AuthorshipThe author of 1 Timothy has been traditionally identified as the Apostle Paul. He is named as the author of the letter in the text (1:1). In modern times, scholars have become divided over the issue of authenticity, with many suggesting that 1 Timothy, along with 2 Timothy and Titus, are not original to Paul, but rather an unknown Christian writing some time in the late-first-to-mid-second century.[1] Despite the very strong challenge to Pauline authorship, the traditional view is still held by many New Testament scholars. Historical viewsThe genuineness of Pauline authorship was accepted by Church orthodoxy as early as c. 180 AD, as evidenced by the surviving testimony of Irenaeus and the author of the Muratorian fragment. Possible allusions are found in the letters from Clement of Rome to the Corinthians (c. 95), Ignatius of Antioch to the Ephesians (c. 110) and Polycarp to the Philippians (c. 130)[2][3], though it is difficult to determine the nature of any such literary relationships. Modern scholars who support Pauline authorship nevertheless stress their importance regarding the question of authenticity: I.H. Marshall and P.H. Towner wrote that 'the key witness is Polycarp, where there is a high probability that 1 and 2 Tim were known to him'[4]. Similarly M.W. Holmes argued that it is 'virtually certain or highly probable' that Polycarp used 1 and 2 Timothy[2]. Late in the second century there are a number of quotations from all three Pastoral Epistles in Irenaeus' work Against Heresies. The Muratorian Canon (c. 170-180) lists the books of the NT and ascribes all three Pastoral Epistles to Paul. Eusebius (c. 330) calls it, along with the other thirteen canonical Pauline Epistles, "undisputed"[5]. Exceptions to this positive witness include Tatian,[6] a disciple of Justin Martyr turned heretic, as well as the Gnostic Basilides[7]. Marcion, an orthodox Bishop later excommunicated for heresy, formed a Gnostic canon of Scripture c. 140 around ten of the canonical Pauline epistles, excluding 1-2 Timothy, Titus and Hebrews. The reasons for these exclusions are unknown, and so speculation abounds, including the hypotheses that they were not written until after Marcion's time, or that he knew of them, but regarded them as inauthentic. Proponents of Pauline authorship argue that he had theological grounds for rejecting the Pastorals, namely their teaching about the goodness of creation (cf. 1 Tim 4:1 ff.)[8]. The challenge to Pauline authorshipThe modern challenge to Pauline authorship began with the work of German theologians F.D.E. Schleiermacher in 1807 and J.G Eichorn in 1812. (Eichorn extended Schleirmacher's attack on 1 Timothy to all three Pastoral letters.) This was argued in further detail by F.C. Baur in 1835. [9]. Following these arguments, a large number of modern scholars continue to reject Pauline authorship, citing various and serious problems in associating it therewith. For example, Norman Perrin analyzed the Greek used by the author or authors of the Pastoral Epistles, finding that over 1/3 of their vocabulary is not used anywhere else in the Pauline epistles; more than 1/5 is not used anywhere else in the New Testament, while 2/3 of the non-Pauline vocabulary are used by second century Christian writers[10]. Richard Heard, in 1950, had this to say: "The evidence of teaching as of style and vocabulary is strongly against Paul’s authorship, nor are these arguments seriously weakened by any supposition that the epistles were written late in Paul’s lifetime and to meet a new type of situation. The three epistles show such a unity of thought and expression that they must be the work of one man, but for the author we must look rather to one of Paul’s admirers than to Paul himself."[11] Robert Grant noted the afore-mentioned parallels to Polycarp's Epistles and suggested he might be the author[12]. The defence of Pauline authorshipScholars who hold to the minority position of Pauline authenticity of the epistle include Wallace,[13] Knight[7], Fee[14], Witherington III[15], Johnson[16], Stott[17] and Towner[18]. Wallace, for example, writes that, "although the evidence against the authenticity of the pastorals is as strong as any evidence against the authenticity of any NT book (save 2 Peter), it still cannot overthrow the traditional view"[13] In addition, a number of computer studies, though they must be treated with caution[19], have indicated that the seven universally-accepted Pauline letters and 1-2 Timothy have a closer "affinity" than is often assumed. Thus:
