-
Identify the objections to Pauline authorship of the Pastoral Epistles, and briefly answer these objections.
-
2 Replies
-
-
Historical objection: The pastoral letters mention Paul’s visits to Ephesus, to Macedonia, to Crete, to Nicopolis, to Troas, to Miletus, and to Rome, and those visits are not mentioned in the Book of Acts where it shows Paul’s journeys, nor can those visits be possibly reconciled.
-
The answer: Paul simply made those visits after the events of the Book of Acts, leaving no need to reconcile those visits with what occurs in Paul’s journeys in the Book of Acts.
Theological objection: Paul’s trinitarian theology and his justification gospel are absent in the pastoral epistles. Dr. Stott says that a simple study of the pastorals will dismiss this argument and see the prevalence of both a Trinitarian theology and a justification gospel.
The Heresy objection: Some say the letter references a heresy which is Gnostic and thus the letter must be a 2nd century letter because that is when Gnosticism is.
-
Answer: This ignores the jewish aspect of the heresy Paul references. He calls them Jewish myths. He calls them fables about the law. This heresy is likely similar to the one Paul referenced in Colossians.
Literary objections:
-
There are 175 hapax legomena in the pastoral epistles which is evidence for an author other than Paul. The pastorals have 130 words common to pastorals but found no where else.
-
Answer: Romans has 130 words only in Romans and that is widely recognized as Pauline.
There are 80 words all the other letters have but pastorals do not. They are eleutheros (free), or ergansesthai (to work), or euangelisesthai (that is, to preach the gospel), or eucharistountes (to give thanks), or sochoristethai (to glory), or ouranos (heaven); pneumatikos (spiritual), sofia (wisdom), soma (body), psuche and huiós (son).
-
Answer: These words are less important than Pauline words like justification and faith, which are there in the pastorals.
Ecclesiastical:
-
The ecclesiastical structure Paul sets forth in the pastoral epistles (monocular episcopas, which is a college of presbyteries and a single bishop, referred to by Ignatius Bishop of Antioch) is that of the 2nd century. Some say the letters are way too “churchy” for Paul.
-
Answer: There is no monocopal episcopate. Rather, there are only presbyters and deacons. Presbyters and bishops are the same thing in the pastorals. While Paul discusses church more in pastorals than in the other letters, it still stems from a love for the gospel of Jesus Christ and does not contradict anything in the other letters.
-
-
The authorship of Paul of the pastoral epistles as attested by both the internal and external evidences has never been in doubt by the early Church. The most vicious attack to Pauline authorship are in four category:
(1) Historical, (2) Theological, (3) Literary, and (4) Ecclesiastical. The objection from historical viewpoint assumes that historical references in the pastoral, like places mentioned to have been touched by apostle Paul have no correspondence with the account in Acts. This understandably may be caused by the fact that apostle Paul may have been released from the imprisonment at Rome after Luke has departed. These journey may have been made by Paul without Luke to these places.
Furthermore, objection to Pauline authorship of the Pastorals because of what they term as variants in the way God was presented in the earlier Pauline letters as father, son and the HolySpirit; and the gospel of the earlier Pauline letters of grace, faith, salvation and good work syndrome. These are no sufficient evidence to disprove Pauline authorship of the Pastorals because this may happen as a result of the subject matter of the Pastorals. furthermore no injury is done to Pauline Theology in the Pastoral that may warrant the assumption that he is not the author.
Moreover, the argument against Pauline authorship of the Pastoral from literary view point is precariously infinitesimal to substantiate that somebody other than apostle Paul wrote the pastorals. The difference in style and vocabulary in the pastoral may well be excused on the ground of variation in subject matter, circumstances and the passage of time between other Pauline letters and the Pastorals. The much talk about variants bears no significance evidence against Pauline authorship of the Pastorals.
Similarly, argument from ecclesiastical viewpoint against Pauline authorship of the Pastoral holds no water. The mention of Church order and officers in the Pastoral does not contradict the Church setting in other Pauline letters. Elders, Presbyters and deacons are virtually the same in their role and function. It must be settled that the church was still growing. All of these are not sufficient in anyway to displace Pauline authorship of the Pastorals.
