Besides these objections, which apply to both epistles alike, there are sonic which affect each epistle separately.
(3) Relation to Timothy. To the first epistle it is objected: (i) That it presents Timothy in a light in which it is inconsistent with other notices of him in Paul's epistles to regard him. Here he appears as little better than a novice, needing instruction as to the simplest affairs of ecclesi astical order: whereas, in the first epistle to the Corinthians, written earlier than this, we find hint (iv :17) described by Paul as 'My beloved son, and faithful in the Lord, who shall bring you into remembrance of my ways which be in Christ, as I teach everywhere in every church t' and in Thess. i we are told that the Apostle had sent him to Thessalonica to establish the believers there, and to comfort them concerning their faith.
If Timothy was so well able to regulate the churches at Corinth and Thessalonica, how, it is asked, can it be supposed that a short while after wards he should require such minute instruotions for his conduct as this epistle contains? To this it may be replied, (a) that in visiting Corinth and Thessalonica Timothy acted as the Apostle's delegate, and had doubtless, received from him minute instructions as to how he should proceed among those to whom he was sent; so that the alleged difference in the circumstances of Timothy when sent to Corinth, and when left in Ephesus, disappears; (b) that it does not necessarily follow, from the injunctions given to Timothy in this epistle, that the writer regarded him as a novice; for they rather respect the application of general principles to peculiar local circumstances, than set forth instructions such as a novice would require; and (c) it is not to he forgotten that the Apostle designed, through Timothy, to present to the church at large a body of instruction which should be useful to it in all ages of its existence.
(2) It is objected that after the church at Ephesus had enjoyed the Apostle's instructions and presidency for three years, it could not have been, at the time this epistle is supposed to have been written by Paul, in such ignorance of ec clesiastical arrangements as the injunctions here given would lead us to suppose. But what is
there in the epistle that necessitates such a sup position? It contains many directions to Timothy how he should conduct himself in a church, some of which are certainly of an elementary charac ter, but there is nothing that leads to the con clusion that they were all intended for the benefit of the church at Ephesus, or that the state of that church was such as to require that in junctions of this kind should be given for its sake alone. Timothy's sphere of evangelistic ef fort extended greatly beyond Ephesus; and this epistle was designed at once to guide him as to what he was to do in the churches which he might be called to regulate, and to supply his authority for so doing. Besides, does it not naturally oc cur that such minute injunctions are just such as a person forging this epistle at a later period, in Paul's name, would be most likely to avoid? (3) The absence of allusions to events in Tim othy's history has been alleged against the Paul ine origin of this epistle. A strange objection, and as untenable as strange! This may be seen by a reference to the following passages : i :IS; iv: 14: v:23; vi:12.
(4) It is alleged that the writer of this epistle has made such a mistake as Paul could nor have made when he classes Alexander with Hymemeus (I Tim. i :20) as a false Christian, whereas we know from 2 Tim. iv :r4. that he was not a Christian at all. But where is the shadow of evi dence that the Alexander mentioned in I Tim.
i :20, is the same person with the Alexander men tioned in 2 Tim. iv :i4? Was this name so un common in Ephesus that we must needs suppose a blunder, where a writer speaks of one so called as a heretic, simply because in other passages mention is made of one so called who was not a heretic? Nothing can he more obvious than that there were two Alexanders, just as there might have been twenty, known to the Apostle and Timothy: and that of these two one was a heretic and troubler of the church at Ephesus, and the other probably a heathen and an enemy of the Apostle.