Paul and Pseudepigraphy (Pauline Studies, Book 8)

(Kiana) #1

168 jermo van nes


According to Van Neste, all of these units are united by literary form,


repetition of keywords, continuity in cohesion fields, and symmetrical


arrangement. Also, the units themselves are connected through a wide


variety of linguistic (e.g., hook words, hooked keywords, plays on words,


and parallel introductions and conclusions), semantic, and thematic ele-


ments. This means that there is “a high level of cohesion in each of the


Pastoral Epistles,” for “[a]ll three letters show evidence of care in their


design.”70


Both the studies of Barr and Van Neste allow for the possibility that


traditional materials were used during the composition of the PE, for an


editor could skillfully have arranged preformed traditions.71 Still, however,


if the literary integrity of the letters can be maintained, there is no reason


to suspect (each of ) them to be the work of multiple authors.


3. Conclusion


The purpose of presenting this overall critique of Harrison’s important


work has not been to question the PE being peculiar writings in compari-


son to the other New Testament letters attributed to Paul. Their distinc-


70 Van Neste, Cohesion and Structure, 285.
71 See especially E. E. Ellis, “Traditions in the Pastoral Epistles,” in The Making of the
New Testament Documents (Leiden: Brill, 1999), 406–25; M. M. Yarbrough, Paul’s Utilization
of Preformed Traditions in 1 Timothy: An Evaluation of the Apostle’s Literary, Rhetorical, and
Theological Tactics (LNTS 417; London: T&T Clark, 2009).


1 Timothy 2 Timothy Titus


3:14–16 4:9–13 3:9–11


4:1–5 4:14–15 3:12–14


4:6–10 4:16–18


4:11–16 4:19–22


5:1–2


5:3–16


5:17–25


6:1–2


6:3–10


6:11–16


6:17–19


6:20–21


(cont.)

Free download pdf