Editor’s Introduction

Volume 9 of Journal for the Study of Paul and His Letters—with both issues bound in a single volume of sufficient content—contains a the-matic topic in the Pastoral Epistles, emerging from a conference held in November of 2018 at the Evangelical Theological Faculty of Leuven, Belgium, in partnership with the Kampen Theological University of the Netherlands. The conference was a well-organized and full day of scholarly interaction, both in the formal meetings and during the meals and breaks together. This thematic issue emerging from the conference brings together several special features that are worth mentioning in this editor’s introduction. I will note three in particular.The first is that this discussion of the Pastoral Epistles was open to a wide range of topics. As the summary of the papers by the conveners of the conference, Jermo van Nes and Myriam Klinker–De Klerck, makes clear, the topic of the conference that generated these papers was concerned with common themes and the individual characteristics of the Pastoral Epistles. As Pauline scholars are well aware, the very name given to the letters addressed to Timothy and Titus—Pastoral Epistles—begs for interpreters to treat them together rather than appreciating or examining their individual characteristics. Of course, the letters do not refer to themselves with this encompassing title, as the label of “Pastoral Epistles” was not given to them until the early 18th century, but it has played a role in their interpretation ever since. In fact, in some ways it is difficult to find a common thread in the various approaches that are taken to the letters—with papers focusing on personal notes, gender scripts, language terminology, and language variation. However, one common theme does emerge from the papers, and that is the many similarities and differences between the individual letters and how these may affect our view of their originating circumstances. The conception of these circumstances varies among the contributors, to be sure, with some choosing to emphasize differences between the letters and others choosing to find commonality. Nevertheless, a predominant idea that underlies the papers is how the individual features of the letters are to be situated within emerging Christianity, in particular in relation to various views of authorship that have been proposed through the years. This necessitates some address of the question of Pauline authorship, even if this is seen as only a partial or incomplete part of the entire authorial and circumstantial picture.A second noteworthy feature of these papers is the structure in which this volume presents them. This format reflects the format of the conference itself. As I mentioned above, the conference was a full day of papers, including six major papers and four responses—all contained within this themed volume of JSPL. One of the features to note was the use of introductory and concluding papers to surround the paired major papers and responses. The introductory paper, by Jermo van Nes, one of the conceptualizers and conveners of the conference, allowed him to provide a suitable backdrop for the entire conference, including a number of pertinent and recurring issues in study of the Pastoral Epistles. This paper introduces this volume and serves a similar purpose here, bringing scholars up to date on some of the most important continuing debates. The concluding paper, which I was graciously invited to deliver, was an attempt at a summary of the major content and arguments of the five major papers, including the introduction. I found the papers to provide stimulating entry points into a number of differing issues within study of the Pastoral Epistles, with the result that a reader should go away from this volume with exposure to many of the major themes in recent scholarly discussion and exposure to some of the latest topics, such as gender scripts.The format of the conference also provided for a formal response to each of the four major papers. The respondents took their task seriously, as readers will note in their own perusal of these papers. Often responses fall short of delivering the kind of provocative counter-punching that one desires in such an exercise. These responses do not lack in facing the proposals by the major papers. I would venture to say, in fact, that the responses for the most part provide their own essays, even if shorter in length and restricted in compass due to their being constrained by the topic of the major paper they are countering. At numerous points, readers will benefit from the respondents’ not only questioning the analyses and conclusions of their major papers but also not hesitating to make suggestive counterproposals that introduce new issues into the discussion. The fact that there are four of these sets of papers provides for a number of discrete units of content, each with major proposals and arguments to weigh in response. The respondents are generally supportive of what their main paper is trying to do, but for the most part each does not hesitate to register his or her critical dissent as well.The third significant feature of these essays is the fact that this discussion, for the most part, originated in Continental Europe and was held in Continental Europe. Those familiar with the history of scholarship of the Pastoral Epistles will know that in many if not most quarters of Continental European scholarship, the Pastoral Epistles have been relatively neglected, primarily because of a generally unquestioned acceptance of their pseudepigraphal authorship. Whereas there are those who wish to claim that, for canonical purposes, pseudepigraphy does not affect interpretation, the fortunes of the Pastoral Epistles provide strong contrary evidence. The letters have, at least until recently, been relatively neglected in Continental European scholarship, because of the logic that, if they were not by Paul, then they have a marginal canonical or at least interpretive status. This is not the place to debate the merits or demerits of such a position but only to recognize that this is the case—or at least it has been until recently. Several of the participants in the conference have been involved in active discussion of the Pastoral Epistles, helping to revive interest in the study of these letters. One of the major figures in this movement to bring further light to the Pastorals has been Jens Herzer, who offers another of his several essays on the status and relationships of the Pastoral Epistles. He has been a persistent voice who has continued his scholarship on the Pastoral Epistles, even though he has not been widely supported in that endeavor by other scholars. In more recent times within North American scholarship, the Pastorals have received more active support as genuine Pauline letters, but there has also been something of a backlash to this movement. Whereas in the past many years—probably since soon after F. C. Baur—Continental scholarship has essentially ignored much of this debate, this volume mostly by Continental scholars provides a venue to reexamine and reopen, as well as discuss for the first time, a variety of issues regarding the Pastoral Epistles. Rob van Houwelingen in his commentary on the Pastoral Epistles (in Dutch and so not probably as well known as others), Armin Baum in several different types of publications, and most recently Jermo van Nes in his major recent volume on linguistic variation within the Pastoral Epistles have all become part of an active group of scholars openly discussing these books once more not just as established pseudepigrapha but as vital books within the New Testament. JSPL now has the opportunity to bring this predominantly European scholarship to a much wider audience, especially North America.No single volume of a journal can reasonably expect to answer all of the questions that it raises, or that are being raised, regarding its subject. The same is certainly true of the Pastoral Epistles and this volume. However, the conference organizers are to be commended, along with their institutions and funding agencies, for venturing into this relatively uncharted territory first to sponsor a conference and now to publish on these letters to Timothy and Titus with JSPL.

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.