Editor’s Introduction

This issue of Journal for the Study of Paul and His Letters encompasses the seventh volume year of the periodical. This volume contains an interesting mix of topics within the field of Pauline studies and even an interesting mix of types of articles. In a limited sense, this constitutes a themed issue, in that a major group of the essays is devoted to the work of J. Louis Martyn on Paul. However, there are a number of other articles as well. The articles are divided into three parts.The first set of articles comprises three essays on three different topics within Pauline studies. The first essay, by Kenneth Berding, addresses Paul’s reference in 2 Cor 13:1 to Deut 19:15 regarding every word being established by two or three witnesses. Berding argues that Paul is referring to two, or possibly three, witnesses on his behalf. These are God, Paul himself in Christ, or possibly Christ as a separate third witness, all within the context of Paul’s reference to his three visits to Corinth. Berding believes that his more literalistic interpretation helps to avoid some of the problems of proposals that are more metaphorical in nature. The second article, by Mark Nanos, follows from the essay Nanos published in the previous issue of JSPL (6.2 [2016]: 199–223). The first part of the two-part argument fell within a set of essays on Paul’s Antioch incident and how to understand it within Judaism. In this follow-up essay, Nanos discusses Greco-Roman banquet conventions as a means of exploring how these occasions either promoted or subverted discrimination among guests. Nanos then links this with Peter’s reaction to Paul in the Antioch incident. The third and final essay of this group, by Timothy Foster, tackles a significant part of one of the most challenging sets of verses in the New Testament, understanding the appeal to Gen 2–3 in 1 Tim 2:8–15. According to Foster, Paul uses the Genesis narrative in 1 Tim 2:13–15 to create an analogy between the episode in Eden and the situation in Ephesus that Paul is addressing, but Paul is using the analogy to argue that the women of Ephesus should experience a different result than befell the original couple. One of the implications of this interpretation is to recast the use of the Genesis account so as not to constitute a mandate that subordinates women in their role-relations to men.The second set of essays in this volume also consists of three essays, all focused around two books. JSPL does not normally publish individual book reviews, but we do occasionally publish review essays. Our review essay in this issue is an extended review by Christine Hayes of two recent books: Matthew Thiessen’s Paul and the Gentile Problem (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2016) and David Kaden’s Matthew, Paul, and the Anthropology of Law, WUNT 2/424 (Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2016). Hayes herself has written on divine law and Jew-Gentile relationships in the Second Temple period. She offers a thorough review of both volumes, which have in common the exploration of how Gentiles were to relate to the Jewish God even though not being Abraham’s descendants. Among other elements, Hayes notes that the books have two different methodological approaches, which gives weight and support to their similar conclusions, and that their composite portrait indicates a better chance of a resolution to the problem. Hayes herself argues for seeing the resolution in embracing both inclusivist and exclusivist perspectives regarding Gentile-Jew relations. Once Hayes is done, Thiessen and Kaden are given their chance to respond. Thiessen emphasizes the pneumatic dimension of a Pauline Gentile included within Abraham’s line. Kaden emphasizes the points of difference in perspective between the two. This set of essays originated in a Pauline Epistles section of the Society of Biblical Literature annual meeting in 2016 in San Antonio, Texas, concerning which more information (and written transcripts of these and additional papers) can be found on the website Ancient Jew Review (http://www.ancientjewreview.com/articles/2017/7/5/sbl-2016-pauline-epistles-review-panel). There is much to be considered in these essays that extends beyond the books themselves, even if they are the instigators of this revitalized discussion.The third set of essays consists of four papers. These four papers were part of a session in Pauline Theology at the 2016 Society of Biblical Literature annual meeting in San Antonio, Texas. This session was a panel discussion dedicated to the work of J. Louis Martyn (1925–2015). Most New Testament scholars are fortunate if they are able to have an impact on one significant area of New Testament studies. Few can claim to have had as significant an impact on two areas as could Lou Martyn. We are certainly familiar with his views on the Johannine community, a discussion recently revived in light of a reassessment of these community constructs. However, Martyn has also had a major impact on Pauline studies, especially its apocalyptic dimension, and these four essays are offered in honor of him. The first essay, by Beverly Roberts Gaventa, introduces us to the man J. Louis Martyn by tracing several influences on him, his emphasis on Paul’s distinctive thought, and his work on Pauline apocalyptic. Gaventa focuses on his commentary on Galatians but also explores some lesser known aspects of his background, such as the influence not only of Ernst Käsemann but of Paul Minear, John Knox, and Paul Meyer. Gaventa then turns to the major areas of his thought, including his apocalyptic epistemology, for which he is probably best known in Pauline studies. Douglas Harink takes up Martyn’s apocalyptic theological perspective and attempts to expand it by exploring two aspects of it both focused on discontinuity. He concludes that for Paul apocalyptic thought meant shifting the metaphor from external invasion to peaceful unity. The third essay, by Joel Marcus, furthers the discussion of Martyn’s work by examining his exegesis of Gal 4:21–5:1 and the allegory of Sarah and Hagar. Rather than supporting Martyn’s analysis of the passage, Marcus argues against its torah-free versus torah-observant depiction of Christianity. The fourth and final essay, by Susan Eastman, addresses a third topic emerging from the work of Martyn. Eastman examines Martyn’s thoughts, especially his final thoughts, on the issue of divine agency, and how humans could be encouraged to thrive while divine will triumphs. She sees this apparent dichotomy as revealing Martyn’s deeper perspective on Christ’s entering into human history and encouraging human accomplishment. These essays add to the growing appreciation of Martyn’s work, but despite their insights they only touch on a few of the many possible areas of response to his scholarship.With this publication, as observant readers may have noticed, we mark the transition from one publisher to another. This journal was inaugurated and has seen six complete volume years published under the auspices of Eisenbrauns in Winona Lake, Indiana. The editorial board of the journal, along with contributors and readers, are grateful to Jim Eisenbraun and his entire publishing house for the visionary support that they have maintained throughout the process of launching and establishing this journal as a first-choice journal for publication of Pauline studies. In the relatively few years of this journal’s existence, it has moved from inception to becoming fully integrated into the fabric of contemporary Pauline studies. This stature is readily witnessed by the range of articles submitted and published, along with the significance of the topics and authors included within the journal itself. Accordingly, it is with both sadness and joy that we acknowledge that Eisenbrauns has become an imprint of another publisher, with the result that JSPL will now be published by The Pennsylvania State University Press, perhaps better and more widely known as Penn State University Press, located in University Park, Pennsylvania. Penn State University Press is a large and active university press in the best tradition of university presses in the United States, under the directorship of Patrick Alexander. Alexander will already be well-known to many in biblical studies from his previous work with a number of theological and biblical publishers, as well as his editorial and consulting roles in the first and second editions of the SBL Handbook of Style (Jim Eisenbraun was involved in both of these as well). Penn State University Press has a growing list in religion and publishes a surprisingly large number of journals, of which JSPL will now become one. We are looking forward to continuing to publish a vibrant journal in Pauline studies, and we anticipate some new and exciting steps forward in the years ahead with Penn State University Press.The editors trust that this volume will make its own modest but noticeable contribution to the field of Pauline studies, as we continue to explore Paul, his writings, and those who have interpreted him.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.