Pastoral Epistles

2008

This thesis discusses issues related to the authorship of the epistles of 1 and 2 Timothy and Titus. The authenticity of the Pastoral Epistles has become the subject of much debate in the last two centuries, and the writer explores the major positions on authorship.

The Book of Titus is one of the three Epistles known collectively as the Pastorals. Indeed these Epistles stand or fall together: and they are all three genuine, or all three spurious (Plummer: 1924). The very Epistles therefore are; 1 Timothy, 2 Timothy and Titus. As a matter of fact, in these Pastorals, the main emphasis is placed on preservation of tradition in the community that seems to be that of the sub-apostolic age. Hence, the pastorals evince a level of church organization that most likely would not have existed in the lifetime of Apostle Paul. The epistle of Paul Titus is looked at by some scholars as a model of Christian doctrine, which is comprehended in a masterful way all that is necessary for every Christian to know and to live(Luther:1960).

This thesis (of which this excerpt is taken from) will explore the authorship, genre, and date of Paul’s Second Letter to Timothy. 2 Timothy, alongside 1 Timothy and Titus, constitute what scholars term the “Pastoral Epistles”. The Pastoral Epistles identify themselves to be from the hand Paul. However, since the early 19th century, a majority of scholars have questioned this claim and argued in favor of a pseudonymous author who wrote in Paul’s name after his death. Consequently, they are often dated sometime after the death of Paul (~62 CE) and taken to be a reflection of late 1st century/2nd century Christianity. The differences between the Pastorals and Paul’s other letters in areas such as vocabulary, style, and theology are often cited in backing up this claim. This thesis first surveys what scholarship has to say about these differences and possible solutions. Subsequently, the case will be made for 2 Timothy’s uniqueness amongst the “Pastoral Epistles” and why the Pastoral Epistles should be studied as three separate letters rather than as a group. The focus will then turn to the consequences of grouping 2 Timothy with 1 Timothy and Titus and what consequences reconsideration of 2 Timothy’s dating and genre can have for our understanding of its nature and provenance.

Diligence: Journal of the Liberty University Online Religion Capstone in Research and Scholarship, 2016

Unbelieving biblical scholars like Bart Ehrman leverage the science of historical criticism to cast doubt on the reliability of Scripture by calling into question the traditionally accepted authorship of biblical books. For example, Ehrman argues that the Pastoral Epistles—1 and 2 Timothy, and Titus—are pseudepigrapha, letters falsely attributed to Paul by anonymous authors, and he claims something of a scholarly consensus as support, even from among believing scholars. However, their conclusions by no means go unchallenged by defenders of Pauline authorship, and the debate rages on. This paper analyzes and compares evidence offered for and against Pauline authorship of the Pastoral Epistles, and concludes that the apostle Paul is likely to have written them.

A number of texts in the Pastoral Epistles, among these 1 Tim 1,12-17, are often regarded, in view of their apparent genre, as incorporating biographical details and/or references to Paul's personal religious experience. Yet, when taking into account the pseudonymous character of these epistles and their overall concern with the preservation of sound doctrine, the establishing of a Pauline tradition, and the refutation of the opponents, it becomes obvious that such texts are part of a well-defined strategy. This is meant to establish the exquisite authority of contemporary church leaders by means of grounding their ministry in their succession to Paul, and ultimately in Paul's commissioning by Christ. 1 Tim 1,12-17, on surface a thanksgiving, argues in fact that Paul has had faith in the gospel of Christ (the sound teaching), Christ has found him trustworthy and appointed him to his ministry. Paul's authority comes from his being the first and typical subject of Christ's saving act: salvation is actualized in Paul's commissioning. His priority and the authority emerging from the topos of priority legitimizes "Timothy", i.e. the contemporary church leaders, and implicitly the teaching and the rules established in the epistle and in the Pastoral corpus.

Although Paul’s epistle to Timothy is sometimes thought of something akin to a church manual, it is probably better to consider it a situational letter sent to his close partner in ministry to address specific problems the Ephesian church was facing. This, of course, does not require an interpreter to consider the implications and insights of this letter irrelevant or not valuable in contemporary church ministry. However, it is helpful to remember that in writing to Timothy Paul was first and foremost dealing with a specific set of issues he was trying to resolve. It is impossible to identify precisely the nature and the details of the problem that arose in the Ephesian church. An exercise in mirror-reading of the letter, shows that the heresy Paul was combating included a combination of Jewish, Hellenistic (including pro-Gnostic), and other elements propagated by false-teachers who arose from within the church. One specific issue appears to be related to a misuse of the Law. In response, Paul proposes a “lawful” use of the Law described in 1 Timothy 1:8-11. The goal of this paper is to identify what Paul means by this phrase in the above-mentioned passage. To accomplish this: 1) 1 Timothy 1:8-11 will be analyzed exegetically; 2) interpretive views will be discussed; 3) the contribution of other relevant passages about the Law from other epistles of Paul will be considered; and 4) a conclusion will be drawn.