error in our epistles, as mere talk, etc., forbids our identifying it
with those later appearances. They are too far removed from what
we find here. All will depend, then, on whether the view we have
given is exegetically well founded. And in this case it can be no pro-
per criterion by which to test the correctness of this view a view that
relates to a period in connexion with which we have few, and in the
matter before us no additional documents to inquire, whether it be
historically demonstrable. That which is presupposed in general in
errors of the kind we refer not merely to the genealogies but also
to the fables, etc. may be sufficiently demonstrated, namely, that
previous to the spread of the gnosi;; in the second century, there ex-
isted already a Jewish and a Jewish-Christian gnosis. With respect
to the former, we know of no one to whom we could refer as having
more directly substantiated this, than Dr. Baur in his work on the
Christian gnosis (p. 36-38). Comp. 3. Especially does the Cab-
bala here come into notice, the elements of which, as is acknowledged,
were already in existence at that period. But with regard also to
the Jewish-Christian griosis, Dr. Baur makes admissions, which
makes its existence before the second century appear entirely natu-
ral. Thus when, for example, he maintains (a. a. Q., j>. 50) that
Christianity, wherever it came into contact with this speculative
philosophy of religion, could not but be also immediately drawn



GENERAL INTRODUCTION. 511

into its sphere ; comp. in Bottger, pp. 175, 208, seq., 213. Not
merely do the Jewish- Christians referred to in the Epistle to the
Romans betray, according to Baur, a dualistic view of the world ;
the strongest proof of the existence of a Jewish-Christian gnosis
must always be the Epistle to the Colossians, with its 0tAoao</>m.
With it are then to be classed the two Epistles to Timothy, not
merely in so far as they treat of those errors hitherto described, but
as they present to us at the same time the beginnings of the later
gnosis in its various tendencies with express reference to the future,
to which these present appearances point. Ty this belong the pas-
sages already adduced, 1 Tim. i. 19, 20 ; 2 Tim. ii. 16-18 ; 1 Tim.
iv. 1 ; 2 Tim. iii. 1, seq. The first of these passages does not afford
any more special mark of the error that is meant ; the second, how-
ever, plainly points to a spiritualistic tendency ; the third clearly
discovers the original form of asceticism ; the last, the immoral an-
tinomian tendency which was connected with magic. How the
traces of this gnosis may be further followed out in the rest of the
epistles of the New Testament, may be seun by referring to Thiersch,
a. a. Q. } p. 236 ; Rothe, die Anfange der Christl. Kirche, p. 320,
seq. ; Neander, a. a. Q., II., p. 261, seq., 638, seq.

We shall again, in the investigation of those passages, recur to
the question whether these Gnostic errors, partly of a spiritualisti-
cally ascetic, and partly of an antinomian character, noticed in cer-
tain passages of the two Epistles to Timothy, may not be conceived
to have existed in the time of the apostle. Here let us refer only to
one other point, the importance of which Baur also fully acknowl-
edges ; it is in the passage Acts xx. 29, 30, where the Apostle Paul,
addressing the elders of the Ephesian church, whom he had sent for
to meet him at Miletus, says, " For I know this, that after my de-
parting shall grievous wolves come in among you, not sparing the
flock ; also of your own selves shall men arise speaking perverse
things to draw away disciples after them." " Only one prop, as it
appears to me," so Dr. Baur expresses himself, " could the defence
of the apostolical origin of the Pastoral Epistles still have upon

which to rest. I mean the farewell address Here we find

the eye of the apostle, directed towards the same state of things as

meets us in the Pastoral Epistles in its more definite form

And indeed he sees the danger to be at no great distance. But
with regard to the whole of this farewell address, it is but too
apparent at least I cannot help thinking so concerning it that it

was written after the event It appears to me, indeed, even

when I overlook its character as an address written post eventum,
one of the most direct testimonies against the genuineness of these
epistles." " It cannot be supposed that the apostle should have
transferred the charge of combating the heretics, from himself to



