1 Thessalonians 2

1 Thessalonians 2:1-99

(2) The Visit of the Missionaries (2:1-12)

The account of the visit (2:1-12; cf. 1:5, 8a, 9a) takes the form of a self-defence against insinuations made by Jews. With the same subtlety that led them to accuse the missionaries of preaching another king, namely, Jesus (Acts 17:7), the Jews were insinuating that the renegade Paul, like many a pagan itinerant preacher, was self-deluded, sensual, and deceiving, delivering his message in flattering words as a foil to cover selfish greed and requiring honour to be paid him. Paul’ s failure to return lent some colour to these assertions, and the converts became anxious. In his defence, Paul, speaking mainly for himself but including his associates, conscious both of the integrity of his motives and of the unselfishness of his love, and aware of the straightforwardness of his religious appeal, reminds his readers that he came not empt-yhanded but with a gospel and a courageous power inspired by God (vv. 1-2). Wherever he goes, he preaches as one with no delusion about the truth, for his gospel is of God; with no consciousness of moral aberration, for God had tested him and commissioned him to preach; with no intention to deceive, for he is responsible to God who knows his motives (vv. 3-4). Furthermore, when he was in Thessalonica, he never used cajoling speech, as the readers know, never used the gospel to exploit his ambitions, and never required honour to be given him, although he had the right to receive it as an apostle of Christ (vv. 5-6).

On the contrary, he waived his right, becoming just one of them, not an apostle but a babe, and waived it in love for his dear children. Instead of demanding honour, he worked incessantly to support himself while he preached, in order to save the readers from any expense on his account (vv. 7-9). His sincerity is evident from the pious, righteous, and blameless conduct which they saw in him (v. 10). Not as a flatterer but as a father, he urged them one and all, by encouragement and by solemn appeal, to behave as those who are called of God into his kingdom and glory (vv. 11-12).

The disposition of 2:1-12 is clearly marked by γά (vv. 1, 3, 5-6) and ἀλλα (vv. 2, 4, 7-12) and by the parallel comparisons attached to λαλοῦμε (v. 4) and ὑμῶ (v. 8). The three points of v. 3 are met in the clause with ἀλλα (v. 4); and the three points of vv. 5-6 are met in vv. 7-12, the γά (v. 9) resuming and further elucidating ἀλλα (v. 7); thus ζητοῦντεςδόξα is considered in vv. 7-9, πλεονεξί in v. 10, and κολακί in vv. 11-12.— A careful exegesis of 2:3-8 is given by Zimmer in Theol. Studien B. Weiss dargebracht, 1897, 248-273.

1Indeed you yourselves know, brothers, that the visit we paid you has not proved to be void of power. 2On the contrary, although we had previously undergone suffering and insult in Philippi, as you know, still we in the power of our God took courage to tell you the gospel of God in the midst of much opposition.

3Indeed the appeal we are wont to make comes not from delusion nor from impurity nor with any purpose to deceive. 4On the contrary, as we stand approved by God to be intrusted with the gospel, so we are wont to tell it, concerned not with pleasing men but God who tests our hearts.

5Indeed, we never once came before you with cajoling address, as you know, or with a pretext inspired by greed, God is witness, 6or requiring honour of men— from you or from others, although we were ever able to be in a position of honour as Christ’ s apostles. 7On the contrary, we became babes in the midst of you— as a nurse cherishes her own children 8so we yearned after you, glad to share with you not only the gospel of God but our very selves as well, for you had become dear to us. 9You remember of course, brothers, our toil and hardship; night and day we worked for our living rather than put a burden on any of you while we preached to you the gospel of God. 10You are witnesses and God as well how piously and righteously and blamelessly we behaved in the sight of you believers. 11As you know, we were urging you individually, as a father his own children, both by encouragement 12and by solemn appeal, to walk worthily of God who calls you into his own kingdom and glory.

1. αὐτοὶγὰροἴδατεκτλ . With an explanatory γά , Paul resumes ὁποίανεἴσοδονἔσχομε (1:9) and takes up explicitly the defence already touched upon in 1:5 (which is strikingly parallel to 2:1-2). Addressing the readers affectionately as (ἀδελφοι in 1:4), he recalls to their knowledge that the visit which he paid them was not empty , meaning not that it was fruitless, for the welcome by the converts (1:6) is not resumed until v. 13; but that, as the ἀλλα cause certifies, the visit was not empty-handed, was not, as 1:5 says, “ in word only but also in power,” for he came with a gospel of which God is the author, and preached with a courage which was due to the power of God operating in him . That he thus preached, notwithstanding recent experiences of persecution and insult in Philippi and great opposition in Thessalonica, is further proof of the divine inspiration both of his message and of his power in proclaiming it.

γά resumes and explains 1:5 (Bengel) by way of 1:9 where περὶἡμῶ is put significantly at the beginning. On αὐτοὶγὰροἴδατ , see 1:5; and on the construction οἴδατετὴ … ὅτ cf. 1 Corinthians 3:20. The article is repeated as in 1:8 . The perfect γέγονε with which the aorists (1:5, 2:5, 7, 10) are to be contrasted denotes completed action; the facts of the visit are all in, and the readers may estimate it at its full value. ἡμῶ shows that Paul includes Silas and Timothy with him in the defence.

2. ἀλλὰπροπαθόντεςκτλ Using a strong adversative (ἀλλα ; cf. vv. 4, 7), he describes positively the character of his visit and defines οὐκενη (v. 1). Equipped with a gospel inspired by God (cf. vv. 4, 8, 9, and see note on τὸεὐαγγέλιονἡμῶ 1:5) and emboldened to preach by the indwelling power of their God , the visit of the missionaries was not devoid of power. Paul had already told them of his persecution and especially of the illegal treatment previously experienced at Philippi, and had mentioned the matter with feeling; for, as Lft. remarks, it was not the physical distress that disturbed him but the insult offered to his Roman citizenship (Acts 16:22 ff.). He recalls the fact now (καθὼςοἴδατ ; cf. 1:5) for apologetic reasons (see above on v. 1).

The aorist participles are of antecedent action and probably concessive. προπάσχει (only here in Gk. Bib.) is one of the compounds with προ which Paul is fond of using (3:4, Galatians 3:1) even when there is no classic or Lxx precedent (e. g. Galatians 3:8, Galatians 3:17, Galatians 1:2, 2 Corinthians 8:6, 2 Corinthians 8:10, 2 Corinthians 8:9:5). ὑβρίζει , which Ruther translates “ to treat illegally,” occurs only here in Paul and rarely in Lxx— παρρησιάζεσθα (here and Ephesians 6:20 in Paul; frequent in Acts) denotes here, as λαλῆσα shows, not “ to speak boldly” but “ to be bold,” “ to take courage” (cf. Sir. 6:11), fiduciam sumpsimus (Calv.). The aorist may be inceptive, “ we became bold.” According to Radermacher (Neutestamentliche Grammatik, 1911, 151), this ἐπαρρησιασάμεθ is only a more resonant and artificial expression for ἐτολμήσαμε (cf. Philippians 1:14) which an Attic author would have rather used, since ἐπαρρησιασάμεθαλαλῆσα is ultimately a tautology. Paul does not elsewhere use πρό with λαλεῖ , but this directive preposition instead of a dative is natural after verbs of saying (cf. 2 Corinthians 6:11, 2 Corinthians 13:7, Philippians 4:6).

ἐντῷθεῷἡμῶ The missionaries are “ in God” (see on ἐνθεῷ 1:1) because God is in them (ὑπ ʼ ἐκείνουἐνδυναμούμενο Theophylact; cf. Philippians 4:13). Characteristic of our epistles (3:9, II 1:11, 12; 1 Corinthians 6:11) and of Revelation (4:11, 5:10, 7:3 ff. 12:10, 19:1 ff.) is ὁθεὸςἡμῶ The ἡμῶ here (cf. τὰςκαρδίαςἡμῶ v. 4) seems to refer primarily to the God whom Paul and his two associates preach (hence ἡμῶ , not μο Romans 1:8, 1 Corinthians 1:4 (ACD) 2 Corinthians 12:21, Philippians 1:3, Philippians 4:19, Philemon 1:4), but does not exclude the further reference to the converts and other believers who feel themselves in common touch with the Christian God, our God Father (1:3, 3:11, 13, Galatians 1:4, Philippians 4:20). There may be in ὁθεὸςἡμῶ a latent contrast with pagan idols and deities (1:9).

Both κύριοςὁθεὸςἡμῶ (Mark 12:29, Acts 2:39, Revelation 19:6) and ὁθεὸςἡμῶ (Hebrews 12:29, Luke 1:78, Jude 1:4, 2 Peter 1:1) are frequent in Lxx (e. g. Deuteronomy 11:22, Ps. 43:20, Psalms 97:3, Isaiah 40:3, Jeremiah 16:19, Jeremiah 49:4 Sap. 15:1 Baruch (passim); cf. πατὴρἡμῶ Tob. 13:4) and express Israel’ s sense of devotion to her God, often in opposition tacit or expressed to the gods of other nations . For ἐντῷθεῷμο , cf. 2 Reg. 32:30 = Ps. 17:30.

ἑνπολλῷἀγῶν . “ In the midst of much opposition” or “ in great anxiety” (Vulg in multa sollicitudine). Whether persecution is meant, as the reference to the experiences at Philippi at first suggests, or inward trouble, as the change from θλίψε (1:6) to ἀγῶν (cf. Hebrews 12:1 Sap. 10:12) may indicate, is uncertain.

Most comm. find here as in Philippians 1:30 a reference to outward troubles, whether persecutions (Ephr.), danger, or untoward circumstances of all sorts (e. g. De W., Lü n., Ell., Lft., Mill., Born). Since, however, ἀγώ in Colossians 2:1 refers to anxiety (cf. also ἀγωνίζεσθα 1 Corinthians 9:25, Colossians 1:29, Colossians 4:12 and συναγωνίζεσθα Romans 15:30), it is not impossible that inward struggle is meant (so Fritzsche apud Lillie and Dob.). In later Gk. ἀγώ tends to mean “ anxiety” . Chrys., who speaks first of danger and then quotes 1 Corinthians 2:3, apparently understands ἀγώ of both external and internal trouble; so Lillie: “ at least this restriction (to the external) in the present case must be justified from the context, not from Paul’ s use of the word elsewhere.”

3-4. The self-defence is continued with direct reference to the insinuation that the missionaries were of a kind with the wandering sophists, impostors, and propagandists of religious cults. First negatively (as v. 1) it is said: “ Indeed (γά as v. 1) our appeal never comes from delusion, nor from impurity, nor is it ever calculated to deceive.” Then positively (ἀλλα as v. 2): “ On the contrary, we are wont to speak as men approved by God to be intrusted with the gospel, concerned not with pleasing men but God who tests our motives.” The three specifications of v. 3 are not replied to formally but are nevertheless adequately met: Not ἐκπλάνη for the gospel is in origin divine not human; not ἐξἀκαθαρσίας , for the gospel has been committed to tested missionaries; and not ἐνδόλῳ , for our responsibility is not to men but to God who sounds the depths of our inner lives. ἡπαράκλησιςἡμῶ . “ The appeal we make,” taking up λαλῆσαιτὸεὐαγγέλιοντοῦθεοῦ . παράκλησι (often in Paul) may mean “ summons,” “ address,” “ encouragement” (1, 2 Mac.; cf. II 2:16) “ comfort” (so usually in Lxx). In this connection, however, as λαλῆσα (v. 2) and λαλοῦμε (v. 4) make evident, the address itself, not the content (διδαχη Chrys.), is meant; hence “ appeal” (Lft.), and that too in virtue of ἐντῷθεῷἡμῶ and τὸεὐαγγέλιοντοῦθεου , a religious appeal, not without reference to προφητεί (5:20, 1 Corinthians 14:1, 1 Corinthians 14:39; Romans 12:8).

ἐστί is to be supplied in view of λαλοῦμε (V. 4). The habitual principle (Bengel) is intended. As the Thess. could have no direct knowledge of Paul’ s custom elsewhere, he does not in vv. 3-4 appeal to them in confirmation (contrast vv. 5 ff).

ἐκπλάνη . Our religious appeal does not come “ from delusion,” for our gospel is of God. πλάν , as δόλῳ shows, is not “ deceit” (active) but “ error” (passive), the state of πλανᾶσθα “ delusion” (Lillie). “ Homo qui errat cannot but be undecided; nor is it possible for him to use boldness without consummate impudence and folly” (Cocceius, quoted by Lillie). οὐδὲἐξἀκαθαρσία . “ Nor does it come from an impure character.” ἀκαθαρσί (elsewhere in N. T. only in Paul, except Matthew 23:27) regularly appears directly with πορνεί or in contexts intimating sexual aberration. Hence here, as 4:7, Romans 6:19, the reference is not to impurity in general, not to covetousness, but to sensuality (Lft.). The traducers of Paul, aware both of the spiritual excitement (5:19 ff.) attending the meeting of Christian men and women and of the pagan emotional cults in which morality was often detached from religion, had subtly insinuated that the missionaries were no better morally than other itinerant impostors. That such propagandists would be repudiated by the official representatives of the cult would aid rather than injure a comparison intended to be as odious as possible.

