oie tee 2 et
ee ge 53:5:
ri
Digitized by the Internet Archive in 2014
https://archive.org/details/expositorsgreeO2nico
: Bible CK(MT) N
ἀκ ξ))ε ΣῈ ΡΠ EXPOSITOR'S
Ser eK TESTAMENT
EDITED BY THE REV.
W. ROBERTSON NICOLL, M.A., LL.D.
EDITOR OF “THE EXPOSITOR,” *' THE EXPOSITOR’S BIBLE,” ETC.
VOLUME IV.
HODDER AND STOUGHTON LONDON MCMX
THE EXPOSITOR’S GREEK TESTAMENT
I
THE FIRST AND SECOND EPISTLES TO THE THESSALONIANS
BY JAMES MOFFATT, D.D. II
THE FIRST AND SECOND EPISTLES TO TIMOTHY
AND
THE EPISTLE TO TITUS
BY NEWPORT J. Ὁ. WHITE, D.D. IIT
THE EPISTLE TO PHILEMON
W. E. OESTERLEY, M.A., B.D. IV THE EPISTLE TO THE HEBREWS
BY MARCUS DODS, D.D.
Vv THE GENERAL EPISTLE OF JAMES
BY
W. E. OESTERLEY, M.A., B.D.
HODDER AND STOUGHTON LONDON MCMX
é - ‘ wy , 2 4
FIRST AND SECOND EPISTLES OF PAUL THE APOSTLE
TO THE
a ah a ere --. ...-.-------
THESSALONIANS
INTRODUCTION:
§1. The Mission to Thessalonica.—The Christian inhabitants of Thessalonica were mainly Greeks by birth and training (1.9, cf. ii. 14; Acts xiv. 15, xv. 19), who had been won over from paganism by the efforts of Paul, Silvanus (Silas), and Timotheus (Timothy), during an effective campaign which lasted for a month or two. It had opened quietly with a three weeks’ mission in the local synagogue. Luke, who by this time had left the trio, enters into no details about its length or methods, adding merely that some of the Jews believed, while a host of devout Greeks and a considerable number of the leading women threw in their lot with the apostles. Luke is seldom interested in the growth or fortunes of individual churches. But, as the subsequent membership of the church, its widespread influence and fame, its inner condition, and the resentment caused by the success of the Pauline mission (continued from the house of Jason, Acts xvii. 5) all imply, a considerable interval must have elapsed before the time when the apostles were forced prematurely to quit the place. Their stay was prolonged to an extent of which Acts gives no idea; for Paul not only supported himself by working at his trade but had time to receive repeated gifts of money! from his friends at Philippi, a hundred miles away, as well as to engage perhaps in mission work throughout Macedonia (i. 7) if not as far west as Illyricum (Rom. xv. 19, cf. Lightfoot’s Biblical Essays, 237 f.). Two or three months possibly may be allowed for this fruitful mission at Thessalonica.
When the local πολιτάρχαι, at the instigation of Jews who were nettled at the Christians’ success, finally expelled Paul and his companions, the subsequent movements of the latter were governed by a desire to keep in touch with the inexperienced and unconsoli- dated Christian community which they had left behind them. The summary outline of Acts xvii. 10-15 requires to be supplemented and
! Probably this was one of the reasons which led to the imputation of mercenary motives (ii. 5, 9).
4 INTRODUCTION
corrected at this point by the information of 1 Thess. 11. 17-i1i. 6. According to Luke, Silas and Timotheus remained at Beroea, under orders to rejoin Paul as soon as possible. They only reached him at Corinth (Acts xviii. 5), however. Now since Timotheus, as we know from Paul, visited Thessalonica in the meantime, we must assume one of two courses. (a) Leaving Silas at Beroea, Timotheus hur- ried on to Paul at Athens, was sent back (with a letter ?) to Thessa- lonica, and, on his return, picked up Silas at Beroea; whereupon both joined their leader, who by this time had moved on suddenly to Corinth. This implies that the plural in itt. 1 is the pluralis majesta- ticus or auctoris (see on iii. δ), since Silas was not with Paul at Athens. But the possibility of that plural meaning both Paul and Silas, together with the silence of Acts, suggests (b) an alternative reconstruction of the history, vzz., that Timotheus and Silas jour- neyed together from Beroea to Athens, where they met Paul and were despatched thence on separate missions, Silas! perhaps to Philippi, Timotheus at an earlier date to Thessalonica, both rejoining Paul eventually at Corinth. In any case the natural sense of iii. 1, 2 is that Paul sent Timotheus from Athens, not (so e.g., von Soden, Studien u. Kritiken, 1885, 291 f.) that he sent directions from Athens for his colleague to leave Beroea and betake himself to Thessalonica (EZ. Bi., 5076, 5077).
From no church did Paul tear himself with such evident reluct- ance. His anxiety to get back to it was not simply due to the feel- ing that he must go on with the Macedonian mission, if at all possible, but to his deep affection for the local community. The Macedonian churches may almost be termed Paul’s favourites. None troubled him less. None came so near to hisheart. At Thessa- lonica the exemplary character of the Christians,? their rapid growth,
1 This mission, or a mission of Silas (cf. iii. 5) after Timotheus to Thessalonica itself, though passed over both by Luke and Paul, must be assumed, if the statement of Acts xviii. 5 is held to be historical, since the latter passage implies that Paul was not accompanied by Silas from Athens to Corinth. The alternative is to suppose that he left Silas behind in Athens, as at Beroea. A comparison of 1 Thess. with Acts bears out the aphorism of Baronius that efistolaris historia est optima historia ; Luke’s narrative is neither clear nor complete.
2Renan (5. Paul, 135-139) praises the solid, national qualities of the Mace- donians, “un peuple de paysans protestants; c’est une belle et forte race, laborieuse, sédentaire, aimant sons pays, pleine d’avenir”. It was their very warmth of heart which made them at once so loyal to Paul and his gospel, and also so liable to unsettlement in view of their friends’ death (iv. 15 f.). Compare the description of the Macedonian churches in von Dobschtitz’s Christ. Lifein the Primitive Church, pp. δι .
INTRODUCTION 5
their exceptional opportunities,! and their widespread reputation, moved him to a pardonable pride. But, as he learnt, they had been suffering persecution since he left, and this awakened sympathy as well as concern for its effects on their faith. Unable to return himself, he had at last sent Timotheus to them; it was the joyful tidings (ili. 6) just brought by him which prompted Paul to send off this informal! letter, partly (i.) to reciprocate their warm affection, partly (ii.) to give them some fresh instructions upon their faith and conduct.
§2. The First Epistle-—This two-fold general object determines the course of the letter, which was written from Corinth? (Acts xviii. 11). It begins with a hearty thanksgiving for the success of the mission at Thessalonica (i. 2-10), and this naturally passes into an apologia pro vita sua (ii. 1-12) against the insinuations which he had heard that local outsiders were circulating vindictively against the character of the apostles. The Thessalonian church knew better than to believe such sordid calumnies! The second reason for thanksgiving is (ii. 13 f.) the church’s brave endurance of hard- ship at the hands of their townsmen. ‘ Would that we could be at your side! Would that we could uphold you and share the good fight! But we cannot. It is our misfortune, not our fault.” Paul now gives a detailed apologia pro absentia sua (1. 17 f.), which ends with praise for the staunchness of his friends during his enforced absence. The latter part of the letter (iv. 1 f.) consists of a series of shrewd, kindly injunctions for the maintenance of their position : περὶ ἁγιασμοῦ (iv. 3-8), περὶ φιλαδελφίας (9 f.) περὶ τῶν κοιμωμένων (13-18), περὶ τῶν χρόνων καὶ τῶν καιρῶν (v. 1-11). With a handful of precepts upon social and religious duties, and an earnest word of prayer, the epistle then closes. Its date depends on the view taken of Pauline chronology in general; that is, it may lie between 48 and
1 Nature has made it the capital and seaport of a rich and extensive district”’ (Finlay, Byzantine Empire, book ii., chap. i. 2). One of its great streets was part of the famous Via Egnatia, along which Paul and his companions had travelled S.W. from Philippi; thus Thessalonica was linked with the East and with the Adriatic alike (cf. i. 7, 8), while its position at the head of the Thermaic Gulf made it a busy trading centre for the Egean. Hence the colony of Jews with their synagogue. It was a populous, predominantly Greek town, of some military importance, with strong commercial interests throughout Macedonia (cf.i. 8) and even beyond. On the far horizon, south-west, the cloudy height of Mount Olympus was visible, no longer peopled by the gods, but, as Cicero put it, occupied merely by snow and fea (cf. i. 9).
2 This is proved not by ἐν ᾿Αθήναις (iii. τ, cf. τ Cor. xv. 32, xvi. 8) but by the reference to Achaia in 1 Thess. i, 7, 8.
6 INTRODUCTION
53 Α.Ὁ., probably nearer the latter date than the former. The epistle itself contains no reference to any year or contemporary event, which would afford a fixed point of time. An ingenious at- tempt has been made by Prof. Rendel Harris (Exp.® viii. 161 f., 401 f.; cf. B. W. Bacon’s Introd. to N.T., 73 {. and his Story of Si, Paul, 235 f.) to show that Timotheus had previously taken a letter from Paul to the church, and that the canonical epistle represents a reply to one sent from the church to Paul; the hypothesis is ten- able, but the evidence is rather elusive. The use of καὶ, e.g., in ii. 13, iii. 5, is not to be pressed into a proof of this: οἴδατε is not an infallible token of such a communication ( = “you have admitted in your letter,” which Timotheus brought), and ἀπαγγέλλετε 1 is an un- supported conjecture in i. 9.
88. The Position of the Local Church.—The occasion and the significance of this epistle to the Christians of Thessalonica thus become fairly clear,
(2) Paul and his friends had left them the memory and inspira- tion of a Christian character. The epistle came to be written because the legacy had been disputed.
The insinuations of some local Jews and pagans 2 against Paul’s character were like torches flung at an unpopular figure ; they simply served to light up his grandeur. Had it not been for such attacks, at Thessalonica as at Corinth, we should not have had these passages of indignant and pathetic self-revelation in which Paul opens his very heart and soul. But this is the compensation derived by a cool and later age. At the moment the attack was more than distasteful to Paul himself. He resented it keenly on account of his converts, for his enemies and theirs were trying to strike at these inexperienced Christians through him, not by questioning his apostolic credentials but by calumniating his motives during the mission and his reasons for not returning afterwards. To discredit him was to shake their faith. To stain his character was to upset their religious standing. The passion and persistence with which he finds it needful to re- pudiate such misconceptions, show that he felt them to be not simply
1The ordinary reading gives quite a good sense: ἃ yap αὐτοὺς ἐχρῆν παρ᾽ ἡμῶν ἀκούειν, ταῦτα αὐτοὶ προλαβόντες λέγουσι (Chrysostom). It is both arbitrary and fanciful of Zahn (Hinleitung, § 13) to mould such allusions into a theory that the news had reached Asia, and that Paul was now in personal touch with envoys from the churches of Galatia, to whom he wrote Galatians before Silvanus and Timotheus rejoined him at Athens,
2 It is unreal to confine the calumnies to the one or to the other, particularly to the pagans (so é.g., von Soden, pp. 306 f.; Clemen, Paulus, ii. 181 f.).
INTRODUCTION 7
a personal insult but likely to prove a serious menace to the interests of his friends at Thessalonica. The primary charge against the Christian evangelists had been treason or sedition; they were ar- raigned before the local authorities for setting up βασιλέα ἕτερον (Acts xvii. 6-8). But during his enforced absence (thanks to the success of this manoeuvre), further charges against Paul’s personal character were disseminated. He was just a sly, unscrupulous, selfish fellow ! He left his dupes in the lurch! And so forth. Naturally, when he comes to write, it is the latter innuendoes which occupy his mind. The former charge is barely mentioned (ii. 12, God’s own kingdom, cf. ΕΠ ον 5).
Paul's vindication of his character and conduct, which occupies most of the first part of the epistle, is psychologically apt. He was the first Christian the Thessalonians had ever seen. He and his ᾿ friends practically represented the Christian faith. It had been the duty of the apostles to give not only instruction but a personal example of the new life to these converts; thus their reputation formed a real asset at Thessalonica. καὶ ὑμεῖς μιμηταὶ ἡμῶν ἐγενήθητε καὶ τοῦ κυρίου. If the local Christians were to lose faith in their leaders, then, with little or nothing to fall back upon, their faith in God might go (cf. ili. 5). It was this concern on their behalf” which led Paul to recall his stay among them and to go over his actions since then, with such anxious care (see notes on i. 4 f., ty ΤΙ 17 £., i. 1-13).
(Ὁ) In addition to this, the Thessalonian community possessed definite παραδόσεις, in the shape of injunctions or regulations as to ineweien and conduct of the Christian life (i. 11, iv. 1, 12; ef. 2 Thess. 11. 5, 15, iii. 6). These were authoritative regulations, * as the other epistles indicate (cf. e.g., 1 Cor. iv. 17) which had the sanc-
1Qn the ethical function of this self-assertion, as a means of inspiration and education, see Exp. Ti., x. 445 f. The young Italian patriots who died, as they had lived, confessing their faith in “God, Mazzini, and Duty,” are a modern case in point. The example of τοῦ κυρίου implies that the Thessalonians were familiar with the earthly trials and temptations of Jesus.
? The language of ii. 1-10 must not be taken as if Paul had been blaming him- self for having appeared to leave his friends in the lurch. It is not the sensitiveness of an affectionate self-reproach but the indignant repudiation of local slanders which breathes through the passage. The former would be a sadly fost factum defence.
3The epistle itself (cf. v. 27) takes its place in the series; this verse (see note) is perfectly intelligible as it stands and need not be suspected as the interpolation of a later reader to emphasise the apostolic authority of the epistle (so Schmiedel and others), much less taken (as e.g., by Baur, van der Vies, 106 f., and Schrader, der Apostel Paulus, 36) to discredit the entire epistle. There is no hint of any clerical organisation such as the latter theory involves.
ὃ INTRODUCTION
tion of apostolic tradition, and must have been based, in some cases, upon definite sayings of Jesus. It is the Christian halacha of which the later epistles give ample if incidental proof. _
This suggests a further question. To what extent do the Thessa- lonian epistles reveal (c) an acquaintance on the part of Paul and the local church with the sayings of the Lord? The evidence cannot be estimated adequately except in the light of the corrobora- tive facts drawn from an examination of the other epistles, but it . is enough to bear the general consideration in mind, that no preoccu- pation with the risen Christ and his return could have rendered Paul absolutely indifferent to the historical data of the life of Jesus. } When he told the Thessalonians that Jesus was the Christ, they could not believe without knowing something of Jesus. The wrath of God they might have reason to fear. But ὁ ῥυόμενος ? Who was He to exercise this wonderful function? Where had He lived? Why had He died? Had Herisen? And when was Hetoreturn? Some historical content? had to be put into the name Jesus, if faith was to awaken, especially in people who lived far from Palestine. The Spirit did not work in a mental vacuum, or in a hazy mist of apoca- lyptic threats and hopes. Hence, a priori, it is natural to assume that such historical allusions to the life and teaching of Jesus may be reflected in Paul’s letters, as they must have been present in his preaching. This expectation 15 justified.
The coincidence of ii. 7 and Luke xxii. 27 is not indeed sufficient to warrant any such inference, while the different meanings of καλεῖν in ii. 12 and in the parable of Luke xiv. 15 f. (cf. ver. 24) prevent any hypothesis of a connection. On the other hand ii. 14-16 certainly contains a reminiscence of the logia preserved in a passage like Luke xi. 48 ἢ, = Matt. xxiit, 32-34 (see the full discussion in Resch’s Parallel Texte, ii. 278 f., 111. 209 f.), and, while the thought of iti. 3b-4 (cf. i. 4-6) only resembles that of Luke ix. 22-24, just as iti. 13 may be derived from an O.T. background instead of, necessarily, from syn- optic logia like those of Mark viii. 38 = Matt. xvi. 27, a sentence such as that in iv. 8 distinctly echoes the saying in Luke x. 16 (“TI’allusion
‘This idea dominates von Soden’s brilliant essay in Theol. Abhandlungen C. von Weizsdcker gewidmet (1892), pp. 113-167. More balanced estimates are to be found in Keim’s Fesus of Nazara, i., pp. 54 f.; Titius, der Paulinismus unter dem Gesichts- punkt dev Seligkeit (1900), pp. 10-18, and M. Goguel, L’Apdtre Paul et Fésus Christus (1904), pp. 67-99. The English reader may consult Sabatier’s Paul, pp. 76 f., and Dr. R. J. Knowling’s Witness of the Epistles (1892) where, as in his Testimony of St. Paul to Christ (1905), the shallows as well as the depths of the relevant literature are indefatigably dredged.
*Cf, Prof. Denney in DCG, ii. 304 ἢ
INTRODUCTION 9
est d'une netteté parfaite,” M. Goguel, p. 87). The well-known λόγος Κυρίου of iv. 16 f. cannot be adduced in this connection without hesi- tation (see note). But no possible doubt attaches to the evidence of v. 1-3. The saying of Jesus which is echoed here has been preserved in Luke xii. 39 (& κλέπτης ἔρχεται) Δῃηά xxi. 34 (μή ποτε. .. ἐπιστῇ ἐφ᾽ ὑμᾶς ἐφνίδιος ἡ ἡμέρα ἐκείνη ὡς παγίς), but the common original seems to have been in Aramaic or Hebrew (so Prof. Marshall, χα." ii. 73 f.), since Paul’s ὥσπερ ἡ ὧδίν and Luke’s ὡς παγίς must reflect a
phrase like bar(s), which might be rendered either as ban (snare)
or as 22 ΓΠ (travail), the latter echoing the well-known conception of ἀρχὴ ὠδινῶν (cf. Mark xii. 8). A further echo of the primitive evan- gelic tradition is to be heard possibly in v. 6 (Matt. xxiv. 42), cer- tainly in v. 13 (cf. Mark ix. 50). But the connection of v. 21 with the agraphon, γίνεσθε δόκιμοι τραπεζῖται, is curious rather than vital.
In the second epistle, apart from coincidences like 1. 5 ( = Luke xx. 35) and ili. ὃ ( = Matt. vi. 13), the allusions to the teaching of Jesus are less numerous, although Resch hears the echo of a logion in iti. 10 (Paulinismus, 409 f.), on most inadequate grounds. The apocalyptic passage, ii. 1-10, contains several striking parallels to the language of Matt. xxiv. (cf. H. A. A. Kennedy, St. Paul’s Conception of the Last Things, 55 f., 96 f.), but no literary relationship can be assumed.
(d) Finally, before Paul left, he arranged for a kind of informal organisation. An ordination of πρεσβύτεροι is not to be thought of, but probably the earliest converts, or at any rate those who had natural gifts, assumed an unofficial superintendence of the com- munity, arranged for its worship and internal management, and were careful that the sick and poor and young were looked after. Otherwise, the movement might have been dissipated. Wesley, in his journal (Aug., 1763), writes: ‘‘ 1 was more convinced than ever that the preaching like an apostle, without joining together those that are awakened, and training them up in the ways of God, is only begetting children for the murderer. How much preaching has there been for these twenty years all over Pembrokeshire! but no regular societies, no discipline, no order or connection ; and the consequence is, that nine in ten of the once-awakened are now faster asleep than ever.” Paul was alive to the same need. He was a practical missionary,
1 With Luke’s πίνειν καὶ μεθύσκεσθαι (45) and μέθῃ (xxi. 34) compare the οἱ μεθυσκόμενοι of τ Thess. v. 7. Contrast also the ἐκφυγεῖν of xxi. 36 with Paul's οὐ μὴ ἐκφύγωσιν (v. 3). The phrase sons of light may well have been common among the early Christians (cf. Abbott’s ¥ohannine Vocabulary, 1782-1783).
10 INTRODUCTION
and, as these epistles show (cf. I., v. 12 f., I1., iii. 6 f.), he knew better than to leave his young societies with nothing more than the vague memory of pious preaching. The local organisation was, as yet, primitive, but evidently it was sufficient to maintain itself and carry on the business of the church, when the guiding hand of the mission- ary was removed (cf, Clem. Rom. xlii.), though the authority of the leaders still required upon occasion the support and endorsement of the apostles (see on v. 12).
84. The Character and Setting of the Second Epistle.—In the second and shorter epistle, after congratulating the local Christians especially on their patient faith (i. 1-4), Paul explains. that the trials and troubles which called this virtue into exer- cise were but the prelude to a final relief and vindication at the ἀπο- κάλυψις τοῦ κυρίου ᾿Ιησοῦ (4-12), As the ardent expectation of this had, however, produced a morbid excitement in some quarters, he sets him- self (ii. 1-12) to weed out such mistakes and mischiefs by reminding the church of his previous warning that the end could not come until the μυστήριον τῆς ἀνομίας attained its climax in a supernatural and personal embodiment of evil, which would vainly challenge the authority and provoke the interposition of the Lord. He then con- cludes (ii, 13-17) with an expression of confidence in them, an appeal for loyalty to his teaching, and a brief prayer on their behalf. Asking their prayers, in return, for himself, he renews his expression of con- fidence and interest (iii. 1-5); whereupon, with a word upon the maintenance of discipline and industry, the epistle ends (iii. 6-18).
Assuming both epistles to have come from Paul,! we may unhesi- tatingly place 2 Thess. after 1 Thess. The evidence for the opposite order, advocated by Grotius in his Axnnotationes (11. 715 f., based on. an antiquated chronology), Ewald (¥ahrb. fiir bibl. Wiss. 1861, 249 f., Sendschreiben des Paulus, 19 f.), Laurent (Studien u. Kriti- ken, 1864, pp. 497 f., N.T. Studien, 49 f.), and J. 5. Chamberlain (The Epp. of Paul the A postle, 1907, 5 f.), breaks down upon examina- tion. It is unnatural to find a reference to II. iii. 6-16 in I. iv. 10-11 ; besides, as Bornemann points out (p. 495), if 2 Thess. is held to. betray all the characteristics of a first letter (Ewald), what about II. 11.15? There is no reason why such a criterion of genuineness
1 On the hypothesis that both are post-Pauline, Baur (Paulus, Eng. tr., ii. 336 f.,. and van der Vies (de beiden brieven aan de Th., 1865, pp. 128-164) argue for the priority of 2 Thess., the latter separating the two by the fall of Jerusalem ; van Manen (Onderzoek naar de Echtheid van P. tweeden Brief an die Thess., 1865, pp. 11-25): refutes both critics. The arguments for the canonical order are best stated by von Hofmann (365), Liinemann (160 f.), and Bornemann (492 f.) in their editions.
INTRODUCTION 1
as that of II. tii. 17, should have occurred in the earliest of Paul’s letters; in view of ii, 3, its appearance, after the composition of 1 Thess. and even of other letters, is psychologically valid. The comparative absence of allusions in 2 Thess. to 1 Thess. (cf, however, IJ. ii. 1 = I. iv. 17, etc.) is best explained by the fact that in the second letter Paul is going back to elaborate part of his original oral teaching in the light of fresh needs which had emerged since he wrote the first epistle. In this sense, and in this sense only, 2 Thess. anticipates the other letter. Finally, while I. 11. 17-iti, 6 does not absolutely exclude the possibility of a previous letter, it cannot be taken to presuppose one of the character of 2 Thess., least of all when the letter is dated from Beroea (Acts xvii. 10, Ewald and Laurent).
δ δ. Its Authenticity.—Since Paul Schmidt’s edition (see be- low) and von Soden’s essay (Studien u. Kritiken, 1885, pp. 263- 310), with which the English reader may compare Jowett’s proof (vol. i, pp. 4-17), it is no longer necessary to discuss the authenticity of the first epistle, or even its integrity. Almost the only passage where a marginal gloss may be _ reasonably conjectured to have crept into the text is ii. 16.1 The second epistle, however, starts a real problem, both on the score of its resem- blance to the first epistle and of its divergence from the style and thought of that or indeed of any other Pauline letter. Paul is still with Silvanus and Timotheus (i. 1) at Corinth (iii. 2, reff. ; 1 Thess. ii. 15 f.), writing presumably not long after the despatch of the former epistle (ii. 15). Fresh information has reached him (iit. 11),? and his aim is to repudiate further misconceptions of his teaching upon the Last Things, as well as to steady the church amid its more recent ana- baptist perils. Hence he writes in substantially the same tone and along the same lines as before; anything he has to communicate is practically a restatement of what he had already taught orally (ii. 5, 15), not a discussion of novel doubts and principles. If any change has taken place in the local situation, it has been in the
1 The terminus ad quem for the composition of the epistle, if it is genuine, is his next visit to Thessalonica (Acts xx. 1, 2); most probably it was despatched before Acts xviii. 12. Corinth is the only place where we know the three men were to- gether at this period.
2 How, we are not told. Possibly Paul had been asked by the local leaders to exert his influence and authority against pietistic developments in the community (ili. 14). The situation demanded an explicit written message; probably no visit of Silvanus or Timotheus would have sufficed, even had they been able to leave Corinth. Spitta’s theory (see below) implies that Timotheus had been in Thessalonica since 1 Thess. was written (ἔτι, ii. 5), but of this there is no evidence whatever,
12 INTRODUCTION
direction of shifting the centre of gravity from fears about the dead to extravagant ideas entertained by the living. Hence, for one thing, the general similarity of structure and atmosphere in both epistles, and, upon the other hand, the sharper emphasis in the second upon Paul’s authority.
Both features have raised widespread suspicion and elicited a variety of reconstructions of the epistle’s date and object (cf. His- torical New Testament, 142-146). The common ground of all such theories is the postulate that 2 Thess. is the work of a later Paulinist, during the age of Nero or of Trajan, who has employed 1 Thess. in order to produce a restatement of early Christian eschatology, under the aegis of the apostle, or to claim Paul’s sanction for an onslaught upon Gnostic views. This is a fair hypothesis, which at first sight seems to account adequately for several of the variations and resem- blances between the two writings. When it is worked out in detail, however, it becomes rather less convincing. Some chastening facts emerge. Why, e.g., should such a writer fix on 1 Thess., and labori- ously work on it? Then (i.) one serious preliminary obstacle is that while pseudonymous epistles addressed ostensibly to individuals (e.g., the pastorals) or to Christendom in general (e.g., 2 Peter) are intelligible enough, the issue of such an epistle, addressed to a definite church which had already a genuine letter of the apostle, involves very serious difficulties. These are not eased by the light- hearted explanation (so Schmiedel and Wrede?) that the epistle was really meant not for Thessalonica at all, but for some other community ! This is to buttress one hypothesis by another. Furthermore (ii.) the style and vocabulary offer no decisive proof of a post-Pauline origin. Of the ἅπαξ εὑρημένα, which are comparatively few, one or two, like ἀποστασία (ii. 3), δίκη (= punishment, 1. 9, cf. Sap. xviii. 11, etc. Jude 7), ἐνδοξάζξομαι (1. 10, 12), ἐγκαυχᾶσθαι (1. 4 Pss.), τίνω (i. 9), weprepydfouar (ii. 2, cf. Sir. 111. 23), σέβασμα (ii. 4, cf Sap. xiv. 20), and σημειοῦσθαι {i1i1. 14), may be fairly ascribed to the influence of the LXX*? upon
1 In pp. 38 f. of his able pamphlet on Die Echthett des zwetten Th. (1903). Wrede knocks on the head (pp. 96 f.) the earlier theories (best represented by Schmiedel) which dated the epistle in the seventh decade of the first century, but he does not succeed better than Holtzmann or Hollmann in presenting any very satisfactory theory of its origin c. 100 A.D. His essay is carefully reviewed by Wernle (αδέέ. Gelehrte Anzeigen, 1905, 347 f.), who adheres to the Pauline authorship, as does Clemen (Paulus, i., pp. 115-122). Kldpper’s article in defence of the epistle against the older attacks (Theol. Studien τι. Skizzen aus Ostpreussen, 1889, Viii., pp. 73-140) is almost as difficult to read as it is to refute.
* The absence of any explicit quotation from the LXX only throws into relief the extent to which, especially ini. 5 f., O.T. language and ideas have been woven into the tissue of the epistle (Acts xvii. 2, 3, ἀπὸ τῶν γραφῶν).
