PastoralEpistles.com

James W. Aageson, Paul, the Pastoral Epistles, and the Early Church (Hendrickson, 2008)

Although the publication date on this book is January 2008, I have just received my copy.  I have looked over it briefly, and it appears to be a very interesting, thorough book.  One might question whether or not it could be a good book since the bibliography fails to mention Lloyd, Perry or myself. J Nonetheless, this will likely be a significant volume in the study of the Pastorals.

Aageson contends that the Pastorals were written after Paul but before Ignatius of Antioch wrote his letters (shortly after AD 100).  The book seeks to trace how certain theological themes are handled in the Pastorals in comparison to Paul and the early church.  I differ from Aageson in many respects, but I think this book will be important and useful.  I look forward to reading it.

In the Fall 2003 the Midwestern Journal of Theology (inaugural issue) and the Southern Baptist Journal of Theology devoted their articles to the Pastoral Epistles.  Sadly the Midwestern Journal’s table of contents is no longer available online.  The issue contained an article by Howard Marshall surveying recent work on the Pastoral Epistles.  The one article from that issue available online is Terry Wilder’s “A Brief Defense of the Pastoral Epistles’ Authenticity.”

The full table of contents from the SBJT issue can be viewed online.  Here are the titles devoted to the Pastorals along with links for those available online:

The Pastoral Epistles
Vol. 7, No. 3, Fall 2003

Editorial: Stephen J. Wellum
Guard the Gospel of Truth

Andreas J. Köstenberger
Hermeneutical and Exegetical Challenges in Interpreting the Pastoral Epistles

Ray Van Neste
The Message of Titus: An Overview

Benjamin L. Merkle
Hierarchy in the Church? Instruction from the Pastoral Epistles concerning Elders and Overseers

Philip H. Towner
The Function of the Public Reading of Scripture in 1 Timothy 4:13 and in the Biblical Tradition

Perhaps this will be of interest even if for some articles you have to track down hard copies.

I was perusing the printed ETS 2007 program the other day and noted the following sessions having to do with the Pastoral Epistles. If you're going to be at the ETS meeting in San Diego this November, maybe you should try to catch one of these papers.

Wednesday Morning (Nov 14)

Garden Salon Two
New Testament
Theme: Paul

9:20-10:00 AM
Greg MaGee (Trinity Evangelical Divinity School)
Paul's Response to the Shame and Pain of Imprisonment in 2 Timothy

11:00-11:40 AM
L. Timothy Swinson (Trinity Evangelical Divinity School)
"Faithful Sayings" or One Faithful Word? Another View of πιστος ο λογος in the Pastoral Epistles

Thursday Morning (Nov 15)

Hampton
Literature of the Bible Study Group
Theme: Familiar Biblical Texts Through a Literary Lens

8:30-11:40 AM
[note that there are three papers plus a planning meeting in this time frame, Ray's paper is second]
Ray Van Neste (Union University)
Looking Through a Literary Lens at a Pastoral Epistle

Thursday Afternoon (Nov 15)

Garden Salon Two
Patristics Study Group
Theme: Early Christianity in Africa

2:10-5:20 PM
[note that there are four papers in this time frame, the below paper is listed fourth]
Francis X. Gumerlock (Providence Theological Seminary)
When 'All' meant 'Some': Fulgentius of Ruspe on 1Ti 2.4 [ESV]
Respondent: Paul Hartog (Faith Baptist Theological Seminary)

Friday Morning (Nov 16)

Royal Palm Salon Three
New Testament

11:30AM-12:10PM
[this isn't specifically on the Pastorals, but 1Co 14.33 always comes up when you're discussing 1Ti 2.11-15 [ESV]]
William Warren (New Orleans Baptist Theological Seminary)
Orderly Worship or Silent Women: A Study of 1 Corinthians 14.33 [ESV]

Unfortunately, I'll have to miss most of these sessions. I don't arrive until early Wednesday afternoon so I'll miss the Wednesday AM papers (Swinson's sounds good; I heard him present on a text-critical issue in the Pastorals last year). I present a non-Pastoral-Epistles paper on Wednesday afternoon (at 4:10 in Garden Salon Two). On Friday morning, I moderate a section on the Gospel of John (from 9:00 to 12:10 in Royal Palm Salon Five, do stop by and say 'hello' if you'd like).

