TIMOTHY
728
TIMOTHY
Philem.? Moreover, the noun dSiKla is found in the
Pastorals, II Tim., ii, 19.
"AKoSopo-Ia (uncleanness) does not occur in I Cor., Phil., II Thess., and Philem. If that does not tell against these Epistles why is it quoted against the Pastorals?
Tloffijla (adoption). — This word is three times in Rom., once in Gal., but it does not occur at all in I and II Cor., I and II Thess., Phil., Col., and Philem. Why its omission should be used against the Pastorals is not easy to understand.
IlttTTjp iiixQf (Our Father). — Two expressions, God "our Father" and God "the Father" are found in St. Paul's Epistles. The former is frequent in his earlier Epistles, viz., seven times in Thess., while the latter expression is not used. But in Romans "God our Father" appears but once, and "the Father" once. In I Cor. we read God "our Father" once, and "the Father" twice; and the same has to be said of II Cor. In Gal. we have " our Father " once and " the Father " three times. In Phil, the former occurs twice and the latter once; in Col. the former only once, and the latter three times. "The Father" occurs once in each of the Pastoral Epistles, and from the above it is evident that it is just as characteristic of St. Paul as "our Father", which is found but once in each of the Epistles to the Romans, I and II Cor., Gal., and Col., and it would be absurd to conclude from this that all the remaining chapters were spurious.
Aiafl^KT) (covenant) occurs twice in Rom., once in I Cor., twice in II Cor., thi'ice in Gal., and not at all in I and II Thess., Phil., Col., and Philem., admitted to be genuine by Moffatt.
'AiroKaXiTTTeip (reveal), a word not found in II Cor., I Thess., Col., and Philem., and only once in Phil.
E\ei8(pos (free), is not in I and II Thess., II Cor., Phil., and Philem., so it is no test of Pauline author- ship. Its compounds are not met in I and II Thess., Phil., Col., or Philem., and, with the e.xception of Gal., in the others sparingly.
Efepyeiv (to be operative) is seen but once in each of Rom., Phil., Col., I and II Thess.; and no one would conclude from its absence from the remaining portions of these Epistles, which are longer than the Pastorals, that they were not written by St. Paul.
KarepydieuBai (perform), though several times is Rom. and II Cor., and once in I Cor. and in Phil., is wanting in I and II Thess., Gal., Col., and Philem., which are genuine without it.
KauxairSai (boast), only once in Phil., and in II Thess., and not at all in I Thess., Coloss., and Philem.
Moipia (folly) i.s five times in I Cor., and nowhere else in St. Paul's Epistles.
But we need not weary the reader by going through the entire list. We have carefully examined every word with the like results. With perhaps a single excep- tion, every word is absent from .several of St. Paul's genuine Epistles, and the exceptional word occurs but once in some of them. The examination shows that this list does not afford the slightest argument against the Pastorals, and that St. Paul wrote a great deal without using such words. The compilation of such lists is likely to leave an erroneous impression on the mind of the unguarded reader. By a similar process, with the aid of a concordance, it could be proved that every Epistle of St. Paul has an appearance of spuri- ousness. It could be shown that Galatians, for in- stance, does not contain many words that are found in some of the other Epistles. \ method of reasoning which leads to such erroneous conclusions should bo di.scredited; and when ^Titers make very positive statements on the strength of such misleading lists in order to get rid of whole books of Scripture, their other assertions should not be readily taken for granted.
B. Objection from the use of particles. — Certain particles and prepositions are wanting. .lidicher in his "Introd. to the New Test.", p. 181, WTites: "The
fact that brings conviction [against the Pastorals] is
that many words which were indispensable to Paul
are absent from the Pastoral Epistles, e.g. dpa., Sii,
Sidri." But, as Jacquier points out, nothing can be
concluded from the absence of particles, because St.
