as furnishing an argument against the Pastoral Epistles, with the
view of giving it a positive investigation, so far as this can be done
in a general way. We mean the alleged unaccountableness of
these epistles on exegetical grounds, as distinct from that on his
torical grounds, which we have just considered. We have here, as
has been already observed, principally to deal with De Wctte, who
has given all diligence to establish this objection. We must of
course leave it to the exposition of the respective epistles to shew,
that they are quite in keeping with the state of things which they
bring before us, that they correspond to the object they have in
* I larless has nlso expressed himself decidedly to tho same effect. Ephcsorbrief, Einl. p. 61.
GENERAL INTRODUCTION. 527
view, and to the relation of the writer to those to whom they were
addressed, and that the exceptions that have been taken to each of
the epistles severally in these respects are without foundation.
We here discuss the objections urged against the epistles on the
ground of the grammatical and religious character common to them
as a whole, comp. in De Wette, p. 116. seq. As the most recent
negative criticism in this respect also treats the three epistles as
one, and has almost entirely withdrawn from Schleiermacher's sus-
picions against the first Epistle to Timothy in particular,* so do we
also treat them in our defence. The three epistles must, in regard
to this objection also, in our view stand or fall together.
We have already fully acknowledged in 1 the critical difficulty
that presents itself here. But we shall find here also that on a closer
examination, what at first seems strange becomes less so, nay, be-
comes quite accountable. These epistles, says De Wette, differ from
all the rest of Paul's epistles in a peculiar phraseology, which is com-
mon either to all the three or at least to two ; and he follows up
this assertion with a long list of these peculiar words and phrases.
The same process which Schleiermacher brought to bear against
the first Epistle to Timothy, is thus extended to the three epistles.
But how uncertain the result of such a process is, in a numerical
respect, has been already ably demonstrated by Planck, in a com-
parison made by him in opposition to Schleiermacher, of the peculiar
expressions to be found in other epistles with those in the first Epistle
to Timothy, in regard to their number. He shews that in the first
Epistle to Timothy there are eighty-one ana!- /Uyd/iem, in the second
sixty-three, and in the Epistle to Titus forty-four ; but that in the
Epistle to the Philippians there are fifty-four, in the Epistle to the
Galatians fifty-seven, and in the Epistles to the Ephesians and Colos-
sians together one hundred and forty-three. It is thus evident that,
in a purely numerical point of view, the Pastoral Epistles appear by
no means in a disadvantageous light. But from this nothing far-
ther can be inferred, than that the difference in phraseology is not
in itself conclusive against the genuineness of these epistles. And
how should this be possible ? We shall not go so far as Planck,
who asserts that the apostle had no rhetorically-developed style of
language ; but we would simply ask, what right have we to sup-
pose, that in ten or eleven other epistles which we possess of the
* " No one who is acquainted with the more recent investigations since Schleierma-
cher, and finds almost all critics unanimous in the opinion that these three epistles in
respect to their contents, their form, and their entire peculiarity, are not to be separated
from each other, can suppose that in point of composition there is so marked a superior-
ity in the two other epistles over the first," Baur p. 78. "Schleiermacher has certainly
exaggerated the more unfavourable characteristics of the first Epistle to Timothy," De
Wette, p. 119. De Wette himself, however, gives an inferior place to the first Epistle to
Timothy as compared with the two others. But in his view they must stand or fall together.
528 PASTORAL EPISTLES.
apostle's writings, his whole stock of words lies hefore us ? The
last epistles of the apostle (keeping the Pastoral Epistles out of
view), contain an abundant supply of new words not before used by
him. If then, in these epistles, which in their having been ad-
dressed to churches, as well as in their aim and contents, bear a
much greater affinity to the rest, we yet find so great a difference,
how much more accountable is this in the Pastoral Epistles which
differ from all the others with the exception of the short Epistle to
Timothy in being addressed not to congregations but to individ-
uals, and these fellow-teachers with the apostle, and in being partly
(that to Titus and the first to Timothy), quite of the nature of
official letters. May we not expect a priori, that in these epistles
a new class of words will appear, when we find this in every one
even of the epistles that are otherwise homogeneous ? Of still
greater importance, however, is another circumstance to be noticed
here. These epistles, as already seen, and as the opposing criticism
most insists upon, bring before us in detail, forms of religious life
altogether new, and errors, the like of which do not occur in the
other epistles. These new things of necessity give rise to new desig-
nations. And if these epistles treat of the institutions of the church,
and contain directions to Titus and Timothy for the right manage-
ment of its affairs, topics handled in none of the other epistles, how
could it be otherwise, than that new expressions should occur in
connexion with these subjects ? And, if these epistles collectively
belong to a later period than all the rest, and all of them to about
the same period, what ground for surprise at finding that they are
closely related to each other, and differ considerably from the rest,
especially as they all refer to matters which till then were unknown ?
