2. εἰςτὸμὴτάχ. σαλευθῆναι] ‘ to the end that you be not readily driven away’ from your sober sense, as a ship from its safe anchorage. For this use of σαλεύειν cf. especially Plut. Mor. 2. 493 d (cited by Lft.) where ὄρεξιντοῦκατὰφύσινἀποσαλεύουσαν is followed almost immediately by ὡςἐπʼ ἀγκύραςτῆςφύσεωςσαλεύει. The verb (from σάλος, Luke 21:25), which is very common in the LXX. in its literal sense of the motion produced by winds and storms, is found also figuratively, as here, especially in the Pss. (e.g. 9:27 (10:6), 29. (30.) 7): cf. 1Ma 6:8, Pss. Sol. 8:39, 15:6, Acts 17:13 (where it is joined with ταράσσειν), Hebrews 12:26 f., also O.G.I.S. 515, 47 (3./a.d.) σαλεύειγὰρὡςἀλη[θῶςἡσωτηρίατῆςπόλε]ωςἐκκακουργίας. Ταχέως ‘ hastily,’ ‘ readily,’ the reference being not so much temporal as modal: cf. Galatians 1:6, 1 Timothy 5:22. ἀπὸτοῦνοός] ‘ from your reason’ (Wycl. from your witte)—νοός (for form, WSchm. p. 84) being used in its regular Pauline sense of the reasoning faculty, especially on its moral side, the highest part of man’ s own nature, through which he is most open to Divine influences: cf. 1 Corinthians 14:14 ff., Philippians 4:7. The word, which is rare in the LXX. (usually for μΕα or μΕαΘα), is found in the N.T. outside the Pauline writings only in Luke 24:45, Revelation 13:18; Revelation 17:9. Thpht.: παρατραπῆναιἀπὸτοῦνοός, ὃνμέχριτοῦνῦνἔχετεὀρθῶςἱστάμενον.μηδὲθροεῖσθαι] ‘ nor yet be disturbed’ in accordance with the regular Bibl. use of θροεῖσθαι: cf. Son 5:4 καὶἡκοιλίαμουἐθροήθηἐπʼ αὐτόν, and especially Matthew 24:6, Mark 13:7 where, as here, it is used with reference to the Parousia. The present tense should be noted as pointing to a continued state of agitation following upon a definite shock received (σαλευθῆναι). μήτεδιὰπνεύματοςκτλ.] The Apostles now proceed to distinguish three ways in which the θρόησις just spoken of may have been caused, the thrice repeated μήτε dividing the foregoing negation (μηδὲθροεῖσθαι) into its component parts: ‘ neither by spirit (i.e. ecstatic utterance, cf. I. 5:19), nor by (reasoned) discourse, nor by letter.’So far the meaning seems clear, but the introduction of the following words ὡςδιʼ ἡμῶν has been the cause of much difficulty. As usually understood, they are regarded as a kind of adjectival clause appended to ἐπιστολῆς =‘ as though (coming) from us’ or ‘ as though we had written it’ (Blass2, p. 253, and cf. B.G.U. 884, 6 f. (2./3. a.d.) τὰδιὰτῶνἐπ[ι]στολῶναὐτοῦ). But if so, in view of the close parallelism of the preceding clauses, it seems impossible not to extend the qualification to them also. The general meaning would then be that in the event of false teachers arising and appealing in support of their views to some revelation or teaching or letter purporting to come from the Apostles, the Thessalonians were not to be disturbed as if they (the Apostles) were in reality in any way responsible. (Erasm.: ‘ Paulus non vult eos commoveri, neque per spiritum tanquam a Paulo profectum, neque per sermonem Pauli nomine allatum, neque per epistolam illius iussu aut nomine scriptam.’ )A modification of this view, suggested apparently first by Dr Marcus Dods, and since advocated on independent grounds by Askwith (Introd. p. 92 ff.) and Wohlenberg, by which ὡςδιʼ ἡμῶν, instead of being dependent on the noun-clauses, is rather to be referred back to σαλευθῆναι and θροεῖσθαι as a separate statement, has the advantage of giving διά the same force as in the preceding clauses. But the former connexion is on the whole simpler, nor is there any real difficulty in the use of διά in the qualifying clause instead of παρά or ἀπό. In a friendly letter the use of the prepositions must not be judged with the same strictness as in a classical treatise, more especially when, as here, no important doctrinal issue is at stake. In any case there is no need to fall back on the conjectural reading ὡςδὴἡμῶν ‘ as pretending to be ours,’ Field Notes p. 202.It is only necessary to add that the anarthrous ἐπιστολῆς cannot be referred directly to 1 Thess. (as by Paley Hor. Paul. 10. § 3), although the knowledge that passages in their former Ep., such as 4:13 ff., had been misunderstood may have been the cause of the writers’ referring to ‘ a letter’ at all as amongst the possible sources of error.ὡςὅτιἐνέστηκενκτλ.] ‘ as if the day of the Lord is now present’ (Vg. quasi instet dies Domini)—ὡςὅτι being equivalent to the Attic ὡς c. gen. abs. (cf. 2 Corinthians 5:19; 2 Corinthians 11:21, and see Blass, p. 235 f.), and ἐνέστηκεν denoting strictly present time as in Romans 8:38, 1 Corinthians 3:22, Hebrews 9:9. Beng.: ‘ magna hoc verbo propinquitas significatur; nam ἐνεστὼς est praesens.’ The verb is very common in the papyri and inscriptions with reference to the current year, e.g. P.Oxy. 245, 6 (1./a.d.) εἰςτὸἐνεστὸςιβ (ἔτος), Magn. 100 b, 26 ἐντῶιἐνεστῶτιἐνιαυτῶι.It may be added that in late Gk. ὡςὅτι also appears in a sense hardly differing from the simple ὅτι, e.g. Dion. Hal. Antt. 9:14 ἐπιγνοὺςὡς [om. ὡς, Kiessling] ὅτιἐνἐσχάτοιςεἰσὶνοἱκατακλεισθέντεςἐντοῖςλοφοῖς, C.P.R. 19, 3 (4./a.d.) πρώηνβίβλιαἐπιδέδωκατῇσῇἐπιμελείᾳὡςὅτιἐβουλήθηντινὰὑπάρχοντὰμουἀποδόσθαι (Jannaris, § 1754, Moulton, Prolegg. p. 212).