of Timothy, as the substitute of Paul; it shews that he means some wish which he had formed after his departure from Thessalonica indeed, but before his departure from Athens.

We may venture to pronounce, therefore, with confidence, that the First Epistle to the Thessalonians was written from Corinth, U. C. 803, soon after St. Paul's arrival, which we placed about the spring of the year. The time of the first determines presumptively the time of the second; which being written apparently to correct a very important mistake, produced by the first", must have been written no long time after it; and, consequently, in U. C. 803. also. In fact, iii. 2. of the Second Epistle may probably allude even to Acts xviii. 6-10. It follows, consequently, that these two Epistles were the earliest of St. Paul's Epistles in general; and there are passages in each of them which might suggest of themselves such a conclusion v.

II. On the First Epistle to the Corinthians.

The First Epistle to the Corinthians was written from Asia"; that is, from the province of that name in Asia Minor; and it was written from Ephesus in that province x. It could not therefore be written before the commencement of the residence at Ephesus, in the thirteenth of Claudius, U. C. 806.

Again; it could not be written before Apollos had visited and preached at Corinth "; to which place it is evident that he proceeded from Ephesus: nor yet before he was come back again thence to Ephesus b. Now when Paul first arrived at Ephesus, U. C. 806, he was still at Corinth : if so, we may take if for grant

u Thess. iv. 13—v. 11. 2 Thess. ii. 1—12.

iii. 14. iii. 17.

w xvi. 18.

VI Thess. v. 27. 2 Thess.

x xv. 32. xvi. 8. z 1 Cor. i. 12. iii. 4, 5, 6. 22. iv. 6. 2 Cor. iii. 1. b 1 Cor. xvi. 12. c Acts xix. 1, 2.

y Acts xix. 1. a Acts xviii. 24. 27.

ed that the Epistle was not written immediately after St. Paul's arrival, nor until some time in the course of the first year of his residence at least; a conclusion which is impliedly confirmed by 1 Cor. iv. 11—13. compared with Acts xx. 31. 34: for St. Paul must have been some time at Ephesus, if this description of his mode of employment daily was natural and just.

Again; the Epistle was written either at or just before the arrival of the period of the Passover; and before the ensuing Pentecost; and it was written after Timothy had been sent to Corinth, and while he was still absent; but when St. Paul was waiting for his return at Ephesus, and for his return in company with others; which implies that others also had been sent with him. And that after this Timothy did actually rejoin St. Paul, before he wrote any second Epistle at least, appears from the Second to the Corinthians. If then the Epistle was written before the point of time specified at Acts xix. 22, which mentions the fact of a mission of Timothy and Erastus into Macedonia; this mission, as concerns the former, and perhaps as concerns the latter too, must have been a second mission: a conclusion not at variance with the Epistle, nor impossible in the nature of things: and this I believe to have been actually the case.

For first; at a time posterior to the mission of Timothy alluded to in the Epistle, St. Paul had not yet decided upon going up to Jerusalem, much less upon visiting Rome; but before the mission specified in the Acts he had already made up his mind to do both 8.

Secondly; when he wrote the Epistle to the Corinthians, he had not yet determined, though he might

d 1 Cor. v. 7, 8. xvi. 8. e iv. 17. xvi. 12. xvi. 10, 11. 8 1 Cor. xvi. 3, 4. 6. Acts xix. 21.

f 2 Cor. i. 1.

have given them some reason to expect he would determine, on passing through Macedonia, and so on to Achaia; much less upon making any stay there: but at the time of the mission in the Acts he had decided on doing both h.

Thirdly; after the mission of Timothy in the Acts, there is no mention of his rejoining St. Paul either at Ephesus or any where else, before they set out together from Greece to go into Asiai: which seems to imply that, after that mission, St. Paul rejoined Timothy, and not Timothy St. Paul. And this might easily be the case; for Timothy had been sent into Macedonia, and Paul left Ephesus to go to Macedoniak; and wrote his Second Epistle to the Corinthians, (as we shall see by and by,) when Timothy was certainly with him, from thence.

