Hi folks.
First, a big thanks to all who read or aggregate this blog. Thanks for your support.
PastoralEpistles.com has always been a merging of personal interests of mine: technology/programming and study of the Pastoral Epistles. I actually wrote the code that makes this site work.
However, things are changing. I've always thought it would be good to have multiple contributors, and in the past week someone has approached me about becoming an blogger for the site, and I'm sure he'll make a great addition.
This is good, but it means many changes. First, the way this site works on the back end is a bit byzantine. I wouldn't want to subject anyone to it, and I don't have the time (or desire) to really make it something that people who aren't me could use.
That means the whole site will be changing. I'll be installing new software (dasBlog 1.9) that supports team blogging. It means some of the interconnectedness that the site used to offer (e.g. the indexes in the sidebar) will go away, but it also means that people who aren't me can use the site.
So now it's time to make a call for participants. Are you interested in blogging regularly about the Pastoral Epistles? I'm not concerned about your perspective. I'd love to have contributors/authors here who see the PE as Pauline, and those who see them as pseudepigraphal, and those who see them anywhere in the spectrum. I think the resulting dialogue will be fun and instructive.
Posts can be book reviews, mentions of or interaction with articles or conference papers, pointers to web sites or blog posts that you think are somehow relevant, exegesis of particular passages, articles on larger topics related or ancillary to the PE ... really, as long as you can somehow work it back to the PE, then it can likely be posted.
If you're interested in making regular posts — minimum of one per week, let's say — then please contact me via email. Tell me a bit about yourself, point me to anything you've written (be it on the PE or not).
And keep your eyes on the site. Thanks again for those who regularly read the blog and correspond with me.
Rob Bradshaw of BiblicalStudies.org.uk sent me the following note:
Thought that you would like to be the first to know about this article: The Pastoral Epistles and the Mind of Paul by Donald Guthrie.
This is an excellent short monograph from Guthrie that interacts with P.N. Harrison's view of the authorship of the Pastorals. It is hard to find in print (ask me, I know) so do please check it out.
FWIW, I have an entry for the monograph in the Bibliography (Books) section.
Rob Bradshaw of BiblicalStudies.org.uk has uploaded the first in a trilogy of articles on the Authorship of the Pastorals. Rob writes:
I have just uploaded the following article in PDF: Stanley L. Porter, "Pauline Authorship of the Pastoral Epistles: Implications for Canon," Bulletin for Biblical Research 5 (1995): 105-123. For those interested in this subject my next two articles to be uploaded from the Bulletin for Biblical Research will be Robert Wall's response to Porter, and Stanley Porter's reply to Wall in Volume 6. Hopefully they will be on-line by Wednesday and will be announced here.
Check 'em out.
My lovely wife and I have been reading through Ecclesiastes in our devotional time. Last night we read Ec 5.13-17:
13 There is a grievous evil that I have seen under the sun: riches were kept by their owner to his hurt, 14 and those riches were lost in a bad venture. And he is father of a son, but he has nothing in his hand. 15 As he came from his mother’s womb he shall go again, naked as he came, and shall take nothing for his toil that he may carry away in his hand. 16 This also is a grievous evil: just as he came, so shall he go, and what gain is there to him who toils for the wind? 17 Moreover, all his days he eats in darkness in much vexation and sickness and anger. (Ec 5.13-17)
This reminded me of 1Ti 6.6-10:
6 Now there is great gain in godliness with contentment, 7 for we brought nothing into the world, and we cannot take anything out of the world. 8 But if we have food and clothing, with these we will be content. 9 But those who desire to be rich fall into temptation, into a snare, into many senseless and harmful desires that plunge people into ruin and destruction. 10 For the love of money is a root of all kinds of evils. It is through this craving that some have wandered away from the faith and pierced themselves with many pangs. (1Ti 6.6-10)
And, to a degree, 1Ti 6.17-19:
17 As for the rich in this present age, charge them not to be haughty, nor to set their hopes on the uncertainty of riches, but on God, who richly provides us with everything to enjoy. 18 They are to do good, to be rich in good works, to be generous and ready to share, 19 thus storing up treasure for themselves as a good foundation for the future, so that they may take hold of that which is truly life. (1Ti 6.17-19)
Derek, on the heretofore unknown-to-me blog eucatastrophe, ponders over the authority of the Pastoral Epistles and how they end up as the red-headed stepchild of Pauline studes, and how to bring them back into the fold (despite whatever you may think of their authorship).
