other ancient writers. They were a mixed population of Greeks and Asiatics, with a considerable infusion of Jews. To the influence of these latter, acting on native superstition, the corruption of Christian doctrine, of which we hear in the epistle, appears to have been largely due (i. 10, 14; iii. 9).1

Where and when written.-The striking resemblance of this epistle to 1 Tim. justifies us in assigning it to the same year (say 67 A.D.) It may have been written in Asia Minor when the apostle was on his way to Nicopolis.

Its Character and Contents.-Although addressed to a friend, this letter, like 1 Tim., has to a certain extent an official character. This is evident from the greeting: "Paul, a servant of God, and an apostle of Jesus Christ . . ." (i. 1-4). It was intended to furnish Titus, as the apostle's representative in Crete, with the same assistance in his work as had already been rendered to Timothy. From i. 5 it would appear that the apostle had heard of opposition being offered to Titus, and desired to strengthen his hands for his arduous undertaking. With this view he gives him directions for the appointment of properly-qualified presbyters in every city, who should be able and willing to teach "the sound doctrine," and to counteract the useless and unwarrantable speculations of a semi-Jewish character, involving endless controversy, which were propagated by dishonest self-seeking teachers. He also reminds Titus of suitable exhortations to be addressed to the various classes in the Church, for the promotion of that practical godliness which ought to accompany sound doctrine. Titus himself is admonished to show himself in all things "an ensample of good works."

The epistle contains a number of memorable sayings, including several of the most comprehensive statements of Christian truth to be found in the New Testament (ii. 11-14; iii. 4-7). In ii. 11-14 we have an excellent

1 In the subsequent history of the island, Titus has figured prominently as the patron-saint of the community.

illustration of that "doctrine which is according to godli. ness," that sober-minded union of faith and practice, which is the ripest fruit of Christianity, and which forms the chief burden of this most salutary letter.

The epistle concludes with some allusions to personal matters (iii. 12-15), in the course of which Paul bids Titus come to him at Nicopolis as soon as Artemas or Tychicus has arrived to relieve him. This is an arrange. ment scarcely consistent with the view of some Episcopalian writers that Titus held a permanent official position in the island.

66 THE SECOND EPISTLE OF PAUL THE APOSTLE

TO TIMOTHY "

Who wrote it. In several passages this epistle bears the stamp of genuineness as a writing of St. Paul's, notably at i. 5-18 and iv. 9-22. In particular the opening thanksgiving (i. 3) is characteristic of Paul, eight of his ten other epistles having a similar commencement. At the same time this is not such a prominent feature as to lead to imitation; and, as a matter of fact, it is not found in the two other pastoral epistles.

A strong proof of genuineness is afforded by the proper names in the epistle. They are twenty-three in number, including ten mentioned elsewhere. In connection with several of these ten, remarks are made which a forger would have been very unlikely to invent. E.g. "Demas forsook me, having loved this present world" (iv. 10, cf. Col. iv. 14), is a record more like what we should have expected to find concerning Mark, in view of his former desertion of Paul (Acts xiii. 13); whereas we find favourable mention of him in this epistle (iv. 11). Dalmatia is also a strange place to have invented as a destination for Titus (iv. 10), considering that he had been written to so recently at Crete. A striking argument has been derived from the occurrence of the name Linus in iv. 21. The argument is based on the fact that Linus, Cletus, and Clement are the names of the

first three "bishops" of the Church of Rome, preserved in her Eucharistic Service, dating from the second century. If the epistle had been written in the postapostolic age, Linus, it is held, would have been sure to receive a more prominent place in the list of salutations, and his name would have been accompanied with that of Cletus, or at all events with that of Clement, as the latter was believed to have been an immediate disciple of Paul. These marks of genuineness are so numerous and striking that this epistle is accepted by many critics who reject the two others. But as the main objections to the latter, on the score of their novel language and teaching, and their want of correspondence with the Book of Acts, apply equally to 2 Tim., it is generally admitted that the three epistles must stand or fall together. Hence any argument for the Pauline authorship of this epistle has a reflex influence on that of the two others.

