past is looked back upon as if from that future day.

In ch. ii. 2, the day of Christ,' should be 'the day of the Lord.' In ver. 3, our two oldest MSS., for 'sin,' have 'lawlessness.' In ver. 4, the words 'as God' are omitted by all our most ancient MSS. In ver. 8, for the Lord, most of our oldest MSS., versions, and Fathers, read the Lord Jesus.' In ver. 11, for God shall send them,' read 'doth God send them.'

In ch. iii. 6, he received' should be 'they received.'

We now come to consider the places where our Authorised Version has inadequately represented the sacred text.

In ch. i. 7, his mighty angels,' should be the angels of his might.' The difference is not important here but in some places, e.g., Phil. iii. 21, this practice of rendering by an adjective, eclipses and obscures the whole meaning. In ver. 11, for the good pleasure of his goodness,' should stand 'good pleasure of goodness.'

In ch. ii. 1, by the coming,' should be 'touching,' or 'concerning, the coming.' As it now stands, it looks like a formula of adjuring them;

with which the phrase has nothing to do.

6

In

ver. 2, 'shaken in mind' should be shaken from your mind,' In the same verse, 'is at hand' should be is come.' This has been vehemently

denied by several who have differed from the above interpretation of the passage. But it ap

pears to me that the words can mean nothing else. The verb occurs six times besides in the New Testament, and always with the meaning, 'to be present,' not, 'to be at hand.' It is the same word as that in the expression things present or things to come' in Rom. viii. 38 and 1 Cor. iii. 22, and is thus distinguished from any reference to the future. And so Chrysostom, himself a Greek, and knowing the force of his own language: 'The devil, when he could not persuade them that the announcements of things future were false, took another way, and having suborned certain pestilent fellows, endeavoured to deceive by persuading them that those great and glorious events had an end. At one time they said that the resurrection was already past (2 Tim. ii. 17, 18); but in this case they said that the judgment was come, and the presence of Christ . . . thus removing fear of retribution for the evil, and hope of reward for the

good. In ver. 3, for a falling away,' render 'the apostasy.' It is not one among many apostasies, but the great and well-known one, which is indicated. The article, being expressed in the Greek in a place where it could not but be emphatic, ought never to have been omitted by our translators. In ver. 8, 'spirit' is better 'breath': and 'brightness' ought to be appearance.' ver. 9, lying wonders' should have been wonders of falsehood' (see above on ch. i. 7). In ver, 11, 'a lie' ought to have been 'the falsehood': viz.,

In

that before spoken of. In ver. 12, 'damned' ought to be judged.' The word in the original is simply that, and nothing more. Of course, from the context, both in the Greek and in the English, an unfavourable issue of the judgment must be assumed but the word never ought to have been strengthened in the translation, either here or in the other places where it has been similarly treated (one very sad instance occurs in 1 Cor. xi. 29). In ver, 13, through sanctification' ought to be ' in sanctification.' Sanctification is not the instrument, but the necessary conditioning state, of our salvation. A similar inaccuracy occurs in ver. 16, where through grace' ought to be 'in grace.'

In ch. iii. 2, 'perverse' more nearly answers to the force of the Greek adjective than ' unreasonable' and 'faith' should be 'the faith.' In ver. 5, 'the patient waiting for Christ' ought to be the patience of Christ,' the patience which was in Christ. The words will not bear the other rendering. In ver. 7 (also in ver. 9), follow' ought to be 'imitate.' In ver. 8, for nought' is perhaps not quite clear: it may give the impression that 'without result' is meant: 'without recompense,' or without payment,' would express the meaning more perspicuously. In ver. 11, in the words ' working not at all, but are busy-bodies,' there is in the original a play upon words, which it is a pity to lose altogether: 'working at no business, but being busybodies,' comes as near as perhaps can be accomplished in English. In ver. 12, 'by our Lord Jesus Christ' should be 'in our Lord Jesus Christ.' In ver. 16, by all means' should be 'in every way.'

I may add, that the probable date of the writing of the two Epistles to the Thessalonians is between the years 52 and 54 A.D. In the latter of these two years, Nero succeeded Claudius as Emperor of Rome.

IV.

THE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE

CORINTHIANS.

E left St. Paul at Corinth, where his

WE sojourn lasted eighteen months. In his

contentions with the Jews there he had been comforted by a vision, in which the Lord had assured him that He had much people in that city. And so he remained, teaching the word of God, till the stir arose in which the cautious and amiable Gallio, refusing to notice the complaints of the Jews, had ensured for the new faith the protection of the law. This favourable incident enabled the Apostle to prolong his stay yet further. His ultimate departure appears to have been occasioned by a vow, compelling him to visit Jerusalem. Thither he rapidly proceeded, making a short visit at Ephesus by the way, and to