new moral power. This introduction is marked by peculiar effects; is attended by its own evidences; is to be recognised by tokens that cannot be mistaken and that could not have been fabricated. 0

And observe the general spirit of this new moral power, as indicated in the letter of which we have given an analysis. Looking, as all the composition does, to Jesus Christ as the author and giver of this new life, it exhibits the essentials of his system in moral perfection-in the love of God and the love and service of man-carried to their most disinterested, loftiest, and most sanctifying pitch. And yet, while the most elevated spiritual excellence is required, all wears a sober practical air. The apostle descends to the virtues which stand lowest in the moral scale, if also he ascends to those which are near heaven itself. He enters into the ordinary concerns of life; he makes religion a work-mate with the handicraftsman-a companion and a monitor on the marts of commerce. And yet this quiet tone, this tone as of every-day life, which breathes through a large portion of the letter, is put forth by one who had only a few years before received into his bosom facts and ideas of the most rousing and exciting nature; and is addressed to persons who were agitated by a conviction that the end of the world was at hand, and who needed, under the injustice and persecution they were suffering, every sustaining aid which Christianity could afford.

The tranquil and sober tone of the letter shows on the part of Paul a true and earnest mind. We are content to put the question of his sincerity on the verdict which twelve intelligent men may give after the careful perusal of this one composition. And then mark how, while the writer is gentle as a nurse, he is also faithful and admonitory as a judge. There is much in this letter that must have given pain and might have occasioned offence. Yet this reproof is written, this reproof is endured. More still, the Thessalonians perpetuate the memory of their own misdeeds by carefully preserving the letter in which they are spoken of and blamed. Are not all these signs of reality? Do they not prove that the Thessalonians had undergone a great moral change, and were undergoing a greater still? Do they not show us the apostle's consciousnessas spotless and full of a divine peace? The study of the Scriptures themselves is the best preventive or the most effectual cure of unbelief.

It is worthy of notice that this letter emanated from Paul, Silvanus, and Timothy. This is expressly set forth (i. 1), and was, therefore, not an accidental circumstance. We see in this fact a proof that the First Epistle to the Thessalonians was an early composition of the apostle's, who as yet

hardly felt the firmness of his own position, and was anxious to recommend what he had to say with all the force he could employ. We see also in this a very natural solicitude, and a proof, that the apostle was a faithful and honest witness for Jesus, who sought to aid his own influence, not by high and exclusive pretensions, but by such means as lay before him; and who therefore associated with himself two persons well known to the Christian community in Thessalonica

The possession of the power of working miracles did not supersede, with the apostles, the employment of ordinary prudence. An additional illustration of this fact is seen in that our Lord himself sent forth his messengers by two and two' (Mark vi. 7). So Barnabas and Paul, then Barnabas and John Mark, and Paul and Silas, went out, each pair together, to the work of the ministry. The reason of this is found not merely in the Jewish law which required the testimony of two men (John viii. 17), but generally in the confirmation that a second witness gives to the statements of a first. It was historical facts that Paul had first to publish, as the groundwork of all his teachings; and historical facts greatly increased in credibility when attested by two competent witnesses.

This letter did not accomplish all that was required and that the apostle wished. News came to him which revived and in some way augmented his solicitude. In faith and love, indeed, the disciples had continued to grow; but their misconceptions regarding the appearance of the Lord Jesus had become greater and more operative on their lives. Paul was led to write the Second Epistle to the Thessalonians.

Hence

The evidence of this letter's having proceeded from Paul is involved in the recog nition as his of the First Epistle to the same church (ii. 15). It refers to the same subjects as the First, and treats of them generally in a (similar manner. There is, indeed, a difference, but this difference favours the hypothesis that both proceeded from Paul. The difference to which we allude is in the tone taken in the Second letter-the tone of a now confirmed and rightful authority, which would seem to justify the ancients in regarding this as the Second letter, written posterior to that which is denominated the First. Accordingly, his apostolic authority is now so established that he no longer, as in the First letter, admonishes in a subdued manner, but speaks in a firm and decided tone, almost blaming his pupils for their indocility (ii. 1, seq.). In the same way he now, as a master, bids them to observe his teachings (ii. 15), and to conduct themselves after the manner that he prescribes (iii. 6, 12); nay, disregard to his authority was to be expressly marked

(iii. 14). He no longer speaks of the introduction of Christianity into Thessalonica, but of its growth and diffusion (iii. 1).

