1 & 2 Timothy and Titus The “Pastoral Epistles”

1 & 2 Timothy & Titus Who wrote? –Text claims Paul “Paul, an apostles of Christ Jesus by the command of God our Saviour and Christ Jesus our hope,” (1 Tim 1:1) “Paul, an apostles of Christ Jesus by the will of God, for the sake of the promise of life that is in Christ Jesus” (2 Tim 1:1) “Paul, a servant of God and an apostle of Jesus Christ…” (Titus 1:1) To Whom? –Text claims Timothy for 1 & 2 Timothy “To Timothy, my loyal child in the faith” (1 Tim 1:2) “To Timonty, my beloved child” (2 Tim 1:2) –Text claims Titus for Titus “To Titus, my loyal child in the faith we share” (Titus 1:4)

1 & 2 Timothy & Titus Needless by now you know “disputed letters” are always, well, disputed when it comes to authorship… Reasons to doubt Pauline authorship –Apparently more “developed” form of church governance implied by letter; level of “institutionalization” reflects later post-Pauline church life e.g., “bishops”/“deacons” (1 Tim 3:3,8) e.g., severely restricted role of women (2:11-12) –Heretical threat looks more like 2 nd century gnosticism than usual Judaizing threat in undisputed Pauline letters (e.g., Galatians) –Some style and vocabulary differences with undisputed Pauline letters e.g., Christ’s “manifestation” or “appearing” (epiphaneia—1 Tim 6:14; 2 Tim 4:1, 8) rather than his “coming” (parousia—1 Thess 2:19, 3:13, 4:15, 5:23; 1 Cor 15:23)

1 & 2 Timothy & Titus Arguments for and against Paul as author –“Institutionalization” is tricky to measure at this distance, most organizations move relatively quickly toward structure if they are to survive for more than a few years and Paul’s Jewish heritage would have supported congregational leadership and structure rather than ongoing enthusiastic egalitarianism, hence not as strong an argument as one might think. –Style and vocabulary differences—significant to be sure, but in other ways the pastoral epistles match Pauline style and vocabulary. Do similarities mean deliberate forgery and discrepancies flawed attempts at forgery OR do similarities establish Pauline authorship and discrepancies merely sylistic variation that happens over time with a writer (i.e., Paul writing much later in life than earlier undisputed letters) In an era of secretaries writing letters, how much weight can we give this? Do differences in audience (personal versus communal) make a difference? –The apparently historical “specifics” (i.e., Paul speaking about his actual apparently recent dealings with named heretics and the comings and goings and greetings of specific individuals) suggest that for this letter to be maximally effective, it must either be addressed to the time it is self-evidently presenting itself as address to (i.e., the era in which these heretics function and these people need to hear from Paul) or it is considerably later, after these individuals are off the scene, and these are touches of vérité to make a forgery convincing. –Most contemporary Pauline scholars treat these letters as pseudipigraphical and late 1 st or early 2 nd century Two very notable exceptions to this: Gordon Fee and Luke Timothy Johnson both create solid historical-critical arguments in favour of Pastoral letters as genuinely Pauline

1 & 2 Timothy & Titus Situation of the writing –If pseudipigraphical… Much less can be determined about the situation of the writing of these letters in this case Presumably there are problems with false teachers that are meant to be read into these fake “earlier letters” by Paul, i.e., Paul is being portrayed as once taking on similar false teachings and shutting it down and this becomes a reminder or authority to do the same in the era these letters are forged Or…did Timothy and/or Titus produce these or have them produced later in life as their Pauline apostolic “credentials”; are the recipients the pseudipigraphical writers? In terms of place and date—usually dated circa CE, and given geographical markers in text, somewhere in Asia Minor?

1 & 2 Timothy & Titus Situation of the writing –If genuinely Pauline… Presumably from an era in which Paul revisits Aegean area churches after his first Roman imprisonment (see last chapters of Acts) and after possibly a mission trip to Spain? (see Rom 15:28) –Circa CE? Paul is leaving former companions behind in churches to run and organize matters in his absence (e.g., Timothy in Ephesus [1 Tim 1:3] and Titus in Crete [Titus 1:5]) 1 Timothy and Titus—written to Timothy (in Ephesus?) and Titus (in Crete?) to encourage them as they try to structure churches while being tangled up with some sort of proto-gnostic heresies 2 Timothy—written to Timothy while imprisoned (2 nd Roman imprisonment when he is about to face execution?—2 Tim 4:6) to encourage him to soldier on in the work Paul has left him to but also requesting a visit (2 Tim 4:9)

1 & 2 Timothy & Titus Contents? To be done by YOU in class!