Early Christian Teachers

Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen
zum Neuen Testament · 2. Reihe
Herausgeber / Editor
Jörg Frey (Zürich)
Mitherausgeber/Associate Editors
Markus Bockmuehl (Oxford) ∙ James A. Kelhoffer (Uppsala)
Tobias Nicklas (Regensburg) ∙ Janet Spittler (Charlottesville, VA)
J. Ross Wagner (Durham, NC)
516
Alessandro Falcetta
Early Christian Teachers

The ‘Didaskaloi’ from Their Origins
to the Middle of the Second Century
Mohr Siebeck
Alessandro Falcetta, born 1971; Associate Professor in Christianity, Religion, Lifeviews and
Ethics at the Faculty of Arts and Education, University of Stavanger.
ISBN 978-3-16-157578-5 / eISBN 978-3-16-157579-2

DOI 10.1628 / 978-3-16-157579-2
ISSN 0340-9570 / eISSN 2568-7484 (Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testa-
ment, 2. Reihe)
The Deutsche Nationalbibliothek lists this publication in the Deutsche Nationalbibliographie;
detailed bibliographic data are available at http://dnb.dnb.de.
© 2020 Mohr Siebeck Tübingen, Germany. www.mohrsiebeck.com

This book may not be reproduced, in whole or in part, in any form (beyond that permitted by
copyright law) without the publisher’s written permission. This applies particularly to repro-
ductions, translations and storage and processing in electronic systems.
The book was printed on non-aging paper by Laupp & Göbel in Gomaringen, and bound by
Buchbinderei Nädele in Nehren.
Printed in Germany.
Preface
This study is based on my postdoctoral dissertation submitted to the

Fondazione per le Scienze Religiose, Bologna, in 2006. This piece of research,
which has subsequently been revised and updated, has brought me into many
debts. I would like to thank Prof. Lorenzo Perrone for suggesting to work on
such an interesting topic. Prof. Giuseppe Alberigo gave his support to this
project. Prof. Peter Hünermann made useful observations as to the way I should
address my subject. Prof. Giuseppe Ruggeri and Prof. Alberto Melloni
followed this work with attention and gave me many ideas and suggestions.
Prof. Catherine Hezser provided important comments, which I have drawn
upon in the revision process. The Italian National Council of Research (CNR)
financed a three week visit to Tübingen where I had the possibility to work in
the university library and the library of the faculty of theology. My greatest
debt is to the late Prof. François Bovon, who supervised my work from the
other side of the Atlantic, encouraging me and making invaluable remarks. Last
but not least, my former doctoral and postdoctoral colleagues in Bologna were
a constant source of inspiration and of much-needed support.
I also would like to thank the Department of Early Childhood Education,
where I worked in 2017‒2019, and the Department of Education and Sport
Science, where I am employed, both at the University of Stavanger, for giving
me the opportunity to complete this project. In addition, they partly sponsored
the indexing of the book, which was competently carried out by Raleigh Heth.
This study is dedicated to my wife, Tina Dykesteen Nilsen. In this as well
as in other projects she was the pillar who sustained me and the rest of the
family. Tina took a great share of my family duties during the composition of
the dissertation and postponed some of her own projects for my sake. She also
improved my English and rescued me from countless pitfalls. Obviously, the
remaining ones are my own fault.
Stavanger, 13 February 2020
Alessandro Falcetta
Table of Content
Preface ..................................................................................................... V
Abbreviations and Note............................................................................. 1
Introduction ........................................................................................... 1
Chapter 1: Scholarship on Early Christian Teachers .................. 5
1. Introduction ...................................................................................... 5
2. Beginnings: 1883–1920s ................................................................... 5

2.1 Adolf von Harnack ..................................................................... 5
2.2 Rudolph Sohm and the Debate with Adolf von Harnack ............ 8
2.3 Max Weber on Charismatic Leadership ...................................... 9
3. Charisma and Office ....................................................................... 11

3.1 The Protestant-Catholic Divide ................................................ 11
3.2 Catholic Scholarship after Vatican II........................................ 13
3.3 The Use of Social Analysis ...................................................... 15
3.4 The Last Decades ..................................................................... 17
3.5 Conclusions.............................................................................. 18
4. Teachers Move Centre Stage .......................................................... 19

4.1 Karl H. Rengstorf ..................................................................... 19
4.2 Heinrich Greeven ..................................................................... 21
4.3 Helmut Merklein ...................................................................... 22
4.4 Heinz Schürmann ..................................................................... 24
5. Teachers as Tradents....................................................................... 25
5.1 Form Criticism and Transmission............................................. 26
VIII Table of Content
5.2 Birger Gerhardsson .................................................................. 27

5.3 Alfred F. Zimmermann............................................................. 29
5.4 Jesus the Teacher in Rainer Riesner and Samuel Byrskog ........ 32
6. The Last Decades............................................................................ 33

6.1 John K. Coyle .......................................................................... 34
6.2 Ulrich Neymeyr ....................................................................... 34
6.3 Stanley F. Jones ....................................................................... 35
7. Social Strata in Early Christianity ................................................... 37
8. Considerations for New Research ................................................... 38
Chapter 2: Teachers in non-Christian Sources ........................... 40
1. Education in the Greco-Roman World ............................................ 40

1.1 The Word dida,skaloj ............................................................... 40
1.2 Teachers of Philosophy or Religion.......................................... 41
1.3 Teachers and Schools ............................................................... 43
2. Education in Jewish Sources ........................................................... 44

2.1 Jewish dida,skaloi .................................................................... 44
2.2 Rabbis ...................................................................................... 45
2.3 Scribes ..................................................................................... 49
2.4 Archaeological Evidence .......................................................... 49
Chapter 3: Sources on Syria............................................................ 53
1. Acts 13:1–3 .................................................................................... 53

1.1 Introduction.............................................................................. 53
1.2 Analysis ................................................................................... 54
1.3 The Origins of Christian Teachers ............................................ 57
1.4 Conclusions.............................................................................. 59
2. 1 Corinthians 12:28–29 ................................................................... 59

2.1 Introduction.............................................................................. 59
2.2 Redaction Criticism.................................................................. 60
2.3 Characteristics of the Triad ...................................................... 63
Table of Content IX
2.3.1 Apostles ..............................................................................63

2.3.2 Prophets ..............................................................................63
2.3.3 Teachers .............................................................................64
2.4 Conclusions.............................................................................. 65
3. Matthew.......................................................................................... 65
3.1 Place and Time ......................................................................... 65
3.2 Matthew 10:24–25 ................................................................... 67
3.2.1 Analysis of the Text ............................................................67
3.2.2 John 13:16.20 and 15:20 .....................................................70
3.2.3 Interpretation ......................................................................73
3.3 Matthew 10:8b-10 .................................................................... 74
3.4 Matthew 10:40–42 ................................................................... 75
3.5 Matthew 23:8–12 ..................................................................... 77
3.5.1 Structure and Motives .........................................................77
3.5.2 Analysis of Matthew 23 ......................................................78
3.5.3 Matthew 23:8–10 ................................................................81
3.5.3.1 Matthew 23:8 ...............................................................82
3.5.3.2 Matthew 23:9 ...............................................................83
3.5.3.3 Matthew 23:10 .............................................................85
3.5.4 Matthew 23:11–12 ..............................................................86
3.5.5 History of the Redaction of Matthew 23:8–12.....................87
3.6 Teaching in Matthew 5:19–20 .................................................. 89
3.7 Teachers and Titles .................................................................. 90
3.8 The “School of Matthew”......................................................... 91
3.9 Leadership According to Matthew 23:34 .................................. 91
3.10 Persecution ............................................................................. 93
3.10.1 The Suffering of the Righteous and the Violent Death
of the Prophet ...................................................................93
3.10.2 The Persecution of the Righteous and of the Prophet
in Matthew........................................................................95
3.11 Conclusions ............................................................................ 96
4. James .............................................................................................. 97
4.1 Introduction.............................................................................. 97
4.2 Authorship, Time and Place ..................................................... 98
4.3 James 3:1–2 ........................................................................... 101
4.4 James 3:3–12.......................................................................... 104
4.5 James 3:13–18........................................................................ 105
4.6 Teachers as a Model for the Community ................................ 106
4.7 Characteristics of Teachers .................................................... 106
4.8 What Teachers Taught ........................................................... 109
X Table of Content
4.9 Conclusions............................................................................ 110
5. Didache ........................................................................................ 111

5.1 Introduction............................................................................ 111
5.2 Genre ..................................................................................... 112
5.3 Time and Place ....................................................................... 113
5.4 Did a Teacher Write the Didache? ......................................... 114
5.4.1 The “Two Ways” Tract .....................................................115
5.4.2 Teachers as Mentors .........................................................116
5.5 Didache 11–13 ....................................................................... 117
5.5.1 Apostles ............................................................................ 118
5.5.2 Prophets ............................................................................ 120
5.5.3 Bishops and Deacons ........................................................124
5.5.4 Teachers ........................................................................... 125
5.5.4.1 Didache 4.1–2 ............................................................ 125
5.5.4.2 Didache 11.1–2 .......................................................... 127
5.5.4.3 Didache 13.2 .............................................................. 129
5.5.4.4 Didache 15.1–2 .......................................................... 131
5.5.4.5 How to Become a Teacher..........................................132
5.5.4.6 Why Does the Didache Say Little about Teachers? ....133
5.5.4.7 Gender of Teachers ....................................................134
5.5.4.8 The Historical Development .......................................135
5.6 Conclusions............................................................................ 135
Chapter 4: Sources on Asia Minor .............................................. 136
1. Ephesians...................................................................................... 136
1.1 Introduction............................................................................ 136
1.2 Authorship, Time and Place ................................................... 136
1.3 Ephesians 4:11–12 ................................................................. 137
1.3.1 Apostles and Prophets .......................................................140
1.3.2 Evangelists........................................................................ 142
1.3.3 Shepherds and Teachers ....................................................143
1.4 Conclusions............................................................................ 144
2. Pastoral Letters ............................................................................. 145

2.1 Introduction............................................................................ 145
2.2 Authorship and Time.............................................................. 145
2.3 Place and Readership ............................................................. 146
2.4 1 Timothy............................................................................... 146
Table of Content XI
2.4.1 Paul’s Adversaries ............................................................ 146

2.4.1.1 Identity ....................................................................... 146
2.4.1.2 Women Teaching .......................................................148
2.4.1.3 Desire for Wealth .......................................................150
2.4.1.4 The Title “Teacher” ....................................................151
2.4.1.5 Contents of Teaching..................................................151
2.4.2 Paul the Teacher ............................................................... 153
2.4.3 Paul’s Successors .............................................................. 156
2.4.3.1 Appointment .............................................................. 157
2.4.3.2 Timothy’s Tasks .........................................................159
2.4.3.3 Bishops and Presbyters ...............................................160
2.5 2 Timothy............................................................................... 164
2.5.1 False Teachers .................................................................. 164
2.5.2 Content of the False Teaching ...........................................166
2.5.3 Paul the Teacher and Timothy the Disciple .......................169
2.5.4 The Content of the Sound Teaching ..................................170
2.5.5 Didaskali,a in the Pastoral Epistles ...................................172
2.5.6 Teachers and Rabbis .........................................................175
2.6 Conclusions............................................................................ 176
3. Letters of Ignatius ......................................................................... 176

3.1 Introduction............................................................................ 176
3.2 Date ....................................................................................... 177
3.3 The Opponents ....................................................................... 178
3.3.1 Magnesians ....................................................................... 180
3.3.2 Philadelphians .................................................................. 182
3.3.3 Ephesians ......................................................................... 184
3.3.4 Trallians ........................................................................... 185
3.3.5 Smyrnaeans....................................................................... 186
3.4 The Three Offices .................................................................. 188
3.5 The Consequences of Theological and Disciplinary Divisions 191
3.6 Teachers among the Opponents .............................................. 192
3.7 Teaching, Discipleship and Martyrdom .................................. 193
3.8 Jesus the Only Teacher ........................................................... 195
3.9 Conclusions............................................................................ 198
4. Polycarp ....................................................................................... 198

4.1 Ancient Sources on Polycarp as a Teacher ............................. 198
4.2 Philippians ............................................................................. 201
4.3 Martyrdom of Polycarp .......................................................... 203
4.3.1 Date and Authenticity .......................................................203
4.3.2 Martyrdom and Gospel .....................................................204
XII Table of Content
4.3.3 Martyrdom of Polycarp 12 ................................................205

4.3.7 The Technical Use of “Martyr” .........................................209
4.3.8 Discipleship, Persecution and Martyrdom .........................210
4.4 Conclusions............................................................................ 211
Chapter 5: A Source on Rome: The Shepherd of Hermas ..... 213
1. Introduction .................................................................................. 213
2. Authorship, Date and Place ........................................................... 213
3. Vision 3.5.1................................................................................... 215
4. Mandate 4.3.1 ............................................................................... 218
5. Similitude 8.6.5 ............................................................................. 220
6. Similitude 9.15.4 ........................................................................... 221
7. Similitude 9.16.5–7 ....................................................................... 223
8. Similitude 9.19.2 ........................................................................... 223
9. Similitude 9.22.1–4 ....................................................................... 226
10. Similitude 9.25.1–2 ..................................................................... 228
11. The Emergence of Teachers in Rome.......................................... 229
12. The Dispute between Marcion and Roman Teachers ................... 231
13. Conclusions ................................................................................ 232
Chapter 6: Sources of Uncertain Location ................................ 234
1. Hebrews........................................................................................ 234
1.1 Authorship, Date and Place .................................................... 234
Table of Content XIII
1.2 Hebrews 5:11–14 ................................................................... 235

1.3 Teaching Righteousness (Heb 5:13) ....................................... 237
1.4 The Rudiments of Christianity (Heb 6:1–3)............................ 238
1.5 No Repentance (Heb 6:4–12) ................................................. 240
1.6 Teachers and Leaders (Heb 13:7.17) ...................................... 241
2. 2 Peter .......................................................................................... 243

2.1 Introduction............................................................................ 243
2.2 Authorship, Date and Place .................................................... 243
2.3 “False Teachers” .................................................................... 244
3. Epistle of Barnabas ...................................................................... 246

3.1 Date and Place ....................................................................... 246
3.2 Authorship: A Teacher? ......................................................... 247
3.3 Barnabas 1.8 .......................................................................... 247
3.4 Barnabas 9.9 and 21.6............................................................ 249
3.5 Teacher’s Language ............................................................... 250
3.6 Transmission .......................................................................... 250
3.6.1 “School” Tracts................................................................. 251
3.6.2 The “Two Ways” Tract .....................................................252
3.7 The Transmission of Knowledge ............................................ 253
3.8 Conclusions............................................................................ 254
Conclusions .......................................................................... 255
Bibliography ......................................................................................... 261
Index of References………………………………………………………285
Index of Modern Authors………………………………………………...303
Index of Subjects…………………………………………………………309
Abbreviations and Note
The abbreviations used in this book are listed in Patrick H. Alexander et al.,
The SBL Handbook of Style: For Ancient Near Eastern, Biblical, and Early
Christian Studies (2nd ed.; Peabody: Hendrickson, 2014).
Additional abbreviations are as follows:
GLTN: Gerhard Kittel and Gerhard Friedrich, eds., Grande Lessico Teologico
del Nuovo Testamento (Italian translation edited by Felice Montanari,
Giuseppe Scarpat and Omero Soffritti; 16 vols.; Brescia: Paideia Editrice,
1965–1992).
JECS: Journal of Early Christian Studies
KAV: Kommentar zu den Apostolischen Vätern
MBT: Münsterische Beiträge zur Theologie
The scripture quotations contained in this book are from the New Revised
Standard Version of the Bible, Anglicized Edition, copyright © 1989, 1995 by
the Division on Christian Education of the National Council of the Churches
of Christ in the United States of America, and are used by permission. All rights
reserved.
Introduction
The history of early Christian teachers has been a subject of scholarly attention
for over a century, though only one book and a few articles have focussed on
them. The interest of this topic rests on the plausible assumption that teachers
played a significant role in the emerging of Christianity. Filson wrote:
I find, however, that I cannot formulate a view of the beginnings of Christianity without at
least a working hypothesis concerning the place and work of the teacher. Moreover, I note
in examining many books on the NT period that others also find it practically impossible to
proceed in the study of this field without such a working hypothesis. 1
Four decades later Christian teachers came to be identified as the main carriers
of the traditions associated to Jesus and therefore charged with the task of
vouchsafing the reliability of the Gospels as a historical source. 2
Christians from the first generations considered teachers together with
apostles, prophets, bishops, presbyters and deacons as one of the forms through
which community-leadership was exercised and the gospel proclaimed. Paul
stated solemnly that “God has appointed in the church first apostles, second
prophets, third teachers” (1 Cor 12:28). Teachers were the earliest leaders of
Christians in Antioch (cf. Acts 13:1–3). The author of the Letter of James was
a teacher (Jas 3:1). Teachers are mentioned in works whose location ranges
from Syria (James, Didache) to Rome (Shepherd of Hermas). We have enough
clues to suggest that teachers were an important factor for the shaping of first
and second century Christianity.
At the same time, teachers remain enigmatic figures. References to them are
not so numerous as one would expect and almost everything concerning them
is the object of speculation. Moreover, contrary to those who can be roughly
considered their Jewish counterparts, the rabbis, Christian teachers did not
come to play a major role in the subsequent history of their religion.
The challenges the inquirer faces are multiples. The main one regards the
teachers’ very existence. Can we talk of teachers as a clearly identifiable role
or does the word only designate one of the functions carried out by community
1
FLOYD V. WILSON, “The Christian Teacher in the First Century,” JBL 60 (1941): 317–
28, 318.
2
ALFRED F. ZIMMERMANN, Die urchristlichen Lehrer: Studien zum Tradentenkreis im
frühen Urchristentum (WUNT II/12; Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1984).
2 Introduction
leaders? The passage from 1 Corinthians, which I examine in detail later, seems
to suggest that the first is the case. It neatly distinguishes three roles and places
them not within a local church, but within the church as a whole. Teachers,
together with apostles and prophets, were a God-given gift. The references to
teachers studied in this book and especially the polemic some authors carried
against them further support Paul’s statement that indeed teachers were a
driving force among early Christians. A related problem is how to understand
and study them. Within sociology one finds role theory as an important branch
with a long history and a large bibliography. 3 Roles can be described as
“characteristic behavior patterns,” a definition based on the idea that “persons
are members of social positions and hold expectations for their behaviors and
those of other partners.” 4 In other terms, roles are characterised by a set of
rights and obligations, which are expected by the society in which the role is
situated. This was the case for Paul’s teachers in 1 Cor 12:28. They are assigned
a precise position within the Christian communities and in relationship to two
other roles. By leaving out additional details, Paul implies that his readers knew
what to expect of teachers and what teachers should expect of them. The
Didache seems to explicit some of these expectations: teachers have the right
to be welcomed (11.1) and to be given food, while they are supposed to deliver
doctrines in tune with the teaching of the Didache itself (13.1–2). Biblical
scholars have already resorted to role theory to throw light on prophets, sages
and priests in the Old Testament. 5 One of these authors is Joseph Blenkinsopp,
who lists the advantages of this approach:
Were the roles in question ascribed or achieved? What skills were required for their
performance, and how did one go about acquiring them? How was the individual recruited
to fill the role? What part did such important variables as gender and class play? What
resources and sanctions did society have to discourage role deviance? 6
3
BRUCE J. BIDDLE, Role Theory: Expectations, Identities and Behaviors (New York:
Academic Press, 1979), and “Recent Developments in Role Theory,” Annual Review of
Sociology 12 (1986): 67–92; DANIEL D. MARTIN and JANELLE L. WILSON, “Role Theory,”
Encyclopedia of Social Theory (ed. GEORGE RITZER; Thousand Oaks: SAGE Publications,
2005), 1: 651–55; MARISKA VAN DER HORST, ‘Role Theory,’ Oxford Bibliographies,
http://www.oxfordbibliographies.com [24.02.2019].
4
BIDDLE, “Recent Developments,” 67; italics in original.
5
E.g. JON L. BERQUIST, “Constructions of Identity in Postcolonial Yehud,” in Judah and
the Judeans in the Persian Period (ed. ODED LIPSCHITS and MANFRED OEMING; Winona
Lake: Eisenbrauns, 2006), 54–66, 58–59; JOSEPH BLENKINSOPP, Sage, Priest, Prophet:
Intellectual and Religious Leadership in Ancient Israel (Louisville: Westminster John Knox
Press, 1995); LESTER L. GRABBE, Priests, Prophets, Diviners, Sages: A Socio-Historical
Study of Religious Specialists in Ancient Israel (Valley Forge: Trinity Press International,
1995).
6
BLENKINSOPP, Sage, 4.
Introduction 3
Role theory seems to open an interesting avenue of research, but the study
of antiquity in general and of the early Christian teachers in particular is fretted
with challenges that sociologists do not need to face. The sources are often
difficult to date, to place and to ascribe, and they usually mention teachers only
to illustrate other topics. 7 Furthermore, different sources may understand
teachers in different ways, so that teachers in Rome and in Antioch, for
instance, may not necessarily have been the same thing.
Because of the nature of the evidence, this book does not purport to be a
sociological study, but it takes from sociology the definition of role and tries
to answer the questions asked by Blenkinsopp whenever the sources allow it.
Its principal aim is to put a selection of texts from early Christianity under the
magnifying glass of the historical-critical method and to try to squeeze out of
them all the information they are able to provide.
The texts have been selected according to two criteria. The first is lexical
and, with a few exceptions whose reasons I shall explain later, follows on the
footsteps of Alfred Zimmermann’s work on early Christian teachers: 8 only
those passages containing the word dida,skaloj as addressed to others than
Jesus are taken into account. Jesus as teacher has already been the topic of
ponderous studies and it is not addressed in this work. 9 The choice of the word
dida,skaloj has the advantage of giving a clear focus and of avoiding the risk
of drowning in a sea of texts. When tackling the role of teachers, the temptation
would be to address teaching in general before moving to the investigation of
a precise group of people. This would entail a survey of the entire New
Testament and of the rest of early Christian literature as it would be hard to
find books that could not be rubricated in one way or another as teaching.
Moreover, within the New Testament it would be necessary to identify the Sitz
im Leben of the passage under scrutiny in order to discriminate between the
teaching of Jesus and that of his followers. The criterion I have chosen reduces
the corpus of evidence to a manageable size and ensures that the texts are
consistently approached from the same perspective. It may be objected that
teachers could be called in different ways in different texts, such as for example
“scribes” (Matthew) or “evangelists” (Ephesians). However, it is not always
clear how far the word dida,skaloj is interchangeable with grammateu,j or
euvaggelisth,j and it is safer to examine this and similar cases only when they
can be connected to dida,skaloj. The second criterion concerns the time-frame.
7
Some of these problems are mentioned in BLENSKINSOPP, Sage, 5–6. The sets of data
sociologists can draw upon are of a very different character (BIDDLE, Role Theory, 79–84).
8
ZIMMERMANN, Lehrer, 68.
9
For instance RAINER RIESNER, Jesus als Lehrer: Eine Untersuchung zum Ursprung der
Evangelien-Überlieferung (WUNT II/7; Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1981), and more recently
VERONIKA TROPPER, Jesus Didaskalos: Studien zu Jesus als Lehrer bei den Synoptikern und
im Rahmen der antiken Kultur- und Sozialgeschichte (ÖBS 42; Frankfurt am Main: Peter
Lang, 2012).
4 Introduction
I concentrate only on those works written before the middle of the second
century. Once again, there is a practical advantage to consider. The teachers to
whom the early Christian sources make reference were a phenomenon that
developed over a long period of time and reached well into the third century,
as we shall see in the first chapter. By concentrating on roughly the first one
hundred years after Jesus’ death, the amount of material to sift remains within
reasonable boundaries. Moreover, the first one hundred years are also the time
when the answer to two important questions is to be sought. Were teachers
tradents of the material pertaining to the life and teaching of Jesus, which we
find in the New Testament? Why did teachers not come to play the same role
within Christianity as their counterparts, the rabbis, did within Judaism?
The present study is divided into three parts. The bibliographical survey
following below lays the methodological foundations for the rest of the book.
The second part contains a survey of Jewish and Greco-Roman literature with
the aim to place the topic of early Christian teachers within the history of the
teachers of philosophy and religion in the first centuries of our era. The
remaining chapters form the third part. They examine the primary sources and
distribute them according to the geographical location of the communities to
which they bring witness. This means, for example, that 1 Cor 12:28 is placed
in the Syrian section because it is considered a witness to the community of
Antioch. Acts 13:1–3 is placed in the same section for the same reason. The
order of the sources does not necessarily correspond to the date of their
composition, but to the time of the traditions they employ. For this reason, the
description of the original leadership of the community in Antioch in Acts
13:1–3 is the first source of the Syrian section.
Early Christian teachers make for a fascinating topic of research with far-
reaching consequences for our understanding of the beginnings of Christianity
and of the structures of today’s churches. The following chapter shows how
these consequences have been pointed out in modern scholarship.
Chapter 1
Scholarship on Early Christian Teachers
1. Introduction
When reading previous scholarship, there are at least three factors that should
be kept in mind. 1 To begin with, very few works focus on early Christian
teachers. Instead, teachers are usually studied along with apostles and prophets
and seen in the larger context of the different roles in primitive Christianity. In
this case secondary literature is legion, though the space devoted to teachers
may vary a great deal. Secondly, the question of charisma and office, within
which teachers are very often mentioned, is largely confessional. Many
scholars have thought of recovering an ecclesiastical structure mirroring or
justifying the modern organisation of their respective churches. Thirdly,
teachers have been assigned a number of tasks, such as preaching, debating
with non-Christians, transmitting Jesus traditions, etc., which were essential
for the life of the early communities. These attributions have been made in spite
of the fact that our sources say very little about what teachers actually did.
2. Beginnings: 1883–1920s
2.1 Adolf von Harnack

The starting point of modern research on early Christian teachers was a literary
discovery. In 1883 bishop Philoteos Bryennios published a book, which he had
found ten years earlier in the library of the Convent of the Holy Sepulchre in
Constantinople. 2 The recovery of the Didache made a tremendous impact on
contemporary scholarship and triggered a wealth of translations and studies.
1
The first two points are illustrated by ZIMMERMANN, Lehrer, 36–37.
2
PHILOTEOS BRYENNIOS, ed., DIDACH TWN DWDEKA APOSTOLWN (Constantinople,
1883). A photographic reproduction was published shortly afterwards by JAMES RENDEL
HARRIS, The Teaching of the Apostles: Newly Edited with Facsimile Text and a Commentary
for the Johns Hopkins University (London: C. J. Clay; Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University,
1887). A brief history of the discovery and scholarly reactions to it are found in AARON
MILAVEC, The Didache: Faith, Hope, & Life of the Earliest Christian Communities, 50–70
C.E. (New York: The Newman Press, 2003), 3–5.
6 Chapter 1: Scholarship on Early Christian Teachers
One of the most influential monographs was written – it goes almost without
saying – by Adolf von Harnack. 3 Harnack published the Greek text with
translation and robust Prolegomena, a long section of which he dedicated to
the triad apostles, prophets and teachers in the Didache and in the rest of early
Christian literature. 4 This section was revised in Mission und Ausbreitung. 5
Harnack hailed the Didache as the document that could at last throw light on
the texts mentioning apostles, prophets and teachers: 1 Cor 12:28–29; Acts
11:27; 13:1–2; Eph 2:20; 3:5; 4:11; Rev 2:2; Matt 10 par.; Jas 3:1; Hebr
13:7.17, and so on. 6 All the members of the triad were “freie Lehrer” 7 and their
authority was based on charisma. 8 The similarities between the Didache, 1 Cor
12:28 and Acts 13:1–2 show that the triad was acknowledged by the universal
church and that its origins are to be dated in the year before 50 and placed in
the post-Easter community of Jerusalem. 9 The role of apostles was of Jewish
origins, 10 focussed on mission, and disappeared in the beginning of the second
century. 11 Prophets, contrary to apostles, were not missionaries, but preachers
who spoke in the spirit and built up the communities. 12 They operated until the
excesses of Montanism and the challenge of impostors put an end to their work
at the closing of the second century. 13 For what concerns teachers, 14 the
importance attached to them is demonstrated by references in texts stretching
from the first to the third/fourth century. Eusebius (Hist. eccl. 7.24.6) records
that in the fourth century Dionysius, bishop of Alexandria, visited some
3
In the couse of time HARNACK changed his views about church structure in early
Christianity: see JAMES T. BURTCHAELL, From Synagogue to Church: Public Services and
Offices in the Earliest Christian Communities (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,
1992), 82–87.
4
Die Lehre der Zwölf Apostel nebst Untersuchungen zur ältesten Geschichte der
Kirchenverfassung und des Kirchenrechts (TU 2.1; Leipzig: J. C. Hinrichs’sche
Buchhandlung, 1884), Prolegomena, 93–158.
5
Die Mission und Ausbreitung des Christentums in den ersten drei Jahrhunderten (4th
ed.; Leipzig: J. C. Hinrichs’sche Buchhandlung, 1924), 1:332–78. HARNACK dealt briefly
with our subject in Entstehung und Entwicklung der Kirchenverfassung und des
Kirchenrechts in den zwei ersten Jahrhunderten nebst einer Kritik der Abhandlung R.
Sohm’s: “Wesen und Ursprung des Katholizismus” und Untersuchungen über
“Evangelium,” “Wort Gottes” und das trinitarische Bekenntnis (Leipzig: J. C.
Hinrichs’sche Buchhandlung, 1910), 18–19 and 86–96.
6
HARNACK, Lehre, 93–94.
7
HARNACK, Lehre, 96.
8
9
HARNACK, Lehre, 98–99 and Mission, 357.
10
HARNACK, Mission, 340–43.
11
12
13
HARNACK, Mission, 363.
14
2. Beginnings: 1883–1920s 7
villages where he met presbyters and teachers (presbute,rouj kai. didaska,louj).

One became teacher as the result of a personal decision, which was made on
the basis of a charisma. 15 The community had the task of acknowledging the
presence of a divine commission, but not that of appointing. 16 Teachers were,
like prophets, devoted to building up the communities, 17 but, unlike prophets,
they were entitled to possessions. Moreover, they were not itinerant, but
resident. 18 The most competent teachers soon began to address only the better
educated Christians, opening the way for a model of instruction along the lines
of the Greco-Roman philosophical schools. Because teachers lacked from the
beginning the “enthusiastic element” 19 of apostles and prophets, they
functioned within the communities for a longer time and disappeared only
between the third and the fourth century, when bishops took upon themselves
the responsibility for teaching.
The offices of bishops and deacons were not universal but local and
concerned administrative tasks. 20 When the Didache recommends that bishops
and deacons should not be disregarded because they carry out the service of
prophets and teachers (Did. 15.1–2), it shows that they took teaching functions
only at a subsequent stage. The authority that bishops eventually exerted did
not stem from their administrative tasks, but from assuming the attributions of
apostles, prophets and teachers. 21 Harnack believed the proclamation of the
word to be the main task of the triad.
Harnack must be understood in the context of late nineteenth century
scholarship. He was the leading representative of liberal theology, promoting
a non-institutionalised form of Christianity, which would match the
contemporary results of historical criticism. 22 The Didache seemed to lend
15
HARNACK, Lehre, 97.
16
HARNACK, Lehre, 98.
17
HARNACK, Lehre, 97.
18
HARNACK, Mission, 365. Right to property and residency is an addition of HARNACK,
Mission, to the corresponding text in HARNACK, Lehre, 131. The statement in HARNACK,
Lehre, 96, that apostles, prophets and teachers “wandered from community to community
with their preaching” is absent from the corresponding passage in HARNACK, Mission, 347.
19
HARNACK, Lehre, 134.
20
ZIMMERMANN, Lehrer, 38, considers HARNACK’s distinction between a universal and
a local organisation to be a development of EDWIN HATCH’s positions stated in a work
HARNACK had translated into German: Die Gesellschaftsverfassung der christlichen Kirchen
im Alterthum: Acht Vorlesungen (vom Verfasser autorisierte Übersetzung von Adolf
Harnack) (Giessen: Ricker, 1883). Excerpts in Das kirchliche Amt im Neuen Testament (ed.
KARL KERTELGE; Wege der Forschung 439; Darmstadt: Wissenschaftliche
Buchgesellschaft, 1977), 19–29.
21
22
Cf. WILLIAM BAIRD, History of New Testament Research. 2. From Jonathan Edwards
to Rudolf Bultmann (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 2003), 5–136.
support to this endeavour, but subsequent scholarship did not share Harnack’s
enthusiasm for his ally. The Didache is not the key, but one key to unlock the
history of the earliest church structures. Moreover, virtually everything in the
Didache is still debated and there is no consensus about the exact nature of the
roles it mentions. In spite of its shortcomings, Harnack’s works determined the
scholarly agenda for years to come. The charismatic element in the triad, the
administrative function attributed to bishops and deacons, the passage from the
triad of apostles, prophets and teachers to the triad of bishops, presbyters and
deacons have been the object of continuous research. Moreover, his collection
of passages about teachers from the first to the fourth century is not only a most
useful tool, but a pivotal one. 23 This list made it possible for the first time to
identify a role of teachers in early Christianity.
2.2 Rudolph Sohm and the Debate with Adolf von Harnack
The debate between Harnack and Rudolph Sohm is a good illustration of how
sensitive and confessionally charged the question of the triad was. According
to Harnack, the replacement of the charismatic triad with the administrative
triad was a linear process of development. 24 In 1892, shortly after Harnack’s
Lehre, Sohm, a canonist, wrote a classic book on church law in which he
belligerently stated: “Das Kirchenrecht steht mit dem Wesen der Kirche im
Widerspruch.” 25 Since the essence of the church is spiritual, legal regulations
should not find place in it. “Ecclesia” is a spiritual entity, the gathering of all
Christians, of which local gatherings are only a particular form. Therefore, the
church as such cannot be a formally regulated organisation, but only a
charismatic one, where charismas are freely acknowledged. 26 Since the word
of God is the foundation of the church, the charisma of teaching plays the main
role and teachers, an umbrella term for apostles, prophets and teachers, are also
the leaders of the community. 27 Teaching is divided in prophecy, didaskali,a
or teaching in the proper sense, and exhortation. Apostles are missionaries who
possess all three forms of teaching and are, therefore, also prophets and
teachers. 28 Prophets are Christians who are gifted with spiritual speech and
who exercise the functions of preachers, lawgivers and community-leaders. 29
Prophets are also teachers. Teachers in the strict sense are community based,
23
HARNACK, Lehre, 110–12 n. 23; 132–36.
24
25
SOHM, Kirchenrecht, 1; Die geschichtlichen Grundlagen (Systematisches Handbuch
der Deutschen Rechtswissenschaft 8; Berlin: Duncker & Humblot, 1892), 1 and 700.
26
SOHM, Kirchenrecht, 16–28.
27
SOHM, Kirchenrecht, 29 and 41.
28
SOHM, Kirchenrecht, 42–45 and 46.
29
2. Beginnings: 1883–1920s 9
provide authoritative teaching, and are subordinated to prophets. In due course

prophets and then teachers were replaced by bishops. 30 The communities tested
the gifts of each member of the triad and were responsible for acknowledging
their authority. 31 Beside this threefold charismatic organisation, there was the
administrative organisation of bishops and deacons. The Didache shows that,
in absence of prophets and teachers, bishops were those who were in charge of
the administration of the eucharist and the offerings. 32
Harnack and Sohm held opposite views with regard to the origins of
Catholicism, though Harnack came to accept some of Sohm’s ideas. 33 Harnack
considered the formal elements of church organisation to be present from the
start, whereas Sohm judged them to be contrary to the original spiritual essence
of the church. With regard to teachers, their views overlapped in several
respects. All the members of the triad are teachers, though some of them are
teachers strictu sensu. It is the teaching charisma that singles teachers out, and
the community’s acknowledgement that validates their decision to be teachers.
Teachers were residential, exercised some form of leadership and were
eventually superseded by bishops. These points of contact are all the more
significant because Sohm and Harnack differed in the final assessment of the
evidence.
The idea that apostles and prophets too were teachers should be highlighted.
This confusion is one of the reasons why subsequent scholarship often paid
little attention to teachers in the proper sense. 34 Another reason is that Harnack,
Sohm and later scholars studied the triad in the larger context of early church
organisation. 35
2.3 Max Weber on Charismatic Leadership

Harnack and Sohm influenced Max Weber’s famous observations on
authority. 36 Weber distinguished three types of authority: rational, traditional
30
31
32
33
The main stages of the debate were RUDOLF SOHM, Wesen und Ursprung des
Katholizismus (Leipzig: Teubner, 1909); HARNACK, Enstehung, 121–86; SOHM, Preface to
Wesen (2nd ed.; Leipzig: Teubner, 1912), III–XXXIII. This debate can be followed in
BURTCHAELL, Synagogue, 89–94.
34
ZIMMERMANN has detected in this overlapping and in the difficulty of drawing precise
boundaries between the members of the triad the cause for the small number of specific
studies on teachers (Lehrer, 41).
35
Cf. ZIMMERMANN, Lehrer, 49.
36
MAX WEBER, Wirtschaft und Gesellschaft: Grundriss der verstehenden Soziologie (ed.
JOHANNES WINCKELMANN; 2 vols.; 4th ed.; Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1956), vol. 1, 124
and 140–48; vol. 2, 662–95. First edition published posthumously in 1922.
and charismatic. The first type is based on the acceptance of the legal order,
the second appeals to some tradition recognised as holy, the third is grounded
in the extraordinary talents of the leader, which are freely acknowledged by a
group of followers. 37 In the course of time, the third type, which by its nature
is very unstable, undergoes a process of routinisation and becomes either
traditional or rational authority or both. Weber’s tripartite model was
promising but also of difficult application. For instance, he examined the
authority of the rabbis 38 and proposed that, before the year 70, it was
charismatic. 39 Then, he twisted his argument by placing its origins in their
intellectual knowledge and training, 40 which are connected with traditional and
rational authority.
Intriguingly, Weber’s observations on charismatic leaders recall the triad of
the Didache. Apostles, prophets and teachers were respected because they were
endowed with talents that were acknowledged by the community. In the course
of time, these roles disappeared in favour of a church organisation based on
rational and traditional authority. These similarities are not a vagary of chance:
Weber informs his readers that he derives the idea of charismatic authority
from early Christian literature and makes explicit reference to Sohm’s
Kirchenrecht. 41 His dependence on contemporary scholarship is likely to
include Harnack as well. Jonathan A. Draper has observed that Weber mentions
Harnack’s work in Wirtschaft und Gesellschaft. 42 As a matter of fact, Weber
did not only know Harnack’s scholarship, he knew Harnack himself. 43 Draper
WEBER, Wirtschaft, 124. He speaks actually of domination (“Herrschaft”), but this can
37
also be interpreted as “authority” because authority is the external manifestation of

domination (see BENGT HOLMBERG, Paul and Power: The Structure of Authority in the
Primitive Church as Reflected in the Pauline Epistles [ConBNT 11; Lund: C. W. K. Gleerup,
1978], 136).
38
MAX WEBER, Gesammelte Aufsätze zur Religionssoziologie. 3. Das antike Judentum
(Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1921), 408–419. For a critique of WEBER see CATHERINE
HEZSER, The Social Structure of the Rabbinic Movement in Roman Palestine (TSAJ 66;
Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1997), 450–52, with bibliography; HOLMBERG, Paul, 139–48.
39
WEBER, Gesammelte Aufsätze, 409.
40
WEBER, Gesammelte Aufsätze, 411.
41
WEBER, Wirtschaft, vol. 1, 124.
42
JONATHAN A. DRAPER, “Weber, Theissen, and ‘Wandering Charismatics’ in the
Didache,” JECS 6 (1998): 541–76, 544–45.
43
They exchanged some correspondence (MAX WEBER, Briefe 1906–1908 [ed. M. R.
LEPSIUS and WOLFGANG J. MOMMSEN; Max Weber-Gesamtausgabe 2/5; Tübingen: Mohr
Siebeck, 1990], 32–33). I have been informed on WEBER’s acquaintance with HARNACK by
Prof. Paolo Pombeni (Bologna University), during a conversation in October 2005 and in a
communication dated 17 October 2006. Wolfgang Mommsen, in a conversation probably
dating September 1983, told Pombeni that Weber and Harnack had lived in the same
building.
3. Charisma and Office 11
rightly warns scholars not to fall into the trap of circular reasoning: to study
Christian origins through the filter of sociological models, which have been
influenced by studies in Christian origins.
Harnack, Sohm, and Weber laid the historical and sociological foundations
upon which much of the research on early church roles depends. From this
point, scholarship on early Christian teachers unfolded along three main lines.
In the first line, teachers are only briefly touched upon and are studied in the
context of early ecclesiology, in particular of the relationship between charisma
and office. 44 In the second line, teachers are placed on centre stage and
examined from different perspectives in an attempt to provide a comprehensive
portrait. The third line is concerned with the question of transmission and
eventually finds in the early Christian teachers its protagonists. We shall see
that the second and third line merged in Alfred Zimmermann’s Die
urchristlichen Lehrer.
3. Charisma and Office
3.1 The Protestant-Catholic Divide

In the first decades of the twentieth century some scholars challenged the
consensus that the authority conferred by charisma was contrary to that
stemming from holding an office. Holtzmann, for instance, held the view that
early Christians blended different elements in the course of a continuing
process. 45 Linton exposed the confessional and western bias of Protestant
reconstructions of the early church and observed that office and spirit were not
antagonists. 46
In an important book of collected essays dating 1946, Austin M. Farrer
proposed an eccentric theory. 47 The Twelve were the equivalent of the Jewish
dida,skaloi, rabbinic leaders who ruled the synagogues, and were the teachers
44
Detailed bibliographical surveys in BURTCHAELL, Synagogue, 1–81; ULRICH
BROCKHAUS, Charisma und Amt: Die paulinische Charismenlehre auf dem Hintergrund der
frühchristlichen Gemeindefunktionen (Wuppertal: Theologischer Verlag Rolf Brockhaus,
1975), 7–94.
45
HEINRICH JULIUS HOLTZMANN, Lehrbuch der neutestamentlichen Theologie (2nd ed.;
2 vols.; Sammlung theologischer Lehrbücher; Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1911; 1st ed. 1897),
vol. 2, 562–80, in particular 576–78.
46
OLOF LINTON, Das Problem der Urkirche in der neueren Forschung: Eine kritische
Darstellung (Uppsala: Almqvist & Wiksell, 1932). At pp. 103–104 he deals with teachers,
but he simply reports HARNACK’s portrait of them.
47
AUSTIN M. FARRER, “The Ministry in the New Testament,” in The Apostolic Ministry:
Essays on the History and the Doctrine of Episcopacy (ed. KENNETH E. KIRK; London:
Hodder & Stoughton, 1946), 113–82.
of all humankind. 48 The Seven, functioning beside the apostles, played the role
of evpi,skopoi, to be compared to the so-called “rulers of the synagogue” in
charge of various practical services. The communities without residential
apostles were led by a group of presbyters presided by evpi,skopoi. These
overseers were in charge of the pastoral care and of the ministry of the word
and absorbed the function of the local teachers. 49 In the course of time, they
were associated as colleagues to the disciples of the apostles and took up the
commission originally given to the apostles. 50
A few years later, Hans von Campenhausen restated the consensus by
putting forward a complex reconstruction. 51 Originally, leadership among early
Christians was in the hands of the apostles, whereas everything else relied on
mutual service through sharing personal talents. 52 The first institutional
element that, under the influence of Judaism, intruded on the early
communities, was the office of presbyters. After a while the apostles
disappeared, followed by prophets and eventually teachers. Initially, teachers
were hardly distinguishable from prophets. 53 They functioned mainly as
catechists and transmitters of the oral and written tradition, from the
interpretation of which their authority issued. In the second century, teachers
were no longer what they used to be:
Die Lehrer des zweiten Jahrhunderts sind keine Enthusiasten. Sie sind Schriftforscher und
Theologen und als solche die ersten bewussten Vertreter einer individuell geprägten,
persönlich gestalteten Geistigkeit innerhalb der Kirche. Dabei wird die Berührung mit dem
philosophischen Geiste der heidnischen Welt immer stärker. Waren die urchristlichen Lehrer
vor allem durch das Erbe des Judentums und durch den Kampf mit der jüdischen
Schriftgelehrsamkeit bestimmt, so gewinnt in der Folgezeit die Auseinandersetzung mit dem
Heidentum an Bedeutung. 54
Protagonist of the transition is the philosopher Justin. In the late second century
teachers do not work exclusively within the community, but they also have
schools where their views are transmitted. “Free” teachers and church officials
48
FARRER, “Ministry,” 142.
49
“If there ever was a time when localised teachers might have taken the lead over the
overseers, the Church was near following the development of the synagogue, where the
archisynagogi never became a spiritual power, while the teaching elder (rabbi, didascalos)
became all-important. But it belongs to the peculiar genius of Christianity that this did not
happen” (FARRER, “Ministry,” 158).
50
FARRER, “Ministry,” 180.
51
HANS VON CAMPENHAUSEN, Kirchliches Amt und geistliche Vollmacht in den ersten
drei Jahrhunderten (2nd ed.; BHT 14; Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1963; 1st ed. 1953).
52
CAMPENHAUSEN, Amt, 69.
53
The section on teachers is in CAMPENHAUSEN, Amt, 210–33; the period of our concern
is dealt with in CAMPENHAUSEN, Amt, 210–15.
54
CAMPENHAUSEN, Amt, 211.
were often the same people and our sources do not permit us to say what was
specific about teachers. 55
In a book published in 1959, Eduard Schweizer championed the consensus
drawing a parabola whose highest point was Paul’s authentic letters and the
lowest the Pastorals. 56 Leonhard Goppelt 57 proposed that Paul saw charisma as
partly expressed through office and partly through functions with no clear
difference. Whereas all believers are priests in the light of the eschatological-
pneumatic character of salvation and of the church, the historical character of
both of them requires a number of offices, 58 among which Goppelt counted
apostles, teachers and prophets. Apostles disappeared within the first
generation. 59 Later, prophets and teachers were replaced by local offices, the
former becoming extinct at the end of the second century, the latter in the
middle of the third century. 60
The consensus was such only among Protestant scholars, whereas Catholic
theologians were dismayed to see the organisation of the Catholic Church
discredited as a fall from charisma to institution. Thaddäus Soiron found in the
Pauline list of charismas of 1 Cor 12 the expression of the hierarchical structure
of the Christian church, which he considered a supernatural organism. 61
3.2 Catholic Scholarship after Vatican II

The Catholic scholarly debate took a different turn after the Second Vatican
Council had issued the Lumen Gentium. The difference between the old and
new course can be exemplified by comparing a book by Rudolf
Schnackenburg, published in 1961, with a book by Hans Küng, published in
1967. 62 Schnackenburg thought that office and hierarchy were important
55
With the exception of Clement of Alexandria, who is examined at length
(CAMPENHAUSEN, Amt, 215–32).
56
EDUARD SCHWEIZER, Gemeinde und Gemeindeordnung im Neuen Testament (ATANT
35; Zurich: Zwingli Verlag, 1959), 165–66.
57
LEONHARD GOPPELT, Die apostolische und nachapostolische Zeit (Die Kirche in ihrer
Geschichte 1/A; Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1962), 121–38.
58
GOPPELT, Zeit, 134.
59
GOPPELT, Zeit, 130.
60
GOPPELT, Zeit, 132.
61
THADDÄUS SOIRON, Die Kirche als der Leib Christi nach der Lehre des hl. Paulus
exegetisch, systematisch und in der theologischen wie praktischen Bedeutung dargestellt
(Düsseldorf: Patmos-Verlag, 1951), 79.
62
RUDOLF SCHNACKENBURG, Die Kirche im Neuen Testament: Ihre Wirklichkeit und
theologische Deutung, ihr Wesen und Geheimnis (QD 14; Freiburg: Herder, 1961); HANS
KÜNG, Die Kirche (Ökumenische Forschungen I. Ekklesiologische Abteilung 1; Freiburg:
Herder, 1967). Comparison in JAMES D. G. DUNN, Jesus and the Spirit: A Study of the
features already present in the Pauline communities. These communities were

not led by the Holy Spirit, but on the principle of the commissioning from
above. 63 On the contrary, Küng wrote that Roman-Catholic theology has
dispensed with Pauline ecclesiology, focussing on charisma, and favoured the
Pastorals and the Acts of the Apostles, which promote church offices. 64
In the wake of Vatican II, a group of French-speaking scholars authored a
volume on the subject of church ministries. The director of this project, Jean
Delorme, rejected the distinction between charisma and institution.
Appointment (“investiture”) in early Christianity acknowledged the charismas
of Christians in the light of their previous achievements and/or in order to
commission a new task on the basis of personal talents. This acknowledgement
could also define in further detail the conditions under which to exercise these
talents. Acknowledgement and description of the office were the task of the
apostles and of the community. 65 For what concern teachers, they might have
been appointed following the Jewish practice of laying hands, but this is
uncertain. 66 They expounded the Scriptures in the light of the gospel and their
role was so important that it could induce arrogance, against which a number
of passages warn. 67
Not all Catholic scholars agreed. Jean Boudillon 68 noted that the discussion
on early church structure is in fact a discussion on the structure of the
Corinthian community. It was not Paul’s intention to highlight that the
Corinthians had a “pneumatical” organisation, an adjective which he never
used, but to say that the pneumatika, are spirit-given gifts meant for the common
good. Boudillon further observed that his colleagues take it as a model to
follow the communities discussed in Paul’s genuine epistles and discard the
communities depicted in the Pastorals, stiffened as they were by
institutionalisation. However, today we are closer to the Pastorals, written after
the death of the apostles and in face of the problems caused by the increasing
Religious and Charismatic Experience of Jesus and the First Christians as Reflected in the
New Testament (London: SCM Press, 1975), 568.
63
KÜNG, Kirche, 33.
64
KÜNG, Kirche, 215–30. KÜNG’s book was kindly but firmly criticised by PIERRE
GRELOT, “La structure ministérielle de l’Église d’après saint Paul: À propos de ‘l’Église’ de
H. Küng,” Istina 15 (1970): 389–424; “Sur l’origine des ministères dans les églises
pauliniennes,” Istina 16 (1971): 453–69.
65
JEAN DELORME, “Diversité et unité des ministères d’après le Nouveau Testament,” in
Le ministère et les ministères selon le Nouveau Testament: Dossier exégétique et réflexion
théologique (ed. JEAN DELORME; Paris: Seuil, 1974), 283–346, 341–43.
66
DELORME, “Diversité,” 334–35.
67
DELORME, “Diversité,” 293–95.
68
JEAN BOUDILLON, “La première épître aux Corinthiens et la controverse sur les
ministères,” Istina 16 (1971): 471–88.
distance from the founding event, than to 1 and 2 Corinthians. Moreover,

Boudillon wondered how a very young and troubled community such as Paul’s
Corinth could be taken as a model. 69
3.3 The Use of Social Analysis

Considering that sources and confessional bias had changed little for almost
one hundred years, it is no wonder that scholars kept advocating the same
views. A new departure was made possible in the 1970s by the application of
sociological methods.
Ulrich Brockhaus published in 1976 a major contribution under the
conventional title of Charisma und Amt. In a lengthy bibliographical survey,
he exposed the division between Catholic and Protestant scholars, the latter
being under Sohm’s influence, the former under the influence of Sohm’s
opponents. On the one side, Protestants take 1 Corinthians 12 as the main
evidence of a charismatic organisation in the early churches, on the other,
Catholics and Anglicans highlight the passages on the appointment of bishops
and the principle of succession. Both camps acknowledge the importance of
charisma, but not exactly which part this played in primitive Christianity.
Whatever the historical reconstruction, Brockhaus pointed to a shared
misunderstanding:
Was bei allen diesen, thematisch wie theologisch so verschiedenen Arbeiten, immer wieder
auffällt, ist, dass sie methodisch zu wenig differenzieren zwischen einer Rekonstruktion der
Gemeindefunktionen in der frühchristlichen – oder auch nur den paulinischen – Gemeinden
einerseits und der Exegese der Stellen, an denen Paulus von Charismen spricht, andererseits.
Gewiss wird der paränetische Charakter von 1. Kor. 12 und Röm. 12 gelegentlich – wenn
auch selten genug – erkannt und anerkannt, konsequent berücksichtigt aber wird er im
Verlauf der Exegese fast nie. So übernimmt man immer wieder – bewusst und unbewusst –
die seit Sohm und Harnack herrschende Vorstellung von der charismatischen Urzeit der
Kirche, deren wesentliche Merkmale den soeben genannten Stellen entnommen werden. 70
Brockhaus believed that it is necessary to distinguish between the functions

actually at work in the Pauline communities and Paul’s teaching on charisma.
From the outset, Paul’s communities were acquainted with office-like features
such as authority, title, special position, salary. However, Paul did not give the
people carrying these functions a clear place in the community, nor is it
possible to distinguish between charisma and office. The concept of charisma
69
“Déceler que cinq ans après sa fondation une communauté de chrétiens [Corinth],
encore embourbés dans un paganisme dont ils viennent à peine de se convertir et constituant
des factions rivales, n’a pas encore de structure bien déterminée et définitivement mise en
place ne semble pas devoir conduire d’une façon pressante à la prendre comme modéle et
comme norme” (BOUDILLON, “Épître,” 487).
70
BROCKHAUS, Charisma, 93.
was taken by Paul from the profane world and only means “gift,” either from
humans or from God. His discussion of charisma in 1 Cor 12 and Rom 12,
where the word is employed in the technical sense of God’s spiritual gift, does
not intend to outline the organisation of the community, but has a paraenetic
character. 71
Some of these ideas were shared by Sigfried Schulz and Bengt Holmberg.
According to Schulz, 72 Paul has integrated his teaching on charisma with pre-
existing community functions marked by authority and title. Holmberg,
following Brockhaus, 73 emphasised the dichotomy between real and ideal. A
number of outstanding scholars, he argued, have taken Paul’s views on the
current situation of his communities to be the theological justification of that
situation, forgetting that between what is ideal and what is real there is a
continuous dialectic. 74 Holmberg believed that in Paul’s communities charisma
functioned within a well-structured organisation, without suffering from it,
because all the three types of authority identified by Weber, charismatic,
traditional and rational, were naturally mingled together. 75 Moreover, he
proposed a new solution to the question of routinisation. Sohm had opposed
charisma and office. Harnack had seen the shift from charisma to office as
inevitable, and Weber had spoken of routine as a means to ensure on a daily
basis the extraordinary talents of the charismatic leader. Holmberg wrote that
charisma “actively seeks institutional manifestation” in order to ensure its own
survival. 76
“Charisma” is a key word in the output of one of the greatest exponents of
the use of social analysis, Gerd Theissen, 77 who, though ignoring teachers,
BROCKHAUS, Charisma, 237–39.

71
72
SIGFRIED SCHULZ, “Die Charismenlehre des Paulus: Bilanz der Probleme und
Ergebnisse,” in Rechtfertigung: Festschrift für Ernst Käsemann zum 70. Geburtstag (ed.
JOHANNES FRIEDRICH et al.; Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck; Göttingen: Vandenhoeck &
Ruprecht, 1976), 443–60.
73
HOLMBERG, Paul, 122 n. 119.
74
HOLMBERG, Paul, 205.
75
HOLMBERG, Paul, 148–61.
76
HOLMBERG, Paul, 162–95. Citation from p. 166. See also BURTCHAELL, Synagogue,
161. Other scholars too have highlighted that the transition from the charismatic beginnings
to the consolidation of the movement in institutional forms is a natural and inevitable
development not to be depreciated as a decline: JOHN G. GAGER, Kingdom and Community:
The Social World of Early Christianity (Prentice-Hall Studies in Religion; Englewood Cliffs:
Prentice-Hall, 1975), 64–92.
77
GERD THEISSEN, Soziologie der Jesusbewegung: Ein Beitrag zur
Entstehungsgeschichte des Urchristentums (2nd ed.; Theologische Existenz heute 194;
München: Chr. Kaiser Verlag, 1978; 1st ed. 1977). Some of his essays written in the
seventies were collected in Studien zur Soziologie des Urchristentums (2nd ed.; WUNT 19;
Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1983; 1st ed. 1979).
referred to apostles and prophets in his powerful picture of early Christianity.

In his view, this was a revolutionary movement spread by wandering
charismatics to whom the Q source would bear witness. Giving up the place of
belonging, family ties, and property, they went around the region of Syria and
Palestine proclaiming the kingdom of God and teaching the words of Jesus,
which they preserved in a reliable way because they enacted them in their
lives. 78 The Hellenisation of Christianity brought about the fall of these
charismatics in favour of communities headed by resident leaders. This
reconstruction, 79 which recalls Sohm’s dramatic opposition between charisma
and institution, is achieved drawing on the ascetics portrayed by Georg
Kretschmar 80 and on the Didache interpreted through the categories on
charisma developed by Weber, who in turn was dependent on Harnack’s work
on the Didache. We have seen how problematic this approach is. Questionable
is also reliance on evidence that is scanty, mainly the sending of the Twelve
and of the Seventy (Mark 6:6–56; Matt 10:1–11:1; Luke 9:1–11; 10:1–24), and
that is susceptible to different interpretations. 81
3.4 The Last Decades

Scholarship from the last three decades has produced no substantial novelty,
but a repetition of old themes. 82 James T. Burtchaell has studied the history of
78
See GERD THEISSEN, “Wanderradikalismus: Literatursoziologische Aspekte der
Überlieferung von Worten Jesu im Urchristentum,” in THEISSEN, Studien, 79–105; first
published in ZTK 70 (1973): 245–71.
79
There are numerous proposals comparable to THEISSEN’s theory of wanderers
associated with the Q source. For a brief survey of these proposals and of their critics, see
ECKHARD J. SCHNABEL, Early Christian Mission (2 vols.; Downers Grove: Intervarsity
Press; Leicester: Apollos, 2004), vol. 1, 753–59.
80
GEORG KRETSCHMAR, “Ein Beitrag zur Frage nach dem Ursprung frühchristlicher
Askese,” ZTK 61 (1964): 27–66. THEISSEN credits the main assumption of his research to
this work (Studien, 86 n. 20).
81
See DRAPER, “Weber,” 542.
82
An incomplete list includes: JOACHIM GNILKA, “Geistliches Amt und Gemeinde nach
Paulus,” in Foi et salut selon S. Paul (Épître aux Romains 1,16): Colloque Œcumenique à
l’abbaye de S. Paul hors le murs, 16–21 Avril 1968 (ed. MARKUS BARTH et al.; AnBib 42;
Rome: Institut Biblique Pontifical, 1970), 233–45; JOSEF HAINZ, Ekklesia: Strukturen
paulinischer Gemeinde-Theologie und Gemeinde-Ordnung (Biblische Untersuchungen 9;
Regensburg: Friedrich Pustet, 1972), 87–88; KARL KERTELGE, Gemeinde und Amt im Neuen
Testament (Biblische Handbibliothek 10; München: Kösel-Verlag, 1972); J. MÜHLSTEIGER,
“Zum Verfassungsrecht der Frühkirche,” ZKT 99 (1977): 129–55 and 257–85; ALFRED
SCHREIBER, Die Gemeinde in Korinth: Versuch einer gruppendynamischen Betrachtung der
Entwicklung der Gemeinde von Korinth auf der Basis des ersten Korintherbriefes (NTAbh
12; Münster: Aschendorff, 1977); JÜRGEN ROLOFF, “Amt / Ämter / Amtverständnis IV. Im
Neuen Testament,” in Theologische Realenzyclopädie (ed. GERHARD KRAUSE and
research in considerable detail and has outlined the changing fortunes of the
consensus. 83 In the second part of his book he observes that the structure of the
church was modelled after the synagogue, though with the difference that the
real leadership was in the hands of charismatics. Unfortunately for Burtchaell,
our sources present the household rather than the synagogue as the model for
early Christian communities. 84 Some years ago, Jochen Wagner has taken this
fact as the basis for his reconstruction. 85 Since early Christians assembled in
houses, their owners exerted a substantial authority over the gathering, though
subordinated to apostles, prophets and teachers. As the apostles died and false
prophets made their appearance, the role of the house owner increased.
Drawing on the pagan world, this was called evpi,skopoj and the council made
of many house leaders formed a presbyterium. “Presbyter” was an honorary
title known in Judaism, which developed to designate the members of the local
collegium. As time went by and in order to fence off the threat of false teachers
or to settle conflicting points of view, one evpi,skopoj emerged at the head of the
presbyterium.
3.5 Conclusions
After over a century of research, the relationship between charisma and office
in the early Christian communities still awaits a satisfactory description. This
impasse is due to a number of reasons. First of all, the very concepts of
“charisma” and “office” are questionable. The former comes from the
GERHARD MÜLLER; Berlin: Walter de Gruyter, 1978), 2: 509–533; WALTER KLAIBER,

Rechtfertigung und Gemeinde: Eine Untersuchung zum paulinischen Kirchenverständnis
(Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1982), 216–18; JACQUES DUPONT, “Dimensions du
problème des charismes dans 1 Co 12–14,” in Charisma und Agape (1 Ko 12–14) (ed.
LORENZO DE LORENZI; Monographie Reihe von “Benedictina” 7; Rome: Abtei von St Paul
vor den Mauern, 1983), 7–21; E. EARLE ELLIS, Pauline Theology: Ministry and Society
(Grand Rapids: Eerdmans; Exeter: Paternoster Press, 1989). To be noted the handy collection
of classic essays gathered by KERTELGE, ed., Amt, and the collective book edited by TRUTZ
RENDTORFF with the title Charisma und Institution (Gütersloh: Gerd Mohn, 1985). The
following essays should be singled out: EDUARD SCHWEIZER, “Konzeptionen von Charisma
und Amt im Neue Testament,” 316–34; FERDINAND HAHN, “Grundfragen von Charisma und
Amt in der gegenwärtigen neutestamentlichen Forschung: Fragestellungen aus evangelischer
Sicht,” 335–49; RUDOLF SCHNACKENBURG, “Charisma und Amt in der gegenwärtigen
neutestamentlichen Forschung: Aspekte, Tendenzen und Fragestellungen aus römisch-
katholischer Sicht,” 350–67.
83
BURTCHAELL, Synagogue.
84
R. ALASTAIR CAMPBELL, The Elders: Seniority within Earliest Christianity (Studies
of the New Testament and Its World; Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1994), 203–204.
85
JOCHEN WAGNER, Die Anfänge des Amtes in der Kirche: Presbyter und Episkopen in
der frühchristlichen Literatur (Texte und Arbeiten zum neutestamentlichen Zeitalter 53;
Tübingen: Francke Verlag, 2011).
4. Teachers Move Centre Stage 19
application of the term “charisma” in 1 Cor 12 to the three roles mentioned in

verse 28. This chapter is a complex text addressing a specific situation and
probably making use of sources. Hence, caution is necessary when
extrapolating from it the concept of charisma and turning it into a category
descriptive of early Christian roles in general. The concept of office is also
problematic. If this is to be interpreted as indicating a position achieved
through some form of appointment, characterised by precise duties and by
continuity, it seems to reflect subsequent church organisation rather than the
structure of early Christian communities. Another reason is that the study of
charisma and office seldom takes into account sociologists’ warning to
distinguish between what is descriptive and what is prescriptive. The fact is
that the scholarly debate is more confessional than academic. Protestant
scholars usually criticise the Catholic Church for betraying the pristine
charismatic structure of the Pauline communities, whereas many Catholic
scholars point out that the concept of office was in place since the beginning. 86
The unwillingness to leave behind confessionally biased hypotheses is
highlighted by Burtchaell in his evaluation of scholarship up to the fifties, a
comment which may be considered valid also for part of subsequent research:
Yet as one looks back over the library that had been a-building on our topic since the 1850s,
one must remark that despite the fact that the arts and sciences of biblical exegesis and
historical research had matured over the years, and despite the increased sophistication of
critical method used in these studies, the influence of ideology has, if anything, increased.
One is inclined to observe that up to this point – one century after Ritschl – there was still
not a Catholic who had seen popular, unofficered sovereignty as the church order of the early
Christians, and hardly a Protestant who saw authoritative office as a legacy of the spirit to
chosen leaders. Therein lies a possible lesson. For the argument over office has in fact been
an argument over autocracy, and over autonomy, and over anarchy. 87
4. Teachers Move Centre Stage
4.1 Karl H. Rengstorf

In 1935 Karl H. Rengstorf wrote an important entry for the Theologische
Wörterbuch zum Neuen Testament on “dida,skaloj.” 88 He examined the history
of the term dida,skaloj, its use in Greek philosophical literature and then in the
New Testament, where it mostly refers to Jesus. Like contemporary Jewish
teachers, Jesus taught starting from the Torah and had an entourage of
86
In the minority one finds ALEXANDRE FAIVRE, who in a militant article regrets the
disappearance of lay teachers in the third century (Ordonner la fraternité: Pouvoir d’innover
et retour à l’ordre dans l’église ancienne [Paris: Cerf, 1992], 213–53).
87
BURTCHAELL, Synagogue, 148.
88
KARL H. RENGSTORF, “dida,skw( ktl),” GLNT, 2: 1093–1172, 1126–55.
disciples, but he distinguished himself because of his unique relationship with

God, which left no space for alternative teachings. In this sense, from the point
of view of the Synoptics his teaching was the teaching par excellence.
Christian teachers, like Jesus and contemporary rabbis, provided practical
rather than theoretical instruction. A statistical survey of the occurrence of
dida,skw suggests that teaching played a greater role in Palestine (Synoptics and
Acts) than among the Pauline communities of Asia Minor and Greece. 89
Teachers came after apostles and prophets (1 Cor 12:28; Eph 4:11) because
these posed the foundations of the communities on which teachers built.
Teachers from the early days should be distinguished from those of later
periods. In the Egyptian church, where the title lasted longer, they underwent
a process of intellectualisation, which turned them into their Greek equivalents
and their task into the exposition of doctrines. This intellectualisation had been
sternly fought by Jesus, Paul and the first Christian teachers.
Rengstorf added interesting material in his article on “maqhth,j,” paying
particular attention to the theme of transmission. 90 The Greek philosophical
schools did not collapse at the death of their founder because they kept alive
his teaching by handing it down to new generations of disciples. This teaching
was renovated without necessarily distinguishing what was new from what was
old. For this reason, Chrysippus taught his own opinions as Zeno’s and
Aristotle referred to the doctrines of the Pythagoreans as a whole body, though
he was able to distinguish between what the founder had said and what his
followers had added. In the Old Testament the situation is quite different, since
it is not possible to find a master-disciple relationship, nor a preoccupation for
transmission since teaching comes directly from God generation after
generation through revelation. In rabbinic literature there is a shift under
Hellenistic influence, since it is possible to observe that the principle of
transmission plays a key role in the rabbi-“talmid” relationship. When it comes
to Jesus and his disciples, it was not the transmission of knowledge that kept
them together, but a personal bond. Contrary to the expectations of the disciples
of philosophers or rabbis, Jesus’ disciples knew that they would never reach
the stage in which they would be able to take his place. Moreover, they were
not tradents of his teaching, but his witnesses. The term “disciple” was later
abandoned probably because it assimilated Christianity to a philosophical
school. Rengstorf does not consider the existence of Christian teachers to be a
challenge to his reconstruction. He proposed that that they did not convey a
89
Two thirds of the ninety-five occurrences are in the Gospels and in the first part of
Acts, ten occurrences are to be found in the Pauline letters, including Ephesians
(RENGSTORF, “dida,skw,” 1100–102).
90
KARL H. RENGSTORF, “manqa,nw( ktl),” GLNT, 6: 1053–1238, 1121–35.
personal teaching, but they were tradents and mediators of God’s revelation as
witnessed in the Scriptures and fulfilled in Jesus. 91
Rengstorf’s two articles offer a useful and broad overview, even if not
always correct. For instance, his claim that a master-disciple relationship is
absent from the Old Testament is questionable. 92 Moreover, his essays are
ideologically biased by the drive to prove the uniqueness of Jesus the teacher
and of the way his association with his disciples unfolded. Rengstorf is eager
to stress the personal bond and total commitment required by Jesus in
opposition to the intellectual bonds established by philosophers and rabbis with
their disciples, and to contrast ethical teaching with intellectual teaching, but
these distinctions are dubious. 93 The practical and ethical questions of how to
conduct one’s life were central to the Hellenistic philosophical schools. 94
4.2 Heinrich Greeven

In a long article on key figures in Paul’s communities, 95 Heinrich Greeven
devoted a section on teachers, which he introduced by asking whether there
was such a thing. He answered affirmatively in the light of the enumeration of
1 Cor 12:28, of the lack of evidence to the contrary and of the continuity
required by the relationship between teacher and disciple. Teachers were
charismatic people, but not wanderers, and could be community leaders. 96 The
instruction they imparted was paraenetic and consisted in showing the way of
life. Its overall purpose was the preservation and transmission of the tradition,
which was primarily made out of the Lord’s words (prophetical, apocalyptic
and paraenetic) and of kerygmatic and confessional formulations. It also
included the interpretation of the Scriptures as prophecies of Christ. The
importance of teachers was such that “Es ist kaum zu viel gesagt, wenn man
feststellt, dass ohne die dida,skaloi der christlichen Gemeinden die Entstehung
einer Überlieferung und letztlich des Kanons nicht zudenken ist.” 97 Recalling
Rengstorf ’s observation that “teacher” was a term requiring the specification
of the object of teaching, 98 Greeven remarked that its absolute use in Paul
91
RENGSTORF, “dida,skw,” 1162–65.
92
MICHAEL J. WILKINS, The Concept of Disciple in Matthew’s Gospel as Reflected in the
Use of the Term Maqhth,j (NovTSup 59; Leiden: Brill, 1988), 43–91.
93
WILKINS, Concept, 11–42. The contrast in RENGSTORF ’s article is schematically
illustrated in ZIMMERMANN, Lehrer, 58.
94
PIERRE HADOT, Exercices spirituels et philosophie antique (rev. and enl. ed.; Paris:
Albin Michel, 2002).
95
HEINRICH GREEVEN, “Propheten, Lehrer, Vorsteher bei Paulus,” ZNT 44 (1952-1953):
1–43; repr. in KERTELGE, ed., Amt, 305–361. Section on teachers at pp. 16–31.
96
GREEVEN, “Propheten,” 9, 17 and 35–37.
97
GREEVEN, “Propheten,” 24.
98
RENGSTORF, “dida,skaloj,” 1129.
presupposes a technical use. On the basis of Luke 2:46, Matt 10:24–25 par
Luke 6:40, Matt 23:8 and archaeological evidence, he argued that Paul’s
teachers corresponded to a role in the synagogue with the same name. Like the
Jewish scribes, Christian teachers were continuously occupied with the
Scriptures.
In comparison to other roles, Greeven noted that in the Pauline communities
the boundaries between apostles, prophets and teachers were fluid. In
particular, he observed that
Prophetie und Lehre sind einander zugeordnet. Sie bilden […] die vertikale und die
horizontale Komponente im Besitz der Gemeinde, Geist und Tradition. Dabei müssen
Prophetie und Lehre immer streng aufeinander bezogen bleiben: Prophetie ohne Lehre
entartet zur Schwärmerei, Lehre ohne Prophetie erstarrt zum Gesetz. 99
Though Greeven focused on the Pauline communities, his analysis may deserve
wider application because of the stress he lays on the relationship between
teachers and transmission and on the part played by paraenesis. This position
is in contrast with Bultmann and in continuity with Dibelius. The connection
he established between Christian and Jewish teachers is also worth pursuing,
though he confused rabbis, scribes and synagogal teaching figures as if these
were one and the same thing.
4.3 Helmut Merklein

While working on Ephesians, Helmut Merklein addressed the question of the
offices in the Pauline communities. 100 He excluded a direct connection between
Eph 4:11 and 1 Cor 12:28 and suggested that both verses depend on a common
tradition. Paul came to know the triad in Antioch (Acts 13:1–2) at some stage
before the year 50. This community was lead by people probably fleeing
persecution from Jerusalem and belonging to the circle of Stephen (Acts
11:20). As they proclaimed the word, they were called “scheluchim”, that is
“apostles”, in the light of the Jewish concept of people authorised to speak in
somebody’s name. However, in Hellenistic Antioch this meaning made little
sense. The designations “prophets” and “teachers” were chosen instead as these
two words better expressed the role of heralds of the word, chief function of
the triad as suggested by Harnack. 101 Given the strong impulse that Antiochene
Christians gave to the mission to the Gentiles, “apostles” came to designate, in
keeping with the habitual Greek use of the term, those sent outside Antioch.
Therefore, “apostles” was the name attributed to prophets and teachers when
GREEVEN, “Propheten,” 29.

99
HELMUT MERKLEIN, Das kirchliche Amt nach dem Epheserbrief (SANT 33;
100
München: Kösel Verlag, 1973).

101
MERKLEIN, Amt, 249–50 and 279–80.
sent out on a mission (cf. Acts 13:1–3; 14:4–14). Prophets and teachers did not
make up two distinct groups. When the carrier of the word spoke from
inspiration, the term “prophet” would be used, whereas when the speaker drew
on tradition, “teacher” was deemed appropriate. 102
Merklein considered the members of the triad as charismatics because their
authority did not depend on some institution, but it was personal. 103 As to the
specific role of teachers, Merklein followed Greeven in attaching their origin
to the Hellenistic synagogue. 104 Their task was not mainly transmission of
“halakot” as suggested by Dibelius, but transmission of doctrines, confessional
formulas, prophecies, words of Jesus, stories about him, and, as pointed out by
Greeven, scriptural exegesis. Contrary to their Jewish counterparts, Christian
teachers were not rigid tradents: the freedom with which Paul and the Synoptics
handled the tradition suggests that Christian teachers did the same, albeit
within the boundaries set by the gospel as transmitted by Paul. 105
Prophets and teachers were leaders of the community. Their task was to
extract from the gospel concrete indications for the life of its members. 106 In
due course they came to be called evpi,skopoi, that is “overseers”, a term from
profane Greek with no office-like connotation.
The threat posed by gnostic apostles and prophets and the idea that the end
of time was near and therefore prophecy needless were a challenge to main
stream prophets. 107 As time went by, teachers and prophets of the first
generation disappeared. The gospel preached by Paul assumed increasing
importance for the recognition of new teachers and hence new leaders. This
selection was carried out by the presbyters, who were not office-holders, but
only the most influential people of the community. 108 This opened the way
towards institutionalisation, which Merklein sees as a natural development of
charismatic roles.
Merklein provided the amplest and most detailed reconstruction of the
history of Christian teachers up to his time. He developed the insights of
previous scholarship and used Ephesians as the starting point for a large picture
of offices in Paul’s communities.
102
MERKLEIN, Amt, 235–80.
103
MERKLEIN, Amt, 287.
104
105
106
107
MERKLEIN, Amt, 351–55, 361.
108
4.4 Heinz Schürmann

Heinz Schürmann’s contribution was originally intended as a preparatory
document for the international theological commission’s plenary meeting of 21
September 1975, which centred on the theme of magisterium and theology. 109
This aim was bound to shape the nature of the article, including the fact that
non-canonical writings are left out. His survey of sources is based on the
methodological assumption that, even when teachers are not mentioned, they
may nonetheless be present in the community from which the texts emerged. 110
The Gospel of Mark and the Gospel and the Letters ascribed to John are a case
in point. However, he also noted that teaching could be carried out by other
people like prophets or presbyters. Furthermore, he suggested that what is
specific to Christian teachers in comparison with their Jewish and pagan
counterparts was the association of “pneuma” and “paradosis”. Providing a
definition reminiscent of Rengstorf ’s, he observed that, whereas rabbinic
teachers were tradents of “mnemotechnic legalism” and pagan teachers of
“Greek speculative intellectualism,” Christian teachers made “paradosis”
understandable in the “pneuma”. 111
On the basis of passages such as 1 Cor 12:28–29, Acts 13:1, Matt 23:34, and
Eph 4:11, Schürmann believed that the question of Christian teachers in the
New Testament must be seen in connection with other roles and that the
relationship between teachers and leadership may change from case to case. 112
In some places, teachers became leaders of the community assuming the role
of presbyters or overseers; elsewhere they remained an independent group
besides presbyters or were even under their control. The authors of a number
of sources are not interested in bringing to light who was responsible for
leadership and teaching. In those texts in which presbyters or overseers fight
against false teachers, teachers are intentionally eliminated from the church
structure in order to avoid the tendency to the perversion of teaching. In Luke
and the Pastorals this tendency is counteracted by entrusting the presbyter a
“paradosis” that stems from Jesus the teacher and the Twelve and passes
through Paul. 113
109
HEINZ SCHÜRMANN, “„… und Lehrer“: Die geistliche Eigenart des Lehrdienstes und
sein Verhältnis zu anderen geistlichen Diensten im neutestamentlichen Zeitalter,” in
Orientierungen am Neuen Testament (KBANT; Düsseldorf: Patmos, 1978); 116–56; rev.
essay originally published in Dienst der Vermittlung: Festschrift zum 25 – jährigen Bestehen
des philosophisch-theologischen Studiums im Priesterseminar Erfurt (ed. WILHELM ERNST
et al.; ETS 37; Leipzig: St. Benno-Verlag, 1977), 107–147.
110
SCHÜRMANN, “Lehrer,” 136–43.
111
SCHÜRMANN, “Lehrer,” 130–31
112
113
5. Teachers as Tradents 25
Schürmann wrote a useful reference work, which put into focus some major
points. He also provided bibliographical references and guidelines for a full-
fledged study. At the same time, some shortcomings must be pointed out. The
distinction drawn between Christian, Jewish and pagan teachers is
ideologically biased. In his view, Christian teachers come up as the best of all
possible worlds because, thanks to the spirit, they avoid legalism and
intellectualism. However, we have seen that the stoic Chrysippus transmitted
his own teaching as part of the teaching of the founder of the school, Zeno, that
is, he used the freedom that Christian scholars ascribed to the spirit. Moreover,
Greek philosophical teaching was not only intellectual speculation, but it also
aimed at providing a way of life. Another debatable point is the choice of the
material to survey, which is too much and too little. On the one hand, the
absence of early patristic literature is a serious drawback. The survey of most
of the New Testament looking for the themes of teaching and leadership may
lead to confusion. On the other hand, what is the difference between someone
who is called “teacher” and a presbyter or bishop who teaches? Is “paradosis”
the main clue to detect the presence of teachers, considering that no text of the
New Testament links explicitly “paradosis” with the word dida,skaloj? The
harmonisation of all the passages about transmission, teaching, teachers,
prophets and leadership is typical of almost all the studies dealing with early
Christian teachers. This method leads to uncontrollable results and the creation
of a generic category of “teacher.”
This problem was spotted by Alfred Zimmermann, but before turning to
him, we must examine another line of research.
5. Teachers as Tradents
This second approach, to be added to that on charisma and office, focused not
on teachers’ position within the community, but on their activity, of which we
can distinguish three aspects: paraenetic teaching, interpretation of scriptures,
transmission of Jesus’ traditions. 114 The last type is central to a major line of
inquiry in New Testament scholarship. The solution to the question of how the
material about Jesus was handed down between approximately the years 30
and 70 115 is a key factor for any quest on the life of Jesus. Early Christian
teachers have often been considered as the obvious protagonists of this process
and their teaching has been examined in search of clues demonstrating reliable
transmission. This investigation was to a large extent a reaction to some tenets
of form criticism.
ZIMMERMANN, Lehrer, 52–53.

114
115
See MARTIN DIBELIUS, Die Formgeschichte des Evangeliums (ed. GÜNTHER
BORNKAMM; 3rd ed.; Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1959), 9.
5.1 Form Criticism and Transmission

The question of transmission was brought to the fore by form criticism.
According to Dibelius, the synoptic authors gathered and slightly edited a
selection of small units of material, which had reached the evangelists already
formed. 116 The starting point was the activity of eyewitnesses who became
servants of the word: “Sie waren die Missionare, Prediger und Lehrer, die die
Botschaft von Jesus Christus hinaustrugen, um die Welt zu gewinnen.” 117 The
reason for transmitting this material was of a practical nature, mission, the way
to transmit it was preaching. However, preaching was not only attached to
mission work, that is addressed to non-Christians, but it was also attached to
cultic and catechetical activities, that is addressed to Christians. Teachers were
particularly concerned with paraenesis. This took the form of the transmission
of isolated sayings of Jesus in catechetical instruction, to be assimilated to the
“halakha”. 118 The “haggadah” was in the hands of storytellers who reported the
death and resurrection of Jesus and his other deeds. 119
Contrary to Dibelius, Bultmann did not pay attention to Christian teachers
but to Christian prophets and he regarded them as the channels of the words of
the risen Christ. In Bultmann’s view, early Christians did not distinguish
between words of Jesus and what the risen Christ allegedly told the prophets. 120
This lack of distinction makes it very difficult to use the Gospel material as a
source of historical information. Bultmann did not point to Christian
communities responsible for the transmission and did not single out people
who might have held special tasks in this sense. 121
Bultmann’s scepticism is at odds with the easiness displayed in his
identifications of material from the early church. It is also surprising that he
ignores the fact that our sources do provide some information both with regard
to major communities and to leading individuals. 122 Furthermore, there is
evidence that early Christians were able to distinguish between the words of
the historical Jesus and their own (1 Cor 7:10; 7:25) and that they possessed
traditions to use as criteria to assess new prophetic utterances. 123 In his
assessment of form criticism, Dunn remarked that these traditions were handed
DIBELIUS, Formgeschichte, 3–4.

116
DIBELIUS, Formgeschichte, 11.

117
118
DIBELIUS, Formgeschichte, 25–27; 239; 241.
119
DIBELIUS, Formgeschichte, 25–27; 66.
120
RUDOLF BULTMANN, Die Geschichte der Synoptischen Tradition (3rd ed.; Göttingen:
Vandenhoek & Ruprecht, 1957), 134–35.
121
BULTMANN, Geschichte.
122
Assessment of BULTMANN’s theses in ZIMMERMANN, Lehrer, 8–12; see also RIESNER,
Jesus, 8–11.
123
JAMES D. G. DUNN, “Prophetic ‘I’ Sayings and the Jesus Tradition: The Importance
of Testing Prophetic Utterances within Early Christianity,” NTS 24 (1978): 175–98.
down by teachers, whose “conservative role” functioned, to some extent, as a

balancing factor to prophetic creativity. 124
Even if Dibelius and Bultmann did not work out the details of transmission,
they laid foundations upon which others built.
5.2 Birger Gerhardsson

Birger Gerhardsson, a disciple of Harald Riesenfeld, was among the most
talented and influential builders, 125 the author of a book that raised a
considerable debate among English-speaking scholars. 126 While appreciating
the role form critics had assigned to tradition, Memory and Manuscript took
issue with Bultmann’s advocacy of a circular approach: the history of the
communities throws light on the texts and the texts throw light on the history
of the communities. 127 Though such a circle is unavoidable in historical
research, Gerhardsson argued that form critics paid too little attention to its
dangers and turned it into a self-justifying method. Gerhardsson further
regretted that Bultmann did not explain how he understood the concept of
tradition. 128 In order to obviate the interpretative and conceptual deficiencies
of form criticism, Gerhardsson proposed to investigate how transmission
actually took place, that is its technical procedures. However, since early
Christian sources are unsatisfactory under this respect, Gerhardsson thought of
shifting focus to contemporary Jewish transmission. Once again, lack of
sources forced him to move his attention to rabbinic material on the assumption
of continuity between the rabbis and the Pharisaic movement contemporary to
Jesus. Though this material was put in writing starting around two centuries
after Jesus’ death, he assumed that transmission techniques did not change.
At the time of Hillel and Shammai, the distinction between written and oral
Torah was already in place. On the one hand, the written Torah was the chore
of the elementary education provided by the “bet sefer”, 129 which he believed
124
DUNN, “Prophetic ‘I’ Sayings,” 182–83.
125
HARALD RIESENFELD, “The Gospel Tradition and Its Beginnings,” in SE I: Papers
Presented to the International Congress on “The Four Gospels in 1957” Held at Christ
Church, Oxford, 1957 (ed. KURT ALAND et al.; TU 73; Berlin: Akademie Verlag, 1959), 43–
65; repr. in HARALD RIESENFELD, The Gospel Tradition (Philadelphia: Fortress Press,
1970), 1–29. BIRGER GERHARDSSON, Memory and Manuscript: Oral Tradition and Written
Transmission in Rabbinic Judaism and Early Christianity (ASNU 22; Lund: C. W. K.
Gleerup; Copenhagen: Ejnar Munksgaard, 1961).
126
It is briefly sketched in ZIMMERMANN, Lehrer, 19–26.
127
GERHARDSSON, Memory, 9–10. GERHARDSSON refers to BULTMANN, Geschichte, 5–
6, and DIBELIUS, Formgeschichte, 3.
128
GERHARDSSON, Memory, 13.
129
GERHARDSSON, Memory, 56–66.
to be a widespread institution in the first century. 130 On the other hand, the oral
Torah was essentially the material produced through the interpretation of the
written Torah and studied in the “bet hammidrash”. 131 The oral Torah was
transmitted by “tannaim”, who were able to recite orally and in a mechanical
way a variable amount of material, which they had committed to memory. 132
This system, which ensured the transmission of the oral Torah till the time it
was put in writing, is not attested before Rabbi Aqiba, but the “balance of
probability” is that it was already at work in the first century. 133
In another section of his study, Gerhardsson tackled Christian material with
particular reference to Acts and Paul. The majority of Jesus’ disciples must
have been influenced by the Pharisees and must have adopted the same
distinction between written and oral Torah. The latter was identified with
Jesus’ teaching and transmitted until the middle of the second century. 134
Gerhardsson concluded observing that, if Jesus taught, his disciples must have
been asked to commit to memory. Therefore, after his death, his words and
works were preserved and studied by the “collegium” of the Twelve in
Jerusalem. 135
Memory and Manuscript was soon followed by a short tract in which
Gerhardsson defended his views vis-à-vis his critics. 136 Examining the
differences between rabbinic and early Christian traditions, he remarked that
the latter regarded Jesus as the only teacher, even if there were also other
Christian teachers. This was the reason why memories about him underwent
little change. 137
Memory and Manuscript restated the question of transmission as a
fundamental issue for the study of early Christianity and balanced the
influential but one-sided theories of form criticism. However, Gerhardsson’s
specific conclusions are debatable. 138 His survey of Acts and Paul was widely
130
“We may be quite sure that at the time of the fall of the Temple there were private
elementary schools in all the Jewish towns of Palestine, and that the larger villages of Judaea
also had such schools. This does not mean that school attendance was general at that time,
though.” (GERHARDSSON, Memory, 59).
131
132
133
GERHARDSSON, Memory, 111.
134
135
136
BIRGER GERHARDSSON, Tradition and Transmission in Early Christianity (ConBNT
20; Lund: C. W. K. Gleerup; Copenhagen: Ejnar Munksgaard, 1964). GERHARDSSON
continued to work on this topic throughout his career. See for example “The Secret of the
Transmission of the Unwritten Jesus Tradition,” NTS 51 (2005): 1–18.
137
GERHARDSSON, Tradition, 40–43.
138
Survey of reactions to GERHARDSSON in ZIMMERMANN, Lehrer, 19–26.
criticised already at the publication of his book. 139 The use of rabbinic literature
to throw light on the first century produces anachronisms. 140 The claim that the
Palestinian Jews had a widespread elementary school system is highly
questionable. 141 Consequently, it is also doubtful that basic mnemonic
techniques were accessible to Jesus’ followers.
The identity of these tradents is an issue that Gerhardsson left open. 142 His
investigation was resumed by Zimmermann twenty years later.
5.3 Alfred F. Zimmermann

The studies of Riesenfeld and Gerhardsson were acknowledged by
Zimmermann as the theoretical framework for his study on the tradents of early
Christian tradition, 143 the topic of his dissertation for the Evangelical-
Theological Faculty of the University of Bern. He agreed with Gerhardsson’s
claim about Jewish school facilities in first century Palestine, but he also
highlighted several shortcomings in Memory and Manuscript, in particular
anachronisms: Gerhardsson applied what we know about rabbis in subsequent
centuries to rabbis in the first. 144 Zimmermann pointed out that Gerhardsson’s
theory should be verified starting from the New Testament. Gerhardsson
himself tried to do it in later writings, in which he looked for traces of rabbinic
activity in Matthew and Acts. 145 Zimmermann rebutted that any such finding,
being based on the form critic principle of inferring the setting from the text,
can only work as indirect evidence of the possible presence of rabbis in
Christian communities. Instead, he proposed a different approach by asking the
question: who transmitted the gospel material between 30 and 70, when
Christianity was still within Judaism? He noted that Athanasius Polag had
139
See ZIMMERMANN, Lehrer, 32.
140
Already noted by GERHARDSSON’s greatest critic, MORTON SMITH, “A Comparison
of Early Christian and Early Rabbinic Tradition,” JBL 82 (1963): 169–76, 169–70. See also
141
This view is criticised for example in GRABBE, Priests, 171–73; CATHERINE HEZSER,
Jewish Literacy in Roman Palestine (TSAJ 81; Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2001), 40–67.
142
He lumps together “evpi,skopoi( presbu,teroi( dia,konoi( dida,skaloi etc.” as people
who possibly were tasked with keeping the tradition by heart (GERHARDSSON, Memory,
203).
143
144
ZIMMERMANN, Lehrer, 29 and 33.
145
E.g. BIRGER GERHARDSSON, The Testing of God’s Son (Matt 4:1–11 & Par): An
Analysis of an Early Christian Midrash (ConBNT 2.1; Lund: C. W. K. Gleerup, 1966);
“Geistiger Opferdienst nach Matth 6,1–6.16–21,” in Neues Testament und Geschichte:
Historisches Geschehen und Deutung im Neuen Testament. Oscar Cullmann zum 70.
Geburtstag (ed. HEINRICH BALTENSWEILER and BO REICKE; Zurich: Theologischer Verlag;
Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1972), 69–77.
already suggested that Christian teachers might have carried the Q material. 146
The function of teachers as tradents is precisely what Zimmermann intended to
investigate. 147
Since Zimmermann’s study is constantly referred to throughout this book,
here it is enough to outline its principal arguments. After an extensive survey
of secondary literature, Zimmermann discussed the archaeological evidence
for the existence of Jewish teachers in first century Jerusalem and for the
meanings of the terms dida,skaloj and ‫רב‬. 148 The bulk of the book is devoted
to the study of the sources with exclusive focus on the texts mentioning the
term dida,skaloj. 149 The oldest passage is 1 Cor 12:28, where Paul inserted a
pre-existing triadic formula stemming from a place where he had come in
conflict with Peter, i.e. Antioch (cf. Gal 2:11ff) or Jerusalem (cf. Gal 1:18).
The mention of the hierarchy of apostles, prophets and teachers is only a
concession to the ecclesiology of Peter’s party in Corinth. Paul’s lack of
interest for teachers is indirectly confirmed by Ephesians, 150 in which one of
his followers placed “teachers” at the end of a list of community offices. The
list of five prophets and teachers in Acts 13:1 is also traditional. These were
Hellenistic Jewish-Christians, founders and leaders of the local community.
Luke was no longer able to distinguish between prophets and teachers even if
passages like 1 Cor 12:28 prove that they were two separate groups. By Luke’s
time, the memory of teachers as holders of a specific community role was lost.
The same applies to the Didache, 151 where the different functions proper to
apostles, prophets and teachers seem to have disappeared (cf. Did. 11.1–2),
even if teachers are also mentioned as an autonomous role (Did. 13.2). The
Syriac origins of the Didache, of Acts 13:1 and of 1 Cor 12:28 is evidence that
the triad was born in Syria-Palestine before Paul’s death. At the same time, the
sources show that by the second half of the first century the differences
between apostles, prophets and teachers had become blurred.
The most important sources for Zimmermann are Matt 23:8 and Matt 10:24–
25. At the end of a long analysis he concluded that Matt 23:8–9 was originally
an Aramaic double logion spoken by Jesus. At the time the pronoun in “rabbi”
was still felt and the term was only a honorific address. Before the year 70, this
word was hardly thinkable as the title of a precise office. A subsequent
translation into Greek turned the double logion into a community rule by
rendering the originally honorific address as dida,skaloj. This was a
ATHANASIUS POLAG, Die Cristologie der Logienquelle (WMANT 45; Neukirchen-

146
Vluyn: Neukirchener-Verlag, 1977), mentioned in ZIMMERMANN, Lehrer, 33–34. I have not

been able to consult this book.
147
148
149
See the methodological remark in ZIMMERMANN, Lehrer, 68.
150
ZIMMERMANN, Lehrer, excursus at pp. 114–18.
151
ZIMMERMANN, Lehrer, excursus at pp. 141–43.
consequence of the increasing presence in the Jerusalem church of Pharisees

seeking to establish a Christian proto-rabbinate. When they left Jerusalem after
the apostolic council, some of them reached Antioch, where the translation may
have taken place. Alternatively, it might have been carried out in Jerusalem
before the death of Stephen, when Hellenists and Hebrews lived side by side.
Hints of proto-rabbinate are also found in Matthew 10:24. Another text
Zimmermann considered to be from Syria-Palestine was the Epistle of James,
which he dated to the generation after James and Paul and which he took as
evidence of the fall of Christian teachers (Jas 3). In a rapid survey of Hebrews
and of the Apostolic Fathers he detected a shift in the meaning of dida,skaloj:
no longer designation of a contemporary and specific role played by Jewish-
Christians, but a reference to teachers in the generic sense, to teachers in
Hellenistic garb, or to a past role of Christian teachers.
In conclusion, Zimmermann reconstructed the history of a group of Jewish-
Christian teachers who functioned as tradents of the evangelical material
between the death of Jesus and the composition of the Gospels. These teachers
were originally Pharisees who brought with them not only their education, but
also a demand for leadership, which the community eventually rejected. This
rejection produced the extinction of the group.
Zimmermann’s dissertation is complementary to Gerhardsson’s. While
Gerhardsson studied rabbinic transmission techniques in order to verify the
hypotheses elaborated by form criticism about Christian transmission,
Zimmermann studied early Christian teachers in order to verify Gerhardsson’s
theory. Thus doing, he was the first and only scholar to turn the question of
Christian teachers into a book. On the one hand, his study deserves praise for
the approach he adopted and for the close analysis of the sources. On the other,
it is regrettable that Zimmermann did not discuss the question of teachers per
se, but in order to validate a certain theory of transmission in early Christianity.
The risk in cases such as this is that the hypothesis controls the interpretation
of the evidence. Zimmermann read the sources from the late first century
onwards as witnesses to the decline of teachers. He saw this decline as
occurring exactly at the beginning of the written gospel tradition, once teachers
had exhausted their alleged function as transmitters. For instance, he explained
the apparent lack of distinction between prophets and teachers in Acts 13:1–2
as a sign that, writing at the end of the first century, Luke was unacquainted
with teachers and consequently unable to make head or tail of his Antiochene
source. However, the simplest explanation is that such a distinction was not in
the source, otherwise Luke, who seems to follow it closely, would have
reported it. Another problem is that not a single text brought forward by
Zimmermann explicitly links his Christian proto-rabbinate with the
transmission of the gospel material. Throughout his book, this remains an
assumption based on the argument that, since later rabbis were transmitters of
tradition, this must apply to Christian proto-rabbis too. Zimmermann seems to
commit the same kind of anachronism he attributed to Gerhardsson.

Reformulating it, we can say that it is not legitimate to transfer what we know
or assume to know about rabbis in the third and subsequent centuries to
Christian proto-rabbis in the first century.
5.4 Jesus the Teacher in Rainer Riesner and Samuel Byrskog

Whereas Zimmermann studied Gerhardsson’s ideas on transmission in
connection with Christian teachers, two other scholars, Rainer Riesner and
Samuel Byrskog, went further back focussing on the question of transmission
in connection with Jesus. At variance from form criticism and in accord with
Gerhardsson, 152 Riesner 153 proposed that already Jesus, on the basis of his high
self-consciousness, considered his teaching the only teaching and taught it in
such a way that it could be faithfully transmitted after his death.
If we compare this theory with Zimmermann’s circle of tradents, it is clear
that there is no longer need for Pharisaic teachers infiltrating the post-Easter
community of Jerusalem, since Jesus himself trained the Twelve as
teachers/tradents. One of the foundations of Riesner’s reconstruction is the
claim, which today is highly questionable, that first century Palestine provided
elementary education on a wide basis, at home, in the synagogue, and in
schools. In these settings, Jesus and his future disciples would have become
familiar with the mnemonic techniques later employed in preaching. 154 Riesner
also observed that Jesus grew in a region, which was not isolated from the rest
of the world, but in contact with Hellenistic civilisation. 155 In the light of Jesus’
alleged acquaintance with Jewish-Hellenistic teaching techniques, Riesner
asked whether the role played by the Greek “paideia” in the Apostolic Fathers
really entailed the falsification of a pristine gospel. 156 This is a far-reaching
question for our topic, because if the answer is negative, Zimmerman’s
differentiation between early Jewish-Christian teachers and subsequent second
century Hellenised teachers becomes debatable. Although Jesus’ contact with
surrounding Hellenistic civilisation is speculative, 157 the same question may be
asked with regard to the first generation of his disciples.
In his book on Jesus the Only Teacher, Samuel Byrskog wondered whether
the transmission of Jesus’ teaching responded to practical needs and was placed
Not unsurprisingly, GERHARDSSON wrote an enthusiastic review of RIESNER’s book

152
on the TLZ 108 (1983): 503–504.

