First Epistle to Timothy

==Authorship==
{{Main|Authorship of the Pauline epistles}}
The authorship of First Timothy was traditionally attributed to the [[Apostle Paul]], although in pre-Nicene Christianity this attribution was open to dispute.<ref name=Grant1963>{{cite book |title=A Historical Introduction to the New Testament |author-link=Robert M. Grant (theologian) |first=Robert M. |last=Grant |chapter=Chapter 14: The Non-Pauline Epistles |year=1963 |publisher=Harper and Row |url=https://www.religion-online.org/book-chapter/chapter-14-the-non-pauline-epistles/ |quote=The Pastorals have certainly been regarded as Paul’s since the latter half of the second century, for they were so used by Theophilus of Antioch and Irenaeus of Lyons and are to be found in the Muratorian list. Before that time they were open to criticism. }}</ref> He is named as the author of the letter in the text ([[1 Timothy 1#Verse 1|1:1]]). Nineteenth- and twentieth-century scholarship questioned the authenticity of the letter, with many scholars suggesting that First Timothy, along with [[Second Timothy]] and [[Epistle to Titus|Titus]], are not the work of Paul, but to an unidentified Christian writing some time in the late-first to mid-second centuries.<ref>{{cite book |last=Ehrman |first=Bart |author-link=Bart Ehrman |title=The New Testament: A Historical Introduction to the Early Christian Writings |publisher=Oxford University Press |date=2003 |page=393 |isbn=0-19-515462-2 |quote=[W]hen we come to the Pastoral epistles, there is greater scholarly unanimity. These three letters are widely regarded by scholars as non-Pauline.}}</ref> Most scholars now affirm this view.<ref>{{cite book |last=Collins |first=Raymond F. |title=1 & 2 Timothy and Titus: A Commentary |publisher=Westminster John Knox Press |date=2004 |page=4 |isbn=0-664-22247-1 |quote=By the end of the twentieth century New Testament scholarship was virtually unanimous in affirming that the Pastoral Epistles were written some time after Paul's death.{{nbsp}}[...] As always some scholars dissent from the consensus view.}}</ref><ref>{{cite book |editor-last=Aune |editor-first=David E. |title=The Blackwell Companion to the New Testament |location=Massachusetts |publisher=Wiley-Blackwell |date=2010 |page=9 |quote=While seven of the letters attributed to Paul are almost universally accepted as authentic (Romans, 1 and 2 Corinthians, Galatians, Philippians, 1 Thessalonians, Philemon), four are just as widely judged to be pseudepigraphal, i.e., written by unknown authors under Paul's name: Ephesians and the Pastorals (1 and 2 Timothy and Titus).}}</ref>

As evidence for this perspective, they put forward that the pastoral epistles contain 306 words that Paul does not use in his unquestioned letters, that their style of writing is different from that of his unquestioned letters, that they reflect conditions and a church organization not current in Paul's day, and that they do not appear in early lists of his [[biblical canon|canonical]] works.<ref>{{cite book |last=Harris |first=Stephen L. |title=The New Testament: A Student's Introduction |edition=4th |location=Boston |publisher=McGraw-Hill |date=2002 |page=366 |quote=In the opinion of most scholars, the case against Paul's connection with the pastorals is overwhelming. Besides the fact that they do not appear in early lists of Paul's canonical works, the pastorals seem to reflect conditions that prevailed long after Paul's day, perhaps as late as the first half of the second century C.E. Lacking Paul's characteristic ideas about faith and the Spirit, they are also un-Pauline in their flat style and different vocabulary (containing 306 words not found in Paul's unquestioned letters). Furthermore, the pastorals assume a church organization far more developed than that current in the apostle's time.}}</ref> Modern scholars who support Pauline authorship nevertheless stress their importance regarding the question of authenticity: [[I. Howard Marshall|I. H. Marshall]] and P. H. Towner wrote that "the key witness is [[Polycarp]], where there is a high probability that 1 and 2 Tim were known to him".<ref>{{cite book |last1=Marshall |first1=I. H. |last2=Towner |first2=P. H. |title=The Pastoral Epistles |publisher=T&T Clark |date=1999 |isbn=0-567-08661-5 |page=3}}</ref> Similarly M. W. Holmes argued that it is "virtually certain or highly probable" that Polycarp used 1 and 2 Timothy.<ref name=Holmes2005 /> Scholars [[Robert M. Grant (theologian)|Robert Grant]], [[I. Howard Marshall]], and [[Hans von Campenhausen]] believe that Polycarp was the actual author of First Timothy, which would date its composition to {{c.|140}}.<ref name=Grant1963 />

