On the other hand, the internal evidence derived from the character of the epistle itself is so strong that it may fairh' be called irresistible. It would be impossi- ble to enter into the question of style here, but the read- er may be referred to the Introduction of Jowett, who has handled this subject very fully and satisfactorily.
THESSALOXIANS
344
THESSALONIANS
An equally strong argument may be drawn also from the mutter contained in the epistle. Two instances of this must sulHce. In the first place, the fineness and delicacy of touch with which the apostle's relations to- wards his Tliessalonian converts are ilrawn — his yearn- ing to sec them, his anxiety in the absence of Tiinotliy, and his heart-felt rejoicing at the good news— are quite beyond the read) of the clumsy ft)rgeries of the early Church. In the second place, the writer uses language which, however it may be explained, is certainly color- ed by the anticipation of the speedy advent of the Lord — language natural enough on the apostle's own lips, but (piite incduceivalilo iu a forgery written after his death, when time bail tiisappointed these anticiiiations, and when the revival or mention of them would serve no purpose and might seem to discredit the apostle. Such a position would be an anachronism in a writer of the 2(1 century.
The genuineness of this epistle was first questioned by Schrader (Ajxislel I'duliis), who was followed by Baur {J'aiiluii, p. 480). The latter writer has elaborated and systematized the attack. The arguments which he alleges in favor of his view are briefiy controverted by Liinemann, and more at length, and with great fair- ness, by Jowett. The following is a summary of Baur's arguments, (a.) He attributes great weight to the general character of the epistle, the difference of style, and especially the absence of distinctive Pauline doc- trines— a peculiarity which will be remarked upon and explained below (§ iii). (b.) In the mention of the "wrath" overtaking the Jewish people (ii, 16), Baur sees an allusion to the destruction of Jerusalem, and therefore a proof of the later date of the epistle. The real significance of these words will be considered below in discussing the Apocalyptic passage in the second epistle, (c.) He urges tlie contradictions to the ac- count in the Ads — a strange argument, surely, to be brought forward by Baur, who postdates and discredits the authority of that narrative. The real extent and bearing of these divergences will be considered below (§ iv). {d.) He discovers references to the Acts, which show that the epistle was written later. It will be seen, however, that the coincidences are subtle and in- cidental, and the points of divergence and 2^>'i>iia-facie contradictions, which Baur himself allows, and indeed insists upon, are so numerous as to preclude the suppo- sition of copying. Schleiermacher {Eiiileif. ins N. T. p. 150) rightly infers the independence of the epistle on these groinids. (e.) He supposes passages in this epis- tle to have been borrowed from the acknowledged let- ters of Paul. Tlie resemblances, however, which he points out are not greater than, or, indeed, so great as, those in other epistles, and bear no traces of imita- tion.
II. Date — This has been approximately determined in the following way: During the course of his second missionary journey, which began in the year 47, Paul founded the Church of Thessalonica. Leaving Thessa- lonica, he passed on to Berrea. From Bera-a he went to Athens, and from Athens to Corinth (Acts xvii, 1- xviii, 18). With this visit to Corinth, which extends over a period of two years or thereabouts, his second missionarj' journey closed, for from Corinth he return- ed to Jerusalem, paying only a brief visit to Ephesus on the way (ver. '20, 2 1 ). There is some uncertainty about the movements of Paul's companions at this time (see below); but, whatever view we adopt on this point, it seems indisputaljle that, when this epistle was written, Silvanus and Timothy were in the apostle's company (1 Thess. i,l; comp. 2 Thess.i, 1) — a circumstance which confines the date to the second missionary journey, for, though Timothy was with him on several occasions af- terwards, the name of Silvanus appears for the last lime in connection with Paid during this visit to Corinth (Acts xviii, 5; 2 Cor. i, 19). The epistle, then, must have been written in the interval between Paid's leav- ing Thessalonica and the close of his residence at Cor-
inth, i. e. within the years 48-51. The following con- siderations, however, narrow the limits of the possible date still more closely. (1.) When Paul wrote, he had already visited, and probably left, Athens (1 Thess. iii, 1). (2.) Having made two unsuccessful attemjits to revisit Thessalonica, he had des])atclied Timothy to obtain tidings of his converts there. Timothy had re- turned before the a|)ostle wrote (ver. 2, (5). (3.) Paul speaks of the Thessalonians as "ensamples to all that believe in Macedonia and Achaia," adding that " in ev- ery place their faith to God-ward was spread abroad" (i, 7, 8) — language prompted, indeed, by the overflowing of a grateful heart, ami tlierefore not to be rigorously pressed, but still implying some lapse of time at least. (4.) There are several traces of a growth and progress in the condition and circumstances of the Thessalonian Church. Perhaps the mention of "rulers" in the Church (v, 12) ought not to be adduced as proving this, since some organization would be necessary frt)m the very beginning. But there is other evidence besides. Ques- tions had arisen relating to the state of those who had fallen asleep in Christ, so that one or more of the Thes- salonian converts must have died in the interval (iv, 13-18). The storm of persecution which the apostle had discerned gathering on the horizon bad already burst upon the Christians of Thessalonica (iii, 4, 7). Ir- regularities had crept in and sullied the infant purity of the Church (iv, 4; v, 14). The lapse of a few months, however, would account for these changes, and a much longer time cannot vvell be allowed. For (5) the letter was evidently written by Paul immediately on the re- turn of Timothy, in the fulness of his gratitude for the joyful tidings (iii, G). Moreover (6), the second epistle also was written before he left Corinth, and there must have been a sufficient interval between the two to al- low of the growth of fresh difliculties, and of such com- munication between the apostle and his converts as the case supposes. We shall not be far wrong, therefore, in placing the writing of this epistle early in Paul's res- idence at Corinth, a few months after he had founded the Church at Thessalonica, i. e. during the year 49.