Moral Virtues Associated with Eldership

By David A. Mappes

[David A. Mappes is Assistant Professor of Biblical Studies, Cedarville University, Cedarville, Ohio.]

In the last eighty years or so scholars have discussed the source and function of the lists of virtues and vices in the New Testament and especially the lists in the Pastoral Epistles. Some writers view these lists as a unique form of subgenre, whereas others see them as Hellenized lists of social norms that have little or no literary importance in the author’s book. Much of this discussion results from the writings of Martin Dibelius, Hans Conzelman, Adolf von Harnack, Adolf Deissmann, and other form critics who sought to discover the Sitz im Leben (“life setting”) of biblical texts.[1]

In particular the writings of Dibelius and Conzelman have influenced the discussion of the source and function of the virtue and vice lists associated with eldership and domestic roles in the New Testament.[2] The principal concern of the present study is to examine the source and function of the list of qualifications for elders in 1 Timothy 3:1–7, while interacting with the various views espoused by some proponents of the sociological-historical-exegetical approach to this passage. A central issue focuses on the source from which the apostle Paul may have obtained this list.

Mussies discusses extensively the many compilations of virtues and vices in the Hellenistic period.[3] While he points out the absence of extended formalized catalogs of virtues and vices in the Old Testament, he does overstate his position.[4] He argues for a close relationship and correspondence between the Greco-Roman virtue and vice lists and those in the New Testament.[5]

In most discussions of these lists scholars use several words and phrases, including Haustafel (“household rules”), paraenesis (“exhortation”), and christliche Bürgerlichkeit (“a Christian good-citizenship” or “bourgeois Christianity.”[6] Haustafel generally refers to a self-contained passage that describes various household or social duties.[7] These are generally grouped into Hellenistic, Jewish, and Christian codes.[8] Paraenesis is used of exhortations for ethical conduct.[9] As Malherbe says, paraenesis is “moral exhortation in which someone is advised to pursue or abstain from something.”[10] Debate often focuses on the source or use of the moral exhortation.[11] For example Easton argues that the lists of New Testament virtues and vices should be understood as a specialized subgenre. He says Paul simply used these lists as a conventional formula with which he introduced his subject matter. Thus these lists function as a genre of introduction.[12] Easton suggests that the New Testament writers rarely modified these lists from their Hellenistic sources; they simply borrowed them from Greek moral teachings of the day. He adds that this subgenre indicates that the lists should not be regarded as integral to Paul’s letters. Thus according to Easton these lists do not reflect Paul’s message.[13]

Gealy suggests that the list in 2 Timothy 3:1–7 follows “a floating list of vices currently available and easily adaptable to the writer’s purposes, a whiplash of stinging words of the sort that any orator of the time well understood where to get and how to use.”[14]

If the New Testament lists of virtues and vices do reflect distinct literary features, subgenres, or rhetorical usage, then their literary form may indeed illuminate the passages in which they exist. This may or may not be obvious from the immediate context. However, if no consistent literary pattern or source list can be demonstrated, then the meaning of the lists will always be found in their immediate context and most likely tightly woven into the author’s argument.

As Bailey and Vander Broek ask, “Is the N.T. writer simply borrowing common Hellenistic virtues or vices, items that have no relationship to the specific situation being addressed, or is he listing virtues and vices that are immediately relevant to the community in mind?”[15]

Easton writes that the lists of virtues found in 1 Timothy 3 and Titus 1 regarding church leaders (overseers and elders), are “unchanged from the non-Christian form.”[16] Easton (like many other scholars) cites Dibelius to sustain his argument that the list in 1 Timothy 3 is copied or derived from Hellenistic sources. Easton writes that the list “has really nothing more to do with the special duties of a bishop than that in Onasander[17] has to do with those of a [Roman] general: both lists represent rhetorical formulas which could be applied … to any responsible walk in life.”[18] Bailey and Vander Broek concur with Easton. “Both Onasander and the writer of 1 Timothy are tapping stereotyped Hellenistic views concerning the virtues of a responsible person, and both are using the standard list form.”[19]

This view, promoted by Dibelius, Easton, and others, continues to be an influence to this day.[20] Betz writes, “Paul does not provide the Galatians with a specifically Christian ethic. The Christian is addressed as an educated and responsible person. He is expected to do no more than what would be expected of any other educated person in the Hellenistic culture of the time. In a rather conspicuous way, Paul conforms to the ethical thought of his contemporaries.”[21] Thus according to Betz and others (many of whom are proponents of form criticism), these lists are simply statements adopted from Hellenistic philosophy and are not always related to the New Testament authors’ theological convictions.

Some writers argue that the purpose of ethical instruction in the New Testament is to create and/or sustain peaceful, harmonious coexistence with people in various social orders.[22] They say that since Christ failed to return in the first century, the church was forced to adopt a more conciliatory position with the world, since both the church and the world would continue to exist together. After citing Dibelius’s assessment of elder qualifications, Lock writes, “The sense of the speedy Parousia of the Lord had passed away…. The writer wishes to say to his churches: You are settling down to join in the life of the empire, to hold your own with your pagan neighbor.”[23]

And Koester writes, “Christianity no longer looked upon itself as a religious sect with a special divine calling that required commitment to unusual ethical demands. Rather, the church had become obligated to the world and society at large and had to fulfill the general social norms in an exemplary fashion.”[24]

Marshall conveys a similar thought. “The church was settling down to become an institution within Graeco-Roman society, and therefore it was striving to fit in with that society by the adoption of a moral code and lifestyle which were in harmony with those of the surrounding culture.”[25] Regarding elder qualifications Marshall says that “many of the qualities are such as are found in secular lists, which are equally general in content.”[26]

