منحولية رسالتي تيموثاوس الاول و الثاني وعدم صحة نسبتهما الى بولس

بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم

ذهب جمع من الناقد اليوم على ان رسالتي تيموثاوس الاولى و الثانية لا تصح نسبتهما الى بولس و ان المؤلف في الحقيقة مجهول ، و قد اعتمد جمع من النقاد في هذا على سببين رئيسيين :

الاول : الاختلاف في اسلوب الكتابة اليونانية في هاتين الرسالتين ( ورسالة تيطس ايضا ) عن بقية رسائل بولس
ثانيا : التفاصيل التي تتكلم عن التنظيم الكنسي في هاتين الرسالتين لا تعكس الكنيسة في القرن الاول و لكنها تعكس لنا صورة الكنيسة في القرن الثاني .

نقرا من كتاب A history of the Bible للمؤلف جون بارتون الصفحة 183 -184
So far we have referred only to those letters that most scholars think are authentically Paul's. This leaves several others as more likely to be pseudonymous, attributed to Paul but not genuinely by him. The most obvious case is the so-called Pastoral Letters, I and 2 Timothy and Titus. These, like the authentic Philemon, are addressed not to churches but to individuals we know to have been associated with Paul in his mission. But they seem unPauline for two reasons. First, the Greek style is unmistakably different from Pauls own, much more polished and refined. It is possible that Paul changed his sole over time, and some have argued that the Pastorals come from late in his life, supposing that he escaped execution and took up his mission again till in old age, he wrote to his old colleagues in these letters. But this strikes most as a desperate ploy to 'save' the letters for Paul.Secondly, the structures of the church that are implied in the Pastorals resemble much more those of the second century than those of Paul's day. In Paul's letters, as we have seen, church order is still incho-ate; in the Pastorals there is a Christian polity, with bishops who have some standing in society in general and who are supposed to be heads of a family; and there is an order of widows in which elderly women can be enrolled (I Timothy 5:3-16). The position of women is clear:
they are to be subordinate to men:Let a woman learn in silence with full submission. I permit no woman to teach or to have authority over a man; she is to keep silent.
(I Timothy 2:II-12)
Paul had been more ambiguous over this. He insisted that women should be veiled in church, but at the same time he assumes that they will pray and prophesy when the assembly meets for worship (see I Corinthians I1:2-16).))

ونقرا من International standard Bible Encyclopedia Online
((The decision of certain critics to reject the Pastoral Epistles as documents not from the hand of Paul, "is not reached on the external evidence, which is perhaps as early an attestation as can be reasonably expected. They are included in the Muratorian Canon, and quoted by Irenaeus and later writers as Paul's" (A.S. Peake, A Critical Introduction to the New Testament, 60). This admission is satisfactory. In recent times, however, the authenticity of these epistles has been called in question by Schmidt, Schleiermacher, Baur, Renan, and many others. Baur asserted that they were written for the purpose of combating the Gnosticism of the 2nd century, and of defending the church from it by means of ecclesiastical organization, and that the date of their composition was about the year 150 AD.II. Alleged Difficulties against Pauline Authorship.Various difficulties have been alleged against the reception of the Pastoral Epistles as Pauline. The chief of these are: (1) the difficulty of finding any place for these letters in the life of Paul, as that is recorded in the Acts and in the Pauline Epistles written before the Pastorals; (2) the fact that there are said to be in them indications of an ecclesiastical organization, and of a development of doctrine, both orthodox and heretical, considerably in advance of the Pauline age; (3) that the language of the epistles is, to a large extent, different from that in the accepted epistles; (4) the "most decisive" of all the arguments against the Pauline authorship--so writes Dr. A.C. McGiffert (A History of Christianity in the Apostolic Age, 402)--is that "the Christianity of the Pastoral Epistles is not the Christianity of Paul.))
https://www.internationalstandardbib...3t1ozeZ9o8H1xg