INTRODUCTION SE?
the writer’s mind. Similarly with εἵλατο (ii. 13) and ἰσχύς (1.9). The occurrence of ἐπιφάνεια (ii. 8), elsewhere only in the pastorals, is cer- tainly striking, and were there more of these words, the case for a later date would be reinforced. But there are not. Besides, the construction of ém@. here is different from those which occur in the pastorals, and the latter are as likely to have copied 2 Thess. as vice- versa, if any literary relationship has to be assumed. The vocabulary thus, as is generally recognised, permits of no more than a non liquet verdict. The style, upon the whole, has quite a Pauline ring about it; and, while this may be due to imitation, it would be uncritical to assume this result without examining (iii.) the internal relation of the two epistles. It is on this aspect of the problem that recent critics are content to rest their case (so e.g., Wrede, 3-36, H. J. Holtzmann, in Zeitschrift fir die neutest. Wissenschaft, 1901, 97-108, and Holl- mann, zbid., 1904, 28-38). The so-called (a) discrepancies need not detain us long. The different reasons given by Paul for having sup- ported himself (cf. on I. 11. 9; 11. π|. 7) are not contradictory but correlative; both are psychologically credible, as expressions of a single experience. Greater difficulty attaches to the apparent change of front towards the second advent. In I. v. 2, the advent is unexpected. and sudden ;! in II. 11. 3 f., it is the climax of a development. But this discrepancy, such as it is (cf. on I. v. 3), attaches to almost all the early Christian views of the end; to be instantaneous and to be heralded by a historical prelude were traits of the End which were left side by side not only by Jesus (cf. Matt. xxiv. 3 f., 23 f., 32 f.) 3 put by later prophets (cf. Rev. itt. 3 = vi. 1 f.). In any case, Paul was more concerned about the practical religious needs of his readers than about any strict or verbal consistency in a region of thought where Christian expectation, like the Jewish tradition to which it generally went back, was as yet far from being homogeneous or definite. The inconsistencies of the two Thessalonian epistles are at least as capable of explanation when they are taken to be varia- tions of one man’s mind at slightly different periods as when they are
1 Not simply for unbelievers, but for Christians. It is hardly fair to explain the difference between the two epis.les by confining the suddenness of the advent to the former. Hollmann is right in maintaining this against Jiilicher and others, but the pseudonymity of 2 Thess. is by no means a necessary inference from it (see note on v. 3).
2 This argument is not affected by the recognition of a small synoptic apocalypse in this chapter; even so, the primitive and genuine tradition of the words of Jesus on the end presents the same combination as the Thessalonian letters show. On the general attitude of Paul to the political and retributory elements in the current or traditional apocalyptic, cf. Titius, dey Paulinisimus (1900), pp. 47 f.
14 INTRODUCTION
held to denote the revision and correction of Paul’s ideas by a later writer who had to reconcile the apparent postponement of the Advent with the primitive hope. This Baur himself is forward to admit (Paulus, Eng. Tr., it. 93). “It is perfectly conceivable that one and the same writer, if he lived so much in the thought of the παρουσία as the two epistles testify, should have looked at this mysterious sub- ject in different circumstances and from different points of view, and so expressed himself regarding it in different ways.” This verdict really gives the case away. Such variations are hardly conceivable if both epistles emanated from a later writer, but they are intelligible, if Paul, living in the first flush and rush of the early Christian hope is held to be responsible for them. (b) The numerous and detailed similarities between the two epistles might be explained by the hypothesis that Paul read over a copy of 1 Thess. before writing 2 Thess., or that his mind was working still along the lines of thought voiced in the former epistle, when he came to write the latter. The first hypothesis is not to be dismissed lightly. The second can be illustrated from any correspondence. It is true that apart from ii. 1-12 the fresh material of 2 Thess. consists mainly in i, 5-12, ii. 15, iit, 2, 13, 14 f., and that there is throughout the letter a certain poverty of expression, a comparative absence of originality, a stiffness in part:, and a stereotyped adherence to certain forms.! But in the treatment of a subject like this it was inevitable that some phrases of self-repetition should recur, e.g., the @\ts-group (i. 4-6), the πίστις - group (i. 4, 10, 11, it. 11-13, iii. 2, 3), ἐργάζεσθαι, etc. Parts of the letter are unlike Paul. That is practically all we cansay. But parts are fairly characteristic of him, and these not only outweigh the others, but dovetail into the corresponding data of 1 Thess. Such incidental agreements are too natural and too numerous to be the artificial mosaic of a later writer.
The internal evidence of ii. 3-12 is no longer adduced as a crucial proof of the un-Pauline origin of 2 Thess. Indeed most recent critics have given up this argument as primary. Fresh investigations into the origins of gnosticism and of the semi-political variations in primitive eschatology have undermined the older hypothesis which relegated this prophecy to the latter part of the first or the opening part of the second century, and it is only necessary to determine which of the possible reconstructions is most suitable to the age of Paul himself. On the whole, no solution of the apocalyptic prophecy
1 The severer tone (iii. 6-15), as well as the more official tinge, of the letter were as necessary now for the Thessalonians as they were soon to be for the Corinthians {1 Cor, iv. 21, v. 3-5).
INTRODUCTION 15
in ii. 3 f. fits in with the data so well as the early theory that ὁ κατέχων and τὸ κατέχον denote, not the episcopate as a restraint against gnosticism (Hilgenfeld and others), but the Emperor and imperial power of Rome (‘ quis nisi Romanus status?” Tertullian, de Resurr., xxiv.). Paul had ample experience of the protection afforded by the polity of the empire against the malevolence of the Jews, and he apparently anticipated that this would continue for a time, until the empire fell. But how could the fall of the empire be expected ἢ The answer lies not so much in any contemporary feelings of panic and dismay, as in the eschatological tradition, derived from a study of Daniel, which was evidently becoming current in certain Jewish and early Christian circles, that the empire represented the penulti- mate stage in the world’s history. ‘‘And when Rome falls, the νοῦ. Hence the tone of reserve and cryptic ambiguity with which Paul speaks of its collapse, ‘‘ne calumniam_ incurreret, quod Romano imperio male optauerit, cum speraretur aeternum ” (ue C72, De., xx.; so Jerome on 2 Thess. ii. 6). The idea of Rome’s downfall could not be spoken of, or at least written about, openly. All that a Christian prophet could do was to hint that this future Deceiver or pseudo-Messiah would prove too strong even for the Restraining Empire, and that King Jesus would ultimately inter- vene to meet and to defeat him. An entire change came over the spirit of the dream, when, nearly half a century later the imperial cultus in Asia Minor stirred the prophet John to denounce Rome as the supreme antagonist of God. The empire, on this view, was no providential restraint on τὸ μυστήριον τῆς ἀνομίας, but was herself μυστήριον (Rev. xvii. 5), loathsome and dangerous and doomed. This altered prospect lay far beyond the horizon of Paul. The imperial worship had not yet become formidable, and to him the empire, with its administrative justice, stood for a welcome, even though a tem- porary, barrier against the antagonistic forces of Judaism. The kingdom of God was not the opponent of the empire, but simply the final conqueror of a foe who would prove too strong even for the restraining control of Roman civilisation.
This interpretation of the restraining power! implies that the supernatural antagonist issues from Judaism (so especially Weiss, N.T. Theologie, ὃ 63). Here again patristric tradition seems to cor-
1Cf. Neumann’s Hippolytus von Rom (Leipzig, 1902), pp. 4 f. The κατέχων is not to be associated with any special emperor, not even with Claudius, whose name has a curious resemblance to it. The theories which identify the Restrainer with Vespasian (as a check on Nero Redivivus), Antichrist, or Domitian, depend on a priori conceptions of the epistle’s origin and aim.
16 INTRODUCTION
roborate it. Both Irenzus (adv. Haer., v. 25, i. 30, 2) and Hip- polytus (de Antichristo, vi., xiv.) expressly state that antichrist is to be of Jewish descent, and the later echoes of the tradition are as pro- nounced (cf. Bousset’s Antichrist, pp. 24 f., 127 f., 182 f.; EB. Ba, 179 f.).!_ Antichrist is to set up his kingdom in Judah ; his reign is from Jerusalem, and the Jews are the dupes of his miraculous influ- ence.2 The ἀποστασία, which Paul anticipates, implies a relation- ship to God which could not be postulated of Christians, much less of pagans in general who, ex hypothesis, “knew not God” (i. 8). The only deliberate anti-Christian movement, which Paul and his friends had already experienced (ἤδη ἐνεργεῖται), was Jewish fanaticism ; its professed zeal for the Law was really ἀνομία, as the apostle puts it with a touch of scathing irony.
Paul is plainly operating with a Beliar(l)-saga® in this passage. If one could only be certain that Sibyll. iii. 63-73 represented a pre- Christian Jewish fragment, as its context indicates, or that any Christian interpolations were confined to minor phrases like ἐκ δὲ Σεβαστηνῶν, we should have one clear trace of this saga. Belial there works many signs (as in Sibyll. 11. 37, καὶ βελίαρ θ᾽ ἥξει καὶ σήματα πολλὰ ποιήσει ἀνθρώποις), Seduces many even of elect believers within Judaism (πολλοὺς πλανήσει, πιστούς τ᾽ ἐκλεκτούς θ᾽ “EBpatous, ἀνόμους τε καὶ ἄλλους ἀνέρας, οἵτινες οὔπω Θεοῦ λόγον εἰσήκουσαν), and is finally burned up, together with his adherents. The suspicions of this pas- sage’s Jewish character seem unjustified; it may be taken, with- out much hesitation, as one reflection of the tradition which was in
1 Bousset often exaggerates the independence of patristic eschatological tradi- tion ; he fails to allow enough for the luxuriant fancies of a later age, which applied the N.T. text arbitrarily to contemporary life. But on this point the evidence is fairly decisive, viz., that the early fathers were not merely building on the text of 2 Thess. ii. 3-6, when they spoke of Antichrist being a seducer whose false worship was set up within a reconstructed temple at Jerusalem.
2 Professor Warfield (Expos.* iv. 40 f.) regards the Jewish state as the divine restraint upon the revelation of Rome’s self-deification. This view is more sensible than that of the Restrainer as Christianity or the church (cf. Reimpell, Studien τι. Kritiken, 1887, 711-736), but it is difficult to see how Judaism could be said to im- pose any check upon the imperial cultus; besides, is it likely that Paul would have subtly combined a polemic against the obstinate antagonism of the Jews with a theory of their unconscious protective services to the church ?
3 See R. H. Charles’ edition of Ascensio Isaiae (pp. Ixii.-lxiii.) and M. Fried- lander’s Religidsen Bewegungen tnnerhalb des Fudentums im Zeitalter Fesu (1905, pp. 50 ἢ). This would be corroborated if Beliar were shown to be, as the latter writer argues (in'‘his Der Antichrist, 1901), a pre-Christian embodiment of the Jewish antinomian sect (959%. For a possible source of such traditions in Paul’s case of. 2 Tims 111. 8.
INTRODUCTION 17
Paul’s mind when he wrote 2 Thess. ii. 2 ἢ, Belial is not indeed named here, as he is in 2 Cor. vi. 15, But he is the opponent of Jesus the true messiah. He appears in human form (cf. Asc. Isa., iv. 2; “ Beliar the great ruler, the king of this world will descend . . . in the likeness of a man, a lawless king”) as the arch-emissary or agent of Satan. The latter, whom Paul here as elsewhere (in consonance with Jewish tradition) keeps in the background, is the supreme opponent of God; but as God’s representative is the Lord Jesus Christ, so Satan’s active representative is this mysterious figure, whose methods are a caricature of the true messiah’s (see notes below on the passage). This is borne out by the contemporary sense of Βελίαλ as ἄγγελος τῆς ἀνομίας (Asc. Isa., 11. 4, etc.) or ἀνομία (ἀποστασία) in LXX. The man of lawlessness, whom Paul predicts, is thus one of whom Belial is a prototype. Only, the apostle fuses this παράνομος with the false messiah, originally a different figure, who is represented as the incarnation of Satan, the devil in human embodiment. That he expected this mysterious opponent to rise within Judaism is not surprising under the circumstances. He was in no mood, at this moment of tension, to think hopefully of the Jews. They were a perpetual obstacle and annoyance to him, ἄτοποι καὶ πονηρο. He had already denounced them as θεῴ μὴ ἀρεσκόντων (I., 11. 15), and from this it was but a step to the position, suggested by the tradition perhaps, that their repudiation of God’s final revelation in Jesus would culminate in an ἀποστασία, which wel- comed the last rival of Jesus as God’s messiah. His prophecy thus embodies a retort.! “You Jews hate and persecute us as apostates from God; you denounce our Jesus as a false messiah. But the
1In Dan. viii. 23 f. when the cup of Israel’s guilt is full (πληρουμένων τῶν ἁμαρτιῶν αὐτῶν), the climax of their punishment came in the person of Antiochus Epiphanes, the presumptuous (ἣ καρδία αὐτοῦ ὑψωθήσεται, cf.2 Thess. ii. 4) and astute (τὸ ψεῦδος ἐν χερσὶν αὐτοῦ . .. καὶ δόλῳ ἀφανιεῖ πολλούς, cf. 2 Thess. 1. 9, 11). Paul, like the rest of the early Christians, still looked for some immediate fulfilment of this prophecy. In the contemporary malevolence of the Jews towards the gospel he saw a sign of its realisation, asthe allusion in 1 Thess. ii. 16 (eis τὸ ἀναπληρῶσαι αὐτῶν τὰς ἁμαρτίας) indicates. The penal consequence of this atti- tude must have also formed part of his oral teaching at Thessalonica, but he does not mention it till local circumstances drew from him a reminder of the final Deluder who must soon come (2 Thess. ii. 3 f.). It is important to notice this underlying tradition, or application of tradition, in the apostle’s mind, on account of its bearing upon the general harmony of the eschatology in the two epistles. Furthermore, since the days of Antiochus Epiphanes, the book of Daniel had made self-deification a note of the final enemy. Any vivid expectation of the End, such as that cherished by a Jewish Christian of Paul’s temperament, instinctively seized upon this trait of the false messiah.
VOL. IV. 2
18 INTRODUCTION
false messiah will come from you, and his career will be short-lived at the hands of our Christ.” To the Christian the prophecy brought an assurance that, while the coldest and darkest hour must precede the dawn, the dawn was sure to come, and to come soon. Thus in both epistles, but particularly in the second, the reader can see the torch of apocalyptic enthusiasm, streaming out with smoke as well as with red flame, which many early Christians employed to light up their path amid the dark providences of the age. Paul is pro- phesying—none the less vividly that he does so ἐκ μέρους.
Attempts have also been made, from various sides, to solve the literary problem of the writing by finding in it (a) either a Pauline nucleus which has been worked over, (b) or a Pauline letter which has either suffered interpolation or (c) incorporated some earlier apocalyptic fragment, possibly of Jewish origin. (a) According to Paul Schmidt (Der erste Thess. nebst einem Excurs tiber den zweiten gleichn. Brief, 1885, pp. 111 f.), a Paulinist in 69 a.p. edited and expanded a genuine letter = 1. 1-4, it. 1-2a, 11. 13-iii. 18. But, apart from other reasons, the passages assigned to Paul are not free from the very feature which Schmidt considers fatal to the others, v7z., similarity to 1 Thess. And the similarities between ii. 3-12 and the apo- calypse of John are very slight. The activity assigned to the editor is too restricted ; besides, ii. 3-12 is so cardinal a feature of the epistle, that the latter stands or falls with it—so much so that it would be easier, with Hausrath, to view the whole writing as a scaf- folding which rose round the original Pauline nucleus of ii. 1-12. Finally, the literary criteria do not bear out the distinction postu- lated by both theories. (b) The strongly retributive cast, the liturgical swing, and the O.T. colouring, of i. 6-10 have suggested the possibility of interpolation in this passage (McGiffert, E. Bz., 5054, Findlay, p. lvii.), either as a whole or in part. This is at any rate more credible than the older idea that ii. 1-12 embodies a Montanist interpolation (J. E. C. Schmidt, Bibliothek fiir Kritik u. Exegese der N.T., 1801, 385 f.) or it. 1-9 a piece of Jewish Christian apocalyptic (Michelsen, Theol., Tijdschrift, 1876, 213 f.). Finally (c) the large amount of common ground between the Jewish and the primitive Christian conceptions of eschatology is enough (see on ii. 5) to invali- date Spitta’s lonely theory (Offenbarung des Foh., 497 f., and Zur Gesch. und Litt. des Urchristentums, i. 189 f.) of a Caligula-apo- calypse, due in part to Timotheus,! in ii, 2-12, or the idea of Pierson
1Cf. Prof. G. G. Findlay’s refutation in Expos.® ii. 255 f., and Bornemann’s paragraphs (pp. 492, 529 f.).
INTRODUCTION 19
and Naber (Verisimilia, 1886, 21 f.) that a pre-Christian apocalypse (i. 5-10, ii. 1-12, iti. 1-6, 14, 15) has been worked up by the unknown Paul of the second century whom the Holland critics find so pro- lific and indispensable.
The second epistle is inferior, in depth and reach, to the first, whatever view be taken of its origin, but both are especially valu- able as indications of the personal tie between Paul and his churches, and as samples of the new literary form which the religious needs of early Christianity created in the epistle. Dryden has hit this off in his well-known lines upon the apostles and their communities :—
As charity grew cold or faction hot,
Or long neglect their lessons had forgot, For all their wants they wisely did provide, And preaching by epistles was supplied. So great physicians cannot all attend,
But some they visit and to some they send. Yet all those letters were not sent to all, Nor first intended, but occasional—
Their absent sermons.
The Thessalonian epistles were written to supply the lack of further personal intercourse and to supplement instruction already given. They were not treatises designed to convey the original teaching of the apostles ; they imply that, and they apply it along special lines, but they are not protocols of doctrine (cf. note on 1 Thess. iv. 4). At the same time, “occasional’”’ must not be taken to mean casual or off-hand. Paul dictated with some care. His ideas are not im- promptu notions, nor are they thrown out off-hand; they represent a prolonged period of thought and of experience. Even these, the least formal of his letters, though written for the moment’s need, reflect a background of wide range and fairly matured beliefs. Nevertheless, they are hardly “absent sermons”. ‘“ Letters mingle souls,’ as Donne remarked, and 1 Thessalonians in particular is the unpremeditated outpouring of a strong man’s tender, firm, and wise affection for people whom he bore upon his very heart. It is the earliest of Paul’s extant letters, and it delivers the simpler truths of the Christian faith to us with all the dew and the bloom of a personal experience which not only enjoined them but lived to impart them. Both epistles show, as Jowett puts it, how Paul was “ ever feeling, if haply he may find them, after the hearts of men’’. ‘‘ He is nota bishop administering a regular system, but a person dealing with other persons out of the fulness of his own mind and nature. .
If they live, he lives; time and distance never snap the cord of
20 INTRODUCTION
sympathy. His government of them is a sort of communion with them; a receiving of their feelings and a pouring forth of his own.”
56. External Evidence, Text, and Literature of both Epistles.— As both epistles are included not only in the Muratorian canon but in Marcion’s strictly Pauline collection (Tert. adv. Mare. v. 15; Epiph., Haer. xiii, 9), they must have been known and circu- lated by the first quarter of the second century, although quotations (mainly of the eschatological sections) do not emerge till Irenzeus and Tertullian. Both Clement of Alexandria and Origen used them, and other evidence of their existence will be found in any text book of the N.T. Canon. But the so-called allusions to 1 Thess. in the earlier apostolic fathers are, for the most part, scanty and vague; é.g., of i. Sand iv. 2 in Clem., Rom. xlii. 3. Hermas, Vis. iii. 9, 10 (εἰρηνεύετε ἐν αὑτοῖς) might go back to Mark as easily as to Paul (cf. on v. 13), though there is a similarity of context, while the general correspondence of outline between iv. 14-16 and Did. xvi. 6 (revela- tion of the Lord, trumpet, resurrection) may imply no more than a common use of tradition, if not of Matt. xxiv. The use of the epistle in the correspondence of Ignatius is probable, but far from certain ; é.g., 1.6 in Eph. x. 3 (μιμηταὶ δὲ τοῦ Κυρίου σπουδάζωμεν εἶναι, different context) ; ii. 4 in Rom. ii. 1 (od θέλω ὑμᾶς ἀνθρωπαρεσκῆσαι, ἀλλὰ Θεῷ)»; and v. 17 in Eph. x. 1 (ἀδιαλείπτως προσεύχεσθε, sz vera lectio). There is but one parallel in Barnabas, iv. 9 = Barn. xxi. 6 (γένεσθε δὲ θεο- δίδακτοι, different context). This scarcity of allusions is not surpris- ing. The comparative lack of doctrinal interest in the first epistle, and its personal, intimate contents, would prevent it from being so often read and cited as the other Pauline letters. The second epistle, however, was evidently known to Justin Martyr (Dial. xxxii., cx., cxvi.) as well as to Polycarp who not only alludes to iii. 15 (in xi. 4, “et non sicut inimicos tales existimetis’’) but misquotes i. 4 (in quibus laborauit beatus Paulus, qui estis in principio epistulae eius, de uobis enim gloriatur in omnibus ecclesiis) as if it were addressed to the Philippians (cf. Wrede, 92 f.); and such data prove the circu- lation of 1 Thess. as well. The echoes of 2 Thess. in Barnabas (2 Thess. ii, 6 = Barn, xviii. 2; it. 8, 12 = xv. 5) indicate rather more than a common basis of oral tradition (so Rauch in Zeztschrift fiir die Wissensch. Theologie, 1895, 458 f.), and, like the apocalypse of John, it appears to have been circulated in Gaul before the end of the second century (cf. letter from churches of Lyons and Vienne, Eus. ΤΠ EF, v.10):
The text printed in this edition agrees generally with that of most critical editors. To save space, all textual notes have been cut out,
INTRODUCTION 21
except where a variant reading bears directly on the exposition, or possesses some independent interest. Since Alford published his edition, the chief foreign commentaries have been those of von Hof- mann (1869), Reuss (1878-9), Liinemann (Eng. tr., 1880) and Borne- mann (1894) in Meyer’s series, Schafer (1890), Zockler (1894), Zimmer’s Theologischer Commentar (1891), Schmiedel (Hand Com- mentar, second edition, 1892, incisive and thorough), S. Goebel (second edition, 1897), B. Weiss (second edition, 1902), Wohlenberg (in Zahn’s Kommentar, 1903; sec. ed. 1908), and Lueken (in Die Schrif- ten des N.T., 1905); in English, those of Eadie (1877), Alexander (Speaker’s Comm., 1881), Dr. Marcus Dods (Schaffs Comm., iii., 1882), Dr. John Hutchinson (1884), Dr. J. Drummond (Jnternat. Hadbk. to N.T., ii., 1899), and Dr. Adeney (Century Bible, n. d.), with three recent and able editions of the Greek text by Lightfoot (Notes on Epp. of St. Paul, 1895, pp. 1-92), Prof. G. G. Findlay (Cambridge Greek Testament, 1904), and Dr. G. Milligan (1908). Of the older works, the editions of L. Pelt (1830), H. O. Schott (1834), and A. Koch (on the first epistle, second edition, Berlin, 1855), in German, together with those of Ellicott (fourth edition, 1880) and Jowett (third edition, 1894), deserve special notice. Dr. Denney’s terse ex- position (Expositor’s Bible, 1892), Lightfoot’s essay (Biblical Essays, 251-269), and E. H. Askwith’s Introduction to the Thessalonian Epistles (1902), together with the articles of Lock (Hastings’ D.B., iv. 743-749) and A. C. McGiffert (E. Bi., 5036-5046), and Dr. ΝΥ. Gunion Rutherford’s translation (1908), will furnish the English student with all necessary material for a general study of the epistles. Zimmer’s monograph (Der Text der Thess. Briefe, 1893) and article on 2 Thess. (Zeits. f. wiss. Theol., xxxi. 322-342) give a competent survey of the textual data.
The abbreviations are for the most part familiar and obvious; é.g., Blass = Neutest. Grammatik, Burton = Moods and Tenses (1894), Deissmann = D.’s Bible Studies (Eng. tr., Edinburgh, 1901), DCG = Hastings’ Dictionary of Christ and the Gospels (1907-1908), E. Bi. = Encyclopedia Biblica, Field = Otium Norvicense, part iii. (1899), Moulton = J. H. Moulton’s Grammar of N.T. Greek, vol. i. (1906), Viteau = Viteau’s Etude sur le grec du N.T. (1898, 1896), Win. = Schmiedel’s edition of G. B. Winer’s Grammatik (Gottingen, 1894 f.). With regard to the references to Sap. (z.c., The Wisdom of Solomon), it must be remembered that Paul in all likeli- hood knew this writing at first hand.
ΠΡῸΣ @ESSAAONIKEIS A.
I. 1. ΠΑΥΛΟΣ καὶ "Σιλουανὸς καὶ Τιμόθεος τῇ ἐκκλησίᾳ Θεσσαλο- ἃ 2 . ΟἹ 2
OF, 1: Τὸ.
sence of
3 b A ‘ ‘ , 3 A Pee CG CN X C: νικέων ἐν “ Θεῷ πατρὶ καὶ Κυρίῳ ᾿Ιησοῦ Χριστῷ : “ χάρις ὑμῖν Kat b On ab
εἰρήνη.
article, see Blass,
d > A a nA e \Ne , ε al f , 2. “ Εὐχαριστοῦμεν τῷ Θεῷ “ πάντοτε περὶ “πάντων ὑμῶν, ᾿ μνείαν δὲ 46. 6,
>
ποιούμενοι
ἃ So Col. i. 3.
CHAPTER I.—Ver. 1. Greeting.—As any trouble at Thessalonica had arisen over Paul’s character more than his authority, or rather as his authority had been struck through his character, he does not introduce his own apostolic rank or that of his colleagues (11. 6) in the forefront of this letter, which is intimate and unofficial throughout. Silvanus is put before Timothy as an older man and colleague, and also as Paul’s special co- adjutor in the local mission. Acts never mentions Timothy in the Macedonian mission till xvii. 14, where he appears beside Silvanus. This does not mean (Bleek) that Timothy took no part in the work at Thessalonica; his intimate rela- tions with the church forbid this supposi- tion. Probably he is left unnoticed as being a junior subordinate, till the time comes when he can act as an useful agent of his leaders.—ékkAX. a pagan term ap- propriated by Christianity. An implicit contrast lies in the following words (so in ii. 14): there were ἐκκλησίαι at Thes- salonica and elsewhere (cf. Chrysostom and Orig., Cels. 111. xxix,-xxx.) which had not their basis and being ἐν . . . Χριστῷ. The latter phrase is a suggestive and characteristic periphrasis for ‘‘ Christian,” and the omission of the ἐν before κυρίῳ, as of tq before év, is enough to show that the seven words form a unity instead of a double antithesis to ‘‘pagan”’ and “ Jewish” respectively.—kvpiw ᾿Ιησοῦ Χριστῷ, a new κύριος (= dominus) for people like the Thessalonians who were hitherto familiar with the title as applied to Claudius (cf. Wilcken’s Griechische
e Eph. v. 20.
47. 10.
᾿ἐπὶ τῶν προσευχῶν ἡμῶν 3. ὅ ἀδιαλείπτως, μνημονεύ- ς Sce ont
Cor. i. 3
1: Ὁ: f Eph, i. 16. g v.17; Rom.i.g Ostraka, 1899, s.v.) the emperor, or to the God of the Jews (cf. Knowling’s Wit- ness of the Epistles, 260 f.). See the ample discussion in Kattenbusch, das Apost. Symbol, ii. 596 f., with his note (pp. 691 f.) on ἐκκλησία. The hope and help of God implied that Christians must hold together, under their κύριος. ‘No Christian could have fought his way through the great dark night of idolatry and immorality as an isolated unit; the community was here the necessary con- dition for all permanent life” (Wernle, Beginnings of Christianity, i. 189).
Vv. 2-10. Thanksgiving for the origin and achievements of the church.—Ver. 2. Whenever Paul was at his prayers, he remembered his friends at Thessalonica ; and whenever he recalled them his first feeling was one of gratitude to God (see iii. 9) for the Christian record which, as individuals and as a church (πάντων), they displayed of active faith (1. 4-10, ii. 13-16), industrious love (iv. g f.), and tenacious hope (v. 1-11). Andnot Paulalone. The plural implies that all three missionaries prayed together.—edxapiototpev. The greeting is followed, as in ordinary letters of the period, by a word of gratitude and good wishes. evx. is common in votive inscriptions, in connection with thanks- giving to a god. But while Paul, in dic- tating his letter, starts with a conven- tional epistolary form, the phrase imme- diately expands loosely into pwn. . - θεοῦ (μνείαν mw. as frequently in ethnic phraseology).
