Discussing The Authenticity Of The Pastoral Epistles

In this essay the authenticity of the Pastoral Epistles will be discussed. The authorship of the Epistles will be evaluated by analysing the external attestation and historical framework of these three books. Furthermore, the linguistics and the theology within these letters will also be assessed to determine their authenticity.

The authorship of the Pastoral Epistles is usually ascribed to Paul the Apostle on the assumption that he wrote them. They form a distinctive group within the Canon. They are composed of three books or letters; the first and second letters to Timothy, and the letter to Titus.

Timothy, the son of a Greek father and Jewish mother, became a disciple of the Apostle and accompanied him on his various missionary trips. He was an intimate friend of Paul and co-wrote many of the Pauline letters. Paul describes him as his "own child in the faith". Titus, also a companion of Paul and also called a child of Paul, was a co-worker in the missionary work of the Apostle.

These Epistles are given the title Pastoral, because they are addressed to people with pastoral supervision of churches. Therefore these letters discuss issues concerning church doctrine, Christian living, and the duties of those in ministerial positions. This sets them apart from the other letters of Paul; which are primarily addressed to select Churches and focus on detailed concerns and teaching.

The first way in which the authenticity of the Pastoral Epistles can be evaluated is by assessing the external attestation. By looking at the writings of the Early Church Fathers one can see that they had an excellent knowledge of these Epistles. Polycarp is the first of the Fathers to use extracts of these epistles, especially in his letter to the Philippians. Irenaeus, regarding them as thoroughly Pauline, quotes freely from them. He says in Adversus Haereses:"Inasmuch as certain men have set the truth aside, and bring in lying words and vain genealogies, which, as the apostle says, `minister questions rather than godly edifying which is in faith`...". He takes his main argument from 1 Tim. 1:4 which reads, "and not to accompany themselves with myths and endless genealogies that promote speculations rather than the divine training that is known by faith". Tertullian also uses this passage and many more in his work De Praescri ptione Haereticorum.

Marcion, the 1st century heretic, excludes them entirely from his New Testament Canon. Marcion was an admirer of Paul and detested scri ptures which were favourable towards Judaism. He may have excluded the Epistles due to their anti-heretical tone and their unfavourable opposition to his theological views. Likewise, the Gnostic Valentinus does not quote them at all within his Gospel of Truth, but he freely quotes from other books of the New Testament.

Furthermore, the Pastoral Epistles do not appear in the Chester Beatty Papyrus (P46) collection. However, these 3rd Century manuscri pts are also missing the personal letter of Paul to Philemon. It is possible that this collection only contained letters addressed to Churches and excluded the ones that were addressed to individuals, such as Philemon. This would account for the exclusion of the Pastoral Epistles along with Philemon. Further to this, the codex is missing the first seven leaves and the last seven leaves. The first seven are thought to be the first half of the book of Romans, and the remaining seven would be enough space for the book of 2 Thessalonians, taking two leaves. Fredric Kenyon estimates that there would not be enough space on the five remaining leaves for the Pastoral Epistles, as eight leaves would be needed altogether.

Secondly, the historical framework of the Pastorals can be assessed to determine their authenticity. If the Pastorals are viewed as a compilation of letters written by Paul the Apostle, it is logical to assume that they tie into his life and ministry. The book of Acts, from chapter 9 onwards, outlines in detail the life and ministry of Paul following his conversion. It continues on to the arrest and first Roman imprisonment of Paul which is thought to have been in 62 A.D. This is where Luke chooses to end his account.

The first letter to Timothy contains very little material regarding the circumstances in which the Apostle finds himself writing this letter. 1 Tim. 1:3 and 3:14 suggest that Paul had recently been in Ephesus and had left for Macedonia. He had left Timothy behind in Ephesus. This corresponds in part with the account in Acts 20:1-5. According to Acts, Paul did not leave Timothy in Ephesus but rather sent him ahead to Macedonia.

Titus is much simpler. According to the Epistle, Titus has been left behind on the island of Crete in order to organize churches which have been founded in a somewhat rapid missionary tour. Paul is in Nicopolis, or will shortly be there; and asks Titus to join him there. The book of Acts does not give an account of the evangelization of Crete or of Paul visiting Nicopolis. Acts 27:7 does however say that Paul was journeying to Rome and sailed past Crete. It could be that Luke has failed to mention a mission campaign to Crete. It could also be that Paul travelled to Crete after his release from prison and without Luke. Acts 16:1 is the first time that Timothy is mentioned in the New Testament. Timothy is called by Paul at the beginning of his second missionary trip. From that time he diligently accompanied and assisted Paul in his mission work. Further to this Timothy is named as the co-writer of many of the Pauline Epistles, including the letters to the churches in Corinth and Thessalonica. Paul describes Timothy as a fellow-worker and fellow-preacher on numerous occasions. Paul further exhorts Timothy by stating that he has never had an assistant quite like Timothy, and that Timothy is responsible for undertaking important duties.