512 PASTORAL EPISTLES.

those persons who were set over the Ephesian church, if in reality
he had afterwards come to devote three special epistles mainly to
this subject." " Let it be supposed, however, that the apostle was
mistaken, it would still be impossible to find a period when these
epistles could have been written, if, as apostolical, they must in any
way be brought to correspond with the farewell address in Miletus"
(a. a. Q., p. 92, seq.) With regard to this critical difficulty, we may
here refer to Neander I., p. 475, seq., and Bottger, a. a. Q., p. 216,
seq. The not knowing, etc., Acts xx. 22, may be opposed to what
is said respecting the certainty with which the apostle foresaw his
future fate. That in the prospect of the threatening dangers, he
earnestly charges the elders, as the shepherds of the flock, with the
care of the church, surely involves no serious difficulty. But the
only real difficulty that the apostle, according to the Pastoral
Epistles, must have gone again to Ephesus, notwithstanding that in
his address to the elders he appears to bid them farewell for ever
can but induce us to suppose, that the olda of the apostle was not
fulfilled in its entire compass (comp. infra). As long as the gen-
uineness of this farewell address is unshaken, we have, according to
Baur's own admission, the necessary point of connexion for the
heretical phenomena of these epistles. They set before us the most
immediate fulfilment of those memorable farewell words ; that ful-
filment itself, pointing to a still more perilous future, which, accord-
ing to the testimony of the later epistles of the New Testament,
and chiefly of the Apocalypse, did not fail to come to pass.

Before closing this investigation concerning the heretics of the
Pastoral Epistles, I owe it to my readers to state Olshausen's view,
as he himself ivfers to this subject in his introduction to the Epistle
to the Colossians, and gives his opinion to the following effect. " It
must be shewn," he observes, " how such heresies may be supposed
to have existed in the apostolic age. Already in the Epistle to the
Komans, chap, xiv., we find a remarkable description of Judaizing
ascetics." In the first Epistle to the Corinthians also, Olshausen
understands by the ol rov Xpiorov, a Gnostic party. Further, he
appeals to the Epistle to the Colossians. " However much these
heretics of the Epistle to the Colossians may have in common with
those in the Pastoral Epistles, there may still be perceived a con-
siderable difference between them. The Colossians entertained false
notions regarding the person of Christ, side by side with whom they
placed angels, to whom they likewise dedicated a species of worship,
ii. 18. Accordingly Paul sets himself in the Epistle to the Colossians
to prove the doctrine of the Divine nature of Christ, i. 15, seq. We
find nothing of this kind in the heretics of the Pastoral Epistles.
These are rather represented as having doubts as to the real hu-
manity of Christ. According to the principle that matter (AT?) is



GENERAL INTRODUCTION. 513

the source of sin, these, like the later Docetists, seem to have held
that the union of Christ the Son of God with a coarse human,
body was inadmissible. Paul, therefore, always brings into prom-
inence in these epistles the humanity of Christ, 1 Tim. ii. 5 ; iit
16 ; 2 Tim. ii. 8. Quite the same we find in 1 John. A farther
gnostic tendency meets us in the second Epistle of Peter, and in
that of Jude, to which also the Apocalypse corresponds, where men
are described who, setting out from gnostic principles, had sunk into
the depths of moral laxity. According to these testimonies we
must say, that the Pastoral Epistles contain nothing at variance
with them in the representation of the heretics which we find there j
rather, it becomes apparent that in the New Testament itself, may
be found already the germs of all those tendencies which in the second
century were developed into sects. If, accordingly, we must reject
Baur's view as altogether inadmissible, the difficult question still
arises to what influence are we to trace the origin of these heresies.
First of all, to a Judaizing influence ; and here a threefold way
may be supposed : 1, we might derive this influence from the sect
of the Essenes and Therapeutse ; or 2, from the Ebionites ; or 3,
from the Cabbalistic sources." Against the first supposition, Ols-
hausen urges the seclusion of these sects. If, however, it is supposed
that, not indeed Essenians, but a certain Essenian influence was
spread into a wider sphere, then less objection could be made to this
view ; but in this form it would correspond with the second suppo-
sition, which traces these heresies to the influence of the Ebionites.
Against this influence, however, according to Olshausen, may be ad-
duced the view expressed in 1 Tim. iv. 3 on the subject of marriage.
There remains then only the third way, according to which these
heresies were derived from the Jewish Cabbalistic ideas which is
adopted by Vitringa, Grotius, Wolf, Schottgen, Herder, Kleuker,
Schneckenburger (Studien, etc., 1832), Osiander (u'ber die Col.
Irrlehrer, Tub. Zeitschrift, 1836), Steiger (Col., p. 90), Baumgarten
(against Baur, p. 170, seq.) The Cabbala seems to have been the
originating principle of the heresies in the Epistle to the Colossians,
as well as in the Pastoral Epistles. That this originating principle
might have various developments, will at once appear when it is
taken into account, that the principles were capable of various in-
terpretations. " There was at that time a fluctuating movement
in principles ; especially does this shew itself in asceticism, in
which the most complete extremes issued from the same principles.
Notwithstanding that the prohibition of marriage and celibacy were
most opposed to the Jewish spirit, yet even this might very easily
be arrived at, by only supposing that matter is evil. And already
do we find approximations to this among the Therapeuta3. Philo.
II. 633 ; Jos. Antt. XVIII. 1, 5 ; Bell. J. II. 8, 2 ; Plin. H. N.
VOL. V. 33