That is, it seems there is a tendency among some academic writing to discount the Pastorals because, in the opinion of some, they're not Paul. Therefore, while instructive on some level, they don't rise to the level of apostolic authority so they're not worthy of merit.
I think Derek's perspective has some ground to stand on but I reach the exact opposite conclusion he does. Derek wants to know how to bring the Pastorals back into the discussion even though they're widely regarded as pseudonomous. I say that the rumors of their pseudonomity may be greatly exaggerated.
The arguments against the authorship of the Pastoral Epistles are not as convincing as others might think. The primary grounds for questioning the authorship have to do with vocabulary studies and some sort of feeling that the writing of the Pastorals sounds like Paul, but doesn't really sound like Paul. P.N. Harrison advanced the argument the most with his work examining vocabulary between the Pastorals and the so-called "genuine" Paulines. He said, basically, that the unique vocabulary of the Pastorals was a sure-fire sign that Paul couldn't have written them.
Well ... further research in the area of style and vocabulary from the realm of corpus linguistics has shown that counting unique words between two different texts really isn't an acccurate method for determining likelihood of same or different authorship. In order to do that sort of thing, one needs massive corpora from a known author to compare against. According to O'Donnell's Corpus Linguistics and the Greek New Testament, you need a known, authoritative corpus at least ten times the size of the document you're comparing against for this to start to have an effect. Another guy, Anthony Kenny, did a stylometric study that compared distribution of various morphological criteria and came to a tentative conclusion that 1 Timothy and 2 Timothy had statistically significant positive correllation with the so-called genuine Paulines. That is, similarities in multiple aspects between the so-called genuine Paulines and these books were far more than simple chance would have them be. They're much more alike than they are different.
In short: The grounds that most scholars have used to argue that the Pastorals aren't Paul — hapax legomenon — aren't that great of an indicator in real-world tests. Yet because these conclusions have been perpetuated many scholarly treatments of the Pastorals published in the past 75 years, the idea that Pastorals aren't Paul due to vocabulary differences still persists even though the grounds for its persistence may not be accurate.
So I say instead of resting in psuedonomity we should instead go back to the start. We should term the question on the basis of tradition and internal evidence: What do the documents themselves say about their authorship, and what does tradition say about their authorship? This must be the starting point. Once stated, that should be taken as the position and then arguments against that position should be posited, examined and reviewed. Schleiermacher's premise from way back in 1807 was wrong, so let's rewind and start again.
For instance: I read the beginning of Irenaeus' Against Heresies the other day. He starts out with quotes from 1Ti 1.4 about "myths and endless geneaologies which ... promote speculations rather than the divine training that is in faith". That's from what, late 2nd century? And Irenaeus likely learned at least some from Polycarp (early 2nd century) who also alluded to references in the Pastoral Epistles (cf. Poly 4.1)? So if they were used that early and as if they were authoritative, what can we understand from that regarding the earliest church's perspective towards these books? And how should that weigh in how we approach them and use them?
Discuss amongst yourselves.
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)
Rob Bradshaw, at the ever-helpful BiblicalStudies.org.uk, has uploaded the following article:
Oskar Skarsaune, "Heresy and the Pastoral Epistles," Themelios 20.1 (1994): 9-14.
You really should be a regular reader of Rob's blog as he announces new articles he posts with frequency.
Thanks, Rob!
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.
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
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.
More information (but not much more) is available on my personal blog.
Andreas Kostenberger has commenced a weekly blog. It is a little unusual in that there don't appear to be any permalinks, so articles are tough to link to directly.
His March 23 blog entry is a respsonse to Ben Witherington, who posted on 1Ti 2.8-15 a few weeks back. Ben's post is good, it and its comments should be read.
In the comments of Dr. Kostenberger's entry he and Dr. Witherington interact a bit. The interaction is good; if this is a topic that you're studying the back-and-forth would be good for you to read.
