Holy Bible

Paul, an apostle of Jesus Christ by the will of God. 2 Timothy 1:1, 2 The dignity of preachers J. Barlow, D. D. Preachers are to maintain the dignity of their persons. Because a good name is as precious ointment, above great riches, and more than the choicest silver and gold, to be regarded. It will rejoice the heart, whereas the contrary is a curse, and to be avoided. Otherwise, if ministers be ill reported of, their doctrine (be it never so sound or sovereign for the soul) will be despised, rejected. If the vessel be counted unsweet, who will with alacrity taste of the liquor: The Word will not speed if the preacher be despised. And for procuring a good report — 1. Be diligent in the discharge of thy duty; avoid idleness in thy Calling. 2. Take heed thou be not justly accused of that which thou hast severely censured in others. 3. Speak not evil of others, for with what measure we mete it shall be measured to us again. Could we cover others' infirmities, they would do the like for us. 4. Seek the glory of God in thy proceedings, for they who honour God shall be honoured of Him, whereas they who seek themselves shall be abased. The people also must take heed how they detract from the credit of their pastors. Nature, by a sacred instinct, will defend the head with the loss of the hand. Why, the preacher is the head of the people, and therefore to be respected; and it is an old axiom, "Do My prophets no harm" ( Psalm 105:15 ). ( J. Barlow, D. D. )

Benson Commentary 2 Timothy 1:1 Paul, an apostle of Jesus Christ by the will of God, according to the promise of life which is in Christ Jesus, 2 Timothy 1:1-5 . Paul, an apostle by the will of God — See 1 Corinthians 1:1-5 ; according to the promise of life — Appointed to exhibit, by preaching the gospel, and to bring men to, eternal life, promised by God to all true believers; in — And through; Christ Jesus — Who hath revealed and procured it. I thank God, whom I serve from my forefathers — That is, whom both I and my ancestors served, or, whom I serve as the holy patriarchs did of old; with a pure conscience — He always worshipped God according to his conscience, both before and after his conversion. Before his conversion, however, his conscience was neither truly enlightened nor awakened; for he was neither acquainted with the spirituality and extent of the moral law, nor with his own sinfulness and guilt through his violations of it. That without ceasing I have remembrance of thee in my prayers — See on Romans 1:8-9 . To know that the apostle prayed for him continually, must have afforded great encouragement to Timothy amidst his labours and sufferings: being mindful of thy tears — Perhaps frequently shed, as well as at the apostle’s last parting with him; that I may be filled with joy — In conversing with thee, and giving thee my dying charge and blessing. When I call to remembrance, &c. — That is, my desire to see thee is greatly increased by my calling to remembrance the unfeigned faith — In the gospel, and in its glorious Author; that is in thee — Of which thou hast given convincing evidence; and which dwelt — An expression not applicable to a transient guest, but only to a settled inhabitant; first in thy grandmother Lois — Probably this was before Timothy was born . Here it is insinuated, to the great praise of Timothy’s grandmother Lois, that, having embraced the Christian faith herself, she persevered in it, and persuaded her daughter Eunice to do the same; and that the instructions and example of these pious women prepared their son for receiving the gospel when it was preached to him: a fit example this for the imitation of all mothers, who, if they take the same pains with their children, may hope that, by the blessing of God, their care will be followed with similar happy effects. 2 Timothy 1:2 To Timothy, my dearly beloved son: Grace, mercy, and peace, from God the Father and Christ Jesus our Lord. 2 Timothy 1:3 I thank God, whom I serve from my forefathers with pure conscience, that without ceasing I have remembrance of thee in my prayers night and day; 2 Timothy 1:4 Greatly desiring to see thee, being mindful of thy tears, that I may be filled with joy; 2 Timothy 1:5 When I call to remembrance the unfeigned faith that is in thee, which dwelt first in thy grandmother Lois, and thy mother Eunice; and I am persuaded that in thee also. 2 Timothy 1:6 Wherefore I put thee in remembrance that thou stir up the gift of God, which is in thee by the putting on of my hands. 2 Timothy 1:6-7 . Wherefore — Because I remember this; I put thee in remembrance — Because of my love to thee; that thou stir up the gift of God — That is, every gift which the grace of God has given thee. The word ??????????? is a metaphorical expression, borrowed from stirring up fire when it is almost extinct, and thereby causing it to burn with a fresh flame. The meaning is, that Timothy was to embrace the opportunities which his station afforded him for improving his spiritual gifts, by boldly and diligently exercising them in inculcating and defending the doctrines of the gospel. By the putting on of my hands — Together with those of the presbytery, 1 Timothy 4:14 . And let nothing discourage thee, for God hath not given us the spirit of fear — That is, the spirit which God hath given us Christians, is not the spirit of fear, or of timidity, or cowardice, as ??????? signifies; but of power — Banishing fear; or of Christian courage in the midst of dangers and troubles; and of love — To God and all mankind, animating us to zeal and diligence in God’s service, and in our endeavours to save men’s souls. And of a sound mind — So as to act according to the best principles of reason and religion. 