“ St. Paul was at this very time living in the midst of the worship of Aphrodite at Corinth and had but lately witnessed that of the Cabiri at Thessalonica” (Lft.). The exact nature of this latter cult, the syncretistic form which it assumed, and the ritual which it used are uncertain, but Lightfoot’ s phrase, “ the foul orgies of the Cabiric worship,” may not be too strong. The maligners of Paul may have had some features of this cult in mind when they charged him with ἀκαθαρσί The cult of the κάβιρο or κάβειροθεοι ) originated, it would appear, in Phœ nicia and was carried thence to Lemnos, Samothrace (cf. Herod. 2:51), Macedonia (cf. Lactant. div. instil.

I, 1518 and Bloch, cols. 2533-34) and elsewhere, and became in the Hellenic-Roman period second in importance only to the Eleusinian mysteries. That it was well known in the seaport town of Thessalonica. is evident from coins and from Jul. Firmicus Maternus (de errore prof. relig. 11). On the Cabiri, see Lft. Bib. Essays, 257 ff. where the older literature including Lobeck’ s Aglaophanes, 1202 ff. is given; also the articles by Hild (Cabires in La Grande Encyc. 606-610) and by Bloch (in Roscher, 1897), Megaloi Theoi, cols. 2522-2541.

οὐδὲἐνδόλῳ . “ Nor is it with craft, with any purpose to deceive,” for they are ever engaged in pleasing not men but God. Over against the ἐ of origin, ἐ denotes the atmosphere of the appeal. It is not clothed with deception or deceit, that is, with any deliberate intention to deceive (Ell.). This charge may have suggested itself to the critics in view of the devices of sophists and the tricks of jugglers and sorcerers (cf. Chrys.) by which they sought to win the attention and the money of the crowd (cf. 2 Corinthians 12:16).

The reading οὐδε before ἐνδόλῳ is well attested, but the οὔτ of KL after an οὐδε has a parallel in Galatians 1:12 (BEKL); cf. Bl 77:10. Note in 1 Mac. ἐνδόλῳ (1:30), μετάδόλο (7:10), and δόλῳ (13:17).

4. With ἀλλα (as v. 2), the origin and purpose of the λαλεῖ are positively affirmed. λαλοῦμε “ we are wont to speak” resumes ἡπαράκλησιςἡμω (v. 3) and λαλῆσα (v. 2). As already noted, the points made in v. 3 are reckoned with: The gospel is of God, hence they are not deluded; they were commissioned to preach, hence their character is not unclean; they are pleasing not men but God, hence their appeal is not meant to deceive.

On the correlation καθὼ … οὓτω 2 Corinthians 1:5, 2 Corinthians 8:6, 2 Corinthians 10:7, etc.; on οὐχὡ … ἀλλα “ not as such who … but as such who,” cf. Colossians 3:22.— Like Apelles (Romans 16:10), they are δόκιμοιἐνΧριστῷ their λαλεῖ is ἐντῷθεῷ not ἐνδόλῳ — ἀρέσκοντε (Galatians 1:10) indicates action going on; on the Pauline ἀρέσκεινθεῷ (2:15, 4:1, Romans 8:8; 1 Corinthians 7:32), cf. Numbers 23:27, Psalms 68:32; on ἀρέσκεινἀνθρώποι , cf. Galatians 1:10; on ἀνθρωπάρεσκο (Colossians 3:22 = Ephesians 6:6), cf. Psalms 52:6.— On ου (Galatians 4:8, Philippians 3:3) with participle instead of μη (v. 15), see BMT 485.— δοκιμάζει =“ prove,” “ test” (of metals Sir. 2:6, 34:25), as in Romans 1:28, Sir. 39:34; on the perfect “ approve after test,” cf. Sir. 42:8, 2 Mal 4:3.

τῷδοκιμάζοντιτὰςκαπδίαςἡμῶ . As the motive is in question, Paul refers to God as one who sounds the depths of the hearts, the inner life (Mark 7:21). ἡμῶ refers to Paul and his associates (contrast ὑμῶ 3:13, II 2:17, 3:5).

In Psalms and Jeremiah, δοκιμάζει of God’ s testing is frequent (cf. also Sap. 3:6); e. g. Jeremiah 12:3 καίσύ , κύριε , γινώσκειςμε , δεδοκίμακαςτὴνκαρδίανμουἐναντίονσο ; cf. also Psalms 16:3, and with the possessive omitted, Jeremiah 11:20, Jeremiah 17:10.

5. γά parallel to γά in vv. 1, 3, resumes γά (v. 3) and further explains that what is true in general (vv. 3-4) of the principles of the missionaries, about which the readers could not know directly (hence no appeal to their knowledge in vv. 3-4), is also true of their behaviour in Thessalonica of which the readers are directly aware (hence the καθὼςοἴδατ as in VV. 1-2). As in vv. 1, 3, the γά clause is negative; and again as in v. 3, there are three separate charges denied, each one being phrased differently: not ἐνλόγῳκολακία , not προφάσειπλεονεξία , and not ζητοῦντεςδόξα . The points are similar to but not identical with those made in v. 3: ἐνλόγῳκολακία corresponds, indeed, rather closely to ἐνδόλῳ , but προφάσειπλεονεξία is less specific than ἐξἀκαθαρσία and is distinct from it in meaning, and ζητοῦντεςδόξα is quite different from ἐκπλάνη . Following the γά clause (vv. 5-6) is the ἀλλα ʼ clause (vv. 7-12; cf. vv. 2, 4) in which the three points of vv. 5-6, are positively answered,— ζητοῦντεςδόξα in vv. 7-9, πλεονεξί in v. 10, and κολακί in vv. 11-12.

On οὔτ (vv. 5-6), cf. Romans 8:38 ff. 1 Corinthians 6:9 ff.; on οὔτεγά … οὔτ … ἀλλα cf. Galatians 6:15.— ποτε = “ ever” is common in Paul and Lxx— ἐγενήθημε governs first a dative with ἐ , then a dative without ἐ , and finally a participle . Since γίνεσθα = ἔρχεσθα (1:4), we may render: “ Indeed we never came before you with cajoling address (ἐ as in 1:4), nor using (dative of means) a pretext inspired by greed, nor demanding honour,” etc. (participle of manner). — The ἐ before προφάσε which Tisch, Zim, Weiss retain, is probably to be omitted as conformation to the first ἐ (Bא c WH., Dob.).

ἐνλόγῳκολακία . “ With cajoling address.” λόγο is here (as 1:5) “ speech,” as λαλῆσαι , παράκλησι and λαλοῦμε (vv. 2-4) demonstrate (Lü n.). κολακί is either “ flattery,” the subordination of one’ s self to another for one’ s own advantage; or, as ἐνδόλῳ intimates, “ cajolery,” a word that carries with it the additional notion of deception. The genitive describes the character of the speech. The hearers could tell whether Paul’ s address was straightforward or not; hence καθὼςοἴδατ .

ἐνλόγοιςἐκολάκευέμεκαὶμετὰδόλουδιὰῥημάτωνἐπαίνε (Test. xii, Joshua 4:1). In classic usage (cf. Schmidt, Syn. 1879, III, 438 ff.), αἰκάλλει (not in Gk. Bib.) indicates flattery in the sense of complimentary remarks designed to please; θωπεύει (not in Gk. Bib.) means any kind of subordination by which one gets one’ s own way with another; while κολακεύει (1 Esd. 4:31, Job 19:17 Sap. 14:17) hints at guile, a flattery calculated to deceive; cf. Aristophanes, Eq. 46. ff. ᾔκαλλ ʼ ἐθώπευ ʼ ἐκολάκευ ʼ ἐξηπάτα . κολακί is only here in Gk. Bib. Ell. notes Theophrastus (Char. 2) and Aristotle (Nic. Etk. 4:12 ad fin.): “ he who aims at getting benefit for money and what comes through money is a κόλα ”

προφάσειπλεονεξία . The “ cloke of covetousness” is literally “ pretext of greediness.” The point is that Paul did not use his message as a foil to cover selfish purposes (cf. ἐπικάλυμμ 1 Peter 2:16). As the appeal to God indicates, the motive is in question (cf. Chrys.). The genitive is subjective, “ a pretext which greediness (Lft.) uses or inspires.” πρόφασι here is not excuse but specious excuse (cf. Philippians 1:18, Psalms 140:4, Hosea 10:4). πλεονεξί is more general than φιλαργυρί and denotes the self-seeking, greedy, covetous character of the πλεονέκτη

The context here does not allow a more specific meaning of πλεονεξί In the Lxx (Judges 5:19 (A) Ps. 118:36, Habakkuk 2:9, etc.), advantage in respect of money is sometimes intended, cupidity. In 4:6 below, it is joined with ἀκαθαρσί ; but it “ does not appear that πλεονεξί can be independently used in the sense of fleshly concupiscence” (Robinson on Ephesians 5:5; but see Hammond on Romans 1:29 and Abbott in ICC on Ephesians 5:5). Lft. (Colossians 3:5) translates: “ ‘ greediness,’ an entire disregard for the rights of others.” — On θεὸςμάρτυ (sc. ἐστί as Romans 1:9), cf. not only Paul (Philippians 1:8, 2 Corinthians 1:23) but Jewish usage (e. g. Genesis 31:44; Gen_1 Reg. 20:23. 42 Sap. 1:6 and especially Test. xii, Leviticus 19:3).

6. οὔτεζητοῦντεςκτλ . “ Nor did we ever come (v. 5) requiring honour,” etc. The participle of manner, in apposition to the subject of ἐγενήθημε (v. 5), introduces the third disclaimer, which, like the other two (v. 5) may reflect the language of the traducers (Zimmer). Paul denies not that he received honour from men, not that he had no right to receive it, but that he sought, that is, required honour from men either in Thessalonica or elsewhere.

δυνάμενοιἐνβάρεικτλ . “ Although we were ever (sc. ποτε from v. 5) able to be in a position of weight (i. e. honour) as Christ’ s apostles.” This concessive clause, subordinated to ζητοῦντεςδόξα , qualifies the fact, “ we never came requiring honour,” by asserting the principle (cf. II 3:9) that the authority to demand honour inheres in their place of preponderance as Christ’ s apostles.

δόξ = “ honour,” as in classic usage. There is no evidence that it is equivalent to honor in the later sense of honorarium. On the rare ζητεῖνἐ , cf. Genesis 43:8, Nahum 3:11, Ezekiel 22:30; and for the rarer ζητεῖνἀπο cf. Barn. 21:6.— Since βάρο may mean not only “ burden” (Galatians 6:2, 2 Corinthians 4:17, Sir. 13:2) but also “ importance” (as in later Gk.; cf. Soph. Lex sub voc. and βαρύ 2 Corinthians 10:10), it is possible to take ἐνβάρειεἶνα (a unique phrase in Gk. Bib.) as equivalent to ἐντιμῇεἶνα (Chrys.), in pondere esse (Calv.), the ἐ indicating the position in which they were able to stand and from which, if necessary, they were able to exercise authority; “ to take a preponderant place” (Ruther).

On the other hand, ἐνβάρειεἷνα may = βαρὺςεἷνα “ to be burdensome.” In a letter to the present editor under date of March 15, 1910, Dr. Milligan writes that he “ is inclined to think the more literal idea of ‘ burden,’ ‘ trouble’ was certainly uppermost in the Apostle’ s thought and that the derived sense of ‘ gravitas,’ ‘ honor” was not prominent, if it existed at all.” He calls attention to P Oxy. 1062:14 (ii, a.d.) εἰδὲτοῦτόσοιβάροςφέρε ; and to BGU, 159:5 (a.d. 210) οὐδυνάμενοςὑποστῆναιτὸβάροςτῆςλειτουργία Assuming the translation “ to be burdensome,” expositors find a reference either (1) to the matter of a stipend ; so for example Theodoret, Beza , Grot., Flatt, Zim, Drummond, and Field (Otium Norv. III, 122); or (2) to both the stipend and the authority; so Chrys., Crocius (non tantum de ambitione sedet de avaritia), Lft., Find., Wohl., Moff. and others. The immediate context, however, does not distinctly suggest a reference to a stipend, unless δόξ =honorarium; furthermore the omission of ὑμῖ (Dob.). which Vulg reads (cum possemus vobis oneri esse), makes the translation “ to be burdensome” less likely than “ to be in honour,” “ in pondere esse” (cf. Erasmus, Hammond, Pelt, De W., Lü n., Ell., Schmidt, Schmiedel, Born, Dob.).— On Χριστοῦἀπόστολοι cf. 2 Corinthians 11:3. Paul uses ἀπόστολο not only of himself and the twelve, but also of Silvanus and Timothy (here), Junias and Andronicus (Romans 16:7), Apollos (1 Corinthians 4:9), Epaphroditus (Philippians 2:25).