The time when the letter was written was when Silvanus and Timothy were still with Paul. It must, as we have just seen, have been posterior to the First letter. Silvanus and Timothy seem to be among the brethren of whom Paul took leave on quitting Corinth (xviii. 18). Timothy appears again in connection with Paul only some time after, and Silas never (xix. 22). Therefore we seem justified in fixing the era of its composition towards the termination of the period during which the apostle remained at Corinth.

The immediate cause of these false views in the minds of the Thessalonians which induced Paul to pen the letter, appears to have lain in new persecutions which had broken out against them, and which they were led to consider as the token of the immediate appearance of Christ (i. 4-7; ii. 2). The way in which the apostle sought to correct these false notions will appear in the summary we are about to give of the contents of the Epistle.

After greeting his readers, the apostle expresses his gratitude to God for the increase of their faith and their mutual love; in consequence of which they were regarded by him as his glory, knowing, as he did, how firm and patient they were under the persecutions which they were then enduring. These sufferings were to be regarded as a token of God's being well pleased with them, since what they endured prepared them for what they would shortly enjoy in the kingdom of God; and so would they be recompensed for their tribulation, while wrath awaited their persecutors, who would receive terrible punishment at the manifestation of the Lord.

This retributory recompence is the general idea of the letter. Its application in particular cases follows (i.).

Having established this retribution as a fact, the writer begs his pupils, by their belief in that appearance of Christ which would occasion it, not to be troubled in their minds as if the event were near. Some persons had been endeavouring to make a wrong use of the fact. They had misinterpreted the apostle's words. They had even brought forward a letter as if from Paul. Thus had they tried to deceive the church. But an event which had not taken place must first happen, of which the apostle, when with the Thessalonians, had given them information; namely, an evil power, the mystery of iniquity, which claimed divine honours, but which was now restrained, would, ere the coming of the Lord, rise into influence and seduce even believers: when this wicked one should have been revealed, Jesus would come and consume him with the spirit of his mouth. Then would

vengeance fall on their persecutors and on all who did not receive the truth; while faithful Christians would be rewarded abundantly and for ever. Hence the apostle requests the prayers of his readers to aid him in his work. He expresses his confidence that they will be obedient to his instructions and wait patiently for Christ. Disorders, too, required a remedy. In the false notion that the world was near its end, some had discontinued to work, and sought their support in the resources of others, meanwhile wasting their time in going about in a disorderly way, augmenting men's fears and alarms. If needful, these persons were to be avoided by the church, yet not as enemies, but as brothers to be admonished. Let all bear in mind Paul's own example, who ate no man's bread for nought, but wrought with labour and travail night and day in order not to be chargeable to any one. So let these mistaken persons work with quietness and eat their own bread, and if any one obeyed not Paul's word as communicated by this Epistle, note that man and have no company with him, that he may be ashamed. Finally, he prayed that the church at large might not be weary in well-doing, but have peace always of the Lord. And in order that no forged letter might be im posed on the church, he wrote the salutation with his own hand, and intimated that this was to be accounted the token of his authorship in every succeeding Epistle.

This conclusion would seem to imply that the apostle contemplated the possibility of his sending other letters to Thessalonica Whether he did so or not we are not informed. If he sent other letters, they have perished.

Various are the opinions as to what the 'man of sin' (ii. 3-12) was of which the apostle speaks. It is styled the 'apostacy or falling away, that is, from the gospel. Paul gives the marks by which it was to be known when it appeared. These marks have all been signally verified in the Roman apostacy, and in it alone.