In studying 1Ti 6.12 [ESV], I was looking further into the phrase "eternal life" (here 'τῆς αἰωνίου ζωῆς'). I'm sure this is noted in commentaries (which I haven't checked yet) but has anyone else noticed that there may be inclusios using 'eternal life' in both First Timothy and Titus?

First Timothy:

1.16 ἀλλὰ διὰ τοῦτο ἠλεήθην, ἵνα ἐν ἐμοὶ πρώτῳ ἐνδείξηται Χριστὸς Ἰησοῦς τὴν ἅπασαν μακροθυμίαν πρὸς ὑποτύπωσιν τῶν μελλόντων πιστεύειν ἐπʼ αὐτῷ εἰς ζωὴν αἰώνιον. (1Ti 1.16, NA27)
1.16 But I received mercy for this reason, that in me, as the foremost, Jesus Christ might display his perfect patience as an example to those who were to believe in him for eternal life. (1Ti 1.16, ESV)

6.12 ἀγωνίζου τὸν καλὸν ἀγῶνα τῆς πίστεως, ἐπιλαβοῦ τῆς αἰωνίου ζωῆς, εἰς ἣν ἐκλήθης καὶ ὡμολόγησας τὴν καλὴν ὁμολογίαν ἐνώπιον πολλῶν μαρτύρων. (1Ti 6.12, NA27)
6.12 Fight the good fight of the faith. Take hold of the eternal life to which you were called and about which you made the good confession in the presence of many witnesses. (1Ti 6.12, ESV)

Titus:

1.2 ἐπʼ ἐλπίδι ζωῆς αἰωνίου, ἣν ἐπηγγείλατο ὁ ἀψευδὴς θεὸς πρὸ χρόνων αἰωνίων, (Tt 1.2, NA27)
1.2 in hope of eternal life, which God, who never lies, promised before the ages began (Tt 1.2, ESV)

3.7 ἵνα δικαιωθέντες τῇ ἐκείνου χάριτι κληρονόμοι γενηθῶμεν κατʼ ἐλπίδα ζωῆς αἰωνίου.
3.7 so that being justified by his grace we might become heirs according to the hope of eternal life.

The phrase is not super-frequent in the Pastorals. And, at least in First Timothy, I've noticed a few other things that seem to tie the benediction at the end of chapter 1 and the end of chapter 6 together, perhaps as an inclusio for the whole thing (which would speak toward the unity and cohesion of the whole letter). The most obvious is the shared metaphor "wage the good warfare" (1Ti 1.18) and "fight the good fight" (1Ti 6.11), but there may be others.

I know inclusios should have more going for them than shared words, but has anyone else noticed this going on? I'll have to check some commentaries later and see if they say anything.

Bonus Question: For you word order / discourse grammar folks out there, is there any significance to the change in word order for the phrase "eternal life" between 1Ti 1.16 (πιστεύειν ἐπʼ αὐτῷ εἰς ζωὴν αἰώνιον) and 6.12 (ἐπιλαβοῦ τῆς αἰωνίου ζωῆς)? The 1Ti 6.12 instance seems to be the only time in the NT that αιωνιος occurs first in the phrase.

[[NB: I blogged briefly about this in December 2006 with Who were the Pastoral Epistles written to? though I made no conclusions there.]]

That may not seem like much of a headline, but it's the conclusion I've come to after reading three articles by Jeffrey T. Reed:

Reed, Jeffrey T. "Cohesive Ties in 1 Timothy: In Defense of the Epistle's Unity", Neotestamentica 26/1: 192-213. 1992.

----- "To Timothy or Not? A Discourse Analysis of 1 Timothy" in S.E. Porter and D.A. Carson (eds.) Biblical Greek Language and Linguistics: Open Questions in Current Research (JSNTSup 80; Sheffield: JSOT Press): 90-118. 1993.