Fourthly; St. Paul's original intention was to pass through Corinth into Macedonia, and back from Macedonia to Corinth; and thence to set out for Judæa1: the plan which he actually adopted was just the reverse of this; passing to Corinth through Macedonia, and back again from Corinth to Macedonia ".

Fifthly; he had never been at Corinth since his first visit; yet he tells them that this was the third time he was coming or ready to come to them; that is, the third time that he had promised to come to them. Now there is one such promise here, and another in various places of the First Epistle P; but there is no instance of a third, unless it was sent by Timothy at the time of the mission specified in the Acts, or at the time of some other mission, such as we are supposing, prior to and distinct from that. And this is much the more probable supposition: for there is no proof in the Acts that

k xx. I.

h I Cor. xvi. 5. Acts xix. 21, 22. i Acts xx. 3, 4. i. 15, 16. in Acts xix. 21. XX. I. 3. n 2 Cor. i. 15. 23. ii. o 2 Cor. xii. 14. xiii. 1. PI Cor. iv. 19. xi. 34. xvi. 2. 3. 5.

1 2 Cor. 1. xiii. 2. q xix. 22.

Timothy was sent any where into Achaia, but there is proof in the Epistle, that he was sent to Corinth; that St. Paul expected he would arrive there; and that he would correct some conception, which had given occasion to the mistaken idea that St. Paul never intended to visit Corinth again; and that to rectify this mistake, as well as for other purposes, was one principal motive to his mission itself. And, 1 Cor. xvi. 5. the emphasis laid on Μακεδονίαν γὰρ διέρχομαι, is another presumptive intimation that St. Paul had sent them a message to that effect already; which message some among them perhaps, might affect to disbelieve. Moreover, from 1 Cor. xvi. 10, it appears that Timothy had not been sent long before the Epistle itself was written; and that St. Paul must have considered it possible the Epistle might arrive at Corinth before him.

The drift of all these considerations is to shew that the First to the Corinthians was written before the point of time specified at Acts xix. 22: and consequently before the expiration of the two years' and three months' residence, as mentioned Acts xix. 8. 10. and xix. 21. at least. If it was written therefore about the time of a Passover, it was probably written before the actual arrival of Easter: nor in fact could it have been said with propriety, ὥστε ἑορτάζωμεν *, unless the feast had been still to come.

Now, when he visited Corinth, the writer considers it probable that he might spend a winter there; which could not be the winter of the year then current, because it would be later both than the Passover and the Pentecost of that year". The Epistle then was written a year at least before the time when this winter was to arrive and if this winter was that which St.

r1 Cor. iv. 17. xvi. 10. iv. 18. u Ibid. xvi. 8.

s Ibid. v. 8.

t Ibid. xvi. 6.

Paul actually did spend in Greece, after he left Ephesus, and before the Passover spent at Philippi', it was the winter of the second of Nero, U. C. 809. ineunte ; and consequently the Epistle, which was written one year at least before it, was written in or before the winter of the first of Nero, U. C. 808. ineunte : which conclusion may be rendered almost indubitably certain by the following consideration.

The Epistle was written at a time when a collection for the church of Jerusalem either had been only recently begun, or was still incomplete and going on at Corinth. The same collection had previously been going on among the churches of Asia; where its origin could not have been earlier than the time of St. Paul's last visit to Galatia, which was in U. C. 805. This collection had been projected, and going forward at Corinth in particular, for a year before it was completed in Macedonia; and it was completed or about to be so in Macedonia, when St. Paul wrote his Second Epistle to the Corinthians: and it had been projected at least, if it had not for some time been going on, before he wrote his First: for the directions at xvi. 1. of the First Epistle, are manifestly given in answer to an inquiry of the Corinthians, among other things about which they had written, respecting also the mode to be adopted in making this collection; and the collection, as we may presume, was in a great measure a proposal of their own, or St. Paul would not write to them in the Second Epistle, as he does write2.

Now we have seen one instance of a similar collection, which was made at Antioch. It was peculiar to this that it was made in or just after a sabbatic year, and against a period of dearth. We have seen also

v Acts xx. 3. 6. I Cor. vii. 1.

WI Cor. xvi. 1. x 2 Cor. viii. 1-4. viii. 10. ix. 2. z 2 Cor. viii. 10—15. ix. 1—5.