To whom written.-"To Timothy, my beloved child" (i. 2), see p. 107.

Where and when written.-From i. 8, 16-18, it is evident that this epistle was written by Paul while a prisoner at Rome. That it was a different imprisonment from that mentioned in Acts xxviii. may be inferred not only from the general considerations adduced on p. 104, but more particularly from the apostle's anticipation of a fatal result (iv. 6-8) as compared with his expectation of release in Phil. ii. 24 and Philemon, ver. 22.1

Moreover, the difference between Paul's position during

1 The same conclusion may be drawn from the fact that Timothy was now at a distance from the apostle (i. 2), whereas he had been with him when he (the apostle) wrote Philippians (i. 1), Colossians (i. 1), and Philemon (ver. 1); as well as from the absence of Demas and Mark (iv. 10-11) who had sent salutations from Rome in Col. iv. 10, 14. In this inference we are further confirmed by iv. 20, "Erastus abode at Corinth: but Trophimus I left at Miletus sick." On his last journey to Jerusalem, before his imprisonment at Rome, Paul was accompanied by Trophimus from Miletus to Jerusalem (Acts xx. 4, 15; xxi. 29); and as Timothy was with Paul during his visit to Corinth, narrated in the same chapter, he could not have required to be informed that Erastus had abode in that city, if it were the same occasion that was referred to.

his first imprisonment (Acts xxviii. 30-31; Phil. i. 1214) and at the time when he wrote this epistle (ii. 9; i. 15-17; iv. 16) leads us to the same conclusion. Such a second imprisonment was in itself not at all unlikely after the great fire in 64 A.D., when the Christian religion was put under the ban; and we know the apostle had no lack of enemies to give information against him. If we are right in dating the first epistle 67 A.D., we may assign this one to 67-68 a.d.

Its Character and Contents.-We have here the apostle's last will and testament in favour of the Church, in the form of a farewell charge to his beloved child Timothy. He still hoped to see him once again, and repeatedly urges him to do his best to come to him shortly-"before winter," while navigation is still practicable (iv. 9, 21). His yearning for Timothy's society in his lonely prison reminds us of our Lord's desire for the sympathy and prayers of His disciples on the eve of His Passion; and in this epistle, as in our Lord's teaching during the week preceding His death, there is blended with a sublime confidence in the speaker's own future, dark foreboding of approaching trial and temptation for the Church. He warns Timothy of the "grievous times" to come (iii. 1), and exhorts him to adhere steadfastly to the teaching he had received from the apostle on the foundation of the Scripture "inspired of God," and to take security for such teaching being continued by "faithful men who shall be able to teach others also "--bidding Timothy emulate his own example in the endurance of hardship and in the practice of selfdenial for the sake of the Gospel.

A peculiarity of this as of the other pastoral epistles is the introduction of short and weighty sayings with the words, "Faithful is the saying." In ii. 11-13 we have what is probably part of a Christian hymn, expressing the faith in which the apostle would have Timothy to meet his trials.

WHO wrote it. This is a question which cannot

be answered with any degree of certainty. The earliest witness on the subject is Pantænus of Alexandria, in the middle of the second century, who assigned the epistle, as Eusebius tells us, to the apostle Paul. In keeping with this opinion we find that the Eastern Church generally regarded it as the work of Paul; but some of the most learned of its bishops and teachers were constrained by internal evidence to depart somewhat from the traditional view. Their idea was that Paul might have written the original, and one of his disciples have translated it into Greek; or that the apostle might have supplied the thoughts, and some disciple have put them into words. In this sense Origen maintains that the thoughts were worthy of the apostle, but "who it was that wrote the epistle, God knows."

The opinion of the Western Church was for a long time adverse to the Pauline authorship. Clement of Rome, who wrote before the close of the first century, frequently quotes the epistle, but never claims for it the authority of Paul. If he believed that the epistle was written by Paul, it is difficult to account for the ignorance of the Roman Church on the subject in succeeding generations-all the more so because of the connection of the epistle with Italy (xiii. 24). It was not till the