PastoralEpistles.com

At SBL I finally managed to find a reasonably priced copy of Carl Joachim Classen’s Rhetorical Criticism of the New Testament (Brill, 2000).  This book is a collection of papers and articles previously given and published.  His first two essays are useful on the question of the legitimacy of using categories of classical rhetoric in analyzing Paul’s letters.  Classen is a classicist rather than a biblical scholar so he brings a valuable perspective to the question.

 

The third essay is the one that directly concerns the Pastoral Epistles and is entitled, “A Rhetorical Reading of the Epistle to Titus.”  Though I differ from Classen on the structure of the letter, I benefitted from reading his analysis while working on my own.  He does conclude that the letter is carefully written (in contrast to many) and that the author did not follow the directions of any of the classical handbooks on rhetoric.  Any examination of the structure of Titus ought to interact with Classen.

 

(You can see my differences with Classen either by comparing his work with my monograph or a brief article, “Structure and Cohesion in Titus,” published in The Bible Translator 53:1 (Jan 2002):118-33.)

I was able to catch a couple of Pastoral Epistles related papers at ETS and to meet some readers of this blog.  Particularly good, I thought, was Tim Swinson’s paper " ‘Faithful Sayings’ or One Faithful Word? Another View of πιστος ο λογος in the Pastoral Epistles.”  Swinson argued that this phrase in the Pastorals should be translated “The word [i.e. the gospel message] is faithful,” and I found the argument quite convincing.  I want to look into the issue further.  I won’t mention more of is argument here since I assume it is part of his dissertation which is in progress, but if the paper is made available (the audio is available, I assume specific sessions will eventually be available), I commend it to you.  I also eagerly anticipate the completion of the dissertation.

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:

Articles / Essays

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.

Books

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

Ancient Letters and the New Testament (Amazon.com), Hans-Josef Klauck (Baylor Press, 2006)

 

Overall this is a valuable contribution to the literature on letters in the ancient world.  Klauck takes six chapters to survey the various types of letters in the ancient world (with student exercises) and then two chapters to survey epistolary issues in the New Testament.  In Chapter 7 he briefly surveys most NT letters and in Chapter 8 he deals with a few letters in more detail.  He treats the Pastoral Epistles briefly in Chapter 7.

 

His treatment of the Pastorals is disappointing.  His assumption of their pseudonymity is not surprising, but what is disappointing is the various points based on overconfidence in literary and epistolary grounds.  He states baldly, “The Pastoral Letters were conceived as a complete collection by their author, who intentionally chose the number three for effect” (324).  He goes on to argue that the author intended them to be read in the order: Titus, 1 Tim, 2 Tim.  This is not a new suggestion, but it does requite argumentation.  Nothing in the manner of letter writing demands or strongly suggests this conclusion.  In fact scholarship of the last decade has increasingly challenged the idea that these three letters should be considered as a distinct corpus.  The lengthy introduction to Titus is significant, but it is a logical leap to assert this proves the author intended Titus to serve as the intro to a three letter collection!  And what “effect” is intended by the choice of the number three as Klauck suggests?  These are just a couple of examples of problems in this section.

 

This section represents some common older assumptions about the pastorals.  It is not very up to date (e.g., none of the works on the structure of Titus are mentioned in the bibliography).  This could be due to the fact that the original German work was published in 1998.  However, Klauck in his introduction states that this book is “not a simple translation, but the text of the German edition has been thoroughly revised, updated, and also enlarged” (viii).

The ever-helpful Review of Biblical Literature has published Raymond Collins' review of Witherington's book:

Ben Witherington III
Letters and Homilies for Hellenized Christians: Volume 1: A Socio-Rhetorical Commentary on Titus, 1-2 Timothy and 1-3 John (Amazon.com)
http://www.bookreviews.org/bookdetail.asp?TitleId=5714
Reviewed by Raymond F. Collins

Collins is generally accepting of Witherington's work despite their disagreement on authorship.

I've read the introductions and various other portions of Witherington's section on the Pastoral Epistles and can recommend it.

The recent IVP Introduction to the Bible is a nicely done book with a great line up of contributors.  The book provides a nice overview of both testaments including intertestamental history.  The chapters take up issues of history, structure, and meaning.  Such a project is always laudable.

 

However, the section on the Pastorals is disappointing.  The coverage is of course brief in such a volume- about 3 full pages.  In such space it is difficult to do much, but my disappointment has to do with the overall picture given of the letters.  The book states that the PE “generally focus on the personal lives and activity of those leaders [Timothy & Titus] (or ‘pastors’- hence the title ‘pastoral’ letters).”  While this opinion of the letters is commonly repeated it simply does not hold.  Of course the letters are addressed to Timothy and Titus, but they are taken up far more with the behavior of others in the church. The letters address far more the ‘public’ activity of Timothy than their ‘personal’ lives.

I've blogged a bit (and still have more to blog) about linkages (be they quotes, allusions, or references) between the Pastorals and the Apostolic Fathers.

My purpose is twofold: First, obviously, is to explore areas where potential dependence of the AF on the NT has been posited. But second is to try to understand the criteria by which these dependencies are posited.

One thing you may have noticed (if you've actually read the posts) is that dependence seems posited on the basis of a catchword or two combined with general topical/contextual agreement.

I've recently become interested in locating potential areas of dependence without having to read and comprehensively know both corpora, and I'm not interested in poring over the details of concordances. Running all sorts of searches is also a bit of a downer. So I figured I'd experiment a bit with writing a script or two to do some comparisons en masse.

My initial comparisons have been between the Pastorals and First Clement. This is because I have several data points already for First Clement: The New Testament in the Apostolic Fathers; as well as Hagner's work on the Old and New Testament in First Clement; and also Lightfoot's two volumes on First Clement. This means I can at least check what I find against a super-set of data where others have already posited linkages.

The script I wrote is currently fairly simple: find references where both corpora share four-consecutive-word lemma strings, with the lemmas in any order. There are problems with this, but initial results were interesting. They are listed in brief below. I have some other ideas on how to sharpen and expand results; as I experiment I may post more info here.

Cruddy Matches

• 1Ti 2.2 => 1Cl 27.4.
• 1Ti 6.1 => 1Cl 42.2; 56.1. The phrase can be loosely translated "of God and the".
• 1Ti 6.17 => 1Cl 13.1.
• 2Ti 1.3 => 1Cl 50.3. Dueling senses of χαρις; NT "I thank God" vs AF according to "the grace of God they have".
• 2Ti 3.17 => 1Cl 33.5. NT "the man of God" to AF "God [created] man".
• 2Ti 4.18 => 1Cl 17.2. NT "to him be the glory" to AF "at the glory [of God]"
• 2Ti 4.8 => 1Cl 49.6.

Decent Matches

• 1Ti 1.14 => 1Cl 65.2. "the grace of our Lord" as something that is possessed or given.
• 1Ti 1.17; 2Ti 4.18 => 2Cl 20.12; 32.4; 38.4; 43.6; 45.7; 45.8; 50.7; 58.2; 61.3; 64.1; 65.2. This is a general benediction "... forever and ever, amen". Some have the addition, "to him be the glory, forever and ever, amen"; but not all.
• 1Ti 3.13; 2Ti 3.15 => 1Cl 22.1. "faith in Christ"; a unique and perhaps Pauline concept? Maybe not to these points in the Pastorals, but I'd guess it does go back to Paul.
• 1Ti 5.18 => 1Cl 34.6; 35.7. This is a variant of the quotation formula, "For the Scripture says:". Clement quotes OT frequently, so it is not surprising to see this formula appear -- certainly no direct reference to the Pastorals here.
• 1Ti 6.3 => 1Cl 13.1. "words of the/our Lord Jesus". The PE use this as the basis of sound doctrine (does it agree with Jesus? It's sound); Clement urges rememberance of "the words of the Lord Jesus" for similar reasons.
• 2Ti 1.14 => 1Cl 63.2. Prepositional phrase "through the Holy Spirit" matches, but the context is different, and the phrase is generic enough to not need source.
• 2Ti 2.9; Tt 2.5 => 1Cl 42.3. "the word of God" used with similar import.
• 2Ti 4.14 => 1Cl 34.3. The phrase is somewhat stereotypical, "according to his works", but here NT speaks of punishment and AF speaks of reward. Perhaps the better NT reference is Re 22.12.
• Tt 3.6 => 1Cl 50.7; 59.3. "though Jesus Christ" is a generic phrase; so the match is not surprising.
• Tt 2.11 => 1Cl 8.1; 50.3; 55.3. "the grace of God", though the phrase is common and the words occur in differing orders and cases.

Impressive Matches

• 1Ti 2.7 => 1Cl 60.4. Though this could also be somewhat related to Ps 145.18[LXX 144.18]. Holmes notes 1Ti 2.7 as an xref in his edition.
• 2Ti 2.21 => 1Cl 2.7. Though most note the parallel is more likely to Titus 3.1 (both Holmes and Lightfoot note this), which differs in preposition).

Others

There is also a group of parallels sharing words like lord/jesus/christ along with pronouns, articles and prepositions:

• NT: 1Ti 1.1, 2, 12, 14; 5.21; 6.3, 14, 15; 2Ti 1.2, 3; 2.2; 4.1; Tt 1.4; 2.14
• AF: 1Cl 12.5; 16.2; 20.11, 12; 21.6; 24.1; 36.1; 38.1; 42.1; 42.3; 44.1; 46.7; 49.6; 50.7; 58.2; 59.4; 64.1; 65.2;

 

This is only tangentially related to the Pastorals. Regular readers know I've been digging into linkages between the Apostolic Fathers and the Pastoral Epistles.

Note that James Darlack of the Old in the New blog is digging into linkages between the epistle of James and the Apostolic Fathers.

I blogged about this back in May and fully meant to follow up then, but life as a new father has been busy. Here are some background posts:

• Treu Papyrus 3605 (NT 0259): 1Ti 1.4-5, 6-7
• P. Berlin 13977 (NT 0262): 1Ti 1.15-16

Those posts only have excerpts of the study I did on the variants in those passages and what the parchments might say about them. My fuller notes are in this PDF file: Treu Papyri.pdf (536.29 KB). I should've posted it two months ago, but oh well.

Of course, I'm interested in any feedback anyone might have. Thanks!

This summer I have submitted two chapters (1 Tim/Titus & 2 Tim) to a forthcoming NT Survey textbook (Kregel) which is to be titled, What the New Testament Authors Really Cared About: A Survey of Their Writings.  While there are numerous NT Survey’s on the market this one aims to be brief and particularly targeted at undergraduate students.  Most surveys are written by seminary professors for that level.  This one is written entirely by people teaching undergraduates.  It is also very focused and brief.  The goal is to summarize the chief concerns of each book in a readable format. 

 

My point here, though, is to submit to readers what I did with the Pastorals.  I was to distill the letters into what I understood to be Paul’s chief concerns in the letters.

 

For 1 Timothy and Titus I argued that Paul’s chief concern was corporate and personal godliness.  I wrote:

Paul’s central concern both in 1 Timothy and Titus was the godliness of Timothy and Titus as individuals and of the congregations in which they ministered.  The concern for godliness governed everything Paul wrote in these letters.  Paul explicitly stated that his purpose in writing to Timothy was to urge godly behavior among believers.  In 1 Timothy 3:14-15 he stated, “I am writing you these instructions so that … you will know how people ought to conduct themselves in God's household.”

I also listed church health and right teaching as key concerns in these two letters.

 

Fro 2 Timothy I suggest perseverance is the major burden of the letter with concern for passing on the pure gospel being a key, related issue.

 

What do you think?

A few items of note, particularly because they involve some gents who occassionally post at PastoralEpistles.com.

First, Lloyd Pietersen has an article in this week's Expository Times. I don't have access to the journal, so I've not read the article, but since it is on the Pastorals it does bear mentioning here. That is, I'm guessing it is an article and not a book review because of the way the title is listed in the Expository Times table of contents. (Lloyd, if you could provide a little more info that would be great!)

Lloyd K. Pietersen. "Salvation Language in the Pastoral Epistles: George M. Wieland, The Significance of Salvation: A Study of Salvation Language in the Pastoral Epistles (Paternoster Biblical Monographs; Milton Keynes: Paternoster, 2006. £24.99. pp. xxii + 344. ISBN 1—84227—257—8)". The Expository Times 2007 118: 487. (PDF, though you need to have SAGE access)

Next, the June 2007 issue of the Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society published Ray Van Neste's review of Perry Stepp's Leadership Succession in the World of the Pauline Circle (Amazon.com). If you have the print, the review is on page 405. I don't believe this issue of the journal is online yet, though with the new ETS web site the promise is that issues will be available online, so ... maybe in a few months.

Congrats Lloyd, Ray and Perry!

[This post is part of a series on The Pastoral Epistles in the Apostolic Fathers. RWB]

Ign. Rom 2.2 || 2Ti 4.6

(2) πλέον δέ μοι μὴ παράσχησθε τοῦ σπονδισθῆναι θεῷ, ὡς ἔτι θυσιαστήριον ἕτοιμόν ἐστιν, ἵνα ἐν ἀγάπῃ χορὸς γενόμενοι ᾄσητε τῷ πατρὶ ἐν Ἰησοῦ Χριστῷ, ὅτι τὸν ἐπίσκοπον Συρίας κατηξίωσεν ὁ θεὸς εὑρεθῆναι εἰς δύσιν ἀπὸ ἀνατολῆς μεταπεμψάμενος. καλὸν τὸ δῦναι ἀπὸ κόσμου πρὸς θεόν, ἵνα εἰς αὐτὸν ἀνατείλω. (Ign. Rom 2.2)
(2) Grant me nothing more than to be poured out as an offering to God while there is still an altar ready, so that in love you may form a chorus and sing to the Father in Jesus Christ, because God has judged the bishop from Syria worthy to be found in the West, having summoned him from the East. It is good to be setting from the world to God, in order that I may rise to him. (Ign. Rom 2.2)
Holmes, M. W. (1999). The Apostolic Fathers : Greek texts and English translations (Updated ed.) (168, 169). Grand Rapids, Mich.: Baker Books.

6 Ἐγὼ γὰρ ἤδη σπένδομαι, καὶ ὁ καιρὸς τῆς ἀναλύσεώς μου ἐφέστηκεν. (2Ti 4.6, NA27)
6 For I am already poured out as a drink offering, and the season of my departure is imminent. (2Ti 4.6, my own translation)

The concept of "pouring out" (σπονδίζω / σπένδω) is clearly similar, but the same word is not used. BDAG clears this up with its note on the entry for σπονδίζω regarding their relationship, "derivative of σπονδή; =earlier Gk. σπένδω" (BDAG 939).

These instances of "poured out" language, while similar, refer to slightly different things. Ignatius is clearly referring to his impending martyr's death. Paul, still alive, considers himself already poured out. He is at the end of his earthly pilgrimage referring to his ministry.

Perhaps the more clear NT parallel to Ignatius is Php 2.17:

17 Ἀλλὰ εἰ καὶ σπένδομαι ἐπὶ τῇ θυσίᾳ καὶ λειτουργίᾳ τῆς πίστεως ὑμῶν, χαίρω καὶ συγχαίρω πᾶσιν ὑμῖν· (Php 2.17, NA27)
17 Even if I am to be poured out as a drink offering upon the sacrificial offering of your faith, I am glad and rejoice with you all. (Php 2.17, ESV)

Here Paul is referring to his future death, not to his work as an apostle. It aligns more clearly with the intent of Ignatius' remark and should be considered the more likely NT parallel.

But is this sort of language common? BDAG cites a few other sources that speak of being "poured out like a drink offering". One is in Philo, On Drunkenness, 152, which speaks of the mind being an offering (σπονδὴν) offered and consecrated (σπένδεσθαι) to God:

(152) And from this it results that the mind which is filled with unmixed sobriety is of itself a complete and entire libation, and is offered as such to and consecrated (σπένδεσθαι) to God. For what is the meaning of the expression, “I will pour out my soul before the Lord,” but “I will consecrate it entirely to him?” Having broken all the chains by which it was formerly bound, which all the empty anxieties of mortal life fastened around it, and having led it forth and emancipated it from them, he has stretched, and extended, and diffused it to such a degree that it reaches even the extreme boundaries of the universe, and is borne onwards to the beautiful and glorious sight of the uncreate God.
Philo, o. A., & Yonge, C. D. (1996, c1993). The works of Philo : Complete and unabridged (220). Peabody: Hendrickson.

In Philo, the offering is clearly not one's death but instead one's mental activity. Other instances in other literature (e.g. Josephus, Ant. 6.22) involve the normal use of the word, as making a drink offering. However, the sense of offering up one's life as a sacrifice to one's God is not completely foreign; a 2nd century AD reference is noted in BDAG's entry for σπένδω:

In the Apollonaretal., Berl. Gr. Pap. 11 517 [II a.d.]: Her 55, 1920, 188–95 ln. 26, the putting to death of a prophet of Apollo who was true to his god appears as a σπονδή. (BDAG 937)

If Ignatius gets his equation of death and martyrdom as "being poured out as a drink offering" from anywhere, he likely gets it from Paul. But he likely gets it from Php 2.17 and perhaps some supplemental force from 2Ti 4.6; but he likely did not get it only from influence of 2Ti 4.6.