As some out there know, I've been writing as I've been working my way through the Pastoral Epistles. I've recently finished a first draft of notes on 1Ti 5. When I finish a chapter, I've been in the habit of inviting friends to my house to critique on I've written. We usually meet every other week. The meeting consists of dinner, which I make, of course! After achieving satiety, we stay sittin' 'round the table and dig into the text for the evening. It is a very fun time.
This time through, I thought it might be nice to allow others to offer feedback on what I've written. So I'd like to make each session's text available as a PDF file on this web site for y'all to download and review. If you'd like to offer feedback, then please do so! You can email, you can write a word doc or something else and send it to me (I prefer PDF; word docs may contain nasty viruses), or even just leave some comments on this site.
I should say a bit about what I'm writing. It isn't commentary, per se. I've settled into a long-term examination of the Pastorals, and I'm convinced it will take multiple passes through the text at several levels. This is my third pass; at current rate I anticipate it will take a few more years to finish.
My first pass was to do a translation. It took two months, as I recall. I'm not altogether happy with it, and plan on updating it at some future point; it is online.
My second pass was just to work through definitions of all verbs, nouns and adjectives in the Pastorals (this is online as well), that took about 10 months, as I recall.
My third and present pass is at the level of word studies. I realize some think that there is much danger in word studies, but when done responsibly they are a necessary part of exegeting a text. I'm interested in the meaning of words in context, not of words as unattached things or abstract concepts devoid of context. My method has been to examine similar usage in like contexts in the NT, the LXX, and other literature (Apostolic Fathers, Josephus, Philo, Pseudeipgrapha, etc.); commenting on the other similar usages for insight to the specific instance in the Pastorals. This pass feels at times like a commentary, but is really intended to examine words and phrases in current, specific context as a necessary precursor to the next pass-thru. The next pass (in a few years) will likely involve more commentary-like examination though it will be at a sentence/paragraph/discourse level.
So I hope to, every other week for the next 10 weeks (so, five posts), be posting a PDF sample of my examination of a chunk of chapter 5. This first chunk will be over 1Ti 5.1-2. The first chunk will be posted shortly. Please note these chunks reflect a rough draft, complete with occasional notes to myself in the footnotes, so go easy on me.
Again, I'm doing this primarily for a wider range of feedback. So if you read it and have thoughts (positive or negative, I can take it) please do email and let me know what you think.
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:
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):
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.
Alan Bandy of Cafe Apocalypsis posts a link to note and updated version of Andreas Kostenberger's web site, BiblicalFoundations.org.
Of most interest to me are the essays and the articles, many of which have PDF editions supplied. A fair proportion of the stuff relates either directly or indirectly to the Pastoral Epistles.
Paul's parenthetical comment to Timothy — 1Ti 5.23 — has confused me for awhile. Why is it there?
I should preface this post by saying I haven't checked commentaries, I'm just thinking about the text. I'm willing to be wrong (very wrong); and I'll check this against commentaries later. Also, I think the argument for Paul writing the Pastorals is better than other authorship arguments (you'll buy no points from me with style arguments, particularly if they include comparions of hapax legomenon as a prominent point — the corpus is just too small). So I'll refer to "Paul" as the author and have the underlying assumption that each letter is a single unredacted unit.
Here's the whole section, 1Ti 5.17-25 in — for a change — my own translation. It isn't perfect but it is serviceable. I've placed verse 23 in italics:
The elders who lead well are considered worthy of double honor, especially the ones who work hard in speaking and teaching. For the Scripture says, “You shall not muzzle a threshing ox” and “The worker is worthy of his wages.” Do not accept an accusation against an elder except on the basis of two or three witnesses. Those continuing in sin you are to rebuke before everyone, so that the remaining elders might have fear. I solemnly urge you before God and Christ Jesus and the elect angels, so that these you might observe without prejudging, doing nothing from partiality. Do not hastily lay hands upon another; nor be partner in the sins of others: keep yourself pure. (No longer drink only water, but use a little wine on account of your stomach and your frequent ailments.) The sins of some men are quite obvious, going before them into judgment, but the sins of others come along later. Likewise also, good works are quite obvious and those that are not cannot remain hidden. (1Ti 5.17-25)
So there it is: "No longer drink only water, but use a little wine on account of your stomach and your frequent ailments." Why was this placed in this context? There are a few things to note.