There is no reason then for our being perplexed by the occurrence
of new expressions and formulas. Still, however, all will depend on
the character of this peculiar phraseology. A single anat- XKJO^EVOV
of a decidedly later origin would weigh more against the genuine-
ness than a long catalogue of peculiar expressions, which Paul does
not elsewhere use, but which, so far as concerns the idea or gram-
matical usage, he might have employed. The oppposing criticism
has made too lax a use of the term " unpauline." It has not ad-
duced a single instance of an expression which can be said to be
unpauline in the sense that Paul could not have used it, however
numerous the instances of words which he does not actually use.
Keeping these general remarks in view, when we turn to what De
Wette has characterised as the peculiar phraseology of the Pastoral
Epistles, we at once find a series of expressions, the occurrence of
which may be simply explained by the circumstance that these
epistles allude to matters not spoken of in the other epistles. He
adduces juvflot, yeveahoyiai, ^T/TTfCTeif, (laraiokoyia, uaratoAoyof, K.EVO-
GENERAL INTRODUCTION. 529
Some of these expressions it will be
evident at a glance, owe their existence to the peculiarity of the
things to which the epistles refer. What proof can be drawn from
the occurrence of pvdoi and yeveaXoyiai, if these were the very things
with which the Jewish Christians carried on their trade in magic ?
As well might we, on grammatical grounds, stumble at the occur-
rence of dduhodvrov in the first Epistle to the Corinthians alone,
where indeed it occurs six times ; or at finding the expression
elduhelov only in that epistle, or ZOeXodprjoKeia, K^arevu only in the
Epistle to the Colossians. But such expressions also as fyrifoeis,
juarafoAoym, and the rest are naturally explained, by the nature of
those phenomena against which they were directed. The chief
characteristic of the apostle's mode of combating the errors here
dealt with is that he almost entirely abstains from a serious refu-
tation of the things brought forward by those seducers who were
destitute of all moral earnestness, and concisely warns against them
as empty talk, profitless controversy, vain disputation, whilst he di-
rects to those subjects that are indeed worthy of being known, and
will conduct to godliness. What expressions could be more appropri-
.ate for this end than just those selected, such as jt/wpcu ^rijaei^, \iarai-
ohoyia, Kevo^uviai, hoyo/ia^iai ? Thus when the historical element,
is justly apprehended, every stumbling-block disappears, whether
arising from the manner in which the apostle combats the error, or
the expressions he employs. And may we not point to parallels to
these expressions in other epistles of the apostle ? MwpoAoym, Eph.
v. 4, ludavokoyia, Col. ii. 4, ^pT/aroAoyta, Rom. xvi. 18, icevodo^ia, Phil.