See further 2 Corinthians 8:23, 2 Corinthians 11:13, Acts 14:14 and McGiffert, Apostolic Age, 648. The word ἀπόστολο occurs once in Lxx ( 3 Reg.14:6 A).

As after γέγονε (v. 1) and δόλῳ (v. 3), so after ἀπόστολο , a comma is to be placed.

7. ἀλλὰἐγενήθημεννήπιο . “ On the contrary, we became babes in the midst of you.” ἀλλα is parallel to ἀλλα in v. 4 and controls vv. 7-12, the γά (v. 9) resuming the ἀλλα here. A colon is to be put after ὑμῶ Although they were entitled to demand honour as Christ’ s apostles, yet they waived that right, choosing to be not apostles but babes in the midst of them. To contrast with ἀπόστολο and to fit ἐνμέσῳὑμῶ , we rather expect not an adjective but a noun. νήπιο (Galatians 4:1, Galatians 4:3, 1 Corinthians 13:11, Romans 2:20, etc.), with its implication of the unripe and undeveloped, far from being meaningless (Schmidt) is a capital antithesis of ἀπόστολο . Not only does νήπιο fit the immediate context admirably, it is also in keeping with the spirit of brotherly equality that characterises Paul’ s attitude to his readers not only in I but also in II. He is just one of them, ὡςεἷςἐξὑμῶ (Chrys.).

Not only is νήπιο admirably adapted to the context, it is also the better attested reading (א BDCGF, Vulg, Boh, Ephr., Ambst, Orig. ad Matthew 19:14) as Tisch admits; and is accepted by WH., Zim, Baljon, Lft., Find., Wohl. Indeed WH. will not allow an alternative reading (cf. App.2 128). On the other hand, Weiss is equally insistent on ἤπιο as alone worthy of attention (AEKLP, Pesh Arm; Tisch, Ell. Schmiedel, Born, Dob., Moff.). While on purely transcriptional grounds ἤπιο may be accounted for by haplography or νήπιο by dittography, internal evidence favours νήπιο — Six of the ten cases of νήπιο in N.

T. (including Ephesians 4:14, Hebrews 5:13) are found in Paul; ἤπιο is found in the Gk. Bib. only 2 Timothy 2:24. The objection (urged by Ell., Schmiedel, Born, and others) that νήπιο “ mars the metaphor” in the succeeding comparison (whose point, however, is not gentleness but unselfish love) is met by Lft. who observes that “ rhetorical rules were as nothing compared with the object which he had in view.” ἐνμέσῳ with gen. occurs only here in Paul; it is frequent elsewhere in Gk. Bib.

7-8. ὡςἐὰντροφό … οὕτωςκτλ “ As a nurse cherishes her own children so we yearning after you were glad to share not only the gospel of God but our very selves as well, because you had become dear to us.” The change from νήπιο to τροφό is due to a natural association of ideas. The point of the new metaphor is love, the love of a mother-nurse for her own children. Not only did the missionaries waive their right to demand honour, they waived it in motherly affection for their dear children . No punctuation is necessary before οὕτω (cf. v. 4 and Mark 4:26).

The construction is similar to Mark 4:26 (AC) οὕτως … ὡςἐὰνβάλῃ On the difference between ὡςἐά = ὡςἅ (א A) with subjunctive indicating the contingency of the act and ὠ with the indicative, note with Viteau (I, 242) 2 Corinthians 8:12 καθὸἐὰνἔχῃ … χαθὸοὐκἔχει . τροφό here as elsewhere in Gk. Bib. (Genesis 35:8, Isaiah 49:23, Isaiah 49:4 Reg. 11:2 = 2 Chronicles 22:11) is feminine. θάλπει = “ to warm” is used of the mother-bird (Deuteronomy 22:6, Job 39:14) and of Abishag (3 Reg. 1:2, 4; cf. θερμαίνει 1:2 ff); here and Ephesians 5:29, the secondary sense “ to cherish” is appropriate (see Ell. on Ephesians 5:29). Neither τροφό nor θάλπει suggests that the τέκν are θηλάζοντ ; hence it is unnecessary to press the metaphor in the clause with οὕτω as some do (e. g. Lü n.). Grot. compares Numbers 11:22 λάβεαὐτὸνεἰςτὸνκόλπονσο (Moses) ὡσεὶἄραιτιθηνὸ (nurshing-father as Isaiah 49:23) τὸνθηλάζοντ , a passage, which, according to Zimmer, may have been in Paul’ s mind.— If ἑαυτῆ is emphatic, as in classic usage, the nurse is also the mother; if it is = αὐτῆ (Bloomfield apud Lillie; cf. Moult I, 87 ff.), the nurse may or may not be the mother.

Zimmer, accepting ἑαυτῆ as emphatic (cf. v. 11), but finding difficulty with the idea of a mother-nurse in service, takes ἐαυτῆ metaphorically, understanding that the professional nurse treats the children of her mistress as if they were “ her own” ; cf. Chrys.: “ Are they (the nurses) not more kindly disposed to them than mothers?” — ἑαυτου in Paul, when used with the article and substantive, has regularly, as in classic Gk., the attributive position (2:8, 12, 4:4, II 3:12); the exceptions are Galatians 6:4, Galatians 6:8, 1 Corinthians 11:5 (B) 2 Corinthians 3:13 (א D), where the position is predicate.

8. ὀμειρόμενοιὑμῶνκτλ “ yearning after you” (Lillie; cf. ἐπιποθοῦντε 3:6). With the affection of a mother-nurse, they were eager to share not only what they had but what they were (Schmidt), because, as is frankly said, the converts had become dear to them, τέκναἀγαπητα (1 Corinthians 4:14, Ephesians 5:1).

ὀμείρεσθα (the breathing is uncertain) is found also in Job 3:21 (Lxx) and Psalms 62:2 (Sym.). In meaning, it is similar to ἐπιποθεῖ and ἱμείρεσθα (see Wetstein, ad loc.); but the derivation is unknown (cf. WH. App. 151, 159; WS 16:6; Bl 6:4). Thackeray (Gram. O.

T. Greek, I, 97, note 5), following Moult, thinks the ο “ comes from a derelict preposition ω There is therefore no connection between ὁ and ἱμείρεσθα ” — The usual reading εὐδοκοῦμε (B has ηὐδοκοῦμε ; so WH., Weiss) is not here a present (2 Corinthians 5:8) but an imperfect, as ἐγενήθημε (v. 7) and ἐγενήθητ (v. 8) demand (cf. Zim). εὐδοχεῖ is common in later Gk. (cf. Kennedy, Sources, 131). In Lxx θέλει is sometimes a variant of εὐδοκεῖ (Judges 11:17, Judges 11:19:10, Judges 11:25), sometimes a parallel (Psalms 50:18) to it. In papyri, εὐδοκεῖ is often used of consent to an agreement (P Oxy. 261:17 97:24; cf.

Mill. ad loc.). In Paul, εὐδοκεῖ is frequent with infin. (3:1, Galatians 1:15, etc.), but rare with ἐ (1 Corinthians 10:5, 2 Corinthians 12:10; Lxx frequently) or with dative alone (II 2:12; cf. Sir. 18:31 A); the construction with accus., with ἐπι and dat. or accus., or with εἰ does not appear in Paul.— The construction μεταδιδόναιτίτιν is found also in Romans 1:11, Tob. 7:18 (B); the accusative is of the part shared; hence μεταδοῦναιψυχά is not a zeugma for δοῦναιψυχὰςὐπὲρὐμῶν . ψυχαι (2 Corinthians 12:15) is plural, for Paul and his associates are in mind. ψυχη like καρδί (v. 4) is the inner self. On ἑαυτῶ for ἡμῶναὐτῶ , cf. WS 22:10; on οὐμόνο … ἀλλὰκαι , see 1:5.

διότ (2:18, 4:6) is regularly “ because” in Gk. Bib.; in 2 Mac. 7:37, it may mean “ that” (Mill.); cf. WS 5:7 d. After ἀγαπητό in Paul we expect a genitive (Romans 1:7) not a dative; but cf. Sir. 15:13 καίοὐχἔστινἀγαπητὸντοῖςφοβουμένοιςάὐτό

9. μνημονεύετεγάρκτλ . “ you remember of course brothers (v. 1).” The γά resumes ἀλλα (v. 7) and further illustrates οὔτεζητοῦντεςδόξα (v. 6). “ Instead of requiring honour of you, we worked hard and incessantly to support ourselves while we preached to you the gospel of God” (cf. II 3:8).

μνημονεύετ is indicative as οἴδατ (vv. 1, 5, 11) suggests. The accus. with μνημονεύει occurs only here in Paul; Lxx has both gen. and accus. (cf. v. l. in Tob. 4:19). The phrase κόποςκαίμόχθο is Pauline (II 3:8, 2 Corinthians 11:27); cf. also Jeremiah 20:18 Test. xii, Jude 1:18:4. In fact in Paul μόχθο always appears with κόπο (cf. Hermas, Sim. V, 6:2). Beza, with Lillie’ s approval, makes labeur, peine, travail the equivalents respectively of πόνος , κόπο and μόχθο Grot. (cf. Lft. and Trench, Syn. 102) considers κόπο passive, in ferendo and μόχθο active, in gerendo. Lft. translates: “ toil and moil.”

νυκτὸςκαὶἡμέραςκτλ Without connecting particle , the ceaselessness of the labour and the purpose of it as a “ labour of love” are indicated. They worked not through the whole night and day (accus.) but during the night and day (gen.). The purpose of this incessant labour (πρὸςτὸμη II 3:8, 2 Corinthians 3:13) was to avoid putting upon the converts individually or collectively a financial burden. ἐργαζόμενο marks the circumstances attending the preaching. As in Corinth (1 Corinthians 4:12, 1 Corinthians 9:6) where there were not many wise, mighty, or noble, so in Thessalonica (II 3:8 ff.) where the converts were mainly working people, Paul finds it necessary to work with his hands (4:11, 1 Corinthians 4:12, Ephesians 4:28) for wages.

The phrase νυκτὸςκαὶἡμέρα occurs in Paul elsewhere only 3:10 and II 3:8; cf. 1 Timothy 5:5, 2 Timothy 1:3, Mark 5:5, Judith 11:17. In the Lxx the usual order is ἡμέραςκαὶνυκτό (e. g. Joshua 1:8, Joshua 1:3 Reg. 8:59, etc.; cf. Luke 18:7, Acts 9:24, Revelation 4:8, etc.). ἐπιβαρεῖ a late word, appears in Gk. Bib. elsewhere only in Paul (II 3:8, 2 Corinthians 2:5) and is “ nearly but not quite equivalent in meaning to καταβαρεῖ ” (Ell.), which is found in Gk. Bib. only 2 Corinthians 12:16 and Mark 14:10 (cf. καταβαρύνει 2 Reg. 13:25, etc.).

With κηρύσσειν Paul uses ἐ (Galatians 2:2, 2 Corinthians 1:19, Colossians 1:23), εί (here, as Grot. notes, for dative), or the dative (1 Corinthians 9:27 and א here)— all permissible Attic constructions (Bl 39:4). The phrase κηρύσσειντὸεὐαγγέλιοντοῦθεου recurs in Mark 1:14; cf. Galatians 2:2, Colossians 1:23, Mark 13:10, Mark 14:9.

10. ὑμεῖςμάρτυρεςκτλ . As vv. 7-9 referred to the charge of ζητοῦντεςδόξα (v. 6), so this verse refers probably to the charge of πλεονεξί (v. 5), and vv. 11-12 to that of κολακί The ἀλλα of v. 7 still controls, as the asyndeton suggests. The fact that Paul and his associates carried themselves in a pious, righteous, and blameless manner (on the adverbs with ἐγενήθημε , cf. 1 Corinthians 16:10, Tob. 7:11) is evidence that they were not using the gospel as a foil to cover greedy ambition (v. 5). As witnesses of their behaviour, they invoke first, since the actual conduct not the motive is mainly in mind, the believers, and then to strengthen the appeal, God himself.

A man is ὅσιο who is in general devoted to God’ s service; a man is δίκαιο who comes up to a specific standard of righteousness; and a man is ἄμεμπτο who in the light of a given norm is without reproach. All three designations are common in the Lxx and denote the attitude both to God and to men, the first two being positive, the third negative.