----- "Discourse Features in New Testament Letters, with Special Reference to the structure of 1 Timothy", Journal of Translation and Textlinguistics 6: 228-52. 1993.

There are two basic options when one considers intended audience of First Timothy: Timothy (as the letter states) or the Ephesian church. If you would've asked me two or three years ago, I'd have told you that I thought that First Timothy, though explicitly addressed to Timothy, was really intended for the Ephesian church and was primarily a way for Paul to disseminate information about church structure and the like. This is the same way that Dibelius and Conzelmann (Hermeneia) approach First Timothy; as well as Barrett, Hanson, and Spicq (If I'm understanding Reed 1993a, p. 91 note 2 properly).

But in reading Reed's stuff (particularly 1993a, though the others have things to say about it) I'm convinced otherwise. Why? The short list:

• There are no second person plural verbs in First Timothy.
• There is only one second person plural pronoun in First Timothy, and that is Paul's somewhat formulaic end of "Grace be with you (pl.)"
• The Ephesian church is not a named participant within the text of the letter.
• The second person singular verbs logically resolve to Timothy as subject.
• The first person singular verbs logically resolve to Paul as subject, and typically occur in exhortations to the addressee (Timothy).

In other words, I really do think that First Timothy is a personal letter, both in structure/address and in reality. Paul wrote the letter to Timothy to tell him to do things, and provided some background for those things. Would others have benefitted from reading the letter? Sure; there is stuff in there that would benefit, say, elders of the church. But the only one who would benefit or receive instruction from the whole of the letter is Timothy.

If you're wondering about all of this, or if you're unconvinced, I'd recommend Reed 1993a above ("To Timothy or Not?").

I'm gearing up to do a home-group Bible study on First Timothy in the "winter" quarter (so, Jan-March/April 2008) for my church. I intend to use it as an excuse to look at First Timothy from the perspective of discourse analysis. I think too often home-group studies of NT epistles devolve into "word study" sessions ("The Greek word means ... ") and the larger perspective of the actual message of the letters is lost. I'm hoping to stay away from that. There are places where studies on words are useful, but my goal will be to come to a better understanding of First Timothy as a letter; not an understanding of pieces of it.

I should say straight up that anyone interested in discourse and the Pastoral Epistles needs to read, learn and love Ray Van Neste's Cohesion and Structure in the Pastoral Epistles (Amazon.com). I'm not just saying that because Ray blogs for PastoralEpistles.com—I'm saying it because it's that good. Get ye to the library and checketh it out (unless you want to drop $150 on the book). I'll probably use Ray's sections and units as the basis of segmentation of the books for my study.

Apart from that, there's a bunch of other stuff to read. Most of these I've read at least once, but I plan on reading them again before I dig in on formal preparation/writing.

There is one article that has proven difficult for me to locate:

Reed, Jeffrey T. "Discourse Features in New Testament Letters, with Special Reference to the structure of 1 Timothy", Journal of Translation and Textlinguistics 6: 228-52. 1993.

I know that an index for the Journal of Translation and Textlinguistics is on the web (at SIL's site), but the article itself isn't. If anyone can point me to the article, or knows a library that actually carries the periodical, I'd appreciate the info.

Here's the short list of stuff I'll be re-examining:

Reed, Jeffrey T. "To Timothy or Not? A Discourse Analysis of 1 Timothy" in S.E. Porter and D.A. Carson (eds.) Biblical Greek Language and Linguistics: Open Questions in Current Research (JSNTSup 80; Sheffield: JSOT Press): 90-118. 1993.

----- "Cohesive Ties in 1 Timothy: In Defense of the Epistle's Unity", Neotestamentica 26/1: 192-213. 1992.

----- "The Cohesiveness of Discourse: Towards a Model of Linguistic Criteria for Analyzing New Testament Discourse" in S.E. Porter and J.T. Reed (eds.), Discourse Analysis and the New Testament: Approaches and Results (JSNTSup 170; Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press): 28-46. 1999.

----- "Identifying Theme in the New Testament: Insights from Discourse Analysis" in S.E. Porter and D.A. Carson (eds.), Discourse Analysis and Other Topics in Biblical Greek (JSNTSup 113; Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press): 75-101. 1995.