Next up: Ign. Magn. 8.1 || Titus 1.14, 3.9

[This post is part of a series on The Pastoral Epistles in the Apostolic Fathers. RWB]

Ign. Trall. 7.2 || 2Ti 1.3

(2) ὁ ἐντὸς θυσιαστηρίου ὢν καθαρός ἐστιν, ὁ δὲ ἐκτὸς θυσιαστηρίου ὢν οὐ καθαρός ἐστιν· τοῦτʼ ἔστιν, ὁ χωρὶς ἐπισκόπου καὶ πρεσβυτερίου καὶ διακόνων πράσσων τι, οὗτος οὐ καθαρός ἐστιν τῇ συνειδήσει. (Ign. Trall. 7.2)
(2) The one who is within the sanctuary is clean, but the one who is outside the sanctuary is not clean. That is, whoever does anything without bishop and presbytery and deacons does not have a clean conscience. (Ign. Trall. 7.2)
Holmes, M. W. (1999). The Apostolic Fathers : Greek texts and English translations (Updated ed.) (162, 163). Grand Rapids, Mich.: Baker Books.

3 Χάριν ἔχω τῷ θεῷ, ᾧ λατρεύω ἀπὸ προγόνων ἐν καθαρᾷ συνειδήσει, ὡς ἀδιάλειπτον ἔχω τὴν περὶ σοῦ μνείαν ἐν ταῖς δεήσεσίν μου νυκτὸς καὶ ἡμέρας, (2Ti 1.3, NA27)
3 I thank God, whom I serve (as did my forbears) in pure conscience, as I have unceasingly remembered you in my prayers night and day, (2Ti 1.3, my own translation)

The concept of a "clean" or "pure" conscience is the link between these two passages. This concept is formed by lexical co-occurrence of the words καθαρός (pure, clean) and συνείδησις (conscience). If the simple presence of these two words in relationship with each other is enough to posit a link, then 1Ti 3.9 (speaking of deacons) should be included as well: "holding to the mystery of faith in clear conscience".

But any link between Ign. Trall. 7.2 and 2Ti 1.3 is stretched. Ignatius uses "the bishop and presbytery and deacons" as a check against conscience; if one goes against that triad, then one cannot have a "clean conscience" in what he does. This isn't what 2Ti 1.3 is about. In Second Timothy, the idea is that Paul serves God just like his progenitors (i.e. Jews) did, with a clean or pure conscience. He isn't falling back on them for authority, he is identifying with his ancestors so his comments in verse 5 -- about Timothy's faithful mother and grandmother -- is more effective.

While the line "clear conscience" is definitely used in both Ignatius and 2Ti (and 1Ti, as seen above) there is no reason to think the concept originated with Paul and influenced Ignatius.

Next up: Ign. Rom. 2.2 || 2Ti 4.6

[This post is part of a series on The Pastoral Epistles in the Apostolic Fathers. RWB]

Ign. Eph. 17.1 || 2Ti 3.6

17.1 Διὰ τοῦτο μύρον ἔλαβεν ἐπὶ τῆς κεφαλῆς αὐτοῦ ὁ κύριος, ἵνα πνέῃ τῇ ἐκκλησίᾳ ἀφθαρσίαν. μὴ ἀλείφεσθε δυσωδίαν τῆς διδασκαλίας τοῦ ἄρχοντος τοῦ αἰῶνος τούτου, μὴ αἰχμαλωτίσῃ ὑμᾶς ἐκ τοῦ προκειμένου ζῆν. (Ign. Eph. 17.1)
17. The Lord accepted the ointment upon his head for this reason: that he might breathe incorruptibility upon the church. Do not be anointed with the stench of the teaching of the ruler of this age, lest he take you captive and rob you of the life set before you. (Ign. Eph. 17.1)
Holmes, M. W. (1999). The Apostolic Fathers : Greek texts and English translations (Updated ed.) (146, 147). Grand Rapids, Mich.: Baker Books.

6 Ἐκ τούτων γάρ εἰσιν οἱ ἐνδύνοντες εἰς τὰς οἰκίας καὶ αἰχμαλωτίζοντες γυναικάρια σεσωρευμένα ἁμαρτίαις, ἀγόμενα ἐπιθυμίαις ποικίλαις, (2Ti 3.6, NA27)
6 For from these are the ones who sneak into the houses and capture idle women overwhelmed by their sin, led on by various desires, (2Ti 3.7, my own translation)

The similarity here appears to be primarily lexical, and that only based on one word, αἰχμαλωτίζω. The contexts, while similar, are not complete matches. Even BDAG categorizes these instances differently with Ign. Eph. 17.1 as a citation of sense 1b and 2Ti 3.6 as a citation of sense 2 (cf.  BDAG p. 31).

While each instance involves the capturing and destruction of someone, the capturer is different. In Ignatius the capturer is the "ruler of this age" while in 2Ti it is the self-serving non-believers (adequately described in vv. 2-5).

There doesn't seem to be much to recommend this as an Ignatian reminiscing of Second Timothy.

Next up: Ign. Trall. 7.2 || 2Ti 1.3

In this week's Review of Biblical Literature, Raymond F. Collins reviews Alfons Weiser's Der zweite Brief an Timotheus, which is part of the EKK (Evangelisch-Katholischer Kommentar zum Neuen Testament) commentary series.

Since I'm not able to read German, I'm grateful for the review. Sounds like there is decent interaction with patristic literature (yay!), though it also sounds like Weiser approaches the text as a pseudepigraphon -- in both sender and receiver.

[This post is part of a series on The Pastoral Epistles in the Apostolic Fathers. RWB]

Apologies for the pause in this series of posts. With the arrival of my new daughter, Ella Kathleen, my schedule has been rightly upended. I hope to re-start working through potential citations/allusions/references of the Pastorals in the Apostolic Fathers as I get used to the new demands at home. RWB

Ign. Poly. 6.2 || 2Ti 2.4

(2) ἀρέσκετε ᾧ στρατεύεσθε, ἀφʼ οὗ καὶ τὰ ὀψώνια κομίζεσθε. μήτις ὑμῶν δεσέρτωρ εὑρεθῇ. τὸ βάπτισμα ὑμῶν μενέτω ὡς ὅπλα, ἡ πίστις ὡς περικεφαλαία, ἡ ἀγάπη ὡς δόρυ, ἡ ὑπομονὴ ὡς πανοπλία· τὰ δεπόσιτα ὑμῶν τὰ ἔργα ὑμῶν, ἵνα τὰ ἄκκεπτα ὑμῶν ἄξια κομίσησθε. μακροθυμήσατε οὖν μετʼ ἀλλήλων ἐν πραΰτητι, ὡς ὁ θεὸς μεθʼ ὑμῶν. ὀναίμην ὑμῶν διὰ παντός. (Ign. Poly. 6.2)
(2) Please him whom you serve as soldiers, from whom you receive your wages. Let none of you be found a deserter. Let your baptism serve as a shield, faith as a helmet, love as a spear, endurance as armor. Let your deeds be your deposits, in order that you may eventually receive the savings that are due you. Be, therefore, patient and gentle with one another, as God is with you. May I always have joy in you. (Ign. Poly. 6.2)
Holmes, M. W. (1999). The Apostolic Fathers : Greek texts and English translations (Updated ed.) (198, 199). Grand Rapids, Mich.: Baker Books.

4 οὐδεὶς στρατευόμενος ἐμπλέκεται ταῖς τοῦ βίου πραγματείαις, ἵνα τῷ στρατολογήσαντι ἀρέσῃ. (2Ti 2.4, NA27)
4 No soldier on active duty involves himself in civilian pursuits, so that he may please the one who enlisted him. (2Ti 2.4, my own translation)

This parallel is based on co-occurrence of similar lexical forms promoting similar concept. Note that the portions specified by the Oxford committee (in bold above) do not share στρατ- verbs. Ign. Poly. 6.2 uses στρατευω while the highlighted portion of 2Ti 2.4 uses the NT hapax στρατολογεω (though στρατευω occurs earlier in the verse). Both instances, however, share some form of the word αρεσκω.

While these two instances contain the only co-occurrence of words (something to do with soldering and also some sort of 'pleasing'), the idea of Christian-as-soldier is not localized to 2Ti 2.4. Second Corinthians 10 speaks of the warfare Christians are to take part in. Ephesians 6 speaks of the armor that a Christian is to gird himself up with; the second part of Ign. Poly. 6.2 may have some allusion to this. The concept of Christian-as-soldier also occurs in First Clement (1Cl 37.1).

What is unique about the current references, however, is notion of soldiering to please the one who as called or enlisted the soldier. This could be Ignatius' own innovation, or he could be reliant upon 2Ti 2.4. Given other affinities between Ignatius' writings and the Pastorals, it seems to be within the realm of possibility that Ignatius is influenced by 2Ti 2.3-4 in this portion (as well as perhaps by Eph 6).

Next up: Ign. Eph. 17.1 || 2Ti 3.6

Michael Bird (Euangelion) blogs some references about the thought that Luke was the author of the Pastoral Epistles.

The main book to read (which is on my list but haven't quite got there yet) is S.G. Wilson's Luke and the Pastorals (Amazon.com). Witherington interacts with this one a bit, though Witherington is of the (much more reasonable, IMO) view that Luke is amanuensis, not post-Pauline author.

Check out Mike's short bibliography.

A few items that may be of interest.

First, the Review of Biblical Literature (RBL) reviews two Pastoral Epistles commentaries:

• I. Howard Marshall reviews Terrence Keegan's slim volume on 1&2 Timothy, Titus and Philemon (Amazon.com). I'm not familiar with this one, so can't say much about it. This is a part of the "New Collegeville Bible Commentary" series. As I recall, Liturgical Press (the publisher) is geared toward the Catholic audience, so this could be a good little volume to get a glimpse at any uniquely Catholic views on the Pastorals.
• Raymond F. Collins reviews Phillip Towner's NICNT volume on the Pastorals (Amazon.com). I've read the intros and select other parts of this one and highly recommend it. I like Towner's approach, particularly his emphasis on un-grouping the Pastoral Epistles. The letters should first be read as letters; they should not be read as a three-part corpus. Collins doesn't quite agree with that, though. I'm not really a fan of Collins' commentary on the Pastorals (Amazon.com), so you can guess I'm not really a fan of his review of Towner either.

Second, Michael Pahl talks about possibilities of Paul citing Luke's gospel as Scripture. This is interesting because one of the possibilities is 1Ti 5.18. Michael writes

"The scripture says, 'You shall not muzzle an ox while it is treading out the grain,' and, 'The laborer deserves to be paid.'" The first quotation is from Deuteronomy 25:4, and the second is word for word the same as Luke 10:7 (and not the same as the Matt 10:10 parallel).

This even has the citation formula that many think is a key to scripture citation. But it isn't so easy, and Michael explains why. He is actually responding to a post from Richard Anderson on the same topic, which is worth checking out.

Over at his eponymous blog, Phil Gons has two posts discussing Titus 2.11 [ESV]:

• Titus 2:11 in Context
• Titus 2:11 in Calvin

Check 'em out.

A few days ago I blogged about NT 0259 (P. Berlin 3065) which covers 1Ti 1.4-5, 6-7. Today I'll blog a bit about NT 0262 (P. Berlin 13977). According to Peter Head (contra Elliott) these fragments are parchments, not papyrus. I don't have the experience to tell the difference, but I trust Dr. Head's judgment on such matters.

First, an image of NT 0262. According to Treu, this is a 7th century MS. The below is a digital photo of a plate in Kurt Treu, “Neue neutestamentliche Fragmente der Berliner Papyrussammlung”, Archiv für Papyrusforschung 18, 1966.

NT 0262 (P. Berlin 13977), 1Ti 1.15-16

Next, Treu's transcription of 0262 (P. Berlin 13977). Note the unique orthography. Actually, it's pretty wacky and is heavily phoneticised.

NT 0262 (P. Berlin 13977), 1Ti 1.15-16. Transcription by K. Treu

Treu also provides a normalisation of the transcription. Below is a table that compares the transcription with the normalisation. Treu's normalisation matches the NA27 letter-for-letter. The bold areas in the left column note major orthographical deviations (i.e., big-time mis-spellings).

NT 0262 (P. Berlin 13977), 1Ti 1.15-16; transcription and normalisation

πιστος or ανθροπινος?

The phrase πιστος ο λογος is formulaic in the Pastorals. It occurs 5x (in NA/UBS) though instances in 1Ti 1.15 and 3.1 are debated; some witnesses have ανθροπινος ο λογος in 1Ti 1.15 and/or 3.1. Thus the reading of 0262 (P. Berlin 13977) may shed some light on the problem.

Treu’s reconstruction of the first word in 0262 (P. Berlin 13977) aligns with NA27. Elliott, not even mentioning the earliest and best MSS that support πιστος, reads ανθροπινος here and in 1Ti 3.1. Lock, in his 1924 ICC volume on the Pastorals, also reads ανθροπινος in 1Ti 1.15 and 3.1.* Tasker, in the Greek text of the New English Bible, reads πιστος in 1Ti 1.15 but ανθροπινος in 1Ti 3.1.** Lock and Elliott treat the two readings (1Ti 1.15 and 3.1) together though the evidence for each reading is not the same. Textual evidence for the variant in 1.15 is scant and only reflected in a handful of Latin witnesses; evidence for the variant in 3.1 is marginally better with only one Greek witness (the original hand of D) and a smattering of Latin witnesses.

0262 (P. Berlin 13977) does not testify to the whole word, but based on Treu’s reconstruction, it witnesses πιστος. The hand is not a well-practiced hand, and it is difficult to discern the –τος of πιστος. Help comes in the first line of column II, where προτος is witnessed. Comparing the –τος in both instances, one can make out the –τος at the start of column I. The strokes can be confirmed again by comparing with Χριστος in column I line 3. Unfortunately, the papyrus contains no –νος sequence (ανθροπι-νος) to compare against for complete verification.

Thus all indications are that 0262 (P. Berlin 13977) supports the commonly-accepted reading of πιστος ο λογος in 1Ti 1.15.

---

* Lock, W. (1924). A critical and exegetical commentary on the Pastoral epistles (I & II Timothy and Titus) (xxxvi). Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark.

** R.G.V. Tasker. New English Bible Greek Text.

I blogged a little while back about papyri with content from First Timothy. I've found some time to poke around the articles. Jim West has graciously agreed to help me by translating the relevant sections from German into English; when that material is available I'll post it on the blog as well.

But I simply couldn't wait any longer and had to do some blogging about this. So here is P3605 from Kurt Treu's article:

Kurt Treu, “Neue neutestamentliche Fragmente der Berliner Papyrussammlung”, Archiv für Papyrusforschung 18, 1966. p. 36.

This papyrus fragment is from the 6th or 7th century. Below I've typed Treu's transcription and have presented it as an image to preserve formatting, etc.

Perhaps the most interesting reading in the papyri is οικονομιαν in line 2. P3605 supports the NA27 reading, against J.K. Elliott who here follows the reading of D’s first hand and Irenaeus, οικοδομην.* Elliott rejects οικονομιαν, contending that it came about as a replacement for οικοδομην. He bases his judgment on the list of atticisms found in Phrynichus** which contains οικοδομη (οικοδομημα) as objectionable. Thus, reasons Elliott, scribes replaced οικοδομην with the less objectionable (and fitting NT/PE style) οικονομιαν (cf. Tt 1.7 and also Col 1.25; Eph 1.10, 3.2; 1Co 9.17).

But Elliott’s reasoning—reject the word because it is on a list of atticisms—is as arbitrary as rejecting a reading because it is the longer reading or because it is not the most difficult reading. These are guidelines that come about as a result of witnessed trends, not hard-and-fast rules. The whole picture must be examined, and the quality and witness of MSS supporting οικονομιαν (Sinaiticus, Alexandrinus, and several other uncials: FGKLPH) must also contribute to the decision. P3605 supports that already overwhelming evidence.

I've been working through all variants I can find for this section of text (largely from Treu's article, Elliott's work in the Pastorals, NA27 and Tischendorf) and will have a PDF with discussions like on these variants available for download at some future point.

Also, in the hopefully not-too-distant future I'll blog about one more reading in P13977 (1Ti 1.15-16) and provide a transcription of that papyri as well.

---

* Elliott, J.K. The Greek Text of the Epistles to Timothy and Titus. (Studies and Documents 26). Salt Lake City: University of Utah Press, 1968. p. 19.

** For Phrynichus’ list, see Chrys C. Caragounis, The Development of Greek and the New Testament: Morphology, Syntax, Phonology and Textual Transmission. Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2007. pp. 125-137.