ὡ = “ how” as in Philippians 1:8. ὅσιο (not in Paul and rare in N. T.) is common in Lxx (especially Ps. Prov. Sap. Ps. Sol.); ὁσιοῦ (not in N.

T.) occurs in Sap. 6:10, Ps. 17:26, Psalms 17:2 Reg. 22:20; ὁσιότη (Ephesians 4:24, Luke 1:75) is found in Sap. and elsewhere in Lxx; ὀσίως in Gk. Bib. elsewhere only Sap. 6:10, 3 Reg. 8:61, is frequent in 1 Clem.; cf. also P Par. 63 (Deiss. BS 211) πρόςοὓςὁσίωςκαίδικαίωςπολιτευσάμενο — ὅσιο and δίκαιο are frequently parallel (Proverbs 17:26; cf. Sap. 9:3, Luke 1:75 I Clem. 48:4). For ὅσιο and ἄμεμπτος cf. Sap. 10:15. δικαίω is more frequent than ὁσίω in Gk.

Bib., but ἀμέμπτω is found elsewhere only 5:23, 3:13 (BL) and Esther 3:13 (13:4); cf. I Clem. 44:3-63:3. The adjective ἄμεμπτο (3:13, Philippians 2:15, Philippians 3:6, Luke 1:6, Hebrews 8:7) is frequent in Job, sometimes (e. g. 1:1, 9:20, etc.) with δίκαιο — The addition of τοῖςπιστεύουσι to ὑμῖ is designed, if at all, not to contrast Paul’ s attitude to the non-Christians with his attitude to the Christians (so some older comm.), or his attitude to the converts as converts with that to the converts as pagans (Hofmann, Dob.), but simply to meet the charge that his attitude to the believers was influenced by selfish motives.

11-12. καθάπεροἴδατεκτλ . Not as a κόλαξ (v. 5 κολακία but as a πατή (1 Corinthians 4:15, Philippians 2:22), they urged the converts individually (ἕναἕκαστονὑμῶ ; cf. II 1:3, Ephesians 4:7, Colossians 4:6), each according to his specific need, as the added παραμυφούμενο and μαρτυρόμενο intimate. The faint-hearted, they encouraged ; to the idlers (5:14), they gave a solemn protest. παρακαλεῖ is general, παραμυθεῖσθα and μαρτύρεσθα specific. Hence εἰςτο is to be construed only with παρακαλοῦντε (cf. 2 Corinthians 1:4; also δέομα below 3:10 and ἐρωτά II 2:2). “ We were urging both by encouragement and by solemn protest, that you walk,” etc.

καθάπε (3:6, 12, 4:5), found frequently in Paul and in Exodus, is equivalent to the less Attic καθώ — ὡ as in v. 10 = πῶ (GF).— παρακαλεῖ , a favourite word in Paul and susceptible of various translations, here means “ urge,” “ exhort.” — παραμυθεῖσθαι a rare word in Gk. Bib. (5:14, John 11:19, John 11:31, John 11:2 Mac. 15:9), means here and 5:14 not “ comfort” but “ encourage.” On παρακαλεῖ and παραμυθεῖσθα , cf. 1 Corinthians 14:3, Philippians 2:1, Philippians 2:2 Mac. 15:8-9. μαρτύρεσθα is stronger than παρακαλεῖ and means either “ to call to witness” or “ to protest solemnly” ; in later Gk. (cf. Mill. ad loc. and 1 Mac. 2:56), it approximates μαρτυρεῖ .— The participial construction is quite admissible (cf. 2 Corinthians 7:5 and Bl 79:10). Some comm. repeat ἐγενήθημε (v. 10), attaching the participle loosely; others supply a verb like ἐνουθετοῦμε (Lft.).— The ὑμᾶ (which א omits) after παρακαλοῦντε resumes ἕναἕκαστονὑμῶ

περιπατεῖνἀξίωςτοῦθεοῦκτλ . The object of the fatherly exhortation is that the readers conduct themselves in a manner worthy of their relation to God who calls them, through the preaching of the gospel (II 2:14), into his own kingdom and his own glory. βασιλεί , an infrequent word in Paul compared with the Synoptic Gospels, denotes the redeemed society of the future over which God rules, the inheritance of believers (Galatians 5:21, 1 Corinthians 6:9, 1 Corinthians 6:10, 1 Corinthians 6:15:50; cf. Ephesians 5:5), and the consummation of salvation (II 1:5, 1 Corinthians 15:24). Foretastes of this sway of God (Romans 14:17 ἐνπνεύματιἁγίῳ cf. 1 Corinthians 4:20, Colossians 4:11) or of Christ (Colossians 1:13) are already enjoyed by believers in virtue of the indwelling power of Christ or the Spirit. δόξ is parallel with βασιλεί and suggests not only the radiant splendour of God or of Christ (II 2:14) but also the majesty of their perfection (cf. Psalms 96:6, Romans 3:23).

περιπατεῖνἀξίωςτοῦθεου , found elsewhere in Gk. Bib. only Colossians 1:10 , is common in the Pergamon inscriptions (Deiss. NBS 75 f.), and appears also in the Magnesian inscriptions (Mill. ad loc.); cf. πολιτεύεσθαιἀξίωςαὐτου 1 Clem. 21:1 Polyc. 5:2.— περιπατεῖ like ἀναστρέφεσθα in the ethical sense is both a Hebrew and a Greek idiom, KL read here, as in Colossians 1:10, Ephesians 4:1, περιπατῆσα — τοῦκαλοῦντο (5:24, Galatians 5:8, Romans 9:11) is timeless like τὸνῥυόμενο (1:10). Paul prefers the present to the aorist participle (Galatians 1:6. Galatians 1:15 and א A here) of καλεῖ On εἰ after καλεῖν cf. II 2:14, 1 Corinthians 1:9, Colossians 3:15.— On βασιλείαθεου , cf.

Sap. 10:10, 2 Chronicles 13:8 Ps. Sol. 17:4; on Christ’ s kingdom, cf. Colossians 1:13, Ephesians 5:5, 2 Timothy 4:1, 2 Timothy 4:18, John 18:36. ἑαυτου does not of necessity indicate a contrast with Satan’ s kingdom (Colossians 1:13, Mark 3:23 ff.). On the meaning of δόξ see Gray, HDB II, 183 ff.; Kennedy, Last Things, 299 ff.; Gunkel, Die Wirkungen des heiligen Geistes, 108 ff.; and SH on Romans 3:23.

(3) Welcome in Persecutions; the Jews (2:13-16)

After the defence of his visit (2:1-12), Paul turns again (cf. 1:6, 9) to the welcome received. Repeating in v. 13 the thanksgiving of 1:2 ff., he points out that just as he is conscious of preaching God’ s gospel (vv. 1-4) so the readers welcomed his word as God’ s word. That it is not a human word, as the Jews alleged, but a divine word, operating in the hearts of believers, is demonstrated by the fact that the readers welcomed it in spite of persecutions (v. 14 resuming 1:6 ff.), persecutions at the hands of Gentiles similar to those which the Jewish Christians in Judæ a experienced at the hands of Jews. Then remembering the constant opposition of the Jews to himself in Thessalonica, Berœ a, and Corinth, and their defamation of his character since he left Thessalonica, and the fact that though the Gentiles are the official persecutors yet the Jews are the prompting spirits, Paul, in a prophetic outburst (cf. Philippians 3:1 ff.), adds, neglecting negative instances, that the Jews have always opposed the true messengers of God, killing the prophets and the Lord Jesus, and persecuting Paul; and prophesies that this their constant defiance is bound to result, in accordance with the purpose of God, in the filling up of their sins always, and in judgment at the day of wrath. Indeed, to his prophetic vision, that day has come at last.

13And for this reason, we too as well as you thank God continually, namely, because when you had received from us the word which you heard, God’ s word, you welcomed it, not as a word of men but as it really is, as a word of God which also is operative in you who believe. 14For you, brothers, became imitators of the assemblies of God in Judæ a, those, namely, that are in Christ Jesus, in that you underwent the same sufferings at the hands of your own countrymen, as they themselves at the hands of the Jews— 15the men who killed both the Lord Jesus and the prophets, and persecuted us; who please not God and are against all mankind 16in that they hinder us from talking to the Gentiles with a view to their salvation,— in order that they might fill up the purposed measure of their sins always; but the wrath has come upon them at last.

13. καὶδιὰτοῦτοκαὶἡμεῖςκτλ . “ And for this reason we too as well as you give thanks.” διὰτοῦτ refers, as the resumptive ὅτ shows, not to the entire contents of vv. 1-12 but to the salient principle enounced in vv. 1-4, namely, that the gospel is not human, as the Jews alleged, but divine. The και in καὶἡμεῖ indicates a reciprocal relation between writers and readers. As the Thessalonians, in their letter to Paul, thanked God that they welcomed the gospel as a word from God, so now do the missionaries reciprocate that thanksgiving.

διὰτοῦτ like διο is frequent in Paul, but καὶδιὰτοῦτ (Mark 6:14 = Matthew 14:2; Luke 14:20, Hebrews 9:15, John 5:16; Barn. 8:7 Ign. Mag. 9:2 Hermas, Sim. VII, 2, IX, 19:1 (καὶδιὰτοῦτοκαι as here)) occurs elsewhere in Paul only II 2:11; hence D here and II 2:11 omits και It is probable that in Paul this consecutive and subordinating διὰτοῦτ has always some reference to the preceding even when the primary reference, often general, is supplemented by a secondary, often specific, reference introduced by ὅτ as here and often in Jn. (cf. Genesis 11:9, Genesis 21:31, etc.; Diogn. 2:6 Hermas Vis. III, 6:1), by ἵν (2 Corinthians 13:10, Philemon 1:15), or by some other construction (II 2:11, 1 Corinthians 11:10, Hebrews 9:15). On διὰτοῦτοκαι cf. 3:5, Romans 13:6, Luke 11:49, Matthew 24:44, John 12:18; on ὅτ = “ because,” Romans 1:8.— και before ἡμεῖ , if it retains its classic force, is to be construed closely with ἡμεῖ Its precise significance here is somewhat uncertain.

In a similar passage (Colossians 1:9), Lft. observes that “ και denotes the response of the apostle’ s personal feeling to the favourable character of the news” (so here Mill.). Wohl. thinks that, Paul tacitly refutes the insinuation that he is not thankful to God. More plausible here (as in Colossians 1:9, Ephesians 1:15) is the conjecture of Rendel Harris (op. cit.; cf. Bacon, Introd. 73 and McGiffert, EB 5038) that και presupposes a letter from the Thess. to Paul (cf. 4:9, 13, 5:1) in which they thanked God as Paul now thanks him. Dob. however, following the lead of Lietzmann (ad Romans 3:7), feels that και is not to be joined closely with ἡμεῖ , but serves to emphasise the εὐχαριστοῦμε with reference to εὐχαριστοῦμε in 1:2. In support of this usage, Dob. refers to καὶλαλοῦμε in 1 Corinthians 2:13, which goes back to the λαλοῦμε in 2:6.

παραλαβόντε … ἐδέξασθ . The distinction between the external reception and the welcome given to the word, a welcome involving a favourable estimate of its worth, was early recognised (cf. Ephr.). That the diostinction is purposed, that Paul is tacitly answering the insinuation of the Jews that the word preached was not of divine but of human origin (vv. 1-4) is suggested by the striking position of τοῦθεου (which leads P to put παρ ʼ ἡμῶ before λόγονἀκοῆς and induces Schmiedel to consider τοῦθεου a gloss) and by the emphasis on the fact that this word, heard, received, and welcomed, also operates in the inner lives of believers.

λόγονἀχοῆ = λόγονὃνἠκούσατ ; cf. Sir. 42:1 λόγονἀκοῆς = ד ב ר ת ש מ ע (Smend). Grot. notes Hebrews 4:2 ὁλόγοςτῆςἀκοῆ The gen. is appositive.— Since παρα with gen. (rare in Paul) is used, apart from Romans 11:27 (Lxx), with verbs implying (II 3:8) or stating the idea of receiving (e. g. παραλαμβάνει 4:1, II 3:6, Galatians 1:12; δέχεσθχ Philippians 4:18; κομίζεσθα Ephesians 6:8), it is more natural to take παρ ʼ ἡμῶ with παραλαμβάνει than with ἀκοῆ , although, as Beza remarks, the sense is the same in either construction. On παραλαμβάνεινεὐαγγέλιο , cf. 1 Corinthians 15:1, Galatians 1:9.