First, note the phrase that precedes v. 23: "keep yourself pure". Perhaps in exhorting Timothy to stay pure, Paul recalls a vow Timothy made in the past (much like Paul had made Nazirite vows). In recalling this, Paul remembers to tell Timothy to not let poor health jeopardize his ministry; to attend to issues of health.
And there might be something to that. As I recall, that seems to be the usual route that commentators take.
Second, however, I notice there are eight imperatives in vv. 17-23. This includes the verbs in the parenthetical comment. Paul really means whatever it is he is saying here, the tone carries straight into the parenthesis.
Could Paul perhaps also be adding some positive testimony in here (i.e., cover) for Timothy? That is, Paul says that where two or three witnesses, charges against the elder are to be pursued. We can, I think, deduce that Timothy has stomach problems and likely even a delicate constitution. Perhaps, when necessary, he medicates his condition with wine. We know that Paul and Timothy have spent years together in ministry (likely at least a decade) so it seems reasonable to think that Paul would know Timothy's state of health and his methods for dealing with his "frequent ailments".
In the context of dealing with purity and enforcing the line that elders remain accountable — if the above is reasonably accurate — Timothy might open himself up for charges of impurity and sin due to his use of wine to medicate his weak stomach and frequent ailments. If so, it is likely that two or three witnesses could be easily rounded up to testify that Timothy had, in fact, drank wine.
But he'd have a get-out-of-jail-free card (of sorts) because of Paul's own acceptance of this practice is documented in this letter. It is not carte blanche acceptance of irresponsible and free use of alcohol; it is acceptance that one attend to issues of health and to properly balance health with ministry.
Discussion questions:
Actually, those last questions are decent questions even if my blathering suppostions are way out in left field and the usual take is more proper.
Comments are, of course, open (as are trackbacks). They are moderated so they will not appear immediately; I'll try to check them occasionally over the next few days.
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?
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.
Andrew D. Rowell of the blog called First Move Thyself posts a Bibliography of Key Biblical Commentaries for Women in Ministry Issues. In his list, he has a section of commentaries on the Pastoral Epistles divided into subcategories of Complementarian and Egalitarian.
In the past I mentioned a book called The Christian Ecclesia by . 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!
Rob Bradshaw (BiblicalStudies.org.uk) points to a few articles on the topic One of the articles Rob points to is the intro to a review of the updated edition of Andreas Kostenberger's study on 1Ti 2.9-15. I've read and have a very short description of the first edition of Women in the Church on PastoralEpistles.com.
Check 'em out. Kostenberger's book is well worth reading. I had borrowed a copy of the first edition from a friend; I'm happy to have my own copy now — and an updated edition at that!
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!
The Wulfila project has transcribed and mechanically analyzed virtually all of the Gothic Bible fragments. This includes known fragments of the Pastoral Epistles.
The Gothic is, from the accounts I've read, a literal word-by-word interpretation of a Greek vorlage. The primary codex from which we know Gothic, Codex Argentus (beautiful purple vellum with gold and silver ink) dates back to the fifth or sixth century, as I understand it.
Suzanne McCarthy has a post on the topic of 1Ti 2.13-15 over at the Better Bibles Blog. Check it out. It's a tough verse and I don't know that we'll ever know exactly what was intended.
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:
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?)
I thought it would be appropriate to interact briefly with feedback specific to the paper I presented that described a bit about PastoralEpistles.com.
First, I'm aware that the small amount of critical feedback (I use the term 'critical' loosely as no criticism was really derogatory or unfounded) was that I was a bit too technical, or that my proposed solutions are a bit technical for the average Biblical studies blogger to implement on their own. This is a valid observation.
However, I'm less interested in interface/ease at this point, and more interested in exploring the problem and potential ways to go about handling it. That is, I'm more interested in the plumbing of the house and not in the faucet that turns on the sink. I think the interface will come later and be easier if the underlying problems are considered first. And my paper was an initial look at what I see as some underlying problems. Hey, it was a CARG session, after all.