I previously mentioned I'd located a copy of the following:

Title: ARCHIV FÜR PAPYRUSFORSCHUNG und verwandte Gebiete. Begründet v. U. Wilcken. Band 18.
Description: Hrsg. v. Fr. Zucker. Leipzig, Teubner, 1966. Gr.-8vo. 2 Bl., 122 S., 1 Bl., 6 Tafeln. OKart. (unaufgeschnitten). (OP 0006) Enthält u.a.: E. Wipszycka: Das Textilhandwerk und der Staat im römischen Ägypten.- K. Treu: Neue neutestamentliche Fragmente der Berliner Papyrussammlung.- R. Koerner: Eine griechisch-christliche Grabinschrift aus Nubien.- Ders.: Eine Weihinschrift aus der Zeit Ptolemaios V. sowie ein ausführliches Urkundenrefarat des Herausgebers.

This was originally mentioned in J.K. Elliott's text-critical work on the Pastorals; Luke Timothy Johnson further mentions it in a footnote, though he also mentions he was unable to find a copy. Thanks to the magic of the internet, I was able to locate a copy and my curiosity got the best of me.

Today's mail brought the journal from a bookseller in Germany. Treu's article publishes a number of NT papyri, some of which are in Aland's Kurzgefaßte Liste, others of which aren't (at least as of 1966, the journal publication date).

Two of these papyri -- neither on Aland's list -- witness First Timothy.

• P3605: 1Ti 1.4-7. From Fayyum area. 6/7th century
• P13977: 1Ti 1.15-16. ca. 7th century

An unexpected surpise -- there's even a plate with an image of P13977. The image quality isn't great, but it's better than nothing. There are transcriptions along with brief apparatus and discussion in Treu's article.

There is nothing earth-shattering in these papyri, though the orthography in P13977 is crazy -- like some ancient version of "hooked on phonics". I'll blog in the future on each of them; no real time to do so right now. I'll see what I can squeeze in over the next while.

Update (2007-05-21): I sent an email to Peter Head (Evangelical Textual Criticism) to refer him to subsequent posts on this material and hopefully get a little more information. He kindly responds:

Just a note that P. Berlin 3605 is NT 0259 and P. Berlin 13977 is 0262. So they are both in Aland, KL (the 1994 edition anyway), but are obviously on parchment, not papyrus (despite their location in the Papyrussammlung!).

Thanks, Dr. Head!

 

[This post is part of a series on The Pastoral Epistles in the Apostolic Fathers. RWB]

Ign. Eph. 2.1; Ign. Smyrn. 10.2 || 2Ti 1.16

(1) Περὶ δὲ τοῦ συνδούλου μου Βούρρου, τοῦ κατὰ θεὸν διακόνου ὑμῶν ἐν πᾶσιν εὐλογημένου, εὔχομαι παραμεῖναι αὐτὸν εἰς τιμὴν ὑμῶν καὶ τοῦ ἐπισκόπου· καὶ Κρόκος δέ, ὁ θεοῦ ἄξιος καὶ ὑμῶν, ὃν ἐξεμπλάριον τῆς ἀφʼ ὑμῶν ἀγάπης ἀπέλαβον, κατὰ πάντα με ἀνέπαυσεν· ὡς καὶ αὐτὸν ὁ πατὴρ Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ ἀναψύξαι, ἅμα Ὀνησίμῳ καὶ Βούρρῳ καὶ Εὔπλῳ και Φρόντωνι, διʼ ὧν πάντας ὑμᾶς κατὰ ἀγάπην εἶδον. (Ign. Eph. 2.1)
(1) Now concerning my fellow servant Burrhus, who is by God’s will your deacon, blessed in every respect, I pray that he might remain with me both for your honor and the bishop’s. And Crocus also, who is worthy of God and of you, whom I received as a living example of your love, has refreshed me in every way; may the Father of Jesus Christ likewise refresh him, together with Onesimus, Burrhus, Euplus, and Fronto, in whom I saw all of you with respect to love. (Ign. Eph. 2.1)
Holmes, M. W. (1999). The Apostolic Fathers : Greek texts and English translations (Updated ed.) (138, 139). Grand Rapids, Mich.: Baker Books.

(2) ἀντίψυχον ὑμῶν τὸ πνεῦμά μου, καὶ τὰ δεσμά μου, ἃ οὐχ ὑπερηφανήσατε οὐδὲ ἐπῃσχύνθητε. οὐδὲ ὑμᾶς ἐπαισχυνθήσεται ἡ τελεία ἐλπίς, Ἰησοῦς Χριστός. (Ign. Smyrn. 10.2)
(2) May my spirit be a ransom on your behalf, and my bonds as well, which you did not despise, nor were you ashamed of them. Nor will the perfect hope, Jesus Christ, be ashamed of you. (Ign. Smyrn. 10.2)
Holmes, M. W. (1999). The Apostolic Fathers : Greek texts and English translations (Updated ed.) (190, 191). Grand Rapids, Mich.: Baker Books.

16 δῴη ἔλεος ὁ κύριος τῷ Ὀνησιφόρου οἴκῳ, ὅτι πολλάκις με ἀνέψυξεν καὶ τὴν ἅλυσίν μου οὐκ ἐπαισχύνθη, (2Ti 1.16, NA27)
16 The Lord grant mercy to the house of Onesiphorus, because many times he refreshed me and he was not afraid of my chains,  (2Ti 1.16, my own translation)

About these passages, the Oxford committe only notes: "These two passages seem to be reminiscences of the same context in 2 Timothy." (p. 72). The apparent similarity has to do with the occurrence of two concepts, that of being "refreshed" (ἀναψύχω) and that of being "ashamed/afraid" (ἐπαισχύνομαι).

In this case, the similarity is lexical; relying on co-occurrence of words. But the ties are thin; two otherwise unrelated passages in two separate letters pointing back to one passage in 2 Timothy? Each case must be argued separately unless there is a reason to combine them. No reason for combination is evident.

The first lexical similarity, then, is that of ἀναψύχω. 2Ti 1.16 is the only NT occurrence of the word (though BDAG reports a variant uses the word in Ro 15.32). Similarly, Ignatius is the only source of the word in the Apostolic Fathers, though he uses it twice (also in Ign. Trall. 12.2). But use of a seemingly rare word cannot establish dependence; the word is also used at least seven times in the LXX (Ex 23.12; Jdg 15.19; 1Sa 16.23; 2Sa 16.14; Ps 38.14; 2Ma 4.46; 13.11) and also occurs in Josephus.

But the similarity isn't only lexical, it is also contextual. In Ign. Eph. 2.1, Ignatius is acknowledging that while in custody he has been "refreshed" by Crocus. The situation is very similar to that of 2Ti 1.16, where Onesiphorus "refreshed" Paul during his time in prison. Thus the similarity here has to do with use of a relatively rare word (ἀναψύχω) in a relatively similar context ("refreshing" the author of a letter while in prison/custody). The tie seems tentative but plausible, though one wishes for more prison letters from alternate sources to see if similar language is used to describe visits of friends.

The second lexical similarity is that of ἐπαισχύνομαι. This word, however, is not an NT hapax. It occurs 3x in 2Ti 1 and a handful of times elsewhere in the New Testament. It also appears in the Shepherd of Hermas. But again, there is other reason to consider these passages as similar outside of sharing an instance of a word. In 2Ti 1.16, Onesiphorus is "not ashamed" of Paul's "chains". In Ign. Smyrn. 10.2, the Smyrnaeans are commended for not being ashamed of Ignatius' "bonds". So, not only is the verb the same, there is similarity in the object of the verb and in the negation of the verb: not being ashamed of the [letter-writer's] status as prisoner.

Again, it would be helpful to be able to examine other contemporary letters with similar settings; where the letter-writer is in custody or prison, and understand how the letter-writer refers to those who visit him. Are these standard ways of saying these things, or are Paul's sentiments relatively unique and thus Ignatius' similar sentiments an echo of Paul?

My conclusion? Ignatius shows probable influence from 2Ti 1.16 in these two passages, but a larger study of contemporary prison letters (which I'm not planning on doing) may provide light on whether or not these are standard forms or uniquely Pauline.

Next up: Ign. Poly. 6.2 || 2Ti 2.4

---

Also notable in Ign. Smyrn. 10.2 is similarity with Mk 8.38 (and || Lk 9.26). Compare these passages (here only in English):

For whoever is ashamed of me and of my words in this adulterous and sinful generation, of him will the Son of Man also be ashamed when he comes in the glory of his Father with the holy angels. (Mk 8.38)

May my spirit be a ransom on your behalf, and my bonds as well, which you did not despise, nor were you ashamed of them. Nor will the perfect hope, Jesus Christ, be ashamed of you. (Ign. Smyrn. 10.2) 

You may remember me blogging about what I called "the mystery papyrus" earlier. J.K. Elliott cites it once; it supposedly contains witness to 1Ti 1.3-5 and 15-16.

My curiosity got the best of me. I did some research and have located and ordered a copy of the edition that contains Kurt Treu's article:

Title: ARCHIV FÜR PAPYRUSFORSCHUNG und verwandte Gebiete. Begründet v. U. Wilcken. Band 18.
Description: Hrsg. v. Fr. Zucker. Leipzig, Teubner, 1966. Gr.-8vo. 2 Bl., 122 S., 1 Bl., 6 Tafeln. OKart. (unaufgeschnitten). (OP 0006) Enthält u.a.: E. Wipszycka: Das Textilhandwerk und der Staat im römischen Ägypten.- K. Treu: Neue neutestamentliche Fragmente der Berliner Papyrussammlung.- R. Koerner: Eine griechisch-christliche Grabinschrift aus Nubien.- Ders.: Eine Weihinschrift aus der Zeit Ptolemaios V. sowie ein ausführliches Urkundenrefarat des Herausgebers.

I'm hoping I can fight through the German to get to the good stuff. I'll report when I know more (the book is on its way from Germany). And I'll certainly post a transcription of the papyrus, assuming Treu's article has that information in such form.

[This post is part of a series on The Pastoral Epistles in the Apostolic Fathers. RWB]

Ign. Smyrn. 4.2 || 1Ti 1.12 (cf. 2Ti 2.1; 4.17)

(2) εἰ γὰρ τὸ δοκεῖν ταῦτα ἐπράχθη ὑπὸ τοῦ κυρίου ἡμῶν, κἀγὼ τὸ δοκεῖν δέδεμαι. τί δὲ καὶ ἑαυτὸν ἔκδοτον δέδωκα τῷ θανάτῳ, πρὸς πῦρ, πρὸς μάχαιραν, πρὸς θηρία; ἀλλʼ ὁ ἐγγὺς μαχαίρας, ἐγγὺς θεοῦ· μεταξὺ θηρίων, μεταξὺ θεοῦ· μόνον ἐν τῷ ὀνόματι Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ, εἰς τὸ συμπαθεῖν αὐτῷ. πάντα ὑπομένω, αὐτοῦ με ἐνδυναμοῦντος τοῦ τελείου ἀνθρώπου. (Ign. Smyrn. 4.2)
(2) For if these things were done by our Lord in appearance only, then I am in chains in appearance only. Why, moreover, have I surrendered myself to death, to fire, to sword, to beasts? But in any case, “near the sword” means “near to God” “with the beasts” means “with God.” Only let it be in the name of Jesus Christ, that I may suffer together with him! I endure everything because he himself, who is perfect man, empowers me.
 (Ign. Smyrn. 4.2)
Holmes, M. W. (1999). The Apostolic Fathers : Greek texts and English translations (Updated ed.) (186, 187). Grand Rapids, Mich.: Baker Books.

12 Χάριν ἔχω τῷ ἐνδυναμώσαντί με Χριστῷ Ἰησοῦ τῷ κυρίῳ ἡμῶν, ὅτι πιστόν με ἡγήσατο θέμενος εἰς διακονίαν (1Ti 1.12, NA27)
12 I am thankful to the one who has strengthened me, Christ Jesus our Lord, because He considered me faithful, appointing me into His service. (1Ti 1.12, my own translation)

1 Σὺ οὖν, τέκνον μου, ἐνδυναμοῦ ἐν τῇ χάριτι τῇ ἐν Χριστῷ Ἰησοῦ, (2Ti 2.1, NA27)
1 And so you, my child, be empowered in the grace that is in Christ Jesus, (2Ti 2.1, my own translation)

17 ὁ δὲ κύριός μοι παρέστη καὶ ἐνεδυνάμωσέν με, ἵνα διʼ ἐμοῦ τὸ κήρυγμα πληροφορηθῇ καὶ ἀκούσωσιν πάντα τὰ ἔθνη, καὶ ἐρρύσθην ἐκ στόματος λέοντος. (2Ti 4.17, NA27)
17 But the Lord stood with me and strengthened me, so that through me the preaching might be fully presented and all the nations might hear; and I was rescued out of the lion’s mouth. (2Ti 4.17, my own translation)

The common idea here is that of Christ as the source of strength/power for the believer. The similarity is lexical with the point of contact being participle forms of the word ἐνδυναμόω. And, as the additional citations of 2Ti 2.1 (an imperative) and 4.17 (again a participle) show, the idea is one that is found in the Pastorals.

However, the idea of being strengthened by Christ is essentially Pauline. The more likely point of contact for Ignatius in this instance is Php 4.13:

13 πάντα ἰσχύω ἐν τῷ ἐνδυναμοῦντί με. (Php 4.13, NA27)
13 I can do all things through him who strengthens me. (Php 4.13, ESV)

Compared to:

πάντα ὑπομένω, αὐτοῦ με ἐνδυναμοῦντος τοῦ τελείου ἀνθρώπου. (Ign. Smyrn. 4.2, end)
I endure everything because he himself, who is perfect man, empowers me. (Ign. Smyrn. 4.2, end)

The larger contexts are roughly the same (Ignatius on his way to martyrdom, Paul in prison) and the sentiments are the same (whatever comes, it can be borne because Christ is the source of strength). The same sentiment is present in 1 & 2 Timothy; and Paul is even in prison again in 2 Timothy.

So Pauline influence here doesn't seem to be a stretch, particularly since Paul is the primary source using ἐνδυναμόω. Paul uses the term 6 times: Ro 4.20; Eph 6.10; Php 4.13; 1Ti 1.12; 2Ti 2.1; 4.17. The only other NT instance is from Luke, in Ac 9.22 -- where he uses the term to describe how Paul "increased all the more in strength".

But I don't think influence can be narrowed to First Timothy. The examples in Php 4.13 and also Eph 6.10 ("Be strong in the Lord and the strength of his might", right before the passage on the armor of God) may have more influence. If one passage must be selected as inspiration for Ignatius, then Php 4.13 is likely it as it has the idea of enduring/doing all things (πάντα) because Christ empowers (ἐνδυναμόω).

Next up: Ign. Eph. 2.1; Ign. Smyrn. 10.2 || 2Ti 1.16

[This post is part of a series on The Pastoral Epistles in the Apostolic Fathers. RWB]

Ign. Rom. 9.2 || 1Ti 1.13

(2) ἐγὼ δὲ αἰσχύνομαι ἐξ αὐτῶν λέγεσθαι· οὐδὲ γὰρ ἄξιός εἰμι, ὢν ἔσχατος αὐτῶν καὶ ἔκτρωμα· ἀλλʼ ἠλέημαί τις εἶναι, ἐὰν θεοῦ ἐπιτύχω.
(2) But I myself am ashamed to be counted among them, for I am not worthy, since I am the very last of them and an abnormality. But I have been granted the mercy to be someone, if I reach God.
Holmes, M. W. (1999). The Apostolic Fathers : Greek texts and English translations (Updated ed.) (174, 175). Grand Rapids, Mich.: Baker Books.

13 τὸ πρότερον ὄντα βλάσφημον καὶ διώκτην καὶ ὑβριστήν, ἀλλὰ ἠλεήθην, ὅτι ἀγνοῶν ἐποίησα ἐν ἀπιστίᾳ· (1Ti 1.13, NA27)
13 even though I was formerly a blasphemer and a persecutor and a violent, insolent man. But I was shown mercy, because I acted unknowingly in unbelief. (1Ti 1.13, my own translation)

The contact in this instance is slight. A relatively common word (ελεεω, 24x in NT, 16x in AF)* in common syntactic context. The syntactic context is the contrasting use of ἀλλὰ. In both situations, "but I was shown/granted mercy" i used to explain the previous statement.

In Ign. Rom., the previous statement has to do with Ignatius' unworthiness of Christ. In what is perhaps a bit of faux humility, Ignatius pleads that he is not worthy to be counted among the church in Syria because he is an 'abnormality'. This actually has more similarity with another area of Paul's writing (particularly in the use of ἔκτρωμα, an NT hapax that only occurs here in the AF), 1Co 15.8-10 where Paul uses the same word in the same sort of argument. After establishing his unworthiness, Ignatius proceeds to contrast his unworthiness with the statement that, in spite of his unworthiness, he has been given mercy.