514 PASTORAL EPISTLES.

V. 15." With regard to the pvdoi and yeveahoyiai in particular,
Olshausen agrees in opinion with the most of the later critics, and
accordingly understands by the pvOoi narrations concerning the
aeons, and by the latter, the successions of emanations of these aeons.

Looking then at the result of this investigation in regard to the
genuineness of the epistles, we deem ourselves at liberty to affirm :
that what is wont to be characterized as the wide-spread heresy of
the Pastoral Epistles, when more closely examined, does not appear
as properly a heresy at all ; but as an unprofitable pursuit taking
its rise in particular among Jewish Christians, the historical possi-
bility of which cannot be denied, as long as the existence of a Jew-
ish Gnosis at that period must be universally admitted. But, even
within the sphere of the New Testament, we find also so many
traces of real heresies of a Gnostic description, both such as fore-
shadowed these heresies, and such as were consequent upon them,
that a reference to them in several passages of the two Epistles to
Timothy ought not in the least to create surprise ; and all that is
necessary with reference to these heretical appearances is to shew
how easily we might adduce from history what is closely analogous
to them ; and then in respect to the particular instances, reference
would have to be made to the Exposition of the passages concerned.
Those other opinions noticed above, as held on the subject of the
genealogies, as well as Buxtorf 's view, according to which conclu-
siones, or Harduin's, according to which etymologies are to be un-
derstood as meant, I do not think it. necessary expressly to refute, as
they, one and all, may be considered to be given up. Heydenreich,
Mack, and Matthies, have stated all that is necessary in opposition
to them, in connexion with the appropriate passages.

2. We proceed now to the second point employed for assailing
the genuineness of the epistles, namely, the ecclesiastical institu-
tions, as represented in the Pastoral Epistles. Here it might suffice
to refer to the critical investigation in 3, in which we have en-
deavoured to shew that the church-organization delineated in these
epistles is demonstrably apostolical, and fully harmonizes with the
hints on this subject found elsewhere in the New Testament. It
has there also been shewn that their alleged hierarchical tendency
is a pure fiction, were it but for the reason that the constitution
which they enjoin is the original one, and therefore the objection of
a hierarchical tendency must apply to this constitution from its first
existence ; chiefly, however, by a comparison with those institutions
of the second century, beneath which such a tendency in reality lay.

We shall here only further direct attention to some marks which
confirm our assertion that the ecclesiastical institutions noticed in
these epistles belong to the apostolic age, and which contradict the
supposition that these epistles have a later date. To these belongs