THEUDAS is by Gamaliel (Acts v. 34, seq.) described as one who, boasting himself to be somebody, rose up before the census by Cyrenius (cir. A.D. 7), and, gathering around him a band of four hundred men, was slain, and his associates put to flight. Josephus (Antiq. xx. 5, 1) mentions an insurgent by the name of Theudas, who was put down under Fadus, procurator of Judea (cir. 44 A.D.). But this cannot be the person of whom Gamaliel spoke in probably A.D. 33. Another person it was to whom Gamaliel referred, and who, under the name of Matthew (the Hebrew form of Theodotos, which in Aramaic is Theudas, each signifying 'given of God'), raised, in the latter days of Herod the Great, a band of his scholars, in

order to effect a social reform, by destroying the heathen works which the king had erected contrary to the law. Matthias, Matthew, or Theudas, was punished with death (Antiq. xvii. 6, 2, 4).

If by the taxing,' apographe, Gamaliel meant, as he may have done, the enrolling under Herod rather than the actual census made after his death (see CYRENIUS), then must the insurrection of Theudas have taken place just before the decree issued by Augustus (Luke ii. 1). The insurrection and the enrolment were very near each other, and we see in this a reason why the two facts stand together in Gamaliel's mind. See TIME.

THOMAS, in the Syriaca twin,' whence the Greek name of the same import, Didymus (John xi. 16; xx. 24), was an apostle of Jesus Christ (Matt. x. 3), probably a native of Galilee (John xxi. 2). Thomas was one

THOMAS.

of those rash and hasty characters that, carried away on the currents of strong emotions, are extreme, changeful, and sudden in every thing; eager in friendship, self-willed in disbelief, headlong in conviction, and beyond bounds in profession. Their characteristics are ardour, force of will, rashness, and extremes (John xi. 16; xiv. 5; xx. 24, seq.). Nothing certain is known of Thomas after his appearance in Acts i. 13; though tradition makes him to have preached the gospel, besides other places, in the East Indies, and to have there founded the church called by his name. The Acts and the Gospel which bear his name are spurious.

THORNS AND THISTLES must have been abundant in the lands of the Bible, for in the Hebrew we find them denominated by some sixteen words, the exact import of which can be ascertained, if ever, only after a much more minute acquaintance with the vegetable kingdom in Western Asia and neighbouring countries, than is at present possessed.

Thorns and thistles in the fields were naturally hateful to the Israelites as an agricultural nation (Job xxxi. 40. Micah vii. 4), and hence became an image of a hostile people (Is. x. 17), and a bramble was the emblem of one who could do only harm (Judg. ix. 15). In Palestine, which was poor in wood, thorns served as fuel (Ps. lviii. 9. Eccles. vii. 6), and, together with stubble, were converted into ashes for manure (Isaiah xlvii. 14. Matt. ii. 12). The fire is rapid in its progress. It burnt till the material was consumed, when of a sudden it went out (Ps. cxviii. 12). The stubble in the East was (and is) much longer than with us. Hence the conflagration and the consequent noise were considerable (Joel ii. 5; comp. Exod. xv. 7. Is. v. 24).

Thorns were employed for hedges. In Prov. xv. 19, we read, The way of the slothful is as an hedge of thorns.' Doubdan, in his Travels, relates that a few miles south of Bethlehem, he met with an orchard of olives, figs, and vines, surrounded with a hedge, the way to which was covered with thorns mixed with pomegranates. The cactus, ficus Indica. or prickly pear, reaches in Palestine a great height, and puts forth fine gold-coloured flowers, but only mocks those who look to it for human food.

What was the plant of which the crown of thorns, put on the Saviour's head, was made, has been much debated. The more common opinion makes it the palturus aculeatus, or 'Christ's thorn,' a shrub that abounds in Judea, and has pliable branches armed with sharp pines. Bishop Pearce and others have preferred the acanthus, or 'brank-ursine.' Yates is in favour of the spartium villosum, or still more probably it might be the rhamnus, which grew in and near Jerusalem. It 'puts out early in the spring into long thin and pliable twigs, with a great many long and strong prickles.'

The thorns with which the mocking crown of the Saviour was made, may, in Hasselquist's opinion, have been of the thorny plant which the Arabs call nabeké. This was very suitable for their purpose, since it has many small pointed thorns which could cause painful wounds, and its round and flexible twigs could easily be bent into a chaplet. What confirmed him in his opinion was, that the leaves of this plant are very like those of ivy in form and colour. He thought it probable that the soldiers chose a plant which resembled that with which their empe

xxx. 28. Amos ix. 9), and 'winnowed with the shovel and with the fan' (Is. xxx. 24); whence religious teachers borrowed striking metaphors (Jer. xv. 7. Matt. iii. 12). At last, the pure grain was brought into the barn or storehouse (2 Sam. ix. 10. Is. xxxii. 10. Job xxxix. 12. Hagg. ii. 19).

