Michael Gilleland, at the Laudator Temporis Acti blog, has a post on The Root of All Evil where he quotes Sophocles, Antigone 295-301, in Greek and English.

Here's the English. Be sure to check his site for the Greek.

There is no institution so ruinous for men as money; money sacks cities, money drives men from their homes! Money by its teaching perverts men's good minds so that they take to evil actions! Money has shown men how to practise villainy, and taught them impiousness in every action! (Sophocles, Antigone 295-301)

This sample covers 1Ti 5.17-19.

Let the elders who rule well be considered worthy of double honor, especially those who labor in preaching and teaching. For the Scripture says, “You shall not muzzle an ox when it treads out the grain,” and, “The laborer deserves his wages.” Do not admit a charge against an elder except on the evidence of two or three witnesses. (1Ti 5.17-19, ESV)

I'm almost hesitant to post this as my thoughts on this section are far from resolved. I'm most confused by the concept of "double honor". Does it involve monetary compenasation?

Also, what really was the structure of the church at this point? How do overseers (ἐπίσκοπος) and elders (πρεσβύτερος) relate to each other? Are all overseers elders, but not all elders overseers?

You'll see that I have many notes to myself in the footnotes, and I discuss sorts of things that I don't typically discuss in these studies. This is just me working through issues on paper, much of it will likely be cut in future revisions that are more "word study" focused.

Please see my overview post for further details on what this is all about.

Comments via email or through the commenting system here are appreciated.

Thanks!

This sample covers 1Ti 5.9-10 and 1Ti 5.11-16:

Let a widow be enrolled if she is not less than sixty years of age, having been the wife of one husband, and having a reputation for good works: if she has brought up children, has shown hospitality, has washed the feet of the saints, has cared for the afflicted, and has devoted herself to every good work. But refuse to enroll younger widows, for when their passions draw them away from Christ, they desire to marry and so incur condemnation for having abandoned their former faith. Besides that, they learn to be idlers, going about from house to house, and not only idlers, but also gossips and busybodies, saying what they should not. So I would have younger widows marry, bear children, manage their households, and give the adversary no occasion for slander. For some have already strayed after Satan. If any believing woman has relatives who are widows, let her care for them. Let the church not be burdened, so that it may care for those who are really widows. (1Ti 5.9-16, ESV)

This is actually covered as two parts (vv. 9-10 and vv. 11-16) of a larger section (vv. 3-16).

Please see my overview post for further details on what this is all about.

Comments via email or through the commenting system here are appreciated.

Thanks!

Suzanne McCarthy has blogged a mighty fine series of bloggin' at the Better Bibles Blog on the Greek word ὀρθοτομέω in 2Ti 2.15. Her posts are rounded up at Orthotomeo: reflections.

This is a tough word because it is an NT hapax legomenon. Most folks know this from the KJV translation:

15 Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth. (2Ti 2.15, KJV).

Here's how the ESV translatates it:

15 Do your best to present yourself to God as one approved, a worker who has no need to be ashamed, rightly handling the word of truth. (2Ti 2.15, ESV)

Suzanne's point is that there is likely something beyond a strictly literal translation going on here. She does a great job examining all sorts of classical Greek literature (using primarily online resources) to examine how ὀρθοτομέω and similar concepts are used. It's worth checking out.

FWIW, here's my translation of 2Ti 2.15:

15 Take pains to present yourself approved of God, an unashamed worker, guiding the word of truth along a straight path.

This sample covers 1Ti 5.3-8:

Honor widows who are truly widows. But if a widow has children or grandchildren, let them first learn to show godliness to their own household and to make some return to their parents, for this is pleasing in the sight of God. She who is truly a widow, left all alone, has set her hope on God and continues in supplications and prayers night and day, but she who is self-indulgent is dead even while she lives. Command these things as well, so that they may be without reproach. But if anyone does not provide for his relatives, and especially for members of his household, he has denied the faith and is worse than an unbeliever. (1Ti 5.3-8, ESV)

This is actually covered as two parts (v. 3 and vv. 4-8) of a larger section (vv. 3-16).

Please see my overview post for further details on what this is all about.

Comments via email or through the commenting system here are appreciated.

Thanks!

I've had a version of my Lexical Notes on the Pastoral Epistles up on my personal web site for awhile. These are the result of my working through the text of the Pastoral Epistles, stopping at each noun, verb and adjective; see the above link for further details.

I've recently munged a version of the HTML for the Libronix Personal Book Builder, to build it as a resource that users of Logos Bible Software can use this within the LDLS if they'd like. Those who have the "Personal Book Builder Reader Key" installed (details here) should be able to grab and use the resource. At least I think that's the case; if you have the key and have problems, please send me an email so I can look into it.

Please note that I did this work in 2003-2004 and haven't revisited it (to edit, anyway) since. There are parts of it I'd likely change. These parts largely have to do with my translation and in some areas of the short notes that are included.

NOTE: This Personal Book Builder resource will only work with LDLS 3.0 RC4 or higher.

Download: Lexical Notes in the Pastoral Epistles

Steps

• Download the file LexicalNotes.zip to your hard drive.
• Unzip the file.
• Make sure to save the .lbxoeb file in a path that the LDLS knows about. This is likely \Program Files\Libronix DLS\Resources.
• Start the LDLS and allow it to discover the new resource.
• Access the resource from My Library. Type in "Lexical" and see what happens.

Navigation can be by verse (type a verse in the reference box) or open the TOC pane on the left and navigate that way.

I just received word that my paper proposal for the 2006 SBL meeting in Washington DC was accepted. Here's the preliminary abstract as submitted.

• Program Unit: Biblical Greek Language and Linguistics
• Paper Title: Word Groups, Head Terms and Modifiers in the Pastoral Epistles: Insight for Questions of Style?
• Abstract: OpenText.org have completed a preliminary syntactic analysis of the Greek New Testament. One level of their analysis is the Word Group level. A word group is a group of words that consists of, at minimum, a head term. It also contains any terms that modify the head term and additionally specifies the type of modification as that of definer, qualifier, relator or specifier. Heretofore, stylistic analysis has been largely bound to the word level, tracking criteria such as word usage and morphology. The OpenText.org Word Group analysis allows for stylistic analysis of the corpus at a different level. Does head term and modifier usage offer any insight for comparative studies of the Pastoral Epistles and the generally accepted Paulines? This paper will examine word group usage data for both the accepted Paulines and the Pastoral Epistles, and will offer preliminary comparisons between the results where results may offer insight for questions of style.

More information (but not much more) is available on my personal blog.

This sample covers 1Ti 5.1-2:

Do not rebuke an older man but encourage him as you would a father. Treat younger men like brothers, older women like mothers, younger women like sisters, in all purity. (1Ti 5.1-2, ESV)

Please see my overview post for further details on what this is all about.

Comments via email or through the commenting system here are appreciated.

Thanks!

First, I owe an apology to David Ritsema. I made a comment about his translation being colored by presupposition when I had only deduced that and hadn't asked him about it. I should have, and I should have done it before I posted. I apologize for that, David, and I'm sorry.

And do please read David's comments on the previous post where he offers some clarifying thoughts for some of the translational choices he made.

Second, please note the following posts on the subject:

• The Birth of the Child by Suzanne McCarthy on the Better Bibles Blog (from Dec. 2005)
• Saved by Childbirth in 1Tim 2.15 on the Better Bibles Blog (which links to and interacts with my previous post on this topic). In response to Wayne's comment, I should say that I don't think a woman's primary role is that of childbearing and nurturing. I think the primary role of anyone — male or female — is to glorify God.

My basic understanding as I was examining the text (1Ti 2.8-15) and some of the literature I have at hand was that in the overall scheme of the letter, Paul is exhorting men and women to return to roles they had abandoned in following false teaching. Paul wanted to restore them in doctrine and in practice, and I think this passage is part of his attempt at restoring practice. I'm still confused as to how 1Ti 2.13-15 fits in that mix.

I must not have said it clearly in the previous post, but this doesn't mean that I see the role of women as that of silent, never speaking, never talking, never teaching, and locked up at home having babies in the hopes that they might be saved. And I don't see men as authoritarian and dictatorial figures in family or in an ecclesial setting.

Now, so there isn't any misunderstanding, the following is me "thinking aloud". You know, blogging. Throwing something up and seeing what happens. "Open" dialog and all that. Please read and (if you'd like) react in that spirit.

If one of the false teachings propagated in Ephesus had to do with promotion of ascetic tendencies (specifically, discounting of marriage and therefore likely family), why wouldn't an exhortation to bear children be an appropriate way to refute that false teaching and show that one was not bound by it — that one adheres to the sound doctrine and is saved?

Here's 1Ti 4.1-5:

Now the Spirit expressly says that in later times some will depart from the faith by devoting themselves to deceitful spirits and teachings of demons, through the insincerity of liars whose consciences are seared, who forbid marriage and require abstinence from foods that God created to be received with thanksgiving by those who believe and know the truth. For everything created by God is good, and nothing is to be rejected if it is received with thanksgiving, for it is made holy by the word of God and prayer. (1Ti 4.1-5, ESV)

What better way to renounce a teaching that forbade marriage than for those who were married to be restored and have children? Wouldn't this publicly and undeniably show that the false teaching was renounced?