GENERAL INTRODUCTION. 515

not merely the fact already adverted to, and fully acknowledged by
those on the other side the identity, namely, of the office desig-
nated equally by the terms Trpea/Syrepofand tmoKo-xos, the entire ab-
sence of anything like the prominent distinction of any single person
(Neander, a. a. Q. 1, 254), a circumstance of itself sufficient to make
it inconceivable that these epistles were written in the second cen-
tury, and with a hierarchical aim. (Comp. 3.) Add to this the
absence of all reference to the deaconship in the Epistle to Titus.
One cannot see how a writer of the second century should here pass
over in silence the office of the deacon, whilst he speaks of this sub-
ject with so much earnestness and minuteness in the first Epistle
to Timothy. The already settled ecclesiastical institutions of hia
time would have induced him to make mention of this office, which
also was handed down from the time of the apostles, when he was
aiming at the confirmation of the church government. On the other
hand, the absence of all reference to the deaconship is, on the sup-
position of the genuineness of these epistles, not only accountable,
but also strikingly aids our insight into the nature of this office, in
its distinction from that of presbyter. The deaconship, as will be
shewn under the appropriate passages, stands in no way on the
same level with that office. Called into existence by no necessity
inherent in the nature of church order and government, it does not
at all form the subject of consideration in the Epistle to Titus,
which treats simply of the establishment of an ecclesiastical con-
nexion. How ditferent is the case in the first Epistle to Timothy,
which treats not of the original church organization, but of conduct-
ing in a proper spirit and manner the already existing organization.
Whilst we plainly see in all this the primitive stamp of the apos-
tolic church government, we, at the same time, perceive in these
epistles certain traces, which, although faithful to this primitive im-
press, yet point to the later period in the history of apostolic labour,
to which the epistles belong. Thus, both in respect to ecclesiastical
institutions, and to heresy, these epistles find a suitable place in the
midst of the phenomena embraced within the compass of the New
Testament. Opposing criticism has found the marks of a post-
apostolic period in the manner in which the office-bearers and their
appointment are spoken of ; thus, for example, in the expression
dpeyeodat tTnoKomjs, in the emphasis that is laid on moral qualities
generally as pre-requisite to ordination, and especially in such ex-
pressions as husband of one wife, neophyte, etc. We can perceive
in all these (comp. the exposition) nothing that is necessarily post-
apostolical ; we must certainly, however, claim these as the mani-
fest indications of a later apostolical period. Both the Epistle to
Titus and the two Epistles to Timothy certainly imply the previous
existence of Christianity for some length of time ; on this supposi^



516 PASTORAL EPISTLES.

tion, too, however, all that has been referred to may be completely
understood, and historically vindicated. There is still another cir-
cumstance in which we may discern the later period, namely, the
comparative disappearance of the %apiaiia-a ; from this, too, we may
infer that Christianity had been already of some considerable
duration. The mighty impulse communicated to the minds of
men on its introduction, had assumed a more fixed and regular
character ; the new relations which were formed had become more
settled ; and along with the free movement of the Spirit in the
charismata, the regular office had been elevated to its real import-
ance. And there is here still a feature which especially deserves
our regard, and to which Neander has, with the same view, already
directed attention (a. a. Q. I., p. 263, seq.) In the first Epistle to
Timothy, iii. 2, v. 17, and in Tit. i. 9, it is required of the presbyter,
that he be apt to teach. " It was not till a later period," justly
observes Neander, " when the pure gospel had to contend with man-
ifold hostile errors, as was the case especially in the latter stage of
the Apostle Paul's labours it was not till this critical period that ha
considered it necessary to unite the two offices of the church teach-
ers (have we authority for supposing that there was an office of this
kind as distinct from that of the tTiiaKorrof ?) and the church presi-
dents more closely with each other, and to take heed that such
should be appointed to preside over the congregations as were at
the same time capable by their teaching, of preserving them from
the infection of error, of confirming them in the pure doctrine, and
confuting enemies, Tit. i. 9. Accordingly he counts those presby-
ters who also laboured in teaching, to be especially worthy of hon-
our. Who does not also recollect here the passage in Acts xx. 28,
eeq., so conclusive in regard to the heretics of the Pastoral Epistles,
where the apostle charges the presbyters with the duty of defending
the church against the coming dangers ? Dr. Baur has acknowl-
edged the weight of this passage, notwithstanding his being on the
opposite side (Past. p. 92). And let it also be observed, that as
with respect to the heretics, we have in the Apocalypse the repre-
sentation of a more advanced state of things, so also with reference
to the office-bearers. " When, however, John in the Apocalypse
addresses his epistle to the ayyeAo^, it is evident that in each of
these congregations one the oldest stood pre-eminent above the
rest, so that already had the constitution, subsequent to the apos-
tolic time, been introduced in a twofold way, with respect, namely,
to the relation of the K-rrioKonog to the npeafivrtpiov, and with respect
to the united organization of congregations with one person at their
head" (extract from the Zeitschr. far prot. und Kirche, 1849, p. 144,
seq.) Thus, then, do we see that in this respect also the Pastoral
Epistles completely correspond in their contents to the historical



GENERAL INTKODUCTION. 517

place that must be assigned to tliem if they are genuine, and thereby
attest their own genuineness.