Ver. 3. ἀδιαλ. Neither distance nor fresh interests make any difference to his
24
h See on 2 Cora. 4 ἐν = a and Heb. τὴς ὕὑπομονὴς THS Vi. IO-II. With gen. as
h
A A ‘ Q ε ~ προσθεν TOU Θεοῦ καὶ πατρὸς ἡμῶν’
ΠΡΟΣ ΘΕΣΣΑΛΟΝΙΚΕΙ͂ΣΑ Ι.
οντες ὑμῶν τοῦ ἔργου τῆς πίστεως καὶ τοῦ κόπου τῆς ἢ ἀγάπης καὶ ἐλπίδος τοῦ Κυρίου ἡμῶν ᾿Ιησοῦ Χριστοῦ, ᾿ ἔμ-
4. "᾿ εἰδότες, ἀδελφοὶ ᾿ ἠγαπη-
Rom. v. 2; pa ὑπὸ Θεοῦ, Thy ἐκλογὴν ὑμῶν" ᾿ ὅτι τὸ εὐαγγέλιον 7 Ὁ οὐκ
cf. Win. § 30. 12,6. 1 Cf. 11. Ὁ, 13 and other side in II. i. 4. MEV ἐν ὑμῖν k Cf. iii. 5. 11} Gace See Col. 111. 12 and Deut. xxxiii. 12.
Ἢ ἐγενήθη "
du ὑμᾶς.
m Blass, ὃ 20, 1.
p “Αἱ most of rhetorical value” (Sx. Lang. N.T. 158). 8S TCor- xian.
§ 1, 1; ii. 13-14, and on 2 Cor. xi. 4.
affection; his life is bound up with their welfare; his source of happiness is their Christian well-being (cf. 11. 17-20, ili, 7-10). The adverb (a late Greek for- mation, cf. Expos., 1908, 59) goes equally well with the preceding or with the fol- lowing words; better with the former, on the whole, as the participles then open the successive clauses in 2, 3 and 4.— ὑμῶν is prefixed for emphasis to the three substantives which it covers, while the closing ἔμπροσθεν . . . ἡμῶν (cf. ii. 19) gathers up the thought of μνημον.--- Faith in one sense is a work, but Paul here (as in Gal. v. 6) means faith that does work (opus opponitur sermoni izanz, Bengel), by producing a change of life and a cheerful courage under trials. It would be no pleasure to recall a merely formal or voluble belief, any more than a display of Christian love (cf. Col. i. 4) which amounted simply to emotions or fitful expressions of goodwill, much less a hope which could not persist in face of delay and discouraging hardships. Ver. 4. The practical evidence of the Spirit in their lives showed that God had willed to enrol them among His chosen people (note the O.T. associations of be- loved by God and election), just as the Same consciousness of possessing the Spirit gave them the sure prospect of final entrance into the Messianic realm— an assurance which (ver. 6) filled them with joy amid all their discomforts. The phenomenon of the Spirit thus threw light backwards on the hidden purpose of God for them, and forwards on their prospect of bliss.—Recollections depend on know!edge; to be satisfied about a person implies settled convictions about his character and position. The apostles feel certain that the Thessalonian Chris- tians had been truly chosen and called by God, owing to (a) the genuineness and
6. καὶ ὑμεῖς "μιμηταὶ ἡμῶν ἐγενήθητε
εἰς Bes ἐν “λόγῳ μόνον ἀλλὰ καὶ ἐν “ δυνάμει Kat ἢ ἐν Πνεύματι ᾿Αγίῳ καὶ ᾿ πληροφορίᾳ πολλῇ, καθῶς οἴδατε οἷοι ἐγενήθη-
5 καὶ
τοῦ Κυρίου, " δεξάμενοι τὸν λόγον ἐν "θλίψει πολλῇ μετὰ * χαρᾶς
n Gal. iii. 14. o Cf. τ Cor. ii. 1-4, iv. 19-20. q Clem. Rom. xlii. 3. r Cf. Introd. t Rom. xiv. 17; Gal. v. 22.
effectiveness of their own ministry at Thessalonica, where they had felt the gospel going home to many of the in- habitants, and (b) the genuine evidence of the Thessalonians’ faith; (a) comes first in ver. 5, (Ὁ) inw.6f. Ini. rf Paul reverts to (a), while in ii. 13-16 (0) is again before his mind. As the divine éxAoyy manifested itself in the Christian qualities of ver. 3, Paul goes back to their historical origin.
Ver. 5. ὅτι = “inasmuch as”.—ro evayy. ἡμῶν, the gospel of which the apostles, and by which their hearers, were convinced. As the καθὼς clause in- dicates, wAnpod. must here denote per- sonal conviction and unfaltering confi- dence on the part of the preachers. The omission of the ἐν before wAnp. throws that word and πνεύματι together into a single conception, complementary to δυνάμει, which here has no specific refer- ence to miracles, but to the apostles’ courage (ii. 2), honesty and sincerity (4,5), devotion (7, 8), earnestness (9), and consistency (10). The effect of the Spirit on the preachers is followed up (in ver. 6) by its effect on the hearers; and this dual aspect recurs in ver. 9 (we and you). év(om. Blass) ὑμῖν = “among you”.
Ver. 6. θλίψει . . . χαρᾶς, cf. for this paradox of experience, Mazzini’s account of his comrades in the Young Italy move- ment: ‘‘ We were often in real want, but we were light-hearted in a way and smil- ing because we believed in the future”’, The gladness of the primitive Christian lay in the certainty of possessing soon that full salvation of which the Spirit at present was the pledge and foretaste. In view of Ps. li. 13, 14 itis hardly correct to say, with Gunkel (Wirkungen des heiligen Geistes, 71), that this connection of joy and the Spirit was entirely foreign to Judaism.
4—I0.
ΠΡΟΣ @ESSAAONIKEIS A
2.
Πνεύματος “Aylou, ἧς ὥστε γενέσθαι ὑ ὑμᾶς ἃ τύπον | πᾶσι τοῖς πιστεύ- U : Pet. v.
ουσιν ἐν TH Μακεδονίᾳ καὶ ἐν τῇ Axata. ται ὃ pers TOU — οὐ μόνον ἐν TH Μακεδονίᾳ καὶ ᾿Αχαΐᾳ
ἐν" μὴ "χρείαν ἔχειν ἡμᾶς λαλεῖν τι. 9.
ὃ. ad’ se yop " ἐξήχη- Bail ti. W ἀλλὰ ν aie Acy.,
cf. Joel
παντὶ τόπῳ ἡ wiotis ὑμῶν ἡ πρὸς τὸν Θεὸν ἐξελήλυθεν, ὥστε iii. 14 A (LXX) ; δ αὐτοὶ yap περὶ " ἡμῶν ἀπ- 3 Macc.
ili. 2
re eet ὁποίαν “ εἴσοδον ἔσχομεν πρὸς ὑμᾶς Kal πῶς ᾿Ἐπεστθεψοτε Ww we ὃ
“ πρὸς τὸν Θεὸν ἀπὸ τῶν εἰδώλων, δουλεύειν Θεῷ ‘ ζῶντι καὶ 5 ἀληθινῷ x Gf coon
. 2; Acts
EO; καὶ h@ ἀναμένειν τὸν υἱὸν αὐτοῦ ἱ ἐκ τῶν ae ὃν ἤγειρεν ἐκ πε iii. x f, ~ A lal 8;
των VEKPWY, ᾿Ιησοῦν, τὸν " ῥυόμενον ἡμᾶς ἐκ τῆς ἱ ὀργῆς τῆς ἐρχομένης. ee Rom.
‘ XXXV. 5; Philemon 5: = “the fact of your faith in God”. Ζν. Oy Via Le a “people, wherever we go”. ὦ 1.6.,) us, apostles. @CfoPs, exx.(cxxi.)'8; LXX. d See on Acts xiv. 15. Cf. Jer. iii, 22
(LXX). e Cf. Eph. ii. 12. Only here in Paul. M.T. 429, and on 2 Cor. i. το.
1For tumovs (NACGKLP, g, syr.p, Chrys., Theod.,
f See on Rev. vii. 2. h Isa. lix. 11, 20; Aésch., Eum., 243.
Rev. iti. 7, etc.
g See on John vi. 57; k Cf. Burton,
i Phil. iii. 20.
1 Rom. v. 9; cf. below, v. 9 (negat. side of ἐκλογή).
etc., Calvin, Schott,
Alexander, Koch, Wohl., Zim.), conformed to vpas, read τυπον with BD* vss.,
edd.
Ver. 8. ἡ πίστις .. - ἐξελ. (Rom. x. 18), by anacoluthon, reiterates for em- phasis ad’ tpav ... κυρίον (ὁ λόγος τ. K. depending for its effectiveness on the definite testimony of Christians). Paul is dictating loosely but graphically. The touch of hyperbole is pardonable and characteristic (cf. Rom. i. 8; 1 Cor. iv. 17; Col. i. 6); but the geographical and commercial position of Thessalonica see Introd., p. 5) must have offered ample facilities for the rapid dissemina- tion of news and the promulgation of the faith, north and south, throughout Euro- pean Greece (Encycl. Bibl., i. 32). The local Christians had taken full advantage of their natural opportunities. Through their imitation of the apostles (see Introd., p- 7) and of Christ (here as in 1 Peter li, 19-21, in his sufferings), they had be- come a pattern for others. The ἐν τῇ is omitted before ᾿Αχαίᾳ here because M. and A. are grouped together, over against π. T.—OoTE ... yap, the reputation of the apostles rested upon solid evidence.
Ver. g. The positive and negative as- pects of faith: ‘“‘ Videndum est ut ruinam errorum sequatur aedificium fidei” (Cal- ν]Π).---ἀὀληθινῷ = “real” as opposed to false in the sense of ‘counterfeit ”.— ζῶντι, as opposed to dead idols (see above, p. 5) impotent to help their worshippers. Elsewhere the phrase (cf. 1 Tim. iii. 15; Heb. iit. 12) “implies a contrast with the true God made prac- tically a dead deity by a lifeless and rigid form of religion” (Hort, Christian Ecclesia, 173). Nothing brings home the reality of God (z.¢.,as Father, vv. 1-3)
to the Christian at first so much as the experience of forgiveness.
Ver. 10. In preaching to pagans, the leaders of the primitive Christian mission put the wrath and judgment of God in the forefront (cf. Sabatier’s Paul, 98 f.), making a sharp appeal to the moral sense, and denouncing idolatry (cf. Sap., xiv., 12f., 22f.). Hence the revival they set on foot. They sought to set pagans straight, and to keep them straight, by means of moral fear as well as of hope. Paul preached at Thessalonica as he did at Athens (Acts xvii. 29-31; see Har- nack’s Expansion of Christianity, 1. τοῦ f.) and the substance of his mission-message on the wrath of God is preserved in Rom, i, 18—ii. 16. The living God is mani- fested by His raising of Jesus from the dead, His awakening of faith in Chris- tians, and His readiness to judge human sin in the hereafter. Seeberg (der Kate- chismus der Urchristenhett, 82-85) finds here an echo of some primitive Christian formula of faith, but his proofs are very precarious.—rov υἱὸν αὐτοῦ. This marked them out from Jewish proselytes, who might also be said to have turned from idols to serve the living God. The quiet combination of monotheism and a divine position of Jesus is striking (cf. Kattenbusch, of. cit., ii. 550 f.).—€x τῶν οὐρανῶν . . . ἐκ T. νεκρῶν, both the hope and the historical fact lay outside the experience of the Thessalonians, but both were assured to them by their experience of the Spirit which the risen Jesus had bestowed, and which guaranteed His final work, Were it not for touches like the
26
a =“ re- member,” . as 1 Cor. i. 16 (cf. Field, 187).
ΒΟ; and 1 Cor. xv. 10.
c See on Acts xvi. 10 f.
δόλῳ,
d See on Eph. vi. 20 and Acts ix. 26; on form cf. Win. § 5. 26 Ὁ. g ‘‘appeal” (cf. Polyb. iii. 109, 6). ΤΟΙ ΑΙ 7.
Phil. i. 30.
and xii. 16. k 2 Macc. iv. 3.
'The second ουδὲ (RSABCD*GP, min.,
ΠΡΟΣ GESSAAONIKEIS A
II.
Ν é ~ A II. τ. Αὐτοὶ γὰρ " οἴδατε, ἀδελφοί, τὴν εἴσοδον ἡμῶν τὴν πρὸς ὑμᾶς, 1b OTL © οὐ κενὴ γέγονεν: 2. ἀλλὰ προπαθόντες καὶ ὑβρισθέντες, καθὼς 3 > Cc , ἃ» , 2 A APE ye ει ol οἴδατε, ἐν " Φιλίπποις, “ ἐπαρρησιασάμεθα ἐν τῷ Θεῷ “ ἡμῶν λαλῆσαι \ ~ “ “ lo ~~ πρὸς ὑμᾶς TO εὐαγγέλιον τοῦ Θεοῦ ἐν πολλῷ * ἀγῶνι. ὁ παράκλησις ἡμῶν " οὐκ ἐκ πλάνης, οὐδὲ ἐξ ἀκαθαρσίας, οὐδὲ 1 ἐν
3. ἡ γὰρ
4. ἀλλὰ καθὼς " δεδοκιμάσμεθα ὑπὸ τοῦ Θεοῦ | πιστευθῆναι
e ili. g; 11:1: 11-12.
ΓῸΣ h Sc. ἐστίν, cf. 2 Cor. vi. 8.
i 2 Cor, iv. 2
etc., edd.) [cf. II. iii. 7-8] is preferable to
the v. 1. οὔτε (Pelt, Hofm., Wohl.); for axa@apo.as, Bentl. conj. “forte εξ av.
apeokias” [1.6. avO@pwraperktas |.
deeper sense of δουλεύειν, the celestial origin of Jesus, and the eschatological definition of ὀργή, one might be tempted to trace a specious resemblance between this two-fold description of Christianity at Thessalonica and the two cardinal factors in early Greek religion, viz., the service of the Olympian deities (@epa- πεύειν) and the rites of aversion (ἀπο- mopmat) which were designed to depre- cate the dark and hostile powers of evil. Paul preached like the Baptist judgment tocome. But his gospel embraced One who baptised with the Spirit and with the fire of enthusiastic hope (cf. 1 Cor. i. 7).
CHAPTER II.—Vv. 1-12. An apologia pro vita et labore suo.
Ver. I. αὐτοί, as opposed to the a. of i. 9.—yéyovev k.T.A., OUr mission was a vital success, as its results still show. For its motives and methods were genuine (2-12).
Ver. 2. ‘‘ Though we had suffered—aye and suffered outrage” in one town, yet on we went to another with the same errand; a practical illustration of Matt. % 23.
Ver. 3. yap: Our mission (whatever that of others may be) is not the outcome of self-seeking, otherwise it would readily be checked by such un- toward circumstances. Our confidence is in God, not in ourselves; our work is not self-appointed but a sacred trust or commission, for which we are respon- sible to Him (4). Hence, discourage- ment and hesitation are impossible. Paul argues that the very fact of their cheerful perseverance at Thessalonica, after their bad treatment at Philippi, points to the divine source and strength of their mission; what impelled them was simply a sense of lasting respon- sibility to God, upon the one hand, and an overpowering devotion to men upon
the other (cf. the δι᾽ ὑμᾶς of i. 5), for the gospel’s sake. Had the apostles yielded to feelings of irritation and despondency, giving up their task in Macedonia, after the troubles at Philippi, or had they con- ducted themselves at Thessalonica in such a way as to secure ease and profit; in either case, they would have proved their mission to be ambitious or selfish, and therefore undivine. As it was, their cour- age and sincerity were at once the evid- ence and the outcome of their divine commission.—mAadvys, “error” (cf. Ar- mitage Robinson on Eph. iv. 14). Their preaching did not spring from some delu~ sion or mistake. Paul was neither fool nor knave, neither deceived nor a deceiver (δόλῳ). Nor was his mission a sordid at- tempt (ἀκαθαρσίας) to make a good thing out of preaching, the impure motive being either to secure money (cf. πλεονεξίας ver. 5, and ver. 9), or to gain a position of importance (ver. 6) and popularity. Cf. Tacit., Annal., vi, 21 (of Tiberius’ attitude to astrologers) ‘‘si uanitatis aut fraudum suspicio incesserat”. Both features were only too familiar in the contemporary conduct of wandering so- phists, ἀρεταλόγοι, and thaumaturgists (e.g., Acts xiii. το, and Clemen’s article in Neue Kirchl. Zeitschrift, 1896, 151 f.) whose practices would also explain the literal interpretation of ax. (= sensual- ity). Butthe context favours the associ- ations of greed (cf. Eph. v. 3), as in the case of πλεονεξία. On the persuasive- ness of sincerity in a speaker, ¢.e., the extent to which his effectiveness depends upon his hearers’ conviction of his own earnestness and honesty, see Aristotle’s analysis of ἠθικὴ πίστις (Κα εέ,, ii. 1) and Isocrates’ description of εὐνοίας δύναμις (Orat., xv. 278, 279).
Ver. 4. ‘As God, who tests our hearts, has attested our fitness to be
18, ΠΡΟΣ @ESSAAONIKEIS A 27
τὸ εὐαγγέλιον, οὕτω λαλοῦμεν, οὐχ “ds ἀνθρώποις " ἀρέσκοντες, ἀλλὰ te es) Tae ἐξ see Vit- “ Θεῷ τῷ δοκιμάζοντι τὰς καρδίας ἡμῶν. 5. οὔτε γάρ ποτε ἐν λόγῳ ay, i. 304). P κολακείας ἐγενήθημεν, καθὼς οἴδατε, οὔτε ἐν “προφάσει πλεονεξίας * n Gal. i. το; for ov
Θεὸς μάρτυς - 6. οὔτε ζητοῦντες ἐξ ἀνθρώπων * δόξαν, οὔτε ἀφ᾽ ὑμῶν with pte.
οὔτε " ἀπ᾿ ἄλλων, " δυνάμενοι ἐν βάρει εἶναι ὡς Χριστοῦ ἀπόστολοι" ἱ 2 Pees 7. ἀλλ᾽ ἐγενήθημεν “ ἤπιοι ἐν μέσῳ ὑμῶν, ds " ἐὰν τροφὸς θάλπῃ TA ° Se a
ἑαυτῆς Téxvas! ὃ. οὕτως ὁμειρόμενοι ὑμῶν " εὐδοκοῦμεν * μεταδοῦναι πος
ὑμῖν ἢ" οὐ μόνον τὸ εὐαγγέλιον τοῦ Θεοῦ ἀλλὰ καὶ τὰς ἑαυτῶν ψυχάς, ΠΣ δον ΝΟΥ); Win.-Schm. ὃ v. 136. q “any pretext,” cf..on 2 ΘΌΣ. xi. 12, 11. 17; 2 Pet. ii. 3. r Cf. John Vili, 50, V. 41-44. S €.g.1. 9. t Cfor Cor.ix. ΤῈ: u of a father (ver. 11) in e.g. Hom. Iliad, xxiv. 770, Odyssey, ii. 234. v = ὅταν (Viteau, i. 217). wiil. 1; see on Rom. xv. 26; = “ we wereright willing’. x Rom.i.11. So. 2 Cor. vili. 5 (force of this example). Vi Che Burton, M.T. 481.
! The important variant νήπιοι, which is even better attested (cf. WH ii. 128), and is adopted, ¢.g., by Bentley, Lachm., Schrader, Jowett, Zimmer, Bisping, WH, Legft., and Wohl., probably arose from a not uncommon dittography of the final N in the preceding word: ymvos “properly implies the kindness of a superior” (Liddell
and Scott s.v.), whereas νηπιος has usually associations of immaturity in Paul.
entrusted with the gospel,” a character- istic play on the word. The definite commission of the gospel excluded any weak attempt to flatter men’s prejudices or to adapt oneself to their tastes. Hence the thought of the following verse.
Ver. 5. ‘‘ Never did we resort to words of flattery” (in order to gain some private end); cf. Arist., Eth. Ntk., iv. 6. As self-interest is more subtle than the desire to please people (which may be one form of self-interest), the appeal is changed significantly from k. o. to θεὸς μάρτυς (Rom. i. 9) : “auaritia aut ambitio, duo sunt isti fontes ex quibus manat totius ministerii corruptio” (Cal- vin). Cf, Introduction, ὃ 1—on θεός and 6 θεός, cf. Kattenbusch, das Afost. Symbol, ii. 515 f.
Wero. To put a full stop after ἄλλων, and begin a new _ sentence with δυνάμενοι (so ¢.g., Vulgate, Cal- vin, Koppe, Weizsacker, H. J. Gibbins, Exp. Ti., xiv. 527), introduces an awk- ward asyndeton, makes ἀλλὰ follow a concessive participle very awkwardly, and is unnecessary for the sense.
Ver. 7. ἐν βάρει εἶναι = “be men of weight,” or “be a burden” on your funds. Probably both meanings are intended, so that the phrase (cf. Field, 199) resumes the ideas of πλεον. and ἀνθ. δόξαν (self-interest in its mercen- ary shape and as the love of reputation) which are reiterated in vv. 7-12, a defence of the apostles against the charges, cur- rent against them evidently in some circles (probably pagan) at Thessalonica,
of having given themselves airs and un- duly asserted their authority, as well as of having levied or at any rate accepted contributions for their own support.— ἀπόστολοι were known to any of the local Christians who had been Jews (cf. Har- nack’s Expansion of Christianity, i. 66 f., 409 f.), since agents and emissaries (ἀπόσ - todo.) from Jerusalem went to and fro throughout the synagogues: but a. Χρισ- τοῦ was anew conception. The Chris- tian ἀπόστολοι had their commission from their heavenly messiah.—qmvor (2 Tim, ii. 24); as Bengel observes, there was nothing ex cathedra about the apostles, nothing selfish or crafty or overbearing. All was tenderness and devotion, fostering and protecting care, in their relations to these Thessalonian Christians who had won their hearts. To eschew flattery (5) did not mean any indifference to consideration and gentle- ness, in their case; they were honest without being blunt or masterful.—rpo- ods, a nursing mother (cf. Hor., Ep. i. 4, 8). ‘In the love of a brave and faith- ful man there is always a strain of maternal tenderness; he gives out again those beams of protecting fondness which were shed on him as he lay on his mother’s knee ’’ (George Eliot). Ruther- ford happily renders: ‘On the con- trary, we carried ourselves among you with a childish simplicity, as a mother becomes a child again when she fondles her children”.
Ver. 8. ὁμειρόμενοι (cf. Job iii. 21, LXX; Ps. Ixii. 2, Symm.) = “ yearning
N
τ 2¢
2 Cf.1 Cor. διότι “dyamyntot ἡμῖν ἐγενήθητε.
ἍΤΙΣ. 5.
ΠΡΟΣ OESSAAONIKEIS A
Il.
9. μνημονεύετε yap, ἀδελφοί,
a Cf. 11. iii, τὸν “ κόπον ἡμῶν καὶ τὸν μόχθον" νυκτὸς καὶ ἡμέρας " ἐργαζόμενοι
8 and 2 Cor. xi.
27. b Cf. Acts
γέλιον τοῦ Θεοῦ. XVill. 3.
“ πρὸς τὸ μὴ “ ἐπιβαρῆσαί τινα ὑμῶν, ἐκηρύξαμεν εἰς ὑμᾶς τὸ εὐαγ- 10. ὑμεῖς “μάρτυρες καὶ 6 Θεός, ὡς ἡ ὁσίως καὶ
ς Cf.2 Cor, δικαίως καὶ ὃ ἀμέμπτως ὑμῖν τοῖς πιστεύουσιν ἐγενήθημεν, IT. καθ-
ili. 13 for constr.
d Cf. 2 Cor. il. 5.
er Sam. nate Sis Num. xvi. e a 15; Acts €auTou ἘΝ ΠΗ:
f Only here in ΝΟ ΤῸ =‘ pious- ly.) (Gf. Eph. iv.
24. g Cf. v. 23 (Clem. Rom. xliv. 4). xv. 8-9. (Deissm. 248). as i. 2 f. Pun. πιο τν 7.6. the word.
h See on Acts xx. 31.
βασιλείαν καὶ ” δόξαν.
k Eph. iv. 17; see on Acts xx. 26 and Gal. v. 3. m See on Rom. viii. 28. ix. 11 and Gal. v. 8. q Cf. Heb. iv. 2. ἀκ. = id quod auditur.
, 75 ¢ he ΠῚ c A ε AY , ε ΠΥ τὶ ἅπερ οἴδατε, ὡς “Eva ἕκαστον ὑμῶν, ὡς πατὴρ τέκνα ἑαυτοῦ, * παρα- καλοῦντες ὑμᾶς καὶ ᾿ παραμυθούμενοι 12. καὶ ἢ μαρτυρόμενοι | εἰς τὸ
' περιπατεῖν ὑμᾶς ᾿ ἀξίως τοῦ Θεοῦ τοῦ "" καλοῦντος ὑμᾶς εἰς τὴν
AQ a oO lal Ae A 9 ΄“Ρ A ap3 , 13. Kat διὰ “ τοῦτο καὶ ἡμεῖς εὐχαριστοῦμεν τῷ Θεῷ " ἀδιαλείπτως, ὅτι παραλαβόντες “ λόγον ἀκοῆς παρ᾽ ἡμῶν "Tod Θεοῦ " ἐδέξασθε οὐ
λόγον ἀνθρώπων ἀλλὰ καθώς ἐστιν ἀληθῶς λόγον Θεοῦ, “ὃς καὶ
iCf. iv. 1 and on 1 Cor. xiv. 3, with 2 Macc. 1 See on Phil. i. 27; ethnic phrase n Cf, ΤΠ τἰ. τὰς o As well
τ With λόγον, cf. Win. § 30. 12d.
* μαρτυρομενοι (SSBDbcHKL, 17, 47, Chrys., Dam., etc., edd.) is preferable to the passive variant μαρτυρουμενοι, a corrupt western reading which has been conformed
to παραμ..
for, or, over”. εὐδοκ.. for absence of augment cf. ὟΝ. H., ii. 161, 162.---διότι causal (‘for as much as’’), almost = γάρ (as in Modern Greek).
Ver. 9. ‘‘ Paul means by the phrase, night and day, that he started work be- fore dawn; the usage is regular and fre- quent. He no doubt began so early in order to be able to devote some part of the day to preaching’ (Ramsay, Church in Roman Empire, p. 85). Paul, to the very last (cf. Acts xx. 29 f.), seems to have been sensitive on this point of independence.
Ver.10. ‘* We made ourselves yours” (cf. 8), the dative going closely (as Rom. vii. 3) with the verb, which is qualified {as in 1 Cor. xvi. 10) by the adverbs; so Born., Findlay.-- ὑμῖν «.7.A. (dative of possession). Paul had met other people at Thessalonica, but only the Christians could properly judge his real character and conduct.
Ver. 11. καθάπερ, sharper than καθώς. Viteau (ii. 111) suggests that k. ο. 15 a parenthesis, and @s a causal introductory particle for the participles (‘‘ hearten- ing,” “‘ encouraging,” ‘‘adjuring”’) which in their turn depend on ὑμῖν. .. ἐγενή- Oypev, but the likelihood is that in the rush of emotion, as he dictates, Paul leaves the participial clause without a finite verb (so e.g., 2 Cor. vii. 5).—@s
πατήρ TA, (cf. ὡς ἐὰν τροφός, 7). The figure was used by Jewish teachers of their relationship to their pupils. Cf. e.g., the words of Eleazar "Ὁ. Azarja to his dying master, ‘“‘ Thou art more to Israel than father or mother; they only bring men into this world, whereas thou guid- est us for this world and the next”. Catullus, Ixxii. 4 (dilexi tum te non tan- tum ut uulgus amicam, sed pater ut natos diligit et generos).
Ver. 12. ἀξίως in this connection (see references) was a familiar ethnic phrase. C. Michel (in his Recueil dinscriptions grecques, 1900, 266, 413) quotes two pre- Christian instances with τῶν θεῶν ..---εἰς τὸ, «.T.X., grammatically meaning either the object or the content of the solemn charge (cf. Moulton, 218 f.). The ethic is dominated by the eschatology, as in lit. 23," ν»9 28.