This basic idea is very similar to what is happening in First Timothy. Paul establishes his unworthiness to be a servant of Christ by appealing to his former life, where he was a self-described blasphemer, a persecutor, and a violent and insolent man. In Paul's eyes these are disqualifications for the service of Christ. But, says Paul, he was provided mercy. The contrasting use of the provision of mercy in spite of professed unworthiness is what echoes back to First Timothy.

Based on the similar contexts and usage (these two instances are the only instances in NT and AF of κατα + ελεεω), it seems as if Ignatius betrays knowledge of this area of First Timothy (and also First Corinthians) in his argumentation. This is not a loose quotation or even really an allusion. It does, however, seem feasible that Ignatius is making loose references to a few different Pauline thoughts in this one statement.

Next up: Ign. Smyrn. 4.2 || 1Ti 1.12

---

*The NT is approximately 2.5-3x the size of the AF corpus, so we can see that ελεεω is actually more common in the AF corpus if one compares frequency (24/138019 in NT, 16/~55000 in AF). Ignatius uses the word 6x in his letters, but three of those instances are in prologues (Rom, Phld, Smyrn).

[This post is part of a series on The Pastoral Epistles in the Apostolic Fathers. RWB]

Ign. Poly 4.3 || 1Ti 6.2

(3) δούλους καὶ δούλας μὴ ὑπερηφάνει· ἀλλὰ μηδὲ αὐτοὶ φυσιούσθωσαν, ἀλλʼ εἰς δόξαν θεοῦ πλέον δουλευέτωσαν, ἵνα κρείττονος ἐλευθερίας ἀπὸ θεοῦ τύχωσιν. μὴ ἐράτωσαν ἀπὸ τοῦ κοινοῦ ἐλευθεροῦσθαι, ἵνα μὴ δοῦλοι εὑρεθῶσιν ἐπιθυμίας. (Ign. Poly. 4.3)
(3) Do not treat slaves, whether male or female, contemptuously, but neither let them become conceited; instead, let them serve all the more faithfully to the glory of God, that they may obtain from God a better freedom. They should not have a strong desire to be set free at the church’s expense, lest they be found to be slaves of lust. (Ign. Poly. 4.3)
Holmes, M. W. (1999). The Apostolic Fathers : Greek texts and English translations (Updated ed.) (196, 197). Grand Rapids, Mich.: Baker Books.

2 οἱ δὲ πιστοὺς ἔχοντες δεσπότας μὴ καταφρονείτωσαν, ὅτι ἀδελφοί εἰσιν, ἀλλὰ μᾶλλον δουλευέτωσαν, ὅτι πιστοί εἰσιν καὶ ἀγαπητοὶ οἱ τῆς εὐεργεσίας ἀντιλαμβανόμενοι. Ταῦτα δίδασκε καὶ παρακάλει. (1Ti 6.2, NA27)
2 But those having believers as masters must not be disrespectful because they are brothers, rather they must serve more, because the ones who benefit from their good work are believers and beloved. Command and teach these things. (1Ti 6.2, my own translation)

In both passages, the attitude of believing slaves toward their masters is dealt with. Slaves must serve their masters respectfully (that is, not conceitedly) to bring glory to God.

Contact in this passage is primarily topical, though some lexical similarity is present:

• Ign. Poly. ἀλλὰ μηδὲ αὐτοὶ φυσιούσθωσαν // neither let them become conceited ==> 1Ti μὴ καταφρονείτωσαν // must not be disrespectful

Here the contact is topical. The warning to the slave is essentially the same; Ignatius urges Polycarp that slaves should not become conceited. That is, slaves are to not consider their equality in Christ to adversely affect their relationship with their masters. They are still in a relationship of submission to their master, to subvert that would be to subvert the station they are in. Paul urges Timothy in much the same way; slaves who are believers (and therefore equal in Christ's eyes with their believing masters) are not to suddenly disrespect their masters because they are brothers in Christ. In both cases the underlying sentiment is similar though the words used to describe the sentiment are different.

• Ign. Poly. ἀλλʼ ... πλέον δουλευέτωσαν // let them serve all the more faithfully ==> 1Ti ἀλλὰ μᾶλλον δουλευέτωσαν // rather they must serve more.

Here the contact is both syntactic and lexical. Both clauses use the conjunction ἀλλὰ to provide a logical contrast with what precedes. Instead of being disrespectful, Ignatius writes, slaves are to serve even more faithfully. Equality in Christ is no reason to serve less and to disrespect one's master; it is instead a powerful argument to serve one's master even better than before. In both Ign. Poly. and 1Ti, the verb is δουλεύω occurring in the present active imperative 3d plural δουλευέτωσαν. Both texts make the same contrast with roughly the same language.

However, one aspect that may argue against Ignatius' alluding to First Timothy is the context of the passage. In Ign. Poly., the text is directed to the masters of the slaves. But First Timothy is directed to the slaves themselves.

One further interesting item in this context, however, is Ignatius' displayed knowledge of the book of Ephesians in his next sentences. In Ign. Poly. 5.1, we find:

Flee from wicked practices; better yet, preach sermons about them. Tell my sisters to love the Lord and to be content with their husbands physically and spiritually. In the same way command my brothers in the name of Jesus Christ to love their wives, as the Lord loves the church.
Holmes, M. W. (1999). The Apostolic Fathers : Greek texts and English translations (Updated ed.) (197). Grand Rapids, Mich.: Baker Books.

This language mirrors that of Eph 5.25, "Husbands, love your wives as Christ loved the church". In some way, Ignatius had knowledge of Ephesians.* This knowledge is displayed in close proximity to our passage which has affinity with First Timothy.

Based on the lexical and syntactic similarity of the contrasting phrase and the somewhat radical idea that slaves should serve their masters more as a result of being brothers in order to properly honor and glorify God, I think it possible that Ignatius displays knowledge of this passage in First Timothy.

Next up: Ign. Rom. 9.2 || 1Ti 1.13

---

* Understandably knowledge of Ephesians does not prove knowledge of any of the Pastoral Epistles. But there are several possible points of contact between Ignatius' writings and Paul's epistles (9+ pages of links in the Oxford Committee's work). Logic dictates that they can't all be chance, coincidence, or based on some Q-like earlier common source material.

[This post is part of a series on The Pastoral Epistles in the Apostolic Fathers. RWB]

There are several points of contact between Ign. Eph. 14.1; 20.1; Magn. 8.1 and 1Ti 1.3-5.

Ign. Eph. 14.1; 20.1; Magn. 8.1 || 1Ti 1.3-5

14.1 Ὧν οὐδὲν λανθάνει ὑμᾶς, ἐὰν τελείως εἰς Ἰησοῦν Χριστὸν ἔχητε τὴν πίστιν καὶ τὴν ἀγάπην· ἥτις ἐστὶν ἀρχὴ ζωῆς καὶ τέλος· ἀρχὴ μὲν πίστις, τέλος δὲ ἀγάπη· τὰ δὲ δύο ἐν ἑνότητι γενόμενα θεός ἐστιν, τὰ δὲ ἄλλα πάντα εἰς καλοκαγαθίαν ἀκόλουθά ἐστιν.
14.1 None of these things escapes your notice, if you have perfect faith and love toward Jesus Christ. For these are the beginning and end of life: faith is the beginning, and love is the end, and the two, when they exist in unity, are God. Everything else that contributes to excellence follows from them.
Holmes, M. W. (1999). The Apostolic Fathers : Greek texts and English translations (Updated ed.) (144, 145). Grand Rapids, Mich.: Baker Books.

20.1 Ἐάν με καταξιώσῃ Ἰησοῦς Χριστὸς ἐν τῇ προσευχῇ ὑμῶν, καὶ θέλημα ᾖ, ἐν τῷ δευτέρῳ βιβλιδίῳ ὃ μέλλω γράφειν ὑμῖν, προσδηλώσω ὑμῖν ἧς ἠρξάμην οἰκονομίας εἰς τὸν καινὸν ἄνθρωπον Ἰησοῦν Χριστόν, ἐν τῇ αὐτοῦ πίστει καὶ ἐν τῇ αὐτοῦ ἀγάπῃ, ἐν πάθει αὐτοῦ καὶ ἀναστάσει,
20.1 If Jesus Christ, in response to your prayer, should reckon me worthy, and if it is his will, in a second letter which I intend to write to you I will further explain to you the subject about which I have begun to speak, namely, the divine plan with respect to the new man Jesus Christ, involving faith in him and love for him, his suffering and resurrection,
Holmes, M. W. (1999). The Apostolic Fathers : Greek texts and English translations (Updated ed.) (148, 149). Grand Rapids, Mich.: Baker Books.

8.1 Μὴ πλανᾶσθε ταῖς ἑτεροδοξίαις μηδὲ μυθεύμασιν τοῖς παλαιοῖς ἀνωφελέσιν οὖσιν· εἰ γὰρ μέχρι νῦν κατὰ Ἰουδαϊσμὸν ζῶμεν, ὁμολογοῦμεν χάριν μὴ εἰληφέναι.
8.1 Do not be deceived by strange doctrines or antiquated myths, since they are worthless. For if we continue to live in accordance with Judaism, we admit that we have not received grace.
Holmes, M. W. (1999). The Apostolic Fathers : Greek texts and English translations (Updated ed.) (154, 155). Grand Rapids, Mich.: Baker Books.

3 Καθὼς παρεκάλεσά σε προσμεῖναι ἐν Ἐφέσῳ πορευόμενος εἰς Μακεδονίαν, ἵνα παραγγείλῃς τισὶν μὴ ἑτεροδιδασκαλεῖν 4 μηδὲ προσέχειν μύθοις καὶ γενεαλογίαις ἀπεράντοις, αἵτινες ἐκζητήσεις παρέχουσιν μᾶλλον ἢ οἰκονομίαν θεοῦ τὴν ἐν πίστει. 5 τὸ δὲ τέλος τῆς παραγγελίας ἐστὶν ἀγάπη ἐκ καθαρᾶς καρδίας καὶ συνειδήσεως ἀγαθῆς καὶ πίστεως ἀνυποκρίτου, (1Ti 1.3-5, NA27)
3 As I urged you while I was on my way to Macedonia, remain at Ephesus so that you may instruct certain people not to teach contrary doctrine, 4 nor to cling to myths and endless genealogies—which give rise to useless speculations rather than administration from God that is by faith. 5 The goal of our instruction is love from a pure heart and a good conscience and faith unfeigned. (1Ti 1.3-5, my own translation)

Three excerpts from Ignatius' letters, each of which have differing points of contact with the opening verses (after the salutation) of First Timothy. I'll handle each point of contact individually below, plus add one of my own.

Ign. Eph. 14.1 || 1Ti 1.5

14.1 ... ἀρχὴ μὲν πίστις, τέλος δὲ ἀγάπη· ...
14.1 ... faith is the beginning, and love is the end, ...

5 τὸ δὲ τέλος τῆς παραγγελίας ἐστὶν ἀγάπη ἐκ καθαρᾶς καρδίας καὶ συνειδήσεως ἀγαθῆς καὶ πίστεως ἀνυποκρίτου, (1Ti 1.3-5, NA27)
5 The goal of our instruction is love from a pure heart and a good conscience and faith unfeigned. (1Ti 1.3-5, my own translation)

Here the similarity is based on a juxtaposition of terms: τελος (end/goal) and αγαπη (love), where love is the end or goal. These occuring with πιστις (faith) in such a close context, and where faith and love are tied together.

The differences, however, are notable. In Ign. Eph., faith and love are a spectrum, with faith at the beginning and love at the end. The same word is used for end (τελος) but is the semantic sense the same? In Ign. Eph. the logical translation is end due to the contrast with beginning. But there is no such order implied in 1Ti 1.5. And there are three items in a list, not two things forming a spectrum.  And the two items that the passages share are in a different order (faith ... love in Ign., love ... faith in 1Ti).

All the same, the lexical correlation, particularly that of τελος and αγαπη, are interesting. Ignatius could be influenced in his construction by First Timothy, but it could just be coincidence.

Ign. Eph. 20.1 || 1Ti 1.4

20.1 ... προσδηλώσω ὑμῖν ἧς ἠρξάμην οἰκονομίας ...
20.1 ... I will further explain to you the subject about which I have begun to speak, namely, the divine plan ...

4 ... οἰκονομίαν θεοῦ τὴν ἐν πίστει. 
4 ... administration from God that is by faith.

Here it seems as if the similarity is based on the one word, οικονομια, in both instances having to do with divine guidance or plan. But it seems to me as if Ign. Eph. 18.2 would be the better passage to posit similarity here:

(2) ὁ γὰρ θεὸς ἡμῶν Ἰησοῦς ὁ Χριστὸς ἐκυοφορήθη ὑπὸ Μαρίας κατʼ οἰκονομίαν θεοῦ, ἐκ σπέρματος μὲν Δαυίδ πνεύματος δὲ ἁγίου· ὃς ἐγεννήθη καὶ ἐβαπτίσθη ἵνα τῷ πάθει τὸ ὕδωρ καθαρίσῃ. (Ign. Eph. 18.2)
(2) For our God, Jesus the Christ, was conceived by Mary according to God’s plan, both from the seed of David and of the Holy Spirit. He was born and was baptized in order that by his suffering he might cleanse the water. (Ign. Eph. 18.2)
Holmes, M. W. (1999). The Apostolic Fathers : Greek texts and English translations (Updated ed.) (148, 149). Grand Rapids, Mich.: Baker Books.

In Ign. Eph. 18.2, the lexical similarity is exact: οἰκονομίαν θεοῦ. It may even be that οἰκονομίας in 20.1 is a reference back to 18.2, where the discussion of "God's plan" began. (NB: I would need to re-read Ign. Eph. to confirm that suggestion; note οικονομια is also used in 6.2). Note Col. 1.25, which uses the same terminology:

25 ἧς ἐγενόμην ἐγὼ διάκονος κατὰ τὴν οἰκονομίαν τοῦ θεοῦ τὴν δοθεῖσάν μοι εἰς ὑμᾶς πληρῶσαι τὸν λόγον τοῦ θεοῦ, (Col 1.25, NA27)
25 of which I became a minister according to the stewardship from God that was given to me for you, to make the word of God fully known, (Col 1.25, ESV)

As regards NT writings, only Paul juxtaposes these two words (cf. also 1Co 9.17). In the AF, only Ignatius does it. I think it is possible that Paul's writings, particularly 1Ti, may have influenced Ignatius here.

Ign. Magn. 8.1 || 1Ti 1.4

8.1 Μὴ πλανᾶσθε ταῖς ἑτεροδοξίαις μηδὲ μυθεύμασιν τοῖς παλαιοῖς ἀνωφελέσιν οὖσιν· εἰ γὰρ μέχρι νῦν κατὰ Ἰουδαϊσμὸν ζῶμεν, ὁμολογοῦμεν χάριν μὴ εἰληφέναι.
8.1 Do not be deceived by strange doctrines or antiquated myths, since they are worthless. For if we continue to live in accordance with Judaism, we admit that we have not received grace.

4 μηδὲ προσέχειν μύθοις καὶ γενεαλογίαις ἀπεράντοις, αἵτινες ἐκζητήσεις παρέχουσιν μᾶλλον ἢ οἰκονομίαν θεοῦ τὴν ἐν πίστει.
4 nor to cling to myths and endless genealogies—which give rise to useless speculations rather than administration from God that is by faith.

Here the similarity is topical, on the futility of "myths"; the similarity is not lexical. It appears that Ign. Magn. is dealing with Judaizers (cf. Ign. Magn. 9 as well as the end of 8.1) though the same cannot be as easily said about the myths in First Timothy, where the myths are vague and could be in reference to a few different practices. Perhaps the better influence for Ignatius in this instance is Titus 1.14, which explicilty notes "Jewish myths" (Ἰουδαϊκοῖς μύθοις).

Conclusion

That so many different portions of Ignatius (indeed, more than have been listed by the committee, as the above shows) have some lexical or topical contact with this one portion of First Timothy is curious. Actually, it is more than curious, particularly because the lexical points of contact (apart from αγαπη and πιστις in the first example) are not frequently-occurring words in either writer's letters. Dependence cannot be proven, but the frequency centered on this one area leads me to lean toward the notion that Ignatius knew of First Timothy. Perhaps other possible points of contact (there are several more) will strengthen or weaken my views.

J.K. Elliott, in his The Greek Text of the Epistles to Timothy and Titus, writes the following about the MS support for the Pastorals:

Two papyri, about 24 uncials and over 500 cursives read part or the whole of the Pastorals. (Elliott 13)

He further notes the Papyri are P32 (Titus 1.11-15, 2.3-8) and P61 (Titus 3.1-5, 8-11, 14-15). This is all well and good; we know all about these.

