3. Time of Writing. Assuming that these epis tles were written by Paul, the question next to be considered respects the time when each of them was composed.
(1) After Leaving Ephesus. With regard to the first, it is clear that it was written not long after Paul had left Ephesus for Macedonia (ch. i :3). Now from Acts xx:1, we learn that Paul left Ephesus after the uproar caused by Deme trius, and went into Macedonia. Shall we sup pose, then, that it was at this time this epistle was written? Many excellent critics reply in the af firmative-, and upon the whole we think this opin ion the one to be preferred. It is not, however, without difficulties; the chief of which lies in the fact that Timothy, to whom this epistle is ad dressed, appears to have been with Paul in Mace donia at this time (comp. 2 Cor. i:1). To ob viate this objection, it has been suggested that Paul might have written this epistle immediately after leaving Ephesus, and the second to the Co rinthians not before the concluding period of his stay in Macedonia; so that Timothy might have visited him in the interval. This appears to re move the difficulty, but it does so by suggesting a new one; for how on this supposition are we to account for the Apostle's delaying so long to write to the Corinthians after the arrival of Titus, by whose intelligence concerning the state of the Corinthian church Paul was led to address them? (See CORINTHIANS, EPISTLES TO THE.) It may be asked also if it be likely that Timothy, after re ceiving such a charge as Paul gives him in this epistle, would so soon have left Ephesus and fol lowed the Apostle.
(2) Possible Later Period. Pressed by these difficulties, many critics of note have resorted to the hypothesis that this epistle must have been written at a later period, subsequent to the Apos tle's first imprisonment at Rome, and upon a journey undertaken by him during the interval between that and his final imprisonment. As the evidence that the Apostle took such a journey is purely hypothetical and inferential, it must be ad mitted that the hypothesis built upon it as to the gate of this epistle rests at the best on somewhat precarious grounds. This hypothesis, besides, seems to assume the possibility of churches re maining in and around Ephesus in a state of de fective arrangement and order for a greater length of time than we can believe to have been the case. It is opposed also by what Paul says, ch. iv:t2, from which we learn that at the time this epistle was written Timothy was in danger of being de spised as a youth; but this could hardly be said of him after Paul's first imprisonment, when he must on the lowest computation have been thirty years of age. And, finally, this hypothesis is di rectly opposed to the solemn declaration of Paul to the elders of the church at Ephesus when he met them at Miletum: 'I know that ye all shall see my face no more' (Acts xx :25), for it as sumes that he did see them again and preached to them. These difficulties in the way of the hy
pothesis of a later date for this epistle seem to us weightier than those which attach to the other supposition.
(3) Prisoner at Rome. With regard to the second epistle, it is certain that it was written at Rome, and whilst Paul was a prisoner there (i :8, 16; ii :9 ; i :17) ; but the question arises, was it during his first or his second imprisonment that this took place? In favor of the first, the most weighty consider ation arises out of the fact that the Apostle appears to have had the same individuals as his companions when he wrote this eaistle, as he had when he wrote the epistles to the Ephesians, Phil ippians, and Colossians, and that to Philemon, which we know were written during his first im prisonment at Rome. 'At the beginning of the imprisonment,' says Hug, who has very forcibly stated this argument in favor of the earlier hy pothesis, 'when the epistle to the Ephesians was written, Timothy, who was not one of Paul's com panions on the voyage to Italy (Acts xxvii:2), was not with him at Rome; for Paul does not add his name in the address with which the epistle commences, as he always did when Timothy was at his side. Timothy afterwards arrived ; and ac cordingly, at the outset of the epistles to the Colossians and Philemon. his name appears with the Apostle's (Col. i ; Philem. t) ; secondly, Luke was in Paul's company (Col. iv :t4; Philem. 24) ; thirdly, Mark was likewise with him (Col. iv:to; Philem. 24) ; fourthly, Tychicus was then Paul's diakonos and letter bearer, and, in particu lar, was sent to Asia (Eph. ; Col. iv:7, 8). All these circumstances are presented to view in the second epistle to Timothy. Timothy was not with Paul at first, but was summoned to his side (2 Tim. iv :9, 21) ; secondly, Luke was with him (iv it 1) ; thirdly, he wishes Mark to come with Timothy, so that he must have been with him in the course of his imprisonment (iv it ; fourthly, Tychicus was with him in the capacity of letter bearer, and, in particular, was sent to Asia (iv: 12). Now, in order to suppose that Paul wrote this epistle to Timothy during a second imprison ment at Rome, we must assume that the circum stances of both were exactly the same, etc. We must also assume that Paul at both times, even in the latter part of Nero's reign, was permitted to receive friends during his confinement, to write letters, dispatch messengers, and, in general, to have free intercourse with everybody' (Introduc tion, p. 556, etc., Fosdick's transl.).