153
In Jesus.
154
RIESNER, Jesus, 97–245.
155
156
157
JOHN P. MEIER, A Marginal Jew: Rethinking the Historical Jesus. 1. The Roots of the
Problem and the Person (ABRL; New York: Doubleday, 1991), 284.
6. The Last Decades 33
in a common setting (Bultmann, Dibelius) or to non-practical needs and was

placed in a separate setting (Gerhardsson, Riesner). 158 His answer was that in
the community of Matthew the traditions about Jesus, the only teacher, were
handed down for their own sake by his pupils in a separate setting, which could
be identified as the school of Jesus. Byrskog saw enough clues “to assume the
existence of transmitters highly able and motivated to preserve the tradition
faithfully also within their own and the community’s creative elaborations.” 159
Concern for transmission features also in the other Gospels, being the four of
them the only texts of the New Testament that represent Jesus as a teacher with
a circle of disciples. The same goes for the letters of Paul, as they display a rich
vocabulary illustrating transmission. In Byrskog’s opinion, ‘The teaching to
believers probably fostered a disciplined act of transmission.’ 160
Byrskog’s assumption is exactly what Zimmermann tried to prove. Byrskog
referred to the works of Zimmermann and Schürmann as providing “some
evidence suggesting that trained teachers were responsible for the transmission
of the Jesus tradition.” 161 Unfortunately, since his focus was on Jesus the
teacher as the source of transmission, he did not inquire who were the
transmitters. This deprived his reconstruction of the necessary verification.
6. The Last Decades
Zimmermann’s book marked the beginning of a new phase, though not all the
scholars working on our topic made reference to his Die urchristlichen Lehrer.
The main focus of this phase was the relationship between first century teachers
and subsequent ones. Zimmermann’s idea of discontinuity between Christian
proto-rabbis and later Christian teacher-philosophers has been either accepted
or challenged on the basis of old and new evidence.
158
SAMUEL BYRSKOG, Jesus the Only Teacher: Didactic Authority and Transmission in
Ancient Israel, Ancient Judaism and the Matthean Community (ConBNT 24; Stockholm:
Almqvist & Wiksell International, 1994).
159
BYRSKOG, Jesus, 400; emphasis original.
160
SAMUEL BYRSKOG, “The Transmission of the Jesus Tradition,” in Handbook for the
Study of the Historical Jesus (ed. TOM HOLMÉN and STANLEY E. PORTER; 4 vols.; Leiden:
Brill, 2011), vol. 2, 1465–94, 1482–84; citation at 1483–84.
161
BYRSKOG, Jesus, 22.
6.1 John K. Coyle

Shortly after Zimmermann’s book, the history of teachers was examined by
John. K. Coyle. 162 In contrast with Zimmermann, whose book Coyle did not
have time to read, and in continuity with Harnack, he took their role well into
the fourth century. Coyle was eager to stress that from the beginning and for
several centuries some Christian teaching was independent of any hierarchy.
In the course of time, teachers passed under the control of bishops and in the
end their functions were completely absorbed by bishops and presbyters.
6.2 Ulrich Neymeyr

This long parabola was criticised by Ulrich Neymeyr in a book, 163 which is the
follow-up of Zimmermann’s Die urchristlichen Lehrer. He disagreed with
Harnack and Coyle and agreed with Zimmermann that there is no historical
continuity between first and second century teachers. 164 On the one hand, the
Didache provides evidence for the decline of the original group of teachers at
the beginning of the second century, a group that was heavily influenced by its
Jewish roots. On the other, second century teachers differed from their
predecessors because of the philosophical instruction they had received as
students. The object of Neymeyr’s work is their history up to the beginning of
the third century.
Christian teachers referred their activity to a charisma received from the
Lord. They taught Gentiles, candidates to baptism, and Christians. Their
teaching could be in oral and written form and employ a monological or
dialogical style. Its content was not simply biblical and theoretical, but also
and more often was concerned with practical problems. It is not clear whether
teachers received material support, but the hypothesis of rich mentors seems
the most probable. The decline of these teachers unfolded in the first half of
the third century, when either presbyters took up their role or they took up that
of presbyters. Mistrust of theologians and especially the challenges caused by
false teachers brought about this change. 165
Neymeyr provided an important service to scholarship by gathering together
the protagonists of Christian teaching in the second century and comparing
their characteristics. He showed the differences and similarities between the
ways teachers perceived their work and taught and he demonstrated how the
overall picture is variegated. His division of the material according to
162
JOHN K. COYLE, “The Exercise of Teaching in the Postapostolic Church,” EgT 15
(1984): 23–43.
163
ULRICH NEYMEYR, Die christlichen Lehrer im zweiten Jahrhundert: Ihre
Lehrtätigkeit, ihr Selbstverständnis und ihre Geschichte (Supplements to Vigiliae
Christianae 4; Leiden: Brill, 1989).
164
NEYMEYR, Lehrer, 3–6.
165
NEYMEYR, Lehrer, 233–35.
6. The Last Decades 35
geographical areas is a contribution against the harmonisation of sources. More

problematic is the clear-cut division between first and second century teachers.
A gradual process of transformation might have been more to the point, as I
will suggest. If this is the case, some of his conclusions with regard to the
activities of second century teachers may also apply to first and early second
century teachers.
6.3 Stanley F. Jones

The distinction between first and second century teachers was rejected by
Stanley F. Jones, who contended that Zimmermann had drawn his conclusions
from a too limited range of sources, the New Testament and the Apostolic
Fathers. Moreover, Zimmermann and Rengstorf, an earlier advocate of the
discontinuity, had made apodictic statements about the evidence without the
necessary supporting analysis. 166 Jones challenged this “emerging basic
theory” 167 with a study on Christian teachers in a third century work, the
Pseudo-Clementines. In the Adjuration prefaced to the Homilies, we find the
description of an oath to be taken by those who are entrusted with Peter’s books
of preaching with a view to keep them and teach (1–2.1; 4.1–3). The list of
witnesses to this oath (heaven, earth, water, ether) recalls comparable lists in
Epiphanius (Pan. 19.1.6a,6b) and Hippolytus (Haer. 9.15.1,5), both authors
writing in reference to the Book of Elchasai (116–17 CE). Against prevailing
opinion, Jones argued that the Pseudo-Clementines’ so-called “basic writer”
(around 220 CE) appropriated the traditions about the teachers of the Elchasaite
Christians. He also claimed that the catechists mentioned in the Pseudo-
Clementines (Epistula Clementis 13–15; Homily 3.71.5) were still active at the
time of the “basic writer” and that they represented the heirs of the Elchasaite
teachers. The authority of these catechists or teachers apparently did not rest
on ordination but on the legitimation they received from their students. In
Jones’ opinion, the Pseudo-Clementines as well as a growing body of
secondary literature indicate that early Christian teachers counterbalanced a
rising hierarchical bureaucracy for a longer time than previously thought. 168
Jones also pointed to oriental Christian traditions as a promising field of quest
for further traces of the survival of this role, giving as an example The Statutes
166
STANLEY F. JONES, “The Ancient Christian Teacher in the Pseudo-Clementines,” in
Early Christian Voices in Texts, Traditions, and Symbols: Essays in Honor of François
Bovon (ed. DAVID H. WARREN; Biblical Interpretation Series 66; Leiden: Brill, 2003), 355–
64, 356 n. 4.
167
JONES, “Teacher,” 355.
168
JONES, “Teacher,” 362 and 364.
of the School of Nisibis. 169 He did not believe that these Syriac teachers were
the only heirs of early Christian teachers, but one of the forms in which early
Christian teachers developed. The philosophical teacher embodied by Justin,
for example, constituted another line of development. 170
Jones brought a healthy challenge to the positions of Zimmermann, recalling
that the evidence requires a more thorough study. His own attempt, however,
must be seen as suggestive more than compelling. The texts he examined are
very complicated and he was weary to note the variety of scholarly opinions
on several key points. An important question is the interpretation of the oath.
The word “teachers” is absent from the manuscripts and the recipients of
Peter’s books might not necessarily be prospective teachers, but people who
are expected to exercise other community roles. The evidence for teachers
among the Elchasaites is limited to the story of one Alcibiades “teaching” in
Rome around 220 (Hippolytus, Haer. 9.16.1), to the presence of teachers
amongst the Manicheans, who were connected with the Elchasaites, and to the
qualification of the readers of the Book of Elchasai as “disciples.” This
evidence is far from being conclusive. Moreover, the identification of the
Pseudo-Clementines catechists as heirs of the Elchasaite teachers is not
discussed.
6.4 Thomas A. Wayment

On the assumption that there were different models of early Christian teachers,
Thomas A. Wayment singled out two competing claims concerning what a
teacher should be. 171 By incorporating Q 6:40 in Matt 10:25, Matthew defined
a certain kind of relationship between master and disciple. This theme was
further developed by presenting Peter as the perfect model of disciple, in
particular in Matt 16:13–19. The community of the Gospel of Thomas found in
Matt 10:25 the justification for asserting the equality between master and
disciple. Drawing on Matt 16, it created a text, Gos. Thom. 13, in which the
role of Peter was played by Thomas, who is portrayed as achieving such a level
of knowledge that Jesus does not consider himself his teacher any longer. For
Thomas Christians, Jesus is not the only teacher, but his disciples can become
teachers like him. Matthew’s community could not accept such interpretation
169
ARTHUR VÖÖBUS, The Statutes of the School of Nisibis: Edited, Translated and
Furnished with a Commentary (Papers of the Estonian Theological Society in Exile.
Scholarly Series 12; Stockholm: Etse, 1961). The school was created in the late fifth century
after the school of Edessa was closed.
170
JONES, “Teacher,” 364 n. 34.
171
THOMAS A. WAYMENT, “Christian Teachers in Matthew and Thomas: The Possibility
of Becoming a Master,” JECS 12 (2004): 289–311.
7. Social Strata in Early Christianity 37
and corrected Matt 10:25 with Matt 23:8, where Jesus is unequivocally
identified as the only teacher.
Wayment’s reconstruction is most problematic. He admits on several
occasions that Gos. Thom. 13 has apparently little in common with Matt 16 and
Matt 23. 172 He does not provide other arguments for his chain of events except
for the distant similarities he believes to spot between the texts. The idea that
the Gospel of Thomas was composed at the same time as and in debate with
Matthew requires verification with further examples. In sum, Wayment’s
proposal cannot be accepted, at least at the present state of research. However,
the insight that the world of early Christian teachers was a complex reality is
noteworthy. 173 Different communities might have had different ideas about
teachers, about their relationship with disciples and their relationship with
Jesus. Probably, there were tensions and transformations within the same
community, as the contrast between Matt 10:25 and 23:8 suggests.
7. Social Strata in Early Christianity
An aspect that scholarship on early Christian teachers has overlooked and that
it is worth mentioning before concluding our survey concerns their possible
social provenance. This is part of the larger question of the social strata in first
century Christianity, a topic addressed by Wayne A. Meeks in his seminal work
on the social world of Pauline communities. Meek proposed that Christians of
the first centuries, though a mixed group, exhibited a preponderant presence of
the middle class. 174 A Christian was typically a “free artisan or small trader”,
including some people who had enough means to provide a gathering place in
their homes. 175 The very rich and the very poor were substantially untouched
by Christianity, with the exception of those wealthy people who remained at
the margins of their social class and sought Christianity as an arena where their
aspiration for higher social standing could be fulfilled.
Recently, an important book by Alexander Weiss 176 has challenged the
scholarly consensus around Meeks’ reconstruction by pointing out that also
people from the social elite, albeit a small minority, did become Christian. Both
172
“This point of contact can be seen in the now distant parallels of GTh 13 and Matthew
16.13–19, 23.10” (WAYMENT, “Teachers,” 291).
173
WAYMENT seems not to be acquainted with the scholarly literature on early Christian
teachers.
174
WAYNE A. MEEKS, The First Urban Christians: The Social World of the Apostle Paul
(2nd ed.; New Haven: Yale University Press, 2003; 1st ed. 1983).
175
MEEKS, First Urban Christians, 73.
176
ALEXANDER WEISS, Soziale Elite und Christentum: Studien zu ordo-Angehörigen
unter den frühen Christen (Millenium Studien 52; Berlin: Walter de Gruyter, 2015).
literary and archaeological evidence provides a new picture and shows that the
“status dissonance” argument, whereby lower members of the roman “ordines”
entered Christianity only to get rid of their frustration, does not hold water.
Another long-held tenet in the field of social studies was that Christianity
was almost exclusively an urban phenomenon and that by the year 300 it made
up 10% of the population of the Roman empire. At the same time, it is usually
understood that 10% of the inhabitants of the empire lived in towns. The
impossible implication of these hypotheses was perceived by Thomas A.
Robinson: if both of them are maintained, the towns of the empire were almost
exclusively inhabited by Christians. 177 Robinson provides a more nuanced
view of the distribution of Christians across the empire. He observes that the
boundaries between town and countryside were nothing but fluid and that a
large number of Christians, like many other inhabitants of the empire, would
have crossed them even on a daily basis. The urban rustics, the poorest part of
society, would have sought menial job where they could find it, either in towns
or in a rustic setting. The number of these poor among early Christians was
probably much higher than previously believed.
In sum, we must think that Christians of the first centuries had a more
variegated social composition than previously suggested. This means that
teachers could emerge not only from the lower middle class, but also from the
upper one, where access to education was sensibly greater. Moreover, since
Christianity was not, to all likelihood, an almost exclusively urban
phenomenon, teachers would have been active both in urban settings and in the
countryside.
8. Considerations for New Research
The results of this survey of secondary literature can be summed up under two
headings, historical and methodological. Under the first heading, we observe
that:
(1) Many scholars agree that there was such a thing as Christian teachers in
the first and second century (Greeven, Schürmann, Zimmermann, Neymeyr,
Coyle, Jones), whereas some, especially of the old guard, often had problems
to distinguish between teachers and the other two members of the triad
(Harnack, Sohm).
(2) Nobody appointed the members of the triad, but their roles were
acknowledged on the basis of their charisma (Harnack). The distinction
between charisma and office looks like a projection of twenty century
177
THOMAS A. ROBINSON, Who Were the First Christians? Dismantling the Urban Thesis
(Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2017).
8. Considerations for New Research 39
ecclesiastical preoccupations in the first century, but it can be maintained that

personal talents were a decisive factor (Harnack, Delorme, Merklein).
(3) Syria-Palestine is the region where early Christian teachers are better
attested (Harnack, Merklein, Theissen, Zimmermann, Jones) and Antioch
(Zimmermann) or Jerusalem (Harnack, Zimmermann) are the places where
probably they first emerged.
(4) Their origins might be sought in the synagogue (Greeven, Merklein),
among Christian Pharisees (Zimmermann), and they may be taken to be the
Christian equivalent of the rabbis (Gerhardsson, Zimmermann).
(5) Their work is usually reckoned to focus on scriptural exegesis
(Rengstorf, Greeven, Merklein, Delorme), on exhortation (Dibelius, Greeven),
on the transmission of the teaching stemming from Jesus and/or from
subsequent Christian generations (Rengstorf, Campenhausen, Greeven,
Gerhardsson, Zimmermann, Byrskog).
(6) A major point of discussion is whether first century Christian teachers
are in historical continuity with subsequent teachers (Harnack, Goppelt, Coyle,
Jones) or not (Rengstorf, Zimmermann, Neymeyr).
(7) Teachers were the last members of the triad to disappear
(Campenhausen, Goppelt) and their functions were absorbed by bishops and/or
prophets (Harnack, Coyle) or, conversely, they took on these offices
(Schürmann, Neymeyr).
(8) The presence of both a higher and a middle class among early Christians
made the emergence of teachers more likely than previous social studies would
have allowed.
Under the heading of methodology, the survey of scholarship has brought to
light several shortcomings to be avoided and contributions that cannot be
avoided:
(1) Precise criteria of research. A study of all the occurrences of teaching
vocabulary or contents make it impossible to distinguish between the teaching
activity of apostles, prophets, teachers, bishops, presbyters and so on (as
Schürmann does). The way out is to focus only on the occurrences of the term
dida,skaloj (Zimmermann).
(2) The danger of controlling ideas. The tradents hypothesis (Zimmermann)
and a biased distinction between Christian and pagan teachers (Schürmann) are
examples of how the sources can be misinterpreted.
(3) A comprehensive survey of canonical and non-canonical literature
(Harnack og Zimmermann vs Schürmann).
(4) The distribution of the sources according to geographical areas
(Neymeyr).
(5) Openness to the possibility that teachers were a variegated phenomenon
(Neymeyr, Jones, Wayment).
Chapter 2
Teachers in non-Christian Sources
1. Education in the Greco-Roman World
1.1 The Word dida,skaloj

Christian teachers were not an isolated phenomenon, but part of a widespread
and variegated category in the Greco-Roman and Jewish world. Its members
perceived their work and were perceived by their environment in various ways.
The word dida,skaloj has a complex and rich history. 1 The earliest evidence
comes from the Homeric hymn to Hermes (Hymn. Merc. 556), dated to the
sixth century BCE. 2 It occurs in what seems an appendix (513–78), whose
author might be the same of the rest of the hymn. 3 The term is also attested in
Heraclitus (ca. 535–475 BCE; fragments 57 and 104), Aeschylus (ca. 525–456
BCE; Eum. 279; 584; Prom. 109; 322; 373; Sept. c. Theb. 573) and is largely
used in subsequent Greek sources. 4 There are only two occurrences in the
Septuagint: Esth 6:1 and 2 Macc 1:10. In the first passage it designates the
reader of the king and is an insertion of the translator; 5 in the second,
Aristobulus is called the “teacher” of Tolomeus (VI Philometor), probably
because he dedicated to the king a book on the Torah, which is now lost except
for some quotations in Christian writers. 6
In pre-Alexandrian times dida,skaloj carried the technical meaning of
director of a choir, who leads performances in public celebrations. 7 Its general
1
RENGSTORF, “dida,skw,” 1126–35; ZIMMERMANN, Lehrer, 76–86.
2
ALBIN LESKY, “Homer,” in PWSup 11:687–846, 827–28.
3
LESKY, “Homer,” 828.
4
References in LSJ, 421; E. REISCH, “Dida,skaloj,” PW 5: 401–406; EMIL KIESSLING
and FRIEDRICH PREISIGKE, Wörterbuch der griechischen Papyrusurkunden: Mit Einschluss
der griechischen Inschriften, Aufschriften, Ostraka, Mumienschilder usw. aus Ägypten (4
vols.; Berlin, 1925–1944), 1:371; 4:567–68; EMIL KIESSLING, Wörterbuch (Supplement 1;
Amsterdam: Adolf M. Hakkert, 1969), 73; RENGSTORF, “dida,skw,” 1126–33. This list has
been conveniently gathered by BYRSKOG, Teacher, 219 n. 5.
5
6
JONATHAN A. GOLDSTEIN, II Maccabees: A New Translation with Introduction and
Commentary (AB 41A; New York: Doubleday, 1983), 168.
7
REISCH, “Dida,skaloj,” 401–402.
1. Education in the Greco-Roman World 41
meaning was aptly defined by Zimmermann as “eine Person oder

personifizierte Sache, die jemand anderem aufgrund eines eigenen Vorsprungs
an Wissen und Können diese Informationen oder Fähigkeiten
weitervermittelt.” 8 He identified four main semantic fields. 9 (1) The term may
mean “advisor.” It is often used negatively in order to indicate an instigator, a
traitor, or somebody who misleads people, as in works of Heraclitus (fragment
57), Aeschylus (Sept. c. Theb. 573), and Lysias (Oratio 12.47,78; 14.30). Philo
calls dida,skaloj kakw/n a woman leading astray an Israelite (Spec. 1.56–57; cf.
Num 25:1–8). Josephus says that Cain “became their [of all whom he met]
instructor (dida,skaloj) in wicked practices (Ant. 1.61). 10 The neutral use is
employed among others by Aeschylus (Eum. 279) and Isocrates (Antid. 95 and
104). (2) Starting from Aristophanes, we find attested the meaning of
“elementary teacher”. The phrase foita/n eivj (scil. oi=kon) tou/ didaska,lou is a
fixed expression meaning “to go to school” (Aristophanes, Equ. 1235; Philo,
Congr. 122; Josephus, Ant. 15.373). Philo employs our term to designate
elementary teachers in several texts (Legat. 27; 53; 54; Migr. 116; Sacr. 51).
(3) Dida,skaloj is also the person who teaches a specific skill (te,cnh), ranging
from music (Plato, Lach. 180d; Menex. 236a) to medicine (Plato, Meno, 93d),
rhetoric (Plato, Menex. 236a) and so on. According to Philo, the young Moses
was educated by dida,skaloi coming from Egypt, neighbouring countries and
Greece (Mos. 1.21–24) on subjects such as arithmetic, geometry, music, etc. 11
(4) Finally, the term can refer to a teacher of philosophy or religion. This
meaning is the most important for this study and deserves special attention.
1.2 Teachers of Philosophy or Religion

In the fifth and fourth century BCE the term dida,skaloj could be controversial
when referred to teachers of religion or philosophy. Plato’s Socrates says that
he has been the teacher of no one (Ap. 33ab), 12 while Aristophanes caricatures
Socrates precisely by defining him a teacher (Nub. 871; 1147; 1467). The word
could bear a negative sense because of its association with the sophists, who
wanted to be paid for imparting instruction. The difference between Socrates
and the sophists has a philosophical basis. The former did not believe that
anything could be taught, but he helped people to bring out what was already
inside them and for this reason he called himself “midwife” (Theaet. 148e-
8
9
10
Translation in H. ST. J. THACKERAY et al., ed., Josephus (10 vols.; LCL; London:
William Heinemann; Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1961), vol. 4.
11
See also RENGSTORF, “dida,skw,” 1129–30.
12
42 Chapter 2: Teachers in non-Christian Sources
151d). The latter earned a living by imparting what they considered to be new
knowledge.
In the second century work Hermotimus (De sectis) Lucian stages a dialogue
about philosophical schools between Lycinus and the stoic Hermotimus.
Lycinus calls the teachers of these schools dida,skaloi (Hermot. 68) and
constantly employs this term when referring to Hermotimus’ own teacher
(Hermot. 1; 2; 3; 6; 7; etc.). 13 What he and his colleagues are said to offer is
not just knowledge to be memorised, but a path (o`do,j) conducing to virtue
through many years of training (Hermot. 2).
As Pierre Hadot observed, adhesion to a philosophical school implied
conversion to a new way of life. 14 Learning did not consist in informing
students, but in forming them. This process unfolded through a number of
practices typical of each school, which Hadot placed under the label of
“spiritual excercises.” They ranged from mastering oneself (evgkra,teia) to
listening (avkro,asij) and paying attention to the present moment (prosoch,). 15
Under this respect, the philosophical schools were not so different from
contemporary Christian communities, whose members were called to convert
and lead a life that would bring them to God. Early Christians too knew of
spiritual exercises in the form of practices allowing their personal
transformation, such as fasting, partaking of the eucharist, and listening to the
word of God.
The definition of school is not an easy matter. R. Alan Culpepper surveyed
the major schools in antiquity: the Pythagorean School, the Academy, the
Lyceum, the Garden, the Qumran school, the House of Hillel, Philo’s school
and Jesus’ school. 16 Working with a comparative method, he identified nine
criteria:
1) they [the schools] were groups of disciples which usually emphasized fili,a and
koinwni,a; 2) they gathered around, and traced their origins to a founder whom they regarded
as an exemplary wise, or good man; 3) they valued the teachings of their founder and the
traditions about him; 4) members of the schools were disciples or students of the founder; 5)
teaching, learning, studying, and writing were common activities; 6) most schools observed
communal meals, often in memory of their founders; 7) they had rules and practices
regarding admission, retention of membership, and advancement within the membership; 8)
13
Text in A. M. HARMON et al., eds., Lucian (8 vols.; LCL; London: William Heinemann;
Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1913–1967), vol. 6, 259–415.
14
HADOT, Exercices.
15
HADOT, Exercices, 26.
16
R. ALAN CULPEPPER, The Johannine School: An Evaluation of the Johannine-School
Hypothesis Based on an Investigation of the Nature of Ancient Schools (SBL.DS 26;
Missoula: Scholars Press, 1975).
1. Education in the Greco-Roman World 43
they often maintained some degree of distance or withdrawal from the rest of society; and
9) they developed organizational means of insuring their perpetuity. 17
A wider definition, including philosophical and non-philosophical schools,

was suggested by Loveday C. Alexander, who distinguished four levels of
increasingly complex relationship: between teacher and individual students;
between fellow students of the same teacher, forming a community; between
teachers, forming a school as a sort of “university”; between schools, forming
a movement. 18 The first type of relationship enables one to talk of school
whenever there is a chain of tradition in which students become teachers.
Alexander’s approach is so broad that it risks to be of little use, since even a
father teaching his children could be considered an example of school. Thomas
Schmeller offers a third approach: he did not stress transmission, but simply
reckoned that the presence of a group of students is the essential requisite of a
school. 19
1.3 Teachers and Schools

The last three meanings of the word dida,skaloj, which are discussed above,
correspond to the three main stages in which education was organised in the
Greco-Roman world from the Hellenistic period onwards, a system that was
called e͗gku,klioj paidei,a and that remained stable for many centuries. 20
Education began with learning to read and write, moved on to the study of
grammar, literary criticism, arithmetic, geometry and algebra, and then
progressed to music, rhetoric, philosophy and astronomy. The words meaning
“teachers” underwent some standardisation according to the levels of
education: the grammatodida,skaloj or grammatisth,j taught reading and
writing; grammar was the realm of the grammatiko,j; the paidotri,bhj was the
expert in athletics; the r`h,twr imparted lessons in rhetoric and the filo,sofoj in
philosophy. At the lower levels, teachers were poorly remunerated and their
deprecable status is reflected in the quip that “He is rather dead or teaching
letters.” An altogether different situation was that of some sophists, who could
charge astonishing fees, or of the teachers of the philosophical schools erected
17
CULPEPPER, School, 258–59.
18
LOVEDAY C. ALEXANDER, “Schools, Hellenistic,” in ABD, 5:1005–1011, 1005.
19
THOMAS SCHMELLER, Schulen im Neuen Testament? Zur Stellung des Urchristentums
in der Bildungswelt seiner Zeit. Mit einem Beitrag von Christian Cebulj zur Johanneischen
Schule (Herders Biblische Studien 30; Freiburg: Herder, 2001), 81.
20
In this section I draw on RAFFAELLA CRIBIORE, Gymnastics of the Mind: Greek
Education in Hellenistic and Roman Egypt (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2001);
TERESA MORGAN, Literate Education in the Hellenistic and Roman Worlds (Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press, 1998); idem, “Education,” in The Oxford Encyclopedia of
Ancient Greece and Rome (ed. MICHAEL GAGARIN; 7 vols.; Oxford: Oxford University
Press, 2010), vol. 3, 13–21.
in Athens by Isocrates, Plato, and Aristoteles. A particular type of teacher was

the kaqhghth,j, a private tutor who moved from place to place and whose
services were particularly appreciated by the affluent living at some distance
from educational centres.
The occurrences in the papyri of the word dida,skaloj or de,skaloj are often
difficult to interpret. Though they usually point to the elementary level, they
may also refer to any of the other educational stages. Its meaning is so wide as
to include instructors of practical skills who train apprentices. In this case,
dida,skaloj is usually qualified by the area in which instruction is given, like
weaving or hairdressing.
The papyri call teachers by name in eighty-seven instances, eighth of which
concerning women. They are referred to as η` dida,skaloj or η` dεskα,lη or η`
de,skaloj. Some may have been teachers’ wives, but it is known that some
women were teachers themselves and also philosophers. In the third century,
the school of Hypathia of Alexandria, lecturing in mathematics, astronomy and
philosophy, was renown across the Mediterranean.
In classical Athens anyone could set up a school, the only requirement for
teaching being to have pupils. There was no need for the school to be placed in
a purposely designed building, but private houses, public spaces such as
gymnasia, baths, porticos, or the shade of a tree would do. At the top end of
the ladder were schools based in major cities and attracting pupils from far and
wide, like the law school of Beirut or the grammar and philosophical schools
of Athens.
2. Education in Jewish Sources
2.1 Jewish dida,skaloi

Some Jewish sources from the first century feature the word dida,skaloj and
employ it in different ways. Philo often calls God dida,skaloj (Congr. 114;
Mut. 270; Her. 19; Sacr. 65; Mos. 1.80). 21 In Josephus Moses is dida,skaloj of
Joshua (Ant. 3.49), Klearchos dida,skaloj of Aristoteles (Ap. 1.176), Ananias
dida,skaloj of king Izates of Adiabene with regard to the Jewish religion (Ant.
20.46). 22 The Sadducees reckoned it a virtue to dispute with the teachers of the
21
PEDER BORGEN et al., The Philo Index: A Complete Greek Word Index to the Writings
of Philo of Alexandria (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans; Leiden: Brill, 2000), 91.
22
The passages containing the term dida,skaloj are conveniently listed and briefly
reported in KARL H. RENGSTORF, ed., A Complete Concordance to Flavius Josephus (4
vols.; Leiden: Brill, 1973–1994), vol. 1, 487. See also GERHARD MAIER, “Die jüdischen
Lehrer bei Josephus,” in Josephus – Studien: Untersuchungen zu Josephus, dem antiken
2. Education in Jewish Sources 45
path of wisdom (didaska,louj sofi,aj) that they pursue” (Ant. 18.16). 23 If the
Testimonium Flavianum is authentic, Josephus applies the term to Jesus too,
along with sofo,j (Ant. 18.63.3). 24 Zimmermann included in this group the New
Testament passages where Jesus is described as dida,skaloj (Matt 9:11; 10:24–
25 and par Luke 6:40; Matt 17:24; Mark 14:14 and par Matt 26:18, Luke 22:11;
Mark 5:35 and par Luke 8:49; John 11:28; 13:13–14), where he is addressed
with the title dida,skale (Matt 8:19; Mark 10:17; etc.), and where John the
Baptist (Luke 3:12), some Jews (Rom 2:20; Luke 2:26; John 3:10) and
Christian teachers are called dida,skaloi. 25
2.2 Rabbis
A particular case is that of Jewish Torah teachers, who are called in different
ways in rabbinic literature: “sages” (‫)הכמים‬, “disciples of sages” (‫)תלמידי הכמים‬,
“abba” (‫)אבא‬, and “rabbi” (‫)רבי‬. 26 Wisdom tradition was well established in the
first centuries CE and both the New Testament (Matt 23:34; 1 Cor 1:18–31)
and the Dead Sea Scrolls (1QSs 1:28; 2:16) are evidence for the existence of
sages at the time. This class of people corresponds to the Greco-Roman sofo,j,
who embodied the ideal man aimed at by most philosophical schools. 27 The
main difference is that in rabbinic literature wisdom is identified with Torah.
The Mishna presents post-70 sages as Torah scholars with a following of
students.
The New Testament contains the earliest attestations of the process leading
to the institution of the rabbis, 28 a word meaning “my great one.” 29 In the
Gospels “rabbi” is applied to Jesus by Peter (Mark 9:5; 11:21), Bartimaeus
(Mark 10:51: ràbbouni,), Judas (Mark 14:45; Matt 26:25.49), the disciples
(John 1:38; 4:31; 9:2; 11:8), Mary (20:16: ràbbouni,) and outsiders (Nathanael
in John 1:49; Nicodemus in John 3:2; the people in John 6:25). Also John the
Baptist is called “rabbi” (John 3:26). In John 1:38; 20:16 and Matt 23:8, the
term is translated with dida,skaloj. These occurrences of “rabbi” are not
Judentum und dem Neuen Testament. Otto Michel zum 70. Geburtstag gewidmet (ed. OTTO
BETZ et al.; Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1974), 260–70.
23
H. ST. J. THACKERAY et al., eds., Josephus (13 vols.; LCL; London: William
Heinemann; Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1926–1965), vol. 9, 14.
24
According to MEIER, the text is authentic, though it contains Christian interpolations.
The term dida,skaloj is not considered an interpolation (A Marginal Jew, 56–88).
25
26
HEZSER, Structure, 55–56. On the earlier history of the word ‫ רב‬see ZIMMERMANN,
Lehrer, 86–87.
27
GEORG FOHRER and ULRICH WILCKENS, “sofo,j( sofi,a,” GLNT, 12: 695–853, 714–
15.
28
HEZSER, Structure, 130–32.
29
TROPPER, Jesus, 228.
redactional. There is no apparent reason why the evangelists should have

introduced a Hebrew word needing translation in works addressed to a Greek-
speaking audience. Moreover, this term would have placed Jesus on the same
footing as the rabbis contemporary with the evangelists, a possibility ruled out
in Matt 23:8. The word ràbbi, seems rather to be a relic from former times 30
and most scholars today reckon that it may go back to the days of Jesus. 31
The semantic field covered by the word “rabbi” in the New Testament is
debated. 32 The first people to be addressed with the title “rabbi” in rabbinic
literature are the students of Yochanan b. Zakkai (M. Abot 2:8). 33 Since Jesus
is believed not to match the traditional image of a rabbi and the Mishna
confines the title to post-70 sages, it is commonly assumed that before the year
70 ràbbi, served to address Jews of high rank 34 and that only with the
foundation of the academy in Yavneh the term came to refer to teachers who
were ordained Torah scholars. 35
In none of the occurrences in Mark is a technical use brought to the fore.
Qumran provides a similar kind of evidence. In the Aramaic texts we find that
words derived from the root “rb” are referred to God (1QapGen 2:4; 2:14;
12:17; 1Q20 1 i 7; 4QEna 1 i 5; 4QEnc 1 vi 11; 4QEng 1 iv 18; 11QtgJob 22:6;
28:3) and to humans (11QtgJob 25:1; 14:3), and we find also a form
“rabbo”/“rabbuni” meaning “chief ” or “leader” (4QEna 1 iii 13 ter; 4QEnb 1 ii
17; 4QEnc 1 ii 24). A survey of Targum Onquelos to Genesis and Codex
Neophyti I to Genesis shows that the term “ribboni” and related forms are
connected to God and humans and should be translated “my lord.” Targumic
evidence should be handled with care because the dating (end of the first
30
FERDINAND HAHN, Christologie Hoheitstitel: Ihre Geschichte im frühen Christentum
(Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1963), 74–75.
31
HAHN, Hoheitstitel, 74–76; RIESNER, Jesus, 254; KENNETH G. C. NEWPORT, The
Sources and Sitz im Leben of Matthew 23 (JSNTSup 117; Sheffield: Sheffield Academic
Press, 1995), 90–95; HEZSER, Structure, 56. See also GUSTAF DALMAN, Die Worte Jesu:
Mit Berücksichtigung des nachkanonischen jüdischen Schrifttums und der aramäischen
Sprache. I. Einleitung und wichtige Begriffe (2nd ed.; Leipzig: J. C. Hinrichs, 1930), 274.
32
See for example LÉGASSE, “Scribes,” 334–36; ZIMMERMANN, Lehrer, 86–91;
BENEDICT T. VIVIANO, “Rabbouni and Mark 9:5,” RB 97 (1990): 207–218; repr. in idem,
Trinity – Kingdom – Church: Essays in Biblical Theology (NTOA 48; Freiburg:
Universitätsverlag; Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2001), 64–74.
33
HEZSER, Structure, 63.
34
Criticism made by HEZSER, Structure, 59.
35
See e.g. RENGSTORF, “dida,skw,” 1140; EDUARD LOHSE, “ràbbi,( ràbbouni,,” in GLNT,
11: 911–22, 915–16; EMIL SCHÜRER, Storia del popolo giudaico al tempo di Gesù Cristo
(trans. Vincenzo Gatti; 3 vols.; Brescia: Paideia Editrice, 1987), vol. 2, 397 n. 10; MARTIN
HENGEL, Sequela e carisma: Studio esegetico e di storia delle religioni su Mt. 8,21 s. e la
chiamata di Gesù alla sequela (trans. Giuliana Jacopino and Claudio Gianotto; Studi Biblici
90; Brescia: Paideia Editrice, 1990), 78–80; RIESNER, Jesus, 267–68.
century-second century) is uncertain, but it supports the evidence from

Qumran. It also supports the evidence from epitaphs and synagogue
inscriptions, which are to be found in Palestine. Not before the third century is
the title “rabbi” attested as indicating a professional expert of the Torah. 36
The evidence for a non-technical use is balanced by three clues pointing to
a technical use. The first is that John translates “rabbi” with dida,skaloj, a
rendering that is not necessarily anachronistic, since there was no need to
present Jesus as being addressed with the title “rabbi.” The second is that the
most popular honourary titles were ‫ אדוני‬and ‫ מרי‬rather than “rabbi.” 37 The third
clue comes from archaeological evidence, showing the existence of Jewish
dida,skaloi in Jerusalem around the time of Jesus. 38 We do not know whether
they were called “rabbi,” but “teacher” was regarded as a title of distinction
comparable to “rabbi.” Had it not been so, it is difficult to imagine that it would
have been engraved on the ossuaries.
A fair account of the evidence suggests that the first century was the period
when the transition from a non-technical to a technical use began and that there
was not a precise moment when this happened. Hezser has challenged the
traditional view that the destruction of the Temple marked a major break, after
which Judaism was organised through ordained teachers. 39 These teachers
allegedly received the title “rabbi” at the end of their studies with a rabbi and
after an ordination ceremony culminating with the laying on of hands. Hezser
dismantles this reconstruction by pointing out that rabbinic sources have been
made to say what they do not and that their ideological picture of a unified
rabbinical Judaism superseding pre-70 sectarianism has been uncritically
accepted. 40 No Palestinian document in tannaitic and amoraic times supports
the hypothesis of an ordination ceremony for rabbis, but they only report
appointments of rabbis to communal or judicial offices. The laying on of hands
in order to appoint rabbis is absent from Palestinian tannaitic sources and in
the amoraic literature is not associated with appointments. 41
36
BEN ZION ROSENFELD, “The Title ‘Rabbi’ in Third- to Seventh-Century Inscriptions
in Palestine: Revisited,” JJS 61 (2010): 235–56.
37
38
ELEAZAR L. SUKENIK, “(‫[ ”מערת־קברים יהודית במורד הר־הזיתים )ב׳‬A Jewish Cave of
Tombs on the Slope of the Mount of Olives], Tarbiz 1/4 (1930): 137–43.
39
This is also challenged by SHAYE J. D. COHEN: “The rabbis did not control the religious
and civil life of second-century Palestinian Jewry” (“The Rabbi in Second-Century Jewish
Society,” in The Cambridge History of Judaism. 3. The Early Roman Period [ed. WILLIAM
HORBURY et al.; Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1999], 922–90, 971).
40
41
HEZSER, Structure, 79–93. See also GÜNTER STEMBERGER, “Zur Frage von Ordination
und Ämtern im rabbinischen Judentum,” in Ordination − mehr als eine Beauftragung? (ed.
Keeping Hezser’s warnings in mind, the portrait we can make is as follows. 42

The normal way to become a rabbi in tannaitic times was to be the student of a
rabbi. Since rabbis provided a higher form of teaching, the student needed
previous training, which could be obtained from elementary teachers, rather
few at the time, or more normally at home. 43 Considering that most people did
not have the knowledge, the time, the money, and probably not even the
willingness to instruct their children, usually students must have been children
of rabbis. 44 Prospective students without rabbinic relations would seek to attach
themselves to a rabbi. The number of students who managed to a establish close
relationship with a rabbi and who eventually became rabbis was surely very
limited. This achievement depended on various factors including intellectual
skills, financial means and enough willingness to accept the servant-master
relationship with the teacher. A time would come when the rabbinic student
would begin to teach and would be considered a teacher himself. Those who
benefited from his teaching would acknowledge his learning with the title
“rabbi” and other rabbis who approved of his scholarship would use the same
title. Its attribution was a matter of recognition. Hezser observes:
whether or not a scholar was called “Rabbi” by the community or by his colleagues seems
to have depended on the attitude which the callers had toward him (or toward the notion of
“rabbis” as superior in general). In other words, the title “Rabbi” was not a title bestowed by
an established institution. It was entirely a manifestation of social relationship, reflecting the
status that its bearer had in some segments of society but not necessarily in all. 45
The rabbis were people of wealth. There is no evidence that second century
rabbis were poor 46 or lived on offers and voluntary contributions from the
people who benefited from their teaching. They issued mostly from the landed
aristocracy and wealth and birth were not less important than intellectual
powers to establish their prestige. However, their influence on the people was
limited because rabbis tended to isolate themselves and had no means other
than persuasion to enforce their legal decisions. 47
KONRAD HUBER and ANDREAS VONACH; Synagoge und Kirchen 3; Wien: LIT-Verlag,
2010), 89–104.
42
43
HEZSER, Literacy, 40–68.
44
45
HEZSER, Structure, 113.
46
The only exception is The Fathers according to Rabbi Nathan a 6 and b 12–13 (in
COHEN, “Rabbi,” 931–32), whose stories, however, seem more paraenetic than historical.
47
COHEN, “Rabbi.”
2.3 Scribes
The evidence concerning rabbis should not be confused with the evidence
concerning scribes (Greek grammatei/j, Hebrew ‫)סופרים‬, 48 even if, for many
years, the sources on rabbis, scribes, and sages, have been conflated in order to
provide a unified picture. 49 Scribes and rabbis were not two identical
categories, though a degree of overlapping did exist. Some scribes might have
been called “rabbis” and some rabbis may have exercised scribal work. The
boundaries between scribes and rabbis were by no means clearly set, but Torah
scholarship occupied only a few scribes and rabbis looked down at scribes
because of inferior Torah knowledge. 50
The two main biblical texts about scribes are Ezra 7 and Sir 38:24–39:11.
The scribe (‫ )סופר‬Ezra has the task “to study the law of the Lord, and to do it,
and to teach the statutes and ordinances in Israel” (Ezra 7:10). The scribe
Sirach, who has got a school independent of the Temple, portrays scribes as
Torah experts, high officials and leaders. At the time of Jesus scribes could be
found across different Jewish groups, Pharisees, Sadducees, Essenes, Zealots. 51
They did not constitute a unified phenomenon, but they carried out different
functions. 52 Scribes were officials in the public administration at all level, from
the royal court and the Temple to villages. While many scribes were employed
by officials, there was also space for independent scribes who wrote letters,
drafted documents and met the increasing demand for written texts of legal and
literary character in the Roman world. Some scribes, mostly living in
Jerusalem, were also scripture scholars. However, it is important to note that
scripture scholarship was not their distinguishing feature. 53
2.4 Archaeological Evidence

Zimmermann drew attention to three ossuary inscriptions, which he believed
to be of “extraordinary importance” for his investigation. 54 The ossuaries were
discovered by Eleazar Sukenik on the road from the Augusta Victoria on the
48
Warning in CHRISTINE SCHAMS, Jewish Scribes in the Second-Temple Period
(JSOTSup 291; Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1998), 34–35.
49
As for instance in JOACHIM JEREMIAS, “grammateu,j,” GLNT, 2: 599–603, 601.
50
51
ULRICH LUZ, Das Evangelium nach Matthäus (4 vols.; EKK; Zurich and Düsseldorf:
Benziger Verlag; Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener Verlag, 1985–2002), vol. 1, 354–55.
52
For what follows see LUZ, Evangelium, vol. 1, 353–56; ANTHONY J. SALDARINI,
Pharisees, Scribes and Sadducees in Palestinian Society (Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1989),
241–76; idem, “Scribes,” ABD, 5: 1012–16; SCHAMS, Scribes.
53
SCHAMS, Scribes, 322.
54
ZIMMERMANN, Lehrer, 69–91; citation at p. 69.
Mount of Olives to the Kedron Valley and its findings were published in 1931.
The ossuaries belonged to a tomb dating to the period of Herod the Great. 55
On one of the long sides of ossuary number twelve it is possible to read the
word ‫תדטיון‬. The opposite side and one of the short sides feature the word
ΔIΔΑСΚΑΛΟΥ. It is remarkable that the name of the dead, Theodotion, is
Greek, but written with Hebrew letters, while his profession is written in Greek.
“Theodotion” may well be the Greek translation of the real name of the dead,
Nataniah, Netanel, or Elnatan. 56 The milieu to which Theodotion belonged
must have spoken Greek and Aramaic and must have particularly valued Greek.
The genitive ΔIΔΑСΚΑΛΟΥ indicates the owner of the ossuary. Usually, no
more than the name of the dead is engraved on ossuaries, since tombs normally
collected the bones of the dead from the same family, whose living members
would not need further identification. 57 The person who engraved the ossuary
wanted to make sure that the profession of the (family of the) deceased may be
recognisable by all.
On one of the short sides of ossuary number six the name of the dead is
QEODOTIWNOС. 58 The fact that it is the same name as that of ossuary twelve
supports the conclusion that this is a family tomb. On the lid of the ossuary
another word is engraved: DEСḌẸKALLOU. Even if the fourth and fifth letter
are hard to decipher, Sukenik believed that this word corresponds to
didaska,lou. Misspellings were common in texts written by non-specialists and
comparable forms like deska,lh and de,skaloj are attested. 59
On one of the long sides of ossuary number three we find the following
inscription: QEMNTOС DEС̣KALOU. 60 If Qe,mntoj is nominative, the word is
an abbreviation for qeo,mnestoj; if genitive, it is an abbreviation for Qeomna/toj,
from a nominative Qeomna/j. The second term is once again taken by Sukenik
to be a Hebrew/Aramaic speaker’s misspelling of didaska,lou.
These inscriptions prove the existence of at least one dida,skaloj and at most
three. 61 What kind of dida,skaloj? Is this word used as the Greek translation of
“rabbi”? Scholars who dealt with the ossuaries answered positively. 62 In his
55
SUKENIK, “‫מערת־קברים‬,” 143.
56
57
58
The following two inscriptions in SUKENIK, “‫מערת־קברים‬,” 142, plate 4, picture 2,
and plate three, picture 4.
59
KIESSLING, Wörterbuch (Supplement), 63. See also ZIMMERMANN, Lehrer, 71.
60
SUKENIK, “‫מערת־קברים‬,” 143, plate 5 picture 2.
61
62
SUKENIK, “‫מערת־קברים‬,” 140; WILLIAM F. ALBRIGHT, The Archaeology of Palestine:
A Survey of the Ancient Peoples and Cultures of the Holy Land, lllustrated with Photographs,
Diagrams, and Line Drawings (Harmondsworth: Penguin, 1956), 244; LOHSE, “ràbbi,(
ràbbouni,,” 915 n. 26. See ZIMMERMANN, Lehrer, 73.
lengthy analysis Zimmermann pointed to Dalman’s distinction between ‫ רב‬in

the sense of “master,” “teacher,” ‫ רבי‬as an address of respect in which the
pronoun is still functioning, that is “my teacher,” and ‫ רבי‬in the sense of
“rabbi.” 63 The first case, which is equivalent to dida,skaloj, and the second,
which is equivalent to dida,skale (mou), were current at the time of Jesus, while
the third belongs to a later period. 64 Then, Zimmermann identified the four
main semantic fields of dida,skaloj, which we have seen above, and concluded
that only the fourth one, “religious teacher and leader,” could apply to the
ossuaries. The first meaning, “advisor,” is too generic. The second,
“elementary teacher,” is again no match, even if Philo uses dida,skaloj in this
sense. Zimmermann dismissed this evidence coming from Egypt apparently on
the ground that, when it comes to educational institutions, urban centres might
differ greatly between themselves. He quoted Martin P. Nilsson to the effect
that “man auf Verschiedenheiten gefaßt sein (muss), da jede Stadt ihr
Schulwesen ordnete, wie es möglich war und es ihr gut dünkte.” 65 However,
this statement cannot rule out the possibility that dida,skaloj could designate
an elementary teacher in Jerusalem as it did in Alexandria. Moreover, Nilsson
spoke of school organisation, which is not the same as the titles used for
teachers. Zimmermann also provided a second reason, namely that other
ossuaries from Jerusalem reflect the custom of inscribing important
qualifications rather than lower ones. 66 This is likely to be correct: considering
that elementary teachers were held in low esteem in Greco-Roman society and
partly also in Jewish society, 67 it is strange to find their profession clearly stated
on an ossuary, all the more since professional status is very seldom indicated
on these objects. The third meaning of dida,skaloj, “teacher” of a specific skill,
can be safely dismissed. Without indication of the skill in question, the
designation is meaningless. The remaining interpretation, “teacher of
philosophy and/or religion,” best fits our inscriptions. Zimmermann went
further and identified dida,skaloj with ‫רב‬. In both cases it is question of
religious teachers: the fact that Jesus was addressed as ràbbi,, that is dida,skaloj,
and the saying “Get yourself a teacher (‫ ”)רב‬in Avot 1.6b are evidence for the
existence of first century Jewish teachers whose title was ‫רב‬/dida,skaloj.
Zimmermann made another leap and assuming that all scribes were Pharisee
he proposed that the bones in the ossuaries belonged to pharisaic
63
DALMAN, Worte, 272–80 and 400–401.
64
65
ZIMMERMANN, Lehrer, 79 n. 16; citation from MARTIN P. NILSSON, Die hellenistische
Schule (München: C. H. Beck, 1955), 60.
66
E.g. “Priest” in CIJ II, 1221, and “Daughter of a priest” in CIJ II 1317. See
67
HEZSER, Literacy, 60–68.
scribes/teachers. 68 This identification well served his overall theory of

transmission in early Christianity. Drawing on the traditional picture that the
Pharisees were the forerunners of the rabbis, he thought of finding in the
ossuaries extra-Gospel evidence for a proto-rabbinate group, some of whose
members allegedly brought into the community of Matthew (proto-)rabbinic
methods of transmission. The problem with it is that the evidence is
outstretched. It is wrong to believe that all scribes were Pharisees, that scribes
were identifiable with rabbis and that rabbinism simply stemmed out of
Pharisaism. 69 The straightforward identification rabbis-Pharisees had been
criticised by Shaye J. D. Cohen 70 the very same year of the publication of
Zimmermann’s book and is also questioned by Hezser. 71 Only a number of
rabbis came from the ranks of the Pharisees, but even these were not interested
in asserting their origins. Hence, it is wrong to see the rabbinic movement as a
natural prosecution of pre-70 Pharisaism.
As important as it may be, the archaeological evidence is only
complementary to the literary witnesses. The aim of the following chapters is
to see how far the texts at our disposal can take us in the reconstruction of the
early Christian teachers.
ZIMMERMANN, Lehrer, 86 and 89.

68
Cf. for example ZIMMERMANN, Lehrer, 88.

69
70
SHAYE J. D. COHEN, “The Significance of Yavneh: Pharisees, Rabbis, and the End of
Jewish Sectarianism,” HUCA 55 (1984): 27–53, 36–38.
71
HEZSER, Structure, 69; cf. MARTIN KARRER, “Der lehrende Jesus: Neutestamentliche
Erwägungen,” ZNT 83 (1992): 1–20, 12 n. 54.
Chapter 3
Sources on Syria
1. Acts 13:1–3
1.1 Introduction
The Lukan corpus has only one text that mentions Christian teachers. It is to
be found in the book of Acts, a work probably composed after 70 and not later
than 90 and likely addressed to Philippi and other Aegean colonies. 1 Acts 13:1–
3, which is placed at the beginning of Paul’s first missionary journey, reads:
Now in the church at Antioch there were prophets and teachers (profh/tai kai. dida,skaloi):
Barnabas, Simeon who was called Niger, Lucius of Cyrene, Manaen, a member of the court
of Herod the ruler, and Saul. While they were worshipping (leitourgou,ntwn) the Lord and
fasting (nesteuo,ntwn), the Holy Spirit said, “Set apart for me Barnabas and Saul for the work
to which I have called them.” Then after fasting and praying they laid their hands on them
and sent them off.
These three verses briefly describe the church in Antioch and the sending of
Barnabas and Paul. The reader is already well informed about the church in
Jerusalem and the effort of evangelisation it carried out, encompassing the
foundation of the Antiochene community (Acts 11:19–26). The arrest and
killing of Stephen dating probably to 31/32, 2 triggered a wide persecution
against the Hellenists (Acts 11:20), some of whom took refuge in Antioch.
Among them were people from Cyprus and Cyrene, the latter group probably
including Lucius (Acts 13:1). They addressed their preaching to Jews and to
Gentiles alike 3 and were so successful that the community in Jerusalem sent
1
CRAIG S. KEENER, Acts: An Exegetical Commentary (4 vols.; Grand Rapids: Baker
Academics, 2012–2015), 1:383–401 and 423–34.
2
RAINER RIESNER, Paul’s Early Period: Chronology, Mission Strategy, Theology (trans.
Doug Scott; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1998), 73–74.
3
There are two possible readings. Èllhnista,j, meaning “Greek-speaking Jews”, is
supported by Vaticanus, second corrector of Bezae, Laudianus, etc. [Ellhnaj, that is “Greek”
or “Gentiles”, is witnessed by P74, second corrector of Sinaiticus, Alexandrinus, the original
reading of Codex Bezae, etc. The latter reading highlights the contrast between Jews and
Gentiles; the former, which seems to distinguish between Aramaic-speaking and Greek-
speaking Jews, does not make as much sense. This is the view of MEIER, Antioch, 33 n. 77,
54 Chapter 3: Sources on Syria
over Barnabas, a levite from Cyprus (Acts 4:36–37). Barnabas’ origins suggest
that he actually belonged to the founding group and was one of those who
began to convert Gentiles. Luke may have doctored his account in order to
stress Jerusalem’s control. 4 Barnabas allegedly went to Tarsus and fetched
Paul, 5 with whom he taught (Acts 11:26) the community in Antioch for a long
time. Some prophets from Jerusalem visited Antioch in this period (Acts
11:27–28).
1.2 Analysis
It is very unlikely that Acts 13:1–3 is fictional. The main reasons are two.
Firstly, three of the five names do not play any role in the rest of Acts. From
the point of view of his narrative strategy, Luke had no need to concoct them.
He even goes out of his way by supplying additional information, such as a
nickname (Simeon called “Niger”), a country of origin (Lucius from Cyrene)
and important connections (Manaen, a member of the court of Herod the
tetrarch). Secondly, why should Luke mention Christian teachers, who are
absent from the rest of Acts and from the Gospel? The lack of a specific agenda
suggests that the author of Acts regarded the list as a genuine piece of the
history of the Antiochene community and that he cited it from some source. 6
This is not to say that the whole pericope was taken over unchanged. The
phrase “the Holy Spirit said” (cf. Acts 10:19) and the imposition of hands (cf.
Acts 6:6) may be redactional, 7 but the body of the text is older. If the
association between this list and the first missionary journey is correct, we can
date the work of prophets and teachers in Antioch around the years forties. 8
Even if historically reliable, the pericope is not unproblematic. The first
serious riddle is the mention of prophets and teachers without apostles. The
comparison with the closest New Testament passage, 1 Cor 12:28, may suggest
that Luke dropped the word “apostles” maybe because for him this title
belonged almost exclusively to the Twelve. However, “apostles” shows up in
connection with Paul and Barnabas on their first missionary journey (Acts
14:4.14). In contrast with Luke’s habit, here the word “apostles” maintains its
who agrees with ERNST HAENCHEN, Die Apostelgeschichte (6th ed.; KEK 3; Göttingen:
Vandenhoek & Ruprecht, 1968), 308 n. 5.
4
See for instance MEEK-WILSEN, Jews, 14–15.
5
On the scarce plausiblity of this event, see HAENCHEN, Apostelgeschichte, 311.
6
ZIMMERMANN, Lehrer, 134. On the non-Lukan origins of the list cf. also MERKLEIN,
Amt, 250.
7
CHARLES K. BARRETT, The Acts of the Apostles. 1. Preliminary Introduction and
Commentary on Acts I–XIV (ICC; Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1994), 599.
8
JOSEPH A. FITZMYER, The Acts of the Apostles: A New Translation with Introduction
and Commentary (AB 31; New York: Doubleday, 1998), 495; SCHNABEL, Mission, vol. 2,
477.
1. Acts 13:1–3 55
full sense of “envoys”, in this case envoys of the Antiochene church. 9

According to Merklein, 10 for Christians in Antioch “apostle” is a teacher or a
prophet sent on a mission. This meaning is reflected in Acts 14:4.14, where
Luke follows his Antiochene source.
Luke does not say who was what in the list of Acts 13:1, nor is it possible
to make a distinction on the basis of the particles te ) ) ) kai,. 11 According to
Zimmermann, Luke was not able to understand who was a teacher because
teachers were not to be seen any longer, the opposite of what Paul experienced
(1 Cor 12:28; cf. Eph 4:11). However, the list in 1 Corinthians does not rule
out that the same people could play more roles. For instance, 2 Tim 1:11
presents Paul as herald, apostle and teacher. The five characters mentioned in
Acts 13:1 might have been both teachers and prophets, an understandable
situation in a young community, where a clear distinction among roles was yet
to be achieved. 12
In spite of the lack of details, the list of names presents some noteworthy
features from which it is possible to gauge some useful information. The names
are all Jewish and two of them are known: Barnabas, who has already been
mentioned (Acts 4:36–37; 11:22–26.30), and obviously Saul (Acts 8:1; 9:1–
31), who has been closely associated with Barnabas (Acts 9:27; 11.25–26.30;
12:25). About Paul we know that he was the disciple of a Jewish
nomodida,skaloj, Gamaliel (Acts 22:3; 5:34). As to the remaining prophets and
teachers, it is likely that at least two of them are Greek-speaking Jews: Simon
called “Niger”, since he bears a Latin nickname, and Lucius, who is from
Cyrene. 13 Simon might have been a North African, if the sobriquet points to
his complexion. Lucius was probably one of the Cyrenians preaching in
Antioch according to Acts 11:20. The most interesting character is Manaen, a
rare name meaning “comforter.” 14 The title su,ntrofoj indicates that he was
brought up with Herod Antipas, a common practice often involving high status
slaves. 15
9
MEIER observes that when the apostle Peter joined the community in Antioch (Gal 2:11),
the triad was complete (Antioch, 35–36).
10
Extensive treatment on apostles and their role in Acts in MERKLEIN, Amt, 260–77.
11
Cf. BARRETT, Acts, 603.
12
Cf. KEENER, Acts, vol. 2, 1982–83. S. DOCKX believes that the five names in Acts
13:1–2 are all teachers, that the prophets are left anonymous and that the spirit in Acts 13:2
spoke only to the latter (“L’ordination de Barnabé et de Saul d’après Actes 13,1–3,” in
Chronologies néotestamentaires et vie de l'Église primitive: Recherches exégétiques
[Gembloux: J. Duculot, 1976], 289–3112, 289–91; also published in NRTh 98 [1976] 238–
50).
13
ZIMMERMANN suggests that the five people in the list were bilingual (Lehrer, 132–33).
14
BARRETT, Acts, 603–604.
15
A close study of the names is in KEENER, Acts, vol. 2, 1984–90.
It is likely that the whole group of prophets and teachers in Antioch made
up the community leadership. 16 Strictly speaking, Luke is silent on this point,
but it is difficult to believe that Barnabas, an envoy of the Jerusalem church,
and his collaborator could be anything else. The presence of a member of the
court of Herod, Manaen, strengthens this hypothesis. 17
The five leaders of the Antiochean church do not seem to be on an equal
footing. In the list Barnabas ranks first, Paul last. Maybe Barnabas is given pre-
eminence because he had been sent by the apostles and Paul is placed at the
bottom because he was the last comer. Luke may want to make a point: at the
beginning Paul is only an associate of Barnabas, but later he becomes the
protagonist.
The following verse deals with the two apostles’ assignment. The subject of
leitourgou,ntwn and nhsteuo,ntwn is unclear. Is it the group of prophets and
teachers or the whole community? Since the latter has not been mentioned
before, the pronoun following the first verb most likely refers to the leaders. 18
Leitourge,w is hapax in Luke. In the whole of the New Testament it occurs only
two more times: Rom 15:27 and Heb 10:11. The cognate forms leitourgo,j
(Rom 13:6; 15:16; Ph 2:25; Heb 1:7; 8:2) and leitourgi,a (Luke 1:23; 2 Cor
9:12; Ph 2:17; 2:30; Heb 8:6; 9:21; cf. also leitourgika, in Heb 1:14) are more
common. The verb usually indicates the carrying out of a service of any kind,
but in early Christian literature it increasingly assumed the connotation of
religious service. 19 In Luke 1:23 leitourgi,a denotes the ministry of Zacharias
in the Temple and surely carries the LXX connotation of cultic service. In Acts
16
This is held, for instance, by JACQUES DUPONT, “Les ministères de l’église naissante
d’après les Actes des apôtres”, in Ministères et célébration de l’Eucharistie: Sacramentum
1 (SA 61; Roma: Editrice Anselmiana, 1973), 124–48, 126; SCHÜRMANN, “Lehrer,” 125;
JOSEPH A. FITZMYER, The Gospel According to Luke (I–IX) (AB 28; New York: Doubleday,
1981), 496.
17
In Codex Bezae there is an important variant. At the beginning of the list the codex
reads evn oi-j. This means that Barnabas and his companions belonged to the group of prophets
and teachers, which therefore included more than the five named people (MARIE-ÉMILE
BOISMARD and ANDRÉ LAMOUILLE, Les Actes des Deux Apôtres. 3. Analyses littéraires [EB
n.s. 14; Paris: Libraire Lecoffre, J. Gabalda, 1990], 179–81).
18
Cf. BARRETT, Acts, 604; ERIK PETERSON, “La Leitourgi,a des prophètes et des
didascales à Antioche,” RSR 36 (1949): 577–79. Many scholars are in favour of the other
solution. See for instance HAENCHEN, Apostelgeschichte, 338; WOLF-HENNING OLLROG,
Paulus und seine Mitarbeiter: Untersuchungen zu Theorie und Praxis der paulinischen
Mission (WMANT 50; Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchen Verlag, 1979), 157–58. DUPONT
thinks that the five presided a community service (“Ministères,” 129–30).
19
See HERMANN STRATHMANN and RUDOLF MEYER, “leitourge,w,” GLNT, 6: 589–634;
RORDORF, Doctrine, 74; NIEDERWIMMER, Didache, 242–43.
1. Acts 13:1–3 57
13:2 the meaning may be similar: prophets and teachers served the community
as religious ministers. 20
Fasting does not play a significant role in the New Testament. In Acts it is
mentioned three times and always in connection with the Antiochene mission
(Acts 13:2.3; 14:23). Probably, it was not a practice that was required when
commissioning people, since fasting is not present in two other commission
texts: Acts 1:23–26 and 6:3–6. The double occurrence in Acts 13:23 and 14:23
may work as a sort of inclusion placed at both ends of the first missionary
journey. At the beginning, we are informed about the commissioning of
Barnabas and Paul, which was accompanied by fasting and praying. At the end,
we read that Barnabas and Paul fasted and prayed in connection with the
appointment of presbyters.
Whoever is the grammatical subject carrying out the religious service and
fasting, it is the spirit that sets apart Barnabas and Paul. This commission may
be modelled after the setting apart of the Levites in Numbers 8. 21 It should not
be considered like rabbinic ordination, which at the time did not exist, and even
if it existed, would have been unnecessary because Paul and Barnabas were
already teachers. The laying on of hand is probably a form of blessing and is
connected with appointment elsewhere too (Acts 6:6). 22
1.3 The Origins of Christian Teachers

Christian teachers are referred to only once in Luke’s work, a fact that may call
for some explanation. The first solution that comes to mind is that the silence
about teachers outside Acts 13:1–2 is purely accidental. Prophets too can blame
Luke for neglect, being mentioned only two more times, in passages in which
their existence is not even relevant for the structure of the community (Acts
11:27–28 and 15:32). Another solution is the one suggested by Zimmermann:
it is possible that, when Luke wrote Acts, teachers might have disappeared
from the scene or have been marginal figures not worth mentioning. A third
option is that teachers were not to be found in the community/communities to
which Luke was attached. The answer to our problem may be a combination of
20
Cf. KEENER, Acts, vol. 2, 1991.
21
DAVID DAUBE, The New Testament and Rabbinic Judaism (JLCRS 2; London: Athlone
Press, 1956), 224–46; ERNEST BEST, “Acts XIII. 1–3,” JTS n.s. 11 (1960): 344–48, 346–47.
22
On this text see J. COPPENS, “L’imposition des mains dans les Actes des Apotres,” in
Les Actes des Apôtres: Traditions, rédaction, théologie (ed. J. KREMER; BETL 48;
Gembloux: J. Duculot; Leuven: Leuven University Press, 1979), 405–38; BARRETT, Acts,
606–607; JACOB JERVELL, Die Apostelgeschichte (KEK 3; Göttingen: Vandenhoeck &
Ruprecht, 1998), 341. On the Holy Spirit and the laying on of hands in Luke see FRANÇOIS
BOVON, Luc le théologien: Vingt-cinq ans de recherches (1950–1975) (2nd ed.; MdB;
Geneva: Labor et Fides, 1988), 244–54.
different factors. It may be suggested that it was in Antioch that teachers were
a relevant phenomenon worth mentioning. The evidence suggests that Antioch
was in fact their place of origin. Acts 13 is the natural follow-up of Acts 11:19–
30, describing the origins of the community of Antioch. After Stephen’s death,
“men of Cyprus and Cyrene” reached Antioch where “they spoke to the
Hellenists also, proclaiming the Lord Jesus” (Acts 11:20). These visitors may
have come from the circle of Stephen. 23 In Antioch, they were joined by
Barnabas and Paul, who taught there for an entire year (Acts 11:25–26). During
this period, Christian prophets arrived from Jerusalem (Acts 11:27). The
presence of prophets and teachers in verse 13:1 should not elicit surprise.
Antiochene Christians burst with activity. They were busy teaching and
welcoming visitors (Acts 11:27; 15:1), they decided to send help to the
believers in Judea (Acts 11:27–30) and Paul and Barnabas on a mission (Acts
13:3) to preach the word to the Gentiles (Acts 14:27), they hosted the famous
argument between Paul and Peter (Gal 2:11–14), they were pivotal for the
issuing of the so-called apostolic decree (Acts 15:2) and were the first believers
to be called “Christians” (Acts 11:26). Antiochene Christians made up an
effervescent community. It would be no wonder if the role of Christian teacher
was born among them. This could not take place in Jerusalem because the local
leadership and teaching were in the hands of the apostles. Moreover, Jerusalem
Christians were bound to be more conservative: many of them had personally
known the teacher and his closest associates were leaders. On the contrary, the
Antiochene community had been newly founded by people who had not known
the teacher, who came from different places and who happened to live in one
of the biggest cities of the Roman Empire.
The openness to novelty among Antiochene Christians justifies the creation
of new roles, it but does not explain why the term “teacher” was adopted. The
simplest hypothesis is that “teacher” was the obvious designation for those who
were constantly occupied with preaching and teaching. This was the title that
people spontaneously gave Jesus on the basis of what he said and did. Probably,
the same thing happened in Antioch. We have seen that the Gospels provide
evidence of the existence of the honorific title “rabbi” in Palestine already in
the first half of the first century. It would be fully understandable if the
equivalent Greek word was applied in Antioch to knowledgeable and
authoritative Christians such as Paul and Barnabas.
The Book of Acts confines the phenomenon of Christian teachers to
Antioch. The leadership of the other Christian communities is placed in the
hands of presbyters (Acts 11:30; 14:23; 15:2.4.6.22.23; 16:4; 20:17; 21:18).
Their connection with the apostles in Jerusalem suggests that they would be
their successors.
23
2. 1 Corinthians 12:28–29 59
Though Acts give little information when it comes to teachers, there is a

clue pointing to a major difference between them and presbyters. There is no
text in the Lukan work that deals with the appointment of teachers, but there is
one text that deals with the appointment of presbyters. This appointment is in
fact carried out by two teachers and prophets, Barnabas and Saul (Acts 14:23).
While presbyters are appointed, teachers, it seems, are acknowledged by the
community.
1.4 Conclusions
Acts 13:1 draws on a source saying that the community in Antioch was led by
a group of prophets and teachers. A case can be made that teachers were first
called such in Antioch. This passage is the only mention of Christian teachers
in Luke’s two books. We may suppose that teachers constituted a phenomenon
of limited extension, since communities were usually led by presbyters. An
important difference between presbyters and teachers is that presbyters were
appointed, while teachers were the object of recognition.
2. 1 Corinthians 12:28–29
2.1 Introduction
Another fundamental testimony to Christian teachers is 1 Cor 12:28–29. This
text has given rise to the hypothesis of an early church led by the triad of
apostles, prophets and teachers, and has influenced the interpretation of similar
texts. It is also the basis for the discussion on charisma and office.
The First Letter to the Corinthians was written by Paul in Ephesus around
51–55. 24 The apostle ment to tackle a number of issues, some of which had
been reported by envoys of Chloe who had visited Corinth and had been
shocked by what they had seen (1 Cor 1:11). Other issues had been raised in a
letter sent by the Corinthians (cf. 1 Cor 7:1). The community was divided in
parties (1 Cor 1:12); sexual behaviour was in some cases unacceptable (1 Cor
5:1–6:20 passim); advice was required on topics such as marriage, celibacy,
circumcision, etc. (1 Cor 7:1–40); on how to relate to the pagan environment
(1 Cor 8:1–11:1); on how to conduct the liturgical assembly (1 Cor 11:2–
14:40); the reality of resurrection was debated (1 Cor 15:1–58).
Addressing the conduct in the liturgical assembly, Paul tried to overcome
divisions by describing the community as a body with different parts, by
proposing love as the ultimate goal, and by downgrading glossolalia in favour
24
WOLFGANG SCHRAGE, Der erste Brief an die Korinther (4 vols.; EKK 7; Düsseldorf:
Benziger Verlag; Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener Verlag, 1991–2001), vol. 1, 36–38.
of comprehensible speech (1 Cor 14). His criticism of glossolalia was aimed at

those who overrated it at the expenses of other gifts.
2.2 Redaction Criticism

Verse 12:28 comes after a long exposition on how spiritual gifts build up the
community. Even if its content dovetails with the overall discussion, it breaks
the flow of the argument and is constructed in an awkward manner. 25 (1) The
subject and the verbal tense are different from their predecessors. (2) The first
three items of the list are roles (apostles, prophets, teachers), whereas the
following ones are not (deeds of power, gifts of healing, forms of assistance,
forms of leadership, various kinds of tongues). (3) The ranking of the three
roles is apparently in contradiction with the emphasis laid on the part played
by each member. (4) The syntax of the sentence is perplexing. The initial
“some” (ou]j de,) normally requires in Greek “others” (ou]j me,n) and Paul should
have written: “God posed in the church some as apostles, others as prophets
and others as teachers.” Instead, “some” is followed by “first […] second […]
third […].” It is true that the New Testament presents several cases in which
“some” is not followed by the expected “others,” 26 but what is striking here is
that the correlation is replaced by a different construction. (5) Nowhere else in
the undisputed Pauline letters are Christian teachers mentioned. The sum of it
all is that, if we take the triad out, Paul’s argument would flow better. The best
explanation to account for these inconsistencies is that verse 28a is a traditional
formula hauled by Paul into his text. 27
Further evidence comes from the comparison with similar lists in Paul
(Table 1). Set against 1 Cor 12:8–10 and Rom 12:6–8, the triad stands out as
an oddity. With one exception, Paul does not list office-holders, but only
functions or gifts. The only time he wants to mention the person exercising a
function, he employs a participle (Rom 12:7: o` dida,skwn) rather than the
corresponding substantive (dida,skaloj). Moreover, the lists are discordant.
The list in 1 Cor 12:8 differs from the one given 20 verses later and even this
one is modified within just two verses in 1 Cor 12:30. The only list to which
Paul sticks is, not surprisingly, the triad (1 Cor 12:28a and 12:29). The
conclusion seems straightforward: the formula in 1 Cor 12:28a is traditional. 28
The independence of the verse from the rest of the chapter and its traditional origin is
25
well argued by ZIMMERMANN, Lehrer, 104–110.

26
The syntactical break is pointed out by ZIMMERMANN, Lehrer, 107, to whom ANDREAS
LINDEMANN replies that is is not unusual in the New Testament (Paulus, Apostel und Lehrer
der Kirche: Studien zu Paulus und zum frühen Paulusverständnis [Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck,
1999], 146 n. 55).
27
Cf. BROCKHAUS, Charisma, 95–96.
28
Cf. MERKLEIN, Amt, 244–47.
1 Cor 12:28 1 Cor 12:29–30 1 Cor 12:8–10 Rom 12:6–8
Kai. ou]j me.n e;qeto o` qeo.j evn mh. pa,ntej avpo,stoloiÈ mh. w-| me.n ga.r dia. tou/ e;contej de. cari,smata kata.
th/| evkklhsi,a| prw/ton pa,ntej profh/taiÈ mh. pa,ntej pneu,matoj di,dotai th.n ca,rin th.n doqei/san
avposto,louj( deu,teron dida,skaloiÈ mh. pa,ntej lo,goj sofi,aj( a;llw| de. h`mi/n dia,fora( ei;te
profh,taj( tri,ton duna,meijÈ 30 mh. pa,ntej lo,goj gnw,sewj kata. to. profhtei,an kata. th.n
didaska,louj( e;peita cari,smata e;cousin ivama,twnÈ auvto. pneu/ma( 9 e`te,rw| pi,stij avnalogi,an th/j pi,stewj(
duna,meij( e;peita cari,smata mh. pa,ntej glw,ssaij evn tw/| auvtw/| pneu,mati( a;llw| 7 ei;te diakoni,an evn th/|
ivama,twn( avntilh,myeij( lalou/sinÈ mh. pa,ntej de. cari,smata ivama,twn evn diakoni,a|( ei;te o` dida,skwn
kubernh,seij( ge,nh glwssw/nÅ diermhneu,ousinÈ tw/| e`ni. pneu,mati( 10 a;llw| evn th/| didaskali,a|( 8 ei;te o`
de. evnergh,mata duna,mewn( parakalw/n evn th/|
a;llw| Îde.Ð profhtei,a( a;llw| paraklh,sei\ o` metadidou.j evn
Îde.Ð diakri,seij pneuma,twn( a`plo,thti( o` proi?sta,menoj evn
e`te,rw| ge,nh glwssw/n( a;llw| spoudh/|( o` evlew/n evn
de. e`rmhnei,a glwssw/n \ i`laro,thtiÅ
2. 1 Corinthians 12:28–29
61
The insertion of this verse in chapter 12 is not arbitrary. Besides the elements
of discontinuity, there are also elements of continuity. Verse 28 is conceptually
parallel to verse 12:18: as God placed (qeo.j e;qeto) in the body (evn tw/| sw,mati)
different members, so God placed ( e;qeto o` qeo.j) different roles in the church
(evn th/| evkklhsi,a|). Moreover, some of the items in the list have already been
mentioned in verse 10. 1 The triad is not an erratic block, but it is meant to
illustrate the body metaphor.
Even if the letter does not provide any hint about the origins of the triad, the
similarity between 1 Cor 12:28, Acts 13:1–2 and the references to apostles,
prophets and teachers in the Didache is undeniable. Since the Didache comes
probably from Syria and Acts 13:1–2 describes the group of leaders in Antioch,
of which Paul was a member, it is very likely that 1 Cor 12:28 reflects
Antiochene tradition.
The ranking of apostles, prophets and teachers in this tradition can be
explained in three ways. 2 (1) The order represents a hierarchical structure. (2)
It represents a logical sequence. (3) It is just meant to distinguish the members
of the triad from each other. The third solution is the easiest to rule out, since
a “some […] others […]” sequence would have been an unequivocal way to
establish such distinction without running the risk of introducing ranking. Both
the first and the second solutions are probably correct. As someone who, in
Paul’s view, had been sent by Christ, an apostle was likely to possess
unparalleled authority. Moreover, apostles taught Christ’s message to newly
founded communities and exhorted new and old Christians with inspired
words. In sum, an apostle was also a prophet and a teacher. 3 Prophets came
before teachers because their gift is the most important one for building up the
community (1 Cor 14). The scope of the teachers’ task was narrower. 4
Zimmermann came up with an ingenuous hypothesis as to why Paul
mentioned the triad. 5 Corinthian Christians were divided in parties and Peter’s
followers claimed the community leadership for themselves. In order to curb
their request, Paul inserted a formula coming from a community where he and
Peter met, Jerusalem (Gal 1:18), or from one where they even clashed, Antioch
ZIMMERMANN, Lehrer, 205; GIUSEPPE BARBAGLIO, La Prima lettera ai Corinzi:

1
Introduzione, versione e commento (Scritti delle origini cristiane 16; Bologna: Dehoniane,
1996), 681.
2
According to BENIGNO PAPA, there was no distinction between prophets and teachers
in Antioch, but this occurred in Corinth (“Profeti e dottori ad Antiochia di Siria,” Nicolaus
2 [1974]: 231–55, 240).
3
Cf. GREEVEN, Propheten, 343.
4
BARBAGLIO notes that the order is not hierarchical, but practical: first the community
founder, then the prophet speaking in the name of the spirit, and finally the teacher
explaining scripture and exhorting (Corinzi, 684).
5
ZIMMERMAN, Lehrer, 111–13.
2. 1 Corinthians 12:28–29 63
(Gal 2:11–14). He thus acknowledged the primacy of the apostle Peter, but at
the same time he played it down through the body metaphor. Pace
Zimmermann, there is no need to bring Peter in. Paul, concerned as he was
about the divisions splitting the community, 6 made it unequivocal that the
leadership was in the hands of apostles, prophets and teachers. The triad was
his answer to a specific problem, which may explain why it does not occur
anywhere else in his genuine writings.
2.3 Characteristics of the Triad

The first piece of information we are given is that the members of the triad are
appointed by God. The reader already knows that it was God who appointed
the apostle Paul (1 Cor 1:1) and that, apparently, a vision of the risen Christ is
a necessary prerequisite (1 Cor 9:1). If these remarks could be extended to the
rest of the triad, it is arguable that, in Paul’s view, apostles, prophets and
teachers were all appointed by God without human mediation.
In order to find out what is specific to teachers, it is necessary to consider
what can be known about the apostles and prophets of 1 Cor 12:28.
2.3.1 Apostles
Apostles are God’s first appointment. Paul’s understanding of his own
apostleship is manifold. 7 Paul has seen the risen Christ (cf. 1 Cor 9:1; 15:5–8),
has been appointed by God (1 Cor 1:1; cf. Rom 1:5; Gal 1:1), and has been sent
to preach the good news (1 Cor 1:17; cf. Rom 11:13; 2 Cor 4:5; Gal 2:7–8). He
sets up (1 Cor 4:15) and builds up (1 Cor 3:8–15) communities. The apostles
are entitled to remuneration on account of their work (1 Cor 9:4–13). A servant
woman may follow them (1 Cor 9:5). The apostles are a distinct group (cf. 1
Cor 9:5), to which Paul belongs by the will of God and Christ’s intervention (1
Cor 1:1 and 1:17).
2.3.2 Prophets
Paul writes that not everyone can be a prophet (1 Cor 12:29), but he also writes
that everyone should seek to prophesy (1 Cor 14:1). This means that (1) the
gift of prophecy can be bestowed under certain circumstances and at different
times on any member of the community; that (2) this gift dwells permanently
in certain people.
The reason why prophecy should be coveted by each member of the
community is that it is the community that chiefly benefits from it (1 Cor 14:1–
5). The best discussion on the role and aim of prophecy is to be found in chapter
6
On these divisions see SCHRAGE, Brief, 1:39–63.
7
Cf. BROCKHAUS, Charisma, 97.
14, which is chiefly about the difference between prophecy and glossolalia. On
the one hand prophecy makes the community grow up; on the other hand
glossolalia, when there is no translator to make it plain, benefits nobody else
than the speaker. Contrary to speaking in tongues, prophecy is understandable,
useful and also accountable (1 Cor 14:29). Hence, it is to be preferred (1 Cor
14:5). We are not told in what prophecy precisely consists, but there is a
passage with clues:
If, therefore, the whole church comes together and all speak in tongues and outsiders or
unbelievers enter, will they not say that you are out of your mind? But if all prophesy, an
unbeliever or outsider who enters is reproved by all and called to account by all. After the
secrets of the unbeliever’s heart are disclosed, that person will bow down before God and
worship him, declaring, “God is really among you” (1 Cor 14:23–25).
The function of prophecy is to reveal people’s hidden thoughts. This is the

main and final piece of evidence about the superiority of prophecy over
speaking in tongues. By bringing out what is hidden in each person, prophecy
turns a gathering of people into a community: when everything is clear and
plain, there are no barriers and God’s spirit can move around.
In a preceding passage Paul placed prophecy in a list of related phenomena:
“Now, brothers and sisters, if I come to you speaking in tongues, how will I
benefit you unless I speak to you in some revelation or knowledge or prophecy
or teaching?” (h' evn avpokalu,yei h' evn gnw,sei h' evn profhtei,a| h' ÎevnÐ didach/|È)
(1 Cor 14:6). Though the difference between each item in the list is debatable,
it seems that the meaning of prophecy would not overlap with the meaning of
the other terms if we interpret it as piercing through people’s souls. However,
according to another text the realm of prophecy is likely to be broader: “For
you can all prophesy one by one, so that all may learn and all be encouraged”
( i[na pa,ntej manqa,nwsin kai. pa,ntej parakalw/ntai) (1 Cor 14:31). Prophecy
is meant to teach and encourage.
2.3.3 Teachers
It is surprising that teachers are the only members of the triad to be mentioned
once, while apostles and prophets receive their due share of attention (1 Cor
1:1; 4:9; 9:5; 14; 15:7.9). Some reasons, which are not mutually exclusive, may
be given.
(1) The community of Corinth needed to be strengthened (1 Cor 14:3).
Strengthening was best provided by prophecy, which is a gift accessible to
anyone and which encourages people. On the contrary, we might suppose that
teaching required previous training and that only few people could become
teachers. Moreover, in the short term it is not so effective in building up a
community as prophecy is.
(2) The Corinthians, who had been enriched evn panti. lo,gw| kai. pa,sh| gnw,sei
(1 Cor 1:4), enjoyed teaching too much. Paul’s polemic against a certain kind
3. Matthew 65
of wisdom in 1 Cor 1:18–31 and 2:6–7 may indicate that many Corinthians
unduly thought that they were wise, an interpretation, which is confirmed by 1
Cor 3:18–23. Their wisdom consisted, it seems, in considering themselves
followers of Paul or Peter or Apollos (1 Cor 1:12; 3:4–6) as if these headed
philosophical schools. For Paul the Corinthians are not disciples, but children
(1 Cor 3:1–3). Given their love for false wisdom, Paul might have preferred to
stress the gift of prophecy over against teaching.
(3) Though the Corinthians might have enjoyed teaching, dida,skaloi are
mentioned only once because there were no teachers among them.
(4) Teachers are absent not only from the rest of 1 Corinthians, but also from
the other undisputedly authentic Pauline letters. It almost seems as if Paul
intentionally avoided the term dida,skaloj. On one occasion in which he
apparently mentions the role of Christian teacher, he does it by using a
participle (o` dida,skwn, 1 Cor 12:7). On another occasion he replaces the
expected dida,skaloj with o` kathcw/n (Gal 6:6). The most logical explanation
is that teachers were not an issue because there were no teachers. This is to say
that there were not divinely appointed teachers, as those mentioned in 1 Cor
12:28, but only community members who were charged with teaching.
2.4 Conclusions
Paul found the triad in a traditional formula. He did not care very much for it,
since he employed it only once. Instead, he had lists of functions, which are all
slightly different. These functions are not at all fixed and are egalitarian,
whereas the formula has a hierarchical structure and deals with church
leadership. It is remarkable that Paul seems to avoid the word dida,skaloj, even
though his churches had people who taught. Maybe the term designated a
clearly defined role and no dida,skaloj was to be found in the Pauline
communities.
3. Matthew
3.1 Place and Time

There is considerable agreement that the Gospel of Matthew was written in
Syria, though not all agree. 8 It is more difficult to pinpoint the exact location,
8
The arguments for locating the Gospel in Syria are concisely stated in JOACHIM GNILKA,
Das Matthäusevangelium (2 vols.; HTKNT; Freiburg im Breisgrau: Herder, 1986–1988),
vol. 2, 513–15. See also LUZ, Evangelium, vol. 1, 73; WILLIAM D. DAVIES and DALE C.
ALLISON, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Gospel According to Saint Matthew
(3 vols.; ICC; Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1988–1997), vol. 1, 138–47; W. J. C. WEREN, Studies
but usually Antioch is reckoned to be the best candidate. 9 The strong Jewish
character of the Gospel, the opening to the Gentiles, the presence of different
strata of tradition seem to match what we know about the Antiochene
Christians. 10 Moreover, Antioch can account for the rapid spreading of the
Gospel, which is less understandable if a smaller centre is involved. Proposing
Antioch, 11 it must be kept in mind that there might have been several Christian
communities in the city in addition to the one recorded in Acts 11 and 13. 12
The time of composition is more debated. The majority view is that the
Gospel was written between the years 70 and 100. 13 The destruction of the
Temple, which may be alluded to in Matt 17:24–27 and 22:1–14, and the
composition and availability of Mark’s Gospel posit the post quem. The ante
quem is Ignatius, who died during the reign of Trajan (98–117) and who shows
acquaintance with the Gospel on at least two occasions: Matt 3:15 in Smyrn.
1.1 and Matt 15:13 in Phld. 3.1. 14
in Matthew’s Gospel: Literary Design, Intertextuality, and Social Setting (BibInt 130;
Leiden: Brill, 2014), 260–64 (the study in question is an article published in 2005). For a
dissonant voice see DAVID C. SIM, “Reconstructing the Religious and Social Milieu of
Matthew: Methods, Sources, and Possible Results,” in Matthew, James, and Didache: Three
Related Documents in Their Jewish and Christian Setting (ed. JURGEN K. ZANGENBERG and
HUBERTUS WALTHERUS MARIA VAN DE SANDT; Symposium Series 45; Atlanta: Society of
Biblical Literature, 2008), 13–32, 15–19.
9
RAYMOND E. BROWN, An Introduction to the New Testament (ABRL; New York:
Doubleday, 1997), 212–16.
10
The case is strongly advocated by MEIER in RAYMOND E. BROWN and JOHN P. MEIER,
Antioch and Rome: New Testament Cradles of Catholic Christianity (New York: Paulist
Press, 1983), 18–27. See also MICHELLE SLEE, The Church in Antioch in the First Century
CE (JSNTSup 244; Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 2003), 118–22.
11
The likely area of origin may be extended to Galilee: see L. MICHAEL WHITE, “Crisis
Management and Boundary Maintenance: The Social Location of the Matthean
Community,” in Social History of the Matthean Community: Cross-Disciplinary Approaches
(ed. DAVID L. BALCH; Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1991), 211–47.
12
LUZ, Evangelium, vol. 1, 74. See JEAN DEAN KINGSBURY, “Conclusion: Analysis of a
Conversation,” in BALCH, ed. History, 259–69, 264.
13
BROWN, Introduction, 216; DAVIES, Commentary, vol. 1, 128, with a survey of the
spectrum of scholarly opinions at pp. 127–38. Among those who favour an earlier date is
ROBERT H. GUNDRY, Matthew: A Commentary on His Handbook for a Mixed Church under
Persecution (2nd ed.; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1994), 599–609; DONALD A. HAGNER,
Matthew 1–13 (WBC 33A; Dallas: Word Books, 1993), lxxiii–lxxv.
14
LUZ, Evangelium, vol. 1, 75–76. The two Matthean passages are redactional. More
clues in MEIER, Antioch, 24–25, and “Matthew and Ignatius: A Response to William R.
Schoedel,” in BALCH, ed., History, 178–86. SCHOEDEL had detected Matthean influence on
Ignatius, maybe through material cut loose from the Gospel (“Ignatius and the Reception of
Matthew in Antioch,” in BALCH, ed., History, 129–77).
3. Matthew 67
3.2 Matthew 10:24–25

The Gospel has two main texts on teachers, Matt 10:24–25 and Matt 23:8–12.
The larger context of Matt 10:24–25 is Jesus’ second discourse (Matt 9:36–
11:1), a complicated composition made out of different sources (Q, special
Matthew, Mark) 15 and consisting of several sections, which are not easy to
delimit. 16 Matthew 9:36–10:5a is the introduction, containing two logia on the
need for mission-workers and a list of the Twelve. The following section (Matt
10:5b–23) is included within two mentions of “Israel” and contains guidelines
for the missionary. This part can be divided in two subsections, framed by the
repetition of the word pro,baton and dealing with two different topics. Matthew
10:5b-15 presents a set of instructions for the disciples on what to do and how
to carry out their mission. Matthew 10:16–23 forecasts strife and persecutions
and offers advice on how to deal with them. The last section (Matt 10:24–42)
is very composite. The disciples cannot expect a better treatment than Jesus
(Matt 10:24–25). They are invited not to fear persecution (Matt 10:26–32:
fobe,w, four times) if they confess Jesus before men (Matt 10:32–33). The strife
of the mission is represented in terms of family relationships (Matt 10:34–39).
The speech is rounded off with an invitation to offer hospitality to the
missionary (Matt 10:40–42).
Our logion (Matt 10:24–25) functions as a bridge between the theme of
persecution (Matt 10:16–23) and the theme of family relationships (Matt
10:34–37).
3.2.1 Analysis of the Text

Matthew 10:24–25 reads:
24a Ouvk e;stin maqhth.j u`pe.r to.n dida,skalon
24b ouvde. dou/loj u`pe.r to.n ku,rion auvtou/Å
25a avrketo.n tw/| maqhth/| i[na ge,nhtai w`j o` dida,skaloj auvtou/
25b kai. o` dou/loj w`j o` ku,rioj auvtou/Å
25c eiv to.n oivkodespo,thn Beelzebou.l evpeka,lesan(
25d po,sw| ma/llon tou.j oivkiakou.j auvtou/Å
This text is made out of at least two different logia. Since the structure and the
content of verse 25cd differ from those of the preceding verses, these words
were probably added by Matthew, who intended to provide the key to interpret
15
LUZ, Evangelium, vol. 2, 77–78; M. EUGENE BORING, Sayings of the Risen Jesus:
Christian Prophecy in the Synoptic Tradition (SNTSMS 46; Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press, 1982), 208–212.
16
I follow the division in LUZ, Evangelium, vol. 2, 75–77. Cf. also DOROTHY JEAN
WEAVER, Matthew’s Missionary Discourse: A Literary Critical Analysis (JSNTSup 38;
Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1990), 73–75.
verses 24–25ab. Taken in isolation, verses 24–25ab could be understood in

different ways, but with the addition of verse 25cd they are made to refer to
persecution and therefore they carry on the topic of verses 16–23. Probably,
verse 25cd is not a Matthean creation since it presupposes a text that comes
only later (Matt 12:22–27) 17 and has Aramaic features. 18 The tense of
evpeka,lesan may go back to a Semitic perfect. “Beelzebul” seems a rough
translation of oivkodespo,thn: oi=koj renders the Aramaic ‫ זבול‬and ‫ בעל‬translates
despo,thj. 19
The remaining verses are most likely not the work of Matthew. Many
scholars believe that verses 24a.25a come from Q because of the parallel in
Luke 6:40: Ouvk e;stin maqhth.j u`pe.r to.n dida,skalon\ kathrtisme,noj de. pa/j
e;stai w`j o` dida,skaloj auvtou/Å 20 Matthew may preserve the original or at least
the older form because of the Semitic features of verses 24a.25a. The
retroversion into Aramaic follows a four accent rhythm particularly indicated
for disciples’ instruction 21 and avrketo,n could be a translation of ‫די‬. 22 Luke’s
kathrtisme,noj de. pa/j looks like a stylistic improvement. 23 Verses 24a.25a are
very ancient, though it is not possible to say if they stem from Jesus.
The assessment of verses 24b.25b is more complicated. Firstly, it is
necessary to get rid of a textual problem. Codex Bobiensis and the Syriac
Sinaiticus omit ouvde. dou/loj u`pe.r to.n ku,rion auvtou/. 24 If the shorter text of
verses 24–25 is original, verse 24b was added to mirror the parallelism between
verses 25a and 25b. However, even if these two codices are important
witnesses, they alone do not carry enough weight to permit the deletion of verse
24b. Secondly, one must see how the section in which our two verses are
placed, Matt 10:17–25, is constructed. The main source of Matt 10:17–22 is
the discourse about persecution of Mark 13:9–13, which easily pulled in Mark
9:31–41 and 10:33–45, both of which refer to Jesus’ delivery to death. In
LUZ, Evangelium, vol. 2, 118–19.

17
RIESNER, Jesus, 258; LUZ, Evangelium, vol. 2, 119 n. 8.

18
19
Actually, this word indicates a heavenly house, a temple.
20
See the history of scholarship and the attribution of this text to Q in CHRISTOPH HEIL
and GERTRAUD HARB, eds., Documenta Q: Reconstructions of Q Through Two Centuries of
Gospel Research Excerpted, Sorted and Evaluated. Q 6:37–42 (Leuven: Peeters, 2011),
253–71.
21
See JOACHIM JEREMIAS, Neutestamentliche Theologie. 1. Die Verkundigung Jesu
(Gütersloh: Gerd Mohn, 1971), 32–33.
22
A. SCHLATTER, Der Evangelist Matthäus: Seine Sprache, sein Ziel, seine
Selbständigkeit. Ein Kommentar zum ersten Evangelium (4th ed.; Stuttgart: Calwer Verlag,
1957), 342.
23
FRANÇOIS BOVON, L’Évangile selon Saint Luc (1,1–9,50) (CNT2 3a; Geneva: Labor et
Fides, 1991), 326. On the debate on these words see HEIL, Documenta Q, 325–37.
24
See CHARLES H. DODD, Historical Tradition in the Fourth Gospel (Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press, 1963), 335–36.
3. Matthew 69
Matthew 10 the fate of Jesus becomes the fate of the disciples. The flogging
(Matt 10:17) comes from Mark 10:34. The question about the greatest among
the disciples and Jesus’ answer are replaced with a combination of two logia,
which maintain several points of contact with Mark (9:34–35; 10:43–45). The
saying on the dida,skaloj may have been suggested to Matthew by the word
dida,skale in Mark 9:38 and 10:35. The insertion of a logion on dou/loj and
ku,rioj was probably prompted by Mark 10:44. The verses on accepting
travelling disciples come from Mark 9:30–37. 25 The saying on giving water to
the little ones is again from the same source, Mark 9:41 (cf. also Mark 10:38–
39, though with a different meaning). This reconstruction is confirmed by the
fact that Matthew is well acquainted with Mark 9, which he reproduces in
chapter 18.
Since the context in which we find Matt 10:24–25ab is redactional, we turn
to Luke 6:40 in search of the context of our saying in Q. Luke 6:40 is a
commentary on the parable of the blind, which is inserted between two texts
on judgement (Luke 6:37–38 and 6:41–42). Luke 6:27–49 contains pericopes,
which, with a few exceptions (e.g. Luke 6:39/Matt 15:14; Luke 6:40/Matt
10:24–25; Luke 6:43–45/Matt 12:33–35), have a parallel in the Sermon on the
Mount. The source is therefore Q, but our text is one of the exceptions. This
means either that it was left out by Matthew and kept by Luke, or that it was
not in this part of Q. Judgement is not the most fitting context for our logion,
nor does the association with Luke 6:39 seem to be original. In both cases,
there are neither thematic nor verbal contacts. It is more likely that a self-
standing logion on disciples and teachers was attached either by Luke or Q to
Luke 6:39. 26 In this new context, the logion refers to troublesome relationships
within the community, apparently caused by false guides. In order to oppose
them, Luke recommends that the disciples should be fully trained. 27
As to the origins of the text, there are at least two arguments pointing to
Matt 10:24b.25b being a pre-extant logion added by the evangelist, who shaped
it after Matt 10:24a.25a. On the one hand, these two verses appear as a proverb
25
This text is likely to be a Markan composition where traditional material (verses 31
and 34–35) is combined with redactional one (E. BEST, “Mark’s Preservation of the
Tradition,” in L’évangile selon Marc: Tradition et rédaction [ed. M. SABBE; 2nd ed.; BETL
34; Leuven: University Press, 1988], 21–34, 26–29). Mark 9:35 transmits a logion, which
appears in different forms throughout the Synoptics: Matt 18:4; 20:25–28; 23:11; Mark
10:41–45; Luke 9:48; 22:24–27. See PAUL HOFFMANN and VOLKER EID, Jesus von Nazareth
und eine christliche Moral (QD 66; Freiburg im Breisgau: Herder, 1975), 186–230.
26
See BOVON, Évangile, 324 and 326–27. Scholars disagree as to the original place of
Luke 6:40/Matt 10:24a.25a in Q: see F. NEYRINCK, “John and the Synoptics: 1975–1990,”
in John and the Synoptics (ed. Adelbert Denaux; BETL 101; Leuven: University Press,
1992), 3–62, 22.
27
FITZMYER, Gospel, 630–31.
in rabbinical literature, which might be a sign of antiquity. 28 On the other, the

nominative o` dou/loj replaces an expected dative corresponding to tw/| maqhth/|
and hence may be the sign of an non-harmonised insertion. 29 As to the origins
of Matt 10:24a.25a. and Matt 10:24b.25b, the former logion could be
dominical, the latter probably not. 30 The portrait of Jesus as the Lord looks like
a theological development over that of Jesus as a teacher. 31
3.2.2 John 13:16.20 and 15:20

Although Matt 10:24b.25b lacks Synoptic attestation, we find two parallels in
John. The first is John 13:13.16:
13 u`mei/j fwnei/te, me\ o` dida,skaloj( kai,\ o` ku,rioj( kai. kalw/j le,gete\ eivmi. ga,rÅ
16a avmh.n avmh.n le,gw u`mi/n( ouvk e;stin dou/loj mei,zwn tou/ kuri,ou auvtou/
16b ouvde. avpo,stoloj mei,zwn tou/ pe,myantoj auvto,nÅ
The second is John 15:20:

20a mnhmoneu,ete tou/ lo,gou ou- evgw. ei=pon u`mi/n\
20b ouvk e;stin dou/loj mei,zwn tou/ kuri,ou auvtou/Å
20c eiv evme. evdi,wxan( kai. u`ma/j diw,xousin\
20d eiv to.n lo,gon mou evth,rhsan( kai. to.n u`me,teron thrh,sousinÅ
John 13:13.16 contains three of the four protagonists of Matt 10:24–25,

teacher, lord, servant, while the word “disciple” is replaced with “apostle”.
John also presents the same argument for what concerns the relationship
between lord and servant. Did he employ Matthew as his model? Scholarship
has discussed the question of the relationship between the Matthean and the
Johannine passage in view of a possible dependence of the Fourth Gospel on
the Synoptics. 32 In an influential study Charles H. Dodd suggested that the
different forms in which the saying was transmitted are evidence of common
oral tradition, on which both John and Matthew independently drew. The main
reason why John was not acquainted with the Matthean form would be that his
28
Cf. Str-B 1: 578.
29
It is noteworthy that the proverb in the rabbinic sources says: “it is enough for the
servant to be like his master.”
30
There are diverging opinions about the origins of the two logia. JEREMIAH considers
Matt 10:24–25ab as a unit because of rhythm and ending rhymes (Theologie, 33); according
to DAVIES (Commentary, vol. 2, 193), the whole text of Matt 10:24–25 is dominical;
RIESNER (Jesus, 257) thinks that these were two dominical logia joined together by Matthew;
ZIMMERMANN (Lehrer, 191–92) and GUNDRY (Matthew, 195) believe that Matt 10:24b.25b
is a Matthean addition.
31
ERICH FASCHER, “Jesus der Lehrer: Ein Beitrag zur Frage nach dem „Quellort der
Kirchenidee“,” TLZ 79 (1954): 326–42, 333. For a survey of scholars debating on whether
Matthew took these verses from Q, see HEIL, Documenta Q, 272-324.
32
NEYRINCK, “John,”, 21–26.
3. Matthew 71
replacement of Matt 10:24b with a text on sender and apostle is unaccountable.

The term maqhth,j occurs 78 times in his Gospel, whereas “apostle” is an
hapax. 33 Raymond E. Brown finds this argument convincing. 34 However, both
scholars also detect several clues pointing to another direction. 35 First,
avpo,stoloj in John 13:16b recalls avpo,stoloj in Matt 10:2 (cf. also avposte,llein
in Matt 10:5.16.40). 36 Second, many words and phrases in John 15:18–19 occur
also in Matt 10:22–25c. 37 Third, John like Matthew interprets the saying in the
light of persecution (John 15:20c). 38 Gilbert Van Belle and David R. M.
Godecharle, drawing on previous scholarship, have listed a long array of
33
DODD, Tradition, 335–38; similar proposal in RUDOLF SCHNACKENBURG, Das
Johannesevangelium (vol. 3; HTKNT 4.3; Freiburg: Herder, 1975), 28–29. TOM THATCHER
writes of “a living stream of hundreds of oral performances,” a stream, which, in our case,
both Matthew and John tapped into. See “The Rejected Prophet and the Royal Official (John
4,43–54): A Case Study in the Relationship between John and the Synoptics,” in Studies in
the Gospel of John and Its Christology: Festschrift Gilbert Van Belle (ed. JOSEPH
VERHEYDEN et al.; BETL 265; Leuven: Peeters, 2015), 119–48; citation at p. 148.
34
RAYMOND E. BROWN, The Gospel According to John (xiii–xxi) (AB 29A; London:
Geoffrey Chapman, 1971), 570.
35
To be noted that the occurrence of mei,zwn in place of u`pe,r with accusative is not
surprising, since both translate Hebrew phrases like ‫ גדול מן‬or ‫ רב מן‬and since John never
employs u`pe,r with accusative, while he is fond of mei,zwn. See DODD, Tradition, 336.
36
See BROWN, Gospel, 569–70. BROWN observes that several logia in John 12–13 occur
also in Matthew 10: John 12:25 and Matt 10:39; John 12:26 and Matt 10:38; John
12:44/13:20 and Matt 10:40. He attributes these numerous parallelisms to “a common
collection of material.” (570). When commenting John 12:25–26 (BROWN, Gospel, 471,
473–75), he says that these two verses along with John 12:24 are a later insertion. Moreover,
BROWN writes that the sequence of these three logia is the result of editorial rearrangement,
that John 12:25 is a variant independent of the Synoptics, and he seems to think the same
about John 12:26. In conclusion, I understand that “common material” should be interpreted
in the sense of two collections gathering the same sayings, but with different texts. This is a
complicated hypothesis. The interpretation of the Greek word for “apostle” is discussed in
LUISE ABRAMOWSKI, “Der Apostel von Johannes 13,16”, ZNT 99 (2008), 116–23. She
thinks that the term may refer to Paul.
37
NEYRINCK, “John,” 24–25. BROWN identifies several connections between Matt
10:17–25, 24:9–10 and John 15:18–16:4a, and comments: “if the fourth evangelist had
copied from Matthew, he would have had to anticipate the era of modern criticism by
recognizing that Matt x 17–25 and xxiv 9–10 belong together” (BROWN, Gospel, 693–95,
quotation at page 695). This statement is subject to at least two objections. First, why should
not John be able to detect the similarities between Matt 10:17–22 and Matt 24:9–14? Second,
it is possible that Matt 24:9–14 is actually a doublette Matthew wrote of Matt 10:17–25,
which is based on Mark 13:9–13 (so LUZ, Evangelium, vol. 3, 403). See also the critical
remarks on BROWN’s hypothesis in NEYRINCK, “John,” 24 n. 107.
38
BROWN would say that this interpretation was in the common tradition on which
Matthew and John drew, but I have pointed out that Matt 10:25cd did not belong to it.
Deprived of this half verse, Matt 10:24–25 has nothing specific about persecution.
similarities between the passages in John and in Matthew and concluded that
indeed the fourth evangelist employed the first. One of the reasons is that the
alleged Q form of the saying does not include the words on the relationship
between servant and lord, which therefore must be considered an addition by
Matthew. Since they are also in John, they must come from Matthew. 39 This
dependence would not be surprising considering that John shared Matthew’s
concern. Matthew was worried about the role that ambition played among
Jesus’ followers and in particular among missionaries, including prophets and
teachers. Travelling preachers were responsible for taking the message to non-
Christians or for strengthening the faith of other Christians. It was imperative
that the task be accomplished with full commitment, all the more since an
ambitious preacher would not have stood persecution.
John 13:16 and 13:20 are insertions into a pre-existing text. 40 First, the
introduction, avmh.n avmh.n le,gw u`mi/n, marks verse 16 out. Second, verse 16b,
dealing with the relationship between apostle and sender, brings in a new topic.
The same goes for verse 20, which is verbally linked to verse 16b. Third, verse
16 breaks the flow of the argument between 15 and 17, which otherwise would
run smoothly. Moreover, verses 18–19 break the flow between 16 and 20. The
conclusion is that verses 16 and 20 were added at the same time at a later
stage. 41 This happened not before they underwent some re-elaboration. Verse
16 is made of two parts. Verse 16a deals with status, verse 16b is about
missionary work and is based on a different background, that of the Botenrecht,
whereby the envoy is credited as a representative of the sender. 42 Verse 16b
seems to be an addition intended to form a bridge between verse 16a and verse
20. This work was carried out before the two verses reached John. The author
of the Gospel found verses 16 and 20 together and then split them up.
The insertion of verses 16 and 20 in the Gospel was meant to address issues
that are also in Matthew: persecution, status, and provisions for missionaries.
The addition of verses 16 and 20 draws the attention on titles and status within
39
GILBERT VAN BELLE and DAVID R. M. GODECHARLE, “C. H. Dodd and John 13:16
(and 15:20): St John’s Knowledge of Matthew Revisited”, in Engaging with C. H. Dodd on
the Gospel of John: Sixty Years of Tradition and Interpretation (ed. TOM THATCHER and
CATRIN H. WILLIAMS; Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2013), 86–106. The point
of contact I have cited comes from p. 98.
40
CHRISTOPH NIEMAND, Die Fusswaschungserzählung des Johannesevangeliums:
Untersuchungen zu ihrer Entstehung und Überlieferung im Urchristentum (SA 114; Rome:
Pontificio Ateneo S. Anselmo, 1993), 136–39.
41
See also BROWN, Gospel, 572.
42
JAN-A. BÜHNER, Der Gesandte und sein Weg im 4. Evangelium: Die kultur- und
religionsgeschichtlichen Grundlagen der johanneischen Sendungschristologie sowie ihre
traditionsgeschichtliche Entwicklung (WUNT II/2; Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1977), 191–
267.
3. Matthew 73
the community. Jesus is teacher and lord, whereas his disciples cannot be more
than servants, nor his apostles more than their sender. The creation of verse
16b and the addition of verse 20 explain why this new focus was necessary.
Apostles, whom Christians are recommended to welcome, should not behave
differently from their sender. If we consider the word “apostle” as a reference
to missionaries, we see that the whole editorial work concerns the question of
travelling Christians and their acceptance on the part of the community. 43
These missionaries did not behave like their master, who washed his disciples’
feet (John 13:1–17), but they aimed at a better treatment. A development of
this theme is found in John 15:20. Those who have been sent by Jesus risk
facing persecution, since servants are not greater than their masters.
Missionaries should be ready for the worse. An attitude of this kind could not
be expected of missionaries who sought honour through their work. The
redactor who combined together verses 16 and 20, and then the evangelist who
inserted them in chapter 13, wrote at times when the work of missionaries
required new regulations. The problems to be faced were similar to those which
Matthew had to tackle, when he radicalised the provisions for missionaries that
he had found in Mark and Q.
However, the question of missionaries is only one aspect of John 13:1–20.
The episode of the footwashing addresses the theme of who is the greatest in
the community. The answer given by this pericope at its final stage of redaction
is that the normal relationships of power in society should be reverted. Jesus’
preparatory actions for the footwashing and the footwashing itself were typical
of a slave. 44 Since disciples imitate their master, the message which Jesus
wants to get across is that disciples become like their teachers by turning
themselves into the servants of all. 45
3.2.3 Interpretation
Through his editorial work Matthew voices the notion that Jesus’ disciples
cannot be better than their master. As a consequence, they cannot expect a
better fate than his, but they must imitate him in all aspects of his life. 46
43
The question of the hospitality due to missionaries is also in 3 John. See RAYMOND E.
BROWN, The Epistles of John (AB 30; New York: Doubleday, 1982), in particular 740–42.
44
JOHN C. THOMAS, Footwashing in John 13 and the Johannine Community (JSNTSup
61; Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1991), 50–55.
45
ADRIANA DESTRO and MAURO PESCE, Come nasce una religione: Antropologia ed
esegesi del Vangelo di Giovanni (Percorsi 8; Roma: Laterza, 2000), 57–59.
46
Matthew 10:24–25 was employed by Jewish-Christians to defend their loyalty to the
Torah in imitation of Jesus against criticism from Gentile-Christians: see EDWIN K.
BROADHEAD, “A Servant like the Master: A Jewish Christian Hermeneutic for the Practice
of the Torah”, in Jesus and the Scriptures: Problems, Passages and Patterns (ed. TOBIAS
HÄGERLAND; London: Bloomsbury T&T Clark, 2016), 151–60, 153–54.
We have already seen that Matt 10:25cd turns verses 24–25 into an
invitation to accept persecution. Since Matthean missionaries needed to be
reminded of the faith of their master, we assume that their attitude towards
mission and persecution was not what should have been. There are two sections
of chapter 10, which provide interesting information about this issue and that
deserve particular attention. They concern the relationship between
missionaries and the recipients of their message.
3.3 Matthew 10:8b-10

Matthew 10:5–15, a text which draws on Mark 6:8–11 and Q (Luke 10:4–12), 47
concerns the world of travelling Christian preachers. The task of these
preachers consisted in healing, raising the dead, cleansing lepers and casting
out demons (Matt 10:8). Teaching is not included yet at this stage of the Gospel
narrative, but it will be at the end, when, after Jesus’ resurrection, the disciples
will take on the role of their master (Matt 28:20). Therefore, teaching was
surely one of the activities carried out by the missionaries connected to
Matthew’s community.
The verses that are of special interest for our study concern the instructions
about the missionary’s equipment and means of living. Verse 8a states
unequivocally that missionaries should accept no earthly reward, but confine
themselves to what is strictly necessary, food and shelter (Matt 10:10–13). In
verse 9 Matthew has replaced “to take up” (ai;rw in Mark 6:8 and Luke 9:3)
with “to procure for oneself ” (kta,omai). 48 Whereas the former word refers to
the provisions to take for the journey, the latter refers to what the missionary
may get from the journey. Matthew argues against those missionaries who
profited from their preaching. This was such a serious problem that Matthew’s
instructions are more detailed and radical than those of Mark and Luke. The
term referring to money (calko,j) passes from the last (last but one in Luke) to
the first position and is associated with gold and silver. Contrary to Mark, the
Matthean missionary is forbidden to carry a staff, and contrary to Mark and
Luke, sandals too are banned. 49 The radicalisation continues in verse 10, where
Matthew substitutes misqo,j (Luke 10:7; cf. 1 Tim 5:18) with trofh,, thus
making it clear that the missionary must be content with what is strictly
necessary for living. Matthew’s rigid attitude presupposes a very serious state
of affairs. Not a few missionaries, judging from Matthew’s concern, were on
the road chiefly in order to make money. The same type of preoccupation is
expressed elsewhere. In Matt 6:19–21.24–34, desire for riches and for the
necessary means of life are considered inappropriate for Jesus’ followers. In
47
LUZ, Evangelium, 2:88–89.
48
LSJ.
49
On Matthew’s redactional changes see GUNDRY, Matthew, 186–88.
3. Matthew 75
Matt 7:15–20 we read of false prophets, who are only interested in acquiring
possessions through their mission (Matt 7:15: lu,koi a[rpagej).
The question of riches and mission was of great consequence in early
Christianity. There are many texts dealing with the provisions for the
missionary and showing concern that the missionary might be selfish: Acts
20:33–35; 1 Cor 9:14–18; 2 Cor 11:7–21; 12:13–18; 1 Thess 2:9; 1 Tim 5:18–
19; Did. 11–13; Herm. Mand. 11.12. 50 These Christian missionaries joined the
ranks of the many wanderers, philosophers, fortune tellers, etc., who begged
for money in the ancient world. 51 In the community of Matthew this was
forbidden because it discredited the message that was proclaimed. Absolute
poverty provided the missionary with the necessary credentials. A missionary
who was worried about money, food and clothes, showed lack of trust in God
(Matt 6:25–34) and therefore was not to be listened to. 52 Absolute poverty
vouchsafed that the missionary was not a liar (Matt 7:15).
Half-hearted and ravenous missionaries had little chance of standing
persecution. The former will try to avoid preaching those aspects of the
message that may draw hostility. The latter will actually change the message
in order to make it most acceptable and materially rewarding. This is why
Matthew radicalised the requirements for the missionary: he wanted to
eliminate any possibility that these aberrations might take place. This may also
be why he re-interpreted the logion about teacher and disciples. In the ancient
world discipleship culminated in the achievement of the role of teacher, which
could entail high social status. However, Jesus had been killed and, according
to Matthew, the perfect disciple must be ready to face the same fate. By altering
his source in Matt 10:9–10 and adding Matt 10:25cd, the evangelist makes the
reader understand that those who wanted to improve their condition should go
elsewhere.
3.4 Matthew 10:40–42

The last three verses of Matthew 10 are addressed to those who are supposed
to put up itinerant disciples. Verse 40 is shaped after a saying in Q (par Luke
10:16) and Mark 9:37; verse 41 does not have close parallels and may come
from a special source; verse 42 is based on Mark. 53 The first verse contains a
50
In Peregrinus, Lucian of Samosata depicts the character of Peregrinus Proteus who
becomes Christian and makes money by visiting Christian communities (see NEYMEYR,
Lehrer, 144–45).
51
See the list of ancient sources in LUZ, Evangelium, vol. 2, 97 n. 58 and 59.
52
MARTINO CONTI, “Fondamenti biblici della povertà nel ministero apostolico,”
Antonianum 46 (1971): 393–426, 395–405 and 425.
53
See LUZ, Evangelium, 2:149–50. Luz believes that verse 42 may come from an
independent tradition.
formula based on the Jewish Botenrecht. Thus, the missionary is fully equated
with Jesus. The envoys in question are prophets and righteous people. The
identification of the latter is rather difficult, but it has been proposed that they
are teachers. 54 If this is so, verses 40–41 adumbrate the triad. In fact, besides
prophets and teachers, we have a hint of the apostles in the verb avpostei,lanta.
The reasons for reading “teacher” behind “righteous” are as follows. 55
Prophets and righteous people are mentioned together three times in Matthew
(Matt 10:41; 13:17; 23:29) and on another occasion the term “prophets” is in
the vicinity of “righteous” (Matt 23:34–35). The only other time prophets are
mentioned in association with another group is in Matt 23:34: ivdou. evgw.
avposte,llw pro.j u`ma/j profh,taj kai. sofou.j kai. grammatei/j. Once again there
may be an implicit reference to apostles (avposte,llw), and a more clear
reference to teachers. Christian scribes had already been mentioned in Matt
13:52, 56 and the wise men may be a Greek translation of ‫חכמים‬, meaning
“erudite.” Since the title “teacher” was forbidden in Matthew’s community
(Matt 23:8), we may assume that the evangelist recurred to alternative terms,
such as “wise man” and “scribes.” If we add that Matt 10 and Matt 23 share
important features such as an interest in missionaries and the theme of
persecution, it would be plausible to identify the envoys of Matt 23:34 with the
people mentioned in Matt 10:40–41. Matthew 23:35 adds further evidence. The
“righteous blood” of “Abel the righteous” and of those who were persecuted
after him is associated with the persecution of those sent by Jesus, namely,
prophets, wise men and scribes. Therefore, “righteous” is an alternative way of
indicating these three groups. 57 Two other passages where the righteous is
mentioned (Matt 13:17 and 23:29) do not yield direct evidence for the
identification of this group with the Matthean teachers, but they may indicate
that the righteous was also a person who taught. In the first passage the word
refers to Old Testament people who wanted to experience what the disciples
experienced: therefore, it may be question of those who explained the will of
God and anticipated the coming of Jesus. In the second passage, “righteous” is
said of Old Testament martyrs, who, it may be assumed, died because of their
testimony to God. In both cases, it is likely that at least some righteous people
were teachers. Further evidence comes from Matt 13:43, where “righteous”
alludes to ‫ המשכילים‬in Dan 12:3 (LXX: oi` sunetoi,), meaning “wise” or “people
of understanding.” External support is given by the occurrence of the righteous
DAVID HILL, “DIKAIOI as a Quasi-Technical Term,” NTS 11 (1964–1965): 296–302.