Ehrman argues that the roles of women had to be curtailed because of “social pressure” and that the later New Testament authors wrote to realign the social balance. He writes,

The eschatological fervor that had driven the original proclamation began to wane (notice how it is muted already in the Pastorals), and the church grew in size and strength. More and more it took on public dimension, with hierarchy and a structure, a public mission, a public voice, and a concern for public relations. The church, in other words, settled in for the long haul, and the apocalyptic message that had brought women relative freedom from the oppressive constraints of their society took a back seat…. The Roman ideology of gender relations became Christianized and the social implications of Paul’s apocalyptic vision became lost.[27]

Harris advocates a similar argument. “Although the author [of 1 Timothy] says that church officials must demonstrate all the virtues typical of Hellenistic ethical philosophy (3:2–23), he says nothing about their intellectual qualifications or possession of the Spirit…. The Pastor’s standards for church office are merely hallmarks of middle-class respectability.”[28] Harris assumes that the lists of virtues associated with eldership simply reflect a Hellenistic standard.[29] Thus the ethical admonitions regarding New Testament believers and church leaders are no different from the ethical expectations of the general populace.[30]

Elder Qualifications in 1 Timothy 3:1-6

Compared to Other Greco-Roman Lists of Virtues and Vices

Commentators generally suggest several sources that Paul may have used in composing his list of qualifications for elders. Bernard says that Paul’s list was like that of the Stoic philosophers mentioned by Diogenes Laërtius.[31] “A comparison of the qualifications of the ἐπίσκοποι enumerated above with the characteristics of the stoic σοφο?ς (Diog. Laert. VII 116ff.) is interesting. We cannot think it impossible that the Apostle was acquainted with the latter list, which was one of the commonplaces of stoic teaching of the day.”[32]

However, a comparison between Diogenes Laërtius and Paul’s list reveals few verbal or conceptual similarities.[33]

Houlden points to similarities between elder qualifications and Polycarp’s epistle to the Philippians as well as similarities to the Community Rule Four in the Dead Sea Scrolls.[34] Houlden argues that Paul’s list of elder qualifications “is conventional in type, paralled in numerous Jewish, pagan, and Christian sources.”[35]

The Community Rule document (known as the Manual of Discipline) is probably one of the oldest documents of the Essene community, written about 100 B.C.[36] The document contains extracts from various sermons, ceremonies, and a penal code, and it addresses matters of discipline and community organization.[37] The section of the document cited by Houlden describes the responsibilities of the community’s teachers, masters, and guardians. Community Rule Four discusses qualities for community leaders in a general way.[38]

While scholars debate the date of Polycarp’s Epistle to the Philippians, the two generally accepted dates of the epistle are shortly after A.D. 110 or between 135 and 137.[39] Both dates are well after the writing of 1 Timothy and thus could not have been consulted by Paul.[40]

As already noted, many commentators cite Dibelius and Conzelmann’s analysis of the verbal correspondence between the Hellenistic lists of virtues and virtues required of elders in 1 Timothy. Dibelius and Conzelmann argue that Stratego (“The General”), by the Platonic philosopher Onasander, was used in the writing of 1 Timothy. According to Oldfather, who wrote a brief introduction to Stratego, the influence of this work was significant in antiquity and “most subsequent military writers are indebted to him.”[41]

In a section entitled “The Choice of a General” Onasander wrote, “I believe, then that we must choose a general, not because of noble birth as priests are chosen, nor because of wealth as superintendents of the gymnasia, but because he is temperate, self-restrained, vigilant, frugal, hardened to labour, alert, free from avarice, neither too young nor too old, indeed a father of children if possible, a ready speaker, and a man with a good reputation.”[42]

Onasander continues his discourse by explaining each of the aforementioned virtues. A number of verbal correspondences between 1 Timothy 3:2–7 and Onasander’s list are evident.

Onasander 1.2-17

1 Timothy 3:2–7

σώφρονα (“sensible”) ἐγκρατῆ (“self-restrained”) νήπτην (“vigilant”) λιτόν (“frugal”) διάπονον (“hardened to labour”) νοερόν (“alert”) ἀφιλάργυρον (“free from avarice”) μιᾶς γυναικὸς ἄνδρα (“a one-woman-man”) νηφάλιον (“temperate”) σώφρονα (“sensible”) κόσμιον (“orderly”) φιλόξενον (“hospitable”) διδακτικόν (“able to teach”) οὔτε δὲ νέον οὔτε πρεσβύτερον (“neither too young or too old”) πατέρα (“a father”) λέγειν δ ᾿ ἱκανὸν (“ready speaker”) ἔνδοξον (“good reputation”)

μὴ πάροινον (“not an excessive wine drinker”) μὴ πλήκτην (“not pugnacious”) ἐπιεικῆ (“gentle”) ἄμαχον (“uncontentious”) ἀφιλάργυρον (“free from the love of money”) τοῦ ἰδίου οἴκου καλῶς προῒστάμενον (“ruling his own household well”) τέκνα ἔχοντα ἐν ὑποταγῇ μετὰ πάσης σεμνότητος (“having children in subjection, with all dignity”) μὴ νεόφυτον (“not a recent convert”) μαρτυρίαν καλὴν ἔχειν ἀπὸ τῶν ἔξωθεν (“have a good reputation with those outside the church”)

Two of the eleven words in Onasander’s list are also found in Paul’s list of elder qualifications and three other words are similar. Both σώφρονα (“sensible”) in 1 Timothy 3:2 and ἀφιλάργυρον (“free from the love of money”) in verse 3 have a counterpart in Onasander’s list. Three other terms or phrases are similar: self-restrained; being a father (though with different implications than in the Pastoral Epistles); and a man of good reputation.

