bmrclZ^.^e;;;;;;tat;on';;n-suS;-afoint would not be un- natural, and a careful comparison of 6i>' witn . 1
■I Co 510 will show
*Eii5^:i^— d of 6- may have been due tothe prSce of disorderiiness and dissension (5»^>5), and would be natural, even without such a supposition (cf. Col 4'").
The objections, then, can be fairly met, w'^l^ on the ntlier hand the style, tlie character of the writer, the many points of contact with 2 Cor., the simplicity and directness of the thought, the primi- tive sta<'e of Church organization, the state of the spiritual gifts, the question about the dead which must have arisen very early in any Cluirch, the absence of any motive for forgery, the apparent discrepancies with the Acts, the improbaVulity that a later forger would put language in St. Pauls mouth which at least seems to imply that he ex- pected the Parousia in his lifetime, — all these carry conviction of its genuineness. Tlie argu- ments on both sides are well stated in Holtz- mann {I.e.], and the genuineness well defended by Jowett, Weizsiioker {Das Apostol. Zeitalter, p. 250) Jiilicher (Einl.^ pp. 41^5), and most fully by von Soden {SK, 1S85), and Bornemann, §5.
vi. Integrity. —The integrity of the Epistle has been questioned both on a large and on a
small scale. ..... . . ,
(1) Pierson and 'S.ahsr (Veri.nmiha, Amsterdam, 1S8G) treat it as a composition of two authors. The hrst was a pre-Christian' Jewish writer, writ- in" a hortatory address to Gentiles before the hrst coming of the Messiah to foretell His advent, and to exhort them to live a life of Jewish morality. The second was a Christian bishop, whose date is not given, named Paul, who inserted into the .lewish treatise a few Christian phrases and a justiHcation of his own motives and preaching. This analysis is based upon the variety of tone- now that of an authoritative proiihet, now that of a humble pastor— the want of close senuence of thought between the paragraphs, and the diUerence in the usage of particular words {Vj/i^pa, ypi)yopeiv), and the scantiness of specially Christian teaching. But the criticism is pedantic, and often inconsist- ent with itself in details: it requires from a letter tlie exact structure of a scientific treatise, and allows no play to varieties of mood and thought within one writer's mind. .
(2) A list of suggestions of interpolations on a smaller scale will be found in Clemen, Die Em- 'heitliehkcit der Paul. Briffe (Gottingen, 1894). 'I'he most imporUnt attect 2»- " and 5-''. The objection to 2"- " a-s a whole is groundless, the attack on the'jews being as natural to St. Paul as it had been to St. Peter or St. Stephen (Ac 2^ 3" T-;) : but v.'*= l!pOa.ae . . . WXos might be an editorial comment added after the destruction of Jerusalem, to point out the fullilment of St. Paul's words {ds t4 avciTr\ripw<rai) ; yet, as we have seen, they are quite natural in St. Paul's own mouth at the time.
5" mi.'ht also be a later addition, emphasizing the imliortance of the Epistle ; but there, too a natural reason for the words is to be foiiiid in the circumstances of the moment (cf. Schmiedel Hdrom. ad loe. ; Mottatt, Histor. A 1 , p. .02.j).
The chief questions of textual criticism attect the reading in 2' (see Westcott-Hort, M,n. App p. 128) »• " 33 4>- « 52- {ib. p. 144) ♦.
LlTERATOIil!.-Of ancient commentators, Chrysostom, though discu^iv^^s excellent in entering into 'he w-nters point ol v^ew: and the moral homilies-e.!?. those on fnen.l,lip(lTh.^ Tn the tear of hell (1 Th 4I8, 2 Th 18), on intercession (2 Th i-)- ^e very sprrituai and pointed. Theodore of Mopsuestia («rc. «6 Id )C more of the modern exeget.cal instwict, and ex. Plains the exact meaning and the historical ""dpracfcal refer- ences well but at tiniel forces the langua-e to suit his own v"ews TheXet, whUe dependent on these tw-o, shows inde. Dcidence of iudginent. His notes are de..r and sensible, and Te is especially Sreful to draw out the dogmatic mlerences of
'"of'^niodera writers, Jowett, A. J. Mason (Ellicott's Comm. /^ En,UshRm<iers). Bishop Alexander (Spmktrt Comm.), and J Dennev (£x-pwi(or'» iJiWO are most interesting on Introduc-
h^ he i/dwmTiVr, and, most completely of all, in Borneniann-
vf;./on Tra^ oT7r (O.V^)^ and on 2.« by K. Zimmer in tThfol^^srh^^tudien d: B Weiss dargebrachf (Gottingen. 1S97) ; Lkwith, Introd. to Thest. Epp. (1902). ^^^ ^^^^
THESSALONI&NS, SECOND EPISTLE TO THE.—
i. Date and Circumstances.
ii. Analvsis.
iii. Literarj- Dependence, iv. Authorship.
V. Integrity. vi. Value.
Literature.
i. Date and Circumstances. -The genuine- ness of this Epistle is more contested than that of any other attributed to St. Paul, except the Pas- torals. If it is not genuine, the exact date and circumstances are merely a hterarj' setting, of little historical value. Yet, even so, a dehnite situation was in the ^vriter's mmd and must be
examined. , .^ .. a„«o»
The following points fix that situation. Appar- ently the temple is still standing {i^i.e. the date is before A.D^O. Further, P^"!;, ^''^^i^""^.', "^"j Timothy, after having founded the Church at Thessalonica (2^ 3'-") and written a letter probably IT^ss^to it (2» and nerh. 2» 3-), are stUl working to-ethe; (1') in some place where they are thwarted b/perve.se and malicious men (3'^), and where the..e a?e other churches in the neighbourhood ( ) 1 h 3 will suit exactly the time ot Ac IS'" ' (cf. 2 Co 1 w th 1^) : late in the stay at Coiinth, but probabl.v before the appeal to Gallio had stopped he Jewis^i persecution. At this time news about the T •essa- onian Church reached them at Corinth (3» caoi.- ou.e.) ; perhaps brought by the messenger implied in I Th 3^ perhaps by the bearer of 1 pess. on his return, perhaps by some chance pa-^^f "^y • J'}?^ were stUl exposed to persecution, and were std^ bravely enduring it; but there w^re tendencies o disorder and insubordination , idlers ^vere presu .^ in-' on the charity of their neighbours; and there was a tendency to excitement catiscd by an expc.> tation of the sneedy setting-in of ' the 'laj °/ the Lord'; spiritual utterances, not duly tested (1 Hi S^-s") increased the expectation ; sayings of 1 aul, Silvanus, and Timothy were exaggerated to coun- tenance it ; possibly a for-ed letter m their name wasdrcilated, or Iniore likely) the language of 1 Th 4 5 was distorted in the same interest (- ). The three teachers feel that their converts must be praised and comforted, yet stimulated and stead led 'riiey write a common letter-always '" the p mal, except that once one of them, probably Paul in- tervenes with a spe.!ial appeal to hU own teaching