was announced by him. He spoke simply and plainly not flattering the rich and busy city, but speaking his message 'with much contention,' 'not as pleasing men, but God which trieth the hearts.' And the reception which his message met with was remarkable. They received it, not as the word of men, but as the word of God. They who heard it formed themselves into a church, in which, though there were doubtless many Jews, yet beyond question the preponderance was on the side of the Gentiles. It has been observed that in neither of these Epistles is there so much as one allusion to the Old Testament Scriptures: a significant fact, when we remember how steeped St. Paul's mind was in all their lore. This does not look as if the readers were to be mainly Jews. Some however of the Jews became believers, and attached themselves to Paul and Silas (Acts xvii. 4). But the great body of believers was composed of Greek proselytes and to these were added, as indeed seems to have been the case everywhere else, many of the chief women of the city.

For upwards of three weeks the influence of the Apostle was on the increase. Each Sabbath-day, we may well imagine, he entered further into the

nature of the "good tidings," and opened and alleged new reasons why Christ must needs have suffered and risen again from the dead; and why this Jesus whom he preached to them was to be received as Christ.

Such a course could not but stir up the hostility of those Jews who rejected the message. As usual, where argument was wanting, violence was resorted to. They gathered together the rabble of the market, collected a multitude, and rioted in the streets; directing their attack upon the house of Jason, with whom apparently the missionaries were lodging. Not finding them, they laid hold on the householder himself, and some of the believers whom they took there, and brought them before the magistrates.

And here let us pause a moment to notice a feature of genuine truth in the narrative. These magistrates of Thessalonica are called by an unusual name: viz., Politarchs, or rulers of the citizens. First of all, we might well suppose that some peculiar name would be used at Thessalonica; for it was what we called a 'free city,' i. e., not like Philippi, a colony, governed after the manner of Rome itself, a little miniature of the metropolis,

but a town left to its own government and customs. So that, if the magistrates were called by some strange title, we might suppose that it was owing to local custom which had not been interfered with. So far we should be justified in believing that St. Luke had been faithful in his report, and we might conclude, from this incidental notice of the name, that it was in use at Thessalonica. That is, the believer in the Scripture narrative would give him this credit: the unbeliever would probably find in the name an occasion for denying the accuracy of the narrative. However, we have not been left in this case to mere inference. An inscription exists to this day on a triumphal arch at Thessalonica, stating that it was erected while Sosipater, Secundus, Gaius, and others were politarchs. It will be also observed that the three names which I have selected out of the list belong also to three of St. Paul's companions in travel; for Sosipater is only a longer form of Sopater (Acts xx. 4), who was of the neighbouring city of Beroa; and Gaius was of Macedonia (Acts xix. 29), Secundus of Thessalonica itself (Acts xx. 4). So accurate does research ever prove the Scripture narrative to have been. The reader is not indeed

to imagine that the bearers of these names, as recorded on the arch, were identical with St. Paul's companions. The arch itself is probably of the age of the Emperor Constantine-250 years later. But the inscription proves that the magistrates were called by the very name which St. Luke gives them; and that the names of St. Paul's Macedonian companions were of current use in that neighbourhood.

The immediate result of the appearance of Jason and his friends was to excite and harass the politarchs. The Apostle was charged with disloyalty to Cæsar, and with 'saying that some one else was king, even Jesus ;' an awkward charge for a free city under the Roman empire to deal with. Not willing to commit themselves to a decision, the magistrates contented themselves with binding over Jason and his friends to keep the public peace.

Both for this reason and on account of the hostility of the Jews, Thessalonica was no longer a place for the Christian missionaries; and accordingly they were privately conveyed away by night to Beroa. Such is the brief history of St. Paul's visit to this city; about a month, more or less, was its duration and it gave occasion to the two

:

remarkable letters which we find in our Testaments. Let us now see how this was.

The charge brought against the preachers by the Jews is very instructive on this head. It is plain that the headship and the kingdom of Christ had been a main subject of their discourses. The rough and unjust treatment of St. Paul at Philippi had roused his spirit, so that he boldly and freely proclaimed the good news of a coming reign of one who should judge the world in righteousness, trying the hearts of men (1 Thess. ii. 2). We find traces of this preaching of the kingdom and coming of the Lord in both the letters. Thus, for instance, in I Thess. i. 10, their conversion is described as having resulted in their serving the living and true God, and waiting for His Son from the heavens; and in the same (ii. 12) they are exhorted to walk worthy of the God who calleth them to His kingdom and glory. See also chap. ii. 19, 20; iii. 13; iv. 13-18; V. I-II, and 23. The most remarkable of all these passages (iv. 13—18) appears to have been written in reply to a fear of the Thessalonians, lest their friends who had fallen asleep in Christ should be excluded from the triumph and glory of His second coming. That they had misunderstood