54
Evidence gathered in HILL, “DIKAIOI,” and GUNDRY, Matthew, 202. See also
55
ALEXANDER SAND, “Propheten, Weise und Schriftkundige in der Gemeinde des

Matthäusevangeliums,” in Kirche im Werden: Studien zum Thema Amt und Gemeinde im
Neuen Testament. In Zusammenarbeit mit dem Collegium Biblicum München (ed. Josef
Hainz; München: Ferdinand Schöningh, 1976), 167–84, 176–77.
56
This identification is challenged by SCHAMS, Jewish Scribes, 194–95.
57
Cf. SAND, “Propheten,” 178–79.
3. Matthew 77
in Enoch (e.g. 1,1; 38,2.3.4; 39,6.7, etc.) and Qumran (e.g. 1QS 3.20,22; 9.14;
CD 4.2–3), where the term is employed to designate people who make a
separate group. Moreover, it must be recalled that the title of the founder of
Qumran was “The Teacher of Righteousness.” Particularly interesting is the
case of Did. 11.1–2, a text related to but not dependent on Matt 10:40. This
passage says that the person who brings the righteousness of the Lord should
be welcomed as the Lord.
3.5 Matthew 23:8–12

Matthew 23 belongs to the fifth discourse of Jesus in the Gospel (Matthew 23–
25). 58 It is a long polemic speech addressed to scribes and Pharisees and
eventually to all the Jews (vv. 32–39). 59 This tirade presents several problems
of interpretation, 60 many of which concern the verses that deal more
specifically with the role of teacher.
3.5.1 Structure and Motives

Matthew crafted the whole chapter by harmonising traditional material with his
own additions. This composite nature is evident at a glance if we consider
addressees and topics to be found within the same frame of temporal and spatial
unity. 61 Verses 1–7 are intended for the crowds and the disciples and concern
scribes and Pharisees. The second part, verses 8–12, deals with the issue of
titles and leadership and is probably a community rule. 62 The third is a list of
seven woes directed against scribes and Pharisees (verses 13–33). The fourth
part, verses 34–36, is a prophetic announcement of evil apparently meant for
58
E.g. GUNDRY, Matthew, 10–11, 453.
59
NEWPORT, Sources, 118–19.
60
For an overview of the issues raised by the whole chapter see DAVID L. TURNER,
Israel’s Last Prophet: Jesus and the Jewish Leaders in Matthew 23 (Minneapolis: Fortress
Press, 2015).
61
I follow the division of the text proposed by LUZ, Evangelium, vol. 3, 291, but I split
the last section (Matt 23:34–39) in two parts, since the addressees are formally different:
“you” (pl.) and “Jerusalem”. A more detailed division is in ERNST HAENCHEN, “Matthäus
23,” ZTK (1951): 38–63. Structures and sources of this chapter are discussed in PATRICK J.
HARTIN, “The Woes against the Pharisees (Matthew 23,1–39): The Reception and
Development of Q 11,39–52 within the Matthean Community,” in From Quest to Q:
Festschrift James M. Robinson (ed. JON MA. ASGEIRSSON et al.; BETL 146; Leuven: Leuven
62
RUDOLF BULTMANN, Die Geschichte der synoptische Tradition (3rd ed.; Göttingen:
Vandenhoek & Ruprecht, 1957), 154–55. Matthew 23:8–10 is a halakic instruction
according to HANS-JÜRGEN BECKER, Auf der Kathedra des Mose: Rabbinisch-theologisches
Denken und antirabbinische Polemik in Matthäus 23,1–12 [Arbeiten zur neutestamentlichen
Theologie und Zeitgeschichte 4; Berlin: Institut Kirche und Judentum, 1990], 201–204).
the contemporary generation. The fifth and last section, verses 37–39, is a
lament over Jerusalem.
The evangelist created this composition in order to tackle problems of his
own community. 63 This becomes clear when we compare chapter 23 with the
preceding one. In chapter 22 Pharisees (Matt 22:15.34–35) and Sadducees
(Matt 22:23) confront Jesus as a dida,skaloj (Matt 22:16.24.36). Jesus passes
the test and turns the tables over his opponents in chapter 23. However, in this
chapter the Sadducees disappear. His antagonists are Pharisees and scribes, the
latter being absent from chapter 22. This inconsistency may be explained by
supposing that chapter 23 addresses contemporary problems. On the one hand,
after the destruction of the Temple, the Sadducees lost the basis of their power.
They were no longer a threat to Jesus’ followers. On the other, scribes and
conservatives like the Pharisees of the past had seen their influence on Jewish
society increase and might have been a source of troubles for Matthean
Christians.
3.5.2 Analysis of Matthew 23

In chapter 23 Matthew lavishly expands the episode of Jesus warning the
crowds against the scribes in Mark 12:37b-40. The first subunit, Matt 23:1–7,
is controlled by one theme, the prestige of scribes and Pharisees, who
represented the teachers of the community. Whether this was the Jewish
community or the Christian one or both is a matter of later discussion. They sit
on Moses chair (evpi. th/j Mwu?se,wj kaqe,draj), teach, lay heavy burdens on
people’s shoulders, draw attention to themselves in several ways, such as
taking the place of honour (th..n prwtoklisi,an) in banquets and the first seats
(ta.j prwtokaqedri,aj) in synagogues. This passage contains both redactional
and traditional material. The comparison with Mark suggests that the
introduction is from Matthew. By making it clear that not only the crowds, but
also the disciples are the recipients of Jesus’ words, Matthew informs his
community that the text is addressed to them. The second verse introduces the
target of Jesus’ criticism, scribes and Pharisees. Since the Pharisees were not
in Mark, their insertion suggests that for Matthew they represented still a
problem. Pharisees and scribes are said to sit on the chair of Moses. The
identification of this chair in archaeological and literary sources is a complex
issue, which has been solved in various ways. It may be question of an actual
piece of synagogue furniture 64 or of an allusion to the Yavneh school, which
The common view is that it was Matthew who composed the chapter (e.g. LUZ,
63
Evangelium, vol. 3, 292–93; GUNDRY, Matthew, 453–75; HAENCHEN, “Matthäus,” 38),

while DAVID E. GARLAND (The Intention of Matthew 23 [NovTSup 52; Leiden: Brill, 1979])
suggests that the evangelist used a document, which he modified only to a limited degree.
64
This interpretation is favoured for instance by LUZ, Evangelium, vol. 3, 299.
3. Matthew 79
reshaped the study of the Torah. 65 According to a third interpretation, it may

be a reference to the fact that scribes and Pharisees held the scrolls of the Torah
and thus were the vehicle of God’s word. 66 It has also been suggested that it is
a metaphor indicating that scribes and Pharisees held a teaching role. 67 This is
probably the right solution in view of the following verse, where Jesus states
that the teaching of scribes and Pharisees must be paid heed to, but not their
deeds. In its turn, this text too, though apparently straightforward, can be
interpreted in different ways. (1) The passage should be taken literally: they
are authoritative guides, though hypocritical. (2) It may be a concession so as
to say: even if you listen to them, do not follow them. (3) It may be ironical
and intended to stress the denunciation that follows. (4) It may be addressed to
Christian scribes and Pharisees, whose teaching must be accepted. Solutions
(1) and (2) are the best candidates. 68 Verses 4–7 show that the problem at stake
is deeds. In verses 8–12 the evangelist criticises the use of titles, but not the
activity of teachers. The vows in verses 13–33 do not aim at the teaching of
scribes and Pharisees, which in one instance is explicitly recognised as valid
(Matt 23:23), but at their hypocrisy. In sum, Matthew depicts scribes and
Pharisees as a batch of hypocrites whose deeds do not match their words. This
is a Greco-Roman commonplace to be found also in other Christian writings (1
Cor 4:20; Rom 15:18; cf. Jas 1:22; 1 Clem. 30.3; 38.2). 69 Probably, the best
expression of it is Rom 2:17–24. Paul’s target, a symbolic Jew whose identity
is defined by knowledge of the Law and relationship with God, is described as
a teacher of children (dida,skalon nhpi,wn) and as someone who teaches others
but not himself (o` ou=n dida,skwn e;teron seauto.n ouv dida,skeij), since he
transgresses the very commandments he teaches. These verses are close to Matt
23:2–7, according to which Pharisees and scribes, who teach observance of the
law, infringe it. It is remarkable that the only occurrence in Paul of a word
comparable to dida,skaloj is proverbial and negative sense. Likewise, when
Matthew employs “teacher” for others than Jesus, he cites a proverb (Matt
10:24) or bans the term (Matt 23:8). It is also interesting to note that according
65
BENEDICT VIVIANO, “Social World and Community Leadership: The Case of Matthew
23.1–12, 34,” JSNT 39 (1990): 3–21, 10–11.
66
MARK A. POWELL, “Do and Keep What Moses Says (Matthew 23:2–7),” JBL 114
(1995): 419–35. Cf. the list of possible interpretations in DAVIES, Commentary, vol. 3, 268.
67
This is particularly stressed by BECKER, Kathedra.
68
See NEWPORT, Sources, 119–24; PIERRE BONNARD, L’évangile selon Saint Matthieu
(3rd ed.; CNT 1; Geneva: Labor et Fides, 1992), 333–35; HAENCHEN, “Matthäus,” 40.
69
See WILLIAM R. SCHOEDEL, Ignatius of Antioch: A Commentary on the Letters of
Ignatius of Antioch (Hermeneia; Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1985), 76–77.
to Ignatius Jesus is the only teacher exactly because he implements what he

teaches (Eph. 14.2–15.1).
Leaving aside for the moment Matt 23:8–12, we move to the series of woes.
These are taken from Q (Luke 11:39–52) and so heavily reworked that it is not
always easy to draw the line between Matthean redaction and his source. The
woes level on scribes and Pharisees a sharp attack, which can be variously
interpreted. 70 If the parting of the ways has already taken place, these verses
may be a warning not to repeat the adversaries’ mistakes. In this case, the woes
may be hurled at the synagogue “across the street” for its rejection of Jesus’
message. A second possibility is that they may be primarily addressed to
Christian scribes and Pharisees. A third interpretation is based on the
hypothesis that Matthew writes right at the time when Christians have been
rejected by the synagogue, they debate their relationship with the other Jews
and decide the mission to the Gentiles. 71 If this is correct, scribes and Pharisees
are best regarded as leaders of the synagogue (Matt 23:2) and still able to
influence believers in Christ. 72 The very scenes described by Matthew present
people who were honoured in the public space, in the street or in the synagogue,
with no indication of a restricted following.
The last section is a lament over Jerusalem, which once again comes from
Q (Matt 23:34–36 and Luke 11:49–51; Matt 23:37–39 and Luke 13:34–35). In
turn, Q may depend on an unknown wisdom text, whose beginning is preserved
in Luke 11:49, where the sender is wisdom. 73 In its Matthean context these
verses deal with the rejection of Israel or at least of its leaders, who have not
accepted Jesus’ envoys. 74 Matthew gives a precise list: prophets, wise men and
scribes (Matt 23:34). We have seen that the latter two are alternative
designations for the teachers in Matthew’s community. The present tense of
the verb “to send” makes it clear that Jesus is not talking about the biblical past,
but about the present. The missionaries connected to the Matthean community
would have recognised themselves in this list.
The verses we left out, Matt 23:8–12, deserve a different treatment as they
have an important bearing on the history of the Christian teacher. Matthew
23:8–12 is a set of instructions with explanations for the disciples, 75 whereas
this is not the case for what precedes, which is a description of the habits of
70
See for example GARLAND, Intention, 64–90; LUZ, Evangelium, vol. 3, 316–45;
DAVIES, Commentary, vol. 3, 282–310.
71
72
73
SIMON LEGASSE, “Scribes et disciples de Jésus,” RB 68 (1961): 321–45 and 481–506,
323–33.
74
See DAVIES, Commentary, vol. 3, 311–25.
75
By addressing the disciples, Matthew makes it clear that what follows must especially
apply to the community (GUNDRY, Matthew, 457).
3. Matthew 81
scribes and Pharisees, and for what follows, which is a list of woes. Its content
concerns a precise topic, the use of titles and social standing. This unit can be
divided into two subunits. Verses 8, 9 and 10 are each introduced by the same
verb in imperative mood and contain a title of distinction. Verses 11–12 are a
gloss on 8–10. Other divisions are also possible: we may attach verse 11 to
what precedes or consider verses 11–12 an explication of 23:10 and verse 9 an
explication of verse 8. 76 However, in my opinion Matt 23:11–12 should be kept
apart from Matt 23:8–10 because of the consistent use of the future tense, of
the indefinite subject, and because of the common theme of greatness vs.
humility.
3.5.3 Matthew 23:8–10

Verses 8–10 read as follows: 77
8a u`mei/j de. mh. klhqh/te ràbbi,\
8b ei-j ga,r evstin u`mw/n o` dida,skaloj(
8c pa,ntej de. u`mei/j avdelfoi, evsteÅ
9a kai. pate,ra mh. kale,shte u`mw/n evpi. th/j gh/j(
9b ei-j ga,r evstin u`mw/n o` path.r o` ouvra,niojÅ
10a mhde. klhqh/te kaqhghtai,(
10b o[ti kaqhghth.j u`mw/n evstin ei-j o` Cristo,jÅ
The difficulties posed by the interpretation of this passage have produced a rich
textual history, 78 during which copists made additions, deletions and changes
of word order. A few manuscripts, such as Codex Koridethi, replaced the
injunction mh. klhqh/te with mhde,na mh. kale,shte, probably in order to harmonise
it with 9a. Codex Bezae, Codex Regius, the first hand and the second corrector
of Codex Sinaiticus, and other witnesses feature kaqhghth,j instead of
dida,skaloj. Once again, it seems to be a case of harmonisation, this time
between verse 8a and verse 10a. The word order of u`mw/n o` path,r in 9b is
reversed by Codex Bezae, Codex Regius, Codex Freer and others, probably
under the influence of Matt 5:45; 6:1.8.9.14; etc. Finally, verse 10b underwent
many changes, which reshaped it in the light of 8b. The best example is offered
by Codex Freer, which reads: ei-j ga,r evstin u`mw/n o` kaqhghth,j.
The tendency to harmonisation shows that the copists believed that Matt
23:8–10 followed originally a regular pattern, which was later broken. Several
clues seem to suggest that they were right. 79 The same verb in negative form
and imperative mood introduces each time three verses dealing with three
76
On the possible subdivisions of Matt 23:8–12 see RIK HOET, “Omnes autem vos fratres
estis”: Étude du concept ecclésiologique des “frères” selon Mt 23,8–12 (Analecta
Gregoriana 232; Rome: Università Gregoriana Editrice, 1982), 95–98, 103–106).
77
Thorough analysis in ZIMMERMANN, Lehrer, 158–89.
78
Brief overview in HOET, “Omnes,” 8–10.
79
VIVIANO, “Social World,” 8.
different titles: “rabbi/teacher,” “father” and “instructor.” Each verse is then

followed by a theological explanation as to why the title cannot be used. This
basic pattern is broken in several points. (1) Verse 8a begins with an emphatic
“you.” (2) “Rabbi” in verse 8a is replaced with “teacher” in 8b. (3) Verse 8c
has no parallel in verses 9 and 10. (4) Verse 9a has replaced the middle-passive
form used in 8a and 10a with the active one. (5) Moreover, the title has been
placed before the verb. (6) After the verb, “of you on earth” is added. (7) In
verse 9b we find the addition “the heavenly one.” (8) Verse 10b breaks the
pattern with an o[ti clause in place of a paratactic one. (9) Furthermore, the
word order is different and “one” is placed at the end in chiastic position with
8a. (10) Verse 10b adds “Christ.”
3.5.3.1 Matthew 23:8

The traces of a regular pattern point to a complex redactional history. The most
striking feature of Matt 23:8 is the use of an Aramaic word, “rabbi,” which is
rendered in the following clause as “teacher.” This is a strong clue that verse
8a as well as its companion, verse 8b, originally circulated in Aramaic. It is
unlikely that 8b was added later since verse 8a would lose much of its impact
without the theological point made by 8b. If this is so, it is intriguing to see
that in verse 8b “rabbi” has been translated. According to Zimmermann, before
the year 70 the possessive suffix in “rabbi” was still functioning and the word
was simply an honorary title. Hence, in verse 8b it was not possible to write
“your rabbi,” since this would be grammatically wrong (“your my great
one”). 80 According to Byrskog, “rabbi” is used by Matthew in Matt 23:7 and
23:8 as a title. 81
Further light comes from the context and from a survey of Matthew’s
translation habits. When Matthew finds “rabbi”/“rabbouni” in Mark, he renders
it twice as ku,rie (Mark 9:5 and Matt 17:4; Mark 10:51 and Matt 20:33), a word,
which is probably due to Matthean heightened christology, but which also
corresponds to the meaning of “rabbi” in the Markan context. This suggests
that the translation in Matt 23:8b is not by Matthew. However, the study of the
context says otherwise. Chapter 23 forms a diptych with chapter 22. In the first
picture Matthew portrays the true and only teacher, Jesus, who is confronted
with three disputes. In each case he is addressed as dida,skaloj (Matt
22:16.24.36). The first question regards the tribute to Caesar and therefore the
relationship between religion and politics. Jesus does not mingle them, as his
teaching is not concerned with the Roman occupation (Matt 22:16–22). The
second question is theological, as the Sadducees intend to prove that there is
no life after death. Jesus’ theology is not dependent on casuistic arguments as
80
81
BYRSKOG, Jesus, 285–87.
3. Matthew 83
the Sadducees’ is (Matt 22:23–33). The last question is legalistic: once again,
Jesus’ teaching regarding the law is sound and essential (Matt 22:34–40). The
importance of the theme of teaching in chapter 22 is further emphasised by the
use of terms from the root of dida,skw (verse 16, twice; verses 24, 33, 36). Such
a concentration of dida,skw-related words is unique in Matthew’s Gospel. In
chapter 23 Jesus takes the lead. In the light of the stress on teaching in the
previous chapter, the presence of the phrase u`mw/n o` dida,skaloj is most
understandable: Matthew intends to make the fundamental point that Jesus is
the only teacher. 82 This suggests that it was Matthew who translated the word
“rabbi” with “teacher.” Besides the need to strike this precise point, Matthew
had another ground not to leave “rabbi” without translation. For Matthew
“rabbi” had a derogatory sense: the only two other times it occurs, it is the word
Judas uses to address Jesus (Matt 26:25–49). 83
Verse 23:8c seems an addition, since Matthew 23:8ab is a self-standing
logion and since avdelfoi, is not the word we would expect. Rather, “disciples”
is the term that would have fitted the context. It looks like Matt 23:8c was
added to the logion before verse 8ab ended up in the Gospel and at a time when
“rabbi” did not yet mean “teacher” but “my lord,” or at any rate, at a time when
both words indicated social standing more than a precise role. 84 This would
confirm the hypothesis that the interpretation of “rabbi” as “teacher” was
brought out only later by Matthew. Zimmermann observes that community
brotherhood is not a topic that interested Matthew. Whenever he refers to it, he
is likely to depend on Mark (cf. Matt 12:48.49.50 and Mark 3:33.34.35) and Q
(five cases for sure: Matt 7:3.4.5 par Luke 6:41.42ab; Matt 18:15 par Luke
17:3; Matt 18:21 par Luke 17.4; one other instance is very likely: Matt 5:47
par Luke 6:33). The remaining cases probably derive from original words of
Jesus (Matt 5:22.23–24). 85
3.5.3.2 Matthew 23:9

The title “father” was used to address old people or/and people with authority
and deserving respect (cf. Acts 7:2; 22:1). 86 In 4 Maccabees, which probably
dates from before 70 CE, Eleazar is called “father” on several occasions (4
Macc 7:1.5.9). Elisha calls Elijah “my father” (2 Kgs 2:12) and he himself is
82
Cf. GARLAND, Intention, 57–61.
83
BYRSKOG, Jesus, 285–86.
84
HAENCHEN, “Matthäus,” 44, proposes that “disciples” could not be used here because
it is employed by Matthew only for the disciples of the pre-Easter Jesus.
85
86
An overview of the possible meanings of “father” is in ZIMMERMANN, Lehrer, 166–
68. See also HOET, “Omnes,” 129–30.
called “father” (2 Kgs 6:21; 13:14; cf. 8:9). 87 It must also be noted that fathers
had the primary responsibility for the religious education of their sons and that,
therefore, they were their first, and sometimes only, teachers. Teachers in the
Greco-Roman world were called “fathers.” Second century church writers
made it clear that teacher and disciple can also be called “father” and “son”
(Irenaeus, Haer. 4.41.12). 88
We have seen that verse 9a breaks the pattern in four ways: (1) the title
comes before the verb; (2) kale,shte replaces klhqh/te; (3) u`mw/n and (4) evpi. th/j
gh/j are added. The meaning of u`mw/n is the key to the interpretation of verse 9
and unfortunately is dubious. It can be a partitive: “do not call (anybody)
‘father’ among you.” It can be an Aramaism for u`ma/j: “Do not call yourself
‘father.’” It can be a possessive adjective: “Do not call (anyone) ‘your father.’”
The second solution is unlikely since the normal practice is to replace u`ma/j
with a dative, not a genitive. 89 The first and third solutions are left without an
explicit object: who is to be called father? This difficulty may have been caused
by the actual dropping of the object in the course of transmission. An
alternative explanation is that this clumsy text is the result of unsatisfactory
redaction. The fact that verse 9 underwent extensive transformation is proved
by the insertion of evpi. th/j gh/j, which is matched by the following o` ouvra,nioj.
Matthew is probably the author of these additions, 90 which are not merely
intended to embellish verse 9. They play a fundamental role, because the
meaning of the verse is completely changed by them. If the pronoun has
partitive value, we understand: “do not call (anybody) ‘father’ among you on
earth.” This seems to imply that others than the disciples, to which this verse
is addressed, are allowed to do it. If u`mw/n is a possessive adjective, we
understand: “Do not call (anyone) your father on earth.” This clause makes

87
On fathers as teachers of their sons and on teachers being called “fathers” see the
88
evidence gathered by RIESNER, Jesus, 102–110. JOACHIM JEREMIAS believed that it does
not apply to teachers (Abba: Studien zur neutestamentlichen Theologie und Zeitgeschichte
[Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1966], 44–45).
89
ZIMMERMANN, Lehrer, 165. The reading u`mi/n was given in the second edition of The
Greek New Testament (ed. KURT ALAND et al.; Stuttgart: United Bible Societies, 1968) on
the basis of D, Q and a number of Latin and Syriac versions. The following editions adopted
the reading u`mw/n. HOET (“Omnes,” 9) writes that in this position u`mw/n cannot be a
possessive adjective and refers to FRIEDRICK BLASS, ALBERT DEBRUNNER and FRIEDRICH
REHKOPF, Grammatik des neutestamentlichen Griechisch (14th ed.; Göttingen:
Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1976), § 284.1. However, if it is stressed, it can follow a noun
(BLASS, Grammatik, § 284.2) and there is also a parallel case in Matt 12:27 (cf. Rom 1:9).
Moreover, it must be recalled that Matt 23:9 has a complex redactional history, during which
some grammatical inconsistencies may well have crept in.
90
LUZ, Evangelium, vol. 3, 298.
3. Matthew 85
perfect sense. 91 If we take away “on earth,” the text does not make sense any
longer because it would mean that the title “father” must be avoided in all
circumstances, even when referred to God. In chapters 5–6 Matthew repeatedly
stressed that God is “your father” (Matt 5:45.48; 6:1.8; cf. 6:9.14.15.26.32; also
7:11). It is not surprising that the same idea is repeated in 23:9a. 92
To sum up, the final stage of this verse was redacted by Matthew, who
wanted to repeat a typical point in Jesus’ teaching: God is your father. He
achieved this by transforming a verse that originally had a different form. The
interpretation of “father” is open to discussion, but it is probably question of a
honorific title indicating special standing.
Before undergoing redaction, verse 9a may have followed the same pattern
as 8a and 10a and read mh. klhqh/te path,r. The whole verse 9 meant: “do not
let yourself be called ‘father’ for one is your father.” Matthew then intervened
in order to harmonise this verse with his own theology. He placed “father”
before the verb as to produce a chiasm with 9b and added “your” and “on
earth.”
What is the cause of this operation? Why did Matthew feel the need to
modify his source? While the topic of verse 9 concerns the relationship
between community members and God, the new text intends to instruct the
community that the appointment of leaders is not permitted. 93
3.5.3.3 Matthew 23:10

Matthew 23:10 is a secondary addition. 94 The breaking of the pattern in 10b
and the thematic dependence from 8a are clues that Matt 23:10 was shaped
after Matt 23:8–9 and attached to it probably before the evangelist modified
verse 9a. To be noted that the word kaqhghth,j is nowhere else employed in the
Gospel, even though the other titles are mentioned several times (ràbbi,: Matt
23:7; 26:25.49; dida,skaloj: Matt 8:19; 9:11; 10:24–25; 12:38; 17:24; 19:16;
22:16.24.36; 26:18). It is also a hapax in the New Testament and is absent from
the LXX, Aquila, Symmachus, Theodotion and Josephus. However, this term
was widely employed in the Greek world. It meant “leader,” “guide,”
“instructor.” 95 In the first century Oxyrhynchus Papyrus 2190 the word is to be
91
JEREMIAS, Abba, 44–45.
92
Cf. GUNDRY, Matthew, 458.
93
Cf. GUNDRY, Matthew, 458.
94
Cf. MARIE-JOSEPHE LAGRANGE, Évangile selon Saint Matthieu (7th ed.; EB; Paris:
Gabalda, 1948), 441; JACQUES SCHLOSSER, “La genèse de Luc, XXII, 25–27,” RB 89
(1982): 52–70, 56–57.
95
DAVIES, Commentary, vol. 3, 278.
rendered “tutor.” 96 In general, it indicates a teacher who provided not only

instruction, but also leadership. 97 Spicq proposed that it is a translation of ‫מורה‬,
“teacher,” an Old Testament term possessing messianic force (Isa 30:20; Joel
2:23), which at Qumran designated the Teacher of Righteousness. 98 The
problem is that there is no evidence that kaqhghth,j ever translated a Semitic
word. Verse 23:10 may have been added when 23:8 was put into Greek. Its aim
is to rule out the use of Greek titles within the community, 99 in addition to the
ban on the Semitic ones.
3.5.4 Matthew 23:11–12

Matthew 23:8–10 should not be read separately from the second subunit, verses
11–12, which gives its interpretation. Each of these two verses is widely
attested in the New Testament. Verse 11 can be compared to Mark 9:34–35;
10:43–44; Matt 5:19; 18:4; 20:26; Luke 9:48; 22:26. Mark 10:43–44 is
probably the source of the other occurrences, including Mark 9:34–35, which
looks like a secondary alteration. 100 It has been proposed that the parallelism
between Matt 23:11 and Luke 22:26 points to a second source besides Mark,
that is Q, but this is much debated. 101 For verse 12 we have: Luke 14:11; 18:14;
2 Cor 11:7; Phil 4:12; Jas 4:10; 1 Pet 5:6. Since these two verses are never cited
together, we conclude that Matthew was probably responsible for joining
them. 102
Matthew has changed the clause o]j a'n qe,lh| me,gaj gene,sqai evn u`mi/n (Mark
10:43; cf. 9:35) into o` mei,zwn, which might be his own translation of ràbbi,,
“my great one.” What follows insists on the inverse proportion between u`yo,w
and tapeino,w. Both verses transmit the same message: they reverse the value
attached to normal social relationships, first through a specific statement,
second through a generic one. This pair explains how the three preceding verses
should be interpreted and thus gives a consistent meaning to the whole pericope
See B. W. WINTER, “The Messiah as the Tutor: The Meaning of kaqhghth,j in Matthew
96
23:10,” TynBul 42 (1991): 152–57.

97
NEWPORT, Sources, 96–98; BYRSKOG, Jesus, 287–90.
98
VIVIANO, “Social World,” 13. CESLAU SPICQ proposed that the logion was a reaction
against the Teacher of Righteousness (“Une allusion au Docteur de justice dans Matthieu,
XXIII, 10?,” RB 66 [1959]: 387–96, 390–96).
99
Cf. HUBERT FRANKEMÖLLE, Matthäus Kommentar (2 vols.; Düsseldorf: Patmos,
1994–1997), vol 1, 369–70.
100
The whole question is the object of close examination in HOFFMANN, Jesus, 188–94.
101
Cf. e.g. JACQUES SCHLOSSER, “Genèse.”
102
Cf. NIEMAND, Fusswaschungserzählung, 95–96.
3. Matthew 87
(Matt 23:9–12): titles should be avoided and the members of the community
should behave like siblings and help each other. 103
Matthew’s understanding of the logion in verse 11 is the same as in Mark
10:43–44, but he and Luke place it in a different context. Both evangelists
apply the logion to community functions. In Luke 22:26–27 it is question of o`
new,teroj, o` hgou,menoj and o` diakonw/n. Thus, Luke is much more precise than
Mark as he refers to actual people. 104 The same goes for Matthew, whose
concern about titles suggests that he was dissatisfied with community leaders.
The case of teachers was particularly worrying to him, since their title is the
first one to be banned. The reasons are two. In the first place, scribes and
Pharisees provided a good example of how teaching was exploited to further
one’s own interests, rather than to build up the community. In the second place,
it is arguable that the presence of teachers implied that of disciples. Now, the
relationship teacher-disciple is one of power. The Gospel of Matthew cannot
accept it. 105
3.5.5 History of the Redaction of Matthew 23:8–12

It is now possible to reconstruct the stages, which the two logia went through
before assuming the form of Matt 23:8–12. (1). There was an Aramaic logion
saying: “do not let yourself be called ‘rabbi’ for one is your rabbi. Another
Aramaic logion, maybe independent of the first one, said: “Do not let yourself
be called ‘father,’ for one is your father.” In the second case, the title is
obviously to be referred to God. The original reference of the first logion is
less clear, but it may have been God. We have seen that in the Aramaic texts
of the Dead Sea Scrolls words from the root “rb” are referred to God. (2) These
two logia were translated into Greek. (3) A third logion was created and
attached to the pair. It came from a strictly Greek-speaking environment; by
employing a rather generic term meaning “instructor,” “master,” it added the
prohibition of using Greek titles of leadership. The absence of kaqhghth,j from
New Testament literature rules out the hypothesis that this word referred to a
precise title or position in the community. (4) The evangelist added a short
bridge: “in fact you are all brothers.” Verse 8c makes it clear that Matthew is
concerned about community structure and the risk that this may become
hierarchical. Furthermore, Matt 23:8c anticipates the following “father” by
means of a metaphor from family vocabulary. (5) The second logion was
altered in such a way as to conform to the contents of chapters 5–6. (6) Matthew
103
104
SCHLOSSER, “Gènese,” 57
105
Cf. JOHN DOMINIC CROSSAN, The Birth of Christianity: Discovering What Happened
in the Years Immediately after the Execution of Jesus (San Francisco: HarperSanFrancisco,
1998), 336–37.
also added a comment to the three logia by means of verses 11–12, which
provide the reason why titles should be avoided.
It is not easy to detect the historical setting of each stage. The Aramaic form
of the two logia (Matt 23:8–9) and the likely absence of christological
interpretations are clues to an early date, though we cannot say whether it was
before or after Easter. An objection to the first solution may be that lower and
middle class people, as Jesus’ disciples mostly were, could not use such a title
for themselves. 106 However, Jesus, a peasant, was addressed as “rabbi” (Mark
9:5; 10:51). 107 At some point the logia were translated into Greek. Either the
transmission of the logia to a Greek-speaking community or the increase of
Greek-speakers in the original community made a Greek translation necessary.
Moreover, a new logion was created, which shows concern about leadership.
It was at around this time that the cluster found its way into Matthew’s Gospel.
In sum, all three prohibitions were pre-Matthean and forbade the use of
titles, with special emphasis placed on the term “teacher.” It must be said that
Matthew was not worried about teaching. He even recommended to follow the
teaching of scribes and Pharisees (Matt 23:3). Instead, he was deeply
concerned about equality, which he saw threatened by changes in the
community structure. 108 The reason for composing chapter 23 has to do with
leadership. Through the diptych with chapter 22, Matthew establishes that there
is only one teacher and only one instructor: this is Jesus. This theological
statement is not intended to eliminate teaching from the post-Easter community
(cf. Matt 5:19–20; 28:20), but only to attack those who, through teaching,
aimed at ruling over their fellow believers. Who are these people targeted by
Matthew? 109 The virulence of the polemic against scribes and Pharisees in
106
So LUZ, Evangelium, vol. 3, 298 n. 23.
107
LUZ thinks that the logion was created after Easter (Evangelium, vol. 3, 298); RIESNER
is of the opposite opinion (Lehrer, 264).
108
This is the main argument of KONRAD HUBER, “Zu Amt und Ämtern im
Matthäusevangelium,” in Neutestamentliche Ämtermodelle im Kontext (ed. THOMAS
SCHMELLER, MARTIN EBNER, RUDOLPH HOPPE; QD 239; Freiburg: Herder, 2010), 34–71.
109
According to WOLFGANG TRILLING (“Amt und Amtsverständnis bei Matthäus,” in
KERTELGE, ed., Amt, 524–42, 525–27; originally published in Mélanges Bibliques en
hommage au R.P. Béda Rigaux [ed. ALBERT DESCAMPS and ANDRÉ DE HALLEUX;
Gembloux: J. Duculot 1970], 29–44), it is question of Christian scribes. GARLAND
(Intention, 61–63, 117–20, 214–15) thinks that chapter 23 is also a warning to Christian
leaders. LÉGASSE, “Scribes,” believes that there were Christian scribes in the Matthean
community, an opinion which is shared by HAENCHEN, “Matthäus,” 43. For HUBERT
FRANKEMÖLLE (“Amtskritik im Matthäus-Evangelium?,” Biblica 54 [1973]: 247–62, 249–
51; idem, Matthäus, 366–90), chapter 23 is to be read in an ecclesiological perspective.
Likewise, MEIER, “Antioch,” 70–71, writes of internal polemic. GUNDRY, Matthew, 457,
refers Matt 23:8 to the quest for honour in the church. LUZ, Evangelium, vol. 3, 307–308,
believes that the polemic is also addressed to Christian scribes. DAVIES and ALLISON suggest
3. Matthew 89
chapter 23 and the reference to Matthew’s community as a separate entity in

verse 8 (“but you”) suggest a burning situation in which Matthean Christians
were in conflict with Jewish leaders. It is reasonable to suggest that Matthew
was worried about the influence exerted by the slowly emerging role of rabbis.
However, this was not his only concern. Verses 11–12 make it clear that anyone
could fall in the temptation of promoting selfish interests.
3.6 Teaching in Matthew 5:19–20

There is one passage that it is worth menting because of its striking
resemblances to 23:8–12: Matthew 5:19–20. 110 Both texts share a reference to
teaching (dida,xh| in Matt 5:19, dida,skaloj in Matt 23:8); they are about what
Jesus’ followers should or should not be called (klhqh,setai in Matt 5:19;
klhqh,te and kale,shte in Matt 23:8–10); they attribute the same adjective to
the person who implements the commandments (me,gaj in Matt 5:19 and mei,zwn
in Matt 23:11); they employ an inverse proportion (evla,cistoj/me,gaj in Matt
5:19; u`yo,w/tapeino,w in Matt 23:12) and they contrast the disciples with
scribes and Pharisees (Matt 5:20 and 23:2–8). These similarities are all the
more significant in view of the position of these two texts: one is in the first
and the other in the last of Jesus’ discourses. The invitation in Matt 5:19 to
keep and teach even the smallest commandment 111 supports the suggestion that
teaching roles were present in the Matthean community. Even if the subject of
verse 19 is generic, the person who is envisaged is a teacher of the
commandments. 112 The performance of these Christian “teachers” should be
superior to that of scribes and Pharisees so that they may be called “great” in
the kingdom of heaven. This verse is the counterpart of Matt 23:8, according
to which a Christian “teacher” must reject the title “great/rabbi” on earth.
Scribes and Pharisees seek this title on earth (Matt 23:7), but they are
hypocrites because they do not do what they preach (Matt 23:3), whereas
Christians teach and do (Matt 5:19). In Matt 5 the text continues with a
reference to the righteousness of scribes and Pharisees, saying that the
that not only non-Christian scribes, but also Christian scribes and Pharisees may be targeted
(Commentary, vol. 3, 280). Pharisees and scribes not belonging to the community is the
solution proposed by both DANIEL J. HARRINGTON (The Gospel of Matthew [SP 1;
Collegeville, Minn.: The Liturgical Press, 1991], 323) and ANTHONY J. SALDARINI
(“Delegitimation of Leaders in Matthew 23,” CBQ 54 [1992]: 659–80).
110
These two verses belong to a subsection of the Sermon on the Mount, Matt 5:17–20.
The origin of these logia and their interpretation in the context of Matthew is one of the most
complex problems of this Gospel (LUZ, Evangelium, vol. 1, 227–50).
111
The nature of these commandments is debated. They may be the commandments of
the Torah (DAVIES, Commentary, vol. 1, 496–97) or those taught by Jesus. The last
interpretation gets rid of the difficulty of making the Matthean Jesus fully uphold the Mosaic
law without qualification (BYRSKOG, Jesus, 291–94).
112
Cf. DAVIES, Commentary, vol. 1, 497.
righteousness of Christians must be superior if they want to enter the kingdom

of heaven. We have already seen that “righteous” may be an alternative
designation for “teachers.”
In conclusion, Matt 5:17–20 and Matt 23:8–12 are two sides of the same
medal. These two texts are a warning addressed to Matthean Christians. They
are told that they must be different from scribes and Pharisees, that they must
do what they teach, and that titles of earthly honour must be avoided.
3.7 Teachers and Titles

I have interpreted kale,w in Matt 23:8–10 as simply meaning “to call,” but it
could also mean “to be,” that is, “Do not be rabbi.” This translation is justifiable
in the light of the use of kale,w in Matt 5:9: auvtoi. uiòi. qeou/ klhqh,sontai. Does
this mean that Matthew, after all, rules out not only the title “teacher”, but the
very presence of teachers in his community? There are several arguments
against this hypothesis. (1) A community without teachers, especially one for
which the Torah and its interpretation are so important, cannot stand. (2) The
other texts coming from Syria show that early Christian communities did have
teachers. (3) More important, Matt 23:8 must be read in its context. Chapter 23
does not question the fact that scribes and Pharisees teach, but it questions their
lust after honour and the cleavage between words and deeds. The same
principle should be applied to the Matthean community. The verb klhqh/te in
verse 8 refers back to kalei/sqai of the previous verse, the meaning of which
is unequivocal. The point that Matthew wants to strike is this: while scribes
and Pharisees love to be greeted in the marketplace and be called “rabbi,” this
should not happen among the disciples.
It is not the role of teachers to be banned, but the use of the title “rabbi,”
which was favoured by those who wanted to enhance their status. 113 The use
of titles was felt as a sign of ostentation and belonged to the array of outward
marks of piety and prestige displayed by people like the scribes. It is
noteworthy that in the New Testament the terms dida,skaloj and path,r, though
they can be said of Christians, they are never used to address them, whereas
they are used to address non-Christians (e.g. Acts 7:2; 22:1). 114
113
See R. T. FRANCE, The Gospel According to Matthew: An Introduction and
Commentary (TNTC; Leicester: Intervarsity Press; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1985), 325.
BONNARD believes that Matt 23:8–10 is addressed against the tendency to authoritarianism
(Évangile, 336–37). For FRANKEMÖLLE, “Amtskritik”, Matthew is against offices in the
community.
114
See HOET, “Omnes,” 113–18.
3. Matthew 91
3.8 The “School of Matthew”

The presence of teachers in the community of Matthew has been associated
with the phenomenon of the formula quotations (e.g. Matt 1:23; 2:6.15.). In his
famous monograph, Krister Stendhal proposed that the aberrant Old Testament
texts of these citations were the product of a rabbinic sort of school. 115 Stendhal
drew his conclusions from a comparison with Qumran’s Pesher Habakkuk
(1QpHab), in which he believed to have found the results of a comparable
exegetical work. Stendhal’s analysis of individual texts is important, but his
hypothesis of a Matthean school has been less successful. 116
From our point of view, the existence of a school would lend support to the
proposal that there were teachers in the community of Matthew. The intense
exegetical work brought to light by Stendhal requires one or more people with
an extensive and deep knowledge of the scriptures and of the techniques to
interpret them. These people may well have been teachers. We will see that in
two works in which scriptural exegesis is fundamental, the Epistle to the
Hebrews and Barnabas, the author is very likely to be a teacher.
3.9 Leadership According to Matthew 23:34

Matthew 23:34, a text parallel to Luke 11:49, shows that teachers were not the
only role functioning in Matthew’s community. According to Luke, wisdom
sends prophets and apostles, while, according to Matthew, Jesus sends
prophets, wise men and scribes. Matthew’s form is in part at least redactional:
it is difficult to see why “Jesus” should be replaced with “wisdom,” whereas
the opposite operation is more probable. 117 As to the pair “wise men and
scribes,” the lack of Synoptic parallels points once again to Matthean redaction.
It can be suggested that he was responsible for adding “scribes” (cf. Matt
13:52) and that he retained “wise men,” whose mention is understandable in a
wisdom saying. 118
We have seen that “wise men” and “scribes” are an alternative designation
for teachers. Here, we can add further arguments why Matt 23:34 actually
115
KRISTER STENDHAL, The School of St. Matthew and Its Use of the Old Testament
(ASNU 20; Lund: C. W. K. Gleerup; Copenhagen: Ejnar Munksgaard, 1954). Matthew 23:8–
10 makes sense only if “something similar to the schools of the rabbis existed” (30).
116
See ROBERT H. GUNDRY, The Use of the Old Testament in St. Matthew’s Gospel: With
Special Reference to the Messianic Hope (NovTSup 18; Leiden: Brill, 1967), 155–59.
117
See GARLAND, “Intention,” 172–74.
118
Brief and acute discussion in O. J. F. SEITZ, “The Commission of Prophets and
“Apostles”: A Re-Examination of Matthew 23,34 with Luke 11,49,” in SE IV: Papers
Presented to the Third International Congress on New Testament Studies Held at Christ
Church, Oxford 1965. Part I. The New Testament Scriptures (ed. Frank L. Cross; TU 102;
Berlin: Akademie Verlag, 1968), 236–40. Most scholars reckon Luke’s form to be the oldest
speaks about prophets and teachers. 119 On the one hand, strings of three roles
may have been traditional. A hint of this is in Testament of Levi, according to
which prophets (16:2), wise men (13:7) and scribes (8:17) are all preachers and
teachers given to Israel. 120 On the other, recalling that the use of certain titles
was forbidden in Matthew’s community, we can point to the variety we can see
among these comparable lists: profh,thn… kai.… di,kaion (Matt 10:41);
profhtw/n… kai.… dikai,wn (Matt 23:29); profh,taj( sofou.j kai. grammatei/j
(Matt 23:34); profh,taj… kai.… tou.j avpestalme,nouj (Matt 23:37). In all these
lists the term “prophet” is always present and placed at the beginning, whereas
the ensuing term(s), though variable, with one exception all seem to refer to
teaching. This is evident for “wise men and scribes” and it is likely for
“righteous.” The exception (avpestalme,nouj) is a comprehensive category,
which may well include “teachers.” Thus, we have a remarkable indication that
Matthew’s community used to be led by prophets and teachers, the latter being
replaced by equivalent categories because the title “teacher” was banned. The
original series was based on the leadership of the Antioch community, with a
more distant echo in 1 Cor 12:28, if we connect the “apostles” mentioned by
Paul with tou.j avpestalme,nouj of Matt 23:37. It is to be noted that Paul,
Matthew and Acts agree in placing “prophets” before the teaching roles and
that Jesus’ sending (avposte,llw) of prophets, wise men and scribes in Matt
23:34 is reminiscent of God’s appointment ( e;qeto) of apostles, prophets and
teachers in 1 Cor 12:28. Verbs and subject are different, but common is the
idea of an appointment from above.
These prophets and teachers are placed by Matthew in a context of
persecutions, which are already forecast in Matt 10:17 and in Matt 5:11–12.
The present tense evkcunno,menon of Matt 23:35, instead of the perfect
evkkecume,non in Luke 11:50, makes it clear that the persecutions are not over.
The situation is so serious that Matthew replaces the Q text, avpoktenou/sin kai.
(LUZ, Evangelium, vol. 3, 368). LUZ advocates a minority view that sofou,j stood in Q, since
in Matt 11:25 it is used in negative sense and since there is no space for “wise men” in a
community where there are already scribes. Similar reconstruction in DAVIES, Commentary,
vol. 1, 314–15. According to S. LÉGASSE, Matt 23:34–36/Luke 11:49 is a citation from a
wisdom writing (“Scribes,” 323–33). However, the evidence that this is the source of the
saying is not conclusive (LUZ, Evangelium, vol. 3, 369).
119
SAND, “Proheten,” 173–84, believes that this passage presents three groups with
specific tasks and leadership roles. This is also the view of REINHART HUMMEL, Die
Auseinandersetzung zwischen Kirche und Judentum im Matthäusevangelium (BEvT 33;
München: Chr. Kaiser, 1963), 27–28. BYRSKOG, Jesus, 241–45, is sceptic as to the
possibility of distinguishing three groups. DAVIES, Commentary, vol. 1, 315, shares this
opinion and includes in the list Christian and non-Christian divine envoys, though it seems
to me unlikely in the light of Matt 10:16.
120
See BYRSKOG, Jesus, 242–43.
3. Matthew 93
diw,xousin (Luke 11:49), with staurw,sete kai. evx auvtw/n mastigw,sete evn tai/j
sunagwgai/j u`mw/n kai. diw,xete avpo. po,lewj eivj po,lin (Matt 23:35). Dreary
persecution, at least in Matthew’s view, is what travelling preachers should
expect. 121
3.10 Persecution
Persecution is an important theme for both Matt 10 and Matt 23. It is
remarkable that two Matthean texts engaging persecution do also tackle issues
connected with the relationship between teacher (Jesus) and disciples. It is also
noteworthy that in both texts hypocrisy is dealt with at length, first regarding
ravenous missionaries (Matt 10), second regarding scribes and Pharisees (Matt
23). Are these similarities between the two chapters pure coincidence?
Probably not. They should be explained in the light of Christian martyrdom
discourse.
3.10.1 The Suffering of the Righteous and the Violent Death of the Prophet
The suffering of the righteous, or passio iusti, is an Old Testament motif, which
helped Jesus’ followers and maybe Jesus himself make sense of
persecutions. 122 It deals with the unjust persecution of the righteous, who
successfully asks God to be saved. Its roots cannot be clearly identified and the
evidence stretches from pre-exilic Psalms down to rabbinic literature. 123 The
Fourth Song of the Suffering Servant (Isa 52:13–53:12) marked an important
development: the servant is identified with the righteous person, his suffering
is vicarious, and he is vindicated because he accepts God’s task. A further step
was taken as a consequence of the policy of compulsory Hellenisation carried
out by Antiochus IV Epiphanes in the middle of the second century. The
persecution and death of those who did not comply with Antiochus’ demands
were the object of theological reflection, which influenced numerous books,
such as Daniel, 2 Maccabees and 4 Maccabees. Probably under the influence
of the Fourth Song of the Suffering Servant, the author of the Book of Daniel
developed the notion that death was not the end, but that it was followed by the
121
GARLAND, Intention, 176–78.
122
See LOTHAR RUPPERT, Der leidende Gerechte: Eine motivgeschichtliche
Untersuchung zum Alten Testament und zwischentestamentlichen Judentum (FB 5;
Würzburg: Echter-Verlag, 1972); idem, Der leidende Gerechte und seine Feinde: Eine
Wortfelduntersuchung (Würzburg: Echter-Verlag, 1973); KARL T. KLEINKNECHT, Der
leidende Gerechtfertigte: Die alttestamentlich-jüdische Tradition vom ‚leidenden
Gerechten‘ und ihre Rezeption bei Paulus (WUNT II/13; Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck), 1984.
See also CANDIDA R. MOSS, “Current Trends in the Study of Early Christian Martyrdom,”
Bulletin for the Study of Religion 41 (2012): 22–29.
123
See KLEINKNECHT, Gerechtfertigte, 23–166.
resurrection of the righteous faithful to God. 124 In Daniel 3, the three men who
do not bend to the will of Nebuchadnezzar are eventually delivered, but the
reality during Antiochus’ reign must have been different. Daniel 12:1–3
foresees a time of judgement when the persecuted will be vindicated. 125
According to 2 Maccabees, a work written in the first century BCE, Antiochus’
persecution is God’s punishment for the sins of the people, and the death of the
persecuted is a means of purification. Those who die will be rewarded. In
chapter 7 we are told the story of seven brothers and their mother who preferred
torture and death to eating defiling meat. Their resistance is supported by a
belief in resurrection. 126 The consequences of violent death in the name of God
are further elaborated in 4 Maccabees, a book written in the first half of the
first century CE. The death of Eleazar in chapter 6 cleanses the sins of the
whole nation, meaning that it carries a vicarious effect. In chapter 18 the story
of the seven brothers is retold with various expansions, including a list of
biblical exempla and quotations of steadfastness with which their mother
intended to encourage them (4 Macc 18:11–19). Slightly different but still
noteworthy is the case of the so-called “diptych” of Wis 2:12–20 and 5:1–7.
These two texts probably stem from the persecutions at the time of Alexander
Jannaeus (103–76 BCE). Drawing on the Fourth Song of the Suffering Servant,
they connect the persecution of the righteous with reward in the after-life. 127
Additional evidence come from the Ethiopic Enoch, the Book of Jubilees, and
the Assumption of Moses. 128 In Qumran the Teacher of Righteousness saw
himself in the light of the role of the suffering servant. 129
ARTHUR J. DROGE and JAMES D. TABOR, A Noble Death: Suicide and Martyrdom
124
among Christians and Jews in Antiquity (San Francisco: HarperCollins, 1992), 69–71;
RUPPERT, “Leidende Gerechte,” 78–82 and 85; KLEINKNECHT, Gerechtferdigte, 91–92.
125
See THEOFRIED BAUMEISTER, Die Anfänge der Theologie des Martyriums (MBT 45;
Münster: Aschendorf, 1980), 13–23; KLEINKNECHT, Gerechtfertigte, 88–92.
126
On 2 Maccabees and the “suffering righteous” motif, see KLEINKNECHT,
Gerechtferdigte, 123–26.
127
The diptych is studied within the frame of Wis 1–6 in RUPPERT, Untersuchung, 70–
105; see also idem, “Der leidende (bedrängte, getötete) Gerechte nach den Spätschriften des
Alten Testaments (inklusive Septuaginta) und der (nichtrabbinischen) Literatur des
Frühjudentums unter besonderer Berücksichtigung des Gottesbildes,” in Die Entstehung der
jüdischen Martyrologie (ed. J. W. VAN HENTEN et al.; StPB 38; Leiden: Brill, 1989), 76–87,
77–84; KLEINKNECHT, Gerechtferdigte, 104–110.
128
ODIL H. STECK, Israel und das gewaltsame Geschick der Propheten: Untersuchungen
zur Überlieferung des deuteronomischen Geschichtsbildes im Alten Testament,
Spätjudentum und Urchristentum (WMANT 23; Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener Verlag,
1967), 137–84; BAUMEISTER, Anfänge, 23–37.
129
HEINZ-JOSEF FABRY, “‘Der Lehrer des Rechts’ – Eine Gestalt zwischen Vollmacht
und Ablehnung. Überlegungen zur Frühjüdischen Rezeption des Leidensknecht-Thematik,”
3. Matthew 95
Another theme to be taken into account is that of the violent death of the
prophets. Early Christian writers make many references to prophets unjustly
persecuted and murdered. 130 This tradition was born out of a need to interpret
the military catastrophes of 733 and later of 587 BCE, and it is based on the
deuteronomistic interpretation of history, claiming that these defeats were the
punishment for having failed to pay heed to God and for having rejected God’s
messengers. The oldest piece of evidence is Neh 9:26, to be read together with
2 Kings 17, 2 Chronicles 36, Jeremiah 44, Zachariah, and Ezra 9. 131 This motif
is also in Josephus, A.J. 9.13.2 and 9.14.1, 132 the Psalms of Solomon, the
Assumption of Moses, Lamentations, Pseudo-Philo’s Liber antiquitatum
biblicarum, 4 Esdras, the Syriac Apocalypse of Baruch, and the Dead Sea
Scrolls.
Though the “suffering righteous” and the “violent death of the prophets” are
to be kept separated, these motifs influenced each other. 133 They included
several features, which varied and were differently expressed according to
social and religious contexts: the righteous, whose soul is immortal, shall
resurrect from the dead; the punishment of the innocent functions as a
purification process in view of the final judgement; the suffering righteous is
ready to die for loyalty to the law; suffering can have vicarious force. 134
3.10.2 The Persecution of the Righteous and of the Prophet in Matthew

Persecution is the background against which Matthew 10 and 23 must be
understood. 135 In both chapters, this is connected with prophets and righteous.
In Matthew 10, the missionary, who is invited not to fear persecution (verse
26), is called “prophet” and “righteous” (verse 41) and is assured that
endurance will be rewarded with salvation (verse 22). 136 Matthew 23 is
particularly rich in material. Matthew 23:11–12 is based on the suffering-
vindication pattern: those who humble themselves are eventually exalted
according to the same principle that those who accept persecution are
in Martyriumsvorstellungen in Antike und Mittelalter: Leben oder sterben für Gott? (ed.
REGINA GRUNDMANN and SEBASTIAN FUHRMANN; AGJU 80; Brill: Leiden, 2012), 22–43.
130
Matthew 5:12 par; 20:30–31; Luke 11:49–50; 13:34; Mark 12 par; Acts 7:52; Rom
11:3; 1 Thess 2:15; Magn. 8.2; Barn. 5:11. See STECK, Israel.
131
STECK, Israel, 60–80.
132
STECK, Israel, 81–86.
133
There in an important difference. As to the violent rejection of the prophets, this is
one in a series of Israel’s failing and the focus is on Israel, whereas in the second theme the
focus is on the suffering of the righteous. See STECK, Israel, 254–57, and the critique by
KLEINKNECHT, Gerechtferdigte, 81–82.
134
KLEINKNECHT, Gerechtferdigte, 163–66.
135
On Matt 23:29–37 see STECK, Israel, 26–50 and 290–97.
136
See STECK, Israel, 257–60.
eventually vindicated. 137 Matthew 23:29–33 mentions the death of the prophets
and of the righteous of old and their vindication through divine judgement
passed on the descendants of the persecutors. Matt 23:34 associates these past
events with the fate of the people sent by Jesus. Matthew 23:35 recalls the
pouring of the blood of the righteous. It includes among them Abel, who also
features as one of the exempla in 4 Macc 18:11–13 (cf. TestBen 7.49). In Matt
23:37 Jesus reminds Jerusalem that it persecuted the prophets and God’s
envoys.
Matthew explained the persecution endured by Jesus in the light of the
motifs of the suffering of the prophets and of the righteous whom God sent to
Israel. He then referred this motif to Jesus’ disciples in order to tell them two
things. First, they should expect persecution. Second, they should not seek
riches and prestige. The reason for both warnings is the same: those who
humble themselves will be exalted. A different approach to their task is not to
be accepted.
We have some famous instances which explain Matthew’s preoccupation
and confirm his analysis of the conditions in which teachers operated. The first
is Paul, a teacher (Acts 13:1–3; 1 Tim 2:7; 2 Tim 1:11), who was repeatedly
persecuted and eventually, most likely, sentenced to death. The other, much
later, is Justin Martyr, another teacher, who met his death in the middle of the
second century because of his faith. Both Paul and Justin, as teachers, would
be the object of the attention of the authorities. They stood up to the challenge
of persecution, but it is easy to imagine that many other Christians, who were
regarded as teachers, accommodated their teaching to escape death.
In order to avoid this kind of situations, Matthew stresses the idea that Jesus
is the only teacher. Teachers provided a model of behaviour to their disciples.
A community with more than one teacher could choose among several models
of behaviour, including one permitting apostasy in times of persecution. This
would have been a betrayal of Jesus’ message. We have seen that the
discrepancy between preaching and deeds was an important topic in early
Christian preaching. In Matthew’s view, aberrations could be avoided by
pointing to only one teacher, Jesus. Since Jesus was persecuted and died on a
cross, his followers should not expect a better fate. Paul and Justin knew it and
accepted it, but many others surely did not.
3.11 Conclusions
Teachers played such an important role among Matthean Christians that they
even sought to be their leaders. The evangelist was sternly opposed to these
aspirations because they threatened the essence of Jesus’ message and the very
137
KLEINKNECHT, Gerechtferdigte, 175–77. Reference is made to Mark 9:35, which is
an alternative form of Matt 23:11–12.
4. James 97
existence of the community. Would be-leaders who are interested in power and
public recognition do not have a chance to stand persecution. Matthew tried to
challenge them by using Christian polemic against desire for power. We find
it in Mark, Luke and John. They knew well that the structure of the newly
formed communities was feeble and easy prey of ambitious believers. In the
case of Matthew, teachers were those who posed this threat. Matthew re-
worked and combined traditional sayings, placed them in contexts of mission
and persecution, and made it clear that teachers and fellow missionaries should
not expect a better treatment than Jesus. If he was tortured and killed, they too
must be ready to be tortured and killed. The theological motif Matthew
employs to bring his argument home is the suffering of the righteous and the
violent fate of the prophet. Only those who humble themselves will be exalted
and those who accept persecution will be vindicated. Those Christians who
seek prestige and riches and expect a better fate than their master’s transgress
this basic principle.
The polemic carried out against teachers should be seen in the larger context
of the history of the community in Antioch to which Matthew probably
belonged. The original leadership was in the hands of five prophets and
teachers, three of whom are likely to have been the founders of the community,
whereas the other two, Barnabas and Paul, came later. The following
generation(s) of leaders probably had less authority, as one would expect when
the “founding fathers” had passed away. The appointment of new leaders was
still considered to come from above (Matt 23:34), but the question of who
should belong to their ranks was bound to be very sensitive. In particular, there
were people who aspired at the title of teachers. These people wanted to be
models of behaviour in stark contrast to the requirement of equality among
community-members. For this reason, Matthew ruled out the title of teacher
altogether. What mattered to the evangelist was the wrong use of the title, not
the presence of the role. There were teachers in his community: they are called
scribes, wise men, and righteous. They have been commissioned by the risen
Jesus to bring the gospel to all nations, not to promote themselves.
4. James
4.1 Introduction
The Letter of James is an intriguing document for the scholar interested in early
Christian teachers. According to Jas 3:1, the role of teacher was so coveted that
the author writes at length in order to discourage candidates. However, the
information that this section and indeed the whole letter may yield about
teachers is not easily accessible. There are several reasons for it. The
preliminary questions of authorship, place and date of composition are still
highly debated. The apparent lack of unity has long frustrated scholars in their
attempt to find a precise setting. Under the spell of Martin Dibelius’ influential
commentary it was believed that James was a collection of paraenetic material
gathered by a teacher, 138 but in the last decades confidence has increased in the
possibility of identifying the historical situation behind the letter. 139
4.2 Authorship, Time and Place

This letter is generally considered a pseudepigraphical work. 140 Its dating
ranges from the middle of the first century to the beginning of the second
century 141 and it has been connected with such different locations as Rome,
Alexandria, Antioch, and Jerusalem. The main grounds for placing the letter in
Rome is the number of features shared with First Clement and Hermas, 142 like
the rare term di,yucoj in Jas 1:8 and Mand. 9.6. However, the evidence is far
from being conclusive. For instance, Hermas’ alleged knowledge of James is
easily explicable supposing that the letter reached Rome at some stage before
the book was written. 143 The contacts with the first two writings are limited to
138
MARTIN DIBELIUS, Der Brief des Jakobus (KEK 15; Göttingen: Vandenhoeck &
Ruprecht, 1921).
139
See TODD C. PENNER, “The Epistle of James in Current Research,” CurBS 7 (1999):
257–308, 266–67.
140
CHRISTOPH BURCHARD, Der Jakobusbrief (HNT 15/1; Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck,
2000), 3–6. There are several people named “James” in the New Testament, but the most
well known and the likeliest to be considered as having the authority to write a letter to the
diaspora (Jas 1:1) was the brother of Jesus. Even assuming that the epistle is
pseudepigraphical, it is still possible that it bears some connection with him. RALPH P.
MARTIN suggests that teaching material left by James was gathered and revised by an editor
after James’ death and turned into the epistle, or that, at any rate, the author believed to
represent James’ thought (James [WBC 48; Waco: Word Books, 1988], lxix–lxxvii).
Another solution, a minority one, is that the epistle was written by an otherwise unknown
Christian teacher by the name of James, a popular name at the time: see RAINER METZNER,
“Der Lehrer Jakobus: Überlegungen zur Verfasserfrage des Jakobusbriefes,” ZNW 104
(2013): 238–67. On the epistle’s setting see TODD C. PENNER, The Epistle of James and
Eschatology: Re-Reading an Ancient Christian Letter (JSNTSup 121; Sheffield: Sheffield
Academic Press, 1996), 33–74.
141
Quick overview in PENNER, “Epistle,” 296–97; cf. BURCHARD, Jakobusbrief, 6–7.
142
One of the major proponents is SOPHIE LAWS, A Commentary on the Epistle of James
(HNTC; San Francisco: Harper & Row, 1980), 15–20 and 22–26. See also PENNER, Epistle,
72 n. 1; DALE C. ALLISON, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Epistle of James
(ICC; London: Bloomsbury T&T Clark, 2013), 94–98.
143
PETER H. DAVIDS, “Palestinian Traditions in the Epistle of James,” in James the Just
and Christian Origins (ed. BRUCE CHILTON and CRAIG A. EVANS; NovTSup 98; Leiden:
Brill, 1999), 33–57, 36–38.
4. James 99
the use of similar stock material 144 and therefore are not decisive. Alexandria
as few advocates, who point to the fact that it was in Egypt that James was first
accepted as scripture. 145
The region of Syria-Palestine is considered by many to be the likeliest place
of origin. 146 First, the letter probably belongs to the specific genre of letters
written by Jewish leaders in Palestine to the diaspora. 147 Second, the
connections between James and the Jesus-material, particularly Q and special
M, are well known. 148 Surely enough, direct knowledge is very hard to prove.
Rather, it seems that James was acquainted with oral traditions about Jesus,
which found their way in Q, the Gospel of Matthew and the Didache. 149 All
these documents are usually placed, with varying degrees of confidence, in
Syria-Palestine. Third, some pieces of information given by the letter would fit
in a Syro-Palestinian setting, such as the early and late rains of Jas 5:7. These
arguments are not exempt from criticism either. The diaspora address may be
fictional and the letter may have been written outside Palestine by somebody
acquainted with the genre. 150 References to realia may be traditional. 151 Still,
the cumulative weight of the evidence is in favour of Syria-Palestine. If this
proposal is correct, the most likely candidates within this region are Antioch
144
This is noted by LAW herself (Commentary, 15–20) and stressed by PENNER, Epistle,
103–105.
145
Among the advocates of an Egyptian origin is FRANZ SCHNIDER, Der Jakobusbrief
(RNT; Regensburg: Friedrich Pustet, 1987), 17–18. See also the arguments listed and refuted
in DAVIDS, “Traditions,” 38–39.
146
Close analysis in MATTHIAS KONRADT, “Der Jakobusbrief als Brief des Jakobus.
Erwägungen zum historischen Kontext des Jakobusbriefes im Lichte der
traditionsgeschichtlichen Beziehungen zum 1. Petrusbrief und zum Hintergrund der
Autorfiktion,” in Der Jakobusbrief: Beiträge zu Rehabilitierung der „strohernen Epistel“
(ed. PETRA VON GEMÜNDEN, MATTHIAS KONRADT and GERD THEISSEN; Beiträge zum
Verstehen der Bibel 3; Münster: Lit, 2003), 17–53; DAVIDS, “Traditions”; PENNER, Epistle,
260–77. The author’s good command of Greek is not against a Palestinian location, as good
Greek was spoken in that region (PENNER, Epistle, 35–47).
147
See for instance KARL-WILHELM NIEBUHR, “Der Jakobusbrief im Licht frühjüdischer
Diasporabriefe,” NTS 44 (1998): 420–43.
148
PATRICK J. HARTIN, James and the Q Sayings of Jesus (JSNTSup 47; Sheffield:
Sheffield Academic Press, 1991), 140–98. Very useful chart at pp. 141–42. Besides
Matthew, Martin points also to parallels with the Didache (James, lxxiv–lxxvi). On James,
Matthew’s Gospel and the Didache see also MASSEY H. SHEPHERD, “The Epistle of James
and the Gospel of Matthew,” JBL 75 (1956): 40–51.
149
HARTIN has even proposed that the author of James knew a version of Q employed by
Matthew. This has been criticised: see PENNER, Epistle, 116–20, in particular 119. The
parallels are not so close as to prove direct knowledge.
150
PENNER, Epistle, 181–83.
151
HUBERT FRANKEMÖLLE, Der Brief des Jakobus: Kapitel 1 (ÖTK 17/1; Gütersloh:
Gütersloher Verlagshaus; Würzburg: Echter-Verlag, 1994), 60–61.
and Jerusalem. Jerusalem could claim to be the centre from which James’
influence radiated, but Antioch was a place where his disciples were very
active (Gal 2:12). If the letter was written at a late date, after the conquest of
Jerusalem by Titus, the best bet would be Antioch. 152
The date is no less debated than the location. For instance, the silence over
the Temple may be a clue that the letter was written after its destruction, when
any reference to the rites carried out there and to its role would have been
meaningless. 153 This very silence may, however, be explained by supposing
that the Temple was still standing and functioning, otherwise the author would
have commented in some way or another on the portentous event of its
destruction. Other factors must be taken into account, such as the possible
acquaintance of the author with Romans and 1 Peter, the reference in Jas 5:13–
20 to a primitive church order, whose earliest evidence is Matt 6:1–18, the
similarities between the letter and 2 Bar 78–87, usually dated to 100 CE. For
these reasons, the letter probably dates to the years 100–120. 154
Of particular interest for our study are the date and the location proposed by
Zimmermann. He is one of the strongest advocates for a Syrian origin, for
which he puts forward “vielleicht entscheidendes Argument.” 155 To the second
and third argument mentioned above he adds the following ones: (1) the
reference to teachers, a role which he has previously indicated to be of Syrian
origin; (2) Werner Georg Kümmel’s opinion that the letter comes from Syria
because the oldest testimonies to James come from Syrian writings; 156 (3) the
pseudonymous attribution, which should be taken as an important clue, and
which points to Jerusalem and Antioch where James’ influence was strong. 157
As to the date, the rigorous ethical stand, the absence of references to Jewish
ritual laws and the fact that pseudonymous attribution was still considered
effective before all Christians, not just those associated with James, point to a
relatively early period of time, that is the generation following that of Paul and
James himself. 158
Zimmermann makes a good case for the location in Syria, but not for an
early date. The first two arguments are far from being conclusive and the third
one does not consider that pseudonymous attributions were widely used in
Christian writings from the second half of the second century onwards. One
gathers the impression that he pushes the evidence in order to make James fit
152
Among others, Antiochene origins are argued for by KONRADT, “Jakobusbrief,” 17–
53; Jerusalem is favoured by DAVIDS, “Traditions.”
153
Cf. FRANKEMÖLLE, Brief, 59–60.
154
ALLISON, Commentary, 3–32.
155
156
WERNER GEORG KÜMMEL, Einleitung in das Neuen Testament (17th ed.; Heidelberg:
Quelle & Meyer, 1973), 365.
157
158
4. James 101
his reconstruction of the history of early Christian teachers in Syria. James is

an important document for his study. By assigning it to an early date, he can
place James before Matthew and present it as a witness to the beginning of the
decline of Christian tradents. This linear trajectory would not be imaginable if
James was a late writing.
It is to be noted that James’ contacts with Matthew and the Didache are clues
to a common environment, presenting a form of Christianity very close to
Judaism. This is a point generally acknowledged and can be illustrated with a
few examples. The letter is addressed to the twelve tribes in the diaspora. This
means Christian-Jews or maybe all the Jews, even those not believing in
Christ. 159 References to Jesus are limited to two passages (Jas 1:1 and 2:1),
whereas the language used about God employs Biblical expressions: God is
holy (Jas 1:13), creator (Jas 1:17), one (Jas 2:19). A couple of passages seems
to challenge Paul’s doctrine of justification or at least a wrong interpretation
of it (Jas 2:21; cf. Gal 2:16.24; Rom 3:28). 160 The whole letter contains nothing
that a Jew might not accept. 161 This writing comes from Jewish followers of
Christ, who maintained their allegiance to the Torah. 162 It is likely that they
regarded James as an important figure, in which case pseudepigraphical
attribution does not come as a surprise.
4.3 James 3:1–2

James 3:1 is the beginning of a new section. 163 The topic of faith and works is
left behind and the topic of teachers and perfection is introduced. This section
covers verses 1–12: verses 1–2 broach the topic of teachers and speech-control,
and verses 3–12 illustrate it. What follows deals with the difference between
159
DALE C. ALLISON JR., “The Fiction of James and Its Sitz im Leben,” RB 108 (2001):
529–70, 530–46.
160
The interpretation of the letter as an anti-pauline writing was strongly advocated by
MARTIN HENGEL, “Der Jakobsbrief als antipaulinische Polemik,” Tradition and
Interpretation in the New Testament: Essays in Honor of E. Earle Ellis (ed. GERALD F.
HAWTHORNE and OTTO BETZ; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans; Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1987),
248–65.
161
ALLISON, “Fiction,” 555–65.
162
LAWS expresses a different opinion, namely that the letter comes from Gentiles who
absorbed Christianity through Judaism. The main clue is that the author does not regard the
entire Torah as law: “His own appeal to the Law, when made explicit, is to a very limited
area: Leviticus xix. 18 (ii. 8) and the Decalogue (ii. 11), and the context and manner of his
appeal to the latter calls in question the extent of his ‘whole’ law” (Commentary, 4; see also
37). However, this is at best an argument from silence.
163
That Jas 3:1 is the beginning of a new section or at least of a new subsection is widely
held. Cf. for instance MARTIN, James, xcviii–civ, with a selected survey of secondary
literature.
the truly wise person and the falsely wise one (Jas 3:13–18) and has a number
of contacts with what precedes.
James 3:1–2 reads: Mh. polloi. dida,skaloi gi,nesqe( avdelfoi, mou( eivdo,tej
o[ti mei/zon kri,ma lhmyo,meqa) polla. ga.r ptai,omen a[pantej) ei; tij evn lo,gw|
ouv ptai,ei( ou-toj te,leioj avnh.r dunato.j calinanwgh/sai kai. o[lon to sw/ma)
The initial words are of difficult interpretation. 164 The first problem concerns
the construction of the sentence, for which we are faced with four possibilities:
(1) Let not many of you be teachers.
(2) Let not be often teachers.
(3) Do not teach often.
(4) Let it not be many teachers.
The first translation interprets polloi, as attribute of the second person plural,
which is the subject of gi,nesqe, and dida,skaloi as predicate. Translations (2)
and (3) differ from the others in that polloi, is used adverbially. 165 Moreover,
in translation (3) dida,skaloi gi,nesqe is considered equivalent to dida,skete.
This is possible in the light of texts such as Josephus, Ant. 19.172 and 20.41;
Philo, Spec. 3.11. 166 In translation (4) the predicate is polloi, dida,skaloi. 167
The best translation must be determined in the light of the context. If the second
rendering is accepted, then, according to James, every member of the
community at one time or another is a teacher. However, the following
sentence implies that the author belongs to the group of teachers (gi,nesqe,
second person plural, vs. lhmyo,meqa, first person plural), who appear as
something set apart from the rest of the community. According to translation
(3), the author addresses not the entire community, but only the group of
teachers, whom he urges not to work too much. This interpretation should be
rejected because of the following avdelfoi, mou, which throughout the letter
refers to the whole community (Jas 1:2.16.19; 2:1.5; etc.). Translations (1) and
(4) convey the same idea, that there should not be many teachers. However,
this can be understood differently. It may mean that the community should have
164
This first verse has been carefully examined by ZIMMERMANN, Lehrer, 198–201. See
also BURCHARD, Jakobusbrief, 135–36.
165
So FRANZ MUßNER, Der Jakobusbrief (HTKNT 13/1; Freiburg: Herder, 1964), 159.
However, most commentators reckon that polloi, is an adjective: MATTHIAS KONRADT,
Christliche Existenz nach dem Jakobusbrief: Eine Studie zu seiner soteriologischen und
ethischen Konzeption (SUNT 22; Göttingen: Vandenhoek & Ruprecht, 1998), 274 n. 42.
166
In ZIMMERMANN, Lehrer, 200.
167
The negative adverb should be close to the verb, but here it is detached for emphasis:
see BLASS, Grammatik, § 433.1.1. In two of the possible constructions given by
ZIMMERMANN, Lehrer, 198–99, the negative adverb is linked to polloi, or alternatively to
polloi. dida,skaloi, but this is grammatically wrong: before words that are not verbs ou; is
used (BLASS, Grammatik, § 426).
4. James 103
few teachers or, as Amphoux suggests, 168 that there should not be diverging
teachings, no matter how numerous the teachers may be. This interpretation is
probably wrong. First, it is rather difficult to extract this meaning from the text:
if this is what James wanted to say, he formulated it awkwardly. Second, the
confirmatory clue proposed by Amphoux is not conclusive. He suggests
without arguments that what follows is about unified teaching. We will see that
this text can be interpreted in numerous ways and that the explanation given by
Amphoux is not the best. James 3:2 does not tackle the question of the number
of teachings, but that of the number of teachers. The author wants to contrast
the idea that everybody makes mistakes with the fact that “many” want to
become teachers. The universal attribute of human fallacy, which is stressed
through alliteration (polla. ga.r ptai,omen a[pantej), is the greatest obstacle on
the way to perfection. This means that only few people can get close to it and
hence that it is unreasonable that many should think to be able to aspire to the
demanding role of teacher. It must also be observed that in antiquity
discouraging the quest for offices was a topos. 169 The fact that teachers will be
subjected to stricter judgement (mei/zon kri,ma lhmyo,meqa) is considered as
something known to the readers (eivdo,tej). Traces of this topos are also in other
early Christian texts. James 3:1–2 reminds one of Jesus’ attack on scribes in
Mark 12:40 (ou-toi lh,myontai perisso,teron kri,ma). Interestingly enough, this
Markan verse belongs to a section (Mark 12:37b–40), which inspired Matt
23:1–36, a text including the ban on the title “rabbi” (Matt 23:8). 170
James 3:1 tells us that many people wanted to become teachers. Why did
James discourage them? The reference to perfection (Jas 3:2) and the text on
wisdom (Jas 3:13–18) after the verses apparently addressed to teachers (Jas
3:1–12) suggested to Joachim Wanke the possibility that Jas 3:1 targets false
teachers, maybe with gnostic connections. 171 This verse could also address the
sort of enthusiasm to be found in certain Pauline churches (cf. 1 Cor 14), where
too many felt called to speak and instruct others, thus disrupting meetings and
community life in general. 172 The answer must be elicited from the analysis of
what follows.
168
CHRISTIAN BERNARD AMPHOUX, “Hypothèse sur l’origine des Épîtres Catholiques,”
in La lecture liturgique des Épîtres catholiques dans l’Église ancienne (ed. CHRISTIAN
BERNARD AMPHOUX and JEAN-PAUL BOUHOT; HTB 1; Lausanne: Zèbre, 1996), 308–332,
316.
169
E.g. Epiktet, Ench. 37; cf. Sir 7:4–6 (in BURCHARD, Jakobusbrief, 135–36).
170
Cf. ALLISON, Commentary, 522.
171
JOACHIM WANKE, “Die urchristlichen Lehrer nach dem Zeugnis des Jakobusbriefes,”
in Die Kirche des Anfangs: Für Heinz Schürmann (ed. RUDOLF SCHNACKENBURG et al.;
Freiburg: Herder, 1978), 489–511, 492–93.
172
ÉTIENNE TROCMÉ, “Les Églises pauliniennes vues du dehors: Jacques 2, 1 à 3, 13,” in
SE II: Papers Presented to the Second International Congress on New Testament Studies
4.4 James 3:3–12

To whom does Jas 3:3–12 refer? The metaphors centred on the power of the
tongue may lead to the conclusion that teachers are the target aimed at.
However, there is a couple of clues that suggests to proceed cautiously. First,
in the whole document teachers are explicitly mentioned only in Jas 3:1.
Second, in Jas 3:2 it is not the teachers who are the subject, but the community
and the person capable of self-control. Therefore, one may wonder whether the
community continues to be the subject in Jas 3:3–12. 173 A brief analysis of Jas
3:3–12 will help solve the dilemma. Verses 3–12 present several metaphors,
which are joined together mainly through thematic and conceptual links. The
first two metaphors deal with the control of a horse by means of the bridle and
of a ship by means of the rudder. These images are held together by the idea
that a small device is capable of guiding a large object. This is made explicit
in the following metaphor (Jas 3:5): the tongue is a small part of the body, but
it can boast great things. Likewise, a small fire can set ablaze a big wood. In a
rather unclear text, the author develops the image of the tongue, which is able
to defile the whole body and set our lives on fire (Jas 3:6). 174 This first series
of images easily lends itself to the interpretation that the tongue in question is
that of teachers, who are capable through their speech to lead the large body of
the community. However, it must be observed that the theme of the tongue as
a governing device is limited to the first two metaphors and that it is turned on
its head in the following one. If the wood is a metaphor for the community, the
image of the tongue like a small fire in a wood means that each member, even
the least influential person, may be lethally dangerous to the rest. The metaphor
works at its best if it is intended to refer to all the members in order to show
that each one of them has got great responsibility. There would not be any need
for such an image if only teachers were targeted, since it is self-evident that
those playing a leading role could more easily than anybody else lead the entire
community astray. The images of verses 6–8 focus on the negative power of
the tongue and on the difficulty of mastering it. If these verses referred only to
teachers, they would provide a very miserable portrait of their work. This
section is more easily understood as a general illustration of the evil power of
the tongue, from which nobody is free. Tongues are capable of doing
Held at Christ Church, Oxford, 1961 (ed. FRANK. L. CROSS; TU 87; Berlin: Akademie-
Verlag, 1964), 660–69, 665–66. Cf. also FRANÇOIS VOUGA, L’Épître de Saint Jacques (CNT
2/13a; Geneva: Labor et Fides, 1984), 94–95.
173
Cf. KONRADT, Existenz, 275; LAWS, Epistle, 144; SCHNIDER, Jakobusbrief, 84. Contra
MARTIN, James, 109.
174
The exact reconstruction of the text would not alter its general meaning. Its
grammatical and textual difficulties are exposed in BURCHARD, Jakobusbrief, 143–44.
4. James 105
completely opposite things, such as blessing and cursing, 175 a skill that cannot
be found in the natural world (Jas 3:9–11). Is this being said of teachers? The
avdelfoi, mou of verses 10 and 12 seems best understood as encompassing
everybody, as it does in the rest of the letter. In conclusion, the Sitz im Leben
of this section is not the work of teachers. Allison thinks that the central theme
concerns blessing and cursing, and, in particular, that the author targeted the
first signs of a ban against Christian Jews emerging in the synagogue he
attended. 176
4.5 James 3:13–18

James 3:13–18 tackles the question of wisdom and, though it constitutes a
separate section, 177 it may throw some light on Jas 3:1–12. The author
distinguishes between two types of wisdom, the one coming from above and
the one that is earthly. The latter is associated with a sort of evil similar to the
one with which the tongue was associated: envy, selfish ambition, disorder,
wickedness of every kind (Jas 3:14.16). The wisdom that comes from above is
just the opposite. If an uncontrolled tongue causes instability and havoc, “the
wisdom from above is first pure, then peaceable, gentle, willing to yield, full
of mercy and good fruits, without a trace of partiality or hypocrisy” (Jas
3:17). 178 This wisdom provides the necessary help to walk towards perfection
(cf. Jas 1:4–5).
James 3:13–18 is not addressed to teachers. The only clue that may point to
them is Jas 3:13, since sofo,j may be considered a different way of addressing
a teacher. 179 However, sofo,j in association with the following evpisth,mwn
(New Testament hapax) is a biblical phrase describing not only community
leaders (Deut 1:13.15; cf. Dan 5:12), but also the entire people (Deut 4:6). 180
James 3:13 tackles the problem of being a perfect Christian.
175
It is possible that Jas 3:9–12 is set against a liturgical background (MARTIN, James,
123–24).
176
ALLISON, Commentary, 518–19.
177
The exact beginning of this section is object of disagreement. Some place it at Jas 3:12
(e.g. BURCHARD, Jakobusbrief, 153); others at Jas 3:13 (e.g. MARTIN, James, civ) or 3:14
(e.g. VOUGA, Épître, 20). In my opinion, Jas 3:12 belongs to what precedes since it continues
to illustrate the idea that very contrasting things may come out of the human mouth, which
is something impossible in the natural world. James 3:13 belongs to what follows since it
introduces the theme of wisdom, which is developed in verses 14–18.
178
Wanke, Lehrer, 495–96, suggests that Jas 3:17 is a list of attributes of teachers, which
has been transferred to wisdom. The list as it stands presents several structural and verbal
problems, which may be clues to redactional intervention, but it must be observed that none
of the adjectives are specific attributes of teachers.
179
E.g. ZIMMERMANN, Lehrer, 205, and WANKE, Lehrer, 496.
180
MARTIN, James, 128–29.
4.6 Teachers as a Model for the Community

James 3:2–12 and 3:13–18 do not specifically target teachers, but all the
addressees, whose tongue may slip out of control and wage havock. This
interpretation solves the difficulty of having to explain why a long section on
teachers would suddenly be introduced without links with what precedes.
James 3:1–12 does not come as a surprise since it develops themes, which were
broached in the first chapter. Perfection is the aim to which all the addressees
of the letter have been called (Jas 1:4) and it consists in not erring (Jas 3:2).
They are invited to be the firstlings of creation (Jas 1:18) and to be saved (Jas
1:21). This is possible if one is slow to speak (Jas 1:19; cf. Jas 3:2–12) and
bridles the tongue (Jas 1:26: calinagwgw/n glw/ssan; cf. Jas 3:2:
calinagwgh/sai… to. sw/ma). If one lacks wisdom, this should be asked of God
(Jas 1:5; cf. Jas 3:14–18) without double mind (Jas 1:8: di,yucoj; cf. Jas 4:8)
and instability of mind (Jas 1:8: avkata,statoj; cf. Jas 3:9). The importance of
deeds is remarked both in Jas 1:22–25.27 and 3:17–18. These verbal and
thematic links with the first chapter, which does not deal with teachers, are an
additional clue that Jas 3:2–18 is likewise addressed to the whole body of
Christians, though teachers may still lay in the background on account of their
higher responsibility. The links also show that Jas 3:1–18 plays an important
part within the letter. Its author is interested in the way to perfection (Jas 1:4),
though this is out of human reach (Jas 3:1–2) because of the obstacles lying on
the way (Jas 3:3–12). Nonetheless, the readers are exhorted to set their entire
lives towards this goal, which can be approached through the divine gift of
wisdom (Jas 1:5 and 3:13–18). 181
If teachers are not the main target of Jas 3:2–12 and 3:13–18, which role do
they play in the letter? Teachers function to some extent as a synecdoche or
pars pro toto. 182 James 3:1–12 apparently refers to teachers because they
feature in the first verse and because the issues tackled in 3:2–12 well match
the challenges they have to face. However, a more careful reading has revealed
that the author was actually addressing believers in general. James 3:1–12
should be read according to a double register. On one level these verses
illustrate the dangers of teaching and may well be based on real life-
experiences. On another level, which is the most important one for the author,
this text deals in a specific way with the topic of perfection and is addressed to
every believer.
4.7 Characteristics of Teachers

This letter provides some important information about teachers. (1) The role of
teachers was coveted by many. The pseudepigraphical fiction confirms it, since
181
See KONRADT, Existenz, 250–260 and 274–85.
182
FRANKEMÖLLE, Brief, 2–5, 482.
4. James 107
it is explicitly indicated that the person who was regarded as the brother of
Jesus was a teacher (Jas 3:1–2). The reason why teaching drew so much
attention was that it could be exploited to set oneself above the rest of the
community and to make statements intended to serve personal agendas. 183 In
this role the rift between words and deeds, about which James is so concerned,
could be most wide. (2) How does one become a teacher? Apparently, nothing
points to a selection carried out by somebody, for example by those who are
already teachers, 184 nor one finds indication to the contrary. James 3:1 may
either imply that many desired to become teachers, or that many tried to be
recognised as teachers. The second possibility is probably correct: if teachers
had been appointed, their number and behaviour would have been easy to
control. The solution proposed in the letter is a sort of self-discipline based on
deeds. The author of James tries to persuade, illustrates the dangers, points to
the right direction. No argument based on the principle of authority is put
forward, in spite of the letter being written, according to the pseudepigraphical
fiction, by the brother of the Lord. In sum, among James’ addressees, teachers
were not appointed, but those with the right talents were recognised, in some
way or another, as teachers. (3) There is nothing explicitly charismatic about
the role of teachers. In discouraging candidates, James does not make any
reference to the need for charismatic endowment, contrary to comparable texts
such as Rom 12:6–7 and 1 Cor 12:28–29. The necessity to test the gift of the
spirit would have made a good case against the proliferation of would-be
teachers. If this text had been written by Paul, he would have stressed the
harmonious work of each part of the body of the community and consequently
the impossibility that the spirit should call too many people to be teachers. The
whole letter does not show any interest in the activity of the spirit with the
possible but unlikely exception of Jas 4:5. The cases in which references to
charismatic power might be expected are disappointing. Prophets belong to the
past (Jas 5:10). Healing is not connected to charisma (Jas 5:14–16), contrary
for instance to 1 Cor 12:28. This lack of interest could be explained by
supposing that the letter was composed at a late date. However, this conclusion
unduly assumes that Paul’s charismatic views of community roles could also
be extended to non-Pauline communities, so that those in which the presence
of charismas was not valued would be at a stage of their history subsequent to
a more primitive one where charismas were at work and appreciated. This
interpretation is not acceptable: for instance, may it not be possible that some
communities never showed a particular interest in charismas? This is likely to
be the case of the Letter of James, which issued from a type of Christianity
183
WANKE has proposed that in James’ community presbyters, not teachers, were the
leaders (“Lehrer,” 509–510). However, this would leave unexplained why James associates
teachers, self-control, and ambition.
184
Cf. HARNACK, Mission, vol. 1, 348.
quite distant from Paul and maybe even in contrast with him (cf. Jas 2:14–26).
(4) What was the standing of teachers among the addressees of the letter? As
we have already seen, they were leaders. A non-leadership role would not have
been the object of ambition and envy. James the teacher could only be a leader.
Moreover, a community the belief of which was centred on the implanted word
(Jas 1:12), the word of truth (Jas 1:18), the law of perfect freedom (Jas 1:25;
2:12) and the royal law (Jas 2:8), must have held in particular esteem those
who explained this word. Teachers were entrusted with something that made
the community what it was. 185
Zimmermann highlights another point. He observes a stark contrast between
the call to perfection lying behind Jas 3:2 and the impossibility of achieving
this perfection clearly illustrated by Jas 3:2–12. The contrast between theory
and reality would be the experience of the teacher who wrote this letter and
would mirror the decline of the role of Jewish-Christian teachers in Syria. This
conclusion can be subjected to a fivefold challenge. First, if there is decline,
this is attested for the addressees of James, not for Syria-Palestine. Second, the
contrast between ideal and reality may not be that source of tension for the
author of the letter as Zimmermann suggests. In fact, it can also be said that
the aim of perfection is regarded by the author as a means to push Christians
towards improving themselves, but not as an actually attainable goal. In this
perspective, James would not be a perfectionist, but a realist. What matters is
that believers set their entire life towards God without doubts or double
allegiances (cf. Jas 1:8 and 4:8). 186 Third, James’ criticism is directed to the
whole community and teachers are used as a foil for general considerations.
Fourth, the attractiveness of being a teacher is a strong argument against the
hypothesis of decline: if many people wanted to be teachers, how could this be
a declining role? Fifth, comparable cases suggest that a community leadership
made of teachers (Jas 3:1 and 5:14), could last long time. This structure is
probably attested in Rome in the middle of the second century (Epiphanius,
Pan. 42.2.2) and in third century Egyptian villages (Eusebius, Hist. eccl.
7.24.6). 187 Even if leadership might have been variously distributed among
185
GERD THEISSEN, “Éthique et communauté dans l’Épître de Jacques,” ETR 77 (2002):
157–76; this article is reproduced in a revised form in “Ethos und Gemeinde im Jakobusbrief:
Überlegungen zu seinem „Sitz im Leben“,” in GEMÜNDEN, Jakobusbrief, 142–65. Theissen
believes that the community of James stood in opposition both to the Roman political power
and to contemporary conceptions of society such as that represented by the domestic tables
in the Pastorals and that that teachers were responsible for the preservation of the identity of
the community.
186
See KONRADT, Existenz, 280.
187
Testimony highlighted by HARNACK, Lehrer, Prolegomena, 135.
4. James 109
teachers and presbyters, what matters is that they could constitute a long-
lasting form of community organisation.
4.8 What Teachers Taught

Does the letter tell us anything about what teachers taught? A promising text
seems to be Jas 1:21. The “word of truth” and the “implanted word” may refer
to baptismal instruction on the ground of the verbal and thematic similarities
with other early Christian texts, which have been associated with that setting
(Rom 6:5; 1 Cor 3:6; 1 Pet 1:22–2:2; Barn. 1:2). 188 However, nothing is said
about the content of the “word of truth” and the “implanted word”. The next
step is therefore to look at the entire letter, an approach justified by the fact
that the letter is written by a teacher, or at least by somebody who wrote it as
if he were a teacher. Since we do not know if it is a typical instance of a
teacher’s work nor do scholars agree on what its driving force is, it will be safer
to point out the main themes and the sources that are clearly employed.
There are three main traditions which have been identified in this letter:
wisdom, eschatology, and prophecy. 189 For our purpose, it is not important to
see which one, if any, is the leading factor, but to observe that they are all
associated with community ethical instruction, as Dibelius pointed out in his
188
GEORG BRAUMANN, “Der theologische Hintergrund des Jakobusbriefes,” TZ 18
(1962): 401–410; LAWS, Epistle, 84–85; VOUGA, L’Épître, 63; MARTIN, James, 48–49;
SCHNIDER, Jakobusbrief, 49; contra FRANKEMÖLLE, Brief, 331–33. In particular, there are
remarkable parallels between Jas 1:18.21 and 1 Pet 1:23–2:2. The word of God is responsible
for making the believer the firstfruit of all creation/for taking the believer to a new birth;
there is the invitation to renounce wickedness and to receive a word that can bring salvation.
There are also significant differences, such as the structure, the use of different terms for
giving birth (Jas 1:18: avpeku,hsen; 1 Pet 1:23: avnagegennhme,noi) and the explicit reference in
1 Peter 1:25 to the word “that was announced to you.” It is therefore impossible to
reconstruct a precise baptismal text, if there is indeed one to be reconstructed (see LAWS,
Epistle, 18–21 and 84–85).
189
According to HARTIN, James, all the three traditions are at work, but they are
controlled by the wisdom one. The role of wisdom has been highlighted also by
FRANKEMÖLLE, Brief, who sees the epistle as consistently drawing on Sirach, a thesis
discussed and rejected by DAVID HUTCHINSON EDGAR, Has God Not Chosen the Poor? The
Social Setting of the Epistle of James (JSNTSup 206; Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press,
2001), 24–26. The role of wisdom was also emphasised some years ago by RUDOLF HOPPE’s
seminal work, Der theologische Hintergrund des Jakobusbriefes (FB 28; Würzburg: Echter-
Verlag, 1977). PENNER, Epistle, considers eschatology the controlling factor of the traditions
employed in James. MARTIN KLEIN believes the final judgement in the near future to be the
decisive motive for the epistle’s ethical instruction (Ein vollkommenes Werk”:
Vollkommenheit, Gesetz und Gericht als theologische Themen des Jakobusbriefes
[BWA(N)T 139; Stuttgart: W. Kohlhammer, 1995], 184). Bibliographical survey on the
whole question in PENNER, “Epistle,” 275–80.
classic commentary. 190 The stress of the entire document lies not on what the
“word of truth” is about, which is taken as known, but on acting according to
it (Jas 1:22: gi,nesqe de. poihtai. lo,gou kai. mh. mo,non avkroatai. paralogizo,menoi
eàutou,j). Therefore, teachers are not only those who explain the content of the
word, which we may safely assume to be their task, but also those who exhort
and encourage fellow believers to put this word into practice.
This paraenetical activity is carried out by drawing on several sources, the
most interesting of which is the Jesus-material. The letter is stuffed with
sentences that are reminiscent of Jesus’ sayings as reported in the Synoptics.
There are as many as 21 possible cases. 191 Direct dependence on the Gospels
can be ruled out since only once the wording is somewhat comparable (Jas 5:12
and Matt 5:34–37). For this reason, a common tradition has been assumed to
be the source on which James and the Synoptics drew. 192 However, it is striking
that the author of James never assigns to Jesus a saying, which other sources
attribute to him. According to Davids, there was no need for it, because the
recipients of the letter would have known Jesus’ teaching by heart and
recognised his words at once. 193 This hypothesis requires some qualification:
the letter would have been read aloud to the gathered community and its content
expounded by the reader, who was likely to be a person of some learning and
maybe even a teacher. Another possibility is that the author of James drew on
early Christian common teaching tradition, which included teachers’ sayings,
Jesus’ sayings and other material without distinction of who said what, and that
at some stage all or part of it was explicitly assigned to Jesus. Rengstorf
recalled a similar case for the elaboration and transmission of teaching in the
Stoic school.
This sort of transmission is very different from what Byrskog believes to
have identified in the community of Matthew, namely that Jesus’ teaching was
considered worth transmitting for the sake of the master. This teaching would
have been handed down for the edification of the community, without
distinguishing who said what. If this is so, one of the tenets of form criticism
would be confirmed, and the rigid transmission of the Jesus-material, which
Zimmermann attributed to early Christian teachers in the wake of
Gerhardsson’s research, disproved.
4.9 Conclusions
James’ addressees were led by teachers. Many people wanted to become
teachers, but James discouraged them on account of the heavy burden on
190
DIBELIUS, Brief.
191
GERHARD KITTEL, “Der geschichtliche Ort des Jakobusbriefes,” ZNW 41 (1942): 71–
105, 84–90.
192
Cf. PENNER, “Epistle,” 287–88.
193
PETER H. DAVIDS, James (NIBC; Peabody: Hendrickson, 1989), 21–22.
5. Didache 111
teachers’ shoulders. The content of their teaching was mostly of paraenetical

character. No signs have been found of rigid transmission of teachings from
the past. James shows the importance of this role for a specific community and
should be read together with Matthew and the Didache as a witness to teachers
in Syria-Palestine in the second half of the first century, but it should not be
placed on a trajectory passing through Matthew and the Didache in order to
prove the decline of early Christian teachers.
5. Didache
5.1 Introduction
Since the first publication of its text in 1883, 194 the Didache has never ceased
to be a topic of intense debate. 195 So far scholars have failed to reach a
consensus on almost all the features of this document, including date and place
of writing, sources, redaction, and relationship with other texts. 196 One thing
on which they agree is the significance of the Didache for the reconstruction
of the history of early Christianity. For instance, we have seen in the first
chapter that Harnack held it to be a fundamental piece of evidence for his
Antiochene triad. Teachers are explicitly mentioned only twice, Did 13.2 and
15.1–2, and maybe implicitly in at least two more passages, Did 4.1 and 11.1–
2. 197
194
BRYENNIOS, DIDACH.
195
GIUSEPPE VISONÀ, Didachè: Insegnamento degli apostoli (Letture cristiane del primo
millennio 30; Milano: Paoline, 2000), 13–19. The title of the study by STANISLAS GIET,
L’énigme de la Didache (Publications de la Faculté des Lettres de l’Université de Strasbourg
149; Paris: Les Éditions Ophrys, 1970), is telling.
196
ANDREW GREGORY, “Reflections on the Didache and Its Community: A Response”,
in The Didache: A Missing Piece of the Puzzle in Early Christianity (ed. JONATHAN A.
DRAPER and CLAYTON N. JEFFORD; Early Christianity and Its Literature 14; Atlanta: Society
of Biblical Literature, 2015), 123–36, 123. Useful bibliographical surveys on the questions
raised by the study of the Didache in JONATHAN A. DRAPER, “The Didache in Modern
Research: An Overview,” in The Didache in Modern Research (ed. JONATHAN A. DRAPER;
AGJU 37; Leiden: Brill, 1996), 1–42; MARCELLO DEL VERME, “Didaché e origini cristiane:
Aggiornamento bibliografico per lo studio della Didaché nel contesto del ‘Giudaismo
cristiano’,” Annali di Storia dell’Esegesi 20 (2003): 455–544. See also the bibliographical
list in KENNETH J. HARDER and CLAYTON N. JEFFORD, “A Bibliography of Literature of the
Didache,” in The Didache in Context: Essays on Its Text, History and Transmission (ed.
CLAYTON N. JEFFORD; NovTSup 77; Leiden: Brill, 1995), 368–82.
197
I use the Greek text and the English translation in BART D. EHRMAN, ed., The
Apostolic Fathers I (LCL 24; Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 2003).
5.2 Genre
The Didache is generally considered to be a manual of discipline, a
“Kirchenordnung”, 198 regulating all the main areas of the life of its community,
though some dissenting voices have been raised. Milavec proposes in his
massive study that “The Didache represents the preserved oral tradition
detailing the step-by-step training of Gentile converts being prepared for full,
active participation in the house churches committed to the Way of Life.” 199
Schöllgen denies the Didache the character of a systematic exposition of
community rules and suggests instead that it tackles only those questions that
were disputed. 200
Some scholars have attributed some inconsistencies to be found in the text
to a redactional work, which, it has been proposed, was completed in the fourth
or fifth century. It consisted in the addition of a number of passages, some in
the sections dealing with apostles, prophets and teachers. 201 Waiting for more
research to be done on the redactional history of the Didache and taking the
hypothesis of late additions as a cautionary warning against drawing sweeping
conclusions from this document, we shall consider it in its entirety as a witness
to the life of a very early Christian community.
198
KURT NIEDERWIMMER, Die Didache (KAV 1; Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht,
1989), 13.
199
MILAVEC, Didache, vii. Later, Milavec expanded on this definition: “the Didache was
the comprehensive, step-by-step program used for the formation of a Gentile converting to
Christianity. By adhering to the order of the Didache, mentors training novices were assured
of following the progressive, ordered, and comprehensive path that master trainers in the
community had effectively culled from their own successful practice in apprenticing
novices” (Didache, xvii).
200
GEORG SCHÖLLGEN, “The Didache as a Church Order: An Examination of the Purpose
for the Composition of the Didache and Its Consequences for Interpretation,” in JEFFORD,
ed., Didache, 43–71; trans. of “Die Didache als Kirchenordnung: Zur Frage des
Abfassungszweckes und seinen Konsequenzen für die Interpretation,” JAC 29 (1986): 5–26.
The Didache may deal with the life of more than one community, but I write “community”
for practical reasons.
201
CLAYTON N. JEFFORD, “Defining Exceptions in the Didache,” in Studies on the Text
of the New Testament and Early Christianity: Essays in Honor of Michael W. Holmes on the
Occasion of His 65th Birthday (ed. DANIEL M. GURTNER et al.; New Testament Tools,
Studies and Documents 50; Leiden: Brill, 2015), 494–516.
5. Didache 113
5.3 Time and Place

There is some consensus that the Didache was written before the end of the
second century. 202 A more precise assessment depends to a large extent on
redaction and source-criticism, on the relationship with other writings, and on
the traditions embedded in the document. The Didache can be seen as the work
of one or more authors who moulded previous traditions in a coherent whole, 203
or as the slow development of a text, which underwent considerable
interventions in response to changing situations. 204 In the first case, the entire
writing stems from a precise moment in time; in the second, it is necessary to
distinguish the redactional layers. The great variety of proposals that have been
put forward makes it difficult to rely primarily on redaction and source-
criticism as criteria for dating the Didache. 205
Over the past decades an increasing number of scholars have drawn attention
to features that suggest a rather early origin. Among them are the following
ones. (1) The Jewish-Christian ethics of the “Two Ways” (Did. 1–6) shows a
community close to its Jewish roots. 206 This is confirmed by the importance
assigned to the Torah. 207 (2) Baptism, eucharist, prayer and fasting in the so-
called “liturgical section” (Did. 7–10) present archaic features. 208 (3) It is
difficult to prove direct acquaintance with the Four Gospels, even in the so-
called “sectio evangelica” (Did 1.3b,6). 209 This seems also to apply to the
202
F. E. VOKES, “Life and Order in an Early Church: the Didache,” ANRW, 27.1: 209–
233, 230–31; cf. JONATHAN A. DRAPER, “Conclusion: Missing Pieces in the Puzzle or Wild
Goose Chase?”, in DRAPER, Didache, 529–43, 530.
203
This is the thrust of MILAVEC, Didache.
204
VISONÀ, Didachè, 36–37.
205
See MILAVEC, Didache, xv-xvii and xix-xxi. A complicated reconstruction of the
redactional history of this document is to be found in JEAN-PAUL AUDET, La Didachè:
Instructions des apôtres (EB; Paris: Gabalda, 1958), 106–115 and 119–20. The same author
wrote D1 (Did 1.1–3a; 2.2-5.2; 7.1; 8.1–11.2) and D2 (Did 11.3–13.2; 14–16). These two
texts circulated independently and none of them had the “you” passages (Did 1.4–6; 6.2–3;
7.2–4; 13.3.5–7), which were inserted by an interpolator.
206
207
JONATHAN A. DRAPER, “Torah and Troublesome Apostles in the Didache
Community,” NovT 33 (1991): 347–72. A clear reference to the Torah is probably the yoke
mentioned in Did 6.2, even if RORDORF and TUILLER (Doctrine, 32–33), followed by
NIEDERWIMMER (Didache, 153–57), interpret it as the yoke of Christ. VISONÀ, Didachè,
310–311, is against this interpretation.
208
209
This position has been favoured by a remarkable array of scholars including AARON
MILAVEC (“Synoptic Tradition in the Didache Revisited,” JECS 11 [2003]: 443–80, with a
list of those holding the same opinion at p. 444); DRAPER, “The Jesus Tradition in the
Didache,” in DRAPER, Didache, 72–91, 79–85 (updated version of a text published in The
Jesus Tradition Outside the Gospel [ed. D. WENHAM; Gospel Perspectives 5; Sheffield:
Gospel that is closer to the Didache, Matthew. 210 Both texts appear to draw on
related material. 211 At the time of the Didache the Four Gospels were not
authoritative yet. 212 (4) In spite of the contacts with Jesus’ teaching recorded
in Q, no word is explicitly attributed to him. This tract is typical of an early
stage of the transmission of the Jesus material, when this was understood
within the frame of the Jewish religion and the need was not felt yet to fix it in
explicit forms through the genre of the gospel. 213 (5) Prophets play an
important role, whereas bishops and deacons have a lower status.
These five characteristics point to the Didache being written before the end
of the first century. They are also clues to the possible location of our
document. The points of contact with the Gospel of Matthew, which we have
assigned to Syria, indicate that region as the birth place of the Didache.
Alternative proposals have been brought forward, for example Egypt, 214 but
Syria-Palestine is the least unlikely option. 215 Some scholars make attempts at
bigger precision. The fame of the Didache among Christian writers and the
discovery of fragments in different locations suggest that it comes from a big
centre, namely Antioch, 216 but others believe that the kind of society described
in it is typical of a rural milieu. 217
5.4 Did a Teacher Write the Didache?