[[Marcion]], an [[orthodoxy|orthodox]] bishop later excommunicated for [[Heresy in Christianity|heresy]], formed an [[Development of the New Testament canon#Marcion of Sinope|early canon]] of scripture {{c.|140}} around the [[Gospel of Luke]] and ten of the canonical Pauline epistles excluding 1–2 Timothy and Titus. The reasons for these exclusions are unknown, and so speculation abounds, including the hypotheses that they were not written until after Marcion's time, or that he knew of them, but regarded them as inauthentic. Proponents of Pauline authorship argue that he had theological grounds for rejecting the pastorals, namely their teaching about the goodness of creation (cf. 1 Timothy 4:1 ''ff''.).<ref name=Stott1996>{{cite book |last=Stott |first=John |title=The Message of 1 Timothy and Titus |location=Leicester |publisher=IVP |date=1996 |page=23}}</ref> The question remains whether Marcion knew these three letters and rejected them as [[Tertullian]] says, since in 1 Timothy 6:20 "false opposing arguments" are referred to, with the word for "opposing arguments" being "antithesis", the name of Marcion's work, and so a subtle hint of Marcion's heresy. However, the structure of the Church presupposed is less developed than the one [[Ignatius of Antioch]] (who wrote {{c.|110}}) presupposes, as well as the fact that not only is "antithesis" itself a Greek word which simply means "opposing arguments" but as it has been noted, the attack on the heretics is not central to the three letters.<ref>{{cite book |last=Marxsen |first=W. |title=Introduction to the New Testament |publisher=ET |date=1968 |page=207 |quote=Can we find, nevertheless, in the light of the contents of the letters, a common key to the understanding of all three? One common factor is to be found in the attack upon heretics, but this does not really stand in the forefront of any of the letters. I Tim. and Tit. are concerned rather with codified 'rules' or 'rules' required to be codified, for the ministry among other things. 2 Tim. also deals with the ministry, not in the sense of laying down rules, but rather that Timothy in fulfilling his ministry should follow the example of Paul.}}</ref>

Late in the 2nd century there are a number of quotations from all three [[pastoral epistles]] in Irenaeus' work ''[[Against Heresies (Irenaeus)|Against Heresies]]''.{{cn|date=September 2021}} The ''[[Muratorian fragment|Muratorian Canon]]'' ({{c.|170–180}}) lists the books of the New Testament and ascribes all three pastoral epistles to Paul.{{cn|date=September 2021}} [[Eusebius]] ({{c.|330}}) calls it, along with the other thirteen canonical [[Pauline epistles]], "undisputed".<ref>Eusebius, ''[[Church History (Eusebius)|Ecclesiastical History]]'' 3.3.5</ref> Exceptions to this positive witness include [[Tatian]],<ref>{{cite book |last=Moffatt |first=James |title=An Introduction to the Literature of the New Testament |date=1911 |page=420}}</ref> as well as the [[gnosticism|gnostic]] [[Basilides]].<ref name=Knight1992>Knight, George William, (1992).</ref> Possible earlier allusions are found in the letters from [[Clement of Rome]] to the Corinthians ({{c.|95}}), Ignatius to the Ephesians ({{c.|110}}) and Polycarp to the Philippians ({{c.|130}}),<ref name=Holmes2005>Holmes, MW, "Polycarp's 'Letter to the Philippians' and the Writings that later formed the NT", in Gregory & Tuckett (2005), ''The Reception of the NT in the Apostolic Fathers'' OUP, p. 226 {{ISBN|978-0-19-926782-8}}</ref><ref name=Berding1999>{{cite journal |last=Berding |first=K. |title=Polycarp of Smyrna's View of the Authorship of 1 and 2 Timothy |journal=Vigiliae Christianae |volume=53 |issue=4 |year=1999 |pages=349–60 |doi=10.2307/1584486|jstor=1584486 }}</ref> although it is difficult to determine the nature of any such literary relationships.