You might think I'm going off of the deep end here. Maybe I am. But the thought did occur, outlandish though it might be, so why not bring it up?

Maybe 1Ti 2.15| really is an oblique reference to a prophecy of Christ as child of Eve who will save the world, complete with problematic noun number shifting and verbs with ambiguous subjects. I'm wide open to that being the case. Language is messy and people don't always write with perfect grammar and syntax — this author included, though I likely didn't need to tell you that.

Bonus Question: Note that 1Ti 3.1 starts out with, "This is a faithful saying". That phrase is formulaic in the Pastorals, a sort of "cue". It occurs before or after a saying that is especially worthy of noting. Note also that the NA27 joins this textual cue at the end of 1Ti 2.15 and breaks the paragraph after the textual cue, right in the middle of 1Ti 3.1. Most English translations break the paragraph before the start of 1Ti 3.1. The NA27 paragraph formatting implies the saying is previous to the cue; most English translations imply the saying is after the cue.

Now the bonus question: Which is the 'faithful saying'? The saying about childbirth (thus 1Ti 2.13-15) or the following text about "If anyone aspires to the office of overseer, he desires a noble task"?

There's a discussion in the blogosphere going on regarding 1Ti 2.15. Well, there always seems to be a discussion going on regarding that verse, doesn't there?

This one apparently started at a blog I'm unfamiliar with called Aaron's Corner, where there is a significant comment thread (do check it out). Aaron refers to an article by Andreas Kostenberger, Saved through Childbearing? A Fresh Look at 1 Timothy 2:15 Points to Protection from Satan’s Deception where Kostenberger notes similarity of 1Ti 2.15 to 1Ti 5.14-15. David Ritsema picked up the thread and blogged a response; be sure to check it out.

There are a bunch of touchy issues with this verse (and the larger context, 1Ti 2.8-15); Stanley Porter has isolated them in his article "What Does it Mean to be 'Saved By Childbirth'? (1Ti 2.15)", published in Studies in the Greek New Testament: Theory and Practice. Porter isolates the following six "lexical and grammatical" issues (Porter, 255-256):

• the subject of the verb σωθήσεται with respect to "the woman" of v. 14
• the sense of the verb σῴζω
• the denotation of the term τεκνογονία
• the function of the preposition διά
• the shift in number of the verbs from singular to plural
• the use of the third class conditional construction

Porter then walks through each of these phenomenon in building his case: That the Greek is difficult to read any other way than the plain sense. Porter's conclusion, however, needs to be set in the context of his entire discussion. If you're interested in this you really should read Porter's article as he tries to come at the text lexically and grammatically to provide a foundation for interpretation instead of reading modern theological and cultural presuppositions back into the text. And this is why I don't really like Ritsema's translation of 1Ti 2.14-15; it seems to start with the presupposition that the verses can't really mean what they seem to say so plainly and then works back through the text with this understanding.

Another essay that has been helpful for me in considering these issues is that of Thomas R. Schreiner, "An Interpretation of 1 Timothy 2.9-15: A Dialogue with Scholarship" in Andreas Kostenberger's Women in the Church: An Analysis and Application of 1 Timothy 2.9-15 (second edition). Schreiner surveys recent literature on the issue and interacts with it, drawing conclusions along the way. It is a helpful read to get a quick understanding of the major paths that most interpreters take on this passage.

As for me, Porter, Kostenberger and Schreiner have helped inform my perspective on this confusing text. From my perspective, the overall sense of the passage (1Ti 2.8-15) is an argument from creation order (reinforced by the allusions to Ge 2.7 and Ge 3.12-16 in 1Ti 2.13-15) urging men and women both to return to foreordained roles; with men leading and women supporting and nurturing. This is why I like to include verse 8 in the pericope; it urges men to set disagreements aside and return to prayer and worship (as 1Ti 2.1-7 exhorts believers to prayer). This is something that, in the context, only men can do as they are the leaders of the fellowship. They set the tone and manage their families (cf. 1Ti 3.1-7 and 1Ti 3.8-13) and are in positions of leadership. They can work to remove anger and bickering from the fellowship and restore the focus to sound doctrine and proper worship.

Starting with verse 9 women are likewise exhorted to similarly return to propriety by clothing themselves modestly — both physically and spiritually. Women are also to return relationships to proper order, and to focus on something that is uniquely feminine: the bearing of children.*

Men and women both are to forsake an apparently growing asceticism (cf. the discussion refuting false teachers on how marriage and foods are good and proper (1Ti 4.1-4), refuting myths/geneaologies as improper to focus upon (1Ti 1.3-4), etc.) and return to the lives they were pursuing under the sound doctrine given by Paul focused on the gospel of Christ.

In other words, the ascetic-leaning false teachers are wrong and there is no need for married couples to abstain from sex and bearing children. So they should refute the ascetics and copulate. The false teachers prescribe a sexless, separated focus on a personally-enforced purity? Refute them by returning to your spouse (husbands to wives; wives to husbands) and get back to the business of being fruitful and multiplying. The false teachers say some foods are bad and should be avoided? Forget that, just pray and consecrate it to God prior to eating it (cf. 1Ti 4.3-4).

This still leaves a strange taste in the mouth as it seems to endorse a works-based salvation: women are saved by having children, not by the blood of Christ. But I don't think that is what it says, particularly because of the clarification added at the end of verse 15: "if they continue in faith and love and holiness, with self-control." Here I'll defer to Schreiner, who writes:

Paul is not asserting in 1 Timothy 2.15 that women merit salvation by bearing children and doing other good works. He has already clarified that salvation is by God's mercy and grace (cf. 1Ti 1.12-17). The term σωθήσεται is used rather loosely here, so that Paul does not specify in what sense women are saved by childbearing and doing other good works (e.g., Ro 3.19-4.25; Ga 2.16-3.14; 2Ti 1.9-11; Titus 2.11-14; Titus 3.4-7), I think it is fair to understand the virtues described here as evidence that the salvation already received is genuine. Any good works of the Christian, of course, are not the ultimate basis of salvation, for the ultimate basis of salvation is the righteousness of Christ granted to us (Schriener 119).

This is, admittedly, a little wiggly. But I think it is fair (also see Porter 266-267 on this third-class conditional statement). As Schreiner next reminds us, a very similar issue shows up in 1Ti 4.11-16, where Timothy is told:

Keep a close watch on yourself and on the teaching. Persist in this, for by so doing you will save both yourself and your hearers (1Ti 4.16).

Does this mean that Timothy's words and persistence are the things that save Timothy and those who hear him? Not likely. But Timothy's obedience in doing these things are visible evidence of his salvation — just like obeying the call to return to proper roles in the fellowship and the family (for both men and women) is visible evidence of salvation.

This doesn't mean that married women must bear children in order to merit or even evidence salvation. But the act of shedding the imposition of false doctrine and false practices and returning to sound doctrine and the lives we are called to lead does evidence salvation.

I should note at this point that I'm not set in this view; I'm still working through it. I think there are issues with just about any interpretation of this passage, but at this time the above seems acceptable. Any comments or further feedback is appreciated.

* I can't help but think there's also something to the idea that painful childbirth is mentioned as a curse of the fall in Ge 3.16} (along with the husband "ruling over" the wife) and that childbirth is mentioned in 1Ti 2.15 as well. Whether this is a further reminder that the pain experienced is a result of the fall and therefore a reminder that salvation is coming or something else I can't really say, but the link seems to be there.

There are five "Faithful Sayings" in the Pastoral Epistles, each introduced or concluded with the phrase πιστὸς ὁ λόγος. They are: 1Ti 1.15; 1Ti 3.1; 1Ti 4.9; 2Ti 2.11; Tt 3.8. At least, those are the verses that πιστὸς ὁ λόγος occurs in.

Several times, Rev 22.6 is offered as a cross-reference, primarily because the words λόγος and πιστὸς are related:

καὶ εἶπεν μοι· οὗτοι οἱ λόγοι πιστοὶ καὶ ἀληθινοι ... , which is translated in the ESV as "And he said to me, 'These words are trustworthy and true. ... ' (Rev 22.6, ESV)

In church this past Sunday, the message was on Heb 10.19-23. Check out verse 23:

κατέχωμεν τὴν ὁμολογίαν τῆς ἐλπίδος ἀκλινῆ, πιστὸς γὰρ ὁ ἐπαγγειλάμενος, — in the ESV, this is "Let us hold fast the confession of our hope without wavering, for he who promised is faithful." (Heb 10.23, ESV)

As regards vocabulary, Rev 22.6 is the better cross-reference. But as regards structure and grammatical concept, wouldn't Heb 10.23 be a better cross reference? Take out the post-positive γὰρ and it is a dead-on match: πιστὸς plus ὁ plus [masc. nom. sing. substantive]. Right?

• πιστὸς ὁ λόγος
• The saying is trustworthy or Faithful is the word
• πιστὸς γὰρ ὁ ἐπαγγειλάμενος
• for he who promised is faithful or perhaps Faithful is the promiser or even The promiser is trustworthy

I haven't done much examination of commentaries relative to this exact reference (Heb 10.23), but as I recall one issue that is generally raised is the lack of use of similar vocabulary or structure in the NT but the repeated use of πιστὸς ὁ λόγος in the Pastorals. It seems fishy to many folks who posit a later date for the Pastorals. Makes me wonder if they've examined πιστὸς ὁ λόγος in light of πιστὸς γὰρ ὁ ἐπαγγειλάμενος in Heb 10.23

I'll have to check and see if Knight handles it.