The full title of the Didache, whether in its shorter and probably original form
(Teaching[s] of the Apostles), or in its longer one (Teaching of the Twelve
JSOT Press, 1985), 269–89; and VISONÀ, Didachè, 90–116. Champion of the opposite
opinion is CHRISTOPHER M. TUCKETT, “Synoptic Tradition in the Didache,” in DRAPER,
Didache, 92–128 (repr. from The New Testament in Early Christianity [ed. J.-M. SEVERIN;
BETL 86; Leuven: Leuven University Press, 1989], 197–230).
210
MILAVEC, “Synoptic Tradition.”
211
This seems also to be the case of Ignatius. According to CLAYTON N. JEFFORD (“Did
Ignatius of Antioch Know the Didache?,” in JEFFORD, ed., Didache, 330–51), the points of
contact between the letters of the bishop and the Didache may be due to acquaintance with
the same Antiochene material.
212
It is debated whether the term euvagge,lion (Did. 8.2; 11.3; 15.3; 15.4) refers to a written
gospel or to the oral transmission of Jesus’ teaching: see NIEDERWIMMER, Didache, 74–77.
213
214
HARNACK, Lehre, Prolegomena, 159–60.
215
See e.g. AUDET, Didachè, 206–210; WILLY RORDORF and ANDRÉ TUILIER, La
Doctrine des douze apôtres (Didachè) (SC 248bis; Paris: Cerf, 1998), 245; HUUB VAN DE
SANDT and DAVID FLUSSER, The Didache: Its Jewish Sources and Its Place in Early
Judaism and Christianity (CRINT, Jewish Traditions in Early Christian Literature 5; Assen:
Royal van Gorcum; Minneapolis: Fortress, 2002), 51–52; NIEDERWIMMER, Didache, 79–80.
216
Cf. for example DRAPER, “Torah,” 347.
217
CROSSAN, Birth, 372–73.
5. Didache 115
Apostles), is misleading: 218 the author is anonymous. Hermann-Ad. Stempel

argued that this writer was a dida,skaloj on account of the numerous
occurrences of words from the same root. 219 Though teaching in the Didache
was associated also with other people, this suggestion deserves attention. We
can test it by examining the section of the Didache in which teaching features
prominently (Did. 1–5), and whose source, the so-called “Two Ways” tract,
gives the title to the entire book. 220
5.4.1 The “Two Ways” Tract

The ethical exposition in Did. 1–5 221 is also to be found in different forms in
Barnabas, the Doctrina apostolorum, the Ecclesiastical Constitution of the
Apostles, the Epitome of the Canons of the Holy Apostles, 222 and a comparable
text is in Qumran (1QS III, 13–IV, 26). The relationship between these
documents is complex, but this exposition ultimately goes back to a “Two
Ways” tract, 223 which was either a Jewish document reworked by a Jewish-
Christian 224 or a Jewish-Christian elaboration of a “Two Ways” tradition. 225 It
is made of several elements, which are rooted in the scriptures 226 and whose
purpose is to instruct the addressees in the way of God, that is loyalty to God’s
law and covenant. 227 The most important addition to this tract is the so-called
“evangelical section” (Did. 1.3b–6), which is very close to Matt 5:27–30. This
short passage probably does not depend on Matthew, but on common traditions
and reflects a stage in which material on Jesus was in a rather fluid form. It
could be inserted into a specimen of Jewish instruction without ruptures.
218
The long title is given by the Jerusalem manuscript (H) containing the whole text of
the work; the short title is attested among others in Athanasius, Ep. fest. 39.11 (in the
singular) and Eusebius, Hist. eccl. 3.25.4 (in the plural). See AUDET, Didachè, 91–103;
219
HERMANN-AD. STEMPEL, “Der Lehrer in der ”Lehre der zwölf Apostel”,” VC 34
(1980): 209–217. The same authorship is advocated by ANDRÉ DE HALLEUX, “Ministers in
the Didache,” in DRAPER, Didache, 300–320, 319–20; trans. of “Les ministères dans la
Didachè,” Irénikon 53 (1980): 5–29; NEYMEYR, Lehrer, 154–55. According to AUDET, the
author of his reconstructed D1 and D2 was an apostle (Didachè, 119–20).
220
221
See the analysis in VISONÀ, Didachè, 55–132.
222
The last two writings are from the third century (RORDORF, Doctrine, 118–19). The
date of the Doctrina is unknown, though very ancient (RORDORF, Doctrine, 117).
223
See VISONÀ, Didachè, 55–132; RORDORF, Doctrine, 22–34.
224
NIEDERWIMMER, Didache, 67–69.
225
VISONÀ, Didachè, 90.
226
227
The degree of “Christianisation” of the tract can be debated, but it is

noteworthy that Jesus’ passion, death and resurrection are not mentioned, not
even in the evangelical section. The teaching of Jesus is bound with traditional
Jewish teaching, rather than transmitted as a separate entity. The result are lines
which, in the words of a Jewish scholar, “contain (except for Did 1:3–6 from
the word “bless” and 6.2–3) not the slightest hint of Christianity.” 228
The strong Jewish character of Did. 1–5 makes it clear that the intended
audience was pagan, since the Gentiles did not know the basics of Jewish
religion and ethics and therefore needed some training if they wanted to
become Christians, training which was useless in the case of Jews confessing
Jesus. 229 Didache 1–5 reflects the pre-baptismal catechesis of pagans who
wanted to enter the community. 230 Once they had been taught the way of life,
they were ready to be baptised: tau/ta pa,nta [i.e. Did. 1–6] proeipo,ntej(
bapti,sate (Did. 7.1). 231 These elements may suggest that the tract was written
by a teacher.
5.4.2 Teachers as Mentors

This interpretation is taken further by Milavec, who prefers to translate
dida,skaloj as “master-trainer,” “mentor” or “spiritual parent.” 232 He takes as
an example the fact that learning the skill to “love those who hate you” (Did.
1.3) requires training or apprenticing over an extended period of time. 233
Didache 1–6.2 was only a “bare-bones training outline,” 234 which was largely
supplemented by the personal relationship with the mentor, who became a
228
GEDALIAH ALON, “Halakah in the Teaching of the Twelve Apostles (Didache),” in
DRAPER, Didache, 165–94; first published in Hebrew in Studies in Jewish History in the
Times of the Second Temple, the Mishna and the Talmud (vol. 1; Tel Aviv: Hakibbutz
Hameuchad, 1958), 274–94. It must be observed that actually the evangelical section would
not be considered a Christian passage if we had not had Matthew and Luke; that scholars
disagree whether Did. 6.2 is strictly Jewish or Christian (VISONÀ, Didachè, 121–32); that
Did. 6.3 does not contain anything specifically Christian. The proximity with Judaism is also
underlined by STEPHEN FINLAN, “Identity in the Didache Community,” in DRAPER,
Didache, 17–32.
229
WILLY RORDORF, “An Aspect of the Judeo-Christian Ethic: The Two Ways,” in
DRAPER, Didache, 148–64, 156–59; trans. of “Un chapitre d’éthique judéo-chrétienne: les
Deux voies,” RSR 60 (1972): 109–28.
230
See MILAVEC, Didache, 49–162.
231
On the ground of literary and philological considerations, AUDET sees this verse as
the interpolation of a fourth century Egyptian monk (Didache, 58–62), but this hypothesis
had not found acceptance. The verse in question is usually believed to be a redactional
intervention of an editor (cf. RORDORF, “Aspect,” 153–55).
232
MILAVEC, Didache, 71.
233
MILAVEC, Didache, 88–93.
234
5. Didache 117
spiritual parent. In the opinion of Milavec, these mentors were not itinerant
charismatics, but settled catechists who trained new pagan converts. The
Didache was the outcome of their teaching experience. This is a fascinating
interpretation of the data, which provides important insights. Teaching
relationships require time, shared life, stability. These characteristics do not
belong to itinerant charismatics. However, Milavec makes the same mistake
that we find in Stempel when he refers all the terms relating to teaching to these
mentors. 235 For example, the instructors of Did. 4.1 are not necessarily the
teachers of Did. 13.2, but they could be prophets. Moreover, the translation of
dida,skaloj with “mentor” is misleading. We do not know if teachers and the
people involved in pre-baptismal catechesis were the same. This catechesis did
not require an advanced religious education and could have been imparted by
people other than teachers, like common believers. In order to know more
about what was specific to teachers, it is necessary to study them in connection
with the other main roles, apostles, prophets, bishops and deacons. This means
that we need to analyse chapters 11–13.
5.5 Didache 11–13

Commentators have formulated differing and even conflicting accounts of the
possible redaction history of this section. Niederwimmer 236 and Patterson 237
have pointed out a number of inconsistencies, which in their opinion betray the
composite character of the text. For instance, chapter 12, which is placed
between two sections on prophets, seems to be a later insertion, but at the same
time it is linked to Did. 13.1 through the catchphrase qe,lein kaqh/sqai pro,j
u`ma/j (Did. 12.3). Furthermore, chapter 13 deals with prophets and teachers, but
seems to forget apostles, who are mentioned in chapter 11. Likewise, chapter
11 deals with apostles and prophets but seems to forget teachers, who are
mentioned in chapter 13. These alleged inconsistencies are accounted for in
several ways. For instance, Niederwimmer believes that Did. 11.1–3; 12.1–5;
13.1–3 and 13.5–7 stem from a redactor, whereas Did. 11.4–12 is from some
kind of tradition and Did. 13.4 is a later gloss. 238 On the basis of codicological
evidence, Patterson thinks that the whole work originally ended at Did. 12.2a
235
Cf. MILAVEC, Didache, 93–94.
236
KURT NIEDERWIMMER, “An Examination of the Development of Itinerant Radicalism
in the Environment and Tradition of the Didache,” in DRAPER, Didache, 321–39, 323–25;
trans. of “Zur Entwicklungsgeschichte des Wanderradikalismus im Traditionsbereich der
Didache,” Wiener Studien 11 (1977): 145–67.
237
STEPHEN J. PATTERSON, “Didache 11–13: The Legacy of Radical Itinerancy in Early
Christianity,” in JEFFORD, ed., Didache, 313–29, 317.
238
NIEDERWIMMER, “Examination,” 326–27.
and that Did. 12.2b–13.7 belongs to a second redactional phase. 239 Draper
focuses on Did. 11.1–6 and proposes that verses 3–6 are the earliest part, verses
1–2 were added later and last to be inserted was the reference to prophets in
Did. 11.3. 240 Milavec disagrees with the stress laid on inconsistencies and tries
to provide a unified interpretation of the entire work.
The variety of opinions makes it clear that at present the redaction history
of Did. 11–13, if any, cannot be satisfactorily clarified. The only likely point
is that the didachist 241 made use of one or more sources. For the time being, we
must content ourselves with seeing whether chapters 11–13 throw light on the
situation at the time of the didachist.
5.5.1 Apostles
The rules for dealing with apostles and prophets are gathered under the same
heading (Did. 11.3), but they are discussed in two separate sections. Apostles
are the first to be considered (Did. 11.4–7). They move from place to place
(evrco,menoj), since an apostle who settles down permanently is no longer an
apostle. 242 Contrary to the provisions regarding the teaching delievered by
outsiders (Did. 11.1–2) and specifically by prophets (Did. 11.7–12), the
provisions concerning apostles do not include any test, since all of them must
“be welcomed as the Lord” (Did. 11.4).
Kretschmar has proposed that they are the same as prophets. 243 De Halleux
agrees and brings forward two main clues. 244 First, in Did. 11.3 there is no
article before profhtw/n, so that the connecting kai, is explicative. This is
239
This has been refuted by subsequent studies: see VISONÀ, Didachè, 47–49.
240
DRAPER, “Torah,” 348–54.
241
With this word I indicate the redactor who worked on the Didache as we know it,
without excluding the possibility that there were more than one.
242
The apostles mentioned in the Didache are considered by some scholars itinerant
charismatics: NIEDERWIMMER, Didache, 215–17; GERD THEISSEN, “„Wir haben alles
verlassen “ (Mc. X. 28): Nachfolge und soziale Entwurzelung in der jüdisch-palästinischen
Gesellshaft des 1. Jahrhunderts n. Ch.,” in idem, Studien, 106–141, 108; repr. from NovT 19
(1977): 161–96. THEISSEN thinks that Did. 11 belongs to the “Gemeinderegeln für den
Umgang mit wandernden Charismatikern” (“Legitimation und Lebensunterhalt: Ein Beitrag
zur Soziologie urchristlicher Missionare,” in Studien, 201–230, 201; repr. from NTS 21
[1974–75]: 192–221). On the same lines as NIEDERWIMMER and THEISSEN is the older work
of GERHARD SAß, “Die Apostel in der Didache,” in In Memoriam Ernst Lohmeyer (ed.
WERNER SCHMAUCH; Stuttgart: Evangelisches Verlagswerk, 1951), 233–39. The origin of
this hypothesis is in HARNACK, Lehrer, Prolegomena, 111–18.
243
KRETSCHMAR, “Beitrag,” 36–37.
244
DE HALLEUX, “Ministers,” 306–307. DE HALLEUX believes the apostle of Did. 11.4–
6 to be the same as the itinerant teacher of Did. 11.1–2 because of the provision to accept
both of them as the Lord (Did. 11.2 and 11.4).
5. Didache 119
grammatically possible but not necessary. 245 Second, the Didache accuses the
apostle who wants to remain more than two days of being yeudoprofh,thj (Did.
11.5) rather than yeudapo,stoloj. This argument, however, does not take into
account that, before the Didache, yeudapo,stoloj is attested only once in Paul
(2 Cor 11:13), where it may well be a neologism in place of yeudoprofh,thj,
which at the time indicates generally somebody who falsely claims to be God’s
envoy. 246 Milavec adds three further clues to those proposed by de Halleux.
(1) The Didache gives instructions about visiting apostles but not about visiting
prophets. (2) We find rules for prophets wishing to settle down, but not for
apostles with the same intention. (3) In early Christianity apostles are
commissioned to “accomplish a prophetic task ” (emphasis original). 247 As to
the first point, it can be rebutted that the presence of prophets was not regulated
by time restrictions. The second clue does not take into account that an apostle
wishing to settle down is not an apostle any longer, but becomes an ordinary
Christian, whose case is dealt with in Did. 12. The third argument presupposes
that what applies to other writings applies also to the Didache. 248 A different
proposal has been put forward by Draper: apostles are the successors of the
Jerusalem apostles and their main assignment is to collect tithes, a task
challenged in Did. 11.6. More specifically, the Didache would criticise Paul,
who was a free-lance apostle and who collected money (1 Cor 16:1–4; 2 Cor
9:1–15; Rom 15:22–23). 249 This makes for a fascinating reconstruction, but an
unverifiable one. Others believe that some apostles belonged to the ranks of
the charlatans and vagabonds wandering across Syria and Palestine at the time.
The prohibition to give apostles anything but some bread would undercut any
form of exploitation of the community resources. This interpretation is
unlikely, because this prohibition does not apply to prophets, although some of
them might issue from the same ranks of impostors.
In my view, the situation envisaged in Did. 11.4–6 makes sense if these
apostles are envoys of one Christian group to another. They probably carry out
the office of the ‫שליח‬: an envoy who is sent on a specific mission on behalf of
someone else, either an individual or a corporate body. Though the Jewish
evidence is late, the New Testament itself can be used to prove the existence
of this sort of figure around the time of the Didache (cf. 2 Cor 8:23 and Phil
245
As it is admitted by MILAVEC, who supports this identification (Didache, 438–39).
246
NIEDERWIMMER, Didache, 216–17; RORDORF, Doctrine, 52.
247
The problem is discussed in MILAVEC, Didache, 439–41.
248
See VISONÀ’s criticism of the attempts to consider apostles, prophets and teachers as
one role (Didachè, 203–204).
249
See JONATHAN A. DRAPER, “Social Ambiguity and the Production of Text: Prophets,
Teachers, Bishops, and Deacons and the Development of the Jesus Tradition in the
Community of the Didache,” in Jefford, ed., Didache, 284–312, 294–95; idem, “Torah.”
2:25). 250 These envoys had neither a particular teaching to deliver nor reason
to ask for money in the places they happened to pass through. They would
normally carry a letter of recommendation, which may be implied in the pa/j de.
avpo,stoloj. Hosts were bound to give only shelter and provisions for the
continuation of the journey. The verb auvli,zomai makes it clear that it is
question of simply finding a place where to spend the night. 251 It is to be noted
that apostles constitute the only category the departure of which is explicitly
mentioned: evxerco,menoj (Did. 11.6).
The journey of Barnabas and Paul described in Acts 13–14 is an interesting
term of comparison. These two “prophets and teachers” are sent out on a
mission of evangelisation, which explains the appellative of “apostles” (Acts
14:4 and 14:14), a word Luke otherwise applies only to the Twelve. They are
apostles because of their mission, as in the Didache. It is true that Barnabas
and Paul sojourned in certain places more than one day (Acts 13:42; 14:3), but
these places were the actual targets of their mission. Other communities met
along the journey would have provided them with the necessary logistic
support, but they would not have been the recipients of their missionary
work. 252
5.5.2 Prophets
If we look at the space devoted to prophets (Did. 11.8–12; 13.1–7; 15.1–2), at
their sphere of intervention, at the exemptions and privileges assigned to them,
we must conclude that they are those held in the highest honour in the
Didache. 253 They can say grace as they wish (Did. 10.7) 254 and are to be given
250
See SCHNABEL, Mission, vol. 1, 280–84; DRAPER, “Weber,” 558–60; FRANCIS H.
AGNES, “The Origin of the NT Apostle-Concept: A Review of Research,” JBL 105 (1986):
75–96; CHARLES K. BARRETT, “Shaliaḥ and Apostle,” in Donum Gentilicium: New
Testament Studies in Honour of David Daube (ed. ERNST BAMMEL et al.; Oxford: Clarendon
Press, 1978), 88–102. On the term “apostle” see also the classic entry by KARL H.
RENGSTORF, “avposte,llw( ktl),” GLNT, 1: 1063–1196, 1088–1190.
251
See “auvli,zomai” in BAGD.
252
In the edition by RORDORF and TUILIER we find a similar, though not identical,
interpretation: “De fait, les apôtres itinerants étaient avant tout des missionaires qui avaient
un rôle nécessairement réduit au sein des communautés existantes. Ils ne s’attardaient pas
dans ces dernières puisqu’ils devaient poursuivre leur route pour fonder des églises
nouvelles” (Doctrine, 51).
253
See VISONÀ, Didachè, 204–210.
254
The text can be interpreted as saying that they have the right to add their words after
the thanksgiving reported in Did. 10.1–6 or that they can formulate this thanksgiving in their
own words, which is more probable (NIEDERWIMMER, Didache, 205).
5. Didache 121
the best of the community produce 255 because they are the community high
priests (Did. 13.2–7).
The main characteristic of prophets is that they act in the spirit: the word
pneu/ma is associated with them four times in six verses (Did. 11.7–12) and is
obviously the reason for their special standing. However, this standing is
achieved only once the prophet has been tested (pa/j de. profh,thj
dedokimasme,noj avlhqino,j, Did. 11.11). The test concerns what the prophet says
and does: if words match deeds, the prophet is a true prophet, if they do not,
the prophet is actually a false prophet. The didachist is very explicit: “Not
everyone who speaks in the spirit is a prophet, but only one who conducts
himself like the Lord ( e;ch| tou.j tro,pouj kuri,ou). Thus, the false prophet and
the true prophet will both be known by their conduct (avpo. ou=n tw/n tro,pwn)”
(Did. 11.8): “Every prophet who teaches the truth but does not do what he
himself teaches is a false prophet” (Did. 11.10). It is the same criterion
employed in Matthew to detect false prophets (Matt 7:15–20) and to criticise
scribes and Pharisees (Matt 23:3–7 and 23:13–33); in the Letter of James to
discourage candidates to the role of teachers (Jas 3:1–12); in Ignatius to
discredit his adversaries (Eph. 15.1). The testing of prophets is also to be found
in 1 John 4:1–6 and Hermas, Mand. 11. The need for some criteria was due to
the fact that prophets could not be appointed, as their claims were based on
self-authentication. Therefore, the relationship between words and deeds was
the only means the community had to judge somebody who was, by definition,
unaccountable. 256 It must be observed that the criterion employed by the
Didache also includes the conformity of the prophet’s conduct to that of the
Lord, that is to the life of the earthly Jesus. 257 According to Matt 10 and 23,
and to Ignatius, the life of Jesus is the only model to follow. A similar principle
is applied here: the true prophet lives as Jesus lived.
There is a long standing problem with regard to prophets: were they itinerant
ascetics or settled people? We have seen above that the Didache has been used
to support the hypothesis of the existence of wandering charismatics moving
255
On the meaning of avparch, see MARCELLO DEL VERME, “The Didache and Judaism:
The avparch, of Didache 13:3–7,” in Papers Presented at the Eleventh International
Conference on Patristic Studies Held in Oxford 1991: Liturgica, Second Century,
Alexandria before Nicaea, Athanasius and the Arian Controversy (ed. ELIZABETH A.
LIVINGSTONE; SP 16; Leuven: Peeters Press, 1993), 113–20. According to SCHÖLLGEN, Did.
13.3.5–7 is a piece of traditional material (“Didache,” 57–58).
256
Cf. VISONÀ, Didachè, 334 n. 7
257
NIEDERWIMMER, Didache, 219. This is criticised by MILAVEC, Didache, 459–63, who
interprets “Lord” as God and infers the right conduct from Did. 3.8: “long-suffering,
merciful, harmless, calm, good”. However, it is more likely that these attributes are said of
Jesus than of God.
from one community to another. 258 However, the text does not say so. If we
keep prophets apart from apostles, as we should, there is no mention of comings
and goings in reference to the former. There is nothing equivalent to the
specific provisions for the apostles who come (“Let every apostle who comes
to you be welcomed as the Lord,” Did. 11.4) and who go (“When an apostle
leaves, he should take nothing except bread,” Did. 11.6). In second place,
prophets are not forced to leave the community after two days, but we must
assume that they could stay on as long as they wished. In third place, it is very
difficult to imagine that the first-fruit of the community produce might be given
to a passerby (Did. 13.3–7). 259 In fourth place, if they accepted this offering,
they would not be ascetics any longer. The evidence points to prophets who
did not conduct an itinerant ascetic lifestyle. They were not destitute and
resided in the community permanently 260 or as long as they thought it
necessary. This is not to say that there were not ascetic prophets popping in
and out, but this sort of people is not dealt with. 261 The Didache lends support
to the first type of itinerant prophets identified by David E. Aune:
The itinerant prophets described in Acts were not aimless wanderers, but appear to have
travelled to certain places for the specific purpose of exercising their prophetic gifts in
particular ways. Similarly, Hermas received commissions directing him to deliver oracles to
particular individuals and groups, though his prophetic activity was generally limited to the
vicinity of Rome. The strong Jewish-Christian traditions evident in Hermas confirm the
connection between his practice and that of the Christian prophets in Syria-Palestine whom
we meet in Acts. 262
258
HARNACK, Lehre, Prolegomena, 119; THEISSEN, “Wanderradikalismus”; GEORG
KRETSCHMAR, “Beitrag,” 36–37; NIEDERWIMMER, Didache, 218. The most picturesque
reconstruction is offered by MILAVEC on the basis of CROSSAN, Birth, e.g. 330–331.
According to MILAVEC, prophets and apostles are the same people and therefore the rules
for the latter apply to the former. These prophets, who could stay in the community no longer
than two days (Did. 11.5), were people who did not chose poverty, but were reduced to
poverty by economic changes and, unable to protect both themselves and their families, sold
their children and their wives or returned the latter to the original families, and set off on a
life of itinerancy, preaching that God was coming soon (Didache, 444–50).
259
260
This is the opinion of DE HALLEUX, who, however, mistakenly reduces the roles of
apostles, prophets and teachers to that of prophets (“Ministers,” 315–16).
261
262
DAVID E. AUNE, Prophecy in Early Christianity and the Ancient Mediterranean World
(Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1983), 215. AUNE identifies another group of itinerant prophets,
corresponding to the homeless charismatics of Theissen. He gathers his evidence mainly
from Lucian’s novel on Peregrinus, from a wide held interpretation of Q, and from the
Didache itself.262 Since I believe that the Didache does not belong to this series, in my
opinion the evidence is reduced to a non-Christian polemical work and a hypothetical
reconstruction of the setting of Q.
5. Didache 123
The missionary journey of Paul and Barnabas (Acts 13–14) is a good example.
Studying whether the role of Paul and Barnabas is equivalent to that of the
prophets envisaged by the Didache, Milavec responds negatively. 263 His
answer is based on three arguments. First, how could people like Paul and
Barnabas be allowed to stay no longer than two days? Second, the provision
regarding those wishing to settle down is useless with people, who, like Paul
and Barnabas, go back to their base. Third, envoys in Acts are supposed to
carry letters of authorisation (cf. Acts 9:2; 15:22–29), something which the
Didache seems to know nothing about because of the testing to which prophets
must be subjected. However, (1) we have seen that the identification apostles-
prophets, whereby the limit of a two-day staying can be extended from apostles
to prophets, is to be rejected. (2) There is no reason to believe that the prophets
who wished to settle were on a mission. (3) This settling does not need to be
definitive, but simply to extend for a long time. 264 (4) Finally, letters of
authorisation do not necessarily exempt the community from checking visitors.
The mission of Paul and Barnabas throws light on the work of prophets who,
being sent on a mission, are also apostles. Once the mission is ended, they are,
once again, only prophets (and/or teachers). An interesting case comparable to
Did. 13.1 is that of Philip the evangelist and his four prophesying daughters,
who resided in Caesarea (Acts 21:8–9), but later are reported to reside in Asia
Minor. 265 The rules regarding prophets wishing to settle (Did. 13.1 and 13.3–
7) do not prove that they were wanderers, but simply that the prophets in
question came from outside. The phrase qe,lwn kaqh/sqai (Did. 13.1) does not
say whether they were itinerant, roaming from place to place 266 or coming on
a mission or even, as Draper suggests, refugees of the Jewish War. 267
Draper proposes a very speculative hypothesis according to which these
prophets coming from Galilee would have brought traditions about Jesus to the
urban centres to which they migrated, such as Antioch. These arrivals caused
tensions within the hosting community, which were solved through the
codification by teachers of these traditions into a corpus, Q, employed to test
the prophets themselves. This corpus then passed into the hands of bishops and
deacons who turned the tables against prophets and teachers. 268
263
264
Cf. AUDET, Didachè, 455–56.
265
Papias and Polycrates of Ephesus in Eusebius, Hist. eccl., respectively 3.39.3 and
3.31.3; 5.24.2. Case mentioned in AUNE, Prophecy, 212–13.
266
NIEDERWIMMER thinks that the prophets of the Didache were “bisher heimatlosen”
(Didache, 228).
267
“Ambiguity,” 311–12; see also PATTERSON, “Didache,” 326.
268
The flight of refugees is also used by PATTERSON (“Didache”) for his hypothesis that
Did. 12.2b–13.7 reflects a stage when it was necessary to regulate the visits and intake of
prophets and teachers.
In my view, chapters 11–15 are best understood if prophets were either

settled or spent a considerable length of time in the community. It must be
noted that chapter 11 does not deal with the right to settle, but with the right to
sustenance. 269 It introduces a correction to what is stated in the previous chapter
with regard to normal Christians wishing to settle. 270 Whereas these
newcomers are requested to work, prophets benefit from the support of the
community.
The tasks assigned to prophets are not explicitly outlined, but only
incidentally mentioned. We are informed that they say thanks at the eucharist
as they wish (Did. 10.7). They have the right to order meals, probably for the
poor (Did. 11.9). 271 They teach (Did. 11.10) and ask money for the needy (Did.
11.9–12). Prophets and teachers perform a leitourgi,a for the community,
which they share with bishops and deacons (Did. 15.1).
5.5.3 Bishops and Deacons

Bishops and deacons are dealt with in Did. 15.1–2. They were selected by the
community (Did. 15.1) and, contrary to teachers and prophets, it is not said that
they were worthy of its support. This indicates that they were people of
independent means, as in the ancient world no one could afford unpaid work
with the exception of a wealthy person. 272 Possibly, it is question of the patrons
of the community. The accompanying list of attributes, which is traditional (cf.
1 Tim 3:2–12; 5:17–18; Titus 1:6–9; 1 Peter 5:2–3), shows the criteria of
selection, which are naturally linked to the functions of these two roles. These
criteria correspond to the qualities of ordinary good administration. The last
phrase, avlhqei/j kai. dedokimasme,nouj (Did. 15.1; cf. 11.11; 13.1–2), implies
that recently converted members have no access to these roles. 273 The criterion
that they should not be fond of money (avfilargu,rouj) suggests that one of their
functions was to manage community funds. 274 The first attribute, praei/j, seems
to be a hint that they should not use their role in order to be abusive or bossy, 275
but to resolve community strife. 276 With the exception of the likely reference
to managerial responsibilities, this list does not point to any specific task.
269
NIEDERWIMMER, Didache, 228.
270
GEORG SCHÖLLGEN, “Didache,” in idem and WILHELM GEERLINGS, Didache, Zwölf-
Apostel-Lehre. Traditio Apostolica, Apostolische Überlieferung (Fontes Christiani 1;
Freiburg: Herder, 1991), 65–66.
271
272
See DRAPER, “Ambiguity,” 291–94.
273
NIEDERWIMMER, Didache, 242 n. 14; SCHÖLLGEN, “Didache,” 61.
274
Cf. NIEDERWIMMER, Didache, 242; MILAVEC, Didache, 588–89.
275
276
SCHÖLLGEN, “Didache,” 61.
5. Didache 125
Proposals that bishops also presided over the eucharist cannot be validated
because the Didache does not say anything about it. 277
Skipping for a moment the question of the leitourgi,a (Did. 15.1), we move
to the final words inviting not to disdain bishops and deacons, “for these are
the ones who have found honour among you, along with the prophets and
teachers.” 278 This last phrase shows that bishops and deacons were disdained
in comparison to prophets and teachers, in other words, that they were not
given the same respect. The skills of a good administrator are not so appealing
as those of prophets and teachers. 279
5.5.4 Teachers
With regard to teachers, I will consider those cases in which the word
dida,skaloj (Did. 13.2; 15.1–2) or the participle of dida,skw (Did. 11.1–2)
occurs. Moreover, I will examine the reference to the teaching of scripture in
Did. 4.1–2. These two exceptions to the method employed in this book are due
to important claims scholars like Stempel have made about teachers on the
basis of these texts.
5.5.4.1 Didache 4.1–2

The first text, Did. 4.1–2, reads:
My child, night and day remember the one who speaks the word of God to you (tou/
lalou/ntoj soi to.n lo,gon tou// qeou/); honor him as the Lord (timh,seij de. auvto.n w`j ku,rion).
For where his lordship is discussed, there the Lord himself is. 2. Every day seek out the
company of the saints, that you may find comfort in their words.
This passage is part of the “Two Ways” section (Did. 1–5), depending on a
tract on which also Barnabas draws:
Love as the apple of your eye everyone who speaks the word of the Lord to you (pa,nta to.n
lalou/nta soi to.n lo,gon kuri,ou). Think about the day of judgment night and day, and seek
out the company of the saints every day, either labouring through the word and going out to
comfort another, being concerned to save a life through the word, or working with your
hands as a ransom for your sins (Barn. 19.9–10). 280
The difference between the two works posits the question whether the didachist
or Barnabas departed from the tract. The metaphor of one’s own pupil is
biblical (Deut 32:10; Prov 7:2) and is to be found in the “Two Ways” section
277
See MILAVEC’s criticism of this position in Didache, 593–94; 608–615.
278
The last phrase can be translated “those who are honoured among you” or “those who
are your honoured ones.” See VISONÀ, Didachè, 211.
279
Cf. MILAVEC, Didache, 586–88.
280
Translation in BART D. EHRMAN, ed., The Apostolic Fathers II (LCL 25; Cambridge,
Mass.: Harvard University Press, 2003).
of the Ecclesiastical Constitution of the Apostles 12.1 and the Epitome of the
Canons of the Holy Apostles 9. Erik Peterson suggested that the didachist used
a faulty copy of the “Two Ways” tract, in which the words h`me,ran kri,sewj had
been dropped. 281 Pierre Prigent 282 claims that the eschatological perspective
brought out by the “day of judgement” stems from pseudo-Barnabas. Probably,
this is correct in view of the following consideration. Peterson and Prigent
agree that the second part of the text in Barnabas is not original and that we
should rather follow the Didache. If this is correct, we observe that this second
section carries on the theme of the first part: “everyone who speaks the word
of the Lord” recalls “the words” of the saints. The eschatological reference
between these two phrases is a diversion, which can be redactional.
Even if the Didache is closer to the tract, it is still possible that the didachist
introduced some changes, though this is extremely difficult to establish. We
can observe that the Ecclesiastical Constitution of the Apostles 12.1 contains
the phrase timh,seij de auvto.n w`j ku,rion. Since this work is independent of the
Didache, 283 it is arguable that the honour which “the one who speaks the word
of God” is held in is a remark already to be found in the tract.
In its original setting the phrase may deal with the relationship between
scribe and disciple 284 or more generally with Jewish sages. 285 Any
interpretation seeking to be more precise should be avoided on account of the
brevity of the passage. It is probably question of people who could speak
authoritatively about God, regardless of their specific role, 286 such as, for
instance, parents (Did. 4.9) and prophets (Did. 11.7–8 and 11.10–11). 287 With
regard to the meaning of “word of God,” it is reasonable to think not only of
281
ERIK PETERSON, “Über einige Probleme der Didache-Überlieferung,” in idem,
Frühkirche, Judentum und Gnosis: Studien und Untersuchungen (Rome: Herder, 1959),
146–82, 153–54. He thus reconstructs the original text: avgaph,seij w`j ko,rhn tou/ ovfqalmou/
to.n lalou/nta soi to.n lo,gon tou/ qeou/Å timh,seij de. auvto.n w`j ku,rion( o[qen ga.r h` kurio,thj
lalei/taiÃ evkei/ ku,rio,j evstinÅ mnhsqh,sh| h`me,ran kri,sewj nukto.j kai. h`me,rajÃ kai. evkzhth,seij
kaqV e`ka,sthn h`me,ran ta. pro,swpa tw/n a`gi,wnÃ i[na evpanapah|/j toi/j lo,goij auvtw/n.
282
PIERRE PRIGENT, Épître de Barnabé (SC 172; Paris: Cerf, 1971), 208 n. 6.
283
RORDORF, Doctrine, 221; VISONÀ, Didachè, 66.
284
NIEDERWIMMER, Didache, 135–37.
285
AUDET, Didachè, 326–28.
286
NIEDERWIMMER, however, thinks that in its new context this text deals with the
Christian dida,skaloj (Didache, 135).
287
This is HARNACK’S identification of those who spoke the word of God according to
Did. 4.1–2: “Nicht ständige Beamte einer Einzelgemeinde, auch nicht von den Gemeinden
gewählte Beamte, sondern zunächst freie Lehrer, die – so müssen wir annehmen – auf ein
göttliches Mandat oder Charisma ihren Beruf zurückführten und von Gemeinde zu
Gemeinde mit ihrer Predigt wanderten. Unter ihnen werden zwei Klassen streng
unterschieden, von denen die zweite wiederum in zwei Ordnungen zerfällt: 1) die Apostel,
2) die Propheten und Lehrer.” (Lehre, Prolegomena, 96–97).
5. Didache 127
the Old Testament, but also of the teaching of the community. In Did. 6.1 we
read: “Take care that no one lead you astray from the path of this teaching
(didach,j), since that one teaches (dida,skei) you apart from God (parekto.j
qeou/).” The teaching of the “Two Ways” tract is related to God and leads to
God. Though there it not an explicit connection, it is arguable that the “word
of God” in Did. 4.2 includes the teaching of the Didache. 288 This seems
confirmed by Did. 11.2: “if his [of o` dida,skwn] teaching brings righteousness
and the knowledge of the Lord, then welcome him as the Lord.” The teaching
of the Didache is considered as part of the divine teaching (Did. 4.1).
5.5.4.2 Didache 11.1–2

The next passage to consider reads as follows:
Welcome anyone who comes and teaches you everything mentioned above. 2. But if the
teacher should himself turn away and teach something different, undermining these things,
do no listen to him. But if his teaching brings righteousness and the knowledge of the Lord,
then welcome him as the Lord.
]Oj a'n ou=n evlqw.n dida,xh| u`ma/j tau/ta pa,nta ta. proeirhme,na( de,xasqe auvto,n\ 2. eva.n de. auvto.j
o` dida,skwn strafei.j dida,skh| a;llhn didach.n eivj to. katalu/sai( mh. auvtou/ avkou,shte\ eivj de.
to. prosqei/nai dikaiosu,nhn kai. gnw/sin kuri,ou( de,xasqe auvto.n w`j ku,rion.
The interpretation of this passage raises several problems. Once again, is it

question of dida,skaloi? Does it say anything about the lifestyle of the people
referred to? What is their relationship with the community of the Didache?
First of all, it must be observed that verse one is a bridge between the previous
section on liturgical questions (Did. 7–10) and the following one on
disciplinary matters (Did. 11–15). On one side, it refers back to what has been
previously said (ta. proeirhme,na); on the other, it points forward to what is
going to be said in the next verse (cf. de,xasqe auvto,n and de,xasqe auvto.n w`j
ku,rion).
The first verb makes it clear that the instructors in question are not settled
in the community, but they come from outside. However, it does not say that
they are itinerant: such a conclusion is not warranted by the text. An alternative
explanation could be that we are reading about envoys of another community.
These visitors deliver some teaching, maybe during community-service, and
their words are put to the test by their audience. 289 The criteria of assessment
are two: the teaching they propose must be in harmony with that of the
community and/or it must promote justice and knowledge of God. It is to be
noted that the author of the Didache does not rule out external and different
teachings, providing that they are not noxious. This openness contrasts with
288
Cf. AUDET, Didachè, 327.
289
For MILAVEC this text was intended for the newly baptised (Didache, 437–38).
the sour polemic carried out by writers such as the author of the Pastorals or
Ignatius against their adversaries. The visitor who passes the test has the right
to be welcomed “as the Lord”, that is Jesus. This passage makes one think at
once of Matt 10:40 and John 13:16.20. The similarity is probably due to the
use of a common tradition regarding the reception of outsiders preaching the
word of God. In the light of the ties Matthew, the Didache and the Gospel of
John have with Syro-Palestinian Jewish-Christianity, this tradition can be
placed in that region. 290
If one brings to the community doctrines, which do not only mismatch those
of the Didache but also destroy what its members have been taught, this person
should be rejected. Draper has proposed that this text is behind Matt 5:17–20
and that its target is Paul, whom the Didache dismisses in the belief that the
apostle to the Gentiles destroyed the Torah. 291 However, our passage is not able
to bear so much interpretative weight. More to the point is the commentary
given by Visonà, according to whom our text belongs to a group discussing
how to distinguish between false and true prophets and teachers (Matt 24:24;
2 Thess 2:2; 1 Tim 4:1; Titus 1:10; 2 Pet 2:1; 3:3; 1 John 2:18; 4:1; 2 John 7).
Second Letter of John 10 is paradigmatic: “Do not receive into the house or
welcome anyone who comes to you and does not bring this teaching.” 292
The absence of the word dida,skaloj, in spite of the fact that it is employed
elsewhere, is a clue that teachers are not the only protagonists of these verses.
Rather, this passage seems to address in a general way the case of teaching
visitors, including prophets (Did. 11.10). This interpretation is not shared by
all scholars. 293 According to Schöllgen, these verses are about dida,skaloi. He
notes that the teaching presupposed by tau/ta pa,nta ta. proeirhme,na requires a
long and systematic catechesis, which is typical of the role of teachers. 294
Therefore, these two verses are not meant to introduce apostles and prophets
(Did. 11.3), since they were allotted only a short time in the community and
since prophets speak in the spirit and should not be tested on the basis of an
existing syllabus (Did. 11.7). However, Did. 11.1–2 only requires the visitor’s
teaching, regardless of its length, to be in harmony with the teaching of the
290
NIEMAND, Fusswaschungserzählung, 146–47.
291
DRAPER, “Torah.”
292
VISONÀ, Didachè, 332 n. 2. “Teachers” is intended here in a large sense.
293
Among those who share it, VAN DE SANDT, Didache, 342–43, and NEYMEYR, Lehrer,
140–41, who draw a distinction between the visitors of Did. 11.1–2 and the teachers of Did.
13.2 and 15.1–2.
294
GEORG SCHÖLLGEN, “Wandernde oder seßhafte Lehrer in der Didache?,” BN 52
(1990): 19–26, 20–23; see also idem, Didache, 58–59.
5. Didache 129
Didache. Moreover, we have seen that even prophets in the Didache are tested
(Did. 11.8–12). 295
5.5.4.3 Didache 13.2

The first unequivocal mention of teachers occurs in Did. 13.1–2:
1. Every true prophet who wants to settle down with you deserves his food. 2. So too a true
teacher, like the worker, deserves his food.
1. Pa/j de. profh,thj avlhqino,j( qe,lwn kaqh/sqai pro.j u`ma/j( a;xio,j evsti th/j trofh/j auvtou/) 2.
z`Wsau,twj dida,skaloj avlhqino,j evstin a;xioj w[sper o` evrga,thj th/j trofh/j auvtou/)
Teachers are introduced right after prophets and placed on the same footing.
This passage raises at least two questions. First, why does the Didache speak
of teachers in a section devoted to prophets? Second, why does our book do it
by partly repeating and partly changing the previous sentence? The hypothesis
of an interpolation seems the best answer to the first question. However, the
complex form of this insertion is problematic. The simplest way would have
been to write “every true prophet and/or teacher,” which is in fact the solution
adopted by Const. ap. 7.28.5, a passage depending on the Didache: pa/j
profh,thj h' dida,skaloj evrco,menoj pro.j u`ma/j a;xio,j evstin th/j trofh/j w`j
evrga,thj lo,gou dikaiosu,nhj. The reason for inserting a brand new verse rather
than two words may be inferred from the alterations of this text. Verse 2 does
not repeat qe,lwn kaqh/sqai pro.j u`ma/j and adds w'sper o` evrga,thj. We may
suppose that teachers were not people wishing to settle down, obviously
because they were resident. 296 It can be objected that this omission as well as
the comparison between prophet and worker are implied. In the case of the
wish to settle down, it is impossible to make a final decision, but the connection
between prophet and worker clashes with the following designation of prophets
295
The seventh book of the Apostolic Constitutions, probably composed in Syria or even
Antioch around 380 (MARCEL METZGER, Les Constitutions apostoliques [SC 320; Paris:
Cerf, 1985], 54–62), heavily relies on the Didache. The chapter drawing on the text in
question explicitly refers to teachers: Pa/j de. o` evrco,menoj pro.j u`ma/j( dokimasqei,j( ou]twj
dece,sqw\ su,nesin ga.r e;cete( kai. du,nasqe gnw/nai dexia.n kai. avristera.n kai. diakri/nai
yeudodidaska,louj didaska,lwn) VElqo,nti me,ntoi tw/| didaska,lw| evk yuch/j evpicorhgh,sate ta.
de,onta\ tw|/ de, yeudodidaska,lw| dw,sete me.n ta. pro.j crei,an( ouv parade,xesqe de. auvtou/ th.n
pla,nhn( ou;te mh.n sumproseu,xhsqe auvtw|/( i[na mh. summianqh/te auvtw|/ (Const. ap. 7.28.3–4).
Text in MARCEL METZGER, Les Constitutions apostoliques [SC 336; Paris: Cerf, 1987].
However, it must be reckoned with the possibility that the word “teacher” here is actually a
generic designation expressing the teaching function of other roles (MARCEL METZGER, Les
Constitutions apostoliques [SC 329; Paris: Cerf, 1986], 58), such as that of bishop (cf. Const.
ap. 8.5.3), though the instruction to give food to visiting prophets and teachers (Const. ap.
7.28.5) suggests that some prophets and teachers might still have been around.
296
PAPA, “Profeti,” 251; NEYMEYR, Lehrer, 150.
as high priests (Did. 13.3). Moreover, it is revelatory that teachers are excluded
from this provision, in spite of being equal to prophets (w`sau,twj in Did. 13.2).
The next question is what verse 13.2 reveals about teachers. We are told that
the teacher who deserves his food must be avlhqino,j. This adjective is taken
from the previous sentence, which, in turn, alludes to the testing that a prophet
must undergo (Did. 11.11) before benefiting from the provisions allotted to the
true prophet. It is not difficult to imagine that the community had to tell apart
true teachers from false teachers. The test must have been the one set in Did.
11.1–2. The doctrines exposed in chapters 1–10 and the capacity of the new
teaching to “bring righteousness and the knowledge of the Lord” (Did. 11.2)
are the criteria to be employed. It is noteworthy that the didachist does not say
that the words of teachers should be in harmony with their deeds, contrary to
the insistence on this topic in the case of the prophets. Since teachers are
mentioned only in two passing references, it can be supposed that the didachist
was not interested in detailing all the criteria for assessing them. Moreover, the
freedom which prophets enjoyed on account of their pneumatic endowment
might have required stricter rules than those for teachers.
We have seen that the true teacher is said to be worthy of his food. The
didachist quotes a proverb, which is almost identical to Matt 10:10b: a;xioj ga.r
o` evrga,thj th/j trofh/j (misqou/, Luke 10:7) auvtou/. This contact is not evidence,
as Tuckett suggests, 297 that the Didache cites Matthew, but that both used
common material. 298 The occurrence of a similar sentence in 1 Tim 5:18,
maybe depending on 1 Cor 9:14.17, shows that we are dealing with a maxim
belonging to the early Christian provisions for preachers and instructors. First
Timothy is particularly interesting because it speaks of presbyters, namely of
those “who labour in preaching and teaching” (ma,lista oi` kopiw/ntej evn lo,gw|
kai. didaskali,a)| . Neymeyr argues that the provisions for the prophets wishing
to settle down are shaped on the basis of those for resident teachers. 299
However, Did. 13.2 is an interpolation, which shows that the opposite is true.
The nature of the trofh, for teachers cannot be established, whereas it is
clearly defined for prophets. However, the grounds for this allowance can be
easily guessed. The comparison between teachers and workers indicates that
teachers deserved sustenance not because of the honour attached to their role,
but because of the time they spent working for the community. If they had a
job, this leitourgi,a determined a partial or total loss of income. Their activities
were, therefore, time-consuming. Liturgical celebrations, which take place on
special occasions and/or on feast days, would not justify this loss, but pre-
baptismal catechesis of new converts, study of the scriptures and of oral or/and
297
TUCKETT, “Tradition,” 105–106.
298
HELMUT KÖSTER, Synoptische Überlieferung bei den apostolischen Vätern (TU 65;
Berlin: Akademie-Verlag, 1957), 212–13. Obviously, TUCKETT disagrees with KÖSTER.
299
NEYMEYR, Lehrer, 150.
5. Didache 131
other written traditions, including material related to Jesus, would be enough

to account for the right to sustenance. 300
5.5.4.4 Didache 15.1–2

Some additional information about teachers is to be gleaned from Did. 15.1–2,
where the subjects are bishops and deacons, who
also conduct the ministry of the prophets and teachers among you. 2. And so, do not disregard
them. For these are the ones who have found honor among you, along with the prophets and
teachers.
u`mi/n ga.r leitourgou/si kai. auvtoi. th.n leitourgi,an tw/n profhtw/n kai. didaska,lwn) 2. Mh.
ou=n u`peri,dhte auvtou,j\ auvtoi. ga,r eivsin oi` tetimhme,noi u`mw/n meta. tw/n profhtw/n kai.
didaska,lwn.
This text poses once again redactional questions. If Did. 13.2 is an

interpolation, the same may be suspected of “teachers” in Did. 15.1–2.
However, since the available evidence does not grant any conclusion, it is
better to take the text as it stands.
Didache 15.1 reminds one of the use of the verb leitourge,w in connection
with the prophets and teachers mentioned in Acts 13:1–2. I have suggested that
the verb in Acts expresses religious service, but it is doubtful that the same
meaning applies in the Didache. The freedom given to prophets to say grace as
they want (Did. 10.7) does not prove that they presided over religious service.
The qualification of being the high priests of the community may concern only
the right to the first-fruit. If this also entitled to preside over the eucharist, we
should explain why, in the absence of prophets, the first-fruit is to be given to
the poor and not to teachers, bishops or deacons. In sum, the verb leitourge,w
and the cognate form leitourgi,a probably indicate “service” in general, thus
including, but not coinciding with, religious service. 301 What these two words
stood for was known to the intended audience of the book and did not need
clarification. The content of these terms may be destined to remain obscure to
us, but there are two points to be remarked. If it is true that managerial
responsibilities were among the functions of bishops (and deacons), it is
300
On the fact that teachers had to receive material support because of their work see
JONATHAN A. DRAPER, “Apostles, Teachers, and Evangelists: Stability and Movement of
Functionaries in Matthew, James, and the Didache,” in VAN DE SANDT, Matthew, 139–76,
163–66.
301
VISONÀ, Didachè, 349 n. 3. MILAVEC prefers to translate the noun as “unpaid public
service” (Didache, 595–98). Bishops were members of the administrative council of the
community. They were chosen from well-off families and did not need support. The
provisions for prophets and teachers (Did. 13.1–2) did not compromise the gratuitous
character of their service. Unfortunately, Milavec does not explain why it did not.
understandable that the community placed its resources in the hands of people
it chose. This is all the more likely if these were wealthy patrons, since they
would have been the most generous sponsors and would have been able to
manage large sums of money. It would be less understandable that these
resources were placed in the hands of prophets and/or teachers, whose talents
lay elsewhere and who, since they were not appointed, were unaccountable. 302
This is one concrete case in which the domain of prophets and teachers did not
coincide with that of bishops and deacons. In this case, the four roles under
consideration performed, as Did. 15.1 says, the same service, in the sense that
their work was something worthy of respect and intended for the good of the
community. The second point concerns how this form of organisation worked
in practice. Since the presence of teachers and prophets was a matter of chance
rather than one of appointment, there could have been periods when none of
them was to be seen. It is obvious that in such unfortunate cases the lot of these
two roles befell bishops and deacons. It is also clear that when teachers and
prophets did show up, bishops and deacons would not be dismissed but they
would continue their work, though in collaboration with teachers and prophets
or even in a subordinate manner, given their lesser status in the eyes of common
believers.
5.5.4.5 How to Become a Teacher

We are not told how one could become a teacher, a prophet or an apostle. This
is taken as known. However, when the didachist introduces bishops and
deacons, we are told that (1) these were appointed; (2) they should be
trustworthy; and (3) they performed the service of prophets and teachers. This
means that bishops and deacons were common Christians who received their
authority from the community and who were associated to prophets and
teachers. We conclude that, by converse, prophets and teachers were not
appointed, that their talents were not common, and that the realm of their work
was not decided by the community. The first point is confirmed by the fact that
prophets and teachers might come from outside, which implies that their hosts
did not play any role in deciding who was to be a teacher. The didachist is not
interested in the process of appointment, but of validation. What matters to our
writer is that the teacher or prophet in question is true (avlhqino,j in Did. 13.1–
2), a feature which is verified through conformity to the rules set by the
community. These rules or criteria concern content of teaching and behaviour,
and not, as one may expect, credentials. We are not in the environment of the
Pastorals, according to which those who teach receive their authority as
successors of Paul, or of Ignatius, for whom the authority of bishops has to be
302
On the accountability of bishops and deacons in the Didache, see MILAVEC, Didache,
605–606.
5. Didache 133
accepted even if their performance is unsatisfactory. Teachers and prophets are

people who present themselves as such before the community and whose
claims the community verifies by checking their deeds.
5.5.4.6 Why Does the Didache Say Little about Teachers?

The Didache is relatively informative with regard to prophets, but less
informative when it comes to teachers. There is nothing explicitly said about
the sphere of their activity. Four reasons can be brought forward. (1) If it is
true that in Did. 13.2 and 15.1–2 didaska,lwn is an insertion made by the
didachist, the Didache does not say anything on the topic we are interested in
because originally it did not deal with teachers at all. (2) Even if these two texts
have not been tampered with, at the time of the composition of the Didache
teachers had only recently reached the stage of being formally equated to
prophets. (3) The Didache is the work of one or more teachers. Understandably,
they exempted themselves from the sort of demanding tests to which they put
apostles and prophets. The only exception are those teachers who came from
outside and whose teaching must not clash with the teaching provided within
(Did. 11.1–2). (4) The whole or parts of the Didache actually deal with what
teachers taught. As to the first solution, even if we assume the interpolation
hypothesis to be correct, the question remains why the didachist did not make
further and more extended insertions about teachers. As to the second point, it
is noteworthy that teachers are not given free hand in saying grace and are not
the recipients of the first-fruit of the community produce, not even when
prophets are absent. One gets the impression that they are not on the same
footing as prophets, maybe because they lack a comparable divine inspiration.
The third and fourth solutions are probably correct as they give the best account
of why there is apparently so little about teachers. The space allotted in the text
to each role is not synonymous with the importance assigned to it, but is, to
some extent, functional to the need to settle controversial or difficult matters.
How to deal with alternative teachings? What to do when an apostle wants to
stay more than two days? Do prophets have right to sustenance? 303 What kind
of honour do bishops and deacons deserve? These must have been debated
questions. On the contrary, the content of the leitourgi,a of prophets, teachers,
bishops and deacons is not made explicit because it was taken for granted.
Teachers deserved attention only as far as the right to sustenance went (Did.
13.2). The reason why teachers were not a source of concern is possibly that
the Didache, at least in its final stage, is the work of one or more teachers, who
303
On this question and on the kind of sustenance see JONATHAN A. DRAPER, “First-fruit
and the Support of Prophets, Teachers, and the Poor in Didache 13 in Relation to New
Testament Parallels,” in Trajectories through the New Testament and the Apostolic Fathers
(ed. ANDREW F. GREGORY and C. M. TUCKETT; Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2005),
223–43.
did not see themselves as a source of troubles. Therefore, they did not regulate
their own activity as they did with prophets and made only non-negative
remarks about themselves: in Did. 15.2 we have a matter-of-fact statement; in
Did. 13.2 there is a provision in favour of them.
If one or more teachers composed the Didache, it means that they could
speak authoritatively about many issues concerning Christian life, from private
conduct, to faith, rituals, and community organisation. In spite of the great
respect accorded to prophets, it seems that it was teachers who had the leading
role.
5.5.4.7 Gender of Teachers

It is not to be taken for granted that only men were teachers. 304 If teachers were
also catechists, it is likely that women were among them. An important clue is
in the “te,knon sentences” (Did. 3.1–6). The Greek term te,knon is equivalent to
“child,” with no reference to sex or age. If only male “children” were
envisaged, the didachist would have probably written pai/j or uiò,j. Since in
antiquity women were usually trained by other women, we may suppose that
female new converts would have been initiated to the basics of Christianity by
other women. There are other clues too. The “Two Ways” section tackles
questions which concern solely men and questions which concern solely
women. The prohibition against aborting (Did. 2.2) is addressed to women. If
men were the target, the text should have ordered them to prohibit their wives
from aborting. When the Didache recommends corporal punishment (Did. 4.9),
the victims are both sons and daughters. Since daughters were usually educated
by their mothers, these are included among the addressees of the instruction. It
is also to be noted that the Didache does not have any household code, which
traditionally mentioned women in their subordinate relationship to men as
wives (cf. Eph 5:22). These clues suggest that women trained at least new
female converts, but they did not say if these instructors or some of them can
also be identified with the dida,skaloi of Did. 13.2 and 15.1–2. It could be
objected that teachers travelled extensively and that this would have been very
dangerous for a lonely woman. However, we have seen that not all the teachers
of the Didache necessarily came from outside. Moreover, women could well
be accompanied. The apostle Junia travelled with Andronicus (Rom 16:7) and
304
What follows draws on CROSSAN’S summary of DEBORAH ROSE-GAIER’s paper, “The
Didache: A Community of Equals,” delivered during the session on “Women and the (Search
for the) Historical Jesus” of the Society of Biblical Literature 1996 annual meeting in New
Orleans (Birth, 369–71). See also the comparison between the position of women in the
Didache, in early Christianity and in the rest of contemporary Greco-Roman society in
5. Didache 135
Prisca with her husband Aquila (Acts 18:2.18.26; Rom 16:3; 1 Cor 16:19; 2
Tim 4:19). In sum, the question must be left open.
5.5.4.8 The Historical Development

I agree with Visonà that the Didache does not reflect the moment in time when
newly-born local offices began to replace apostles, prophets and teachers. This
happened later and a stage of this process is well attested in the Apostolic
Constitutions, which rewrite the Didache updating it for the fourth century.
This work skips the section on prophets and apostles of Did. 11.3–12 and
replaces Did. 12–13 with a long discussion about teachers, who are given the
highest honour (Const. ap. 7.28), 305 though, later, teachers were to give the
right of way to bishops and deacons. The reason for this is indicated by the
Didache itself. It was always possible to find bishops and deacons because
these were appointed, but teachers were not. The presence of teachers did not
depend on regulations, but on factors such as personal talent and theological
education. In such conditions, a constant and reliable supply of teachers was in
the long run impossible. Almost inevitably, their leadership was to be taken
over by bishops and deacons. It is often argued that for the Didache they are a
recent institution because of the invitation not to disregard them, but this only
reveals that the addressees do not place them on the same footing as teachers
and prophets.
5.6 Conclusions
At the time the Didache was composed, teachers played an important role,
probably the leading one. Teachers resided in the community, had the right to
sustenance, and carried out a number of activities, which are gathered under
the rubric of “liturgy.” The Didache itself is likely to be the work of a teacher.
Teachers were not appointed. When there was no supply of them, their
functions could be taken over by bishops and deacons, who were appointed
with the goal of insuring continuity in administration and other realms of
community life.
In addition to teachers, bishops and deacons, there were prophets, who were
held in high esteem, but at the same time could be a source of troubles. The
criteria to distinguish between true and false prophets and the regulations about
what they could do mirror the ambivalent reception they were given.
If the Didache is the work of one or more Christian teachers, it is noteworthy
that there is little interest for singling out the teaching of Jesus. This was not
transmitted for its own sake, but for the sake of the community.
305
RORDORF, Doctrine, 54–55.
Chapter 4
Sources on Asia Minor
1. Ephesians
1.1 Introduction
The Letter to the Ephesians contains a list of community roles (Eph 4:11), in
which teachers are given the last position. In the few decades which separate 1
Corinthians from Ephesians, it is likely that community structures underwent
some adaptation in order to tackle unforeseen difficulties and the problems
caused by the growing distance from the founding event. These adaptations
included the reformulation of the triad.
1.2 Authorship, Time and Place

Most scholars believe that Ephesians was not written by Paul, and this is the
opinion accepted in this book. 1 The arguments concern style, vocabulary and
some theological tenets. For instance, the style is overloaded and sentences
may reach an unusual length, which is the case for the one mentioning teachers
(Eph 4:11–16). There are many words that are not to be found in the undisputed
Pauline letters. Moreover, whereas in 1 Cor 3:11 Paul states that the church he
erects is built on the foundation of Christ, according to Ephesians the
foundations are apostles and prophets (Eph 2:20).
Not only the author, 2 but the addressees too are unknown. The word
“Ephesians” in verse 1:1 is absent from important manuscripts. 3 Furthermore,
the writer addresses the recipients of the letter in general terms and does not
1
See GERHARD SELLIN, Der Brief an die Epheser (KEK 8; Göttingen: Vandenhoeck &
Ruprecht, 2008), 54–57; ERNEST BEST, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on Ephesians
(ICC; Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1998), 7–36; BROWN, Introduction, 626–31. Among those in
favour of Pauline authorship is MARKUS BARTH, Ephesians (2 vols.; AB; New York:
Doubleday, 1974), vol. 2, 36–52. The discussion is partly linked to that of the relationship
between Ephesians and Colossians: see BEST, Ephesians, 20–25.
2
I will refer to the author as “he,” since he was probably a man (BEST, Ephesians, 7–8).
P , first hand of Codex Sinaiticus and of Codex Vaticanus, etc.
3 46
1. Ephesians 137
seem to be informed about their situation. Scholars are inclined to think that
Ephesians was written for one or more communities in Asia Minor. 4
As to the date, the ecclesiology proposed by the author seems to come from
the end of the first century. 5
1.3 Ephesians 4:11–12

Ephesians can be divided in two parts. The first part (Eph 1–3) is a doctrinal
exposition, while the second draws the consequences of the first and is of
paraenetic character (Eph 4–6). The verses mentioning teachers occur towards
the beginning of the second part in a subsection dealing with an ecclesiological
theme. All community members belong to the same body, the head of which is
Christ, and they are like gifts given by him. These gifts are then narrowed down
to the five roles listed in Eph 4:11. The text of Eph 4:11–12 reads:
He gave the apostles, the prophets, the evangelists, the shepherds and teachers for the
equipment of the saints for the work of ministry for the building of the body of Christ. 6
Kai. auvto.j e;dwken tou.j me.n avposto,louj( tou.j de. profh,taj( tou.j de. euvaggelista,j( tou.j de.
poime,naj kai. didaska,louj pro.j to.n katartismo.n tw/n a`gi,wn eivj e;rgon diakoni,aj( eivj
oivkodomh.n tou/ sw,matoj tou/ Cristou/.
Verses 7, 8 and 11 in Ephesians 4 are closely linked through the use of cognate
words (evdo,qh, dwrea/j, e;dwken do,mata, e;dwken). However, this relationship is
only linguistic, not logical. 7 According to verse 7, grace has been given to
every member of the church, but in verse 11 Christ does not bestow grace.
Instead we find him giving “people,” that is roles from which all members shall
benefit. Thus, the author of Ephesians moves away from a typically Pauline
theme (cf. 1 Cor 12:4–11) towards a new application of it by apparently
restricting the scope of Christ’s gifts. 8
The verse listing the five roles recalls 1 Cor 12:28. Ephesians 4:11 is placed
in a similar ecclesiological context, contains many of the roles in 1 Cor 12 and
has a comparable structure. These points of contact strongly suggest that the
4
E.g. SELLIN, Brief, 57.
5
BEST, Ephesians, 45–46; RUDOLF SCHNACKENBURG, Der Brief an die Epheser (EKK
10; Köln: Benziger; Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener Verlag, 1982), 30–34; SELLIN, Brief,
58.
6
My translation.
7
Cf. ERNEST BEST, “Ministry in Ephesians,” in idem, Essays on Ephesians (Edinburgh:
T&T Clark, 1997), 157–77, 160–61; repr. from IBS 16 (1994): 146–60.
8
REGINA PACIS MEYER notices this discrepancy, but also that the restriction of gifts to
the five roles must be read within the context of verses 7–16, where the general stress is on
all the members of the church (Kirche und Mission im Epheserbrief [SBS 86; Stuttgart:
Verlag Katholisches Bibelwerk, 1977], 68–69). Below I argue against it.
138 Chapter 4: Sources on Asia Minor
author of Ephesians knew and used as a source 1 Cor 12. 9 However, there are
also several differences. First of all, it is Christ, not God, who is the giver of
these roles. Secondly, it is not a question of appointing (e;qeto) but of giving
(e;dwken), which is in keeping with the vocabulary used a few verses earlier.
Third, the ranking to be found in 1 Corinthians is replaced by a simple listing.
Fourth, which is the most striking feature of all, there are not three, but five
roles. The last two points call for attention.
The series tou.j me,n… tou.j de,… can be rendered in two different ways. The
articles might be interpreted as pronouns and what follows them as predicates.
In this case, the translation would be: “he gave some as apostles, some as
prophets.” Alternatively, the articles maintain their original meaning and the
translation is: “he gave on one side the apostles, on the other the prophets.”
This second rendering is more in conformity with New Testament usage and
the one to be preferred, while the first translation would be more acceptable in
classical Greek. 10 The author of Ephesians should have employed the pronouns
ou]j me,n… ou]j de,…, if he had wanted his phrase to be understood as “some
[…] others […].” In fact, the list in 1 Cor 12:28 begins with ou]j me,n before the
insertion of the triadic formula. It is remarkable, on the one hand, that
Ephesians is stylistically more consistent than Paul, who let a formula based
on ranking break his sentence; on the other, that Ephesians departs from Paul
by using an article instead of a pronoun. The reason may be purely accidental
or may stem from Ephesians’ ecclesiology. By writing that God appointed
some people in order to work as apostles and so on, Paul stresses the fact that
every member of the community has got a role to play. This is a consequential
application of the ecclesiology of 1 Cor 12. On the contrary, by writing that
Christ gave apostles, etc., the author of Ephesians restricts the assignment of
roles among Christians to a limited number of people. The verb “to appoint”
(ti,qhmi) implies that in principle everybody could become apostle or prophet
or teacher, even though this practically depends on individual gifts. The verb
“to give” (di,dwmi) implies a separation between common believers and the
chosen ones. If this analysis is correct, it seems that the free circulation of the
spirit which Paul wished for the Corinthians is not something which is within
reach for the addressees of Ephesians. The structure of their community is more
rigid or so the author of the letter would like it to be.
What the five roles meant to the author of Ephesians will be dealt with in
9
MERKLEIN rules out direct literary dependence. The author belongs to the Pauline
school and thinks in terms recalling 1 Corinthians (Amt, 237–39). However, the contacts
between the two letters are too numerous to be accounted for in this way.
10
The first translation is given and discussed by MERKLEIN, Amt, 74–75; cf. also
SCHNACKENBURG, Epheser, 183; BEST, Ephesians, 388. The second translation is to be
found in BARTH, Ephesians, vol. 2, 425 and 435.
1. Ephesians 139
detail in the next section. Before that, it is better to move on to the following
verse, the interpretation of which is a complex matter. The first problem is the
sense of several key-words. The term katartismo,j is a hapax in the New
Testament, but cognate forms are frequent (Matt 21:16; Luke 6:40; Acts 21:5;
Heb 11:3; 2 Tim 3:17; etc.). The only meanings fitting the context are those of
“furnishing,” “preparation,” or “training,” “discipline.” The last set of words
would apply only to teachers, the first to the remaining roles as well. 11 The
term diakoni,a indicates service in a generic way. 12 Oivkodomh, (cf. Eph 2:20–
22) refers to the process of building. 13 The object is the sw/ma of Christ (cf. Eph
1:23; 3:6; 4:4), that is the church, 14 which grows up and leaves behind the
condition of childhood (Eph 4:14). The question regarding who is responsible
for this must be answered in the light of how we link the three prepositional
phrases. Here I give the main solutions scholars have come up with. (1) They
all depend on the main clause, so that we read: “for the restoration of the saints;
for the work of the ministry; for the building up of the body of Christ.” 15 In
this case, the switch from pro,j to eivj is considered of no significance in the
light of passages such as Wis 15:15; T. Jud. 14:3; T. Zeb. 5:1; Rom 3:26; 15:2;
Phlm 5. The presence of the article after pro,j and its absence after the
remaining two prepositions is likewise not problematic, because the article
might be a scribal addition. Important minuscules do not have it (1, 242 and
1149). (2) A different interpretation is achieved by making both the second and
the third phrase dependent on the first. In this way, stress is laid on the ministry
of all believers: this is given “in order that ‘the saints’ become ‘equipped’ to
carry out ‘the work of service,’ even ‘the building.’” 16 (3) It is also possible to
consider each phrase dependent on the preceding one. This is to say that the
roles of verse 11 are given to the community in order to enable each believer
for the work of ministry for the task of building the church as the body of
Christ. 17 We can have a variant of this interpretation if we translate diakoni,a
with “service” rather than “ministry”: the five roles are given in order to equip
each believer for service for the building of the church as the body of Christ. 18
11
See BEST, Ephesians, 395; GERHARD DELLING, “a;rtioj,” GLNT, 1: 1265–68, 1268.
12
HERMANN WOLFGANG BEYER, “diakoni,a,” GLNT, 2: 966–69.
13
See OTTO MICHEL, “oivkodomh,,” GLNT, 8: 408–415, 409–410.
14
On the concept of sw/ma in Ephesians see EDUARD SCHWEIZER, “sw/ma,” GLNT, 13:
609–790, 746–52.
15
This case is made at lenght by J. C. O’NEILL, “The Work of Ministry in Ephesians
4:12,” ExpTim 112 (2001): 336–40, translation at p. 338.
16
BARTH, Ephesians, vol. 2, 478–82.
17
See HANS-JOSEPH KLAUCK, “Das Amt in der Kirche nach Eph 4,1–16,” Wissenschaft
und Weisheit 36 (1973): 81–110, 99–100; SELLIN, Brief, 342–43.
18
These interpretations, with the exception of the second one, are also to be found in
PAUL BONY, “L’Épître aux Ephésiens,” in DELORME, ed., Ministère, 74–92, 87–88.
There are two reasons why I think that the third rendering is to be preferred.
First, the presence of the article after pro,j and the change of preposition cannot
be easily explained away. The hypothesis of a scribal addition is conjectural.
Second, by assuming that phrase one introduces phrase two, which introduces
phrase three, we have a climatic structure that rises up to me,,cri katanth,swmen
oi` pa,ntej eivj th.n e`no,thta th/j pi,stewj of the following verse. 19 According to
this interpretation of verse 12, the five roles of verse 11 have the specific task
of equipping the saints so that these may work for the development of Christ’s
church. 20
1.3.1 Apostles and Prophets

The five roles of Eph 4:11 make up an intriguing list. The first two roles must
be set apart because they are coupled together on two occasions: Eph 2:19–20
and 3:5–6.
so then you are no longer strangers and aliens, but you are citizens with the saints and also
members of the household of God, built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets
(evpoikodomhqe,ntej evpi. tw/n qemeli,wn tw/n avposto,lwn kai. profhtw/n), with Christ Jesus
himself as the cornerstone (Eph 2:19–20).
In former generations this mystery was not made known to humankind, as it has now been
revealed to his holy apostles and prophets by the spirit (w`j nu/n toi/j a`gi,oij avposto,loij
auvtou/ kai. profh,taij evn pneu,mati): that is, the Gentiles have become fellow heirs, members
of the same body, and sharers in the promise in Christ Jesus through the gospel (Eph 3:5–6).
For what concerns apostles, it should be observed that our author does not
exclusively think of the Twelve. 21 Paul, too, is an apostle (Eph 1:1). The
author’s definition of apostleship is functional. They are those to whom the
mystery of Christ has been made known through revelation (Eph 3:3.5). This
mystery is that the Gentiles are partakers of the promises of Christ. This is not
exactly the concept of apostleship held in the undisputed letters, according to
which Paul is apostle because he has seen the risen Christ and proclaims the
news of Jesus’ death and resurrection (1 Cor 9:1–2; 15:1–11), which is the
basis of faith (1 Cor 15:12–19). The difference between Ephesians and 1
Corinthians can be explained if we place each letter at the ends of a line. At the
beginning of it, we see that Paul is an apostle because of his call from the risen
Christ and that his apostleship consists in proclaiming the good news to Jews
and Gentiles. At the end of it, we see that it is this proclamation that has taken
the centre stage and becomes the founding concept of apostleship. From the
point of view of someone writing at the end of the first century, what mattered
was not Paul’s claim to apostleship and the consequent necessity to stress his
19
For a detailed discussion see BEST, Ephesians, 395–99.
20
On the church as a constantly growing and developing body, cf. MERKLEIN, Amt, 115.
21
Cf. BONY, “Épître,” 77.
1. Ephesians 141
commission by the risen Christ. That Paul was an apostle was then a settled
question. What mattered instead was Paul’s message of including the Gentiles
among the inheritors of Jesus’ promises. This is stressed by making this
“mystery” the object of God’s direct revelation and even the basis of
apostleship.
From Eph 2:20 and 3:5 it seems that the role of prophets is close to the one
of apostles. The degree of closeness is to be measured in the light of the syntax
of Eph 3:5. There are two main questions. Does a`gi,oij refer to both apostles
and prophets or only to apostles? Does evn pneu,mati refer to both of them or
only to prophets? As to the first question, the words “apostles” and “prophets”
are introduced by the same article and it seems natural that the adjective too
refers to both terms. Moreover, from Eph 2:20 it appears that “apostles and
prophets” is a fixed phrase, and this interpretation may be confirmed by Did.
11.3. The presence of auvtou/ after “apostles” is not disturbing since it may have
been pushed back from its expected place by evn pneu,mati and, if so, it refers to
both. 22 Prophets may not be of Christ (auvtou/), if they are to be interpreted as
Old Testament prophets, 23 but this is unlikely in the light of Eph 2:20 and 4:11.
Moreover, if Eph 3:5 speaks of Old Testament prophets, why does this verse
say that the mystery was not revealed at the time of other (read “past”)
generations as it is now? It is true that w`j (“as”) may also be translated “as
much as,” but this would destroy the sense of absolute novelty represented by
avpekalu,fqh. 24
As to evn pneu,mati, this may refer to the prophets, to both apostles and
prophets or to the verb. The first option can be dismissed in the light of the
preceding arguments concerning auvtou/. Furthermore, prophets are obviously
inspired people and the addition of this phrase is redundant, though it must be
acknowledged that the author likes redundancy. 25 The second option suggests
that some apostles and prophets were not “in spirit,” a rather unlikely
22
For this construction of the phrase see BEST, Ephesians, 306–307. HEINRICH SCHLIER
gives the same construction, but he is unsure whether evn pneu,mati is associated with the verb
or prophets and concludes that this question is not of particular importance (La lettera agli
Efesini: Testo greco e traduzione [trans. Omero Soffritti; 2nd ed.; Commentario Teologico
del Nuovo Testamento 10/2; Brescia: Paideia Editrice, 1973], 231–33).
23
That it is question of Old Testament prophets is the opinion of JOHN HENRY ROBERTS,
Die Opbou van die Kerk volgens die Efese-brief (Gröningen: V.R.B., 1963), 193; the
opposite view is held by SCHLIER, Efesini, 218; SCHNACKENBURG, Epheser, 123; BEST,
Ephesians, 282–83.
24
Cf. SCHNACKENBURG, Epheser, 134.
25
MERKLEIN believes that the adjective “saint” sets the apostles apart as the recipient of
direct revelation, whereas the mystery was revealed to the prophets only in spirit (Amt, 187–
93). However, this interpretation can be reached only by forcing the text to say more than it
actually does and by uncertain syntactical decisions.
statement. The third solution is to be preferred, also because “in spirit” is linked
to a verb in other verses too (Eph 5:18 and 6:18). 26
The mystery has been revealed to apostles and prophets and they are the
foundation of the church (Eph 2:20). The author of Ephesians does not say that
the mystery is revealed, but that it was revealed (Eph 3:5). The revelation of
the mystery is a once-for-all event. It cannot be duplicated, but only
transmitted. Apostles and prophets are first of all recipients of a specific truth.
Once this has been revealed to them and they have made it known, their task
has, strictly speaking, ended. Hence, it is doubtful that there were still apostles
and prophets at the time of writing. The mention of evangelists suggests that
the job of spreading the truth revealed to apostles and prophets has passed into
the hands of others. 27
1.3.2 Evangelists
Recalling that Eph 4:11 was written some decades after 1 Cor 12:28, it would
not be surprising if some alterations of the triad have occurred, for instance
through the insertion of evangelists. The first possibility to consider is that,
while apostles and prophets belong to the past, the new-comers are introduced
because they belong to the present and are the heirs of apostles and prophets. 28
The word euvaggelisth,j occurs in the New Testament only two more times:
Acts 21:8 and 2 Tim 4:5. From such a slim attestation, any description of the
evangelist’s role is bound to be quite speculative. According to Acts, the
evangelist Philip lived in Caesarea. He was one of the Seven and was
responsible for bringing the good news to Samaria (Acts 8:4–8). As far as we
know, he was not directly commissioned by God. According to the second
witness, Timothy was not even an evangelist, but he was charged by Paul with
the work of an evangelist. The immediately preceding context mentions
teachers who teach what suits people’s desires but clashes with sound teaching.
Since Paul’s commission to Timothy is a reaction to this, it can be said that in
the Pastorals the work of the evangelist consists in spreading the sound
teaching.
The task of the evangelist of Ephesians was to bring the good news (Eph
3:8: toi/j e;qnesin euvaggeli,sasqai to. avnexicni,aston plou/toj tou/ Cristou/),
consisting in the mystery of Christ revealed to apostles and prophets. In the
26
See BEST, Ephesians, 308.
27
See BONY, “Épître,” 82; BEST, “Ministry,” 157–58; DIETRICH-ALEX KOCH, “Die
Entwiklung der Ämter in frühchristlichen Gemeinden Kleinasiens”, in Neutestamentliche
Ämtermodelle im Kontext (ed. THOMAS SCHMELLER, MARTIN EBNER, RUDOLPH HOPPE; QD
239; Freiburg: Herder, 2010), 166–206, 178.
28
Cf. SELLIN, Brief, 340.
1. Ephesians 143
post-pauline situation of Ephesians the evangelist took on the job of the apostle
and carried it out. 29
1.3.3 Shepherds and Teachers

The word “shepherds” is another unexpected intrusion in the list and quite a
problematic one since it shares the article with teachers. Either the same people
are meant or the article before “teachers” is implied, as it probably is before
“prophets” in Eph 2:20 and 3:5. In the first case it can be supposed that teachers
were also community-leaders in force of a role that necessarily set them apart
from the rest of believers, and that made others look up to them for guidance. 30
In the second case, shepherds joined teachers in exercising leadership. We have
seen that apostles and prophets probably had been replaced by evangelists.
Likewise, it is possible that teachers too are replaced or being replaced by
shepherds. 31
There is no mention of bishops or presbyters in Ephesians, but in other New
Testament writings poimh,n and/or cognate forms are associated with evpi,skopoj
(Acts 20:28; 1 Pet 2:25; cf. 1 Pet 5:4–5). The insertion of “shepherds” is a sign
of the modifications undergone by the structure of some communities: teachers
became shepherds, who are the Ephesian equivalent of bishops. Merklein
believes that shepherds were teachers who had been officially recognised by
the community. The proximity between shepherds and bishops makes this
hypothesis very likely. 32
What teachers and shepherds taught is not said, but a few remarks are in
place. Their activity must have had some connections with the work of apostles
and prophets. If these were the recipients of revelation, we must infer that
teachers were not. If these and their successors, the evangelists, spread the
revelation, we equally infer that this was not primarily the task of a teacher.
What was left for teachers to do was to understand the consequences of
revelation and re-propose it as time went by and the conditions of the
community changed. Their task was to strengthen the local community in the
light of the mystery and ensure the continuity of the transmission of the
revelation. The remaining part of the long sentence of Eph 4:11–16 holds some
clues. The work of the five roles is to build up the body of Christ, so that its
members are not children tossed by any wind of doctrine (didaskali,aj). The
content of these doctrines is not clarified, but they threaten the unity of faith
and consequently the maturity of the believer (cf. Eph 4:13). In the light of
what we have seen above, it is arguable that one such doctrine may deny the
29
See MERKLEIN, Amt, 345–47.
30
SELLIN, Brief, 341.
31
According to ROBERTS, shepherds and teachers were two functions carried out by the
office of elders (Efese-brief, 194).
32
Gentiles’ share of inheritance. The use of the term didaskali,ai does not
necessarily imply that these doctrines are spread by teachers. False apostles
and prophets may do it as well. What matters is that the task of teachers and
shepherds was to make the community hold on to the true mystery.
1.4 Conclusions
In taking up the formula of 1 Cor 12:28, the author of Ephesians was a true heir
of Paul, but also betrayed Paul by laying unique stress on certain roles. In Paul,
a list of fixed roles is followed by a list of the numerous gifts of the spirit. The
author of Ephesians too is interested in spiritual gifts, but the five roles are
what really matters to him. 33
The number five is a further departure from 1 Cor 12:28. At the time of the
author of Ephesians, apostles and prophets were not to be seen any longer.
They were considered the foundations of the church and their place had been
taken by evangelists. The role of teachers was blended with the role of
shepherds. 34 Evangelists and shepherds are the new actors. Like their
predecessors, they were divinely assigned roles, but with a different tinge.
They are not appointed, but given, and they are not recipient of revelation, but
its bearers. Moreover, the list of Eph 4:11 is clearly closed, whereas the Pauline
lists in the undisputed letters are variegated. The community structure
presented by Ephesians is more rigid than what is expected of a Pauline
community. 35 The five roles mentioned in Eph 4:11, or better the two or three
actually functioning, are responsible for the equipping of the members so that
the body of the church can grow as a unity. 36 These well-defined
responsibilities were absent from 1 Cor 12. For the author of Ephesians the role
of teachers is in the process of transformation.
33
Cf. ZIMMERMANN, Lehrer, 117.
34
Cf. KLAUCK, “Amt,” 96–97. KLAUCK thinks that apostles and prophets belong to the
past and that their roles have been assumed by evangelists, shepherds and teachers. In
particular the latter may carry out the job of prophets. SCHNACKENBURG too thinks that the
last three roles carry out the work of the first two (Epheser, 183). However, it must be
recalled that teachers are not a new role and that their placement after evangelists and
shepherds suggests a loss of importance.
35
Cf. FERDINAND HAHN, “Charisma und Amt: Die Diskussion über das kirchliche Amt
im Lichte der neutestamentlichen Charismenlehre,” ZTK 76 (1979): 419–49, 445–46;
KLAUCK, “Amt,” 106; MERKLEIN, Amt, 116.
36
KOCH, “Entwiklung,” 205–206.
2. Pastoral Letters 145
2. Pastoral Letters
2.1 Introduction
There are several passages in 1 and 2 Timothy mentioning the word dida,skaloj,
which is absent in Titus. 37 However, in some instances we will make use of
Titus too, because the three letters seem to stem from the same circle.
2.2 Authorship and Time

The authorship of 1 and 2 Timothy and Titus is still debated, but many believe
that they were not written by Paul. 38 Vocabulary, style, theology and
ecclesiology differ from the undisputed letters to a degree that cannot be easily
accounted for by supposing Pauline authorship, whether direct or mediated
through an amanuensis. 39
The non-Pauline authorship raises the question of the letters’ mutual
relationship and their relationship with the historical Paul. The common view
is that they were penned by the same person or within the same circle at some
stage within the range of years 80–100. 40 However, 1 Timothy and Titus agree
on several points that are not to be found in 2 Timothy. 41 The linguistic and
theological features of the letter, which is a sort of Paul’s testament, are the
37
For an overview of the question of false teachers in the Pastorals see ROBERTO AMICI,
“Etero-didascalie e falsi maestri nelle lettere a Timoteo e Tito,” RivB 56 (2008): 455–73.
38
BROWN, Introduction, 662–68 and 672–75.
39
The clues are conveniently gathered in PAUL TREBILCO, The Early Christians in
Ephesus from Paul to Ignatius (WUNT 166; Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2004), 197–202. See
also JÜRGEN ROLOFF, Der erste Brief an Timotheus (EKK 15; Zurich: Benziger;
Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener Verlag, 1988), 25–32. I. HOWARD MARSHALL makes a
proposal, which is half way between authenticity and pseudepigraphy: allonimity. The
Pastorals were written soon after Paul’s death by a close associate (see his book written in
collaboration with PHILIP H. TOWNER, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the
Pastoral Epistles [ICC; Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1999], 59–79). Pauline authorship is
advocated, among others, by CESLAS SPICQ, Saint Paul: Les épîtres pastorales (2 vols.; 4th
ed.; EB; Paris: Gabalda, 1969), vol. 1, 157–214; WILLIAM D. MOUNCE, Pastoral Epistles
(WBC 46; Nashville: Thomas Nelson, 2000), xli-cxxix; GORDON D. FEE, 1 and 2 Timothy,
Titus (NIBCNT; Peabody: Hendrickson, 1988), 23–26. MOUNCE and FEE attribute the
departures from the undisputed letters to an amanuensis.
40
BROWN, Introduction, 675.
41
JEROME MURPHY-O’CONNOR lists over thirty points in which 2 Timothy differs from
1 Timothy and Titus. Even if not all the points have equal weight, he considers the
cumulative evidence compelling (“2 Timothy Contrasted with 1 Timothy and Titus,” RB 98
[1991]: 403–18). This article develops MICHAEL PRIOR’s proposal that the three letters
should be considered separately (Paul the Letter-Writer and the Second Letter to Timothy
[JSNTSup 23; Sheffield: JSOT Press, 1989], 169).
most Pauline of all three. These clues point to 2 Timothy being written first,
soon after Paul’s death, and the other two letters being written at a later stage,
possibly within the span 80–100. 42
Though final decision, if ever possible, must wait for a full reassessment of
the question, it is advisable to deal with 1 Timothy and 2 Timothy separately.
2.3 Place and Readership

If it was Paul who wrote the Pastorals, he wrote Titus on his way from Crete
to Nicopolis (cf. Titus 1:5 and 3:13), 1 Timothy from Macedonia (cf. 1 Tim
1:3), and 2 Timothy while a prisoner in Rome (cf. 2 Tim 1:3; 1:17). However,
if it was not Paul, the question of place cannot be easily answered.
The intended readership is easier to guess. First Timothy is written to
Timothy who is in Ephesus (1 Tim 1:3–4). Several clues point to Ephesus being
the target of 2 Timothy (cf. 2 Tim 1:18; 4:12; Onesiphorus, probably an
Ephesian according to 2 Tim 1:16–18, is greeted in 2 Tim 4:19). The readers
of Titus are in Crete (Titus 1:5). 43 It can be argued that these communities are
only the explicit target, whereas the letters actually address Christians in
general, though the situations they describe can hardly be considered entirely
fictitious. 44
2.4 1 Timothy
The purpose of 1 Timothy can be inferred from the first verses: Timothy is
requested to address people who teach doctrines differing from those of Paul
(1 Tim 1:3), who is explicitly called “teacher” (1 Tim 2:7). Who are these
alleged adversaries of Paul? What does the author of 1 Timothy say about Paul
the teacher, his successors and the content of “sound doctrine”?
2.4.1 Paul’s Adversaries

2.4.1.1 Identity
The texts dealing with the adversaries are numerous and mostly abusive. 45
These people are likely to be members of the community, otherwise one could
42
This position is held by BROWN, Introduction, 675, who is influenced by MURPHY-
O’CONNOR, “2 Timothy”.
43
See WERNER THIESSEN, Christen in Ephesus: Die historische und theologische
Situation in vorpaulinischer und paulinischer Zeit und zur Zeit der Apostelgeschichte und
der Pastoralbriefe (Texte und Arbeiten zum neutestamentlichen Zeitalter 12; Tübingen: A.
Francke Verlag, 1995), 249–54; TREBILCO, Christians, 206–207.
44
See TREBILCO, Christians, 207–209.
45
ABRAHAM J. MALHERBE gives a concise summary of the portrait of the adversaries
drawn by the Pastorals: “The author describes them as intellectually inferior, having diseased
not expect that they would listen to Timothy, who is charged to instruct them
(1 Tim 1:3). When the author reminds Timothy of the task to address his
opponents, 46 he mentions the names of two people, Hymenaeus and Alexander,
against whom Paul took disciplinary measures (1 Tim 1:18–20). 47
One Hymenaeus is also mentioned in 2 Tim 2:17 as claiming with one
Philetus that the resurrection has already taken place. In 2 Tim 4:14–15 we read
of Alexander the coppersmith who did Paul harm. This name is also mentioned
in Acts 19:33–34, according to which Alexander, a Jew, tried to address the
Ephesians gathered in the theatre. It is impossible to say if the same people are
mentioned in all cases. We are not even sure whether the people mentioned in
1 Tim 1:20 are historical figures. The use of names may serve the
pseudepigraphical agenda of claiming authenticity for the letters through
precise, albeit fictitious, details, or may warn the community against well-
known people. 48
As to the religious affiliation of these adversaries, it may be question of
Jewish-Christians. According to 1 Tim 1:7, they want to be recognised as
“teachers of the law” (nomodida,skaloi), a clue indicating at least a strong
interest in Judaism. A comparable case is Tit 1:10: “There are also many
rebellious people, idle talkers and deceivers, namely those of the circumcision
(ma,lista oi` evk th/j peritomh/j).” The adverb ma,lista may carry two meanings:
“especially” or “namely.” In view of the following reference to “Jewish myths”
(1 Tim 1:14), the adopted translation is to be preferred, but one should keep in
mind that the alternative rendering is also possible. The adversaries, Christians
of Jewish origins and/or Gentile Christians, seem to hold views, which, in the
author’s opinion, Paul has rejected. 49
minds which produce violent preaching and contaminate those who accept their teaching.
They are antisocial and upset the social order by their preaching. They are motivated to
preach by their hope of financial gain. Those who welcome them are likewise intellectually
and morally inferior and are infected by them.” (“Medical Imagery in the Pastoral Epistles,”
in Texts and Testaments: Critical Essays on the Bible and Early Church Fathers [ed. W.
EUGENE MARCH; San Antonio: Trinity University Press, 1980], 19–35, 23). Comparable
vocabulary is to be found in contemporary polemical works against bad rhetoricians. See
SPICQ, Épîtres, vol. 1, 87–88 n. 1.
46
First Timothy 1:18–20 is the conclusion of the section 1 Tim 1:1–20: see ROLOFF,
Timotheus, 100.
47
MARSHALL, Epistles, 407–410 and 414–15.
48
The range of possibilities is illustrated in MARSHALL, Epistles, 412–14. MARSHALL
thinks these were historical characters. The same opinion is advocated by ROLOFF
(Timotheus, 105), who disagrees with the opposite opinion held by PETER TRUMMER, Die
Paulustradition der Pastoralbriefe (BBET 8; Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang, 1978), 137–
38.
49
SPICQ, Paul, vol. 1, 103, writes of “nouveau rabbinat chrétien”, made of Jewish
rhetoricians and teachers of Ephesus and Crete, who converted to Christianity. According to
The position occupied by Paul’s adversaries in the community is unclear.

We know that there were one or more bishops, presbyters and deacons and that
the task of teaching belonged to the first two offices. The lengths to which the
author goes in his provisions for bishops (1 Tim 3:1–7), the importance he
assigns to presbyters who taught (1 Tim 5:17–18) and the immediately
preceding allusion to Timothy’s own appointment (1 Tim 1:18), though the
role is not explained, suggested to some scholars that the adversaries were
among these community leaders. 50 This is possible, but the evidence is far from
being conclusive. For instance, there is nothing in the section about presbyters
(1 Tim 5:17–20), pointing to the problem of false teaching.
2.4.1.2 Women Teaching

The provisions regarding women in 1 Tim 2:9–15 and young widows in 1 Tim
5:11–15 contain several clues that some women taught. 51
The setting of the first text is worship (1 Tim 2:8). The target of the author’s
injunctions is called gunh,/gunai/kej, meaning either “wife” or “woman.” The
first translation poses several problems, in particular because single women
and widows would be allowed to do what is not permitted to married wives.
This is particularly strange in the light of comparable injunctions that are
addressed to widows in the second text that we must examine. 52 The dressing
apparel evoked in 1 Tim 2:9 makes it clear that at least some of these women
were rich and therefore influential. It may also be suggested that they owned
the houses where the community met and therefore that they were heads of
house churches. In 1 Tim 2:11 the prohibition to teach presupposes that there
LORENZ OBERLINNER, “those of the circumcision” does not necessarily mean “Jews,” but it
may be a polemical designation intended to discredit the adversaries on the ground that some
of them, not necessarily the majority, held views, which may be connected to the Old
Testament or to Judaism (Le lettere pastorali [3 vols.; trans. Paola Floricoli and Franco
Ronchi; Commentario Teologico del Nuovo Testamento 11/2; Brescia: Paideia Editrice,
1999], vol. 3, 55–57).
50
FEE, Timothy, 40 and 59.
51
The first text is the object of a wide scholarly debate because of the restrictions it
apparently imposes on women in the church. See the bibliography gathered in MOUNCE,
Epistles, 94–102; a rapid survey of scholarly positions in MARSHALL, Epistles, 438–39. The
text is read against the background of the contemporary world in SPICQ, Épîtres, vol. 1, 385–
425. It depends on Hellenistic traditions concerning the demeanour of women and is
probably related to 1 Cor 14:33–36, which may be an interpolation (ROLOFF, Timotheus,
127–30). Both 1 Tim 2:8–15 and 5:13–15 are studied by TREBILCO, Christians, 508–520. I
find his analysis convincing and I am to a considerable extent indebted to it. For an
interpretation that is less focussed on the connection with the adversaries see ROLOFF,
Timotheus, 126–42. SPICQ believes that Paul advocates equal rights in the divine service,
though he introduces here some prescriptions on convenient demeanour (Épîtres, vol. 1,
375).
52
All the pro and cons in MOUNCE, Epistles, 112.
were women who had passed from learning to teaching, and the verb auvqentei/n
indicates that they also wielded some form of authority. The correct
interpretation of this term is difficult, but in the Pastorals teaching is the base
of leadership: only those who are able to teach can become leaders (1 Tim 3:2;
Tit 1:9). It is natural to expect that learned women, especially those who were
wealthy and maybe heads of house churches, would not be less authoritative
and persuasive than men. The author of the letter commands an alternative
model: quietness (evn h`suci,a|, repeated twice in 1 Tim 2:11–12) and submission
(1 Tim 2:11: evn pa,sh| u`potagh/|). This emphasis on women’s subjugation seems
to be explained by what is said of widows in 1 Tim 5:13: “they learn to be idle,
gadding about from house to house; and they are not merely idle, but also
gossips and busybodies, saying what they should not say (lalou/sai ta. mh.
de,onta).” This text recalls Tit 1:11: “They [the adversaries] must be silenced,
since they are upsetting whole families by teaching for sordid gain what it is
not right to teach (dida,skontej a] mh. dei/)” (cf. 2 Tim 3:6). A comparison
between 1 Tim 5:13 and 2 Tim 3:6 makes it clear that the talk of widows
consisted in teaching. This conclusion is compounded by the fact that the
writer, who is very concerned with the teaching of the adversaries, would
hardly worry about the problems caused by gossips. These texts show that
women went around to teach others. Even if Titus 1:11 may represent a stock
polemical charge against the opponents, in the light of the other texts it is likely
to reflect a real situation.
The theological reasons of the prohibitions in 1 Tim 2:11–12 are given in
the following verses. They are two. Adam was created first, Eva second. Eva
was deceived (evxapathqei/sa), Adam was not. The first statement addresses the
claim to authority made by some women or the authority that naturally ensued
from their teaching. The argument of Eva’s deception is to be connected to the
apostasy of those who will pay attention to “deceitful spirits and teachings of
demons” (pneu,masin pla,noij kai. didaskali,aij daimoni,wn, in 1 Tim 4:1; cf. 2
Tim 3:13). We conclude that women were forbidden to teach because some of
them were among the adversaries, whose teaching they contributed to spread.
Moreover, if some of these women were rich, they would have had more time
to teach, the prestige to persuade others, 53 and the resources to support those
advocating the same views. This might have been why the adversaries are
accused of making way in their homes (2 Tim 3:6–7) and looking for money
(2 Tim 6:5).
First Timothy 2:15 indicates the two conditions for women to be saved:
childbearing and proper conduct. The reference to childbearing may imply a
criticism of the ascetic views of the adversaries (1 Tim 4:3), 54 which may have
53
Cf. BROWN, Introduction, 660–61.
54
Cf. NORBERT BROX, Die Pastoralbriefe (4th ed.; RNT 7/2; Regensburg: Friedrich
Pustet: 1969), 138.
been based on God’s curse on procreation. It is also an exhortation for women

to marry in order to place them under their husbands’ control. This matches
one of the two reasons why young widows should remarry. Besides the fact
that they may themselves want to remarry, thus breaking their pledge to be part
of the rank of widows (1 Tim 4:11–12), young women go around saying what
they should not, which we have seen to mean, probably, teaching what they
should not (1 Tim 4:13). It is also said that some of them turned after Satan (1
Tim 4:15). This is a clear indication that their fault consists in following the
adversaries’ teaching: Satan, the devils or demons are elsewhere associated
with them (2 Tim 2:26; 1 Tim 4:1; 1:20).
In conclusion, women were among those who taught. Some of these women
welcomed the views of the author’s opponents and helped spread them. The
women who had material resources and abundance of free time must have been
particularly effective. The author of First Timothy seeks to curb their didactic
activity by confining them to an exclusively domestic role.
The reason why some women were attracted by the adversaries’ teaching
obviously depends on the nature of this teaching. As we shall see, they
advocated an “over-realised eschatology,” according to which it was already
possible to live in the same way as it had been the end of time. One of the
implications was that women should enjoy the same status as men. Some
women who were already teachers and/or wealthy, might have embraced the
adversaries’ views in order to achieve a higher status. 55 The world of the
Pastorals already knew many examples of women’s emancipation. 56 Moreover,
Paul had already taken for granted that women should participate in public
worship through prayers and prophecy and rejected discriminations of any sort
within the community (Gal 3:28 and 1 Cor 12:13). 57 Women’s claims were
consistent with Pauline teaching, or at least with part of it.
2.4.1.3 Desire for Wealth

First Timothy 6:3–21 contrasts the adversaries and their teaching with Timothy
and sound teaching. The most serious charge against the adversaries is their
55
Cf. EGBERT SCHLARB, Die gesunde Lehre: Häresie und Wahrheit im Spiegel der
Pastoralbriefe (Marburger Theologische Studien 28; Marburg: N. G. Elwert Verlag, 1990),
123–24; PHILIP H. TOWNER, The Goal of Our Instruction: The Structure of Theology and
Ethics in the Pastoral Epistles (JSNTSup 34; Sheffield: JSOT Press, 1989), 38–42. It has
also been proposed that women were forbidden to teach because they were unlearned (CRAIG
S. KEENER, Paul, Women & Wives: Marriage and Women’s Ministry in the Letters of Paul
[Peabody: Hendrickson, 1992], 101–132).
56
See SPICQ, Épîtres, vol. 1, 387–88 n. 3.
57
See SCHLARB, Lehre, 123–24. First Corinthians 14:34–35 is generally considered an
interpolation.
desire for wealth. According to verse 5, they imagine that “godliness is a means
of gain” (cf. 2 Tim 3:5). How exactly they thought of making gain out of
godliness is not said, but we suppose that their teaching was not for free. In the
ancient world this was a standard accusation against philosophers 58 and from a
similar charge Paul had to defend himself (1 Cor 9:4–18; cf. 2 Cor 11:9; 2
Thess 2:5). The emphatic attack against desire for wealth in verses 9–10 proves
that verse 5 is not merely stock charge, but that it reflects a real situation. 59 The
proper attitude against this behaviour is auvtarkei,a (1 Tim 6:6), which consists
in being content with what is essential to life, that is clothing and food (1 Tim
6:8). This model of life was often advocated in the ancient world, 60 but it also
matches the early Christian attitudes to missionary work that we have found in
Matt 10:9–10.
2.4.1.4 The Title “Teacher”

Were these adversaries called “teachers” by their supporters? In 1 Tim 1:7 we
read of people qe,lontej ei=nai nomodida,skaloi( mh. noou/ntej mh,te a] le,gousin
mh,te peri. ti,nwn diabebaiou/ntaiÅ The word “teachers of the law” occurs in
Christian literature 61 and in an inscription in Rome not earlier than the third
century (CIJ 201) 62. In Luke 5:17 it refers to the scribes, in Acts 5:34 to
Gamaliel. In these two occurrences the term is not employed polemically, since
in Luke when the same scribes criticise Jesus they are called grammatei/j (Luke
5:21) and in Acts Gamaliel plays a positive role. There are good reasons to
believe that the adversaries were called “teachers” or “teachers of the law.”
2.4.1.5 Contents of Teaching

In 1 Timothy and Titus the teaching of the adversaries is described in generic
terms, with the exception of 1 Tim 4:3–5. These terms are “myths and endless
58
For examples, see ROLOFF, Timotheus, 333 n. 30; HANS DIETER BETZ, Lukian von
Samosata und das Neue Testament: Religionsgeschichtliche und paränetische Parallelen
(TU 76; Berlin: Akademie Verlag, 1961), 112–14; idem, Der Apostel Paulus und die
sokratische Tradition: Eine exegetische Untersuchung zu seiner »Apologie« 2 Korinther 10–
13 (BHT 45; Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1972), 106–115. The last work includes references
to Jewish and Greek literature.
59
Thus ROLOFF, Timotheus, 334, and MARSHALL, Epistles, 643, who disagrees with
OBERLINNER, Lettere, vol. 1, 433–35. OBERLINNER points to the fact that if the approved
presbyters deserve their salary (1 Tim 5:18), verse 5 does not address a real situation.
60
SPICQ, Épîtres, vol. 1, 562.
61
See RENGSTORF, “dida,skw,” 1155–56.
62
Inscription reported by UMBERTO FASOLA, “Le due catacombe ebraiche di Villa
Torlonia,” Rivista di archeologia cristiana 52 (1976): 7–62, 19–200. The term yalmw|do,j
refers to the singing of psalms in the liturgical service of the synagogue.
genealogies that promote speculations” (1 Tim 1:4); “profane myths and old
wives’ tales” (1 Tim 4:7); “controversy and […] disputes about words” (1 Tim
6:4); “Jewish myths or […] commandments of those who reject the truth”
(Titus 1:14); “stupid controversies, genealogies, dissensions, and quarrels
about the law, for they are unprofitable and worthless” (Tit 3:9). “Myths”
occurs also in 2 Tim 4:4. Myths and genealogies feature as the centre of the
adversaries’ long discussions. The term mu,qoj refers to a story devoid of truth.
The term genealogi,ai recalls the genealogies in Genesis. 63 Both words feature
together in classical and Jewish literature. 64 In Plato, Tim. 22a, the
corresponding verbs (muqologei/n and genealogei/n) are associated with creation
myths and the succession of generations. In Philo, Mos. 2.45ff, “genealogies”
refers to the historical part of the Pentateuch. According to Philo, the
Pentateuch is also made of another part, the law, which brings to mind at once
the adversaries’ claim to be “teachers of the law” in 1 Tim 1:7. In Ignatius, to
be lead astray by muqeu,mata palaia, means to kata. vIoudai?smo.n zh/n and
sabbati,zein (Magn. 8.1 and 9.1). These texts show that myths and genealogies
are another way of designating the Jewish scriptures and in particular the
creation account. In the view of the author of the letter, e`terodidaskalei/n (1
Tim 1:3) consists in proposing an interpretation of the scriptures that he
believes to belong to Judaism rather than to Christianity. The Jewish origin of
some adversaries is explicitly mentioned in Titus 1:10. The importance of
appealing to scripture in debates with the adversaries is explicitly or implicitly
stated in several passages: 1 Tim 1:8–9 (dispute over the law); 2:13–14 (order
of succession Adam-Eve); 4:3–4 (food, marriage and creation); Tit 1:15 (purity
and impurity); 2 Tim 3:15–16 (usefulness of scripture). These texts are similar
to other New Testament passages, such as 1 Cor 6:16 (against fornication on
the basis of Gen 2:24); 11:5–16 (on how women should cover their head, in
connection with Gen 2); 15:35–49 (references to Gen 1–2 on the question of
the resurrection). Interpreters have also pointed to Gnosticism as the
background of myths and genealogies in the light of the Nag Hammadi texts
where series of archons and aeons are the object of great interest. 65 The
Pastorals may witness developments that later led to gnostic speculations, but
that can be adequately explained from roughly contemporary sources. 66
63
ROLOFF, Timotheus, 64.
64
See SPICQ, Épîtres, vol. 1, 93–103, and the excursus in MARTIN DIBELIUS and HANS
CONZELMANN, Die Pastoralbriefe (3rd ed.; HNT 13; Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1955), 14–
15. I follow the interpretation given by SCHLARB, Lehre, 83–93; cf. MARSHALL, Epistles,
365–66.
65
E.g. ALFONS WEISER, Der zweite Brief an Timotheus (EKK 16/1; Düsseldorf: Benziger
Verlag; Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener Verlag, 2003), 303–304.
66
Even accepting the gnostic hypothesis, it is impossible to identify a precise gnostic
system fought in the letters: see DIBELIUS, Pastoralbriefe, 52–54.
In one instance we are informed about the precise content of the debate. In
1 Tim 4:1–5 the author foresees what the last days hold in store, namely the
defection of some and the presence of false teaching. The last days refer to the
time of the author, as the precise identification of the false teaching shows.
This is said of consisting in forbidding marriage and in abstaining from food.
The author replies by stating that all creation is good, provided that it is
“received with thanksgiving by those who believe and know the truth” (1 Tim
4:4). The rationale for these prohibitions is difficult to see. Numerous proposals
have been made, ranging from early encratite to early gnostic influences. 67
However, the text is so short that it is hazardous to pinpoint a definite
background, but a couple of remarks can be made. First, we observe the
contrast between two different interpretations of what is given by God, in this
case creation. The author’s approach is inclusive, the adversaries’ approach is
exclusive. The second remark is based on a comparison with 2 Tim 2:18,
according to which some adversaries believe that the resurrection of believers
has already taken place. Even if this letter cannot be assumed as mirroring the
same situation of 1 Timothy, the similarities between the two writings show
that they address related problems. We will see that 2 Tim 2:18 depicts the
opponents as holding a view of realised eschatology. Abstinence from food and
marriage point to the same direction: the restoration of the world of Genesis
before the fall. 68 It must be observed that genuine Pauline teaching could easily
lead to this conclusion (e.g. 1 Cor 7:29–31; Gal 3:27–29; 6:15). On the strength
of these observations, we gain some insights into the adversaries’ views. They
considered life as something regulated through prohibitions, which either are
the signs of or make possible life on a different level, that of complete
fulfilment. 69
2.4.2 Paul the Teacher