Vv. 13-16. Further thanksgiving for their endurance of trial.
Ver.13. ‘* And for this we also render thanks, viz., that;” the καί, by a loose but not unusual (cf. ili. 5; Rom. iii. 7, v. 3, etc.) construction, goes not with the pronoun but with the verb, or simply emphasises the former (e.g., Soph., Oed. Col., 53, 520, etc.).—tTod θεοῦ comes in so awk- wardly that one is tempted to regard it, with Baljon and some other Dutch critics, as a scribal gloss.
9---17.
A -“ al , " ἐνεργεῖται ἐν ὑμῖν τοῖς πιστεύουσιν.
ἐγενήθητε, ἀδελφοί, ”
ΠΡΟΣ ΘΕΣΣΑΛΟΝΙΚΕΙ͂ΣΑ
20
᾿ γὰρ μιμηταὶ υ “15 made opera-
14. ὑμεῖς
τῶν ἐκκλησιῶν τοῦ Θεοῦ τῶν οὐσῶν ἐν τῇ tive” (c/.
Robin-
ἡ Ἰουδαίᾳ ἐν Χριστῷ Ἰησοῦ, ὅτι τὰ αὐτὰ ἐπάθετε Kat ὑμεῖς ὑπὸ τῶν son's
διωξάντων καὶ Θεῷ μὴ 16.
ὁ ἀναπληρῶσαι αὐτῶν Tas ἁμαρτίας πάντοτε[ *
ἡ © ὀργὴ ἢ εἰς τέλος].
“κωλυόντων ἡμᾶς τοῖς ἔθνεσι λαλῆσαι
Ephes.
ἰδίων * συμφυλετῶν, 7 καθὼς καὶ αὐτοὶ ὑπὸ τῶν ᾿Ιουδαίων, 15. τῶν καὶ pp. 2arf.). v Proof and
τὸν Κύριον ἀποκτεινάντων ᾿Ιησοῦν kat τοὺς * προφήτας | καὶ ἡμᾶς “ek- result of
Ῥ , ἈΠ πὶ 2 , 3 , évepyet-
ἀρεσκόντων καὶ πᾶσιν ἀνθρώποις ἐναντίων, ται.
be 06 a x w Gal. i. 22;
ἵνα σωθῶσιν, “εἰς τὸ Cor it ἔφθασε δὲ ἐπ᾽ αὐτοὺς * OMY Sis
= * com- patriots”’.
17. Ἡμεῖς δέ, ἀδελφοί, ‘ ἀπορφανισθέντες ἀφ᾽ ὑμῶν πρὸς καιρὸν 5 "΄ ἅπερ.
ὥρας (* προσώπῳ οὐ καρδίᾳ) ' περισσοτέρως ἐσπουδάσαμεν τὸ πρόσ-
49 (Acts xvii. 5-14). Cf. 2 Cor. xi. 24, 26. Acts Xvii. 5, XXii. 22. d xii. 27 and Gen. xv. 16.
τ ΟΣ x43. . Burton, M.T. 411 and Mouit. i. 219. ΤῸ]. Phil. iii. 16, etc.
z Matt. v. 12, XXiil. 34, etc.
a So Lk. xi.
eke xis 52;
e 2 Macc. vi. 14. Cf. Sap.
g Lk. xiv. 21, xxi. 23. Cf. on Rom. i, 18.
Cf. on Eph. ii. 12.
ἢ “ Utterly, completely” (Ps. Sol. i. 1, ii. 5; Joseph. Bie J: vii. 8, 1), alm. = = ‘to the bitter end”
(Abbott, Joh. Gramm, 2322).
3; 2 Cor. v. 12. 1 Gal. 1. 14; 2 Cor. i. 12.
i Here only (NST);
ine bereft,” ch. Field 199 f. Κι Cor. v.
1Om. the Syrian interpolation wrovs with SABD*GP (min.), sah., cop., arm.,
aeth., Orig., Euth., edd., as an insertion by Marcion (Tert.,
before προφητας.
Ver. 14. μιμηταί, and soon helpers (Rom. xv. 26). The fact that they were exposed to persecution, and bore it manfully, proved that the gospel was a power in their lives, and also that they were in the legitimate succession of the churches. Such obstacles would as little thwart their course as they had thwarted that of Jesus or of his immediate followers. ovupd. might in- clude Jews (Acts xvii. 6), but Gentiles predominate in the writer’s mind.—The καί after καθώς simply emphasises the comparison (as in iv. 5, 13). As Calvin suggests, the Thessalonians may have wondered why, if this was the true re- ligion, it should be persecuted by the Jews, who had been God’s people. a. is racial rather than local, but the local persecution may have still been due in part to Jews (cf. Zimmer, pp. 16 f.).
Ver. 15. ‘‘ The Lord, even Jesus” (cf. Acts ii. 36). mpod. may go either with ἄποκτ. or with ἐκδιωξάντων.
Ver. 16. κωλυόντων x.7.A., defining (Luke xi. 52) from the Christian stand- point that general and familiar charge of hatred to the human race (ἐναντίων k.t-A.) which was started by the exclu- siveness of the ghetto and the synagogue. --ἔφθασε «.7.X., ‘the Wrath has come upon them,” apparently a reminiscence Of Test. Levi. vi. 11. This curt and sharp verdict on the Jews sprang from Paul’s irritation at the moment. The apostle was in no mood to be concilia-
ἘΣ Nestle’ 8 Einf. 253)
tory. He was suffering at Corinth from persistent Jewish attempts to wreck the Christian propaganda, and he flashes out in these stern sentences of anger. Later on (Rom. ix.-xi.) he took a kinder and more hopeful view, though even this did not represent his final outlook on the prospects of Judaism. Consequently, it is arbitrary to suspect vv. 14 (15)-16 as a later interpolation, written after 70 A.D- (cf. the present writer’s Hist. New Testa- ment, pp. 625, 626). But the closing sen- tence of ver. 16 has all the appearance of a marginal gloss, written after the tragic days of the siege in 70 A.D. (so e.g., Spitta, Pfleiderer, Primitive Christianity, i. 128, 129, Schmiedel, Teichmann, die Paul. Vorstellungen von Auferstehung u. Gericht, 83, Drummond, etc.). The Jews, no doubt, had recently suffered, and were suffering, as a nation in a way which might seem to Paul, in a moment of vehement feeling, a clear proof of con- dign punishment (so e.g., Schmidt, 86- go). But neither the edict of Claudius nor the bloody feuds in Palestine quite bear out the language of this verse. And ὀργή is surely more than judicial har- dening (cf. Dante’s Paradiso, vi. 88-93) ; its eschatological significance points to a more definite interpretation.
Ver. 17-CHAPTER III. Ver. 13. apologia pro absentia sud.
Ver. 17. πρὸς k. @., as we both ex-. pected, but, as it turned out, for much longer. προσ. ov k., “not where |
Paul’s
30 m Win.§5, Tov ὑμῶν ἰδεῖν ἐν πολλῇ ἐπιθυμίᾳ. 7, ἃ, οἵ. \ Co iA Se Ny 4 or A onii. 8. πρὸς ὑμᾶς, ἐγὼ “μεν Παῦλος kat n =" For ae ΕΣ: i my part”; ἡμᾶς ὁ Σατανᾶς. on ab- sence of δέ, cf. Blass, S77 ΤΣ , o =“ More Χαρᾶ. than once” (Phil. iv. 16). p Cf. Gal. v. 7; Rom. xv. 22. (LXX). s Blass, § 77, 11. : 8, d. v 2 Cor. viii. 23, cf. 2 Cor. i. 14.
breathe; but where I love, I live’’ (South- well, the Elizabethan Jesuit poet, echo- ing Augustine’s remark that the soul lives where it loves, not where it ex- ists); cf. Eurip., Jon, 251. Ὑπὸ next paragraph, ii. 17-iil. 13, starts from a fresh imputation against the apostles’ honour. Paul, it was more than hinted by calumniators at Thessalonica, had left his converts in the lurch (cf. 18) ; with him, out of sight was out of mind; fresh scenes and new interests in the South had supplanted them in his affec- tions, and his failure to return was inter- preted as a fickle indifference to their concerns, The reply is three-fold. (a) Paul’s continued absence had been un- avoidable (17 f.); he had often tried to get back. In proof of this anxiety (b) he had spared Timothy from his side for a visit to them (iii. 1-5), and (c) Timothy’s report, he adds (iii. 6 f.) had relieved a hearty concern on his part for their wel- fare; he thus lets them see how much they were to him, and still prays for a chance of re-visiting them (11). He was not to blame for the separation ; and, so far from blunting his affection, it had only whetted (περισσοτέρως) his eager- ness to get back.
Ver. 18. ‘We did crave to reach you,” διότι ( = because) not being re- quired with the English stress on did. The whole verse is parenthetical, syn- tactically. —Kait... Σατανᾶς. The mysterious obstacle, which Paul traced back to the ultimate malice of Satan, may have been either (a) an illness (cf. 2 Cor. xii. 7, so Simon, die Psycho- logie des Apostels Paulus, 63,64), (b) local troubles, (c) the exigencies of his mission at the time being (Grotius), or (4) a move on the part of the Thessalonian poli- tarchs who may have bound over Jason and other leading Christians to keep the peace by pledging themselves to prevent Paul’s return (Ramsay’s St. Paul the Traveller, 230 f., Woodhouse, Ε. Bi., 5047, Findlay). Early Christian thought re-
ΠΡΟΣ OESSAAONIKEIS A
t Cf. Kattenbusch: das Apost. Symntbol, ii. 597 Ε.
II. 18—19.
τὸ, "ἢ διότι ἠθελήσαμεν ἐλθεῖν
A , “ἅπαξ καὶ " δίς, καὶ " ἐνέκοψεν
19. τίς γὰρ ἡμῶν ἐλπὶς ἢ 1 χαρὰ ἢ “ στέφανος ᾿ καυχήσεως "(ἢ οὐχὶ καὶ ὑμεῖς) ἔμπροσθεν τοῦ ᾿ Κυρίου ἡμῶν ὑ Ἰησοῦ ἐν τῇ αὐτοῦ παρουσίᾳ; 20. ὑμεῖς γάρ ἐστε “ ἡ " δόξα ἡμῶν καὶ ἡ
q Phil. iv. 1. τ Cf. Prov. xvi. 31
u Win. § 18,
ferred all such hindrances to the devil as the opponent of God and of God’s cause. The words ἐν ᾿Αθήναις (iii. 1) rule out Zimmer’s application of (δ) to the emer- gency at Corinth, while the silence of Acts makes any of the other hypotheses quite possible, though (d) hardly fits in with the ordinary view of the Empire in II. ii. 2 f. and renders it difficult to see why the Thessalonians did not under- stand at once how Paul could not return. The choice really lies between (a) and (c). Kabisch (27-29), by a forced ex- egesis, takes ver. 20 as the explanation of this satanic manceuvre. Satan pre- vented us from coming, in order to rob us of our glory and praise on the last day, by wrecking your Christian faith; he was jealous of our success among you.
Ver. 19. Of course we wanted to come back, for (γάρ), etc. The touch of fine exaggeration which follows is true to the situation. Paul’s absence from the young church was being misinterpreted in a sinister way, as if it implied that the Achaian Christians had ousted the Thes- salonians from his affections. You it is, he protests, who but you (καὶ super- fluous after 4, as in Epict. i. 6, 39; Rom. xiv. Io, but really heightening the follow- ing word, as in Rom. v. 7; almost = ‘‘ indeed ” or ‘‘even’”’)—you are my pride and delight !—orépavos, of a_ public honour granted (as to Demosthenes and Zeno) for distinguished public service. The metaphor occurs often in the inscrip- tions (cf. also Pirke Aboth, iv. 9). Paul coveted no higher distinction at the ar- rival of the Lord than the glory of having won over the Thessalonian church. Cf. Crashaw’s lines to St. Teresa in heaven :
‘© Thou shalt look round about, and see Thousands of crown’d souls throng to be Themselves thy crown”.
Napovoia = royal visit (cf. Wilcken’s Griech. Ostraka, i. 274 f.), and hence applied (cf. Matt. xxiv.) to the arrival of the messiah, though the evidence for the
ΠΡΟΣ CESSAAONIKEIS A 21
Ill. I—5. 2
111. 1. Διὸ μηκέτι στέγοντες, “ ηὐδοκήσαμεν " καταλειφθῆναι éva 1.6. Paul 3 , , Nii Sg , x 3 Me em , and Silva- Αθήναις μόνοι 2. Kal ἐπέμψαμεν Τιμόθεον τὸν ἀδελφὸν ἡμῶν καὶ
nus, Cf, ii. NG A te) - 3 , A A > CY fal , 8. συνεργὸν “τοῦ Θεου “ ἐν τῷ εὐαγγελίῳ τοῦ Χριστοῦ, εἰς TO“ στηρίξαι b Acts xxv, ᾿ς A A , Ξ ἐν , 4. ὑμᾶς καὶ ὅ παρακαλέσαι “ὑπὲρ τῆς πίστεως ὑμῶν, 3. ᾽ τὸ μηδένα ς τ etc.,1 Cor. ili. 9. at 27 cf. below, ver. 13.
© σαίνεσθαι 2 ἐν ταῖς θλίψεσι ταύταις - αὐτοὶ γὰρ οἴδατε ὅτι εἰς " τοῦτο
a , ‘ BY .«“ k Ων ec. A 5. λέ ea ) κείμεθα: 4. Kal yap ὅτε " πρὸς ὑμᾶς ἦμεν, προελέγομεν ὑμῖν ὅτι ἃ
ἱ μέλλομεν θλίβεσθαι, καθὼς καὶ ἐγένετο καὶ οἴδατε. 5. διὰ τοῦτο
> A , a e =mepi (cf. ἢ κἀγώ μηκέτι στέγων ἔπεμψα “els τὸ γνῶναι Thy πίστιν ὑμῶν, μή IT iL τ ο 3 , ἘΣ tae /e a Sey x (aha BP: ε , Rom.i.8; πως ° ἐπείρασεν ὑμᾶς ὁ πειράζων καὶ Peis κενὸν “γένηται 6 κόπος Piato’s Apol.
XXXIX. 6).
f Cf. Viteau, i. 272; Blass, ὃ 71, 2, opposition to preceding clause (cf. iv. 6). g Hereonly(N.T.), = “allured, beguiled " or ‘‘ disturbed” (Diog. Laert. viii. 43: οἱ δὲ σαινόμενοι Tots λεγόμενοις ἐδάκρνον). h 1.6. τὸ θλίβεσθαι, cf. i. 6, 11. i. 5. 1 ΒΗ: 1 τὸ: k= τ, sisi, 1, τοὶ εἰς: 1 “We Christians.” m Cf. n Cf. on ii. 16. o Unrealised purpose, see Gal. ii. 2,
. ON ii. 13. iv. 11, for mood; also Burton, M.T. 227. p Win. § 29, 2, b. q deliberative conjunctive.
1 For ἡμῶν και διακονον 7.0. και συνεργον ἡμων (DcKL, syr.sch, Chrys., Theod., Dam., etc.), or npwv kat 8.7.0. (NSAP, min., vg., cop., syr.ptxt, arm., aeth., Euth., etc., Ti., Tr., Bj., Zim.) read the original and harder Western text ἡμων και συνεργον 7.0. (D*, d, e, 17, Amb. [B om. 1.0. so Weiss, Findlay], Lach., Al., Ell., WH marg., Born., Schm., Wohl., Feine), from which the variants seem to have sprung. Later scribes are more likely to have stumbled at 1.0. after cvvepyov than to have inserted it by a reminiscence of 1 Cor. iii. 0.
2For p. σαινεσθαι (cf. Zahn, Hinl. § 14, 2), Lach., Ernesti, and Verschuis (so Alexander) conj. pndev αἀσαινεσθαι (= χαλεπῶς φέρειν), a more than dubious passive form of ἀσαω, Beza and Bentley μηδενα cadever Oar (v.1. sever Sar, Bentl.), and Holwerda μηδὲν αναινεσθαι (= repent or be ashamed of); if any change is required {but cf. Koch’s full note, 233-237), it would be in the direction of σιεινεσθαι {Ξξσιαινεσθαι, to be disheartened, unnerved), the attractive reading of FG which is preferred by Sophocles (Lex., s.v.), Reiske, and Nestle (Exp. ΤΊ. xviii. 479, Preuschen’s Zeitschrift, vii. 361-62, cf. Mercati, zbid. viii. 242). G elsewhere (cf. Rom. xi. 26,
xii. 17) confuses εἰ and au.
use of the term in pre-Christian Judaism is scanty (Test. Jud. xxii. 3; Test. Levi. viii. 15; for the idea of the divine ‘‘ com- ing” cf. Slav. En., xxxii. 1, xlii. 5). This is the first time the term is used by Paul, but it was evidently familiar to the readers. Later on, possibly through Paul’s influence, it became an accepted word for the second advent in early Christianity.
CHAPTER III].—Ver. I. px, instead of οὐκ.» to bring out the personal motive, - στέγοντες “able to bear’ (cf. Philo, Flacc., § 9, μηκέτι στέγειν δυνάμενοι τὰς ἐνδείας), sc. the anxiety of ii. τι f.—éev °A. μόνοι. Paul shrank from loneliness, especially where there was little or no Christian fellowship; but he would not gratify himself at the expense of the Thessalonians. Their need of Timothy must take precedence of his.
Ver. 3. Cf. Artemid., Oneirocritica ii. It, ἀλλότριοι δὲ κύνες σαίνοντες μὲν δόλους καὶ ἐνέδρας ὑπὸ πονηρῶν ἀνδρῶν [cf. 2 Thess. iii. 2] ἢ γυναικῶν [cf. Acts xvii. 4] σημαίνουσιν.
Mer ay Cy, Acts xvii; 3, δ; 13 f.
Ver. 5. Resuming the thought of iii. I-3a, after the parenthetical digression of 3b, 4, but adding a fresh reason for the mission of Timothy, v7z., the apostle’s desire to have his personal anxiety about the Thessalonians relieved. It is need- less to suppose (with Hofmann and Spitta) that iii. 5 refers to a fresh mes- senger or a letter (Wohl.) despatched by Paul on his own account. As in ii. 18, Paul passes to the singular, to emphasise his personal interest in the matter; the change of number, especially after the generic use of the plural in 3, 4, does not necessarily prove that the plural of ver. I means Paul alone. The dominating anxiety of Paul was about their faith (5- 10). He was overjoyed to hear that they retained ‘‘a kindly remembrance” of himself, and he reciprocates their desire for another meeting; but, while this un- doubtedly entered into their general Christian position, it is the former on which unselfishly he dwells (cf. the transition in toa and τοῦ). --- πίστιν
32 ΠΡΟΣ OESSAAONIKEIS A
111. 6—r3.
r=“A ἡμῶν. 6, "ἄρτι δὲ ἐλθόντος Τιμοθέου πρὸς ἡμᾶς ἀφ᾽ ὑμῶν Kat
3 > ΕΝ Q ΙΝ Ν δὴ 3 , co oA Ἀν @ ago, εὐαγγελισαμένου ἡμῖν τὴν πιστιν καὶ τὴν ἄγαπην ὑμῶν καὶ OTL
“ost =
s Cf. Lk. i. ἔχετε μνείαν ἡμῶν ἀγαθὴν πάντοτε, ἐπιποθοῦντες ἡμᾶς ἰδεῖν, * καθ--
19; inun- ,
technical ἅπερ Kat ἡμεῖς ὑμᾶς, 7. ἢ διὰ τοῦτο παρεκλήθημεν, ἀδελφοί, * ἐφ᾽
classical
sense of ὑμῖν ἐπὶ πάσῃ “TH ἀνάγκῃ καὶ “ θλίψει ἡμῶν διὰ τῆς ὑμῶν πίστ-
" bring-
ing good εὡς " ὃ, ὅτι νῦν * ζῶμεν, ἢ ἐὰν ὑμεῖς " στήκετε ἐν Κυρίῳ. 9. τίνα
τ oO n Ξ 3 4
tive =‘‘by 8
this good νυκτὸς Kal ἡμέρας " ὑπερεκπερισσοῦ δεόμενοι “eis τὸ ἰδεῖν
Cf. ii. ix, Yap “ εὐχαριστίαν δυνάμεθα τῷ Θεῷ ἀνταποδοῦναι περὶ ὑμῶν, ἐπὶ , A A Ὁ , Cr ΣΡ 3 A PAYNE lol πάσῃ τῇ χαρᾷ ἡ χαίρομεν δι᾿ ὑμᾶς ἔμπροσθεν τοῦ Θεοῦ ἡμῶν, το.
ὑμῶν
ews”. Ἶ ἢ ῶ 5 Cf.2 Cor. τὸ πρόσωπον καὶ καταρτίσαι τὰ ὑστερήματα τῆς πίστεως ὑμῶν ; 11. uy, "Αὐτὸς δὲ 16 Θεὸς καὶ πατὴρ ἡμῶν καὶ ὁ Κύριος ἡμῶν ᾿Ιησοῦς ὅ κατ- 1b oes
w Job xv.
24 (EX%), ευθύναι τὴν ὁδὸν ἡμῶν πρὸς ὑμᾶς" 12. ὑμᾶς δὲ ὁ Κύριος "πλεονάσαι
ε we were
39
suflering καὶ ‘ περισσεύσαι τῇ ἀγάπῃ εἰς ἀλλήλους καὶ εἰς πάντας (καθάπερ
(cf. ver. 3.)
᾽
as well as καὶ ἡμεῖς “eis ὑμᾶς) 13. εἰς τὸ ' στηρίξαι "ὑμῶν τὰς καρδίας "ἀμέμ-
you’’,
».
(cf. 2 Cor.
Intensive πτοὺς ἐν “ ἁγιωσύνῃ, ἔμπροσθεν τοῦ Θεοῦ Kal πατρὸς ἡμῶν ἐν TH
= eee wn ’ Aw > A ~ ~ V1. 9, xiii. παρουσίᾳ τοῦ Κυρίου ἡμῶν ᾿Ιησοῦ μετὰ ἢ πάντων τῶν “ ἁγίων αὐτοῦ.
4: ‘ului- mus, hoc : est recte ualemus” (Calvin).
iii. 23 (Theod.) and v. 13 below. ς e Cf. iv. 16, and contrast ii. 18. h Transit.as Num. xxvi. 54 (LXX), etc. k Sc. “abound in love”.
p Cf. iv. 17, ἡμεῖς. . « σὺν αὐτοῖς.
κιτιλι ‘‘Initium omnium malarum ten- tationum inconstantia animi est et parua ad Deum confidentia” (De Imit. Christi, i. 13, 5).--ἐπείρασεν, with success, it is implied.
Ver. 8. The news put life and spirit into him.—oryKerte, for construction cf. Mark xi. 25 and Abbott’s Johan. Gramm., 2515 (i). ;
Ver. το. Another adaptation of ethnic phraseology, cf. Griechische Urkunden, i. 246, 12, νυκτὸς Kal ἡμέρας ἐντυγχάνω τῷ θεῷ ὑπὲρ ὑμῶν (a pagan papyrus from second or third century, A.D.). The con- nection of δεόμενοι k.t.A. with the fore- going words is loose, but probably may be found in the vivid realisation of the Thessalonians called up before his mind as he praised God for their constancy. Timothy had told him of their loyalty, but had evidently acquainted him also with some less promising tendencies and shortcomings in the church; possibly the Thessalonians had even asked for guid- ance on certain matters of belief and practice (see below). Hence Paul’s eager- ness to be on the spot again, not merely for the sake of happy fellowship (Rom. i. 11), but to educate and guide his friends, supplying what was defective in their
Υ =o7av, 1. 7. Win. ὃ 5,19; Burton, M.T. 247, and Moult. i. 168. 11. 11. 2; constr. aS in ii. 12. f Cf. Win. § 18, 7, Moult. i. 179. i Transit. as 2 Cor. ix. 8; cf. for thought Phil. i. 9. 1 Cf. above, ver. 2. Viteau, II. 275), as v. 23; cf. Phil. ii. 15, Clem. Rom. xliv. 6, Sap. ii. 22. ἡμεῖ q Jude 14, cf. Everling: die paul. Angelologie (78-79).
z Il. 11. 15, late form, cf. Blass § 65, 4; a Cf. on Acts xxiv. 3. Dan. d See note on v. 23. g Il. iti. 5, Lk. i. 79.
n Proleptic (cf.
m See note on v. 23. o Cf. 2 Cor. vii. 1.
faith. As this was impracticable in the meantime, he proceeds to write down some kindly admonitions. Thus τοῦ forms the transition to the second part of the letter; Paul, as usual, is wise enough to convey any correction or remonstrance on the back of hearty commendation. In the prayer which immediately follows, toa is echoed in 11, τοῦ in 12, 13, for the maturing of the Thessalonian’s faith does not depend on the presence of their apostles. Whatever be the answer to the prayer of 11, the prayer of 12, 13 can be accomplished.
Ver. τι. κατευθύναι (optative), as al- ready (Acts xvi. 8-10, xvil. 1). The singular (cf. 11., ii. 16, 17) implies that God and Jesus count as one in this con- nection. The verb is common (e.g., Ep. Arist., 18, etc.) in this sense of providence directing human actions.
Vv. 12,13. The security and purity of the Christian life are rested upon its brotherly love (so Ep. Arist., 229); all breaches or defects of ἁγιωσύνη, it is im- plied, are due to failures there (cf. iv. 3, 6); even sensuality becomes a form of selfishness, on this view, as much as im- patience or resentment. This profound ἀγάπη ‘is an ever-fixed mark That looks:
a
IV. 1—3.
ΠΡΟΣ @ESSAAONIKEIS A
33
IV. 1. "Λοιπὸν οὖν, ἀδελφοί, ἢ ἐρωτῶμεν Byte καὶ παρακαλοῦμεν a “Locutio
ἐν Κυρίῳ Ἰησοῦ, ἵνα καθὼς παρελάβετε παρ᾽ ἡμῶν “τὸ πῶς δεῖ ὑμᾶς περιπατεῖν “Kat " ἀρέσκειν Θεῷ, καθὼς καὶ περιπατεῖτε, σεύητε μᾶλλον 2. οἴδατε γὰρ τίνας παραγγελίας ἐδώκαμεν ὑμῖν
διὰ τοῦ Κυρίου Ἰησοῦ.
3.
naris in Exp.5 viii. 429 f. b Phil. iv. 3 5, Viteau, I. 132, Win. § 18, 2. on tempests and is never shaken;”’ it fixes the believing man’s life in the very life of God, by deepening its vital powers of growth; no form of ἁγιωσύνη which sits loose to the endless obligations of this ἀγάπη will stand the strain of this life or the scrutiny of God’s tribunal at the end.—tpas δὲ, what ever becomes of us.—ayiwv, either (a) ‘saints’ (as II., i. το, De Wette, Hof- mann, Zimmer, Schmidt, Everling, Ka- bisch, Findlay, Wohl.), or (5) ‘‘ angels” (Ex. i. 9; Ps. Sol. xvii. 49, etc. Hithn, Weiss, Schrader, Titius, Schmiedel, Lueken), or (c) both (cf. 4 Esd. vii. 28, xiv. 9; Bengel, Alford, Wohl., Askwith, Ellicott, Lightfoot, Milligan). The remini- scence of Zech. xiv. 5 (LXX) is almost de- cisive for (b), though Paul may have put another content into the term; πάν- των must not be pressed to support (c). In any case, the phrase goes closely with παρουσίᾳ. The ἅγιοι are a retinue.
CHAPTER IV.-Ver. 1-CHAPTER V.-Ver. Ir, Spectal instructions (iv. 1-12) on chastity, etc.
Ver. 1. Resuming the thought of ii. II, 12 as well as of ili. 10-13. Cf. a pre- Christian letter in Oxyrh. Papyri, iv. 294 (13 ἐρωτῶ σε οὖν iva pi, 6 f. ἐρωτῶ σε καὶ παρακαλῶ σε). The ἵνα, repeated often for the sake of clearness, is sub-final (so II., iii. 12) = infinitive, cf. Moulton, i. 206 f. Paul meant to write οὕτως καὶ περιπατῆτε, but the parenthesis of praise (κ. kat mw.) leads him to assume that and to plead for fresh progress along the lines already laid down by himself.