ii. 3, are words similarly formed ; whilst the first two are similar
also with respect to the sense. We might justly refer, as others
have already done, for paraiohoyia, to 1 Cor. iii. 20 ; Rom. i. 21, for
Kevocpuvia, to Eph. v. 6, for fyrrjoeis to ov^rjTrjrr]g at 1 Cor. i. 20. But
the influence of the specific error which is combated in the Pastoral
Epistles, extends to their phraseology much more than might at
first be believed. The terms vyi^g and vyiaiveiv along with that to
which they stand opposed, namely, voaelv are adduced as peculiar,
in so far as they are employed to denote the true doctrine, and sur-
prise has been expressed that the apostle, although he combats
heresies in others of his epistles, yet employs these expressions only
here, and here so often. But this surprise proceeds from overlook-
ing just the principal thing, namely, that we do not find in these
epistles, as many commentators suppose, the opposition of true and
false doctrine, but of an unsound and a sound Christianity. The
apostle characterizes as diseased the Christianity of those who give
themselves up to profitless things, that are destitute of all moral
fruitfulness, and as sound that of those who direct their regards
to the truth which is according to godliness, or as he is wont con-
VOL. V 34
530 PASTORAL EPISTLES.
cisely to express it, the vyiaivovaa dida.aiea.Xia. We shall find no
more appropriate designation for this kind of error in the other
'epistles of the apostle. With this is connected the frequent use of
evvtpeia in the Pastoral Epistles, an expression which the apostle
employs nowhere else ; on which we have said what is necessary at
Tit. i. 1. In like manner, the frequent use of autypuv with its deriv-
atives is explained by taking into account that the apostle, in delin-
eating Christianity as opposed to a morally unsound course of
conduct, lays all stress on the disposition and conduct of its pro-
fessors. Where does the apostle, in any other place, describe Chris-
tianity in its application to individuals, and that, according to the
distinctions of sex, age, and rank ? And on turning to Phil. iv. 8
a passage which comes nearest to that, in which ouxppwv occurs, inas-
much as the apostle there aims at giving an exhaustive designation
of the idea of Christian morality we find several expressions which
do not occur anywhere else, or occur but seldom, such as dyvog and
aefivog, so often found in these epistles, and -poafyiXi'is, ev^T/juo^, dperrj
not found at all in any other place. The epithets 0K t 3ij^oc, ypa^^T]g,
d-rraldevTos (the two latter occurring only once) arc also adduced.
But their occurrence is also explained by the relation they bear to
the errors that are combated. If they denote things of a foolish
and insipid character, then the use of these words, which belonged
to the ustis linguae of that period, is no proof that the epistles
were not written by the apostle. Further, the expressions npooexeiv,
dTTOTpeTreadcu, ^Krpk-naOai, rceputrraadai, 7mpaj.TEioOai, darn^elv, rvtyova-
dat are adduced. But these expressions also all refer to the er-
rors opposed in these epistles, as Bohl also justly observes, that
.the peculiarity in the language of the Pastoral Epistles, almost
wholly relates to the designation of the evangelical doctrine on the
one hand, and of the errors on the other. The first of these expres-
sions occurs elsewhere in the sense in which it is adduced as peculiar
to these epistles ; comp. on Tit. i. 14. 'ATrorpK-eaOai kn-rpfataQai,
and the remaining expressions, are found indeed only here ; for
in Heb. xii. 13, ticrpK-rcEoQai has a different signification ; comp.
De Wette on the passage. But nothing in the words themselves
prevents our supposing that the apostle might have used them ;
and the reason of his not using them elsewhere is that he does
not elsewhere combat error by repelling it in the same summary
way. Rom. xvi. 17 might be mentioned as containing an ex-
pression which has some resemblance to it : xal tKKXirare drr' avrtiv.
This expression is quite as peculiar to this passage as those of
a similar kind in our epistles ; only, at Rom. iii. 12, the expres-
sion occurs again without d-rro. In like manner we find at Gal.
L 6, neTarideadat OTTO, which does not thus occur elsewhere. The
case is the same with -epttarafjOai, which, in the signification in
GENERAL INTRODUCTION. 531
which it is here used is not at all an uncommon word ; comp.
Passow. With 7rapairelo6ai compare Heb. xii. 19, 25, and Acts
xxv. 11. And what objection can be made to the expression daro-
%KU, further than that it does not occur elsewhere, which might
also be said of ca"kf.vQr\vai d-rro occurring only at 2 Thess. ii. 2, fiera-
Kiveladai d-rro only at Col. i. 23, eKmirreiv rivog only at Gal. v. 4 ; es-
pecially as (like the preceding term KK-psireadai) the word stands in
express connexion with TO rt'-lo^, 1 Tim. i. 5, 6 ? How similar to
it is the elsewhere occurring expression oToi%elv } Rom. iv. 12 ; Gal.
vi. 16 ? Finally, against rv^ovadai we might place the expression
Qvotovodat, which, with the exception of Col. ii. 18, is found only in
the Epistles to the Corinthians, and occurs there no fewer than six
times. Other expressions on which stress is also laid, such as diafte-
ftaiovadai treyl rivog, vTToiufj.vrjaKeiv, are occasioned by the epistles
being addressed to fellow-teachers of the apostle, on whom he en-
joins what they are to do, as Bottger has already observed. With
respect to the former of these expressions, it may be observed that
(3ej3aiog, 0e/3aiow, (3e(3aiuaic;, are frequently used by the apostle ; while
the latter will suggest the dvaiMfivfjotiu of 1 Cor. iv. 17, which also
occurs at 2 Tim. i. 6 in proximity to the other. De Wette, more-
over, adduces the unnsual formulas of salutation xdpis, tvleoc, elprjvrj,
which occur in 1 Tim. i. 2 ; 2 Tim. i. 2 (that in Tit. i. 4 is spurious).