Both the First and the Second Letter to Timothy offer a straightforward
definition of the role played by Paul in relation to the community and the
spreading of the gospel. In 1 Tim 2:7 we read: eivj o] evte,qhn evgw. kh/rux kai.
avpo,stoloj( avlh,qeian le,gw ouv yeu,domai( dida,skaloj evqnw/n evn pi,stei kai.
avlhqei,a|Å If we delete the portions in italics and add kai, before dida,skaloj, 1
67
Nine different interpretations are listed in MARSHALL, Epistles, 533–35.
68
See SCHLARB, Lehre, 131–33; PHILIP H. TOWNER, “Gnosis and Realized Eschatology
in Ephesus (of the Pastoral Epistles) and the Corinthian Enthusiasm,” JSNT 31 (1987): 95–
124, 107–109; idem, Goal, 36–38.
69
ROLOFF, Timotheus, 217–28, sees in the rejection of marriage and of some types of
food the signs of early Gnosticism. I see in them some elements of later Gnosticism, but we
cannot speak of Gnosticism at this stage.
Tim 2:7 is identical to 2 Tim 1:11. 70 The oldest text is probably the latter, since
the words in italics break the flow of the sentence and are not necessary to the
comprehension of it. The relationship between these two passages confirms the
hypothesis of those who believe 1 Timothy to have been written in the wake of
2 Timothy. It must be noted that the triadic formula is very close to the one of
1 Cor 12:28, the differences being that “prophet” is replaced with “herald” and
that “apostle” comes second. Considering that the Pastorals are not interested
in prophecy, but in the proclamation and transmission of the right teaching, it
is possible that 1 Tim 2:7 and 2 Tim 1:11 are an adaptation of 1 Cor 12:28.
Verse 7 must be understood in the context to which it belongs. This is
commonly believed to be framed by verses 1 and 7, a section where the author
of the letter deals with the theme of prayer, 71 though his focus is actually the
theme of salvation. The beginning of verse 7 points to the preceding text, a
creedal statement, 72 which is meant to justify the assertion in verse 4 that
salvation and knowledge of truth are for all humans. Verses 5–6 stress the fact
that there is one God and one mediator, Christ Jesus, in order to underline the
universality of salvation: Jesus “gave himself a ransom for all” (1 Tim 2:6).
The triadic formula of verse 7 presents Paul as the carrier of this doctrine.
The term kh/rux nowhere else refers to Paul, and the meaning of “Christian
preacher” is not attested in the New Testament. It is likely that this absence is
due to the specialised role of heralds in the contemporary world and to the
stress early Christianity laid on the message, rather than on the messengers. 73
In 1 Clem. 5.6 it is said of Paul. The following verse states that Paul “taught
(dida,xaj) righteousness to the whole world” (1 Clem. 5.7). The proximity of
kh/rux and dida,skw in 1 Clem. 5.6–7 and of kh/rux and dida,skaloj in 1 and 2
Timothy suggests that both designations are part of a topos dealing with how
Paul was perceived. 74 The difference between kh/rux and dida,skaloj is difficult
to appreciate, because proclamation and teaching were closely bound and
70
The variants in 1 Tim 2:7 are not significant. The textual criticism of 2 Tim 1:11 is
fairly simple. A few minuscules replace dida,skaloj with dia,konoj, probably because of
assimilation to Col 1:23. A more serious array of witnesses, including ‫א‬c C D F G Y 1739
1881, adds evqnw/n, which is likely to be a form of harmonisation with 1 Tim 2:7 (see
MARSHALL, Epistles, 702).
71
ROLOFF, Timotheus, 107–108.
72
Probably a traditional text, though it is also possible that the author of the letter
reshaped it. Be as it may, the results of the analysis of our passage are not affected. See
MOUNCE, Epistles, 77.
73
GERHARD FRIEDRICH, “kh/rux,” GLNT, 5: 389–423, in particular 423.
74
ANDREAS LINDEMANN, Paulus im ältesten Christentum: Das Bild des Apostels und die
Rezeption der paulinischen Theologie in der frühchristlichen Literatur bis Marcion (BHT
58; Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1979), 76–77.
complementary in early Christianity. 75 Probably, what truly mattered to the

author was rather the special role played by Paul in spreading the gospel
coming from God and realised by Christ (1 Tim 2:5–6). The remaining term,
“apostle,” refers to Paul in all the three inscriptions of the Pastorals (1 Tim 1:1;
2 Tim 1:1; Tit 1:1) and it is Paul’s self-designation (Rom 1:1; 11:13; 1 Cor 1:1;
9:1–2; etc.).
In the New Testament the title “teacher” is assigned to Paul only in Acts and
in these two texts. The insertion of “I am telling the truth, I am not lying,” lays
stress on this term. Such an insertion, which may be dependent on Rom 9:1, 76
could either refer to what precedes or to what follows, but the former
hypothesis is unlikely. There is no reason why the addressees or the adversaries
should reject Paul’s appointment as herald and apostle. Rather, there were
reasons why someone may not have liked to consider Paul as “teacher of the
Gentiles,” since this is the very topic at issue in 1 Tim 2:4–6. The double
occurrence of pa,ntej (1 Tim 2:4.6; cf. 2:1) and the prominent position given
to ei-j (1 Tim 2:5-6) make it clear that the author draws on Paul’s authority in
order to advocate the universal scope of redemption (cf. 1 Tim 4:10; Tit 2:11). 77
His focus, therefore, is not on Paul the teacher, but on the content of his
teaching, that Jesus died for all (1 Tim 2:6). It is in order to protect this content
that Paul’s position as a teacher is heightened to the point that he can be
regarded as the only teacher. It is true that this is not what the text says, but the
pseudepigraphical fiction did not allow the author to present Paul as
considering himself the only teacher. Instead, he does it through the implicit
contrast between the plural form of nomodida,skaloi (1 Tim 1:7; cf. 2 Tim 4:4)
and the singular of dida,skaloj in reference to Paul. 78 In the Pastorals, the only
occurrence of the plural didaskali,ai has a negative connotation (1 Tim 4:1),
whereas the didaskali,a that Paul and his loyal followers teach is always in the
singular (1 Tim 1:10; 4:13; 4:16; 5:17; 6:1; etc.). Already in the Old Testament
didaskali,ai was considered a negative term because it implied the plurality of
human teachings as opposed to the truth coming from God. It must also be
noted that Timothy, Titus and all those who are faithful to Paul’s teaching are
never called “teachers,” though they are said to teach. In the world of the
Pastorals the teaching function was not to be exercised by teachers, but by
presbyters and bishops appointed according to a line of succession. If the
author of 1 Timothy had acknowledged the existence of the role of teachers
75
JAMES I. H. MCDONALD, Kerygma and Didache: The Articulation and Structure of the
Earliest Christian Message (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1980), 126–27.
76
MARSHALL, Epistles, 434.
77
MICHAEL WOLTER, Die Pastoralbriefe als Paulustradition (FRLANT 146; Göttingen:
Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1988), 67; MOUNCE, Epistles, 76.
78
Cf. e.g. SCHLARB, Lehre, 286.
within the community, he would have automatically acknowledged the

plurality of teachings. His polemic against Paul’s adversaries forced him to
restrict to Paul the title of teacher 79 and to give presbyters and bishops the task
of transmitting the content of faith.
Paul’s authority is validated by the following phrase: evn pi,stei kai. avlhqei,a|.
There are two possible interpretations. Paul was appointed either “faithfully
and truthfully” or “in the sphere of the faith and the truth.” 80 The latter solution
is to be preferred. In the Septuagint text of Jer 33 (26):15 and 35 (28):9 “faith”
and “truth” are respectively the characteristics of God’s commission to the
prophet. These terms express the notion that Paul has been empowered by God
and that his teaching is therefore fully reliable. 81
If the universal dimension of Paul’s teaching and his role as teacher of the
Gentiles required to be stressed, it is highly probable that his adversaries
advocated the opposite view and were not Gentiles. 82 The doctrine that the
Christian message is addressed to a restricted circle of people befits what we
know of the adversaries. They were to a large extent Jewish-Christians or
Christians with a strong interest in Judaism. Obedience to the law, or at least
to parts of it (1 Tim 1:7–10), must have been regarded by them as an essential
criterion for membership.
2.4.3 Paul’s Successors

The purpose of the pseudepigraphical fiction of 1 Timothy is to establish a
connection between Paul and third generation Christians through Timothy.
What is said of Timothy, is actually said of those who considered themselves
Timothy’s legitimate followers and, therefore, Paul’s legitimate followers. It
seems remarkable that no specific title is assigned to Timothy, but this is
understandable if we recall that Timothy was Paul’s co-worker: he represents
the continuity with the Pauline tradition and a general model of ministry. 83
What Paul is made to write about himself can also be applied to a certain extent
to Timothy and, mutatis mutandis, to the third generation of Christian leaders.
Paul is called “herald, apostle and teacher of the Gentiles.” While the role of
“apostle” is restricted to Paul’s mission, the roles of herald and teacher apply
easily to these new Christian leaders, though they are called “bishops” and
79
I agree with ROLOFF, Timotheus, 124, and WOLTER, Pastoralbriefe, 77–78 and 81–82.
MARSHALL does not think that Paul was the only teacher, since teaching is expected of
Timothy and church leaders (Epistles, 435). However, we should not confuse the function
of teaching with the title teacher.
80
81
See WOLTER, Pastoralbriefe, 77–82, especially 81–82.
82
Cf. FEE, Timothy, 67; MOUNCE, Epistles, 91–94.
83
HERMANN LIPS, Glaube – Gemeinde – Amt: Zum Verständnis der Ordination in den
Pastoralbriefen (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1979), 106–108.
“presbyters”. This means that these leaders, among whom the letter was
written, regarded themselves as the heirs of a teacher. At this point, it is
necessary to study what role teaching played among their tasks. First, I consider
what we are told about Timothy, then about bishops and presbyters.
2.4.3.1 Appointment
Though Timothy does not hold any specific position in the community, 1 and
2 Timothy point to some form of appointment. In 1 Tim 4:14 we read: “Do not
neglect the gift that is in you, which was given to you through prophecy with
the laying on of hands by the council of elders” (mh. avme,lei tou/ evn soi.
cari,smatoj( o] evdo,qh soi dia. profhtei,aj meta. evpiqe,sewj tw/n ceirw/n tou/
presbuteri,ou). The exhortation not to neglect the charisma that Timothy
received refers to the preceding verses, which list Timothy’s tasks through a
number of imperatives (1 Tim 4:6–13). Teaching (didaskali,a) features at the
beginning (1 Tim 4:6) and at the end (1 Tim 4:13) of the list. The connection
between teaching and charisma is, of course, traditional (Rom 12:6–8; 1 Cor
12:28–30). Charisma enables Timothy to perform his tasks as a minister. 84
Attention must be drawn to the fact that the Pastorals’ conception of charisma
differs from that of Paul. 85 It is true that the apostle and the Pastorals see
charisma in relationship with the leadership of the community, but in the latter
it is no longer a gift of the spirit, but something that is conferred to specific
individuals and is associated with the holding of office. Charisma equips the
office holders for ministry and in particular empowers them to keep and teach
the sound doctrine, whereas in Paul’s view there were different charismas for
different people. The difference between Paul and the Pastorals is aptly
expressed by the contrast between the image of the church as a body, where
each part is tied up with the rest (1 Cor 12:12–27), and the image of the church
as a household, where every part is regulated through the authority of the
paterfamilias (1 Tim 3:5).
The interpretation of what follows depends on how to answer a number of
questions. The word profhtei,aj may be either genitive singular or accusative
plural: hence, the phrase dia. profhtei,aj means either “by means of prophecy”
or “on account of prophecies.” 86 According to the first translation, prophecy
accompanied the imposition of hands. Therefore, the phrase describes what
happened during the appointment: a prophetic word, which can be interpreted
as an exhortatory speech, was given on that occasion. 87 The second translation
brings out the meaning that prophecies made about Timothy were the cause of
84
MARSHALL, Epistles, 564–65.
85
See ROLOFF, Timotheus, 255–57; LIPS, Glaube, 183–223.
86
87
ROLOFF, Timotheus, 258.
the appointment. This meaning corresponds to what is said of Timothy in 1

Tim 1:18 and of the appointment of Barnabas and Paul to missionary work in
Acts 13:1–3. 88 It does not imply the presence of prophets in the congregation,
about whom nothing is said in the Pastorals, but it shows that the elders were
considered to be spiritually gifted people.
The meaning of the whole ceremony and in particular of the laying on of
hands is debated. It has been connected by some with the rabbinic ordination
that allegedly developed around the same time. In particular, Daube proposed
that the phrase evpi,qesij tw/n ceirw/n tou/ presbuteri,ou is the equivalent form
of the technical term “semikath zeqenim”, “the leaning on of elders,” which
indicated the ordination of a rabbi. 89 This cannot be held any longer because
contemporary Jewish sources actually do not refer to rabbis’ ordinations. 90 It
is more to the point to compare this text with Acts 13:1–3, where the laying on
of hands is simply used to commission a very defined and time-limited task. In
1 Timothy, we find a general appointment to ministry (cf. 1 Tim 4:6: kalo.j
e;sh| dia,konoj Cristou/ VIhsou/), 91 the aim of which is to show that Timothy is a
source of authority.
The account of this appointment given by 1 Timothy differs from the
account in 2 Tim 1:6–7. This text reads: “For this reason I remind you to
rekindle the gift (ca,risma) of God that is within you through the laying on of
my hands; for God did not give us a spirit of cowardice, but rather a spirit of
power and of love and of self-discipline.” The most important difference
concerns the identity of the person or people responsible for the laying on of
hands: the circle of presbyters in 1 Tim, Paul in 2 Timothy. Various solutions
have been proposed: both texts may refer to the same occasion seen from
different perspectives; it may be a question of two different appointments, one
to general ministry, the other to the office of elder; one occasion may be the
historical appointment made by Paul, the other one may be fabricated. 92 In my
view, since the two letters are fictitious, the identity of those responsible for
laying hands is to be explained in the light of the message the author wanted to
get across, without paying attention to consistency. In 2 Timothy, Paul’s
88
89
DAUBE, New Testament, 244–46. The similarities between 1 Tim 4:14; 6:11–16, and
rabbinic ordination are pointed out in ROLOFF, Timotheus, 264–67, who sees in these two
passages a bishop ordination service (Timotheus, 342–45). ROLOFF builds on BROX’s similar
proposal (Briefe, 212–19).
90
Arguments against the hypothesis of rabbinic ordination are brought forth in JOHN P.
MEIER, “Presbyteros in the Pastoral Epistles,” CBQ 35 (1973): 323–45, 341–42;
MARSHALL, Epistles, 654–55; Lips, Glaube, 177–80.
91
MOUNCE, Epistles, 72 and 262–63.
92
The range of proposals in MARSHALL, Epistles, 568. MARSHALL favours the first
solution.
testament, the apostle is the one who lays hands. In 1 Timothy, more interested
in community structure, the elders are given this task.
2.4.3.2 Timothy’s Tasks

Timothy’s main duties are two: to guide the community with instructions and
orders (1 Tim 1:3; 1:18; 4:11; 5:7; 6:2.17) and to teach (1 Tim 4:11.13.16; 6:2).
Instructions and orders should be addressed to those teaching false doctrines
(1 Tim 1:3.18 and 4:11) and should regulate the life of community members (1
Tim 5:7; 6:13; 6:17). Teaching consists in the transmission of what Timothy
has learned from Paul, the content of which covers both doctrinal (cf. 1 Tim
1:4; 1:8–10; 4:1–5) and practical matters (cf. 1 Tim 1:8–10; 6:2). Leadership
and teaching are related (1 Tim 4:11 and 6:2): Timothy is a leader because Paul
entrusted him his sound doctrine (cf. 1 Tim 5:21).
In Acts and the Letter of James some teachers were leaders on account of,
we may presume, their talents. These talents enabled them to exercise
leadership functions. In the Pastorals the situation is different: the ability to
teach has been turned into an object, which can be passed on from person to
person.
Timothy’s orders and teachings must be consistent with his way of life (1
Tim 4:11–12). He must be an example for what concerns speech, conduct, love,
faith and purity (1 Tim 4:12). He is also requested to “give attention to the
public reading of scripture, to exhorting, to teaching (th/| avnagnw,sei( th/|
paraklh,sei( th/| didaskali,a|)” (1 Tim 4:13). 93 Probably, these three activities
refer to divine service, and, in any case, they are known to the community as
shown by the presence of the article. It is very likely that scriptural reading
included not only the Old Testament, but also Pauline letters (cf. 1 Thess 5:27
and Col 4:16). The scriptures thus understood are the basis of teaching, which
in turn provides encouragement. Parakale,w expresses the idea of giving
encouragement through persuasive instruction. In this context, the noun
denotes the encouragement that is provided through exposition of the scriptures
(cf. 1 Macc 12:9; 2 Macc 15:9) 94 and it may be equivalent to “sermon” (cf.
Acts 13:15; Heb 13:22). As to teaching, this term refers to the totality of what
the community has received from Paul. It has both ethical and doctrinal
content. It is to be noted that in Rom 12:7–8 didaskali,a immediately precedes
paraklh,sij.
Timothy is also responsible for laying hands on people and is urged not to
do it hastily (1 Tim 5:22). Most probably, this text must be interpreted as
On this verse, see MARSHALL, Epistles, 563; ROLOFF, Timotheus, 254–55.

93
94
See SPICQ, Épîtres, 321; OTTO SCHMITZ, “parakale,w,” GLNT, 9: 599–674, 660–66;
MARSHALL, Epistles, 167 and 563.
describing the appointment of church leaders, 95 a task that ensures the

transmission of the right teaching.
2.4.3.3 Bishops and Presbyters

First Timothy was written by third generation Christians who were acquainted
with overseers and presbyters. In the view of the author(s) of the Pastorals,
bishops and presbyters stand at the end of a process that begins with Paul,
herald, apostle and above all teacher, and passes through Timothy, for whom
teaching was the main activity.
Bishops are dealt with in 1 Tim 3:1–7 and Titus 1:7–9b; presbyters in 1 Tim
5:1–2, 5:17–22, and Titus 1:5–6. What is the relationship between bishops and
presbyters? Four main solutions are debated: (1) They are the same people. (2)
All bishops are presbyters, but not all presbyters are bishops. (3) There is only
one bishop, who comes from the ranks of presbyters. (4) There is only one
bishop, who does not come from the ranks of presbyters. Though no consensus
is in sight, there is at least some agreement that the consistent use of the
singular for “bishop” and of the plural for “presbyters” does not mean that there
was only one bishop. Besides the fact that “bishop” occurs only twice (1 Tim
3:2; Tit 1:7), it is likely that the singular points to the role, not to the number
of people who exercised it. 96 In my view, Meier has convincingly argued that
(1) in the recently founded Christian community of Crete overseers and elders
were the same people, which is the most obvious interpretation of Tit 1:5–9;
(2) in the older community of Ephesus, a number of people within the group of
elders specialised in teaching and preaching and were called “overseers.” 97 His
main argument is that the reference in 1 Tim 3:2 (cf. Tit 1:9) to the ability of a
bishop to teach corresponds to 1 Tim 5:17, where those elders who are
prominent in teaching and preaching are marked out. 98
95
An alternative interpretation is that the laying on of hands corresponds to the same
practice attested in later times, whereby a penitent person was forgiven and restored to the
community. See for instance Cyprian, Ep. 74.12; Eusebius, Hist. eccl. 7.2. However, in 1
Tim 4:14 and 2 Tim 1:6 the laying on of hands is a form of appointment and the theme of
community positions is one of the main concerns of 1 Timothy. For the arguments in favour
and against each of these two views, see LIPS, Glaube, 174–77; MARSHALL, Epistles, 620–
22.
96
97
MEIER, “Presbyteros.” The question of the identity of presbyters and bishops is not
relevant for this study.
98
Whatever solution is advocated, it must be remarked that at this stage church structures
were fluid and often differed from place to place. A survey of the writings written in a span
of time ranging from the second half of the first century to the second half of the second
century presents the following results: elders and bishops in Acts 11:30; 14:23; 15:2.4.6;
20:17.28; etc.; elders in 1 Pet 5:1–5; teachers and prophets in Did. 13.1–2 and 15.1–2;
First Tim 3:2–7 presents a number of requirements for bishops in keeping

with the contemporary use of virtue lists concerning people holding particular
positions. 99 The beginning of the list runs as follows: “Now a bishop must be
above reproach, married only once, temperate, sensible, respectable,
hospitable, an apt teacher (didaktiko,n), not a drunkard, not violent but gentle,
not quarrelsome, and not a lover of money” (1 Tim 3:2–3). The word
didaktiko,j can be translated as “able to teach,” without implying that bishops
were necessarily active in teaching. However, since the major problem tackled
by 1 Timothy is the threat posed by the teaching of the adversaries, the ability
to teach sound doctrine must have been essential. 100
First Timothy 5:17–18 is the beginning of a section dealing with
requirements for presbyters: 101
Let the elders (presbu,teroi) who rule well be considered worthy of double honour (diplh/j
timh/j), especially those who labour in preaching and teaching (ma,lista oi` kopiw/ntej evn
lo,gw| kai. didaskali,a|); for the scripture says, “You shall not muzzle an ox while it is treading
out the grain,” and, “The labourer deserves to be paid.”
The main difficulty in this passage is the translation of ma,lista. If it means

“especially,” the author has in mind three types of elders: normal elders, elders
who serve well, and among them those who teach. 102 If the adverb means
“namely,” the elders who serve well are the same as those who teach. The latter
rendering is to be preferred because the former interpretation, leaving the
question open as to whether double payment (1 Tim 5:18) is for the third group
only or for both the second and the third, 103 would have demanded further
clarification. In the following verse, the term timh, means “honour” or
“honorarium.” The second meaning is well attested in the New Testament and
ancient sources. 104 It makes better sense in relation to the preceding “double”
and adequately explains the presence of the following quotation from Deut 25:4
(1 Tim 5:18). 105 “Double salary” implies a term of comparison which is not
specified, but the simplest solution is that the presbyters engaged “in the word
bishops and deacons in Did. 15.1–2; bishops and deacons in 1 Clem. 42.4–5; overseer, elders
and deacons in Ignatius, Magn. 6.1; Trall. 2.2–4; 3.1; Phld. Inscription; Smyrn. 12.2; Pol.
6.1, elders and deacons in Polycarp, Phl. 5.3; apostles, overseers, teachers and deacons in
Hermas, Vis. 3.5.1. See MARSHALL, Epistles, 177.
99
See MOUNCE, Epistles, 166–67.
100
Mounce, EPISTLES, 174; FEE, Timothy, 81.
101
The delimitation of this section is debated because it is not clear whether verses 20–
25 still refer to presbyters or to sinners. The question is acutely dealt with by MEIER
(“Presbyteros,” 325–37), who shows that 1 Tim 5:17–25 forms a clearly defined periscope.
102
For instance, SPICQ, Épîtres, vol. 1, 542.
103
104
SPICQ, Épîtres, vol. 1, 542.
105
MEIER, “Presbyteros,” 327.
and teaching” should be paid twice as much as the other presbyters. We may
suppose that the presbyters received some sort of remuneration on account of
the time they spent for the community and that those who were also engaged
in teaching needed larger support in order to compensate the consequent
additional loss of income. This remuneration might have been a set salary or
an honorarium. 106 The practice of giving material support to Christians who
preached was not unheard of in early Christianity (1 Cor 4–12, with citation of
the same text, Deut 25:4, in 4:9; Did. 13.2).
The verb kopia,w is typically Pauline and denotes the work carried out in
ministry (1 Thess 5:12; 1 Cor 15:10; Gal 4:11; Rom 16:12; Phil 2:16; etc.). The
realm of this ministry is defined as evn lo,gw| kai. didaskali,a|Å The first term
seems to refer to preaching (cf. Tit 1:3), 107 the second to the activity of teaching
and its content, as we shall see later.
Even though the last text is in Titus, it will be worthwhile to draw attention
to it for it belongs to a virtue list that is related to the one in 1 Tim 3:2–4. Titus
1:7–9 reads:
For a bishop, as God’s steward, must be blameless; he must not be arrogant or quick-
tempered or addicted to wine or violent or greedy for gain; but he must be hospitable, a lover
of goodness, prudent, upright, devout, and self-controlled. He must have a firm grasp of the
word that is trustworthy in accordance with the teaching, so that he may be able both to
preach with sound doctrine and to refute those who contradict it (avnteco,menon tou/ kata. th.n
didach.n pistou/ lo,gou( i[na dunato.j h= kai. parakalei/n evn th/| didaskali,a| th/| u`giainou,sh|
kai. tou.j avntile,gontaj evle,gcein).
Titus’ list spells out the teaching requirements of the bishop, which in 1 Tim
3:2 were concisely expressed by didaktiko,j. 108 Judging from the space devoted
to it, the ability to teach seems to be the bishop’s most important endowment.
The verb avnte,cw in the middle voice means either “to cling to, hold fast to, be
devoted to,” or “to have a strong interest in.” The first meaning is to be
preferred in the light of the Pastorals’ interest in contrasting sound teaching
with the adversaries’ teaching, and in the light of those passages where
Timothy is ordered to keep the teaching that Paul entrusted to him (1 Tim 4:16;
6:20; 2 Tim 1:13; 1:14; 3:14). 109 This verb brings out one of the dominant
themes of the Pastorals: leadership is based on teaching. 110 In the following
phrase pisto,j denotes the trustworthiness of the message 111 and lo,goj its
106
The last solution is more probable according to ROLOFF, Timotheus, 308–309,
followed by MOUNCE, Epistles, 309–310.
107
SCHLARB, Lehre, 224.
108
109
See the entry “avnte,cw” in BDAG; SPICQ, Épîtres, vol. 2, 604–605; MARSHALL,
Epistles, 165–66; MOUNCE, Epistles, 391.
110
MOUNCE, Epistles, 392.
111
MOUNCE, Epistles, 391; MARSHALL, Epistles, 167.
outward expression through proclamation and instruction (cf. Titus 1:3). 112
Didach, is the content of teaching and is included in the following th/|
didaskali,a| th/| u`giainou,sh|. Bishops must know the right teaching in order to
encourage sound doctrine and to refute the false one (cf. 2 Tim 4:2–3).
Since the most important requirement for bishops and presbyters was the
ability to teach, it is legitimate to suppose that these people were already
engaged in teaching before their appointment, otherwise it would have been
very difficult to ascertain whether they were didaktikoi,. Hence the injunction
to Timothy not to impose hands hastily (1 Tim 5:22) when appointing people
whose most important task was to “labour in preaching and teaching” (1 Tim
5:17). Presbyters and bishops must have been entrusted the sound doctrine
already before proving themselves reliable and effective in the fight against the
adversaries. The transmission of the doctrine from Paul to Timothy is a major
concern for the writer: Timothy must teach what he has received from Paul
(e.g. 1 Tim 1:18; 4:6.11.15; 6:2.17). In 2 Timothy the transmission from
Timothy to others is explicitly dealt with: “what you have heard from me in
the presence of many witnesses entrust (para,qou) to faithful people who will
be able to teach (dida,xai) others as well” (2 Tim 2:2). There is an apparent
contradiction between dia. pollw/n martu,rwn, which normally should be
instrumental, and parV evmou/. The translation here adopted gets rid of the
problem by interpreting dia. pollw/n martu,rwn as “with the support/in the
presence of many witnesses.” 113 These are able to confirm that Timothy’s
teaching corresponds to what Paul actually said, in implicit polemical
opposition to the adversaries. We understand that these people too claimed that
their teaching was authentically Pauline. The verb parati,qhmai occurs also in
1 Tim 1:18 and paraqh,kh in 1 Tim 6:20 and 2 Tim 1:12.14 in reference to what
Timothy has received from Paul. The whole text does not mention
appointments, but only the transmission of Paul’s teaching. It makes clear that
there were in the community people who taught. Some of them were later
appointed to specific roles, but it is not necessary to think that all of them were.
Nothing in the Pastorals shows that teaching was restricted to presbyters and
bishops, but these letters offer clues that presbyters and bishops were selected
from the ranks of those who taught, forming a chain engaged in the reliable
transmission of Paul’s doctrines. 114
112
SCHLARB, Lehre, 224.
113
This is the translation followed by the majority of exegetes (WEISER, Timotheus, 157
n. 160). See also “dia,,” BDAG, and MARSHALL, Epistles, 725. WEISER believes the context
to be ordination (Timotheus, 157–59), but the text does not say so.
114
Cf. NORBERT BROX, “Amt, Kirche und Theologie in der nachapostolischen Epoche:
Die Pastoralbriefe,” in Gestalt und Anspruch des Neuen Testaments (ed. JOSEF SCHREINER;
Würzburg: Echter-Verlag, 1969), 120–33, 125–26.
2.5 2 Timothy
The Second Letter to Timothy is conceived as the testament of Paul, who is
imprisoned (2 Tim 1:8) and who, in proximity of death, gives instructions on
how to stabilise his work and continue his mission. This letter explicitly
mentions two parties of dida,skaloi: a one-man party, that of Paul (2 Tim 1:11),
and a soon-to-come party of teachers, who will suit people’s desires (2 Tim
4:3). The two parties are opposed and strive for power. Since in the authentic
letters Paul never calls himself “teacher,” it is possible that this title is used
here in reaction to the second party.
2.5.1 False Teachers

Second Timothy 4:3–4 reads:
For the time is coming when people will not put up with sound doctrine (u`giainou,shj
didaskali,aj), but having itching ears, they will accumulate for themselves teachers to suit
their own desires (evpiswreu,sousin didaska,louj), and will turn away from listening to the
truth and wander away to myths.
It is true that the term dida,skaloi is applied to teachers who have not come
yet, but this is a literary fiction, which projects the current situation into the
eschatological times (cf. 2 Tim 3:1–9; 1 Tim 4:1–5). 115 Paul claims that he has
been deserted by everybody in Asia, including Phygelus and Hermogenes (2
Tim 1:15). He exhorts Timothy to avoid confrontations (2 Tim 2:14.16; cf.
2:23) with those who chatter, among whom are Hymenaeus and Philetus (2
Tim 2:17–18). People enter women’s houses and preach what is contrary to
truth (2 Tim 3:6). Teachers who threaten the author’s views are busy at work. 116
Through the eschatological projection of the term “teacher,” the author of the
letter can avoid calling his current adversaries “teachers” in order to assign this
title exclusively to Paul. Moreover, the use of the plural is an additional
criticism of his foes: people “accumulate” teachers, whereas there is need of
only one teacher, Paul. 117 We are not told how the term “teacher” should be
understood, because this is taken for granted. In order to throw light on the
matter, it is necessary to have a closer look at the “adversaries.”
The author of 2 Timothy discloses the names of some of his opponents.
Hymenaeus and Philetus delivered unacceptable doctrines (2 Tim 2:17–18).
One Alexander, a coppersmith (2 Tim 4:14–15), did Paul great harm and
opposed the message Paul and Timothy preached. The menial work carried out
115
WEISER, Timotheus, 302–303.
116
JACQUES SCHLOSSER, “La didascalie et ses agents dans les épîtres pastorales,”
RevScRel 59 (1985): 81–94, 85.
117
MARSHALL, Epistles, 802; SCHLARB, Lehre, 283.
by Alexander may not befit a teacher, but we should remember that Paul
himself was a tent-maker (Acts 18:3).
Hymenaeus, Philetus, Alexander and the remaining adversaries targeted in
2 Timothy are people belonging to the community. 118 Several clues point in
this direction. The fact of calling them by name shows that they were supposed
to be known. The order to avoid the wrongdoers of the last days (2 Tim 3:5)
makes sense if these are considered as springing from within the community
rather than from outside. The strife with Hymenaeus and Philetus presupposes
internal conflicting views regarding resurrection, all the more since they are
said to have departed from truth (2 Tim 2:18). 119 What we find in this letter is
intra-mural polemic. This suggests that the adversaries recognised the authority
of Paul and that they considered themselves as his heirs. The emphasis the
author lays on Paul’s teaching and on its transmission is explicable if the
adversaries did the same.
The misdeeds of the opponents are manifold. They apparently avoid
persecutions, which are to be expected by anybody who lives a godly life (2
Tim 3:11–13). They are deceivers (2 Tim 3:13). Their words do not match their
deeds (2 Tim 3:5). They like to engage people in verbal controversies (2 Tim
2:14.16.23). Their vices are numerous (2 Tim 3:2–4). They entice women (2
Tim 3:6). Most of these charges are traditional and were employed by
philosophers against sophists. 120 However, there are two elements we can
retain as authentic, though the second is dubious. The first, not a stock charge,
is the implication in 2 Tim 3:11–13 that the adversaries avoided persecutions.
Teaching and persecution are linked in Matt 10 and 23 and this charge is
repeated in Ignatius and the Martyrdom of Polycarp. 121 The second element
may be the enticing of women. It was not common and fits in with what we
have found in 1 Tim 2:8–15. 122 It is possible that some adversaries attempted
to attract women, who may have been owners of the houses where the
community gathered and therefore very influential, and who may have helped
118
SCHLARB, Lehre, 140; TOWNER, “Gnosis,” 102.
119
Cf. YANN REDALIÉ, Paul après Paul: Le temps, le salut, la morale selon les épîtres à
Timothée et à Tite (MdB 31; Geneva: Labor et Fides, 1994), 383.
120
ROBERT J. KARRIS, “The Background and Significance of the Polemic of the Pastoral
Epistles,” JBL 92 (1973): 549–64, 553–54.
121
The world of the Pastorals recalls that of the Christians depicted by Pliny in his letter
to Trajan (Epistulae ad Trajanum 96): see LIPS, Glaube, 158–59.
122
KARRIS, “Background,” 560: though each letter must be read separately, they refer to
similar or even the same context. JERRY L. SUMNEY (‘Servants of Satan,’ ‘False Brothers’
and Other Opponents of Paul [JSNTSup 188; Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1999],
283–84) disagrees with KARRIS, because the three letters should be kept rigoroulsy apart.
the spreading of their teaching. These adversaries carried out missionary

activity. 123
The interest of the list does not only lay in the single items, but also in the
fact that there is such a list at all. It implies that the author recognised his
adversaries as teachers. 124 The Second Letter of Timothy portraits Paul as a
teacher (2 Tim 1:11), who attacks those who oppose his views as one would do
with colleagues.
2.5.2 Content of the False Teaching

Second Timothy 2:18 deserves attention because the author, contrary to his
custom, provides information about the doctrines held by his adversaries. 125 In
this text we are told that “[Hymenaeus and Philetus] have swerved from the
truth by claiming that the resurrection has already taken place. They are
upsetting the faith of some.” Obviously, it is question neither of Jesus’
resurrection nor of the bodily resurrection of those who have already died.
Many scholars agree that Hymenaeus and Philetus advocate the view that the
spiritual resurrection of believers has already taken place. Through conversion
they take part in a new life. So far, this view has nothing particularly striking.
Numerous parallels are to be found in Christian and Jewish literature: Luke
15:24.32; John 5:25–29; Col 2:12–13; 3:1.3–4; Eph 2:4–6; 5:14; Rev 3:1–3;
1QH 3.19–20; Jos. Asen. 8.10–11; 20.7; 2 Macc 7.22–23; Philo, Migr. 122–
123; Contempl. 13 (about the Therapeutes); Ps.-Philo, De Jona 153; Const. ap.
7.39.4; Acts Phil. 84.117. 126 The problems must have arisen in connection with
bodily resurrection. Probably, Hymenaeus and Philetus were satisfied with the
spiritual resurrection and dispensed with the resurrection of the body at the end
of time. This teaching is often compared to what Paul tackled in 1 Cor 15:12,
where he cites from his adversaries: “Now if Christ is proclaimed as raised
from the dead, how can some of you say there is no resurrection of the dead?”
First Corinthians 15:12 is the object of a long-standing debate, from which
four different interpretations have emerged. 127 (1) There is nothing after death.
(2) Only those who will be found alive at the end of time will live for ever. (3)
123
Cf. BROX, Pastoralbriefe, 38.
124
KARRIS, “Background,” 555.
125
OBERLINNER, Lettere, vol. 2, 148. On this passage see in particular the excursus in
WEIZEN, Timotheus, 210–25.
126
See SPICQ, Épîtres, vol. 2, 757–58; WEIZEN, Timotheus, 212–14; THEISSEN, Christen,
330–32.
127
See the convenient summary in GERHARD BARTH, “Zur Frage nach der in 1Korinther
15 bekämpften Auferstehungsleugnung,” ZNT 83 (1992): 187–201, 188–91. See also
ALEXANDER J. M. WEDDERBURN, Baptism and Resurrection: Studies in Pauline Theology
against Its Graeco-Roman Background (WUNT 44; Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1987), 6–37.
Paul’s opponents favoured the Greek concept of the immortality of the soul
against the Jewish concept of the resurrection of the body. (4) Paul’s
adversaries were enthusiasts who interpreted the reception of the spirit as the
entrance into a heavenly life of perfection and who did not care for any future
resurrection of the dead. This last position benefits from widespread
approval: 128 it matches similar ideas in the Christian and Jewish texts
mentioned above and in the picture of the Corinthian gatherings which Paul
draws. Two important points must be observed. First, Paul paved the way to
his criticism of the view quoted in 1 Cor 15:12 with a discussion on the
reliability of the gospel he proclaims. He laid stress on Christ’s resurrection
through the support of the scriptural testimony and the testimony of those who
saw the risen Jesus. Not surprisingly, commenting the doctrine mentioned in
verse 12, he wrote that “if there is no resurrection of the dead, then Christ has
not been raised; and if Christ has not been raised, then our proclamation has
been in vain and your faith has been in vain.” (1 Cor 15:13–14). The second
point concerns, once again, Paul’s counter-argument. The apostle affirms that
if there is no resurrection of the dead,
why are we putting ourselves in danger every hour? I die every day! That is as certain,
brothers and sisters, as my boasting of you—a boast that I make in Christ Jesus our Lord. If
with merely human hopes I fought with wild animals at Ephesus, what would I have gained
by it? If the dead are not raised, ‘Let us eat and drink, for tomorrow we die.’ (1 Cor 15:30–
32).
Paul’s argument is based on the contemporary topos that those who endangered
their lives for a great cause did it in order to achieve some sort of immortality
(e.g. Cicero, Tusc. 1.32–33; Plato, Symp. 208d), 129 a topos that in modified
form Ignatius employs, as we shall see. In Jewish sources this motif is linked
with that of the suffering righteous and of the violent death of the prophet,
which are based on the suffering-vindication pattern. “According to the
scriptures” refers to this pattern. 130 As one who believes to have seen the risen
Jesus, Paul feels confident that this pattern will also be implemented in his own
case: his own suffering, like Jesus’ suffering, will be rewarded with
resurrection.
The connection between 1 Cor 15:12 and 2 Tim 2:18 may be questioned. In
the first text “some” reject the resurrection of the dead; in the second two
people spread the idea that the resurrection has already taken place. On one
side we have denial of resurrection, on the other acceptance of it. 131 However,
128
SCHRAGE, Brief, vol. 4, 114. See also SCHLARB, Lehre, 93–133.
129
See BARTH, “Frage,” 194–95.
130
REINHOLD LIEBERS, “Wie geschrieben steht”: Studien zu einer besonderen Art
frühchristlichen Schriftbezuges (Berlin: Walter de Gruyter, 1993).
131
See WEDDERBURN, Baptism, 393.
in the first case it is question of the resurrection “of the dead,” in the second of
some sort of resurrection of the spirit. These two passages do not say the same
things, but the views they represent are related. The possession of the spirit,
which in the case of the Corinthians was probably marked by ecstatic
performances, assured believers that they already partook of the new life. This
“already” is ironically marked by Paul himself in 1 Cor 4:8. 132 The slight
discrepancy between 1 Cor 15:12 and 2 Tim 2:18 is also due to their distance
in time. For the Corinthians of the middle of the first century, their endowment
with the spirit was not yet theologically codified, but only expressed negatively
as dismissal of the belief in bodily resurrection. For the addressees of 2
Timothy, a few decades later, the presence of the spirit was positively
interpreted as resurrection. 133
If it is correct to say that Paul’s adversaries, as portrayed in 2 Timothy,
advocated only spiritual resurrection and consequently rejected the bodily one,
it is probable that for them Jesus had not raised from the dead. This belief, as
we have noticed, brings them quite close to Judaism and matches the label of
“teachers of the law”, which we find elsewhere in the Pastorals. It is therefore
possible to suggest that the real issue at stake between the views heralded by
the Pastorals and those of their adversaries consisted in establishing what sort
of relationship Christians should have regarding their Jewish heritage.
Christianity had little ground to exist as separate from Judaism if belief in the
full resurrection of Christ was ungrounded. One can well understand the
Pastorals’ polemical virulence against teachers undermining the doctrinal
foundations of the community and why their author(s) intended to get rid of
the title “teacher” altogether as long as it did not refer to Paul. Thus doing, the
way was opened for a church ruled by bishops and presbyters and not for one
ruled by teachers, the Christian equivalent of the rabbis slowly making their
appearance among the Jews.
132
Further contacts with 1 Cor are pointed out by BROWN: 2 Tim 2:2, where Timothy has
heard from Paul “through many witnesses,” recalls 1 Cor 15:11, where Paul refers to his own
preaching and the preaching of other witnesses; the crown of 2 Tim 4:8 recalls the prize in
1 Cor 9:24–27 (Introduction, 677 n. 11).
133
It has been pointed out that belief in a realised resurrection is also a characteristic
feature of Nag Hammadi writings (e.g. NHC 2,4/49,23–24; II,6/134,9–15; II,3/69,25–26;
IX,3/36,8.22.26–27) and it is also to be found in anti-gnostic polemic (e.g. Irenaeus, Haer.
1.23.5; Tertullian, De Anima 50.2).133 The adversaries in 2 Timothy were not strictly gnostic,
but part of the fertile soil, which will later produce Gnosticism. On 2 Timothy and
Gnosticism see WEIZEN, Timotheus, 214–19.
2.5.3 Paul the Teacher and Timothy the Disciple

I have already considered the designation of Paul as a teacher in 2 Tim 1:11
and its relationship with 1 Tim 2:7. Both 2 Tim 1:11 and 4:17 show that the
appointment is from God. The divine election of Paul as a teacher is in
opposition to the “teachers” of the end of time. Whereas Paul’s teaching is to
be transmitted (2 Tim 2:2), the teaching of his adversaries will be against the
sound doctrine (2 Tim 4:3). Timothy is Paul’s faithful tradent. It must be noted
that Timothy does not hold any office: the only time he is associated with what
may be an office, that of euvaggeli,sthj (2 Tim 4:5), Timothy is not called
“evangelist,” but he is requested to perform the work of an evangelist. 134 On
another occasion we are told that Paul’s hands were laid upon Timothy (2 Tim
1:6). The interpretation of this text is controversial, especially because it
echoes a similar statement in 1 Tim 4:14. 135 Be that as it may, in both passages
the laying on of hands is tied up with the transmission of charisma, which
enables Timothy to instruct the community in Paul’s message, rather than with
the appointment to a precise office. 136
Though Timothy is not appointed as a teacher, his main task is to teach. The
author of the letter is keen to place Timothy in the chain of transmission
intended to preserve the right doctrine. Timothy is Paul’s son (2 Tim 1:2; 2:1);
he received his faith from his grandmother and his mother (2 Tim 1:5); he was
instructed by the apostle (2 Tim 1:13; 2:2; 3:14); he is requested to keep his
teaching (2 Tim 1:13–14; 3:14) and to transmit it (2 Tim 2:2). Through the use
of words from the root “daj” and of semantically cognate forms in connection
with Timothy (2 Tim 2:2.15.24.25; 3:10.14; 4:2.5), the author portrays a
teacher-disciple relationship, to which the custody and the transmission of the
right doctrine across generations is entrusted. 137 Timothy is a close associate
of a teacher, whose life he knows well (2 Tim 3:10–11). However, contrary to
the contemporary custom in Jewish and pagan milieus, the disciple does not
become a teacher, but remains a disciple. The transmission of teaching
authority is only partial because it does not include the transmission of the title
“teacher.”
Paul is portrayed as giving a number of instructions as to the way Timothy
should carry out his task. He must not debate with his adversaries (2 Tim
2:14.16.23; 3:5), but oppose them by sticking to his work (2 Tim 4:5). He must
134
WEISER, Timotheus, 304.
135
136
WEISER, Timotheus, 50–51 and 106–109. ANDRÉ LEMAIRE went beyond the evidence
when he stated that the laying on of hands in these passages transmits “la dignité d’Ancien”
to Timothy and corresponds to rabbinical ordination (“Les épîtres pastorales. B. Les
ministères dans l’Église,” in DELORME, ed., Ministère, 102–117, 104).
137
Cf. BROX, “Amt,” 125–26.
transmit Paul’s teaching to faithful people (2 Tim 2:2) and, before the
congregation, he must
proclaim the message; be persistent whether the time is favourable or unfavourable;
convince, rebuke, and encourage, with the utmost patience in teaching (kh,ruxon to.n lo,gon(
evpi,sthqi euvkai,rwj avkai,rwj( e;legxon( evpiti,mhson( paraka,leson( evn pa,sh| makroqumi,a| kai.
didach/)| (2 Tim 4:2).
A list of five aorist imperatives tells Timothy how the congregation should be
instructed, disciplined and protected from the adversaries. Paul’s teaching must
be proclaimed, every opportunity must be seized upon in order to teach, people
must be showed their faults and reproved, and all should be exhorted with
patience and in conformity to proper teaching. 138
2.5.4 The Content of the Sound Teaching

Second Timothy 1:8–10 reports the content of the euvagge,lion, for which Paul
has been appointed apostle, herald and teacher (2 Tim 1:11). It is a rather
complicated text, a traditional kerygma, which might have served as a hymn in
the author’s congregation and which has been revised by him. 139 This text
conveys three thoroughly Pauline ideas: God is the saviour and salvation is
carried out through grace, not works; salvation takes place through Christ
Jesus; Jesus has destroyed death and revealed immortal life. 140 It must be
observed that this “gospel” is bound with Paul’s suffering. It is because of it
that Paul suffers (2 Tim 1:12), that he is in chains and it is for the sake of the
gospel that he invites Timothy to take his share of suffering (2 Tim 1:8).
Another bit of gospel is reported in 2 Tim 2:8, where Paul’s euvagge,lion is
“Jesus Christ, raised from the dead, a descendant of David.” Whereas the
preceding text focuses on God’s salvific action, this focuses on christology. It
is possible that this statement is addressed to those who believe that the
resurrection has already taken place. Since Jesus’ resurrection consisted in
raising “from the dead,” those who believe in some form of spiritual
resurrection in this life are wrong. 141 Once again, it is noteworthy that the
“gospel” is associated with Paul’s suffering: the gospel is that “for which I
suffer hardship, even to the point of being chained like a criminal. But the word
of God is not chained” (2 Tim 2:9). The same topic is dealt with a few verses
earlier: the entrusting of what Timothy learned from Paul to people who may
teach (dida,xai) others is immediately followed by the exhortation to “share in
suffering (sugkakopa,qhson) like a good soldier of Christ Jesus” (2 Tim 2:2–3).
138
See MARSHALL, Epistles, 799–801.
139
WEISER, Timotheus, 105–106; MARSHALL, Epistles, 700–701.
140
See MARSHALL, Epistles, 702.
141
Cf. OBERLINNER, Lettere, vol. 2, 119–22; TOWNER, “Gnosis,” 106.
The connection between the two themes is not fortuitous. In 2 Tim 4:5 suffering
and the evangelist’s work are connected (su.… kakopa,qhson( e;rgon poi,hson
euvaggelistou/). A few verses later, in the second chapter, there is a text
gathering traditional elements 142 in which the main ideas are the capacity of
suffering with Jesus and being faithful (2 Tim 2:11–13). Second Timothy 2:11
points to the pattern of suffering and vindication. 143 We have already found
this pattern in Matt 10 and 23. Second Timothy partakes of Christian
speculations on suffering for the gospel’s sake, which will be fully developed
in the Martyrdom of Polycarp. Attention must be drawn to the role played by
teachers in these speculations. It is obvious that people involved in missionary
activities and advocating views that gave rise to disputes were most liable to
suffer at the hand of external or internal adversaries. For this reason, the title
and the role of teacher were controversial.
The third and last text on the content of teaching is the famous passage on
the scriptures in 2 Tim 3:14–17:
But as for you, continue in what you have learned (e;maqej) and firmly believed, knowing
from whom (para. ti,nwn) you have learned (e;maqej) it, and how from childhood you have
known the sacred writings that are able to instruct you for salvation through faith in Christ
Jesus. All scripture is inspired by God and is useful for teaching (didaskali,an), for reproof
(evlegmo,n), for correction (evpano,rqwsin), and for training in righteousness (pro.j paidei,an
th.n evn dikaiosu,nh|).
These four verses form a unity clearly separated from what precedes, verses 2–
13, which is held together by the repetition of a;nqrwpoi, and from what
follows, which is marked by a new beginning through diamartu,romai. 144 The
content of what has been taught to Timothy probably included the gospel and
the Old Testament, judging from the following verses and from 2 Tim 4:2. 145
The pronoun ti,nwn is likely to refer, besides Paul, to Timothy’s mother and
grandmother (2 Tim 1:5), and more in general to all his predecessors
responsible for the correct transmission. 146 “Through faith in Christ Jesus” may
refer either to “instruct” or to “salvation.” If the former, it is question of the
christological reading of the scriptures, but the position of the phrase is such
as to point to “salvation” or in general to the whole preceding clause. 147 Pa/sa
grafh, may mean “every scripture,” “all scripture,” or “every scriptural
142
143
Cf. MARSHALL, Epistles, 735; on the latter text cf. MOUNCE, Letters, 512.
144
Further arguments in GIUSEPPE DE VIRGILIO, “Ispirazione ed efficacia della scrittura
in 2Tm 3,14–17,” Rivista Biblica 38 (1990): 485–94, 487.
145
MOUNCE, Letters, 562.
146
Cf. MARSHALL, Epistles, 788; OBERLINNER, Lettere, vol. 2, 214–15; WEISER,
Timotheus, 277.
147
passage.” Be as it may, the general meaning is the same. 148 The syntax of what
follows is debated. We can translate “every scripture is inspired by God and
useful” or “every scripture inspired by God is also useful.” The main
arguments in favour of the second translation are that the stress of the sentence
is on the usefulness of the scriptures. The advocates of the first rendering insist
that the second translation seems to assume that some scripture is not inspired,
and that its syntax is awkward. 149 The solution to this question will not affect
the fact that the main term is “useful”, as the following clause explains. The
four nouns of this clause have a chiastic construction: didaskali,an corresponds
to paidei,an and evlegmo,n to evpano,rqwsin. 150 The first pair concerns general
instruction, the second pair concerns the refutation of those who went astray.
It must be observed that these terms express the activity of instruction and
refutation more than the content of these activities. We have already seen that
the Pastorals are more interested in practice than in doctrine. The final clause
indicates either the purpose or the consequence of what precedes. “Man of
God” could be any believer, or a special reference to the leaders, 151 or more
probably both, 152 since the text envisages Timothy and those who benefit from
his teaching.
Verses 14–17 present the role that the scriptures should play in the life and
the work of the leaders. Acquaintance with the scriptures begins at an early
age, whereas proper comprehension comes later. This enables the leader to
instruct others, so that every believer is equipped for good work. Three points
must be marked. First, scriptural instruction is part of the chain of transmission.
Second, the author writes of inspiration and usefulness of all scripture possibly
because some thought differently about it. 153 Third, scriptural instruction
produces good deeds.
2.5.5 Didaskali,a in the Pastoral Epistles

I pointed out that 2 Timothy must be read separately from the other two letters,
since its distinctive features may suggest an earlier date. However, the three
letters are likely to have been issued from the same circle. This is why a
synchronic study of their teaching vocabulary may shed some light on the
question of teachers.
148
MARSHALL, Epistles, 792. See also MOUNCE’s close analysis in Letters, 565–68.
149
For a survey of positions, see MARSHALL, Epistles, 792–93; WEISER, Timotheus, 280–
81.
150
151
FEE, Timothy, 280.
152
MARSHALL, Epistles, 796; cf. MOUNCE, Letters, 570–71.
153
FEE, Timothy, 278; OBERLINNER, Lettere, vol. 2, 222.
We have seen that words from the root “das” are very frequent in the
Pastoral Epistles. 154 The most recurrent one is didaskali,a (1 Tim 1:10;
4:1.6.13.16; 5:17; 6:1.3; 2 Tim 3:10.16; 4:3; Titus 1.9; 2:1.7.10). This term
denotes the teaching carried out by Timothy and Titus and in 1 Tim 4:1 the
“teachings” of the adversaries, the only instance in which the word is in the
plural. The contrast between didaskali,a and didaskali,ai corresponds to the
contrast between dida,skaloj referred to Paul and nomodida,skaloi (1 Tim 1:7)
and didaska,louj (2 Tim 4:3) referred to the adversaries. The origins of this
opposition are to be found in the Old Testament. 155 The Septuagint employs
the word didaskali,a only four times. Three times it refers to the instructions
received from God (Prov 2:17; Sir 24:33; 39:8) and is singular. The fourth time
it disparagingly refers to human teachings and is plural (Isa 29:13): [God’s
people] dida,skontej evnta,lmata avnqrw,pwn kai. didaskali,aj. This suggests that
the plural indicates the variety of human opinions, against which the singular
denotes the only truth, which comes from God. With the exception of the
Pastorals, the word has little interest for the writers of the New Testament
because it could be easily associated with the different philosophical doctrines
available in Greco-Roman culture. Most of the occurrences are citations of Isa
29:13 (Mark 7:7 and par. Matt 15:9; Col 2:22) and therefore in the plural. The
singular positively refers to Christian instruction in Rom 12:7 and 15:4. More
difficult is the case of Eph 4:14: perifero,menoi panti. avne,mw| th/j didaskali,aj
evn th/| kubei,a| tw/n avnqrw,pwn. Even if the singular didaskali,a seems to point
to acceptable teaching, the phrase panti. avne,mw| makes it clear that the author
refers to a plurality of teachings. 156 If the article th/j points to didaskali,a as
being the Christian teaching, panti. avne,mw| refers to aberrant interpretations of
it. 157 In both instances, it is clear that the plural is implicitly understood as
referring to human teachings. As to the Pastorals, in the inner polemic among
competing Christian groups claiming for themselves the Pauline heritage,
didaskali,a in the singular emphasises the trustworthiness of what the epistles
advocate, whereas the plural discredits the adversaries’ teaching by attaching
it to human origins.
The term didaskali,a is synonymous with didach, (2 Tim 4:2; Titus 1:9). 158
It is employed instead of didach, because it expresses the idea that the teaching
comes from the dida,skaloj Paul. Paul is not portrayed as its source since he
154
See the whole list in LIPS, Glaube, 44 n. 61.
155
On the use of didaskali,a in biblical and extra-biblical literature see RENGSTORF,
“dida,skw,” 1158–65; CLARA BURINI, “th/| u`giainou,sh| didaskali,a|: Una norma di vita
cristiana in Tito 2, 1,” Vetera Christianorum 18 (1981): 275–85, 278–79.
156
See BEST, Ephesians, 405.
157
MERKLEIN, Amt, 107.
158
himself has received from others the doctrines he teaches (1 Tim 1:11; Titus
1:3), but he vouches for what Timothy and Titus say. 159
We have seen the difficulty in pinpointing the contents of teaching. 160 The
Pastorals are not interested in them, but in opposing the doctrines held by the
adversaries (1 Tim 4:6; 6:1.3; 2 Tim 3:10.16). 161 The allegedly authentic
Pauline teaching is qualified as (didaskali,a) u`giai,nousa (1 Tim 1:10; 2 Tim
4:3; Titus 1:9; 2:1; cf. 1 Tim 6:3; 2 Tim 1:13; Titus 1:13; 2:2.8), an expression
in which the medical aspect may not be lost: what the opponents teach seems
to be considered deleterious for the believer. 162 In fact, the approved teaching
of the Pastorals is not only doctrinal, but also ethical. 163 Paul’s injunctions and
guidance include disciplinary measures and virtue lists, which are meant to
make life within the community running smooth and befitting Christian belief.
One of the best examples is in Titus, where, within the inclusion su. de. la,lei
a] pre,pei th/| u`giainou,sh| didaskali,a| (Titus 2:1) and tau/ta la,lei kai. paraka,lei
(Titus 2:15), instructions on proper behaviour are given. 164
Didaskali,a is not the only word denoting teaching in the Pastorals, but there
are several more terms, the precise meaning of which is not easy and probably
not even correct to disentangle. 165 The words euvagge,lion (1 Tim 1:11; 2 Tim
1:8.10; 2:8), kh,rugma (2 Tim 4:17; Titus 1:3; cf. 1 Tim 2:7; 2 Tim 1:11; 4:2)
and martu,rion (1 Tim 2:6; 2 Tim 1:8) refer to the proclamation and
transmission of the content of faith carried out by Paul and entrusted to
Timothy. This content is thus made accessible to the community through the
catechesis of its leaders. 166 Paraqh,kh (1 Tim 6:20; 2 Tim 1:12.14) describes
the whole of what Paul has entrusted to Timothy as a deposit, which must be
159
GERHARD LOHFINK, “Paulinische Theologie in der Rezeption der Pastoralbriefe,” in
Paulus in den neutestamentlichen Spatschriften: Zur Paulusrezeption im Neuen Testament
(ed. KARL KERTELGE; QD 89; Freiburg: Herder, 1981), 70–121, 99–100; SCHLOSSER,
“Didascalie,” 85–86; LIPS, Glaube, 269.
160
See the overview of scholarship in SCHLARB, Lehre, 196–205 and 274.
161
Cf. MARSHALL, Epistles, 168.
162
ROLOFF, Timotheus, 78. On two occasions the Pastorals describe the adversaries’
teaching as an illness (1 Tim 6:4 and 2 Tim 2:17) and on many occasions as causing
ignorance and negative demeanour (1 Tim 4:2; 6:4-5.9; Titus 1:15; etc.). This sort of
vocabulary was employed in antiquity by philosophers to address their audiences, and
especially by rigorist Cynics to abuse them. At the same time, the Pastorals’ picture of the
adversaries is paralleled in those authors, like Lucian, who turned the tables against these
abusive Cynics (MALHERBE, “Medical Imagery”).
163
Cf. SCHLARB, Lehre, 288–89; 291–92.
164
See LIPS, Glaube, 46.
165
166
See LIPS, Glaube, 41–44; SCHLARB, Lehre, 240–54. On euvagge,lion see also ROLOFF,
Timotheus, 79–80.
transmitted without alterations. 167 Lo,goj/lo,goi mainly indicate the expression

of the contents of faith in forms that can be used in its proclamation and in
teaching. 168
These words are in closer connection both with each other and with the word
group “das” and contribute, each with its specific features, to clarify the
teaching of the Pastorals. They manifest the intention to build and fix a
vocabulary which can be employed against adversaries and at the same time
ensure the proclamation and transmission of what is considered proper
Christian doctrine. Paul’s missionary work as well as the activity of Timothy,
Titus and the other leaders are subordinated to this double task with regard to
the adversaries and the rest of the community. The content of teaching is more
important than those who transmit it. In the Pastorals there can be no teachers
in the sense of people who interpret and elaborate the message, with the
exception of the non-repeatable case of Paul. His followers who attempt this
interpretation are considered teachers in a disparagingly way (2 Tim 4:3) or as
unsuccessfully trying to be teachers (1 Tim 1:7), and belong to the ranks of the
adversary.
2.5.6 Teachers and Rabbis

Why are the Pastorals against the transmission of the title “teacher”? This is an
important point, which is connected with the fact that Christianity did not build
communities led by dida,skaloi and did not go down the same road as rabbinic
Judaism. In the first century, some Christians, like the author(s) of the
Pastorals, challenged the role of teachers at its very core, that is the possibility
of establishing a chain of transmission teacher-disciple-teacher. The reasons
are at least two. The first is that Christian teachers, contrary to the forerunners
of the rabbis, had to face the risks of persecution. The Pastorals, Matthew, and,
as we shall see, Ignatius, were painfully aware that Christian teachers could be
confronted with the same fate of their master and that the temptation to change
their doctrines in order to please persecutors and avoid death would be great.
Better to avoid the title “teacher” altogether and keep Jesus’ followers in a
permanent state of discipleship, which allowed the transmission of his teaching
but not, in principle, its alteration. The second reason concerns the very identity
of the master. The rabbis did not descend from a master who was regarded by
many to be the son of God, but this is what early Christian teachers did. Jesus
was not only an interpreter and transmitter of tradition, he was also the very
object of interpretation and transmission. According to our analysis of the
Pastorals, some teachers preached that he had not been raised from the dead
and as nomodida,skaloi demanded at least part of the law to be fulfilled and
167
LIPS, Glaube, 266–70; BROX, Pastoralbriefe, 235–36; ROLOFF, Timotheus, 371–73.
168
SCHLARB, Lehre, 206–229.
spent a deal of their time in the study of the Jewish scriptures. It is reasonable
to suppose that, if their teachings had found wide acceptance, there would not
have been much left of Christianity. In fact, it would have been hardly
distinguishable from Judaism. While rabbinic Judaism came to incorporate a
variety of opinions, Christian teachers had a much more limited room for
manoeuvre. It was necessary to believe not only that Jesus had had a special
relationship with God, but also that he had conquered death and that he was
God’s son. Teachers who denied the resurrection would have eventually
brought Christianity back within Judaism. There was too much at stake to leave
teaching in the hands of teachers. Since the transmission of teaching was
unavoidable, better to give it to bishops and presbyters, administrative roles
more easily accountable than independently-minded, self-appointed
nomodida,skaloi.
2.6 Conclusions
The adversaries of the Pastorals were members of the community and were
probably called “teachers” by their followers. These teachers paid attention to
some requirements of the law and advocated some form of realised
eschatology. They were very active in spreading their views and some of them
might have been women. The author(s) of the Pastorals disagreed with their
doctrines and might have sensed that they threatened the very existence of the
community as separate from the synagogue. In order to oppose these “teachers
of the law”, the author(s) presented Paul as the only teacher. The only correct
teaching is the one coming from Paul, who has entrusted it to Timothy and
Titus, who have entrusted it to reliable and capable people, mainly presbyters
and bishops. What is transmitted is a fixed deposit of teaching, whereas the
title “teacher” is not transmitted. The reason is simple: disciples who do not
become teachers cannot alter the deposit. The development of a community
structure similar to the rabbinical one slowly emerging in Judaism was
therefore put out of the question. However, the disciples can become presbyters
and bishops. These are appointed on account of their talents, but is the
appointment, not their talents, that is the basis of their authority.
3. Letters of Ignatius
3.1 Introduction
Considering that Ignatius comes from the same region as the Gospel according
to Matthew, it is reasonable to expect from him some light on the role of
teachers. However, a cursive reading of the letters proves to be rather
disappointing. The only teacher to be mentioned is Jesus and the only roles
about which Ignatius seems to be concerned are those of bishop, presbyter and
3. Letters of Ignatius 177
deacon. However, this silence may be a clue that Ignatius is not telling the
whole story, especially in view of the fact that his phrase “Jesus the only
teacher” recalls Matthew’s criticism of teachers. Ignatius’ hostility against
those holding different views and his recurrent self-labelling as a disciple are
further clues that the Antiochene bishop may turn out to be an important
witness to the history of teachers. 169
3.2 Date
Ignatius wrote a number of letters during his journey as a captive from Antioch
to Rome, where he was to be eaten by wild beasts. In one of these writings he
states that he is the bishop of Syria (Rom. 2.2), which probably stands for
Antioch, where his arrest took place (Smyrn. 11.1). The dates of this event and
of the subsequent journey are unclear. According to Eusebius (Hist. eccl. 3.36),
Ignatius was arrested during the reign of Trajan (98–117). Another possible
setting is the Jewish War of 132–135. A third proposal points to the reign of
Antoninus Pius and more precisely the years 140s. 170 At the current stage of
research, rather than pinpointing a date, it is safer to propose a range of years.
The combination of external data, such as the revolt and the war, and of internal
data, such as the ecclesiology, the christology, and the nature of the opposition
169
English quotations are taken from the edition by WILLIAM R. SCHOEDEL, Ignatius of
Antioch: A Commentary on the Letters of Ignatius of Antioch (Hermenia; Philadelphia:
Fortress Press, 1985). The Greek quotations come from HOLMES, Apostolic Fathers. I follow
the majority of Ignatian scholars who rely on the middle recension (WILLIAM R. SCHOEDEL,
“Polycarp of Smyrna and Ignatius of Antioch,” ANRW 27.1: 272–358, 345–46). JOSEP RIUS-
CAMPS (The Four Authentic Letters of Ignatius, the Martyr [OrChrAn 213; Rome:
Pontificium Institutum Orientalium Studiorum, 1980] has challenged it by stating that only
Romans, Magnesians, Trallians and Ephesians are authentic, though the latter three contain
interpolations. The interpolator, who was also the forger of the remaining three letters,
painted a hierchical image of the church, which promoted the interests of the bishop of
Philadelphia, whose authority was being challenged. RIUS-CAMPS’ reconstruction is very
complex and his arguments have been considered too weak (SCHOEDEL, Ignatius, 5–6;
ALLEN BRENT, “The Relations Between Ignatius and the Didascalia,” SecCent 8 [1991]:
129–56). REINHARD M. HÜBNER, (“Thesen zur Echtheit und Datierung der sieben Briefe des
Ignatius von Antiochien,” ZAC 1 [1997]: 44–72) has suggested that all the letters of Ignatius
are a forgery from the second half of the second century. Their author would be an anti-
gnostic writer influenced by Noetus of Smyrne. This proposal has not found acceptance. See
ANDREAS LINDEMANN, “Antwort auf die „Thesen zur Echtheit und Datierung der sieben
Briefe des Ignatius von Antiochien“,” ZAC 1 (1997): 185–94; GEORG SCHÖLLGEN, “Die
Ignatianen als pseudepigraphisches Briefcorpus: Anmerkung zu den Thesen von Reinhard
M. Hübner,” ZAC 2 (1998): 16–25; MARK J. EDWARDS, “Ignatius and the Second Century:
An Answer to R. Hübner,” ZAC 2 (1998): 214–26; HERMANN JOSEF VOGT, “Bemerkungen
zur Echtheit der Ignatiusbriefe,” ZAC 3 (1999): 50–63.
170
TIMOTHY D. BARNES, “The Date of Ignatius,” ExpTim 120 (2008), 119–30.
described by Ignatius, permits to place the letters some time between 105 and
140s. 171
The grounds for the arrest are unknown. It has been suggested that the
Jewish revolts of the years 115–117 in the oriental regions of the Roman
Empire might have provided the setting and that Ignatius was arrested because
he was considered one of the leaders of the parties engaged in conflict. 172 In
this case, it was precisely his role as a bishop the cause of his arrest. The office
of bishop must have been a recent creation. The community of the Didache
was rather critical of bishops, and that of James was headed by a group of
teachers. Matthew 23:8, with its warning against appointing a leader, testifies
to the fact that things were moving in directions the evangelist did not like.
From the letters of Ignatius we gather that in Asia Minor the role of bishop was
criticised and disregarded by some people. These texts show that the rule of
one person must have been something of a novelty in the Antiochene church.
The controversy around it might have been particularly acute since this big
centre was likely to host different Christian groups and to be exposed to the
influence of non-Christian doctrines. 173 It is not surprising that the church of
Antioch was not at peace and that its bishop was deeply concerned about his
community until the day tensions eased (Phld. 10.1; Smyrn. 11). In such a
difficult situation, Ignatius’ opponents might have thought of drawing the
attention of the Roman authorities to their adversary. 174
3.3 The Opponents

The letters of Ignatius are largely concerned with the opposition to the bishops
in the communities he addressed. The ideas and practices of these dissenting
parties are the target of Ignatius’ passages on discipleship and church structure.
Since the title of teacher is absent from the type of church the martyr advocates,
it may be asked whether it is actually present among those whom he criticises.
171
See CHARLES MUNIER, “Où en est la question d’Ignace d’Antioche? Bilan d’un siècle
de recherches 1870–1988,” ANRW 27.1: 359–484, 480–84; SCHOEDEL, “Polycarp,” 347–49.
172
MARCO RIZZI, “Jews and Christians under Trajan and the Date of Ignatius’
Martyrdom”, in Jews and Christians in the First and Second Centuries: The Interbellum 70–
132 CE (ed. JOSHUA SCHWARTZ and PETER J. TOMSON; Compendia Rerum Iudaicarum ad
Novum Testamentum 15; Brill: Leiden, 2018), 119–26.
173
Cf. MEIER, “Antioch,” 79–81. Assuming that Matthew was written in Antioch, I agree
with MEIER that Ignatius inherited the tensions between the different groups that are
witnessed in the Gospel. However, MEIER’s assumption that the docetists and Judaisers of
the letters are in Antioch cannot be accepted without qualification.
174
SCHOEDEL is on similar lines. Ignatius’ office had been challenged and the authorities
chose to intervene in order to force Christians into conformity (Ignatius, 10–11 and 13–14).
I think it possible that this intervention may have been prompted by the opponents of
Ignatius.
There is no consensus on the issue of Ignatius’ adversaries. 175 Their

doctrines are close to Judaism and docetism, but their exact nature is debated.
Depending on the answer given to this question, the number of the opposing
parties varies. 176 I believe that there were two main parties because the letters
dealing with judaising tendencies do not overlap those dealing with docetic
ones. When some overlapping is suggested, it is timidly presented by Ignatius
as if he were aware of doing something he should not (Magn. 9.1). However,
the differences are not to be given too much weight. 177 The Ascensio Isaiae, an
Antiochene work written around the time of Ignatius, offers a case in point.
This writing comes from Jewish-Hellenistic Christian prophets who were not
interested in the earthly life of Jesus, but only in his salvific action, and who,
as a consequence, held docetic views. 178 At the same time, the reason for the
similarities scholars perceive between the two groups could be attributed to the
fact that Ignatius employs the same type of argument with both: the scriptural
one. In his opinion, the scriptures witness to the gospel, thus disproving
Judaisers, and to the reality of the incarnation, thus disproving docetists. 179
175
See MATTI MYLLYKOSKI, “Wild Beasts and Rabid Dogs: The Riddle of the Heretics
in the Letters of Ignatius,” in The Formation of the Early Church (ed. JOSTEIN ÅDNA;
WUNT 183; Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2005), 341–77; SCHOEDEL, “Polycarp,” 301–304;
MUNIER, “Question,” 398–413; CHARLES K. BARRETT, “Jews and Judaizers in the Epistles
of Ignatius,” in Jews, Greeks and Christians: Religious Cultures in Late Antiquity: Essays
in Honor of William David Davies (ed. ROBERT HAMMERTON-KELLY and ROBIN SCROGGS;
SJLA 21; Leiden: Brill, 1976), 220–44, 221–30.
176
Some scholars believe that Ignatius combated docetists only (EINAR MOLLAND, “The
Heretics Combated by Ignatius of Antioch,” JEH 5 [1954]: 1–6; ENRICO NORELLI, “Ignazio
di Antiochia combatte veramente dei cristiani giudaizzanti?,” in Verus Israel: Nuove
prospettive sul giudeocristianesimo. Atti del Colloquio di Torino (4–5 novembre 1999) [ed.
GIOVANNI FILORAMO and CLAUDIO GIANOTTO; Brescia: Paideia Editrice, 2001], 220–64);
other scholars that he opposed gnostics and Jewish-Christians (PAUL J. DONAHUE, “Jewish
Christianity in the Letters of Ignatius of Antioch,” VC 32 [1978]: 81–93, 82-88; VIRGINIA
CORWIN, St. Ignatius and Christianity in Antioch [New Haven: Yale University Press, 1960],
52–65). There are also some who propose that Ignatius tackled the opposition of several
groups, which agreed in rejecting the rule of the bishop (PETER MEINHOLD, “Schweigende
Bischöfe: Die Gegensätze in den kleinasiatischen Gemeinden nach den Ignatianen,” in
Festgabe Joseph Lortz. 2. Glaube und Geschichte [ed. ERWIN ISERLOH and PETER MANNS;
Baden Baden: Bruno Grimm, 1958], 467–90; repr. in PETER MEINHOLD, Studien zu Ignatius
von Antiochien [Veröffentlichungen des Instituts für Europäische Geschichte Mainz 97;
Wiesbaden: Franz Steiner, 1979], 19–36).
177
According to SCHOEDEL, it is Ignatius who polarised the two groups, Judaisers and
docetists (Ignatius, 12–13).
178
ENRICO NORELLI, Ascensio Isaiae: Commentarius (Corpus Christianorum Series
Apocryphorum 8; Turnhout: Brepols, 1995), 53–66 and 525–61.
179
PAUL A. HARTOG, “The Good News in Old Texts? The ‘Gospel’ and the ‘Archives’
in Ign.Phld. 8.2,” in Papers Presented at the Seventeenth International Conference on
Another preliminary question concerns the location of the dissidents.

Ignatius may write about people and ideas he knew from Antioch; 180 he may
refer to opponents actually at work in the communities he addresses; 181 he may
refer to them keeping in mind what he knows from Antioch. 182 He mentions
preachers of unacceptable doctrines travelling from Ephesus to Smyrna (Eph.
9.1) and he explicitly refrains from giving the names of opponents in Smyrna.
There is no doubt that he addressed local problems, though keeping in mind
the situation at home. Around his time and a little later Antioch hosted
important gnostic teachers 183 and was therefore a place which could provide its
bishop with some preliminary knowledge. Being one of the greatest cities of
the empire, Antioch was likely to attract all sorts of new doctrines.
3.3.1 Magnesians
The letters where judaising views come to the fore are those addressed to the
Magnesians and to the Philadelphians. The first letter was sent from Smyrna
(Magn. 15), where Ignatius received the visit of the Magnesian bishop Damas,
the presbyters Bassus and Apollonius and the deacon Zotion (Magn. 2). These
are surely the people who informed him about the situation of the church in
Magnesia (Magn. 1), which he did not visit. On the basis of their reports,
Ignatius believed that there were in Magnesia people who behaved as Jews and
he addressed against them part of the letter. 184 These Judaisers were fellow
Christians and Ignatius’ polemic was intra mural. When he writes “if we
Patristic Studied Held in Oxford 2015 (ed. MARKUS VINZENT; StPatr 93; Leuven: Peeters,
2017), 105–21.
180
See for example WOLFRAM UEBELE, “Viele Verführer sind in die Welt ausgegangen”:
Die Gegner in den Briefen des Ignatius von Antiochien und in den Johannesbriefen
(BWANT 151; Stuttgart: W. Kohlhammer, 2001); DONAHUE, “Jewish Christianity,” 81–82.
181
BARRETT, “Jews,” 240. There may be some connections between the opponents in the
Ignatian letters and the people attacked in Revelation since three letters in this book are
addressed to the same communities which Ignatius wrote to (Ephesus, Philadelphia, and
Smyrna). See CHRISTINE TREVETT, “Apocalypse, Ignatius, Montanism: Seeking the Seeds,”
VC 43 (1989): 313–38; PIERRE PRIGENT, “L’hérésie asiate et l’église confessante de
l’Apocalypse à Ignace,” VC 31 (1977): 1–22.
182
MIKAEL ISACSON, To Each Their Own Letter: Structural Themes, and Rhetorical
Strategies in the Letters of Ignatius of Antioch (ConBNT 42; Stockholm: Almqvist &
Wiksell, 2004), 216–18. Isacson observes that Ignatius knew the situation in Philadelphia
and Smyrna, which he visited, better than the situation in Ephesus, Magnesia and Tralles,
which he did not visit.
183
UEBELE, “Viele Verführer,” 158–59.
184
In the conclusion of the letter Ignatius denies that he writes because he knows that
these errors are present among the Magnesians (Magn. 11). This statement should not be
taken literally, as it intends to strengthen the effect of the recommendations (see SCHOEDEL,
Ignatius, 129).
continue to live until now according to Judaism” (Magn. 8.1), he clearly

addresses Christians (“we”) and, furthermore, only non-Jews can “judaise.” 185
No details are given about this way of life except that these people are deceived
by erroneous opinions (e`terodoxi,ai) and old fables (muqeu,mata palaia,), which
are useless (Magn. 8.1). From Magn. 9.1 one may infer that they also keep the
Sabbath rather than the Lord’s Day, though this is not what Ignatius explicitly
says. 186 The content of their erroneous opinions is not explained. The term
denoting them recalls the word e`terodidaskalou/ntej in Pol. 3.1. The second
part of the charge, a belief in muqeu,mata pa,laia, recalls the link between
Judaism and mythology to be found in the Pastorals (Tit 1:14; cf. 1 Tim 1:4;
4:7; 2 Tim 4:4). Since the problem is what Ignatius calls “Judaism,” the “old
fables” are likely to be the stories of the scriptures. Ignatius obviously accepted
the Jewish scriptures, but he rejected the Jewish interpretation of them. 187 The
scriptures were “useless” when they were interpreted apart from the Christ-
event. By writing “if we continue to live until now according to Judaism”
(Magn. 8.1), Ignatius implies that what he considers the novelty brought by
Christ has left no mark. Those who do not read the scriptures in the light of
Christ miss their true meaning, because the prophets spoke of him so that “the
disobedient might be persuaded” (Magn. 8.2). If the prophets lived according
to Jesus and prophesised about him, how can Christians, who have the
advantage point of seeing the prophecies fulfilled, live according to Judaism?
In short, these Judaisers do not accept the proof from prophecy. 188 Henceforth,
the scriptures lose their meaning and are useless old fables. The theological
consequences of this refusal are far-reaching. Ignatius hints at them in
connection with the Sabbath. He writes that the prophets lived “in accordance
with the Lord’s Day” (Magn. 9.1). This means for the bishop that they knew in
advance of Jesus’ death and resurrection. Thus, the prophets were disciples of
Jesus, the only teacher, in the spirit (Magn. 9.1–2). We understand that in
Ignatius’ opinion those who do not read the scriptures in the light of Jesus do
not acknowledge the salvific power of his death and resurrection. This
interpretation is confirmed in the following passages. Magnesians 10.1 implies
that the false teachers are called by a name other than “Christians”, which could
only be “Jews.” Ignatius goes on saying that they profess Jesus Christ and at
the same time behave as Jews, which he considers two mutually exclusive
things (Magn. 10.3).
185
See SHAYE J. D. COHEN, “Judaism without Circumcision and ‘Judaism’ without
‘Circumcision’ in Ignatius,” HTR 95 (2002): 395–415, 398–99.
186
According to MOLLAND (“Heretics,” 3–4), the passage refers to the Old Testament
prophets who kept the Lord’s Day instead of the Sabbath. However, the stress on the need
for conversion in Magn. 9.1 cannot apply to the prophets and maybe there was no question
of people actually keeping the Sabbath (SCHOEDEL, Ignatius, 123).
187
Cf. BARRETT, “Jews,” 237–38.
188
SCHOEDEL, Ignatius, 119–20.
The problems involved in interpreting the text are due to the fact that nothing
explicit is said of the Judaisers’ opinion about Jesus’ death and resurrection, in
spite of what Magn. 9.1 seems to suggest. Mentioning “Jesus’ death” Ignatius
adds a parenthetical clause, “which some denies.” The use of an indefinite
pronoun and of an incision shows that Ignatius is not writing about the opinions
of the Judaisers, but hinting at docetism, otherwise he would have gone to some
length in his criticism. Moreover, this allusion is so tenuous that we must
conclude that there was no docetism in Magnesia, and that Ignatius wants to
lump together all dissenters in one group. This is confirmed by the fact that the
anti-docetic rule of faith of Magn. 11.1 lacks the strength of other comparable
passages unequivocally addressed to docetists (cf. Trall. 9.1–2; Smyrn. 1.1–
2). 189 Ignatius was not interested in a fair representation of his adversaries.
The letter does not say anything about the leaders, if any, of the Judaisers,
but Ignatius’ insistence on Jesus’ role as the only teacher (Magn. 9) seems to
imply that they were regarded as teachers. The fact that they apparently read
the scriptures as Jews may have done shows that they may have been receptive
to the teachings of Jewish rabbis. Jesus was not for them the only interpreter
nor, indeed, the key to the interpretation.
3.3.2 Philadelphians
Ignatius wrote this letter from Troas (Phld. 11.2), having sojourned in
Philadelphia (Phld. 3.1 and 6.3). His major concern is the presence in
Philadelphia of dissidents who do not follow the bishop (Phld., Inscription; 2–
4), though their role was not so influential as Ignatius would like us to think
(Phld. 3.1: “not that I found division among you, but a filtering out”). 190 These
dissidents propose “false teachings” (Phld. 2.1: kakodidaskali,ai), which are
rooted in Judaism (Phld. 6.1). The last passage seems to shed light on their
identity: “But if anyone expounds Judaism to you, do not listen to him; for it
is better to hear Christianity from a man who is circumcised than Judaism from
a man uncircumcised; both of them, if they do not speak of Jesus Christ, are to
me tombstones and graves of the dead on which nothing but the names of men
is written.” Apparently, the expounder of Judaism is an uncircumcised, but
what follows indicates that Ignatius should not be taken literally: he writes that
it does not matter whether one is circumcised or not because what counts is
Jesus Christ. Ignatius proposes a paradox, of which similar examples are to be
189
SCHOEDEL, Ignatius, 125; CHARLES T. BROWN, The Gospel and Ignatius of Antioch
(Studies in Biblical Literature 12; New York: Peter Lang, 2000), 179.
190
SCHOEDEL, Ignatius, 198.
found in antiquity, in order to highlight the superiority of Christianity over

Judaism (cf. Magn. 10.3). 191
The nature of the problem Ignatius finds in Judaism is suggested by this very
passage, in which the verb “to expound” (e`rmhneu,ein) points to the question of
scriptural interpretation. In Phld. 5.2 Ignatius writes: “we also love the
prophets because they also made their proclamation with the gospel in view
and set their hope on him [Jesus]” (cf. Phld. 9.2). It is clear that the dissidents
love the prophets, but that they, contrary to Ignatius, do not believe that their
proclamation had Christ in view. This problem is brought to the fore in Phld.
8.1: “I heard some say, ‘If I do not find (it) in the archives, I do not believe (it
to be) in the gospel.’ And when I said, ‘It is written,’ they answered me, ‘That
is just the question.’” The interpretation of this passage depends on the
meaning of the word “archives.” (avrcei,oi). Schoedel argued convincingly that
they are an alternative designation for the scriptures. 192 This is confirmed by
Ignatius’ statement, “It is written,” which elsewhere he uses only of the Old
Testament (cf. Eph. 5.3; Magn. 12). Our passage shows that the dissidents have
challenged Ignatius to prove his point from the Old Testament, that he thought
the Old Testament did it, and that they remained sceptical. The point under
discussion can be easily inferred from what follows: “But for me the archives
are Jesus Christ, the inviolable archives are his cross and death and his
resurrection and faith through him—in which, through your prayers, I want to
be justified” (Phld. 8.2). Ignatius is not particularly interested in the
scriptures, 193 but for the opponents the scriptures could not be bypassed. Their
interest in Judaism was especially an interest in the holy writings. 194 Did they
really speak about Christ? The answer of the dissidents, who considered the
scriptures as the ultimate test of truth, was either uncertain or negative. 195 This
was not so for Ignatius, for whom the ultimate test of truth was Jesus Christ’s
passion and resurrection. If the scriptures are read separately from the Christ-
event, they are useless old fables (Magn. 8.1). 196
191
I follow the proposal made by COHEN, who defines this figure as “paradoxical bipolar
antithetical comparison” (“Judaism,” 407–413). Cf. also DONAHUE, “Jewish Christianity,”
88–89.
192
SCHOEDEL, Ignatius, 208; see also idem, “Ignatius and the Archives,” HTR 71 (1978):
97–106; BARRETT, “Jews,” 233; MOLLAND, “Heretics,” 4–5.
193
Ignatius’ attitude to the scriptures is quite different from the exegesis proposed by the
writers of the great church, who were at pains to find connections between the Old Testament
and the life of Jesus. Cf. THEO PREISS, “La mystique de l’imitation du Christ et de l’unité
chez Ignace d’Antioche,” in idem, La vie en Christ (Neuchatel: Delachaux & Niestlé, 1951),
7–45, 29–32.
194
SCHOEDEL, “Archives,” 104–106 and “Polycarp,” 343.
195
Cf. COHEN, “Judaism,” 399–402.
196
Cf. BARRETT, “Jews,” 237.
Judging from his letters, Ignatius knew little about the scriptures and we
may safely say that he was no match to his opponents. This is why he does not
argue further against their scepticism, but he jumps to the rule of faith. His
letters are one of the earliest witnesses to the polemic carried out by the great
church against both Jews and gnostics, which was fully developed starting from
the middle of the second century and which was largely based on the proof
from prophecy. Scriptural passages or testimonia were collected and
occasionally forged in order to prove the continuity of God’s plans and their
fulfilment in Jesus and the church. Ignatius was confronted with this issue, but
he was not able to argue from the scriptures. 197
These dissidents, insofar as they placed the scriptures at the centre of their
beliefs, were close to Judaism, though this is not to say that they were Jews
turned Christians. Ignatius does not show any interest in Jewish practices in
this letter. 198 His opponents may be Gentiles who, through becoming
Christians, thought of entering a Jewish sect or, in any event, Gentiles
influenced by a Jewish way of expounding the scriptures.
We do not know whether these dissidents were called “teachers.” The least
that can be said is that it is possible and maybe probable. Ignatius attributes
“false teachings” to them and calls them “wolves” and “evil plants.” By
singling out the leaders of the Judaisers, he might have unwillingly
acknowledged that their exegetical expertise had won them the title of teacher.
3.3.3 Ephesians
Docetic views are mainly tackled in three letters: Ephesians, Trallians and
Smyrnaeans. Ignatius wrote Ephesians in Smyrna (Eph. 21.1), where he
received the visit of the Ephesian bishop Onesimus and his companions (Eph.
2.1). These must have been his source about the situation in Ephesus. It seems
that the community was not divided in factions (Eph. 6.2) and that it did not
pay heed to the teaching of visitors (Eph. 9.1; cf. 6.2). These are people who
“are accustomed with evil deceit to carry about the name” and that hide their
deadly intention like “rabid dogs” who bite without warning (Eph. 7.1). 199
After Ephesus, they passed through Smyrna (Eph. 9.1) carrying “evil
teaching,” (Eph. 9.1: kakh.n didach,n), corrupting faith “by evil teaching” (Eph.
16.2: evn kakh/| didaskali,a)| , and anointing with the “ill odour of the teaching of
the ruler of the age” (Eph. 17.1: duswdi,an th/j didaskali,aj tou/ a;rcontoj tou/
197
On the testimonia question see MARTIN C. ALBL, “And Scripture Cannot Be Broken”:
The Form and Function of the Early Christian Testimonia Collections (NovTSup 96;
Leiden: Brill, 1999); ALESSANDRO FALCETTA, Testimonies: The Theory of James Rendel
Harris in the Light of Subsequent Research (Ph.D. diss., University of Birmingham, 2000).
198
See COHEN, “Judaism,”402-403; contra BARRETT, “Jews,” 233–35.
199
SCHOEDEL, Ignatius, 59. This was a well-known proverb.
aivw/noj tou,tou). Ignatius never calls them “teachers,” but what he writes about
them is revelatory of a group of travelling teachers wanting to spread their
views and performing their work not on an occasional but on a regular basis
(eivw,qasin in Eph. 7.1). 200 It is likely that Ignatius deliberately avoids the term
“teachers” in order not to acknowledge them as worthy of being listened to. In
fact, the proper reaction to their teaching is, as the Ephesians did, to stop one’s
ears (Eph. 9.1).
It is significant that this picture partly overlaps the one to be found in
Polycarp’s letter where the Philippians are warned against those who “carry
about the name of the Lord in hypocrisy, who lead astray foolish people” (Phil.
6.3: tw/n evn u`pokri,sei fero,ntwn to. o;noma tou/ kuri,ou( oi[tinej avpoplanw/si
kenou.j avnqrw,pouj). In both cases the warning is issued against itinerant
Christians whose fault is hypocrisy. 201
The content of their teaching can be inferred from several texts which have
an anti-docetic thrust. After warning against the teachers who are “rabid dogs,”
Ignatius lists semi-creedal paradoxes which highlight both the spiritual and the
human nature of Jesus (Eph. 7.2). These paradoxes are developed in a
subsequent text collecting similar material in which the human nature of Jesus
is in full focus: “For our God, Jesus the Christ, was carried in the womb by
Mary according to God’s plan—of the seed of David and the Holy Spirit—who
was born and baptised that by his suffering he might purify the water” (Eph.
18.2). The same themes are placed in eschatological perspective towards the
end of the letter, where apocalyptic traditions and legends on the birth of Christ
are combined in order to illustrate the meaning of the incarnation. 202 Ignatius
explicitly presents this text as his reply to the teachers coming from the ruler
of this age (Eph. 19.1; cf. Eph. 17.1).
3.3.4 Trallians
Polybius, bishop of Tralles, met Ignatius in Smyrna, and informed him about
the situation of his church. In Smyrna Ignatius wrote a letter to Polybius’
community (Trall. 1.1 and 12.1). Ignatius forewarns the Trallians, who have
not been affected yet by the false teaching (Trall. 8.1), that its advocates are a
plant which is “faction” (Trall. 6.1: ai[resij) and offers deadly instructions
mixed with attractive topics and/or style (Trall. 6.2). According to these
people, Jesus suffered only in appearance (Trall. 10.1), a notion against which
Ignatius writes a quasi-creedal text (Trall. 9.1–2). This stresses the reality of
Jesus’ birth, earthly life, death, and resurrection by repeating the adverb “truly”
(avlhqw/j) four times. Rather than delivering a well-argued response to his
200
In Ignatius “to carry about” is associated with travelling in Eph. 11.2; Magn. 1.2 and
Trall. 12.2 (SCHOEDEL, Ignatius, 59).
201
202
opponents, Ignatius composes a statement of what he considers to be facts. This

is typical of his method for avoiding doctrinal discussions: he merely invites
the Trallians not to listen to those who speak “apart from Jesus Christ” (Trall.
9.1). There is no question of judging for themselves what is the best view. The
only argument the Antiochene bishop puts forward is that, if Jesus suffered
only in appearance, his bonds are in vain (Trall. 10.1).
There is little to glean from Ignatius’ portrait of the docetic views. He only
gives a most general summary of their tenets by claiming that they deny
Christ’s sufferings. We do not know if this denial extended to the entire life of
Jesus and was a full-fledged docetism, as Ignatius would like us to think. 203
3.3.5 Smyrnaeans
Writing to Smryna while in Troas (Smyrn. 12.1), Ignatius could rely on his
first-hand knowledge of the situation among his addressees, whom he had
visited earlier (Magn. 15; Trall. 1.1; Eph. 21.1). Life in Smyrna was deranged
by people claiming that Jesus had suffered only in appearance (Smyrn. 2; 5.1;
cf. Trall. 10). Ignatius’ response is fourfold. First, he writes an elaborated semi-
creedal text, which is placed right after the inscription (Smyrn. 1–2). Drawing
on traditional material, the bishop lists the major events of Jesus’ life and
underlines their reality by reiterating that they “truly” (avlhqw/j, five times; cf.
Trall. 9.1–2) took place and by reminding the Smyrnaeans that they have been
nailed to Jesus’ cross “both in flesh and spirit” (Smyrn. 1.1). 204 Second,
Ignatius emphasises Jesus’ bodily resurrection by saying that the disciples
touched his body and that he ate and drunk (Smyrn. 3). The two pictures are
related to, but not dependent on, Luke 24:39–43. They are meant to address in
a general way, not just anti-docetic, the reality of the resurrection. 205 Third, we
find an appeal to the scriptures and the gospel (Smyrn. 5.1; cf. 7.2). When
Ignatius observes that his opponents were not persuaded by either, he assumes
that they both bear testimony to Jesus. The law of Moses and the prophets do
so by telling events in advance, the gospel by recording them. 206 The two terms,
“gospel” and “scripture”, are loosely related, but the gospel would soon
provide the table of contents around which Christians gathered quotations
intended to function as proofs from prophecy. The connection between gospel
and scripture was already made in Matthew’s use of fulfilment formulas and
203
204
SCHOEDEL, Ignatius, 220–24
205
206
“Gospel” here is to be intended not as a written book, but as an oral message of
salvation. See BROWN, Gospel.
would be developed by subsequent writers such as Justin. 207 In Ignatius’ letters

it is adumbrated: the scriptures should be interpreted in the light of the life of
Jesus (cf. Phld. 5.2; 8.2; 9.2). He does not summon specific passages, but he
takes the scriptures to be a “general source of authority.” 208 His opponents in
Smyrna, like the Judaisers of Philadelphia, failed to be impressed. Maybe they
kept holding on to a different interpretation. Fourth, Ignatius mentions his own
suffering: “For if those things [the events in Jesus’ life and his bodily
resurrection] were done by our Lord (only) in appearance, I too am bound
(only) in appearance. And why indeed have I given myself up to death, to fire,
to sword, to wild beasts?” (Smyrn. 4.2). 209 We have seen that this argument
was a contemporary topos.
Since it was not possible to convince his adversaries, the only defence that
Ignatius recommends to put up is the same as before: do not listen to them.
These people are to be avoided and are not to be mentioned in conversation
with others (Smyrn. 4.1; 7.2). This is why Ignatius himself does not call them
by name (Smyrn. 5.3).
Who were they? Even if teachers came to Smyrna while Ignatius was there
(Eph. 9.1), the opponents he has in mind belong to the local community. They
do not care for the weak nor take part in the eucharist (Smyrn. 6.2–7–1), they
should be avoided (Smyrn. 7.2), their names are known (Smyrn. 5.3). The
damnatio memoriae with which Ignatius wants to punish them, unless they
repent (Smyrn. 4.1), makes more sense if they were local believers than if they
were itinerants who happened to pass by. Their leader might have been an
official of the Smyrnaean church, maybe a presbyter; it is probably for this
reason that Ignatius recommends that the eucharist should not be celebrated
without the bishop or his representative (Smyrn. 8.1). 210
The challenge brought by the opponents to the bishop’s authority is likely
to be Ignatius’ real or main concern. Their docetic views are important insofar
as they are a potential cause of division. In fact, the theological arguments in
the first part of the letter (Smyrn. 1–6.1) give way at the end to warnings and
considerations concerning community life (Smyrn. 6.2–9.2). Moreover, the gap
between Ignatius’ and the opponents’ views was not so wide after all if it is
true that they praised him (Smyrn. 5.2).
207
For instance, it has been found out that quotations in Justin’s First Apology are
organised according to a creedal pattern (OSKAR SKARSAUNE, The Proof from Prophecy: A
Study in Justin Martyr’s Proof-Text Tradition: Text-Type, Provenance, Theological Profile
[NovTSup 56; Leiden: Brill, 1987], 139).
208
BROWN, Gospel, 193.
209
NORBERT BROX, Zeuge und Märtyrer: Untersuchungen zur frühchristlichen Zeugnis-
Terminologie (SANT 5; München: Kösel-Verlag, 1961), 213–14.
210
3.4 The Three Offices

The letters dealing with the Judaisers and those dealing with the docetists do
not overlap, but there is a theme, which keeps recurring throughout the Ignatian
writings: resistance to the rule of the bishop and his associates, presbyters and
deacons. For this reason, it has been suggested that Ignatius combated on a
third front, that of anti-episcopal activity. 211 This resistance is the natural
consequence of the emergence of a single and all-controlling leadership. This
was a novelty. Ignatius’ numerous exhortations to obey the bishop and keep
unity (Eph. 2.2; 4.1–5.1; 20.2; Magn. 1.2; 3.1–4.1; 6.1; 7.1; 13.2; Trall. 2.1–
3.2; 7.1; 12.2; 13.2; Phld. Inscription; 3.2; 7.1–8.1; Smyrn. 8.1–9.1; Pol. 1.2;
6.1) show that this office did not command sufficient respect, probably because
it was not yet well-established. 212 This is confirmed by the fact that Ignatius
has to justify in direct or indirect ways the authority of the bishop (Eph. 3.2;
5.3; 6.1; Magn. 1.1; 3; 6.1; Smyrn. 9.1). In so doing, Ignatius does not appeal
to the idea of apostolic succession. The apostles are for him a thing of the past
(Eph. 11.2; Magn. 7.1; Trall. 3.3; Rom. 4.3; Phld. 9.1). 213 In communities for
which the rule of the bishop was something of a novelty and lacked a precise
theological foundation, the challenge of dissident members was a serious
threat.
In two communities the bishop was criticised for being silent (Phld. 1.1 and
Eph. 6.1). Ignatius rebutted that silence can do more than many words. The
context of this silence can be gauged from Eph. 15.1–2, where it is associated
with teaching, and from Eph. 7.1, where Ignatius reprobates wandering people
who are probably teachers. Thus, it seems that the Ephesian bishop, Onesimus,
was silent because he was unable to argue with them. 214 It is interesting to note
that Ignatius’ defence recalls what the author of James writes about teachers.
There are many would-be teachers, but their inability to control their tongue
shows that they are not the right people for the job (Eph. 3:1–11). Likewise,
the critics of the bishop are false teachers, whose deeds do not match their
words, whereas the bishop’s silence and good deeds show he is a good leader.
211
CHRISTINE TREVETT, “Prophecy and Anti-Episcopal Activity: a Third Error
Combatted by Ignatius?,” JEH 34 (1983): 1–18; idem, “Apocalypse,” 342. According to
SCHOEDEL, “Polycarp,” 342, TREVETT overstates her case, though the presence of
charismatic movements deserves attention.
212
SCHOEDEL, Ignatius, 22–23; TREVETT, “Prophecy”; MEINHOLD, “Bischöfe,” 22 and
24.
213
SCHOEDEL, Ignatius, 112–13; MICHAEL J. WILKINS, “The Interplay of Ministry,
Martyrdom and Discipleship in Ignatius of Antioch,” in Worship, Theology and Ministry in
the Early Church: Essays in Honor of Ralph P. Martin (ed. MICHAEL J. WILKINS and
TERENCE PAIGE; JSNTSup 87; Sheffield: JSOT Press, 1992), 294–315, 300. On Ignatius’
ideas about church structure, see CAMPENHAUSEN, Ecclesiastical Authority, 97–106.
214
It has also been proposed that the silent bishop lacked the prophetic gifts
which were expected of people in his position. 215 He was not a charismatic and
consequently was incapable of inspired speech, which, for instance, Paul
wanted to see in the gatherings of his communities (1 Cor 14). The case of
Philadelphia provides some useful information. Praising the local bishop,
Ignatius writes that:
Of which bishop I know that he obtained a ministry for the community, not of himself, nor
yet through any human beings, nor yet for vainglory (kenodoxi,an), but in the love of God the
Father and the Lord Jesus Christ, by whose gentleness I was struck, who though silent can
effect more than they who talk vanity (tw/n ma,taia lalou/ntwn) (Phld. 1).
This praise looks like an apology. The authority of the bishop was apparently
challenged as being of human origin rather than divine. Probably, he did not
show any spiritual gift which could confirm that his position was
acknowledged by God. His silence is for the opponents evidence of his lack of
inspired speech. 216 This text should be compared with a passage from the
Ascensio Isaiae, the first six chapters of which are to be dated to the beginning
of the second century: 217
and how many and many of those believing in him [the Beloved one, that is Jesus] will speak
in the holy spirit, and how there will be many signs and wonders in those days. And when
he draws near his disciples will abandon the prophecy of his twelve apostles and the faith
and their love and their purity. And there will be many divisions when he draws near, and
there will be in those days many willing to rule and devoid of wisdom. And there will be
many lawless presbyters (presbu,teroi) and shepherds (poime,nej) who will be unjust with
their sheep […] because there are not pure shepherds. And many […] of their pure clothes
in clothes of money lovers […]. And there will be many calumnies and vainglory (kenodoxi,a)
when the lord draws near, and the holy spirit will withdraw from the majority. And there
will not be in those days many prophets speaking hard words, but one here and there (Mart.
Ascen. Isa. 3.19–25). 218
This text probably comes from prophets unhappy with the development of a
twofold hierarchy of presbyters and shepherds, the latter to be identified with
215
MEINHOLD, “ Bischöfe.” See also VISONÀ, Didachè, 214; cf. TREVETT, “Prophecy.”
JOACHIM ROHDE thinks that MEINHOLD went too far in denying an actual role to the docetic
and judaising opposition (“Häresie und Schisma im Ersten Clemensbrief und in den Ignatius-
Briefen,” NovT 10 [1968]: 217–33, 232-33). This criticism is correct, but it should be kept
in mind that Ignatius probably exaggerates the role of these two currents: his concern is for
the unity of the churches he addresses.
216
See MEINHOLD, “Bischöfe,” 27.
217
ENRICO NORELLI, L’Ascensione di Isaia: Studi su un apocrifo al crocevia dei
cristianesimi (Origini, Nuova Serie 1; Bologna: Dehoniane, 1994), 66.
218
My translation from the Greek fragment reported in PAOLO BETTIOLO et al., ed.,
Ascensio Isaiae: Textus (Corpus Christianorum Series Apocryphorum 7; Turnhout: Brepols,
1995), 142–45.
bishops. 219 Several points in common with Ignatius should be noted: the charge
of being only humanly appointed, of seeking personal advantage, of vainglory,
and the reference to the opponents of the bishops as people who talk vanity,
according to the negative judgement passed by Ignatius, or “hard words”,
according to the positive assessment of the Ascensio. 220 The opponents to the
Philadelphian bishop and the prophets of the Ascensio seem to share a
pneumatic understanding of church offices. It must be observed that this was
not rejected altogether by Ignatius. The Antiochene bishop presents himself as
a spiritually gifted person in order to support, directly or indirectly, his
arguments (Eph. 20.2; Trall. 5; Phld. 7.2) and recommends Polycarp to be
spiritual (Pol. 1.2; 2.2). 221
Additional information can be found in the Didache. The community is
invited to appoint worthy bishops and deacons. It is recommended that they
should not be despised because their role is comparable to that of prophets and
teachers (Did. 15.1–2). The Didache shows that bishops and deacons did not
enjoy the esteem in which prophets and teachers were held. Prophets are
particularly appreciated in the Didache since they are accorded the possibility
of saying thanksgiving after eucharist as they please (Did. 10.7; cf. 1 Cor
14:16–17). In comparison to the prophetic powers of these preachers, a leader
devoid of spiritual gifts might have been disappointing. Those who held on to
the old customs were inclined to accept the leadership of a bishop not because
of his office, but only if the person proved to be endowed with the necessary
pneumatic gifts. If this was not the case, they did not pay attention to him and
even celebrated eucharist separately (Magn. 4.1; cf. 7.1; cf. Trall. 2.2; 7.2; cf.
Phld. 4.1; Smyrn. 7.1; cf. 8.1–2). This may have been a celebration in which
inspired speech was welcomed and which was presided by those who were in
possession of it. For these reasons, Ignatius repeatedly exhorted to be united
with the bishop and to celebrate only one eucharist. 222
The silent bishop may have lacked both the knowledge and the inspiration
of a teacher. It is possible that the bishop’s opponents followed leaders and/or
welcomed itinerants who were teachers. The opposition to the emerging office
219
NORELLI, Ascensione, 167–73.
220
The comparison between the two texts is in NORELLI, Ascensione, 273.
221
On Ignatius and the role of the spirit, see KARIN BOMMES, Weizen Gottes:
Untersuchungen zur Theologie des Martyriums bei Ignatius von Antiochien (Theophaneia:
Beiträge zur Religions- und Kirchengeschichte des Altertums 27; Köln: Peter Hanstein,
1976), 165–81; CAMPENHAUSEN, Authority, 103–105.
222
Different explanations have been proposed. For instance, DONAHUE believes that in
Phld. 4 Ignatius attacks the practice of Jewish-Christians in Antioch who did not eat meals
with Gentile-Christians, as the dispute between Paul and Peter in Galatians attests
(“Christianity,” 89–90). However, between Galatians and Ignatius there is too big a lapse of
time to use the former in order to throw light on the latter.
of bishop must have been particularly strong in the case of Judaisers and
docetists whose opinions about Jesus and the scriptures did not match those of
the bishop, especially if the bishop was unable to provide good arguments.
Ignatius tackled the difficulty of meeting the opponents’ challenge by
transferring the dispute from the theological to the ecclesiological ground, in
which he felt more at ease. 223 By saying that nothing should be done without
the bishop Ignatius undercut the authority of his opponents. In the church he
envisioned there was no room for people who escaped control. For this reason,
he promoted a tightly hierarchical structure. 224 Ignatius was a bishop who did
not eschew conflict and who assigned to his office a status higher than many
fellow bishops would have done. 225
3.5 The Consequences of Theological and Disciplinary Divisions

Another obstacle towards unity was the presence within the same church of
dissenting theological views. 226 In the previous section I have considered the
opinions of docetists and Judaisers. They were not so radical as Ignatius
depicted them, but they challenged the authority of the bishop, something
which the future martyr could not accept. Apparently, these opponents had a
better knowledge of the scriptures than Ignatius and his fellow-bishops and
demanded convincing arguments about the truth of faith. This means that they
were sufficiently independent-minded to upset Ignatius’ project of churches
kept under strict control. However, this freedom of thought was not his only
source of concern. Ignatius believed that the very nature of their theological
tenets was potentially dangerous both to ecclesiastical organisation and to the
very core of his faith.
For what concerns docetists, the problem was twofold. First, if Jesus did not
really suffer at the hand of the political and military authorities, there was no
reason to challenge them by building communities that threatened the
organisation of the Greco-Roman society. On the contrary, there was room for
compromise. 227 Second, the docetic conception of the eucharist was a seedbed
for divisions. If divinity and humanity in Jesus were kept apart, Ignatius was
sure that the community would have lacked the reason for being one undivided
223
BARRETT, “Jews,” 243–44.
224
See JAMES L. ASH, “The Decline of Ecstatic Prophecy in the Early Church,” TS 37
(1976): 227–52.
225
PAUL FOSTER, “Polycarp in the Writings of Ignatius,” in Studies on the Text of the
New Testament and Early Christianity: Essays in Honor of Michael W. Holmes on the
226
ISACSON, Letter, 186–89, shows that unity is the main theme in Ignatius’ letters.
227
PRIGENT, “L’hérésie,” 7. PRIGENT believes that there were only docetic opponents.
body under the bishop (Magn. 13.2; cf. Phld. 4.1; cf. Smyrn. 12.2). 228
For what regards Judaisers, we may assume that Ignatius regarded a non-
christological interpretation of scripture as implying that in the end Christian
communities would lose the very reason for their existence and fall back into
Judaism, an issue we found already in the Pastorals.
Judaisers and docetists agreed on one point: they were unhappy with
Ignatius’ interpretation of the scriptures. The Judaisers could not find in them
prophecies that pointed forward to Jesus, nor the docetists prophecies that
confirmed the reality of Jesus’ suffering. Ignatius writes little about their views
on the matter, but it is clear that these left room for the existence of an
unsettling role. If Jesus was not the Messiah of the scriptures, there was place
for other teachers besides him. If he was not a real man, there could not be
competition between him and human teachers. Ignatius’ restrain from calling
anyone other than Jesus “teacher” is explicable in the light of the theology of
his opponents and their interest in teachers. Ignatius believed that, if there were
more teachers, the tenets of his opponents were indirectly confirmed.
3.6 Teachers among the Opponents

