another place confeffeth it. The apostles too had already turned from the Jews to the Gentiles. Paul and Barnabas had declared to the Jews at Antioch in Pifidia, (Acts XIII. 46.) It was neceffary that the word of God should firft have been Spoken to you; but feeing ye put it from you, and judge yourselves unworthy of everlasting life, lo, we turn to the Gentiles: but this tranfaction was before this Epistle was written, and indeed before ever Paul went to Theffalonica. As part of the facts here predicted as future were already past, fo the other part are manifeftly falfe, or of uncertain credit at beft. The ftatue erected to Simon Magus at Rome, and his public defeat there by the preaching and miracles of St. Peter in the presence of the emperor, are no better than fables. Even papists doubt the truth of these things, and well may others deny it. Simon Magus might perhaps have many followers; but it doth not appear that many of the Chriftians apoftatized to him. Simon Magus might perhaps be worshipped by the Samaritans; but it doth not appear that he was ever worshipped in the temple of God at Jerufalem, or in any house of God belonging to the Chrif tians. He died by all accounts fome years before the deftruction of Jerufalem; and it doth not appear that any of the Gnoftics were involved

in the deftruction of the unbelieving Jews. They were so far from being all involved in the same deftruction as Dr. Hammond afferts, that that fect florifhed most after the deftruction of Jerufalem, and the fecond century after Chrift is fometimes distinguished by the title of Seculum Gnofticum or the age of the Gnoftics. Befides when it is faid Whom the Lord fhall confume with the fpirit of his mouth, and fhall deftroy with the brightness of his coming, it is evident that the same person who was to be confumed with the fpirit of his mouth, was alfo to be destroyed with the brighness of his coming: but according to this expofition, Simon Magus was confumed by the fpirit of his mouth, that is by the prayer and preaching of St. Peter; and the unbelieving Jews and Gnoftics were deftroyed together by the brightness of his coming, that is by the deftruction of Jerufalem. They who defire to see a farther refutation of this expofition, may find it in (5) Le Clerc among the foreign, and in Whitby among our English

commentators.

3. Le Clerc, whofe comment on the New Teftament is a tranflation and fupplement of Hammond's, hath not demolished his hypothefis

(5) Clericus in locum. Whitby's Pref. to the 2d Epift. to the Theffalonians.

(6) Nihil

the temple of God.

thefis without erecting (6) another of his own, which he esteems much more probable than the conjecture both of Grotius and Hammond. He supposeth that the apoftafy was the great revolt of the Jews from the Romans. The man of fin was the rebellious Jews, and especially their famous leader Simon, not Magus, but the son of Gioras. They trampled upon all authority divine and human. They feifed and profaned What hindered was what reftrained the Jews from breaking into open rebellion, which was partly the reverence of the Jewish magistrates, and partly the fear of the Roman armies. The mystery of iniquity was the spirit of rebellion then working under the mask of liberty. The feditious Jews were also the wicked one; and they had among them falfe prophets and impoftors, who pretended to fhow great figns and wonders. But to this hypothesis it may be replied, that the apoftafy is plainly a defection from the true religion, and

(6) Nihil vetat in medium fufpicionem proferre, quæ haud paulo verifimilior videtur, et Grotiana et Hammondiana conje&tura. Amoracias ergo fufpicor Paulum vocare defectionem illam magnam Judæorum, qua imperii Romani jugum excutere fruftra conati funt.-fequitur bominem peccati effe rebelles

it

Judæos, et præfertim eximium eorum ducem Simonem, non Magum, fed Gioræ filium.Seditiofi Judæi auctoritatem omnem legitimam, cum exterorum, tum popularium, tantum abeft ut coluerint, ut contrà fefe eâ fuperiores exiftimarint-Scelerati illi Zelotæ et Idumæi, qui templum Jerofolymitanum inva

ferant

it is used in no other fenfe by the apostle. It was not likely that he should entertain his new Gentile converts with discourses about the Jewish state and government, wherewith they had little concern or connexion. It was alfo scarce worthy of the fpirit of prophecy to say, that the deftruction of Jerufalem fhould not happen, unless there was first a rebellion of the Jews. No good reason is affigned, why Simon the son of Gioras should be reputed the man of fin, rather than the other factious leaders, John and Eleazar. No proof is alleged, that he was ever worshipped in the temple of God as God. He was not exalted above every God or emperors for he was vanquished and made the emperor's prifoner. His coming was not with all figns and lying wonders; for he never pretended to any fuch power, He was not deftroyed in the deftruction of Jerufalem; but was preferved alive, and (7) was afterwards led in triumph at Rome, and then was dragged thro' the streets with a

ferant &c. To zatexo eft quod coercebat Judæos, ne in apertam rebellionem erumperent; hoc eft, partim reverentia procerum Judææ gentis,-partim metus exercituum Romanorum, &c. Museρion avoμias, quod fieri incipiebat hoc tempore, erat in eo fitum, ut fpecie libertatis &c.-Verè quidem nofter avouer

rope

vocari animadvertit fceleftos homines, qui antea defignati fuerunt voce avrineμeros; fed intelligendi feditiofi Judæi, &c. -Fuere et alii impoftores, quorum non uno loco meminit Jofephus &c. Cleric. in locum,

(7) Jofephus de Bell. Jud. Lib. 7. Cap. 5. Sect. 6. Edit. Hudfon.

(8) wagesia

rope about his neck, and was severely fcourged, and at laft put to death in the common prison. Besides it is not very confiftent in this learned critic, by the coming of Christ in ver. 8 to understand the deftruction of Jerufalem, and in his note upon ver. I to fay that (8) the coming of Chrift both in the first Epistle to the Theffalonians, and in this is the coming of Christ to judge the quick and dead.

4. Dr. Whitby's (9) fcheme is fomewhat perplexed and confufed, as if he was not fatiffied himself with his own explication. "The

apoftafy is the revolt of the Jews from the "Roman empire, or from the faith," If the former, it is the fame mistaken notion as Le Clerc's. If the latter, it is true that many were to apoftatize from the faith, before the destruction of Jerufalem, according to the prediction of our Saviour: but it doth not appear that their number was fo very great, as to deserve to be called by way of eminence and distinction the apoftafy. "The man of fin is the Jewish "nation with their high-priest and sanhedrim.” But the Jewish nation with their high-priest and fanhedrim could not be faid to apoftatize from the faith which they never received: and those Chriftian

(8) waga Chrifti et in 1 Ep. ad Theffalonicenses, et in

hac eft adventus Chrifti, ad ju

dican