Second, thanks to the folks who took the time to read the paper and respond on their blogs, or were in the session and listened to what I had to say. It was a fun time, and I look forward to (hopefully) presenting additional papers (CARG or elsewhere) in the future.
Thomas Naef (whom I had the pleasure of meeting at the recent SBL conference in Philadelphia) has sent me notice of the BiBIL project, of which I was largely unaware.
Please check it out and play with the searches. I think you'll see that it could be a valuable resource in doing preliminary work to identify sources relevant to a particular text or topic in Biblical studies.
They currently have 178 resources relevant to the Pastoral Epistles catalogued. You can see the full list here.
Thanks, Thomas!
I've posted a copy of my paper for the 2005 SBL conference in Philadelphia. I'm presenting in the CARG (Computer Assisted Research Group). The paper has to do with "biblioblogging". My subject is this web site, PastoralEpistles.com. I've used it to experiment with things I see as shortcomings with existing blog software. The paper examines those shortcomings and the approach of PastoralEpistles.com in addressing them.
Session Info:
Paper Title: Biblioblog Problems and Solutions: PastoralEpistles.com as a Sandbox.
Biblioblogs have come to serve a valuable role in the academic community: they disseminate information throughout the academy while serving to humanize their authors. But the information produced by bibliobloggers, while searchable via Google and able to be displayed upon request, is locked in an environment that stores content as a sort of lowest common denominator. Salient bits of information, ranging from discussions of particular Biblical passages to impromptu book reviews, are unable to be easily retrieved unless one happens to fortuitously stumble upon them. Most biblioblog content is first-rate, but the blogging software that typically generates and archives the content could be better. This paper further defines some of these “lowest common denominator” problems and explores methodology used by PastoralEpistles.com to address them.
You may download the paper. I won't be reading it word-for-word at the session; but it will serve as my basic outline and content guide. If you link to it from your own blog please use the trackback functionality and post a trackback so that other folks (myself included) will be aware of any further discussion that may occur. Otherwise, as always, feel free to use the comments on this post.
Just today, I received an email from Thomas C. Black announcing a sermon series on 1 Timothy:
I’ve just begun a sermon series on 1 Timothy, and I’ll be posting my Study notes on my blog at www.stilltruth.com.
The entire collection will be made available as Thomas preaches through the text; I'd guess he'll update weekly.
Check it out when you have the chance.
The ever-helpful Review of Biblical Literature reviews:
If you're looking into the Pastorals, Van Neste's book is very helpful. I've mentioned it before on this blog. Between Van Neste and James D. Miller (The Pastoral Letters as Composite Documents) the borders of the debate about the cohesiveness of the Pastorals are set. Personally, I tend toward the Van Neste-ian shoreline; I find his work more helpful. But Miller has some gems too. Both are necessary if you're looking into authorship or overall cohesiveness in the Pastorals.
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.
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.
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.
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.
The 2005 meeting of the Evangelical Theological Society is scheduled to take place on November 16-18 in Valley Forge, PA.
There are at least two sessions having to do with the Pastoral Epistles that I can find in my perusing of the schedule. The first session:
The second session may or may not directly deal with the Pastoral Epistles, but the title certainly refers to 1Ti 3.2 and 1Ti 3.12:
For the record, I'll be at the ETS meeting as my employer (Logos Bible Software) is bringing me along this year. I'll be presenting a paper at ETS as well, though it will have nothing to do with the Pastoral Epistles:
I'll be covering tools developed to utilize syntactic databases of the Greek New Testament. I might even make sure some of my examples come from the Pastoral Epistles. If you're going to be at ETS, feel free to find me at the Logos booth right by the front door or at a session.
I have no idea why I didn't do it sooner, but I've added comment and trackback capability via HaloScan. Since I added the magic juice to the code that generates articles and such, this means that any post from the past can be commented upon or tracked back, as well as any future post.