This formula, however, is not a peculiarity which universally belongs
to the Pastoral Epistles, for we find there the more common along
with the more uncommon formula. Further, 6ebg aurrjp. It were
easy to shew that the idea is not unpauline ; comp. on Tit. i. 3.
This concise expression of the idea becomes accountable on the hy-
pothesis that these epistles belong to a later period, as has been
already observed by a critic ; and an imitator of the apostle would
naturally have avoided this. Lastly, the formula morbg 6 Adyo?
corresponding to the d^v (comp. on Tit. iii. 8) is used by the
apostle only here. Did it occur only once, no one would object
to it ; and I take its more frequent occurrence to be just as
accidental as the frequent occurrence of fj-f] -rrXavdads in the first
Epistle to the Corinthians, whilst it is found elsewhere only at Gal.
vi. 7. The expression doubtless involves an antithetical reference
to the uncertain human opinions of the seducers, comp. Tit. i. 9 ;
although it is also used in a general way, as at 1 Tim. iii. 1. In
such matters full allowance ought to be made for a writer's individ-
uality. If these epistles were written about the same time, and
bear such an affinity to one another as imparts to them the charac-
ter of one epistle in comparison with the rest, then, in the frequent
occurrence of one and the same expression, we have the same phe-
nomenon that meets us in the other epistles, as, for example, when
we find the word ^V/Adw occurring five times in the Epistles to
532 PASTORAL EPISTLES.
the Corinthians, although it occurs hesides only in Gal. iv. 17,
18, or when we find QvmovoOai six times in the Epistles to the
Corinthians, and only once besides, in Col. ii. 18. But a closer
comparison of the usus lingua? in the other epistles of Paul with
that in the Pastoral Epistles, would doubtless bring to light many
expressions which are specifically Pauline, and which, except in
those epistles and in the Pastoral, occur nowhere else. We ad-
duce, for the sake of example, Ivfaiicvvadai, Tit. ii. 10, which, in
the New Testament is used by the apostle alone, but by him fre-
quently ; together with evdEifa and tvfcty/na, which are used only
by him. In like manner dvanaivtixus and ara/iamjw, dvanaivifa are
used only by Paul ; comp. Tit. iii. 5. Again dra^tnvtiaK^, 2 Tim. i.
6, occurs besides, in the New Testament, only at 1 Cor. iv. 17. So
vovderelv and vovOeoia used only by the apostle (in Acts xx. 31 it is
the apostle who speaks), and by him eight times in all, is found at
Tit. iii. 10 ; also ^Tr/roy//, (iveia, 7rAdiu, found only in the other epis-
tles of Paul, and there repeatedly. In like manner arrorojuw^, </>pei>a-
Trardtj, comp. with Tit. i. 10, and aQopfirj. For the explanation of
the other expressions adduced by De Wette, im^dveia instead of
napovaia, dea-norrj^ instead of Kvpio$ } I refer to the passages in which
they occur. Besides these expressions, which are common to the
three epistles, or to two of them, others of a peculiar kind, which
occur in each of the epistles respectively, will be attended to in
the exposition. These general remarks are intended only to shew
that the difference in phraseology observable in these epistles by
no means proves that which is sought to be proved by it. In
the circumstances that they allude to new forms of error, that
they are addressed to fellow-teachers of the apostle, that in their
contents they bear a strong affinity to each other, and that they
were written nearly contemporarily, the peculiarity of their phrase-
ology is easily accounted for, and in comparison with the other
epistles of the apostle, offers no inexplicable enigma. The crit-
icism which has failed to shew, in the case of any one of those
words, that the apostle might not have used it, ought at least to
point out what Pauline expressions should have been chosen in
place of the " unpauline" ones, and how a forger should happen to
prove false to the original precisely in those things in which a suc-
cessful imitation would have displayed the smallest art, as, for ex-
ample, in the formulas of salutation. But how unsuccessful has
Schleiermacher been in his attempt to fulfil the former of these ob-
ligations, when he takes irtpofadaaKaXelVj 1 Tim. i. 3, to be identical
with aAAov 'Irjaovv Krjpvaaeiv, 2 Cor. xi. 4, and thinks that the apostle
would never have expressed himself in such a round-about way if
he had known the frnpodtdfUMcaXefr. In reply to this it is enough to
refer to 1 Tim. vi. 3. Comp. on 1 Tim. i. 3. That the language of
GENERAL INTRODUCTION. 533
the Pastoral Epistles is purer Greek than that of the other epistles,
arises plainly from the circumstance that the apostle does not here
treat of doctrinal subjects.