But it is further urged, by way of objection, that we cannot
suppose that the apostle should have spoken so fully and so ear-
nestly on church government. Those indeed who discover in this
church government, on which so much emphasis is laid, the victory
of the Jewish Christian Petriue element over the Pauline, must
think so, and must regard as well founded, the alleged want of a
church organization in the spirit and character of the Christianity
of Paul. We have ( 3) no reason for such an opinion. This whole
question presents itself to us in this form : can we conceive it pos-
sible that the Apostle Paul should at any time have made the order
and government of churches the subject of his earnest regard ? Or
more exactly still, are we at liberty to predicate of the apostle, that
he perceived and valued the importance of church organization in
order to the continuance of the Christian church ? If so, then we
need not be surprised at the earnestness with which, in these epis-
tles, he treats of ecclesiastical institutions. But why, it is asked,
does the apostle, in these epistles particularly, insist with such ear-
nestness and emphasis on church institutions ? Granted, that there
is a connexion between heresies and the development of church
government, it will still have to be explained, say our opponents,
how in other epistles, where the apostle also combats heresies, this
point is not brought forward, as for example in the Epistles to the
Corinthians and the Epistle to the Galatians. It remains then, say
they, for the advocates of the genuineness to shew a special neces-
sity in this case. We observe, in reply, that this reasoning can
only be maintained by the rejection of the passage Acts xx. 17, seq.
" Here we see the apostle's eye (according to Baur, p. 92) already
directed to the same state of things as meets us in a more definite
form in the Pastoral Epistles. The most powerful protection from,
and resistance to, this danger that threatened the church is expected,
as in the Pastoral Epistles, from those who were set over the church ;
and it was chiefly with this view that the apostle sent for them to
meet him at Miletus, in order to commit this charge to them in
the most earnest manner, before taking leave of that scene of his
previous labours. This address seems, therefore, to prove most
clearly that what forms the principal contents and the principal
design of the Pastoral Epistles, was even at that time within the
sphere of the apostle's vision." So Dr. Baur expresses himself, and
we know of nothing that could be said in addition to this for our
purpose ; we will only further call attention to Acts xiv. 23, where
we have an account of the appointment of presbyters by the apostle.
That passage not merely shews that the apostle elsewhere than in
the Pastoral Epistles made church-government the subject of his



518 PASTORAL EPISTLES.

most earnest concern ; but it can also shew why, in the Pastoral
Epistles, this subject comes so much into the foreground. Dr. Baur
has himself unintentionally indicated this in the words quoted
above : that the apostle commits this charge in the most pressing
terms to those who presided over the church, before taking leave of
that scene of his past labours ; and further, in that he says that
the apostle here, as in the Pastoral Epistles, expects at the hands
of those who were set over the church the most powerful protection
from, and resistance to, a danger which threatened the church. We
have already adverted to the fact that the office could then only
acquire its full significance and efficiency when things had bfgun to
assume a settled form. What could be effected by office-bearers
whose power rested solely on the obedience of faith, so long as faith
itself had not yet found a settled place in the heart, as in the Epistlo
to the Galatians so long as the very continuance of Christianity
was placed in doubt, or when, as in the Epistle to the Corinthians,
the church was rent by factions which endangered the apostolical
authority of the apostle ? In circumstances such as these, the very
principle was assailed, on the acknowledgment of which the whole
efficiency of the elders appointed by the apostle depended. The
church in Galatia must first be brought to the obedience of the
faith, the factions in the church at Corinth must first be removed,
ere the influence of office can with any propriety be spoken of. In
this way do we account for no further mention being made of office-
bearers in those epistles. Altogether different is the case when the
danger of being led away threatens a Christian, or as it is said, a
Pauline-Christian church already standing. Here, that which the
efficiency of the office presupposes, is already acknowledged. It is