I think it would be great if folks who have experience with books that I've listed in book bibliography posts would jot a thought or two about a book's worth (or lack of worth) in the comments. Or, if you're a blogger and you've blogged about a book I've listed, add a trackback to the book's post.
Apologies for taking so long to do this.
I'll be experimenting with HaloScan to add comments and trackbacks to posts. Strange things may happen as I dig in and add the necessary stuff to make it work. Apologies for any disruption.
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.
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.
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:
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!
I stumbled across the website of Andreas Kostenberger (http://biblicalfoundations.org/) while browsing around for other things. Included on the site are PDF editions of several reviews he has written.
Upon reading the site front page, I'm also led to believe that a second updated edition of his book Women in the Church: A Fresh Analysis of 1Ti 2.9-15 will be released in 2005 under the title Women in the Church: An Analysis and Application of 1Ti 2.9-15. Also, apparently Dr. Kostenberger is the author of the upcoming New Expositor's Bible Commentary volume (published by Zondervan) on the Pastoral Epistles. This volume as well is currently scheduled for a 2005 release.
As I've mentioned before, since I began this site to blog about the Pastoral Epistles, I've associated some posts with Bible references. Also, within posts themselves, I have a number of links to the Bible and also to the writings of the Apostolic Fathers.
One feature I've had in mind since then was reference indexing. I was finally able to think through some issues and write the code to do it today.
There are currently two reference indexes, links are in the sidebar. These are:
If you have any thoughts on these sorts of features, I'm very interested in knowing about them. Feel free to drop me an email at pe | pastoralepistles | com.
I've blogged about this one before, but it seems to be coming closer to reality. Perry L. Stepp posts a graphic of the cover of his upcoming book, Leadership Succession in the World of the Pauline Circle.
The book is to be published by Sheffield Phoenix press. You can view more information or perhaps take advantage of Sheffield's "Scholar's Price" and purchase a copy.
I'm looking forward to reading this one. Hopefully it's off the press soon!
The ever-helpful Review of Biblical Literature has a review of The Polemic of the Pastorals: A Sociological Examination of the Development of Pauline Christianity by by Lloyd K. Petersen.
The reviewer, David Downs, opens his review with this paragraph:
This volume is a revision of the author's doctoral dissertation, directed by Loveday Alexander at the University of Sheffield. Utilizing insights from modern sociological studies, Pietersen contends that the polemic of the Pastoral Epistles is directed against Jewish-Christian enthusiasts and visionaries who had successfully attracted members of the Pauline churches, particularly women, with a message of realized eschatology, asceticism, and thaumaturgy.
I've not read the book and I don't know that I will, though the review was enlightening on some points.
As I've mentioned in the past, PastoralEpistles.com articles carry metadata that isn't necessarily utilized by the system. For example, I've added key words as topics to many articles at the time of post composition, but I have never had a subject index page.
Well, today I wrote some code and now I generate these pages. Actually, I generate a few different types of indexes:
All of these are available on the sidebar. Click away and see what you find. Yes, I'm aware that the articles listed aren't visibly sorted. They're actually sorted by post type, then by date of post — not alphabetically. I may change the article sort to alphabetical at some later point, but that will take some time.
Note also that I also have accounted for a place index; I simply haven't denoted anything as having topics of this sort. Yet.
Do you find this sort of stuff helpful in the context of a blog? If so, please let me know. I often wonder if I'm the only one who thinks of these types of features. Drop me a line at pe | pastoralepistles | com (I'm guessing you know what to do with that to make it into an email address) to let me know what you think.
Next up, when I have time to write more code, are reference indexes for both the Bible and the Apostolic Fathers. Not quite sure when that'll be.
I've added support for a new post type: Journal Article Bibliographies. I've wanted to do this since I started the site, I just hadn't got 'round to it. The cool part: after adding the proper XML stuff for the post type, the bibliography-style index view just simply works.
I'll most likely add a few article entries today.
In other news, I believe I've also fixed a long-standing bug in the way that dates were specified in the RSS file. Due to my extreme laziness, the date was not in the standard format that RSS expects, so most readers (I'm guessing) simply used the date that the entry was read for the entry post date. Hopefully this is fixed now.
I'll be making some changes (hopefully improvements) as I work on issues related to my SBL paper on biblioblogging.