He then mentions in passing: "Treu knows papyri which include 1Ti 1.4-7, 15-16." (Elliott 13). The note to Treu refers back to the following:

K. Treu, 'Archiv fur Papyrusforshung', vol. 18, 1966.

He then lists the following in his bibliography:

K. TREU: "Neue Neutestamentliche Fragmente der Berliner Papyrussammlung" in 'Archiv fur Papyrusforschung' Vol. 18. Leipzig (1966).

Elliott then goes on to cite "Pap. 3605 published by Treu" in the apparatus on 1Ti 1.4, but that appears to be the only citation of Treu in the apparatus (after a quick survey of Elliott's notes on 1.4-7, 15-16). He gives no info on date or provenance of the papyrus.

I find the content of this mystery papyrus (mystery papyri?) interesting. 1Ti 1.5 is fairly important in the scope of First Timothy. And 1Ti 1.15 is the first "trustworthy saying" (is it πιστος or ανθρωπινος?) and v. 16 follows this with Paul's explanation of its importance. I'd love to see earlier witnesses of these verses (if, of course, the mystery papyri prove to be early, which is not a sure thing).

Anyone know anything about these mystery 'papyri'? Date and/or provenance? And are there transcriptions or photos of it anywhere?

One of the cool things about Luke Timothy Johnson's Anchor Bible commentary on 1 & 2 Timothy is his inclusion of volume/column references to Patrologia Graeca where commentary on the Pastorals is discussed. This list is his (as are the dates associated with each commentator) though I've added volume/column references to include commentary on Titus.

Each of these commentaries is in Greek; many have a parallel Latin column. Most importantly for my purposes, each contains the text of the epistles commented upon.

Patristic Commentaries

Chrysostom (347-407)

• First Timothy: PG 62:501-599
• Second Timothy: PG 62:599-662
• Titus: PG 663-700

Theodoret of Cyr (393-466)

• First Timothy: PG 82:787-830
• Second Timothy: PG 82:831-858
• Titus: PG 82:858-871

John of Damascus (675-749)

• First Timothy: PG 95:997-1016
• Second Timothy: PG 95:1016-1026
• Titus: 95:1026-1030

Medieval Commentaries

Oecomenius of Tricca (10th century)

• First Timothy: PG 119:133-196
• Second Timothy: PG 119:195-240
• Titus: PG 119:242-261

Theophylact of Bulgaria (11th century)

• First Timothy: PG 125:9-87
• Second Timothy: PG 125:87-140
• Titus: PG 125:142-170

If you're not near a library where you can access PG's 161 volumes, you may be interested in RelTech's image edition of Migne's Patrologia Graeca.

[This post is part of a series on The Pastoral Epistles in the Apostolic Fathers. RWB]

There are some affinities between 1Cl 29.1 and 1Ti 2.8.

1Cl 29.1 || 1Ti 2.8

29.1 Προσέλθωμεν οὖν αὐτῷ ἐν ὁσιότητι ψυχῆς, ἁγνὰς καὶ ἀμιάντους χεῖρας αἴροντες πρὸς αὐτόν, ἀγαπῶντες τὸν ἐπιεικῆ καὶ εὔσπλαγχνον πατέρα ἡμῶν ὃς ἐκλογῆς μέρος ἡμᾶς ἐποίησεν ἑαυτῷ.
29. Let us, therefore, approach him in holiness of soul, lifting up to him pure and undefiled hands, loving our gentle and compassionate Father who made us his chosen portion.
Holmes, M. W. (1999). The Apostolic Fathers : Greek texts and English translations (Updated ed.) (60, 61). Grand Rapids, Mich.: Baker Books.

8 Βούλομαι οὖν προσεύχεσθαι τοὺς ἄνδρας ἐν παντὶ τόπῳ ἐπαίροντας ὁσίους χεῖρας χωρὶς ὀργῆς καὶ διαλογισμοῦ. (1Ti 2.8, NA27)
8 Therefore I want men everywhere to pray, lifting holy hands without anger or dispute. (1Ti 2.8, my own translation)

The concepts here are parallel, but dependence is not likely. The image of lifting hands in prayer and/or blessing is known elsewhere in the NT as well as in the LXX and the deuterocanonical books. Four examples will suffice:

50 Ἐξήγαγεν δὲ αὐτοὺς [ἔξω] ἕως πρὸς Βηθανίαν, καὶ ἐπάρας τὰς χεῖρας αὐτοῦ εὐλόγησεν αὐτούς. 51 καὶ ἐγένετο ἐν τῷ εὐλογεῖν αὐτὸν αὐτοὺς διέστη ἀπʼ αὐτῶν καὶ ἀνεφέρετο εἰς τὸν οὐρανόν. (Lu 24.50-51, ESV)
50 Then [Jesus] led them out as far as Bethany, and lifting up his hands he blessed them. 51 While he blessed them, he parted from them and was carried up into heaven. (Lu 24.50-51, ESV)

6 καὶ ηὐλόγησεν Εσδρας κύριον τὸν θεὸν τὸν μέγαν, καὶ ἀπεκρίθη πᾶς ὁ λαὸς καὶ εἶπαν Αμην ἐπάραντες χεῖρας αὐτῶν καὶ ἔκυψαν καὶ προσεκύνησαν τῷ κυρίῳ ἐπὶ πρόσωπον ἐπὶ τὴν γῆν. (Ne 8.6, LXX)
6 And Ezra blessed the Lord, the great God; and all the people answered and said "Amen"; they lifted up their hands and bowed, and worshipped the Lord with their faces toward the ground. (Ne 8.6, my own translation)

1 Ἰδοὺ δὴ εὐλογεῖτε τὸν κύριον, πάντες οἱ δοῦλοι κυρίου οἱ ἑστῶτες ἐν οἴκῳ κυρίου, ἐν αὐλαῖς οἴκου θεοῦ ἡμῶν. 2 ἐν ταῖς νυξὶν ἐπάρατε τὰς χεῖρας ὑμῶν εἰς τὰ ἅγια καὶ εὐλογεῖτε τὸν κύριον. (Ps 133.1-2[134.1-2 English])
1 Behold, now bless the Lord, all bond-servants of the Lord who stand in the house of the Lord, in the courts of the house of our God. 2 In the night, lift up your hands unto the holy place and bless the Lord! (Ps 134.1-2[133.1-2 LXX], my own translation)

20 τότε καταβὰς ἐπῆρεν χεῖρας αὐτοῦ ἐπὶ πᾶσαν ἐκκλησίαν υἱῶν Ισραηλ δοῦναι εὐλογίαν κυρίου ἐκ χειλέων αὐτοῦ καὶ ἐν ὀνόματι αὐτοῦ καυχήσασθαι, (Sir 50.20, LXX)
20 While he was descending, he lifted up his hands over the whole congregation of the sons of Israel, to give a blessing of the Lord from his lips and to glory in his name. (Sir 50.20, my own translation)

One difference between these examples and the 1Cl/1Ti example is that the hands are not further qualified with some sense of "pure" or "holy". But that is not to say such examples do not exist; they're just not in the canonical literature. Lightfoot compounds these with additional quotations from Athenagoras (Suppl. 13), επαιρωμεν οσιους χειρας αυτω, and Heliodorus the tragedian in Galen. de Antid. ii. 7 (XIV. p. 145, ed. Kuhn), αλλʼ οσιας μεν χειρας ες ηερα λαμπρον αειρας, commenting further "The expression describes the attitude of the ancients (as of the Orientals at the present day) when engaged in prayer, with extended arms and uplifted palms". (Lightfoot, vol 2 p. 93)

On top of that, note similar imagery of "stretching" (ἐκτείνω) out one's hands in 4Ma 4.11; Jos. Apion 1.209; 1Cl 2.3 and Ep.Barn. 12.2 (L.T. Johnson, p. 198) though these contexts are slightly different than our primary example passages(s). Johnson also lists Seneca, Natural Questions 3, Preface 14; Jos. Wars 5.380; and the Athenagoras citation also listed by Lightfoot as examples of the picture.

On the whole, the concept of lifting hands in prayer to the Lord or in the act of bestowing blessing from the Lord seems well documented across different corpora. There is no reason to think the image used in First Clement comes directly from the use in First Timothy.

Next up: Ign Eph. 14.1; 20.2; Magn. 8.1 || 1Ti 1.3-5

[This post is part of a series on The Pastoral Epistles in the Apostolic Fathers. RWB]

There are some affinities between 1Cl 61.2 and 1Ti 1.17.

1Cl 61.2 || 1Ti 1.17

(2) σὺ γάρ, δέσποτα ἐπουράνιε, βασιλεῦ τῶν αἰώνων, δίδως τοῖς υἱοῖς τῶν ἀνθρώπων δόξαν καὶ τιμὴν καὶ ἐξουσίαν τῶν ἐπὶ τῆς γῆς ὑπαρχόντων· σύ, κύριε, διεύθυνον τὴν βουλὴν αὐτῶν κατὰ τὸ καλὸν καὶ εὐάρεστον ἐνώπιόν σου, ὅπως διέποντες ἐν εἰρήνῃ καὶ πραΰτητι εὐσεβῶς τὴν ὑπὸ σοῦ αὐτοῖς δεδομένην ἐξουσίαν ἵλεώ σου τυγχάνωσιν. (1Cl 61.2)
(2) For you, heavenly Master, King of the ages, give to the sons of men glory and honor and authority over those upon the earth. Lord, direct their plans according to what is good and pleasing in your sight, so that by devoutly administering in peace and gentleness the authority which you have given them they may experience your mercy. (1Cl 61.2)
Holmes, M. W. (1999). The Apostolic Fathers : Greek texts and English translations (Updated ed.) (98, 99). Grand Rapids, Mich.: Baker Books.

17 Τῷ δὲ βασιλεῖ τῶν αἰώνων, ἀφθάρτῳ ἀοράτῳ μόνῳ θεῷ, τιμὴ καὶ δόξα εἰς τοὺς αἰῶνας τῶν αἰώνων, ἀμήν. (1Ti 1.17, NA27)
17 To the King of eternity, impervious to death, invisible, the only God, honor and glory forever and ever, amen. (1Ti 1.17, my own translation)

The phrase under discussion is βασιλεῦ τῶν αἰώνων, "King of the ages/eternity". It is a striking phrase and grabs one's attention. However, the phrase does occur in Tob 13.6, 10a [LXX 13.7, 11] (also in a variant of Rev 15.3). Here's the Tobit 13.10a/11 instance:

11 ἐξομολογοῦ τῷ κυρίῳ ἀγαθῶς
     καὶ εὐλόγει τὸν βασιλέα τῶν αἰώνων,
ἵνα πάλιν ἡ σκηνὴ αὐτοῦ οἰκοδομηθῇ σοι μετὰ χαρᾶς. (Tob 13.11 LXX)
10a Acknowledge the Lord, for he is good,
     and bless the King of the ages,
so that his tent may be rebuilt in you in joy. (Tob 13.10a NRSV)

The 1Cl and 1Ti instances, however, have a little more in common as they each have alternate formulations describing God in close context. In 1Cl "heavenly Master" and "King of the ages" are both, surprisingly, in the vocative case; working together to describe the same God of whom Clement is making requests. In 1Ti 1.17, the dative case is used in a list of attributes; God is the King of the ages, he is also "impervious to death", "invisible" and "the only God". Tobit, on the other hand, has no immediately preceding or following appositional statements. God is referred to as King or Father of eternity a few times (Tob 13.1, 4, 6 NRSV), but that's it.

Still, there seems little to commend any direct influence of 1Ti 1.17 (or Tob 13) on 1Cl 61.2. Lightfoot notes Clement's earlier use of πατηρ των αιωνων (§35) and Θεος των αιωνων (§55); in light of that βασιλεῦ τῶν αἰώνων does not seem out of place for the author. According to the Oxford Committee, Lightfoot also notes similarity with this phrase and Jewish liturgical form:

The phrase is striking, but Dr. Lightfoot has pointed out in his notes on the passage, that it is probably based upon Jewish liturgical forms ... (54-55).

The direct notes on the passage in Lightfoot's 2-volume work on Clement do not mention anything about Jewish liturgical forms, but Lightfoot probably does mention this elsewhere in the work. I have foggy memories of such a statement in general but no specific reference handy to cite.

All in all, this seems like a phrase that could arise in 1Cl based on other phrases in 1Cl. It is also a phrase that has been used in thanksgivings to the Lord (cf. Tob 13). There seems to be no compelling reason to attribute Clement's usage directly to the Pauline benediction in 1Ti 1.17.

Next up: 1Cl 29.1 || 1Ti 2.8

Here are a few selections that point to Christ as our Saviour. These seem appropriate to meditate and consider today. The translation is my own.

1Ti 2.1-7

¹ First of all, then, I encourage supplications, prayers, petitions, and praises to be made on behalf of all men, ² on behalf of kings and all in authority, so that we may lead a tranquil and quiet life in all godliness and dignity. ³ This is good and pleasing in the sight of God our Saviour, ⁴ who desires all people to be saved and come to knowledge of the truth. ⁵ For there is one God and one mediator of God and men, the man Christ Jesus, ⁶ who sacrificed himself as a ransom on behalf of all, the witness at the proper time. ⁷ Into this I was appointed herald and apostle—I speak the truth, I do not lie—a teacher of the Gentiles in faith and truth.

Titus 2.11-15

¹¹ For the grace of God has appeared bringing salvation to all men; ¹² instructing us, after we renounce impiety and worldly desires, to live self-controlled, justly and godly in this present age; ¹³ looking forward to the blessed hope and appearing of the glory of the great God and deliverer of us, Jesus Christ, ¹⁴ who gave himself on behalf of us, to redeem us from all lawlessness and purify for himself a chosen people, zealous for good works. ¹⁵ These things speak and exhort and set forth with all authority. Let no one disregard you.

Titus 3.1-7

¹ Remind them to be subject to rulers and authorities, to obey, to be prepared for all good work, ² to speak evil of no one, to be peaceable, gentle, showing all courtesy to all men. ³ For we too were foolish, disobedient, deluded, enslaved to various lusts and pleasures, spending our lives in malice and envy, loathsome, hating one another. ⁴ But when the kindness and benevolence of God our Saviour appeared, ⁵ not out of works in righteousness which we did but according to His mercy He saved us through washing of rebirth and renewal of the Holy Spirit, ⁶ whom He poured out on us richly through Jesus Christ our Saviour, ⁷ so that being justified in His grace we become heirs according to the hope of life eternal.

[This post is part of a series on The Pastoral Epistles in the Apostolic Fathers. RWB]

1Cl 2.7 || Titus 3.1; 2Ti 2.21; 3.17; 2Co 9.8

(7) ἀμεταμέλητοι ἦτε ἐπὶ πάσῃ ἀγαθοποιΐᾳ, ἕτοιμοι εἰς πᾶν ἔργον ἀγαθόν. (1Cl 2.7)
(7) You never once regretted doing good, but were “ready for every good work.” (1Cl 2.7)
Holmes, M. W. (1999). The Apostolic Fathers : Greek texts and English translations (Updated ed.) (30, 31). Grand Rapids, Mich.: Baker Books.

3.1 Ὑπομίμνῃσκε αὐτοὺς ἀρχαῖς ἐξουσίαις ὑποτάσσεσθαι, πειθαρχεῖν, πρὸς πᾶν ἔργον ἀγαθὸν ἑτοίμους εἶναι, (Tt 3.1, NA27)
3.1 Remind them to be subject to rulers and authorities, to obey, to be prepared for all good work, (Tt 3.1, my own translation)
21 ἐὰν οὖν τις ἐκκαθάρῃ ἑαυτὸν ἀπὸ τούτων, ἔσται σκεῦος εἰς τιμήν, ἡγιασμένον, εὔχρηστον τῷ δεσπότῃ, εἰς πᾶν ἔργον ἀγαθὸν ἡτοιμασμένον. (2Ti 2.21, NA27)
21 If then anyone might cleanse himself from these, he will be a pot for honor, having been made holy, useful to the master, having been prepared for every good work. (2Ti 2.21, my own translation)
17 ἵνα ἄρτιος ᾖ ὁ τοῦ θεοῦ ἄνθρωπος, πρὸς πᾶν ἔργον ἀγαθὸν ἐξηρτισμένος. (2Ti 3.17, NA27)
17 so that the man of God might be capable, having been equipped for all good work. (2Ti 3.17, my own translation)
8 δυνατεῖ δὲ ὁ θεὸς πᾶσαν χάριν περισσεῦσαι εἰς ὑμᾶς, ἵνα ἐν παντὶ πάντοτε πᾶσαν αὐτάρκειαν ἔχοντες περισσεύητε εἰς πᾶν ἔργον ἀγαθόν, (2Co 9.8, NA27)
8 And God is able to make all grace abound to you, so that having all sufficiency in all things at all times, you may abound in every good work. (2Co 9.8, ESV)

The repeated concept is, obviously, that of "all good work" and the idea of being prepared/equipped for it. I hadn't really noticed the repetition of the phase in Titus and 2Ti before; this does well to bring that repetition out.

