For many Christians, the letters of the Apostle Paul form the backbone of Christian theology. Romans, Corinthians, Galatians—these texts ring with Paul’s passion and urgency as he founded and corrected early churches. But here is a startling claim: not all the letters bearing Paul’s name may actually have come from his hand.

Most modern New Testament scholars agree that only seven letters can be confidently attributed to Paul: Romans, 1 and 2 Corinthians, Galatians, Philippians, 1 Thessalonians, and Philemon. The others—such as Ephesians, Colossians, and 2 Thessalonians—are disputed, while the so-called Pastoral Epistles (1 & 2 Timothy, Titus) are widely considered pseudonymous, written decades after Paul’s death.

The technical word for this is pseudepigraphy—literally “false writing.” In the ancient world, attaching the name of a revered teacher to a text was not always seen as plagiarism in the modern sense. It was a way of lending authority to teachings and ensuring they would be heard and preserved. Yet for today’s readers, the realization that some Pauline letters were likely composed by later Christians in Paul’s name raises profound questions about authorship, authority, and even inspiration.

The Letters in Question

Scholars typically divide the Pauline corpus into three categories:

Undisputed Letters – Almost universally recognized as genuinely Paul’s: Romans, 1 & 2 Corinthians, Galatians, Philippians, 1 Thessalonians, Philemon.
Disputed/Deutero-Pauline Letters – Widely debated: 2 Thessalonians, Colossians, Ephesians.
Pastoral Epistles – Almost certainly written later: 1 Timothy, 2 Timothy, Titus.

Why disputed? The reasons vary:

Style and Vocabulary – The Greek in the Pastorals, for example, is different from Paul’s quick, punchy style. Entire clusters of words appear that Paul never uses elsewhere.
Theological Development – In the undisputed letters, Paul expects the imminent return of Christ. In the later letters, the tone shifts: Christ’s return seems distant, and the focus moves to church order and leadership structures.
Historical Context – The Pastorals describe a church with bishops, elders, and detailed qualifications for leaders—something that fits the 2nd century church much more than Paul’s mid-1st century missionary movement.

Why Write in Paul’s Name?

The motive is as fascinating as it is unsettling. If you were a Christian leader living 50–70 years after Paul, facing new challenges—heresies, organizational struggles, persecution—you might reach for the authority of Paul’s name.

Doctrinal Authority – By claiming Paul’s voice, the writer could settle theological disputes.
Institutional Legitimacy – Instructions about bishops, elders, and women’s roles gain weight if they are “Paul’s words.”
Continuity – Later Christians may have sincerely believed they were articulating what Paul would have said, had he been alive.

Faith and Forgery

The word forgery can feel jarring. Was this deception? Or was it simply an accepted literary convention? Scholars debate this fiercely. In Greco-Roman culture, pseudepigraphy was both common and controversial. Some readers tolerated it; others condemned it as outright fraud.

For Christians, the deeper shock is theological. If letters like 1 Timothy or Ephesians were not written by Paul, what does this mean for their place in Scripture? Does it weaken their authority? Or does it reveal that God can inspire truth even through anonymous hands?

How Scholars Detect Forgery

Determining authorship in the ancient world is complex, but scholars rely on several lines of evidence:

1. Writing Style and Vocabulary

Colossians and Ephesians use long, winding sentences, unlike Paul’s punchy prose.
Vocabulary shifts dramatically: Colossians contains many terms not found in the authentic letters, including rare Greek words more common in later Christian writings.
The Pastoral Epistles (1 & 2 Timothy, Titus) use over 300 words that never appear in Paul’s undisputed letters.

2. Theological Development

Ephesians presents a highly developed view of the church as a universal, cosmic body—far beyond Paul’s usual, urgent, community-specific tone.
1 Timothy envisions church offices like bishops and deacons, reflecting a later, more structured church organization than in Paul’s lifetime.
Some disputed letters emphasize faith and tradition handed down, rather than Paul’s hallmark theme of faith versus law.

3. Historical Anachronisms

The Pastoral Epistles assume an institutional church with established leadership hierarchies, which better fits the early 2nd century than Paul’s mid-1st century missionary world.
The focus on combating heresies in the Pastorals (such as Gnostic-like teachings) reflects theological battles that arose after Paul’s death.

4. Contradictions with Authentic Letters

1 Thessalonians confidently expects Christ’s imminent return. But 2 Thessalonians delays the timeline, insisting certain signs must happen first—a theological shift that suggests later authorship.
Paul in Galatians insists on freedom from the Mosaic Law, but the Pastorals stress conformity and order.