One of these changes was implemented this weekend. Now each post style has a bibliography-style index. For example:
There is actually more to it under-the-hood than a bibliography view; the support is a little more generic. But this is the easiest way to display it, for now.
More to come in later weeks as I work through things. If you have suggestions, feel free to zap me a message: pe | pastoralepistles | com.
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:
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).
It's true. PastoralEpistles.com is the subject of a paper I'll be presenting to the Computer Assisted Research Group (CARG) at the 2005 SBL Annual meeting in Philadelphia.
More information is available in a post in my personal blog.
Once again, I'll take the opportunity to solicit feedback from PastoralEpistles.com readers.
You can find me at pe | pastoralepistles | com.
I was working through 1Ti 4.5 this weekend. Here's the text (ESV):
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 4.4-5)
The context is simple enough. Paul (or "the author", whichever you prefer) is warning against false teachers who will come and who will make false requirements of believers — denying marriage, and requiring abstinence from certain foods. Paul's retort is that everything was created by God for "those who believe and know the truth" (1Ti 4.3).
But as I was looking at this, I wondered — is this process of receiving food in thanksgiving and, through prayer, asking for it to be purified (like many Christians ask a blessing before they eat even today) a picture of the what God does for His Own children?
That is, Paul says that if what is received is prayed for, the word of God will purify it and make it acceptable to those who know God. The power of God is not bound. If the food has been offered to idols, then the prayer invoking the word of God (blessing) will be effective, and the food may be consumed.
Is this a smaller picture of what it is that God does for His people? When one approaches God and asks for forgiveness of sin through Jesus Christ, that person is forgiven and is able to approach God as he is seen through the blood of Jesus Christ. He, for all intents and purposes, has been purified since he is able to now approach God through Jesus Christ.
It seemed to me that a similar thing was specified for these practices or things which may be questioned, particularly food. The food is or may be impure. Upon petitioning God, the food is purified and may be consumed.
I know it's a stretch, but it got me thinking. So I thought I'd mention it.
I received another email from PastoralEpistles.com reader John Kendall pointing me to another article on the book of Titus. Thanks, Mr. Kendall! This one is:
Reggie M. Kidd, Titus as Apologia: Grace for Liars, Beasts, and Bellies Horizons in Biblical Theology 21.2 (December 1999) 185-209
The article is available from that page in either HTML or PDF format. I've not yet read it, but after I do I'll post an entry to the Bibliography section.
Mr. Kendall also points me to the published edition of Kidd's dissertation:
Kidd, Reggie M. Wealth and Beneficence in the Pastoral Epistles: A "Bourgeois" Form of Early Christianity?. Scholar's Press, SBL Dissertation Series. 1990.
I'll make the plea once again: If you have links that are directly (or indirectly) related to the study of the Pastoral Epistles, send them my way. Or if you have books to recommend, send the recommendations my way. The address to use is pe | pastoralepistles | com (you know how to munge that into an address, I'd guess).
Thanks!
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.
The excellent Review of Biblical Literature has a review of The Pauline Canon, the first volume in Brill's Pauline Studies series. The volume is edited by Stanley Porter.
According to the reviewer (Ron Fay of Trinity Evangelical Divinity School) there are a few essays in the book that directly deal with the Pastoral Epistles. Other essays may be helpful to read as well.
I've gotta find a cheap source for these books — my tax return is going to run out quickly at this rate!
In Ray Van Neste's book Cohesion and Structure in the Pastoral Epistles, only the idea of cohesiveness of the text is discussed. That is, Van Neste doesn't explicitly discuss authorship. As such, his first chapter contains the following statement:
No position on the authorship of the Pastorals is taken in this study. The concern here is strictly how the text operates. Thus the names 'Paul', 'Timothy', and 'Titus' will be used to refer to the people protrayed in the text without assuming any conclusion on the authorship issue. (Van Neste, 7)
I bring this up because this is pretty much the same direction I've taken in my work on the Pastorals. Sure, I have thoughts on authorship. But to handle the issue in a work that really doesn't need to have it handled is a tall order. And writing things like "the author" or "the composer" or something else gets old fast and gets tiring to write. I think it is much better to personify the sender and recipients, and what better option than the names that the text itself uses?