Dissimilarities between the lists are also apparent. Unique to Paul’s list are these qualifications: ability to teach, not an excessive wine drinker, not a new convert, having children in subjection, and having the ability to govern the church based on managing one’s own family. The requirement of not being a new convert, while similar to Onasander’s comment (“neither too young or too old”) has a different meaning.[43] Paul was concerned here with Christian maturity and not simply the overseer’s age.

The dissimilarities discount the hypothesis of Dibelius and others that the writer of the Pastorals used a well-known list of virtues and vices to call the church to a conciliatory position with society.

The fact that small dissimilarities exist between deacon and elder qualifications also mitigates against the idea that one stylized generic list was used simply for rhetorical affect. If only one list existed, then Paul could not have clearly made distinctions between qualifications for elders and deacons. Knight correctly concludes that “the lists for the bishop and the deacons share certain distinctive concepts that are appropriate for the particular ministry of that group and do not appear to be a mere echoing of some existing list.”[44] Johnson agrees. “There is really no parallel in the undisputed letters to this sort of list of qualities … due, in part, to the fact that Paul nowhere else addresses the same circumstances.”[45] The crucial issue is not whether Paul’s list of virtues was similar in any way to lists in other communities. Rather, the point is that in listing these virtues Paul communicated his own theological intent.[46]

Fee believes that while the similarities between the elder qualifications and Onasander’s list are “striking,” they are nonetheless “very likely coincidental.”[47] Similarities between words, ideas, and values, certainly do not constitute a borrowing. “Each of the Pastorals’ vice lists seems different enough from the others to need its own explanation and to resist our reduction of them all to a single, rigid literary form.”[48]

Other vice and virtue lists in the New Testament also discount the idea of one stylized common list. They have no clearly identifiable literary form or subgenre. Various New Testament lists are used to describe pagans, Spirit-filled believers, professing believers, and various age, ethnic, and gender groups. “When Paul used traditional materials, he presumably adapted them for his own purposes and integrated them into the flow of thought of his letters. One should not base an interpretation on an alleged pre-Pauline form…. Such an enterprise is often too speculative and one can end up arguing in a vicious circle…. We can know Paul’s meaning as he expressed it in the text.”[49]

The vice list in 2 Corinthians 12:20–21 is directly related to the factions in the church in Corinth. And the list of vices in the Galatian church may be indicative of the problems those believers were experiencing (Gal. 5:19–23).

Furnish convincingly argues that the New Testament writers imprinted their theological intent in their lists of virtues and vices.[50] While there is no doubt that Paul did appeal to established Jewish and Christian moral traditions (e.g., in Rom. 16:17; 1 Cor. 4:17; 2 Thess. 3:6), he used them in such a way as to convey his own intended meaning.

The Function of Elder Qualifications in the Pastorals

One of Paul’s purposes in listing the qualifications for elders in 1 Timothy 3:1–7 and Titus 1:5–9 was to help Timothy differentiate between true and false teachers. Paul emphasized that teaching must be accompanied with personal “godliness” (1 Tim. 6:3; Titus 1:1). While the exact meaning of “godliness” (εὐσέβεια) in the Pastorals is debated,[51] the word points to a contrast between false teachers, false doctrine, and wrong conduct and true teachers, true doctrine, and right conduct.[52] The false teachers held to a form of godliness (2 Tim. 3:5), but it did not result in good deeds (Titus 1:16; 3:8–11). They taught strange doctrines (1 Tim. 1:3; 2 Tim. 4:15).[53]

In contrast true teachers adhere to (and thus model) sound doctrine that conforms to godliness (εὐσέβεια).[54] Karris writes, “The good teacher preserves the legacy of Paul intact and uses it as a standard by which he can judge between orthodoxy and heresy.”[55] On the other hand “in 1 Tim. 1:9–10, the vices are depicted as a necessary result of being heterodox.”[56] Thus Paul used the elder qualifications and lists of vices in the Pastoral Epistles to construct a polemic against the false teachers. This is evident in 1 Timothy 1:3–11; 4:1–16; 6:3–19; 2 Timothy 2:14–4:5; Titus 1:10–16; 3:9.

Mounce’s chart illustrates how some of the virtues associated with church leadership contrast with the vices of false teachers.[57]

Overseer 1 Tim. 3:1–7	Deacons 1 Tim. 3:8–13	Elder Titus 1:5–9	Opponents
“good work”			“worthless for any good deed” (Titus 1:16)
“above reproach”; “good reputation”	“above reproach”	“above reproach”	bring reproach on the church (Titus 1:11–14)
“one-woman man”	“one-woman man”	“one-woman man”	seduce women (2 Tim. 3:6)
“self-controlled”		“self-controlled”	uncontrolled (2 Tim. 3:6)
“hospitable”		“hospitable”	upset house churches (2 Tim. 3:6)
“skilled teacher”		“able to exhort with sound teaching and rebuke”	teaching a different gospel (1 Tim. 1:3; cf. 4:7; 5:3; 6:4, 20; 2 Tim. 4:3–4)
“do not fall into the devil’s snare”			taken captive by the devil (1 Tim. 1:20; 4:1; 5:15; 2 Tim. 2:26)
“gracious”		“not arrogant”	teaching results in “quarrels” (2 Tim. 2:23; Titus 3:9)
“not a lover of money”	“not greedy”	“not greedy for gain”	think godliness is a “means of profit” (1 Tim. 6:5); “lovers of money” (2 Tim. 3:2); “shameful gain” (Titus 1:11)
“managing his own household well, having submissive children”	“managing their children and their own household well”	“having faithful children, not … rebellious”	“disobedient to parents” (2 Tim. 3:2); “rebellious” (Titus 1:10)

These leadership qualifications present a code of conduct that enhances and illumines sound teaching. The elder qualifications describe what the elder is to be like (1 Tim. 3:1–2) and what he is not to be like (vv. 3–4). The vices mentioned in verses 2–4 depict false teachers; hence the vices depicting what an elder is not to be like demonstrate the error of the false teachers and their doctrine since their conduct conforms to the stated vices.