2 Timothy 1:7 For God hath not given us the spirit of fear; but of power, and of love, and of a sound mind. 2 Timothy 1:8 Be not thou therefore ashamed of the testimony of our Lord, nor of me his prisoner: but be thou partaker of the afflictions of the gospel according to the power of God; 2 Timothy 1:8-10 . Be not thou, therefore — Discouraged by any dangers or trials; or ashamed of the testimony of our Lord — The gospel which testifies of Christ, or of testifying the truth and importance of it to all men; nor of me his prisoner — The cause of the servants of God, doing his work, cannot be separated from the cause of God himself. But be thou partaker of the afflictions of the gospel — Of such afflictions as I endure for the gospel’s sake: or, be ready to undergo the persecutions and troubles which attend the profession and preaching of the gospel: according to the power of God — That is, as God shall enable thee; who hath saved us — By faith in his Son and in his gospel, from sin and misery, present and eternal, and therefore we may the more readily endure any temporal evils for the gospel. The love of the Father, the grace of our Saviour, and the whole economy of salvation, are here admirably described. And called us with a holy calling — A calling holy in regard, 1st, Of the author, God; 2d, The means, his word and Spirit; 3d, The end, holiness; not according to our works — See on Romans 9:11 ; Romans 11:6 . But according to his own purpose and grace — That is, his gracious purpose; (see on Ephesians 3:11 ;) which was given us in Christ — Through his mediation and grace; before the world began — He being appointed, in the everlasting and unchangeable counsels of God, to be the Redeemer and Saviour of all that should believe in and obey him. But now is made manifest — Is openly revealed and exhibited; by the appearing of our Saviour — By his manifestation in the flesh, and the publication of the gospel of his grace. Who hath abolished death — Hath obtained for persevering believers a glorious resurrection even from temporal death hereafter, and deliverance from the sting of it here; with a title to, and meetness for, the eternal life of both soul and body; so that death shall be completely swallowed up in victory. And hath brought life and immortality to light — Hath clearly revealed by the gospel that immortal life which he hath purchased for us. Or, if ????????? be rendered, as it properly may, not immortality, but incorruption, the meaning will be, he hath clearly revealed the life, or existence and happiness, of the soul immediately after death, and the incorruption of the body: or rather, hath made them clear; for the word ?????? , here used, means to make a thing clear and plain which was formerly obscure, a translation which is more proper here than to bring to light. “For the Israelites had an obscure knowledge of the immortality of the soul, and of the resurrection of the body, given them in the writings of Moses, as is plain from our Lord’s words, ( Luke 20:37 ,) and from what is related 2Ma 7:9 ; 2Ma 7:14 ; 2Ma 7:23 . Nevertheless, as these things were but obscurely revealed in the ancient oracles, the far more clear discovery of them in the gospel, but especially Christ’s express promise to raise the dead, and give eternal life to believers, might with the greatest propriety be called a making these things clear.” The heathen also had some confused hopes of the immortality of the soul, but as they had no ground for these hopes but uncertain tradition and their own wishes, they were much in the dark concerning it. 2 Timothy 1:9 Who hath saved us, and called us with an holy calling, not according to our works, but according to his own purpose and grace, which was given us in Christ Jesus before the world began, 2 Timothy 1:10 But is now made manifest by the appearing of our Saviour Jesus Christ, who hath abolished death, and hath brought life and immortality to light through the gospel: 2 Timothy 1:11 Whereunto I am appointed a preacher, and an apostle, and a teacher of the Gentiles. 2 Timothy 1:11-12 . Whereunto — For proclaiming which good news; I am appointed a preacher — ????? , a herald; and an apostle — Invested with an extraordinary commission, and furnished with spiritual gifts to make me a successful teacher of the Gentiles — That is, of them chiefly. For which — Namely, my preaching to the Gentiles; I suffer these things — “By assigning his preaching salvation to the Gentiles through Christ, without obedience to the law of Moses, as the cause of his second bonds in Rome, he hath insinuated that the unbelieving Jews were active in getting him imprisoned, and tried for his life as a criminal.” — Macknight. Nevertheless — Though my condition may seem infamous; I am not ashamed — Either of my doctrine or of my sufferings. For I know whom I have believed — That is, whose word and promise I have credited, and to whom I have trusted all my important concerns: I know his power, and love, and faithfulness; and am persuaded, fully satisfied, he is able to keep that which I have committed to him — ??? ????????? ??? , my deposite, until that day — Of final retribution; meaning, undoubtedly, his immortal soul, or his whole person, soul and body. Thus Peter, ( 1 Peter 4:19 ,) Let them that suffer according to the will of God, commit the keeping of their souls to him, (or, as may be included, the preservation, or, if taken away, the restoration, of the life of their bodies,) in well-doing, as unto a faithful Creator, who never did, and never will, deceive, or disappoint the hopes of any that trust in him. 2 Timothy 1:12 For the which cause I also suffer these things: nevertheless I am not ashamed: for I know whom I have believed, and am persuaded that he is able to keep that which I have committed unto him against that day. 2 Timothy 1:13 Hold fast the form of sound words, which thou hast heard of me, in faith and love which is in Christ Jesus. 