Ver. 2. Almost a parenthesis, as Bahnsen points out in his study of 1-12 (Zeitschrift f. wiss. Theol., 1904, 332-358). The injunctions (παραγγελίαι in semi- military sense, as 1 Tim. i. 18) relate to chastity (3-8) and charity, (9, 10), witha postscript against excitement and idle- ness (11, 12).—mapayy. for the cognate use of this term (cf. ver. 8) in the inscrip- tions of Dionysopolis (ταραγγέλλω πᾶσιν μὴ καταφρονεῖν Tod θεοῦ) cf. Exp. ΤΊ., xX. 150.---διὰ κιτιλ., the change from the ἐν of ver. 1 does not mean that the Thes-
WOOL. IV.
‘roito γάρ ἐστι
d And so (result).
proper- antis ad finem ” (Grotius), Test. Reub. v. 5; cf. on 2 Cor. Xlii. II, and Jan- c On article in indir. questions, see Blass, § 47. e Contr. ii. 15. f v.18, Ps. xxix. 5, etc.
ἵνα περισ-
᾿θέλημα τοῦ Θεοῦ, ὁ
salonians before their conversion got such injunctions from Paul on the authority of Christ, while afterwards they simply needed to be reminded of the obligations of their union (év) with the Lord. No strict difference can be drawn between both phrases (cf. Heitmuller’s Im Namen Fesu, 71 f.), though the διά lays rather more stress on the authority. For Jesus to command διά the apostles seems to us more natural than to say that the apostles issue commands διὰ τοῦ Κυρίου, but the sense is really the same. The apostles give their orders on the authority of their commission and revelations from the Lord whom they interpret to His fol- lowers (cf. Rom. xv. 30, xii. 2). But this interpretation must have appealed to the sayings of Jesus which formed part of the παράδοσις (cf. Weizsiicker’s Apostolic Age, i. 97, 120, 11. 39). Thus 8a is an echo of the saying preserved in Luke x. 16.
Ver. 3. ἁγιασμός (in appo ition to τοῦτο, θέλημα without the article being the predicate) = the moral issue of a life
related to the “Aytos (cf. ver. δ), viewed here in its special and negative aspect of freedom from sexual impurity. The gospel of Jesus, unlike some pagan cults, e.g., that of the Cabiri at Thessalonica (cf. Lightfoot’s Biblical Essays, pp. 257 f.), did not tolerate, much less foster, licentiousness among its worshippers. At Thessalonica as at Corinth Paul found his converts exposed to the penetrating taint of life in a large seaport. As the context indicates, ay. ὑμῶν = = ‘the per- fecting of you in holiness”? (ay. in its active sense, ὑμῶν genitive objective : so Lunemann, Ellicott, Bahnsen). The ab- sence of any reference to δικαιοσύνη is remarkable. But Paul’s dialectic on justi- fication was occasioned by controversies about 6 νόμος which were not felt at Thessalonica. Besides, the ‘‘ justified” standing of the believer, even in that synthesis of doctrine, amounted practi- cally to the position assured by the posses- sion of the Spirit to the Christian. In his uncontroversial and eschatological mo-
3
34 ΠΡΟΣ OESSAAONIKEIS A IV.
g Actsxv. ἁγιασμὸς ὑμῶν, ὅ ἀπέχεσθαι ὑμᾶς ἀπὸ τῆς ὃ πορνείας - 4. ὅ εἰδέναι
20; infin.
ofapposi- ἕκαστον ὑμῶν τὸ ἑαυτοῦ ἢ σκεῦος κτᾶσθαι ἐν ᾿ ἁγιασμῷ καὶ
tion, as
k
τιμῇ,
Acts xv. 5. μὴ ἐν ' πάθει " ἐπιθυμίας, καθάπερ ™ καὶ τὰ ἔθνη " τὰ μὴ εἰδότα ii16. τὸν Θεόν - 6. “τὸ "μὴ ὑπερβαίνειν καὶ πλεονεκτεῖν “ ἐν τῷ “πράγματι
h x Pet. iii, . ᾿
δι i See Tob. Vili. 4-9, and 1 Cor. vii. 39. on ii, 14. § 20, 3 δ). Ὁ sc. τινὰ from ἕκαστον (4). purpose. q Cf. on 2 Cor. vii. 11. r
ments, Paul taught as here that the ex- perience of the Spirit guaranteed the believer’s vindication at the end (cf. i. 9, 10) and also implied his ethical behaviour during the interval. The comparative lack of any allusion to the forgiveness of sins (cf. ¢.g., iii. 5, 10, 13) does not mean that Paul thought the Thessa- lonians would be kept sinless during the brief interval till the parousia (so Wernle, der Christ u. die Siinde bei Paulus, 25- 32); probably no occasion had called for any explicit teaching on this common- place of faith (1 Cor. xv. 3, 11).
Ver. 4. Paul demands chastity from men ; it is not simply a feminine virtue. Contemporary ethics, in the Roman and Greek world, was often disposed to con- done marital unfaithfulness on the part of husbands, and to view prenuptial un- chastity as ἀδιάφορον or at least as a comparatively venial offence, particularly in men (cf. Lecky’s History of European Morals, i. 104 f., ii. 314 f.). The strict purity of Christ’s gospel had to be learnt (εἰδέναι). --- σκεῦος (lit. ‘ vessel ”) = ‘‘ wife ;” the rendering ‘‘ body” (cf. Barn. vii. 3) conflicts with the normal meaning of κτᾶσθαι (‘‘ get,” ‘ acquire ;’’ of mar- riage, LXX. Ruth iv. 10; Sir. xxxvi. 29, Xen., Symp., ii. 10), Paul views mar- riage on much the same level as he does in r Cor. vii. 2, 9; in its chaste and religious form, it is a remedy against sensual passion, not a gratification of that passion. Each of you (he is ad- dressing men) must learn (εἰδέναι = know [how] to, cf. Phil. iv. 12) to get a wife of his own (when marriage is in question), but you must marry ἐν ἁγιασμῷ (as a Christian duty and vocation) καὶ τιμῇ (with a corresponding sense of the moral dignity of the relationship). The two latter words tend to raise the current estimate, presupposed here and in ver. 6, of a wife as the σκεῦος of her husband; this in its turn views adultery primarily as an infringement of the husband’s rights or an attack on his personal pro-
Tov ἀδελφὸν adtod: διότι *
k See Heb. xiii. 4 and Ignat. ad Polyk. v. 2.
ἢ From Jer. x. 25; cf. II. i. 8: ‘“whose characteristic is ignorance of God” (Win. p Cf. iii. 3, for the accus. infin. with neg. to denote
Ps. xciv. 1, cf. Sir. v. 3; Rom. xii. 19, and xiii. 4.
ΕΙΣ , \ , , ἔκδικος Κύριος περὶ πάντων τούτων,
1 4 Macc. τ: 35. τὰ Gf.
perty. Paul, however, closes by an em- phatic word on the religious aspect (6-8) of the question; besides, as Dr. Drum- mond remarks, “is it not part of his greatness that, in spite of his own somewhat ascetic temperament, he was not blind to social and physiological facts?’’ It is noticeable that his eschat- ology has less effect on his view of mar- riage here than in τ Cor. vii. Even were κτᾶσθαι taken as = ‘‘ possess,” a usage not quite impossible for later Greek (cf. Field, 72), it would only extend the idea to the duties of a Christian husband. The alternative rendering (‘‘acquire mastery οἵ, Luke xxi. 19) does not justify the “body ” sense of σκεῦος.
Ver. 6. Compare the saying of rabbi Simon ben Zoma (on Deut. xxiii. 25): ‘‘ Look not on thy neighbour’s vineyard. If thou hast looked, enter not; if thou hast entered, regard not the fruits; if thou hast regarded them, touch them not; if thou hast touched them, eat them not. But if thou hast eaten, then thou dost eject thyself from the life of this world and of that which is to come” (quoted in Bacher’s Agada der Tannaiten, and ed., 1903, i. 430). There is no change of subject, from licentiousness to dishonesty. The asyndeton and the euphemistic ἐν τῷ πράγματι (not τῳ = τινί, Win. §6 4d) show that Paul is still dealing with the immorality of men, but now as a form of social dishonesty and fraud. The metaphors are drawn from trade, perhaps as appropriate to a trading community. While ὑπερβαίνειν may be intransitive (in its classical sense of ‘ transgress ᾽}, it probably governs ἀδελ- φόν in the sense of “ get the better of,” or “‘ overreach;’’ πλεονεκτεῖν similarly = *‘overreach,”’ ‘‘ defraud,” ‘‘take advant- age of” (2 Cor. vil. 2, xil. 17, 18; Aen, Mem., iii. 5, 2; Herod. viii. 112). Com- pare ἀκαθαρσίας πάσης ἐν πλεονεξίᾳ (Eph. iv. 19). The passage (with ver. 8) sounds almost like a vague reminiscence of Test. Asher, ii. 6: ὃ πλεονεκτῶν τὸν
4—II.
Q Cr 9 , eA Niet ὃ καθὼς καὶ "προείπαμεν ὑμῖν καὶ "διεμαρτυράμεθα. ἐκάλεσεν ἡμᾶς ὁ Θεὸς " ἐπὶ "ἀκαθαρσίᾳ ἀλλ᾽ " ἐν ἁγιασμῷ. γαροῦν ὁ ἀθετῶν οὐκ ἄνθρωπον ἀθετεῖ ἀλλὰ τὸν Θεὸν τὸν διδόντα τὸ
col ~~ ῳ A Πνεῦμα αὐτοῦ τὸ Ἅγιον ‘eis ὑμᾶς.
ΠΡΟΣ ΘΕΣΣΑΛΟΝΙΚΕΙΣΑ
35
7. οὐ γὰρ 5 Cf. Win.
§ 13, 13. ὃ. * To.- t = “Sol- emnly Pipe " ᾿ξ (cf.1 Tim. 9. περὶ δὲ τῆς * φιλαδελφίας se 21).
“Witha
A A u οὐ " χρείαν ἔχετε "γράφειν Gutv:! adtoilyap ὑμεῖς " θεοδίδακτοί ἐστε view to”
“eis τὸ ἀγαπᾶν ἀλλήλους ᾿ το. καὶ γὰρ ποιεῖτε αὐτὸ εἰς πάντας τοὺς
ἀδελφοὺς “ev ὅλῃ τῇ Μακεδονίᾳ.
(ΌΣ τὴ 5. ph. ν, 3), Lest. Jos. iv. 6.
x Heb. xii. 1. i 2 Cor. ix. 1; Heb. v. 12. ἘΠ; Ps. Sol. xvii. 35. Berea, etc. e Active side of iii. 12. guished for a quiet life,” ‘‘strive to be quiet”. business,” cf. Dem. Olynth. ii. 16.
παρακαλοῦμεν δὲ ὑμᾶς, ἀδελφοί, “περισσεύειν μᾶλλον II. καὶ ᾿φιλοτιμεῖσθαι “ἡσυχάζειν καὶ "ἢ πράσ-
(cf. Eph. ii. 10): object and terms.
v “ Sexual vice” (as
w -Ξ εἰς (1 Cor. vii. 15; Eph. iv. 4; Win. ὃ 50, 5). y As in Ezek. xxxvii. 14 (LXX). eee
z See on Rom, xii. 10. a Blass, § 69, 5;
Ὁ Elaborated in Rom. v. 5; 2 Cor. v. 14, cf. Barn. xxi. 6; Isa. liv. c Epexegetic infinitive, (Moult. 218-219) of object.
d Philippi, See on 2 Cor. v. 9 and Rom, xv. 20 = “ ke distin- @ Cfo Ti. ti. 12. h = ‘attend to your own
l ov x. exeTe ypaperv υμιν (NQ*AD¢, etc., edd.), an irregular but not uncommon turn (“ you have no need of anyone to write you”’), corrected in \¥cD*G, vg., Chrys.,
etc., to exopev κιτ.λ. (so Liinem., Lachm.,
Blass, cf. i. 8), and in B to εἰχομεν k.7.A.
(Weiss, Bahnsen), as in H to γραφεσϑαι «.7.A. (from ν. 1).
πλησίον παροργίζει τὸν Θεόν. .. τὸν ἐντολέα τοῦ νόμον Κύριον ἀθετεῖ. Only τὸν ἄνθ. here is not the wronged party but the apostles who convey God’s orders.—8.6Tt κιτ.λ. = ‘since (cf. 11. 8) the Lord is the avenger (from Deut. xxxii. 35; of. Sap. xii. 12; Sir. xxx. 6; 1 Macc. xili. 6, ἐκδικήσω περὶ ; 4 Macc. xv. 29) in all these matters” (of impurity). How, Paul does not explain (cf. Col. iii. 5, 6). By a premature death (1 Cor. xi. 30) ἢ Or, at the last judgment (i. 10)? not in the sense of Sap. iii. 16, iv. 6 (illegitimate children evidence at last day against their parents) at any rate.
Ver. 8. Elsewhere (i. 5, 6) ἅγιον simply denotes the divine quality of πνεῦμα as operating in the chosen ἅγιοι of God, but here the context lends it a specific value. Impurity is a violation of the relationship established by the holy God between Himself and Christians at bap- tism, when the holy Spirit is bestowed upon them for the purpose of consecrat- ing them to live His life (cf. 1 Cor. iii, 16, vi. 19). The gift of the Spirit here is not regarded as the earnest of the future kingdom (for which immorality will disquality) so much as the motive and power of the new 1Π{π.---διδόντα = “ the giver of,” not implying continuous or successive impartation ; present as in ch. v. 24; Gal. v. 8. He not only calls, but supplies the atmosphere and energy re- quisite for the task.—aOera@v «.t.d. (cf. ii, 13) = contemns by ignoring such in- junctions (2-6) in practical life, deliber- ately sets aside their authority. Cf. Isa. xxiv. 16, 17 f., oval τοῖς ἀθετοῦσιν" οἱ
ἀθετοῦντες τὸν νόμον, φόβος καὶ βόθυνος καὶ παγὶς ἐφ᾽ ὑμᾶς (nor shall any escape: cf. below onv. 3). In 2 Sam. xii. 9 f. Nathan fixes on the selfishness of David’s adultery and charges him especially with despising the commandment of the Lord.
Vv. Qg-10. περὶ φιλαδελφίας. One might have expected that adultery, especially when viewed as selfish greed (cf. ver. 6), would have come under g., but the latter bears mainly here on charity and liberality, a Christian impulse or instinct which seems to have come more naturally to the Thessalonians than ethical purity. ‘‘A new creed, like a new country, isan unhomely place of sojourn, but it makes men lean on one another and join hands” (R. L. Stevenson).
Ver το. Their ἀγάπη was no paro- chial affection, but neither was it to be fussy or showy, much less to be made an excuse for neglecting their ordinary busi- ness (ΤΙ, 12); this would discredit them in the eyes of the busy outside public (πρὸς = in intercourse or relations with) and sap their own independence. Such seems the least violent way of explaining the transition in καὶ φιλοτιμεῖσθαι κ.τ.λ. The church was apparently composed, for the most part, of tradesmen and working people (χερσὶν ὑμῶν, cf. Renan’s 5. Paul, 246 f.) with their families, but there may have been some wealthier members, whose charity was in danger of being abused. Cf, Demos., Olynth., iil. 35: οὐκ ἔστιν ὅπου μηδὲν ἐγὼ ποιοῦσιν τὰ τῶν ποιούντων εἶπον ὡς δεῖ νέμειν, οὐδ᾽ αὐτ- ovs μὲν ἀργεῖν καὶ σχολάζειν καὶ ἀπορεῖν.
Ver. 11. φιλοτ. ἡσυχάζειν (oxy-
36
i See on 1 Cor. xiv. 40.
k See on x eins 1Cor.v. Sevds χρείαν ἔχητε. 12. Neuter (Heb. v. ra, etc.)
m Cf. note
λαμεν" 12. ἵνα περιπατῆτε
ΠΡΟΣ OESSAAONIKEIS A
ἵνα μὴ λυπῆσθε καθὼς “Kai οἱ "λοιποὶ “οἱ μὴ ἔχοντες ἐλπίδα.
IV.
σειν τὰ ἴδια Kal ἐργάζεσθαι ταῖς χερσὶν ὑμῶν, καθὼς ὑμῖν παρηγγεί- ᾿ εὐσχημόνως πρὸς “tots ἔξω καὶ ' μη-
13. οὐ θέλομεν δὲ ὑμᾶς ἀγνοεῖν, ἀδελφοί, περὶ τῶν κοιμωμένων,
4.
> , [τ 3, lol A on ii. τ4. εἰ γὰρ πιστεύομεν OTL Ingots ἀπέθανε καὶ ἀνέστη, " οὕτω καὶ ὁ Θεὸς
Nn 1.¢. pa- gans asin Eph. ii. 3, cf. Sap. ii. 1 f. ‘then it follows that”’.
moron). The prospect of the second ad- vent (iv. 13 f., v. I-10) seems to have mrade some local enthusiasts feel that it was superfluous for them to go on working, if the world was to be broken up immediately. This feverish symptom occupies Paul more in the diagnosis of h:s second letter, but it may have been present to his mind here. For instances of this common phase in unbalanced minds compare the story of Hippolytus (Comm. Dan., iv. 19) about a Pontic bishop in the second century who misled his people by prophesying the advent within six months, and also a recent outburst of the same superstition in Tripoli (West- minster Gazette, Nov., 1899) where ‘‘ the report that the end of the world will come on November 13” produced ‘‘an amazing state of affairs. The Israelites are sending their wives to pray in the synagogues, and most workmen have ceased work. Debtors refuse to pay their debts, so that trade is almost paralysed.” —Kal πράσσειν τὰ ἴδια. Plato uses a similar expression in his Republic, 496 D (ἡσυχίαν ἔχων Kal τὰ αὑτοῦ πράττων) ; but of the philosopher who withdraws in despair from the lawlessness of a world which he is impotent to help (see also Thompson’s note on Gorg., 526c).
Vv. 13-18. περὶ τῶν κοιμωμένων.
Ver. 13. δὲ, after οὐ θέλομεν as a single expression.—Affection for the liv- ing has another side, viz., unselfish solici- tude for the dead. Since Paul left, some of the Thessalonian Christians had died, and the survivors were distressed by the fear that these would have to occupy a position secondary to those who lived until the advent of the Lord, or even that they had passed beyond any such par- ticipation at all. At Corinth some of the local Christians felt this anguish so keenly, on behalf of friends and relatives who had died outside the church, that they were in the habit of being baptised as their representatives, to ensure their final bliss (1 Cor. xv. 29). The concern
o Cf. Theogn..567, Iph. Aul. 1250, Sap. ii. 22, iii. 18.
p 4.e.
of the Thessalonians, however, was for their fellow-Christians, in the intermedi- ate state of Hades. As the problem had not arisen during Paul’s stay at Thessa- lonica, he now offers the church a reason- able solution of the difficulty (13-18).— ov θέλομεν δὲ ὑμᾶς ἀγνοεῖν, contrast the οἴδατε of iv. 2, v. 2, and compare the ordinary epistolary phrases of the papyri (Expos., 1908. 55) such as γεινώσκειν σε θέλω (commonly at the beginning of a letter, cf. Col. πὸ 1; Phila 225 τ i. 8, and with ὅτι, but here, as in 1 Cor. xii. I, with περί).---τῶν κοιμωμένων = the dead in Christ (16), a favourite Jew- ish euphemism (Kennedy, St. Paul’s Conc. of Last Things, 247 f., and cf. Fries in Zeitschrift fur neutest. Wiss. i. 306 f.), not unknown to Greek and Roman 1 tera- ture.—oi λοιποὶ, «.t.A., cf. Butcher’s Somc Aspects of the Greek Genius, pp. 153 f., 159 f. Hope is the distiny uishing note of Christians here as in Eph. 11. 12; Col. i. 22, etc.
Ver. 14. Unlike some of the Corin- thians (1 Cor. xv. 17, 18), the Thessa- lonians did not doubt the fact of Christ’s resurrection (εἰ of course implies no uncertainty). Paul assumes their faith in it and argues from it. Their vivid and naive belief in Christ’s advent within their own lifetime was the very source of their distress. Paul still shares that belief (17).—81a τοῦ Ἰησοῦ is an unusual expression which might, so far as gram- mar is concerned, go either with τ. x. (so. é.g-, Ellic., Alford, Kabisch, Light- foot, Findlay, Milligan) or ἄξει. The latter is the preferable construction (so most editors). The phrase is ot needed (cf. 15) to limit +. x. to Christians (so Chrys., Calvin), for the unbelieving dead are not before the writer’s mind, and, even so, ἐν would have been the natural preposition (cf. 16); nor does it mean martyrdom. In the light of v. Ὁ (ef. Rom. v. 9; 1 Cor. xv. 21), it seems to connect less awkwardly with ἄξει, though not = “δὲ the intercession of Jesus”
12—I5.
“ τοὺς κοιμηθέντας διὰ τοῦ ᾿Ιησοῦ * ἄξει σὺν αὐτῷ.
ὑμῖν λέγομεν "ἐν λόγῳ " Κυρίου, ὅτι ἡμεῖς οἱ ζῶντες οἱ * περιλειπό- 3 ᾿ , A , τὰν ἃ Αι ἔν, A
μενοι εἰς THY παρουσίαν τοῦ Κυρίου “od μὴ “ φθάσωμεν τοὺς κοιμη-
i. 6 and Asc. Isa. iv. 16.
(Beza). t 2 Macc. i. 31, viii. 14, etc.
(Rutherford). Jesus is God’s agent in the final act, commissioned to raise and muster the dead (cf. Stahelin, ¥ahrb. f. deut. Theol., 1874, 189 f., and Schettler, Die paul. Formel ‘‘ Durch Christus,” 1907, 57 1). The divine mission of the Christ, which is to form the climax of things, involves the resurrection of the dead who are His (v. 10). Any general resur- rection is out of the question (so Did., xvi. 6: ἀνάστασις νεκρῶν" ov πάντων δὲ, ἀλλ᾽ ὡς ἐρρέθη, ἥξει ὁ Κύριος καὶ πάντες οἱ ἅγιοι μετ᾽ αὐτοῦ).
Ver. 15. κυρίου. On the tendency of the N.T. writers to reserve κύριος, with its O,T. predicates of divine authority, for Jesus, cf. Kattenbusch, of. cit., ii. 522. Paul’s use of the term goes back to Christ’s own claim to κύριος in the higher sense of Mark xii. 35 f.—Aéyopev. Con- trast the οἴδατε of v. 2 and the language of iv. 1. Evidently Paul had not had time or occasion to speak of such a con- tingency, when he was with them.—év λόγῳ κυρίου may mean either (a) a quota- tion (like Acts xx. 35) from the sayings of Jesus, or (δ) a prophetic revelation vouch- safed to Paul himself, or to Silvanus (cf. Acts xv. 32). In the former case (so, among modern editors, Schott, Ewald, Drummond, Wohl.), an ἄγραφον is cited (Calvin, Koch, Weizsiacker, Resch, Paul- inismus, 238 f.; Ropes, die Spriiche Fesu, 153 f.; M. Goguel; van der Vies, 15-17; O. Holtzmann, Life of Fesus, 10; von Soden) but it is evidently given in a free form, and the precise words cannot (even in ver. 16) be disentangled. Besides we should expect τινι to be added. Unless, theretore, we are to think of a primitive collection (Lake, Amer. ¥ourn. Theol., 1906, 108 f.) or of some oral tradition, (δ) is preferable. The contents of Matt. xxiv. 31 (part of the small apocalypse) are too dissimilar to favour the conjecture (Pelt, Zimmer, Weiss) that Paul was thinking of this saying as current per- haps in oral tradition, and the O.T. an- alogy of λόγος Κυρίου ( = God’s pro- phetic word), together with the internal probabilities of the case (Paul does not remind them of it, as elsewhere in the epistle) make it on the whole more likely
ΠΡΟΣ OESSAAONIKEIS A
of
I5. τοῦτο yapq = “those 5 ha who have fallen asleep”’ (Moult. i. 162).
rt Cf. Heb.
s LXX of 1 Kings xx. 35, “ Domini nomine et quasi eo loquente” τ ‘‘by no means” (cf. 1 Cor. viii. 13).
v Sap. vi. 13, etc.
that Paul is repeating words heard in a vision (cf. 2 Cor. xii. Ὁ; so Chryst., Theod., etc., followed by Alford, de Wette, Ellicott, Dods, Lunemann, Go- det, Paret: Paulus und Fesus, 53 1., Simon: die Psychologie des Ap. Paulus, 100, Findlay, Lightfoot, Milligan, Lue- ken). Cf. the discussion in Knowling’s Witness of the Epistles, 408 f., and Feine’s Fesus Christus u. Paulus, 178,179. Later in the century a similar difficulty vexed the pious Jew who wrote Fourth Esdras (v. 41, 42: I said, But lo, Ὁ Lord, thou hast made the promise to those who shall be in the end: and what shall they do that have been beforeus ...? And He said to me, I will liken my judgment to a ving ; as there is no slackness of those who are last, so shall there be no swiftness of those who are first). His theory is that the previous generations of Israel will be as well off as their posterity in the latter days. Further on (xiii. 14 f.) he raises and answers the question whether it was better to die before the last days or to live until they came (the phrase, those that are left, ‘* qui relicti sunt,”’ vii. 28 = Paul’s ot περιλειπόμενοι). His solution (which Steck, in $¥ahrb. fir prot. Theol., 1883, 509-524, oddly regards as the λόγος κ. of 1 Thess. iv. 15; see Schmidt’s refutation, pp. 107-110) is the opposite of Paul’s: those who are left are more blessed than those who have died. If this difficulty was felt in Jewish circles during the first half of the century, it may have affected those of the Thessa- lonian Christians who had been formerly connected with the synagogue, but the likelihood is that Paul’s language is coloured by his own Jewish training (cf. Charles on Asc. Isa., iv. 15). The mis- understanding of the Thessalonians, which had led to their sorrow and per- plexity, was evidently due to the fact that, for some reason or another, Paul had not mentioned the possibility of any Christians dying before the second ad- vent (so sure was he that all would soon survive it), coupled with the fact that Greeks found it hard to grasp what ex- actly resurrection meant (cf. Acts xvii. 32) for Christians.
38
w Cf, iii. Ir; not
ΠΡΟΣ OESSAAONIKEIS A
IV. 16—18.
θέντας - τό. ὅτι " αὐτὸς ὁ Κύριος ἐν κελεύσματι, ἐν φωνῇ "ἀρχαγγέλου
Α A A angels as καὶ ἐν ἢ σάλπιγγι Θεοῦ, καταβήσεται ἀπ᾽ οὐρανοῦ, καὶ ὅ ot νεκροὶ * ἐν
in Mt. XXiv. 31. Jude g: to sum- mon the angels ἢ (iii. 13).
1 Cor. xv. 52, from Joel ii. x ? (LXX); cf. 4 Esd. vi. 23, etc. v.10, 11.1.7; 2Cor.iv.14. ἃ Post-classical as in Mt. xxv. I. f Burton, M.T. 237. 21, etc. i 1.6. 15-17.
~
μεθα.
Ver. τ6. κελεύσματι = the loud sum- mons which was to muster the saints (so in Philo, De praem. et poen., 19: καθάπερ οὖν ἀνθρώπους ἐν ἐσχατιαῖς ἀπῳκισμ- ένους ῥᾳδίως ἑνὶ κελεύσματι συναγάγοι ὁ θεὸς ἀπὸ περάτων εἰς ὅ τι ἂν θελήσῃ χωρίον); forms, as its lack of any genitive shows, one conception with the ¢. a. and the o. @. (cf. DCG, ii. 766). The archangel is Michael, who in Jewish tradition not only summoned the angels but sounded a trumpet to herald God’s approach for judgment (e.g., in Afoc. Mosis, xxii.). With such scenic and real- istic details, drawn from the heterogene- ous eschatology of the later Judaism, Paul seeks to make intelligible to his own mind and to that of his readers, in quite an original fashion (cf. Stahelin, Fahrb. f. deut. Theol., 1874, pp. 199- 218), the profound truth that neither death nor any cosmic crisis in the future will make any essential difference to the close relation between the Christian and his Lord. Οὕτω πάντοτε σὺν κυρίῳ ἐσόμεθα (cf. v. 11; 2 Cor, v.8; Phil. i. 20) : this 15 all that remains to us, in our truer view of the universe, from the naive λόγος κυρίου of the apostle, but it is everything. Note that Paul says nothing here about any change of the body (Teichmann, 35 f.), or about the embodiment of the risen life in its celestial δόξα. See Asc. Isa., iv. 14-15: ‘‘And the Lord will come with His holy angels and with the armies of the holy ones from the seventh heaven ...and He will give rest to the godly whom He shall find in the body in this world.”
