II. Dale. — There is the strongest reason for believing that this second epistle was written very soon after the first, and at the same place, viz. Corinth, A.D. cir. 50. The circnmstances of the apostle while writing the one seem very much the same as they were while writing the other; nor do those of the Thessalonians jiresent an\^ greater difference than such as the infiuences refer- red to in the second epistle may be supjiosed in a very short time to have produced. What seems almost to decide the question is that, while writing the second epistle, the apostle had Timothy and Silas still with him. Now. after he left Corinth, it was not for a long time that either of these individuals was found again in his company (Acts xviii, 18; comp. xix, 22): and with regard to one of them, Silas, there is no eviilence that he and Paul were ever together at any subsequent period.
It will be seen presently that the teaching of the second epistle is corrective of, or rather supplemental to, that of the first, and therefore presupposes it. IMore- over, the first epistle bears on its face evidence that it is the first gush of his affectionate yearnings towards his converts after his departure from. Thessali>nica ; while, on the other hand, the second epistle contains a direct allusion to a previous letter, which may suitably be referred to the first — '■ Hold fast the tradition which ye were taught either by word or by letter from us" (ii, 15). We can scarcely be wrong, therefore, in main- taining the received order of the two epistles. It is due, however, to the great names of Grotius and of Ewald {.Tahrh. iii, 250; Sendschr. p. 16), who are follow- ed in this by Baur, Hilgenfeld. Laurent, and Davidson, to mention that they reverse the order, idacing the sec- ond e])istle before the first in point of time — on different groinids, indeed, but both etpially insufficient to disturb the traditional order, supported as it is by the consider- ations already alleged.
III. Occasion and Desiyu. — In the former letter we
THESSALONIANS
349
THESSALONIANS
saw chiefly the outpouring of strong personal affection occasioned by the renewal of the apostle's intercourse with the Thessalonians, and the doctrinal and hortato- ry portions are there subordinate. In the second epis- tle, on the other hand, his leading motive seems to have been the desire of correcting errors iu tlie Church of Thessalonica. We notice two points especially which call forth his rebuke.
1, It seems that the anxious expectation of the Lord's advent, instead of subsiding, hail gained ground since the writing of the first epistle. They now looked upon this great crisis as imminent, and [heir d;iily vocations were neglected in consequence. There were expres- sions in the first epistle which, taken by themselves, might seem to favor this view; and, at all events, such was falsely represented to be the apostle's doctrine. Tins notion some inculcated as a truth speciall}' con- firmed to them by the Spirit; others advocated it as part of the apostolic doctrine ; and some claimed for it the specific support of Paul in a letter (ii, 2). Wheth- er the letter here referred to is the apostle's former epis- tle to the Thessalonians or one forged in his name b_v some keen and unscrupulous advocates of the notion above referred to is uncertain. The latter opinion has been very generally adopted from the time of Chrysos- tom downwards, and is certainly somewhat counte- nanced by the apostle's statement in the close of the epistle as to his autograph salutation being the mark of a genuine letter from him (iii, 17). At the same time, it must be admitted that the probability of such a thing being done by any one at Thessalonica is, un- der all the circumstances of the case, not very strong. He now writes to soothe this restless spirit and quell their apprehensions by showing that many things must happen first, and that the end was not yet. referring to his oral teaching at Thessalonica in confirmation of this statement (ii, 1-12 ; iii, 6-12).
2. The apostle had also a personal ground of com- plaint. His authority^ was not denied by any, but it was tampered with, and an unauthorized use was made of his name. It is difficult to ascertain the exact cir- cumstances of the case from casual and indirect allu-- sions, and indeed we may perhaps infer from the vague- ness of the apostle's own language tliat he himself was not in possession of definite information; but, at all events, his suspicions were aroused. Designing men might misrepresent his teaching in two ways, either by suppressing what he actually had written or said, or by forging letters and in other ways representing him as teaching what he had not taught. Paul's language hints in different places at both these modes of false dealing. He seems to have entertained suspicions of this dishonesty even when he wrote the first epistle. At the close of that epistle he binds the Thessalonians by a solemn oath, "in the name of the Lord," to see that the epistle is read "to all the holy brethren" (v, 27) — a charge unintelligible in itself, and only to be explain- ed by supposing some misgivings in the apostle's mind. Before the second epistle was written his suspicions seem to have been confirmed, for there are two pas- sages which allude to these misrepresentations of his teaching. In the first of these he tells them in vague language, which may refer equally well to a false inter- pretation put upon his own words in the first epistle, or to a supplemental letter forged in his name, "'not to be troubled either by spirit or by word or by letter, as coming from us, as if the day of the Lord were at hand." They are not to be deceived, he adds, by any one, what- ever means he employs {Kara }ii)C'tva rpoirov, ii, 2,3). In the second passage, at the close of the epistle, he says, "The salutation of Paul with mine own hand, which is a token in every epistle: so I write" (iii, 17) — evidently a precaution against forgery. With these two passages should be combined the expression in iii. 14, from which we infer that he now entertained a fear of direct opposition — " If any man obey not our word conveyed by our epistle, note that man."