However, in the second letter to Timothy, Paul refers to Timothy as young and inexperienced; needing to turn away from youthful impulses. 2 Tim. 2:22-23 says, "Shun youthful passions and pursue righteousness, faith, love, and peace, along with those who call on the Lord from a pure heart. Have nothing to do with stupid and senseless controversies; you know that they breed quarrels". His youth which is mentioned in 1 Tim. 4:12, is not to be an excuse for immature behaviour. This casts a doubt over Pauline authorship of the Epistles. It seems strange for Paul to be weary of his companion in the faith, whom he had personally trained in the Gospel. On the other hand, these verses could be viewed as simply demonstrating the mentoring nature of Paul.

Thirdly, the linguistics and the style of the text can be evaluated to further determine the authenticity of the Epistles. The general outline and structure of the epistles appear to show that they are thoroughly Pauline. The opening salutations and closing benedictions have a Pauline flavour to them. On the other hand, these agreements are counteracted by equally prominent differences. The style of writing varies from the genuine letters of Paul. The Pastorals lack the Apostle`s enthusiasm and vigour which characterise his letters to the churches.

The Pastorals are filled with linguistic peculiarities. These irregularities can be assessed by counting the Hapax Legomena, or number of words that are not to be found anywhere else in the Pauline Corpus or the New Testament. P.N. Harrison outlines in his book, The Problem of the Pastoral Epistles, that the vocabulary of the Pastorals consist of approximately 902 words, and of these 54 are proper names. Harrison`s ground-breaking work found that there were more Hapaxes in the Pastoral Epistles than anywhere else in the Pauline Corpus. Many characteristic Pauline phrases are lacking from these Epistles, while a number of common Pauline words and terms are given different meanings within these letters and completely new word forms are introduced. For example, the traditional Pauline use of ??????????, "I thank", is used frequently by Paul to thank God. In the Pastorals it is replaced with ????? ???, "I am grateful", which is more passive. Harrison further points out that these same `Hapaxes` are evident in the writings of the Apostolic Fathers and Apologists within the 2nd Century.

Finally, authenticity can be explored further by analysing the theological aspect of the Epistles. When compared to the writings of Paul, there seems to be noticeable discrepancies in the theology of these letters. Firstly, by looking at Romans 9-11, one will see Paul`s view on Predestination. Romans 9:15-18 clearly says:

"I will have mercy on whom I have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I have compassion. So it depends not on human will or exertion, but on God who shows mercy... So then he has mercy on whomsoever he chooses, and he hardens the heart of whomsoever he chooses."

This scri pture, and many others, show Paul`s acceptance of God`s election of those whom he has called to salvation and those called to damnation. However, this is not the case in the Pastorals. 1 Tim. 2:3-4 says, "This is right and is acceptable in the sight of God our Saviour, who desires everyone to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth". This scri pture shows the authors view that salvation is for everyone and not solely for those predestined by God. Secondly, when dealing with original sin, Paul is enthusiastic to point out that sin entered into the world through Adam and that salvation is attainable through the death and resurrection of Christ. Paul writes in Romans 5:12f, "Therefore, just as sin came into the world through one man, and death came through sin, and so death spread to all because all have sinned". The typical Jewish view of the time was that sin came into the world through Eve. Paul is adamant to depose this view. The author of the Pastorals writes that Eve was deceived and therefore allowed sin to enter the world. The author writes in 1 Tim. 2: 11-15:

"Let a woman learn in silence with full submission. I permit no woman to teach or to have no authority over a man; she is to keep silent. For Adam was formed first, then Eve; and Adam was not deceived, but the woman was deceived and became a transgressor. Yet she will be saved through childbearing, provided that they continue in faith and love and holiness, with modesty. "

By assessing the various aspects of the Pastoral Epistles it is effortless to conclude that they have a seemingly non-Pauline authorship. Although the early Church Fathers referenced them frequently, one cannot help but take into account all of the peculiarities surrounding these letters. The circumstances regarding the authorship, as outlined in the epistles, do not tie into the life and work of the Apostle as recorded in the New Testament. It is possible that the letters were written by a disciple of Paul or an early Church Father. These letters speak of the three-fold office of Bishops, Deacons, and Priests; an institutionalised view of ministry pointing to the 2nd Century. However, it is still plausible that Paul continued his missionary work between his first and second Roman imprisonments. If Paul had written these letters much later in his life and at a stage of increased maturity, the style and the linguistics of the letters could be accounted for. Concerning the Hapax Legomena, Udny Yule states that at least 10,000 words are needed in a sample of text to accurately display any statistical differences; whereas the Pastorals contain less than 4,000 words. Based on the linguistics of Romans, a strong case can be made for non-Pauline authorship. Therefore the authenticity of these letters should not be based solely on counting the Hapax Legomena.

Some may say that it is important to know who has written these Epistles, in order to determine who or what the source is, and the validity of that source. Others may say that it is unimportant, because the person who has penned it has done so under the instruction of the Holy Spirit. Although the authorship of the Pastoral Epistles is debated, it is certain that these letters promote orthodox Christian living.