This article is within the scope of WikiProject Bible, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the Bible on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Christianity, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Christianity on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Epistle to the Romans which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 16:29, 12 June 2016 (UTC)
"According to the the letter, Paul urges Timothy..."
Yes, I noticed that problem, and started to work on fixing it, but then realized that that would require careful redaction, and then it occurred to me that the references to the reader as "Timothy" were at least as problematic as the references to the author as Paul. (One of the arguments against Pauline authorship is that a frequent companion of Paul, as Timothy apparently was, would not need a letter from Paul to give him rudimentary instructions on how to be a good pastor, and while I can't imagine scholars fretting over such things it's pretty funny to imagine the historical Timothy receiving instructional letters from someone claiming to be Paul while both Paul and Timothy were still alive.)
But by the time I thought I had worked it out you had already presented your own solution. Obviously your version adequately addresses the question of authorship as it deals with the content summary, but it also kind of makes it look like the reason for writing the letter was to present a narrative about Paul writing to Timothy, rather than providing pastoral instruction to a reader. How about replacing "Paul" (and "he") with "the author" and "Timothy" with "the reader" throughout the section? This solution would be just as NPOV, as it is equally accurate whether one accepts or rejects the Pauline attribution.
Yes, I realised that was the weakness of my edit, but saying that the author is telling the reader certain things is too interpretive: just looking at the first sentence, it is clearly "Timothy" who presumably has a propensity to timidity, rather than any old reader. It is certainly "Timothy" - and not any other implied reader - who is to come to him before winter. That is, we ought not to down play the (implied, at least) specific historical situation - the letter does not merely contain timeless truths of pastoral instruction. StAnselm (talk) 07:58, 3 September 2016 (UTC)