----- "Discourse Features in New Testament Letters, with Special Reference to the structure of 1 Timothy", Journal of Translation and Textlinguistics 6: 228-52. 1993.

Levinsohn, Stephen H. "Some Constraints on Discourse Development in the Pastoral Epistles" in S.E. Porter and J.T. Reed (eds.), Discourse Analysis and the New Testament: Approaches and Results (JSNTSup 170; Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press): 316-333. 1999.

----- "A Discourse Study of Constituent Order and the Article in Philippians" in S.E. Porter and D.A. Carson (eds.), Discourse Analysis and Other Topics in Biblical Greek (JSNTSup 113; Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press): 60-74. 1995.

Wendland, Ernst R. "'Let No One Disregard You!' (Titus 2.15): Church Discipline and the Construction of Discourse in a Personal, 'Pastoral' Epistle" in S.E. Porter and J.T. Reed (eds.), Discourse Analysis and the New Testament: Approaches and Results (JSNTSup 170; Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press): 334-351. 1999.

Guthrie, George. The Structure of Hebrews: A Text-Linguistic Analysis (NovT Sup 73; Leiden: Brill). (also reprinted by Baker Books, which is the copy I have, though I don't have the citation handy)

Miller, J.D. The Pastoral Letters as Composite Documents (SNTSMS 93; Cambridge: Cambridge University Press). 1997.

Reed, Jeffrey T. A Discourse Analysis of Philippians, Method and Rhetoric in the Debate over Literary Integrity (JSNTSUp 137; Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press). 1997.

Van Neste, Ray. Cohesion and Structure in the Pastoral Epistles (JSNTSup 280; Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press). 2004.

That oughta do it. Note Miller's book is (at least for me) frustrating to read because I absolutely don't agree with it. Ray responds directly to many of the issues raised by Miller; which is why it is helpful to examine both books. If you can only choose one, go with Ray.

There are some specialized studies I'll probably also read and work through (e.g. Heckert on Discourse Function of Conjoiners in the Pastoral Epistles (Amazon.com)), but don't appear on the list. I'm not trying to be comprehensive with the above list; think of it more like a shotgun approach: maximum info in minimum reading. Do you have another article or book to add to the list? Let me know via the comments.

I will likely blog sporadically about this study, hopefully to work through an approach to discourse. But I may not — it all depends on how I feel while I'm in the process.

Update (2007-09-17): I've had a few folks offer to send me the article. Y'all are incredible! Thanks very much!

Interpreting the Bible: A Handbook of Terms and Methods, Randolph Tate

(Hendrickson, 2007)

This is an interesting and useful book from a bit more of a critical perspective.  My reason for commenting on it here is Tate’s evaluation of the Pastoral Epistles in his entry for “Epistolary Literature”.  In this entry Tate refers to the “Undisputed Pauline Letters”, the “Disputed (Deutero-)Pauline Letters” and the “Pseudo-Pauline Letters.”  These are fairly standard categories.  What is unusual is that for Tate the Pastorals are the “Disputed” letters and Ephesians and 2 Thessalonians are the “Pseudo-Pauline”!  Every other source I have ever read which uses these three categories places the Pastorals in the lowest category, the least Pauline.  Ephesians and other letters are typically labeled “Deutero-Pauline.”  The reversal of categories is so complete that I wonder if it was a mistake.  If not, does Tate see the Pastorals as more Pauline than Ephesians?  That would be interesting.  His treatment of the Pastorals does not seem to suggest a higher view of the letters however (indeed he does not seem to be aware of some research that has seriously challenged older criticisms of the Pastorals).

Any thoughts form others?

One of the eternally problematic passages in First Timothy is 1Ti 2.13-15 [ESV]. This passage alludes to but does not directly quote from Genesis 3.15-16 [ESV].

Today, on his blog Ancient Hebrew Poetry, John Hobbins blogs a bit about the Genesis passage. He has two posts that may be of interest:

• Symmetry, Asymmetry and Word Play in Genesis 3.14-19
• KJV vs. NRSV at Genesis 3.16-17: KJV Wins