In spite of Ignatius’ silence about human teachers, we have found several clues
showing that the opponents he addressed were actually teachers. This word is
not to be intended in the general sense that whoever exposes some doctrine is,
ipso facto a teacher, but in the sense that they called themselves “teachers” and
were called in this way by their followers. Summarizing, there are five clues.
1. Both Judaisers and docetists were discontent with the threefold
organisation of bishop, presbyters and deacons. The background of this
uneasiness is provided by the Ascensio Isaiae and the Didache, two works
written not far in time from Ignatius and coming from the region of Antioch.
They show that the authority held by bishops, presbyters and deacons was
something new, that this novelty was not always well accepted, and that the
older organisation based on the leadership of prophets (Ascensio and Didache)
and teachers (Didache) was held in greater esteem. It is likely that the
opponents of the Ignatian letters are prophets and/or teachers who were
unhappy with the new community-structure. They appreciated prophetic gifts
and eschewed bishops who did not possess them.
2. In his defence of the silent bishop accused by Judaisers (Philadelphians)
and docetists (Ephesians), Ignatius writes that it is better to be and do than only
to speak. This argument recalls the polemic involving Christian teachers in
James 3 and scribes and Pharisees in Matthew 23.
228
WILLARD M. SWARTLEY, “The Imitatio Christi in the Ignatian Letters,” VC 27 (1973):
81–103, 102–103.
3. Neither the Judaisers nor the docetists accepted the proof from prophecy.
The former seem to have a greater scriptural knowledge than Ignatius. The
latter might have recognised the scriptures as authoritative, but refused
Ignatius’ interpretation: once again, some exegetical expertise was required on
their part, as it was in the case of the nomodida,skaloj of the Pastorals.
4. Both Judaisers and docetists are confronted by Ignatius with the notion
that there is only one teacher, Jesus. This implies that in their opinion there
were more teachers than one. We will see in a while how Ignatius developed
this theme.
5. The itinerants who came from Ephesus to Smyrna expounding docetic
views were probably teachers: they are accustomed to go around, to preach the
name of Jesus, and they sow evil teaching, which the Ephesians are urged not
to listen to. This means that they were not local leaders like the docetic
presbyter of Smyrna and that their normal activity was to teach.
3.7 Teaching, Discipleship and Martyrdom

Ignatius tackles the challenge brought by these teachers in several ways. So
far, I mostly explored the negative side of his response, that is the rejection,
not refutation, of their doctrines and of their role. Now I will consider the
positive side, that is Ignatius’ own views about teaching, or, to be more precise,
his views about discipleship. While “teacher” is never used except in
association with Jesus, the word “disciple” is a recurrent one and an important
clue for understanding his letters. The term maqhth,j and its related forms occur
fifteen times, 229 a figure that, by itself, is enough to prove that the concept of
discipleship plays a major role for the Antiochene bishop. 230 The word can be
employed without qualifications in the meaning of “disciple of Christ” (e.g.
Eph. 1.2 and 3.1; cf. Rom 4.2). 231 It can also point to two specific ways of being
a disciple. 232 The first consists in being part of the community and living
according to the tenets of Christianity (Eph. 3.1; 10.1; Magn. 9.1; 10.1). The
second is the way of the martyr and refers specifically to Ignatius (Eph. 1.2;
3.1; Rom. 4.2; 5.1; 5.3; Pol. 7.1). At this time, “martyr” (ma,rtuj) was not yet
the technical term for the believer who suffered death in the name of Christ,
229
The term maqhth,j occurs in Eph. 1.2; Magn. 9.1; 9.2; 10.1; Trall. 5.2; Rom. 4.2; 5.3;
Pol. 2.1; 7.1; the verb maqhteu,w in Eph. 3.1; 10.1; Rom. 3.1; 5.1; the noun maqhtei,a in Trall.
3.2. See WILKINS, “Interplay,” 299.
230
On the theme of martyrdom in Ignatius, see WILKINS, “Interplay”; BOMMES, Weizen;
BROX, Zeuge, 203–222.
231
BOMMES, Weizen, 45.
232
WILKINS, “Interplay,” 299; BOMMES, Weizen, 44–46.
nor does Ignatius use the stem ma,rtÄ in this sense. 233 “Disciple” is the word in
Ignatius that gets closer to this meaning.
In the case of the martyr, discipleship is a process with a beginning (Rom.
5.3) and an end (Rom. 4.2; cf. Eph. 3.1; Rom. 5.1 and 5.3). The term “disciple”
indicates the achievement of perfection at the end of the martyr’s suffering. 234
The model for the martyr is the passion. Through it the disciple’s destiny gets
as close as it can to that of the master. 235 In this sense the term “disciple”
maintains its original meaning of learning and in particular that of learning
through the existential imitation of the teacher, which we find already in the
Gospels. 236
We have seen that the passion was at the centre of Ignatius’ polemic with
his opponents. He considered his own martyrdom as an anti-docetic testimony:
his bonds witnessed that Jesus truly suffered and died, otherwise, Ignatius
himself would be suffering in vain (Trall. 10; Smyrn. 4.2). 237 We have seen
how a similar argument was used by Paul in 1 Cor 15. Even if the opponents
were not convinced, Ignatius hoped through his martyrdom to strengthen the
rule of the bishops in the communities he addressed and to bring about
pacification in Antioch (cf. Eph. 20–21; cf. Magn. 14; Trall. 12.2). Conversely,
unity in Antioch and, to a lesser degree, in the churches he wrote to was the
condition for the success of his martyrdom (Pol. 7.1). 238 We may assume that
in his opinion martyrdom belongs to the realm of deeds that speak more than
many words. 239 Ignatius believes that, while the opponents waste their time
with false teachings, he goes straight to the core of Christian faith. In his view
the touchstone of the truth of one’s teaching lies in following in Jesus’ footsteps
even if these lead to death. True teaching is the one in agreement with the
suffering of Christ. 240 People who accept dissenting teachings go away from
the passion (Phld. 3.3). Those who deny the reality of it are false teachers.
Ignatius’ insistence on martyrdom and his polemic against docetists are related
to an important idea. Even if some docetists appreciated Ignatius’ readiness to
233
BROX, Zeuge, 204; BOMMES, Weizen, 29.
234
BROX, Zeuge, 208–209.
235
BOMMES, Weizen, 119. The theological dimensions of this idea of discipleship and
salvation are examined in PREISS, “Mystique.”
236
WILKINS, “Interplay,” 302; BOMMES, Weizen, 47; FRIEDRICH NORMANN, Christos
Didaskalos: Die Vorstellung von Christus als Lehrer in der christlichen Literatur des ersten
und zweiten Jahrhunderts (MBT 32; Münster: Aschendorffsche Verlagsbuchhandlung,
1966), 84.
237
See BROX, Zeuge, 211–14.
238
SCHOEDEL, Ignatius, 12–13; SWARTLEY, “Imitatio.”
239
Cf. Eph. 15.1–2, where the silence of Jesus the only teacher is probably a reference to
his passion (SCHOEDEL, Ignatius, 77–78).
240
NORMANN, Christos, 86–87; Cf. WILKINS, “Interplay,” 304–306.
undergo martyrdom (Smyrn. 5.2), their teaching, so at least the bishop believed,
provided theological justification to eschew it. This meant that the life of Jesus
was no longer a model to imitate or at least it was not the only model. In other
words, if Jesus did not suffer and, therefore, if a Christian was not ultimately
bound to follow in Jesus’ footsteps, there was place for alternative life-paths
(cf. Magn. 9–10.1). From a practical point of view, the consequences were
serious: in case of arrest, disciples who did not conform their lives to that of
Jesus could have simply recanted their faith and be set free. 241 Moreover,
plurality of convictions and behaviours among Christians meant separate
gatherings: for the Antiochene bishop this would be a threat to the existence of
Christian faith. 242
From the point of view of discipline, Ignatius tackled the challenge urging
believers to stop their ears before teachers and to listen only to the bishop.
From a doctrinal point of view, he stressed the reality of Jesus’ death and his
role as the only teacher.
3.8 Jesus the Only Teacher

In three passages of his letters Ignatius calls Jesus “teacher” and in two of them
Jesus is even the only teacher. Ephesians 15.1 tackles the opposition against
the silent bishop Onesimus (cf. Eph. 6.1): “It is better to be silent and to be
than while speaking not to be. To teach (dida,skein) is good if the one who
speaks acts. One, then, is the teacher (ei-j ou=n dida,skaloj) who ‘spoke and it
was so,’ and also what he has effected in silence is worthy of the Father.”
Ignatius defends the bishop with a three-step argument, which is based on the
Greco-Roman topos that words must match deeds. 243 First, taken in isolation,
deeds are better than words. Second, a better case is that of deeds matching
words. Third, the perfect case is that of deeds matching words and,
paradoxically, even silence. In this passage Ignatius presents the full range of
possible teaching models. On the negative side, one obviously finds the
docetists, whose teaching is empty. On the positive side we have Onesimus,
who lacks verbal teaching, but acts properly. An improvement on it is the
model of somebody whose verbal and practical teaching match. The final
model is that of Jesus, whose deeds match both his silence —probably a
reference to the passion— and his words. The term “teacher” is employed only
for this last case, which cannot be reproduced because Jesus is the only teacher.
Ignatius’ unequivocal attribution of this title to Jesus and only to him, is best
explained if the opponents were themselves teachers.
The remaining two mentions of the word “teacher” are in Magn. 9.1–2:
241
Cf. WILKINS, “Interplay,” 304.
242
Cf. BROWN, Gospel, 180–97.
243
If, then, those who lived in old ways came to newness of hope, no longer keeping Sabbath,
but living in accordance with the Lord’s Day, on which also our life arose through him and
his death (which some deny), through which mystery we received faith, and therefore we
endure that we may be found disciples of Jesus Christ, our only teacher (tou/ monou/
didaska,lou h`mw/n); how shall we be able to live without him of whom the prophets also were
disciples in spirit, him to whom they looked forward as their teacher (w`j dida,skalon)? And
therefore he for whom they rightly waited came and raised them from the dead.
According to Ignatius, by keeping the Sabbath rather than the Lord’s Day the
Judaisers of Magnesia reject faith in Jesus, the core of which is his death and
resurrection. Following Jesus to the point of death is the condition for
becoming a true disciple of the only teacher. Thus doing, the disciple does what
the prophets already did before, as they underwent persecution because they
lived according to Christ (Magn. 8.2), who was their teacher (Magn. 9.2). Such
insistence on Jesus the only teacher suggests that Ignatius wants to fight his
opponents on their ground: it is if as he wanted to concede that Jesus was a
teacher, but adding that he was the only one. 244
These two texts on Jesus the only teacher present interesting connections
with the Gospel of Matthew. Ephesians 15.1 is particularly close to Matt 23:
both places contain not only the theme of the only teacher (Matt 23:8), but also
a discussion on words and deeds (Matt 23:3). These contacts are among the
clues used to claim that Ignatius knew Matthew’s Gospel, though it is also
possible that they drew on common (Antiochene) tradition. 245 Be as it may,
what matters is that both writings deal with comparable situations. Matthew
calls Jesus the only teacher against those who claimed the title in order to
enhance their own position. Ignatius calls Jesus the only teacher to rule out the
presence of teachers who may disrupt the life of the community. Both texts
prove that (1) Jesus was not considered by everybody the only teacher; (2) the
presence of teachers was deemed to be dangerous. There are also suggestive
differences. Matthew bans the title. Ignatius bans the role, which in his view
must be absorbed by the bishop. Matthew envisages a community where all are
siblings. Ignatius employs the theme of “Jesus the only teacher” in order to
promote the role of the bishop. 246
If it is true that Matthew’s Gospel comes from Antiochia, we conclude that
Matthew’s prohibition was a double failure. On one side, it did not prevent the
emergence of a hierarchical organisation. On the other, it did not manage to
eliminate the use of the title “teacher,” since a few decades later there were still
people using it. 247
244
BARRETT, “Jews,” 227.
245
SHOEDEL, “Ignatius,” 171–72; BROWN, Gospel, 153–54.
246
SCHOEDEL, “Ignatius,” 171–72.
247
CORWIN suggests that the theme of Jesus the only teacher is addressed against the
Teacher of Righteousness (Ignatius, 63), but the parallels she finds between Ignatius’ letters
and the Dead Sea Scrolls are tenuous (SCHOEDEL, Ignatius, 16).
The second text, Magn. 9.1–2, must be compared to Matt 10:24. According
to the latter, disciples are those people who aim at being like their teacher,
although there is no chance of becoming one. The passage in Ignatius agrees
with it. It must be further observed that both texts associate discipleship and
persecution. Matthew believes that disciples should not expect a better fate than
that of their persecuted teacher (Matt 10:25). Likewise, for Ignatius disciples
follow the pattern of the life of their teacher up to death. Matthew and Ignatius
are tackling the same problem: there are disciples who claim to have become
teachers and who retreat before persecution. According to Matthew, these
pseudo-teachers are moved by selfish interests (cf. Matt 23:11–12), which is
just the opposite of what is required when confronted with mortal danger.
According to Ignatius, the teachers who deny the reality of Jesus’ suffering will
try to avoid persecution. Matthew and Ignatius are united in ruling out models
of life differing from that of Jesus.
Besides the three passages where Ignatius calls Jesus “teacher,” there are
several texts where Jesus is portrayed as the source of authoritative teaching
(Eph. 9.2 and Rom. Inscription: evntolh,; Magn. 2: no,moj; Magn. 13.1: do,gmata;
Phld. 8.2: cristomaqi,a). 248 With the exception of Magn. 2 and 13.1, all these
texts place Jesus’ teaching in opposition to wrong teachings or wrong courses
of actions. If the reader wanted to know more precisely what Jesus preached,
the letters are silent. When the bishop writes sentences that other sources
attribute to Jesus, 249 he does not ascribe them to him, even though this would
have added weight to the point he wants to make. Of course, he may not know
that the tradition he draws on is from Jesus or it may be that the attribution to
Jesus in other sources is an innovation. In any case, Ignatius does not show any
interest in finding out what the specific teachings of Jesus were, nor the specific
ways in which Jesus played the role of the only teacher. Rather, his insistence
on Jesus’ teaching serves apologetic and polemical purposes: “Jesus the only
teacher” is a weapon against the teachers Ignatius bashes. The message he
wants to get across is that these teachers propose teachings devoid of truth
because there are no teachers but Jesus. 250 This argument was also employed
by the Pastorals, though in that case the only teacher was Paul.
248
BROWN, Gospel, 157–58; cf. NORMANN, Christos, 85–86.
249
“Be prudent as a serpent in everything and always pure as the dove” (Pol. 2.2) can be
compared to Matt 10:16 and Gos. Thom. 39.2 (BROWN, Gospel, 158–59).
250
“All of this [the texts I mentioned above] suggests that ‘Jesus the only teacher’ exists
in the world of Ignatius’ letters to serve a specific purpose: to counter erroneous teachers
[…] In Ignatius’ world view, ‘Jesus the one teacher’ does not function as a source for specific
guidelines for Christian living; rather, ‘Jesus the only teacher’ serves as an unimpeachable
figure of authority supporting Ignatius’ position vis-à-vis the error he wishes to counter in
the various communities” (BROWN, Gospel, 159).
3.9 Conclusions
What Ignatius worries most about is the unity of the church. In his view, this
is achieved and preserved if all authority is gathered in the hands of a threefold
hierarchy, bishops, presbyters and deacons. This point is so important to him
that he almost defines a Christian as one who obeys the bishop (Magn. 4). 251
However, his project had to face a serious challenge: the presence of teachers.
These were people who not only escaped the control of the bishops, but who
also possessed qualities that the bishop might lack, such as charismatic speech
and knowledge of the scriptures. Moreover, the presence of travelling or
residential teachers had been part of Christian life since the earliest times,
whereas the threefold hierarchy was an innovation. However, for Ignatius, their
activities could not be tolerated any longer. The reasons he brought forward
were two. On the one hand, docetic views were spreading. On the other, it was
increasingly difficult to accept the influence of Jewish ideas and customs in
communities where the Gentile element was dominant. By getting rid of
teachers, the threat posed by both the Judaisers and the docetists could be
disposed of.
It must be recalled that Ignatius probably exaggerated the risks involved in
these two “errors” and that there might have been other reasons behind his
attacks. His own church had been disrupted by conflict and he had been
arrested. The case of troublesome Corinth, which made Paul and later the
author of 1 Clement worry, or the conflict in Antioch between Paul and Peter
are there to remind us that early Christian communities could be anything but
peaceful. The challenge to Ignatius’ authority in Antioch and his inability to
keep his flock under control must have made a big impact on the bishop and
lead him to flatten any opposition to the authority of his colleagues in the
communities he addressed during his journey as a captive.
4. Polycarp
4.1 Ancient Sources on Polycarp as a Teacher

Polycarp, bishop of Smyrna, is the author of a letter addressed to the
Philippians and the protagonist of a work reporting his martyrdom. Polycarp is
called “teacher” in the latter writing (Mart. Pol. 12.2; 16.2; 19.1). Apart from
these documents, our main sources on Polycarp are Ignatius, Irenaeus and
251
See SCHOEDEL, Ignatius, 109–110.
4. Polycarp 199
Eusebius. 252 Irenaeus recalls his acquaintance with Polycarp when he was
young and writes:
[Polycarp] always taught the things that he had learned from the apostles (quae ab apostolis
didicerat) and which the church too transmits, and which are the only true ones. All the
churches which are in Asia and all those who were successors of Polycarp testify to these
things, Polycarp who had much bigger authority and was a more reliable witness of truth
that Valentinus and Marcion and all the others who hold wrong opinions (Haer. 3.3.4). 253
Though Irenaeus’ apologetic interest is patent, it is clear that in his view

Polycarp was a teacher. The same conclusion can be drawn from a remarkable
fragment of Irenaeus preserved in Eusebius. In his letter to Florinus, whom
Irenaeus tries to divert from Gnosticism, we read:
For while I was still a boy I knew you in lower Asia in Polycarp’s house when you were a
man of rank in the royal hall and endeavouring to stand well with him. I remember the events
of those days more clearly than those which happened recently, for what we learn as children
grows up with the soul and is united to it, so that I can speak even of the place in which the
blessed Polycarp sat and disputed, how he came in and went out, the character of his life, the
appearance of his body, the discourses which he made to the people, how he reported his
intercourse with John and with the others who had seen the Lord, how he remembered their
words, and what were the things concerning the Lord which he had heard from them, and
about their miracles, and about their teaching, and how Polycarp had received them from the
eyewitnesses of the word of life (peri. th/j didaskali,aj( w`j para. tw/n auvtoptw/n th/j zwh/j
tou/ lo,gou pareilhfw,j), and reported all things in agreement with the Scriptures. […] He
would have fled even from the place in which he was seated or standing when he heard such
words [Florinus’ opinions]. (Eusebius, Hist. eccl. 5.20.5–7). 254
Irenaeus remembers the place where the bishop sat and his comings and goings.
This description suggests that Polycarp was a teacher who delivered his
teaching in a particular location. Irenaeus also distinguishes between private
teaching, the one from which he and Florinus benefited, and public teaching.
It is a pity that Irenaeus does not go into details: probably, the reason is that
this sketch would have been enough to remind Florinus of the time spent with
Polycarp. Irenaeus also recalls that Polycarp met the first Christian generation.
252
The ancient sources on Polycarp are conveniently gathered and examined in CLARA
BURINI, Policarpo di Smirne: Lettera ai Filippesi. Martirio (Scritti delle origini cristiane
26; Bologna: Dehoniane, 1998), 13–31. Brief biographical sketch on the basis of these
sources in JOHANNES BAPT. BAUER, Die Polykarpbriefe (KAV 5; Göttingen: Vandenhoeck
& Ruprecht, 1995), 10–12.
253
My translation. Text in ADELIN ROUSSEAU et al., eds., Irénée de Lyon: Contre les
hérésies (SC 211; Paris: Cerf, 1974).
254
Text in EDUARD SCHWARTZ, ed., Eusebius Werke (GCS 9/1; Leipzig: J. C.
Hinrichs’sche Buchhandlung, 1903); I use the translation by KIRSOPP LAKE, ed., Eusebius:
The Ecclesiastical History, Books 1–5 (LCL 153; London: William Heinemann; Cambridge,
Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1926).
We expect Irenaeus to provide reliable information, because his addressee had

personally known Polycarp and would be able to tell the truth from a lie.
However, there is one point on which Irenaeus is probably mistaken.
Irenaeus believed “John” to be the evangelist (cf. Haer. 3.3.4 and Irenaeus’
epistle to Victor, bishop of Rome, cited in Hist. eccl. 5.24.11–17, in particular
verse 16), an identification that should be questioned in the light of Eusebius’
remarks following Irenaeus’ fragment in Hist. eccl. 3.39.1. Eusebius quotes a
passage from Papias, where the name “John” is repeated twice: first, in a series
including members of the group of the Twelve, second, as “John the presbyter”
and together with one Aristion (Hist. eccl. 3.39.4). Eusebius concludes that
Papias knew John the presbyter, not John the evangelist (Hist. eccl. 3.39.5–7).
The question is debated, but probably Polycarp knew John the presbyter, 255
whom Irenaeus wrongly believed to be the author of the Fourth Gospel. 256 This
John may have belonged to the first generation, as Papias’ fragment in
Eusebius and Irenaeus’ epistle to Florinus suggest, though there is no way of
validating this hypothesis. 257 Chronology is not against it. If Polycarp died in
the year 155 at the age of 86 (see Mart. Pol. 9.3), 258 he was born in the year 69,
close enough to Jesus’ ministry to have known some of his disciples.
In Haer. 3.3.4, part of which I cited above, Irenaeus wrote: “Polycarp was
not only taught by the apostles and had not only intercourse (edoctus et
conuersatus) with many who saw our Lord, but was also appointed by the
apostles bishop in Asia in the church which is in Smyrna.” The statement that
he was appointed by the apostles is most suspicious. Irenaeus does not give
details on which apostle(s) appointed Polycarp and when. Eusebius simply says
that Polycarp was appointed by the eyewitnesses and servants of Jesus (Hist.
eccl. 3.36.1: tw/n auvtoptw/n kai. u`phretw/n). The reason for Irenaeus’ claim is
that he wanted to stress continuity between Polycarp and Jesus’ disciples in
order to construct a chain of succession which would support his teaching
against gnostics.
In sum, ancient sources provide enough information for a very simple, but
interesting portrait. As a youth, Polycarp met people who saw Jesus. One of
these eyewitnesses was John the presbyter. At a later stage, Polycarp taught
what he learned about Jesus to people who gathered around him. Irenaeus’
statement that he did it in accordance with the scriptures has an anti-gnostic
255
Main arguments in JÜRGEL REGUL, Die antimarcionitischen Evangelienprologe
(Vetus Latina. Aus der Geschichte der lateinischen Bibel 6; Freiburg: Herder, 1969), 109–
112. Paul, not John, is important to Polycarp.
256
ENRICO NORELLI, ed., Papia di Hierapolis: Esposizione degli oracoli del Signore: I
Frammenti (Letture cristiane del primo millennio 36; Milano: Paoline, 2005), 261–63.
257
NORELLI, Papia, 261 and 267.
258
The year 155 is the earliest date suggested for the martyrdom of Polycarp (see below).
In Mart. Pol. 9.3 Polycarp claims to have served Christ for 86 years. The starting point may
be Polycarp’s baptism or more likely his birth (see BUSCHMANN, Martyrdom, 192).
4. Polycarp 201
ring, but Smyrn. 5.1 and 7.2 demonstrates that scriptural interpretation was an
important issue. This is the portrait of a teacher, who has a circle of disciples,
transmits and interprets what he has received and does it in a precise setting.
On some occasions he also taught Christians publicly.
4.2 Philippians
The letter Polycarp addressed to the Philippians belongs to the correspondence
he sent to neighbouring communities and individuals, about which Ireaneus
speaks in his letter to Florinus (Eusebius, Hist. eccl. 5.20.8; cf. Ignatius, Pol.
8.1). 259 Composed in the first half of the second century, probably in the span
of years 110–117, 260 its explicit purpose is to discuss justification (Phil. 3.1),
but the overall intention is paraenetic and pastoral. Polycarp never refers to
teachers, but he does mention presbyters (Phil. 5.3–6.1) and deacons (Phil.
5.3), roles demanding perfect moral conduct and dealing with pastoral care.
Teaching is not a major concern and teachers are absent from the bygone days
Polycarp evokes. He urges the faithful to serve Jesus “as he commanded and
the apostles, who brought us the good news, and the prophets, who announced
in advance the coming of our Lord, commanded.” (Phil. 6.3). For Polycarp, the
apostles are a thing of the past and the prophets are to be placed even further
back into Old Testament times. Christian teachers and prophets are not
explicitly part of his world. However, teaching is not entirely neglected.
Polycarp writes that nobody can attain the wisdom of Paul, who “accurately
and reliably taught” the Philippians (Phil 3.2: edi,daxen avkribw/j kai. bebai,wj),
and inserts a quotation from 1 Cor 6:2 with the words “Paul teaches” (Phil.
11.2). In the second chapter a string of Jesus’ sayings is introduced as “the
things which the Lord said while teaching” (Phil. 2.3: w-n ei=pen o` ku,rioj
dida,skwn). Elsewhere, the Philippians are invited to teach themselves “to walk
in the commandment of the Lord” (Phil. 4.1), to teach their wives and the
widows to follow proper conduct (Phil. 4.2–3), and everybody to behave in a
sober way (Phil. 10.3). No specific teaching role or task is visible. More
interesting material is to be found in the section devoted to the opponents.
Chapter seven apparently concerns docetists, whose fault is to reject the
incarnation, Jesus’ suffering on the cross, his resurrection and the future
259
The following English quotations are taken from EHRMAN, Apostolic Fathers I.
260
Introductory matters in SCHOEDEL, “Polycarp,” 276–85; BAUER, Polykarpbriefe, 10–
30; BURINI, Policarpo, 35–62; PAUL HARTOG, Polycarp’s Epistle to the Philippians and The
Martyrdom of Polycarp: Introduction, Text, and Commentary (Oxford Apostolic Fathers;
Oxford, 2013), 40–45. The question of the unity of the letter, namely whether we have two
letters, one in chapters 1–12.14 and the other in chapter 13, does not influence the
conclusions of this section.
judgement (Phil. 7.1; cf. 2.1). 261 Their false doctrines should be abandoned in
order to come back to the word received from the beginning (Phil. 7.2: dio.
avpolipo,ntej th.n mataio,thta tw/n pollw/n kai. ta.j yeudodidaskali,aj evpi. to.n
evx avrch/j h`mi/n paradoqe,nta lo,gon evpistre,ywmen). The only time the word
“teaching” features in this letter is a compound form referring to the opponents
and carrying a negative connotation. It is not necessary to stretch the
imagination and think that teaching was regarded by Polycarp with suspicion
because of the doctrines put forward by dissidents. For the bishop of Smyrna,
the term “teaching” should be replaced with the concept of transmission of the
word received from the beginning. The content of this word is stated in a semi-
creedal text in Phil. 8.1 (cf. also Phil. 1.2): “Christ Jesus, who bore our sins in
his own body on the tree, who did not commit sin or was deceit found in his
mouth; but he endured all things on our account, that we might live in him.”
While it was possible to teach in the realm of ethical matters (Phil. 4.2–3),
there was nothing to teach in the realm of the contents of faith, which were
simply to be handed over. In Mart. Pol. 7.2 we find paradoqe,nta lo,gon, in
Mart. Pol. 4.2 th/| doqei,sh| auvtai/j [i.e. wives] pi,stei. It seems that for Polycarp
doctrinal teaching consists in elaboration and alteration, whereas true
Christians must simply rely on the same unchangeable word, which is passed
from one generation to the other. Of course, this idea is itself a didactic
construction and matches what we have already found in the Pastorals. It is
based on the claim of continuity, which was standard defence against
dissenters. Moving a step forward, we suppose that presbyters and deacons
were the protagonists of this transmission and the people in charge of
contrasting unacceptable teachings. This interpretation is confirmed by the
context in which the term ta.j yeudodidaskali,aj is inserted. In chapter five
Polycarp writes about deacons. In chapter six he writes about presbyters. Not
surprisingly, at the end of chapter six and before the discussion on wrong
teaching, we find the opponents. Polycarp writes that “we should be zealous
for what is good, avoiding stumbling blocks, false brothers, and those who
carry the name of the Lord (fero,ntwn to. o;noma tou/ kuri,ou) in hypocrisy,
leading the empty-minded astray” (Phil. 6.3). These opponents were not
satisfied with holding on to their ideas, but they were actively engaged in
spreading them. The verb fero,ntwn may indicate that they were itinerant
preachers. Already Ignatius wrote about the opponents as people with the habit
of do,lw| ponhrw/| to. o;noma perife,rein (Eph. 7.1). Polycarp brings against them
the charge of hypocrisy. This refers to their being “false brothers” and
261
See BAUER, Polykarpbriefe, 57–60; HARTOG, Polycarp’s Epistle, 72–78; PAUL A.
HARTOG, “The Opponents of Polycarp, Philippians, and 1 John,” in Trajectories through
the New Testament and the Apostolic Fathers (ed. ANDREW F. GREGORY and C. M.
TUCKETT; Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2005), 375–91. Cf. Ignatius, Smyrn. 5.2 and
7.1.
4. Polycarp 203
advocates of “false teaching.”

The picture Polycarp draws is simple: he sees the church as firmly rooted in
presbyters and deacons whose abilities are eminently pastoral and whose
behaviour is blameless. Their task is to pass on the word received from the
beginning. This word is betrayed by “false brothers” who teach “false
teachings.”
4.3 Martyrdom of Polycarp

4.3.1 Date and Authenticity
The church in Philomelium asked the church in Smyrna to send an account of
Polycarp’s martyrdom (Inscription). This was written down by Evaristus on
the basis of Marcion’s testimony (Mart. Pol. 20.1–2). 262 Chapter twenty-one
provides detailed information as to the date of the martyrdom, but the
interpretation of this text is unsettled. The dates usually suggested for the
martyrdom range from 155 to two decades later. Many scholars favour an early
date. 263
The authenticity and the redactional history of the Martyrdom have long
been debated especially because of the shorter text quoted by Eusebius (Hist.
eccl. 4.15.3–45). However, there is a growing consensus that the whole of
Martyrdom is authentic with the exception of chapters twenty-one and twenty-
two, which should be considered later interpolations. 264 The manuscript
tradition described in chapter twenty-two is unreliable, 265 whereas chapter
twenty-one is believed to contain important clues. 266
262
For convenience, I will refer to the author of the letter as Evaristus.
263
See the discussion on the Martydom’s date in BURINI, Policarpo, 98–106; SCHOEDEL,
“Polykarp,” 354–55; BOUDEWIJN DEHANDSCHUTTER, “The Martyrium Polycarpi: A
Century of Research,” ANRW, 27.1: 485–522, 497–502 REMO CACITTI, Grande sabato: Il
contesto pasquale quartodecimano nella formazione della teologia del martirio (Milan: Vita
e Pensiero, 1994), 11–38; HARTOG, Polycarp’s Epistle, 186. A dissenting voice is that of
CANDIDA R. MOSS, who suggests that the work was composed in the third century: “On the
Dating of Polycarp: Rethinking the Place of the Martyrdom of Polycarp in the History of
Christianity,” Early Christianity 1 (2010): 539–74.
264
BURINI, Policarpo, 108–10; GERD BUSCHMANN, Martyrium Polycarpi – Eine
formenkritische Studie: Ein Beitrag zur Frage nach der Entstehung der Gattung
Märtyrerakte (BZNW 70; Berlin: Walter de Gruyter, 1994), 16–19, 39–70; idem, Das
Martyrium des Polykarp (KAV 6; Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1998), 37–38;
DEHANDSCHUTTER, “Martyrium,” 492–97.
265
BURINI, Policarpo, 169–70.
266
On the date of the final redaction of the text, maybe third century, see JESSE HOOVER,
“False Lives, False Martyrs: “Pseudo-Pionius” and the Redating of the Martyrdom of
Polycarp,” VG 67 (2013), 471–98.
4.3.2 Martyrdom and Gospel

The Martyrdom of Polycarp is not only a historical report. It is also a
theological interpretation of the death of Polycarp. History and theology are
hardly distinguishable. The purpose of this writing is to show that the
(blood)testimony of the bishop took place kata. to. euvagge,lion. This phrase
occurs in the first (Mart. Pol. 1.1) and the last chapter (Mart. Pol.19.1), before
the appendixes. A similar phrase is to be found in Mart. Pol. 2.1, where the
author praises those martyrdoms that are kata. to. qe,lhma tou/ qeou/. The
“gospel” and the “will of God” point to the death of Jesus. His passion is the
unique model to which those whose life is threatened for Jesus’ sake should
look at. Polycarp imitates Christ (Mart. Pol. 1.2; cf. 17.3) and is glad to claim
that he partakes of Christ’s chalice (Mart. Pol. 14.2). 267 His flight, arrest,
questioning and death are told in such a way as to recall Jesus’ passion.
Evaristus lays stress on the conformity between the death of Polycarp and the
death of Jesus by introducing two further cases. Chapter Three features a young
Christian, Germanicos, who stands by his faith and is killed by a wild beast.
The protagonist of the following chapter is Quintus. He and other people
delivered themselves to the authorities, but the sight of the beasts persuaded
him to sacrifice to the emperor. For the author of the Martyrdom, self-
denunciation is not admissible, because ouvc ou[twj dida,skei to. euvagge,lion
(Mart. Pol. 4.4). Quintus’ episode makes it clear that only one sort of
martyrdom is viable, that which is in agreement with the gospel. It is possible
that this episode was introduced to criticise montanist enthusiasm for
martyrdom, to which the phrase kata. to. euvagge,lion would refer. 268 However,
eagerness for martyrdom is not necessarily to be connected with Montanus or
pre-montanist tendencies. 269 We have seen such willingness in Ignatius too. It
is no question of orthodox and heretics, but of an approach to voluntary death
common to a number of early Christians. 270
Quintus’ story can also be seen as a case in which words do not match deeds.
Contrary to Quintus, Polycarp does not only confess to be a Christian, but he
also accepts the consequences of his confession. In the life of the martyrs words
and deeds are joined together because martyrs are imitators and disciples of
267
BUSCHMANN, Martyrium, 49–52.
268
269
SCHOEDEL, “Polycarp,” 358.
270
DROGE, Death, 132–38. Evaristus’ book may address the excesses of an enthustiastic
long for martyrdom. See THEOFRIED BAUMEISTER, “Die Norm des evangeliumgemässen
Blutzeugnisses: Das Martyrium Polycarpi als vorsichtige Exhortatio ad Martyrium,” in
Stimuli: Exegese und ihre Hermeneutik in Antike und Christentum. Festschrift für Ernst
Dassmann (ed. GEORG SCHÖLLGEN and CLEMENS SCHOLTEN; JAC 23; Münster, Westfalen:
Aschendorffsche Verlagsbuchhandlung, 1996), 122–28.
4. Polycarp 205
Jesus (Mart. Pol. 17.3). We have seen that the relationship between words and
deeds plays an important role in Ignatius’ thought. In Eph. 15.1 he wrote that
deeds should match words and even silence and added that Jesus was the only
teacher “who spoke and it was so.” We can compare this text to Mart. Pol.
16.2, according to which “every word that came forth from his [Polycarp’s]
mouth was fulfilled and will be fulfilled.” 271 It is noteworthy that in the same
paragraph Polycarp is called “teacher”. Mart. Pol. 16.2 may allude to Eph.
15.1. Alternatively, both texts may share the idea that a teacher is one whose
words and deeds match. The term “teacher” is polemically employed to praise
somebody, Jesus and Polycarp, against others, docetists and candidates to
martyrdom.
There is an important difference between the letters of Ignatius and the
account of Polycarp’s martyrdom. For Ignatius, only Jesus is teacher; for
Evaristus, not only Jesus (Mart. Pol. 17.3), but also Polycarp is teacher (Mart.
Pol. 12.2; 16.2; 19.1). The three texts in which Polycarp is called “teacher”
deserve close scrutiny.
4.3.3 Martyrdom of Polycarp 12

A herald informed the crowd of Gentiles and Jews gathered in the arena that
Polycarp had confessed to be a Christian (Mart. Pol. 12.1). The crowd reacted
with rage and cried aloud:
This is the teacher of impiety, the father of the Christians, the destroyer of our own gods, the
one who teaches many not to sacrifice or worship the gods.
Ou-to,j evstin o` th/j avsebei,aj dida,skaloj( o` path.r tw/n Cristianw/n( o` tw/n h`mete,rwn qew/n
kaqaire,thj( o` pollou.j dida,skwn mh. qu,ein mhde. proskunei/n (Mart. Pol. 12.2). 272
Then, the crowd asked Philip, the Asiarch, that Polycarp should be eaten by a
lion. Since no lion was available, the crowd wanted Polycarp to burn alive.
This sort of death fulfilled a vision Polycarp had had (Mart. Pol. 17.2–3).
The crowd’s outcry is actually the sentence that the Roman authorities
issued against Polycarp. Maybe Evaristus transferred the sentence from the
authorities to the crowd in order to lay the blame for the bishop’s death on the
latter. This might have been a manoeuvre intended not to irritate the Romans. 273
It might also have been a manoeuvre against the Jews of Smyrna in order to
271
BUSCHMANN, Martyrium, 139–41 and Polykarp, 101–103.
272
I quote the Martyrdom of Polycarp from EHRMAN, Apostolic Fathers I. Here, I follow
EHRMAN’s reading, avsebei,aj against BUSCHMANN’s Asi,aj (Martyrium, 215–16). Brief
survey of the arguments in favour of the first reading in BOUDEWIJN DEHANDSCHUTTER,
“The Martyrdom of Polycarp,” ETL 75 (1999): 430–37, 432. See also HARTOG, Polycarp’s
Epistle, 304.
273
See BUSCHMANN, Martyrium, 208.
claim the superiority of the Christian religion over theirs. It is not possible to
say whether the Jews actually took part in the gathering of wood for the pyre
(Mart. Pol. 13.1), but this piece of information has a polemical ring. We must
recall that the boundaries between the two groups were not clearly set. The
Martyrdom itself proves it. It largely draws on material common to 2 and 4
Maccabees 274 and it also draws on Jewish exegesis. For instance, the binding
of Polycarp to the pyre alludes to a Jewish tradition according to which the ram
that was sacrificed in Isaac’s place was bound (Mart. Pol. 14.1). 275 Polycarp’s
martyrdom belongs to Christian polemic against the Jews. 276 Within this
context, even the statement that Polycarp is a teacher has polemical
significance: heathens and Jews correctly identify the bishop’s role, but they
are wrong to reject his teaching. 277 The polemical use of the term “teacher” is
nothing new: we have already found it in Matthew and Ignatius. Maybe, it is
even possible to detect Matthean influence. Polycarp is called dida,skaloj(
path,r( kaqaire,thj. This series recalls that of dida,skaloj( path,r( kaqhghth,j in
Matt 23:8–10. It is true that in Matthew these titles are banned, whereas in the
Martyrdom they are positively employed, but Evaristus respected the Matthean
prohibition by placing them in the mouth of non-Christians.

Chapter sixteen describes Polycarp’s wondrous death, which amazed the crowd
of the unbelievers and of the elect alike (Mart. Pol. 16.1). The author
comments:
This most outstanding Polycarp, who in our time was an apostolic and prophetic teacher and
bishop (dida,skaloj avpostoliko.j kai. profhtiko.j geno,menoj evpi,skopoj) of the universal
church in Smyrna. For every word that came forth from his mouth was fulfilled and will be
fulfilled (Mart. Pol. 16.2).
The phrase “apostolic and prophetic teacher” seems to be shaped after 1 Cor
12:28. Evaristus was probably acquainted with 1 Corinthians because he seems
to quote 1 Cor 2:9 in Mart. Pol. 2.3. 278 Now, the question to be asked is in
which sense the three terms of the triad are used. First of all, it is clear that, for
274
Parallels and differences are conveniently listed in JUDITH M. LIEU, Image and
Reality: The Jews in the World of the Christians in the Second Century (Edinburgh: T&T
Clark, 1996), 79–82. See also BAUMEISTER, Anfänge, 295–98.
275
On Gen 22 and Passover references in Martyrdom see GEORG KRETCHMAR,
“Christliches Passa im 2. Jahrhundert und die Ausbildung der christlichen Theologie,” RSR
60 (1972): 287–323, 292–98. On the patristic interpretation of the Aqeda, see GEDALIAHU
G. STROUMSA, “Herméneutique biblique et identité: l’exemple d’Isaac,” RB 99 (1992): 529–
43.
276
On Martyrdom and anti-Jewish polemic, see LIEU, Image, 57–102.
277
Cf. BUSCHMANN, Martyrium, 214.
278
Bibliography in DEAHANDSCHUTTER, “Martyrium,” 507. The question is not settled.
4. Polycarp 207
Evaristus, apostles and prophets belong to the past: hence, Polycarp could only
be a teacher. However, “apostle” and “prophet” could be rescued as adjectives.
Evaristus’ testimony agrees with what we know about Polycarp from the
ancient sources quoted above: he was a teacher in contact with the tradition
stemming from Jesus. Moreover, Evaristus depicts Polycarp as a teacher in his
brief conversation with the proconsul: “But if you wish to learn an account of
Christianity, appoint a day and listen” (Mart. Pol. 10.1). Though Polycarp was
a teacher, this was obviously not his official title. The description made by
using the terms of the triad is immediately followed by a precise identification
of his office: “bishop of the universal church in Smyrna”. The Martyrdom
witnesses to a situation in which teachers are no longer recognised roles within
the community. In the Pastorals this role has been absorbed by bishops and
presbyters. We do not know how and why Polycarp was appointed bishop, but
it is likely that in his case the role of teacher has taken on the title of bishop.
As to “apostolic,” this adjective probably expresses the continuity between
Polycarp, the apostles and Jesus, either on the ground of companionship with
the apostles or on his dependence on their teaching. 279 Whatever one chooses,
it found expression in the conformity of Polycarp’s death with the passion,
which is attested in this chapter. The blood streaming out of the fatal wound
opened by the dagger recalls John 19:34. The recognition of Polycarp as a
teacher recalls the confession of Jesus as a righteous man (Luke 23:47; cf. Matt
27:54; Mark 15:39). The fulfilment of every word Polycarp said recalls John
19:36. 280 In sum, Evaristus described Polycarp’s death in terms of current
traditions about the death of Jesus. “Prophetic” probably refers to the power of
the bishop’s words: through the vision of his burning pillow (Mart. Pol. 5.2),
Polycarp was able to inform prophetically (profhtikw/j) those around him
about how he would die (Mart. Pol. 12.2).
Polycarp is represented as the embodiment of the perfect Christian. This
portrait is achieved by means of a remarkable manipulation of the list of the
three offices of 1 Cor 12:28. This allusion to 1 Corinthians shows that the
relationship with the first generation is marked both by continuity and by
discontinuity, since “apostles” and “prophets” are turned into adjectives.

Before moving to the last case, it is necessary to consider a passage which calls
Jesus dida,skaloj (Mart. Pol. 17.3). 281 It belongs in a chapter, which is a key
279
HARTOG, Polycarp’s Epistle, 315–16. In his letter to Florinus, Irenaeus calls Polycarp
evkei/noj o` maka,rioj kai, avpostoliko.j presbu,teroj (Eusebius, Hist. eccl. 5.20.7).
280
See BUSCHMANN, Martyrium, 316–18.
281
Most of Mart. Pol. 17 has been considered an interpolation: see HANS
CAMPENHAUSEN, “Bearbeitungen und Interpolationen des Polykarpmartyrium,” in Aus der
text in order to understand the relationship between Jesus the teacher and
Christian teachers. Here we find the solution to a question that previous
Christian writers either left unanswered or got rid of by eliminating Christian
teachers altogether. After Polycarp’s death, his body became object of
contention. Nicetas, father to the police-chief Herod, asked the magistrate not
to hand the body over to Christians, for fear that “they desert the one who was
crucified and begin to worship this one” (Mart. Pol. 17.2). We do not know
whether this is a historical petition, but behind this episode lies an important
issue: the wondrous life and death of Polycarp may persuade some Christians
to place the martyred bishop on the same level as Jesus. The narrator dismisses
this possibility with a matter-of-course statement followed by a clearly set out
distinction between martyrs and Jesus. 282 The Jews who instigated the petition
did not know that
we are never able to abandon Christ, who suffered for the salvation of the entire world of
those who are being saved, the one who was blameless for sinners; nor are we able to worship
any other. For we worship this one who is the Son of God, but we love the martyrs as
disciples and imitators (tou.j de. ma,rturaj w`j maqhta.j kai. mimhta,j) of the Lord. And they
are worthy, because of their unsurpassable affection for their own king and teacher
(dida,skalon). May we also become partners and fellow disciples with him! (Mart. Pol. 17.2–
3).
This sentence outlines the hierarchical structure of Christianity: first Jesus,

teacher and king; second the martyrs, imitators and disciples of Jesus; third
common believers. It is clear that this passage intentionally avoids calling
teacher anyone else but Jesus, a notion matching Ignatius’ attitude and the
theology of Matt 23:8–12. The contrast between this deliberate silence and
those texts calling Polycarp “teacher” brings into daylight the christological
drive of early Christian polemic against teachers. There is only one teacher,
that is, only one life-model: Jesus. Christian teachers are teachers not only on
the ground of their words, but also and especially when they are found to be
disciples of Jesus. This means that they cannot offer alternative models. If they
did, they would not be teachers any longer, because their lives would not
conform to the gospel (cf. Mart. Pol. 4.1). Conformity to the gospel implies
agreement between words and deeds. As Ignatius writes, kalo.n to. dida,skein(
eva.n o` le,gwn poih/| (Eph. 15.1). This is what Quintus was not able to do. Violent
death is the final test case for Christians and especially for teachers.
The Martyrdom of Polycarp contains theological assumptions that we found
hinted at for the first time in Matthew and maybe in James. Matthew placed
the ban on the title “teacher” in a chapter dealing with persecution and
Frühzeit des Christentums: Studien zur Kirchengeschichte des ersten und zweiten
Jahrhunderts (Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1963), 253–301, 275–80. Other shcolars have
emphasised consistency with the rest of the book: see BUSCHMANN, Martyrium, 325–27.
282
Cf. BUSCHMANN, Martyrium, 333–35.
4. Polycarp 209
hypocrisy without explicitly linking these three themes. In Evaristus’ work,

persecution has become martyrdom, the risk of hypocrisy clearly represented
(Quintus’ episode), and the implications of being a teacher unequivocally
expressed.
The relationship between teaching, martyrdom, words and deeds is also dealt
with in Mart. Pol. 19. 283 Polycarp is the only one among twelve martyrs who
is remembered by everybody, “For he was not only an exceptional teacher
(dida,skaloj geno,menoj evpi,shmoj) but also a superb martyr. Everyone longs to
imitate his martyrdom, since it occurred in conformity with the gospel of
Christ” (Mart. Pol. 19.1). Because of his endurance, Polycarp has received the
crown of immortality. He glorifies God and blesses Jesus together with the
apostles and all upright people (Mart. Pol. 19.2). In this chapter, Polycarp is
described as a teacher and a martyr. No mention is made of his being also
bishop. This is understandable: Polycarp is bishop of a precise community,
whereas he is teacher of all Christians. Moreover, pagans cannot acknowledge
him as a bishop, but they can as a teacher. To be noted that “teacher” and
“martyr” belong to the same sentence. We have seen the reason for this
connection in chapter seventeen: Polycarp is not only a teacher, but also a doer
of his teaching. The most difficult deed is that of accepting martyrdom, which
is what Polycarp does. Obviously, the implementation of words is a question
concerning all Christians, but it can be supposed that in the case of teachers
this was a very sensitive issue. 284 It must be further observed that Polycarp’s
martyrdom is a model for other Christians, because it took place according to
the gospel. This is another way of saying what we have already detected in
chapter seventeen: “Jesus the teacher” is the model to follow for all Christians,
including teachers.
4.3.7 The Technical Use of “Martyr”

In Ignatius’ letters the term for “martyr” is maqhth,j (“disciple”), but a few
decades later the Martyrdom of Polycarp employs ma,rtuj. The new technical
meaning of this word is not explained: therefore, it is presumed to be known to
the addressees. During the lapse of time between Ignatius and the Martyrdom
something in Asia Minor brought about this change. The scholarly debate
concerning this issue is still open, but there is a proposal that has received large
283
This chapter may contain an interpolation beginning with the mention of Polycarp
being a teacher, because Eusebius’ quotation from the Martyrdom (Hist. eccl. 4.15.45) stops
before it (see CAMPENHAUSEN, “Bearbeitungen,” 263). Against this hypothesis see
284
BAUMEISTER, Anfänge, 266.
support. 285 Ignatius saw his death as a convincing proof of the reality of Jesus’
suffering against his docetic opponents. In this sense, his death was a
testimony. The increasing distance from Jesus’ death explains this new sense
of ma,rtuj. The first Christians could rely on the testimony of those who actually
saw Jesus and knew he was a flesh-and-bone person capable of suffering. The
following generations could not benefit any longer from this testimony, nor
from the testimony of the four Gospels, which were neither widely known, nor
held yet as authoritative writings. A new form of testimony was needed.
Persecutions brought this about: the martyr’s own suffering witnesses to the
reality of Jesus’ suffering. Strictly speaking, this testimony is based on a petitio
principis, since it assumes what it intends to prove. Ignatius’ opponents failed
to be impressed, but writers belonging to the great church saw in it a persuasive
argument.
This reconstruction can be maintained even if subsequent research has
shifted the object of testimony from Jesus’ suffering to the relationship
between deeds and words. 286 Martyrs accept to suffer what they teach and
believe in, that is Jesus’ passion. We have seen that this question is particularly
important to Ignatius. One of the proofs is the text of Eph. 15.1, which, as
already mentioned, joins together the theme of Jesus the only teacher and of
the matching of words and deeds.
In my opinion, the origins of the technical use of ma,rtuj are already to be
found in Matthew. Matthew 10 and 23 joins persecution and discipleship and
criticises hypocrisy. The theological reflection that produced these two
chapters is the same on which Ignatius built his idea of martyrdom as a form
of discipleship. Starting from the same ground, Ignatius laid emphasis on the
necessity that words match deeds.
4.3.8 Discipleship, Persecution and Martyrdom

We have seen that Ignatius does not employ the term ma,rtuj and cognate forms
in the technical sense of “martyr”. The Martyrdom is the first writing in which
this happens (e.g. Mart. Pol. 13.2 and 19.2). 287 The origins of this use may go
back to Matt 10:24–25, a text which is placed between two sections on
persecution (Matt 10:17–23 and 10:28). These two verses say that the
persecution of the teacher implies the persecution of the disciples. At a later
stage, we find the bishop of Antioch. Ignatius brings this theme a step further
by claiming that discipleship not only includes readiness to accept violent
285
It is clearly outlined in BROX, Zeuge, 203–225. See also ERNST GÜNTHER, “Zeuge
und Märtyrer,” in ZNW 47 (1956): 145–61, 155–57.
286
Baumeister, Anfänge, 257–70; ANNA MARIA SCHWEMER, “Prophet, Zeuge und
Märtyrer: Zur Entstehung des Märtyrerbegriffs im frühesten Christentum,” ZTK 96 (1999):
320–50.
287
HERMANN STRATHMANN, “ma,rtuj,” GLNT, 6: 1269–1392, 1364.
4. Polycarp 211
death, but also consists in violent death. Persecution becomes martyrdom.

Ignatius held a consistent view of martyrdom and discipleship. Jesus is the only
teacher. All Christians are disciples of Jesus. One form of this discipleship is
martyrdom. In the previous section we have seen the reasons why this discourse
excluded any reference to Christian teachers. The Martyrdom of Polycarp
belongs to the third stage. Evaristus is not as consistent as Ignatius. There are
two teachers, Jesus and Polycarp. Polycarp is also disciple and martyr.
Common Christians should hope to become fellow disciples of the martyrs. I
have observed above the problems caused by placing another teacher besides
Jesus. Evaristus was not a theological mind of the first water and
inconsistencies might be expected. Moreover, he may have been influenced by
the possession of a full fledged theory of martyrdom embodied in technical
terms. At the time of the Martyrdom, the term “disciple” was being unburdened
of the connotation of violent death for God’s sake, because another term was
at disposal. This meant that through the discourse of martyrdom the unique
path of Jesus’ passion was secured as the only one Christians should follow
when facing comparable circumstances of opposition. Then, it was possible to
use the counterpart of “disciple,” “teacher,” as applied to people other than
Jesus. 288
4.4 Conclusions
The Martyrdom of Polycarp was composed about one hundred years after 1
Corinthians and is the only text that in the course of this span of time lists all
the members of the triad together. However, two of them have become
adjectives. This is a telling phenomenon, which is the result of the
transformations undergone by the triad. In the view of Evaristus, there are no
longer apostles and prophets. The only surviving role is that of the teacher. In
fact, Polycarp is portrayed in our sources as a teacher addressing a small circle
of students and occasionally the whole congregation. We can presume that
nobody appointed Polycarp as a teacher, but that his talents and his contact
with the earliest teaching of Jesus made him one. Though he was a teacher, it
was not as such that he had authority over his flock, but as a bishop. This
appointment must have been the official recognition of his leading role.
The portrayal of Polycarp as a teacher recalls Paul the teacher in the
Pastorals, and Jesus the only teacher in Matthew and Ignatius. In all these cases
the topos of the eminent or only teacher is at work. By placing one particular
character as the only or main source of teaching, alternative teachings are ruled
out since their advocates are not teachers, at least not on the same level. In this
way, not only dissenting views are banned, but also the “original” teaching is
288
On discipleship and persecution, see ALESSANDRO FALCETTA, “From Jesus to
Polycarp: Reflections on the Origins of Early Christian Martyrdom,” CNS 27 (2006): 67–98.
turned into a deposit which cannot be changed, because it is transmitted by

non-teachers, such as bishops and presbyters. This deposit includes Jesus’
acceptance of death. Matthew, Ignatius, and Evaristus present the life of Jesus
as the only model to follow, even in the face of persecution. Since Jesus was
persecuted, his disciples should not expect a better fate. In this regard, the topos
of the only teacher regulates the discourse of martyrdom. We find its roots in
Matthew, its development in Ignatius and its full shape in the Martyrdom of
Polycarp.
Chapter 5
A Source on Rome: The Shepherd of Hermas
1. Introduction
The Shepherd of Hermas contains revelations given to Hermas, a Roman

Christian, and interpreted by different figures, in particular an angel who
appears as a shepherd. 1 It was a very popular work among early Christians and
enjoyed a quasi-canonical status, 2 but it fell into oblivion until its full text
became available again in the nineteenth century. 3 It provides an unusual
picture of Christianity and has been studied to gather information on Christians
in Rome in the second century. A remarkable feature of this work is the
repeated occurrence of the term dida,skaloi and of other terms relating to
community roles. No other writing examined in the present study has as many
references to teachers.
2. Authorship, Date and Place
There is no serious reason to question the authorship of this book, 4 though it is

debatable whether the biographical details given in it are fictitious. If the text
is biographically accurate, Hermas was born outside Rome and sold as a slave
to a woman named Rhode. He lived in Rome, was freed and gathered a
considerable wealth, which he lost. At the time of the revelations reported in
The Shepherd, he owned a plot of land and conducted some business. He had
1
HOLMES, Apostolic Fathers, 442. This edition is the source of my Greek and English
quotations.
2
See NORBERT BROX, Der Hirt des Hermas (KAV 7; Göttingen: Vandenhoeck &
Ruprecht, 1991), 55–71.
3
It was found almost in its entirety in Codex Athous on Mount Athos in 1855. A survey
of the witnesses to the text is in ROBERT JOLY, Hermas: Le Pasteur (2nd ed.; SC 53bis;
Paris: Cerf, 1968), 58–64. New and old witnesses in GIANFRANCO LUSINI, “Nouvelles
recherches sur le texte du Pasteur d’Hermas,” Apocrypha 12 (2001): 79–97.
4
BROX, Hirt, 15.
214 Chapter 5: A Source on Rome: The Shepherd of Hermas
a wife and children and his family was a source of troubles to him. 5 It is
probable that this simple portrait has some historical foundations, but also that
Hermas reworked it in the light of his literary goals. 6 What he says about
himself suggests that he had no specific theological or rhetorical education,
which is confirmed by the style and content of his book. 7
The role played by Hermas in his Christian community is unknown. He has
sometimes been thought to be a prophet, but he fails to meet the requisites for
prophets mentioned in Mand. 11.5–17. Whereas prophets are directly inspired
by God and speak in the assembly, Hermas’ revelations are mediated through
celestial figures and take place in solitary contexts. 8 There are no compelling
clues for considering him a bishop, a presbyter or a deacon. The way Hermas
receives the teaching he is charged to transmit and his repeated apologies for
his lack of intelligence seem to rule out that he was a teacher. 9
A debated issue is whether the authorship of The Shephed is actually
multiple, a proposal meant to explain the inconsistencies of the text. Giet
proposed three different authors, 10 Coleborne six. 11 Other scholars tend to
confirm the unity of authorship. Philippe Henne sees this work in its final
redaction as theologically consistent. 12 Writing in response to Giet, he believes
to identify a didactic methodology whereby the Visions are chiefly addressed
to catechumens and the subsequent sections to already baptised Christians. 13 A
different and probably more nuanced model is suggested by Carolyn Osiek who
5
See the analysis of the biographical data in PETER LAMPE, Die stadtrömischen Christen
in den ersten beiden Jahrhunderten: Untersuchungen zur Sozialgeschichte (2nd ed.; WUNT
II/18; Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1989), 182–88.
6
BROX, Hirt, 16–17; CAROLYN OSIEK, Shepherd of Hermas (Hermeneia; Minneapolis:
Fortress Press, 1999), 23–24. The data cannot be used for biographical purposes according
to MARTIN DIBELIUS, Der Hirt des Hermas (HNT, Die apostolischen Väter 4; Tübingen:
Mohr Siebeck, 1923), 419–20.
7
Cf. LAMPE, Die stadtrömischen Christen, 191–97.
8
JANNES REILING, Hermas and Christian Prophecy: A Study of the Eleventh Mandate
(NovTSup 37; Leiden: Brill, 1973), 155–70; MARTIN LEUTZSCH, Die Wahrnehmung
sozialer Wirklichkeit im „Hirten des Hermas“ (FRLANT 150; Göttingen: Vandenhoeck &
Ruprecht, 1989), 104; BROX, Hirt, 19–21; Hermas is a prophet according to JOLY, Hermas,
11; he is a “prophet in a general sense” for OSIEK, Shepherd, 23.
9
See STANISLAS GIET, Hermas et les pasteurs (Paris: Presses universitaires de France,
1963), 297.
10
GIET, Hermas.
11
W. COLEBORNE, “The Shepherd of Hermas: A Case for Multiple Authorship and Some
Implications,” in StPatr 10 (TU 107; Berlin: Akademie-Verlag, 1970), 65–70; BROX, Hirt,
29–33.
12
PHILIPPE HENNE, La Christologie chez Clément de Rome et dans le Pasteur d’Hermas
(Paradosis 33; Fribourg, Suisse: Éditions universitaires, 1992), 147–302.
13
PHILIPPE HENNE, L’unité du Pasteur d’Hermas: Tradition et rédaction (ChRB 31;
Paris: Gabalda, 1992).
3. Vision 3.5.1 215
assigns the inconsistencies to oral performance. In her opinion, this was a work
that was modified according to the response of the audience and changing
needs. 14 Whatever the model, it is likely that there were different stages of
development. Probably Visions 1–4 were written first. Vision 5 seems an
introduction to the Mandates, which, along with the Similitudes, were
composed afterwards, probably not in one stroke. 15
The place of writing is very likely Rome. Hermas mentions Rome and the
Tiber (Vis. 1.1–3), the Via Campana (Vis. 4.1.2), 16 which passed through
Rome, and it alludes to agricultural practices fitting the region (Sim. 2). 17 The
identification of the time of writing is not as straightforward, but it is usually
set around the years 140s. 18 An important clue is the testimony of the
Muratorian Canon (lines 73–77) about Hermas having being recently written
by one Hermas, brother of one Pius, when the latter was bishop of Rome.
Another clue comes from the lack of clear references to Gnosticism, which
spread in Rome from the middle of the second century. 19 It must be recalled
that this dating refers to the final redaction of the text, which is likely to have
been composed over an extended length of time.
3. Vision 3.5.1
Vision 3.5.1 is one of nine passages mentioning the word dida,skaloj. An old
woman shows Hermas a tower, which is being built on water by six young
women. It is made of different stones, some coming from the water, some from
the land. The first group fits very well into the tower, part of the second group
is rejected and part hewn in order to fit in. The tower, the lady explains, is
herself, the church (Vis. 3.3.3), the water, she makes Hermas understand, is
baptism (Vis. 3.3.5), and the women are six angels (Vis. 3.4.1). Hermas asks
what the stones stand for (Vis. 3.4.3). This is her explanation:
14
CAROLYN OSIEK, “The Oral World of Early Christianity in Rome: The Case of
Hermas,” in Judaism and Christianity in First-Century Rome (ed. KARL P. DONFRIED and
PETER RICHARDSON; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1998), 151–72; idem, Shepherd, 13–16.
15
BROX, Hirt, 26–29; OSIEK, Shepherd, 10.
16
ERIK PETERSON prefers the alternative reading kamphnh|/, indicating simply a winding
road: “Die Begegnung mit dem Ungeheuer,” in Frühkirche, 285–309, 287.
17
BROX, Hirt, 22–23; OSIEK, Shepherd, 18. ERIK PETERSON believes to have found in
The Shepherd ascetic practices, which point to Palestine, and that it is a methodological
mistake to use this book to draw conclusions on Christianity in Rome (“Kritische Analyse
der fünften Vision des Hermas,” in Frühkirche, 271–84, 281–83). His suggestions have not
found acceptance.
18
BROX, Hirt, 23 n. 6 and 25.
19
DIBELIUS, Hirt, 422.
Those that are square and white and fit into their joints are the apostles and overseers and
teachers and deacons (oi` avpo,stoloi kai. evpi,skopoi kai. dida,skaloi kai. dia,konoi) who
proceed (poreuqe,ntej) mindful of the dignity of God, who have governed (evpiskoph,santej)
and taught (dida,xantej) and served (diakonh,santej) the elect of God in holiness and dignity,
some of whom have fallen asleep and some of whom are still alive. They were always in
harmony with each other and were in peace with one another and listened to each other. That
is why their joints fit with one another in the building of the tower (Vis. 3.5.1).
There is no apparent reason for the order the four roles are listed in, 20 except
maybe alliteration. 21 The absence of prophets is remarkable, all the more since
the whole of Mandate 9 is devoted to them. 22 This omission has been
considered a serious challenge to Harnack’s theory of a charismatic triad. 23
Harnack proposed that Hermas left prophets out because he was one of them, 24
but the very opposite is more likely, that he should have included them in the
foundations of the tower precisely because he himself was a prophet. For Aune,
Hermas omitted them because of mistrust. 25 Other explanations are that they
did not play leadership roles 26 and that in Hermas’ community prophecy was
congregational, whereby all the members could be prophets when inspired. 27
Any proposal about the omission must consider that for Hermas Christian
prophets of the past generations did not belong among the founders of the
church, nor were they essential part of the contemporary church. His first
opinion should not surprise. There are only two early Christian texts that posit
prophets as divinely commissioned to build up the church: 1 Cor 12:28 and
Eph 4:11. Since the Ephesian passage depends on 1 Corinthians, the evidence
is reduced to one text. It is more difficult to see why they are not mentioned in
connection with the contemporary church figures of bishops and deacons, since
prophets belong to the time of Hermas (cf. Mand. 11). Probably they did not
exercise specific functions as it was the case with the Didache, where prophets,
though vivifying the community through their activity, were not leaders.
Besides the omission of prophets, another oddity seems to occur in the
following line, where four participles describe the activity proper to each of the
20
According to HARNACK, Entstehung, 55, this passage gathers together roles concerning
the whole church (apostles) and the local community (bishops, teachers and deacons).
21
22
HARNACK, Entstehung, 55.
23
Cf. REILING, Hermas, 7.
24
HARNACK, Mission, vol. 1, 351–52.
25
Aune, Prophecy, 209.
26
DAMIEN VAN DEN EYNDE, Les Normes de l’Enseignement Chrétien dans la littérature
patristique des trois premiers siècles (Universitas Catholica Lovanienses. Dissertationes ad
gradum magistri in Facultate Theologica consequendum conscriptae. Series II. Tomus 25 ;
Gembloux: J. Duculot; Paris: Gabalda, 1933), 91.
27
REILING, Hermas, 153–54 and 175. AUNE, Prophecy, 209–210, believes Reiling wrong
and thinks that the prophets of Mandate 11 were religious specialists.
3. Vision 3.5.1 217
previously mentioned roles. The only case in which the verb does not stem
from the same root of the noun is in reference to apostles. The reason may be
that apostles are no longer a living reality for the Roman church. 28 However, it
is more likely that Hermas did not have much choice. The required participle
would not have had any connection with their actual activity, as is the case for
the other three participles, but only with the starting point of it. “Apostles” was
the only instance in which the verb corresponding to the noun did not express
what Hermas wanted to say, so that a different verb was needed. This is not to
deny that they are in Hermas a thing of the past, as we can see in the other
places mentioning them (Sim. 9.15.4; 16.6; 17.1; 25.2).
Two other terms requiring some brief examination are “overseers” or
“bishops” and “deacons.” Bishops are mentioned also in Sim. 9.27.1–2: among
their duties are those of hospitality and of caring for the needy. Hospitality
meant keeping contact with other Christian communities and also putting up
foreign teachers, who might have brought with them controversial doctrines. 29
Hospitality was a debated issue among early Christians due to the disruption
that visitors might bring. Deacons probably assisted bishops and were
responsible to some extent for the common funds (cf. Sim. 9.26.2).
The recipients of the work of bishops, teachers and deacons are the “elect of
God.” This construct is more likely than the one that refers toi/j evklektoi/j only
to the participle diakonh,santej, even if this is the only one demanding the
dative. It would be difficult to explain why those who benefited from the
ministry of the deacons are mentioned, whereas teachers and bishops are left
without counterparts. If this interpretation is correct, it is clear that teachers
taught people who were already baptised (cf. Vis. 2.2.5; 2.4.2; 3.9.10; 4.2.5). 30
Who among the four roles are those asleep and who those still living? I have
already recalled that throughout the book apostles are considered a thing of the
past. Bishops and deacons surely belong to the present. The question, then,
really concerns teachers. As there are no clues in this passage that may help the
inquirer, we shall look for them elsewhere. This approach is criticised by
Neymeyr who points to the fact that the other sections of The Shepherd of
Hermas mentioning teachers belong to different textual units, so that our
passage should be interpreted by itself. 31 It can be replied that the presence or
absence of teachers in the world of Hermas does not depend on the structure of
his book or on the date of compositions of its parts, unless it was written over
a long span of time. However, Neymeyr rightly emphasises that an important
28
OSIEK, Shepherd, 71.
29
30
LAGE PERNVEDEN, The Concept of the Church in the Shepherd of Hermas (Studia
Theologica Lundensia 27; Lund: Berlingska Boktryckeriet, 1966), 117.
31
point of the passage consists in the stress placed on a harmonious relationship

between different roles. Hermas is not interested in chronology but in the well-
being of his community, which in this case takes the form of internal harmony
among its leading members. 32 They were not only the people who founded the
church, but also those who came after them. Apostles and teachers (Sim. 9.15.4;
9.25.2) laid the foundations, bishops, deacons and also teachers, as we shall
see, supervised its development in Hermas’ days.
4. Mandate 4.3.1
After listening to the Shepherd on the connection between penitence and

intelligence (Mand. 4.2), Hermas asks the following question:
I have heard some teachers (ti,nwn didaska,lwn), sir, that there is no other conversion
possible than the one when we descended into the water and received forgiveness of our
previous sins. He said to me: “You heard well. That is right. The one who has received
forgiveness of sins should never have been sinning again, but should remain in purity. But
since you ask such careful questions, I will also show you this, not so as to give an excuse
to those who will believe or those who are now coming to faith in the Lord. Those now
coming to faith and future believers do not have conversion from sins, but forgiveness of
former sins. For those called before these days, the Lord has appointed the chance for
conversion (Mand. 4.3.1–4).
The Shepherd continues observing that this chance comes from God’s
knowledge of human weakness, of the shrewdness of the devil, and from God’s
compassion. There is no other chance after this. Upon hearing these words,
Hermas felt relieved (Mand. 4.3.4–7). The doctrine of post-baptismal penitence
is generally considered the main theme of the whole book. 33 It is the foundation
of Hermas’ project of bringing the church from its moral crisis and division
into a unified body. This plan of reform was not unique. Marcion and
Valentinus proposed their own ideas about church renewal in Rome at around
the same time and built separate communities as a result of the failure to
persuade the rest of Roman Christians. 34
The starting point of Hermas’ project is the doctrine held by some teachers
about forgiveness of sins. In this case there is no doubt that the teachers are
contemporary to Hermas. Who these teachers were is not said, but it is possible
to get some idea about their place within Roman Christianity. Commentators
often remark that it is not question of heretical teachers because their views are
32
Cf. OSIEK, Shepherd, 71.
33
34
EINAR THOMASSEN, “Orthodoxy and Heresy in Second-Century Rome,” HTR 97
(2004): 241–56, 251–55.
4. Mandate 4.3.1 219
endorsed by the Shepherd, 35 but this opinion wrongly presupposes a division

between orthodoxy and heterodoxy in Rome at a very early date. Roman
Christianity before the end of the second century was a composite
phenomenon. The capital attracted all sorts of new ideas and Christians lacked
a central authority that could appraise them. 36 A different order of observations
is in place. First, the Shepherd of Hermas was very popular in antiquity and,
though suspicious, was even about to become canonical. Hence, the ideas
expressed by “some teachers” and approved by the Shepherd cannot be
relegated to the margins of contemporary Roman Christianity. Second, Hermas
writes to all Roman Christians and wants his work to be sent abroad by Clement
(Vis. 2.4.3). The recipients were supposed to recognise the ideas of these
teachers. Third, a comparable doctrine is earnestly held in Heb 6:4–6 (cf. Heb
10:26–31). It is therefore safe to say that these teachers expressed an important
view among Roman Christians. 37 The qualification “some teachers” makes it
clear that their views were not generally held, but, at the same time, the
Shepherd’s endorsement shows that they were believed by Hermas to be
theologically correct.
The target of the rigorist doctrines coming from these teachers is not stated.
It may concern all believers or only the candidates to baptism. In the latter
instance, the setting would be catechetical instruction. Those wishing to enter
the community would be told that there was no chance of forgiveness after
baptism. Poschmann has formulated the hypothesis that the teaching in fact
was double. 38 For pedagogical and pastoral reasons, what one was told by a
teacher before baptism, namely a rigorist doctrine, was the opposite of what
the same teacher would tell after baptism, namely a permissive doctrine. This
suggestion, however, presupposes that there were no contacts between
catechumens and community members, and that Hermas’ book, or at least its
sections on penitence, was not to fall into the hands of catechumens. 39 Even if
Poschmann’s theory is to be rejected, the fact remains that the teaching in
35
Cf. DIBELIUS, Hirt, 508–509; BROX, Hirt, 211; OSIEK, Shepherd, 114.
36
See THOMASSEN, “Orthodoxy.”
37
Scholarly opinions about the prevailing(s) doctrine(s) on penitence are briefly surveyed
in INGRID GOLDHAHN-MÜLLER, Die Grenze der Gemeinde: Studien zum Problem der
Zweiten Busse im Neuen Testament unter Berücksichtigung der Entwicklung im 2. Jh. bis
Tertullian (GTA 39; Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1989), 241–42. Goldhahn-Müller
believes that there were different teachings on forgiveness of sin. In particular, she
challenges the influential proposal made by BERNHARD POSCHMANN, according to whom
there was a unified teaching on penitence, which reckoned with the possibility of post-
baptismal forgiveness: see Paenitentia secunda: Die kirchliche Busse im ältesten
Christentum bis Cyprian und Origenes: Eine dogmengeschichtliche Untersuchung
(Theophaneia 1; Bonn: Peter Hanstein Verlagsbuchhandlung, 1940; repr. 1964).
38
POSCHMANN, Paenitentia, 160–67. POSCHMANN follows a suggestion by A. D’ALÈS
(166 n. 1).
39
See also the critique by JOLY, Hermas, notes at pp. 156–62.
question concerns baptism and that the teachers whom Hermas writes about
may be involved in teaching catechumens.
We may reckon the author of Hebrews among the proponents of the doctrine
modified by Hermas. Hebrews’ uncompromising position might have been
considered radical and not viable. It is true that the type of sin debated in Heb
6:4–6 is of a different kind, but Hermas may have misunderstood it or re-
interpreted it in the light of the normal life of a Christian, leaving the case of
apostasy aside.
5. Similitude 8.6.5
Though this passage does not explicitly mention teachers, it throws light on the
text examined above. In Sim. 8 Hermas watches the believers gathered under a
willow. Each of them is given a stick cut from the tree by an angel, who then
wants them back. The answer to Hermas’ enquiry about the meaning of the
different sorts of sticks returned to the angel includes the following typology:
Those who gave them up dry and not moth-eaten are near them [those who gave the sticks
dry and moth-eaten]. They were hypocrites and proponents of strange teachings (didaca.j
e`te,raj eivsfe,rontej) and deceivers of the servants of God – especially of those who sinned,
not allowing them to be converted, but persuading them with their stupid teachings (tai/j
didacai/j tai/j mwrai/j pei,qontej auvtou,j). They have hope of conversion (Sim. 8.6.5).
It is possible that not all of these hypocrites were teachers, but it seems unlikely
that none was it. This passage bears some resemblance to Mand. 4.3.1–2,
though, while in Mandates the doctrine on penitence proposed by some
teachers was endorsed by the Shepherd, here doctrines concerning sin and
conversion are rejected. It is difficult to imagine that there were no teachers
among those who preached them. The reason why the word dida,skaloj is not
employed may be polemical, as I have suggested for Ignatius. The “proponents
of strange teachings” are not called with the title “teacher” because Hermas
does not want to acknowledge the authority which this word implies.
The label “hypocrites” is not to be taken literally but as a conventional
charge. 40 The real fault of these people lies not in their conduct or preaching,
but in the content of their teaching. This is left unexplained, but we are
informed about its consequence or its aim: sinners do not convert. A number
of possibilities can be envisaged. 41 (1) They taught that there is no repentance
after baptism, 42 but this teaching is explicitly approved by the Shepherd in
40
Cf. OSIEK, Shepherd, 207.
41
Overview of scholarship about which “heresies” are targeted in BROX, Hirt, 370 n. 21.
42
6. Similitude 9.15.4 221
Mand. 4.3.2. 43 (2) They preached multiple chances of penitence, thus making
sinners miss the only chance they were actually allowed. (3) They held certain
sins in no account. 44 We will see that this is the correct answer while examining
a related text, Sim. 9.19.2. For the time being, it suffices to note that this
passage tackles all those teachings that contradicted, differed from, or
invalidated the revelation received by Hermas about a once-and-for-all chance
of repentance. Interesting enough, those proposing a different teaching are not
threatened with expulsion (cf. Sim 8.7.1–3). 45 Hermas’ main preoccupation is
moral conduct and unity rather than doctrinal differences.
6. Similitude 9.15.4
In one of the similitudes Hermas watches the building of a tower, symbolizing

the church (Sim. 9.13.1), which is made out of stones of different provenance
(Sim. 9.4.2–3). He asks the Shepherd the meaning of what he sees:
“But sir,” I said, “which are the stones from the deep that were fashioned into the building?”
“The first ones,” he said, “the ten that were put into the foundation, are the first generation,
the twenty-five are the second generation of just men, the thirty-five are the prophets as
ministers (profh/tai kai. dia,konoi) of God, and the forty are apostles and teachers of the
proclamation of the Son of God (avpo,stoloi kai. dida,skaloi tou/ khru,gmatoj tou/ uiòu/ tou/
qeou/)” (Sim. 9.15.4).
The present passage does not provide a synchronic description of the church,
but a diachronic account of how it came into being. Probably, the ten stones
represent the patriarchs (Gen 5; cf. Luke 3:36–38). The twenty-five stones are
the generations from Sem to David (cf. Luke 3:31–36). The prophets are not
Christian, but pre-Christian, since they are of God, rather than preachers of the
Son of God with apostles and teachers. The two figures of thirty-five and forty
are difficult to explain. It can be observed that the sum of the first three figures
is seventy, 46 which, being a biblical number indicating fullness, well fits the
description of the Old Testament generations. The preachers of the Son of God,
apostles and teachers, belong to the Christian generations. The number forty is
equally biblical and recalls the exodus. Maybe it captures the idea that apostles
and teachers are responsible for the passage from the Old Testament times to
the period marked by the preaching of the Son of God.
43
DIBELIUS, Hirt, 596; BROX, Hirt, 370.
44
JOLY, Hermas, 277 n. 5.
45
LAMPE, Christen, 325; OSIEK, Hermas, 207.
46
See DIBELIUS, Hirt, 624–25; OSIEK, Hermas, 237; BROX judges negatively the
attempts at explaining the numbers (Hirt, 397 and 430).
The main interest of this passage is that it qualifies the terms “apostles” and
“teachers” with “proclamation of the Son of God.” This is to be understood as
a genitive objective 47 and therefore as the content of what apostles and teachers
preached. The term “proclamation” (kh,rugma) is also in Sim. 8.3.2, where it is
said that the law of God given to the whole world is the Son of God who has
been preached to the ends of the earth and that those who are under the law,
symbolised by a willow, are those who have listened to the proclamation and
believed in the Son. The context of the preaching is the mission (“ends of the
earth”), its content is the Son. More precisely, the Son-law is equivalent to the
gospel in the sense of message of salvation. 48 The third and last occurrence of
“proclamation” is in Sim. 9.16.5, which is dealt with later. In all three cases the
content of the preaching is not the deeds or words of Jesus. Hermas is interested
neither in the cross, nor in what preceded it, but in a message which brings
salvation.
A closer description of the content of this message is difficult. Considering
the source of the preaching on the Son of God to be the Son himself, the work
of apostles and teachers is an extension of the work attributed to him (Sim.
5.1.5; 5.3.2; 5.5.3), namely, the giving of the commandments, which are about
personal conduct. 49 It may be wondered whether there is a distinction between
the preaching of the apostles and that of the teachers, even if the object is the
same. It is likely that the apostles were those who brought the message first,
whereas the teachers spoke within already established communities.
Two more indications of this teaching-activity may be found in the meeting
with the beast of Vis. 4.1 and in Sim. 9.18.2. As the beast approaches, Hermas
takes on courage remembering “the great things he [God] had taught me (w-n
evdi,daxe,n me megalei,wn)” (Vis. 4.1.8). In the passage from the Similitude we
read that eternal death is the destiny of those who do wrong, in spite of having
“seen God’s greatness (ta. megalei/a auvtou/ e`wrako,tej).” 50 In the LXX ta.
megalei/a usually refer to God’s acts of salvation, mostly in the past (Deut 11:2;
Ps 70[71]:19; Tob 11:15; 3 Macc 7:22). The only New Testament occurrence
refers to the “wonderful works” that God accomplished in Jesus (Acts 2:11).
Lage Pernveden argues that these works, past and present, were employed by
teachers as illustration of God’s presence in human life. 51 Biblical stories must
have been included among the past works, adventures such as the meeting with
the beast among the present works (cf. Vis. 4.2.5).
47
PERNVEDEN, Concept, 114–15.
48
PERNVEDEN, Concept, 84–85; 113–14.
49
50
Cf. also Sim. 10.2.3.
51
7. Similitude 9.16.5–7 223
7. Similitude 9.16.5–7
In this text, which is related to the preceding one, Hermas asks the Shepherd
why the stones had to be raised from the depth of the water. The explanation
goes that human beings, before entering the water, an allusion to baptism, are
dead, whereas they gain life after emerging from it, which coincides with being
given the name of God or the seal. Hermas makes a further inquiry:
“Why, sir,” I said, “did the forty stones rise with them from the depth already having the
seal?” “Because,” he said, “these are the apostles and teachers (oi` avpo,stoloi kai. oi`
dida,skaloi) who proclaimed (oi` khru,xantej) the name of the Son of God, who, having fallen
asleep in power and faith of the Son of God, even proclaimed (evkh,ruxan) to those who had
previously fallen asleep and gave them the seal of the proclamation (khru,gmatoj). They
descended with them into the water and came up again, except that these descended alive
and came up alive. Because of them, these others were enlivened and came to know the name
of the Son of God” (Sim. 9.16.5–7).
The descensus ad inferos is traditionally performed by Jesus after the

crucifixion, 52 but here Hermas relies on a different story according to which
the same mission is performed by apostles and teachers. This passage shows
that “the name of God” designates the message of salvation, which in this case
is addressed to those who are already dead. Obviously, the teachers in question
are not Hermas’ contemporaries, but they have passed away. Norbert Brox has
compared our text with Sim 9.17.1 and 9.25.2. In the first passage the
proclamation of the Son of God is carried out by apostles (evkhru,cqh); in the
second, both apostles and teachers are those “who proclaimed (oi` khru,xantej)
to the whole world and who taught (oi` dida,xantej) the word of the Lord.” Since
the same thing can be said of apostles and teachers, he concludes that in these
passages “teachers” is apposition to “apostles.” 53 This argument cannot be
accepted because in Sim. 9.25.2 the verbs “to proclaim” and “to teach” are both
used. Hermas’ concise way of writing Sim. 9.17.2 cannot warrant any
inference. As to our passage, it could be objected that it would have been
enough to send only the apostles to the other world, but the team of apostles
and teachers can be explained as representing the totality of the preaching of
salvation.
8. Similitude 9.19.2
In Sim. 9.17.1 Hermas is told that the apostles have preached to the twelve
tribes, symbol of the entire world, represented by twelve mountains. Stones are
52
1 Pet 3:19–20; 4:6; Ep. Apos. 27; Apoc. Pet. 14; Odes Sol. 42.11–20; Irenaeus, Haer.
1.27.3; Tertullian, Marc. 4.24. References in OSIEK, Shepherd, 238 n. 56.
53
BROX, Hirt, 433.
taken from these mountains for the construction of the tower. The Shepherd
explains that:
“From the second mountain, the bare one, are believers like these: hypocrites and teachers
of evil (dida,skaloi ponhri,aj). These are like the first, with no fruit of justice (karpo.n
dikaiosu,nhj). As their mountain is unfruitful, so these people have the name, but they are
empty of faith and there is no fruit of truth in them. For these there is conversion if they turn
quickly to convert. But if they delay, their death will be with the first group.” “Why, sir,” I
said, “is there conversion for them but not for the first ones [“apostles, blasphemers against
the Lord, and betrayers of the servants of God,” Sim. 9.19.1]? Their deeds are about the
same.” “This is why there is conversion for them: because they have not blasphemed their
Lord nor become betrayers of the servants of God. Because of the desire for profit they acted
like hypocrites and each one taught (evdi,daxen) [according to] 54 the desires of sinful people.
They will pay some just price, but there is conversion for them because they became neither
blasphemers nor betrayers” (Sim. 9.19.2–3).
The hypocrites and teachers of evil may well be the same people. This is borne
out by the remark that “each one taught according to the desires of sinful
people,” where “each one” refers to the subjects of the previous sentence,
namely people who acted like hypocrites. The qualification “evil” can be a
subjective or an objective genitive. In the first case, it is question of evil
teachers, 55 in the second the teachers teach evil. 56 Considering that the problem
is the content of their teaching (Sim. 9.19.3), the second solution is to be
preferred. Their teaching is evil because it does not produce what it should:
“fruit of justice.” This probably means that the recipients of their teaching do
not learn how to conduct their life according to God’s will. It is important to
observe that, once again, we find “justice” associated with teachers or similar
figures (cf. Matt 5:20; 10:41; Did. 11.2; Heb 5:13; 2 Pet 2:21).
In spite of their faults, these teachers are not without hope of salvation like
the apostates and traitors of the first mountain (Sim. 9.19.1), but they are among
those who can still convert. Their problem is emptiness of faith and lack of
fruit of justice. Their conduct does not correspond to the name they carry, that
is to the baptism they have received and the doctrine they have been taught.
Consequently, the community does not benefit from their work, but it is they
who benefit from what they do. The reason for this emptiness is that they aimed
at profit and taught in order to suit people’s desires. These teachers adapted the
content of their doctrines to the desires of their listeners in order to please them
and obtain money from them. This can only have happened in private settings,
not in the common assemblies. The content of this teaching can be inferred
through comparison with two texts, Sim. 5.7.2 and 8.6.5. The latter passage,
which has already been examined above, is part of the account of the cosmic
54
Brackets in OSIEK’s translation, Shepherd, 240.
55
56
JOLY, Hermas, 335.
8. Similitude 9.19.2 225
willow, whose branches are given to different groups of people. This image of
the church is equivalent to that of the tower, and the typology of the branches
has some parallels with the typology of the stones. 57 We note two points of
contact between Sim. 9.19.2–3 and 8.6.5. Both texts are preceded by a reference
to apostates, blasphemers and betrayers; the dryness of the stick corresponds
to the bareness of the mountains and the emptiness of the people. In Similitude
8.6.5 the author writes of “hypocrites and proponents of strange teachings”, in
Sim. 19.9.2 of “hypocrites and teachers of evil.” In both cases the accused have
hope of conversion. What these teachers of evil taught is not explained, but
Sim. 5.7.2, can shed light on this question. After explaining the meaning of the
parable of the vineyard, the Shepherd thus exhorts Hermas:
Keep this flesh of yours pure and undefiled, so that the spirit that dwells in it may witness to
it and your flesh be justified. See to it that it not enter your heart that this flesh of yours is
perishable, and you misuse it in some kind of defilement. If you defile your flesh, you will
defile the Holy Spirit, and if you defile your flesh, you will not live.
Some commentators have seen in this passage a reference to resurrection. 58 The

teaching against which the Shepherd speaks rejects the idea of imperishable
flesh and focus only on the spirit. According to it, the defilement of the flesh
is of no consequence for what happens in the after-life. The teachers of
doctrines that please their recipients may well be people who distinguish
between spirit and flesh and do not impose restrictions on one’s conduct
concerning the latter. This is the soil on which Gnosticism would later grow.
From the point of view of the Shepherd/Hermas, these people who defile their
body are sinners, but since they are not aware of it, they will not take advantage
of the not-to-be repeated chance of post-baptismal conversion. Hermas’
polemic with these teachers recalls the polemic of 2 Tim 2:18 against those
claiming that the resurrection has already taken place. This was probably a
reference to the resurrection of the spirit, which implied that there was no
interest in the resurrection of the body. Like 2 Tim 2:18, Sim. 5.7.2 too can be
compared with 1 Cor 15, according to which some deny the resurrection of
Jesus, probably meaning his bodily resurrection, which is the model for the
resurrection of the believer. Paul states that if his opponents are right, then we
can indulge in drinking and eating (1 Cor 15:32), a good example of defilement
of the flesh. Ignatius’ discussion with those who expressed doubts about the
resurrection of Jesus confirms that this was a controversial issue. The Shepherd
of Hermas is the only text that associates this topic with teachers. Hermas does
what the Pastorals and Ignatius could not do, because both authors proclaimed
that there is only one teacher, Paul and Jesus respectively.
57
58
JOLY, Hermas, 241; OSIEK, Shepherd, 183; contra BROX, Hirt, 326, who observes that
“spirit” and “flesh” are not to be interpreted in a dualistic way, since the flesh designates the
whole person.
The significance of our next witness is such that it is necessary to give the full
Greek text after the translation of what the Shepherd says.
From the fifth mountain with plants that are green and rough are believers like these: they
are faithful, but slow to learn, arrogant and pleasing themselves, wanting to know everything
and knowing absolutely nothing. Because of this arrogance of theirs, understanding
withdrew from them, and stupid foolishness entered them. They praise themselves as having
understanding and want to be self-authenticating teachers, being foolish. Because of this
haughtiness, many became empty exalting themselves: for arrogance and empty self-
confidence are a great demon; many of these were rejected, some were converted and
believed and submitted themselves to those who have understanding, acknowledging their
foolishness. For the rest of the same sort, there is conversion: for they were not evil, rather
stupid and without understanding. If they are converted, they will live to God; if they do not
convert, they will dwell with the women who will do evil things to them. 59
vEk de. tou/ o;rouj tou/ pe,mptou tou/ e;contoj bota,naj clwra.j kai. trace,oj o;ntoj oi`
pisteu,santej toiou/toi, eivsi\ pistoi. me,n( dusmaqei/j de. kai. auvqa,deij kai, eàutoi/j avre,skontej(
qe,lontej pa,nta ginw,skein( kai. ouvde.n o[lwj ginw,skousi) Dia. th.n auvqa,deian auvtw/n tau,thn
a`pe,sth avpV auvtw/n h` su,nesij( kai. eivsh/lqen eivj auvtou.j avfrosu,nh mwra,) vEpainou/si de.
eàutou.j w`j su,nesin e;contaj kai. qe,lousin evqelodida,skaloi ei=nai( a;fronej o;ntej) Dia.
tau,thn ou=n th.n u`yhlofrosu,nhn polloi. evkenw,qhsan u`you/ntej eàutou,j\ me,ga ga.r daimo,nio,n
evstin h` auvqa,deia kai. h` kenh. pepoi,qhsij\ evk tou,twn ou=n polloi. avpeblh,qhsan( tine.j de.
meteno,hsan kai. evpi,steusan kai. u`pe,taxan eàutou.j toi/j e;cousin su,nesin( gno,ntej th.n eàutw/n
avfrosu,nhn) ouvk evge,nonto ga.r ponhroi,(, ma/llon de. mwroi. kai. avsu,netoi) Ou-toi ou=n eva.n
metanoh,swsi( zh,sontai tw|/ qew|/\ eva.n de. mh. metanoh,swsi( katoikh,sousi meta. tw/n gunaikw/n
tw/n ponhreuome,nwn eivj auvtou,j)
The fifth mountain does not have parallels to the vision of the stones (Vis. 3)
or of the sticks (Sim. 8). Wer are introduced to people who want to be
evqelodida,skaloi, a term difficult to translate. 60 The prefix indicates the desire
to be something that one cannot be. 61 The translation must, therefore, take into
account two questions: (1) How do these people want to become teachers? (2)
Why is it not possible? As to (1), it must be observed that the Shepherd does
not say, as one would expect, “they want to be teachers,” but he repeats the
root of the verb twice. This means that a particular sort of teacher is envisaged,
one that clashes with Hermas’ idea of this role. This sort is expressed through
59
I have revised OSIEK’s translation in many points.
60
Among the various renderings I note the following ones: “spielen sich aus eigener Kraft
als Lehrer auf ” (DIBELIUS, Hirt, 630), “[ils] veuelent être docteurs de leurs propres
doctrines” (GIET, Hermas, 293), “freiwillige Lehrer” (NEYMEYR, Lehrer, 14); “self-
made/self-proclaimed teacher in contrast to one authorised by God’s people (church)”
(BDAG), “ils ont la prétention d’être docteurs” (JOLY, Hermas, 339).
61
See “evqelo-,” BDAG. The prefix has two meanings: (1) “To be or to do someth.
designedly or on purpose.” (2) “To wish to be or do someth. that a person is not or cannot
do, so that it remains a wish and nothing more.” Cf. also evqeloqrhski,a in Col 2:23.
9. Similitude 9.22.1–4 227
terms and phrases of similar meaning and whose roots occur sometimes more
than once in this short text: auvqa,deij/auvqa,deia (twice), eàutoi/j avre,skontej, the
verb qe,lw (three times), evpainou/si de. eàutou.j, u`yhlofrosu,nhn, u`you/ntej
eàutou,j. Hermas targets self-centred people, for whom being a teacher is a way
to serve themselves rather than the rest of the community. The consequences
of their attitude provide an answer to question (2): by focussing on themselves,
these teachers lack a feature that belongs to all Christians and to teachers in
particular, understanding, and are endowed with folly instead. Understanding
is an important concept in this book. 62 It is through understanding that God
created the world (Vis. 1.3.4); it is where God dwells (Mand. 10.1.6); it can be
asked from God in order to throw light on obscure matters (Sim. 9.2.6); it is
given to those who convert and conversion itself is understanding (Mand.
4.2.2). “Ignorant” (avsu,netoj) is what the Shepherd repeatedly calls Hermas
(e.g. Vis. 3.6.5; 3.8.9; 3.10.9; Mand. 10.2.3; cf. Sim. 6.3.3 [a;frwn]), who is in
constant need of receiving explanations. Understanding makes it possible to
get at the real meaning of things, which is what Hermas tries to do with his
frequent questions.
Egocentrism and lack of understanding are related: the first brings the
second about (Sim. 9.22.2). The specific characteristic of these people is that
they do not seek the recognition of the community. Osiek’s translation, “self-
authenticating teachers,” expresses well this idea. These “self-authenticating
teachers” cannot be actual teachers because they lack the necessary
recognition.
Our passage makes it clear that teachers were not appointed, 63 otherwise
Hermas could have made his attack by simply labelling them as unauthorised
teachers, a thing which he does not. Moreover, at least in Hermas’ opinion,
teachers are such in relationship to something else, the community, we may
suppose. As long as they serve the community and their teaching is accepted,
they are acknowledged as teachers. Without these conditions, they are “self-
authenticating” teachers.
The fault of these teachers is not unforgivable because they can be admitted
to the tower if they submit to those who have understanding. The fact that there
is room for repentance, here as well as in Sim. 9.19.2, suggests that for Hermas
teaching had not the same importance to be found in other works, for example
the Pastorals. Moral conduct matters more than what one may teach. The point
at issue is probably the same as the one tackled by Matt 23:8–12: desire of
power. At the time of Hermas teachers must have been held in great esteem
and enjoyed influence, though the exact nature of their prestige cannot be
established. The hypocritical teachers envisaged by Hermas did not serve other
62
See PERNVEDEN, Concept, 148, with regard to understanding and teachers.
63
PERNVEDEN, Concept, 148–49; NEYMEYR believes that Pernveden reads too much into
our passage (Lehrer, 14 n. 38).
Christians as they were supposed to, but they intended teaching as a form of
self-promotion. This moral fault led to a doctrinal one: their behaviour
deprived them of the understanding that a teacher must possess.
There are not enough clues to state that this text is an example of anti-gnostic
polemic on the part of Hermas, as it has been said. 64 Arrogance and claim to
be knowledgeable are not exclusively gnostic features.
The last text to be examined refers once again to the image of the stones coming
from the twelve mountains.
From the eighth mountain which has many springs – and all the Lord’s creation was drinking
from the springs – are believers such as these: apostles and teachers (avpo,stoloi kai.
dida,skaloi) who proclaimed (oi` khru,xantej) to the whole world and who taught (oi`
dida,xantej) the word of the Lord with reverence and holiness, who held back absolutely
nothing for evil desire but always went forward in justice and truth, as they received the
Holy Spirit. Their passage is with the angels.
The image of apostles and teachers as sources to which all creation went
presupposes not only the initial spreading of the preaching but also its
continuation. These two different tasks are expressed by the statement that
these were those “who proclaimed (oi` khru,xantej) to the whole world and who
taught (oi` dida,xantej) the word of the Lord.” The order of the two verbs in this
sentence is distributive: the apostles proclaimed and the teachers taught. We
have seen that objection can be raised that in Sim. 9.15.4 and 9.16.5 apostles
and teachers are both associated with the verb “to proclaim” and the
corresponding nominal form, without reference to teaching. Therefore, it seems
as if “to proclaim” can be used of both apostles and teachers, but our text is
unequivocal. The missionary outreach expressed by “to the whole world” fits
best the apostles. This interpretation does not imply a distinction between
kerygma and word as two separate concepts, the former referring to baptism
and the latter to post-baptismal instruction, a distinction which may be difficult
to accept in the light of Vis. 3.7.3. 65 Rather, it brings to light two different
moments in the preaching activity, the initial spreading of the word by the
apostles and the following teaching by the teachers.
Apostles and teachers are praised not only for their preaching, but also
because they did not withhold anything. There are three main explanations as
64
Cf. OSIEK, Shepherd, 247; BROX, Hirt, 347–48. The opposite opinion is expressed by
DIBELIUS, Hirt, 630, and NEYMEYR, Lehrer, 14.
65
For this reason, PERNVEDEN considers a neat distinction between proclaiming and
teaching to be dangerous (Concept, 121).
11. The Emergence of Teachers in Rome 229
to what they might have withheld. Hermas may implicitly criticise gnostic
esoteric teaching, but there are no clues in support of it. It may be question of
money, for instance some form of income from their ministry, 66 but it is not
clear why they were supposed to share it. The third and more likely solution is
that they did not hold anything back with regard to their own ministry. 67 They
preached to the full extent of their abilities and their conduct was
irreproachable. A good parallel is Vis. 3.8.11, where Hermas is ordered to
transmit all the words he has heard from the Shepherd.
The “evil desire” mentioned by the Shepherd may be connected to the “evil”
that was taught by the teachers of Sim. 9.19.2, who were people who sought
after profit. Contrary to other teachers, those who are praised in our text did
not teach expecting money in return. This is not to say that they did not get
anything from their teaching. Our text only conveys the idea that a teacher
should not ask money, but it does not forbid those who benefited from their
teaching to give it to them. If they did, it is for the time being an open question.
11. The Emergence of Teachers in Rome
Hermas is a witness to the presence of Christian teachers in Rome, to the

influence of their teaching, and to the existence of traditions about their role in
the past. The question is what are the origins of Roman Christian teachers. The
answer must be sought in the origins and early history of Roman Christianity.
How Christianity came to Rome is debated, but it is clear that it happened very
early, probably already in the thirties. 68 Christianity was not a unified
phenomenon. Since Rome was the largest town in the empire and counted
about one million inhabitants, 69 it would have been difficult to establish already
at an early date a tied organisation capable of reaching and controlling all local
Christians. Moreover, it would be odd to suppose that Christians, who
elsewhere were divided in many groups differing in outlook and doctrinal
tenets, would be united in a town which hosted the multifarious diversity of the
empire. 70 Information at our disposal about Roman Christians is scanty, 71 but
it seems that Christians were divided in a number of house-churches, each led
66
DIBELIUS, Hirt, 632. He refers to 1 Cor 9:7–15; Acts 20:33–34 and 1 Thess 2:5–6 as
comparable instances.
67
BROX, Hirt, 450–51; OSIEK, Shepherd, 248–49.
68
SCHNABEL, Mission, vol. 1, 801, 805–806.
69
On Rome in the first century see for example SCHNABEL, Mission, vol. 1, 801–803.
70
See LAMPE, Christen, 301–345.
71
GEORG SCHÖLLGEN, “Probleme der frühchristlichen Sozialgeschichte: Einwände
gegen Peter Lampes Buch über »Die stadtrömischen Christen in den ersten beiden
Jahrhunderten«,” JAC 32 (1989): 23–40, 24.
by one or more presbyters, probably most often identifiable with the owner of
the house. These house-churches had contacts with each other and in the matter
of external relations there was a sort of secretary who kept the correspondence
on behalf of Roman Christians at large. The author of 1 Clement may well have
played such a role. 72
The soil from which Roman Christianity grew was that of the Jewish
synagogues. 73 In the first century there were in Rome about 50,000 Jews and
probably at least four synagogues. 74 Philo writes that Roman Jews gathered in
houses of prayer where, inter alia, their ancestral philosophy was taught (Legat.
155–57). Jewish traditions are to be found in the background of 1 Clement and
of Hermas itself. 75 Since the first Christian generations in Rome were made of
people whose religious education stemmed from the synagogues, it is
interesting to note that there is epigraphic evidence from the catacombs for
different titles of Jewish teachers in ancient Rome, though these inscriptions
are to be dated between the third and fifth century: nomodida,skaloj (CIJ 201),
dida,skaloj kai. nomomaqh,j (CIJ 333), maqhth,j sofw/n (CIJ 508), grammateu.j
yalmw|do.j filo,nomoj, 76 grammateu,j (CIJ 7, 18, 24, 36, 53, etc.). 77
The presence of Christian teachers in Rome may well be explained
supposing that Jewish teachers embraced the message proposed by
missionaries from the East. It is also possible that among these travelling
Christians were teachers who settled in the imperial capital. There was no
formal authority that appointed them, but the authority which issued from their
own work, which some carried out or had carried out in the synagogue. Since
Hermas, about whom there is no indication that he was a teacher, must appeal
to a special revelation to confirm and correct the doctrines of some teachers, it
72
LAMPE, Chisten, 334–45.
73
SCHNABEL, Mission, vol. 1, 803–816.
74
On Jews in Rome in the first century see HERMANN LICHTENBERGER, “Jews and
Christians in Rome in the Time of Nero: Josephus and Paul in Rome,” ANRW, 26.1: 2142–
76; SCHNABEL, Mission, vol. 1, 803–805. On Jewish synagogues in the capital see Lee I.
Levine, The Ancient Synagogue: The First Thousand Years (New Haven: Yale University
Press, 2000), 97–99.
75
LAMPE, Christen, 53–63 (on Roman Jews and Christians in general), 174–82 (on the
author of 1 Clement); HELMUT KÖSTER, Introduction to the New Testament. 2. History and
Literature of Early Christianity (2nd ed.; New York: Walter de Gruyter, 2000), 63–65 (on
Hermas).
76
Inscription reported by Fasola, “Le due catacombe ebraiche,” 19–200. The term
yalmw|do,j refers to the singing of psalms in the synagogue liturgical service.
77
List in LAMPE, Christen, 61 n. 171, with the exception of the last title, about which see
BURTCHAELL, Synagogue, 252. Twenty-five out of the twenty-six epitaphs mentioning
scribes are from Rome. Full list of occurrences in BURTCHAELL, Synagogue, 252 note 130.
BURTCHAELL recalls that the title grammateu,j may indicate different roles. Dating in
LEONARD V. RUTGERS, “Überlegungen zu den jüdischen Katakomben Roms,” JAC 33
(1990): 140–57.
12. The Dispute between Marcion and Roman Teachers 231
can be suggested that arguments alone were the strength of these teachers he
targeted.
12. The Dispute between Marcion and Roman Teachers

Epiphanius of Salamis writes that Marcion presented his teaching in Rome
before a gathering of presbyters and teachers. The text reads:
In posing his question to those who were then the elders, he began so to speak at the very
beginning and made the starting point of his inquiries the following: “Tell me, what does
this mean: They do not put new wine into old skins or a piece of unshrunk cloth on an old
garment; otherwise the patch pulls away and will not fit the old material, for a bigger tear
will result?”. When the kindly and all-holy elders and teachers (presbu,teroi kai. dida,skaloi)
of the holy church of God heard the question, they replied to him with kindness, giving the
reasonable and fitting explanation: “Child, the old skins represent the hearts of the Pharisees
and scribes, inveterate in sins and unreceptive of the preaching of the gospel. And the old
garment is like Judas, who was inveterate in avarice and did not accept the proclamation of
hope in the new and holy and heavenly mystery, even though he was associated with the
eleven apostles and called by the Lord himself. He suffered a greater rupture through his
own fault, with no one else the cause of it, because his mind was not in tune with the hope
above and the heavenly calling of the future good things, instead with the things here and
the pomp, and the hope and pleasure in passing friendship (Pan. 42.2.2). 78
This passage seems to provide a most interesting example of the many disputes
that teachers presumably had been involved in. In this case, it concerned the
correct interpretation of a logion corresponding to Matt 9:16–17 par. Luke
5:36–37. This episode is rejected by Harnack 79 as a dramatic fiction. It may be
argued that an anecdote was written on the basis of a logion, which, as
Tertullian confirms (Marc. 3.15; 4.11), was known to be an important text for
Marcion. 80 Though dismissing the historicity of this meeting, Harnack believes
that the Marcion affair was handled in Rome by “presbyters and teachers, the
disciples of the apostles’ disciples.” 81 This is a reading combining presbu,teroi
kai. dida,skaloi and the preceding toi/j e;ti presbu,taij periou/si kai. avpo. tw/n
maqhtw/n tw/n avposto,lwn o`rmwme,noij, whom Marcion tried unsuccessfully to
bring to his side (Pan. 42.1.7). This harmonisation must be rejected because
the last phrase deals with only one group of people, presbyters: it is they who
were instructed by the disciples of the apostles, not the teachers, who are absent
78
Translation in PHILIP R. AMIDON, ed., The Panarion of St. Epiphanius, Bishop of
Salamis: Selected Passages (New York: Oxford University Press, 1990), 144–45. Greek text
in KARL HOLL, ed., Epiphanius II: Panarion haer. 34–64 (2nd rev. ed. by JÜRGEN DUMMER;
GCS; Berlin: Akademie Verlag, 1980).
79
HARNACK, Marcion, 27*.
80
However, the logion in question corresponds to Luke 6:43 in the account on Marcion
given by the Pseudo-Tertullian, Adversus omnia haereses 6.2.
81
HARNACK, Marcion, 26*.
from this passage. Even if Harnack may be right when he says that this episode
is anecdotal, the important question is whether Epiphanius believed that
presbyters and teachers were active in Rome at the time, the middle of the
second century. Considering that teachers are marginal characters in our
ancient sources, it would be strange if they are a gratuitous insertion. At this
point, a new question arises, whether the kai, between presbu,teroi and
dida,skaloi distinguishes two groups of people or not. In the first case, the
doctrine proposed by Marcion was assessed by presbyters and teachers; in the
second case, Marcion’s doctrine was assessed by presbyters who were also
teachers. The second interpretation is supported by the fact that the dispute is
introduced as being proposed to “presbyters.” Therefore, teachers would not
be a different group of disputants, but they are to be identified with the
presbyters. However, the first interpretation may be justified supposing that
presbyters summoned teachers because they had to tackle matters about which
they were not competent. This solution is to be preferred, otherwise, it is
difficult to see why Epiphanius felt the need to explain that presbyters were
also teaching guides. 82
13. Conclusions
The Shepherd of Hermas is a testimony to the past and contemporary

importance of early Christian teachers in Rome or at least in some communities
of the capital. The teachers of the past followed in the footprints of the apostles,
founders of communities, and strengthened them with their work. The presence
in Rome of this role in not surprising given that teaching activity was carried
out in the synagogues. At the time of Hermas, teachers taught doctrines about
topics such as forgiveness of sin, right conduct and resurrection. They do not
appear to have been appointed, but their authority derived from what they said.
Since Hermas, who was not a teacher, appeals to a revelatory experience in
order to endorse and also correct the teaching of some teachers, we can imagine
that what they said was supported by the force of their arguments alone. The
polemic against self-authenticating teachers confirms that teachers were not
appointed, but that the special talents of some people were recognised by
fellow Christians. The main feature of the self-authenticating teachers was that
they served themselves rather than the community. They taught what people
wanted to hear instead of the truth. In return, they received money or other
forms of material support. Hermas does not say that teachers should not be
supported, but that the content and the addressees of their activity must not
depend on the prospect of gain. The problem tackled by Hermas recalls to some
82
The separation between presbyters and teachers is favoured by NEYMEYR, who also
refers to the testimony of Hermas (Lehrer, 15–16).
13. Conclusions 233
extent Matt 23. The role of teachers was a means to achieve power and for this
reason their title was rejected by the evangelist.
Chapter 6
Sources of Uncertain Location
1. Hebrews
1.1 Authorship, Date and Place