Ver. 17.. ἐν "νεφέλαις, the ordinary method of sudden rapture or ascension to heaven (Acts i. 9, 11; Rev. xi. 12; Slav. En. ili, 1, 2).---ὠρπαγησόμεθα. So in Sap. iv. 11, the righteous man, εὐάρεστος τῷ θεῷ (1 Thess. iv. 1) γενόμενος ἦἠγα- πήθη (τ Thess. i. 4), is caught up (Aprayn).— dpa σὺν aitots... σὺν Κυρίῳ, the future bliss is a re-union of
περιλειπόμενοι, “ἅμα σὺν αὐτοῖς
ΖΘ ΟΣ τ»
Zz aA , a b aA A Χριστῷ ἀναστήσονται πρῶτον" 17. " ἔπειτα ἡμεῖς οἱ ζῶντες, ot
ἅ ἁρπαγησόμεθα ἐν νεφέλαις εἰς
A , ἀπάντησιν “ τοῦ Κυρίου εἰς ἀέρα, καὶ οὕτω πάντοτε σὺν Κυρίῳ ἐσό- f a A i 18. "ὥστε ἔ παρακαλεῖτε ἀλλήλους “év τοῖς λόγοις * τούτοις.
15. _a Blass, ὃ 47, 7. b x Cor. xv.7, 23. form, Win. § 13, τὸ cf. Sap. iv. 10. e Genitive ιν στ, oll rl. h Instrumental, as 1 Cor. iv.
Christians not only with Christ but with one another.—eis ἀπάντησιν, a pre- Christian phrase of the koiné (cf. eg., Tebtunis Papyri, 1902, pt. i., n. 43, 7, παρεγενήθημεν εἰς ἀπάντησιν, K.T.A., an
Moulton, i. 14), implying welcome of a great person on his arrival. What fur- ther functions are assigned to the saints, thus incorporated in the retinue of the Lord (iii. 13; cf. 2 Thess. i. 10),— whether, e.g., they are to sit as assessors at the judgment (Sap. iii. 8; 1 Cor. vi. 2, 3; Luke xxii. 30)—Paul does not stop to state here. His aim is to reassure the Thessalonians about the prospects of their dead in relation to the Lord, not to give any complete programme of the future (so Matt. xxiv. 31; Did. x., xvi.). Plainly, however, the saints do not rise at once to heaven, but return with the Lord to the scene of his final manifesta- tion on earth (so Chrysost., Aug., etc.). They simply meet the Lord in the air, on his way to judgment—a trait for which no Jewish parallel can be found.—«at οὕτως πάντοτε σὺν κυρίῳ ἐσόμεϑα (no more sleeping in him or waiting for him).
Ver. 18. ἐν Tots λόγοις τούτοις. Paul had an intelligible word upon the future, unlike the Hellenic mysteries which usually made religion a matter of feel- ing rather than of definite teaching (Hardie’s Lect. on Classical Subjects, pp. 53 ἢ). A pagan letter of consolation has been preserved from the second century (Oxyrh. Papyri, i. 115): ‘“‘ Eirene to Taonnophris and Philon good cheer! I was as grieved and wept as much over Eumoiros as over Didymas, and I did all that was fitting, as did all my family. . . . But still we can do nothing in such a case. So comfort yourselves. Good- bye.”’ One of Cicero’s pathetic letters (ad. Fam., xiv. 2), written from Thessa- lonica, speaks doubtfully of any re-union after death (‘‘haec non sunt in manu nostra’’).
ie tase, ΠΡΟΣ OESSAAONIKEIS A
39
A a A , ,
V. 1. Περὶ δὲ τῶν * χρόνων καὶ τῶν * καιρῶν, ἀδελφοί, οὐ ἢ χρείαν a See on 3, ἘΠ᾿ νι Die ses 28 \ ce 2 a ” ΠῚ are Acts i. 7. ἔχετε ὑμῖν γράφεσθαι 2. " αὐτοὶ γὰρ “ ἀκριβῶς οἴδατε ὅτι “ ἡμέρα " Cy. iv. 9.
’ ec , 3 & [- ” f¢ l ς ς . Ὁ τ Κυρίου " ὡς κλέπτης ἐν νυκτὶ οὕτως ἔρχεται 3. ᾿ ὅταν ᾿ λέγωσιν, Actsxviii.
᾽ 3 , 3 ae | , ” 25;
“ Εἰρήνη καὶ ἀσφάλεια, ἦ τότε ἢ αἰφνίδιος αὐτοῖς ᾿ ἐπίσταται “ ὄλε- ἃ Without article as
θρος ᾿ ὥσπερ ἡ ™ ὠδὶν TH ἐν γαστρὶ ἐχούσῃ, καὶ “od μὴ ἐκφύγωσιν. in Phil. i. a Pre sg 6, I0, ii. 4. ὑμεῖς δὲ, ἀδελφοί, οὐκ ἐστὲ ἐν °oxdter Piva ἡ ἡμέρα «ὑμᾶς ὧς 46, ZN ς 3 ε e Remini- κλέπτας 2 katahdBy: κ. πάντες yap ὑμεῖς " υἱοὶ φωτός ἐστε καὶ viol cence of saying in A Aa oi xi. 39; cf. Rev. iii. 3, xvi.15. f Cf. 1 Cor. xv. 54. Ezek. xiii. το. h Lk. xxi. 34. i Win.
[3 § 5, 10, c.; Sap. vi. 5. k “*Destruction”’ (II. i. 9). l Cf. En, 1xil. 4. m On form, cf. Win. § 9, το. n iv. 15; cf. Ps. Sol. xv. 9, and above on iv. 8. o Rom. ii. 19; cf. Hom. Iliad, iii. το, κλέπτῃ δέ Te νυκτὸς ἀμείνω. p Conceived result (cf. Burton, M.T., 218-219) ="‘so that”. q Emphatic. r From Lk. xvi. 8 (cf. En. cviii. 11) ?
1 To the original asyndeton of οταν (NQ*AG, 17, 44, 47, 179, d, 6, f, g, Syr.sch, arm., aeth., Tert., Cyp., Jer, Orig., etc.; so edd.), either yap (KLP, vg. Euthal., Dam.), or δὲ (5 ΒΠ), cop., Syr.P, Eus., Chrys., Theod., Schott, Findlay, WH marg.) has been subsequently added. For worep ἡ wd, Bentl. conj. womeper wives.
2 κλεπτας (AB cop., so Bentl., Grot., Koch, Ewald, Renan, Jowett, Rutherford, Lach., WH, Legft.), seems to be smoothed away in the strongly attested variant and correction kAemrns (from ver. 2). Field (200-201) cites instances from Plutarch (e.g., Vit. Crassi, xxix., τὸν δὲ Κρασσον npepa κατελαβεν) and Pausanias, to illustrate nocturnal operations being surprised by the advent of the dawn. ‘The echo of the word (κλεπτης) is still in his ears; to avoid repetition, he changes its use. Lastly, the reading κλεπτας gives a point to viot φωτος " (Jowett). For another instance of AB preserving the original reading, cf. Eph. i. 20.
CHAPTER V.—Vv. I-III. χρόνων Kal τῶν καιρῶν.
Ver. 1. The times and periods are not ‘‘simply the broad course of time, of which the ἡμέρα Κυρίου constitutes the closing scene” (Baur) ; καιρός denotes a section of time more definitely than χρόνος, in Greek usage. “No nation has distinguished so subtly the different forms under which time can be logically conceived. Χρόνος is time viewed in its extension, as a succession of moments, the external framework of action. ... Καιρός, a word, which has, I believe, no single or precise eqivalent in any other language... is that immediate present which is what we make it; time charged with opportunity’ (Butcher, Harvard Lect. on Gk. Subjects, pp. 117- 119). In the plural, especially in this eschatological outlook, the phrase is little more, however, than a periphrasis for “ when exactly things are to happen”. Paul thought he needed to do no more than reiterate the suddenness of the Last Day. But, not long afterwards, he found that the Thessalonians did require to have the χρόνοι καὶ καιροί explained to them in outline (II., ii. 2 f.).
Ver. 2. οἴδατε, referring to the teach- ing of Jesus on this crucial point, which Paul had transmitted to them (see Intro- duction).
περὶ τῶν
Ver. 3. ὅταν, κιτιλ.» when the very words, ‘‘ All’s well,” ‘ It is all right,” are on their lips.—érlorarat, of an enemy suddenly appearing (Isocrat., Evag., § 58 ἐπὶ τὸ βασίλειον ἐπιστάς, Herod. iv. 203).--αὐτοῖς, i.¢., while the Day comes suddenly to Christians and un- believers alike, only the latter are sur- prised by it. Christians are on the alert, open-eyed; they do not know when it is to come, but they are alive to any signs of itscoming. Thus there is no incompatibility between this emphasis on the instantaneous character of the advent and the emphasis, in II., ii. 3 ἢ, on the preliminary conditions.
Ver. 4. From the sudden and unex- pected nature of the Last Day, Paul passes, by a characteristic inversion of metaphor in κλέπτας, to a play of thought upon the day as light. A double sym- bolism of ἡμέρα, as of κοιμᾶσθαι, thus pervades 4-8. Lightfoot cites a very striking parallel from Eur., [ph. Taur., 1025-1026.
Ver. 5. The present age is utter night (πο
ἐὰν sow), as contemporary rabbis taught; the age to come is all day. Meantime faith is to be held fast through this night (cf. passages quoted in Schlat- ter’s die Sprache u. Heimat des vierten Evangelisten, 17, 18). υἱοὶ φΦ. καὶ v.
40 ΠΡῸΣ OESZAAONIKEIS A V. eect ᾿ ἡμέρας - οὐκ ἐσμὲν νυκτὸς "οὐδὲ σκότους. 6 “Apa ᾿οὖν μὴ “Kab- 153 cf. 3 εύδωμεν ὡς ot “ λοιποί ἀλλὰ “ γρηγορῶμεν καὶ ᾿νήφωμεν. 7. οἱ om. Vv. is etc. γὰρ καθεύδοντες νυκτὸς καθεύδουσι " καὶ of ” μεθυσκόμενοι νυκτὸς u . on A Eph.v.14. μεθύουσιν: ὃ. “ἡμεῖς δὲ “ἡμέρας ὄντες νήφωμεν, > ἐνδυσάμενοι ν iv. 13. w Cf.onr “θώρακα πίστεως καὶ ἀγάπης καὶ περικεφαλαίαν ἐλπίδα σωτηρίας" Cor. xvi. τ 9 ἃ ἔθ Queena ε Ν᾿ 9 ἢ 5 , 9 3. ἜΑ τ. , 13; Mt. 9. ὅτι οὐκ “ἔθετο “ἡμᾶς ὃ Θεὸς εἰς ᾿ ὀργήν ἀλλ᾽ εἰς ὅ περιποίησιν XXIV. 42. a CA A a A x Seeonr σωτηρίας διὰ τοῦ Κυρίου ἡμῶν ᾿Ιησοῦ Χριστοῦ, 10. τοῦ ἀποθαν- Pet. v. 8 ε - > A A i y Win. § ὄντος ὑπὲρ ἡμῶν, ἵνα “eite γρηγορῶμεν, εἴτε καθευδῶμεν, ᾿ ἅμα σὺν 15. a a A 2 Eph. vi. αὐτῷ ζήσωμεν. 11. διὸ " παρακαλεῖτε ἀλλήλους καὶ οἰκοδομεῖτε 14. 17; Le NG tices \ Ν τὴ Rom. xiii, εἷς τὸν ἕνα, καθὼς καὶ ποιεῖτε. ΤΠ a Constr. ;
of Win. § 30, 11, b. b Isa. lix. 17. Emphatic, as opposed to οἱ λοιποί.
as in II. ii. 14. Heb. x. 39. k iv. 18.
[4
ἡμέρας is a stronger and Semitic way of expressing the thought of ‘‘ belonging to” {6}: νεῖ: 8).
Ver. 6. To be alert, in one’s sober senses (νήφειν), is more than to be merely awake, Here, as in verse 8, the Christians are summoned to live up to their privileges and position towards the Lord. ‘There are few of us who are not rather ashamed of our sins and follies as we look out on the blessed morning sunlight, which comes to us like a bright- winged angel beckoning us to quit the old path of vanity that stretches its dreary length behind us” (George Eliot). In one of the Zoroastrian scriptures (Vendidad, xvili. 23-25) the cock, as the bird of the dawn, is inspired to cry, ‘‘ Arise, Omen! ... Lo here is Bushyasta com- ing down upon you, who lulls to sleep again the whole living world as soon as it has awoke, saying, ‘Sleep, sleep on, O man [and live in sin, Yasht, xxii. 41]! The time is not yet come.’ ”’
Ver; 7. (ἡ, Plutarch: De vdstde vin, Οἶνον δὲ οἱ μὲν ἐν Ἥλιου πόλει θερα- πεύοντες τὸν θεὸν οὐκ εἰσφέρουσιν τοπα- ράπαν εἰς τὸ ἱερόν, ὡς οὐ προσῆκον ἡμέ- ρας πίνειν, τοῦ κυρίον καὶ βασιλέως ἐφορῶντος.
Ver. 8. ἐνδυσάμενοι θώρακα κ.τ.λ.; the thought of 11. 12, 13 ; the mutual love of Christians, which forms the practical expression of their faith in God, is their true fitness and equipment for the second advent. Faith and love are a unity; where the one goes the other follows. They are also not merely their own coat of mail, requiring no extraneous protec- tion, but the sole protection of life against indolence, indifference and indulgence. They need simply to be used. If they
c Cf. on Eph. vi. 14=‘‘ coat of mail”. f i, 10. h Cf. for syntax, Rom. xiv. 8; Burton, M.T., 252-253. 1 unclassical, Blass, § 45, 2; cf. 1 Cor. v. 6.
ἃ 1 Petsinis: g Cf. on Eph. i. 14; here active (= possess.) i iv. 17.
are not used, they are lost, and with them the Christian himself. The transition to the military metaphor is mediated (as in Rom. xiii. 12, 13) by the idea of the sentry’s typical vigilance.
Ver. 9. The mention of the future σωτηρία starts Paul off, for a moment, on what it involves (9, το).
Ver. 10. Life or death makes no dif- ference to the Christian’s union and fellowship with Jesus Christ, whose death was in our eternal interests (cf. Rom. xiv. 7; -9). For this metaphorical use of ypny. etre καθ. (different from that in 6), Wohl. cites Plato, Symp., 2038 : διὰ τούτου (i.e. Eros) πᾶσα ἐστιν ἡ ὁμιλία καὶ a διά- λεκτος θεοῖς πρὸς ἀνθρώπους, καὶ ἐγρη- γορόσι καὶ καθεύδουσιν, as a possible basis.
Ver. 11. The modification in the primitive attitude of Christians to the Parousia of Jesus is significant. Instead of all expecting to be alive at that blessed crisis, the inroads of death had now forced men to the higher consolation that ‘‘it did not make the least difference whether one became partaker of the blessings of that event in the ranks of the dead or of the living. The question whether the Parousia was to happen sooner or later was no longer of paramount importance. The important thing was to cultivate that attitude of mind which the writer of this epistle recommended” (Baur),.— οἰκοδομεῖτε, the term sums up all the support and guidance that a Christian receives from the fellowship of the church (cf. Beyschlag’s N.T. Theology, ii. 232).
--καθὼς καὶ ποιεῖτε, another instance
(cf. iv. 1, 10) of Paul’s fine courtesy and tact. He is careful to recog- nise the Thessalonians’ attainments,
6—17.
12. ™’Epwrapev δὲ ὑμᾶς, ἀδελφοὶ, " εἰδέναι τοὺς
ΠΡΟΣ ΘΕΣΣΑΛΟΝΙΚΕΙ͂Σ ἃ
41
ο κοπιῶντας ἐν πὶ iv. τ, II-
a oe A , A A ε A © ὑμῖν Kat Ῥπροϊσταμένους ὑμῶν ἐν Κυρίῳ καὶ “νουθετοῦντας ὑμᾶς, 13.n Cf. Ps.
A wn 3᾿ a καὶ " ἡγεῖσθαι αὐτοὺς ὑπερεκπερισσῶς ἐν ἀγάπῃ διὰ τὸ ἔργον αὐτών. A A , 14. “παρακαλοῦμεν δὲ ὑμᾶς, ἀδελφοί,
" εἰρηνεύετε ἐν “ὑ ἑαυτοῖς.
xvi. 18; Ign. Smyrn, ix.
νουθετεῖτε τοὺς " ἀτάκτους, “ παραμυθεῖσθε τοὺς * ὀλιγοψύχους, ἀντέ- ο Gal. iv.
χεσθε τών ἀσθενών, ἡ μακροθυμεῖτε πρὸς πάντας. τις "κακὸν ἀντὶ κακοῦ τινὶ ἀποδῷ - ἀλλὰ πάντοτε τὸ " ἀγαθὸν διώ-
11; 1 Cor. Xv. I0.
p Cf. on Rom.
15. δρᾶτε ”* μή
κετε εἰς ἀλλήλους καὶ εἰς πάντας. 16. πάντοτε “χαίρετε, 17. “ἀδια- ὦ See on
τ ἘΏΠ 115. 07: Π| 8 ὃς ἵν: 5; etc:
eye τ Geshe τ
(so Plato, Gorg’. 465 ο).
x Exod. vi. 9; Isa. lvii. 15; Sir. vii. 10, and Ps. Sol. xvi. 11. [ a Prov. xx. 22 (Matt. ν. 44); Rom. xii. 17. : Ὁ Paul’s pr.ctice, 2 Cor. vi. 10; cf. Phil. iv. 4; Rom. xii. 12, and Col.i. 11.
clause (Burton, M.T. 209). and helpful.”
xii. 8. Acts Xx. 31; 1 Cor. s Mk. ix. 50; 2 Cor. xiii. 11. t = ἀλλήλοις. v Xen. Mem. 111. i. 7. WwW, i. rr; Joh. xi. 19. 31. y See oni Cor. xiii. 4. z Object.
Ὁ =‘* What is kind
ἃ i. 3; cf. Ign. Eph. x.; Herm, Sim. ix. 11,73; Ep. Arist. 226 (τὸν Θεὸν ἐπικαλοῦ διαπαντός).
even while stirring them up to further efforts.
Vv. 12-22. General instructions for the church. Ver. 12. These mpotorapevor are not
officials but simply local Christians like Jason, Secundus, and perhaps Demas (in whose houses the Christians met), who, on account of their capacities or position, had informally taken the lead and made themselves responsible for the welfare and worship of the new society. The organisation is quite primitive, and the triple description of these men’s functions is too general to permit any precise de- lineation of their duties (cf. Lindsay’s The Church and the Ministry in the Early Centuries, pp.122f). κοπιῶντας denotes the energy and practical interest of these people, which is further defined by προΐ- σταμένους (a term with technical associa- tions, to which ἐν κυρίῳ is added in order to show that their authority rests on re- ligious services) and νουθετοῦντας ( = the moral discipline, perhaps of catechists, teachers and prophets). An instinct ot rebellion against authority is not confined to any one class, but artisans and trades- men are notorious for a tendency to suspect or depreciate any control exercised over them in politics or in religion, especially when it is exercised by some who have risen from their own ranks. The com- munity at Thessalonica was largely re- cruited from this class, and Paul, with characteristic penetration, appeals for respect and generous appreciation towards the local leaders.
Ver. 13. ‘‘ Regard them with a very special love for their works’ sake’”’ (so thorough and important it is). ‘‘ Be at peace among yourselves” (instead of introducing divisions and disorder by any jnsubordination or carping).
Ver. 14. The particular form of in- subordination at Thessalonica was idle- ness (for the contemporary use of a7. in this sense, see Oxyrh. Papyri, ii. 1901, Ῥ- 275). Similarly, in Olynth. iu. 11, Demosthenes denounces all efforts made to shield from punishment τοὺς ἀτακ- τοῦντας; i.¢., those citizens who shirk ac- tive service and evade the State’s call for troops.—éAryoWvxous = ‘‘ faint-hearted ” (under trial, i. 6, see references), ἀντέ- χεσθε (cleave to, put your arm round), ἀσθενῶν (i.e., not in health only but in faith or position, Acts xx. 35), pak. π. πάντας = do not lose temper or patience with any (of the foregoing classes) however unreasonable and exact- ing they may be (cf. Prov. xviii. 14, LXX). The mutual services of the community are evidently not to be left to the προΐσ- τάμενοι, for Paul here urges on the rank and file the same kind of social duties as he implies were incumbent upon their leaders (cf. vovOer. 12,14). If ἀδελφοί here meant the mpotordpevor, it would have been more specificially defined. An antithesis between 12 and 14 would be credible in a speech, not in a letter.
Ver. 15. The special circumstances which called for forbearance (ver. 14) were likely to develop a disposition to retaliate upon those who displayed an ungenerous and insubordinate spirit (¢.g., the ara- KTou); but the injunction has a wider range (εἰς πάντας, including their fellow- countrymen, il. 14).
Ver. 16. Tocomment adequately upon these diamond drops (16-18) would be to outline a history of the Christian experi- ence in its higher levels. am. χαίρετε, cf. Epict., i. 16 (‘‘ Had we understanding, ought we to do anything but sing hymns and bless the Deity and tell of His bene- fits? ... What else can I do, a lame
42
ΠΡΟΣ @OESSAAONIKEIS A ν.
e Cf.onz λείπτως προσεύχεσθε, 18. " ἐν παντὶ ᾿εὐχαριστεῖτε: ὅ τοῦτο γὰρ
Οοτ. iv. 8
f2Cor. vi. © θέλημα Θεοῦ ἐν Χριστῷ "Incod ἢ εἰς ὑμᾶς. ne ριστῷ “In μ
10; Phil. iv. δὲ
sence of article in this constr. see Field, 59-60 on the similar usage in Lk. vii. 30. over’: μὴ with pres. imper. implies action already begun Moult. i. 122 f.
i. 5, and cf. 1 Cor. xiv. 1. ΠΟ κοι, 8.1: 3): q ili. IT; iv. 16;
1 ἢ a Opie τς
o =“form” or “sort” (so Jos. Ant. x. 3). r Only here (N.T.), = ὅλους (through and through).
19. τὸ πνεῦμα * ph
" σβέννυτε, 20. προφητείας μὴ ἐξουθενεῖτε - 21. πάντα! δὲ 'δοκιμάζετε, TO" καλὸν κατέχετε 22. "dard παντὸς ° εἴδους πονηροῦ ἢ ἀπέχεσθε. 23. "Αὐτὸς δὲ ὁ Θεὸς τῆς εἰρήνης ἁγιάσαι ὑμᾶς " ὁλοτελεῖς - καὶ
i ‘‘Give k Contrast 2 Tim. “m2 Cor: xili..7; Phil 1. το. n Like Job p iv. 3; cf. Dids moze
1 After wavra edd. add the disjunctive δὲ (with almost all MSS. and vss., also Clem., Alex., Paed. iii. 12, 95, exc. $Q*A, cop., syt.sch), which became absorbed by the first syllable of the following word. Blass (after K, min., etc.) δοκιμαΐζοντες.
old man, than sing hymns toGod?... I exhort you to join in this same song.’’) There is a thread of connection with the foregoing counsel. The unswerving aim of being good and doing good to all men, is bound up with that faith in God’s un- failing goodness to men which enables the Christian cheerfully to accept the disappointments and sufferings of social life. This faith can only be held by prayer, 2.6., a constant reference of all life’s course to God, and such prayer must be more than mere resignation; it im- plies a spirit of unfailing gratitude to God, instead of any suspicious or rebel- lious attitude.
Ver. 17. ‘‘ Pray always, says the Apostle; that is, have the habit of prayer, turning your thoughts into acts by con- necting them with the idea of the redeem- ing God” (Coleridge, Notes on the Book of Common Prayer), cp. iii. 11, v. 23.
Ver. 18. Chrysostom, who wrote : τὸ ἀεὶ δηλονότι εὐχαριστεῖν, τοῦτο φιλοσό- φου ψυχῆς, gave a practical illustration of this heroic temper by repeating, as he died in the extreme hardships of an en- forced and painful exile, δόξα τῷ θεῷ πάντων ἕνεκα. For thanksgiving even in bereavement, cf. Aug., Conf., ix. 12; and further, zb7d., ix. 7 (tunc hymni et psalmi ut canerentur, secundum morem Orientalium partium, ne populus maeroris taedio contabesceret, institutum est).
Ver. 19. τοῦτο x.t.A. The primary reference is to εὐχαριστεῖτε, but the pre- ceding imperatives are so closely bound up with this, that it is needless to exclude them from the scope of the @éAnpa.—év X.°l. This glad acceptance of life’s rain and sunshine alike as from the hand of God, Jesus not only exemplified (cf. con- text of μιμηταὶ . .. τοῦ Κυρίου, 1. 6) but also enabled all who keep in touch with him to realise. The basis of it
is the Christian revelation and experi- ence; apart from the living Lord it is neither conceivable nor practicable (cf. R. H. Hutton’s Modern Guides of English Thought, pp. 122 f.).
Ver. 20. As εὐχαριστεῖν was a special function of the prophets in early Chris- tian worship (cf. Did. x. 7), the transition is natural. The local abuses of ecstatic prophecy in prediction (2 Thess. ii. 2) or what seem to be exaggerated counsels of perfection (ver. 16 f.) must not be al- lowed to provoke any reaction which would depreciate and extinguish this vital gift or function of the faith. Paul, with characteristic sanity, holds the balance even. Such enthusiastic outbursts are neither to be despised as silly vapouring nor to be accepted blindly as infallible revelations. The true criticism of προ- φητεία comes (ver. 21) from the Christian conscience which is sensitive to the καλόν, the συμφέρον, the οἰκοδομή, or the ἀναλογία τῆς πίστεως (cf. Weizsdcker’s Apost. Age, ii. 270 f.). But this criticism must be positive. In applying the stand- ard of spiritual discernment, it must sift, not for the mere pleasure of rejecting the erroneous but with the object of retaining what is genuine.
Vcr. 22. A further general precept, added to bring out the negative side of κατέχετε, κ.τ.λ.---πονηροῦ neut. abstract = “of wickedness,” as Gen. ii. 9 (τοῦ εἰδέναι γνωστὸν καλοῦ καὶ trovnpov).— παντὸς κιτιλ., perhaps an allusion to the manifold ways of going wrong (Arist., Nik. Eth., ii. 6 14, τὸ μὲν ἁμαρτάνειν πολλαχῶς ἐστίν. .. τὸ δὲ κατορθοῦν μοναχῶς).
Ver. 23. εἰρήνης, with a special allu- sion to the breaches of harmony and charity produced by vice (cf. connection of ili, 12, 13 and iv. 3 f.), indolence, im- patience of authority or of defects in one
18—28.
ΠΡΟΣ ΘΕΣΣΑΛΟΝΙΚΕΙ͂Σ A
43
ὁ ὁλόκληρον ὑμών τὸ πνεῦμα καὶ ἡ ψυχὴ καὶ τὸ ᾿σώμα ἀμέμπτως ἐν 5 Adj. put
τῇ παρουσίᾳ τοῦ Κυρίου ἡμών ἸΙησοῦ Χριστοῦ τηρηθείη.
A A a τὸς ὁ “ καλῶν ὑμᾶς, ὃς καὶ ” ποιήσει.
25. ᾿Αδελφοὶ, " προσεύχεσθε περὶ ἡμών.
ἀδελφοὺς πάντας ἐν φιλήματι * ἁγίῳ.
27. ἐνορκίζω 1 ὑμᾶς * τὸν Κύριον, ἢ ἀναγνωσθῆναι τὴν “ ἐπιστολὴν
“πᾶσι τοῖς ἀδελφοῖς.
28. ἡ χάρις τοῦ Κυρίου ἡμών ᾿Ιησοῦ Χριστοῦ μεθ᾽ ὑμών.