Ben Witherington has an interesting post on 2Ti 3.16. He talks just a bit about the grammar/syntax of the verse and also some about θεόπνευστος. Please do check it out.

I haven't made it into Second Timothy yet (I'm through chapter 5 of First Timothy, though!) so I haven't muddled through some of the issues Ben's post dwells on.

Ben also mentions a forthcoming commentary of his on "the Pastorals and Johannine Epistles, which is due out next November". Part of his bloc post uses his commentary as source. I'm of course interested to see what he's come up with. If you need advance readers, Ben, please let me know!

These citations are from J.D. James, The Geniuneness and Authorship of the Pastoral Epistles, p. 13. He lists several potential allusions to First Clement, which he dates as 93-95 AD. This post only goes into one of them, though I'll likely work through a chunk of them here over the next few weeks (I hope!)

1Cl 2.7 ἀμεταμέλητοι ἦτε ἐπὶ πάσῃ ἀγαθοποι·́ᾳ, ἕτοιμοι εἰς πᾶν ἔργον ἀγαθόν. (Lake's Greek). Ye repented not of any well-doing, but were ready unto every good work. (Lake's English)

Tt 3.1 Ὑπομίμνῃσκε αὐτοὺς ἀρχαῖς ἐξουσίαις ὑποτάσσεσθαι, πειθαρχεὶν, πρὸς πᾶν ἔργον ἀγατθὸν ἑτοίμους εἶναι (NA27) Remind them to be submissive to rulers and authorities, to be obedient, to be ready for every good work. (ESV)

2Ti 2.21 ἐὰν οὖν τις ἐκκαθάρῃ ἑαυτὸν ἀπὸ τούτων, ἔσται σκεῦος εἰς τιμήν, ἡγιασμένον, εὔχρεστον τῷ δεσπότῃ, εἰς πᾶν ἔργον αγ̓αθόν ἡτοιμασμένον. (NA27) Therefore, if anyone cleanses himself from what is dishonorable, he will be a vessel for honorable use, set apart as holy, useful to the master of the house, ready for every good work. (ESV)

2Ti 3.17 ἵνα ἄρτις ᾖ ὁ τοῦ θεοῦ ἄνθρωπος, πρὸς πᾶν ἔργον ἀγαθὸν ἐχηρτισμένος. (NA27) that the man of God may be competent, equipped for every good work. (ESV) (though this instance doesn't use ἕτοιμος it has the "every good work" bit)

Well, that's all fine and dandy, they use similar phrasing. But how do we know that the thought of being "ready for every good work" or "prepared for every good work" (that is, ἕτοιμος + (εἰς or πρός) + πᾶν ἔργον αγ̓αθόν) wasn't some sort of common phrase used at the time? Did it occur elsewhere? In other circumstances?

The phrase πᾶν ἔργον αγ̓αθόν does occur elsewhere in the New Testament. There are the three instances in the Pastorals (cited above) plus 2Co 9.8:

And God is able to provide you with every blessing in abundance, so that having all contentment in all things at all times, you may abound in every good work. (ESV) εἰς πᾶν ἔργον αγ̓αθόν

And the phrase πᾶν ἔργον αγ̓αθόν occurs a two more times in the Apostolic Fathers — both in First Clement:

What then must we do, brethren? Must we idly abstain from doing good, and forsake love? May the Master never allow this to befall us at least; but let us hasten with instancy and zeal to accomplish every good work. (1Cl 33.1, Lake)

He exhorteth us therefore to believe on Him with our whole heart, and to be not idle nor careless unto every good work. (1Cl 34.4, Lake)

So, a few questions. Clement was ostensibly writing to the Corinthians (if you take the preface to First Clement as accurate), so why couldn't he have been familiar with Second Corinthians, which also uses a similar phrase? Or how do we know that the phrase/concept of "every good work" wasn't simply a phrase in currency in the latter half of the first century?

Well, I searched a few things. I searched the NT and the Apostolic Fathers for the phrase with the results reported above. I also searched for the phrase in the Works of Philo and the Works of Josephus, no luck. What I haven't done is search Perseus or TLG. Perhaps at a later date I'll be able to do that.

But what I know at this point is: The phrase occurs once in Second Corinthians, three times in the Pastoral Epistles, and three times in First Clement. Logicially, then, it is possible that there has been earlier NT influence on Clement; it is possible to see other allusions to other NT documents in his writing. I realize correlation does not prove causation; but it does make some sort of relationship or influence between the two possible. And J.D. James has a whole list of common ideas/phrases like this one (three pages worth) positing allusions of the Pastoral Epistles within First Clement.

I'll hopefully look into another one of these next, sometime in the next few days.

In 1Ti 3.14-15, we have:

I hope to come to you soon, but I am writing these things to you so that, if I delay, you may know how one ought to behave in the household of God, which is the church of the living God, a pillar and buttress of truth.

The Greek in the NA/UBS text of this phrase is στῦλος καὶ ἑδραίωμα τῆς ἀληθείας; the key words being στῦλος (pillar) and ἑδραίωμα (buttress).

Eusebius uses this same phrase in Hist. Eccl. Book V, 1.17:

But the whole wrath of the populace, and governor, and soldiers was aroused exceedingly against Sanctus, the deacon from Vienne, and Maturus, a late convert, yet a noble combatant, and against Attalus, a native of Pergamos where he had always been a pillar and foundation, and Blandina, through whom Christ showed that things which appear mean and obscure and despicable to men are with God of great glory, through love toward him manifested in power, and not boasting in appearance.

The underlying Greek of Eusebius is στῦλον καὶ ἑδραίωμα τῶν ἐταῦθα ἀεὶ γεγονότα, again using στῦλος and ἑδραίωμα. I retrieved this citation from The Genuineness and Authorship of the Pastoral Epistles by J.D. James, published in 1907 (on p. 6). The Eusebius citation is from the Letter of the Churches of Vienne and Lyons which, according to James, dates to 180.

James offers several other citations/allusions/common phrases between the Pastoral Epistles and other somewhat contemporary literature; I may detail some of them here as I work through them. Some are interesting (like this one), others are not too exciting.

In the past I mentioned a book called The Christian Ecclesia by Fenton John Anthony Hort. It deals with the idea of church as described by use of the word ἐκκλησία.

I've recently become aware that Hort's book is available online from the ever-helpful CCEL.

If you're studying the Pastoral Epistles, particularly chapter 3 (see 1Ti 3.5 and 1Ti 3.15) then you need to consult The Christian Ecclesia.

While you're there, make sure to take a peek at the other stuff from Hort that the CCEL have digitised and placed online.

P.J. Williams of the Evangelical Textual Criticism blog has a post called D, F, and G in the Pastorals.

Thanks to John Kendall for the pointer!

1Ti 5.13 has the following text:

Besides that, they learn to be idlers, going about from house to house, and not only idlers, but also gossips and busybodies, saying what they should not. (1Ti 5.13, ESV)

The phrase "going about from house to house" (περιερχόμεναι τὰς οἰκίας) is the one I have questions about. I'm curious about the houses that these younger widows were circulating between. We read this today and likely think that these younger widows were dropping in and out of neighbors' houses. Next door, across the street, down the street, across the back fence. You get the picture.

But I'm skeptical. I know that the Pastorals use ἐκκλησία for church (as in people gathered together as a community of believers); but these folks likely met in houses. You know, τάς οἰκίας, which is what is used here. Could the widows have been going from house-church to house-church, picking up a pastiche of teaching and not being bound to any of them? Were they house-hopping amongst the houses of the false teachers who seemingly had some influence in Ephesus at that time? Or were they simply visiting houses of other believers in the ἐκκλησία and gabbing about all sorts of non-edifying stuff?

Anyone with insight, feel free to contact me (my email address is on the sidebar) with references or pointers. Or — better — leave a comment.

Thanks!

Browsing around this evening, I happened upon the Early Manuscripts at Oxford University site. Poking around a bit further in the Magdalen College collection, I examined Magdalen College MS. Gr. 9 which is described as:

Greek New Testament, Psalms and Canticles, with illuminated headpieces and initials, Constantinople, 3rd quarter of the 12th century, with additions up to the end of the 14th century including a note relating to Epiros.

Note the following:

• First Timothy begins on folio 215 recto
• Second Timothy begins on folio 218 recto
• Titus begins on folio 220 verso

The order of the books is different than we're used to today; MS. Gr. 9 has Gospels, then Acts, then Catholic (General) Epistles, then Paulines (which include the PE), and then the Apocalypse.

The MS uses, of course, a minuscule hand that I can only read if I happen to know the Greek in question. But it looks pretty cool. Check it out.

Anyone know if this particular MS has any interesting readings (in the Pastorals or otherwise?)

In working through the Pastoral Epistles, one runs across 1Ti 4.16:

Keep a close watch on yourself and on the teaching. Persist in this, for by so doing you will save both yourself and your hearers.

