9. It is alleged that the ordinance concerning widows (v. 9, ff.) betrays a later date than the time of St. Paul. But in order to make this good, those who adduce the objection have to assume that these widows were deaconnesses, an order not recognised in the apostolic age. This may be [DEAcoNNEssj ; but the assumption that these widows were deaconnesses is wholly gratuitous. They were persons received into a class, either as fit objects for relief, or as fit agents of some work ; but there is no evidence that they held any office in the church, or were in any sense an instdra'z'on.
to. De Wette maintains that the injunction in ch. v. 23 is so much beneath the dignity of an apostle, that we cannot suppose it to have pro ceeded from such a writer as Paul. I3ut what is there in such an injunction less dignified than in many injunctions of an equally familiar 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 especially when, by acting as is here en joined, he would vindicate Christian liberty from those ascetic restraints by which the false teachers sought to bind it.
Such are the principal objections which have of late been urged against the Pauline authorship of the First Epistle to Timothy. Let us now turn to glance with equal brevity at those which have been urged against the Second. Of these the most weighty are founded on the assumption that this epistle must be viewed as written during the apostle's first imprisonment at Rome ; and as, for reasons to be subsequently stated, we do not regard this assumption as tenable, it will not be necessary to occupy space with any remarks upon them. We may leave unnoticed also those ob jections to this epistle which are mere repetitions of those urged against the first, and which admit of similar replies.
t. In ch. iii. the writer enumerates a series of persecutions and afflictions which befel him at Antioch, Iconium, and Lystra, of which he says Timothy knew. Would Paul, it is asked, in making such an enumeration, have committed the mistake of referring to persecutions which be had endured &fore his connection with Timothy, and have said nothing of those which be endured subsequently, and of which Timothy must have lcnown, whilst of the former he might be ignorant! But there is no mistake in the matter. Paul has
occasion to refer to the knowledge Timothy had of his sufferings for the gospel. Of these some had occurred before Timothy's connection with him, whilst others had occurred while Timothy was his companion and fellow-sufferer. Of the latter, therefore, Paul makes no specific 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 conceive that any interesting point in Paul's pre vious history would be unknown to his dear son in the faith,' he makes specific enumeration. This fully accounts for his stopping short at the point where Timothy's personal experience could amply supply the remainder.
2. The declaration in ch. iv. 7, etc., is incom patible with what Paul says of himself in Phil. iii. 12, etc. But respect must be had to the very dif ferent circumstances in which the apostle was when he wrote these two passages. In the one case he viewed himself as still engaged in active work, and having the prospect of service before him ; in the other he regards himself as very near to death, and shortly about to enter into the presence of his Master. Surely 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 ch. i. 6, and ii. 2, there are allusions to ecclesiastical ceremonies which betray a later age than that of Paul. This is said without reason. The laying on of hands in the conferring of a xcipio-Fa was altogether an apostolic usage ; and the hear ing of Paul's doctrines was what Timothy, as his companion in travel, 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.
A survey of these objections will show that no insuperable objection lies in the way of our yield ing full assent to the claims of these two epistles to Timothy to rank among the productions of the apostle Paul. On the other side, the entire spirit, tone, character, and contents of these epistles are so truly Pauline, that they carry the evidence of their authenticity with them.