Hebrews not only contains the word “teacher,” but even presents a list of
subjects, which were taught. This is very promising, but the evidence should
be handled with care, for the passage in question can be interpreted in different
ways and issues like authorship, date and place have not yet been answered. 1
Most scholars believe that the identity of the author cannot be ascertained. 2 We
can say with confidence only that the writer was well-trained in rhetoric and a
skilled interpreter of the scriptures. 3 Apollos is considered a good candidate,
though this suggestive hypothesis has no solid arguments vouching for it. 4 In
any case, it is question of a man in the light of Heb 11:32.
The date of composition is unknown. The similarities between Hebrews and
1 Clement, the use of Heb 1:5–13 passim in 1 Clem. 36.2–6, and the fact that
the writer and the addressees are second generation Christians (Heb 2:3–4)
point to a range of years between 60 and the turn of the first century. 5 Attempts
at a more precise dating are based on ambiguous clues. 6
The place of writing is debated. The addressees are a group within a
community (cf. Heb 13:17.24). 7 A number of scholars think of Rome. These
commentators point out that the greetings of those from Italy (Heb 13:24)
1
See HAROLD W. ATTRIDGE, The Epistle to the Hebrews: A Commentary on the Epistle
to the Hebrews (Hermeneia; Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1989), 10.
2
CRAIG R. KOESTER, “The Epistle to the Hebrews in Recent Study,” CurBS 2 (1994):
123–45, 128.
3
KNUT BACKHAUS, Der Hebräerbrief (RNT; Regensburg: Friedrich Pustet, 2009), 22.
4
LUKE TIMOTHY JOHNSON, Hebrews: A Commentary (Louisville: Westminster John
Knox Press, 2006), 40–44.
5
ATTRIDGE, Epistle, 6–9.
6
WILLIAM L. LANE (Hebrews [2 vols.; WBC 47; Dallas: Word Books, 1991], vol. 1, lxii–
lxvi) posits an early date, 64–68. HANS-FRIEDRICH WEISS (Der Brief an die Hebräer [KEK
15; Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1991], 76–77) favours the years between 80 and
90. The same dating is advocated by BACKHAUS, Hebräerbrief, 36.
7
Cf. LANE, Hebrews, vol. 1, liii.
1. Hebrews 235
suggest an Italian destination, though this is far from being certain. 8 The use
of the epistle by 1 Clement and the reference to the “leaders” (h`goume,nwn) in
Heb 13:17.24, a title present in Rome (1 Clem. 1.3; 21.6; Herm. Vis. 2.6; 3.9.7),
are additional clues. 9 At the same time, if the author is Apollos, Corinth would
be a more likely destination. 10 The data at our disposal are so uncertain that it
is best to leave this problem unsolved, though this means that we deprive
ourselves of the possibility of attaching whatever information on teachers we
can glean to a particular location. The author is acquainted with the recipients
(Heb 13:19b) 11 and what he writes may be used to throw light on their situation.
Probably, they were not Jews, but they were concerned with the Jewish origins
of their religion. 12
1.2 Hebrews 5:11–14

The mention of dida,skaloi is to be found within a pericope clearly delimited
(Heb 5:11–6:20). In Heb 5:10 the author begins a discussion on Jesus the high
priest according to the order of Melchizedek and resumes it in Heb 7:1. In
between there is an excursus about the difficulty of the problem to be tackled.
This section can be divided into two parts. The first is delimited by the term
nwqroi, (Heb 5:11 and 6:12) and deals with the readers’ capacity of
understanding advanced teaching, the second is an exposition of God’s
promises (Heb 6:13–20). 13 The most important passage is in the first part:
About this we have much to say that is hard to explain, since you have become dull in
understanding (nwqroi. gego,nate tai/j avkoai/j). For though by this time you ought to be
teachers (dida,skaloi), you need someone to teach you again the basic elements of the oracles
of God (dida,skein u`ma/j tina. ta. stoicei/a th/j avrch/j tw/n logi,wn tou/ qeou/). You need milk,
not solid food; for everyone who lives on milk, being still an infant, is unskilled in the word
of righteousness (a;peiroj lo,gou dikaiosu,nhj). But solid food is for the mature, for those
whose faculties have been trained by practice to distinguish good from evil (tw/n dia. th.n
e[xin ta. aivsqhth,ria gegumnasme,na evco,ntwn pro.j dia,krisin kalou/ te kai. kakou/). Therefore
let us go on toward perfection, leaving behind the basic teaching about Christ (to.n th/j avrch/j
tou/ Cristou/ lo,gon), and not laying again the foundation: repentance from dead works and
faith toward God, instruction (didach/j) about baptisms, laying on of hands, resurrection of
the dead, and eternal judgement. And we will do this, if God permits (Heb 5:11–6:3).
This extract presents a few textual problems that can be briefly dealt with. The
word tina in Heb 5:12 can be either indefinite pronoun (tina,), that is the
8
ATTRIDGE, Epistle, 10.
9
KOESTER, “Epistle,” 128.
10
JOHNSON, Hebrews, 43–44.
11
LANE, Hebrews, vol. 1, lxi.
12
BACKHAUS, Hebräerbrief, 23–24.
13
ATTRIDGE, Epistle, 156; WEISS, Brief, 328.
236 Chapter 6: Sources of Uncertain Location
subject of dida,skein, or an interrogative adjective (ti,na) referring to the

following ta. stoicei/a, but the former interpretation fits the context better. 14 In
some manuscripts (462 1912 lat syhmg) the latter form is preferred and they
accordingly change dida,skein into dida,skesqai. 15 The genitive didach/j is
replaced by an accusative in P46, B, 0150, d, in which case didach,n is
apposition to qe,melion. 16
In this text, the author of Hebrews appears as a teacher challenging his
students. Since the whole pericope is redundant with pedagogical and ethical
language typical of the time, it is likely that in this case too he draws on
contemporary images. 17 In antiquity, it was commonplace to emphasise
people’s acquaintance with a subject by saying that they should be able to teach
it. 18 By scolding his readers about their alleged inability to do so, what the
author actually does is to goad them into paying due attention to what follows. 19
The ensuing metaphor, distinguishing between milk, which is rudimentary
teaching for the immature believer, and solid food, which is advanced teaching
for the mature believer, 20 is well attested in ancient sources in connection with
different levels of instruction 21 and illustrates two phases in the Christian life
(Heb 5:11–6:3). The goal of the second phase is to become skilled in “the word
of righteousness”, an expression, which can be interpreted in several ways. 22
(1) It may indicate what infants are unable to say: “right, normal speech.” 23 (2)
It is the knowledge of God’s justice, which enables one to distinguish between
14
JAMES MOFFATT, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Epistle to the Hebrews
(ICC; Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1924), 69–70; ATTRIDGE, Epistle, 155.
15
16
The first reading is favoured, among others, by BARBARA ALAND et al., eds., Novum
Testamentum Graece (28th rev. ed.; Stuttgart: Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft, 2012), the second
one by MOFFATT, Commentary, 74–75; ATTRIDGE, Epistle, 155; LANE, Hebrews, vol. 1,
132.
17
This is also the opinion of ZIMMERMANN, Lehrer, 209–210; ATTRIDGE, Epistle, 158;
WEISS, Brief, 331–32; ERICH GRÄSSER, An die Hebräer (2 vols.; EKK 17; Zurich: Benziger
Verlag; Neukirchen: Neukirchener Verlag, 1990–1997), vol. 1, 324–25; CESLAS SPICQ,
Saint Paul: L’Épître aux Hebreux (2 vols.; EB; Paris: Gabalda, 1952), vol. 1, 143.
18
Xenophon, Cyr. 3.3.35; Plato, Symp. 189D; Philostratus, Vit. Apoll. 1.17; Seneca, Ep.
33.9. List in MOFFATT, Commentary, 70.
19
BACKHAUS, Hebräerbrief, 216–17.
20
On this metaphor see WILHELM THÜSING, “„Milch“ und „feste Speise“ (1Kor 3,1f. und
Hebr 5,11–6,3): Elementarkatechese und theologische Vertiefung im neutestamentlicher
Sicht,” TTZ 76 (1967): 233–46 and 261–80.
21
E.g. Epictetus, Diatr. 3.24.9; Philo, Agr. 2; see MOFFATT, Commentary, 70–71;
HEINRICH SCHLIER, “ga,la,” GLNT, 2: 345–50, 345–47.
22
See also LANE, Hebrews, vol. 1, 137–38; WEISS, Brief, 334–35.
23
EDUARD RIGGENBACH, Der Brief an die Hebräer (Kommentar zum Neuen Testament
14; Leipzig: A. Deichert, 1913), 143–44.
1. Hebrews 237
right and wrong. 24 (3) It corresponds to “solid food” and is the teaching of
chapters 7–10. 25 The last two points are to be preferred. 26 Those who are skilled
in the word of righteousness are able to grasp the advanced teaching of chapters
7–10 and their faculties have been trained by practice to distinguish good from
evil. These ideas are expressed through a language typical of Hellenistic
philosophy. The expression ta. aivsqhth,ria indicates the faculties required for
moral judgement 27 and it is also to be found in stoic literature as a technical
term for an organ of sense. 28 The use of the plural indicates “a plurality of
capacities for moral decision.” 29 The participle gegumnasme,na is another
philosophical term, which can be found associated with aivsqhth,rion. 30 The act
of distinguishing between good and evil is a theme occurring in the scriptures, 31
but it is better attested in Hellenistic philosophy. For instance Sextus Empiricus
thus defines that part of philosophy dealing with ethics: o[per dokei/ peri. th.n
dia,krisin tw/n te kalw/n kai. kakw/n kai. avdiafo,rwn katagi,gnesqai (Pyr.
3.168)) 32
In sum, the author of Hebrews draws on contemporary philosophical
language in order to describe the target of Christian life. The knowledge of
advanced Christian teaching and its concrete application is the lo,goj
dikaiosu,nhj, which enables believers to make appropriate decisions and
assessments in all realms of life. 33 This interpretation corresponds to the sense
of dikaiosu,nh found elsewhere in Hebrews, where it simply means “what is
right” (Heb 1:9; 11:33; 12:11).
1.3 Teaching Righteousness (Heb 5:13)

Apparently, the word “teachers” in our passage does not refer to a specific
Christian role, but it is part of a proverb. As a matter of fact, nowhere else in
the epistle do we read of community roles such as bishops, deacons, presbyters,
apostles and prophets. However, we may find a clue in favour of the
identification of the teachers mentioned in Hebrews with the teachers who are
the object of this study if we look at some of the texts examined above.
According to Matt 5:20, the righteousness of Christians, probably with
particular reference to Christian scribes, must be greater than the righteousness
24
SPICQ, Épître, vol. 2, 144. WEISS thinks of the faculty of moral judgement (Brief, 335).
25
THÜSING, “„Milch“,” 239–40.
26
For what follows cf. GRÄSSER, Hebräer, vol. 1, 329–31; LANE, Hebrews, vol. 1, 139.
27
GERHARD DELLING, “aivsqa,nomai,” GLNT, 1: 506.
28
MOFFATT, Commentary, 72.
29
LANE, Hebrews, vol. 1, 139.
30
GALEN, De dignoscendis pulsibus 3.2 (in MOFFATT, Commentary, 72).
31
Cf. Gen 2:17; 3:15; Deut 1:39; Isa 7:16 (ATTRIDGE, Epistle, 161 n. 84).
32
See MOFFATT, Commentary, 72; ATTRIDGE, Epistle, 161 n. 85.
33
Cf. WEISS, Hebräer, 329–30.
of scribes and Pharisees. In Matt 10:41 the “righteous” may be the person who
makes other people righteous, that is a teacher. In Did. 11.1–2 we read that
only those visitors whose teachings contribute to righteousness and to the
knowledge of God should be welcomed. Righteousness probably is the
capacity, given through teaching, of choosing the right path within the frame
of the ethic of the tract on the “Two Ways” (Did. 1–6). In Hebrews too we find
“righteousness” in association with teaching. The proverbial expression
employed in Heb 5:12 seems to have been selected in order to convey the idea
that teachers train believers to choose the right path.
1.4 The Rudiments of Christianity (Heb 6:1–3)

The first two verses of chapter six present a list of teaching topics. The
introductory phrase, to.n th/j avrch/j tou/ Cristou/ lo,gon, can be translated
differently according to the way it is construed. The genitive th/j avrch/j refers
either to “basic teaching” or to “the beginnings of Christ.” In the light of the
parallel phrase in Heb 5:12, ta. stoicei/a th/j avrch/j tw/n logi,wn tou/ qeou/, the
first alternative is to be preferred. 34 The second genitive, tou/ Cristou/, is either
subjective, the teaching coming from Christ, or objective, the teaching about
Christ. The same parallel phrase supports the latter solution. 35 Many agree that
this “initial word about Christ” gives the rudiments of Christian instruction to
new converts. 36 These topics are the beginning (th/j avrch/j) and the foundation
(qeme,lion) of this instruction, which the author will not deal with in order to
move to its end (cf. th.n teleio,thta). 37 It is usually observed that the list of six
34
35
GRÄSSER, Hebräer, vol. 1, 333; cf. WEISS, Brief, 336. The meaning of the two phrases
is not necessarily identical (LANE, Hebrews, vol. 1, 140), but what matters is that the genitive
in the first one indicates the object of teaching.
36
ANTHONY R. CROSS, “The Meaning of ‘Baptisms’ in Hebrews 6.2,” in Dimensions of
Baptism: Biblical and Theological Studies (ed. ANTHONY R. CROSS and STANLEY E.
PORTER; JSNTSup 234; London: Sheffield Academic Press, 2002), 163–86, 140 n. 11.
WEISS writes of “Elementarunterricht” and “Katechumenatsunterricht” (Brief, 332–33).
37
The initial “therefore” (dio,) is apparently bizarre: what precedes seems to imply that
the author will teach the basics before moving on to advanced instruction, but he now says
that he will skip the rudiments. It has been suggested that Heb 5:11–14 is ironical and is
meant to push the audience to go forward (LANE, Hebrews, vol. 1, 139). SIMON J.
KISTEMAKER suggests that the author is an expert psychologist who rouses his audience by
inducing shame (Exposition of the Epistle to the Hebrews [New Testament Commentary;
Welwyn: Evangelical Press, 1984], 152). According to THÜSING, “Milch,” 240–41, hard
food is the right nourishment for Christians who have become “sluggish” (nwqroi, in Heb
6:12; cf. Heb 5:11). Another solution is that Judaism, which would be represented by the six
topics, is to be abandoned in favour of Christianity (BERNARD COLLINS, “Tentatur nova
interpretatio Heb. 5,11–6,8,” VD 26 [1948]: 144–51 and 193–206, 199–200).
1. Hebrews 239
topics contains nothing properly Christian 38 and that it may well have belonged
to Jewish instruction provided to God-fearers. 39 There is nothing strange in it
if the addressees are Gentiles: they would require to be instructed in the basics
of Jewish religion before moving forward to the specific contribution of
Christianity. 40
The six topics are arranged in groups of two: (1) “repentance from dead
works and faith toward God,” (2) “instruction about baptisms and laying on of
hands” (3) “resurrection of the dead and eternal judgement.” The last two
groups depend on “teaching.” If we accept the reading didach,n, they are to be
considered apposition of qeme,lion, thus clarifying what the foundation is
about. 41 In any case, the whole series is under the rubric of “the basic teaching
about Christ.” This basic teaching seems to mirror the three phases of the
believer’s life: conversion, entrance into the community, the end of time. 42
There is no reason to believe that this short teaching program is a creation of
the author of Hebrews. It is traditional material, which he lists in order to make
his readers remember what they have already been taught. 43 This may be borne
out by a comparison with the Didache. 44 The first four chapters, the section on
the “Two Ways”, deal with the behaviour befitting a Christian. This part
corresponds to the first group of Heb 6:1. The works of death do not indicate
the work of the law, but behaviour unfitting a Christian as stemming from a
pagan life (cf. Heb 9:14). 45 It is not in these topics that the author of Hebrews
is interested, but in bringing his readers towards perfection, if God permits it
(Heb 6:3). 46
38
For this reason ATTRIDGE believes that tou/ Cristou/ in Heb 6:1 is subjective genitive
(Epistle, 162). This was also the opinion of J. CLIFFORD ADAMS, “Exegesis of Hebrews VI.
1f.,” NTS 13 (1966–67): 378–85. For a critique of Adams see GRÄSSER, Hebräer, vol. 1,
335 n. 145.
39
THÜSING, “Milch,” 241–42; GRÄSSER, Hebräer, vol. 1, 335–36; WEISS, Brief, 71.
40
WEISS, Brief, 337; GRÄSSER, Hebräer, vol. 1, 335–36.
41
42
Cf. SPICQ, Épître, vol. 1, 147; GRÄSSER, Hebräer, vol. 1, 344–45.
43
For what concerns the interpretation of the single elements see THÜSING, “Milch,”
245–46; GRÄSSER, Hebräer, vol. 1, 337–43.
44
Cf. THÜSING, “Milch,” 243.
45
More precisely, it may be the cult of pagan deities (GRÄSSER, Hebräer, vol. 1, 338–
39; WEISS, Brief, 337), which are dead; it can also be works leading to death, that is sin
(MOFFATT, Commentary, 74; ATTRIDGE, Epistle, 164).
46
See GRÄSSER, Hebräer, vol. 1, 343–44: verse 3 is not about postponing the teaching
of the basics to another time.
1.5 No Repentance (Heb 6:4–12)

The interpretation of Heb 6:4–12, in particular of verses 4–8, is the object of
intense debate because of its far-reaching theological consequences. The
construction of the long sentence in Heb 6:4–6 is open to different
possibilities, 47 but its sense is sufficiently clear: there is no second repentance
for those who have fallen away. These people are not doomed because of single
trespasses, 48 but for abandoning Christ, that is for apostasy (cf. Heb 3:12). 49
This interpretation is supported by Heb 10:26–31, which focuses on those who
“sin after having received the knowledge of the truth” (Heb 10:26). The present
tense of the participle a`martano,ntwn (cf. avnastaurou/ntaj and
paradeigmati,zontaj in Heb 6:6) indicates a continuous opposition to Christ, 50
even after having received “the knowledge of the truth.” This is probably a
fixed expression (cf. 1 Tim 2:4; 2 Tim 2:25; 3:7; Titus 1:1; cf. 2 Pet 1:2–3.8;
2:20; Ignatius, Eph. 6:2, Hermas, Sim. 8.9.1) 51 and implies some sort of
doctrinal transmission, whose contents must be those specified in Heb 6:1–2.
The people who continuously sinned in spite of knowing the truth “have
spurned the Son of God, profaned the blood of the covenant by which they
were sanctified, and outraged the Spirit of grace” (Heb 10:29). What is
envisaged here is a full-fledged break of the commitment to Christian faith,
presumably either by (re-)turning to Judaism 52 or to pagan cults. For those who
break away, there is no way back to the Christian community. The reason is
christological: the once-and-for-all sacrifice of Christ the high priest implies a
once-and-for-all chance for repentance. 53 This gives us the reason why the
rudiments of faith are not to be taught again: these are given only to new
converts, but they cannot be repeated to people who once belonged to the
community and want to belong again, because there is no second chance. 54
The sternness of the author seems to commentators to be excessive.
Probably, he was not interested in dogmatics, but only in bringing home the
point that his addressees should not fall away. The impossibility of second
47
GOLDHAHN-MÜLLER, Die Grenze, 89–92.
48
GOLDHAHN-MÜLLER, Grenze, 97–98, takes also into account serious sins.
49
ATTRIDGE, Epistle, 166–72; BACKHAUS, Hebräerbrief, 228; KISTEMAKER, Exposition,
160; LANE, Hebrews, vol. 1, 142; WEISS, Brief, 345–47; GRÄSSER, Hebräer, vol. 1, 355.
For POSCHMANN, Paenitentia, 42–43, these verses say that the second penitence is
impossible only for those who have fallen away in full conscience.
50
LANE, Hebrews, vol. 1, 292; cf. MOFFATT, Commentary, 149.
51
LANE, Hebrews, vol. 1, 292–93; GOLDHAHN-MÜLLER, Grenze, 98.
52
COLLINS, “Interpretatio,” 201–205; cf. LANE, Hebrews, vol. 1, 142.
53
54
LANE, Hebrews, vol. 1, 142; GRÄSSER, Hebräer, vol. 1, 346–47.
1. Hebrews 241
repentance, therefore, should be interpreted within a paraenetic context. 55 The

encouraging words that follow verses 4–8 suggest that what precedes was
intended to warn the addressees against the risks of a weak faith and to confirm
them in their good deeds.
Hebrews 6:4–8 may be connected to an important text on dida,skaloi:
Hermas, Mand. 4.3.1. In this passage Hermas recalls that some teachers told
him that a second repentance after sin is impossible. Commentators have
observed the resemblance of these two texts and proposed that Hermas intends
to water down Hebrew’s rigorist theology through some form of compromise
between forgiveness and non-forgiveness of sins. 56 The resemblance, in fact,
may be more extensive. (1) Both texts deal with the question of post-baptismal
sin and take a rigorist stance to second repentance. (2) Hermas writes in Rome
and Hebrews is sometimes considered as addressing Roman Christians around
the same time or probably earlier. (3) “Teachers” are mentioned in connection
with repentance in the Mandate and in the proximity to an exposition on
repentance in Hebrews. However, there are also differences. (1) The kind of
fault envisaged in these two texts is not the same. For Hermas, it is question of
individual sins, some of which were committed by himself. For Hebrews it is
question of apostasy. (2) The teachers mentioned in Hebrews may be the
protagonists of a proverbial image rather than members of the Christian
community. Against point (1) it can be said that Hermas is not a refined
theologian like the author of Hebrews and that he might have misunderstood
what the teachers he met taught. Alternatively, it can be said that he
deliberately interpreted this doctrine in a larger sense in order to make it clear
to all sinners that they had a second chance. As to (2), we have seen that the
mention of teachers may be deliberate. The evidence is far from being
conclusive, but it suggests that teachers in Hermas are colleagues, though not
contemporaries, of the writer of Hebrews.
1.6 Teachers and Leaders (Heb 13:7.17)

The last relevant clues occur in chapter 13, where we find the word “leaders”
(h`gou,menoi in Heb 13:7.17) in two passages apparently associated with
teaching. The first one contains an exhortation to the readers: “Remember your
leaders, those who spoke the word of God to you; consider the outcome of their
way of life, and imitate their faith.” The word h`gou,menoi in profane and
55
ANDRIES H. SNYMAN, “Hebrews 6.4–6: From a Semiotic Discourse Perspective,” in
Discourse Analysis and the New Testament: Approaches and Results (ed. STANLEY E.
PORTER and JEFFREY T. REED; JSNTSup 170; Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1999),
354–68; cf. WEISS, Brief, 348–49. Against this interpretation, GOLDHAHN-MÜLLER insists
on the objective impossibility of second repentance (Grenze, 86–93).
56
BROWN, Antioch, 204; GOLDHAHN-MÜLLER, Grenze, 245–47.
religious literature indicates people who hold a leading position. 57 It is not a

specific title, but it has a wide range of employment. 58 In our quotation the
writer does not seem interested in outlining the hierarchical structure of the
community or in enhancing the power of its leaders by referring to divine or
human commission. Roles are not his concern. In Heb 2:3, those who heard the
word of salvation coming through Jesus are not called “apostles” or “disciples”,
as one may expect, but “hearers.” It is the living transmission of the word that
matters to the writer, not the position of the transmitters. 59 Therefore, it is
unlikely that h`gou,menoi is to be interpreted in a technical way 60 and likely that
this word was chosen precisely for its generic meaning. 61 As to the actual
functions of these leaders, some information may be gleaned from what
follows. The leaders are those who preached the word of God. This is the
source of their authority: it is their work as preachers the basis of their position
of leadership. 62 They must have belonged to the chain of transmission that
began with the hearers of Heb 2:3. Since these leaders, whose life must be the
object of imitation, belong to the past, their preaching is probably the one that
founded the community or strengthened it.
The second mention of h`gou,menoi occurs after a difficult passage attacking
“all kinds of strange teachings” (Heb 13:9: didacai/j poiki,laij kai. xe,naij).
The target is likely to be food laws or some form of cultic dining through which
the readers mistakenly believed to obtain God’s grace. 63 The term
“strange”/“foreign” may not necessarily indicate something stemming from
outside the community, but doctrines whose fault is to be alien to the only true
teaching, that of Christ as exposed by the author of Hebrews. The h`gou,menoi
of Heb 13:17 are not deceased leaders, but living protagonists: “Obey your
leaders and submit to them, for they are keeping watch over your souls and will
give an account. Let them do this with joy and not with sighing – for that would
be harmful to you.”
There is nothing in the way of considering “leaders” as a qualification
attributed to teachers and there is some evidence in favour of it, though the
author might have had in mind other roles too. If this proposal, which is only
tentative, is correct, teachers are to be placed at the origins of the community
and to be considered a living force in its subsequent life.
57
SPICQ, Épître, vol. 2, 420; GRÄSSER, Hebräer, vol. 2, 368.
58
BACKHAUS, Hebräerbrief, 465.
59
Cf. GRÄSSER, Hebräer, vol. 1, 106–107; vol. 2, 368–69.
60
LANE, Hebrews, vol. 2, 526; GRÄSSER, Hebräer, vol. 2, 368; contra WEISS, Brief, 708,
though he adds that there is no question of formal recognition.
61
Cf. GRÄSSER, Hebräer, vol. 2, 369.
62
GRÄSSER, Hebräer vol. 2, 368–69; LANE, Hebrews, vol. 2, 526–27.
63
LANE, Hebrews, vol. 2, 530–53.
2. 2 Peter 243
1.7 Conclusions
In Heb 5:11–6:12 teachers are explicitly mentioned and the contents of their
teaching are listed. Though the context of this mention is that of a topos, there
are clues suggesting that the writer of Hebrews actually thought of Christian
teachers and of their work. If this is correct, we see that teachers were engaged
in two realms: imparting the basics of Jewish faith to pagan catechumens and
advanced teaching, including a doctrine on repentance, which is the main topic
of The Shepherd of Hermas. It is also possible that teachers played a leading
role in establishing the community to which the epistle was addressed.
2. 2 Peter
2.1 Introduction
Second Peter contains a word which is an hapax in the entire New Testament
and which does not feature in the Septuagint: yeudodida,skaloi (2 Pet 2:1). The
thrust of this letter seems to consist in contrasting their work and saving its
recipients from error and misconduct. The identity of these “false teachers” is
nowhere stated and the very content of their troublesome teaching is open to
discussion. As a matter of fact, much concerning this letter is still unsettled,
including the location of its addressees.
2.2 Authorship, Date and Place

Though the name of the author appears at the very beginning of this document
together with a clear statement as to his relationship with Jesus, doubts on the
authenticity of 2 Peter have been raised since patristic times and today the
majority of scholars sees this work as pseudepigraphical. 64
The question of authorship is decisive for the question of date. If the author
is Peter, the letter was written before his death, which occurred either in 68
during Nero’s persecutions, according to tradition, or some time later. If the
work, as assumed in this book, is pseudepigraphical, 2 Peter was written
probably before 110 and surely before 140, being this span of years the time in
64
LEWIS R. DONELSON, “Gathering Apostolic Voices: Who Wrote 1 and 2 Peter and
Jude”, in Reading 1–2 Peter and Jude: A Resource for Students (ed. ERIC F. MASON and
TROY W. MARTIN; Resources for Biblical Studies 77; Atlanta: Society of Biblical Literature,
2014), 11–26; RUTH ANNE REESE, 2 Peter & Jude (The Horizons New Testament
Commentary; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2007), 115–18. An important dissenting voice is
GENE L. GREEN, Jude & 2 Peter (Baker Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament;
Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2008), 139–50.
which the Apocalypse of Peter, which draws on our letter, was composed. 65
As to the location of the addressees, if they are the same as those mentioned
in 1 Peter, they lived in northwest Asia Minor. However, differences in style
make it unlikely that the two letters were written by the same hand. In this case,
judging from the acquaintance with Greco-Roman culture that is expected of
the readers and the paucity of references to Jewish literature, one can say that
it is question of predominantly Gentile-Christians. 66
2.3 “False Teachers”

Second Peter 2:1 reads: “But false prophets also arose among the people, just
as there will be false teachers among you, who will secretly bring in destructive
opinions.” This chapter continues with a virulent attack on the false teachers,
whose behaviour and doctrines are object of condemnation, but unfortunately
not of adequate description. The expression “false prophets” occurs only once
in the Old Testament (Zech 13:2), but the concept is often employed (1 Kgs
22:22–23; 2 Chr 18:21–22; Jer 14:14–15; 23:25–26.32; 34:15, Ezek 13:9;
22:28). In 2 Peter “false teachers” are the typological fulfillment of “false
prophets.” 67 Though their arrival is postponed to the future, they are much
present and alive and a source of deep concern (2 Pet 10b–22). Regarding their
behavior, the author says that they have abandoned the “way of truth (o`do.j th/j
avlhqei,aj)” (2 Pet 2:2), the “straight way (euvqei/a o`do,j)” (2 Pet 2:15), the “way
of righteousness (o`do.j th/j dikaiosu,nh)” (2 Pet 2:22). They do not follow moral
law (2 Pet 2:21), but they give full swing to their desire for sex, food and drink
(2 Pet 2:2.10.13.14.18). They are “slaves of corruption” and exploit people to
satisfy their greed (2 Pet 2:3.14). These charges are commonplaces authors
employed in antiquity to vilify adversaries (vituperatio) and it is doubtful
whether they correspond to reality. 68 The doctrinal charges are less equivocal,
though still not so clear as one may wish. According to the author, the false
teachers do not accept any longer the rule of Jesus (2 Pet 2:10), even though
he bought them free from slavery (2 Pet 2:1). They do not believe in the
inspiration of the prophets (2 Pet 1:20–21) and twist the doctrines of Paul (2
Pet 3:15–16). The most serious charge is that, seeing that the parousia is
delayed, they claim that the teaching on the second coming and on the final
judgement has been invented by its preachers (2 Pet 1:16; 3:3–10). The
consequence of rejecting the doctrine of the final judgement is that the false
teachers feel justified to misbehave. This they call “freedom” (2 Pet 2:19) and
65
PETER H. DAVIDS, The Letters of 2 Peter and Jude (The Pillar New Testament
Commentary; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2006), 130–31.
66
DAVIDS, Letters, 132–33.
67
GREEN, Jude, 237.
68
GREEN, Jude, 151, believes that it is not only question of commonplaces, but also of
real misconduct. Davids, Letters, 223, is of the same opinion.
2. 2 Peter 245
teach it to people who have only recently turned Christians (2 Pet 2:19). This
freedom covers both sexual behavior and disobedience to authority (2 Pet 2:10;
3:17). The truth of the matter is that it is not freedom but a form of slavery
what they preach (2 Pet 2:21). These teachers come from inside the community
(2 Pet 2:13) and this is surely one important reason why the author of the letter
is so virulent in criticising them. They bring destructive opinions, but they will
be destroyed themselves (2 Pet 2:1 and 2:12), they are like animals, who are
“born to be caught and killed” (2 Pet 2:12), and darkness is in store for them
(2 Pet 2:17).
The identity of the false teachers has been debated for a long time. It was
usually believed that they were gnostics, but a new interpretation emerged with
the work of Jerome H. Neyrey. 69 He observed that the problem of the letter is
theodicy and that the solution advocated by the false teachers recalls epicurean
views. Epicureans did not believe that the deity is troubled by human affairs
and that judgement is brought upon the unrighteous. As a consequence, humans
are free from fear of punishment or expectation of a reward. There is no
doctrine of a life after death either. These ideas were not solely Greek but well
attested in Judaism too. Josephus explicitly ascribed this epicurean teaching to
the Sadducees and it is clearly present in Targum Pseudo-Jonathan to Gen. 4:8.
Pirqe Abot 2.18 warns against Epicurus’ philosophy, possibly with regard to
his denial of after-life. It is likely that the false teachers of 2 Peter were either
under the spell of Epicurus or held comparable views. 70 It is also likely that the
problem tackled by our letter is connected with the denial of bodily
resurrection, which we found preached in 2 Tim 2:18; cf. Phil. 7.1; Magn. 9.1;
Smyrn. 1.1; 3; 4.2; Sim. 5.7.2). Though this is not the same as the denial of
after-life, what is common is the belief that (1) death marks the end of the body;
(2) believers can behave as they please either because they have experienced
spiritual resurrection in this life or because they have nothing to fear after their
death; (3) Jesus was not raised from the dead, otherwise God would do the
same with his followers. Once again, we find teachers challenging one of the
most important doctrines held by early Christians, that good behaviour will be
rewarded with bodily resurrection.
Second Peter does not have theological arguments to disprove the doctrines
of the false teachers, but it has to resort to exempla from the Old Testament,
which show how God is merciless towards the unrighteous and merciful
towards the righteous (2 Pet 2:4–10). Whether the author managed to persuade
69
JOHN NEYREY, “The Form and the Background of the Polemic in 2 Peter”, JBL 99
(1980), 417–31.
70
DAVID, Letters, 135. GREEN, Jude, 157–59, does not accept that these views could be
found among Christians who believed in God, but the fact remains that they were to be found
among (other) Jews. THOMAS SCOTT CAULLEY (“‘They Promise Them Freedom’: Once
again, the yeudodida,skaloi in 2 Peter,” ZNT 99 [2008], 128–38) thinks that our author was
worried about the risk of assimilation.
the recipients of this letter is unknown, but its acceptance in the canon and the
subsequent history of early Christianity are proofs that in the long run these
teachers lost their battle. The letter, however, is an interesting witness to the
history of early Christian teachers. By using the term yeudodida,skaloi our
author acknowledges that they were called dida,skaloi by their supporters and
let us understand that true teachers were such not in light of an appointment,
but of the response they got from their disciples. Moreover, we see that these
teachers were free to move around and spread their views without fearing that
disciplinary measures could be taken against them. In third place they were
open to the influence of ideas that challenged what others saw as the main
tenets of faith in Christ.
3. Epistle of Barnabas
The Epistle of Barnabas is a letter 71 or a tract dressed in the form of a letter, 72

dealing with a number of issues concerning the interpretation of the the
scriptures, Jewish rituals and life-conduct. Its author claims that he will not
address his readers as a teacher. Once again, the role of teacher is problematic.
3.1 Date and Place

The dating of Barnabas mainly depends on two debated passages, Barn. 4.3–
5, where three quotations are applied to contemporary history, 73 and Barn.
16.3–4, where it is apparently question of Jewish hope of rebuilding the
Temple. The dating varies according to the interpretation of these texts, but
generally this work is put between the years 80 and 130. 74
71
REIDAR HVALVIK holds that this work was a “literary letter” used to convey some
material from the author’s lectures (The Struggle for Scripture and Covenant: The Purpose
of the Epistle of Barnabas and Jewish-Christian Competition in the Second Century [WUNT
II/82; Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1996], 66–81). For JAMES CARLETON PAGET, it is a homily
addressed to one or more communities (The Epistle of Barnabas: Outlook and Background
[WUNT II/64; Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1994], 42–45).
72
FERDINAND R. PROSTMEIER, Der Barnabasbrief (KAV 8; Göttingen: Vandenhoeck &
Ruprecht, 1999), 86–89. PIERRE PRIGENT believes that Barnabas is made out of several
tracts (in idem and ROBERT A. KRAFT, eds., Épître de Barnabé [SC 172; Paris: Cerf, 1971],
9–10). KLAUS WENGST writes of “in Briefform gekleidetes Propagandaschreiben”
(Tradition und Theologie des Barnabasbriefes [Arbeiten zur Kirchengeschichte 42; Berlin:
Walter de Gruyter, 1971], 104).
73
They are assigned to Henoch, a prophet and Daniel, but their real source is debated
(PRIGENT, Épître, 92–95 n. 3)
74
See PAGET, Epistle, 9. PAGET himself dates the letter to Nerva’s reign, 96–98 (Epistle,
9–30). LESLIE W. BARNARD, proposes 118–120, early in Hadrian’s reign (“The ‘Epistle of
3. Epistle of Barnabas 247
If this is not a real letter, the place of writing coincides with that of reception. 75
The composition of Barnabas may have taken place in Asia Minor, 76 Syria-
Palestine 77 or Egypt, 78 but so far no really cogent argument has been put
forward.
3.2 Authorship: A Teacher?

The identity of the author is beyond recovery. 79 It is a man (Barn. 1.8) and
probably a Gentile-Christian, because in Barn. 14.5 and 16.7 he includes
himself among the Gentiles. 80 Proposals that his exegetical expertise would be
evidence that he was a converted rabbi 81 can be dismissed. The exegetical
methods employed in Barnabas may reveal more about the origins of its
sources than about the affiliation of its writer. His knowledge of Jewish
exegesis and rituals is mediated.
The issue of the material employed by Barnabas and the extent of his own
contribution is debated, but it is fairly certain that the two passages containing
the word “teacher” are his own work. 82 These two texts, in which Barnabas
seems to discard the role of teacher, are actually the very evidence used by
many a commentator to say that he was indeed a teacher.
3.3 Barnabas 1.8

The first passage reads:
Accordingly, since I have concluded that if I care enough about you to share something of
what I have received (me,roj ti metadou/nai avfV ou- e;labon), I will be rewarded for having
ministered to such spirits, I have hastened to send you a brief note, so that along with your
faith you might have perfect knowledge as well ( i[na meta. th/j pi,stewj u`mw/n telei,an e;chte
th.n gnw/sin). Well, then, there are three basic doctrines of the Lord: the hope of life, which
is the beginning and the end of our faith; and righteousness (dikaiosu,nh), which is the
beginning and the end of judgment; and a glad and rejoicing love, which is the testimony of
Barnabas’ and Its Contemporary Setting,” ANRW 27.1: 159–207, 173–80); PRIGENT, Épître,
25–27, suggests the second quarter of the second century and PROSTMEIER, Barnabasbrief,
111–19, the years 130–32, just before the Second Jewish War.
75
PROSTMEIER, Barnabasbrief, 119.
76
WENGST, Tradition, 113–18.
77
PRIGENT, Épître, 20–24.
78
BARNARD, “Epistle”; PAGET, Epistle, 30–42; PROSTMEIER, Barnabasbrief, 119–30.
79
PROSTMEIER, Barnabasbrief, 130. I will refer to him by his fictitious name, Barnabas.
80
PRIGENT, Épître, 28; HVALVIK, Struggle, 43–44. Brief discussion on the question of
the ethnic origins of Barnabas in PAGET, Epistle, 7–9.
81
See BARNARD, “Epistle.”
82
Barnabas 1.8 belongs to the introduction, which cannot be but Barnabas’ work.
Barnabas 4.9 is a seam employed by the author to join different materials (WENGST,
Tradition, 14–17; PAGET, Epistle, 85–86).
works of righteousness (dikaiosu,nh). For the Master has made known to us through the
prophets things past and things present, and has given us a foretaste of things to come.
Consequently, when we see these things come to pass, one thing after the other just as he
predicted, we ought to make a richer and loftier offering out of reverence for him. For my
part, not as a teacher but as one of you (evgw. de,( ouvc w`j dida,skaloj avllV w`j ei-j evx u`mw/n), I
will point out a few things that will cheer you up in the present circumstances (Barn. 1.5–
8). 83
The goal of the epistle is clearly stated. Its author wants to help his readers see
how the prophecies of Moses have been fulfilled in order to lead them to perfect
knowledge. He believes that the achievement of this goal is facilitated by his
claim that he will not act as a teacher. It is important to observe that he does
not say that he is not a teacher, but that he will not propose his teaching as a
teacher would do. This disclaim is considered by most commentators a
rhetorical device and evidence that the author is in fact a teacher. The
interpretation of our passage, however, is debated. Many say that it is a
protestation of humility. 84 The author would have felt his status as a teacher to
be an “emotional buffer,” 85 which hindered a close relationship with his
readers. 86 Moreover, since Jewish teachers explained their past as salvation
history, it is understandable that a writer who opposed this interpretation did
not want to have anything to do with such a role. 87 Other commentators assume
that teachers did not enjoy a good reputation and that it was necessary for
Barnabas to keep distance from them. 88 We may think that teachers who
extolled their status were likely to promote their own interests rather than those
of their disciples. Therefore, they might have kept some distance from other
believers and, as a consequence, they might have been disdained. As many
have pointed out, Barn. 1.8 is likely to depend on the same polemical tradition
as Matt 23:8. 89 These two texts share two important elements. First, they do
not target the role of teacher in itself, but the fact that it is showed off. Second,
the relationship between teacher and disciple is replaced by a relationship
between equals (cf. Barn. 4.6).
83
English quotations and Greek text from HOLMES, The Apostolic Fathers.
84
E.g. VAN DEN EYNDE, Normes, 96–97; CAMPENHAUSEN, Amt, 214; WENGST,
Tradition, 12; PRIGENT, Épître, 28.
85
PAGET, Epistle, 85–86. He adds that it may also be a “conventional apology for
assuming to teach his addressees anything” (Epistle, 86). JONATHAN A. DRAPER sees
Barnabas’ claim as an ironical statement, which is part of a subversive paraenesis meant to
recast the baptismal teaching of the “Two Ways” section (Barn. 18–21) into advanced gnosis
(“Barnabas and the Riddle of the Didache Revisited,” JSNT 58 [1995]: 89–113, 108).
86
HVALVIK, Struggle, 47.
87
PROSTMEIER, Barnabasbrief, 160 n. 98.
88
Cf. ZIMMERMANN, Lehrer, 210–11; NEYMEYR, Lehrer, 172–73.
89
BARNARD, “Epistle,” 191; HVALVIK, Struggle, 47–48; NEYMEYR, Lehrer, 174–77.
A different explanation is put forward by Prostmeier, who advocates the

view that Barnabas lays emphasis not on his authority but on that of the
material he transmits, with regard to which he is only a tradent. This is also
why the writing is anonymous: the author understands himself as a transmitter
of the authentic tradition, not as the creator of a new one. 90
3.4 Barnabas 4.9

The second passage in which Barnabas rejects the title of teacher reads as
follows: “Though I would like to write a great deal more, not as a teacher (ouvc
w`j dida,skaloj), but as befits one who does not like to leave out anything we
possess, nevertheless I hasten to move along‒your devote servant (peri,yhma
u`mw/n)” (Barn. 4.9). This time it seems that teachers had the reputation of
keeping distance from their disciples by withholding part of their knowledge,
a theme we have already seen in Sim. 9.25.1–2. By doing so, they kept their
listeners in permanent need of their instruction, which we may suppose was not
given for free. This attitude explains some of the reasons behind early Christian
polemic against teachers, accused of exploiting their role for gain and
prestige. 91 However, it is also possible that Barnabas simply rejects the role of
a master whom the disciples should serve, according to the contemporary
custom, and proposes himself to his readers as a servant. This attitude is also
found in Matt 23:8, where the relationship teacher-disciples is replaced by one
based on brotherhood.
3.4 Barnabas 9.9 and 21.6

Besides being a rhetorical protestation of humility, Barnabas’ disclaim may be
elucidated also in another way. We read in Barn. 9.9: “The one who placed
within us the implanted gift of his convenant (th.n e;mfuton dwrea.n th/j didach/j
auvtou/) understands. No one has ever learned form me a more reliable word, but
I know that you are worthy of it.” A similar phrase occurs in Barn. 1.2: “so
deeply implanted is the grace of the spiritual gift you have received” (e;mfuton
th/j dwrea/j pneumatikh/j ca,rin eivlh,fate). 92 This gift is likely to be the
revelation entrusted by God to Christians (Barn. 1.7; 5.3; 7.1; cf. 16.9). 93 Our
passages do not say that every Christian knows it fully, but that it is accessible
to Christians through the help of people like Barnabas (cf. Barn. 1.8; 9.9). It is
noteworthy that the agent who planted the gift is not the catechetical instructor,
90
PROSTMEIER, Barnabasbrief, 130–31; 159–60.
91
Cf. NEYMEYR, Lehrer, 173–77.
92
Both here and in Barn. 9.9 the gift may have been bestowed in baptismal catechesis
(cf. Rom 6:5): PRIGENT, Épître, 73 n. 3; PROSTMEIER, Barnabasbrief, 371.
93
but God. The same concept is explicitly brought to light in Barn. 21.6: “Be
instructed by God (qeodi,daktoi), seeking out what the Lord seeks from you and
then doing it, in order that you may be found faithful in the day of judgment.”
The rare term qeodi,daktoi occurs in previous literature only in 1 Thess 4:9. 94
Barnabas makes it clear that the source of teaching is God. The imperative
gi,nesqe expresses the notion that being qeodi,daktoi is a goal. 95 This consists
in being taught directly by God without the mediation of a human teacher. 96 Its
achievement is facilitated by the work of Barnabas: “And if there is any
remembrance of what is good, remember me when you meditate 97 on these
things, in order that my desire and vigilance may lead to some good result; I
ask you this as a favor” (Barn. 21.7).
The second reason for the disclaim is a familiar theme: there is only one
teacher, God. Barnabas does not follow other Christian writers in employing
this theme polemically in order to discredit the teaching of his adversaries, but
in order to support the authenticity and authority of what he writes.
3.5 Teacher’s Language

There are some more clues showing that Barnabas was indeed a teacher. One
of them is the recurrent use of the verb manqa,nw in didactic contexts (Barn. 5.5;
6.9; 9.7; 9.8; 9.9; 14.4; 16.2; 16.7; 16.8; 21.1). The underlying teacher-disciple
relationship is stressed by the fact that the form which is always employed with
two exceptions (Barn. 9.9 and 21.1) is the imperative ma,qete. This is but one
instance of imperatives and phrases typical of a teacher-disciple relationship
(e.g. prose,cete in Barn. 7.4; 7.6; 7.7; 7.9; 15.4; 16.8; avllV evrei/j in Barn. 9.6). 98
Furthermore, Barnabas does call his readers not only “brothers,” but also
“children” (Barn. 7.1; 9.7; 15.4; 21.9). 99 It is clear that, in spite of his disclaims,
Barnabas perceives himself as a teacher and that he wants his tract to be read
as a teacher’s work.
3.6 Transmission
Commentators put forward another clue in support of the hypothesis that
Barnabas was a teacher, namely that he transmits material he has received. The
argument goes that teachers are tradents, and since Barnabas is a tradent,
94
See STEPHEN WITMER, “qeodi,daktoi in 1 Thessalonians: A Pauline Neologism,” NTS
52 (2006): 239–50.
95
PROSTMEIER, Barnabasbrief, 573–74.
96
DRAPER, “Barnabas,” 110.
97
“Mediate” in HOLMES’ translation.
98
See the longer list in WENGST, Tradition, 55.
99
See Hvalvik, STRUGGLE, 46; PROSTMEIER, Barnabasbrief, 146–49.
Barnabas is a teacher. 100 The statement that teachers are tradents must be
demonstrated from the texts, rather than being used to interpret them. In the
case of Barnabas, we have already gathered enough clues to consider him a
teacher. The second stage of this inquiry is to see whether his teaching activity
was focussed on transmission of pre-extant material and how the word
“teacher” is to be intended.
That the epistle makes use of sources is beyond question. Barnabas employs
seams in order to join different blocks of material and other forms of
redactional interventions in order to draw the attention of his reader. 101
Scholarship has brought to light at least two sources, “school” tracts and a
“Two Ways” tract.
3.6.1 “School” Tracts

Barnabas cites many Old Testament quotations in forms that can be compared
to similar quotations in other authors. His sources must have contained Old
Testament material, which he found already elaborated. It was probably
question of tracts based on testimonia collections, where the scriptures were
quoted and edited in order to provide anti-cultic arguments and to explain the
suffering of Jesus. Numerous studiesch have brought to light the complexity of
the material employed in the epistle. 102 An example may suffice. 103 In Barn.
11–12 two sources are drawn upon, one with scriptural texts on the “water,”
the other with scriptural texts on the “cross”/“wood.” One cluster (Barn. 11.2–
3) is a composite quotation made out of Jer 2:12–13ab and Exod 16:1b.2a. The
two texts are introduced as belonging to the same prophet, whose identity is
not given. Moreover, the concluding part of Jer 2:3, “cracked cisterns that can
hold no water,” is not retained, though it well suited the “baptismal” use of the
quotation. Finally, in Justin’s Dialogue with Trypho 114.5, we find a conflation
of Jer 2:13bcd+Isa 16.1b+Jer 3:8 attributed to Jeremiah and placed in a
different context, namely Israel’s rejection of Jesus. The overall conclusion is
that neither Barnabas nor Justin knew the exact text of their quotations and that
they quoted them from some source. This example is evidence of exegetical
work drawn upon by Justin and Barnabas and that this work was in progress,
as new authors may introduce changes. Bousset was right in seeing the epistle
100
Cf. NEYMEYR, Lehrer, 170–71.
101
WENGST, Tradition, 14–70. See for example Barn. 4.6a; 4.9a; 5.3; 6.5; 6.10; 7.1.
102
ROBERT A. KRAFT, “Barnabas’ Isaiah Text and the “Testimony Book” Hypothesis,”
JBL 79 (1960): 336–50; PIERRE PRIGENT, Les testimonia dans le christianisme primitif:
L’Épître de Barnabé I–XVI et ses sources (EB; Paris: Gabalda, 1961); ALBL, “Scripture,”
106–108.
103
See KRAFT, “Isaiah,” 347–48; PRIGENT, Testimonia, 91–93; SKARSAUNE, Proof, 69–
70.
as the result of “Schulbetrieb.” 104 This is not necessarily a school in the more
technical sense of the word, an enterprise which seems rather unlikely at this
early stage. Barnabas and Justin are not disciples of the same school whose
lectures they attended. “School” must be intended in a larger sense. 105 Barnabas
is one of those Christians who interpreted the scriptures in order to explain the
suffering of Christ and to defend the tenets of their faith vis-à-vis the Jews who
did not convert. We may safely conjecture that this work was conducted in the
setting of the community, where more teachers might have studied together the
scriptures. In both cases, the reaction of the community to what they proposed
was bound to influence subsequent expositions. The expressions of dialogical
character, some of which have already been noted, may stem from this didactic
tradition. 106
3.6.2 The “Two Ways” Tract

We have seen that Barn. 18–20 and Did. 1–5 depend on a common tradition.
The “Two Ways” tract functioned in the setting of the Didache as a pre-
baptismal catechesis for Gentile converts and was aptly placed at the beginning
of the book. In Barnabas the addressees are not candidates to baptism, but
Christians who have already gone some way in their religious education. The
reason for inserting chapters 18–20 is to be seen in the light of what precedes.
Chapters 2–16 contain a strong criticism of Jewish interpretation of the
scriptures and of Jewish rituals. This is the pars destruens. Chapters 18–20
illustrate how Christians should live: it is the pars construens. 107 It is not by
chance that the “Two Ways” teaching concludes the book and that it is alluded
to at the beginning. The purpose of it is to strengthen the group identity of the
addressees by showing them how to conduct their lives. 108
It is to be noted that neither in the Didache nor in Barnabas does the “Two
Ways” section present material on the life of Jesus. The same observation
104
BOUSSET, Schulbetrieb, 312–13. See also WENGST, Tradition, 54–56. WENGST points
to a school-setting and rules out testimonia as sources with the exception of Barn. 9.1–2 and
11.4–5. He believes testimonia to be citations without commentary, a definition which is too
rigid. School-setting and testimonia are not contradictory (PAGET, Epistle, 90–99) and their
association is more plausible than the opposite (ALBL, “Scripture,” 68–69).
105
This is what ALBL proposed in reference to the setting of Barnabas: “I intend ‘school’
as a scribal setting in which relatively sophisticated scriptural interpretations are produced
and taught.” (“Scripture,” 106 n. 44). HVALVIK suggests that the setting is the congregation,
rather than the school (Struggle, 48–49).
106
For prose,cete and ma,qete see above. Cf. also i;de in Barn. 6.14; 12.10; 12.11; 15.7.
See WENGST, Tradition, 55.
107
HVALVIK, Struggle, 99–101.
108
JULIEN C. H. SMITH, “The Epistle of Barnabas and the Two Ways of Teaching
Authority,” VC 68 (2014), 465–97.
applies to Barn. 2–17. 109 The purpose of the epistle as well as the purpose of
the “Two Ways” tract did not consist in informing the addressees about what
Jesus said and did, but in providing rules and guidelines for life.
Barnabas introduces this section as “another knowledge 110 and teaching”
(Barn. 18.1: e`te,ran gnw/sin kai. didach,n). “Knowledge” is a recurrent term;
“teaching” belongs to the original title of the “Two Ways” tract. The “way of
light” is elsewhere in Barnabas called “the way of righteousness” (Barn. 1.4:
evn o`dw/| dikaiosu,nhj), a phrase which is also to be found associated with
“knowledge”: “knowledge of the way of righteousness” (Barn. 5.4: o`dou/
dikaiosu,nhj gnw/sin). For Barnabas “righteousness” is not to be interpreted in
the Pauline sense, but as the whole of God’s provisions intended to direct
human life. 111 “Righteousness” is what permits to do good deeds (cf. Barn.
1.6). It is interesting to observe that “righteousness” (Barn. 1.6) is to be found
in the proximity of “teacher” (Barn. 1.8), and it is mentioned in a list of
ordinances, which presumably teachers taught. We have already pointed out
that “righteous” and “righteousness” are terms to be found in connection with
“teacher” and “teaching” (Matt 5:20; 10:41; 2 Tim 3:17; Heb 5:13; 2 Pet 2:22;
Did. 11.2).
3.7 The Transmission of Knowledge

In Barn. 1.5 the author expects eternal reward for transmitting (metadou/nai) a
part of which he has received (e;labon). The verb metadi,dwmi actually means
“share” and it is not the technical term early Christian writers employed to
signify transmission of traditions. Barnabas could have used instead the verbs
paralamba,nw and paradi,dwmi (cf. 1 Cor 11:23; 15:3). The object of e;labon is
lacking, but in the light of Barn. 1.5b it is clear that this is “knowledge”
(gnw/sij). The reception as well as the transmission of knowledge are a common
theme (Barn. 9.7; 9.8; 10.1; 10.10), in which the giver is always God (cf. Barn.
6.10; 21.5).
The words “knowledge” (gnw/sij) and “teaching” (didach,) are key terms. 112
They cannot be separated and are probably synonymous (cf. Barn. 18.1). 113
Their object is probably to be identified with the “things past and things
present” that “the Master has made known to us” (Barn. 1.7: evgnw,risen ga.r
h`mi/n o` despo,thj. Cf. Barn. 5.3; 7.1). “Knowledge” and “teaching” do not refer
to doctrinal contents that a teacher hands over, but to the understanding of the
109
PRIGENT, Épître, 42.
110
“Lesson” in HOLMES, Apostolic Fathers.
111
Cf. PRIGENT, Épître, 77 n. 4.
112
On “knowledge” see PRIGENT, Épître, 34–35; WENGST, Tradition, 95–99; PAGET,
Epistle, 46–49.
113
will of God as revealed in the scriptures and of God’s work as unfolded in what
the scriptures say. The task of the teacher is to bring this comprehension to
light. Barnabas’ idea of knowledge makes it clear that he was not a gnostic
teacher. 114 “Knowledge” is linked to scriptural interpretation and is available
to all Christians. Strictly speaking, Barnabas is not a tradent. He does not
transmit stories or logia of Jesus to the next generation of Christians, but he
helps them understand what they should do with their lives. If there is anything
he transmits, it is a particular exegetical method, which functions as a key that
unlocks the meaning of the scriptures.
3.8 Conclusions
Barnabas supplements what we know about teachers from other sources, such
as Matt 23:8 and Jas 3:1. This role implied prestige and was in demand.
Barnabas does not accept the loftiness of his colleagues and, like the author of
Matthew’s Gospel, wants to replace the teacher-disciple relationship with a
relationship of friendship. In keeping with Matt 23:12, he inverts the poles of
power-relationship and presents himself as the servant of his disciples.
This teacher was a Gentile-Christian whose teaching focussed, if we judge
it on the solely base of the epistle, on the correct interpretation of the scriptures.
Barnabas is not a transmitter of Jesus-material, but a teacher who helps his
disciples discover what the scriptures truly say. This knowledge gives his
reader the capacity to walk on the way of righteousness, that is to do good
works. The focus on how to live life belongs also to the author of James, the
teachers of the Didache and those of Hermas and 2 Peter.
114
This is VAN DEN EYNDE’s idea (Normes, 96–97).
Conclusions
The history of early Christian teachers from their origins to the middle of the
second century is variegated and complex. The title “teacher” first emerged in
Antioch around the year 40. Among these first teachers were Simeon, Lucius
and Manaen, who were probably Hellenists from the circle of Stephen,
Barnabas, who was a Levite, and Paul, who was a Pharisee. Antioch was the
place where the term “Christians” first came into use, where a large-scale
mission to the Gentiles was first undertaken and where the debates that
triggered the so-called “Jerusalem council” took place. Antioch was one of the
largest cities in the eastern region of the Roman Empire, a centre of Greek
culture and with an important Jewish presence. For Christians it was close
enough to Jerusalem to maintain a vital contact with the first community and
far enough to explore new ways in which the gospel could be interpreted and
spread. In such an effervescent place the emergence of the title “teachers” is
not surprising. Dida,skaloj was the Greek-speaking Christian equivalent of ‫רבי‬,
a word which later came to designate an authoritative teaching-role among non-
Christian Jews. It was also the term employed for teachers of philosophy in the
Greek world. Christian teachers were not an isolated phenomenon, but part of
a wider context, which involved Greco-Roman and Jewish societies.
Additional evidence for the hypothesis that the title “teacher” comes from
Syria is that Polycarp, though holding the office of bishop, was also considered
an eminent teacher, who as a youth had met people who had seen Jesus and
who, therefore, came from Syria-Palestine. We can imagine that before
becoming bishop, Polycarp had been a teacher who had owed his role to his
acquaintance with the earliest Christian teaching.
The five people mentioned in Acts 13:1 were not only teachers, but also
prophets, and oversaw Antiochene Christians. They led religious service
(“liturgy”) and could decide to send people on mission, as they did in the case
of Barnabas and Paul. Those thus sent were called “apostles,” a title which
expired once the mission had been accomplished.
The roles of teachers, prophets, and apostles are held together by Paul in the
so-called triad (1 Cor 12:28–29). Paul holds fast to a different concept of
apostleship and constructs the triad according to a hierarchical structure, which
was not to be found in Antioch. Paul used the triad as a part of his arguments
addressed to the unruly Corinthians.
256 Conclusions
The community of the Gospel of Matthew was also based in Antioch, though
it may not necessarily coincide with the Antiochene Christians of Acts 13.
However, its form of leadership was similar: prophets and scribes or wise men,
which were roles equivalent to that of teachers, being the title “teacher”
banned. The reason for the ban was that at some stage teachers became a source
of troubles. Some Christian scribes and maybe others as well thought that many
teachers exploited their role to serve personal interests and achieve prestige.
The Gospel of Matthew was sternly opposed to this and promoted the notion
of a community where all should be brothers and sisters (Matt 23:8c) and where
the highest aspiration should be to become the servant of all (Matt 23:11).
Matthew had two specific reasons for this opposition, both related to the fact
that teachers were among the people involved in missionary work. The first
was that some envoys did not do what they preached, but they were concerned
with personal gain. Thus doing, they discredited the gospel. The second was
that Christians in general and Christian missionaries in particular were exposed
to persecution. People promoting themselves did not have a chance to
withstand persecution as Jesus did. For these reasons, Matthew forbade any
prestigious title within the community, starting from that of “rabbi”/“teacher.”
The only teacher is Jesus, whereas all believers are on an equal footing (Matt
23:8c) and disciples of Jesus (Matt 10:24–25). A theological and practical
consequence of considering Jesus the only teacher was that Jesus became the
only model for Christians. No alternative model can be accepted, in particular
in the face of persecution. If Jesus was persecuted and killed, his disciples
should not expect a better fate (Matt 10:25). At the same time, Matthew exhorts
fellow-believers not to feel bogged down. Drawing on the biblical motifs of
the suffering righteous and of the violent death of the prophet, he tells disciples
that abasement is followed by vindication (Matt 23:11–12).
In other Syrian communities the need to rule out the title “teacher” was not
felt, even if they experienced similar problems. In the community of the Letter
of James, written at some point in the second half of the first century, many
people wanted to become teachers, presumably because teachers enjoyed a
high status. The author of the letter discourages them by showing the hardship
teachers must face. Contrary to Acts 13 and to Matthew, the leadership is not
in the hands of teachers and prophets, but of teachers and presbyters. The pair
of teachers and presbyters is also to be found in Rome in the middle of the
second century and in Egyptian villages in the third century. A comparable
form of leadership is in Ephesians, were teachers are closely linked with
shepherds, an alternative designation for presbyters/bishops.
In the Didache the leadership is in the hands of teachers and prophets.
Prophets are meant to preach, celebrate the eucharist and give orders in the
name of the spirit. They are held in high esteem, but at the same time they are
a constant source of concern and their activity requires regulations to prevent
that abuses may take place. Teachers seem to have exerted the real leadership:
Conclusions 257
they deserve material support as workers for the community, contribute to its
life in the same way as prophets, bishops and deacons do, and a teacher may
well have authored the final redaction of the Didache. If this proposal is
correct, teachers were those who set the rules for everybody, including
prophets. It is to be noted that these teachers and prophets resided in the
community either permanently or for a long time. Some of them may have
come from outside and surely the Didache provides evidence for travelling
prophets and teachers, but it is silent about whether they lead an ascetic and
itinerant life-style or carried out missionary journeys like the journey of
Barnabas and Paul in Acts 13–14.
At some stage a shift occurred from communities led by teachers to
communities led by bishops. This shift took place at an early date in Antioch.
Instead of prophets and teachers, or people with equivalent titles, we find at the
beginning of the second century the rule of just one person, bishop Ignatius.
We do not know how Ignatius came to power nor if he was the first bishop of
Antioch. We may only speculate that Matthew paved the way for the rise of
the administrative, non-prestigious role of bishops/presbyters by ruling out the
title of teacher, and by campaigning against the desire of power and prestige.
The rule of one person solved the problem of having many people jostling in
order to become teachers.
Ignatius promoted the rule of bishops, presbyters and deacons among the
Christians of Asia Minor to whom he addressed his letters. His polemic against
people holding unacceptable theological views and in some cases challenging
the authority of the local bishops presents clues that these adversaries were
called “teachers” by their followers. For some of Ignatius’ adversaries the
scriptures held an important place and were the lens through which to see the
life and teaching of Jesus. The same or other adversaries questioned the reality
of Jesus’ death, which was to Ignatius the main reason to accept martyrdom.
Ignatius thought of becoming a perfect disciple of Jesus by imitating his
passion. Ignatius, like Matthew, used the idea that Jesus is the only teacher. If
there are not other teachers, there are not alternative models to follow. This
means that a true disciple must be ready and even willing to experience the
passion. The idea of “Jesus the only teacher” is fundamental to understand
Ignatius’ views on discipleship and martyrdom. These views are taken further
in the Martyrdom of Polycarp, where the discourse on martyrdom achieves full
maturity. Polycarp is a teacher but also the perfect disciple of Jesus the teacher
and as such knows how to face martyrdom “according to the gospel.”
The theme of the only teacher is also at work in the Pastoral Epistles. In this
case Paul is implicitly presented as the only teacher in order to discredit the
teachers whom the author(s) of the Pastorals oppose(s). This theme is
instrumental to the construction of a reliable chain for the transmission of the
“deposit”/“teaching.” The deposit has been entrusted by Paul to Timothy and
Titus, who, in turn, entrust it to bishops and presbyters. It is important to note
258 Conclusions
that it is the teaching that is transmitted, not the title nor the role of teacher,
probably because a teacher would have had the authority to alter this deposit.
This is what the opponents allegedly did. We are told that they were interested
in the Jewish scriptures and that they preached some form of realised
eschatology. They seem to believe that the resurrection has already taken place.
These ideas are close to those tackled by Paul in 1 Corinthians. They probably
contributed to the emergence of Gnosticism, which would count famous
teachers among its ranks.
Christian teachers are also attested in Rome. The Shepherd of Hermas
attributes to some of them a particular doctrine on repentance, which the
Shepherd confirms and modifies.
The location of the remaining writings is difficult to ascertain. Hebrews
makes one understand that there were teachers among the Christians the author
addresses and gives even some hint as to the content of their teaching. Second
Peter is a virulent attack against teachers who preached a way of life and
doctrines that are deemed aberrant. The author of the Epistle of Barnabas is a
teacher, who is worried about the distance his role puts between himself and
his readers. In order to eliminate barriers, he does not present himself as a
teacher, but as somebody who loves his correspondents. Barnabas confirms
the evidence we gathered from Matthew that the relationship between teachers
and disciples was one of power, rather than of equality.
This survey of different texts shows that early Christian teachers were a
phenomenon not to be restricted to Syria-Palestine and to the first century, as
Zimmermann proposed. Syria-Palestine is the area where they thrived, but they
were to be found also in Asia Minor and Rome. Teachers were the leaders of a
number of early Christian communities, sometimes in the company of prophets
and presbyters. Their role was very attractive and many strived to become
teachers. Nothing suggests that they were appointed, but, on the contrary, it
seems that they were recognised as teachers by their communities or groups
within it on the basis of personal talents. Contrary to what Zimmermann
proposed, these talents were not chiefly employed to transmit the gospel
material, but they centred on the ability to give guidance, both in theological
questions and ethical matters, and to interpret the the scriptures. Two themes
were particularly important and sensitive. The first was the teaching of
righteousness, a word which was so important as to almost summarise the
entire activity of teachers and which could be pinned down to the ability to
distinguish between good and evil, especially in a “Two Ways” ethic. This
means that the instruction teachers provided was mostly practical and
paraenetical, focussing on moral conduct rather than on theological
speculations or on transmitting the teaching of Jesus. The second was the
problem of the resurrection. A number of teachers denied the resurrection of
the body and some of them might have even rejected any form of after-life.
This entailed, in the eyes of their adversaries, that licentious behaviour was
Conclusions 259
thus justified. How teachers obtained their knowledge and skills is not clear.
Only in the case of Polycarp we find evidence of a chain teacher-disciple.
Probably, it was more often question of people who applied the education they
had acquired through private means to the elaboration and spreading of the
Christian message. Literacy must have been an important part of this process:
we have proposed that some of the writers studied in this book were teachers,
that the interpretation of the scriptures played some role, and that, at least in
Matthew, “scribe” could be an alternative designation for a teacher. If all of
this is correct, only those who had access to education could become teachers,
which means the middle and upper classes and usually men rather than women.
Education provided the right soil to nurture personal talents. What happened
next is difficult to establish. Where was the authority of the teachers rooted in?
Appeal to apostolic succession is not to be reckoned with as there is no
indication of such a thing among early Christian teachers, with the partial
exception of Polycarp. The reason for their influence was probably a
combination of different factors. In addition to talents, social position may have
played some part as well as the degree of learning they had achieved.
The influence of teachers was controversial and never became big enough
to ensure their survival as an office in the history of the Christian churches.
These came to be ruled by bishops, whereas in the Jewish world rabbis, the
equivalent of teachers, established themselves as the leading figures. Why did
Christianity experience such a different outcome? The first reason to be pointed
out is that early Christian teachers apparently did not develop a system based
on the chain teacher-disciple, in which disciples became teachers and so forth.
Instead, the supply of teachers depended on random circumstances, such as the
presence of people with enough education and talents. Bishops and presbyters,
on the contrary, were roles that did not require special competence like
charismatic gifts, and that, therefore, were much easier to fill. The second
reason is that many teachers were seen as a threat to the unity of believers.
They preached a variety of ways of life and doctrines, some of which were
influenced by docetism, others by early Gnosticism, others by Epicureism, and
many teachers were close to Judaism. Fundamental tenets such as the
resurrection of Jesus or the christological interpretation of the scriptures were
the object of inquiry and even denial. A number of authors wrote against
“aberrant” teachings by appealing to the argument of the only teacher, Jesus,
or alternatively Paul. The role of teacher was thus discredited to the benefit of
that of bishops and presbyters. It was not too difficult for those holding an
appointed position, like bishops and presbyters, to overtake those whose
authority rested solely on their own words. We have seen bishops and
presbyters overtaking the role of teachers, or teachers transforming into
bishops and presbyters, in Syria, Asia Minor, and eventually in Rome. The
third reason is that teachers threatened the principle of equality among
260 Conclusions
believers. They might have been the cause of internal conflicts and eventually
were superseded by bishops who, at least initially, were not the object of envy.
An important topic for future research is the development of the role of
teachers in the second half of the second century and beyond. This study stops
with texts from the middle of the second century for practical reasons. The
investigation of our theme in Justin Martyr, Irenaeus, Clement of Alexandria
and so on would make for one or more books, though some relevant results are
already to be found in Neymeyr’s work. What is important for our purposes is
to observe that the history of early Christian teachers is open-ended. No signs
of a break are to be found in the period of our concern. Though their trajectory
was declining while that of bishops was ascending, the role of teachers
developed in new ways when the great church writers came on stage, but its
roots are to be found in the sources examined in this book.
Bibliography
1. Primary Sources
Hebrew Bible and LXX

ELLIGER, K., and W. RUDOLPH, eds., Biblia Hebraica Stuttgartensia (Stuttgart: Deutsche
Bibelstiftung, 1977).
RAHLFS, ALFRED, ed., Septuaginta: Id est Vetus Testamentum graece iuxta LXX interpretes
(2 vols; Stuttgart: Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft, 1935).
Holy Bible: New Revised Standard Version. Anglicized Edition with Apocrypha (Oxford:
Oxford University Press, 1995).
Old Testament Pseudepigrapha

BETTIOLO, PAOLO, et al., eds., Ascensio Isaiae: Textus (Corpus Christianorum Series
Apocryphorum 7; Turnhout: Brepols, 1995).
New Testament
ALAND, BARBARA, et al., eds., Novum Testamentum Graece (28th rev. ed.; Stuttgart:
Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft, 2012).
Greco-Roman and Jewish Authors

Lucian
HARMON, A. M., et al., eds., Lucian (8 vols.; LCL; London: William Heinemann;
Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1913–1967).
Josephus
THACKERAY, H. ST. J., et al., eds., Josephus (13 vols.; LCL; London: William Heinemann;
Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1926–1965).
Early Christian Writings

Apostolic Constitutions
METZGER, MARCEL, ed., Les Constitutions apostoliques (SC 320; Paris: Cerf, 1985).
–, ed., Les Constitutions apostoliques (SC 329; Paris: Cerf, 1986).
–, ed., Les Constitutions apostoliques (SC 336; Paris: Cerf, 1987).
262 Bibliography
Apostolic Fathers
EHRMAN, BART D., ed., The Apostolic Fathers I (LCL 24; Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard
University Press, 2003).
–, ed., The Apostolic Fathers II (LCL 25; Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press,
2003).
HOLMES, MICHAEL W., The Apostolic Fathers: Greek Texts and English Translations (3rd
ed.; Grand Rapids: Baker Academics, 2007).
LIGHTFOOT, J. B., AND J. R. HARMER, eds., The Apostolic Fathers (Grand Rapids: Baker
Book House, 1956).
Didache
BRYENNIOS, PHILOTEOS, ed., DIDACH TWN DWDEKA APOSTOLWN (Constantinople,
1883).
HARRIS, JAMES RENDEL, ed., The Teaching of the Apostles: Newly Edited with Facsimile
Text and a Commentary for the Johns Hopkins University (Baltimore, 1887).
RORDORF, WILLY, and ANDRÉ TUILIER, eds., La Doctrine des douze apôtres (Didachè) (SC
248bis; Paris: Cerf, 1998).
SCHÖLLGEN, GEORG, “Didache,” in idem and Wilhelm Geerlings, eds., Didache, Zwölf-
Apostel-Lehre: Traditio Apostolica, Apostolische Überlieferung (Fontes Christiani 1;
Freiburg: Herder, 1991).
VISONÀ, GIUSEPPE, ed., Didachè: Insegnamento degli apostoli (Letture cristiane del primo
millennio 30; Milano: Paoline, 2000).
Epiphanius
AMIDON, PHILIP R., ed., The Panarion of St. Epiphanius, Bishop of Salamis: Selected
Passages (New York: Oxford University Press, 1990).
HOLL, KARL, ed., Epiphanius II: Panarion haer. 34–64 (2nd rev. ed. by JÜRGEN DUMMER;
GCS; Berlin: Akademie Verlag, 1980).
Epistle of Barnabas
PRIGEN, PIERRE, and ROBERT A. KRAFT, eds., Épître de Barnabé (SC 172; Paris: Cerf,
1971).
Eusebius
LAKE, KIRSOPP, ed., Eusebius: The Ecclesiastical History, Books 1–5 (LCL 153; London:
William Heinemann; Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1926).
SCHWARTZ, EDUARD, ed., Eusebius Werke (GCS 9/1; Leipzig: J. C. Hinrichs’sche
Buchhandlung, 1903).
Irenaeus
ROUSSEAU, ADELIN, et al., eds., Irénée de Lyon: Contre les hérésies (SC 211; Paris: Cerf,
1974).
Papias
NORELLI, ENRICO, ed., Papia di Hierapolis: Esposizione degli oracoli del Signore. I
Frammenti (Letture cristiane del primo millennio 36; Milano: Paoline, 2005).
Bibliography 263
2. Secondary Literature
ABRAMOWSKI, LUISE, “Der Apostel von Johannes 13,16,” ZNT 99 (2008), 116–23.
ADAMS, J. CLIFFORD, “Exegesis of Hebrews VI. 1f.,” NTS 13 (1966–67): 378–85.
AGNES, FRANCIS H., “The Origin of the NT Apostle-Concept: A Review of Research,” JBL
105 (1986): 75–96.
ALBL, MARTIN C., “And Scripture Cannot Be Broken”: The Form and Function of the Early
Christian Testimonia Collections (NovTSup 96; Leiden: Brill, 1999).
ALBRIGHT, WILLIAM F., The Archaeology of Palestine: A Survey of the Ancient Peoples and
Cultures of the Holy Land, lllustrated with Photographs, Diagrams, and Line Drawings
(Harmondsworth: Penguin, 1956).
ALEXANDER, LOVEDAY C., “Schools, Hellenistic,” in ABD, 5:1005–1011.
ALLISON, DALE C. JR., “The Fiction of James and Its Sitz im Leben,” RB 108 (2001): 529–
70.
–, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Epistle of James (ICC; London:
Bloomsbury T&T Clark, 2013).
ALON, GEDALIAH, “Halakah in the Teaching of the Twelve Apostles (Didache),” in
DRAPER, Didache, 165–94; first published in Hebrew in Studies in Jewish History in the
Times of the Second Temple, the Mishna and the Talmud (vol. 1; Tel Aviv: Hakibbutz
Hameuchad, 1958), 274–94.
AMICI, ROBERTO, “Etero-didascalie e falsi maestri nelle lettere a Timoteo e Tito,” RivB 56
(2008): 455–73.
AMPHOUX, CHRISTIAN BERNARD, “Hypothèse sur l’origine des Épîtres Catholiques,” in La
lecture liturgique des Épîtres catholiques dans l’Église ancienne (ed. CHRISTIAN
BERNARD AMPHOUX and JEAN-PAUL BOUHOT; HTB 1; Lausanne: Zèbre, 1996), 308–
332.
ASH, JAMES L., “The Decline of Ecstatic Prophecy in the Early Church,” TS 37 (1976): 227–
52.
ATTRIDGE, HAROLD W., The Epistle to the Hebrews: A Commentary on the Epistle to the
Hebrews (Hermeneia; Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1989).
AUDET, JEAN-PAUL, La Didachè: Instructions des apôtres (EB; Paris: Gabalda, 1958).
AUNE, DAVID E., Prophecy in Early Christianity and the Ancient Mediterranean World
(Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1983).
BACKHAUS, KNUT, Der Hebräerbrief (RNT; Regensburg: Friedrich Pustet, 2009).
BAIRD, WILLIAM, History of New Testament Research. 2. From Jonathan Edwards to Rudolf
Bultmann (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 2003).
BALCH, DAVID L., ed., Social History of the Matthean Community: Cross-Disciplinary
Approaches (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1991).
BARBAGLIO, GIUSEPPE, La Prima lettera ai Corinzi: Introduzione, versione e commento
(Scritti delle origini cristiane 16; Bologna: Dehoniane, 1996).
BARNARD, LESLIE W., “The ‘Epistle of Barnabas’ and Its Contemporary Setting,” in ANRW,
27.1: 159–207.
BARNES, TIMOTHY D., “The Date of Ignatius,” ExpTim 120 (2008), 119–30.
BARRETT, CHARLES K., “Jews and Judaizers in the Epistles of Ignatius,” in Jews, Greeks
and Christians: Religious Cultures in Late Antiquity: Essays in Honor of William David
Davies (ed. ROBERT HAMMERTON-KELLY and ROBIN SCROGGS; SJLA 21; Leiden: Brill,
1976), 220–44.
264 Bibliography
–, “Shaliaḥ and Apostle,” in Donum Gentilicium: New Testament Studies in Honour of David
Daube (ed. ERNST BAMMEL et al.; Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1978), 88–102.
–, The Acts of the Apostles. 1. Preliminary Introduction and Commentary on Acts I–XIV
(ICC; Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1994).
BARTH, GERHARD, “Zur Frage nach der in 1Korinther 15 bekämpften
Auferstehungsleugnung,” ZNT 83 (1992): 187–201.
BARTH, MARKUS, Ephesians: Introduction, Translation, and Commentary on Chapters 1–3
(AB; New York: Doubleday, 1974).
BAUER, JOHANNES BAPT., Die Polykarpbriefe (KAV 5; Göttingen: Vandenhoeck &
Ruprecht, 1995).
BAUER, WALTER, and FRIEDRICK W. DANKER, A Greek-English Lexicon of the New
Testament and Other Early Christian Literature (3rd ed.; Chicago: The University of
Chicago Press, 2000).
BAUMEISTER, THEOFRIED, Die Anfänge der Theologie des Martyriums (MBT 45; Münster:
Aschendorf, 1980).
–, “Die Norm des evangeliumgemässen Blutzeugnisses: Das Martyrium Polycarpi als
vorsichtige Exhortatio ad Martyrium,” in Stimuli: Exegese und ihre Hermeneutik in
Antike und Christentum. Festschrift für Ernst Dassmann (ed. GEORG SCHÖLLGEN and
CLEMENS SCHOLTEN; JAC 23; Münster, Westfalen: Aschendorffsche
Verlagsbuchhandlung, 1996), 122–28.
BECKER, HANS-JÜRGEN, Auf der Kathedra des Mose: Rabbinisch-theologisches Denken und
antirabbinische Polemik in Matthäus 23,1–12 (Arbeiten zur neutestamentlichen
Theologie und Zeitgeschichte 4; Berlin: Institut Kirche und Judentum, 1990).
BELLE, GILBERT VAN, and DAVID R. M. GODECHARLE, “C. H. Dodd and John 13:16 (and
15:20): St John’s Knowledge of Matthew Revisited”, in Engaging with C. H. Dodd on
the Gospel of John: Sixty Years of Tradition and Interpretation (ed. TOM THATCHER and
CATRIN H. WILLIAMS; Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2013), 86–106.
BERQUIST, JON L., “Constructions of Identity in Postcolonial Yehud,” in Judah and the
Judeans in the Persian Period (ed. ODED LIPSCHITS and MANFRED OEMING; Winona
Lake: Eisenbrauns, 2006), 54–66.
BEST, ERNEST, “Acts XIII. 1–3,” JTS n.s. 11 (1960): 344–48.
–, “Mark’s Preservation of the Tradition,” in L’évangile selon Marc: Tradition et rédaction
(ed. M. SABBE; 2nd ed.; BETL 34; Leuven: University Press, 1988), 21–34.
–, “Ministry in Ephesians,” in idem, Essays on Ephesians (Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1997),
157–77; repr. from IBS 16 (1994): 146–60.
–, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on Ephesians (ICC; Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1998).
BETZ, HANS DIETER, Lukian von Samosata und das Neue Testament: Religionsgeschichtli-
che und paränetische Parallelen (TU 76; Berlin: Akademie Verlag, 1961).
–, Der Apostel Paulus und die sokratische Tradition: Eine exegetische Untersuchung zu
seiner »Apologie« 2 Korinther 10–13 (BHT 45; Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1972).
BEYER, HERMANN WOLFGANG, “diakoni,a,” GLNT, 2: 966–69.
BIDDLE, BRUCE J., Role Theory: Expectations, Identities and Behaviors (New York:
Academic Press, 1979).
–, “Recent Developments in Role Theory,” Annual Review of Sociology 12 (1986): 67–92.
BLASS, FRIEDRICK, ALBERT DEBRUNNER and FRIEDRICH REHKOPF, Grammatik des
neutestamentlichen Griechisch (14th ed.; Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1976).
BLENKINSOPP, JOSEPH, Sage, Priest, Prophet: Intellectual and Religious Leadership in
Ancient Israel (Louisville: Wesminster John Knox Press, 1995).
Bibliography 265
BOISMARD, MARIE-ÉMILE, and ANDRE LAMOUILLE, Les Actes des Deux Apôtres. 3.
Analyses littéraires (EB n.s. 14; Paris: Libraire Lecoffre, J. Gabalda, 1990).
BOMMES, KARIN, Weizen Gottes: Untersuchungen zur Theologie des Martyriums bei
Ignatius von Antiochien (Theophaneia: Beiträge zur Religions- und Kirchengeschichte
des Altertums 27; Köln: Peter Hanstein, 1976).
BONNARD, PIERRE, L’évangile selon Saint Matthieu (3rd ed.; CNT 1; Geneva: Labor et
Fides, 1992).
BONY, PAUL, “L’Épître aux Ephésiens,” in DELORME, ed., Ministère, 74–92.
BORGEN, PEDER, et al., The Philo Index: A Complete Greek Word Index to the Writings of
Philo of Alexandria (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans; Leiden: Brill, 2000).
BORING, M. EUGENE, Sayings of the Risen Jesus: Christian Prophecy in the Synoptic
Tradition (SNTSMS 46; Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1982).
BOUDILLON, JEAN, “La première épître aux Corinthiens et la controverse sur les ministères,”
Istina 16 (1971): 471–88.
BOVON, FRANÇOIS, Luc le théologien: Vingt-cinq ans de recherches (1950–1975) (2nd ed.;
MdB; Geneva: Labor et Fides, 1988)
–, L’Évangile selon Saint Luc (1,1–9,50) (CNT2 3a; Geneva: Labor et Fides, 1991).
BRAUMANN, GEORG, “Der theologische Hintergrund des Jakobusbriefes,” TZ 18 (1962):
401–410.
BRENT, ALLEN, “The Relations Between Ignatius and the Didascalia,” SecCent 8 (1991):
129–56.
BROADHEAD, EDWIN K., “A Servant like the Master: A Jewish Christian Hermeneutic for
the Practice of the Torah”, in Jesus and the Scriptures: Problems, Passages and Patterns
(ed. TOBIAS HÄGERLAND; London: Bloomsbury T&T Clark, 2016).
BROCKHAUS, ULRICH, Charisma und Amt: Die paulinische Charismenlehre auf dem
Hintergrund der frühchristlichen Gemeindefunktionen (Wuppertal: Theologischer
Verlag Rolf Brockhaus, 1975).
BROWN, CHARLES T., The Gospel and Ignatius of Antioch (Studies in Biblical Literature 12;
New York: Peter Lang, 2000).
BROWN, RAYMOND E., The Gospel According to John (xiii-xxi) (AB 29A; London: Geoffrey
Chapman, 1971).
–, The Epistles of John (AB 30; New York: Doubleday, 1982).
–, An Introduction to the New Testament (ABRL; New York: Doubleday, 1997).
–, and JOHN P. MEIER, Antioch and Rome: New Testament Cradles of Catholic Christianity
(New York: Paulist Press, 1983).
BROX, NORBERT, Zeuge und Märtyrer: Untersuchungen zur frühchristlichen Zeugnis-
Terminologie (SANT 5; München: Kösel-Verlag, 1961).
–, “Amt, Kirche und Theologie in der nachapostolischen Epoche: Die Pastoralbriefe,” in
Gestalt und Anspruch des Neuen Testaments (ed. JOSEF SCHREINER; Würzburg: Echter-
Verlag, 1969), 120–33.
–, Die Pastoralbriefe (4th ed.; RNT 7/2; Regensburg: Friedrich Pustet: 1969).
–, Der Hirt des Hermas (KAV 7; Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1991).
BÜHNER, JAN-A., Der Gesandte und sein Weg im 4. Evangelium: Die kultur- und
religionsgeschichtlichen Grundlagen der johanneischen Sendungschristologie sowie ihre
traditionsgeschichtliche Entwicklung (WUNT II/2; Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1977).
BULTMANN, RUDOLF, Die Geschichte der synoptische Tradition (3rd ed.; Göttingen:
Vandenhoek & Ruprecht, 1957).
BURCHARD, CHRISTOPH, Der Jakobusbrief (HNT 15/1; Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2000).
266 Bibliography
BURINI, CLARA, “th/| u`giainou,sh| didaskali,a:| Una norma di vita cristiana in Tito 2, 1,”
Vetera Christianorum 18 (1981): 275–85.
–, Policarpo di Smirne: Lettera ai Filippesi. Martirio (Scritti delle origini cristiane 26;
Bologna: Dehoniane, 1998).
BURTCHAELL, JAMES T., From Synagogue to Church: Public Services and Offices in the
Earliest Christian Communities (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1992).
BUSCHMANN, GERD, Martyrium Polycarpi – Eine formenkritische Studie: Ein Beitrag zur
Frage nach der Entstehung der Gattung Märtyrerakte (BZNW 70; Berlin: Walter de
Gruyter, 1994).
–, Das Martyrium des Polykarp (KAV 6; Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1998).
BYRSKOG, SAMUEL, Jesus the Only Teacher: Didactic Authority and Transmission in
Ancient Israel, Ancient Judaism and the Matthean Community (ConBNT 24; Stockholm:
Almqvist & Wiksell International, 1994).
–, “The Transmission of the Jesus Tradition,” in Handbook for the Study of the Historical
Jesus (ed. TOM HOLMÉN and STANLEY E. PORTER; Leiden: Brill, 2011), vol. 2, 1465–
94.
CACITTI, REMO, Grande sabato: Il contesto pasquale quartodecimano nella formazione
della teologia del martirio (Milan: Vita e Pensiero, 1994).
CAMPBELL, R. ALASTAIR, The Elders: Seniority within Earliest Christianity (Studies of the
New Testament and Its World; Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1994).
CAMPENHAUSEN, HANS VON, Kirchliches Amt und geistliche Vollmacht in den ersten drei
Jahrhunderten (2nd ed.; BHT 14; Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1963; 1st ed. 1953).
–, “Bearbeitungen und Interpolationen des Polykarpmartyrium,” in idem, Aus der Frühzeit
des Christentums: Studien zur Kirchengeschichte des ersten und zweiten Jahrhunderts
(Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1963), 253–301.
CAULLEY, THOMAS SCOTT, “‘They Promise Them Freedom’: Once again, the
yeudodida,skaloi in 2 Peter”, ZNT 99 (2008), 128–38.
COHEN, SHAYE J. D., “The Significance of Yavneh: Pharisees, Rabbis, and the End of Jewish
Sectarianism,” HUCA 55 (1984): 27–53.
–, “The Rabbi in Second-Century Jewish Society,” in The Cambridge History of Judaism. 3.
The Early Roman Period (ed. WILLIAM HORBURY et al.; Cambridge: Cambridge
–, “Judaism without Circumcision and ‘Judaism’ without ‘Circumcision’ in Ignatius,” HTR
95 (2002): 395–415.
COLEBORNE, W., “The Shepherd of Hermas: A Case for Multiple Authorship and Some
Implications,” in StPatr 10 (TU 107; Berlin: Akademie-Verlag, 1970), 65–70.
COLLINS, BERNARD, “Tentatur nova interpretatio Heb. 5,11–6,8,” VD 26 (1948): 144–51
and 193–206.
CONTI, MARTINO, “Fondamenti biblici della povertà nel ministero apostolico,” Antonianum
46 (1971): 393–426.
COPPENS, J., “L’imposition des mains dans les Actes des Apotres,” in Les Actes des Apôtres:
Traditions, rédaction, théologie (ed. J. KREMER; BETL 48; Gembloux: J. Duculot;
Leuven: Leuven University Press, 1979), 405–438.
CORWIN, VIRGINIA, St. Ignatius and Christianity in Antioch (New Haven: Yale University
Press, 1960).
COYLE, JOHN K., “The Exercise of Teaching in the Postapostolic Church,” EgT 15 (1984):
23–43.
Bibliography 267
CROSS, ANTHONY R., “The Meaning of ‘Baptisms’ in Hebrews 6.2,” in Dimensions of

Baptism: Biblical and Theological Studies (ed. ANTHONY R. CROSS and STANLEY E.
PORTER; JSNTSup 234; London: Sheffield Academic Press, 2002), 163–86.
CROSSAN, JOHN DOMINIC, The Birth of Christianity: Discovering What Happened in the
Years Immediately after the Execution of Jesus (San Francisco: HarperSanFrancisco,
1998).
CULPEPPER, R. ALAN, The Johannine School: An Evaluation of the Johannine-School
Hypothesis Based on an Investigation of the Nature of Ancient Schools (SBL.DS 26;
Missoula: Scholars Press, 1975).
DALMAN, GUSTAF, Die Worte Jesu: Mit Berücksichtigung des nachkanonischen jüdischen
Schrifttums und der aramäischen Sprache. I. Einleitung und wichtige Begriffe (2nd ed.;
Leipzig: J. C. Hinrichs, 1930).
DAUBE, DAVID, The New Testament and Rabbinic Judaism (JLCRS 2; London: Athlone
Press, 1956).
DAVIDS, PETER H., James (NIBC; Peabody: Hendrickson, 1989).
–, “Palestinian Traditions in the Epistle of James,” in James the Just and Christian Origins
(ed. BRUCE CHILTON AND CRAIG A. EVANS; NovTSup 98; Leiden: Brill, 1999), 33–57.
–, The Letters of 2 Peter and Jude (The Pillar New Testament Commentary; Grand Rapids:
Eerdmans, 2006).
DAVIES, WILLIAM D., and DALE C. ALLISON, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the
Gospel According to Saint Matthew (3 vols.; ICC; Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1988–1997).
DE HALLEUX, ANDRÉ, “Ministers in the Didache,” in DRAPER, ed., Didache, 300–20; trans.
of “Les ministères dans la Didachè,” Irénikon 53 (1980): 5–29.
DE VIRGILIO, GIUSEPPE, “Ispirazione ed efficacia della scrittura in 2Tm 3,14–17,” Rivista
Biblica 38 (1990): 485–94.
DEHANDSCHUTTER, BOUDEWIJN, “The Martyrium Polycarpi: A Century of Research,” in
ANRW, 27.1: 485–522.
–, “The Martyrdom of Polycarp,” ETL 75 (1999): 430–37.
DEL VERME, MARCELLO, “The Didache and Judaism: The avparch, of Didache 13:3–7,” in
Papers Presented at the Eleventh International Conference on Patristic Studies Held in
Oxford 1991: Liturgica, Second Century, Alexandria before Nicaea, Athanasius and the
Arian Controversy (ed. ELIZABETH A. LIVINGSTONE; SP 16; Leuven: Peeters Press,
1993), 113–20.
–, “Didaché e origini cristiane: Aggiornamento bibliografico per lo studio della Didaché nel
contesto del ‘Giudaismo cristiano’,” Annali di Storia dell’Esegesi 20 (2003): 455–544.
DELLING, GERHARD, “aivsqa,nomai,” GLNT, 1: 506.
–, “a;rtioj,” GLNT, 1: 1265–68.
DELORME, JEAN, “Diversité et unité des ministères d’après le Nouveau Testament,” in idem,
ed., Ministère, 283–346.
–, ed., Le ministère et les ministères selon le Nouveau Testament: Dossier exégétique et
réflexion théologique (Parole de Dieu; Paris: Seuil, 1974).
DESTRO, ADRIANA, and MAURO PESCE, Come nasce una religione: Antropologia ed esegesi
del Vangelo di Giovanni (Percorsi 8; Roma: Laterza, 2000).
DIBELIUS, MARTIN, Der Brief des Jakobus (KEK 15; Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht,
1921).
–, Der Hirt des Hermas (HNT, Die apostolischen Väter 4; Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1923).
–, and HANS CONZELMANN, Die Pastoralbriefe (3rd ed.; HNT 13; Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck,
1955).
268 Bibliography
–, Die Formgeschichte des Evangeliums (ed. GÜNTHER BORNKAMM; 3rd ed.; Tübingen:
Mohr Siebeck, 1959).
DOCKX, S., “L’ordination de Barnabé et de Saul d’après Actes 13,1–3,” in idem,
Chronologies néotestamentaires et vie de l'Église primitive: Recherches exégétiques
(Gembloux: J. Duculot, 1976), 289–31; also published in NRTh 98 (1976): 238–50.
DODD, CHARLES H., Historical Tradition in the Fourth Gospel (Cambridge: Cambridge
DONAHUE, PAUL J., “Jewish Christianity in the Letters of Ignatius of Antioch,” VC 32
(1978): 81–93.
DONELSON, LEWIS R., “Gathering Apostolic Voices: Who Wrote 1 and 2 Peter and Jude”,
in Reading 1–2 Peter and Jude: A Resource for Students (ed. ERIC F. MASON and TROY
W. MARTIN; Resources for Biblical Studies 77; Atlanta: Society of Biblical Literature,
2014), 11–26.
DRAPER, JONATHAN A., “The Jesus Tradition in the Didache,” updated version of an article
published in The Jesus Tradition Outside the Gospel (ed. D. WENHAM; Gospel
Perspectives 5; Sheffield: JSOT Press, 1985), 269–89.
–, “Torah and Troublesome Apostles in the Didache Community,” NovT 33 (1991): 347–72.
–, “Barnabas and the Riddle of the Didache Revisited,” JSNT 58 (1995): 89–113.
–, “Social Ambiguity and the Production of Text: Prophets, Teachers, Bishops, and Deacons
and the Development of the Jesus Tradition in the Community of the Didache,” in
JEFFORD, ed., Didache, 284–312.
–, ed., The Didache in Modern Research (AGJU 37; Leiden: Brill, 1996).
–, “The Didache in Modern Research: An Overview,” in DRAPER, ed., Didache, 1–42.
–, “Weber, Theissen, and ‘Wandering Charismatics’ in the Didache,” JECS 6 (1998): 541–
76.
–, “Apostles, Teachers, and Evangelists: Stability and Movement of Functionaries in
Matthew, James, and the Didache,” in VAN DE SANDT, ed., Matthew, 139–76.
–, “First-fruit and the Support of Prophets, Teachers, and the Poor in Didache 13 in Relation
to New Testament Parallels,” in Trajectories through the New Testament and the
Apostolic Fathers (ed. ANDREW F. GREGORY and C. M. TUCKETT; Oxford: Oxford
–, “Conclusion: Missing Pieces in the Puzzle or Wild Goose Chase?”, in DRAPER, ed.,
Didache, 529–43.
–, and CLAYTON N. JEFFORD, eds., The Didache: A Missing Piece of the Puzzle in Early
Christianity (Early Christianity and Its Literature 14; Atlanta: Society of Biblical
Literature, 2015).
DROGE, ARTHUR J., AND JAMES D. TABOR, A Noble Death: Suicide and Martyrdom among
Christians and Jews in Antiquity (San Francisco: HarperCollins, 1992).
DUNN, JAMES D. G., Jesus and the Spirit: A Study of the Religious and Charismatic
Experience of Jesus and the First Christians as Reflected in the New Testament (London:
SCM Press, 1975).
–, “Prophetic ‘I’ Sayings and the Jesus Tradition: The Importance of Testing Prophetic
Utterances within Early Christianity,” NTS 24 (1978): 175–98.
DUPONT, JACQUES, “Les ministères de l’église naissante d’après les Actes des apôtres,” in
Ministères et célébration de l’Eucharistie: Sacramentum 1 (SA 61; Roma: Editrice
Anselmiana, 1973), 124–48.
–, “Dimensions du problème des charismes dans 1 Co 12–14,” in Charisma und Agape (1
Ko 12–14) (ed. LORENZO DE LORENZI; Monographie Reihe von “Benedictina” 7; Rome:
Abtei von St Paul vor den Mauern, 1983), 7–21.
Bibliography 269
EDGAR, DAVID HUTCHINSON, Has God Not Chosen the Poor? The Social Setting of the
Epistle of James (JSNTSup 206; Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 2001).
EDWARDS, MARK J., “Ignatius and the Second Century: An Answer to R. Hübner,” ZAC 2
(1998): 214–26.
ELLIS, E. EARLE, Pauline Theology: Ministry and Society (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans; Exeter:
Paternoster Press, 1989).
EYNDE, DAMIEN VAN DEN, Les Normes de l’Enseignement Chrétien dans la littérature
patristique des trois premiers siècles (Universitas Catholica Lovanienses. Dissertationes
ad gradum magistri in Facultate Theologica consequendum conscriptae. Series II. Tomus
25 ; Gembloux: J. Duculot; Paris: Gabalda, 1933).
FABRY, HEINZ-JOSEF, “‘Der Lehrer des Rechts’ – Eine Gestalt zwischen Vollmacht und
Ablehnung. Überlegungen zur Frühjüdischen Rezeption des Leidensknecht-Thematik,”
in Martyriumsvorstellungen in Antike und Mittelalter: Leben oder sterben für Gott? (ed.
REGINA GRUNDMANN and SEBASTIAN FUHRMANN; AGJU 80; Brill: Leiden, 2012), 22–
43.
FAIVRE, ALEXANDRE, Ordonner la fraternité: Pouvoir d’innover et retour à l’ordre dans
l’église ancienne (Paris: Cerf, 1992).
FALCETTA, ALESSANDRO, Testimonies: The Theory of James Rendel Harris in the Light of
Subsequent Research (Ph.D. diss., University of Birmingham, 2000).
–, “From Jesus to Polycarp: Reflections on the Origins of Early Christian Martyrdom,” CNS
27 (2006): 67–98.
FARRER, AUSTIN M., “The Ministry in the New Testament,” in The Apostolic Ministry:
Essays on the History and the Doctrine of Episcopacy (ed. KENNETH E. KIRK; London:
Hodder & Stoughton, 1946), 113–82.
FASCHER, ERICH, “Jesus der Lehrer: Ein Beitrag zur Frage nach dem „Quellort der
Kirchenidee“,” TLZ 79 (1954): 326–42.
FASOLA, UMBERTO, “Le due catacombe ebraiche di Villa Torlonia,” Rivista di archeologia
cristiana 52 (1976): 7–62.
FEE, GORDON D., 1 and 2 Timothy, Titus (NIBCNT; Peabody: Hendrickson, 1988).
FILSON, FLOYD V., “The Christian Teacher in the First Century,” JBL 60 (1941): 317–28.
FINLAN, STEPHEN, “Identity in the Didache Community,” in DRAPER, ed., Didache, 17–32.
FITZMYER, JOSEPH A., The Gospel According to Luke (I–IX) (AB 28; New York: Doubleday,
1981).
–, The Acts of the Apostles: A New Translation with Introduction and Commentary (AB 31;
New York: Doubleday, 1998).
FOHRER, GEORG, and ULRICH WILCKENS, “sofo,j( sofi,a,” GLNT, 12: 695–853.
FOSTER, PAUL, “Polycarp in the Writings of Ignatius,” in Studies on the Text of the New
Testament and Early Christianity: Essays in Honor of Michael W. Holmes on the
FRANCE, R. T., The Gospel According to Matthew: An Introduction and Commentary
(TNTC; Leicester: Intervarsity Press; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1985).
FRANKEMÖLLE, HUBERT, “Amtskritik im Matthäus-Evangelium?,” Biblica 54 (1973): 247–
62.
–, Der Brief des Jakobus: Kapitel 1 (ÖTK 17/1; Gütersloh: Gütersloher Verlagshaus;
Würzburg: Echter-Verlag, 1994).
–, Matthäus Kommentar (2 vols; Düsseldorf: Patmos, 1994–1997).
FRIEDRICH, GERHARD, “kh/rux,” GLNT, 5: 389–423.
270 Bibliography
GAGER, JOHN G., Kingdom and Community: The Social World of Early Christianity
(Prentice-Hall Studies in Religion; Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall, 1975).
GARLAND, DAVID E., The Intention of Matthew 23 (NovTSup 52; Leiden: Brill, 1979).
GEMÜNDEN, PETRA VON, MATTHIAS KONRADT and GERD THEISSEN, eds., Der
Jakobusbrief: Beiträge zu Rehabilitierung der „strohernen Epistel“ (Beiträge zum
Verstehen der Bibel 3; Münster: Lit, 2003).
GERHARDSSON, BIRGER, Memory and Manuscript: Oral Tradition and Written
Transmission in Rabbinic Judaism and Early Christianity (ASNU 22; Lund: C. W. K.
Gleerup; Copenhagen: Ejnar Munksgaard, 1961).
–, Tradition and Transmission in Early Christianity (ConBNT 20; Lund: C. W. K. Gleerup;
Copenhagen: Ejnar Munksgaard, 1964).
–, The Testing of God’s Son (Matt 4:1–11 & Par): An Analysis of an Early Christian Midrash
(ConBNT 2.1; Lund: C. W. K. Gleerup, 1966).
–, “Geistiger Opferdienst nach Matth 6,1–6.16–21,” Neues Testament und Geschichte:
Historisches Geschehen und Deutung im Neuen Testament. Oscar Cullmann zum 70.
Geburtstag (ed. HEINRICH BALTENSWEILER and BO REICKE; Zurich: Theologischer
Verlag; Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1972), 69–77.
–, review of Riesner, Jesus, TLZ 108 (1983): 503–504.
–, “The Secret of the Transmission of the Unwritten Jesus Tradition,” NTS 51 (2005): 1–18.
GIET, STANISLAS, Hermas et les pasteurs (Paris: Presses universitaires de France, 1963).
–, L’énigme de la Didache (Publications de la Faculté des Lettres de l’Université de
Strasbourg 149; Paris: Les Éditions Ophrys, 1970).
GNILKA, JOACHIM, “Geistliches Amt und Gemeinde nach Paulus,” in Foi et salut selon S.
Paul (Épître aux Romains 1,16): Colloque Oecumenique à l’abbaye de S. Paul hors le
murs, 16–21 Avril 1968 (ed. MARKUS BARTH et al.; AnBib 42; Rome: Institut Biblique
Pontifical, 1970), 233–45.
–, Das Matthäusevangelium (vol. 2; HTKNT; Freiburg im Breisgrau: Herder, 1988).
GOLDHAHN-MÜLLER, INGRID, Die Grenze der Gemeinde: Studien zum Problem der Zweiten
Busse im Neuen Testament unter Berücksichtigung der Entwicklung im 2. Jh. bis
Tertullian (GTA 39; Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1989).
GOLDSTEIN, JONATHAN A., II Maccabees: A New Translation with Introduction and
Commentary (AB 41A; New York: Doubleday, 1983).
GOPPELT, LEONHARD, Die apostolische und nachapostolische Zeit (Die Kirche in ihrer
Geschichte 1/A; Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1962).
GRABBE, LESTER L., Priests, Prophets, Diviners, Sages: A Socio-Historical Study of
Religious Specialists in Ancient Israel (Valley Forge: Trinity Press International, 1995).
GREGORY, ANDREW, “Reflections on the Didache and Its Community: A Response”, in
DRAPER, ed., Didache, 123–36.
GREEN, GENE L., Jude & 2 Peter (Baker Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament;
Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2008).
GRÄSSER, ERICH, An die Hebräer (2 vols.; EKK 17; Zurich: Benziger Verlag; Neukirchen:
Neukirchener Verlag, 1990–1997).
GREEVEN, HEINRICH, “Propheten, Lehrer, Vorsteher bei Paulus,” ZNT 44 (1952–1953): 1–
43; repr. in KERTELGE, ed., Amt, 305–361.
GRELOT, PIERRE, “La structure ministérielle de l’Église d’après saint Paul: À propos de
‘l’Église’ de H. Küng,” Istina 15 (1970): 389–424.
–, “Sur l’origine des ministères dans les églises pauliniennes,” Istina 16 (1971): 453–69.
GUNDRY, ROBERT H., The Use of the Old Testament in St. Matthew’s Gospel: With Special
Reference to the Messianic Hope (NovTSup 18; Leiden: Brill, 1967).
Bibliography 271
–, Matthew: A Commentary on His Handbook for a Mixed Church under Persecution (2nd
ed.; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1994).
GÜNTHER, ERNST, “Zeuge und Märtyrer,” in ZNW 47 (1956): 145–61.
HAENCHEN, ERNST, “Matthäus 23,” ZTK (1951): 38–63.
–, Die Apostelgeschichte (6th ed.; KEK 3; Göttingen: Vandenhoek & Ruprecht, 1968).
HADOT, PIERRE, Exercices spirituels et philosophie antique (rev. and enl. ed.; Paris: Albin
Michel, 2002).
HAGNER, DONALD A., Matthew 1–13 (WBC 33A; Dallas: Word Books, 1993).
HAHN, FERDINAND, Christologie Hoheitstitel: Ihre Geschichte im frühen Christentum
(Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1963).
–, “Charisma und Amt: Die Diskussion über das kirchliche Amt im Lichte der
neutestamentlichen Charismenlehre,” ZTK 76 (1979): 419–49.
–, “Grundfragen von Charisma und Amt in der gegenwärtigen neutestamentlichen
Forschung: Fragestellungen aus evangelischer Sicht,” in RENDTORFF, ed., Charisma,
335–49.
HEIL, CHRISTOPH, and GERTRAUD HARB, eds., Documenta Q: Reconstructions of Q
Through Two Centuries of Gospel Research Excerpted, Sorted and Evaluated. Q 6:37–
42 (Leuven: Peeters, 2011).
HAINZ, JOSEF, Ekklesia: Strukturen paulinischer Gemeinde-Theologie und Gemeinde-
Ordnung (Biblische Untersuchungen 9; Regensburg: Friedrich Pustet, 1972), 87–88.
HARDER, KENNETH J., and CLAYTON N. JEFFORD, “A Bibliography of Literature of the
Didache,” in JEFFORD, ed., Didache, 368–82.
HARNACK, ADOLF, Die Lehre der Zwölf Apostel nebst Untersuchungen zur ältesten
Geschichte der Kirchenverfassung und des Kirchenrechts (TU 2.1; Leipzig: J. C.
Hinrichs’sche Buchhandlung, 1884).
–, Entstehung und Entwicklung der Kirchenverfassung und des Kirchenrechts in den zwei
ersten Jahrhunderten nebst einer Kritik der Abhandlung R. Sohm’s: “Wesen und
Ursprung des Katholizismus” und Untersuchungen über “Evangelium,” “Wort Gottes”
und das trinitarische Bekenntnis (Leipzig: J. C. Hinrichs’sche Buchhandlung, 1910).
–, Die Mission und Ausbreitung des Christentums in den ersten drei Jahrhunderten (4th ed.;
Leipzig: J. C. Hinrichs’sche Buchhandlung, 1924).
HARRINGTON, DANIEL J., The Gospel of Matthew (SP 1; Collegeville, Minn.: The Liturgical
Press, 1991).
HARTIN, PATRICK J., James and the Q Sayings of Jesus (JSNTSup 47; Sheffield: Sheffield
–, “The Woes against the Pharisees (Matthew 23,1–39): The Reception and Development of
Q 11,39–52 within the Matthean Community,” in From Quest to Q: Festschrift James M.
Robinson (ed. JON MA. ASGEIRSSON et al.; BETL 146; Leuven: Leuven University Press,
2000), 265–83.
HARTOG, PAUL A., “The Opponents of Polycarp, Philippians, and 1 John,” in Trajectories
through the New Testament and the Apostolic Fathers (ed. ANDREW F. GREGORY and C.
M. TUCKETT; Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2005), 375–91.
–, Polycarp’s Epistle to the Philippians and The Martyrdom of Polycarp: Introduction, Text,
and Commentary (Oxford Apostolic Fathers; Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2013).
–, “The Good News in Old Texts? The ‘Gospel’ and the ‘Archives’ in Ign.Phld. 8.2,” in
Papers Presented at the Seventeenth International Conference on Patristic Studied Held
in Oxford 2015 (ed. MARKUS VINZENT; StPatr 93; Leuven: Peeters, 2017), 105–21.
272 Bibliography
HATCH, EDWIN, Die Gesellschaftsverfassung der christlichen Kirchen im Althertum: Acht