نقرا من كتاب forged للدكتور بارت ايرمان تحت باب Early Christian forgeries
((There are thirteen letters in the New Testament that claim to be written by Paul, including two to the Thessalonians. In the Second Letter to the Thessalonians we find a most intriguing verse in which the author tells his readers that they are not to be led astray by a letter "as if by us" indicating that the "day of the Lord" is almost here (2:2). The author, in other words, knows of a letter in circulation claiming to be by Paul that is not really by Paul. This other letter allegedly teaches an idea that Paul himself op-poses. Who would create such a forged letter?Obviously someone who wanted to advance his own views about when the end would come and decided to do so with the authority of Paul, even though he was not Paul.But there is a terrifically interesting irony connected with this passage. Second Thessalonians, in which the passage appears, is itself widely thought among scholars not to be by Paul, even though it claims to be written by him (we'll see the reasons for thinking this in Chapter 3). Is 2 Thessalonians itself a forgery in Paul's name? If so, why would it warn against a forgery in Paul's name? There can be little doubt about the answer: one of the "tricks" used by ancient forgers to assure readers that their own writings were authentic was to warn against writings that were not authentic. Readers naturally assume that the author is not doing precisely what he condemns.?))

الرد على الاعتراضات النصرانية :
سنشرع بالرد على الاعتراضات النصرانية المقدمة على السببين المذكورين في الاعلى

1. الرد على الاعتراض القائل بان اختلاف اسلوب الكتابة اليونانية في الرسالتين قد يكون نتيجة كبر سن بولس و انه كتب هذا بعد خروجه من السجن.
اقول : لا يمكن باي حال من الاحوال قبول مثل هذه الاحتمالية اذ انها مجرد افتراض قائم على فكرة لزوم تغير اسلوب الكتابة مع كبر السن و دخول السجن !!! و الحقيقة ان هذا اللزوم غير مشروط و المثل يقول " ثبت العرش ثم انقش" فاين الدليل ان اسلوب كتابة بولس تغيرت بعد دخوله السجن و كبر سنه !!!!!
نعيد ما قاله جون بارتون في الاعلى :
(( First, the Greek style is unmistakably different from Pauls own, much more polished and refined. It is possible that Paul changed his sole over time, and some have argued that the Pastorals come from late in his life, supposing that he escaped execution and took up his mission again till in old age, he wrote to his old colleagues in these letters. But this strikes most as a desperate ploy to 'save' the letters for Paul.))

نقرا من الموسوعة البريطانية :
((Attempts have been made to apply the tools of statistical analysis in comparing these disputed letters to the rest of the New Testament (particularly to the Pauline corpus) for the purpose of establishing authorship. The studies, utilizing computer technology, point toward non-Pauline authorship with affinities to language and style of a later, possibly 2nd-century, date. More refined and complex analyses, however, are still needed.Linguistic facts—such as short connectives, particles, and other syntactical peculiarities; use of different words for the same things; and repeated unusual phrases otherwise not used in Paul—offer fairly conclusive evidence against Pauline authorship and authenticity.))
https://www.britannica.com/topic/bib...ZmaPlG5f4HMJRg