The Importance of the Elder’s Personal Example

The polemic function of the lists, however, is not their only purpose. They also have a didactic function, at least on two levels. They provide a general description of the godly life, and they call church officers to be examples (τύποι)[58] of the godly life.[59] Elders and deacons are to set the standard for ethical behavior to which all believers should aspire.[60] The elder qualifications are not to differentiate or segregate believers into two distinct classes, though they have often had this effect.[61] Church leaders are to model a life of godliness so that others can imitate them.[62]

Paul and other writers often underscored the importance of personal example. By godly living elders defend their own ministry as well as encourage believers to be worthy of imitation by others. In 1 Thessalonians 1:6–7 Paul wrote, “You also became imitators [μιμηταὶ] of us [ἡμῶν] and of the Lord … so that you became an example [τύπον] to all the believers in Macedonia and in Achaia.” In 2 Thessalonians 3:6–9 Paul substantiated the ethical uprightness of his ministry (not being a burden, v. 8) and wrote that he set aside apostolic prerogatives “in order to offer ourselves as a model [τύπον] for you, so that you would follow our example [μιμεῖσθαι].”[63] Paul did not consider himself the only model to be imitated. In both 1 and 2 Thessalonians he included Timothy and Silvanus as those who should be followed, thus substantiating the point that such imitation is not to be restricted to the apostles.[64]

Paul enjoined believers in Philippi to imitate him (συμμιμηταί μου) as well as those who walk according to the pattern (τύπον) that had been established (Phil. 3:17). For Paul, imitation would provide a sense of unity. Also he urged the Corinthian believers, “Be imitators [μιμηταί] of me, just as I also am of Christ” (1 Cor. 11:1). Thus the imitatio Christi that Paul advocated is a kind of “mediated imitation,” as Stanley put it—from Christ to Paul to others.[65]

This aspect of mediated imitation necessarily involves the fullness of the Spirit, as He transforms believers into the image of Christ.[66] “Behind the Christian life and its virtues, invisibly and secretly, there is the life and perfection of the Lord Jesus Christ.”[67]

Paul’s instruction in 2 Timothy 1:14 typifies this sense of the Spirit-empowered life: “Guard, through the Holy Spirit who dwells in us, the treasure which has been entrusted to you.” Paul’s instruction to Titus also illustrates this sense of example. “In all things show yourself to be an example [τύπον] of good deeds, with purity in doctrine, dignified, sound in speech which is beyond reproach, so that the opponent will be put to shame, having nothing bad to say about us” (Titus 2:7–8). This imitation springs forth from the Spirit's transforming work. When one is filled with the Spirit (who is God), thus bearing the fruit of the Spirit, one’s actions are deemed worthy of imitation since God is thereby being imitated.

The idea of imitation is even clearer in Scriptures that address leadership. Elders should be “examples [τύποι] to the flock” (1 Pet. 5:3). Being an example is inherent to the command to shepherd the sheep.[68] If an elder is not an example, he cannot shepherd the flock of God as an undershepherd. In Paul’s farewell to the Ephesian elders at Miletus, he spoke of his free and pure conscience and his irreproachable conduct. Then he pointed to his personal example in shepherding, as he exhorted these elders to shepherd their flock faithfully (Acts 20:28). Clearly he was directing them to follow his example in all things (v. 35), including hard work, personal sacrifice, and faithfulness.[69]

When the New Testament writers called for their readers to imitate them, they were not suggesting that those believers copy their personalities, experiences, gifts, or achievements.[70] Instead Paul urged his readers to follow his example of joyful endurance in suffering (1 Thess. 1:6), industriousness and self-sacrifice (2 Thess. 3:7–9), humility and self-giving (1 Cor. 4:15–16), relinquishing his rights (9:1–11:1), and complete commitment to Christ (Phil. 3:12–17).[71]

Throughout his Pastoral Epistles Paul presented himself to Timothy as a model Christian (e.g., 1 Tim. 1:12–17), who appropriated the power of the gospel through the Spirit. This was to encourage Timothy to be faithful in the face of his difficulties.[72] Paul explicitly challenged Timothy to follow his example in teaching and conduct (2 Tim. 1:8–14; 2:3; 3:10–13; 4:5).

As Timothy followed Paul’s pattern of teaching, conduct, purpose, faith, patience, love, and perseverance (2 Tim. 1:13; 3:10), Timothy would then be a pattern (τύπος) for others in speech, conduct, love, faith, and purity (1 Tim. 4:12). In addition Timothy was to entrust Paul’s teaching to faithful men who would be able to teach others (2 Tim. 2:2). Since the teaching of “sound doctrine” necessarily involves personal example (1 Tim. 4:6; Titus 2:1–2), these faithful men would be examples to others.

Conclusion

Paul used the qualifications of church leaders and the function of personal example throughout the Pastoral Epistles to form a polemic against the false teachers’ conduct and teaching, while at the same time instructing the church as to the nature of sound doctrine. These qualifications also point out the ethical behavior required of church leaders and of all believers.

