This connection with the ecclesiastical society of the capital illustrates passages like 31£. 745-52 1147-53 1242. 43 1815 1939 f., but necessitates-upon presupposes (like Réville, 1. 394, II. 147) that both the sons of Zebedee suffered a martyr's death in Palestine (Mk 1039, Mt 2023). Consequently the only John in Asia Minor at the beginning of the second century was John the Presbyter. However, even though the fourth gospel were given up as anonymous, no reasonable objection could be taken to the critical position. The anonymity of treatises so different and weighty as Matthew and Hebrews helps materially to illustrate the possibility that a writer of such genius in the philosophy of religion as the fourth evangelist might have passed away without leaving any trace of his name or of his character.

Delff's hypothesis, partially followed by Fries 1-the excision of a series of passages (including those upon the Logos, the Galilean ministry, and the eschatology) which were interpolated ("by Cerinthus," Fries) in the original document, in order to harmonise it with the Alexandrian philosophy of religion, the prevailing synoptic tradition, and the chiliastic tendencies current toward the close of the first century. The original document itself was written by a Jewish Christian named John, for the benefit of Jewish priests; its locus was Jerusalem, its date the years immediately preceding 70 A.D.

The Pastoral Epistles. It has been already pointed out that the most reasonable criticism assigns these writings to a post-Pauline date, and at the same time recognises that a genuine element of the apostle's mind and spirit exists in their pages. The solution of the problem offered by this dual characteristic is probably 2 to be found in a modified application of the interpolation- and compilation- theories. The author, a devoted Paulinist, not only possessed some knowledge of the apostle's life and ideas, but also in all likelihood notes from his hand or fragments of his letters. These had been originally addressed to Timotheus and Titus. Subsequently they came to be incorporated in the substance of the extant pastorals, and attempts have been made by several critics to extricate them from their matrix. This may no longer be possible, with any degree of certainty. But the abrupt connections and apparent inconsistencies give some aid; and it is interesting to notice that the various attempts agree in one or two passages at least with a fair measure of unanimity. The following sections may be taken, roughly speaking, as containing considerable Pauline fragments according to the interpolation-theories: they are to be classified as (c) certain, and (p) probable. (c) 2 Ti 115-18 46(9)-22 (practically the whole, except vers. 3, 4, and minor additions).

Tit 312. 13(15)

(p) 2 Ti 21-18 310-12

Tit 11-6

(1 Ti 112-17).

Special examples of this criticism are appended, chiefly as they bear upon the question of the date at which either the fragments or the main writings were composed. The composite character, especially of 2 Timotheus, and partly even of Titus, is widely felt, but the schemes of reconstruction vary in many details.

Hilgenfeld (ZwTh, 1897, pp. 1-86), e.g., working along the line of Hesse, detects in 1 Timotheus a coherent letter, "Eine wohl zusammenhängende und abgeschlossene Empfehlung der neuen Gestaltung christlicher Ge

1 Det fjärde Evangelict och Hebreerevangelict (Stockholm, 1898).

2 So Renan, Sabatier, Ménégoz, Beyschlag, Spitta, Réville, Krüger, and, besides Clemen (Einheit. 1894, pp. 142-175), who subjects the letters to a detailed discussion, McGiffert (A4, pp. 404-413). Holtzmann (Past. pp. 119–126) rigorously objects to all such analyses, and O. Holtzmann also treats this line of criticism too unfavourably (in a review of Lemme's work, ZwTh, 1883, pp. 45-72). The chief special works are by Lemme (Das echte Ermahnungschreiben des Apostels Paulus an Timotheus, 1882), Hesse (Die Entstehung der neutestamentlichen Hirtenbriefe, 1889), and Knoke (Praktisch-theologischer Commentar zu den Pastoralbriefe). The last-named finds Titus genuine, except 17-9. 12. 13. In 1 Timotheus he disentangles a Pauline letter (xxрayyεíα) to Timotheus, dating from Corinth=13. 4. 18-20 21-10 412 51-6. 11-15. 19-23; another, written from his imprisonment in Caesarea=112-17 314-16 41-11. 13-16 212-15 57. 8 617-19 15-11 62-16; and finally another church-document written in the Pauline spirit, 31-10. 12. 13 211 59. 10. 16. 17 61. 2. All compiled by a later editor!

meindeverfassung, deren Kern der monarchische Episkopat mit dem zu ihm gehörenden Diakonate, die Zurücksetzung des Presbyteriums als der leitenden Behörde ist." This consists of 11. 2. 12-17 21-6a. 8-15 31-16 49-11 412-518 519-22. 24. 25. The rest of the canonical epistle consists of additions made by another editor (p. 32 f.) who had a slightly different conception of Paul, and who (after 136 A.D.) may have changed an original Bariλéws (22) into Bariλéwv (!). Titus has been only slightly re-edited (11. 2. 12. 13a 213 310. 11 in parts), under a similar tendency to emphasise soundness and sureness of doctrine. 2 Timotheus again represents an interpolated letter, in which the respective limits of the original and the additions are worked out in most elaborate and unconvincing detail, the redactor, according to Hilgenfeld, being responsible for passages reflecting the view that the battle of the faith is against erroneous doctrine, not (as in the original) against the heathen world: "Der Bearbeiter steht in der Hitze der gnostischen Bewegung und kämpft namentlich gegen jene Antithese des Christentums und der alttestamentlichen Religion, welche Marcion vertrat." See below, p. 708, for Prof. Bacon's reconstrustion.