2 Timothy 1:13-14 . Hold fast the form — The draught, pattern, or model; (so ?????????? signifies;) of sound words — Of pure and salutary doctrine; which thou hast heard of me — Hast received repeatedly from my own lips: keep this, not merely in theory, and in thy memory, but in thy heart; in faith and love — In that cordial faith and sincere love which are essentially necessary to our being in Christ Jesus, and which will ensure our being owned by him as his true disciples. Macknight thinks the phrase ??????????? ????? , sound, wholesome, or salutary words, here used by the apostle, is an insinuation that the false teachers had introduced into their discourses a variety of high-sounding, mysterious words and phrases of their own invention, on a pretence that they expressed the Christian doctrines better than those used by the apostles; and that Timothy was hereby required to “resist this bad practice, by adhering closely to the words and phrases in which the apostle had taught him the doctrines of the gospel, and which he terms wholesome words, because, being dictated by the Spirit, ( 1 Corinthians 2:13 ,) they are more fit for expressing the doctrines of Christ than any words of human invention. The teachers in modern times, who, in explaining the articles of the Christian faith, use phrases different from the Scripture phraseology, would do well to attend to this apostolical injunction.” That good thing which was committed, &c. — Greek, ??? ????? ????????????? , literally, the good deposite. “Our translators have added the words to thee, which are not in the original; and besides are unnecessary, because the apostle is speaking of a deposite committed in trust to himself, as well as to Timothy; as is plain from the last words of the verse, ??????? , guard by the Holy Ghost which dwelleth in us.” Concerning this deposite, see on 1 Timothy 6:20 . “As the form of sound words, mentioned in the preceding verse, was a part of this deposite, an exhortation to guard them was extremely necessary, before the writings of the apostles and evangelists were published, in which the doctrines of the gospel are expressed in words taught by the Holy Ghost. And now that these inspired writings are in our possession, this exhortation implies that we ought to preserve them pure, without any alteration; and that all the translations which are made of them ought to exhibit, as nearly as possible, the very words which were dictated to the inspired writers by the Spirit of God.” 2 Timothy 1:14 That good thing which was committed unto thee keep by the Holy Ghost which dwelleth in us. 2 Timothy 1:15 This thou knowest, that all they which are in Asia be turned away from me; of whom are Phygellus and Hermogenes. 2 Timothy 1:15-18 . This thou knowest — Of this thou hast received information; that all they which are in Asia — He appears to mean those of Asia who were known to him by a profession of Christianity, and who had attended him at Rome for a while; are turned away from me — And have proved treacherous friends, after all their forward pretences. See on chap. 2 Timothy 4:16 . “What! turned away from Paul, the aged, the faithful soldier, and now prisoner of Christ! This was a glorious trial, and wisely reserved for that time when he was on the borders of immortality.” — Wesley. Of whom are Phygellus and Hermogenes — Probably he mentions these two persons as known to Timothy, or as having distinguished themselves by their profession, so that there was great reason to expect a different conduct from them. The Lord give mercy unto the house — Or family; of Onesiphorus — As well as himself; for he oft refreshed me — By his visits and liberalities, both at Ephesus and Rome; see 2 Timothy 1:18 ; and was not ashamed of my chain — That is, he both owned and relieved me without fear or shame, in this time of my imprisonment. It appears that offices of kindness done to Paul, especially when in distress, made a deep impression on his mind, and filled him with gratitude. When he was in Rome he sought me out — An expression implying that the apostle was in such close confinement that few knew where he was to be found. The Lord grant, &c ., that he may find mercy of the Lord — The Lord, in this latter clause, may mean the Lord Jesus; or the words may be a common Hebraism for, May the Lord grant him mercy. By praying first for the family of Onesiphorus, ( 2 Timothy 1:16 ,) the apostle intimated that Onesiphorus was at a distance from his family; and then his praying for that good man himself, implies that he was not dead, as the Papists suppose, inferring from this prayer of the apostle the lawfulness of praying for the dead. 2 Timothy 1:16 The Lord give mercy unto the house of Onesiphorus; for he oft refreshed me, and was not ashamed of my chain: 2 Timothy 1:17 But, when he was in Rome, he sought me out very diligently, and found me . 2 Timothy 1:18 The Lord grant unto him that he may find mercy of the Lord in that day: and in how many things he ministered unto me at Ephesus, thou knowest very well. Benson Commentary on the Old and New Testaments Text Courtesy of BibleSupport.com . Used by Permission.

Expositor's Bible Commentary 2 Timothy 1:1 Paul, an apostle of Jesus Christ by the will of God, according to the promise of life which is in Christ Jesus, , 2 Timothy 1:1 , Titus 1:1 Chapter 1 Introductory THE CHARACTER AND GENUINENESS OF THE PASTORAL EPISTLES.- 1 Timothy 1:1 ; 2 Timothy 1:1 ; Titus 1:1 THE first question which confronts us on entering upon the study of the Pastoral Epistles is that of their authenticity, which of late has been confidently denied. In reading them are we reading the farewell words of the great Apostle to the ministers of Christ? Or are we reading only the well-meant but far less weighty counsels of one who in a later age assumed the name and imitated the style of St. Paul? It seems necessary to devote the first of these expositions to a discussion of this question. The title "Pastoral Epistles" could hardly be improved, but it might easily be misunderstood as implying more than is actually the case. It calls attention to what is the most conspicuous, but by no means the only characteristic in these Epistles. Although the words which most directly signify the pastor’s office, such as "shepherd," "feed," "tend," and "flock," do not occur in these letters and do occur elsewhere in Scripture, yet in no other books in the Bible do we find so many directions respecting the pastoral care of Churches. The title is much less appropriate to 2 Timothy than to the other two Epistles. All three are both pastoral and personal; but while 1 Timothy and Titus are mainly the former, 2 Timothy is mainly the latter. The three taken together stand between the other Epistles of St. Paul and the one to Philemon. Like the latter, they are personal; like the rest, they treat of large questions of Church