Notes

1. Scholars who practice what is sometimes referred to as “sociological-historical-exegesis” assume that types of literature or genres are bound to and shaped by specific types of social life settings (Sitze im Leben). Critiques of this approach include Brent Holmberg, Sociology and the New Testament: An Appraisal (Minneapolis: Fortress, 1990); Thomas F. Best, “Sociological Study of the New Testament: Promise and Peril of a New Discipline,” Scottish Journal of Theology 36 (1983): 181-94; and Robert Scrogs, “Sociological Interpretation of the New Testament: The Present State of Research,” New Testament Studies 26 (1980): 164-79.
2. Martin Dibelius and Hans Conzelmann, The Pastoral Epistles, Hermeneia (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1972). See also Martin Dibelius, James: A Commentary on the Epistle to James, rev. H. Greeven, trans. M. A. Williams, Hermeneia (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1976), 3, 19–23; and Martin Dibelius, From Tradition to Gospel of Paul, trans. Bertram L. Wolf (New York: Scribner, 1935), 233–65.
3. Gerard Mussies, “Catalogues of Sins and Virtues Personified,” in Studies in Gnosticism and Hellenistic Religions, ed. R. van Broek and M. J. Vermaseren (Leiden: Brill, 1981), 315–35. Also Anton Vögtle compiled and analyzed several New Testament lists (Die Tugend- und Lasterkatalogue in Neuen Testament: exegetisch, religions- und formgeschichtlich Untersucht [Münster: Aschendorff, 1936]). See also Abraham J. Malherbe, Moral Exhortation: A Greco-Roman Sourcebook (Philadelphia: Westminster, 1986).
4. A few short lists of vice do appear in Proverbs 6:17–19; Jeremiah 7:9; and Hosea 4:2, though vice lists appear in later Jewish literature (e.g., Apocalypse of Abraham 24; 1 Enoch 10:20; 2 Enoch 9:1; 10:4–6; 34:1–2).
5. Mussies identifies the following lists of virtues in the New Testament: 2 Corinthians 6:6–7; Galatians 5:22–23; Ephesians 4:2–3; 4:32–5:2; 5:9; Philippians 4:8; Colossians 3:12; 1 Timothy 3:2–4, 8–10, 11–12; 4:12; 6:11, 18; 2 Timothy 2:22–25; 3:10; Titus 1:8; 2:2–10; Hebrews 7:26; 1 Peter 3:8; 2 Peter 1:5–7 (Mussies, “Catalogues of Sins and Virtues Personified,” 67, 172).
6. Towner, Kidd, and Schrage critique the christliche Bürgerlichkeit (P. H. Towner, The Goal of Our Instruction: The Structure of Theology and Ethics in the Pastoral Epistles [Sheffield: Sheffield Academic, 1989]; Reggie M. Kidd, Wealth and Beneficence in the Pastoral Epistles [Atlanta: Scholars, 1990]; and Wolfgang Schrage, The Ethics of the New Testament, trans. David E. Green [Philadelphia: Fortress, 1988], 257–68).
7. Haustafel, which comes from the German word Haustafeln (“tables of household rules”), describes the responsibilities of household members (New Testament examples include Eph. 5:21–6:9; Col. 3:18–4:1; and 1 Pet. 2:13–3:12). Dibelius, Weidinger, Crouch, Balch, and Verner use this term to articulate how first-century Christians lived their new life in Christ within the framework of the first-century social orders.
8. James E. Crouch, The Origin and Intention of the Colossian Haustafel (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1972), 10–31.
9. Paraenesis is related to the Greek word παράκλησις (“exhortation”), which is used of shunning vices and/or cultivating virtues (e.g., Rom. 1:1–2; 15:30–32: 1 Thess. 4:1, 10b). See W. C. Coetzer, “The Literary Genre of Paranesis in the Pauline Letters,” Theologia Evangelica 17 (September 1984): 36-42.
10. Malherbe, Moral Exhortation, 124.
11. The content of the exhortation is often viewed as traditional material rather than new content. For example Paul often used the phrase “as you know” to introduce his moral exhortations (e.g., 1 Cor. 6:9; 1 Thess. 1:5; 2:2, 5, 11; 3:4). This feature of paraenesis, in which the New Testament authors appealed to material known by the readers, has led some scholars to conclude wrongly that this traditional material may not relate to the situations addressed by the New Testament authors. Malherbe cautions against this method of interpretation. “Related to this feature is its general applicability, which does not mean, however, that paraenesis is not related or adapted to the setting in which it is given” (ibid.).
12. Burton Scott Easton, “New Testament Ethical Lists,” Journal of Biblical Literature 51 (1932): 1-12. Fitzgerald and Quinn also discuss this issue (John T. Fitzgerald, “Virtue/Vice Lists,” in The Anchor Bible Dictionary, ed. David Noel Freedman [Nashville: Doubleday], 1992; and Jerome D. Quinn, “Parenesis and the Pastoral Epistles,” in De La Tôrah au Messie, ed. Maurice Carrez, Joseph Doré, and Pierre Grelot [Paris: Desclée, 1981], 495–501).
13. Easton, “New Testament Ethical Lists,” 1–3.
14. Fred D. Gealy, “II Timothy: Text, Exegesis, and Exposition,” in The Interpreter’s Bible, ed. George A. Butterick, vol. 11 (Nashville: Abingdon, 1955), 498.
15. James L. Bailey and Lyle D. Vander Broek, Literary Forms in the New Testament: A Handbook (Louisville: Westminster John Knox, 1992), 67.
16. Easton, “New Testament Ethical Lists,” 11.
17. Some scholars have identified what they claim is verbal correspondence between the list of virtues that Onasander used of a military leader and the list Paul used in 1 Timothy 3:2–4.
18. Easton, “New Testament Ethical Lists,” 10.
19. Bailey and Vander Broek, Literary Forms in the New Testament, 66.
20. See Victor Paul Furnish, Theology and Ethics in Paul (Nashville: Abingdon, 1968); and Richard Hayes, The Moral Vision of the New Testament: A Contemporary Introduction to New Testament Ethics (Harper: San Francisco, 1996).