This sort of phrasing is also seen in some writings of the Apostolic Fathers:

I do not think that I have given trivial advice about self-restraint. And whoever takes my advice will have no regrets, but will instead save both himself and me, the one who has given the advice. There is no small reward for the one who converts a person who is going astray toward destruction, that he may be saved. (2Cl 15.1, Ehrman)

Do not be deceived, my brothers; those who corrupt their households will not inherit the kingdom of God. If then those who do such things according to the flesh die, how much more the one who corrupts the faith of God through an evil teaching, the faith for which Jesus Christ was crucified? Such a person is filthy and will depart into the unquenchable fire; so too the one who listens to him. (IEph 16.1-2, Ehrman)

There are others, of course, and they're listed in the article. What I've done is create a few very general patterns (based on morphology of portions of the phrase in 1Ti 4.16) and searched other corpora for that pattern. The PDF article simply lists semi-relevant instances that I culled from the 100+ hits located in corpora such as the Apostolic Fathers, OT Pseudepigrapha, Works of Philo and Works of Josephus.

I've been a bit stumped by 1Ti 4.10 for awhile now; that means I need to think through it. One way I do that is by writing. Please realize the below reflects my process of thought, not necessarily final conclusions. Comments or private email with further discussion or thought is welcome.

Here's the verse:

For this we work hard and we agonize, because we have fixed our hope on the living God, who is Saviour of all people, especially believers. (1Ti 4.10, my own translation)

I've read a few articles (T.C. Skeat here and Vern Poythress here) and Poythress makes more sense to me. While Skeat's proposal of "God, who gives salvation to all men — that is to say, to all who believe in Him" is attractive because it makes the verse easier to fit into an overall theology of election, it is tough to justify for the reasons Poythress brings to light; primarily that none of Skeat's supporting examples demand it.

But that leaves me in the same spot. Actually, it leaves me in a worse spot because I now I can't lean on Skeat's proposal to wriggle out of my perplexed state.

Relation to 1Ti 2.1-7

I do think (as do others, particularly Knight) that the way one interprets 1Ti 2.1-7 has impact on how 1Ti 4.10 is interpreted. The verses from chapter 2 are below.

First of all, then, I encourage supplications, prayers, petitions, and praises to be made on behalf of all people, on behalf of kings and all in authority, so that we may lead a tranquil and quiet life in all godliness and dignity. This is good and pleasing in the sight of God our Saviour, who desires all people to be saved and come to knowledge of the truth. For there is one God and one mediator of God and men, the man Christ Jesus, who sacrificed himself as a ransom on behalf of all, the witness at the proper time. 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. (1Ti 2.1-7, my own translation)

I think 2.1-7 are key because they deal with the same language (all people, salvation) in the same letter.* I don't think that all people here means "all sorts of people" (contra Knight). I do think that all people in 1Ti 2.1 is qualified in a particular way. In 1Ti 2.4, all people is qualified as those whom God our Saviour desires to be saved. Thus we are to pray for all people because God desires that they be saved. Our evangelism is to be based on the premise that God wants people saved. We cannot be effective in our prayers for others (kings, as v. 2 indicates, or anyone else) if we do not believe that God can save them.

So, I don't see 1Ti 2.4 as stating unequivically that God will save everyone. It is not a foundation for universalism. But it does reinforce that man is in need of salvation, and that from our perspective as Christians we are to interact with everyone believing that God wants them saved, and can act to save them.

This, in turn, means I have to apply the same conclusion to 1Ti 4.10. But this is tough for me because the text doesn't say that the living God desires all people to be saved, it says that He is Saviour of all people, and then goes on to qualify that further with especially believers.

But is this different from 1Ti 2.1-7? Taking some time to step back and consider it, I really don't think it is all that different. In 4.10, there are "believers" and there are "all people". In 2.1-7, there are the ones doing the praying, and the "all people" being prayed for. God is the Saviour of those who believe, this is sure. But He is also the Saviour of those who don't believe. God is the only one who can save them, thus — even if He doesn't act to save them — He is still the only one who is able to save them, whether He has acted to save them or not.

Often, I find myself thinking that God is Saviour because He has saved me. That is, he is my Saviour, thus when I read Saviour I think, "Yes, praise God, He has saved me!" But he was no less my Saviour before I was led by the Holy Spirit to believe in Him.

For anyone, then, believer or unbeliever, God is Saviour. We are to realize that in our interaction, particularly with those that we know do not believe.

Returning to 1Ti 4.10

Now, take this and plug it into 1Ti 4.10:

For this we work hard and we agonize, because we have fixed our hope on the living God, who is Saviour of all people, especially believers. (1Ti 4.10, my own translation)

Can the especially believers bit be in reference to the fact that the ones who believe are those who are saved, they are those whom the Holy Spirit has led and are able to return praise to God for His salvation? Because of the saving act of Jesus Christ, those who believe (the faithful ones) know they are saved. This text doesn't say that God will save all people, and it doesn't say that God will save "all kinds of people". It says that God is Saviour. The believers, those who are beneficiaries of God's salvation not through merit but through mercy and grace, are especially distinct among all people.

What Do Commentaries Say?

As I check commentaries on 1Ti 4.10, I find the discussion on this verse lacking. Hermeneia is relatively silent. It has only one paragraph, and most of that focuses on identifying the "goal" (this in my translation). In what it does say it seems to jive with what I've written here:

For Paul all men are, theoretically, capable of becoming believers. The Pastorals are reconciled to the fact that the faithful represent only a portion of humanity. Thus the church is not just a preliminary form of the kingdom of God but already its substitute. (Hermeneia, p. 69)

Mounce (WBC) has discussion that is worth reading but too long to reproduce here, but he specifically addresses and criticises the approach that 1Ti 4.10 can be used as a basis of universal salvation.

Knight (NIGTC) refers to his discussion on 1Ti 2.3-4 where he takes the "all kinds of people" approach. Regarding especially believers, Knight specifically cites (and seems to recommend) Skeat's approach.

Ellicott writes as follows:

The declaration is made to arouse the feeling that the same God who is a living is a loving God, one in whom their trust is not placed in vain; the Saviour of all men, chiefly, especially, of them that believe. ... God is the σωτὴρ of all men, in the greatest degree of the πιστοί; i.e. the greatest and fullest exhibition of His σωτηρία, its complete realization, is seen in the case of the πιστοί; comp. Gal 6.10. (Ellicott, pp. 62-63)

There are others, but those are the primary commentaries I consult. What I've mused upon above fits into what Hermeneia and Mounce discuss. It doesn't really fit into Knight, though it isn't specifically precluded. Ellicott ... well, one has to get their mind into mid 19th century European scholarship to fully grok Ellicott. I don't think 1Ti 4.10 has to do with degrees of salvation (one is saved or one isn't, there is no middle ground); but I'm not really sure if that is what Ellicott is proposing.

I've run on for a bit, and need to wrap this up. Again, if you have comments or thoughts, please feel free to leave them here. Or email me. Or write on your own blog and leave a trackback here.

• If you think Miller's approach of fragmentary sources and heavy redaction has merit, you'll disagree with me or at least minimise the importance that 1Ti 2.1-7 holds in examining 1Ti 4.10. I think Miller's approach is a caricature of redaction theory and is of little value. If one considers the Pastorals cohesive (at a minimum) or of one author (as I do), then this has to be a consideration.

This short article by T.C. Skeat examines 2Ti 4.13:

When you come, bring the cloak that I left with Carpus at Troas, also the books, and above all the parchments. (2Ti 4.13, ESV)

Skeat offers the suggestion that perhaps μάλιστα, here translated above all, should be instead translated as namely. He writes:

My own suggestion is that μάλιστα in this passage, instead of differentiating the βιβλία from the μεμβράναι, in fact equates them, at least to the extent of defining or particularizing the general term βιβλία, and that an idiomatic English translation would be 'the books — I mean the parchment notebooks'. (Skeat, 174).

Skeat's suggestion has other implications, notably in 1Ti 4.10, which in the ESV reads:

For to this end we toil and strive, because we have our hope set on the living God, who is the Savior of all people, especially of those who believe. (1Ti 4.10, ESV)

Skeat discusses this instance of μάλιστα as well:

On my hypothesis this should be rendered 'God, who gives salvation to all men — that is to say, to all who believe in Him'. This in fact gives better sense, since although God is the potential Saviour of all, He can only be the Saviour of those who accept him. (Skeat, 174-175).

As much as my Calvinist leanings like this because it makes this text much easier to deal with, there are problems with Skeat's approach. Vern Poythress provides a critical review of Skeat's postulation in a later edition of JTS.

Both articles are worth reading, particularly when dealing with 1Ti 4.10.

2 Timothy 4.13 reads:

When you come, bring the cloak that I left with Carpus at Troas, also the books, and above all the parchments. (2Ti 4.13, RSV)

The phrase and above all is from the Greek word μάλιστα, typically translated as especially. The word μάλιστα is used elsewhere in the Pastoral Epistles, perhaps most prominently in 1Ti 4.10:

For to this end we toil and strive, because we have our hope set on the living God, who is the Savior of all men, especially of those who believe. (1Ti 4.10, RSV)

In 1979, T.C. Skeat published an article in the Journal of Theological Studies that proposed a new sense of μάλιστα; that of that is or namely. This has potential soteriological consequences in the translation of 1Ti 4.10. Skeat's suggestion has made its way into commentaries and articles having to do with these verses.

