10. De Wette maintains that the injunction in v, 23 is so much beneath the dignity of an apostle that we cannot suppose it to have proceeded from such a writer as Paul. But what is there in such an injunction less dignified than in many injunctions of an equally famil- iar nature scattered through Paul's epistles? And in what is it incompatible with the apostolic character that one sustaining it should enjoin upon a young, zealous, and active preacher, whom he esteemed as his own son, a careful regard to his health ; the more es- pecially when, by acting as is here enjoined, he would vindicate Christian liberty from those ascetic restraints by which the false teachers sought to bind it ?
(III.) Special Ohjecliinm to the Secoml Epistle. — Of these the most weighty are founded on the assinnption that this epistle must be viewed as written during the apostle's first imprisonment at Rome; and as, for rea- sons to be sid)se()uently stated, we do not regard this assumption as tenable, it will not be necessary to occu- py space with any remarks upon them. We may leave uimoticcd also those objections to this epistle which are mere repetitions of those urged against the first, and which admit of similar replies.
1. In iii, 11, the writer enumerates a series of per- secutions and afflictions which befell iiim at Antioch,
TDIOTHY, FIRST EPISTLE TO 421 TIMOTHY, FIRST EPISTLE TO
Tcoiiium, and Lj'stra, of which he says Timothy knew. Would Paul, it is asked, in mailing such an enumera- tion, have committed the mistake of referring to perse- cutions which he had endured before his connection with Timoth)', and have said notiiing of those which he endured niibsfqiicii//;/, and of which Timothy miiKl have known, while of the former he iitifjht be ignorant? But there is no mistake in the matter. Paul has occa- tiion to refer to the knowledge Timothy had of his suf- ferings ft)r the Gospel. Of these some had occurred before Timothy's connection with him, while others had occurred while Timothy was his companion anil fellow- sufferer. Oi the latter, therefore, Paul makes no spe- citic mention, feeling that to be unnecessary ; but of the former, of which Timothy could know only by hearsay, but of which he no doubt did know, for we cannot con- ceive that any interesting point in Paul's previous his- tory would be unknown to his "dear son in the faith," he makes specilic enumeration. This fully accounts for his stopping short at the point where Timothy's per- sonal experience could amply supply the remainder.
2. The declaration in iv, 7, etc., is incompatible with what Paul says of himself in Phil, iii, 12, etc. But re- spect must be had to the v^ry different circumstances in which the apostle was when he wrote these two pas- sages. In the one case he viewed himself as still en- gaged in active work, and having the prospect of ser- vice before him ; in the other he regards himself as very near to death, and shortly about to enter into the ]iresence of his master. Surelj' the same individual might in the former of these cases speak of work yet to do, and in the latter of his work as done, without any contradiction.
3. In i, 6 and ii, 2 there are pointed allusions to ec- clesiastical ceremonies which betray a later age than that of Paul. This is said without reason. The lav- ing-on of hands in the conferring of a x^'piaf^ta was altogether an apostolic usage; and the hearing of Paul's doctrines was what Timothy, as his companion in trav- el, could easily enjoy, without our needing to suppose that the apostle is here represented as acting the part of professor in a school of theology.
Fidl particulars on this discussion will be found in the introductions of Alford, Wordsworth, Huther, Da- vidson, Wiesinger, and Hug. Cony beare and Howson (App. I) give a good tabular simimary both of the ob- jections to the genuineness of the epistles and of the answers to them, and a clear statement in favor of the later date. The most elaborate arguinent in favor of the earlier is to be found in Lardner, Historij of A post, and Evanrj. {Works, vi, 315-37.5). See also the intro- ductions of Iliinlein, Michaelis, Eichhorn, De VVette, Bertholdt, Guericke, Schott, etc. ; Schleiermacher, Ueher den sorjenunnten ersten Brief des Paulus an den Timo- the.ns, ein kritisches Sendschreiben an J. C. Gass ( Berl. 1807, 12mo) ; Planck, Bemerkinifien iiber d. ersten Pau- lin. Brief an d. Tim, (Gott. 1808, 8vo); Beckhaus, Specimen Obss. Crif.-exeget. de Vocabulis liwa^ Xeyojus- voiQ ill I. ad Tim. Ep. Paulina obinis, A vthenlia ejus nihil detrahentibiis (Lingre, 1810, 8vo) ; Curtius, P)e Tempore quo prior Panli ad Tim. Epist. eocarata sit (Berol. 1828, 8vo) ; Otto, Die geschichtl. Verhdltnisse der Past.-Briefe (Leips. 1860, 8vo).
II. Date. — The direct evidence on this point is very slight, {a.) i, 3 implies a journey of Paul from Ephe- sus to Macedonia, Timothy remaining behind, (ft.) The age of Timothy is described as vn'ri]!; (iv, 12). (c.) The general resemblance between the two epistles indicates that they were written at or about the same time. Three hypotheses have been maintained as ful- filling these conditions.
1. The journey in question has been looked upon as an unrecorded episode in the tiro yeurs^ irork at Ephesus (Acts xix, 10). This conjecture has the merit of bring- ing the epistle within the limit of the authentic records of Paul's life, but it has scarcely any other. Against it we may urge that a journey to Macedonia would