t 3. THE DATE OF THE EPISTI,E. This Epistle was evidently written shortly after the First. Silas and Timothy, as in the First Epistle, are conjoined with Paul in the salutation, ctnd were consequently still in his company when he wrote this Epistle. But when Paul left Corinth, we are not informed that these two fellow- wurkers accompanied him (Acts xvii. 8); nor, from what appears, were they ever afterwards both together with him. Timothy, we are informed, rejoined Paul at Ephesus (Acts xix. 22); but there is no further mention of Silas in the Acts of the Apostles. B,sides, the relations and wants of the Church are similar to those which are presupposed in the First Epistle; similar commendations, warnings, instructions, and prayers are contained in both Epistles; the only difference being what the lapse of a few montht1 might effect in the character and conduct of the Thessalonian Church. A closer indication of time is supposed to be contained in oh. iii. 2, where the apostle entreats the Thessalonians to pray for him that he might be delivered from unreasonable and wicked men-evidently from his unbeliev- ing Jewish opponents-from which it has been inferred that the outbreak of Jewish hatred and fanaticism, when the apostle was dragged before Gallio, was about to take place. At all events, time must be allowed for further information concerning the Church of Thessalonica to have reached the apostle, for the progress which the Thessalonians made in faith and love, and for the further development of the error concerning the advent. We cannot be wrong in fixing the time of the composition of this Epistlo to the later part of Paul's residence in Corinth, or to the close of A.D. 53. Calvin is undoubtedly mistaken when he supposes that this Epistle was written during the last journey of Paul to Jerusalem, suppo~ing that the "unreasonable and wicked men" were the Judaizing Christians who dogged his steps. Some-Grotius, Ewald, Laurent, Baur, Davidson (2nd edit.)--reverse the order of the Epistles, an<l suppose that this Second Epistle was in reality the First. But the reasons which they give for this opi11icm are without weight. The mark of genuineness, at the close of the Epistle, was given in consequence of the existence of a spurious Epistle ( oh. ii. 2), and not because it was the first Epistle which the apostle wrote. The Second Epistle presupposes the First. 'l'he First Epistle describes how the Thes- 1:,alonians received the Word of God, whilst the Second Epistle mentions their progress in faith, love, and patience. The First Epistle treats of the uncertainty of the ad vent; the Second Epistle corrects the misapprehension of the Thessalonians concerning that uncertainty. The First Epistle advert.a to the 1:,pirit of disorder, the germs of which the apostle ~aw in the Thes- salonian Church; the Second Epistle reb\lkes this spirit still more sharply, as the1:,e germs had developed and borne percicious fruit. The First Epistle had given the Theeealonians oommandruenta to be obeyed; and, in the t1 INTRODUCTION 'l'O THE SECOND 'l'HESSALONIANS.
Second E1,istle, the apostle exhorts them to hol<l. the traditions whiob he had delivered to tl-..em, whether by word or his Epistle. The plaoe of writ.ing was Corinth. The n .. te at the end of the Epistle, "The Second Epistle to the Thessalonians was written from Athens," 1tltho11gh found in very ancient manuscripts, is undoubtedly erroneous; so also are other statements which refer the composition of this Epistle to Berrna, Laudicea, or Rome. This, then, is the second of Paul's extant Epistles.
§ 4. THE PECULIARITIES OF THE EPISTLB. The great peculiarity of this Epistle-that which distinguishes it from all Paul's other Epistles, and imparts to it a peculiar importance, and at the same time renders its exposition a matter of great difficulty-is the prediction of the man of sin, contained in the st,cond chapter (vers. 1-12). This section is distingui~hed from all the othe:r writings of Paul, and is closely allied to the prophecies of Daniel and the apocalyptic visions of .John. Here the apostle glances into the future, and predicts what is to happen in the latter days. There are othe-.· portions of his Epistles in which he refers to what will occur in the last days, and at the period of the manifestation of the isons of God (2 Tim. iii. 1-5; Rom. viii. 19-24), and he also foretells the full conversion of both Jews and Gentiles to the faith of Jesus ( Rom. xi. 25); but this is the only passage in all his Epistles where a detailed prophecy is given. This prediction of the man of sin, as already observed, had peculiar attractions to the early Church suffering from persecution; and it has been the subject of numerous dissertations in modern times; its very obscurity being one cause of thEI interest attached to it, and of the amount of ingenious labour expended on its elucidatioa. THE SECOND EPISTLE OF