21. Hans Dieter Betz, Galatians, Hermeneia (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1979), 292.
22. Dibelius and Conzelmann, The Pastoral Epistles, 8–10, 39, 141; H. von Campenhausen, Tradition and Life in the Early Church: Essays and Lectures in Church History (London: Collins, 1968), 155–59; Martin Hengel, Property and Riches in the Early Church: Aspects of a Social History of Early Christianity (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1974), 57–59; and Jack T. Sanders, Ethics in the New Testament (London: SCM, 1975), 81–90.
23. Walter Lock, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Pastoral Epistles, International Critical Commentary (Edinburgh: Clark, 1978), xiv-xv.
24. Helmut Koester, Introduction to the New Testament: History and Literature of Early Christianity, Hermeneia (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1982), 302.
25. I. Howard Marshall, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Pastoral Epistles, International Critical Commentary (Edinburgh: Clark, 1999), 94–95. Marshall cites Dibelius and Conzelmann in his discussion, though it is difficult to ascertain to what degree he supports the position proposed by them.
26. Ibid., 473.
27. Bart D. Ehrman, The New Testament: A Historical Introduction to the Early Christian Writings (New York: Oxford, 1997), 350.
28. Stephen L. Harris, The New Testament: A Student’s Introduction (Mountain View, CA: Mayfield, 1999), 316.
29. Ibid., 317.
30. Mark Harding is another recent advocate of a modified view of this position (Tradition and Rhetoric in the Pastoral Epistles [New York: Peter Lang, 1998]).
31. Diogenes Laërtius (early third century A.D.) wrote about the lives and doctrines of ancient philosophers. The philosopher and writing addressed by Diogenes relating to the subject matter in this article is Zeno of Elea (333-261 B.C.). Geoffrey S. Kirk provides further discussion on the life and writings of Zeno in The Presocratic Philosophers: A Critical History with a Selection of Texts (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1963), 263–79.
32. J. H. Bernard, The Pastoral Epistles: With Introduction and Notes (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1899; reprint, Grand Rapids: Baker, 1980), 57.
33. The two similarities pointed out by Bernard focus on statements about the philosopher’s family life. According to Zeno, “The Stoics approve also of honoring parents and brothers in the second place next after the gods. They further maintain that parental affection for children is natural to the good” (Diogenes Laërtius, ed. T. E. Page, trans. R. D. Hicks, Loeb Classical Library [Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1965], 2:225 [Diogenes Laërtius, 7.120-23]). Obviously little correspondence exists between Paul’s list and Zeno’s discussion of virtues. In fact Zeno’s statements are in a discourse, not a list.
34. J. L. Houlden, The Pastoral Epistles: I and II Timothy, Titus, Pelican New Testament Commentaries (Philadelphia: Trinity, 1989), 77.
35. Ibid.
36. Geza Vermes, The Dead Sea Scrolls in English, 3d ed. (London: Penguin, 1987), 62.
37. Ibid. Hershel Shanks provides helpful insights pertaining to this document (The Mystery and Meaning of the Dead Sea Scrolls [New York: Random House, 1998], 90–97).
38. The list in the Community Rule Four (4Q257 2 I) includes more than twenty virtues and more than twenty vices. The virtues include meekness, patience, generous compassion, eternal goodness, intelligence, understanding, wisdom, enthusiasm for the decrees of justice, and careful behavior. The vices include greed, sluggishness, wickedness, falsehood, pride, haughtiness of heart, dishonesty, trickery, cruelty, impatience, much foolishness, a blasphemous tongue, and hardness of heart. See The Dead Sea Scrolls Study Edition, ed. and trans. Florentino Garcia Martinez and Eibert J. C. Tigchelaar, vol. 1 (New York: Brill, 1997), 77. For further discussion on leadership qualities and qualifications in ancient culture, see David A. Mappes, “The ‘Elder’ in the Old and New Testaments,” Bibliotheca Sacra 154 (January-March 1997): 90-92.
39. See Michael W. Holmes, “Polycarp of Smyrna,” in Dictionary of the Later New Testament and Its Developments, ed. Ralph P. Martin and Peter H. Davids (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity, 1997), 937. Polycarp’s martyrdom occurred in 155 or 156. Since he claimed to have been a Christian for eighty-six years, his birth was in 69 or 70 (Cyril Richardson, trans and ed., Early Christian Fathers [New York: Macmillan, 1970], 121–28). Thus Polycarp’s writing could not have predated Paul’s writing of the Pastoral Epistles.
40. In his Epistle to the Philippians Polycarp wrote, “Likewise the deacons should be blameless before his righteousness, as servants of God and Christ and not of men; not slanderers, or double-tongued, not lovers of money, temperate in all matters, compassionate, careful, living according to the truth of the Lord, who became servant of all” (Richardson, Early Christian Fathers, 132).
41. William A. Oldfather, “Introduction,” in Aeneas Tacticus, Asclepiodotus, Onasander, in Loeb Classical Library (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1923), 351–52. Oldfather suggests that Stratego was written in about A.D. 58 (ibid., 347 n. 3).
42. Ibid., 375 (Onasander, 1.1).