οὐλόγονἀνθρώπωνκτλ . “ Not as a word of men but, as it really is, as a word of God.” Since there is a distinction between παραλαμβάνει and δέχεσθα , the latter implying an estimate of worth, λόγονἀνθρώπω and λόγονθεου are to be taken predicatively. The precise point appears to be not that the word is true, for this is first stated in καθὼςἀληθῶςἐστί , not that the hearers welcomed the word as if it were true, for there is no ὡ (contrast Galatians 4:14), but that they welcomed the word as a word of God (cf. Ephr.). ὃςκαὶἐνεργεῖτα Since λόγο receives the emphasis, ὅ refers not to θεου but to λόγο The και indicates not only that the word is heard , received , and welcomed , but also that it is an active power (Romans 1:16) operating constantly (pres. tense) in (Colossians 1:29) the hearts of believers. The word is living, for the power of God is in the believers as it is in the missionaries .

Eighteen of the twenty-one cases of ἐνεργεῖ in the N. T. occur in Paul. In the active, it is used of superhuman operations, usually divine but once (Ephesians 2:2) demonic. ἐνεργεῖσθα (II 2:7, 2 Corinthians 4:12, Colossians 1:29, Ephesians 3:20; cf. Romans 7:5, 2 Corinthians 1:6, Galatians 5:6) may be passive “ to remind us that the operation is not self-originated” (Robinson, Ephesians, 247) or middle, without such a reminder (Mayor on James 5:16). It happens that ὑπο is never expressed. “ In actual meaning ἐνεργεῖ and ἐνεργεῖσθα come nearly to the same thing” (Robinson, l.c.). Grot. remarks: ἐνεργεῖσθα sono Passivum sensu activum.

See further Robinson (op. cit. 241-247).— The Old Latins and some comm. (Ephr., Th. Mops., Piscator, Bengel, Auberlen refer ὅ to θεό , an interpretation which is contextually improbable and which is precluded if ἐνεργεῖτα is passive.

14. ὑμεῖςγὰρμιμηται … ὅτιἐπάθετ . “ For you became imitators, brothers, of the Christian congregations in Judæ a in that you suffered.” γά connects the points of welcome and steadfastness under persecution, and at the same time illustrates and confirms the reality of the indwelling word of God. The ὑπομονὴἐνθλίψε of 1:6 is obviously resumed; but the persons imitated are not the missionaries and the Lord Jesus, but the Jewish Christians in Palestine, the analogy between them and the Thessalonians being that the former suffered at the hands of the Jews as the latter at the hands of the Gentiles. The reason for referring to the persecutions in Judæ a is unknown. It may be that the older churches are selected as pertinent examples of steadfastness to the younger communities; or that, and with greater probability (cf. Calv.), the Jews in Thessalonica had insinuated that Christianity was a false religion, inasmuch as the Jews, the holy people of God, were constrained to oppose it. If the latter surmise be correct, the force of Paul’ s allusion is that the Jews persecute the Christians because they always persecute the true followers of the divine will, and that it is the Jews who incite the Gentiles to harass the believers. ἐπάθετ may refer to a single event in the remoter (Galatians 1:13, 1 Corinthians 15:9) or nearer (Dob.) past, or to a series of persecutions, considered collectively (BMT 39c).

In the latter case, the reference would include not only the case of Jason (Acts 17:9), but the persecutions which continued since Paul’ s departure (3:3), the Jews being the real cause of Gentile oppression in Thessalonica, as they were the actual persecutors in Judæ a. The defence of his failure to return (2:17-3:13), which follows immediately after the prophetic outburst against the Jews, confirms the probability that the Jews are at the bottom of Gentile persecutions in Thessalonica after Paul’ s departure, as well as during his visit, and makes unnecessary the rejection of vv. 15-16 (Schmiedel) or of vv. 14-16 (Holtzmann, Einl 214) as interpolation. τῶνἐκκλησιῶντοῦθεου This phrase, mainly Pauline (II 1:4, 1 Corinthians 11:16), might of itself denote Jewish assemblies or congregations; hence the distinctively Pauline ἐνΧριστῷἸησου (see on ἐνθεῷ 1:1) is added here, as in Galatians 1:22, to specify the communities as Christian.

ἐκκλησί , the Greek term for the assembly of citizens (cf. Deiss. Light, 112 ff.), is used by Lxx regularly for ק ה ל and rarely for ע ד ה ; συναγωγη on the other hand usually renders the latter, and rarely the former. The terms are virtually synonymous in Jewish usage; cf. ἐκκλησίακυρίο 1 Chronicles 28:8); συναγωγὴκυρίο (Numbers 16:3, Numbers 20:4); also Proverbs 5:14: ἐνμέσῳἐκκλησίαςκαίσυναγωγῆ (see Toy, ad loc. in ICC) and I Mac. 3:13 ἄθροισμακαίἐκκλησίανπιστῶ How early the Christians began to restrict συναγωγη to the Jewish and ἐκκλησί to the Christian assembly is uncertain (cf. James 2:2 and Zahn, Introd.

I, 94 f.). The plural αἱἐκκλησίαιτοῦΧριστου occurs once in N. T. (Romans 16:16), but the singular ἡἐκκλησίατοῦΧριστου does not appear, except Matthew 16:18 , before Ignatius (Trall. init. and 1:2). On τῶνοὔσωνἐ , cf. 1 Corinthians 1:2, 2 Corinthians 1:1.

τὰαὐτάκτλ . “ In that you suffered from your own fellowcitizens the same as they did from the Jews.” The point of imitation, introduced by ὅτ , is obviously not the fact of παθεῖ but the steadfast endurance manifested under persecution. The comparison τὰαὐτὰκαι … καθὼςκαι is intended to express not identity but similarity. συμφυλέτα are Gentiles as Ἰουδαίω shows.

After τὰαὐτα (Romans 2:1, 2 Corinthians 1:6, Philippians 3:1, Ephesians 6:9) we have not the expected α (2 Corinthians 1:6) but the looser καθώ Ell. cites Plato, Phaed. 86 A: τῷαὐτῷλόγῳὥσπερσυ ; cf. also Sap. 18:11 ὁμοίᾳδὲδίκῃδοῦλοςἅμαδεσπότηκολασθείς , καὶδημότηςβασιλεῖτὰαὐτὰπάσχω — For the correlative και in καίὑμεῖ … καὶαὐτοι , cf. Romans 1:13 and Bl 78:1.— αὐτοι is constructio ad sensum for αὐται ; cf. Galatians 1:23 ἐκκλησία … ἀκούοντε — πάσχει is a kind of passive of ποιεῖ (Bl 54:2); hence ὑπο (D ἀπο cf. Ep. Jer_33, Mark 5:26, Matthew 17:12— D omits καὶὑμεῖ

Like φυλέτη , a classic word not found in Gk. Bib., συμφυλέτη , only here in Gk. Bib., means either “ tribesman” or “ countryman” ; it is similar to συνπολίτη (Ephesians 2:19). The tendency in later Gk. to prefix prepositions without adding to the original force was condemned, as Ell. remarks, by the second-century grammarian Herodianus: πολίτηςδημότηςφυλέτηςἅνευτῆςσύ Paul, however, is fond of such compounds with σύ even when they do not appear in the Lxx (e.g. Philippians 2:2, Philippians 2:3:10. Philippians 2:17, 2 Corinthians 6:15, Galatians 1:14, etc.).— ἴδιο , common in Gk. Bib., may in later Gk. mean either proprius (Vulg) or vester.

The term Ἰουδαῖο (see Zahn, Introd. II, 306 ff.) is not of itself disparaging. It is frequently employed by Jews as a self-designation (Romans 2:17, Jeremiah 39:12, 45:19, etc.). Paul, however, while he speaks of himself as of the seed of Abraham, of the tribe of Benjamin, a Hebrew and an Israelite (Romans 11:1, 2 Corinthians 11:22, Philippians 3:5), rarely if ever employs Ἰουδαῖο as a self-designation (Galatians 2:15), but uses it of the Jew who finds in Christ the fulfilment of the law (Romans 2:28), of the Jew contrasted with the Greek (so regularly as here), and of Judaism in contrast with Christianity (1 Corinthians 10:32, Galatians 1:13 f.), no disparagement being intended by the word itself.

15-16. The past experiences in Thessalonica and Berœ a (Acts 17:1-15), the insinuations alluded to in vv. 1-12, and the present troubles in Corinth (3:7; cf. Acts 18:5 ff.) explain sufficiently this prophetic denunciation of the Jews (cf. Philippians 3:1 ff.). The counts are set forth in a series of five participles in close apposition with τῶνἸουδαίω . Of these, the first two are aorist and refer to the past: “ who put to death both the Lord Jesus and the prophets, and persecuted us,” that is, Paul, Silvanus, and Timothy (their experiences particularly in Thessalonica and Berœ a being looked at collectively).

The next two participles are present and describe the constant attitude of the Jews, a description qualified by the fifth participle also present : “ and who oppose the will of God and the good of humanity in that they hinder us from speaking to the Gentiles with a view to their salvation.” For such obstinacy, judgment is prepared. In accordance with the purpose of God, the Jews are constantly filling up the measure of their sins; and to the prophetic outlook of Paul, the wrath of God has actually come upon them at last.

The denunciation is unqualified; no hope for their future is expressed. The letters of Paul reveal not a machine but a man; his moods vary; now he is repressed , again he is outspokenly severe (Philippians 3:1 ff.), and still again he is grieved, but affectionate and hopeful (Romans 9:1 ff. Romans 9:11:25).

καὶτὸνκύριονκαὶτοὺςπροφήτα . “ Both the Lord and the prophets.” και … και correlates the substantives. The “ prophets” are not Christian but Hebrew (Romans 1:2, Romans 3:21, Romans 11:3). By separating τὸνκύριο from Ἰησοῦ , Paul succeeds in emphasising that the Lord of glory whom the Jews crucified (1 Corinthians 2:8) is none other than the historical Jesus, their kinsman according to the flesh (Romans 9:5).

That the first two και are correlative is the view of Ell., Lft., Dob. et al. and is confirmed by 1 Corinthians 10:32. Flatt, De W. Lillie, Auberlen, Lü n. Schmiedel, et al., interpret the first και to mean “ also.” Erasmus and Schmidt translate “ not only the Lord and the prophets but also us.” — Some comm. take τοὺςπροφήτα with ἐκδιωξάντω Since, however, ἀποκτείνει , a rare word in Paul, is used literally by him only here and Romans 11:3 = 3 Reg. 19:10 , the construction with ἀποκτεινάντω suggested by the και correlative is preferable, apart from the consideration that the argument would be weakened were προφήτα attached to ἐκδιωξάντω (cf. Luke 13:34 = Matthew 23:37).— For τῶνκαι with participle, we might have had οἳκαι with finite verb (Romans 8:34, Romans 16:7). On ἀποκτείνει of the death of Jesus, cf.

Acts 3:15; also σταυροῦ (Acts 2:36, Acts 2:4:10, 1 Corinthians 2:8) and ἀναιρεῖ (Acts 2:23, etc.). On ὁκύριοςἸησοῦς cf. 4:2, II 1:7, 2:8, 1 Corinthians 16:23, 2 Corinthians 4:14, 2 Corinthians 11:31, Ephesians 1:15, Philemon 1:5. According to Tert. (adv. Marc. 5:15), Marcion prefixed ἰδίου to προφήτα (so KL, et al.), thus making the reference to the Hebrew prophets unmistakable.

καὶἡμᾶςἐκδιωξάντω . “ And persecuted us.” It is uncertain whether ἐκδιώκει here means “ persecute” or “ banish” ; it is likewise uncertain whether the aorist indicates a single act of ἐκδιώκει or a series of acts taken collectively. The word would recall to the readers the harassing experiences of Paul and his associates in Thessalonica and perhaps also in Berœ a.

Ell. emphasises the semi-local meaning of ἐ , and renders “ drive out” ; he sees a specific allusion to Acts 17:10. But ἐκδιώκει may be equivalent to διώκει , as the use of these words and of καταδιώκει in Lxx suggests (cf. Kennedy, Sources, 37).

καὶθεῷμὴἀρεσκόντωνκτλ . This present participle and the succeeding ἐναντίων state the constant obstinate attitude of the Jews to God and men, a statement to be understood in the light of the explanatory κωλυόντωνκτλ (v. 16), added without και The Jews please not God by resisting his purpose to save the Gentiles; they oppose all men not, as Tacitus (Hist. 5:5) and others have it, in being adversus omnes alios hostile odium, but in being against the best interests of humanity, namely, their salvation. It is not talking to the Gentiles that the Jews are hindering but the talking to them with a view to their salvation (cf. Acts 17:6 ff.), the λαλεῖντὸεὐαγγέλιοντοῦθεοῦ (v. 2) εἰςπεριποίησινσωτηρία (5:9).

On Tacitus and the Jews, cf. Th. Reinach, Textes Relatifs au Judaï sme, 1895, 295 ff. ἐναντίο is rarely used of persons in the Gk. Bib. (cf. Numbers 1:53 (AF) 2:2 and 1 Esd. 8:51 πρὸςτοὺςἐναντίουςἡμῖ ). On ἀρέσκειν , see v. 4; on πάντεςἄνθρωπο , cf.