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.
Peter Kirby, of Early Christian Writings fame, sent me an email with a note that he is starting to gather material for a set of notes on the Pastoral Epistles. On his own blog, he writes:
I have begun to create a set of notes on the interpretation of the Pastoral Epistles. I have completed the first two sections of it (and part of the third). I plan to do a section or two per day. After I have finished making notes, I plan to write an introduction, treating at least the issues of authorship, date, provenance, and occasion. At that time I may, or I may not, write the kind of free flowing prose that is usually termed "commentary."
Check it out and make sure to offer him some feedback. My own work in the Pastorals is from a little different angle — I'm staying away from formal commentaries on purpose for now unless I'm really stuck and can't figure out what's going on. I'll most likely make a later pass in which I will interact with commentaries and review what I've written.
Peter appears to be compiling salient bits from various sources and interspersing them with his own thoughts. If he keeps it up (and I have no reason to think he won't) the resultant resource should end up a nice site to check out when working through a passage in the Pastorals.
Thanks, Peter!
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 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.
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)
Folks —
I've put together a sample draft of my comments on 1Ti 3.1-7. The PDF file is approx. 325kb. It includes a partial Table of Contents and also an in-process introduction that still needs a lot of work. There are approx. 30 pages of comments and 15 pages of introduction.
The PDF file is here.
The title of the whole ball o' wax is still in flux; for now it is Lexical Studies in the Pastoral Epistles. That could very easily change.
I'm posting this because I really want to know what folks think. Please feel free to send feedback via email to pe | pastoralepistles | com, or comment on the thread I've reserved for comments over at my personal blog.
Thanks in advance.
I believe all is well in the land of RSS. Specifically, you should be able to subscribe to this site's RSS feed now.
The link is located in the sidebar to the left under the submissions address.
Don't know what RSS is or why you'd want to know about it? Check out Feed Readers by Eric Sowell of The Coding Humanist for more info.
Enjoy!
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.
I just did a Google search for Pastoral Epistles. At the top of the page was a link to the Google Print edition of Donald Guthrie's Commentary on the Pastoral Epistles (hopefully that link works for you).
Weird. I hadn't thought about how to categorize that sort of stuff.
I've received a few emails about site navigation and also about becoming a "user" of the site.
The login box below is basically for me (and anyone else whom I feel is qualified to post articles or bibliography entries). You don't need to login at all to use the site. All content is browseable by anyone who happens across this oasis for the Pastoral Epistles.
Perhaps this Site Document that discusses site navigation will clear up some questions some folks out there may have.
Basically ... just click if you're curious. Almost all of the text on the sidebar (headings and bullet points) will take you somewhere.
First of all, thanks for the enthusiastic reception you've all given to PastoralEpistles.com.
Some folks have asked about an RSS feed. Yes, that is actually next on the to-do list. It shouldn't take a whole long time to do (famous last words), I just need to find the time to do it. Perhaps Monday night, if all goes well.
I'll post an announcement here and on my personal blog when the RSS feed is live.
I need to make a quick note on the bibliography entries.
I realize they're not too useful when they are unsorted. My plan is to eventually write some code to do a seperate view of bibliographic items, sorted by title or author or key word (yes, I add key words/subjects to each bibliographic post — I'm just not displaying them currently).
That way, the blog-style posts on bibliography items will serve as updates of something new added, but the bibliography view will serve as an index to the annotated entries.
I just want to get a decent amount of content in the bibliography pipeline before writing the code to do the bibliography view. It's always nice to have real data to play with when writing that sort of thing.
After a few weekends of work, it's live.
For more info on what this is all about, check out this link: Introducing PastoralEpistles.com.
I have more work to do under the hood, but the site is serviceable as-is.
So poke around, and drop me an email when something breaks. The address on the sidebar should do the trick.
Site Map
PastoralEpistles.com Site Index
Contact
pe|pastoralepistles|com
Article Submissions
articles|pastoralepistles|com
Copyright 2005 R.W. Brannan. All rights reserved.
