AK > 2 Tim is different from other Pauline letters because it is written to
an
AK >individual and personal friend of Paul's not a church group. This must
be
AK >taken into account but rarely is.
AK
AK >The stylistic arguement is quite invalid. Authors can use different
styles
AK >for different purposes
JO > Your analogy is well taken, though I wonder if that distinction, i.
e.,
JO > style, can be attributed to letter writers in the ancient world. The
JO > letter to Philemon is also a personal letter, yet is regarded by most
as
JO > genuinely Pauline primarily because it coheres stylistically with
other
JO > letters regarded to be be genuinely Pauline.
"A personal letter"? ". . . to Philemon . . ., to Apphia . . ., to
Archippus . . ., and to the church that meets in your home" (Phm 1.1).
That doesn't sound like a personal letter to me.
"To Timothy, my true son in the faith" (1 Tim 1.1). That sounds more like
a personal letter, although it impresses me as possibly being the opening
of an "open" personal letter.
Perhaps our impression of Philemon as a personal letter is based more on
our knowledge of its contents, and our impression of how we would feel if
someone read such a letter publicly if we were Philemon (or Apphia--don't
the subscriptions in many manuscripts indicate that many scribes thought
her to be the master of Onesimus?), than what's in the text. (How's that
for tortured English?)
Grace and peace,
PLStepp
Pastor, DeSoto Christian Church
Ph.D. candidate, Baylor University (Yo, Ox!)
************************************************************
"A system of morality which is based on relative
emotional values is a mere illusion, a thoroughly vulgar
conception which has nothing sound in it and nothing
true."
Phaedo 69b
************************************************************