doctrine, practice, and government, rather than of private and personal matters. Like that to Philemon, they are addressed, not to Churches, but to individuals; yet they are written to them, not as private friends, but as delegates, though not mere delegates, of the Apostle, and as officers of the Church. Moreover, the important Church matters of which they treat are regarded not as in the other Epistles, from the point of view of the congregation or of the Church at large, but rather from that of the overseer or minister. And, as being official rather than private letters, they are evidently intended to be read by other persons besides Timothy and Titus. Among the Epistles which bear the name of St. Paul none have excited so much controversy as these, especially as regards their genuineness. But the controversy is entirely a modern one. It is little or no exaggeration to say that from the first century to the nineteenth no one ever denied or doubted that they were written by St. Paul. It is true that certain heretics of the second century rejected some or all of them. Marcion, and perhaps Basilides, rejected all three. Tatian, while maintaining the Apostolicity of the Epistle to Titus, repudiated those to Timothy. And Origen tills us that some people doubted about 2 Timothy because it contained the name of Jannes and Jambres, which do not occur in the Old Testament. But it is well known that Marcion, in framing his mutilated and meager canon of the Scriptures, did not profess to do so on critical grounds. He rejected everything except an expurgated edition of St. Luke and certain Epistles of St. Paul, -not because he doubted their authenticity, but because he disliked their contents. They did not fit into his system. And the few others who rejected one or more of these Epistles did so in a similar spirit. They did not profess to find that these documents were not properly authenticated, but they were displeased with passages in them. The evidence, therefore, justifies us in asserting that, with some very slight exception in the second century, these three Epistles were, until quite recent times, universally accepted as written by St. Paul. This large fact is greatly emphasized by two considerations. (1) The repudiation of them by Marcion and others directed attention to them. They were evidently not accepted by an oversight, because no one thought anything about them. (2) The evidence respecting the general acceptance of them as St. Paul’s is full and positive, and reaches back to the earliest times. It does not consist merely or mainly in the absence of evidence to the contrary. Tertullian wonders what can have induced Marcion, while accepting the Epistle to Philemon, to reject those to Timothy and Titus: and of course those who repudiated them would have pointed out weak places in their claim to be canonical if such had existed. And even if we do not insist upon the passages in which these Epistles are almost certainly quoted by Clement of Rome (cir. A.D. 95), Ignatius of Antioch (cir. A.D. 112), Polycarp of Smyrna (cir. A.D. 112), and Theophilus of Antioch (cir. A.D. 180), we have direct evidence of a very convincing kind. They are found in the Peshitto, or early Syriac Version, which was made in the second century. They are contained in the Muratorian canon, the date of which may still be placed as not later than A.D. 170. Irenaeus, the disciple of Polycarp, states that "Paul mentions Linus in the Epistle to Timothy," and he quotes Titus 3:10 with the introduction "as Paul also says." Eusebius renders it probable that both Justin Martyr and Hegesippus quoted from 1 Timothy; and he himself places all three Epistles among the universally accepted books, and not among the disputable writings: i.e., he places them with the Gospels, Acts, 1 Peter, 1 John, and the other Epistles of St. Paul, and not with James, 2 Peter 2:1-22 and 3 John, and Jude. In this arrangement he is preceded by Clement of Alexandria, and Tertullian, both of whom quote frequently from all three Epistles, sometimes as the words of Scripture, sometimes as of "the Apostle," sometimes as of Paul, sometimes as of the Spirit. Occasionally it is expressly stated that the words quoted are addressed to Timothy or to Titus. It would take us too far a field to examine in detail the various considerations which have induced some eminent critics to set aside this strong array of external evidence and reject one or more of these Epistles. They fall in the main under four heads. (1) The difficulty of finding a place for these letters in the life of St. Paul as given us in the Acts and in his own writings. (2) The large amount of peculiar phraseology not found in any other Pauline Epistles. (3) The Church organization indicated in these letters, which is alleged to be of a later date than St. Paul’s time. (4) The erroneous doctrines and practices attacked, which are also said to be those of a later age. To most of these points we shall have to return on some future occasion: but for the present this much may be asserted with confidence. (1) In the Acts and in the other Epistles of St. Paul the Apostle’s life is left incomplete. There is nothing to forbid us from supposing that the remaining portion amounted to several years, during which these three letters were written. The second Epistle to Timothy in any case has the unique interest of being the last extant utterance of the Apostle St. Paul. (2) The phraseology which is peculiar to each of these Epistles is not greater in amount than the phraseology which is peculiar to the Epistle to the Galatians, which even Baur admits to be of unquestionable genuineness. The peculiar diction which is common to all three Epistles is well accounted for by the peculiarity of the common subject, and by the fact that these letters are separated by several years from even the latest among the other writings of St. Paul. (3, 4) There is good reason for believing that during the lifetime of St. Paul the organization of the Church corresponded to that which is sketched in these letters, and that errors were already in existence such as these letters denounce. Although the controversy is by no means over, two