In 2002, Vern Poythress published a response to Skeat's article, in JTS, titled The Meaning of μάλιστα in 2Ti 4.13 and Related Verses.

I was looking into 1Ti 4.14 this morning, and ran across Poly 6.1, both of which use the word ἀμελέω for neglect.

I blogged a bit about it over on my personal blog but wanted to at least record a link here since it is about the Pastoral Epistles.

None of the essays in New Testament Greek and Exegesis directly concern the Pastoral Epistles, but at least one of the essays may be helpful in a specific area. One image used twice in the Pastoral Epistles is that of the "snare of the devil" (παγίδα τοῦ διαβόλου .

The essay in question is Finding the Devil in the Details: Onomastic Exegesis and the Naming of Evil in the World of the New Testament by Douglas L. Penney. In discussing how adjectives describing things at times end up becoming names (particularly in the realm of angels and demons), Penney discusses Ps 91.3-6, which mentions "the snare of the fowler". Penny refers to Akkadian magical texts that discuss "net-demons":

The phrase "snare of the fowler," although admittedly cumberson in the Hebrew poetry, nevertheless reflects a well-attested Mesopotamian belief in net demons. (p. 48)

After about a page of this discussion, Penny continues:

The words, phrases, and images employed in the magical literature are very long-lived. In spite of the dearth of Semitic magical texts from the Roman period and especially from Second Temple Palestine, many words, phrases, and motifs appear in Aramaic magical texts from the Islamic period almost unchanged from their antecedents in the Akkadian texts. This longevity points to a continuous surviving tradition of magical texts in spite of the paucity of archaeological finds. The concept of nets and net demons also follows this pattern. Later Aramaic and Greek magical texts continue this tradition, speaking of nets as demonic weapons. The same concept lies behind the NT metaphor "snare of the devil." [cf. 1Ti 3.7; 2Ti 2.26] The invisible demonic nets may cause physical or intellectual stumbling. Even in relatively recent times the net as a metaphor for the devil's tool or agent continues. (pp. 49-50)

Searching through Technorati for other things, I happened across a blog post on a blog called Parableman about the use of αυθεντειν in 1Ti 2.12.

The comments for the post list a paper by Franklin Pyles, An Exegetical Study of 1 Timothy 2.11-15. I know nothing about Dr. Pyles or about the gent who posted the reference to Dr. Pyles' paper. I've not yet read Dr. Pyles' paper, but I have printed out a copy and hope to get to it sometime in the next few weeks. Based on the comments on the original blog post, though, I'd guess I won't be too convinced by anything in Dr. Pyles' paper. We'll see though.

Wayne Leman of the Better Bibles Blog posts a link to Kenny Pearce's blog, where Kenny (whom I'm unfamiliar with) has a question about 2Ti 2.2.

In his entry, Kenny writes:

This past week, Steven and I were rather perplexed by the way in which the standard translations have chosen to render 2Ti 2.2, and had some difficulty connecting the translations to the Greek. NKJV renders this verse, "And the things you have heard from me among many witnesses, commit these to faithful men who will be able to teach others also." The relevant portion, "the things you have heard from me among many witnesses," is rendered almost identically by the other translations. NIV: "the things you have heard me say in the presence of many witnesses," ESV: "what you have heard from me in the presence of many witnesses." The trouble is that the Greek seems to suggest a reading more like "the things which you have heard from me through many witnesses." That is, the Greek appears to say that Timothy heard these teachings from many witnesses who came from Paul, rather than that he heard them from Paul himself. The following is my (mostly failed) attempt to make sense of this.

I was browsing through the Hosted Articles at BiblicalStudies.org.uk and came across the following:

Robert H. Gundry, "The Form, Meaning and Background of the Hymn Quoted in 1 Timothy 3:16," W. Ward Gasque & Ralph P. Martin, eds., Apostolic History and the Gospel. Biblical and Historical Essays Presented to F.F. Bruce. Exeter: The Paternoster Press, 1970. Hbk. ISBN: 085364098X. pp.203-222.

The article is available as a PDF file. The site has scads of other content as well, be sure to check it out to see if there is anything else there that interests you.

I've created an 8-page PDF file (approx 500kb) that has the contents of the Pastoral Epistles from a transcription of Codex Alexandrinus. You'll need to rotate the document in order to read it in your browser.

The entire transcription of Alexandrinus' New Testament, in PDF, is available from bibles.org.uk

I've created an 8-page PDF file (approx 600kb) that has the contents of the Pastoral Epistles from a photographic facsimile of Codex Sinaiticus. The facsimile is based on photograph taken by Kirsopp Lake in the summer of 1908 in St. Petersburg.

The entire facsimile edition of Sinaiticus, in PDF, is available from bibles.org.uk

PastoralEpistles.com reader John Kendall sent an email to notify me of an upcoming title from Sheffield Phoenix Press. The book is titled Timothy's Task, Paul's Prospect: A New Reading of 2 Timothy, by Craig A. Smith.

You should read the description on the Sheffield Phoenix site for a few reasons:

• How often to you get to see the word aver used in an uncontrived context?
• C'mon, it's Sheffield Phoenix. You know you want to read it.

Not convinced? Here's an excerpt from the description:

Deploying epistolary analysis and rhetorical criticism, Smith shows that these verses (4:1-8) do not have the literary structure or the vocabulary of a testament or a farewell; rather, they are a 'charge', an authoritative command, comprised of five specific formal elements. This charge form is found also in the exorcism command and in some magical texts, Christian and non-Christian.

The currently scheduled release date is "December 2005". Let's hope it stays on schedule!

This book is a re-working of Holmes' PhD thesis. Holmes considers traditional interpretations of 1Ti 2.9-15 and their reliance on passages such as Ge 2-3; Gal 2.28; 1Co 11.3-16; 1Co 14.34-35 and finds them all exhibiting some degree of inadequacy. Holmes writes in his preface:

The research had its genesis in the painfully slow realization that my understanding of 1Ti 2.9-15 was more the result of supposition than of what the Greek text and context actually specify. As I explored the literature, I discovered that, generally speaking, the syntactical peculairities and semantic ambiguities of the passage are not so much explained as explained away. That is to say they are interpreted by some combination of: other problematic passages ... not always convincing historical backgrounds; speculation; and unsubstantiated assertion. No interpretation I was able to find struck me as altogether compelling.

When I heard about this book from a friend (who let me borrow his copy) my initial reaction was "Hoo-boy, yet another book and perspective on 1Ti 2.9-15 ... ". But after reading the preface and introduction, I'm encouraged. Even if I don't end up agreeing with Holmes' perspective, I think I'll appreciate his argument.

I was reading Parsons/Culy on Ac 7.27 this morning and came across the word ἀπώσατο. I knew I'd looked into this word before, but couldn't remember where until I saw the cross-reference to 1Ti 1.19. The whole context is below:

This charge I entrust to you, Timothy, my child, in accordance with the prophecies previously made about you, that by them you may wage the good warfare, holding faith and a good conscience. By rejecting this, some have made shipwreck of their faith, among whom are Hymenaeus and Alexander, whom I have handed over to Satan that they may learn not to blaspheme. (1Ti 1.18-20, ESV, emphasis mine)

I'd looked into the use of ἀπωθέω when I was working on this verse. At that time, I'd noted that ἀπωθέω is used in a similar sense in Ro 11.1-2:

I ask, then, has God rejected his people? By no means! For I myself am an Israelite, a descendant of Abraham, a member of the tribe of Benjamin. God has not rejected his people whom he foreknew. Do you not know what the Scripture says of Elijah, how he appeals to God against Israel? (Ro 11.1-2, ESV, emphasis mine.)

And I even went to Ac 7.39 and noted similarities:

Our fathers refused to obey him, but thrust him aside, and in their hearts they turned to Egypt, (Ac 7.39, ESV, emphasis mine).

The "him" in the above verse is Moses. I don't know why I didn't notice this before, but Ac 7.27 uses ἀπωθέω with Moses as the object of the "pushing aside" too:

But the man who was wronging his neighbor thrust him aside, saying, ‘Who made you a ruler and a judge over us? (Ac 7.27, ESV, emphasis mine)

Here one of the two Israelites who were fighting "thrust aside" Moses. In reading Parsons/Culy this morning, they note that this instance is typically assumed to be a physical "pushing aside". BDAG lists this usage as a literal, physical meaning. But Parsons/Culy are not convinced and think that this usage may be metaphorical as well.

I'd not noticed that the same sort of language (the "thrusting aside" of Moses) was used by the same speaker (Stephen) in the same context (his speech prior to his martyrdom).

The word ἀπωθέω also occurs in the Epistle to Diognetus (EpDiog 9.2:

And when our iniquity had been fully accomplished, and it had been made perfectly manifest that punishment and death were expected as its recompense, and the season came which God had ordained, when henceforth He should manifest His goodness and power (O the exceeding great kindness and love of God), He hated us not, neither rejected us, nor bore us malice, but was long-suffering and patient, and in pity for us took upon Himself our sins, and Himself parted with His own Son as a ransom for us, the holy for the lawless, the guileless for the evil, the just for the unjust, the incorruptible for the corruptible, the immortal for the mortal. (EpDiog 9.2, Lightfoot, emphasis mine)

Now, the questions:

• Does the usage of ἀπωθέω in Acts (occuring 6x in the NT, including Ac 13.46 which I've not quoted here) have any influence on how we understand the use of ἀπωθέω in 1Ti 1.19?