Why Would Someone Forge a Letter?

In the ancient world, writing under a revered teacher’s name was not always considered outright deception. It could be seen as honoring a tradition or continuing a legacy. Still, early Christians debated whether pseudonymous writings were valid. Some church fathers rejected certain Pauline letters as spurious, only for them to later enter the canon.

Likely motives for pseudepigraphy included:

Authority: Borrowing Paul’s name lent credibility to teachings.
Relevance: Later communities faced new challenges—heresies, church organization, delayed expectations of Christ’s return.
Continuity: Authors may have believed they were faithfully interpreting Paul for a new era.

Why This Matters

For modern believers, discovering that some Pauline letters are pseudepigraphal does not mean discarding them. Rather, it invites us to:

Read More Carefully – Recognize the difference between Paul’s urgent missionary letters and later church-building documents.
Understand Development – Early Christianity was not static. Beliefs, practices, and institutions evolved over decades.
Ask Deeper Questions – How does God work through human history, human communities, and even human ambiguity?

How Scholars Determine Authorship of Paul’s Disputed Letters

When scholars examine the authenticity of Paul’s letters, they do not rely on a single line of evidence. Instead, they apply a suite of historical-critical methods, especially textual and literary criticism, to build a cumulative case. This careful, multi-pronged analysis allows them to assert—with relative confidence—which letters are genuine and which are likely pseudonymous.

1. Textual Criticism (the Manuscript Tradition)

Scholars compare the earliest surviving manuscripts of the Pauline corpus to check for variations, insertions, or editorial activity.
While textual criticism rarely proves authorship on its own, it ensures the text under study reflects the earliest recoverable form. For example, the uniform manuscript tradition of the Pastoral Epistles confirms they circulated as Pauline by the 2nd century, but this doesn’t guarantee they originated with Paul himself.

2. Vocabulary and Style Analysis

Quantitative studies count word frequency and sentence length.
- The Pastoral Epistles contain over 300 words absent from the seven undisputed letters, including terms typical of 2nd-century Greek.
- Ephesians and Colossians employ unusually long, hymn-like sentences, unlike Paul’s abrupt, fiery style.
This doesn’t mean an author cannot vary style, but when combined with theological and historical differences, it raises strong red flags.

3. Theological Content

Authentic Pauline letters focus on urgent issues: justification by faith, the law, and Christ’s imminent return.
The disputed letters reflect later developments:
- Ephesians presents the church as a cosmic, universal body.
- The Pastorals emphasize institutional order, orthodoxy, and moral teaching.
- 2 Thessalonians tempers Paul’s apocalyptic urgency with a delayed eschatology.
Such shifts suggest authors writing a generation after Paul, adapting his thought to new contexts.

4. Historical Context and Anachronism

The Pastoral Epistles describe structured leadership offices (bishops, deacons, presbyters), which do not align with the fluid, charismatic leadership in Paul’s undisputed letters.
Concerns with Gnostic-like heresies in the Pastorals also align better with 2nd-century debates than with Paul’s mid-1st century world.

5. Intertextual Comparison

Scholars compare disputed letters against the undisputed corpus. For example:
- 1 Thessalonians teaches Christ’s immediate return, while 2 Thessalonians redefines the timeline—suggesting reinterpretation after Paul’s death.
- Paul empowers women leaders in Romans 16, while 1 Timothy restricts them—pointing to later cultural retrenchment.

Verse-Level Evidence for Disputed Pauline Letters

2 Thessalonians

Delay of the Parousia:
- 1 Thessalonians 4:15–17 — Paul insists the Lord’s return is imminent, even within his own lifetime (“we who are alive, who are left…”).
- 2 Thessalonians 2:1–3 — The author insists that the end will not come until after a sequence of cosmic events, such as the rise of “the man of lawlessness.” This contradicts Paul’s urgent expectation and looks like a later adjustment when the end didn’t arrive.
Style:
- The letter is more rigid and formulaic than 1 Thessalonians. Scholars note long prayers (e.g., 1:3–12) that resemble later Christian liturgical style rather than Paul’s usual urgent tone.

Colossians

Cosmic Christology:
- Colossians 1:15–20 — Presents Christ as “the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of all creation,” with the entire cosmos created through him and for him.
- Compare with Romans 8:34 or 1 Corinthians 8:6 — Paul emphasizes Christ’s death and resurrection as central, but does not describe such a grand metaphysical cosmology.
Tension with Paul’s Eschatology:
- Colossians 3:1–3 — Believers are already “raised with Christ,” suggesting a realized eschatology.
- In contrast, Philippians 3:10–11 emphasizes hope for a future resurrection.
Vocabulary: Over 30 words appear nowhere else in Paul’s undisputed letters, such as “reconciliation” (apokatallassō, 1:20–22) in a cosmic sense.

