Table Of ContentEarly Christian Paraenesis in Context
W
DE
G
Early Christian Paraenesis
in Context
Edited by
James Starr and Troels Engberg-Pedersen
Walter de Gruyter · Berlin · New York
First published in 2004 as volume 125 of
Beihefte %ur Zeitschrift für die neutestamentliche Wissenschaft (BZNW 125).
® Printed on acid-free paper which falls within
the guidelines of the ANSI to ensure permanence and durability.
ISBN 3-11-018154-1
IJbraty of Congress — Cataloging-in-Publication Data
A CIP catalogue record for this book is available from the Library of Congress.
Bibliographic information published by Die Deutsche Bibliothek
Die Deutsche Bibliothek lists this publication in the Deutsche Nationalbibliografie; detailed
bibliographic data is available in the Internet at < http://dnb.ddb.de >.
© Copyright 2005 by Walter de Gruyter GmbH & Co. KG, D-10785 Berlin
All rights reserved, including those of translation into foreign languages. No part of this book may
be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including
photocopy, recording, or any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in
writing from the publisher.
Printed in Germany
Cover design: Christopher Schneider, Berlin
Table of Contents
Introduction
by James M. Starr and Troels Engberg-Pedersen 1
Part I. What is Paraenesis?
Paraenesis in the New Testament
An Exercise in Conceptuality
by Wiard Popkes 13
The Concept of Paraenesis
by Troels Engberg-Pedersen 47
Was Paraenesis for Beginners?
by James M. Starr 73
Paraenesis in Light of Protrepsis
Troubling the Typical Dichotomy
by Diana M. Swancutt 113
Part II. Paraenesis in the Jewish and Graeco-Roman World
The Paraenesis of the Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs
Between Torah and Jewish Wisdom
by Johannes Thomas 157
VI Table of Contents
Four Maccabees: A Paraenetic Address?
by Stephen Westerholm 191
Paraenesis and the Concept of God According to
Oratio XII (Olympikos) of Dio of Prusa
by Hans Dieter Betz 217
Part III. Paraenesis in the New Testament
"Brotherly Advice"
Christian Siblingship and New Testament Paraenesis
by Reidar Aasgaard 237
Paraenesis in Pauline Scholarship and in Paul—
An Intricate Relationship
by Anders Klostergaard Petersen 267
Paraenesis in the Epistle to Titus
by Abraham Malherbe 297
Paraenesis or Paraclesis—Hebrews as a Test Case
by Walter Übelacker 319
Motivation as the Core of Paraenesis—Remarks on
Peter and Paul as Persuaders
by Lauri Thuren 353
Revised Conventions in Early Christian Paraenesis—
"Working Good" in 1 Peter as an Example
by Karl Olav Sandnes 373
Is There Paraenesis in 1 John?
by Jonas Holmstrand 405
Table of Contents VII
Part IV. Early Christian Paraenesis after the New Testament
The Rhetoric of Moral Exhortation in Clement's Pedagogue
by Clarence E. Glad 433
Parainesis as an Ancient Genre-Designation
The Case of the 'Euthalian Apparatus' and the 'Affiliated Argumenta'
by David Hellholm and Vemund Blomkvist 467
Wisdom, Paraenesis and the Roots of Monasticism
by Samuel Rubenson 521
Bibliography 535
Select Index of Ancient Literature 579
Index of Personal Names 601
Index of Subjects 613
Introduction
by
James M. Starr and Troels Engberg-Pedersen
This volume attempts to set a new agenda for the modern scholarly study of
ancient paraenesis ("moral exhortation" or perhaps better "injunction") by
problematizing the concept and the phenomenon in relation to two con-
nected fields. One is the more or less standard understanding of paraenesis in
modern New Testament scholarship, and the other is the scholarship directed
specifically to paraenesis over the last century—from the source and form-
critical approaches of Paul Wendland (1905) and Martin Dibelius (from
around 1910 onwards) to the more functional ones of Abraham Malherbe
(from around 1980 onwards) and the recent summary of the state of the
question by Wiard Popkes (1996). By problematizing the concept in relation
to previous scholarship and the more or less unreflective standard under-
standing, and by introducing some illuminating material that has previously
been largely overlooked, the volume aims to focus the issues that need to be
solved in order to reach a comprehensive, but still carefully nuanced, appre-
ciation of paraenesis. If we have succeeded on this score, the volume should
constitute the proper starting point for further clarification of this important
aspect of ancient, and not least early Christian, thought and practice.
The Issues
The volume is the result of a scholarly process among a group of
researchers from the Nordic countries (Denmark, Finland, Iceland, Norway
and Sweden) supplemented by a distinguished contribution from Germany
and North America. The process began at a conference in Lund, Sweden,
held August 25-27, 2000 (the "Lund conference"), and was continued at
another conference in Gran outside of Oslo, Norway, held August 24-26,
2001 (the "Oslo conference"). On the agenda was a broad range of issues
pertaining to paraenesis that reflected the scholarly discussion during the
preceding century. These issues are also all reflected, in one way or another,
in the present volume. For analytical purposes, they may be divided up into
the following categories.
2 James Μ. Starr and Troels Engberg-Pedersen
Definition. How should the concept of paraenesis be defined? What
phenomena should it be taken to cover? And how much of the textual
material that is at our disposal should be included under it? Also, is it
possible to speak—at some point in ancient history—of paraenesis as a
literary genre? Such questions are relevant to the broader Graeco-Roman
tradition, where the term itself has its origin, to the Jewish tradition, which
partly overlaps with the Graeco-Roman tradition, and to the early Christian
tradition, which completely overlaps with the other two.
The Judaism/Hellenism divide. Since the term itself has its origin within
the Graeco-Roman tradition, the question of definition raises a set of ques-
tions that pertain specifically to the Judaism/Hellenism divide. Is paraenesis
a distinctly Graeco-Roman concept and phenomenon? Or is it in fact a more
general one, even though the concept—possibly with some specific defining
features—had a distinctly Graeco-Roman origin? If one opts for the latter
view, how should paraenesis be defined so as to keep in and leave out
everything that one intuitively thinks should be kept in or left out? Or, a
third possibility, should one rather recognize that there are more or less
independent, basic types of paraenesis within different cultures that together
constitute a kind of "family" (in Wittgenstein's sense)? Also, are there any
specific features within the Jewish tradition that derive from the fact that
here one constantly had at the back of one's mind the Mosaic law, which
prohibits or commands, but hardly engages in paraenesis? (Along the same
lines, one might also try to broaden the framework even more by bringing
in ancient Egyptian material or Near-Eastern material outside Judaism.)
The specifically Christian usage. Is it possible to define a Pauline practice
of paraenesis that encompasses only those texts that are taken either
intuitively or traditionally to fall within its perimeters? If so, how does such
a stipulative understanding of paraenesis in Paul compare with what is—
either intuitively or traditionally—taken to be paraenesis in other, later
letters in the New Testament? Further, is paraenesis (both the concept and
the phenomenon) found in later ancient Christian material, from the
Apostolic fathers onwards?
The functions of paraenesis. A further set of issues that has been
extensively discussed during the last two decades revolves around the
question of function. Are there specific features to be identified regarding
the speakers of paraenesis? Or the addressees? Or the circumstances and
situations in which paraenesis was given? What social roles did paraenesis
have, whether intended or unintended? How did it shape the social field?
The importance of the concept and phenomenon. How did the concept and
practice cohere with other concepts and practices in the material where we
speak of paraenesis? And how significant was it in comparison with those