results of it are very generally accepted as practically certain. I. The three Epistles must stand or fall together. It is impossible to accept two, or one, or any portion of one of them, and reject the rest. They must stand or fall with the hypothesis of St. Paul’s second imprisonment. If the Apostle was imprisoned at Rome only once, and was put to death at the end of that imprisonment, then these three letters were not written by him. (1) The Epistles stand or fall together: they are all three genuine, or all three spurious. We must either with the scholars of the Early Church, of the Middle Ages, and of the Renaissance, whether Roman or Protestant, and with a clear majority of modern critics, accept all three letters; or else with Marcion, Basilides, Eichhorn, Bauer, and their followers, reject all three. As Credner himself had to acknowledge, after having at first advocated the theory, it is impossible to follow Tatian in retaining Titus as apostolic, while repudiating the other two as forgeries. Nor have the two scholars who originated the modern controversy found more than one critic of eminence to accept their conclusion that both Titus and 2 Timothy, are genuine, but 1 Timothy not. Yet another suggestion is made by Reuss, that 2 Timothy is unquestionably genuine, while the other two are doubtful. And lastly we have Pfleiderer admitting that 2 Timothy contains at least two sections which have with good reason been recognized as genuine, { 2 Timothy 1:15-18 ; 2 Timothy 4:9-21 } and Renan asking whether the forger of these three Epistles did not possess some authentic letters of St. Paul which he has enshrined in his composition. It will be seen, therefore, that those who impugn the authenticity of the Pastoral Epistles are by no means agreed among themselves. The evidence in some places is so strong, that many of the objectors are compelled to admit that the Epistles are at least in part the work of St. Paul. That is, certain portions, which admit of being severely tested, are found to stand the test, and are passed as genuine, in spite of surrounding difficulties. The rest, which does not admit of such testing, is repudiated on account of the difficulties. No one can reasonably object to the application of whatever tests are available, nor to the demand for explanations of difficulties. But we must not treat what cannot be satisfactorily tested as if it had been tested and found wanting; nor must we refuse to take account of the support which those parts which can be thoroughly sifted lend to those for which no decisive criterion can be found. Still less must we proceed on the assumption that to reject these Epistles or any portion of them is a proceeding which gets rid of difficulties. It is merely an exchange of one set of difficulties for another. To unbiased minds it will perhaps appear that the difficulties involved in the assumption that the Pastoral Epistles are wholly or partly a forgery, are not less serious than those which have been urged against the well-established tradition of their genuineness. The very strong external evidence in their favor has to be accounted for. It is already full, clear, and decided, as soon as we could at all expect to find it, viz., in Irenaeus, Clement of Alexandria, and Tertullian. And it must be noticed that these witnesses give us the traditional beliefs of several chief centers in Christendom. Irenaeus speaks with full knowledge of what was accepted in Asia Minor, Rome, and Gaul; Clement witnesses for Egypt, and Tertullian for North America. And although the absence of such support would not have caused serious perplexity, their direct evidence is very materially supported by passages closely parallel to the words of the Pastoral Epistles found in writers still earlier than Irenaeus. Renan admits the relationship between 2 Timothy and the Epistle of Clement of Rome, and suggests that each writer has borrowed from a common source. Pfleiderer admits that the Epistle of Ignatius to Polycarp "displays striking points of contact with 2 Timothy." Bauer’s theory, that all three letters are as late as A.D. 150, and are an attack on Marcion, finds little support now. But we are still asked to believe that 2 Timothy was forged in the reign of Trajan (98-117) and the other two Epistles in the reign of Hadrian (117-138). Is it credible that a forgery perpetrated A.D. 120-135 would in less than fifty years be accepted in Asia Minor, Rome, Gaul, Egypt, and North Africa, as a genuine letter of the Apostle St. Paul? And yet this is what must have happened in the case of 1 Timothy, if the hypothesis just stated is correct. Nor is this all: Marcion, as we know, rejected all three of the Pastoral Epistles; and Tertullian cannot think why Marcion should do so. But, when Marcion was framing his canon, about the reign of Hadrian, 2 Timothy, according to these dates, would be scarcely twenty years old, and 1 Timothy would be brand-new. If this had been so, would Marceon, with his intimate knowledge of St. Paul’s writings, have been in ignorance of the fact; and if he had known it, would he have failed to denounce the forgery? Or again, if we assume that he merely treated this group of Epistles with silent contempt, would not his rejection of them, which was well known, have directed attention to them, and caused their recent origin to be quickly discovered? From all which it is manifest that the theory of forgery by no means frees us from grave obstacles. It will be observed that the external evidence is large in amount and overwhelmingly in favor of the Apostolic authorship. The objections are based on internal evidence. But some of the leading opponents admit that even the internal evidence is in favor of certain portions of the Epistles. Let us, then, with Renan, Pfleiderer, and others admit that parts of 2 Timothy were written by St. Paul; then there is strong presumption that the whole letter is by him; for even the suspected portions have the external evidence in their favor, together with the support lent to them by those parts for which the internal evidence is also satisfactory. Add to which the improbability that any one would store up genuine