the day of the Lord was come— how could they hold that the Lord had descended — that the trumpet had been heard — that the dead had been raised and the living caught up ? It will scarcely do to conjecture, with Lillie, that they might imagine that "the day had come in some different way from that in which they had been taught to look for it, or else, that this great crisis had actually transpired, and in that precise shape, while they were not aware of it." They must in such a case have thought that they had forfeited their share in the glory of the kingdom. We cannot imagine the possibility of such delusion, and the hallucinations which Lillie brings in proof are not at all to the point. The first instance adduced by him is that of a party in the church of Corinth who said that "there is no resurrection." But this denial is a very different error from saying that it had already taken place without their par- ticipation in the result, or their witnessing its glories and mysteries. The other instance, that of those who said that the resurrection is past, was based on a false spiritualistic philosophy, which identified resurrection with the revivification of the soul ; surely a veiy different error from the imagination that the resurrection of the dead in the physical sense had already taken place. It was scarcely possible that the error had pro- ceeded so far as to impugn the reality and universality of the resurrection. The apostle had said that "the day of the Lord cometh as a thief in the night," suddenly and without warning, but could they persuade themselves that the sudden destruction then threatened had fallen on their enemies, and that none of them had escaped? The phrase employed, rj/mepa tov K.vpiov may not be identical with the actual irapova-la tov Ivvpiov, but may denote its period and comprehend the events which are its antecedents and concomitants. Not the irapovaia itself, but its period had come. The day of the Lord, the epoch of the Second Advent had now dawned upon them, and the persecutions now falling on them were tokens of its presence. Thej^ regarded the day of grace as apparently at an end, so that in fancy they 264 COMMENTAKY ON ST. PAUL'S [Chap. II. were in the period of judgment, which was to witness the disso- lution of society and the introduction of a new state of things. This error was taught as if on the apostle's authority — his teaching or letter — and it may have been the more readily adopted from his own words, which seemed to imply that he himself was to be alive at the Advent ; or the error may have been given out not as a retractation, but as a farther expansion of his oral teaching and his doctrine as given in the first epistle. (Ver. 3.) M>7 -n? v/ulcis e£a7ra,T)'ii Kara prjSeva Tp'oirov — "Let no one deceive you in any wa} 7 ." The anxiety of the apostle on the point leads him to a virtual repetition of the warning. The doctrine that the day of the Lord had set in was a decep- tion; whatever might be the motives of those who taught it, it was a perilous error and they were to guard against being its dupes. The Ik in the compound verb has an intensive force, the verb meaning "to deceive out and out." The phrase Kara fj.}]Siva rpoirov does not allude merely to the three ways specified in the preceding verse, as if it meant by any of these means (CEcumenius, Theophylact, Bengel, Baumgarten- Crusius), but is absolute and inclusive, "in no way," by no method of deception whatever its form or character. otl eav /ut.)] eXOij i) aTro&Taa-'ia irpMTov — " because the day will not set in unless there come the apostacy first." The ellipse is easily supplied — otiovk€V€(tti]K€v i) rtfi&pa rod Ku/ r j/ou(Liinemann), or, as Ellicott, t) ijfxepa ovk eva-r^arerai, or, as Theophylact, ov yevi'jcrtTui >) irapovuia tou KuptW The clause involving the use of a finite verb is omitted ; the mind of the writer is fixed specially on the event which must intervene, the mental nega- tion implied in the two previous verses, namely, "the day of the Lord has not taken place," involving the consequent unex- pressed negation, " nor will it take place unless." Winer, § 64, 7 ; Hermann, Vigerus, II. p. 694. On av with the subjunctive, see Donaldson, § 583 /3. There are two proposed constructions which are hard and unnatural. Storr and Flatt propose to get rid of the ellipse by giving eav juli'i a sense analogous to the Hebrew lb n^ ganz gewiss, certissime (Numbers xiv, 28 ; Ezek. xvii, 19 ; Heb. iv. 3, 5) ; but in those places the phrase has the form of an oath. Knatchbull's connection is as unsatisfactory, Ver. 3.] SECOND EPISTLE TO THE THESSALONIANS. 265 for lie places a comma after on, joins it to e 'fa7rciT?/07/, and sup- plies eveo-TtjKev, " let no man deceive you that the day of the Lord is come, if it shall not come before the apostacy, ne qivis sed/ucat vos ullo modo quod instet dies Domini si non venerit prius a/postasia. ' A.iroa-ra(Ti(i is a more recent form for the older airo- crTaa-tf. Lobeck, Phrynichus, p. 528. The word is found in Acts xxi, 21 — a charge against Paul that he taught defection from Moses ; in Sept., 2 Chron. xxix, 19 — the idolatrous defection of Ahaz; in Jer. ii, 19, with a similar sense — iruiSevo-ei ]v uirojs a/uapTiag, 6 vio? T?]$ airoo- Xe/u? — " and there be revealed the Man of Sin, the Son of Perdition." For a/uaprla?, avop.la