It is not, however, merely the diction of the Pastoral Epistles
that is alleged to be unpauline, but also the style as a whole, the
composition of the epistles. De Wette remarks as a peculiarity
common to them all, that they deal much in common-places, and
that even what is intended to serve for the refutation of error or for
instruction, is given in a general form ; with which also is to be con-
nected the further peculiarity, that after such digressions or general
instructions, a return, or a conclusion and resting point, is generally
sought in an exhortation or an application in some form, addressed
to the party who is to receive the epistle. In order to understand
what De Wette means by the common-places so frequently occur-
ring in these epistles, we may refer to such passages as Tit. ii. 11-15
or iii. 3-8. We must leave it to the exposition to shew, with refer-
ence both to this passage and to the remaining passages of the same
kind, whether it is a digression or a common-place that is expressed,
and not rather a truth which stands in close connexion with the
foregoing exhortation, as that by which it is confirmed, and which
on this account is strongly urged on the party to whom the epistle
is addressed, as on one who ought to conduct himself in accord-
ance with this general truth. It is true, however, that in these
epistles the special and the general follow each other in close
succession, that the particular subjects are for the most part
treated in a general way, and that even what is said in the way
of refutation or of instruction is presented in a general form.
It is this, namely, the sententious character of the epistles, in
which they differ from the others. And with this sententious-
ness which characterizes the particular sentences, their general
structure stands closely connected. It is evident at first sight
that these epistles for the most part contain no artificially-con-
structed periods, but sentences connected in a simple form. Sen-
tence follows sentence in the simplest connexion, often in no
connexion ; and this want of apparent connexion frequently ap-
pears also in the transitions, where, with the connecting link
of a relative or a /cat, something follows quite remote from
what goes before. This difference in the style of composition, can
fail to be perceived by no one who passes from the reading of the
other epistles to these. How is the apostle elsewhere wont to inter-
weave the special with the general, how lively and impressive is his
style, how full of special allusions, and the context how closely con-
nected, and how full of the subtlest reciprocal references ! Whilst,
in the case of the other epistles of Paul, the expositor cannot in
general mistake the right meaning if he but carefully considers
534 PASTORAL EPISTLES.
the context ; in the Pastoral Epistles, he is often deserted by
the context, as well in respect to tho meaning of particular
words as to the whole thought, and left to form his opinion from
the general usage of the language and the general analogy of the
apostle's peculiar sphere of thought ; and in like manner in deter-
mining the connexion (this applies especially to the first Epistle to
Timothy) he is very much left to the resources of his own judgment.
How is this dissimilarity to be explained ? If we have referred in a
general way to the other epistles of Paul in order to make this dis-
similarity apparent, we must also, on the other hand, refer to them
in our endeavour to account for it. And whilst it cannot be denied
that there is a certain similarity between the Pastoral Epistles and
the others, it must also be acknowledged how great a difference there
is between them. Schleiermacher, with special reference to the first
Epistle to Timothy, gives prominence to the objection that it is en-
tirely wanting in specialities, that in it everything wears a general
and undefined aspect, and appears unfixed, as if hovering in the air
rather than resting on the firm ground of a really existing state of
things. But he is not inclined to undertake from a comparison with
the rest of Paul's epistles in respect to their style, to prove that this
epistle cannot be of a Pauline origin, for, he says this dissimilarity
might be of trifling significance, inasmuch as these epistles (the
other epistles of Paul) are of so very various a character, that there
might easily have been one other differing in a peculiar way from
all the rest. Leaving out of view that Schleiermacher would have
found it difficult to prove the style of the first epistle to be unpaul-
ine, so long as the two others are acknowledged to be Pauline, we
accept as perfectly true his remark as to the other epistles of Paul
being various in their character, and we unhesitatingly bring it for-
ward in behalf of the three epistles. How different, in spite of the
fundamental similarity already alluded to, is the dialectic character
of the Epistles to the Romans and to the Galatians, from the orato-
rical style of the Epistle to the Ephesians, and this again from the
Epistle to the Philippians, which approaches nearest to the purely