Ὃ As Num. xxiii. 19; Ps. xxxvii. 5 (LXX). 1 Cor. xvi. 20; and Justin’s Apol. i. 65. Acts xix. 13.
2 Clem. Alex. Paed. III. ii. 81. b Lk. iv. 16; Acts xv. 21; 2 Cor. iii. 15; Col. iv. 16.
first for emphasis, agreeing with first of subst. which it precedes. ε ΟἿ. Ebi): iii. 21. See above on 1 1 3; and li. 10. v See on 1 Cor. i. 9. y See on Rom. xvi. 16; a For constr. cf. ΘΙ. it. 15:
24. " πισ-
26. ἀσπάσασθε τοὺς
x Vers 17,11. ΠῚ
1 Read ενορκιζω [only here N.T., = “adjure,” strengthened form of ορκιζω] with
ABD*, min., Euth., Dam. (edd.).
But om. αγιοις before αδελφοις with δ Βα,
min., d, e, f, g, aeth., Euth., Amb., Cassiod. (edd., exc. de Wette, Koch, Ellic., Weiss) ; the addition of aytous, like the omission of maou, “entspringt vielleicht dem hierarchischen Interesse, die Bibel nicht Allen zuganglich zu machen ” (Zimmer).
another (v. 13 f.), retaliation (v. 15), and ‘differences of opinion (v. 19 ἢ) Such faults affect the σῶμα, the ψυχή and the “πνεῦμα respectively, as the sphere of that pure and holy consciousness whose out- come is εἰρήνη.---ἦἡἢ μῶν, unemphatic geni- tive (as in iii, 10, 13, cf. Abbott’s F¥ohan- nine Grammar, 2559a) throwing the em- phasis on the following word or words. πνεῦμα is put first, as the element in human nature which Paul held to be ‘most directly allied to God, while ψυχή denotes as usual the individual life. The collocation of these terms is unusual but of course quite untechnical.—apépmrws has almost a proleptic tinge = ‘‘ preserved entire, (50 as to be) blameless at the ar- rival of,’’ which has led to the substitu- tion, in some inferior MSS., of εὑρεθείη for τηρηθείη (cf. textual discussion in Amer. Four. Theol., 1903, 453 f.). The construction is rather awkward, but the general sense is clear. With thethought of the whole verse compare Ps. Sol. xviii. 6: καθαρίσαι ὁ θεὸς ᾿Ισραὴλ .. . εἰς ἡμέραν ἐκλογῆς ἐν ἀνάξει Χριστοῦ αὐτοῦ, also the description of Abraham being preserved by the divine σοφία in Sap. x. 5 (ἐτήρησεν αὐτὸν ἄμεμπτον θεῷ).
Ver. 24. The call implies that God will faithfully carry out the process of ἁγιάζεσθαι and τηρεῖσθαι (cf. Phil. i. 6), ‘which is the divine side of the human endeavour outlined in the preceding verse.
Vv. 25-27. Closing words of counsel ‘and prayer.
Ver. 26. Neither here, nor above at ver. 14, is there any reason to suppose that Paul turns to address the leaders of the local church (so e.g., Bornemann, Ellicott, Alford, Askwith, Zimmer, Light-
foot, Weiss, Findlay) as though they were, in the name of the apostle(s), to convey the holy (z.e. not of convention or human passion) kiss, which betokened mutual affection (cf. Renan’s S. Paul, 262, DCG. i. 935, and E. Bz. 4254) in the early Christian worship. This greeting by proxy is not so naturalas the ordinary sense of the words; the substitution of τ. a.m. for the more common ἀλλήλους is intelligible in the light, e.g., cf. Phil. iv. 21; and it would be harsh to postulate so sharp a transition from the general reference of v. 25 and v. 28. Even in ver. 27 it is not necessary to think of the local leaders. While the epistle would naturally be handed to some of them in the first instance, it was addressed to the church; the church owned it and was held responsible for its public reading at the weekly worship.—aou.v, like the πάντας of ver. 26, simply shows Paul’s desire to prevent the church from becom- ing, on any pretext, a clique or coterie. But the remarkable emphasis of the in- junction points to a period when such public reading of an apostolic epistle was not yet a recognised feature in the worship of the churches. Paul lays stress upon the proper use of his epistle, as being meant not for a special set, but for the entire brotherhood (i.e., at Thes- salonica, not, as Flatt thinks, in Mace- donia). See that every member gets a hearing of it at some meeting or other (a4vay., timeless aor.), and thus knows exactly what has been said. So Afoc. Bar. \xxxvi.: ‘‘ when therefore ye receive this my epistle, read it in your congre- gations with care. And meditate thereon, above all on the days of your fasts.”
ΠΡΟΣ @ESSAAONIKEIS B.
ah belt tlc
b Cf. x Cor. i. 3, etc.
Call Clem. Rom, XXXVili. 4. GF. 1 John iii. 16, iv. II.
d See oni Cor. xvi.
᾿ ἡμᾶς ἐν ὑμῖν * ἐγκαυχᾶσθαι ἐν ταῖς
1. *MAYAOZ καὶ Σιλουανὸς καὶ Τιμόθεος τῇ ἐκκλησίᾳ Θεσσαλο-- νικέων ἐν Θεῷ πατρὶ ἡμών καὶ Κυρίῳ ᾿Ιησοῦ Χριστῷ 2. χάρις ὑμῖν. ἐν Θεῷ πατρὶ ἡμῶν καὶ Κυρίῳ Ἰησοῦ Χριστῷ - 2. χάρις Spi καὶ " εἰρήνη " ἀπὸ Θεοῦ πατρὸς | καὶ Κυρίου ᾿ἸΙησοῦ " Χριστοῦ. 3. “εὐχαριστεῖν “ ὀφείλομεν τῷ Θεῷ πάντοτε περὶ ὑμών, ἀδελφοί, (καθὼς “ ἄξιόν ἐστιν) ὅτι “ ὑπεραυξάνει ἡ πίστις ὑμών καὶ ‘ πλεονάζει.
ἡ ὅ ἀγάπη ἑνὸς ἑκάστου πάντων ὑμών εἰς ἀλλήλους " 4. ὥστε αὐτοὺς
* ἐκκλησίαις τοῦ Θεοῦ, ὑπὲρ
4 and A ε κι cea Q 2 3 A A ὃ al e A Ν Phil. τ. γ. τῆς ὑπομονῆς ὑμῶν καὶ πίστεως ἐν πᾶσι τοῖς διωγμοῖς ὑμῶν καὶ
e Only here ΤΌΝ": f 2 Pet. τ: 8.
with inf. asin I.1. 7. i See 2 Cor. ix. 2.
g In answer to prayer of I. iii, 12, iv. 9-10.
h As well as others (I. i. 8); ὥστε
k7.e. of Achaia, etc. Cf. 1. 1. 3.
10m. ἡμῶν after πατρος with BDP, 17, 49, 71, d, e, Theoph., Pelag. (Al., Lachm., WH, Findlay, Milligan, etc.), as a scribal addition from ver. 1.
CuHaPTerR I.—Vv. 1-8. ‘Lhe address (i. 1, 2) is followed first by a thanksgiving (3-10) which passes into a prophetic piece of consolation, and then by a brief prayer (11, 12).
Ver. 3. wept ὑμῶν: Your thankless situation (4 f.) only throws into more brilliant relief your personal character and bearing under adverse circumstances. ὅτι is best represented by our colloquial ‘* because,’”’ which includes both the causal and the objective senses of the word; what forms matter for thanks- giving is naturally the reason for thanks- giving. ἀγάπη x.7.A., a period of strain tires mutual gentleness (see on Rev. li. 4) as well as patience towards God (ver. 4), sincé irritation and lack of unselfish con- sideration for others (cf. iii. 6 f.) may be as readily produced by a time of tension and severe anxiety as an impatient temper of faith.. Paul is glad and grate- tul that suffering was drawing his friends together and binding them more closely to their Lord, instead of stunting the growth of their faith and drying up the flow of their mutual charity. Praise comes as usual before blame. Paul is proud of his friends, because suffering has not spoiled their characters, as suffer-
ing, especially when due to oppression and injustice, is too apt to do.— égetAopev (so Cic. ad. Fam., xiv. 2, gratiasque egi, ut debui:; Barn. v. 3; νἱἱ 1 ἸΠ8 phrase is unexampled in Paul, but not unnatural (cf. Rom. xv. 1, etc.); “the form of duty is one which all thoughts- naturally take in his mind”’ (Jowett). Ver. 4. The single article groups ὑπομονὴ and πίστις as a single concep- tion = faith in its special aspect of patient endurance (cf. on Rev. xiii. Io), faithful tenacity of purpose. M. Geb- hardt,in his L’Italie Mystique (pp. 318 f.),. observes that ‘‘ the final word of Lante’s belief, of that ‘religion of the heart’ which he mentions in the Convito, is given in the 24th canto of the Paradiso. He comes back to the very simple symbol of Paul, faith, hope and love; for him as for the apostle faith is at bottom simply hope.” Faith is more than that to Paul, but sometimes hardly more. The Thessa- lonians are not to fear that they are hold- ing a forlorn outpost. Neither man nor God overlooks their courage (cf. Plato’s Theaet., xxv., ἀνδρικῶς ὑπομεῖναι καὶ μὴ ἀνάνδρως φεύγειν). Their founders and friends at a distance are watching with pride their resolute faith ; while in God's.
I. 1—8.
ΠΡΟΣ ΘΕΣΣΑΛΟΝΙΚΕΙΣ B
45
ταὶς θλίψεσιν ‘ais ἀνέχεσθε, 5. "᾿ ἔνδειγμα τῆς δικαίας κρίσεως τοῦ | Attract. ἔτ
ας or ὧν
Θεοῦ, " εἰς τὸ 5 καταξιωθῆναι ὑμᾶς τῆς βασιλείας τοῦ Θεοῦ, ὑπὲρ ἧς (Win. §
24, 4€).
3, , A A a καὶ πάσχετε: 6. " εἴπερ 4 δίκαιον παρὰ Θεῷ "ἀνταποδοῦναι τοῖς m Only here
θλίβουσιν ὑμᾶς θλῖψιν 7. καὶ ὑμῖν τοῖς θλιβομένοις " ἄνεσιν * μεθ’ ἡμῶν ἐν τῇ “ ἀποκαλύψει τοῦ Κυρίου Ἰησοῦ ἀπ᾽ οὐρανοῦ μετ᾽ ἀγγέλων δυνάμεως αὐτοῦ 8. “ ἐν πυρὶ φλογός, διδόντος © ἐκδίκησιν * τοῖς μὴ εἰδόσι Θεὸν καὶ τοῖς μὴ "ὑπακούουσι τῷ * εὐ λί ῦ Κυρί
εἰδόσι Θεὸν καὶ τοῖς μὴ σι τῷ " εὐαγγελίῳ τοῦ Κυρίου "τ;
and xiv. 22.
li. 5-6, 9, Vili. 17; 2 Cor. iv. 17 f.
Isa. iv. 15 (quoted on I. iv. 16).
knows!” ur Cor.i.7; Rom. ii. 5.
and on 1 Cor. iii. 13. A Hebraism. x Cf. I. iv. 5 (Jer. x. 25; Ps. Ixxviii. 6).
sure process of providence that faith has a destiny of its own, since it is bound up with His eternal designs. Hope is only mentioned once (ii. 16, cf. ili. 5) in this epistle, for all its preoccupation with the future. Faith covers almost all its con- tents here.—@AtWeo.v more general than διωγμοῖς.--ὑπὲρ, as in I., ili. 2, is equiva- lent to περί, with a touch of personal interest (Abbott’s F¥ohannine Grammar, Ρ. 559; Meisterhans, Gramm. d. attischen Inschriften, 182).
Ver. 5. ἔνδειγμα, in apposition to the general thought of the preceding clause ; it does not matter to the sense whether the word is taken as an elliptic nominative or an appositional accusative. ‘All this is really a clear proof of (or points to) the equity of God’s judgment,” which will right the present inequalities of life (Dante, Purg., x. 109f.). Δικαία κρίσις is the future and final judgment of 6-10, whose principle is recompense (Luke xvi. 25); there is a divine law of compensa- tion which will operate. This throws back light upon the present sufferings of the righteous. These trials, it is as- sumed, are due to loyalty and innocence of life; hence, in their divine aspect (ver. 5), they are the necessary qualification or discipline for securing entrance into the realm of God. They are significant, not casual. Paul begins by arguing that their very infliction or permission proves that God must be contemplating a suit- able reward and destiny for those who endured them in the right spirit. εἰς τὸ k.T.A., is thus a loose expansion (from the common rabbinic phrase, cf. Dalman’s Worte Fesu, 97 f.; E. Tr., 1190) of one side of the Sux. κρίσις. The other side, the human aspect of θλῖψις, then emerges in ver.6. Since the Thessalonians were suffering at the hands of men (τοὺς θλί- Bovras, Isa. xix. 20), the two-handed
p See on Rom. iii. 30, viii. 9, 17 = “since”. r From Isa. Ixvi. 2 (LXX). s Cf t 1 Thess. ii. 15; see below, iii. 2. v Cf. LXX of Exod. iii. 2; Isa. xxix. 6, Ixvi. 6, 15 f. w Ezek. xxv. 14 (LXX); Jer. xxv. 12; Deut. vii. 9. y Cf. Rom. x. 16. Acts vi. 7; Clem. Rom. xiii. 4.
invNe for idea, see Phil. i. 27-28
and Sap.
Acts v. 41 q Exod. xxiii. 22; see on Rom. . 2 Cor. ii. 13; Asc. ‘““We need it too, God
engine of retribution (so Lam. iii. 64 f.; Obad. 15; Isa. lix. 18, for ἀνταποδ,.) must in all fairness punish the persecutors (cf. Sap. xi.9, 10). This is the only passage in which Paul welcomes God’s vengeance on the enemies of the church as an ele- ment in the recompense of Christians.— ὑπὲρ ἧς καὶ πάσχετε: to see an intelli- gible purpose in suffering, or to connect it with some larger movement and hope, is always a moral stay. “God gave three choice gifts to Israel—the Torah, the Land of Promise, and Eternal Life, and each was won by suffering”’ (Bera- choth, 5a).
Ver. 7. After noting the principle of recompence (5-7a), Paul proceeds (7b-10) to dwell on its time and setting, especi- ally in its punitive aspect. He consoles the Thessalonians by depicting the doom of their opponents rather than (gc, 10) their own positive relief andreward. The entire passage breathes the hot air of the later Judaism, with its apocalyptic antici- pation of the jus talionis applied by God to the enemies of His people; only, Paul identifies that people not with Israel but with believers in Christ Jesus. He ap- propriates Israel’s promises for men and women whom Israel expelled and perse- cuted.—The ἄγγελοι are the manifesta- tion of Christ’s δύναμις, as the ἅγιοι (saints not angels) are ot his δόξα (ver. 10) ; the position of ayy. (cf. Win., § 80, 126) tells against Hofmann’s interpretation of
Suv.=“ host” (NAY, so LXX). Here
and in the following verses the divine prerogatives (e.g., fiery manifestation and judicial authority) are carried over to Jesus.
Ver. 8. Those who know not God are of course not pagans as such but im- moral pagans, in the sense of Rom. i. 28 ἢ. Those who refuse obedience to the
46 ΠΡΟΣ ΘΕΣΣΑΛΟΝΙΚΕΙΣ B I. z4Macc. ἡμῶν Ἰησοῦ " 9. οἵτινες δίκην τίσουσιν, “ ὄλεθρον "αἰώνιον, * ἀπὸ X. 15.
a From Isa. προσώπου τοῦ Κυρίου καὶ ἀπὸ τῆς δόξης THs ἰσχύος αὐτοῦ, το. ὅταν ii. 10, 19,
21 (LXX). ἡ ἔλθῃ © ἐνδοξασθῆναι ἐν τοῖς ἁγίοις αὐτοῦ καὶ ἃ θαυμασθῆναι ἐν πᾶσι Cf. Ps. li. a , 3 i xe , ε lol Sig tet a δ᾽" 11: Lk. τοῖς πιστεύσασιν (ὅτι ἐπιστώθη 1 τὸ “ μαρτύριον ἡμῶν ἐφ᾽ ὑμᾶς) ἴ ἐν xiii. 27, ele > , ἘΞΑ Q , Ae τας εἰς. τῇ ἡμέρᾳ ἐκείνῃ. τι. ὅ εἰς ὃ καὶ προσευχόμεθα πάντοτε περὶ ὑμῶν, b -- fut. hey ε A ΕἸ , la , ς Q ε lol AQ Xx , A perf. ἵνα ὑμᾶς ἀξιώσῃ τῆς κλήσεως ὁ Θεὸς ἡμῶν καὶ πληρώσῃ πᾶσαν (Moult. 186). c Only here in N.T., cf. Ex. xiv. 4; Sir. xxxviii. 6, etc. ; Isa. iv. 2 f., xlix. 3. d Reminiscence
of Ps. Ixviii. 36; Ixxxix.8(LXX). Cf. Sir. xxxviii. 3; 4 Macc. xviii. 3. e Cf. 1 Cor-16: f From Isa. ii. τὰ (17). g Cf. Col. i. 29. ‘It is to this our thoughts turn as we pray, etc.” (Ruther- ford). h Equivalent, as e.g. in LXX of Exod. ix. 16.
1 For εἐπιστευθη Markland and Hort conj. εἐπιστωθη (So 31, 112), as if ‘the Christian testimony (vv. 4-5) of suffering for the faith had been confirmed and sealed upon the Thessalonians”’ (cf. Ps. xcii. 4 f, LXX, θαυμαστος ev υὑψηλοις 0 κυριος “τα μαρτυρια σον ἐπιστωθησαν σφοδρα). πιστωθήτω is used (as here with em) of the divine word in 1 Chron. xvii. 23 (cf. 2 Chron. ii. 9). The MSS. reading throws ἐπιστευθη to the front for emphasis, but it must go with ep npas. The point of the sentence, as Left. admits, leads us to expect “a direct connexion between the Thessalonians and a belief in the gospel rather than between the Thess. and the preaching of the gospel,” so that paprvpvov is less vital to ef npas. No satisfactory parallel can be quoted for either construction of ἐπιστευθη, however, and the likelihood upon the whole is that it represents a primitive and natural corruption of ἐπιστωθη.
gospel are, as the repetition of the article suggests, a different class of people, per- haps drawn both from Jews and pagans. But as Paul never seems to contemplate the idea of any Jew failing to hear the gospel (cf. Rom. x. 16 f.), the description here applies principally to them.—év πυρὶ φλογός, one of the most favourite real- istic traits of the last judgment, in apocalyptic Judaism (cf. passages in Volz’s Fidische Eschatologie, 285, 286) ; here it is simply a descriptive touch, which Paul does not pause to elaborate (cf.. τ Cor. {|:-. 13). The wather “broad and inflated” language (Weizsicker) of the whole passage is probably due to the subject, more than to Paul’s employ- ment of Silvanus, himself a prophet (cf. Acts xy. 32 and 1 Thess. ii. 12-16), as his amanuensis.
Ver.g. The overwhelming manifesta- tion of the divine glory sweeps from be- fore it (pregnant ἀπὸ) into endless ruin the disobedient (Ps. Ixxvi. 7) men who (see Moulton, gi f.) shall pay the penalty of (see Prov. xxvii. 12, LXX) eternal de- struction (the common apocalyptic belief, see Volz, Fid. Eschat., 286 f.).
Ver. το. ἐπιστώθη, like the variant ἐπιστεύθη, is suggested by πιστεύουσιν (cf. a similar instance in iii, 3). The abrupt parenthesis (‘‘ you included—for ”’) shows how Paul was thinking of the Thessalonians especially, while he de- picted the bliss οἱ the saints in general.—— ἐνδοξ., in one sense they were to be a
credit and honour to their apostles (I., ii. 19 f.); in another, they were a glory to Christ Himself, by their ripened character—a Johannine touch (cf. John Xvii. Io, and ver. 12 of this chapter ; the parallel between ἔργον πίστεως and John vi. 29 is verbal).—®avp. = to be wondered at (by whom? cf. Ezek. xxxix. 21, Eph. iii. 10?) am (ϊ.6., by reason of, on account of) believers ; for a partial parallel to the phrase see Isa. Ixii. 6 (καὶ ἐν τῷ πλούτῳ αὐτῶν θαυμασθήσεσθε). If ὅτι. . . ὑμᾶς had been meant to give the reason for θαυμασθῆναι (so Zimmer, Wohl.), Paul would probably have put God’s wit- ness instead of our witness, and expressed the idea unambiguously ; the transition from the πᾶσιν to the special case of the Thessalonians becomes, on this construc- tion, an anti-climax. The rhythmical swing of 7b-10 suggests a reminiscence or quotation of some early Christian lit- urgical hymn, perhaps one of the pro- phetic ψαλμοί which he had heard at Corinth (1 Cor. xiv. 15, 26).
Ver. 11. καὶ «.T.A.. we pray as well as render thanks (ver. 3) for you. Un- able any longer to give the Thessalonians their personal example and instructions— the time for that had passed (ἐπιστώθη)--- Paul and his colleagues can still pray for them. The duties of a preacher or evangelist do not cease with the utter- ance of his message. ἀξιώσῃ: one proof that God deemed them worthy of His kingdom lay in the discipline of
ἘῚ 12, II. 1--2.
' εὐδοκίαν * preteens καὶ ἔργον πίστεως | ἐν ϑυνάμει :
™ ἐνδοξασθῇ τὸ
11
ΠΡΟΣ ΘΕΣΣΑΛΟΝΙΚΕΙ͂Σ Β
᾿Ἐρωτῶμεν δὲ ines, ἐδελθοῦ
47
ἘΖ- Ὁ ὅπως i Contrast 11125) ὁ΄- ἃ ὄνομα τοῦ Κυρίου ἡμῶν τὴν ἐν ὑμῖν, “καὶ ὑμεῖς ἐν Ee τ Ze x.1; Ep ° αὐτῷ, κατὰ τὴν χάριν " τοῦ Θεοῦ " ἡμῶν καὶ 3 Κυρίου ᾿Ιησοῦ Χριστοῦ. : i 5. he ὁ ὑπὲρ τὴς ποραισίαβι τοῦ Rom. xv. 14 and ἡμῶν ° ἐπισυναγωγῆς ἐπ᾽ αὐτόν, 2. “ εἰς Eph. v.9.
Κυρίου 2 Ἰησοῦ hl καὶ "ἢ τὸ μὴ “ταχέως
μήτε διὰ πνεύματος, μήτε διὰ λόγου, μήτε δι᾽
Ezek, xxxix. 21. p So ver. II.
xxiv. 31; 2 Macc. ii. 7, etc. de tits τὸ; Sap. iv. 4. Jos. Vt. xi.,
XXXV. iSc. γεγραμμένης.
n = Person or character (cf. on Phil. ii. 9-10). q For x. without article, cf. Win. § 19. 13 d, § 18. 7. περί (an Ionism, cf. Meisterhans, Gramm. d. attisch. Inschrift. 182).
g Elsewhere in N.T., only in Matt. xxiv. 6 (= Mk. Xiii. 7).
Col. i. 29.
᾿σαλευθῆναι ὑμᾶς ἀπὸ Tod νοὸς μηδὲ εθροεῖσθαι, {Col LXX;
of Isa. XXiv. 15, xvi. 5; Mal. i. 11; Ὁ John xvii. 1, 10, 21 f. a‘‘with regard to,” = b See oni. 7. cCf. Matt. f See Acts xvii. 13; h Forged? cf.
ἢ ἐπιστολῆς (ὡς ᾿ δι᾿
e Gal. i. 6 = “hastily”’.
1 Om. npev after Κυριου, with B, syr. (WH, Weiss, Findlay).
suffering by means of which He developed their patient faith (4, 5), but Paul here finds another proof of it in their broader development of moral character and vital religion (cf. 10). πᾶσαν includes ἔργον as well as εὐδοκίαν; the piayer is for success to every practical enterprise of faith as well as for the satisfaction of every aspiration and desire after moral excellence. Compare Dante’s Paradiso, XVili. 58-60. κλῆσις is ‘‘ the position you are called to occupy,” ‘‘ your voca- tion,” as heirs of this splendid future—a not unnatural extension (cf. Phil. ii. 14) of its ordinary use (= 1 Cor. i. 26, etc.). This implies that a certain period of moral ripening must precede the final crisis. In ii. I-iii. 5, Paul proceeds to elaborate this, in order to allay the fever- ish excitement at Thessalonica, while in iii. 6 f., he discusses the further ethical disorders caused by the church’s too ardent hope. The heightened misery of the present situation must neither break down their patience (4 f.), nor on the other hand must it be taken as a proof that the end was imminent.
Ver. 12. Here at any rate it is im- possible to take χάριν in a universalistic sense (so Robinson, Ephesians, pp. 225 f.), as though it implied that Christians were put on the same level as O.T. saints. The idea is the merciful favour of God, to the exclusion of human merit. The main topic of the letter is now brought forward ; ii. 1-2 gives the occasion for the λόγος παρακλήσεως (3- 12) which follows.
CHAPTER II.—Ver. τ. ἐπισυν., a term whose verb was already in use for the muster of saints to the messianic reign. —oak., ‘‘get unsettled”. Epictetus uses ἀποσαλεύεσθαι for the unsettling of the mind by sophistries (111. 25), and the
nearest equivalent for νοῦς here is our ‘‘mind”. This mental agitation (aor.) results in θροεῖσθαι = nervous fear (Wrede, 48 f.) in prospect of the immin- ent end.
Werte 2. ὡς δι᾽ ἡμῶν, ‘‘ purporting to come from us,’ goes with ἐπιστολῆς alone, for, while λόγος (Linemann)
might be grouped under it, πνεῦμα can- not. A visionary would claim personal, not borrowed, authority for his revela- tion. If ὡς ὃ. H. went with the preceding verbs (so Dods, Askwith, g2 f., Wohl. = ‘‘we are the true interpreters of Paul’s meaning ’’), an active (as in ver. 3) not a passive turn might have been expected to the sentence.— ἐνέστηκεν = ‘‘ were al- ready present’. The cry was, 6 κύριος πάρεστι. The final period had already begun, and the Thessalonians were pro- bably referred to their sufferings as a proof of this. Paul could only guess the various channels along which such a misconception had flowed into the local church ; either, ¢.g., πνεύματος, the hal- lucination of some early Christian pro- phet at Thessalonica; or λόγου, oral statement, based in part perhaps on some calculation of contemporary history or on certain logia of Jesus; or ἐπιστολῆς, ΐ.6.. the misinterpretation of some passage in 1 Thess. or in some lost letter of Paul. Possibly Paul imagined an epistle had been forged purporting to come from him or his companions, but we have no means of knowing whether his suspicion was well-founded or not. In any case the allusion is quite credible within his life- time. Such expectations may have been excited in a more or less innocent fashion, but Paul peremptorily (ver. 3) ranks them all as dishonest; he is concerned not with their origin but with their mis-
48
k Cf. 2 Cor. ἡμῶν),} * ὡς ἢ ὅτι ' ἐνέστηκεν ἣ ἡμέρα τοῦ Κυρίου.
x1. 21, “‘to the effect that”.
ΠΡΟΣ CESSAAONIKEIS B
ii,
3. Μή τις ὑμᾶς
Ὦ 3A
ει , ™ ἐξαπατήσῃ κατὰ μηδένα τρόπον : ὅτι " ἐὰν μὴ ἔλθῃ ° ἡ ἀποστασία
1 Rom. viii, ἢ πρῶτον καὶ ὃ ἀποκαλυφθῇ ὁ ἄνθρωπος τῆς ἀνομίας,2 ὁ υἱὸς " τῆς
38, etc.
Ν a , mAor.conj, ἀπωλείας, 4. ὁ ἀντικείμενος καὶ ὑπεραιρόμενος ἐπὶ " πάντα λεγό-
asin2 Ε Ἂ fs , Cor. xi. μενον 8 " θεὸν ἢ " σέβασμα, ὥστε αὐτὸν “eis τὸν ναὸν τοῦ θεοῦ καθίσαι, ; δ \ ε; 5 an
ec ’ ἀποδεικνύντα ἑαυτὸν ὅτι ἐστὶ θεός. 5. οὐ μνημονεύετε ὅτι ETL ὧν n Sc. ‘it
shall not
come" (ellipsis, as in. ver. 7). o “The well known.” P = πρότερον (I. iv. 16). q Matt.