The combination is [adj or participle] modified by [εἰς or πρὸς] + πᾶν ἔργον ἀγαθόν. Here are the instances laid out a bit more clearly with the preposition in red and the balance of the prepositional phrase in blue:

1Cl 2.7: ἕτοιμοι εἰς πᾶν ἔργον ἀγαθόν
Tt 3.1: πρὸς πᾶν ἔργον ἀγαθὸν ἑτοίμους εἶναι
2Ti 2.21: εἰς πᾶν ἔργον ἀγαθὸν ἡτοιμασμένον
2Ti 3.17: πρὸς πᾶν ἔργον ἀγαθὸν ἐξηρτισμένος
2Co 9.8: περισσεύητε εἰς πᾶν ἔργον ἀγαθόν

As such, one word group stands out in 1Cl 2.7, Tt 3.1 and 2Ti 2.21: ἕτοιμος/ἑτοιμάζω. 2Ti 3.17 and 2Co 9.8, while sharing the prepositional phrase, do not share the modified portion.

Despite the different pronoun in Tt 3.1, it is the reading that 1Cl 2.7 is closest to. Lightfoot (Clement vol. II, p. 18) notes regarding 2Cl 2.7 "The latter clause ἕτοιμοι κ.τ.λ. is from Titus 3.1, πρὸς πᾶν ἔργον ἀγαθὸν ἑτοίμους εἶναι". In his edition, Lightfoot even puts the Greek in smallcaps, denoting that he sees it as a quotation or allusion. Holmes similarly in his English translation puts "ready for every good work" in quotes and provides a citation of Titus 3.1 as the source. Jerome Quinn, in his Anchor Bible volume on Titus, deals with the discrepancy in pronoun:

The PE do not otherwise use hetoimos, though the cognate verb occurs when 2Ti 2.21 takes up this phrase again. Construing hetoimos with pros, literally "ready for," instead of eis, is rare in biblical Greek (1Pe 3.15; Tob 5.17) and is not found in the Apostolic Fathers. A variation between pros and eis may pertain to current Greek idiomatic style (Moule, Idiom, p. 68) and may thus be conceptually of no consequence. ... The Apostolic Fathers employ hetoimos fewer than a dozen times, principally Ignatius, but 1Cl 2.7 may be quoting Titus (or the list that served as a source at this point) when he writes nostalgically to the troubled Corinthian church, "you were without misgiving in doing every kind of good, ready for every good work." (Quinn 180)

I don't notice any variants at the preposition in Tt 3.1 (Elliott has none listed). But searching for other substantive-modifying prepositional phrases that contained πας, I came across Tt 1.16 which should probably also be added to our list. (Quinn associates 1.16 with 3.1 as well, p. 180)

16 θεὸν ὁμολογοῦσιν εἰδέναι, τοῖς δὲ ἔργοις ἀρνοῦνται, βδελυκτοὶ ὄντες καὶ ἀπειθεῖς καὶ πρὸς πᾶν ἔργον ἀγαθὸν ἀδόκιμοι. (Tt 1.16, NA27)
16 They claim to know God, but they deny Him with their works; being detestable and disobedient and unfit for any good work. (Tt 1.16, my own translation)

This is very relevant to the current examination not only because it also uses πρὸς but because it occurs in a list, much like Tt 3.1 does. Comparing Tt 1.16 to Tt 3.1, it is evident that one list (1.16) is a negative list, the other (3.1) is a positive list.

16 They claim to know God,
    but they deny Him with their works;
    being detestable and disobedient
    and unfit for any good work. (Tt 1.16, my own translation)

3 Remind them
    to be subject to rulers and authorities,
    to obey,
    to be prepared for all good work, (Tt 3.1, my own translation)

The last two items on each list contrast each other directly. In 1.16, the target is unbelievers, those described in 1.10-14. They are unfit for any good work. In 3.1, the target is believers, those to whom the glorious salvation in 2.11-14 applies. And the context of 1Cl 2.7 is much the same; it is written with believers in mind.

Due to the contextual similarity, the lexical similarity, and the work of Lightfoot, Quinn and Holmes, I'm inclined to think that Clement here does reflect knowledge of Titus and perhaps even the balance of the Pastoral Epistles.

If that is true, and if First Clement does date to the 90's* then Titus has been established enough by the 90s to be known by the author of First Clement. This argues against a second-century dating of at least Titus; since most concur that the Pastorals were composed around the same time (either together or over a space of 1-2 years) this puts all of the PE before the second century in the late first century at the latest. It will be interesting to see what can be made of other affinities between First Clement and the Pastoral Epistles.

---

* Lightfoot strongly argues for this. Holmes also notes "There is widespread agreement in dating this letter about a.d. 95–97, in the last year of the emperor Domitian or the first of his successor, Nerva." (Holmes 23).

[This post is part of a series on The Pastoral Epistles in the Apostolic Fathers. RWB]

The discussion of First Clement in The New Testament in the Apostolic Fathers lists four areas of potential reference to the Pastoral Epistles. The readings range from a 'c' rating to a 'not classed' rating.

The instance under discussion today is the 'c' rated reading.

1Cl 1.3 || Titus 2.4-5

(3) ἀπροσωπολήμπτως γὰρ πάντα ἐποιεῖτε, και τοῖς νομίμοις τοῦ θεοῦ ἐπορεύεσθε, ὑποτασσόμενοι τοῖς ἡγουμένοις ὑμῶν καὶ τιμὴν τὴν καθήκουσαν ἀπονέμοντες τοῖς παρʼ ὑμῖν πρεσβυτέροις· νέοις τε μέτρια καὶ σεμνὰ νοεῖν ἐπετρέπετε· γυναιξίν τε ἐν ἀμώμῳ καὶ σεμνῇ καὶ ἁγνῇ συνειδήσει πάντα ἐπιτελεῖν παρηγγέλλετε, στεργούσας καθηκόντως τοὺς ἄνδρας ἑαυτῶν· ἔν τε τῷ κανόνι τῆς ὑποταγῆς ὑπαρχούσας τὰ κατὰ τὸν οἶκον σεμνῶς οἰκουργεῖν ἐδιδάσκετε, πάνυ σωφρονούσας. (1Cl 1.3)
(3) For you did everything without partiality, and you lived in accordance with the laws of God, submitting yourselves to your leaders and giving to the older men among you the honor due them. You instructed the young to think temperate and proper thoughts; you charged the women to perform all their duties with a blameless, reverent, and pure conscience, cherishing their own husbands, as is right; and you taught them to abide by the rule of obedience, and to manage the affairs of their household with dignity and all discretion. (1Cl 1.3)
Holmes, M. W. (1999). The Apostolic Fathers : Greek texts and English translations (Updated ed.) (28-29). Grand Rapids, Mich.: Baker Books.

4 ἵνα σωφρονίζωσιν τὰς νέας φιλάνδρους εἶναι, φιλοτέκνους 5 σώφρονας ἁγνὰς οἰκουργοὺς ἀγαθάς, ὑποτασσομένας τοῖς ἰδίοις ἀνδράσιν, ἵνα μὴ ὁ λόγος τοῦ θεοῦ βλασφημῆται. (Tt 2.4-5, NA27)
4 so that they might encourage the younger women to love their husbands, love their children, 5 to be sober minded, pure, fulfilling their household duties, kind, being subject to their own husbands, so that the word of God is not blasphemed. (Tt 2.4-5, my own translation)

The surrounding context in Titus (Tt 2.1-8) also has similar concepts to those mentioned in the first portion of 1Cl 1.3, particularly the bits about older men and "the young". Also note the similar idea of submitting to leaders; this idea is familiar in First Timothy, both to governmental leaders and also to overseers and elders.

The striking portion of 1Cl 1.3, compared to Tt 2.4-5, has to do with lexical similarity in the passage describing the charge to the women. The Oxford committee highlights several items. The following list has text from Clement on the left and text from Titus on the right; translations are on alternating lines.

• ἁγνῇ συνειδήσει -> ἁγνὰς
• pure conscience -> pure/good
• στεργούσας καθηκόντως τοὺς ἄνδρας ἑαυτῶν -> φιλάνδρους
• cherishing their own husbands -> love their own husbands
• ἔν τε τῷ κανόνι τῆς ὑποταγῆς ὑπαρχούσας -> ὑποτασσομένας τοῖς ἰδίοις ἀνδράσιν
• to abide in the rule of obedience -> being subject to their own husbands
• οἰκουργεῖν -> οἰκουργοὺς
• manage affairs of the household -> fulfilling household duties
• πάνυ σωφρονούσας -> σώφρονας
• all discretion -> to be sober minded

Between the two passages there is a concentration of similar ideas, particularly the concept of managing the house. The editors of the Oxford committee find this the strongest point:

The Committee is inclined to think that correspondence of phrases, and especially of οἰκουργεῖν and οἰκουργοὺς, cannot well be accounted for by chance, and makes it probable that the one writer is dependent on the other: they have, therefore, with some hesitation, decided to place the passage in Class C. (51).

This is followed by one committee member's note that he posits a common source document between the two; some sort of "manual of directions for the moral life" (51). But the lists don't read like other such lists. How is this known? There is a similar list in Philo De Execr.:

ὄψονται καὶ γυναῖκας, ἃς ἠγάγοντο κουριδίας ἐπὶ γνησίων παίδων σπορᾷ, σώφρονας καὶ οἰκουροὺς καὶ φιλάνδρους ἑταιρῶν τρόπον ὑβριζομένας (Philo, Rewards 139)
Borgen, P., Fuglseth, K., & Skarsten, R. (2005). The Works of Philo : Greek Text with Morphology (Rewards 139). Bellingham, WA: Logos Research Systems, Inc.
They will also see their wives, whom they married in holy wedlock for the purpose of propagating legitimate children, their modest, domestic, affectionate wives, insulted like so many courtesans. (Philo, Rewards 139)
Philo, o. A., & Yonge, C. D. (1996, c1993). The works of Philo  : Complete and unabridged (Rewards 139, p.677). Peabody: Hendrickson.

Here there are some common elements with the lists in 1Cl and Titus. But the list in Philo is the result of evil (cf. De Execr. 138-142); listing the qualities of the wives to remind the men of what they are losing as a result of what they've done. The context in 1Cl and Titus is completely different in that it is positive. The agreements between 1Cl and Titus are greater in number, adding items like purity/conscience and being subject to their own husbands.

I think it is likely that the list in Philo is not related but coincidental. It is interesting that Titus uses vocabularly like that of Philo. Again, Philo listed first, Titus after:

• σώφρονας -> σώφρονας
• οἰκουροὺς -> οἰκουργοὺς
• φιλάνδρους -> φιλάνδρους

The second listed similarity is a bit deceptive; read the words carefully. They are not the same. However, Philo's οἰκουροὺς does show up in variant readings of this verse (S^c, D², H, Byz) but οἰκουργοὺς is the better attested reading (cf. Jerome Quinn, The Letter to Titus, [Anchor Bible] p. 121; also J.K. Elliott Greek Text of the Epistles to Timothy and Titus, pp.181-182.).

Given that Philo pre-dates Titus and 1Cl, neither Titus nor 1Cl could have possibly influenced Philo. I have not seen any special studies on similarities between Philo and Paul (though if you have references, please leave them in the comments to this post) so I can't make any judgment on if Paul could have been influenced by Philo, or if it was part of the first century Jewish mileu to use words and concepts like this in the description of women. And there's always sheer coincidence.

My own dating of the Pastorals puts them in Paul's lifetime (I think Paul is responsible for them via amanuensis); my dating of First Clement is to the 90's. Thus, by dates alone, it is possible for Titus to have influenced First Clement given the 25-30 year span between the two of them. First Clement was written from Rome by the church at Rome. Given Pauline authorship, Titus was likely written from Rome. Paul died in Rome, so any copies of his letters he had at his death could very possibly end up in the hands of the church at Rome.

I think the concentration of ideas in Titus that show up here in First Clement may be more than coincedence. The little we know about the provenance of both letters makes it possible that Paul's letters, even the pastoral letters, would be known to the church in Rome. But I'm not inclinded to rule out coincidence or even rule out appealing to a common mileu at present. I'm more interested in examining other potential parallels before making that call.

Next up: 1Cl 2.7; 24.4 || Titus 3.1; 2Ti 2.21; 3.17; 2Co 9.8.

[This post is part of a series on The Pastoral Epistles in the Apostolic Fathers. RWB]

The discussion of the Didache in The New Testament in the Apostolic Fathers lists only one potential reference to the Pastoral Epistles. The reading has 'd' rating. This means the editors see some affinity between the two books in this instance, but no clear case for dependence can be made.

In this instance, one passage in the Didache is linked to three somewhat similar NT passages.

Did 13.1-2 || Matt 10.10; Lu 10.7; 1Ti 5.18

13.1 Πᾶς δὲ προφήτης ἀληθινός θέλων καθῆσθαι πρὸς ὑμᾶς ἄξιός ἐστιν τῆς τροφῆς αὐτοῦ. (2) ὡσαύτως διδάσκαλος ἀληθινός ἐστιν ἄξιος καὶ αὐτὸς, ὥσπερ ὁ ἐργάτης, τῆς τροφῆς αὐτοῦ. (Did 13.1-2)
13. But every genuine prophet who wishes to settle among you “is worthy of his food.” (2) Likewise, every genuine teacher is, like “the worker, worthy of his food.” (Did 13.1-2)
Holmes, M. W. (1999). The Apostolic Fathers : Greek texts and English translations (Updated ed.) (266, 267). Grand Rapids, Mich.: Baker Books.

10 μὴ πήραν εἰς ὁδὸν μηδὲ δύο χιτῶνας μηδὲ ὑποδήματα μηδὲ ῥάβδον· ἄξιος γὰρ ὁ ἐργάτης τῆς τροφῆς αὐτοῦ. (Mt 10.10, NA27)
10 no bag for your journey, nor two tunics nor sandals nor a staff, for the laborer deserves his food. (Mt 10.10, ESV)
7 ἐν αὐτῇ δὲ τῇ οἰκίᾳ μένετε ἐσθίοντες καὶ πίνοντες τὰ παρʼ αὐτῶν· ἄξιος γὰρ ὁ ἐργάτης τοῦ μισθοῦ αὐτοῦ. μὴ μεταβαίνετε ἐξ οἰκίας εἰς οἰκίαν. (Lu 10.7, NA27)
7 And remain in the same house, eating and drinking what they provide, for the laborer deserves his wages. Do not go from house to house. (Lu 10.7, ESV)
18 λέγει γὰρ ἡ γραφή· βοῦν ἀλοῶντα οὐ φιμώσεις, καί· ἄξιος ὁ ἐργάτης τοῦ μισθοῦ αὐτοῦ. (1Ti 5.18, NA27)
18 For the Scripture says, “You shall not muzzle a threshing ox” and “The worker is worthy of his wages.” (1Ti 5.18, my own translation)

The Didache text is most like that of Matthew, with "food" (τροφή) the common point. The NT instances of the phrase vary between τροφή ("food", Mt) and μισθός ("wages", Lu/1Ti).* Given the Didache's strong affinity with Mt in other areas, it seems best to consider the primary linkage that of Matthew.

However, the First Timothy reference is interesting because of its use of the citation formula, λέγει γὰρ ἡ γραφή ("For the Scripture says"). This is interesting because the citation formula is typically used to refer to LXX/Hebrew Bible citations. But it doesn't appear that the quoted text ("The worker is worthy of his wages") appears in that form in the OT,** at least based on quick keyword searches and examination of cross-references. The previous quote ("You shall not muzzle a threshing ox") does occur in the OT (De 25.4; though 1Co 9.9 also quotes the same text).

But the quoted wisdom saying does occur in Matthew and Luke, in the words of Jesus. This means there are two possibilities. Either 1Ti 5.18 is quoting Jesus (and perhaps even Paul!) as Scripture (what does that mean for 2Ti 3.16?) or 1Ti 5.18 is quoting a commonly known bit of wisdom as Scripture. Sort of like one at times catches a Shakespearean proverb attributed to the Bible. The underlying sentiment is there, but the form is not found in the attributed source.

Of course, a third possibility (though this is nit-picking and I don't think it probable) is that the 'scripture' is the first saying, and the second saying is merely tacked on the end as extra information and not intended to be a quotation of Scripture. This seems improbable because of the continuative/connective nature of καί. The sayings are connected, it is logical to assume that the introduction applies to both. After all, if the introduction were instead something like, "you have heard it said [saying] καί [saying]", we'd have no problem with the linkage of the sayings.

Whatever is going on in 1Ti 5.18, the Didache likely knew nothing of it; if anything it is better to attribute influence to Matthew.

Next up: First Clement

---

* Again, Luke and 1Ti sharing phrasing and perhaps a source saying. Maybe there is something to the thought of a Lukan influence on the Pastorals ...