letters of St. Paul for fifty years and then use parts of them to give substance to a fabrication. Or let us with Reuss contend that in 2 Timothy "the whole Epistle is so completely the natural expression of the actual situation of the author, and contains, unsought and for the most part in the form of mere allusions, such a mass of minute and unessential particulars, that, even did the name of the writer not chance to be mentioned at the beginning, it would be easy to discover it." Then there is strong presumption that the other two letters are genuine also; for they have the external evidence on their side, together with the good character reflected upon them by their brother Epistle. This result is of course greatly strengthened, if, quite independently of 2 Timothy, the claims of Titus to be Apostolic are considered to be adequate. With two of the three letters admitted to be genuine, the case for the remaining letter becomes a strong one. It has the powerful external evidence on its side, backed up by the support lent to it by its two more manifestly authentic companions. Thus far, therefore, we may agree with Baur: "The three Epistles are so much alike that none of them can be separated from the others; and from this circumstance the identity of their authorship may be confidently inferred." But when he asserts that whichever of this family of letters be examined will appear as the betrayer of his brethren, he just reverses the truth. Each letter, upon examination, lends support to the other two; "and a threefold cord is not easily broken." The strongest member of the family is 2 Timothy: the external evidence in its favor is ample, and no Epistle in the New Testament is more characteristic of St. Paul. It would be scarcely less reasonable to dispute 2 Corinthians. And if 2 Timothy be admitted, there is no tenable ground for excluding the other two. II. But not only do the three Epistles stand or fall together, they stand or fall with the hypothesis of the release and second imprisonment of the Apostle. The contention that no place can be found for the Pastoral Epistles in the narrative of the Acts is valid; but it is no objection to the authenticity of the Epistles. The conclusion of the Acts implies that the end of St. Paul’s life is not reached in the narrative. "He abode two whole years in his own hired dwelling," implies that after that time a change took place. If that change was his death, how unnatural not to mention it! The conclusion is closely parallel to that of St. Luke’s Gospel; and we might almost as reasonably contend that "they were continually in the temple," proves that they were never "clothed with power from on high," because they were told to "tarry in the city" until they were so clothed, as contend that "abode two whole years in his own hired dwelling," proves that at the end of the two years came the end of St. Paul’s life. Let us grant that the conclusion of the Acts is unexpectedly abrupt, and that this abruptness constitutes a difficulty. Then we have our choice of two alternatives. Either the two years of imprisonment were followed by a period of renewed labor, or they were cut short by the Apostle’s martyrdom. Is it not more easy to believe that the writer did not consider that this new period of work, which would have filled many chapters, fell within the scope of his narrative, than that he omitted so obvious a conclusion as St. Paul’s death, for which a single verse would have sufficed? But let us admit that to assert that St. Paul was released at the end of two years is to maintain a mere hypothesis: yet to assert that he was not released is equally to maintain a mere hypothesis. If we exclude the Pastoral Epistles, Scripture gives no means of deciding the question, and whichever alternative we adopt we are making a conjecture. But which hypothesis has most evidence on its side? Certainly the hypothesis of the release. (1) The Pastoral Epistles, even if not by St. Paul, are by some one who believed that the Apostle did a good deal after the close of the Acts. (2) The famous passage in Clement of Rome (Corinthians 5.) tells that St. Paul "won the noble renown which was the reward of his faith, having taught righteousness unto the whole world, and having reached the furthest bound of the West ( ?? ????? ??? ?????? )." This probably means Spain; and if St. Paul ever went to Spain as he hoped to do, { Romans 15:24 ; Romans 15:28 } it was after the imprisonment narrated in the Acts. Clement gives us the tradition in Rome (cir. A.D. 95). (3) The Muratorian fragment (cir. A.D. 170) mentions the "departure of Paul from the city to Spain." (4) Eusebius ("H.E.," II 22:2) says that at the end of the two years of imprisonment, according to tradition, the Apostle went forth again upon the ministry of preaching, and on a second visit to the city ended his career by martyrdom under Nero; and that during this imprisonment he composed the Second Epistle to Timothy. All this does not amount to proof; but it raises the hypothesis of the release to a high degree of probability. Nothing of this kind can be urged in favor of the counter-hypothesis. To urge the improbability that the labors of these last few years of St. Paul’s life would be left unrecorded is no argument. (1) They are partly recorded in the Pastoral Epistles. (2) The entire labors of most of the Twelve are left unrecorded. Even of St. Paul’s life, whole years are left a blank. How fragmentary the narrative in the Acts must be is proved by the autobiography in 2 Corinthians. That we have very scanty notice of St. Paul’s doings between the two imprisonments does not render the existence of such an interval at all doubtful. The result of this preliminary discussion seems to show that the objections which have been urged against these Epistles are not such as to compel us to doubt that in studying them we are studying the last writings of the Apostle of the Gentiles. If any doubts still survive, a closer examination of the details will, it is hoped, tend to remove rather than to strengthen them. When we have completed our survey, we may be able to add our testimony to those who through many centuries have found