Romans 12:17 f. 1 Corinthians 15:19, 2 Corinthians 3:2, Philippians 4:5, etc.; κωλύει , 1 Corinthians 14:39; λαλεῖνἵν , 1 Corinthians 14:19; ἵνασωθῶσι , 1 Corinthians 10:33.— σώζει and σωτηρί (5:8-9, II 2:13) are Jewish terms borrowed by the early Christians to designate the blessings of the age to come under the rule of God the Father. To Paul this salvation is future, though near at hand (cf. Romans 13:11); but there are foretastes of the future glory in the present experience of those who possess the Spirit (Romans 8:23), and thus belong to the class “ the saved” . σώζει need not be negative except when ἀπὸτῆςὀργῆ (Romans 5:9) or the like is mentioned (see on 1:10).

εἰςτὸἀναπληρῶσαικτλ . They killed both Jesus and the prophets, they persecuted Paul and his fellow-missionaries, they are hindering the Gentile mission, with the distinct purpose (εἰστο — not on their part but on God’ s part) of filling up the measure of their sins always. Grammatically, εἰςτο with infin. (see v. 12) may denote either purpose or conceived result; logically it may here denote purpose, for what is in result is to Paul also in purpose. The obstinacy of the Jews is viewed as an element in the divine plan.

The metaphor underlying ἀναπληρῶσα is to be found in the Lxx (cf. Genesis 15:16, Daniel 8:23, Daniel 8:2 Mac. 6:14). A definite measure of sins is being filled up continually by each act of sin, in accordance with the divine decree. The aorist infin. is future in reference to the participles in the preceding context, but the tense of the infin. itself indicates neither action in progress nor action completed; it is indefinite like a substantive. The infinitive rather than the noun is chosen in reference to πάντοτ , the point of the adverb being the continual filling up. This πάντοτεἀναπληρῶσα , while logically progressive, is regarded by the aorist collectively, a series of ἀναπληρῶσα being taken as one (cf. BMT 39).

ἔφθασενδὲἐπ ʼ αὐτούςκτλ . “ But the wrath has come upon them at last.” ἡὀργη (that is, as DG, Vulg explain, ἡὀργὴτοῦθεου ; see 1:10) is not so much the purposed or merited wrath (cf. Sap. 19:4) as the well-known principle of the wrath of God which is revealed (Romans 1:18) in the ends of the ages (1 Corinthians 10:11) in which Paul lives, and which is shortly to be expressed in the day of wrath (Romans 2:5). In view of the eschatological bearing of ἡὀργη , the reference in ἔφθασε , not withstanding ἡὀργήἡἐρχομέν (1:10), cannot be to a series of punishments in the past (cf. the catena of Corderius on John 3:36 in Orig. (Berlin ed.) IV, 526: τὰςἐπελθούσαςἐπ ʼ αὐτοὺςθεηλάτουςτιμωρία ); nor to a specific event in the past, whether the loss of Jewish independence, or the famine (Acts 11:28), or the banishment from Rome (Acts 18:2; cf. Schmidt, 86-90); nor quite to the destruction of Jerusalem, even if Paul shared the view that the day of judgment was to be-simultaneous with the destruction of Jerusalem; but must be simply to the day of judgment which is near at hand. ἔφθασε is accordingly proleptic. Instead of speaking of that day as coming upon the sons of disobedience (Ephesians 5:6), he speaks of it as at last arrived. Such a proleptic use of the aorist is natural in a prophetic passage and has its analogy in the Lxx (Dob. notes Hosea 9:2 f. Hosea 9:10:5).

In the N. T. φθάνει occurs, apart from Matthew 12:28 = Luke 11:20, only in Paul, and is always equivalent to ἔρχεσθα except in I 4:15 where it is synonymous with προφθάνει (Matthew 17:25). In the Lxx it means regularly “ to come” ; occasionally “ to anticipate” (Sap. 6:13, 16:28; cf. 4:7, Sir. 30:25). Elsewhere in Paul, φθάνει is construed with εἰ (Romans 9:31, Philippians 3:16; cf. Dan. (Th.) 4:17, 19, 6:24, 12:12) and ἀχρι (2 Corinthians 10:14). For ἐπι , cf. Matthew 12:28 = Luke 11:20; Judges 20:34. Judges 20:42, Ecclesiastes 8:14 Dan. (Th.) 4:21, 25; for ἕω , cf. 2 Chronicles 28:9 Dan. (Th.) 4:8, 7:13, 8:7.— For the use of the English perfect in translating the Greek aorist, cf. BMT 46.

εἰςτέλο . “ At last.” That the temporal meaning of εἰςτέλο is here intended and that too not in the sense of “ continually,” “ forever,” but, as ἔφθασε demands, “ at last” is evident from the parallelism of the clauses:

ἀναπληρῶσααὐτῶτὰςἁμαρτίαπάντοτ

ἔφθασεἐπ ʼ αὐτοὺἡὀργηεἰςτέλο

For εἰςτέλο = postremo, cf. Stephanus, Thes. col. 9224. In the Lxx εἰςτέλο (apart from εἰςτὸτέλο of many Psalms and of Jos 3:16 F) is used both intensively “ utterly,” “ completely,” and temporally “ forever” (Psalms 48:10; cf. εἰςτὸναἰῶν as a variant reading (Psalms 9:19) or as a parallel (Psalms 76:7, Psalms 102:9) of εἰςτέλο ); but the translation “ at last” is in no single case beyond question. In Genesis 46:4 = Amos 9:8, εἰςτέλο represents the so-called Hebrew infin. abs. (cf. Thackeray, Gram. O. T. Greek, I, 47, note 1).

In Luke 18:5 “ forever” = “ continually” is equally possible with “ finally.” The difficulties in rendering εἰςτέλο may be observed in any attempted translation of 2 Clem. 19:3 Ign. Eph. 14:2 Rom 1:1, Romans 10:1. In our passage, however, πάντοτ demands the temporal sense and that, too, because of ἔφθασε , “ at last.” — When εἰςτέλο is taken intensively, ἔγθασε is joined both with ἐπι and εἰ , and ὀρῆ is tacitly supplied after τέλο (cf. Job 23:7, Ezekiel 36:10); or αὐτῶ is supplied after εἰςτέλο “ to make an end of them” (De W.); or η is supplied before εἰςτέλο (the article could easily be omitted; cf. 2 Corinthians 7:7, 2 Corinthians 9:13), “ the wrath which is extreme” ; or πάντοτ is taken loosely for πάντως , παντελῶ (Dob.). For a conspectus of opinions, see either Lillie or Poole.— The reading of B Vulg f is to be observed: ἐφθ . δὲἡὀργὴἐπ ʼ αὐτοὺςεἰςτέλο With this order, we may translate either “ the wrath has come upon them at last” or “ the wrath which was against them has come to its height” (cf. 2 Mac. 6:15 πρὸςτέλοςτῶνἁμαρτιῶ and 6:14 πρὸςἐκπλήρωσιντῶνἁμαρτιῶ ; also Sap. 12:27 τὸτέρματῆςκαταδίκηςἐπ ʼ αὐτοὺςἐπῆλθε ; and 2 Mac. 7:38). In the latter translation, φθάνει is construed with εἰ as in Romans 9:31, Philippians 3:16.

The order of B is, however, probably not original; it inverts for emphasis as in 5:9 ἔθετοὁθεὸςἡμᾶ (Zim); furthermore the parallelism with v. 16 f. is broken. The reading ἔφθακε (BD) makes explicit the prophetic sense of ἔφθασε ; there is a similar variant in 1 Mac. 10:23, Son 2:12.— If the literal sense of ἔφθασε is insisted upon, and if of the many possible references to the past the destruction of Jerusalem is singled out, then either the entire letter is spurious (Baur, Paulus,2 II, 97) or the clause ἔφθασε … τέλο is an interpolation inserted after 70 a.d. (cf.

Schmiedel, ad loc. and Moff. Introd 73). In view of the naturalness of a proleptic aorist in a prophetic passage, the hypothesis of interpolation is unnecessary (cf. Dob. and Clemen, Paulus, I, 114).

Relation of v. 16c to Test. xii, Leviticus 6:11. That notwithstanding the textual variations there is a literary relation between our clause and Leviticus 6:11, is generally admitted. But that Leviticus 6:11, is original to Levi is still debated. Charles in his editions of the Test. xii (1908), following Grabe (Spicileg. 1700,2 I, 138), holds that 6:11 is an integral part of the original text of Levi and that Paul quotes it. The text which Charles prints is supported by c h i and a e f (except that these three read not τοῦθεου but κυρίο , and is apparently to be translated: “ but the wrath of God has forestalled them completely.” In his English version Charles has: “ but the wrath of God came upon them to the uttermost,” a translation that seems to presuppose the text of b d g and the first Slavonic recension (d omits δε and prefixes διὰτοῦτ ; b S1 invert the order to read: ἔφθασενδὲἡὀργὴκυρίουἐπ ʼ αὐτοὺςεἰςτέλο )— In favour of the view that Leviticus 6:11 in some form is original to Levi, it is urged (1) that this passage, unlike 4:4 ad fin. (where both Charles and Burkitt admit a Christian interpolation, although some form of ἀνασκολοπίζει is attested), is not specifically Christian and hence is not likely to be an interpolation; and (2) that 6:11 is prepared for by 6:7 ff. where Levi sees that the ἀπόφασιςθεοῦἦνεἰςκακα against Shechem and the Shechemites. On this theory Paul quotes Leviticus 6:11 from memory.— In favour of the view that Leviticus 6:11 is a Christian interpolation from Paul, it is urged (1) that the striking parallelism of members already observed between our clause and v. 16b points to the originality of v. 16c with Paul; (2) that the textual variations in Levi reflect those in Paul; for example, (a) ἡὀργη , which is used absolutely by Paul in a technical sense, does not appear in Test. xii, while ἡὀργὴτοῦθεου is found both in Leviticus 6:11 and Reuben 4:4; to be sure in Paul DEGF, Vulg add τοῦθεου , but not א BAPKL (CH are wanting); (b) in b, S1 of Leviticus 6:11, the order of words is that of B f Vulg of Paul; (c) six of the nine Gk.

Mss. of Levi (c h i a e f) omit the ἐπ ʼ , a reading similar to that of the catena of Corderius already noted: ἔφθασενδὲαὐτοὺςἡὀργὴεἰςτέλο ; and (d) above all, the first Armenian recension omits Leviticus 6:11 altogether. (That εἰςτέλο is used absolutely in Test. xii elsewhere only in the poorly attested Leviticus 5:6 is not significant, in the light of the frequent use of εἰςτέλο in the Lxx). According to this theory, Leviticus 6:11, instead of being the original which Paul quotes, is an interpolation from Paul (the various Greek forms of the interpolation being influenced largely by the variants in Paul), and is thus an early witness to the presence in Paul of v. 16c(Dob.).

The question may be considered as still unsettled. Conybeare (RTP 1908, 375) seems to agree with Charles; Burkitt (JTS 1908, 138) and Plummer (Matthew, 1909, xlvi) dissent; as does also Dob. (48), who, however, prefers (115) to leave it, in the present state of investigation, “ ganz unsicher.” Lock (HDB IV, 746a) surmises that the “ use of the phrase in the Test. xii Patr. perhaps shows that it was a half-stereotyped rabbinical formula for declaring God’ s judgment,” but does not adduce any rabbinical parallels. Rö nsch (ZWT 1875, 278 ff.), according to Dob., finds the origin of both Leviticus 6:11, and our verse in a divergent conception of Gen 35:4 f. (cf. also Jub. 30:26). Burkitt (op. cit.) regards the text of Levi as “ a Christian interpolation or at any rate as having been modified in language by the translator or by an editor who was familiar with 1 Thess.”

(4) The Intended Visit (2:17-20)

These verses are to be joined closely to the succeeding sections of the epistolary thanksgiving, viz., the sending of Timothy (3:1-5), his return with a report on the whole favourable, though there were some deficiencies in their faith (3:6-10), and the prayer that the apostles might be able to come back to Thessalonica (3:11-13). The emphasis upon the fact that they wanted to return, that Satan was the only power to hinder them, that Timothy, the trusted companion, is sent to take their place, and that they are praying God and Christ to direct their way to them, intimates rather strongly that 2:17-3:13, with its warm expressions of personal affection, is an apology for Paul’ s failure to return (cf. especially Calv.), prompted by the fact that the Jews (vv. 15-16) had insinuated that he did not return because he did not want to return, did not care for his converts, an assertion which had made an impression on the warm-hearted and sensitive Thessalonians, in that it seemed to lend some colour to the criticism of Paul’ s conduct during his visit.