43. The matter of age is not directly associated with the office of church leadership (Mappes, “The ‘Elder’ in the Old and New Testaments,” 85–88).
44. George Knight, The Pastoral Epistles: A Commentary on the Greek Text (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1992), 151.
45. Luke Timothy Johnson, The First and Second Letters to Timothy: A New Translation with Introduction and Commentary, Anchor Bible (New York: Doubleday, 2001), 213.
46. Dio Chrysostom (A.D. 40-ca. 112) wrote that kings will illustrate true kingship by their virtues, and then he discussed those virtues (Oration 4.83-96, quoted in Malherbe, Moral Exhortation, 138–42). Crates (365-285 B.C.) wrote, “Shun not only the worst of evils, injustices and self-indulgence, but also their causes, pleasures. For you will concentrate on these alone, both present and future, and on nothing else. And pursue not only the best of goods, self-control and perseverance, but also their causes, toils, and do not shun them on account of their harshness” (Crates, Epistle 15, quoted in Malherbe, Moral Exhortation, 141). Malherbe discusses portions of eighteen other Greco-Roman classic sources, including Cicero, De Officiis (106-34 B.C.); Pseudo-Demetrius, Epistolary Types (fourth century B.C.); Epictetus, Discourses (A.D. 55-135); Horace, Satires, Epistles, and Ars Poetica (65-8 B.C.); Isocrates, To Demonicus (436-338 B.C.); Musonius Rufus, Musonius Rufus: The Roman Socrates (first century A.D.); Seneca, Epistulae Morales and Moral Essays (4 B.C.-A.D. 65). No one of these works approximates Paul’s list of elder qualifications. As Malherbe points out, the absence or presence of certain items reflects the authors’ intent. “Catalogs of virtues and vice are used widely but not indiscriminately…. The presence or absence of certain items reflected the values of the authors” (Moral Exhortation, 13). So while similarities certainly exist between lists of virtues and vices, those similarities do not imply that the New Testament authors simply copied them or that the New Testament authors did not imprint their own intended meaning on these virtues and vices. See also Mussies, “Catalogues of Sins and Virtues Personified,” 315–35; Vögtle, Die Tugend- und Lasterkatalogue in Neuen Testament; and W. D. Davies, “The Relevance of the Moral Teaching of the Early Church,” in Neotestamentica et Semitica: Studies in Honour of Matthew Black, ed. E. Earle Ellis and Max Wilcox (Edinburgh: Clark, 1969), 30–49.
47. Gordon D. Fee, 1 and 2 Timothy, Titus, New International Biblical Commentary (Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 1984), 78–84.
48. Neil J. McEleney, “Vice Lists of the Pastoral Epistles,” Catholic Biblical Quarterly 36 (1974): 204.
49. Thomas R. Schreiner, Interpreting the Pauline Epistles (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1990), 39–40.
50. Furnish, Theology and Ethics in Paul, 81, 92–101.
51. C. Spicq claims εὐσέβεια emphasizes one’s inner attitude toward God. Therefore he contends εὐσέβεια is similar to the fear of the Lord in the Old Testament (Les Épitres Pastorales [Paris: Gabalda, 1969], 1:485). Dibelius and Conzelmann claim that the predominate idea of εὐσέβεια “illustrates the idea of good, honorable citizenship” (The Pastoral Epistles, 39). Foerster indicates that εὐσέβεια is more of a respectful attitude toward societal structures as opposed to certain virtuous or ethical behavior. Thus he advocates that in the Pastorals εὐσέβεια characterizes those who respect the structures that promote life (W. Foerster, “Eusebeia in den Pastoralbriefen,” New Testament Studies 5 [1959]: 215-16). Εὐσεβέω occurs only in Acts 17:23 and 1 Timothy 5:4, but εὐσέβεια occurs in 1 Timothy 2:2; 3:16; 4:7–8; 6:3, 5–6, 11; 2 Timothy 3:5; Titus 1:1, and εὐσεβῶς occurs in 2 Timothy 3:12 and Titus 2:12. These words appear almost exclusively in the Pastoral Epistles. Godliness and healthy doctrine are associated (1 Tim. 6:3), as are unhealthy doctrine and ungodliness. Godliness is a virtue to seek (1 Tim. 6:11; Titus 1:1; 2:12), predicated on the mystery of the work of Christ (1 Tim. 3:16), a manner of life lived in relationship to God (2 Tim. 3:12), based on one’s faith in Him (1 Tim. 3:16; 6:3). Towner rightly concludes that εὐσέβεια characterizes Christian existence as the practical (visible) result of adhering to this correct knowledge of (belief in) God (The Goal of Our Instruction, 151–52). In the Pastoral Epistles εὐσέβεια is a proper manner of Christian life that results from belief and adherence to sound doctrine. False teachers, on the other hand, did not believe sound doctrine, nor did their manner of life conform to sound doctrine. Believers who exhibit εὐσέβεια show that they properly understand and adhere to God’s saving work in their lives. See Donald Guthrie, The Pastoral Epistles, Tyndale New Testament Commentaries (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1990), 169–70; and J. N. D. Kelly, A Commentary on the Pastoral Epistles, Black’s New Testament Commentaries (London: Adam Black, 1963), 194–95. Knight writes, “The false teachers are professing to be Christians and engaging in a form of Christianity without knowing its reality” (Knight, The Pastoral Epistles, 432).
52. Paul often used antitheses to contrast his teaching (e.g., Gal. 1:10–12; 4:12; 5:11–13; 6:14–15; Phil. 3:3–4) to those who were disturbing the churches by their erroneous teachings (Benjamin Fiore, The Function of Personal Example in the Socratic and Pastoral Epistles [Rome: Biblical Institute, 1986], 187).