** I recently examined the use of the quotation formula in James 4.5 on the Logos Bible Software blog. James 4.5 is somewhat similar because the formula is used to introduce a quotation that doesn't exist in the LXX/Hebrew Bible, but rather a summation of Scripture's teaching in an area.

This is the title of my paper which has just been accepted for the Disputed Paulines Consultation at the annual meeting of the Society of Biblical Literature in November 2007.  The abstract of the paper is below and no doubt I shall be musing on this here as my thoughts develop.

Nearly all English translations translate the phrase flu&aroi kai\ peri/ergoi in 1 Tim 5:13 as “gossips and busybodies” (ESV, GNT, NAB, NIV, NKJV and NRSV, for example), and the concluding phrase lalou~sai ta_ mh_ de/onta as some variation of “saying what they should not say”.  This paper revisits the suggestion by Spicq, Hanson, Kelly and others in their commentaries on this passage that the former phrase has to do with working magic and the latter with the actual formulae used.  I argue that the phrase “gossips and busybodies” has, therefore, been consistently mistranslated and that the apparent misogyny of this passage has to be seen in the context of very real opposition arising from what the writer views as false teaching and magical practices within the community.

[This post is part of a series on The Pastoral Epistles in the Apostolic Fathers. RWB]

Ep.Barn. 14.5 and Titus 2.14 have some commonalities.

Ep.Barn. 14.5 || Titus 2.14

(5) ἐφανερώθη δὲ ἵνα κἀκεῖνοι τελειωθῶσιν τοῖς ἁμαρτήμασιν καὶ ἡμεῖς διὰ τοῦ κληρονομοῦντος διαθήκην κυρίου Ἰησοῦ λάβωμεν, ὃς εἰς τοῦτο ἡτοιμάσθη, ἵνα αὐτὸς φανείς τὰς ἤδη δεδαπανημένας ἡμῶν καρδίας τῷ θανάτῳ καὶ παραδεδομένας τῇ τῆς πλάνης ἀνομίᾳ λυτρωσάμενος ἐκ τοῦ σκότους, διάθηται ἐν ἡμῖν διαθήκην λόγῳ. (Ep.Barn. 14.5)
(5) And he was made manifest in order that they might fill up the measure of their sins and we might receive the covenant through the Lord Jesus who inherited it, who was prepared for this purpose, in order that by appearing in person and redeeming from darkness our hearts, which had already been paid over to death and given over to the lawlessness of error, he might establish a covenant in us by his word. (Ep.Barn. 14.5)
Holmes, M. W. (1999). The Apostolic Fathers : Greek texts and English translations (Updated ed.) (312, 313). Grand Rapids, Mich.: Baker Books.

14 ὃς ἔδωκεν ἑαυτὸν ὑπὲρ ἡμῶν, ἵνα λυτρώσηται ἡμᾶς ἀπὸ πάσης ἀνομίας καὶ καθαρίσῃ ἑαυτῷ λαὸν περιούσιον, ζηλωτὴν καλῶν ἔργων. (Tt 2.14, NA27)
14 who gave himself on behalf of us, to redeem us from all lawlessness and purify for himself a chosen people, zealous for good works. (Tt 2.14, my own translation)

These texts have slight lexical commonalities and, therefore, some topical similarity. First, previous to the common material, Ep.Barn. notes Christ's "appearing in person". Titus 2.13 also notes "appearing", but there it is the "appearing of the glory of our great God and Saviour Jesus Christ". One passage focuses on Christ's person, the other on His glory. The end is the same (focus on the appearing of Christ) but the means are different.

Our NT passage here (Titus 2.14) also focuses on Christ's person, using the reflexive pronoun ἑαυτὸν. Thus we know it is "our great God and Saviour Jesus Christ" who gave himself. Ep.Barn. also uses a pronoun (though here the personal pronoun, αὐτὸς) to refocus and emphasize the one received: the covenant-inheriting "Lord Jesus", the one who was "prepared for this purpose". In both texts Jesus Christ himself is the one given to a special, prepared people.

This special people that Christ is being given over to is lawless and in need of redemption. The word translated "lawlessness" in both texts is ἀνομία. Additionally, both texts use the verb λυτρόω (Ep.Barn. an aorist middle participle, λυτρωσάμενος; Titus a future indicative, λυτρώσεται) for "redeem". In both texts, the problem (ἀνομία) is the same, and the solution (λυτρόω) is the same.

Note, however, that Tt 2.14 may echo Ps 130.8 [LXX 129.8]. The language is similar and the verb is exactly the same: 

8 καὶ αὐτὸς λυτρώσεται τὸν Ισραηλ ἐκ πασῶν τῶν ἀνομιῶν αὐτοῦ.
8 and he himself will redeem Israel from all of its lawlessnesses. (Ps 130.8 [LXX 129.8])

Ps 130.8 [LXX 129.8] may therefore lie at the root of both texts; or it may lie at the root of Titus 2.14, which may in some loose way influence Ep.Barn. Either way, direct dependence is unable to be proven though the confluence of lexical and topical similarities may indicate some loose affinity between the two.

The Oxford committee further notes:

Here the idea of Christ preparing for Himself a special people, by redeeming it from ἀνομία, is present in both writings in rather similar language, and so far strengthens the presumption created by Ep.Barn 1.3-6 || Tt 3.5-7, 1.2. (14).

The earlier noted affinity (Ep.Barn 1.3-6 || Tt 3.5-7, 1.2) brings to light the idea of the spirit being "poured out" on men, creating a "hope for life" that is present in both texts. This hope has ground in Christ's own sacrifice, the price of redemption being paid. The two parts do go together, but whether or not these two texts are dependent in this presentation cannot be said. Christ's death redeems sinners, and the giving of the spirit (a result of his death was the gift of the spirit, see here) and the resultant hope of life (the spirit is present as a temporary deposit after Christ's resurrection, just as he promised, which gives us hope of his return) are foundational and necessary pieces to the whole of Christianity.

It is not surprising that two Christian texts would make these statements. What is surprising, however, is the commonality of language between the two. There may be some influence, or the two may both have some influence from both common liturgies/creeds/hymns and the LXX, but direct influence of Titus on Barnabas is not likely. Might the author of Ep.Barn. known of Titus, and might he have read it? Sure. Might he have been influenced by that exposure? Perhaps. But his using of Titus as direct source in areas of Ep.Barn. isn't very likely, in my estimation.

Next up: Pastoral Epistles in the Didache

[This post is part of a series on The Pastoral Epistles in the Apostolic Fathers. RWB]

Ep.Barn. 1.3, 4, 6 have some commonality with Titus 3.5ff and Titus 1.2.

Ep.Barn. 1.3-6 || Titus 3.5-7; 1.2

(3) διὸ καὶ μᾶλλον συγχαίρω ἐμαυτῷ ἐλπίζων σωθῆναι, ὅτι ἀληθῶς βλέπω ἐν ὑμῖν ἐκκεχυμένον ἀπὸ τοῦ πλουσίου τῆς πηγῆς κυρίου πνεῦμα ἐφʼ ὑμᾶς. οὕτω με ἐξέπληξεν ἐπὶ ὑμῶν ἡ ἐπιποθήτη ὄψις ὑμῶν. (4) πεπεισμένος οὖν τοῦτο καὶ συνειδὼς ἐμαυτῷ, ὅτι ἐν ὑμῖν λαλήσας πολλὰ ἐπίσταμαι, ὅτι ἐμοὶ συνώδευσεν ἐν ὁδῷ δικαιοσύνης κύριος, καὶ πάντως ἀναγκάζομαι κἀγὼ εἰς τοῦτο, ἀγαπᾶν ὑμᾶς ὑπὲρ τὴν ψυχήν μου, ὅτι μεγάλη πίστις καὶ ἀγάπη ἐγκατοικεῖ ἐν ὑμῖν ἐλπίδι ζωῆς αὐτοῦ. (5) λογισάμενος οὖν τοῦτο, ὅτι ἐὰν μελήσῃ μοι περὶ ὑμῶν τοῦ μέρος τι μεταδοῦναι ἀφʼ οὗ ἔλαβον, ὅτι ἔσται μοι τοιούτοις πνεύμασιν ὑπηρετήσαντι εἰς μισθόν, ἐσπούδασα κατὰ μικρὸν ὑμῖν πέμπειν, ἵνα μετὰ τῆς πίστεως ὑμῶν τελείαν ἔχητε τὴν γνῶσιν. (6) Τρία οὖν δόγματά ἐστιν κυρίου· ζωῆς ἐλπίς, ἀρχὴ καὶ τέλος πίστεως ἡμῶν· καὶ δικαιοσύνη, κρίσεως ἀρχὴ καὶ τέλος· ἀγάπη εὐφροσύνης καὶ ἀγαλλιάσεως, ἔργων ἐν <δικαιοσύνῃ> μαρτυρία. (Ep.Barn. 1.3-6)

(3) Therefore I, who also am hoping to be saved, congratulate myself all the more because among you I truly see that the Spirit has been poured out upon you from the riches of the Lord’s fountain. How overwhelmed I was, on your account, by the long-desired sight of you! (4) Being convinced, therefore, of this and conscious of the fact that I said many things in your midst, I know that the Lord traveled with me in the way of righteousness, and above all I too am compelled to do this: to love you more than my own soul, because great faith and love dwell in you, through the hope of his life. (5) Accordingly, since I have concluded that if I care enough about you to share something of what I have received, I will be rewarded for having ministered to such spirits, I have hastened to send you a brief note, so that along with your faith you might have perfect knowledge as well. (6) Well then, there are three basic doctrines of the Lord: the hope of life, which is the beginning and end of our faith; and righteousness, which is the beginning and end of judgment; and love shown in gladness and rejoicing, the testimony of righteous works. (Ep.Barn. 1.3-6)
Holmes, M. W. (1999). The Apostolic Fathers : Greek texts and English translations (Updated ed.) (274, 275). Grand Rapids, Mich.: Baker Books.

5 οὐκ ἐξ ἔργων τῶν ἐν δικαιοσύνῃ
ἃ ἐποιήσαμεν ἡμεῖς
ἀλλὰ κατὰ τὸ αὐτοῦ ἔλεος
ἔσωσεν ἡμᾶς διὰ λουτροῦ παλιγγενεσίας
καὶ ἀνακαινώσεως πνεύματος ἁγίου,
6 οὗ ἐξέχεεν ἐφʼ ἡμᾶς πλουσίως
διὰ Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ τοῦ σωτῆρος ἡμῶν,
7 ἵνα δικαιωθέντες τῇ ἐκείνου χάριτι
κληρονόμοι γενηθῶμεν κατʼ ἐλπίδα ζωῆς αἰωνίου. (Titus 3.5-7, NA27)

5 not out of works in righteousness
which we did
but according to His mercy
He saved us through washing of rebirth
and renewal of the Holy Spirit,
6 whom He poured out on us richly
through Jesus Christ our Saviour,
7 so that being justified in His grace
we become heirs according to the hope of life eternal. (Titus 3.5-7, my own translation)

2 ἐπʼ ἐλπίδι ζωῆς αἰωνίου, ἣν ἐπηγγείλατο ὁ ἀψευδὴς θεὸς πρὸ χρόνων αἰωνίων, (Titus 1.2, NA27)

2 into hope of life eternal, which the non-lying God promised before eternal ages, (Titus 1.2, my own translation)

The first commonality is found in the concept of the "pouring out" of the Holy Spirit in a "rich" manner. The verb translated "pour out" is ἐκχέω (Ep.Barn. ἐκκεχυμένον, Titus ἐξέχεεν). The similarity of "rich" in the texts is less exact, involving the use of the πλουσ* word group (Ep.Barn. τοῦ πλουσίου (noun), Titus πλουσίως (adverb)). Thus in Ep.Barn. the source of the spring is what is rich ("poured out from the riches of the Lord's fountain") and in Titus, the pouring itself is done in a rich manner ("whom He poured out on us richly"). Not exactly the same, but very close. In both instances, the Holy Spirit is being poured out, and it is being done so in a generous manner. While these occurrences are similar, I'd guess there may be more influence on Barnabas from Acts 2.17-21, specifically Acts 2.17:

καὶ ἔσται ἐν ταῖς ἐσχάταις ἡμέραις, λέγει ὁ θεός,
ἐκχεῶ ἀπὸ τοῦ πνεύματός μου ἐπὶ πᾶσαν σάρκα,
καὶ προφητεύσουσιν οἱ υἱοὶ ὑμῶν καὶ αἱ θυγατέρες ὑμῶν
καὶ οἱ νεανίσκοι ὑμῶν ὁράσεις ὄψονται
καὶ οἱ πρεσβύτεροι ὑμῶν ἐνυπνίοις ἐνυπνιασθήσονται· (Ac 2.17, NA27)

17 “ ‘And in the last days it shall be, God declares, that I will pour out my Spirit on all flesh, and your sons and your daughters shall prophesy, and your young men shall see visions, and your old men shall dream dreams; (Ac 2.17, ESV)

This of course refers back to Joel 2.28-32 (LXX 3.1-5):

Καὶ ἔσται μετὰ ταῦτα
καὶ ἐκχεῶ ἀπὸ τοῦ πνεύματός μου ἐπὶ πᾶσαν σάρκα,
καὶ προφητεύσουσιν οἱ υἱοὶ ὑμῶν καὶ αἱ θυγατέρες ὑμῶν,
καὶ οἱ πρεσβύτεροι ὑμῶν ἐνύπνια ἐνυπνιασθήσονται,
καὶ οἱ νεανίσκοι ὑμῶν ὁράσεις ὄψονται, (Joel 3.1 LXX [Eng 2.28])

The concept of the Spirit being generously poured out likely runs all the way back to Joel. The occurrence of the same thought in Titus may actually be some sort of pre-formed text -- an instance of an early hymn, creed or topical saying of the church. NA27 imply much the same by their treating it as poety. In any event, the idea of the Spirit being poured out is found in multiple places in the NT,* based on prophecy from Joel, and it should not surprise us to find the same concept in the writings of the early church (here, in Ep.Barn.).

The second commonality involves the "hope of life". While the lexical similarity is present, and while "hope of life" is not a commonly found theme** this has some problems in my view because in Ep.Barn. it is only "hope of life" (or "hope of his life", the life of Christ) and not the "hope of eternal life" of Titus. Ep.Barn. has ἐλπίδι ζωῆς αὐτοῦ (1.4) and ζωῆς ἐλπίς (1.6). Titus has ἐλπίδα ζωῆς αἰωνίου (3.7) and ἐλπίδι ζωῆς αἰωνίου (1.2). The stronger lexical correlation is between Ep.Barn. 1.4 and Titus 1.2 based on exactness of word form. And Ep.Barn. is not simply talking about the hope of life, it is focusing on the hope of his life. The pronoun "his" has "Lord" as its antecedent. Ep.Barn. 1.3 notes that the author is "hoping to be saved", finding this point in common with those to whom he is writing. Indeed, he considers them to be saved as they have had the Spirit poured out on them richly. In 1.4, the "hope of his life" is the agent by which "great faith and love" dwell in them. Because of this, the author desires "to love you more than my own soul". In other words, because these are brothers in the Lord, who have had the Spirit poured out on them, he loves them. But does Ep.Barn.'s "hope of life" in 1.4 reference eternal life? Again, it is hope in the Lord's life. There is hope of salvation because of the life of the Lord. What about Ep.Barn. 1.6 and "hope of life" there? This appears to be a topic statement; the author is setting out his path for the rest of the epistle. Whether or not "hope of life" in 1.6 refers to eternal life or not will be seen as he expounds upon this concept in the rest of the letter. Either way, the lexical similarity is not exact. Even if a hope of eternal life is meant (and I think it probably is) the direct influence of the Epistle of Titus is not very probable in my opinion. There may be loose reaches back to an overall concept, but it would be a great stretch to posit dependence of Ep.Barn. on these verses in Titus.

Next up: Ep.Barn. 14.5f

---

* Interesting to think about this in light of Lukan influence on the Pastorals. If Luke is Paul's amanuensis, the inclusion of the concept of the Spirit being poured out is less surprising and perhaps even better explained.

** In the NT, the phrase "hope of life" is only found in Titus 1.2 and 3.7. The word "hope" (ἐλπίς) is qualified in other ways, though:

• Ac 16.19: hope of gain
• Ac 27.20: hope of being saved
• Ac 28.20: hope of Israel
• Ro 5.2: hope of the glory of God
• 1Co 9.10: hope of sharing (in the crop)
• 2Co 1.7; 1Th 2.19; 1Ti 1.1: hope of us ("our hope")
• Ga 5.5: hope of righteousness
• Eph 1.18: the hope to which he has called you (note also use of "riches" in this context, see full verse)
• Eph 4.4: the one hope that belongs to your call
• Php 1.20: the hope of me ("my hope")
• Col 1.23: the hope of the gospel
• Col 1.27: the hope of glory
• 1Th 1.3: hope in our Lord Jesus Christ
• 1Th 5.8: hope of salvation

[This post is part of a series on The Pastoral Epistles in the Apostolic Fathers. RWB]

Ep.Barn. 7.2 has one primary point in similarity with 2Ti 4.1, though it shares some commonality with 1Pe 4.5; Ac 10.42; Poly. Phil. 2.1; 2Cl 1.1.