Although 2:17-3:10 is a unit, we subdivide for convenience as follows: The Intended Visit (2:17-20); The Sending of Timothy (3:1-5); and Timothy’ s Return and Report (3:6-10).

To allay their doubts, the readers are reminded (vv. 17-20) that the apostles from the very moment that they had been bereaved of them were excessively anxious to see them, that Paul especially, the centre of the Jew’ s attack, had wished, and that too repeatedly, to see their faces again. Indeed, nothing less than Satan could have deterred them. Far from not caring for them, the missionaries insist, in language broken with emotion, on their eagerness to return, for is it not, they ask, above all, the Thessalonians who are the object of their glory and joy both now and in that day when the converts, having finished their race, will receive the victor’ s chaplet.

17Now we, brothers, when we had been bereaved of you for a short time only, out of sight but not out of mind, were excessively anxious to see your faces with great desire, 18for we did wish to come to you— certainly I Paul did, and that too repeatedly— and yet Satan stopped us. 19For who is our hope or joy or chaplet to boast in— or is it not you too— in the presence of our Lord Jesus when he comes? 20In-deed it is really you who are our glory and our joy.

17. ἡμεῖςδε While δε introduces a new point in the letter, the apology for his absence, it is also adversative, introducing a contrast not with ὑμεῖ (v. 14) but with the Jews (vv. 15-16; so Lü n.). Over against the insinuation that Paul did not wish to return, that his absence meant out of mind as well as out of sight, he assures the distressed readers, with an affectionate address , that he had been bereaved of them (ἀπορφανισθέντε is temporal, not both causal and temporal) only for a moment, a bodily absence that did not betoken forgetfulness when he and his companions were excessively anxious to return.

ἀπορφανισθέντε . Paul is not only τροφό (v. 7), νήπιο (v. 7), and πατή (v. 11), but also, if with Th. Mops. we press the metaphor here, ὀρφανό ; for although ὀρφανό is used “ with some latitude of reference” (Ell. who notes inter alia Plato, Phaed. 239 E), yet the specific reference is here quite pertinent, as Chrys. insists: “ He says not Χωρισθέντεςὑμῶ not, διασπασθέντεςὑμῶ not, διαστάντε not, ἀπολειφέντε , but ἀπορφανισθέντεςὑμῶ He sought for a word that might fitly indicate his mental anguish. Though standing in the relation of a father to them all, he yet utters the language of orphan children that have prematurely lost their parent” (quoted by Lillie, ad loc.).

ἀπορφανίζεσθα is found only here in Gk. Bib. Wetstein notes it in Æ schylus, Choeph. 247 (249). ὀρφανίζεσθα (not in Gk. Bib.) takes the gen. The ἀπο with ὑμῶ is in lieu of a gen. of separation; cf. 2 Clem. 2:3: ἔρημοςἀπὸτοῦθεου , and Bl 40:3.— ἀδελφοι frequently as here (cf. 2:1, 4:1, 10, 13, 5:1, 12, 25) but not always (1:4, 2:9, 14, 3:7, 5:4) marks the beginning of a new section.

πρὸςκαιρὸνὥρα . This idiomatic expression for a very short time is to be connected closely with ἀπορφανισθέντε Calvin observes: “ It is not to be wondered at if a long interval should give rise to weariness or sadness, but our feeling of attachment must be strong when we find it difficult to wait even a very short time.” And the reason for the emphasis is that the Jews had insinuated that Paul had no intention to return, on affection to inspire such an intention.

The phrase πρὸςκαιρὸνὥρα only here in Gk. Bib. appears to combine the classic πρὸςκαιρό (1 Corinthians 7:5, Luke 8:13; Proverbs 5:3 Sap. 4:4) and the later πρὸςὥρα (2 Corinthians 7:8, Galatians 2:5, Philemon 1:15, John 5:35); it is perhaps a Latinism in the κοινη ; cf. momento horae.

προσώπῳοὐκαρδίᾳ . “ In face not in heart” ; physically but not in interest; “ out of sight not out of mind” (Ruther). The phrase is interjected in view of the assertion of the Jews that Paul’ s absence is intentional not enforced.

We have not τῷσώματιοὐκἐνπνεύμετ (cf. 1 Corinthians 5:3), not τῆσαρκὶοὐτῷπνεύματ (cf. Colossians 2:5), but, as in 2 Corinthians 5:12, προσώπῳοὐκαρδίᾳ On the idea, cf. 1 Reg. 16:7: ἄνθρωποςὄψεταιεἰςπρόσωπονὁδὲφεὸςεἰςκαρδίαν

περισσοτέρωςἐσπουδάσαμενκτλ . No sooner had we been separated than we became “ anxious out of measure to see your face with passionate desire” (Ruther). The verb receives two parallel modifiers, περισσοτέρω , in the elative sense of “ excessively,” and ἐνπολλῇἐπιθυμίᾳ The repetition of a similar idea and the resumption of ἐσπουδάσαμε in ἠθελήσαμε (v. 18) serve to indicate not tautology, and not simply intensity of affection, but a tacit defence of Paul against the slanders of the Jews.

Since in later Gk. the comparative tends to usurp the function of the superlative, while the superlative tends to become an emphatic positive (Bl 11:3; Moult I, 78, 236), it is probable that περισσοτέρω is here not comparative but elative as in 2 Corinthians 7:13 and 7:15 (where Bachmann (in Zahn’ s Komm.) notes a similar use in BGU, 38010). περισσῶ does not occur in Paul; περισσοτέρω is found chiefly in Paul (cf. 2 Cor.).— Interpreters who hold strictly to the comparative force of περισσοτέρω explain the meaning variously (see Lillie, ad loc.). (1) “ The more fervently did we endeavour, as knowing the perils that beset you” (Fromond, Hofmann, Schmidt, Schmiedel); (2) the love of the apostles “ instead of being lessened by absence was rather the more inflamed thereby” (Calvin, Lillie, Lft.); (3) “ the repeated frustration of his attempts to get back to Thessalonica, far from deterring Paul from his intention, have rather still more stirred up his longing and increased his exertion to visit the believers in Thessalonica” (Born; cf. Find. Wohl., Mill.).— Other expositors, taking περισσοτέρω as elative, find the reference in the confidence of Paul that the separation being external cannot in God’ s purpose be for long, a fact that prompts the eagerness to overcome the separation (cf. Dob. who refers to Philippians 1:14, Philippians 1:25).— σπουδάζει (Galatians 2:10, Ephesians 4:3) is always in the N. T. and occasionally in the Lxx (Judith 13:1, 12, Isaiah 21:3) construed with the infinitive. τὸπρόσωπονὑμῶνἰδεῖ (3:10; cf. Colossians 2:1, Colossians 2:1 Mac. 7:30) = ὑμᾶςἰδεῖ (3:6; Romans 1:11, 1 Corinthians 16:7, etc.), as in P.

Par. 47 (Witk., 64).— ἐπιθυμί is used here and Philippians 1:23 in a good sense. On πολλῇ see on 1:5. The phrase ἐνπολλῇἐπιθυμίᾳ is not the cognate dative (Luke 22:15, Galatians 5:1?), though this dative is common in Lxx and occasional in classic Gk. (cf. Conybeare and Stock, Septuagint, 60-61). Note the various expressions of desire: σπουδάζειν , ἐπιθυμία , θέλειν , εὐδοκεῖ (3:1) and ἐπιποθεῖ (3:6).

18. διότιἠθελήσαμενκτλ “ For we did wish to come to you.” ἐσπουδάσαμε becomes ἠθελήσαμε and τὸπρόσωπονἰδεῖ becomes ἐλθεῖνπρὸςὑμᾶ ; the parallel expressions are virtually synonymous. The repetition is purposed, for he is defending himself and his associates; hence also he adds, “ and Satan stopped us.” Inasmuch, however, as the Jews had singled out Paul as the chief offender, he interjects ἐγὼμὲνΠαῦλος , καὶἅπαξκαὶδί In the light of ἅπαξκαὶδί (Deuteronomy 9:13, Deuteronomy 9:1 Reg. 17:39, Nehemiah 13:20, Nehemiah 13:1 Mac. 3:30), the first και may be ascensive, and the interjected phrase as a whole be translated: “ Certainly I Paul did wish to come, and that too repeatedly.”

διότ here as v. 8 is not “ wherefore” (διο ; so DcEKL) but “ because” ; a comma suffices after ἐπιθυμίᾳ . θέλει (cf. 4:13, II 3:10, 1 Corinthians 16:7) occurs in Paul about twelve times as often as βούλεσθα In Paul it is difficult to distinguish between them, though θέλει seems to pass into “ wish,” while βούλεσθα remains in the realm of “ deliberate plan.” Had Paul here intended to emphasise distinct deliberation, be would probably have used βούλεσθα as in 2 Corinthians 1:15. The actual resolve following σπουδάζει and θέλει comes first in ηὐδοκήσαμε (3:1).— μέ occurs in every letter of Paul except II and Phile.; in about one-third of the instances it is solitarium.— Apart from the superscriptions and the ἀσπασμό (II 3:17, 1 Corinthians 16:21, Colossians 4:18; cf. Philemon 1:19), Παῦλο appears in every letter of Paul except Rom. and Phil.— For ἐγὼμέ , cf. 1 Corinthians 5:3; for ἐγὼΠαῦλο , 2 Corinthians 10:1, Galatians 5:2, Ephesians 3:1, Colossians 1:23, Philemon 1:19.

The meaning of καὶἅπαξκαὶδί , a collocation found in Gk. Bib. only here, Philippians 4:16 and Nehemiah 13:20 , is uncertain. Usually the four words are taken together to mean an indefinite succession of occurrences, “ often,” “ repeatedly” (e. g. Grot., Pelt, Lft,; Wohl., Dob.), or else, definitely (cf. Herod. II, 121, III, 148, cited by Wetstein on Philippians 4:16 and Plato, Phaed. 63 E init.: καὶδὶςκαὶτρί = “ both twice and thrice” ), “ both once and twice, that is, twice” (Mill.).

Zahn, indeed (Introd. I, 204 f.; cf. Find.), conjectures that Paul attempted to return first when in Berœ a and a second time when waiting in Athens for Silvanus and Timothy. In the Lxx, however, we have simply ἅπαξκαὶδί which in Deuteronomy 9:13, Deuteronomy 9:1 Reg. 17:39 and Nehemiah 13:20 invites the translation “ often,” “ repeatedly,” and which in 1 Mac. 3:30 appears to mean καθὼςἀει , “ as usual.” Similar is the recurring phrase ὡςἅπαξκαὶἅπα (1 Reg. 3:10, 20:25, Judges 16:20, Judges 16:20:30, Judges 16:31) which seems to mean καθὼςἀει (Judges 16:20 A) or κατὰτὸεἰωθό (Numbers 24:1). If the phrase in our passage is not καὶἅπαξκαὶδί but ἅπαξκαὶδί , then the first και is ascensive: “ and what is more, repeatedly ” ; and light is thrown on Philippians 4:16: ὅτικαὶἐνθεσσαλονίκῃκαὶἅπαξκαὶδὶςεἰςτὴνχρείανμοιἐπέμψατ , which is to be rendered not, “ for even in Thessalonica ye sent once and again unto my need,” but, taking και … και correlatively (cf. Ewald, ad loc., in Zahn’ s Komm.), “ for both (when I was) in Thessalonica and repeatedly (when I was in other places) you sent to my need.” The point of Php 4:16 is thus not that the Philippians sent help frequently to Paul in Thessalonica but simply sent help to him there (probably on their own initiative) and frequently elsewhere.

καὶἐνέκοψενἡμᾶςὁΣατανᾶ . “ We were anxious to see you, we did wish to come to you, and yet Satan stopped us” (ἡμᾶ , that is, Paul and his two associates). The contest gives an adversative turn to the copula (Vulg sed). What particular obstacle Satan put in the way of their return, Paul does not tell us. Satan, however, did not thwart all of them permanently; they are able to send one of their number, Timothy, from Athens; and they are confident that God and Christ, to whom they pray (3:11) will direct their way to Thessalonica.

The reference to the work of Satan has been variously interpreted. (1) The illness of Paul is thought of as in 2 Corinthians 12:7 (so Simon, Die Psychologie des Apostels Paulus, 1897, 63). But as Everling remarks (Die paulinische Angelologie und Dä monologie,1888, 74), the theory of illness does not fit Silvanus and Timothy. (2) Satan prevented them from returning inorder to destroy the spiritual life of the converts and thus rob Paul of his joy in their chaplet of victory at the Parousia (so Kabisch, Die Eschatologie des Paulus, 1893, 27 f.) But as Dibelius (Die Geisterwelt im Glauben des Paulus, 1909, 56) observes, the chaplet of victory will be theirs if they continue steadfast under persecution; and furthermore, to make the victory sure, Paul himself need not return to Thessalonica (cf. 3:11-13). (3) Satan inspired the Politarchs to compel Jason and his friends to give bonds for the continued absence of Paul (so Ramsay, St. Paul the Traveller, 240; McGiffert, Apostolic Age, 249; Find. and others). This explanation, however, “ renders it difficult to see why the Thessalonians did not understand at once how Paul could not return” (Moff.), and takes the force out of the insinuations of the Jews. (4) Hence it is safer to leave the reference indefinite as Paul does (Everling, Dibelius, Mill.), or at most to think of “ the exigencies of his mission at the time being” (Moff.).