2. الرد على الاعتراض القائل بان التنظيم الكنسي الموجود في رسالة تيموثاوس الاولى موجود نظيرها في نصوص اخرى من رسائل بولس .
اقول : يقصد بهذا ذكر عبارة الاساقفة و الشمامسة في نصوص اخرى كما في رسالة بولس اهل فيليبي 1: 1 ( بُولُسُ وَتِيمُوثَاوُسُ عَبْدَا يَسُوعَ الْمَسِيحِ، إِلَى جَمِيعِ الْقِدِّيسِينَ فِي الْمَسِيحِ يَسُوعَ، الَّذِينَ فِي فِيلِبِّي، مَعَ أَسَاقِفَةٍ وَشَمَامِسَةٍ) ، الا ان هذا لا يثبت شيئا اذ ان الكلمة اليونانية المستخدمة هنا هي episkopoi kai diakonoi و معنى هذه العبارة لا يمكن حصرها في الاساقفة و الشمامسة بالمفهوم المعروف في القرن الثاني و لذا ذهب الى ان التفسير او الترجمة الصحيحة هي seers and helpers .
نقرا من A history of the Bible للمؤلف John Barton الصفحة 173((We can see from the letters that Paul set up some for of organization in his churches: there were evidently leaders, though they have no fixed titles, and there is no telling what their activities consisted of. Philippians tir speaks of the episkopoi kai diakonoi, traditionally translated as bishops and deacons', but there is no way of telling what relation such people have to later bishops and deacons. A small church such as that at Philippi would hardly have had a multitude of bishops' in the later sense of the word, and the NRSV note, 'over-seers and helpers' may capture the sense better. In I Corinthians it is clear that Stephanas and his family have a central role (16:15-16), and we And believers who seem to 'host' the church, which meets in people's houses (16:19). There are also odd references to 'apostles' (apostoloi), one of whom may be female (Junia, mentioned in Romans 16:7). They are clearly not identical with the twelve original disciples. But what Paul meant by apostolos is impossible to say; in 2 Corinthians 8:23 he refers to the apostoloi of the churches, meaning simply those sent by the churches' (apostolos means originally 'sent one' or 'envoy') - 'the messengers of the churches', as NRSV translates it.Nor do we know whether the leaders of the churches were in charge of their liturgical life. Nothing at all is said about who may preside at the Lord's Supper or Eucharist, as it came to be known, and there is nothing about who may baptize. Paul at one point actually denies that he himself had done this to any significant extent (I Corinthians I:16-17), saying that his task was not to baptize but to preach the gospel, a distinction that would not have appealed to later generations of Christian leaders. The idea that these were in some sense priests, like the priests of ancient Israel, arrived later than Paul's day: indeed, throughout the New Testament priest (hiereus) means either the priests in the Old Testament or the priestly caste of contemporary Judaism, and is never applied to any Christian minister or leader. In Hebrews it is Jesus who is the true high priest:We have such a high priest, one who is seated at the right hand of the throne of the Majesty in the heavens, a minister in the sanctuary and the true tent that the Lord, and not any mortal, has set up.(Hebrews 8:1-2)Where the contents of Christian worship are concerned, Paul again pro-rides virtually no information.))

و نقرا من الموسوعة البريطانية
(( Linguistic facts—such as short connectives, particles, and other syntactical peculiarities; use of different words for the same things; and repeated unusual phrases otherwise not used in Paul—offer fairly conclusive evidence against Pauline authorship and authenticity.
Church offices are more developed in the Pastoral Letters than in Paul’s time. There are presbyters and bishops, but these are sometimes used interchangeably and the monarchical episcopate is not yet depicted, although church offices appear to be heading in that direction. Requirements for office are strict and leaders are chosen and ordained by laying on of hands. Such leaders must be able to teach true and sound doctrine and guard what has been entrusted to them, the parathēkē—i.e., the deposit of teaching or the message to be carried on. They must also be able to stand firm and argue against heresy. Such offices and aims suggest an expectation of future generations of faithful witnesses to carry on the traditions, perhaps particularly necessary as some may be killed for the witness they make. ))
https://www.britannica.com/topic/bib...ZmaPlG5f4HMJRg