• If the Acts instances have no bearing (or little bearing) on our understanding of the usage of ἀπωθέω in First Timothy, then why are the instances in Acts translated (at least in the ESV) in the way they are? ("thrust aside" in Acts vs. "rejected" everywhere else).

• Is the difference in English translation due to the context of a direct speech, where Stephen is trying to prove a point and thus ἀπωθέω is translated with more strength/emphasis? If so, then why is Ac 13.46 translated the same way, yet it is outside of Stephen's speech? Is it again due to the mysterious catch-all "emphasis"? If so ... why doesn't the context of casting Alexander and Hymenaeus over to Satan provide enough contextual "emphasis" to translate ἀπωθέω as "thrust aside" in 1Ti 1.19?

I know I don't have comments enabled. If you send me email (see sidebar for address) or post comments on your own blog with responses/thoughts, I'll post a follow-up to this post with links to blogs or reproductions of email comments (provided you grant permission).

In the inbox this evening was an email from John Kendall. He pointed me toward a page of dissertations hosted at the Centre for Bible Interpretation and Translation in Africa, which is located at Stellenbosch University in Stellenbosch, South Africa (just north of Cape Town, a wonderful place to visit!).

Mr. Kendall pointed me to a page of dissertations and noted one dissertation in particular:

Kevin G Smith, Bible translation and relevance theory. The translation of Titus. (December, 2000)

I've only perused the first few pages of the PDF file, but it looks to be a good one. I'm looking forward to reading it. After I'm more familiar with it, I'll post a bibliographical entry for the paper.

Of course, if anyone else out there has articles, dissertations or other links dealing directly with the Pastoral Epistles (either individual letters, or the group as a whole) I'm interested in cataloguing them here. Just send the link to me using the site contact email address in the sidebar.

Thanks!

I'm currently working through chapter 4 of First Timothy. Tonight I was in 1Ti 4.3 and came across the phrase by those who believe and know the truth.

The Greek of this is: τοῖς πιστοῖς ἐπεγνωκόσι τὴν ἀλήθειαν.

Upon hitting the phrase "know the truth", I thought immediately of 1Ti 2.4: " ... who desires all people to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth".

The Greek of the phrase in 1Ti 2.4 is: ὅς πάντας ἀνθρόπους θέλει σωθῆναι και εἰς ἐπίγνωσιν ἀληθείας ἐλθεῖν.

First of all, I was amazed because this is one of the few times (but starting to become more frequent) where I noticed a cross-reference based on the Greek phrase instead of an English phrase. After reading 1Ti 4.3 I thought "I think there's similar language in 1Ti 2.4 ... " so I looked.

Second, could 2.4 be an echo of 4.3? Could these verses be using similar language to refer to the same group? 2.4 mentions "people to be saved", 4.3 mentions "those who believe"; 2.4 mentions "the knowledge of the truth", 4.3 mentions those who "know the truth".

I think so. I don't think the repetition is an accident. I'll have to do some searching around on variations on the phrase. I'm not proposing some sort of larger unit that runs from 2.1 through 4.5 with the phrase supplying some sort of inclusio, that wouldn't make much sense. But the similar phrasing does help indicate cohesion between sections within First Timothy. I'll also have to check Van Neste to see if he mentions it.

Over on B-Greek, a question was asked about the phrase translated "seen of angels" (ὤφθη ἀγγέλοις) in 1Ti 3.16.

Stephen Lo Vullo's response (which expanded on Carl Conrad's initial response) was most instructive. The primary point of Mr. Lo Vullo's response is:

Jesus, of course, had been seen on many, many occasions by Cephas, his apostles, and others. But it is the special post-resurrection appearances that are here in view. I think it is the post-resurrection Christ who is also in view in 1Ti 3.16, and that BDAG is correct in saying that the appearance in 1Ti 3.16 is of "the triumphant Christ ... to the angelic powers." Of course the angels had seen Christ since their creation, but he certainly hadn't appeared to them in his resurrection glory until after his actual resurrection. The point in 1Ti 3.16, I think, is that angels, such important and glorious beings (see 1Ti 5.21), were witnesses of the resurrection. This fact lends authority to the gospel, just as the mention of angels in 1Ti 5.21 lends authority to Paul's charge.

When I was recently examining this verse for my own project on the Pastorals, I came to much the same conclusion though I didn't examine all of the evidence that Mr. Lo Vullo does in his B-Greek post. The primary NT cross-reference I dealt with was Lu 24.33-34. Mr. Lo Vullo points us to examine 1Co 15, primarily 1Co 15.5-8. I'll have to re-examine that in light of his comments.

My friend and colleague Eli, over at Big Slow Eel, has some comments about my previous post on Miller's book. In light of his comments, I should clear a few things up and set the scene for a response.

First, Miller is not positing a single author compiling sources; he's proposing that there was a Pauline community of some sort. The below is a bit out of context (apologies for that); Miller is working through one of Hanson's reservations about the Pastorals being fragmentary in nature:

... each of our three Pastorals originated as an authentic note written by the apostle to Timothy and Titus. These three notes were read by the recipients, who then handed them over to the scribes responsible for preserving the communitity's sacred writings. Over the course of transmission, the notes were expanded by the addition of other sacred community traditions; the expansion was not intended to make the letters "look" Pauline; rather it was motivated by the community's desire to preserve the traditions and to be instructed by them. (Miller, 146)

Miller suggests this may be analogous to the community he sees as responsible for the Hebrew Bible book of Jeremiah:

... the book of Jeremiah, for example, in its present form, cannot be attributed to any one man; it is clearly made up of a variety of traditional materials. But there is little doubt that the book originated as a collection of genuine prophetic oracles from the great Jeremiah himself. Other materials were added later during the process of transmission. Similar literary histories are shared by most of the prophetic books. (Miller, 146)

Ok. Now we can start to hit some of the questions and suggestions that Eli throws out. First, Eli makes some suggestions (responding to my earlier post) as to what some of the Apostolic Fathers may have been alluding to in their writings:

They could have been alluding to the unedited form, that is, the letters that they were alluding to no longer exist in the form they were discussing. The fathers could be referring to one version, copy, or redaction as it existed at a single point in time. Redaction of the text we have received could have happened at any time during or after the exchange of letters between the fathers. Or they might have been merely alluding to one of the snippets that eventually made its way into the collective documents that we now know as the PE.

Yes, this is all true and it should be considered. But if this is the case, and if there were early and most likely much shorter editions of the Pastorals floating about, why don't we see hugely variant editions of the Pastorals (or other canonical NT books, for that matter) There is one MS that has a few massive additions to the Pastorals (MS 460, a 13th century MS; e.g. Titus 1.9). Why don't we see more textual evidence like this, and why don't we see stripped-down versions of the Pastorals? Apart from 460, variants in the Pastorals are fairly typical from what I can tell.

To be fair to Eli, he's arguing with me for the sake of arguing (we do this frequently, it's a good thing). He sees the Pastorals as cohesive. And no, Eli, I don't have the Deissmann citation handy, though I recall the quote and tend to agree. One more reason for folks to state their preference and start the line for Deissmann's Light from the Ancient East via the Logos Bible Software Community Pricing Program.

(Sorry, couldn't resist the plug.)

I've mentioned Miller's book before. Miller's analysis of the Pastoral Epistles attempts to show that the documents that we know as the "Pastoral Epistles" are really products edited, expanded and redacted over time. He posits a few fragments of Paul were their basis originally, and that a Pauline community added traditional content that it deemed was worthy of preserving.

Straight up, I've got to say that I don't agree with Miller's analysis. Every single transistion seems to be, for Miller, an opportunity to see lack of cohesion in the documents. Everything seems to be a reason for discounting a unified source.

But that doesn't mean that Miller's work shouldn't be read. Those who think the Pastoral Epistles are cohesive (whether or not one would adhere to Pauline authorship) need to read and interact with Miller's work. He asks questions that should be answered.

For instance, I fully agree that there is some "traditional" material that has made its way into the Pastoral Epistles. The content in 1Ti 2.3-6 comes to mind, as does 1Ti 3.16. Miller may have convinced me that the corpus has more traditional materials that I'd previously thought. But he didn't convince me that one author couldn't have assembled the material. The gospels assemble material from various sources for use within their specific narratives. Acts cites letters from the Jerusalem council. Several of the NT books cite content from either the LXX or Hebrew Bible. Why is it out of the question for the Pastoral Epistles cite traditional material yet still be cohesive?

The other overall problem that I had with Miller's thesis is the timing. The Pastoral Epistles have been included in the NT canon from an early date. There are allusions to content of the Pastorals (cf. Peter Kirby's e-Catena for some possibilities). I'm confused as to how the supposed process of expanding and redacting the content of the Pastorals occurred if allusions to the material in the Pastorals can be easily found in early writings of the Church. If Ignatius or Polycarp may have had it in a form that could be alluded to, when did the expansion/redaction actually take place and how quickly did it happen?