Ep.Barn. 7.2 || 2Ti 4.1

(2) εἰ οὖν ὁ υἱὸς τοῦ θεοῦ, ὢν κύριος καὶ μέλλων κρίνειν ζῶντας καὶ νεκρούς, ἔπαθεν ἵνα ἡ πληγὴ αὐτοῦ ζωοποιήσῃ ἡμᾶς, πιστεύσωμεν ὅτι ὁ υἱὸς τοῦ θεοῦ οὐκ ἠδύνατο παθεῖν εἰ μὴ διʼ ἡμᾶς. (Ep.Barn. 7.2)
(2) If, therefore, the Son of God, who is Lord and is destined to judge the living and the dead, suffered in order that his wounds might give us life, let us believe that the Son of God could not suffer except for our sake. (Ep.Barn. 7.2)
Holmes, M. W. (1999). The Apostolic Fathers : Greek texts and English translations (Updated ed.) (290, 291). Grand Rapids, Mich.: Baker Books.

1 Διαμαρτύρομαι ἐνώπιον τοῦ θεοῦ καὶ Χριστοῦ Ἰησοῦ τοῦ μέλλοντος κρίνειν ζῶντας καὶ νεκρούς, καὶ τὴν ἐπιφάνειαν αὐτοῦ καὶ τὴν βασιλείαν αὐτοῦ· (2Ti 4.1, NA27)
1 I solemnly urge in the presence of God and Christ Jesus, the one who will judge the living and the dead, and by His appearing and His Kingdom: (2Ti 4.1, my own translation)

The primary point of similarity is, obviously, that Christ (the Son of God) will judge the living and the dead. The portion about judging is exactly the same in both texts: κρίνειν ζῶντας καὶ νεκρούς. An infinitive, followed by a participle and adjective, joined by καὶ and agreeing in case, number and gender.

The secondary point of similarity—the bit about the impending state of the judgment—is wrapped up with the first. In both texts it uses the same verb (Ep.Barn. anarthrous participle μέλλων; NA27 subsantive participle τοῦ μέλλοντος) but the modification structures are different. Barnabas has a phrase with noun and participle, joined by καὶ, agreeing in case, number and gender. This is all part of a relative clause that further explains who the Son of God is and what he does:

εἰ οὖν ὁ υἱὸς τοῦ θεοῦ,
If, therefore, the Son of God,
   ὢν
   who
      κύριος καὶ μέλλων κρίνειν
      (is) Lord and (is) destined to judge
         ζῶντας καὶ νεκρούς
         living ones and dead

2Ti 4.1, however, uses the same verb as a particple but in a different case with an article. It is in the genitive, which is in agreement with the phrase that precedes it, and it serves to further modify "Christ Jesus".

Διαμαρτύρομαι ἐνώπιον
I solemnly urge in the presence
      τοῦ θεοῦ
      of God
   καὶ
   and
      Χριστοῦ Ἰησοῦ
      Christ Jesus
         τοῦ μέλλοντος κρίνειν
         who is about to judge
            ζῶντας καὶ νεκρούς
            living ones and dead

One issue in 2Ti invovles determining what the participle+infinitive phrase modifies. Does Granville Sharp apply? I'd say that while Paul invokes the presence of both God and Christ Jesus, the singular number of the participle phrase would point back to just "Christ Jesus". It points to Christ as judge. The article of the participle substantizes the phrase and functions like a relative pronoun, thus the participial clause functions like a relative clause, as I've translated. (I'm flying off the seat of my grammatical pants here, though, and am open to correction or other opinions). The Ep.Barn. passage has no such confusion, it more explicitly points to the "Son of God" as judge, after calling him Lord and judge.

Also note that Ep.Barn. and 2Ti here use relative structures (one a relative clause, the other a participial clause functioning relatively) in disclosing who judges and the impending nature of the judgement. All in all very similar, but as was noted above this same idea of Christ being the judge of the living and the dead is not localized to these two passages. Here are the others:

• 1Pe 4.5: οἳ ἀποδώσουσιν λόγον τῷ ἑτοίμως ἔχοντι κρῖναι ζῶντας καὶ νεκρούς.
• Ac 10.42: καὶ παρήγγειλεν ἡμῖν κηρύξαι τῷ λαῷ καὶ διαμαρτύρασθαι ὅτι οὗτός ἐστιν ὁ ὡρισμένος ὑπὸ τοῦ θεοῦ κριτὴς ζώντων καὶ νεκρῶν.
• Poly. Phil. 2.1: ... ὃς ἔρχεται κριτὴς ζώντων καὶ νεκρῶν,
• 2Cl 1.1: Ἀδελφοί, οὕτως δεῖ ἡμᾶς φρονεῖν περὶ Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ, ὡς περὶ θεοῦ, ὡς περὶ κριτοῦ ζώντων καὶ νεκρῶν.

As the same basic phrase and thought occurs among different authors (six instances, in total, from six different authors) I'd say that any dependence of Ep.Barn. on 2Ti is unlikely even though they use the same exact form of infinitive clause. That Christ "will judge the living and the dead" was a phrase likely found in some common liturgical source or emphasized due to its repetition in the NT documents. Still, the degree of similarity between Ep.Barn. and 2Ti is intriguing.

Next up: Ep.Barn. 1.3, 4, 6.

[This post is part of a series on The Pastoral Epistles in the Apostolic Fathers. RWB]

A few NT references are listed as potential allusion sources for Ep.Barn. 5.6.

Ep.Barn. 5.6 || 1Ti 3.16, 2Ti 1.10*

(6) οἱ προφῆται, ἀπʼ αὐτοῦ ἔχοντες τὴν χάριν, εἰς αὐτὸν ἐπροφήτευσαν. αὐτὸς δὲ ἵνα καταργήσῃ τὸν θάνατον καὶ τὴν ἐκ νεκρῶν ἀνάστασιν δείξῃ, ὅτι ἐν σαρκὶ ἔδει αὐτὸν φανερωθῆναι, ὑπέμεινεν,
(6) The prophets, receiving grace from him, prophesied about him. But he himself submitted, in order that he might destroy death and demonstrate the reality of the resurrection of the dead, because it was necessary that he be manifested in the flesh.
Holmes, M. W. (1999). The Apostolic Fathers : Greek texts and English translations (Updated ed.) (284, 285). Grand Rapids, Mich.: Baker Books.

16 καὶ ὁμολογουμένως μέγα ἐστὶν τὸ τῆς εὐσεβείας μυστήριον· ὃς ἐφανερώθη ἐν σαρκί, ἐδικαιώθη ἐν πνεύματι, ὤφθη ἀγγέλοις, ἐκηρύχθη ἐν ἔθνεσιν, ἐπιστεύθη ἐν κόσμῳ, ἀνελήμφθη ἐν δόξῃ. (1Ti 3.16, NA27)
16 And most certainly, great is the mystery of godliness: Who was revealed in flesh, Vindicated in the Spirit, Seen by angels, Proclaimed amongst the peoples, Believed on in the world, Taken up in glory. (1Ti 3.16, my own translation)

10 φανερωθεῖσαν δὲ νῦν διὰ τῆς ἐπιφανείας τοῦ σωτῆρος ἡμῶν Χριστοῦ Ἰησοῦ, καταργήσαντος μὲν τὸν θάνατον φωτίσαντος δὲ ζωὴν καὶ ἀφθαρσίαν διὰ τοῦ εὐαγγελίου (2Ti 1.10, NA27)
10 and now has been revealed through the appearance of our Saviour Christ Jesus, who indeed abolished death and brought to light life and immortality through the gospel (2Ti 1.10, my own translation)

There are a few spots where affinities between Barnabas and the PE texts can be seen.

First, between Ep.Barn. 5.6 and 1Ti 3.16, the primary affinity has to do with the idea of Christ being manifested (φανερόω) in the flesh (ἐν σαρκὶ). The ideas are remarkably the same and the language seems almost liturgical. Indeed, that's the vibe one gets from 1Ti 3.16, which has long been considered to have some sort of early Christian hymn or creed as its source. The Oxford committee that gathered these references notes the same thing: "But as it itself (1Ti 3.16) is probably quoting a current liturgical form, literary dependence cannot be pressed either way" (13). Note also that Ep.Barn. uses the phrase "manifested in the flesh" several times (Ep.Barn. 6.7, 9, 14; 12.10; 14.5). The idea has to come from somewhere, whether it be common liturgical formula (probably) or this portion of First Timothy.

Second, between Ep.Barn. 5.6 and 2Ti 1.10, there are a few points of contact. The first is similar to that of 1Ti 3.16, that Christ has appeared. 2Ti 1.10 uses φανερόω not in reference to Christ (directly, as both Ep.Barn. 5.6 and 1Ti 3.16 do) but as a participle clause that further explains "purpose and grace" from v. 9. We were saved according to God's "purpose and grace" and not our own works. 2Ti 1.9-10 has two clauses that further explain this purpose and grace. The first is v.9, explaining that his purpose and grace have "been granted to us in Christ Jesus from times eternal". The second is the first part of v. 10, which here has some affinity with Ep.Barn. 5.6. God's "purpose and grace" has been "revealed" (φανερόω) through the appearance (ἐπιφανείας) of our Saviour Jesus Christ. This is similar to 1Ti 3.16, though the specific note of manifestation/appearance in the flesh (ἐν σαρκὶ) is not made in 2Ti 1.10.

The second point of contact between Ep.Barn. 5.6 and 2Ti 1.10 has to do with the destruction of death. The word translated destruction (Ep.Barn) or abolish (2Ti) is καταργέω. In both cases the destruction is of death (τὸν θάνατον). Both texts portray Jesus Christ as the one who destroyed death.

A third point of contact is not specifically lexical but rather topical. Both texts note the effect of the destruction of death using different words but both essentially supporting the same concept. In Ep.Barn., the consequence of the destruction of death is that Christ demonstrates "the reality of the resurrection of the dead". In 2Ti, Christ brings "to light life and immortality through the gospel". In both cases, the effect has to do with life -- immortality. Because Christ destroyed death, the dead in Christ also are not bound by death, they will rise. Christ's death obliterates the darkness and shines light on the life we will have into the ages. Different words, same basic concept: With the destruction of death those who are dead are no longer bound by death. There is now life.

These three points in common between Ep.Barn. 5.6 and 2Ti 1.10 are striking. I don't know that dependence can be proven, but the ideas behind both texts share several commonalities that stimulate thought.

Next up: Ep.Barn. 7.2.

---

* Note that the Oxford committee also lists 1Pe 1.20-21 as a possible allusion/parallel source along with 2Ti 1.10:

20 προεγνωσμένου μὲν πρὸ καταβολῆς κόσμου φανερωθέντος δὲ ἐπʼ ἐσχάτου τῶν χρόνων διʼ ὑμᾶς 21 τοὺς διʼ αὐτοῦ πιστοὺς εἰς θεὸν τὸν ἐγείραντα αὐτὸν ἐκ νεκρῶν καὶ δόξαν αὐτῷ δόντα, ὥστε τὴν πίστιν ὑμῶν καὶ ἐλπίδα εἶναι εἰς θεόν. (1Pe 1.20-21, NA27)
20 He was foreknown before the foundation of the world but was made manifest in the last times for your sake, 21 who through him are believers in God, who raised him from the dead and gave him glory, so that your faith and hope are in God. (1Pe 1.20-21, ESV)

[This post is part of a series on The Pastoral Epistles in the Apostolic Fathers. RWB]

The discussion of the Epistle of Barnabas in The New Testament in the Apostolic Fathers lists seven potential references to the Pastoral Epistles. The editors rate each of the Pastoral Epistles with a 'D', and each of the readings have a 'd' mark as well. This means the editors see some affinity between the two books in these seven instances, but no clear case for dependence can be made.

Ep. Barn 5.9 || 1Ti 1.15f.

(9) ὅτε δὲ τοὺς ἰδίους ἀποστόλους τοὺς μέλλοντας κηρύσσειν τὸ εὐαγγέλιον αὐτοῦ ἐξελέξατο, ὄντας ὑπὲρ πᾶσαν ἁμαρτίαν ἀνομωτέρους ἵνα δείξῃ ὅτι οὐκ ἦλθεν καλέσαι δικαίους ἀλλὰ ἁμαρτωλούς, τότε ἐφανέρωσεν ἑαυτὸν εἶναι υἱὸν θεοῦ. (Ep. Barn. 5.9)
(9) And when he chose his own apostles who were destined to preach his gospel (who were sinful beyond all measure in order that he might demonstrate that “he did not come to call the righteous, but sinners”), then he revealed himself to be God’s Son.
Holmes, M. W. (1999). The Apostolic Fathers : Greek texts and English translations (Updated ed.) (284). Grand Rapids, Mich.: Baker Books.

15 πιστὸς ὁ λόγος καὶ πάσης ἀποδοχῆς ἄξιος, ὅτι Χριστὸς Ἰησοῦς ἦλθεν εἰς τὸν κόσμον ἁμαρτωλοὺς σῶσαι, ὧν πρῶτός εἰμι ἐγώ. 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 1.15-16, NA27)
Aland, B., Aland, K., Black, M., Martini, C. M., Metzger, B. M., & Wikgren, A. (1993, c1979). Novum Testamentum Graece (27th ed.) (543). Federal Republic of Germany: United Bible Societies.
15 The saying is trustworthy and deserving of full acceptance, that Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners, of whom I am the foremost. 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 1.15-16, ESV)

There is affinity between the two, but the likelier influence is that of Mt 9.13: "Go and learn what this means, ‘I desire mercy, and not sacrifice.’ For I came not to call the righteous, but sinners." Holmes provides a footnote linking to this verse in his edition as justification for the quote marks in his text. And the Oxford committee also lists Mt 9.13 as a parallel (along with the synoptic parallels to this passage). But that's only part of the story.

Unique in relation to 1Ti 1.15-16 is the idea that Paul was a vile sinner, and his calling to apostle served as an object lesson of the extent to which God's grace can reach. Key to this is the use of the same word group (Barn: δείξῃ, NA27: ἐνδείξηται) for the verb that has Christ (either explicitly or via verb person/number reference) as subject.

Also interesting, at least to me, is the language used to describe the apostles (Ep.Barn.) and Paul (1Ti). It is not complementary. Ep.Barn. calls them "sinful beyond all measure"; Paul calls himself the foremost of sinners. The picture in both of these passages is clear. The most sinful have been redeemed. The degree of change was massive -- from the worst sinner to an apostle of Christ. And the reason is the same: That Christ might demonstrate his power to save by using the worst sinners as his primary ambassadors.

Next up: Ep. Barn. 5.6

Awhile back I was able to locate a facsimile copy of an older work, The New Testament in the Apostolic Fathers, on archive.org. This is a cool old book.

The basic idea of the book was to examine possible NT quotations and allusions within the corpus of the Apostolic Fathers and discuss whether or not the AF material had any dependence on the NT. Here's how the preface to the book states it:

The first duty of the Committee was to agree upon a plan. It was decided to arrange the books of the New Testament in four classes, distinguished by the letters A, B, C, and D, according to the degree of probability of their use by the several authors. Class A includes those books about which there can be no reasonable doubt, either because they are expressly mentioned, or because there are other certain indications of their use. Class B comprises those books the use of which, in the judgement of the editors, reaches a high degree of probability. With class C we come to a lower degree of probability; and in class D are placed those books which may possibly be referred to, but in regard to which the evidence appeared too uncertain to allow any reliance to be placed upon it. Under each author the books of the New Testament are arranged in accordance with these four classes, except that the Gospels are reserved for a section by themselves after the other writings. ... Under each class (A, B, C, D) the books follow one another in the present canonical order; and the passages cited under each head are arranged in the order of probability, according to the editors' judgment, and marked a, b, c, d -- symbols to which an explanation will apply similar to that which has been given in connexion with the capital letters. (iv).

So, basically, they go through potential quotations/allusions and provide some rating as to the liklihood of dependence. So a book gets a rating (A, B, C, D) and the readings get ratings (a, b, c, d).

I've been wanting to work though the quotations/allusions to the Pastoral Epistles in this book for awhile. I have a little time tonight, so it seems like a good time to start. I'll have at least one post per book of the Apostolic Fathers. I'll work through them in the order they appear in The New Testament in the Apostolic Fathers.

• Barnabas: Part I, Part II, Part III, Part IV, Part V. 
• Didache: Part I.
• I Clement: Part I, Part II, Part III, Part IV. 
• Ignatius: Part I, Part II, Part III, Part IV, Part V, Part VI, Part VII, Part VIII, Part IX  
• Polycarp
• Hermas
• II Clement