وقد ذهب البعض الى الاستشهاد بما في رسالة كورنثيوس الاولى 14 : (33-36) لبيان التوافق بينها و بين ما هو مذكور في رسالة تيموثاوس الاولى 2 : (11 - 12) من ناحية موقف بولس تجاه المراة في الكنيسة من ناحية السكوت وعدم التحدث ، الا ان جمعا من النقاد ذهبوا الى ان مثل هذه النصوص في كورنثيوس الاولى هي في الحقيقة مضافة لاننا نجد في كورنثيوس الاولى الاصحاح 11 : 5 انه قد سمح للمراة ان تصلي و تتنبا في الكنيسة ( 5 وَأَمَّا كُلُّ امْرَأَةٍ تُصَلِّي أَوْ تَتَنَبَّأُ وَرَأْسُهَا غَيْرُ مُغُطَّى، فَتَشِينُ رَأْسَهَا، لأَنَّهَا وَالْمَحْلُوقَةَ شَيْءٌ وَاحِدٌ بِعَيْنِهِ.) .
نقرا من كتاب A history of the Bible للمؤلف جون بارتون الصفحة 184:
((The position of women is clear: they are to be subordinate to men:
Let a woman learn in silence with full submission. I permit no woman to teach or to have authority over a man; she is to keep silent.
(I Timothy 2:II-12)
Paul had been more ambiguous over this. He insisted that women should be veiled in church, but at the same time he assumes that they will pray and prophesy when the assembly meets for worship (see I Corinthians I1:2-16). At the same time, in another passage in I Corinthians (14:33b-36), we read that women should be silent in the churches ... For it is shameful for a woman to speak in church'. NRSV prints the whole paragraph in parentheses, probably implying the widespread belief that it is a later addition to I Corinthians, since it disrupts the argument of the chapter, which is about prayer and prophesying in the Christian assembly but not about who is permitted to speak. If it is jenuinely by Paul, then one reason for being doubtful about I Timothy is diminished, but it certainly seems to be an insertion, twisting Paul's teaching in the same direction as that of the Pastorals. For elsewhere Paul seems robustly in favour of the inclusion of women, like slaves and Gentiles, on equal terms in the churches:
There is no longer Jew or Greek, there is no longer slave or free, there is no longer male and female; for all of you are one in Christ Jesus.
(Galatians 3:28) ))

3. الرد علي الاعتراض المتمسك باقوال اباء الكنيسة .
اقول : حاول البعض ان ينسب الى بعض اباء الكنيسة في اواخر القرن الاول و بداية القرن الثاني انهم صرحوا بنسبة هذه الرسائل الى بولس بينما الحقيقة عكس ذلك فنجد القس فهيم عزيز يستشهد باكلمندس السكندري و بوليكاربوس ورسائل اغناطيوس حيث يقول في المدخل الى العهد الجديد الصفحة 524 :
(( ففي كتابات اكليمندس الروماني في اواخر القرن الاول الميلادي توجد عبارات ((ملك الدهور)) ((مستعدا لكل عمل صالح)) التي تتكرر في هذه الرسائل و لا تظهر في غيرها من كتب العهد الجديد و هناك عبارات اخرى مثل (( اخدمه بضمير صالح)) وغيره تدل على انه كان يعرف هذه الرسائل.
اما بوليكاربوس ( 107- 117) فيقتبس في رسالته الى فيلبي ثلاث عبارات هي ( 1 تيموثاوس 6: 10)، 2 تيموثاوس 4: 6، 1 تيموثاوس 2: 1و 2) وهذه موجودة في رسالته ( 4: 1، 9:2، 12: 3) ورسائل اغناطيوس تحتوي على الكثير من العبارات التي تظهر في هذه الرسائل الرعوية ))

