First, arguments based on vocabulary and style prove nothing more than
that the vocabulary and style differ. They say little about authorship. There
are many factors that need to be considered before accepting this argument.
First, it is clear that Paul used secretaries in his letter-writing process
(e.g. Rom. 16.22). This was a common practice in Paul’s day. Recent research
suggests that letter writers used secretaries in different ways and gave them
varying degrees of control over the final product. What impact does this have
when comparing a personally written letter with one written with a secretary? I
acknowledge that function words (e.g. conjunctions, prepositions, etc.). could
be used to reveal similarities and differences in style, which may lead to
decisions on authorship. Function words are used rather uniformly by a single
author. However, again, this may reveal only different secretaries. Second, in
general, context dictates the choice of non-function word vocabulary. The
emphases of the undisputed Paulines are quite different from those of
Ephesians. Therefore, differences in vocabulary would be expected. Third, there
is a gap in time between the writing of Ephesians and most of the undisputed
Paulines. This should result in some difference in vocabulary and style. Fourth,
even granting that these factors can contribute to a decision about authorship,
there is no remotely objective means of establishing how much difference in
vocabulary and style would be needed to demonstrate different writers. To my knowledge
no major study has been undertaken to provide criteria for this type of claim.
Such a study would need to begin by choosing undisputed works by (preferably
ancient) authors writing within a single field but concerning different
subjects over a period of time. Each author’s work would need to be subjected to
vocabulary and style comparisons similar to those that the disputed Pauline
epistles have undergone. Only after many such authors are studied would one
have any kind of external criteria for determining whether a document is not
authentic. Of course, there are still questions of secretaries and other unique
elements in Paul’s work not factored into the proposed study. Nevertheless, it
is a start to be able to use this criterion of vocabulary and style as a
determining factor in this debate. (Joseph F. Fantin, The Lord of the Entire
World: Lord Jesus, a Challenge to Lord Caesar? [New Testament Monographs
31; Sheffield: Sheffield Phoenix Press, 2011], 277-78)