Threshing-floors, from their being open and important spots, gave names to places (2 Sam. vi. 6. 1 Chron. xiii. 9).

Speaking of Sebustieh, the ancient Samaria, Robinson (iii. 141) says, 'We ascended the hill, and came soon to the threshingfloors of the village. They were still in full operation, although the harvest seemed to be chiefly gathered in. Here we first fell in with the ledge, as used for threshing. It consists chiefly of two planks fastened together side by side, and bent upwards in front, precisely like the common stone-sledge of New England, though less heavy. Many holes are bored in the bottom underneath, and into these are fixed sharp fragments of hard stone. The machine is dragged by the oxen as they are driven round upon the grain; sometimes a man or boy sits upon it, but we did not see it otherwise loaded. The effect of it is to cut up the straw quite fine. We afterwards saw this instrument frequently in the north of Palestine.'

Robinson (ii. 276) saw on the plain of Jericho 'a truly scriptural scene, where the reaping and the threshing go hand in hand (Ruth ii. 8). The people we found were our old acquaintances, the inhabitants of Taiyibeh, who had come down to the Ghor in a body, with their wives and children, and their priest, to gather in the wheatharvest. They had this year sown all the wheat raised in the plain of Jericho, and were now gathering it in shares; one-half being retained for themselves, one quarter going to the people of the village, and the remaining quarter to the soldiers of the garrison, on behalf of the government. The people of Jericho, it seems, are too indolent, or, as it was said, too weak, to till their own lands.

'The wheat was beautiful; it is cultivated solely by irrigation, without which nothing grows in the plain. Most of the fields were already (May 13th) reaped. The grain, as soon as it is cut, is brought in small sheaves to the threshing-floors on the backs of asses, or sometimes of camels. A level spot is selected for the threshing-floors, which are then constructed near each other, of a circular form, perhaps fifty feet in diameter, merely by beating down the earth hard. Upon these circles the sheaves are spread out quite thick, and the grain is trodden out by animals. Here were no less than five such floors, all trodden by oxen, cows, and younger cattle, arranged in each case five abreast, and driven round in a circle, or rather in all directions, over the floor. By this

process the straw is broken up and becomes chaff. It is occasionally turned with a large wooden fork, having two prongs, and when sufficiently trodden, is thrown up with the same fork against the wind in order to separate the grain, which is then gathered up and winnowed. The whole process is exceedingly wasteful. Among the Mohammedans, I do not remember to have seen an animal muzzled (Deut. xxv. 4). The precept in Deuteronomy serves to show that of old, as well as at the present day, only neat cattle were usually employed to tread out the grain' (comp. Hos. x. 11).

THRONE, from the Greek thronos, seems, from the import of the Hebrew root, to have originally signified a covered seat.' The divan or cushioned elevation at the end or sides of a room may have been the primitive throne, as in the East it is still the seat where ordinarily sits the administrator of justice. From this custom we may derive the idea of covering involved in the word. In Judg. iii. 20, the term is rendered seat," and appears to signify merely the divan. It was, however, used of a raised seat, for on such must Eli have sat when, falling backward, he brake his neck and died' (1 Sam. iv. 13, 18). This seat seems from the facts to have been a kind of stool (2 Kings iv. 10). In time, however, it came to be applied to the more or less decorated seat of a military commander (Jer. i. 15), of the high-priest (1 Sam. i. 9; comp. Zech. vi. 13), of a judge (Ps. cxxii. 5), considered, however, as the peculiar seat of a king engaged in administering justice (Prov. xvi. 12; xx. 8, 28), the characteristic function of an Oriental monarch (Dan. vii. 9). Hence a throne was used as

w

a symbol of monarchy (Gen. xli. 40) or regal power (1 Kings i. 47). Great splendour was occasionally bestowed on thrones, especially