these writings a source of Divine guidance, warning, and encouragement, especially in ministerial work. The experience of countless numbers of pastors attests the wisdom of the Church, or in other words the good Providence of God, in causing these Epistles to be included among the sacred Scriptures. "It is an established fact," as Bernhard Weiss rightly points out ("Introduction to the New Testament," vol. 1. p. 410), "that the essential, fundamental features of the Pauline doctrine of salvation are even in their specific expression reproduced in our Epistles with a clearness such as we do not find in any Pauline disciple, excepting perhaps Luke or the Roman Clement." Whoever composed them had at his command, not only St. Paul’s forms of doctrine and expression, but large funds of Apostolic zeal and discretion, such as have proved capable of warming the hearts and guiding the judgments of a long line of successors. Those who are conscious of these effects upon themselves will probably find it easier to believe that they have derived these benefits from the great Apostle himself, rather than from one who, with however good intentions, assumed his name and disguised himself in his mantle. Henceforward, until we find serious reason for doubt, it will be assumed that in these Epistles we have the farewell counsels of none other than St. Paul. 2 Timothy 1:2 To Timothy, my dearly beloved son: Grace, mercy, and peace, from God the Father and Christ Jesus our Lord. Chapter 2 1 Timothy TIMOTHY THE BELOVED DISCIPLE OF ST. PAUL-HIS LIFE AND CHARACTER.- 1 Timothy 1:2 ; 2 Timothy 1:2 IN the relation of St. Paul to Timothy we have one of those beautiful friendships between an older and a younger man which are commonly so helpful to both. It is in such cases, rather than where the friends are equals in age, that each can be the real complement of the other. Each by his abundance can supply the other’s wants, whereas men of equal age would have common wants and common supplies. In this respect the friendship between St. Paul and Timothy reminds us of that between St. Peter and St. John. In each ease the friend who took the lead was much older than the other; and (what is less in harmony with ordinary experience) in each ease it was the older friend who had the impulse and the enthusiasm, the younger who had the reflectiveness and the reserve. These latter qualities are perhaps less marked in St. Timothy than in St. John, but nevertheless they are there, and they are among the leading traits of his character. St. Paul leans on him while he guides him, and relies upon his thoughtfulness and circumspection in cases requiring firmness, delicacy, and tact. Of the affection with which he regarded Timothy we have evidence in the whole tone of the two letters to him. In the sphere of faith Timothy is his "own true child" (not merely adopted, still less supposititions), and his "beloved child." St. Paul tells the Corinthians that as the best means of making them imitators of himself he has sent unto them "Timothy, who is my beloved and faithful child in the Lord, who shall put you in remembrance of my ways which be in Christ, even as I teach everywhere in every Church." { 1 Corinthians 4:17 } And a few years later he tells the Philippians that he hopes to send Timothy shortly unto them, that he may know how they fare. For he has no one like him, who will have a genuine anxiety about their welfare. The rest care only for their own interests. "But the proof of him ye know, that, as a child a father, so he slaved with me for the Gospel." { 2 Timothy 2:22 } Of all whom he ever converted to the faith Timothy seems to have been to St. Paul the disciple who was most beloved and most trusted. Following the example of the fourth Evangelist, Timothy might have called himself "The disciple whom Paul loved." He shared his spiritual father’s outward labors and most intimate thoughts. He was with him when the Apostle could not or would not have the companionship of others. He was sent on the most delicate and confidential missions. He had charge of the most important congregations. When the Apostle was in his last and almost lonely imprisonment it was Timothy whom he summoned to console him and receive his last injunctions. There is another point in which the beloved disciple of the Pastoral Epistles resembles the beloved disciple of the Fourth Gospel. We are apt to think of both of them as always young. Christian art nearly invariably represents St. John as a man of youthful and almost feminine appearance. And, although in Timothy’s case, painters and sculptors have not done much to influence our imagination, yet the picture which we form for ourselves of him is very similar to that which we commonly receive of St. John. With strange logic this has actually been made an argument against the authenticity of the Pastoral Epistles. Myth, we are told, has given to this Christian Achilles the attributes of eternal youth. Timothy was a lad of about fifteen when St. Paul converted him at Lystra, in or near A.D. 45; and he was probably not yet thirty-five when St. Paul wrote the first Epistle to him. Even if he had been much older there would be nothing surprising in the tone of St. Paul’s letters to him. It is one of the commonest experiences to find elderly parents speaking of their middle-aged children as if they were still boys and girls. This trait, as being so entirely natural, ought to count as a touch beyond the reach of a forger rather than as a circumstance that ought to rouse our suspicions, in the letters of "Paul the aged" to a friend who was thirty years younger than himself. Once more, the notices of Timothy which have come down to us, like those which we have respecting the beloved disciple are very fragmentary; but they form a beautiful and consistent sketch of one whose full portrait we long to possess. Timothy was a native, possibly of Derbe, but more probably of the neighboring town of Lystra, where he was piously brought up in a knowledge of the Jewish Scriptures by his grandmother Lois and his mother Eunice. It was probably during St. Paul’s first visit to Lystra, on his first missionary journey, that he