ἐνκόπτει occurs in Gk. Bib. elsewhere only Galatians 5:3, Acts 24:4; ἐνκόπτεσθα only Romans 15:22, 1 Peter 3:1. GF here and some minuscules in Galatians 5:7 read ἀνέκοψε . The Satan of Job, Zech. and 1 Chronicles 21:1 is rendered in Lxx by διάβολο except Job 2:3 (A) which like Sir. 21:27 has ὁΣατανᾶ For Σατά , cf. 3 Reg. 11:14, 23. In Paul, ὁΣατανᾶ (II 2:9; always with article except 2 Corinthians 12:7) is ὁπειράζω (3:5), ὁπονηρό (II 3:3), ὁθεὸςτοῦαἰῶνοςτούτο (2 Corinthians 4:4), ὁἄρχωντῆςἐξουσίας , τοῦἀέροςτοῦπνεύματοςτοῦνῦνἐνεργοῦντοςἐντοῖςυἱοῖςτῆςἀπειθία (Ephesians 2:2). On demonology in general, cf.

Bousset, Relig.2 381 ff. and J. Weiss. in PRE IV, 408 ff.; in Paul, the works of Everling and Dibelius noted above.

19-20. τίςγὰρἡμῶνκτλ In reply to the insinuation that he does not return because he does not care for his converts, Paul insists, with a compliment to their excellence, that he wanted to come to them because they are really his glory and his joy. As he thinks of them now and as he looks forward to the day when Jesus is to come, when the Christian race in over, and the Thessalonians receive the triumphant wreath, he sees in them his hope and joy, and in their victory his ground of boasting. His words are broken with emotion: “ For (γά introducing the motive of the ardent desire to return) who is our hope and joy and chaplet of boasting?” The answer is given in v. 20; but Paul anticipates by an interjected affirmative question: “ Or is it not you as well as my other converts ?” The και before ὑμεῖ is significant (cf. Chrys.): “ Can you imagine that the Jews are right in asserting that we do not care for you as well as for our other converts?” This said, he finishes the original question with the emphasis more on hope than on joy: “ before our Lord Jesus when he comes?” And finally he repeats the answer implied in ἢοὐχὶκαὶὑμεῖ , but without και , in v. 20: “ Indeed (γά = certe, as Calvin notes) it is really you who are our glory and our joy.”

τί = “ who” (Romans 8:35); on τίςγά , cf. 1 Corinthians 2:14, 1 Corinthians 2:7, 1 Corinthians 2:2:16 = Romans 11:34. As the hope is present, ἐστ is to be supplied; ἡμῶ goes with the three nominatives. η is usually disjunctive but sometimes the equivalent of a copula (Bl 7711); it appears in all the Pauline letters; cf. ἢοὐκοἴδατ (Romans 11:2, 1 Corinthians 6:2 ff.) or ἐπιγινώσκετ (2 Corinthians 13:5); א here omits ἤ . οὐχι is used frequently by Paul, chiefly in interrogative sentences (cf. Romans 3:29).— στέφανο (Philippians 4:1; 2 Timothy 4:8, 1 Corinthians 9:25) is here not the royal crown (2 Reg. 12:30, 1 Chronicles 20:2: Zechariah 6:11, Zechariah 6:14, Psalms 20:3; see Mayor on James 1:12 and Swete on Mark 15:17, Revelation 2:10) but the victor’ s wreath or chaplet; Deiss, (Light., 312) notes a second-century a.d. inscription in the theatre at Ephesus: ἠγωνίσατοἀγῶναςτρεῖς , ἐστέφηδύκαυχήσεω (obj. gen.) is the act of boasting. ע ט ר ת ת פ א ר ת is rendered variously in Lxx: στέφανοςκαυχήσεω (Ezekiel 16:12, Ezekiel 23:42, Proverbs 16:31), τρυφῆ (Proverbs 4:9), κάλλου (Isaiah 62:3), δόξη (Jeremiah 13:18) and ἀγαλλιάματο (Sir. 6:31; so A in our passage).

ἔμπροσθενκτλ . Paul’ s hope for his converts will be realised when they come “ before our Lord Jesus,” that is, ἔμπροσθεντοῦβήματοςτοῦΧριστου (2 Corinthians 5:10; cf. 1 Thessalonians 1:3, 1 Thessalonians 3:13 and contrast 3:9), as ἐντῇπαρουσίᾳαὐτου explains. When Jesus comes, arrives, is present, they will receive not ὀργη (as the Jews of v. 16) but σωτηρί (5:9).

παρουσί is used untechnically in 1 Corinthians 16:17, 2 Corinthians 7:6-7, 2 Corinthians 10:10, Philippians 1:26, Philippians 2:12 (cf. Nehemiah 2:6, Judith 10:18, 2 Mac. 8:12, 5:21, 3 Mal 3:17). Whether the technical use is a creation of the early church (Mill. 145 ff.; Dibelius) or is taken over from an earlier period (Dob.) is uncertain. (Test. xii, Jud. xxii. 3 ἕωςτῆςπαρουσίαςθεοῦτῆςδικαιοσύνη is omitted by the Armenian; cf. Charles). Deiss. (Light, 372 ff.) notes that in the Eastern world παρουσί is almost technical for the arrival or visit of a king (cf. also Matthew 21:5, Zechariah 9:9, Malachi 3:1) and that while the earthly king expected on his arrival to receive a στέφανοςπαρουσία , Christ gives a στέφανο to believers ἐντῇπαρουσίᾳαὐτου — ὁκύριοςἡμῶνἸησοῦ (3:11, 13, II 1:8, Romans 16:20, 1 Corinthians 5:4, 2 Corinthians 1:14) is less frequent in Paul than ὁκύριοςἡμῶνἸ . (1:3, 5:9, 23, 28, II 2:1, 14, 16, 3:18, Romans 5:1, Romans 5:11, Romans 5:15:6, 30, 1 Corinthians 2:2, 1 Corinthians 2:7 ff, 1 Corinthians 2:15:57, 2 Corinthians 1:3, 2 Corinthians 8:9, Galatians 6:14, Galatians 6:18, Ephesians 1:3, Ephesians 1:17, Ephesians 1:5:20, Ephesians 1:6:24, Colossians 1:3); hence GF add here Χριστου

ὑμεῖςγάρἐστεκτλ . “ Indeed it is really you who are the objects of our honour and our joy.” ἐστ is significantly expressed, not to contrast the present with the future (Flatt; see Lillie, ad loc.) or with the past, but to contrast the reality of Paul’ s affection for his converts with the falsity of the insinuations of the Jews. χαρα is repeated from v. 19. δόξ is new, and may mean “ glory” or “ honour.” In the latter case, the point may be that he does not demand honour from them (v. 6) but does them honour.

Weiss B. Weiss in TU. XIV, 3 (1896).

Lft Lightfoot.

Lxx The Old Testament in Greek (ed. H. B. Swete, 1887-94).

Ruther W. G. Rutherford, St. Paul’ s Epistles to the Thess. and Corinthians. A New Translation (1908).

Calv Calvin.

A A (e a p r). Cod. Alexandrinus, saec. v, now in the British Museum. Edited by Woide in 1786. Facsimile by E. M. Thompson, 1879. Contains I and II complete.

C C (e a p r). Cod. Ephraemi Rescriptus, saec. v, now in the National Library at Paris. The N. T. fragments were edited by Tischendorf in 1843. Contains I 1:2 ευχαριστουμεν — 2:8 εγενηθητε .

D D (p). Cod. Claromontanus, saec. vi, Graeco-Latin, now in the National library at Paris. Edited by Tischendorf in 1852. Contains I and II complete.

Vulg Vulgate.

Ephr Ephraem Syrus.

De W De Wette.

Lü n Lü nemann.

Ell Ellicott.

Mill George Milligan.

Born Bornemann.

Lillie John Lillie, Epistles of Paul to the Thessalonians, Translated from the Greek, with Notes (1856).

Dob Ernst von Dobschü tz,

Soph. E. A. Sophocles, Greek Lexicon of the Roman and Byzantine Periods (revised by J. H. Thayer, 1887, 1900).

Chrys Chrysostom.

K K (a p). Cod. Mosquensis, saec. ix, now at Moscow. Collated by Matthaei, 1782. Contains I and II complete.

L L (a p). Cod. Angelicus, saec. ix, now in the Angelican Library at Rome. Collated among others by Tischendorf (1843) and Tregelles (1845). Contains I and II complete.

B B (e a p r). Cod. Vaticanus, saec. iv, now in the Vatican Library. Photographic reproduction by Cozza-Luzi, Rome, 1889, and by the Milan firm of Hoepli, 1904. Contains I and II complete.

E E Cod. Sangermanensis, saec. ix, now at St. Petersburg. A copy of D.

Bl F. Blass, Grammatik des neutestamentlichen Griechisch (1896, 19022).

BMT E. D. Burton, Syntax of the Moods and Tenses in N. T. Greek (18983).

Tisch Tischendorf.

Zim F. Zimmer, Der Text der Thessalonicherbriefe (1893).

א Ԡ א (e a p r). Cod. Sinaiticus, saec. iv, now at St. Petersburg. Edited by Tischendorf, its discoverer, in 1862. Photographic reproduction by H. and K. Lake, Oxford, 1911. Contains I and II complete.

WH The New Testament in the Original Greek (1881; I, Text, II, Introduction and Appendix).

ICC International Critical Commentary.

P P (a p r). Cod. Porphyrianus, saec. ix, now at St. Petersburg. Edited by Tischendorf (1865). Contains I and II except I 3:5 μηκετι — ημειςοι 4:17.

G G (p). Cod. Boernerianus, saec. ix, now in the Royal Library at Dresden. “ It is closely related to F, according to some the archetype of F” (Souter). Edited by Matthaei, 1791. Im Lichtdruck nachgebildet, Leipzig (Hiersemann), 1909. Contains I and II complete.

Grot Hugo de Groot (Grotius).

Find G. G. Findlay.

Wohl Wohlenberg.

Moff James Moffatt.

F F (p). Cod. Augiensis, saec. ix, Graeco-Latin, now in the Library of Trinity College, Cambridge. An exact transcript by Scrivener, 1859. Contains I and II complete.

Boh Coptic version in the Bohairic dialect.

Ambst Ambrosiaster.

Pesh Syriac Vulgate.

Arm Armenian version.

Viteau J. Viteau, Etude sur le Grec du N. T. (I, 1893, II, 1896).

Moult James Hope Moulton, A Grammar of N. T. Greek, I (1906).

WS P. W. Schmiedel, 8th ed. of Winer’ s Grammatik (1894 ff.).

Deiss. A. Deissmann, Bibelstudien (1895).

Deiss. A. Deissmann, Neue Bibelstudien (1897).

HDB Hastings’ Dictionary of the Bible (1898-1904).

Kennedy, H. A. A. Kennedy, St. Paul’ s Conceptions of the Last Things (1904).

SH Comm. on Romans in ICC. by W. Sanday an A. C. Headlam.

EB The Encyclopæ dia Biblica (London, 1899-1903; ed. J. S. Black and T. K. Cheyne).

Th. Mops Theodore of Mopsuestia, in epistolas Pauli commentarii (ed. H. B. Swete, 1880-82).

Einl Einleitung in das N. T.

Deiss. A. Deissmann, Light from the Ancient East (1910) = Licht vom Osten (19093).

f f Latin of the bilingual F

e e Latin of the bilingual E

d d Latin of the bilingual D

g g Latin of the bilingual G

H H (p). Cod. Saec. vi. Most of the forty-one leaves now known are in the National Library at Paris; the remainder are at Athos, Moscow, St. Petersburg, Kiev, and Turin. The fragments at Kiev contain 2 Corinthians 4:2-7, 1 Thessalonians 2:9-13 and 4:4-11 ; cf. H. Omont, Notice sur un trè s ancien manuscrit, etc. 1889.

RTP Review of Theology and Philosophy.

JTS The Journal of Theological Studies.

ZWT Zeitschrift fü r Wissenschaftliche Theologie.

Witk St. Witkowski, Epistulæ Privatæ Græ cæ (1906).

PRE Real-Encyclopä die fü r protest. Theologie u. Kirche (3d ed. Hauck, 1896-1909).