[Reuss (pp. 120-129) dates 2 Tim wholly from the Roman imprisonment.]

2 Ti 115 418-17 420-22a-A genuine letter of Paul, written in 58 A.D. from Caesarea (Hitzig, Ueber Joh. Marcus, 1843, p. 154 f.). At any rate, as 420 stands in its extant setting, it is very plainly an isolated fragment of alien origin.

46-12 419 116-18 422b.-Another genuine letter, written from Rome in 63 A.D. (Hitzig). As 411a contradicts 421, and 420. 21 is apparently a doublet of 49-13, Jülicher (Einl. p. 127) also suggests that in this chapter passages from two separate letters to Timothy have been combined, which the editor only possessed in fragmentary shape. This is at least better than Holtzmann's solution of "tendenziöse Wiederholung."

Krenkel (Beiträge zur Aufhellung der Geschichte und der Briefe des Apostels Paulus, 1890, pp. 395-468) finds genuinely Pauline fragments in three letters :

Tit 312, 2 Ti 420, Tit 318.-(a) Written during Paul's second journey (Ac 201-3) to Corinth (from Illyricum ?); addressed to Titus at Crete.

[Reuss (pp. 80, 81) with great hesitation suggests that the whole epistle to Titus may have been written at Corinth, 57-59 A.D., and then taken by Apollos to Crete. This hazardous scheme he regards as the only possible alternative to abandoning the epistle as non-genuine. Bartlet (A4, pp. 182 f.) also fixes it in 59 (60), addressed to Titus, whom Paul had left at Lasea (Ac 278).]

2 Ti 49-18(b) Written during his Caesarean captivity, later than Coloss-Philemon; addressed to Timothy at Troas.

2 Ti 419 116-17 118b 421.—(c) Written from Rome during his imprisonment; addressed to Ephesus.

[Bartlet (AA, pp. 192 f., 198 f.) places 2 Ti 49-13. 21. 22a between Col-Eph and Philippians, and the rest of 2 Timothy later than Philippians, as Paul's very last word; while Spitta (Urc. i. pp. 39–46) labours hard to prove that 2 Ti 416-18 cannot spring from the first imprisonment of the apostle.] 2 Ti 112-14. Later than Paul, with

6b.

214-317, etc.-Most un-Pauline part of the epistle, in great part from another hand.

43-4. An interpolation. .--An

McGiffert (AA, p. 404 f.); though "itis impossible to decide with any degree of accuracy." Lemme also takes 211-45 as an insertion, 11-210 46-8 as interpolations.

49. 11-18. 20-21a.-Another note written shortly before 2 Corinthians (McGiffert); in response to it, Timotheus joined him soon (2 Co 11).

Hausrath and Pfleiderer (Urc. p. 822 n.). Clemen dates it 61, from Rome; McGiffert (adding 19-11), at the close of Paul's Roman imprisonment. Similarly von Soden (ad loc.) dates 115-18 49-22 shortly after Philippians, and (like that epistle) written from Rome, except 20-21a, which are unauthentic. Clemen puts 419-21 into c. 56 A.D., before Paul's imprisonment in Jerusalem; 49-18 he regards as composed a year or two later.

Hausrath's (iv. pp. 160-163) letter to Timotheus, which he discovers in the extant 2 Timotheus, is composed of 11. 2. 15-18 49-18 ̧

For an elaborate note on 2 Ti 418 and the papyrus-rolls of Paul, cp. Zahn, GK, ii. pp. 938-942.

Tit 17-9... 110-16 mostly, 2 mostly, 38-11. 14 unauthentic (McGiffert). 17-9 is clearly an interpolation interrupting the thought. . .

(6) . . . εἰσὶν γὰρ πολλοὶ ἀνυπότακτοι (10), and partly a reproduction of 6a (Harnack, Chron. pp. 710, 711).

31-7. 12-18-Undoubtedly Pauline (McGiffert); a note written to Titus, before Paul wintered for three months at Corinth (Ac 203). 312-15-Genuine Pauline fragment.

Weisse (Philos. Dogmatik, i. p. 146) (adding 2 Ti 49-22). Cp. Jülicher (p. 127). Clemen dates 312-14 in 52, 53 A.D., during Paul's winter residence at Nikopolis; while von Soden (EBi, i. p. 812) admits that this undoubtedly authentic " note (312-14) may have been addressed to Titus about the year 54 (58), although the plan was not carried out.

66

1 Ti 31-13 517-20, with Tit 17-9, later fragments added after 138 a.d. (Harnack, Chron. pp. 482-484), betraying their origin in the regulations for ecclesiastical offices and the quotation of an evangelic word as γραφή. Indeed, the whole passage 51-22a is out of connection (ibid. pp. 710, 711) with the context, which reads much more smoothly when it is omitted. [Reuss, pp. 82-85, again, conjectures that 1 Tim as a whole may have arisen out of the same situation as that which gave rise to Titus; and Bartlet (AA, p. 180 f.) fixes it in 55 (56), written on board ship by Paul after leaving Miletus. But how could Paul hope to rejoin Timotheus at Ephesus (1 Ti 314 412) in face of what he had just told the Ephesians (Ac 2025. 38)? The same critic finds in 2 Ti 420 a private postscript originally attached to this epistle.]

617-21. The references to riches, as in Hermas and James, in vers. 17-19,