became the boy’s spiritual father, by converting him to the Christian faith. It was at Lystra that the Apostle was stoned by the mob and dragged outside the city as dead: and there is no improbability in the suggestion that, when he recovered consciousness and re-entered the town, it was in the home of Timothy that he found shelter. In any case Lystra was to the Apostle a place of strangely mixed associations; the brutality of the pagan multitude side by side with the tender friendship of the young Timothy. When St. Paul on his next missionary journey again visited Lystra he found Timothy already enjoying a good report among the Christians of that place and of Iconium for his zeal and devotion during the six or seven years which had elapsed since his first visit. Perhaps he had been engaged in missionary work in both places. The voices of the prophets had singled him out as one worthy of bearing office in the Church; and the Apostle, still grieving over the departure of Barnabas with John Mark, recognized in him one who with Silas could fill the double vacancy. The conduct of the Apostle of the Gentiles on this occasion has sometimes excited surprise. Previously to the ordination, Paul, the great proclaimer of the abrogation of the Law by the Gospel, circumcised the young evangelist. The inconsistency is more apparent than real. It was an instance of his becoming "all things to all men" for the salvation of souls, and of his sacrificing his own convictions in matters that were not essential, rather than cause others to offend. Timothy’s father had been a Gentile, and the son, though brought up in his mother’s faith, had never been circumcised. To St. Paul circumcision was a worthless rite. The question was, whether it was a harmless one. This depended upon circumstances. If, as among the Galatians, it caused people to rely upon the Law and neglect the Gospel, it was a superstitious obstacle with which no compromise could be made. But if it was a passport whereby preachers, who would otherwise be excluded, might gain access to Jewish congregations, then it was not only a harmless, but a useful ceremony. In the synagogue Timothy as an uncircumcised Jew would have been an intolerable abomination, and would never have obtained a hearing. To free him from this crippling disadvantage, St. Paul subjected him to a rite which he himself knew to be obsolete. Then followed the ordination, performed with great solemnity by the laying on of the hands of all the elders of the congregation: and the newly ordained Evangelist forthwith set out to accompany Paul and Silas in their labors for the Gospel. Wherever they went they distributed copies of the decrees of the Apostolic Council at Jerusalem, which declared circumcision to be unnecessary for Gentiles. Their true position with regard to circumcision was thus made abundantly evident. For the sake of others they had abstained from availing themselves of the very liberty which they proclaimed. In the Troad they met Luke the beloved physician (as indicated by the sudden use of the first person plural in the Acts), and took him on with them to Philippi. Here probably, as certainly afterwards at Beroea, Timothy was left behind by Paul and Silas to consolidate their work. He rejoined the Apostle at Athens, but was thence sent back on a mission to Thessalonica, and on his return found St. Paul at Corinth. The two Epistles written from Corinth to the Thessalonians are in the joint names of Paul and Timothy. At Corinth, as at Lystra, Iconium, and Philippi, Timothy became prominent for his zeal as an evangelist; and then for about five years we lose sight of him. We may think of him as generally at the side of St. Paul, and as always working with him; but of the details of the work we are ignorant. About A.D. 57 he was sent by St. Paul on a delicate mission to Corinth. This was before 1 Corinthians was written; for in that letter St. Paul states that he has sent Timothy to Corinth, but writes as if he expected that the letter would reach Corinth before him. He charges the Corinthians not to aggravate the young evangelist’s natural timidity, and not to let his youth prejudice them against him. When St. Paul wrote 2 Corinthians from Macedonia later in the year, Timothy was again with him, for his name is coupled with Paul’s: and he is still with him when the Apostle wrote to the Romans from Corinth, for he joins in sending salutations to the Roman Christians. We find him still at St. Paul’s side on his way back to Jerusalem through Philippi, the Troad, Tyre, and Caesarea. And here we once more lose trace of him for some years. We do not know what he was doing during St. Paul’s two years’ imprisonment at Caesarea; but he joined him during the first imprisonment at Rome, for the Epistles to the Philippians, the Colossians, and Philemon are written in the names of Paul and Timothy. From the passage already quoted from Philippians we may conjecture that Timothy went to Philippi and returned again before the Apostle was released. At the close of the Epistle to the Hebrews we read, "Know ye that our brother Timothy hath been set at liberty." It is possible that the imprisonment to which this notice refers was contemporaneous with the first imprisonment of St. Paul, and that it is again referred to in 1 Timothy { 1 Timothy 6:12 } as "the good confession" which he "confessed in the sight of many witnesses." The few additional facts respecting Timothy are given us in the two letters to him. Some time after St. Paul’s release the two were together in Ephesus; and when the Apostle went on into Macedonia he left his companion behind him to warn and exhort certain holders of erroneous doctrine to desist from teaching it. There were tears, on the younger friend’s side at any rate, to which St. Paul alludes at the opening of the Second Epistle; and they were natural enough. The task imposed upon Timothy was no easy one; and after the dangers and sufferings to which the Apostle had been exposed, and which his increasing infirmities continually augmented, it was only too possible that the friends would never meet again. So far as we know, these gloomy apprehensions may have been rea