DateThe dating of 1 Timothy depends very much on the question of authorship. Those who accept the epistle's authenticity believe it was most likely written toward the end of Paul's ministry, c.62-67 AD. Other historians generally place its composition some time in the late first century or first half of the second century AD, with a wide margin of uncertainty. The text seems to be contending against nascent Gnosticism(1 Tim 1:4, 1 Tim 4:3)[23](see Encratism), which would suggest a later date due to Gnosticism developing primarily in the latter 1st century. The term Gnosis("science") itself occurs in 1 Timothy 6:20.[24] If the parallels between 1 Timothy and Polycarp's epistle are understood as a literary dependence by the latter on the former, as is generally accepted[3], this would constitute a terminus ante quem of 130-155 AD. However, Irenaeus (writing c. 180 AD) is the earliest author to clearly and unequivocally describe the Pastorals. Historical background
This historical relationship between Paul and Timothy is one of mentorship. Timothy is first mentioned in Acts 16:1. His mother Eunice, and his grandmother, Lois, are mentioned in 2 Tim. 1:5. All that we know of his father is that he was a Greek not a Jew (Acts 16:1). Paul's second visit to Lystra is when Timothy first connected with Paul (1 Timothy 1:2; 2 Timothy 3:11). Paul not only brought Timothy into the faith but he was Timothy’s main mentor in Christian leadership (Acts 16:3), having done church planting and missionary journeys together. Timothy would have received his authority to preach in churches directly from Paul who of course was the greater known and accepted of the two and an apostle. Timothy’s official position in the church was one of an evangelist (1 Timothy 4:14) and he worked with Paul in Phrygia, Galatia, and Mysia, Troa, Philippi and Berea (Acts 17:14) and continued on to do even more work in Athens, and Thessalonica for the church (Acts 17:15; 1 Thessalonians 3:2) not to mention his work in Corinth, Macedonia, Ephesus and greater Asia. Timothy was also noted for coming to Paul’s aid when Paul fell into prison (Philippians 1:1, 2 Timothy 4:13). It is noteworthy that despite not being required due the ruling of the Jerusalem council; Timothy took circumcision himself to be a better witness among the Jews. According to church tradition he was loyal to Paul’s wishes and stayed and worked in Ephesus until he finally suffered the Martyr's death himself. CircumstancesRegardless of whether this epistle is seen as a 4th missionary journey not recorded in Acts or as being written at some other point of Paul’s life, its intent seems clear that Paul is writing to encourage Timothy on his own ministry. Timothy is now pastoring in the Ephesus Church and Paul writes him to tell him to stay there and continue his good work there. Paul had planted the Ephesus church himself putting over 3 years of his blood and tears in to the effort (Acts 19:10; 20:31) and he is well pleased his former student is currently taking the post there. This is most likely a letter written in Paul’s late life and can be seen as being among his departing advice to his former student who has risen up in the ranks of church leadership himself. As Paul becomes more aware of his impending end, soon to be at the hands of Nero, he is setting things in order for the next generation. Key themes and wordsThe themes in this book circulate around church structure more than any other issue in the letter. Paul gives an example warning to Timothy not to let false doctrine such as Encratism take hold. The structure for the role of women in the Church at Ephesus is laid out as well as a detailed list of qualifications for who can and cannot serve as Elders and Deacons in the church. It is a notably a hotly debated issue in the church as to what Paul meant in this book in regard to the women’s role in the church. Some feel he clearly teaches that women are not to have authority over men in the church structure (1 Timothy 2:12) and that this is why he clearly excludes them from the roles of Elder/Bishop and Deacon in chapter three. People who hold to this stance point out that Paul’s use of the phrase “Husband of one wife” is gender specific and excludes women from that role. They would point out that in the Greek text it literally reads "Man of one woman".citation needed However, more liberal scholars debate this, arguing that this is a product of the time in which Paul lived and it is a cultural reference not meant to be eternally binding on the church.citation needed Many churches have now embraced the ordination of women based on this modern scholarly outlook.citation needed The treatment of widows, elders, masters, youth, and church members are spelled out; as well as a healthy warning against greed being given to the rich. Key words and phrases in this book include; “fight the good fight”, “This is a faithful saying”,” let no one despise your youth”, doctrine, elder/bishop, deacon, fables, guard. OutlineI. Salutation (1:1-2) II. Negative Instructions: Stop the False Teachers (1:3-20)
III. Positive Instructions: Repair the Church (2:1–6:10)
IV. Personal Instructions: Pursue Godliness (6:11-21)
See alsoNotes
External linksWikisource has original text related to this article:
| | ||||||||||