Paul's employment of them is not uniform, and sev-
eral of them are not found in his imquestioned Epis-
tles. Dr. Headlam, an Anglican writer, pointed out
in a paper read at the Church Congress, in 1904,
that ipa occurs twenty-six times in the four Epis-
tles of the second group, only three times in all the
others, but not at all in Col., Phil., or Philem. Ai4
occurs eighteen times in Rom., Gal. and Cor., but
not at all in Col. or II Thess. The word 5i6ti does
not occur in II Thess., II Cor., Eph., Col., or Philem.
We find that Iweira does not appear at all in Rom.,
II Cor., Phil, Col., II Thess., and Philem., nor ?ri
in I Thess., Col., and Philem. It is unnecessary
to go through the entire catalogue usually given by
opponents, for the same phenomenon is discovered
throughout. Particles were required in the argu-
mentative portions of St. Paul's Epistles, but they are
used very sparingly in the practical parts, which re-
semble the Pastorals. Their employment, too, de-
pended greatly on the character of the amanuensis.
C. Objection from Hapax Legomena. — The great
objection to the Pastorals is the admittedly large
number of hapax legomena found in them. Work-
man (Expository Times, VII, 418) taking the terra
"hapax legomenon" to mean any word used in a par-
ticular Epistle and not again occurring in the New
Testament, found from Grinnn-Thayer's "Lexicon"
the following numbers of hapax legomena: Rom. 113,
I Cor. 110, II Cor. 99, Gal. 34, Eph. 43, Phil. 41, Col. 38, I Thess. 23, II Thess. 11, Philem. 5, I Tim. 82, II Tim. 53, Titus 33. The numbers have to be somewhat reduced as they contain words from variant readings. These figures would suggest to most people, as they did to Dean Farrar, that the number of peculiar words in the Pastorals does not call for any special exT^lanation. Mr. Workman, how- ever, thinks that for scientific purposes the propor- tionate length of the Epistles should be taken into account. He calculated the average number of hapax legomena occurring on a page of Westcott and Hort's text with the following results: II Thessalo- nians 3-6, Philemon 4, Galatians 41, I Thessaloniana 4-2, Romans 4-3, I Corinthians 4-6, Ephesians 4-9,
II Corinthians 6- 10, Colossians 6-3, Philippians 68, II Timothy 11, Titus and I Timothy 13. The pro- portion of hapax legomena in the Pastorals is large, but when compared with Phil., it is not larger than that between II Cor. and II Thess. It has to be noted that these increase in the order of time.
Workman gives a two-fold explanation. First, a writer as he advances in life uses more strange words and involved constructions, as is seen on comparing Carlyle's "Latter-Day Pamphlets" and his "Heroes and Hero-Worship". Secondly, the number of un- usual words in any author is a variable quantity. He has found the average number of hapax legomena per page of Irving's one-volume edition of Shakespeare's plays to be as follows: "Love's Labour Lost" 7-6, "Comedy of Errors" 4-5, "Two Gentlemen of Verona" 3-4, "Romeo and Juliet" .5-7, "Henry VI, pt. 3" 3-5, "Taming of the Shrew" .51, "Midsummer Night's Dream" 6S, "Richard 11" 4-6, "Richard III" 4-4, "King John" 5-4, "Merchant of Venice" 50," Henry IV, pt. I " 9-3, " pt. II " 8, " Henry V " 8-3, "Merry Wives of Windsor" 6-9, "Much Ado About Nothing" 4-7, "As You Like It" 6-4, "Twelfth Night" 7-5, "All's Well" 6-9, "Julius Cipsar" 3-4, "Measure for Measure" 7, "Troilus and Cressida" 101, "Macbeth" 9-7, "Othello" 7-3, "Anthony and Cleopatra" 7-4, "Coriolanus" 68, "King Lear" fl-7, "Timon" 6-2, "Cymbeline" 6-7, "The Tempest" 9-3, "Titua Andronicus" 4-9, "Winter's Tale" 8,
