294 philip l. tite
Thanksgiving
the thanksgiving period is immediately marked in v. 3 by Ps.-Paul’s expres-
sion of thanks (gratias).10 this expression of thanks dominates the sense
of the entire sentence, where the thanksgiving is unpacked through stan-
dard Pauline structural elements.11 all other elements in the thanksgiving
period are elaborations on gratias and, therefore, these elements must be
read as building upon or elucidating the semantic field of thanksgiving.
following raymond Collins’s delineation of these elements, we find in
laodiceans three of the five elements explicitly present (with the remain-
ing two elements implicitly present):12
(1) an expression of thanksgiving (gratias)
(2) an indication of the recipient of that thanks (ago Christo)
(3) a temporal qualification.
for a particular reason, and simply reads laodiceans as “misappropriate[ing] Paul’s self-
description” (126).
10 excellent discussions of ancient thanksgiving periods can be found in, especially, exler,
Form, 101–13; White, “epistolary literature,” 1740; raymond f. Collins, “a significant decade:
the trajectory of the hellenistic epistolary thanksgiving,” in Porter and adams (eds.),
Paul and the Ancient Letter Form, 159–84, see especially 165–70, 182; Peter arzt-grabner,
“Paul’s letter thanksgiving,” in Porter and adams (eds.), Paul and the Ancient Letter Form,
129–58. see also arzt-grabner, “the ‘epistolary Introductory thanksgiving’ in the Papyri
and in Paul,” NovT 36 (1994): 29–49; cf. Jeffrey t. reed, “are Paul’s thanksgivings ‘episto-
lary’?” JSNT 61 (1996): 87–99. also of interest is hans-Josef klauck, Ancient Letters and the
New Testament: A Guide to Context and Exegesis (Waco, tX: Baylor university Press, 2006),
21; Jerome h. neyrey, “lost in translation: did It Matter If Christians ‘thanked’ god or
‘gave god glory’?” CBQ 71 (2009): 1–23.
11 the thanksgiving period comprises only laod 3, which stands on its own as a tightly
knitted unit following the elements of the Pauline thanksgiving, as articulated by Collins
and artz-grabner. the eschatological promise brings the period to an appropriate conclu-
sion (see William g. doty, Letters in Primitive Christianity [Philadelphia: fortress, 1973], 27,
33; Peter thomas o’Brien, Introductory Thanksgivings in the Letters of Paul [leiden: Brill,
1977], 28). Pervo, however, extends the thanksgiving to include vv. 4 and 5 (Pervo, Paul,
108). however, there are two difficulties with Pervo’s reading. first, he mistakenly reads
laod. 4 and 5 as comprising a closing prayer. rather than a prayer, these verses consti-
tute the opening of the letter body by focusing on the occasion of the letter (see below).
second, the opening of v. 4 is marked by a shift toward the threat facing the community
by neque destituant vos quorundam vaniloquia insinuantium (marking the body opening),
while et nunc at v. 5 compositionally marks the body middle. Consequently, the thanks-
giving period is best read as being comprised of only v. 3, coming to an eschatological
climax or finale. Penny, “Ps-Pauline letters,” 324, also limits the thanksgiving period to v. 3,
but does not offer an analysis of the thanksgiving beyond simply noting a dependency on
Phil 1:3–4, 6, 10.
12 Collins, “a significant decade,” passim.