XXiv. 12. r Win. § 30, 6, b; cf. Deissm. 163; Jub. x. 3. s 1 Cor.viii. 5. t Elsewhere
in N.T., only in Acts xvii. 23 (Sap. xv. 17). u Matt. xxiv. 15. v By deeds as well as words,
cf. Acts ii. 22; here = “proclaim”.
10n ὡς δι npov Field (202) writes: “Perhaps the apostle wrote ws Sy nov, as pretending to be ours,” adding instances from Ast. Lex. Plat. to justify the latter’s statement that ‘‘cum irrisione quadam plerumque ponitur ws 8y”.
2 The avopras of δῷ Β min., cop., arm., Euth., Dam., Tert., Amb. (Ti., Tr., WH, Zim., Bj., Findlay, Legft.), is preferable to the Western paraphrastic apaptias (Alford,
Ellic., Wohl., Weiss). 3 Bentl. conj. emt παν To Aeyopevov.
chievous effects upon the church (cf. Matt. xxiv. 4). Probably his suspicions of misinterpretation were due to his recent experiences in Galatia, though the Macedonian churches seem to have escaped any infusion of the anti-Pauline propaganda which soured Corinth not long afterwards.
Ver. 3. καὶ ἀποκ., the apostasy and the appearance (so of Beliar, Asc. Isa., iv. 18) of the personal anti-_hrist or pseudo- Christ form a single phenomenon. From the use of ἣ ἀποστασία as a Greek equivalent for Belial (LXX of 1 Kings xxi. 13, A, and Aquila), this eschatolo- gical application of the term would natur-
ally flow, especially .as ρον WR might well be represented by 6 ἄνθρωπος τῆς ἀνομίας on the analogy of 2 Sam. xO, ν᾽ (eX) Ps ιχυϊ (τυ) 7 Lawlessness was a cardinal trait in the Jewish figure of Belial, as was persecu- tion of the righteous (i. 4, 11. 7, see Asc. Isa., ii. 5, etc.). The very order of the following description (ἀπωλείας set be- tween ἀνομίας and ὁ ἀντικείμενος, etc., unchronologically, but dramatically) sug- gests that this incarnation of lawlessness was a doomed figure, although he chal- lenged and usurped divine prerogatives. He is another Antiochus Epiphanes (Dan. xi. 36, καὶ ὑψωθήσεται ἐπὶ πάντα θεὸν καὶ ἐπὶ τὸν θεὸν τῶν θεῶν ἔξαλλα λαλήσει, though Paul carefully safe- guards himself against misconception by inserting λεγόμενον in his quotation of the words). This conception of a super- natural antagonist to Jesus Christ at the end is the chief element of novelty intro-
duced by Paul, from Jewish traditions, into the primitive Christian eschatology. The recent attempt of . aligula to erect a statue of himself in the Temple at Jeru- salem may have furnished a trait for Paul’s delineation of the future Deceiver; the fearful impiety of this outburst had sent a profound shock through Judaism, which would be felt by Jewish Christians as well. But Paul does not identify the final Deception with the Imperial cultus, which was far from a prominent feature when he wrote. His point is that the last pseudo-Messiah or anti-Christ will em ody all that is profane and blasphem- ous, every conceivable element of im- piety ; and that, instead of being repudi- ated, he will be welcomed by Jews as well as pagans (cf. Acts xii. 21, 22).
Ver. 5. It was no after-thought, on Paul’s part (the singular rules out Spitta’s idea that Timothy wrote this apocalyptic piece). Nor was it an idio- syncrasy of his teaching. Especially since the days of Antiochus Ep phanes (Van. vil., xi.; cf. Gunkel’s Schopfung u. Chaos, 221 f.), a more or less esoteric and varied Jewish tradition had pervaded pious circles, that the last days would be heralded by a proud uprising against God. The champion of this movement was no longer the Dragon or cosmic op- ponent of God, as in the older mythology (though traces of this belief still linger), but an individual (6 ἄνομος) who incor- porates human wickedness (τὸ μυστήριον τῆς ἀνομίας) and infernal cunning in his own person, and who essays to supplant and suppress the worship of the true God, by claiming divine honours for himself.
3—I0.
πρὸς ὑμᾶς, ταῦτα ἔλεγον ὑμῖν ; 6. καὶ νῦν τὸ τὸ ἀποκαλυφθῆναι αὐτὸν ἐν τῷ αὐτοῦ ” καιρῷ. ἤδη ἐνεργεῖται “THs ἀνομίας, “μόνον ὃ κατέχων ἄρτι ἕως ἐκ μέσου y γένηται: 8. "καὶ τότε ἀποκαλυφθήσεται ὁ ἄνομος, ὃν ὁ Κύριος Ἰησοῦς ° ἀνελεῖ “ τῷ πνεύματι τοῦ στόματος “ αὐτοῦ καὶ “ καταργήσει τῇ ἐπιφανείᾳ τῆς παρουσίας αὐτοῦ - 9. οὗ ἐστιν ἡ παρουσία κατ᾽ ἐνέργειαν τοῦ Σατανᾶ ἐν πάσῃ δυνάμει καὶ ‘ σημείοις καὶ τέρασι * ψεύ- Sous I0. καὶ ἐν πάσῃ ἀπάτῃ * ἀδικίας " ἀνθ᾽ ὧν τὴν ἀγάπην τῆς ἀληθείας οὐκ ᾿ ἐδέξαντο εἰς τὸ σωθῆναι
classical, Win. § 13, 5. 4 Esd. xiii. 38. e See on 1 Cor. i. 28. of origin.
ΠΡΟΣ CESSAAONIKEIS B
49
Ὗ κατέχον * οἴδατε εἰς w Ἐ τον ΤΥ5.). 7. τὸ γὰρ μυστήριον x Μαιί χι, II, etc. “cc Ap- pointed season” (as Dan. Xi. 29, 35). z Epexeg. genit.
a Gal. ii. 10. b Common eschat. formula
(cf. 1 Cor. iv. 5,etc.). c Post-
ἢ τοῖς ᾿ ἀπολλυμένοις,
d From Isa. xi. 4 (LXX), copied in Ps. Sol. xvii. 27, 41; cf. Job iv. 9, f
Cf. on 2 Cor. xii. 12; Matt. xxiv. 24. g Gen.
ἢ Dat. incommodi (Blass, ὃ 37, 2), aS in 1 Cor. i. 18; cf. Moulton, 114-115 (“strongly
durative though the verb is, we see perfectivity in the fact that the goal is ideally reached”).
i Cf. on 2 Cor. ii.15. k See on Acts xii. 23.
He is Satan’s messiah, an infernal cari- cature of the true messiah. Cf. Asc. Isa., iv. 6, where it is said that Belial ‘“ will do and speak like the Beloved and he will say, Iam God and before me there has been none ”’.
Ver. 6. Well now, you know what vestrains him from being manifested (com- ing fully into play and sight) before his appointed season. Νῦν probably goes with οἴδατε, not with τὸ κατέχον (as ¢.g., in John iv. 18, so Olshausen, Bisping, Wie- seler, Zahn, Wrede), and kat νῦν is not temporal, but ‘‘a mere adverb of pas- sage”’ (Linemann, Alford) in the argu- ment (so with οἶδα in Acts iii. 17). Were νῦν temporal, it would mean (a) that dur- ing the interval between Paul’s teaching and the arrival of this letter fresh circum- stances (so Zimmer) had arisen to throw light on the thwarting of the adversary. But of this there is no hint whatsoever in the context. Or (b), preferably, it would contrast with the following év τῷ αὐτοῦ καιρῷ, as an equivalent for “already” (Hofmann, Wohl., Milligan, etc.)
Ver. 7. yap, explaining οἴδατε, The κατέχων is a fact of present experience and observation, which accounts for the ἀνομία being as yet a μυστήριον, Opera- ting secretly, and not an ἀποκάλυψις. Paul does not say by whom (the ἄνομος himself?) the restraint is removed.— μόνον, the hiatus must be filled up with some phrase like ‘it cannot be mani- fested”’. Its real character and full scope are not yet disclosed. For ἄρτι Ξε νῦν, cf. Nageli’s note in dev Wort- schatz des Apostels Paulus (36, 37), and for omission of ἄν, Blass, § 65, 10.
Ver. 8. ὅν, «.t.A., his career is short and tragic. The apparition (cf. 1 Tim.
VOL. IV.
4
1 Contrast I. 1. 6, 11. 13.
vi. 14, etc., Thieme, Die Inschriften von Magnesia, 34 f.) of Jesus heralds his overthrow.—émupaveta = sudden appear- ance of a deity at some crisis (cf. Diod., Sicul., i. 25), as the god in 2 Macc. ii. 21, iii. 24, etc. ‘In hieratic inscriptions the appearing of the god in visible form to men is commonly expressed by the same word” (Ramsay, Exp. Ti., x. 208). This passage, with its fierce messianic antici- pation of the adversary’s doom interrupts the description of his mission which is resumed (in ver. 9) with an account of the inspiration (κατὰ), method (ἐν) and results (ver. 10), of this evil advent. Galen (de facult. nat., τ. 2, 4-5) physio- logically defines ἐνέργεια as the process of activity whose product is ἔργον. The impulse to ἐνέργεια is δύναμις. The δύναμις of this supernatural delusion 15 specially manifested in signs and wonders. The power of working miracles in order to deceive people (ver. 11) was an ac- cepted trait in the Jewish and early Christian ideas of such eschatological opponents of God (cf. on Rev. xiii. 13, and Friedlander’s Geschichte d. jid. Apolog., 493 f.).
Ver. το. ἀγάπη (cf. ver. 12) here, as Luke xi. 42, with obj. gen. Cf. Asc. Isa., iv. 15, 16: ‘And He will give rest [above, ch. i. 7] to the godly whom He shall find in the body in this world, and to all who because of their faith in Him have execrated Beliar and his kings”’. ἀλήθεια, not = ‘‘truth” in the general sense of the term (Liinemann, Lightfoot, Zimmer) but = ‘“‘the truth of the gospel”’ (as usual in Paul) as against ἀδικία and ψεῦδος (Rom. i. 15 f., ii. 8). The apostle holds that the refusal to open one’s mind and heart to the gospel leaves life a prey to moral delusion; judicial infatua-
50 ΠΡΟΣ OEZSAAONIKEIS Β I. m See αὐτούς: τι. καὶ διὰ τοῦτο "" πέμπει αὐτοῖς ὁ Θεὸς ἐνέργειαν a.
24-25, and €ls\TO πιστεῦσαι αὐτοὺς TO ψεύδει" 12. ἵνα “ κριθῶσι πάντες οἵ μὴ
Rom. i.
etc. n Sap. v.
(as Heb.
24, 26, 28, πισπεύπαντες τῇ " ἀληθείᾳ ἀλλ᾽ “ εὐδοκήσαντες τῇ " ἀδικίᾳ. 13.
Ημεῖς δὲ " ὀφείλομεν εὐχαριστεῖν τῷ Θεῷ πάντοτε περὶ ὑμῶν, " ἀδελ- 7: \ > d alg: , e+
ο --ἰκατακρ. POL ἡγαπημένοι ὑπὸ Kuptou, ὅτι
εἵλατο ὑμᾶς ὁ Θεὸς “ ἀπαρχὴν | εἰς
’ “ἅν xiii, 4, σωτηρίαν ἐν ἣ ἁγιασμῷ " πνεύματος καὶ πίστει ἀληθείας, 14. εἰς “ὃ
etc.). p See on Rom.i.18,
xiii. 6.
ἐκάλεσεν ὑμᾶς διὰ τοῦ " εὐαγγελίου * ἡμῶν, εἰς ᾿ περιποίησιν δόξης and 1 Gor, Τοῦ Κυρίου ἡμῶν Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ. 15.
*Gpa οὖν, ἀδελφοί, " στήκετε
Ν A q Contrast καὶ κρατεῖτε τὰς " παραδόσεις ἃς ἐδιδάχθητε, εἴτε διὰ λόγου εἴτε δι᾽,
1,0
ri. 9. s Cf. 1. i. 4 (in similar connexion), t Alexandrian form ae § 13, 13); cf. Deut. XXvi. 18. u Rom. xi. 16, xvi. 5; 1 Cor. xv. 20, etc.; v I. iv. 7-8 w 1.6., general position reflected in ver. 13. x Cf. 2 Cor. iv. 3. y Cf. I. v. 9. "z Cf. I. v. 6; resumes
thought of ii. 1-2.
a Cf. 1. iii. 8 and 1 Cor. xvi. 13.
Ὁ See ili. 6 and 1 Cor. xi. 2.
‘The singular variant awapxyv, adopted by Lach., WH marg., Weiss (Left. ?} from BGerP, min., f. vg., syr.p, Euth., Dam., etc., is preferable to the strongly supported aw apxns (Pauline aw. evp., in historical sense of Phil. iv. 15, Ac. xv. 7, etc.). The Thessalonians or Macedonians are /irst-fruzts, as contrasted with others
yet to follow (cf. iii. 1, and i. 4).
tion is the penalty of disobedience to the truth of God in Christ.
Ver. τὶ. An echo ‘of the primitive Semitic view (still extant, cf. Curtis’s Prim. Sem. Religion To-Day, pp. 69 f.), that God may deliberately lead men astray, or permit them to be fatally in- fatuated, as a penal discipline (cf. Ps. Sol. viii. 15; Dest. XI. Pat) Dan-ix): A modern would view the same pheno- menon as wilful scepticism issuing in superstition, or in inability to distinguish truth from falsehood. Delusions of this kind cannot befall believers (cf. Mark xiii.
2; Test. Issach. 111.). In Test: Napht. iii. 3, idols are πνεύματα πλάνης (cf. Test. Levi. 111. 3, etc:).
Ver. 12. Like the prophet John half a century later (xiii, 2 f.), Paul distin- guishes his anti-Christ or antitheistic hero from the Satan whose campaign he executes; but, unlike John, the apostle has nothing to say about the fate of Satan. The tools and the victims of Satan are destroyed, and they alone.— εὐδοκ. not with ἐν as usual, but with the less common (cf. ¢.g., 1 Macc. i. 43, καὶ πολλοὶ ἀπὸ ᾿Ισραὴλ ηὐδόκησαν τῇ λατ- pia αὐτοῦ) dative. “Απά the greater number of those who shall have been associated together in order to receive the Beloved he [i.e., Beliar] will turn aside after him” (Asc. Isa., iv. Q).
Ver. 13-CHAPTER III.-Ver. 5. Thanks, prayers and counsels.
Ver. 13. God has chosen you (εἵλατο, another LXX expression, implying that Christians had now succeeded to the cherished priviliges of God’s people) to
be saved, instead of visiting you with a deadly delusion (το, 11) which ends in judgment (12); your discipline is of sanc- tification (contrast 128) and belief in what is true (contrast 11, 12a), these forming the sphere and the scope (cf. τ Tim. ii. 15, and for ἐν ἁγιασμῷ in this sense Ps. Sol. xvii. 33) for salvation being realised. Those who are sanctified and who truly believe shall be saved. Cf. ver. 14 and Apoc. Bar., liv. 21 : “ in fine enim saeculi uindicta erit de iis qui improbe egerunt, iuxta improbitatem eorum, et glorificabis fideles iuxta fidem eorum”.—avevpartos may be either (a) = ‘“‘ wrought by the (holy) Spirit” (cf. τ Peter i. 2), the divine side of the human πίστει, or (b) = “of the spirit” (cf. I. v. 23; 2 Cor. vii. 1), as of the heart (I., iii. 13). The absence of the article is not decisive against the former rendering, but the latter is the more probable in view of the context; the process of ἁγιασμός involves a love of the truth and a belief in it (2.6., in the true gospel) which is opposed to religious delusions ‘cf. ii. 2).
Ver. 14. To be saved ultimately (12) is to possess or rather to share the glory of Christ (cf. I., ii. 12).
Ver. 15. The divine purpose does not work automatically, but implies the co- operation of Christians—in this case, a resolute stedfastness resting on loyalty to the apostolic gospel. In view of pass- ages like 1 Cor. xi. 23, xv. 5, it is gratui- tous to read any second-century passion for oral apostolic tradition into these words or into those of iii. 6.
ea. ΡΟΣ OESSAAONIKEIS B
“ ἐπιστολῆς ἡμῶν.
καὶ “ὁ Θεὸς ὁ πατὴρ ἡμῶν, ὁ ἀγαπήσας ἡμᾶς “καὶ δοὺς παράκλησιν
ξ αἰωνίαν καὶ ἐλπίδα ἀγαθὴν ἢ
16. “αὐτὸς δὲ ὁ Κύριος ἡμῶν
51
Ἰησοῦς Χριστὸς ες. ν. 27 Ἶ Ρ d For order, cf. 2 Cor. ΧΙ. 13.
ἐν χάριτι, 17. ᾿ παρακαλέσαι ὑμῶν e Cf. Rom.
Ἐ Ἰὰ ν. 5, 8 τὰς καρδίας καὶ ἱ στηρίξαι " ἐν παντὶ ἔργῳ καὶ ᾿ λόγῳ | ἀγαθῷ. f See on 2 A ε Cor. i III. τ. "Τὸ λοιπὸν, "ἢ προσεύχεσθε, ἀδελφοί, περὶ " ἡμῶν, ἵνα “δ᾽ 3-7. as im Contrast λόγος τοῦ “ Κυρίου “ τρέχῃ καὶ " δοξάζηται καθὼς καὶ ‘mpds ὑμᾶς, 2. ἐπ Ὁ a n ni = ‘‘ gra- καὶ ἵνα " ῥυσθῶμεν ἀπὸ τών ἢ ἀτόπων καὶ ἢ πονηρών ' ἀνθρώπων " * οὐ ἘΣΕΙ͂Σ γὰρ πάντων ἡ πίστις. 3. ' πιστὸς δέ ἐστιν ὁ Κύριος, ὃς “᾿ στηρίξει᾽ ἦι Mine ὑμᾶς καὶ " φυλάξει ἀπὸ τοῦ πονηροῦ. 4. “πεποίθαμεν δὲ ἐν Κυρίῳ f optk. > °ép ὑμᾶς, ὅτι ἃ παραγγέλλομεν ποιεῖτε " καὶ ποιήσετε. 5. ὃ δὲ Thre?’ 139, 4; ‘ : Υ Test. Gad, vi. I. al.iv. 1; Eph. vi. ro. b I. v. 25. ὉΕῚ: 8. ἃ Ps. cxlvii. 15, etc. (LXX), contrast 2 Tim.ii.9. eInsense of Acts xiii. 48. fI.iii.4. g Cf. Rom. xv. 31; 2 Ti. iv. 17; Ps. Sol. iv. 27. h See on Acts xxviii. 6; Isa. xxv. 4 (LXX); and on I. lii. 3, ‘‘ misguided and unprincipled’’ (Rutherford). ie.g., in Corinth; cf. Acts xviii. 6 f. 2 Ti. iii. 13. k Cf. Rom. x. 16 with Acts xvii. 12, 34. 1 Cf. i. το, Acts xvili. gf. m ii. 17. n 2 Ti. iv. 18. 0 2Co.,
mice, I. iv. τὸ;
Le 3.
Ver. 16. αὐτὸς δὲ, perhaps with a slight implicit apposition to the you or we of the previous sentence.—ayamyoas καὶ δοὺς, K.T.A., Connection as in John iii. τ. --- παράκλησιν for this world, ἐλπίδα for the world to come; all hope is encouragement, but not vice-versa.
Ver. 17, in contrast to the disquiet and confusion of ii. 2. ἔργῳ as in i. 11, iii. 4, “Γ᾿ λόγῳ aS ill. 1,15; 1.,1.8. See the fulsome pagan inscription of Halicar- nassus, which after giving thanks for the birth of Augustus, σωτῆρα τοῦ κοινοῦ τῶν ἀνθρώπων γένους, declares that men now are full of ἐλπίδων μὲν χρηστῶν πρὸς TO μέλλον, εὐθυμίας δὲ εἰς TO παρόν. Contrast also the κενὴ ἐλπίς of the im- pious in Sap. iii. 11.
CHAPTER III.—Ver. 1. In addition to offering prayers on their behalf, Paul asks them to pray for the continued success of the gospel (‘‘ may others be as blest as we are’’!) and (ver. 2), for its agents’ safety (Isa. xxv. 4, LXX, a reminiscence of). The opponents here are evidently {ii. τὸ f.) beyond hope of conversion ; preservation from their wiles is all that can be expected. For a speedy answer to this prayer, see Acts xviii. 9 f. The repeated use of ὁ Κύριος in vv. 1-5, brings out the control of God amid the plots and passions of mankind.—artémwv. The general sense of the term is given by Philo in his queer allegorising of Gen. 11]. 9 (Leg. Alleg., iii. 17, ἄτοπος λέγεται εἶναι ὁ φαῦλος) ; commonly it is used, as elsewhere in the N.T., of things, but here of persons, either as = ‘‘ill-disposed,”’ or, in a less general and derivative sense = 4*perverse”’ (cf. Nigeli, der Wortschatz
des Paulus, p. 37), or “ froward”. The general aim of the passage is to widen the horizon of the Thessalonians, by en- listing their sympathy and interest on behalf of the apostles. They are not the only sufferers, or the only people who need prayer and help.—ov παντὸς ἀνδρὸς eis Κόρινθόν ἐσθ᾽ ὁ πλοῦς, so ran the ancient proverb. Paul writes from Cor- inth that while everyone has the chance, not all have the desire, to arrive at the faith. ἡ πίστις is the faith of the gospel, or Christianity. By a characteristic play upon the word, Paul (ver. 3), hurries on to add, ‘‘ but the Lord is faithful”. ὑμᾶς (for which Bentley and Baljon plausibly conjecture ἡμᾶς) shows how lightly his mind rests on thoughts of his own peril as compared with the need of others. It is impossible to decide, either from the grammar or from the context, whether τοῦ πονηροῦ is neuter or masculine. Either sense would suit, though, if there is a reminiscence here of the Lord’s prayer (so Feine, Fesus Christus τ. Paulus, 252 f., and Chase, Texts and Studies, i. 3. 112 f.), the masculine would be inevitable, as is indeed more probable for general reasons (so e.g., Hofmann, Everling, Ellicott, etc.)
Ver.4. πεποίθαμεν ( = we have faith), still playing on the notion of πίστις. Paul rallies the Thessalonians by remind- ing them, not only of God’s faithfulness, but of their friends’ belief in them.
Ver. 5. κατευθύναι, «.7.A. Paul no longer (I., 111. 11) entertains the hope of revisiting them soon. ‘‘ God’s love and Christ’s patient endurance’”’ (i.¢., the ὑπομονή which Christ inspires and re-
52 ΠΡΟΣ OESZAAONIKEIS B ΠΙ.
αι Chron. Κύριος Ἱ κατευθύναι ὑμῶν τὰς καρδίας εἰς τὴν " ἀγάπην τοῦ Θεοῦ καὶ
xxix. 18
(LXX), εἰς ὑπομονὴν τοῦ Χριστοῦ.
Ps. Sol.
xii. 6, etc. r Cf. ii.
16; cf-Abbott, Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ, " στέλλεσθαι ὑμᾶς ἀπὸ παντὸς ἀδελφοῦ
Joh.
2033 b. 5 QA Q mr » “ sCflgnat. 7. αὐτοὶ γὰρ οἴδατε πώς δεῖ
ad Polyk. 5 e¢ κα 8
5. ἐν Um, ὃ. t See on
6. " Παραγγέλλομεν δὲ ὑμῖν, ἀδελφοί, ἱ ἐν ὀνόματι τοῦ Κυρίου
Υ ἀτάκτως
Gramm, περιπατοῦντος καὶ μὴ κατὰ τὴν παράδοσιν ἣν παρελάβετε | Tap ἡμών. Y μιμεῖσθαι ἡμᾶς " ὅτι οὐκ ἢἡτακτήσαμεν ᾿ οὐδὲ δωρεὰν ἄρτον ἐφάγομεν παρά τινος, ἀλλ᾽ " ἐν κόπῳ
Ν , θ Ἀ Ny ie: , 9 ἈΝ Q ΝΖ. 5 mn ’ τοι, τ, καὶ μόχθῳ νυκτὸς καὶ ἡμέρας ἐργαζόμενοι πρὸς τὸ μὴ " ἐπιβαρῆσαι
Io. ε ἌΝ Seeon2 τίγρὰ ὕμων" 0. Cor. viii. b 20.
ΟἹ Lave τὰ, “ἃ loafer ”’ (Rutherford).
c
a
different motive). ἈΠ. 5:
, rf c “ 3 ΣΝ Ὁ A ε A TUTTOV δώμεν υμιν εἰς TO μιμεῖσθαι ἡμᾶς.
w Cf. I. i. 6, ii. 14, and on 1 Cor. iv. 16. ΧΟ, 1 9, 2 Cor. xi. 27, Herm. Sim. v. 6, 2, etc., ‘toiling and moiling” (Ruthetoan a Seeoni Cor. ix. 3-18, and 2 Cor. i. 24.
“οὐχ ὅτι οὐκ ἔχομεν ἐξουσίαν, ἀλλ᾽ ἵνα ἑαυτοὺς
Ν Q ΠῚ Θ' IO. καὶ γὰρ OTE μεν
πρὸς ὑμᾶς, τοῦτο παρηγγέλλομεν ὑμῖν, ὅτι “ εἴ τις οὐ θέλει Epyat-
y Cf. lean. “2. ii. ie pi a b See on Phil. iii. 17. Did.
1 Read παρελαβετε, with BG, 43, 73, 80, g, goth., syr.p, arm., etc. (so Lach., Tr., WH, Bj., Weiss), or παρελαβοσαν (ἐλαβοσαν D*) with Α, d, e, 17, etc. (Ti. Ξε Al., Zim. , Lgft., Wohl., Findlay [Tr., WH, Lach., all in marg. ἢ
quires, cf. Ignat. ad. Rom., last words) correspond to the double experience of love and hope in ii. 16. It is by the sense of God’s love alone, not by any mere acquiescence in His will or stoical endurance of it, that the patience and courage of the Christian are sustained. Cf. Ep. Arist., 195, ἐπὶ τῶν καλλίστων πράξεων οὐκ αὐτοὶ κατευθύνομεν τὰ βουλευθέντα - θεὸς δὲ τελειοῖ τὰ πάντων. Connect with ver. 3 and cf. Mrs. Brown- ing’s line, ‘‘I waited with patience, which means almost power”
Vv. 6-16. Injunctions upon church- life and order.
Ver. 6. How necessary it was to pro- mote ὑπομονή with its attendant virtues of diligence and order at Thessalonica, is evident from the authoritative (ἐν év. τ. Κυρίου) tone and the crisp detail of the following paragraph. Napayy., like ἀτά- kTws, has a military tinge (cf. on I. iv. 2, and Dante’s Paradiso, xil. 37-45). oveAX., for his own sake (ver. 14), as well as for yours: a service as well as a precau- tion. The collective action of his fellow- Christians, besides preserving (1 Cor. v. 6) themselves from infection—and no- thing is so infectious as an insubordinate, indolent, interfering spirit —will bring home to him a sense of his fault. Light- foot aptly cites the παράγγελμα of Ger- manicus to his mutinous troops: ‘“ dis- cedite a contactu, ac diuidite turbidos: id stabile ad paenitentiam, id fidei uinculum erit”’ (Tacit. Annal., i. 43).—The ἄτακτοι of 6-12 are excitable members who “ break
the ranks” by stopping work in view of the near advent, and thus not only dis- organise social life but burden the church with their maintenance. The apostles had not been idle or hare-brained en- thusiasts, and their example of an orderly, self-supporting life is held up as a pattern. Insubordination of this kind is a breach of the apostolic standard of the Christian life, and Paul deals sharply with the first symptoms of it. He will not listen to any pious pleas for this kind of conduct.
Ver. 8. Paul’s practice of a trade and emphasis upon the moral discipline of work are quite in keeping with the best Jewish traditions of the period. Compare e.g., the saying of Gamaliel II. (Kiddusch. i. 11): ‘He who possesses a trade is like a fenced vineyard, into which no cattle can enter, εἴς." -- δωρεάν = “ for nothing, gratis”.
Ver. 9. The apostles had the right to be maintained by the church, but in this case they had refused to avail themselves of it. The Thessalonians are not to mis- construe their action.
Ver. 10. Precept as well as example