<P> Vocabulary, sentence structure, employment of idioms and common phrases, etc. are analyzed for consistency with the author's other known works . A similar style implies common authorship, while a radically divergent vocabulary implies different authors . For example, E.J. Goodspeed argued that the vocabulary of the Epistle to the Ephesians showed a literary relationship with the First Epistle of Clement, written around the end of the 1st century . Similarly, E. Percy argued that the speech and style of Colossians more strongly resembled Pauline authorship than not . Of course, style and language can vary for reasons other than differing authorship, such as the subject of the letter, the recipient, the circumstances of the times, a different amanuensis, or simply maturation on the part of the author . </P> <P> Similar to internal evidence, doctrinal consistency and development are examined against the author's other known works . Theological themes like the eschaton or the Mosaic Law could reappear in different works, but in a similar manner . A consistent point of view implies a common author; contradictory or unrelated teachings imply multiple authors . For example, W. Michaelis saw the Christological likeness between the Pastoral Epistles and some of Paul's undisputed works, and argued in favor of Pauline authorship . A problem with this method is analyzing the coherence of a body of diverse and developing teachings . This is seen in the disagreement between scholars . For example, with the same epistles mentioned above, B.S. Easton argued their theological notions disagreed with other Pauline works, and rejected Pauline authorship . G. Lohfink argued the theology of the Pastoral epistles agreed with Paul's, but took this as proof someone wishing to enjoy the authority of an apostle copied the famous church leader . </P> <P> The name "undisputed" epistles represents the traditional scholarly consensus asserting that Paul authored each letter . However, even the least disputed of letters, such as Galatians, have found critics . Moreover, the unity of the letters is questioned by some scholars . First and Second Corinthians have garnered particular suspicion, with some scholars, among them Edgar J. Goodspeed and Norman Perrin, supposing one or both texts as we have them today are actually amalgamations of multiple individual letters . There remains considerable discussion as to the presence of possible significant interpolations . However, such textual corruption is difficult to detect and even more so to verify, leaving little agreement as to the extent of the epistles' integrity . See also Radical Criticism, which maintains that the external evidence for attributing any of the letters to Paul is so weak, that it should be considered that all the letters appearing in the Marcion canon were written in Paul's name by members of the Marcionite Church and were afterwards edited and adopted by the Catholic Church . </P> <Ul> <Li> Romans </Li> <Li> First Corinthians </Li> <Li> Second Corinthians </Li> <Li> Galatians </Li> <Li> Philippians </Li> <Li> First Thessalonians </Li> <Li> Philemon </Li> </Ul>

Which is not a difference between ephesians and other genuine pauline letters