But I like Miller's book because it challenges me. It makes me think. It's like that guy you debate who always seems to have one more rebuttal to your primary point. Because he's done such an incredibly good job of presenting his argument, it has to be dealt with in a serious way. And that's good.

I'm now in the process of reading Ray Van Neste's book, Cohesion and Structure in the Pastoral Epistles, which directly responds to Miller's position. If you're interested in this sort of stuff, you really need to read these books as a pair, and you really need to read Miller's first.

Van Neste's book examines the Pastoral Epistles to see if these three documents lack cohesion, as others (such as Miller's The Pastoral Letters as Composite Documents) state.

In his introduction, Van Neste writes:

This thesis, then, will seek to analyze the way in which language is used to create connections within 1 Timothy, 2 Timothy, and Titus. In doing so, it is expected that this work will add to the previous work done on the coherence of the Pastorals. This work will respond to Miller, but move beyond his challenges to an attempt to see what sort of literary structure might be present.

Most interesting is the appendix, Appendix: Cohesion Shift Analysis of the Pastoral Epistles. This is a huge table (pp. 288-315) that lists each and every verb in the Pastorals, in order, and provides morphological information along with participant, genre and topic information.

I don't believe I've posted a link to this before.

About a year and a half ago, I was able to locate a relatively inexpensive copy of P.N. Harrison's The Problem of the Pastoral Epistles.

One of the appendices of this book is a hand-written edition of the Pastoral Epistles, in Greek, in Souter's 1912 edition (with Westcott & Hort variants noted at the foot of the page). I've placed scans of these pages online for those interested in consulting them when looking at issues of authorship in the Pastoral Epistles:

P.N. Harrison's Marked-up Edition of the Pastorals

Here's a sample page:

Enjoy!

Miller's book takes an interesting perspective on the age-old "who wrote 'em?" question. Dr. Miller doesn't think Paul wrote the Pastorals, but he's not ready to simply chalk it up as pseudepigrapha either.

So I don't mess it up, I'll quote from the jacket description:

Dr. Miller argues that the evidence demands a third solution, and suggests that no single author can be held responsible for much of this material. He presents a wide-ranging review of Jewish and early Christian literature, focusing on the compositional histories of these documents. This is the environment out of which the Pastorals emerged. ... Miller's conclusion is that the Pastorals are composite documents based upon brief, but genuine, Pauline notes written to Timothy and Titus. The notes were preserved within the community's archives and later became that literary vehicle upon which other traditional material sacred to the community was loaded.

So, there you go. I haven't read the whole book yet (it's only 200 pages, though, so it should be a quickie) but from what I have taken in it seems like he's building off of the basics of Harrison's fragmentary hypothesis and positing that a group and not a single person is responsible for the resultant 'editing' of the material into the form that we today call the "Pastoral Epistles".

Even though I realize I'm a bit of a luddite when it comes to authorship and the Pastorals in that I still think that Pauline authorship makes the most sense (not that it isn't problematic, only that it makes the most sense to me — it is the least worst alternative, in my mind); I'm interested in this book because I want to see where Dr. Miller places this editing period in the timeline of the development of the Pastorals. Such work would, I'd think, have to be very early in order for these epistles to gain the traction they had so early in the history of the church.

I'll post more as I'm able to grok Dr. Miller's work.

Also note that this is #93 in the Society for New Testament Studies Monograph Series (SNTS 93).

I'm working through 1Ti 3.15. The word in question is ἑδραίωμα. This is a hapax legomenon; BDAG doesn't have much beyond the basics. That is, it doesn't tell me anything beyond what is obvious.

But at the end of the BDAG article is the ever-frequent "M-M. TW." which refers the reader, of course, to Moulton & Milligan as well as TDNT. Since I use BDAG (and TDNT) electronically in Logos Bible Software, I head to TDNT first (simple keylink directed to TDNT from the BDAG article headword — neat little trick, saves some time). This article (the last few lines) is somewhat helpful.

So I move on to Moulton & Milligan. This is in print, so I start flipping pages. I end up on pp. 180-181. Here there is a reference to Hort, Christian Ecclesia, p. 174 with very brief mention of the Latin term firmamentum.

I happen to own Christian Ecclesia, so I grab it and go to page 174. Here's the paragraph speaking about the phrase " ... which is the church of the living God, a pillar and buttress of truth":

There are few passages of the New Testament in which the reckless disregard of the presence or absence of the article has made wilder havoc of the sense than this. To speak of either an Ecclesia or the Ecclesia, as being the pillar of the truth, is to represent the truth as a building, standing in the air supported on a single column. Again there is no clear evidence that the rare word ἑδραίωμα ever means 'ground' = "foundation." It is rather, in accordance with the almost universal Latin rendering firmamentum, a "stay" or "bulwark".

The point: If I would've been content to sit with BDAG's entry (or even BDAG and TDNT), it would've been awhile before I got to the reference in Hort's book (if ever). But checking references, even if only the ones available at hand, provided further information that helps in understanding what's going on. And that is the goal, isn't it? So why aren't we more diligent about looking up references when we're researching things?

OK, perhaps I should say "me" or "I" instead of "we" there, but you get the picture.

I've been interested in the distribution of semantic domains (among content-bearing words) in the Pastoral Epistles for awhile. When I was making my so-called "lexical notes", I assigned a Louw-Nida domain/article number to each instance of each verb, noun, and adjective.

I finally got around to writing code to count the instances of each domain per section. The section is the section as defined by the NA27 printed text. Here's an example from First Timothy §1 (1Ti 1.1-2):

• Domain 93, Names of Persons and Places: 8 occurrences
• Domain 12, Supernatural Beings and Powers: 4 occurrences
• Domain 25, Attitudes and Emotions: 2 occurrences

I provide numbers for everything with two or more occurrences in a given section. Please note that I have not double-checked my Louw-Nida domain assignment and I know there are a few mistakes in there. But the general trends should properly relate what's going on in each section.

I just received the weekly(?) email from Eisenbrauns about New and Noteworthy titles. On title mentioned is from Ray Van Neste: Cohesion and Structure in the Pastoral Epistles. I've not read this title, but the description piques my interest.

Van Neste examines 1 and 2 Timothy, and Titus to determine the boundaries of each discourse unit using cohesion shift analysis. The cohesion of each unit is then analyzed, noting common devices from the ancient epistolary genre, rhetorical devices, lexical and semantic repetition and symmetrical patterns. He also focuses on connections between the units in the letter — connections between contiguous units, semantic chains, and the grouping of units into larger sections. Thus the variety of connections across and throughout the letter are highlighted.

The bad news, of course, is that the book is $135.00 (though $95.00 on sale currently at Eisenbrauns). I think my tax return is going to disappear quickly ...

Sheffield Phoenix Press have scheduled an April release for a book titled Leadership Succession in the World of the Pauline Circle by Perry L. Stepp.

This sounds like it will be a good resource for those studying how leadership in the Christian community worked in those early years. Here's a excerpt from the book blurb:

This book undertakes, for the first time, a thoroughgoing analysis of the evidence, deftly laying out the data from a wide range of Greek and Roman writers. The question then becomes how the early readers of the New Testament, conditioned by prior knowledge of such epistolary and other literary conventions, would have interpreted Paul’s relationship with his delegates like Timothy and Titus, and how they would have conceived the ministry portrayed in the Pastorals as passing from a leader to a successor.

I'll add this to the bibliography after I'm able to peruse it. Good thing the tax return should be a-comin' soon ...

I'm playing around with semantic domains in the Pastoral Epistles, using data I compiled last year. As I was working through the text at the word level, I classified every noun, verb and adjective with a Louw-Nida Domain/article number. Right now, I'm simply using the domain information. I may experiment with subdomains at a later date.

These numbers are raw and my domain/article assignment has not been verified. I know there are some errors in there, but they should be minimal. These are only total occurrences for all three books. I plan to later break it down by pericope to get an idea of what domains are concentrated in particular pericopies. Still, the data is interesting.

• Domain 33 (Communication) occurs 224 times
• Domain 88 (Moral and Ethical Qualities and Related Behavior) occurs 152 times
• Domain 93 (Names of Persons and Places) occurs 125 times
• Domain 25 (Attitudes and Emotions) occurs 100 times
• Domain 31 (Hold a View, Believe, Trust) occurs 95 times
• Domain 13 (Be, Become, Exist, Happen) occurs 94 times
• Domain 12 (Supernatural Beings and Powers) occurs 88 times
• Domain 59 (Quantity) occurs 72 times

I expected domain 33 to be at the top of the list. Domains 25, 31 and particularly domain 59 were surpises to me. 31 makes sense, but I didn't know it would end up that popular, comparatively.

(Note: Thanks to Matthew Brook O'Donnell for his suggestions and prodding to dig around in this area)

John Lee's A History of New Testament Lexicography surveys the development of New Testament lexicography. Lee's survey includes case studies on several words.

One of the words is οἰκονομία, which occurs in 1Ti 1.3-4. Lee discusses this on pp. 305-310 of his book.

Lee calls into question Bauer's sense of training in his definition of οἰκονομία, working through some citations to show that Bauer's examples may not merit this conclusion.

Between August 2003 and May 2004 I worked my way through all of the nouns, adjectives and verbs in the Pastoral Epistles.