53. In the opening verses of 1 Timothy Paul contrasted the false teachers and their doctrine (1:3–4) with his teaching (1:5). There is an antithesis throughout the Pastorals between Paul’s statement in 1:5 (“the goal of our instruction is love from a pure heart and a good conscience and a sincere faith”) and the false teachers who did not have a pure heart (Titus 1:15), a good conscience, or sincere faith (1 Tim. 1:19–20; Titus 1:16).
54. First Timothy 1:3–11; 4:6, 11–12; 6:3–5; 6:11–19; 2 Timothy 1:13; 2:1–2; 3:10–17; 4:1–5.
55. Robert Joseph Karris, “The Function and Sitz im Leben of the Paraenetic Elements in the Pastoral Epistles” (Ph.D. diss., Harvard University, 1971), 57.
56. Lewis R. Donelson, Pseudepigraphy and the Ethical Argument in the Pastoral Epistles (Tübingen: J. B. Mohr [Paul Siebeck], 1986), 174.
57. Adapted from William D. Mounce, Pastoral Epistles, Word Biblical Commentary (Nashville: Nelson, 2000), 156–58.
58. Τύπος is “a visible impression of a stroke or pressure,” “copy, image,” “that which is formed,” “form, figure, pattern,” “type, pattern, model,” and a symbol that foreshadows (Walter Baur, William F. Arndt, and F. Wilbur Gingrich, A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature, 2d ed., rev. Frederick W. Danker and F. Wilbur Gingrich [Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1979], 837–38). The noun τύπος most likely derived from the verb τύπτω, which means to strike a blow or form something by an impression. Τύπος occurs three times in association with “imitation” (Phil. 3:17; 1 Thess. 1:6–7; 2 Thess. 3:9), thus suggesting a pattern or model to be followed. Τύπος also occurs in Titus 2:7 and 1 Peter 5:3.
59. Donelson, Pseudepigraphy and Ethical Argument in the Pastoral Epistles, 174–76.
60. Paul masterfully exhibited moral character throughout the Pastoral Epistles. He was an example in knowledge (1 Tim. 1:8; Titus 1:1), faith (1 Tim. 2:7; Titus 1:1, 4), toil and labor (1 Tim. 4:10), suffering (2 Tim. 2:9–10), forgiveness of those who abandoned him (4:16), and recognition of God’s protection (1:12; 4:16–18) and power (4:17) (Fiore, The Function of Personal Example in the Socratic and Pastoral Epistles, 215). See also E. Kenneth Lee, “Words Denoting ‘Pattern’ in the New Testament,” New Testament Studies 8 (1961–62): 166-73.
61. “Pastoral responsibility can never remain the reserve of a select few but always exists as an obligation upon every member of the community” (Robert Banks, Paul’s Idea of Community: The Early House Churches in Their Historical Setting [Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1980], 147).
62. Many of these elder qualifications are also virtues for other church community members to follow. Temperate (νηφαλίους) appears in 1 Timothy 3:11 and Titus 2:2; sensible (σώφρονας) appears in Titus 2:2, 5; orderly (κοσμεῖν) is used in 1 Timothy 2:9; hospitable (φιλόξενοι) appears in 1 Peter 4:9; able to teach (διδακτικόν) is in 2 Timothy 2:24; gentle (έπιεικεῖς) appears in Philippians 4:5; Titus 3:2; James 3:17; and 1 Peter 2:18; uncontentious (ἀμάχους) appears in Titus 3:2; not a lover of money (ἀφιλάργυρος) appears in Hebrews 13:5; and having obedient children is referred to in Ephesians 5:6 and Colossians 3:20.
63. Μιμέομαι means to “imitate, emulate, follow, use as a model,” while μίμημα is a “copy” or “image” (Bauer, Arndt, and Gingrich, A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature, 523).
64. The first-person plural personal pronouns throughout both letters indicate Timothy and Silvanus were also models to be imitated.
65. D. M. Stanley, “ ‘Become Imitators of Me’: The Pauline Conception of Apostolic Tradition,” Biblica 40 (1959): 877. On the nine times Paul used “imitate” or “imitators” see Roy B. Zuck, Teaching as Paul Taught (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1998), 120–23.
66. Paul’s injunction in Ephesians 5:1 to be “imitators of God” is related to Christian maturity and to the fullness of the Spirit. “The life of the Christian disciple as imitatorChristi is not any kind of yoga of self-endeavor. It is not a process that is initiated and sustained by the Christian believer, as if the imitatio Christi were some kind of literal mimicry. It is a process initiated and sustained by the Spirit as Paraclete, and in it he conforms the pattern of life to that of the Lord so men may be aware that they are his disciples” (E. J. Tinsley, The Imitation of God in Christ: An Essay on the Biblical Basis of Christian Spirituality [Philadelphia: Westminster, 1960], 130–31).
67. Ibid., 138.
68. The imperative ποιμάνατε governs all the other participles in the passage. Shepherding involves (a) exercising oversight with proper motivation, (b) not misusing authority, and (c) being an example.
69. Willis Peter De Boer, The Imitation of Paul: An Exegetical Study (Kampen: Kok, 1962), 201–5.
70. Tinsley, The Imitation of God in Christ, 139.
71. Adele Reinhartz, “On the Meaning of the Pauline Exhortation: ‘mimetai mou ginesthe—Become Imitators of Me,’ ” Studies in Religion/Sciences Religieuses 16 (1987): 402; Boykin Sanders, “Imitating Paul,” Harvard Theological Review 74 (1981): 353-63; and De Boer, The Imitation of Paul, 206–7.
72. Raymond F. Collins, “The Image of Paul in the Pastorals,” Laval Theologique et Philosophique 31 (1975): 168-69; and R. J. Raja, “The Church in Transition: Ecclesiology of the Pastoral Epistles,” Jeevádhara 15 (1986): 103-22.