Ephesians

Ecclesiology (Church as Universal Body):
- Ephesians 1:22–23; 4:11–16 — Speaks of the church as Christ’s cosmic body, fully developed with roles like apostles, prophets, evangelists, pastors, and teachers.
- In contrast, Romans 12:4–8 and 1 Corinthians 12:12–28 focus on local communities with diverse gifts, not a universalized church structure.
Salvation by Grace:
- Ephesians 2:8–9 — “By grace you have been saved through faith… not by works.”
- Compare to Romans 3:28 and Galatians 2:16 — Paul insists on “faith, not works of the law.” The Ephesian formula is more polished, catechetical, and generalized, likely reflecting later theological summarization.
Style:
- Sentences run extremely long (e.g., 1:3–14 is a single 202-word Greek sentence), unlike Paul’s shorter, more fragmented bursts.

1 Timothy, 2 Timothy, Titus (The Pastoral Epistles)

Church Hierarchy:
- 1 Timothy 3:1–13 — Detailed qualifications for bishops and deacons, presupposing an established church structure.
- In Paul’s authentic letters (e.g., Philippians 1:1 mentions “bishops and deacons” but without hierarchy), leadership is fluid and charismatic, not institutional.
Concern for Tradition:
- 2 Timothy 1:13–14; 2:2 — Emphasis on “the pattern of sound teaching” and handing down tradition.
- Contrast with Galatians 1:11–12 — Paul insists his gospel came directly by revelation, not tradition.
The Role of Women:
- 1 Timothy 2:11–12 — Women must remain silent and not teach men.
- Compare Romans 16:1–7 — Paul commends Phoebe (a deacon) and Junia (called “outstanding among the apostles”). The restriction in Timothy looks like a later retrenchment.
Eschatology:
- 1 Timothy 6:14–15 — Christ’s appearing is a distant, almost timeless event.
- Compare 1 Thessalonians 4:15–17 — Christ’s coming is imminent.

Key Indicators of Analysis

Historical anachronisms (hierarchical church offices, anti-heresy battles, and realized eschatology all reflect a later stage of Christianity).

Contradictions with authentic Pauline theology (imminent vs. delayed Parousia, freedom vs. conformity to tradition).

Different vocabulary and style (Pastorals especially resemble 2nd-century church manuals).

Scholarly Consensus

Seven letters (Romans, 1 & 2 Corinthians, Galatians, Philippians, 1 Thessalonians, Philemon) are virtually undisputed.
Three letters (Ephesians, Colossians, 2 Thessalonians) are debated, with many scholars viewing them as deutero-Pauline.
Three letters (1 & 2 Timothy, Titus) are almost universally considered pseudepigraphal, written decades later in Paul’s name.

The confidence in these categories arises not from any single proof but from the convergence of evidence—style, vocabulary, theology, and historical setting all point in the same direction. This is the standard method of historical-critical research: when multiple, independent lines of analysis support the same conclusion, scholarly consensus becomes strong.

Refences

Brown, Raymond E. An Introduction to the New Testament. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1997.
Ehrman, Bart D. Forgery and Counterforgery: The Use of Literary Deceit in Early Christian Polemics. New York: Oxford University Press, 2013.
Ehrman, Bart D. Forged: Writing in the Name of God—Why the Bible’s Authors Are Not Who We Think They Are. New York: HarperOne, 2011.
Johnson, Luke Timothy. The Writings of the New Testament: An Interpretation. 3rd ed. Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 2010.
MacDonald, Margaret Y. Colossians and Ephesians. Sacra Pagina Series. Collegeville, MN: Liturgical Press, 2000.
Meade, David G. Pseudonymity and Canon: An Investigation into the Relationship of Authorship and Authority in Jewish and Earliest Christian Tradition. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1986.
Porter, Stanley E., and Andrew W. Pitts, eds. Christian Origins and Greco-Roman Culture: Social and Literary Contexts for the New Testament. Leiden: Brill, 2013.
Towner, Philip H. The Letters to Timothy and Titus. New International Commentary on the New Testament. Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 2006.
Wall, Robert W., and Eugene E. Lemcio. The New Testament as Canon: A Reader in Canonical Criticism. Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1992.
Wright, N. T. Paul and the Faithfulness of God. 2 vols. Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 2013.

Post Views: 12