Corpus-Paul

[Christopher Hutson <crhutson AT salisbury.net>]

>From: "J.E.Harding" <BSP97JEH AT sheffield.ac.uk>
>
>I am currently writing on 2 Timothy, and trying to remain 
>non-committal on the question of authorship. My reasons for remaining

>non-committal relate to my fundamental problem with method in 
>determining the authenticity or pseudonymity of a particular letter. 

I think it is good to try to remain non-commital while you work out
your own judgments.  At each step along the way, I try to ask how a
theory would work if the letter were written by Paul and how it would
work if not.

I further agree with you and Bob Kraft and others that differences in
language and style and so forth are very squishy and not useful for
establishing authorship, although they should be taken into account
once authorship is established on other grounds (if it can be
established).

>
>In any case, the Pauline corpus is tiny. How, on the basis of such a 
>tiny amount of evidence, given that Paul may have dictated letters 
>over a period of several years (e.g. 50-64), to a variety of 
>audiences with different concerns, and given that his own theology 
>would have developed (not necessarily *changed*), as would his stock 
>of metaphors and linguistic signs, can we  possibly hope to make a
proper 
>decision on the authenticity issue in any given case?


For me, the kicker with the PE was the way the letters are oriented
toward "youthful" readers.  The author says to "flee youthful lusts"
(2 Tim 2:22) and "let no one despise your youth" (1 Tim 4:12).  These
are the most explicit passages, but in a variety of ways, the author
identifies the addressees as "youthful."  These are manifestly letters
from an older mentor to younger proteges.  

But now let us suppose that the historical Paul wrote these letters to
the historical Timothy and Titus?  Where in Paul's career would you
locate them?  early or late?  In my dissertation I lay out why I think
Prior is wrong, but suppose for the sake of argument that Paul did
write 2 Tim from a Roman prison in the mid 60s.  How old would the
historical Timothy have been at that point?  How young do you think
Timothy was when he was converted about AD 49 and left home to travel
with Paul (according to Acts)?  How old was he when he stayed behind
in Thessalonica to help smooth things out in a start-up church after
Paul was run out of town on a rail (1 Thess 1-3, more or less
corroborated by Acts 17)?  Was he a teenager then?  Was he 20? 
Whatever age you think is plausible, add 12-15 years of close work as
Paul's trusted assistant, handling ticklish situations, say in
Corinth, on Paul's behalf.  Consider also that the NT gives no
indication that Titus was "young" outside of the impression you get
from the letter to Titus.  Titus also was Paul's longtime, trusted
associate, his test case on circumcision in Jerusalem (Gal 2) and also
sent to handle ticklish situations in Corinth.  Then ask yourself why
Paul would write the PE to THESE guys as if they were greenhorns?  Why
would he address them as "young" when they are perhaps 35-40?  Why
would he give them such elementary advice on church leadership, when
they have already seen it all, working closely with Paul for so many
years?  

When I consider the PE this way, I have to say that something fishy is
going on here.  Now that doesn't necessarily mean that Paul didn't
write the letters.  After all, Seneca wrote to Lucilius as if he were
a "young" beginning philosophy student, even when he was a senior
politician near retirement.  But Lucilius WAS in fact a beginning
philosophy student.  The point is that Seneca wrote not only TO
Lucilius but THROUGH him to address a wider secondary audience of
beginning philosophy students, the majority of whom were young.  So it
is conceivable, at least in theory, that Paul was writing THROUGH
Timothy and Titus, using them as a vehicle to address a wider
secondary audience of young church leaders.  In other words, even if
the author is historical, he has to a great extent fictionalized his
addressees.

But did Paul write that way?  Hmmm.  Why wouldn't it be just as
likely, even more likely, for a follower of Paul in a later generation
to write the sorts of things Paul would have said to his young
mentors, as a vehicle for the actual author to address young church
leaders in the later generation.  Consider that 2 Tim 2:2 envisions a
tradition already looking toward its fourth generation:  "what you
heard from me through many witnesses, commit to faithful people who
will be able to teach others also."  Here the author is looking ahead
to the fourth generation of teachers.  Could this reflect the
historical location of the actual author?

It is interesting that even Michael Prior and Luke Johnson put most of
their authenticity eggs in the 2 Tim basket.  It is still very
difficult to place 1 Tim and Titus anywhere in Paul's known career. 
So arguments for authenticity must rely on very tenuous assumptions
that Paul got out of prison and conducted further evangelism "in the
west?" after Acts ends.  But this only compounds the problem.  Not
only is the evidence for a further Pauline mission tenuous, but also
(a) 1 Tim and Titus are located in the east, not in the "west," as 1
Clement suggests, and (b) a later date for these letters only
compounds the problem of why Timothy and Titus are addressed as if
they were "young."  The older Timothy and Titus get, the greater the
problem of explaining these letters as simple, actual correspondence
to the historical proteges of Paul.

Finally, let us hear nothing about how "young" in antiquity meant
anyone under 40.  Hokum.  Sure, "young" is a relative term in any
language, including Greek, where it CAN be applied quite broadly. But
what was normal usage?  The vocabulary and contents of the PE imply
that the addressees are in their early twenties, beginners in their
teaching careers.  That must be at the least a literary fiction.  It
is likely also a historical fiction.   My dissertation includes a
detailed survey of usage of the vocabulary of youth (chapter 2), but
since that is not readily available, you might check out:

Emiel Eyben, _Restless Youth in Ancient Rome_ trans. P. Daly (London &
NY:  Routledge, 1993).

Jean-Pierre Neraudau, _La Jeunesse dans la Litterature et les
Institutions de la Rome Republicaine_ (Paris:  Belles Lettres, 1979.

R. Garland, _The Greek Way of Life_  (Ithaca:  Cornell UP, 1990).

In short, ancients new the difference between a "youth" and a mature
adult.  The addressess of the PE are tenderfeet, but that could not be
said of the historical Timothy and Titus.

Finally, on the historical Timothy, you might be interested in my
article, "Was Timothy Timid?  The Rhetoric of Fearlessness (1
Corinthians 16:10-11) and Cowardice (2 Timothy 1:7)," in _Biblical
Research_ 42 (1997), 58-73.

So, James, that is how I approach the PE.  Notice that my argument
does not turn on matters of language and style but focuses on the main
thrust of the letters themselves.  I ask not just, "Could the
historical Paul have written these?" but also, "Could they be
addressed to the historical Timothy and Titus?"  In the end,
pseudonomy is the easier explanation, and at that point considerations
of language, style and so on tend to fall into place behind the main
argument.

BTW, I think your question was very well put.  I hope this helps you. 
I'm sorry it took a couple of days before I found time to compose a
response.

XPIC

------------------------------------
Christopher R. Hutson
          Hood Theological Seminary
          Salisbury, NC  28144
crhutson AT salisbury.net
------------------------------------