To the close of this imprisonment apparently also belongs the Epistle to the Ilebrews (q. v.).
(2.) Last Labors and Martynlmn. — In both these last Epistles Paul expresses a confident hope that before long he may be able to visit the persons addressed in person (Phil, i, 25, oUa, k.t.\. ; ii, 24, TrfVoiS-a, /c.r.A.; Heb. xiii, 10, 'iva Ta\ior, k. r. X. ; 23, oxpopai vpag). Whether this hope were fulfilled or not belongs to a question which now presents itself to us, and which has been the occasion of nuicli controversy. Accord- ing to the general o])inion, the apostle was liberated from his imprisonment and left Rome soon after the writing of the letter to the Philippians, .'pent some time in visits to Greece, Asia Jlinor, and Spain, re- turned again as a prisoner to Rome, and was put to death there. In opposititm to tliis view it is main- tained by some that he was never liberated, but was put to death at Rome at an earlier period than is com- monly supposed. 'I he arguments adduced in favor of the common view are : (1) the hopes expressed by Paul of visiting Philippi (already nsmed) and Colossae (Philemon 22); (2) a number of allusions in the Pas- toral Epistles, and their general character; and (3) the testimon}' of ecclesiastical tradition. The argu- ments in favor of the single im|irifonment appear to be wholly negative, and to aim fin pl}^ at showing that there is no proof of a liberf.tion or departure from Rome. It is contended that Paul's expectations were not always realized, and that the passages from Phile- mon and Philippians are effectualh' neutralized by Acts XX, 25, " I know that ye all (;it Ephesus) shall see my face no more ;" inafmuch as tlie supporters of the ordinary view hold that Paul went again to Ephe- sus. This is a ftiir answer, but inconsistent, inasmuch as it assumes the cert;iinty of Paul's expectations, which this theorj* had just denied. The argument from the Pastoral Epistles is met most simplj' bj' a denial of their genuineness. The tradition of ecclesiastical antiquity is affirmed to have no real weight.
The decision must turn mainly upon the view taken of the Pastoral Epistles. It is true that there are many ci itics, including Wieselcr and Dr. Davidson, w ho ad- mit the genuineness of these Epistles, and yet, by re- ferring 1 Timothy and Titus to an earlier period, and by strained explanations of the allusions in 2 Timothj', get rid of the evidence they arc generally understood to give in favor of a second imprisonment. The voy-
PAUL
816
PAUL
ages required by the two former Epistles, and the writing of them, arc placed within the three years spent chiefly at Ephesus (Acts xx, 31). But the hj'- pothesis of voyages during that period not recorded by Luke is just as arbitrary as that of a release from Rome, which is objected to expressly because it is arbitrary ; and such a distribution of the Pastoral Epistles is shown by overwhelming evidence to be untenable. The whole question is discussed in a masterly and de- cisive manner by Alford in his Prolegomena to the Pastoral Epistles. If, however, these Epistles are not accepted as genuine, the main ground for the belief in a second imprisonment is cut awa3\ For a special con- sideration of the Epistles, let the reader refer to the articles on Timothy and Titus.
The difficulties which have induced such critics as De Wette and Ewald to reject these Epistles are not inconsiderable, and will force themselves upon the at- tention of the careful student of Paul. But they are overpowered by the much greater difficulties attend- ing any hypothesis which assumes these Epistles to be spurious. We are obliged therefore to recognise the modifications of Paul's style, the developments in the history of the Church, and the movements of various persons, which have appeared suspicious in the Epistles to Timothy and Titus, as nevertheless historically true. And then, without encroaching on the domain of con- jecture, we draw the following conclusions : (1) Paul must have left Kome, and visited Asia Minor and Greece ; for he suys to Timothy (1 Tim. i, 3), " I be- sought thee to abide still at Ephesus, when I was set- ting out for Macedonia." After being once at Ephe- sus, he was purposing to go there again (1 Tim. iv, 13), and he spent a considerable time at Ephesus (2 Tim. i, 18). (2) He paid a visit to Crete, and left Titus to organize churches there (Tit. i, 5). He was intend- ing to spend a winter at one of the places named Ni- copolis (Tit. iii, 12). (3) He travelled by Miletus (2 Tim. iv, 20), Troas (2 Tim. iv, 13), where he left a cloak or case, and some books, and Corinth (2 Tim. iv, 20). (4) He is a prisoner at Rome, "suffering unto bonds as an evil-doer" (2 Tim. ii, 9), and expect- ing to be soon condemned to death (2 Tim. iv, C). At this time he felt deserted and solitary, having only Luke of his old associates to keep him company; and he was ver}' anxious that Timothy should come to him without delaj' from Ephesus, and bring Mark with him (2 Tim. i, 15 ; iv, 9-12, IG).