و حقيقة لا ادري اين وجه الدليل في التشابه في بعض العبارات و ذكر بعض النصوص - دون الاشارة الى بولس او كونه مؤلف تلك العبارات - يقطع على كون بولس مؤلف رسالتي تيموثاوس او ان الرسالتين كانتا معلومتين لبوليكاربوس و اكليمندس السكندري و اغناطيوس حيث ان الناحل بطبيعة الحال لن يستخدم الفاظا و عبارات خارج التاثير و التعليم الكنسي و اذا ما اخذنا بعين الاعتبار ان مثل هذه العبارات كانت منتشرة فلا يستبعد ان يكون الناحل قد علم بتلك العبارات و استخدمها في الرسالتين و نسبها الى بولس بعد ذلك .
و لذلك ذهب بعض الباحثين - باعتراف فهيم عزيز - الى ان بوليكاربوس هو مؤلف الرسائل الرعوية
نقرا من المدخل الى العهد الجديد الصفحة 525 :
(( وقد كانت كتابات بوليكابوس الذي من سميرنا (+ 155) تشابه هذه الرسالة حتى ان الدارسين ظنوا انه هو الذي كتبها ))

و مع وجودها في القائمة الموريتارية من نهاية القرن الثاني - و التي تعتبر اقدم شهادة لقنونيتها - الا اننا لا نجدها في بردية 46 من القرن الثالث .
نقرا من الموسوعة البريطانية
((These letters, however, do not appear among the Pauline letters in P 46, an early-3rd-century manuscript, and there is no clear external attestation in the primitive church concerning them until the end of the 2nd century. Not until the 19th century were doubts expressed about the Pastorals as being authentically Pauline, when German scholars and others noted discrepancies in style and vocabulary, church organization, heresies, biographical and historical situations, and theology from those found in the Pauline letters. The problems of authorship, authenticity, and dating almost paralyze investigation of the Pastorals unless discussion of these problems is seen as connected also with the literary character of the material.))

4. الرد على الاعتراض القائل بان كاتب الرسالة صرح بانه تيموثاوس .
اقول : و هذا اضعف دليل ان اعتبرناه دليلا فقد كانت العادة سابقا ان ينسب العمل نحلة الى شخص ذي اهمية ليكتسب العمل شهرة فهذا الادعاء اذا لا يقدم و لا يؤخر .
نقرا من كتاب جون بارتون السابق الصفحة 185 :
((In the case of he Pastorals there are explicit references within the text of the letters to circumstances in Paul's life, adding verisimilitude to the claim that they are by Paul: he greets particular people, and refers by name to those people who are opposing his mission, such as Alexander the coppersmith
"Timothy 4:14). How should we deal with this phenomenon?
It has been common for New Testament scholars to say that the attribution of texts to people who were not their actual authors was a matter of convention in the ancient world. In the case of the Bible, they point to the ascription of the Psalms to David, or the wisdom books to Solo-mon, or the Pentateuch to Moses. This, it is argued, does not mean that anyone was being deceived: people knew that it was customary to attribute one's own writings to figures from the past. The analogy is however an imperfect one. In fact, very few Old Testament books are actually ascribed within the text itself to the figures whose names we know them by, and when this does occur, it is the use of a hallowed name from the remote past to give a kind of seal of approval to a recent work. This is true also of the large number of Jewish works outside the Hebrew Bible that have come down to us in various languages: they are almost always ascribed to an ancient prophet or seer, not to a contemporary of the actual author. In the case of the New Testament, we are talking about an attribution to a figure from the last or last-but-one generation, one that is surely meant quite literally. People in antiquity knew about forgery, and abhorred it, as we can see from 2 Thessalonians itself, where 'Paul' cheekily tells his readers not to take any notice of letters fraudulently ascribed to him (2 Thessalonians 2:2), and at the end adds: I, Paul, write this greeting with my own hand. This is the mark in every letter of mine; it is the way I write (3:17). (Compare I Corinthians 16:21, Galatians 6:I%.) This is an unambiguous claim to real Pauline authorship. Bart Ehrman, in a major study of the subject, speaks plainly of *forgery in such cases, and the term can scarcely be avoided." Matters may be different where an original letter of Paul or some other Figure has been edited by adding passages or tweaking the text: scribes did that kind of thing a lot, without thereby falsifying the naming of the text.))

هذا وصلى الله على سيدنا محمد و على اله وصحبه وسلم