I wrote a little program to help me keep track of my notes on each word, and reference words back to their first occurrence (in the Pastorals) as that is where the primary notes for the word are located. My examination of each word consisted of summarizing the BDAG entry very briefly (typically looking at the extended definitions and glosses). I also examined LSJ and added notes where I thought relevant. A third field included my own thoughts on the instance in question. Finally, I also ascribed a Louw-Nida domain and article number to the instance of the word.

This data should be used with caution, I have not proofread it at all. There are things in there that I know are wrong. There are other areas where I have since changed my mind and would write differently. I do not plan on updating this data any time soon, but I am using it (and modifying, and rewriting, and expanding it) as I work through the text again in the process of writing more coherently on the topic. Samples from this work will be posted for evaluation on this website at a later date.

I offer the Vocabulary Notes here in case they are useful for some. Here is a sample from 1Ti 4.7, word #8: γύμναζε:

• 4.7 Word #8: γύμναζε (LN 88.88)
• BDAG: BDAG glosses as ‘to train’, ‘undergo discipline’.
• LSJ: LSJ, of course, begins with the classical sense of the word: ‘train naked’, ‘train in gymnastic exercise’. Originally γυμνάζω had to do with training the body. As time progressed, γυμνάζω began to be used of ‘training’ or ‘practice’ in general.

• Comment: The proper translation here is train. Note that while γυμνάζω applied to both physical and mental training at this point, the original connotation of "gymnastic" training would not be lost. Indeed, that is the very reason why the word is so appropriate — it conjures up images of hard physical training so that one knows he must enter into similarly rigorous training of the mind and body for godliness.

One topic that crops up in a few different places in the Pastoral Epistles is that of what are apparently judaizing believers. This is seen in references to the geneaologies, to myths, and things of this nature.

This book, a series of lectures from F.J.A. Hort that was edited and posthumously published, discusses the "Judaistic" influence on Christianity. Though the entire book is valuable to read, chapter 7 (pp. 130-146) discusses this subject as it applies to the Pastoral Epistles.

From Hort's introductory lecture:

The subject onwhich I propose to lecture this term is the History of Judaistic Christianity in the Apostolic and following Ages. The phrase 'Judaistic Christianity' is more ambiguous than might be wished; but it is difficult to find another more precise. To prevent any misunderstanding as to the sense in which I propose to use it, it will be well to begin with explaining what are the senses which might not unnatrually be attributed to this phrase, but which lie outside the purpose of these lectures.

The edition cited here is a 1980 reprint of the 1894 edition of this volume. It was originally published by MacMillan.

This book is a compilation of a series of lectures prepared by F.J.A. Hort. It was published posthumously. The book is about the notion of the Christian church as described in the New Testament.

As 1Ti 3.5 and 1Ti 3.15 use the word ἐκκλησία, this is important material to cover. Indeed, a few commentaries on the Pastoral Epistles reference this work by Hort in the discussion of "church" (Mounce's WBC volume, Fee's NIBC volume and probably others).

The Pastoral Epistles themselves are specifically discussed in chapter 11, from pp. 171-188. Other sections of the book deal with portions of the Pastoral Epistles as well.

Below is Hort's opening paragraph from the first lecture:

The subject on which I propose to lecture this term is The early conceptions and early history of the Christian Ecclesia. The reason why I have chosen the term Ecclesia is simply to avoid ambiguity. The English term church, now the most familiar representative of ecclesia to mostof us, carries with it associations derived from the institutions and doctrines of later times, and thus cannot at present without a constant mental effort be made to convey the full and exact force which originally belonged to ecclesia. There would moreover be a second ambiguity in the phrase the early history of the Christian Church arising out of the vague comprehensiveness with which the phrase 'History of the Church' is conventionally employed.

Stanley Porter's collection of essays concerning various NT passages includes, as its final chapter, an essay on 1Ti 2.15 and being "saved by childbirth". The essay is titled What Does it Mean to be "Saved By Childbirth" (1 Timothy 2:15)". It runs from pp. 255-268.

Porter doesn't have any silver bullets stashed away, but he does take a serious look at the Greek of this verse to determine what it does — and does not — say. This is strictly a look at the Greek, it is not exegesis or interpretation.

Porter's opening paragraph closes with:

The major lexical and grammatical questions raised in this single verse include determining (a) the subject of the verb σωθήσεται with respect to "the woman" of v. 14, (b) the sense of the verb σῴζω, (c) the denotation of the term τεκνογονία, (d) the function of the preposition δία with the genitive case, (e) the shift in number of the verbs from singular to plural, and (f) the use of the third class conditional construction. In themselves, each of these issues may not be particularly complex, but their composite understanding is necessary to avoid irresponsible interpretation. (pp. 255-256)

This book is volume 6 in Peter Lang's excellent Studies in Biblical Greek series.

Marc Goodacre of the NT Gateway Weblog posted his normal link to the latest reviews from Review of Biblical Literature.

There's a review of a book that sounds very interesting as it relates to the Pastoral Epistles:

Treblico, Paul. The Early Christians in Ephesus from Paul to Ignatius. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2004. pp. xxi + 826

The book is 800+ pages, published by Mohr-Siebeck. Unfortunately it is also EUR 149.00. Too much for this bibliophile's book budget. I couldn't find any info on their web page about non-library purchasers.

But read the review anyway. I may add this to the bibliography section later, I need to first consider if I want to treat books I haven't read or personally examined differently than books that I am familiar with.

Peter Misselbrook has posted a series of word docs and PDF docs designed to help one read through the Greek New Testament over a period of five years. His notes on the Pastoral Epistles are set to be studied over the course of nine weeks.

From his page, he offers a PDF document of the whole nine-week session and also has word docs for each week.

His brief comments with each verse reference Mounce's WBC edition on the Pastoral Epistles.

The phrase "The saying is trustworthy" occurs five times in the Pastoral Epistles and nowhere else in the New Testament. Knight's study examines each of these instances in depth and attempts to identify the "sayings" regarded as "faithful", and then discusses the sayings in light of their prominence.

From the introduction:

The phrase "Faithful is the saying" (πιστὸς ὁ λόγος) elicits one's attention by virtue of its five-fold occurrence in the Pastoral Letters. This repeated phenomenon in the Pastorals is all the more striking because of the absence of this exact phrase, or anything closely approximating it, anywhere else in Paul or for that matter in the N.T. Equally striking is the addition "and worthy of all acceptation" (καὶ πάσας ἀποδοχῆς ἄξιος) in two of the five occurrences but not at the other three. Coupled with this striking phrase are the sometimes more evident, sometimes less evident, sayings to which it refers. Here indeed is a fascinating situation worthy of serious investigation. And strangely enough here is a situation which has received virtually no intensive and comprehensive study. Thus this dissertation is an attempt to provide at least a beginning in investigating with some measure of care the phenomenon of the faithful sayings in the Pastoral Letters.

Knight also notes the article by H.B. Swete in Journal of Theological Studies xvii (published in 1917) on the subject The Faithful Sayings (click on "Articles and Papers", look for article #44), which should be examined in conjunction with Knight's work.

George W. Knight's NIGTC volume is, as far as I am concerned, the best available critical commentary available that seriously interacts with the Greek text.

Mounce (WBC) is good. Knight is better. Knight deals directly with morphological and syntactical issues when necessary and doesn't have the broad structure of WBC to bog him down. He doesn't get into the contemporary citations so much, but again the focus helps him. If you plan to work through the Greek text, then Knight (combined with SIL's Exegetical Summaries) is your friend.

This volume of the Hermeneia series is valuable for its citations of the Apostlic Fathers and other early Christian materials. But it is handy for other things too.

The Greek text is interacted with to great detail and several other works are cited. In many instances, English translations of cited Greek are provided, which is helpful if one's Greek skills are not as sharp as they once were.

After one has done his initial study of the text, if his study is serious he should next interact with Dibelius and Conzelmann.

Ellicott's commentary hails from the late 19th century, but don't let that scare you away. The commentary is on the Greek directly. I'm not sure of the Greek edition, though. I'd thought it was Tischendorf's editio octava maior, but I can't confirm that at present. Perhaps it is Textus Receptus.

Either way, Ellicott's work is worth examining, primarily because he really is commenting critically on the language. He also brings in readings from Latin, Syriac and Gothic and examines them along with the Greek where he deems appropriate. He references readings from various uncial texts frequently. There are several references to classical Greek works as well.

His Revised Translation is his attempt to update the KJV. Most helpful in this translation is his apparatus of alternate English readings, with several English versions represented.

This book is part of SIL's Exegetical Summary series. It works throught the text, phrase by phrase, pointing to different lexicons and translations of the phrase at hand. It also points to the opinion of different commentaries.

The book is extremely helpful for one who is working through the text at the phrase level. It serves as an index to both commentaries and lexicons. In addition, the text asks (and answers) several questions along the way.

This book is part of SIL's Exegetical Summary series. It works throught the text, phrase by phrase, pointing to different lexicons and translations of the phrase at hand. It also points to the opinion of different commentaries.

The book is extremely helpful for one who is working through the text at the phrase level. It serves as an index to both commentaries and lexicons. In addition, the text asks (and answers) several questions along the way.