Historical Problems
Historical Problems
Many scholars draw attention to the difficulty of fitting the situations envisaged in the Pastorals into what we learn of the life of Paul from Acts and the Pauline letters. It is argued that this is quite impossible, and it is therefore suggested that the author of these letters has manufactured allusions that would give the impression of a historical setting. To this there are two rejoinders. One is that Acts finishes with Paul in prison in Rome, but with reasonable prospects of being released. Festus thought that Paul "had done nothing deserving of death” (Acts 25:25), while Agrippa held there was no case against him and that, had he not appealed to Caesar, he could have been freed (Acts 26:32). Even when he was in Rome, "Paul was allowed to live by himself, with a soldier to guard him” (Acts 28:16); he "stayed there in his own rented house and welcomed all who came to see him” (Acts 28:30); he was free enough to be able to summon Jewish leaders and hold a meeting with them. This does not look like the preliminary to an execution. There is nothing improbable about Paul being set at liberty and engaging in further activities of the sort envisaged in the Pastorals. The other possibility arises from the fact that we know so little of what Paul did during the years of his ministry. When did he undergo his frequent imprisonments, his five beatings at the hands of the Jews, his three shipwrecks, and the other sufferings that he mentions once only (2 Cor. 11:2327)? One may say, "I cannot see how to fit the incidents mentioned in the Pastorals into Paul’s earlier life,” but one may not say, "Those incidents cannot be fitted into Paul’s earlier life.” We simply do not have enough information. Especially if we do not take the Pastorals as a unit but consider the letters individually, there is no insuperable difficulty.13
We should not overlook the difficulty of fitting the personal reminiscences in the Pastorals into the framework envisaged by those who see the letters as pseudonymous. Why then should we read of Paul’s cloak and his scrolls (2 Tim. 4:13)? Or of his leaving Timothy in Ephesus when he went to Macedonia (1 Tim. 1:3)? Of his hope to come to Timothy soon but with no certainty that he would not be delayed (1 Tim. 3:14-15)? What is the point of saying that Onesiphorus searched for Paul in Rome and found him (2 Tim. 1:16-17)? Or of his instruction to Titus to help Zenas the lawyer and Apollos (Titus 3:13)? It is not easy to see what to make of these and other such references on the theory that the letters come from the second century and from an author who did not know Paul’s situation. Surely any such writer would fit his reminiscences into what is known of Paul’s life. No convincing reason has been suggested for the manufacture of hypothetical situations of this nature. Moreover, all such references in all three of these letters bear the stamp of historical particularity. There is nothing like the legendary touches that are such a feature of, say, the second-century Acts of Paul. The Pastorals are much more akin to the accepted letters of Paul than they are to the known pseudonymous documents that circulated in the early church.