Vorlesungen (vom Verfasser autorisierte Übersetzung von Adolf Harnack) (Giessen:
Ricker, 1883); excerpts in KERTELGE, ed., Amt, 19–29.
HENGEL, MARTIN, “Der Jakobsbrief als antipaulinische Polemik,” Tradition and
Interpretation in the New Testament: Essays in Honor of E. Earle Ellis (ed. GERALD F.
HAWTHORNE and OTTO BETZ; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans; Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck,
1987), 248–65.
–, Sequela e carisma: Studio esegetico e di storia delle religioni su Mt. 8,21 s. e la chiamata
di Gesù alla sequela (trans. Giuliana Jacopino and Claudio Gianotto; Studi Biblici 90;
Brescia: Paideia Editrice, 1990).
HENNE, PHILIPPE, La Christologie chez Clément de Rome et dans le Pasteur d’Hermas
(Paradosis 33; Fribourg, Suisse: Éditions universitaires, 1992).
–, L’unité du Pasteur d’Hermas: Tradition et rédaction (ChRB 31; Paris: Gabalda, 1992).
HEZSER, CATHERINE, The Social Structure of the Rabbinic Movement in Roman Palestine
(TSAJ 66; Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1997).
–, Jewish Literacy in Roman Palestine (TSAJ 81; Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2001).
HILL, DAVID, “DIKAIOI as a Quasi-Technical Term,” NTS 11 (1964–1965): 296–302.
HOET, RIK, “Omnes autem vos fratres estis”: Étude du concept ecclésiologique des “frères”
selon Mt 23,8–12 (Analecta Gregoriana 232; Rome: Università Gregoriana Editrice,
1982).
HOFFMANN, PAUL, and VOLKER EID, Jesus von Nazareth und eine christliche Moral (QD
66; Freiburg im Breisgau: Herder, 1975).
HOLMBERG, BENGT, Paul and Power: The Structure of Authority in the Primitive Church as
Reflected in the Pauline Epistles (ConBNT 11; Lund: C. W. K. Gleerup, 1978).
HOLTZMANN, HEINRICH JULIUS, Lehrbuch der neutestamentlichen Theologie (2nd ed.; 2
vols.; Sammlung theologischer Lehrbücher; Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1911; 1st ed.
1897).
HOPPE, RUDOLF, Der theologische Hintergrund des Jakobusbriefes (FB 28; Würzburg:
Echter-Verlag, 1977).
HORST, MARISKA VAN DER, ‘Role Theory,’ Oxford Bibliographies, at http://www.oxford-
bibliographies.com [24.02.2019].
HUBER, KONRAD, “Zu Amt und Ämtern im Matthäusevangelium”, in Neutestamentliche
Ämtermodelle im Kontext (ed. THOMAS SCHMELLER, MARTIN EBNER, RUDOLPH HOPPE;
QD 239; Freiburg: Herder, 2010), 34–71.
HÜBNER, REINHARD M., “Thesen zur Echtheit und Datierung der sieben Briefe des Ignatius
von Antiochien,” ZAC 1 (1997): 44–72.
HUMMEL, REINHART, Die Auseinandersetzung zwischen Kirche und Judentum im
Matthäusevangelium (BEvT 33; München: Chr. Kaiser, 1963).
HVALVIK, REIDAR, The Struggle for Scripture and Covenant: The Purpose of the Epistle of
Barnabas and Jewish-Christian Competition in the Second Century (WUNT II/82;
Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1996).
ISACSON, MIKAEL, To Each Their Own Letter: Structural Themes, and Rhetorical Strategies
in the Letters of Ignatius of Antioch (ConBNT 42; Stockholm: Almqvist & Wiksell,
2004).
JEFFORD, CLAYTON N., “Did Ignatius of Antioch Know the Didache?,” in JEFFORD, ed.,
Didache, 330–51.
–, ed., The Didache in Context: Essays on Its Text, History and Transmission (NovTSup 77;
Leiden: Brill, 1995).
Bibliography 273
–, “Defining Exceptions in the Didache,” in Studies on the Text of the New Testament and
Early Christianity: Essays in Honor of Michael W. Holmes on the Occasion of His 65th
Birthday (ed. DANIEL M. GURTNER et al.; New Testament Tools, Studies and Documents
50; Leiden: Brill, 2015), 494–516.
JEREMIAS, JOACHIM, “grammateu,j,” GLNT, 2: 599–603.
–, Abba: Studien zur neutestamentlichen Theologie und Zeitgeschichte (Göttingen:
Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1966).
–, Neutestamentliche Theologie 1. Die Verkundigung Jesu (Gütersloh: Gerd Mohn, 1971).
JERVELL, JACOB, Die Apostelgeschichte (KEK 3; Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht,
1998).
JOHNSON, LUKE TIMOTHY, Hebrews: A Commentary (Louisville: Westminster John Knox
Press, 2006).
JONES, F. STANLEY, “The Ancient Christian Teacher in the Pseudo-Clementines,” in Early
Christian Voices in Texts, Traditions, and Symbols: Essays in Honor of François Bovon
(ed. DAVID H. WARREN; Biblical Interpretation Series 66; Leiden: Brill, 2003), 355–64.
KARRER, MARTIN, “Der lehrende Jesus: Neutestamentliche Erwägungen,” ZNT 83 (1992):
1–20.
KARRIS, ROBERT J., “The Background and Significance of the Polemic of the Pastoral
Epistles,” JBL 92 (1973): 549–64.
KEENER, CRAIG S., Paul, Women & Wives: Marriage and Women’s Ministry in the Letters
of Paul (Peabody: Hendrickson, 1992).
–, Acts: An Exegetical Commentary (4 vols.; Grand Rapids: Baker Academics, 2012–2015).
KLEIN, MARTIN, “Ein vollkommenes Werk”: Vollkommenheit, Gesetz und Gericht als
theologische Themen des Jakobusbriefes (BWA(N)T 139; Stuttgart: W. Kohlhammer,
1995).
KERTELGE, KARL, Gemeinde und Amt im Neuen Testament (Biblische Handbibliothek 10;
München: Kösel-Verlag, 1972).
–, ed., Das kirchliche Amt im Neuen Testament (Wege der Forschung 439; Darmstadt:
Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft, 1977).
KIESSLING, EMIL, Wörterbuch (Supplement 1; Amsterdam: Adolf M. Hakkert, 1969).
–, and FRIEDRICH PREISIGKE, Wörterbuch der griechischen Papyrusurkunden: Mit
Einschluss der griechischen Inschriften, Aufschriften, Ostraka, Mumienschilder usw. aus
Ägypten (4 vols.; Berlin, 1925–1944).
KISTEMAKER, SIMON J., Exposition of the Epistle to the Hebrews (New Testament
Commentary; Welwyn: Evangelical Press, 1984).
KITTEL, GERHARD, “Der geschichtliche Ort des Jakobusbriefes,” ZNW 41 (1942): 71–105.
KLAIBER, WALTER, Rechtfertigung und Gemeinde: Eine Untersuchung zum paulinischen
Kirchenverständnis (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1982).
KLAUCK, HANS-JOSEPH, “Das Amt in der Kirche nach Eph 4,1–16,” Wissenschaft und
Weisheit 36 (1973): 81–110.
KLEINKNECHT, KARL T., Der leidende Gerechtfertigte: Die alttestamentlich-jüdische
Tradition vom ‚leidenden Gerechten‘ und ihre Rezeption bei Paulus (WUNT II/13;
KOCH, DIETRICH-ALEX, “Die Entwiklung der Ämter in frühchristlichen Gemeinden
Kleinasiens”, in Neutestamentliche Ämtermodelle im Kontext (ed. THOMAS SCHMELLER,
MARTIN EBNER, RUDOLPH HOPPE; QD 239; Freiburg: Herder, 2010), 166–206.
KOESTER, CRAIG R., “The Epistle to the Hebrews in Recent Study,” CurBS 2 (1994): 123–
45.
274 Bibliography
KÖSTER, HELMUT, Synoptische Überlieferung bei den apostolischen Vätern (TU 65; Berlin:
Akademie-Verlag, 1957).
–, Introduction to the New Testament. 2. History and Literature of Early Christianity (2nd
ed.; New York: Walter de Gruyter, 2000).
KONRADT, MATTHIAS, Christliche Existenz nach dem Jakobusbrief: Eine Studie zu seiner
soteriologischen und ethischen Konzeption (SUNT 22; Göttingen: Vandenhoek &
Ruprecht, 1998).
–, “Der Jakobusbrief als Brief des Jakobus: Erwägungen zum historischen Kontext des
Jakobusbriefes im Lichte der traditionsgeschichtlichen Beziehungen zum 1. Petrusbrief
und zum Hintergrund der Autorfiktion,” in GEMÜNDEN, ed., Jakobusbrief, 17–53.
KRAFT, ROBERT A., “Barnabas’ Isaiah Text and the “Testimony Book” Hypothesis,” JBL 79
(1960): 336–50.
KRETSCHMAR, GEORG, “Ein Beitrag zur Frage nach dem Ursprung frühchristlicher Askese,”
ZTK 61 (1964): 27–66.
–, “Christliches Passa im 2. Jahrhundert und die Ausbildung der christlichen Theologie,”
RSR 60 (1972): 287–323.
KÜMMEL, WERNER GEORG, Einleitung in das Neuen Testament (17th ed.; Heidelberg:
Quelle & Meyer, 1973).
KÜNG, HANS, Die Kirche (Ökumenische Forschungen I. Ekklesiologische Abteilung 1;
Freiburg: Herder, 1967).
LAGRANGE, MARIE-JOSEPHE, Évangile selon Saint Matthieu (7th ed.; EB; Paris: Gabalda,
1948).
LAMPE, PETER, Die stadtrömischen Christen in den ersten beiden Jahrhunderten:
Untersuchungen zur Sozialgeschichte (2nd ed.; WUNT II/18; Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck,
1989).
LANE, WILLIAM L., Hebrews (2 vols.; WBC 47; Dallas: Word Books, 1991).
LAWS, SOPHIE, A Commentary on the Epistle of James (HNTC; San Francisco: Harper &
Row, 1980).
LEGASSE, SIMON, “Scribes et disciples de Jésus,” RB 68 (1961): 321–45 and 481–506.
LEMAIRE, ANDRE, “Les épîtres pastorales. B. Les ministères dans l’Église,” in DELORME,
ed., Ministère, 102–117.
LESKY, ALBIN, “Homer,” in Supplement XI to Paulys Realencyclopädie der classischen
Althertumswissenschaft (ed. A. F. PAULY et al.; new edition.; Stuttgart: Alfred
Druckenmüller Verlag, 1968), 687–846.
LEUTZSCH, MARTIN, Die Wahrnehmung sozialer Wirklichkeit im „Hirten des Hermas“
(FRLANT 150; Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1989).
LEVINE, LEE I., The Ancient Synagogue: The First Thousand Years (New Haven: Yale
LICHTENBERGER, HERMANN, “Jews and Christians in Rome in the Time of Nero: Josephus
and Paul in Rome,” in ANRW, 26.1: 2142–76.
LIDDELL, HENRY G., ROBERT SCOTT and HENRY S. JONES, Greek English Lexicon (9th ed.
with a revised supplement; Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1996).
LIEBERS, REINHOLD, “Wie geschrieben steht”: Studien zu einer besonderen Art
frühchristlichen Schriftbezuges (Berlin: Walter de Gruyter, 1993).
LIEU, JUDITH M., Image and Reality: The Jews in the World of the Christians in the Second
Century (Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1996).
LINDEMANN, ANDREAS, Paulus im ältesten Christentum: Das Bild des Apostels und die
Rezeption der paulinischen Theologie in der frühchristlichen Literatur bis Marcion (BHT
58; Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1979).
Bibliography 275
–, “Antwort auf die „Thesen zur Echtheit und Datierung der sieben Briefe des Ignatius von
Antiochien“,” ZAC 1 (1997): 185–94.
–, Paulus, Apostel und Lehrer der Kirche: Studien zu Paulus und zum frühen
Paulusverständnis (Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1999).
LINTON, OLOF, Das Problem der Urkirche in der neueren Forschung: Eine kritische
Darstellung (Uppsala: Almqvist & Wiksell, 1932).
LIPS, HERMANN, Glaube – Gemeinde – Amt: Zum Verständnis der Ordination in den
Pastoralbriefen (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1979).
LOHFINK, GERHARD, “Paulinische Theologie in der Rezeption der Pastoralbriefe,” in Paulus
in den neutestamentlichen Spatschriften: Zur Paulusrezeption im Neuen Testament (ed.
KARL KERTELGE; QD 89; Freiburg: Herder, 1981), 70–121
LOHSE, EDUARD, “ràbbi,( ràbbouni,,” in GLNT, 11: 911–22.
LUSINI, GIANFRANCO, “Nouvelles recherches sur le texte du Pasteur d’Hermas,” Apocrypha
12 (2001): 79–97.
LUZ, ULRICH, Das Evangelium nach Matthäus (4 vols.; EKK; Zurich and Düsseldorf:
Benziger Verlag; Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener Verlag: 1985–2002).
MAIER, GERHARD, “Die jüdischen Lehrer bei Josephus,” in Josephus – Studien:
Untersuchungen zu Josephus, dem antiken Judentum und dem Neuen Testament. Otto
Michel zum 70. Geburtstag gewidmet (ed. OTTO BETZ et al.; Göttingen: Vandenhoeck &
Ruprecht, 1974), 260–70.
MALHERBE, ABRAHAM J., “Medical Imagery in the Pastoral Epistles,” in Texts and
Testaments: Critical Essays on the Bible and Early Church Fathers (ed. W. EUGENE
MARCH; San Antonio: Trinity University Press, 1980), 19–35.
MARSHALL, I. HOWARD, in collaboration with PHILIP H. TOWNER, A Critical and Exegetical
Commentary on the Pastoral Epistles (ICC; Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1999).
MARTIN, DANIEL D., and JANELLE L. WILSON, “Role Theory,” in Encyclopedia of Social
Theory (ed. GEORGE RITZER; Thousand Oaks: SAGE Publications, 2005), vol. 1, 651–
55.
MARTIN, RALPH P., James (WBC 48; Waco: Word Books, 1988).
MCDONALD, JAMES I. H., Kerygma and Didache: The Articulation and Structure of the
Earliest Christian Message (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1980).
MEEKS, WAYNE A., The First Urban Christians: The Social World of the Apostle Paul (2nd
ed.; New Haven: Yale University Press, 2003; 1st ed. 1983).
MEIER, JOHN P., “Presbyteros in the Pastoral Epistles,” CBQ 35 (1973): 323–45.
–, A Marginal Jew: Rethinking the Historical Jesus. 1. The Roots of the Problem and the
Person (ABRL; New York: Doubleday, 1991).
–, “Matthew and Ignatius: A Response to William R. Schoedel,” in BALCH, ed., History,
178–86.
MEINHOLD, PETER, “Schweigende Bischöfe: Die Gegensätze in den kleinasiatischen
Gemeinden nach den Ignatianen,” in Festgabe Joseph Lortz. 2. Glaube und Geschichte
(ed. ERWIN ISERLOH and PETER MANNS; Baden Baden: Bruno Grimm, 1958), 467–90;
repr. in idem, Studien zu Ignatius von Antiochien (Veröffentlichungen des Instituts für
Europäische Geschichte Mainz 97; Wiesbaden: Franz Steiner, 1979), 19–36.
MERKLEIN, HELMUT, Das kirchliche Amt nach dem Epheserbrief (SANT 33; München:
Kösel Verlag, 1973).
METZNER, RAINER, “Der Lehrer Jakobus: Überlegungen zur Verfasserfrage des
Jakobusbriefes,” ZNW 104 (2013): 238–67.
MEYER, REGINA PACIS, Kirche und Mission im Epheserbrief (SBS 86; Stuttgart: Verlag
Katholisches Bibelwerk, 1977).
276 Bibliography
MEYER, RUDOLF, and HERMANN STRATHMANN, “leitourge,w,” GLNT, 6: 589–634.

MICHEL, OTTO, “oivkodomh,,” GLNT, 8: 408–415.
MILAVEC, AARON, The Didache: Faith, Hope, & Life of the Earliest Christian Communities,
50–70 C.E. (New York: The Newman Press, 2003).
–, “Synoptic Tradition in the Didache Revisited,” JECS 11 (2003): 443–80.
MOFFATT, JAMES, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Epistle to the Hebrews
(ICC; Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1924).
MOLLAND, EINAR, “The Heretics Combated by Ignatius of Antioch,” JEH 5 (1954): 1–6.
MORGAN, TERESA, “Education,” in The Oxford Encyclopedia of Ancient Greece and Rome
(ed. MICHAEL GAGARIN; 7 vols.; Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2010), vol. 3, 13–21.
MOSS, CANDIDA R., “On the Dating of Polycarp: Rethinking the Place of the Martyrdom of
Polycarp in the History of Christianity,” Early Christianity 1 (2010): 539–74.
–, “Current Trends in the Study of Early Christian Martyrdom,” Bulletin for the Study of
Religion 41 (2012): 22–29.
MOUNCE, WILLIAM D., Pastoral Epistles (WBC 46; Nashville: Thomas Nelson, 2000).
MÜHLSTEIGER, J., “Zum Verfassungsrecht der Frühkirche,” ZKT 99 (1977): 129–55 and
257–85.
MUNIER, CHARLES, “Où en est la question d’Ignace d’Antioche? Bilan d’un siècle de
recherches 1870–1988,” in ANRW, 27.1: 359–484.
MURPHY-O’CONNOR, JEROME, “2 Timothy Contrasted with 1 Timothy and Titus,” RB 98
(1991): 403–418.
MUßNER, FRANZ, Der Jakobusbrief (HTKNT 13/1; Freiburg: Herder, 1964).
MYLLYKOSKI, MATTI, “Wild Beasts and Rabid Dogs: The Riddle of the Heretics in the
Letters of Ignatius,” in The Formation of the Early Church (ed. JOSTEIN ÅDNA; WUNT
183; Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2005), 341–77.
NEWPORT, KENNETH G. C., Sources and Sitz im Leben of Matthew 23 (JSNTSup 117;
Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1995).
NEYMEYR, ULRICH, Die christlichen Lehrer im zweiten Jahrhundert: Ihre Lehrtätigkeit, ihr
Selbstverständnis und ihre Geschichte (Supplements to Vigiliae Christianae 4; Leiden:
Brill, 1989).
NEYREY, JOHN, “The Form and the Background of the Polemic in 2 Peter”, JBL 99 (1980),
417–31.
NEYRINCK, F., “John and the Synoptics: 1975–1990,” in John and the Synoptics (ed.
ADELBERT DENAUX; BETL 101; Leuven: University Press, 1992), 3–62.
NIEBUHR, KARL-WILHELM, “Der Jakobusbrief im Licht frühjüdischer Diasporabriefe,” NTS
44 (1998): 420–43.
NIEDERWIMMER, KURT, “An Examination of the Development of Itinerant Radicalism in
the Environment and Tradition of the Didache,” in DRAPER, ed., Didache, 321–39; trans.
of “Zur Entwicklungsgeschichte des Wanderradikalismus im Traditionsbereich der
Didache,” Wiener Studien 11 (1977): 145–67.
–, Die Didache (KAV 1; Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1989).
NIEMAND, CHRISTOPH, Die Fusswaschungserzählung des Johannesevangeliums: Untersu-
chungen zu ihrer Entstehung und Überlieferung im Urchristentum (SA 114; Rome:
Pontificio Ateneo S. Anselmo, 1993).
NILSSON, MARTIN P., Die hellenistische Schule (München: C. H. Beck, 1955).
NORELLI, ENRICO, L’Ascensione di Isaia: Studi su un apocrifo al crocevia dei cristianesimi
(Origini, Nuova Serie 1; Bologna: Dehoniane, 1994).
–, Ascensio Isaiae: Commentarius (Corpus Christianorum Series Apocryphorum 8;
Turnhout: Brepols, 1995).
Bibliography 277
–, “Ignazio di Antiochia combatte veramente dei cristiani giudaizzanti?,” in Verus Israel:

Nuove prospettive sul giudeocristianesimo. Atti del Colloquio di Torino (4–5 novembre
1999) (ed. GIOVANNI FILORAMO and CLAUDIO GIANOTTO; Brescia: Paideia Editrice,
2001), 220–64.
NORMANN, FRIEDRICH, Christos Didaskalos: Die Vorstellung von Christus als Lehrer in der
christlichen Literatur des ersten und zweiten Jahrhunderts (MBT 32; Münster:
Aschendorffsche Verlagsbuchhandlung, 1966).
OBERLINNER, LORENZ, Le lettere pastorali (3 vols.; trans. Paola Floricoli and Franco
Ronchi; Commentario Teologico del Nuovo Testamento 11/2; Brescia: Paideia Editrice,
1999).
OLLROG, WOLF-HENNING, Paulus und seine Mitarbeiter: Untersuchungen zu Theorie und
Praxis der paulinischen Mission (WMANT 50; Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchen Verlag,
1979).
O’NEILL, J. C., “The Work of Ministry in Ephesians 4:12,” ExpTim 112 (2001): 336–40.
OSIEK, CAROLYN, “The Oral World of Early Christianity in Rome: The Case of Hermas,” in
Judaism and Christianity in First-Century Rome (ed. KARL P. DONFRIED and PETER
RICHARDSON; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1998), 151–72.
–, Shepherd of Hermas (Hermeneia; Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1999).
PAGET, JAMES CARLETON, The Epistle of Barnabas: Outlook and Background (WUNT
II/64; Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1994).
PAPA, BENIGNO, “Profeti e dottori ad Antiochia di Siria,” Nicolaus 2 (1974): 231–55.
PATTERSON, STEPHEN J., “Didache 11–13: The Legacy of Radical Itinerancy in Early
Christianity,” in JEFFORD, ed., Didache, 313–29.
PENNER, TODD C., The Epistle of James and Eschatology: Re-Reading an Ancient Christian
Letter (JSNTSup 121; Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1996).
–, “The Epistle of James in Current Research,” CurBS 7 (1999): 257–308.
PERNVEDEN, LAGE, The Concept of the Church in the Shepherd of Hermas (Studia
Theologica Lundensia 27; Lund: Berlingska Boktryckeriet, 1966).
PETERSON, ERIK, “La Leitourgi,a des prophètes et des didascales à Antioche,” RSR 36
(1949): 577–79.
–, Frühkirche, Judentum und Gnosis: Studien und Untersuchungen (Rome: Herder, 1959).
POSCHMANN, BERNHARD, Paenitentia secunda: Die kirchliche Busse im ältesten
Christentum bis Cyprian und Origenes: Eine dogmengeschichtliche Untersuchung
(Theophaneia 1; Bonn: Peter Hanstein Verlagsbuchhandlung, 1940).
POWELL, MARK A., “Do and Keep What Moses Says (Matthew 23:2–7),” JBL 114 (1995):
419–35.
PREISS, THEO, “La mystique de l’imitation du Christ et de l’unité chez Ignace
d’Antioche,” in idem, La vie en Christ (Neuchatel: Delachaux & Niestlé, 1951), 7–45.
PRIGENT, PIERRE, Les testimonia dans le christianisme primitif: L’Épître de Barnabé I–XVI
et ses sources (EB; Paris: Gabalda, 1961).
–, “L’hérésie asiate et l’église confessante de l’Apocalypse à Ignace,” VC 31 (1977): 1–22.
PRIOR, MICHAEL, Paul the Letter-Writer and the Second Letter to Timothy (JSNTSup 23;
Sheffield: JSOT Press, 1989).
PROSTMEIER, FERDINAND R., Der Barnabasbrief (KAV 8; Göttingen: Vandenhoeck &
Ruprecht, 1999).
REDALIE, YANN, Paul après Paul: Le temps, le salut, la morale selon les épîtres à Timothée
et à Tite (MdB 31; Geneva: Labor et Fides, 1994).
REESE, RUTH ANNE, 2 Peter & Jude (The Horizons New Testament Commentary; Grand
Rapids: Eerdmans, 2007).
278 Bibliography
REGUL, JÜRGEL, Die antimarcionitischen Evangelienprologe (Vetus Latina. Aus der

Geschichte der lateinischen Bibel 6; Freiburg: Herder, 1969).
REILING, JANNES, Hermas and Christian Prophecy: A Study of the Eleventh Mandate
(NovTSup 37; Leiden: Brill, 1973).
REISCH, E., “Dida,skaloj,” Paulys Realencyclopädie der classischen Altertumswissenschaft
(ed. A. F. PAULY and GEORG WISSOWA; Stuttgart: J. B. Metzlersche Verlagsbuchhand-
lung, 1903), vol. 5, 401–406.
RENDTORFF, TRUTZ, ed., Charisma und Institution (Gütersloh: Gerd Mohn, 1985).
RENGSTORF, KARL H., “avposte,llw( ktl),” GLNT, 1: 1063–1196.
–, “dida,skw( ktl),” GLNT, 2: 1093–1172.
–, “manqa,nw( ktl),” GLNT, 6: 1053–1238.
–, ed., A Complete Concordance to Flavius Josephus (4 vols.; Leiden: Brill, 1973–1994).
RIESENFELD, HARAN, “The Gospel Tradition and Its Beginnings,” in SE I: Papers Presented
to the International Congress on “The Four Gospels in 1957” Held at Christ Church,
Oxford, 1957 (ed. KURT ALAND et al.; TU 73; Berlin: Akademie Verlag, 1959), 43–65;
repr. in HARALD RIESENFELD, The Gospel Tradition (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1970),
1–29.
RIESNER, RAINER, Jesus als Lehrer: Eine Untersuchung zum Ursprung der Evangelien-
Überlieferung (WUNT II/7; Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1981).
–, Paul’s Early Period: Chronology, Mission Strategy, Theology (trans. Doug Scott; Grand
Rapids: Eerdmans, 1998).
RIGGENBACH, EDUARD, Der Brief an die Hebräer (Kommentar zum Neuen Testament 14;
Leipzig: A. Deichert, 1913).
RIUS-CAMPS, JOSEP, The Four Authentic Letters of Ignatius, the Martyr (OrChrAn 213;
Rome: Pontificium Institutum Orientalium Studiorum, 1980).
RIZZI, MARCO, “Jews and Christians under Trajan and the Date of Ignatius’ Martyrdom”, in
Jews and Christians in the First and Second Centuries: The Interbellum 70–132 CE (ed.
JOSHUA SCHWARTZ and PETER J. TOMSON; Compendia Rerum Iudaicarum ad Novum
Testamentum 15; Brill: Leiden, 2018), 119–26.
ROBERTS, JOHN HENRY, Die Opbou van die Kerk volgens die Efese-brief (Gröningen:
V.R.B., 1963).
ROBINSON, THOMAS A., Who Were the First Christians? Dismantling the Urban Thesis
(Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2017).
ROHDE, JOACHIM, “Häresie und Schisma im Ersten Clemensbrief und in den Ignatius-
Briefen,” NovT 10 (1968): 217–33.
ROLOFF, JÜRGEN, “Amt / Ämter / Amtverständnis IV. Im Neuen Testament,” in
Theologische Realenzyclopädie (ed. GERHARD KRAUSE and GERHARD MÜLLER; Berlin:
Walter de Gruyter, 1978), vol. 2, 509–533.
–, Der erste Brief an Timotheus (EKK 15; Zurich: Benziger; Neukirchen-Vluyn:
Neukirchener Verlag, 1988).
RORDORF, WILLY, “An Aspect of the Judeo-Christian Ethic: The Two Ways,” in DRAPER,
ed., Didache, 148–64; trans. of “Un chapitre d’éthique judéo-chrétienne: les Deux voies,”
RSR 60 (1972): 109–128.
ROSE-GAIER, DEBORAH, “The Didache: A Community of Equals,” paper delivered during
the session on “Women and the (Search for the) Historical Jesus,” at the Society of
Biblical Literature 1996 annual meeting in New Orleans; summary in CROSSAN, Birth,
369–71.
ROSENFELD, BEN ZION, “The Title ‘Rabbi’ in Third- to Seventh-Century Inscriptions in
Palestine: Revisited,” JJS 61 (2010): 235–56.
Bibliography 279
RUPPERT, LOTHAR, Der leidende Gerechte: Eine motivgeschichtliche Untersuchung zum

Alten Testament und zwischentestamentlichen Judentum (FB 5; Würzburg: Echter-
Verlag, 1972).
–, Der leidende Gerechte und seine Feinde: Eine Wortfelduntersuchung (Würzburg: Echter-
Verlag, 1973).
–, “Der leidende (bedrängte, getötete) Gerechte nach den Spätschriften des Alten Testaments
(inklusive Septuaginta) und der (nichtrabbinischen) Literatur des Frühjudentums unter
besonderer Berücksichtigung des Gottesbildes,” in Die Entstehung der jüdischen
Martyrologie (ed. J. W. VAN HENTEN et al.; StPB 38; Leiden: Brill, 1989), 76–87.
RUTGERS, LEONARD V., “Überlegungen zu den jüdischen Katakomben Roms,” JAC 33
(1990): 140–57.
SALDARINI, ANTHONY J., Pharisees, Scribes and Sadducees in Palestinian Society
(Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1989), 241–76.
–, “Delegitimation of Leaders in Matthew 23,” CBQ 54 (1992): 659–80.
–, “Scribes,” ABD, 5: 1012–16.
SAND, ALEXANDER, “Propheten, Weise und Schriftkundige in der Gemeinde des
Matthäusevangeliums,” in Kirche im Werden: Studien zum Thema Amt und Gemeinde im
Neuen Testament. In Zusammenarbeit mit dem Collegium Biblicum München (ed. JOSEF
HAINZ; München: Ferdinand Schöningh, 1976), 167–84.
SANDT, HUUB VAN DE, and DAVID FLUSSER, eds., The Didache: Its Jewish Sources and Its
Place in Early Judaism and Christianity (CRINT, Jewish Traditions in Early Christian
Literature 5; Assen: Royal van Gorcum; Minneapolis: Fortress, 2002).
SAß, GERHARD, “Die Apostel in der Didache,” in In Memoriam Ernst Lohmeyer (ed.
WERNER SCHMAUCH; Stuttgart: Evangelisches Verlagswerk, 1951), 233–39.
SCHAMS, CHRISTINE, Jewish Scribes in the Second-Temple Period (JSOTSup 291; Sheffield:
Sheffield Academic Press, 1998).
SCHLARB, EGBERT, Die gesunde Lehre: Häresie und Wahrheit im Spiegel der Pastoralbriefe
(Marburger Theologische Studien 28; Marburg: N. G. Elwert Verlag, 1990).
SCHLATTER, A., Der Evangelist Matthäus: Seine Sprache, sein Ziel, seine Selbständigkeit.
Ein Kommentar zum ersten Evangelium (4th ed.; Stuttgart: Calwer Verlag, 1957).
SCHLIER, HEINRICH, “ga,la,” GLNT, 2: 345–50.
–, La lettera agli Efesini: Testo greco e traduzione (trans. Omero Soffritti; 2nd ed.;
Commentario Teologico del Nuovo Testamento 10/2; Brescia: Paideia Editrice, 1973).
SCHLOSSER, JACQUES, “La genèse de Luc, XXII, 25–27,” RB 89 (1982): 52–70.
–, “La didascalie et ses agents dans les épîtres pastorales,” in RevScRel 59 (1985): 81–94.
SCHMELLER, THOMAS, Schulen im Neuen Testament? Zur Stellung des Urchristentums in
der Bildungswelt seiner Zeit. Mit einem Beitrag von Christian Cebulj zur Johanneischen
Schule (Herders Biblische Studien 30; Freiburg: Herder, 2001).
SCHMITZ, OTTO, “parakale,w,” GLNT, 9: 599–674.
SCHNABEL, ECKHARD J., Early Christian Mission (2 vols.; Downers Grove: Intervarsity
Press; Leicester: Apollos, 2004).
SCHNACKENBURG, RUDOLF, Die Kirche im Neuen Testament: Ihre Wirklichkeit und
theologische Deutung, ihr Wesen und Geheimnis (QD 14; Freiburg: Herder, 1961).
–, Das Johannesevangelium (vol. 3; HTKNT 4.3; Freiburg: Herder, 1975).
–, Der Brief an die Epheser (EKK 10; Köln: Benziger; Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener
Verlag, 1982).
–, “Charisma und Amt in der gegenwärtige neutestamentliche Forschung: Aspekte,
Tendenzen und Fragestellungen aus römisch-katholischer Sicht,” RENDTORFF, ed.,
Charisma, 350–67.
280 Bibliography
SCHNIDER, FRANZ, Der Jakobusbrief (RNT; Regensburg: Friedrich Pustet, 1987).

SCHOEDEL, WILLIAM R., “Ignatius and the Archives,” HTR 71 (1978): 97–106.
–, Ignatius of Antioch: A Commentary on the Letters of Ignatius of Antioch (Hermeneia;
Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1985).
–, “Ignatius and the Reception of Matthew in Antioch,” in BALCH, ed., History, 129–77.
–, “Polycarp of Smyrna and Ignatius of Antioch,” ANRW 27.1: 272–358.
SCHÖLLGEN, GEORG, “The Didache as a Church Order: An Examination of the Purpose for
the Composition of the Didache and Its Consequences for Interpretation,” in JEFFORD,
ed., Didache, 43–71; trans. of “Die Didache als Kirchenordnung: Zur Frage des
Abfassungszweckes und seinen Konsequenzen für die Interpretation,” JAC 29 (1986): 5–
26.
–, “Probleme der frühchristlichen Sozialgeschichte: Einwände gegen Peter Lampes Buch
über »Die stadtrömischen Christen in den ersten beiden Jahrhunderten«,” JAC 32 (1989):
23–40.
–, “Wandernde oder seßhafte Lehrer in der Didache?,” BN 52 (1990): 19–26.
–, “Die Ignatianen als pseudepigraphisches Briefcorpus: Anmerkung zu den Thesen von
Reinhard M. Hübner,” ZAC 2 (1998): 16–25.
SCHRAGE, WOLFGANG, Der erste Brief an die Korinther (4 vols.; EKK 7; Düsseldorf:
Benziger Verlag; Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener Verlag, 1991–2001).
SCHREIBER, ALFRED, Die Gemeinde in Korinth: Versuch einer gruppendynamischen
Betrachtung der Entwicklung der Gemeinde von Korinth auf der Basis der ersten
Korintherbriefes (NTAbh 12; Münster: Aschendorff, 1977).
SCHULZ, SIGFRIED, “Die Charismenlehre des Paulus: Bilanz der Probleme und Ergebnisse,”
in Rechtfertigung: Festschrift für Ernst Käsemann zum 70. Geburtstag (ed. JOHANNES
FRIEDRICH et al.; Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck; Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1976),
443–60.
SCHÜRER, EMIL, Storia del popolo giudaico al tempo di Gesù Cristo (trans. Vincenzo Gatti;
3 vols.; Brescia: Paideia Editrice, 1987).
SCHÜRMANN, HEINZ, “„… und Lehrer“: Die geistliche Eigenart des Lehrdienstes und sein
Verhältnis zu anderen geistlichen Diensten im neutestamentlichen Zeitalter,” in idem,
Orientierungen am Neuen Testament (KBANT; Düsseldorf: Patmos, 1978); rev. essay
originally published in Dienst der Vermittlung: Festschrift zum 25 – jährigen Bestehen
des philosophisch-theologischen Studiums im Priesterseminar Erfurt (ed. WILHELM
ERNST et al.; ETS 37; Leipzig: St. Benno-Verlag, 1977), 107–147.
SCHWEIZER, EDUARD, Gemeinde und Gemeindeordnung im Neuen Testament (ATANT 35;
Zurich: Zwingli Verlag, 1959).
–, “sw/ma,” GLNT, 13: 609–790.
–, “Konzeptionen von Charisma und Amt im Neue Testament,” in RENDTORFF, ed.,
Charisma, 316–34.
SCHWEMER, ANNA MARIA, “Prophet, Zeuge und Märtyrer: Zur Entstehung des
Märtyrerbegriffs im frühesten Christentum,” ZTK 96 (1999): 320–50.
SEITZ, O. J. F., “The Commission of Prophets and “Apostles”: A Re-Examination of
Matthew 23,34 with Luke 11,49,” in SE IV: Papers Presented to the Third International
Congress on New Testament Studies Held at Christ Church, Oxford 1965. Part I. The
New Testament Scriptures (vol. 4; ed. FRANK L. CROSS; TU 102; Berlin: Akademie
Verlag, 1968), 236–40.
SELLIN, GERHARD, Der Brief an die Epheser (KEK 8; Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht,
2008).
Bibliography 281
SHEPHERD, MASSEY H., “The Epistle of James and the Gospel of Matthew,” JBL 75 (1956):
40–51.
SIM, DAVID C., “Reconstructing the Religious and Social Milieu of Matthew: Methods,
Sources, and Possible Results,” in Matthew, James, and Didache: Three Related
Documents in Their Jewish and Christian Setting (ed. JURGEN K. ZANGENBERG and
HUBERTUS WALTHERUS MARIA VAN DE SANDT; Symposium Series 45; Atlanta: Society
of Biblical Literature, 2008), 13–32.
SKARSAUNE, OSKAR, The Proof from Prophecy: A Study in Justin Martyr’s Proof-Text
Tradition: Text-Type, Provenance, Theological Profile (NovTSup 56; Leiden: Brill,
1987).
SLEE, MICHELLE, The Church in Antioch in the First Century CE (JSNTSup 244; Sheffield
SMITH, JULIEN C. H., “The Epistle of Barnabas and the Two Ways of Teaching Authority,”
VC 68 (2014), 465–97.
SMITH, MORTON, “A Comparison of Early Christian and Early Rabbinic Tradition,” JBL 82
(1963): 169–76.
SNYMAN, ANDRIES H., “Hebrews 6.4–6: From a Semiotic Discourse Perspective,” in
Discourse Analysis and the New Testament: Approaches and Results (ed. STANLEY E.
PORTER and JEFFREY T. REED; JSNTSup 170; Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press,
1999), 354–68.
SOHM, RUDOLPH, Wesen und Ursprung des Katholizismus (Leipzig: Teubner, 1909).
–, Kirchenrecht. 1. Die geschichtlichen Grundlagen (Systematisches Handbuch der Deut-
schen Rechtswissenschaft 8; Berlin: Duncker & Humblot, 1892).
SOIRON, THADDÄUS, Die Kirche als der Leib Christi nach der Lehre des hl. Paulus
exegetisch, systematisch und in der theologischen wie praktischen Bedeutung dargestellt
(Düsseldorf: Patmos-Verlag, 1951).
SPICQ, CESLAS, Saint Paul: L’Épître aux Hebreux (2 vols.; EB; Paris: Gabalda, 1952).
–, “Une allusion au Docteur de justice dans Matthieu, XXIII, 10?,” RB 66 (1959): 387–96.
–, Saint Paul: Les Épîtres pastorales (2 vols.; 4th ed.; EB; Paris: Gabalda, 1969).
STECK, ODIL H., Israel und das gewaltsame Geschick der Propheten: Untersuchungen zur
Überlieferung des deuteronomischen Geschichtsbildes im Alten Testament, Spätjuden-
tum und Urchristentum (WMANT 23; Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener Verlag, 1967).
STEMBERGER, GÜNTER, “Zur Frage von Ordination und Ämtern im rabbinischen Judentum,”
in Ordination − mehr als eine Beauftragung? (ed. KONRAD HUBER and ANDREAS
VONACH; Synagoge und Kirchen 3; Wien: LIT-Verlag, 2010), 89–104.
STEMPEL, HERMANN-AD., “Der Lehrer in der ”Lehre der zwölf Apostel”,” VC 34 (1980):
209–217.
STENDAHL, KRISTER, The School of St. Matthew and Its Use of the Old Testament (ASNU
20; Lund: C. W. K. Gleerup; Copenhagen: Ejnar Munksgaard, 1954).
STRATHMANN, HERMANN, “ma,rtuj,” GLNT, 6: 1269–1392.
STROUMSA, GEDALIAHU G., “Herméneutique biblique et identité: l’exemple d’Isaac,” RB 99
(1992): 529–43.
SUKENIK, ELEAZAR L., “(‫[ ”מערת־קברים יהודית במורד הר־הזיתים )ב׳‬A Jewish Cave of Tombs on
the Slope of the Mount of Olives], Tarbiz 1/4 (1930): 137–43.
SUMNEY, JERRY L., ‘Servants of Satan,’ ‘False Brothers’ and Other Opponents of Paul
(JSNTSup 188; Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1999).
SWARTLEY, WILLARD M., “The Imitatio Christi in the Ignatian Letters,” VC 27 (1973): 81–
103.
282 Bibliography
THATCHER, TOM, “The Rejected Prophet and the Royal Official (John 4,43–54): A Case
Study in the Relationship between John and the Synoptics,” in Studies in the Gospel of
John and Its Christology: Festschrift Gilbert Van Belle (ed. JOSEPH VERHEYDEN et al.;
BETL 265; Leuven: Peeters, 2015), 119–48.
THEISSEN, GERD, “Wanderradikalismus: Literatursoziologische Aspekte der Überlieferung
von Worten Jesu im Urchristentum,” in idem, Studien, 79–105; first published in ZTK 70
(1973): 245–71.
–,“Legitimation und Lebensunterhalt: Ein Beitrag zur Soziologie urchristlicher Missionare,”
in Studien, 201–230; repr. from NTS 21 (1974–75): 192–221.
–, “„Wir haben alles verlassen“ (Mc. X. 28): Nachfolge und soziale Entwurzelung in der
jüdisch-palästinischen Gesellschaft des 1. Jahrhunderts n. Ch.,” in idem, Studien, 106–
141; repr. from NovT 19 (1977): 161–96.
–, Soziologie der Jesusbewegung: Ein Beitrag zur Entstehungsgeschichte des Urchristen-
tums (2nd ed.; Theologische Existenz heute 194; München: Chr. Kaiser Verlag, 1978; 1st
ed. 1977).
–, Studien zur Soziologie des Urchristentum (2nd ed.; WUNT 19; Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck,
1983).
–, “Éthique et communauté dans l’Épître de Jacques,” ETR 77 (2002): 157–76; rev. ed. in
“Ethos und Gemeinde im Jakobusbrief: Überlegungen zu seinem „Sitz im Leben“,” in
GEMÜNDEN, ed., Jakobusbrief, 142–65.
THIESSEN, WERNER, Christen in Ephesus: Die historische und theologische Situation in
vorpaulinischer und paulinischer Zeit und zur Zeit der Apostelgeschichte und der
Pastoralbriefe (Texte und Arbeiten zum neutestamentlichen Zeitalter 12; Tübingen: A.
Francke Verlag, 1995).
THOMAS, JOHN C., Footwashing in John 13 and the Johannine Community (JSNTSup 61;
Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1991).
THOMASSEN, EINAR, “Orthodoxy and Heresy in Second-Century Rome,” HTR 97 (2004):
241–56.
THÜSING, WILHELM, “„Milch“ und „feste Speise“ (1Kor 3,1f. und Hebr 5,11–6,3):
Elementarkatechese und theologische Vertiefung im neutestamentlicher Sicht,” TTZ 76
(1967): 233–46 and 261–80.
TOWNER, PHILIP H., “Gnosis and Realized Eschatology in Ephesus (of the Pastoral Epistles)
and the Corinthian Enthusiasm,” JSNT 31 (1987): 95–124.
–, The Goal of Our Instruction: The Structure of Theology and Ethics in the Pastoral Epistles
(JSNTSup 34; Sheffield: JSOT Press, 1989).
TREBILCO, PAUL, The Early Christians in Ephesus from Paul to Ignatius (WUNT 166;
TREVETT, CHRISTINE, “Prophecy and Anti-Episcopal Activity: a Third Error Combatted by
Ignatius?,” JEH 34 (1983): 1–18.
–, “Apocalypse, Ignatius, Montanism: Seeking the Seeds,” VC 43 (1989): 313–38.
TRILLING, WOLFGANG, “Amt und Amtsverständnis bei Matthäus,” in KERTELGE, ed., Amt,
524–42; first published in Mélanges Bibliques en hommage au R.P. Béda Rigaux (ed.
ALBERT DESCAMPS and ANDRÉ DE HALLEUX; Gembloux: J. Duculot 1970), 29–44.
TROCMÉ, ÉTIENNE, “Les Églises pauliniennes vues du dehors: Jacques 2, 1 à 3, 13,” in SE
II: Papers Presented to the Second International Congress on New Testament Studies
Held at Christ Church, Oxford, 1961 (ed. FRANK L. CROSS; TU 87; Berlin: Akademie-
Verlag, 1964), 660–69.
Bibliography 283
TROPPER, VERONIKA, Jesus Didaskalos: Studien zu Jesus als Lehrer bei den Synoptikern
und im Rahmen der antiken Kultur- und Sozialgeschichte (ÖBS 42; Frankfurt am Main:
Peter Lang, 2012).
TRUMMER, PETER, Die Paulustradition der Pastoralbriefe (BBET 8; Frankfurt am Main:
Peter Lang, 1978).
TURNER, DAVID L., Israel’s Last Prophet: Jesus and the Jewish Leaders in Matthew 23
(Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 2015).
UEBELE, WOLFRAM, “Viele Verführer sind in die Welt ausgegangen”: Die Gegner in den
Briefen des Ignatius von Antiochien und in den Johannesbriefen (BWANT 151; Stuttgart:
W. Kohlhammer, 2001).
VIVIANO, BENEDICT, “Social World and Community Leadership: The Case of Matthew
23.1–12, 34,” JSNT 39 (1990): 3–21.
–, “Rabbouni and Mark 9:5,” RB 97 (1990): 207–218; repr. in idem, Trinity – Kingdom –
Church: Essays in Biblical Theology (NTOA 48; Freiburg: Universitätsverlag;
Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2001), 64–74.
VOGT, HERMANN JOSEF, “Bemerkungen zur Echtheit der Ignatiusbriefe,” ZAC 3 (1999): 50–
63.
VOKES, F. E., “Life and Order in an Early Church: the Didache,” in ANRW, 27.1: 209–233.
VÖÖBUS, ARTHUR, The Statutes of the School of Nisibis: Edited, Translated and Furnished
with a Commentary (Papers of the Estonian Theological Society in Exile. Scholarly
Series 12; Stockholm: Etse, 1961).
VOUGA, FRANÇOIS, L’Épître de Saint Jacques, 94–95 (CNT 2/13a; Geneva: Labor et Fides,
1984).
WAGNER, JOCHEN, Die Anfänge des Amtes in der Kirche: Presbyter und Episkopen in der
frühchristlichen Literatur (Texte und Arbeiten zum neutestamentlichen Zeitalter 53;
Tübingen: Francke Verlag, 2011).
WANKE, JOACHIM, “Die urchristlichen Lehrer nach dem Zeugnis des Jakobusbriefes,” in Die
Kirche des Anfangs: Für Heinz Schürmann (ed. RUDOLF SCHNACKENBURG et al.;
Freiburg: Herder, 1978), 489–511.
WAYMENT, THOMAS A., “Christian Teachers in Matthew and Thomas: The Possibility of
Becoming a Master,” JECS 12 (2004): 289–311.
WEAVER, DOROTHY JEAN, Matthew’s Missionary Discourse: A Literary Critical Analysis
(JSNTSup 38; Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1990).
WEBER, MAX, Gesammelte Aufsätze zur Religionssoziologie. 3. Das antike Judentum
(Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1921).
–, Wirtschaft und Gesellschaft: Grundriss der verstehenden Soziologie (ed. JOHANNES
WINCKELMANN; 2 vols.; 4th ed.; Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1956).
–, Briefe 1906–1908 (ed. M. R. LEPSIUS and WOLFGANG J. MOMMSEN; Max Weber-
Gesamtausgabe 2/5; Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1990).
WEDDERBURN, ALEXANDER J. M., Baptism and Resurrection: Studies in Pauline Theology
against Its Graeco-Roman Background (WUNT 44; Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1987).
WEISER, ALFONS, Der zweite Brief an Timotheus (EKK 16/1; Düsseldorf: Benziger Verlag;
Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener Verlag, 2003).
WEISS, ALEXANDER, Soziale Elite und Christentum: Studien zu ordo-Angehörigen unter den
frühen Christen (Millenium Studien 52; Berlin: Walter de Gruyter, 2015).
WEISS, HANS-FRIEDRICH, Der Brief an die Hebräer (KEK 15; Göttingen: Vandenhoeck &
Ruprecht, 1991).
WENGST, KLAUS, Tradition und Theologie des Barnabasbriefes (Arbeiten zur Kirchenge-
schichte 42; Berlin: Walter de Gruyter, 1971).
284 Bibliography
WHITE, L. MICHAEL, “Crisis Management and Boundary Maintenance: The Social Location
of the Matthean Community,” in BALCH, ed., History, 211–47.
WILKINS, MICHAEL J., The Concept of Disciple in Matthew’s Gospel as Reflected in the Use
of the Term Maqhth,j (NovTSup 59; Leiden: Brill, 1988).
–, “The Interplay of Ministry, Martyrdom and Discipleship in Ignatius of Antioch,” in
Worship, Theology and Ministry in the Early Church: Essays in Honor of Ralph P. Martin
(ed. MICHAEL J. WILKINS and TERENCE PAIGE; JSNTSup 87; Sheffield: JSOT Press,
1992), 294–315.
WINTER, B. W., “The Messiah as the Tutor: The Meaning of kaqhghth,j in Matthew 23:10,”
TynBul 42 (1991): 152–57.
WITMER, STEPHEN, “qeodi,daktoi in 1 Thessalonians: A Pauline Neologism,” NTS 52 (2006):
239–50.
WOLTER, MICHAEL, Die Pastoralbriefe als Paulustradition (FRLANT 146; Göttingen:
Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1988).
ZIMMERMANN, ALFRED F., Die urchristlichen Lehrer: Studien zum Tradentenkreis der
dida,skaloi im frühen Urchristentum (WUNT II/12; Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1984).
Index of References
Old Testament
Genesis Ezra
1–2 152 7:10 49
2 152 9 95
2:17 237
2:24 152 Nehemiah
3:15 237 9:26 93
5 221
Psalms
Exodus 70[71]:19 222
16:1b 251
16:2a 251 Proverbs
2:17 173
Numbers 7:2 125
25:1–8 41
Isaiah
Deuteronomy 16:1b 251
1:13 105 29:13 173
1:15 105 30:20 86
4:6 105 52:13–53:12 93
11:2 222
25:4 161, 162 Jeremiah
32:10 125 2:3 251
2:12–13ab 251
1 Kings 2:13bcd 251
22:22–23 244 3:8 251
14:14–15 244
2 Kings 23:25–26 244
2:12 83 23:32 244
6:21 84 33 (26):15 (LXX) 156
13:14 84 34:15 244
8:9 84 35 (28):9 (LXX) 156
17 95 44 95
2 Chronicles Ezekiel
36 95 13:9 244
18:21–22 244 22:28 244
286 Index of References
Daniel Joel
5:12 105 2:23 86
12:1–3 94
12:3 76 Zechariah
13:2 244
New Testament
Matthew 10 6, 93, 171

1:23 91 10:1–11:1 17
2:6, 15 91 10:2 71
3:15 66 10:4–25 22
5:11–12 92 10:5 71
5:17–20 90 10:5–15 74
5:19 86, 89 10:5b–15 67
5:19–20 88, 89 10:5b–23 67
5:20 89, 224, 237, 10:8 74
253 10:10–13 74
5:22 83 10:9–10 75, 151
5:23–24 83 10:16 71
5:27–30 115 10:16–23 67
5:34–37 110 10:17 69, 92
5:45 81 10:17–22 68
5:45, 48 85 10:17–23 210
5:47 83 10:17–25 68
6:1 81, 85 10:22 95
6:1–10 100 10:22–25c 71
6:8 81, 85 10:24 31, 79, 197
6:89 81, 85 10:24–25 30, 45, 67, 68,
6:14 81,85 69, 70, 74, 85,
6:15 85 210, 256
6:19–21 74 10:24–42 67
6:24–34 74 10:25 37, 197, 256
6:25–34 75 10:25cd 74, 75
6:26 85 10:26 95
6:32 85 10:26–32 67
7: 3 83 10:28 210
7:4 83 10:32–33 67
7:5 83 10:34–37 67
7:11 85 10:34–39 67
7:15 75 10:40 71, 77
7:15–20 75, 121 10:40–41 76
8:19 85 10:40–42 67, 75
9:11 45, 85 10:41 76, 92, 95, 224,
9:16–17 231 253
9:36–10:5a 67 12:22–27 68
9:36–11:1 67 12:33–35 69
Index of References 287
12:38 85 23:9 83, 84, 85

12:48 83 23:9–12 87
12:49 83 23:10 37, 85
12:50 83 23:11 86, 256
13:17 76 23:11–12 86, 95, 197, 256
13:43 76 23:12 89, 254
13:52 76, 91 23:13–33 121
15:9 173 23:23 79
15:13 66 23:24 24, 45, 91
15:14 69 23:29 76, 92
16:13–19 37 23:29–33 96
17:4 82 23:32–39 77
17:24 45, 85 23:34 80, 91, 92, 96,
17:24–27 66 97
18:4 86 23:34–35 76
18:15 83 23:34–36 80
18:21 83 23:35 76, 92, 96
19:16 85 23:37 92, 95
20:33 82 23:37–39 80
20:26 86 24:24 128
21:16 139 26:18 45
22:1–14 66 26:25–49 83
22:15 78 26:25 45, 85
22:16–22 82 26:49 45, 85
22:16 78, 82, 85 27:54 207
22:23 78 28:20 74, 88
22:23–33 83
22:24 78, 82, 85 Mark
22:34–35 78 3:33 83
22:34–40 83 3:34 83
22:36 78, 82, 85 3:35 83
23 93, 171, 192, 5:35 45
196 6:6–56 17
23:1–7 78 6:8 74
23:2 80 6:8–11 74
23:2–7 79 7:7 173
23:2–8 89 9:5 45, 88
23:3 88, 89, 196 9:30–37 69
23:3–7 121 9:31–41 68
23:7 82, 85, 89 9:34–35 69, 86
23:8 22, 30, 37, 45, 9:35 86
46, 76, 79, 82, 9:37 75
83, 89, 90, 103, 9:38 69
178, 196. 248, 9:41 69
254, 256 10:17 45
23:8–9 30, 85, 88 10:33–45 68
23:8–10 81, 89, 90, 206 10:34 69
23:8–12 67, 77, 80, 87, 10:35 69
89, 90, 208, 227 10:38–39 69
10:43 86 18:14 86
10:43–44 86, 87 22:11 45
10:43–45 69 22:26 86
10:44 69 22:26–27 87
10:51 45, 88 23:47 207
11:21 45
12:37b–40 78, 103 John
13:9–13 68 1:38 45
14:14 45 1:49 45
14:45 45 3:2 45
15:39 207 3:10 45
3:26 45
Luke 4:31 45
1:23 56 5:25–29 166
2:26 45 6:25 45
2:46 22 9:2 45
3:12 45 11:8 45
3:31–36 221 11:28 45
3:36—38 221 13:1–17 73
5:17 151 13:1–20 73
5:21 151 13:13 70
6:27–49 69 13:16 70, 72
6:33 83 13:20 72
6:37–38 69 15:18–19 71
6:39 69 15:20 70, 73
6:40 22, 45, 68, 69, 15:20c 71
139 19:36 207
6:41 83 20:16 45
6:41–42 69
6:42ab 83 Acts
6:43–45 69 1:23–26 57
8:49 45 2:11 222
9:1–11 17 4:36–37 54, 55
9:3 74 5:34 55, 151
9:48 86 6:3–6 57
10:1–24 17 6:6 54, 57
10:4–12 74 7:2 83, 90
10:7 74, 130 8:1 55
10:16 75 8:4–8 142
11:39–52 80 9:1–31 55
11:49 80, 91 9:2 123
11:49–51 80 9:27 55
11:50 92 10:19 54
13:34–35 80 11 66
15:24 166 11:19–26 53
15:32 166 11:19–30 58
14:11 86 11:20 22, 53, 55, 58
17:3 83 11:22–26 55
17:4 83 11:25–26 58
11:25–26 55 Romans
11:26 54, 58 1:1 155
11:27 6, 58 1:5 63
11:27–28 54, 57 2:17–24 79
11:27–30 58 2:20 45
11:30 55, 58 3:26 139
12:25 55 3:28 101
13 66 6:5 109
13:1 24, 30, 53, 55, 9:1 155
256 11:13 63, 155
13:1–2 6, 22, 31, 57, 62, 12 16
131 12:6–7 107
13:1–3 4, 23, 53, 54, 96, 12:6–8 60, 157
158 12:7 60, 173
13:2 57 12:7–8 159
13:2–3 57 13:6 56
13:3 58 15:2 139
13:15 159 15:4 173
13:42 120 15:16 56
14:3 120 15:18 79
14:4 120 15:22–23 119
14:4–14 23, 54, 55 15:27 56
14:14 120 16:3 135
14:23 57, 58, 59 16:7 134
14:27 58 16:12 162
15:1 58
15:2 58 1 Corinthians
15:2 58 1:1 63, 64, 155
15:4 58 1:4 64
14:6 58 1:18–31 45
15:22 58 1:11 59
15:22–29 123 1:12 59, 65
15:23 58 1:17 63
15:32 57 1:18–21 65
16: 4 58 2:6–7 65
18:2 135 2:9 206
18:3 165 3:1–3 65
18:18 135 3:4–6 65
18:26 135 3:6 109
19:33–34 147 3:8–15 63
20:17 58 3:11 136
20:28 143 3:18–23 65
20:33–35 75 4:8 168
21:5 138 4:9 64, 162
21:8–9 123 4:15 63
21:18 58 4:20 79
22:1 83, 90 5:1–6:20 59
22:3 55 6:16 152
7:1 59
7:1–40 59 15:5–8 63
7:10 26 15:7 64
7:25 26 15:9 64
7:29–31 153 15:10 162
8:1–11:1 59 15:12 166, 167, 168
9:1 63 15:12–10 140
9:1–2 140, 155 15:13–14 167
9:4–13 63 15:32 225
9:4–18 151 15:35–49 152
9:5 63, 64 16:1–4 119
9:14 130 16:19 135
9:14–18 75
9:17 130 2 Corinthians
11:2–14:20 59 4:5 63
11:5–16 152 8:23 119
11:23 253 9:1–15 119
12 16, 18, 148 9:12 56
12:4–11 137 11:7 86
12:7 65 11:7–21 75
12:8 60 11:9 151
12:8–10 60 11:13 119
12:12–27 157 12:13–18 75
12:13 150
12:28 4, 6, 20, 21, 22, Galatians
30, 54, 55, 60, 1:1 63
61, 63, 65, 92, 1:18 30, 62
107, 137, 142, 2:7–8 63
144, 154, 206, 2:11ff 30
207, 216 2:11–14 58, 62
12:28a 60 2:12 100
12:28–29 6, 24, 59, 107, 2:16 101
256 2:24 101
12:28–30 157 3:27–29 153
12:29 60, 63 3:28 150
12:30 60 4:11 162
14 60, 62, 64, 103, 6:6 65
189 6:15 153
14:1 63
14:1–5 63 Ephesians
14:3 64 1:1 136, 140
14:5 64 1:23 139
14:16–17 190 2:4–6 166
14:23–25 64 2:19–20 140
14:29 64 2:20 6, 136, 141,
14:31 64 142, 143
15 194, 225 2:20–22 139
15:1–11 140 3:3, 5 150
15:1–58 59 3:5 6, 141, 142, 143
15:3 253 3:5–6 140
3:6 139 1:10 155, 173, 174

3:8 142 1:11 174
4:4 139 1:14 147
4:11 6, 20, 22, 24, 1:18 148, 158, 159,
55, 136, 141, 163
142, 144, 216 1:18–20 147
4:11–12 137 1:20 147, 150
4:11–16 143 2:1 155
4:13 143 2:4 240
4:14 139, 173 2:4–6 155
5:14 166 2:5–6 155
5:18 142 2:6 154, 155, 174
5:22 134 2:7 96, 146, 153,
6:1 195 154, 169, 174
6:18 142 2:8 148
2:8–15 165
Philippians 2:9 148
2:16 162 2:9–15 148
2:17 56 2:11 148, 149
2:25 56, 120 2:11–12 149
2:30 56 2:13–14 152
4:12 86 2:15 149
3:1–7 148, 160
Colossians 3:2 149, 160, 162
2:12–13 166 3:2–4 162
2:22 173 3:2–7 161
3:1 166 3:2–12 124
3:3–4 166 3:5 157
4:1 128, 149, 150,
1 Thessalonians 155, 173
2:9 75 4:1–5 153, 159, 164
4:9 250 4:3 149
5:12 162 4:3–4 152
4:3–5 151
2 Thessalonians 4:4 153
2:2 128 4:6 157, 158, 163,
2:5 151 173, 174
4:6–13 157
1 Timothy 4:7 152, 181
1:1 155 4:10 155
1:3 146, 147, 152, 4:11 159, 163
159 4:11–12 150, 159
1:3–4 146 4:12 159
1:4 152, 159, 181 4:13 150, 155, 157,
1:7 147, 151, 152, 159, 173
155, 173, 175 4:14 157
1:7–10 156 4:15 150, 163
1:8–9 152 4:16 155, 159, 162,
1:8–10 159 173
5:1–2 160 2:15 169

5:7 159 2:16 164, 165, 169
5:13 149 2:17 147
5:17 155, 160, 163 2:17–18 164
5:17–18 124, 148, 161 2:18 153, 165, 167,
5:17–22 160 168, 225, 245
5:18 74, 130, 161 2:23 164, 165, 169
5:18–19 75 2:24 169
5:21 159 2:25 169, 240
5:22 159, 163 2:26 150
6:1 155, 173, 174 3:1–9 164
6:2 159, 163 3:2–4 165
6:3 173, 174 3:5 151, 165, 169
6:3–21 150 3:6 149, 164, 165
6:4 152 3:6–7 149
6:6 151 3:7 240
6:8 151 3:10 169, 173, 174
6:13 159 3:10–11 169
6:17 159, 163 3:11–13 165
6:20 162, 163, 174 3:13 149, 165
3:14 162, 169
2 Timothy 3:14–17 171
1:1 155 3:15–16 152
1:2 169 3:16 173, 174
1:3 146 3:17 139, 253
1:5 169, 171 4:2 169, 170, 171,
1:6 169 173, 174
1:6–7 158 4:2–3 163
1:8 164, 170, 174 4:3 164, 169, 173,
1:10 174 174, 175
1:11 55, 96, 154, 4:3–4 164
164, 166, 169, 4:4 152, 155, 181
170, 174 4:5 142, 169, 171
1:12 163, 170, 174 4:12 146
1:13 162, 169, 174 4:14 169
1:13–14 169 4:14–15 147, 164
1:14 162, 163, 174 4:17 169, 174
1:15 164 4:19 135, 146
1:16–18 146 6:5 149
1:17 146
1:18 146 Titus
2:1 169 1:1 155, 240
2:2 163, 169, 170 1:3 162, 174
2:2–3 170 1:5 146
2:8 174 1:5–6 160
2:9 170 1:6–9 124
2:11–12 149 1:7 160
2:11–13 171 1:7–9 160, 162
2:14 164, 165, 169
1:9 149, 160, 173, 10:11 56

174 10:26 240
1:10 128, 147, 152 10:26–31 219, 240
1:11 149, 174 10:29 240
1:13 174 11:3 139
1:14 152, 181 11:32 234
1:15 152 11:33 237
2:1 173, 174 12:11 237
2:2 174 13:7 6, 241
2:7 173 13:9 242
2:8 174 13:17 6, 234, 235,
2:10 173 241, 242
2:11 155 13:22 159
2:15 174 13:24 234, 235
3:9 152
3:13 146 James
1:1 101
Philemon 1:2 102
5 139 1:4 106
1:4–5 105
Hebrews 1:5 106
1:5–13 234 1:8 98, 106, 108
1:7 56 1:12 108
1:9 237 1:13 101
1:14 56 1:16 102
2:3 242 1:17 101
2:3–4 234 1:18 106, 108
3:12 240 1:19 102, 106
5:10 235 1:21 106
5:11 235 1:22 79, 110
5:11–6:3 235, 236 1:22–25 106
5:11–6:12 243 1:25 108
5:11–6:20 235 1:26 106
5:12 235 1:27 106
5:13 224, 237, 253 2:1 101
6:1 239 2:1 102
6:1–3 238 2:5 102
6:3 239 2:8 108
6:4–6 219, 220, 240 2:12 108
6:4–8 241 2:14–26 108
6:4–12 240 2:19 101
6:6 240 2:21 101
6:12 235 3 31, 192
6:13–20 235 3:1 6, 97, 103, 104,
7:1 235 108, 254
8:2 56 3:1–2 101, 102, 103,
8:6 56 106, 107
9:14 239 3:1–12 103, 105, 106,
9:21 56 121
3:1–18 106 1:20–21 244

3:2 103, 106, 108 2:1 128, 243, 244,
3:2–12 106, 108 245
3:2–18 106 2:2 244
3:3–12 104, 106 2:3 244
3:5 104 2:4–10 245
3:6 104 2:10 244, 245
3:9 106 2:10b–22 244
3:9–11 104 2:12 245
3:13–18 102, 103, 105, 2:13 244, 245
106 2:14 244
3:14 105 2:15 244
3:14–18 106 2:17 245
3:16 105 2:18 244
3:17 105 2:19 244, 245
3:17–18 106 2:20 240
4:5 107 2:21 224, 244, 245
4:8 106, 108 2:22 244, 253
4:10 86 3:3 128
5:7 99 3:3–10 244
5:10 107 3:15–16 244
5:12 110 3:17 345
5:13–20 100
5:14 108 1 John
5:14–16 107 2:18 128
4:1 128
1 Peter 4:1–6 121
1:22–2:2 109
2:25 143 2 John
5:2–3 124 7 128
5:4–5 143 10 128
5:6 86
Revelation
2 Peter 2:2 6
1:2–3:8 240 3:1–3 166
1:16 244
Jewish Pseudepigrapha
2 Baruch 1 Maccabees
78–87 100 12:9 159
Enoch 2 Maccabees
1,1 77 7:22–23 166
38,2.3.4 77 15:9 159
39,6.7 77
3 Maccabees Testament of Benjamin

7:22 222 7.49 96
4 Maccabees Testament of Judah

7:1 83 14:3 139
7:5 83
7:9 83 Testament of Levi
18:11–13 96 8:17 92
18:11–19 94 12:6 92
13:7 92
Joseph and Aseneth
8.10–11 166 Testament of Zebulun
20.7 166 5:1 139
Martyrdom and Ascension of Isaiah Tobit

3/19–25 189 11:15 222
ben Sirach Wisdom

24:33 173 2:12–20 94
38:24–39:11 49 5:1–7 94
39:8 173 15:15 139
Dead Sea Scrolls, Josephus, Philo, and Rabbinic Texts
Dead Sea Scrolls

1QapGen 2:4 46 Damascus Document
1QapGen 2:14 46 4.2–3 77
1QapGen 2:17 46
1QpHab 91 Josephus
1Q20 1 I 5 46
1QH 3.19–20 166 Antiquities
1QS 3.20, 22 77 1.61 41
1QS 3.13–4.26 115 9.13.2 95
1QS 9.14 77 9.14.1 95
1QSs 1:28 45 15.373 41
1QSs 2:16 45 18.16 45
4QEna 1 I 5 46 18.63.3 45
4QEna 1 iii 13 ter 46 19.172 102
4QEnb 1 ii 17 46 20.41 102
4QEnc 1 ii 24 46 20.46 44
4QEnc 1 vi 11 46
4QEng 1 vi 18 46 Contra Apion
11QtgJob 14:3 46 1.176 44
11QtgJob 22:6 46
11QtgJob 25:1 46 Philo
11QtgJob 28:3 46
Congr. 1.80 44
114 44 2.45ff 152
122 41
Spec.
Contempl. 1.56–57 41
13 166 3.11 102
Her. Ps.–Philo
19 44
De Jona
Legat. 153 166
27; 53; 54 41
155–157 230 Mishnah
Avot 1:6b 51
Migr. Avot 2:8 46
116 41 Avot 2:18 245
122–123 166
Targum Pseudo–Jonathan
Mos. Gen 4:8 245
1.21–24 41
Christian Writings
Acts of Philip 1–5 115, 116, 125,

84.117 166 252
1–6 113, 116, 238
Apostolic Constitutions 1–6.2 116
7.28 135 2.2 134
7.28.5 129 3.1–6 134
7.39.4 166 4.1 111, 117, 127
4.1–2 125
Clement 4.2 127
4.9 126, 134
1 Clement 6.1 127
1.3 235 6.2–3 116
5.6–7 154 7.1 116
21.6 235 7–10 113, 127
30.3 79 10.7 120, 124, 131,
36:2–6 234 190
38.2 79 11.1–2 30, 77, 111,
118, 125, 128,
Didache 130, 133, 238
1.3 116 11.1–3 117
1.3–6 116 11.1–6 118
1.3b–6 115 11.2 127, 130, 224,
1.3 113 253
1.6 113 11.3 118, 128, 141
11.3–12 135 Panarion

11.4 118, 122 19.1.6a, 6b 35
11.4–6 119 42.1.7 231
11.4–7 118 42.2.2 108, 231
11.4–12 117
11.5 119 Eusebius
11.6 119, 120, 122
11.7 128 Ecclesiastical History
11.7–8 126 3.36 177
11.7–12 118, 121 3.36.1 200
11.8 121 3.39.1 200
11.8–12 120, 129 3.39.4 200
11:9 124 3.39.5–7 200
11.9–12 124 4.15.3–45 203
11.10 121, 124, 128 5.20.5–7 199
11.10–11 126 5.20.8 201
11.11 121, 124, 130 5.24.11–17 200
11–13 75, 117, 118 7.24.6 6, 108
11–15 127
12 119 Epistle of Barnabas
12.1–5 117 1.2 109, 249
12.2a 117 1.4 253
12.2b–13.7 118 1.5–8 248
12.3 117 1:6 253
13.1 117, 123 1.7 249
13.1–2 124, 132 1.8 247, 248, 249,
13.1–3 117 253
13.1–7 120 2–17 253
13.2 30, 111, 117, 4.3–5 246
125, 129, 130, 4.6 248
131, 133, 134, 4.9 249
162 5.3 249, 253
13.2–7 121 5.4 253
13.3 130 5.5 250
13.3–7 122, 123 6.9 250
13.4 117 6.10 253
13.5–7 117 7.1 249, 250, 253
15.1 124, 125, 131, 7.4 250
132 7.6 250
15.1–2 7, 111, 120, 7.7 250
124, 131, 133, 79 250
134 9.6 250
15.2 134 9.7 250, 253
9.8 250, 253
Ecclesiastical Constitution of the 9.9 249, 250
Apostles 10.1 253
12.1 126 10.10 253
11.2–3 251
Epiphanius 14.4 250
14.5 247 11.2 188

15.4 250 14.2–15.1 79
16.2 250 15.1 121, 195, 196,
6.3–4 246 205, 208, 210
16.7 247, 250 15.1–2 188
16.8 250 16.2 184
16.9 249 17.1 184, 185
18–20 252 18.2 185
18.1 253 19.1 185
19.9–10 125 20–21 194
21.1 250 20.2 188, 190
21.5 253 21.1 184, 186
21.6 250
21:7 250 Magnesians
21:9 250 1 180
1.1 188
Epitome of the Canons of the Holy 1.2 188
Apostles 2 180, 197
9 126 3 188
3.1–4.1 188
Gospel of Thomas 4 198
13 36, 37 4.1 190
6.1 188
Hippolytus 7.1 188, 190
8.1 152, 181, 183
Haer. 8.2 181, 196
9.15.1,5 35 9 182
9.16.1 36 9–10.1 195
9.1 152, 181, 182,
Ignatius of Antioch 193, 245
9.1–2 181, 195, 197
Ephesians 9.2 196
1.2 193 10.1 193
2.1 184 10.3 181, 183
2.2 188 11.1 182
3.1 193 13.1 197
3.1–11 188 13.2 188, 192
3.2 188 14 194
4.1–5.1 188 12 183
5.3 183, 188 15 180, 186
6.1 188
6.2 184, 240 Philadelphians
7.1 184, 185, 188, insc 2–3 182
202 insc 3.2 188
7.2 185 insc 7.1–8.1 188
9.1 180, 184, 185, 1 189
187 1.1 188
9.2 197 2.1 182
10.1 193 3.1 66, 182
3.3 194 12.1 186

4.1 190, 192 12.2 192
5.2 183, 187
6.1 182 Trallians
6.3 182 1.1 185, 186
7.2 190 2.1–3.2 188
8.1 183 2.2 190
8.2 183, 187, 197 3.3 188
9.1 188 5 190
9.2 183, 187 6.2 185
10.1 178 7.1 188
11.2 182 7.2 190
8.1 185
Polycarp 9.1 186
1.2 188, 190 9.1–2 182, 185
2.2 190 10 186, 194
3.1 181 10.1 185, 186
6.1 188 12.1 185
7.1 193, 194 12.2 188, 194
13.2 188
Romans
2.2 177 Irenaeus
3.1 194
4.2 193, 194 Adv haer.
4.3 188 3.3.4 199, 200
5.1 193, 194 4.41.12 84
5.3 193, 194
Justin Martyr
Smyrnians
1.1 66, 186, 245 Dialogue with Trypho
1.1–2 182 114.5 251
1–2 186
1–6:1 187 Martyrdom of Polycarp
2 186 1.1 204
3 186, 245 1.2 204
4.1 187 2.1 204
4.2 187, 194, 245 2.3 206
5.1 186, 201 4.1 208
5.2 187, 195 4.2 202
5.3 187 4.4 204
6.2–9.2 187 5.2 207
7.1 190, 201 7.2 202
7.2 186, 187 9.3 200
8.1 187 10.1 207
8.1–2 190 12.1 205
8.1–9.1 188 12.2 198, 205, 207
9.1 188 13.1 206
11 178 13.2 210
11.1 177 14.1 206
14.2 204 4.3.1–2 220

16.1 206 4.3.1–4 218
16.2 198, 205, 206, 4.3.2 221
208 4.3.4–7 218
17.2–3 205, 208 9 216
17.3 204, 205, 206 9.6 98
19 209 10.1.6 224
19.1 198, 204, 205, 10.2.3 227
209 11 121, 216
19.2 209, 210 11.5–17 214
20.1–2 203 11.12 75
Polycarp Sim.
2 215
Philippians 5.1.5 222
1.2 202 5.3.2 222
2.1 202 5.5.3 222
2.3 201 5.7.2 224, 225, 245
3.1 201 6.3.3 227
3.2 201 8 226
4.1 201 8.3.2 222
4.2–3 201, 202 8.6.5 220, 224, 225
5.3 201 8.7.1–3 221
5.3–6.1 201 8.9.1 240
6.3 185, 201, 202 9.2.6 227
7.1 202, 245 9.4.2–3 221
7.2 202 9.13.1 221
8.1 201, 202 9.15.4 217, 218, 221,
10.3 201 228
11.2 201 9.16.5 222, 228
9.16.5–7 223
Pseudo–Clementines 9.17.1 223
9.17.2 223
Adjuration 9.18.2 222
1–2.1 35 9.19.1 224
4.1–3 35 9.19.2 221, 227, 228
9.19.2–3 224, 225
Epistula Clementis 9.22.1–4 226
13–15 35 9.22.2 227
9.25.1–2 228, 249
Homily 9.25.2 218, 223
3.71.5 35 9.26.2 217
9.27.1–2 217
Shepherd of Hermas 16.6 217
17.1 217
Mand. 19.9.2–3 225
4.2 218 25.2 217
4.2.2 227
4.3.1 241 Vis.
1.1–3 215 3.8.11 229

1.3.4 227 3.9.7 235
2.2.5 217 3.9.10 217
2.4.2 217 2.10.9 227
2.4.3 219 4.1 222
2.6 235 4.1.2 215
3 226 4.1.8 222
3.3.3 215 4.2.5 217, 222
3.3.5 215
3.4.1 215 Tertullian
3.4.3 215
3.5.1 215, 216 Adversus Marcionem
3.6.5 227 3.15 231
3.7.3 228 4.11 231
3.8.9 227
Other Ancient Literature
Aeschylus Heraclitus
Eumenides Fragment 57 41
279 40, 41
584 40 Hymn to Mercury
556 40
Prometheus vinctus
109 40 Isocrates
322 40
373 40 Antidosis
95 41
Septem contra Thebas 104 41
572 40
573 41 Lucian
Aristophanes Hermotimus 42
Equites Lysias
1235 41
Oratio
Nubes 12.47 41
871 41 12.78 41
1147 41 14.30 41
1467 41
Plato
Cicero
Apologia
Tusc. 33ab 41
1.32–33 167
Laches
180d 41
Menexenus
236a 41
Meno
93d 41
Symposium
208d 167
Theaetetus
148e–151d 41
Timaeus
22a 152
Sextus Empericus
Pyr.
3.168 237
Index of Modern Authors
Abramowski, L. 71 Beyer, H.W. 139

Adams, J.C. 239 Biddle, B.J. 2–3
Agnes, F.H. 120 Blass, F. 84, 102
Albl, M.C. 184, 251–252 Blenkinsopp, J. 2–3
Albrigt, W.F. 50 Boismard, M-E. 56
Alexander, L.C. 31, 43 Bommes, K. 190, 193–194
Allison, D.C. 65, 88–89, 98, 100– Bonnard, P. 79, 90
101, 103, 105 Bony, P. 139–140, 142
Alon, G. 116 Borgen, P. 44
Amici, R. 145 Boring, M.E. 67
Amphoux, C.B. 103 Boudillon, J. 14–15
Ash, J.L. 191 Bovon, F. 57, 68–69
Attridge, H.W. 234–240 Braumann, G. 109
Audet, J-P. 113–116, 123, 126–127 Brent, A. 177
Aune, D.E. 122–123, 216 Broadhead, E.K. 73
Brockhaus, U. 11, 15–16, 60, 63
Backhaus, K. 234–236, 240, 242 Brown, C.T. 182, 241
Baird, W. 7 Brown, R.E. 66, 71–73, 136, 145–
Barbaglio, G. 62 146, 149, 168, 186–187, 195–197
Barnard, L.W. 246–248 Brox, N. 149, 158, 163, 166, 169,
Barnes, T.D. 177 175, 187, 193–194, 210, 213–215,
Barrett, C.K. 64–67, 120, 179–181, 219–221, 223, 225, 228–229
183–184, 191, 196 Bühner, J-A. 72
Barth, G. 166–167 Bultmann, R. 22, 26–39, 33, 77
Barth, M. 136, 138–139 Burchard, C. 98, 103–105
Bauer, J.P. 199, 201–202 Burini, C. 173, 199, 201, 203
Baumeister, T. 94, 204, 206, 209–210 Burtchaell, J.T. 6, 9, 11, 16–19, 230
Becker, H-J. 77, 79 Buschmann, G. 200, 203–209
Belle, G.B. 71–72 Byrskog, S.32–33, 39–40, 82–83, 86,
Berquist, J.L. 2 89, 92, 110
Best, E. 57, 69, 136–142, 173
Betz, H.D. 151 Cacitti, R. 203
Campbell, R.A. 18
304 Index of Modern Authors
Campenhausen, H.v. 12–13, 29, 188, Ellis, E.E. 18

190, 207, 209, 248 Eynde, D.V.D. 216, 248, 254
Caulley, T.S. 245
Cohen, S.J.D. 47–48, 52, 181, 183– Fabry, H-J. 94
184 Faivre, A. 19
Coleborne, W. 214 Falcetta, A. 184, 211
Collins, B. 238, 240 Farrer, A.M. 11–12
Conti, M. 75 Fascher, E. 70
Conzelmann, H. 152 Fasola, U. 151, 230
Coppens, J. 57 Fee, G. 145, 148, 156, 161, 172
Corwin, V. 179, 196 Filson, F.V. 1
Coyle, J.K. 34, 38–39 Finlan, S. 116
Cross, A.R. 238 Fitzmyer, J.A. 54, 56, 69
Crossan, J.D. 87, 114, 122, 134 Flusser, D. 114
Culpepper, R.A. 42–43 Fohrer, G. 45
Foster, P. 191
Daube, D. 57, 158 France, R.T. 90
Davids, P. 98–100, 110, 244 Frankemölle, R.T. 86, 88, 90, 99–
Davies, W.D. 65–66, 70, 79–80, 85, 100, 106, 109
88–89, 92, 179 Friedrich, G. 154
De Halleux, A.88, 115, 118–119, 122
Debrunner, A. 84 Gager, J.G. 16
Dehandschutter, B. 203, 205 Garland, D.E. 78, 80, 83, 88, 91, 93
Del Verme, M. 111, 121 Gemünden, P.V. 108
Delling, G. 139, 237 Gerhardsson, B. 27–29, 31–33, 39,
Delorme, J. 14, 39 110
Destro, A. 73 Giet, S. 111, 214, 226
Dibelius, M. 22–23, 25–27, 37, 39, Gnilka, J. 17, 65
98, 109–110, 152, 214–216, 219, Godecharle, D.R.M. 71–72
221, 224, 226, 228–229 Goldhahn-Müller, I. 219, 240–241
Dockx, S. 55 Goldstein, J.A. 40
Dodd, C.H. 68, 70–72 Goppelt, L. 13, 39
Donahue, P.J. 179–180, 183, 190 Grabbe, L.L. 2, 29
Donelson, L.R. 243 Gregory, A. 111
Draper, J.A. 10, 17, 111, 113–120, Green, G.L. 243–245
123–124, 128, 131, 133, 248, 250 Grässer, E. 236–240, 242
Droge, A.J. 94, 204 Greeven, H. 21–23, 38–39, 62
Dunn, J.D.G. 13, 26–27 Grelot, P. 14
Dupont, J. 18, 56 Gundry, R.H. 66, 70, 74, 76–78, 80,
85, 88, 91
Edgar, D.H. 109 Günther, E. 210
Edwards, M.J. 177
Eid, V. 69
Index of Modern Authors 305
Haenchen, E. 53–54, 56, 77–79, 83, Kiessling, E. 40, 50

88 Kistemaker, S.J. 238, 240
Hadot, P 21, 42 Kittel, G. 110
Hagner, D.A. 66 Klaiber, W. 17–18
Hahn, F. 18, 46, 144 Klauck, H-J. 139, 144
Hainz, J. 17 Kleinknecht, K.T. 93–96
Harb, G. 68 Koch, D-A. 142, 144
Harder, K.J. 111 Koester, C.R. 234–235
Harnack, A. 5–11, 15–17, 22, 34, Konradt, M. 99–100, 102, 104, 106,
38–39, 107–108, 111, 114, 118, 108
122, 126, 216, 231–232 Köster, H. 130, 230
Harrington, D.J. 89 Kraft, R.A. 246, 251
Hartin, P.J. 77, 99, 109 Kretschmar, G. 17, 118, 122
Hartog, P.A. 179, 201–203, 205, 207 Kümmel, W.G. 100
Hatch, E. 7 Küng, H. 13–14
Heil, C. 68, 70
Hengel, M. 46, 101 Lagrange, M-J. 85
Henne, P. 214 Lamouille, A. 56
Hezser, C. 10, 29, 45–49, 51–52 Lampe, P. 214, 221, 229–230
Hill, D. 76 Lane, W.L. 234–240, 242
Hoet, R. 81, 83–84, 90 Laws, S. 98, 101, 104, 109
Hoffman, P. 69, 86 Legasse, S. 46, 80, 88, 92
Holmberg, B. 10, 16 Lemaire, A. 169
Holtzmann, H.J. 11 Lesky, A. 40
Hoppe, R. 109 Leutzsch, M. 214
Horst, M.V.D. 2 Levine, L.I. 230
Huber, K. 88 Lichtenberger, H. 230
Hübner, R.M. 177 Liebers, R. 167
Hummel, R. 92 Lieu, J.M. 206
Hvalvik, R. 246–248, 250, 252 Lindemann, A. 60, 154, 177
Linton, O. 11
Isacson, M. 180, 191 Lips, O. 156–158, 160, 165, 173–175
Lohfink, G. 174
Jefford, C.N. 111–112, 114 Lohse, E. 46, 50
Jeremias, J. 49, 68, 84–85 Lusini, G. 213
Jervell, J. 57 Luz, U. 49, 65–68, 71, 74–75, 77–78,
Johnson, L.T. 234–235 80, 84, 88–89, 92
Jones, F.S. 35–36, 38–39
Karrer, M. 52 Maier, G. 44
Karris, R.J. 165–166 Malherbe, A.J. 146, 174
Keener, C.S. 53, 55, 57, 150 Marshall, I.H. 145, 147–148, 151–
Klein, M. 109 164, 169–174
Kertelge, K. 17–18, 21 Martin, D.D. 2
Martin, R.P. 98–99, 101, 104–105, Ollrog, W-H. 56

109 O’Neill, J.C. 139
McDonald, J.I.H. 155 Osiek, C. 214–215, 217–221, 223–
Meeks, W.A. 37 229
Meier, J.P. 32, 45, 53, 55, 66, 88,
158, 160–161, 178 Paget, J.C. 246–248, 252–253
Meinhold, P. 179, 188–189 Papa, B. 62, 129
Merklein, H. 22–23, 39, 54–55, Patterson, S.J. 117, 123
58, 60, 138, 140–141, 143–144, 173 Penner, T.C. 98–99, 109–110
Metzner, R. 98 Pernveden, L. 217, 222, 227–228
Meyer, R.P. 137 Peterson, E. 56, 126, 215
Meyer, R. 56 Poschmann, B. 219, 240
Michel, O. 139 Powell, M.A. 79
Milavec, A. 5, 112–114, 116–119, Preiss, T. 183, 194
121–125, 127, 131–132, 134 Prigent, P. 126, 180, 191, 246–
Moffatt, J. 236–237, 239–240 249, 251, 253
Molland, E. 179, 181, 183 Prior, M. 145
Morgan, T. 43 Prostmeier, F.R. 246–250, 253
Moss, C.R. 93, 203
Mounce, W.D. 145, 148, 154–156, Redalie, Y. 165
158, 161–162, 171–172 Reese, R.A. 243
Mühlsteiger, J. 17 Regul, J. 200
Munier, C. 178–179 Rehkopf, F. 84
Murphy-O’Connor, J. 145 Reiling, J. 214, 216
Mußner, F. 102 Reisch, E. 40
Myllykoski, M. 179 Rendtorff, T. 18
Rengstorf, K.H. 19–21, 24, 35, 39–
Newport, K.G. 46, 77, 79, 84, 86–87 41, 44, 46, 110, 120, 151, 173
Neymeyr, U. 34, 38–39, 75, 115, Riesenfeld, H. 27, 29
128–130, 217, 220, 226–228, 232, Riesner, R. 3, 26, 32–33, 46, 53,
248–249, 251, 260 68, 70, 84, 88
Neyrey, J. 245 Riggenbach, E. 236
Neyrinck, F. 69–71 Rius-Camps, J. 177
Niebuhr, K-W. 99 Rizzi, M. 178
Niederwimmer, K. 56, 112–115, Roberts, J.H. 141, 143
117–124, 126 Robinson, T.A. 38, 77
Niemand, C. 72, 86, 128 Rohde, J. 189
Nilsson, M.P. 51 Roloff, J. 17, 145, 147–148, 151–
Norelli, E. 179, 189–190, 200 154, 156–159, 162, 174–175
Normann, F. 194, 197 Rordorf, W. 56, 113–116, 119–120,
126, 135
Oberlinner, L. 148, 151, 166, 170– Rose-Gaier, D. 134
172 Rosenfeld, B.Z. 47
Index of Modern Authors 307
Ruppert, L. 93–94 242

Rutgers, L.V. 230 Steck, O.H. 94–95
Stemberger, G. 47
Saldarini, A.J. 49, 89 Stempel, A-D. 115, 117, 125
Sand, A. 76, 92 Stendahl, K. 91
Sandt, H.V.D. 114, 128 Strathmann, H. 56, 210
Saß, G. 118 Stroumsa, G.G. 206
Schams, C. 49, 76 Sukenik, E.L. 47, 49–50
Schlarb, E. 150, 152–153, 155, 162, Sumney, J.L. 165
164–165, 167, 174–175 Swartley,W.M. 192, 194
Schlatter, A. 68
Schlier, A. 141, 236 Tabor, J.A. 94
Schlosser, J. 85–87, 164, 174 Thatcher, T. 71
Schmeller, T. 43 Theissen, G. 16–17, 39, 99, 108, 118,
Schmitz, O. 159 122, 166
Schnabel, E.J. 17, 54, 120, 229–230 Thiessen, W. 146
Schnackenburg, R. 13, 18, 71, 137– Thomas, J.C. 73
138, 141, 144 Thomassen, E. 218–219
Schnider, F. 99, 104, 109 Thüsing, W. 236–239
Schoedel, W.R. 66, 79, 177–188, Towner, P.H. 145, 150, 153, 165, 170
194–196, 198, 201, 203–204 Trebilco, P. 145–146, 148
Schöllgen, G. 112, 121, 124, 128, Trevett, C. 180, 188–189
177, 229 Trilling, W. 88
Schrage, W. 59, 63, 167 Trocmé, E. 103
Schreiber, A. 17 Tropper, V. 3, 45
Schulz, S. 16 Trummer, P. 147
Schürer, E. 46 Turner, D.L. 77
Schürmann, H. 24–25, 33, 38–39, 56
Schweizer, E. 13, 18, 139 Uebele, W. 180
Schwemer, A.M. 210
Seitz, O.J.F. 91 Viviano, B.T. 46, 79, 81, 86
Sellin, G. 136–137, 139, 142–143 Vogt, H.J. 177
Shepherd, M.H. 99 Vokes, F.E. 113
Sim, D.C. 66 Vööbus, A. 36
Skarsaune, O. 187, 251 Vouga, F. 104–105, 109
Slee, M. 66
Smith, J.C.H. 252 Wagner, J. 18
Smith, M. 29 Wanke, J. 103, 105, 107
Snyman, A.H. 241 Wayment, T.A. 36–37, 39
Sohm, R. 8–11, 15–17, 38 Weaver, D.J. 67
Soiron, T. 13 Weber, M. 9–11, 16–17
Spicq, C. 86, 145, 147–148, 150–152, Wedderburn, A.J.M. 166–167
159, 161–162, 166, 236–237, 239, Weiser, A. 152, 163–164, 169–172
Weiss, A. 37
Weiss, H-F. 234–242
Wengst, K. 246–248, 250–253
Index of Subjects
Acts of the Apostles 14, 28–29 —the Twelve 11, 67, 140
—presbyters in 58 Apostolic Fathers 31–32, 35
—prophets in 53–59 Apostolic succession 188, 259
—teachers in 53–59, 159 appointment 14, 19
Adam 149, 152 Aristotle, Aristotelian 20
Αισθητήριον 237 Ascensio Isaiae 189–190, 192
Alexander (adversary of Paul) 147, Asia Minor 20, 164, 243, 247, 257–
164–165 259
Alexandria 51, 98–99 —as recipients of letter of Ephesians
Angels 213, 215, 220, 228 137
Antioch 3–4, 22, 30–31, 39, 98, 114, Authority 11
255, 256, 257 —tripartite 9–10, 16
—Christian community in 53–58,
92 Barnabas 53–59, 91, 97, 120, 123,
—conflict in 198 158, 248, 250, 252, 255, 257
—as Matthean community 66, 97 —as a teacher 57, 247–251
—traditions 62 —commissioning 57
Antoninus Pius 177 —as disciple of a school 252
Apocalypse of Peter 244 —idea of knowledge 254
Apollos 234–235 —as missionary 158
Apostasy 220, 239, 241 —use of scripture 251–252
Apostate 225 Baptism 113, 215, 218–220, 223–
Apostle 1, 6, 8, 14, 22, 216–218, 228, 239, 248n85, 251–252
221–224, 231, 237, 242, 255 Betrayer 225
—death of 14 Bishop(s) 15, 124–125, 143, 214,
—in the Didache 118–120 216–218, 237, 255–257, 259
—as discontinued role 201 —authority 187–191
—and presbyters, deacons 8, 156–
—in Ephesians 136–138, 140–142, 157, 192
144 —as adversary of Paul see Paul
—Paul as see Paul —appointment of 132
—prophets, teachers, and see “triad, —as Eucharistic celebrants 190
the” —as heir to teachers 135, 168
—teaching all creation 228 —as managers 131–132
310 Index of Subjects
—relationship to presbyters 160 Cyprus and Cyrene 53–54, 58

—relationship to prophets 123
—requirements on 161, 163 Daniel 246n73
—as successor of Paul see Paul David 221
Blasphemer 225 Deacon 123–125, 201–203, 214,
Boudillon, J. 14–15 216–218, 237, 257
Brockhaus, U. 15–16 —appointment of 132, 190
Bultmann, R. 22, 26–27 —as adversary of Paul see Paul
Burtchaell, J. T. 17–18 —as managers 131–132
Byrskog, S. 32–33, 82, 110 Dead Sea Scrolls 45
Demon 150
Campenhausen, H.V. 12 —as teachers, see Teacher, Demons
Catholic, Catholicism 9, 15, 13–15, as
19 “Deposit”/“teaching,” 176, 257–258
Catechesis 116, 174, 219 Descensus ad inferos 223
Catechumen 214, 219 Devil, the 150
Charisma 5–9, 11, 13–19, 23, 157 Dibelius, M. 22–23, 26–27, 33, 98
—and office 5, 11–19, 25, 38 Didache 1, 2, 5–10, 17, 30, 34, 47,
—of teachers 6–7, 21, 34 101, 111–135, 190, 192, 216, 239,
—transmission 169 252, 254, 256–257
“Charismatic Triad” 8–9, 23, 216 Διδάσκαλος see Teacher,
Christ See “Jesus” Dionysios of Alexandria 6–7
Church 13 Disciple(ship) 12, 20, 36, 73–75, 89–
—organization/structure 10, 13–14, 90, 231, 242, 256–258
18–19 —and philosophic schools 20
—ecclesia 8 —as succeeding teachers 176, 194
—authority of 9 Docetists 179, 182, 186, 192–194,
Christian Community 37–38 198
1 Clement Doctrine 20
—author 230
Clement of Alexandria 260 Ecclesiology 11, 14
Clement of Rome 219 Egypt 20, 41, 247, 256
Codex Athous 213n3 Elders 160, 231
Corinth 15, 30, 235 Encratite 153
—community of 14, 59–60, 64–65, Ephesians (biblical book) 3, 20, 22–
198 23, 30, 256
1 Corinthians 15, 18–21, 136, 258 —addressees 136–137
—redaction issues 60, 62–63 —authorship 136, 137–138
—relationship to Ephesians 137– —community roles in 136, 138–139
138, 144 —dating 137
2 Corinthians 15 Epicureans 245
Coyle, J.K. 34 Epicureanism 245, 259
Crete 146 Epiphanius of Salamis 231–232
Index of Subjects 311
Ἐπίσκοπος 12, 18, 23 Gnosis 248n85

Epistle of Barnabas 246, 254, 258 Gnosticism 215, 225, 258–259
—authorship 247 —in the Pastoral letters 152–153
—composition 247 —polemic against 168n133,
—dating 246 177n169, 179n176, 184, 199–201
Eschatology 150, 153, 176 —teachers 180
Eucharist 9, 113, 187, 190 God–fearer 239
Eusebius 6 Greco–Roman culture 244
Eva/Eve 149, 152 —education 42–43, 84
Evangelist (εὐαγγελιστής) 3, 137, Greece 20
169 Greek philosophy/thought 19–22,
—heirs of apostles and prophets 24–25, 41–43, 237
142–144 Greeven, H. 21–23
—the Seven 142
Evaristus 203–208, 211–212 Hadrian 246n74
Haggada 26
False Apostle 144 Halaka 23, 26
False Prophet 75, 119, 121, 144, 244 Harnack, A.V. 5–8, 9–11, 16, 17, 22,
False Teacher (ψσευδοδιδάσκαλος) 34, 38–39, 111, 216, 231–232
18, 24, 34, 243–246, 257–259 “Hearers” 242
—as Epicureans 245 Hebrews 31, 234–237, 241, 258
—as Gnostics 103, 245 —author of 220
“Father,” title 82–85, 87 Hellenists 53, 255
Fiction, Pseudepigraphical 106–107, Henoch 246n73
155 Hermas 215–227, 241, 254
Final judgment 239, 244 —biography 213–214
“Flesh” 225n58 —polemic 225, 228–229, 232
Food laws 242 —role in Christian community 214,
Forgiveness 232
—post–baptismal 218–219 Hermogenes 164
Form criticism 26–28, 31–32 Herod 50, 53–56, 208
Heterodoxy 219, 220
Gamaliel 55, 151 Hierarchy 13, 34
Γεγυμνασμένα 237 Historical Criticism 7
Genesis Holmberg, B. 10, 16
—genealogies 152 Holy Spirit 14, 228
Gentile 22, 34, 140–141, 144, 198, Hospitality 217
239 House–churches 229–230
—Gentile–Christians 112, 147, Hymenaus 164–166
190n222, 244, 247, 254 Hypathia 44, 147, 164–165
—opposing Ignatius see Ignatius, “Hypocrites” 220, 224–225
Opponents
Gerhardsson, B. 27–29, 110 Ignatius 212, 225, 257
—on church offices 188–190 201–202, 251–252

—connection to Gospel of Matthew —traditions 1, 5, 23, 25, 33, 99,
176 252–253
—date of letters 177–178 Jews, Jewish communities 22, 34,
—on Jesus as teacher see Jesus, as 45, 140, 235, 239
teacher —customs 198
—on martyrdom 204, 209–211 —depiction in Pastoral Epistles 147
—opponents 178–188, 191–195, 198, —education 27, 29, 32
202 —Jewish–Christians 31–32, 101,
—suffering of 175, 187 105, 108, 115, 147, 156, 190n222
Intellectualism 24–25 —lifestyle 29, 246–247
Institution 13–14, 17, 23 —literature 152, 166
“Instructor,” title 82, 85–87 —polemic against 77, 184, 206, 208
Irenaeus 260 — rabbi/rabbinic tradition 1, 10,
12n49, 20–22, 24, 27–33, 39, 45–48,
James 1, 31, 254 50–52, 247, 255, 259
—Letter of 97–111, 159 —revolts 178
Jeremiah 251 —ritual 14, 246–247, 252
Jerusalem 5–6, 22, 28, 30–32, 39, —sages 45–46, 49
47, 49, 51 —scribes 49, 51–52
Jesus 27, 29, 31, 222, 238–239, 244 —scriptures 176, 181–182
—and transmission 32–33 —synagogues 230, 232
—and disciples 19, 28, 33, 93 —teachers in 6, 11–12, 19, 22–25,
—Church as the body of 137, 139, 30, 44–45, 169, 230, 248
143 —and transmission 27–28
—discourses of 67–70, 77–89 Jewish War (132–135) 177
—as teacher 3, 21, 37, 69–70, 73, John the Baptist 45
79–80, 96, 135, 195–197, 225, 242, John, Gospel of 24, 70–73
256–57, 259 John as gospel writer 47
—as giver of leadership roles 137– Jones, S.F. 35–36
138 Josephus 41, 44–45, 245
—as high priest 235, 240 Judaism 12, 19, 181, 238n37, 240,
—as rabbi 45–46, 88 243, 245, 259
—as teacher 19, 24, 28, 32–33, 36– Judas 231
37, 88, 121, 176–177, 193, 196–197, Justin Martyr 12, 36, 96, 187, 251–
205, 207–211 252, 260
—relationship to the author of 2 Peter
243 Kirchenordnung 112
—resurrection of 140, 167–168, 170, Kretschmar, G. 17, 118
182, 225, 245, 259
—Sayings of 23, 26, 30, 39, 254 Laying on of hand 47, 239
—suffering of 95–97, 154, 171, 185– Leaders (ἡγούμενοι) 235, 241–242
186, 191–192, 194–195, —function of 242
Letter of James, The 256 Nicopolis 146

Levite(s) 54, 57, 255
Literacy 259 Office 5, 7, 11–16, 18–19, 22–23,
Lucian 42 25, 30, 38–39
Luke, Gospel of 24, 30–31, 74, 91 Old Testament 2, 20–21, 221, 244–
245, 251
Macedonia 146 —martyrs 76
Magnesia 180–182, 196 —motifs 93
Manaen 54–56, 255 —prophets in 141, 181n186, 201
Manichees 36 —teachers in 155, 173
Marcion 203, 218, 231–232 Onesimus (bishop in Ephesus) 188,
Mark, Gospel of 24, 46, 73–74, 78 195
Martyr, Martyrdom 76, 93, 178, 191, Onesiphorus 146
193–195, 198, 203–205, 210–211, Ossuaries 49–52
257 Oral performance 215
Matthew 3, 30, 212, 257–258 Orthodoxy 219
—persecution in 93–96
—school of 91, 256 Paideia, παιδεία 32, 43
—community of 33, 36–37, 52, 78, Pagan 243
80, 86–87, 90–91, 96–97, 110 —cult 240
Matthew, Gospel of 101, 111 —deities 239n45
—attitude toward money 74–75 —lifestyle 239
—composition 65–66 —teachers 24–25, 39
—preservation of Semitic features 68 Palestine 17, 20, 28–29, 32
—relation to the Didache 114–115 Paradosis 24–25
Melchizedek 235 Paraenesis 21–22, 110, 137, 248n85
Meeks, W. 37 Parousia 244
Merklein, H. 22–23, 55, 143 Pastoral Epistles, the 13–14, 24, 142,
Mishna 45 225, 257–258
Missionaries 8, 72–76, 80, 93, 97 —addressees 146, 168
Montanism 6 —authorship 145, 150, 155, 160,
Montanus 204 166, 176
Moses 41 —charisma in 157
—“the chair of” 78–79 —concern with right teaching 154,
—prophecies of 248 162, 174–175, 202
Mount Athos 213n3 —dating 145–146, 154, 172
—differences among 158–159
Nero 243 —elders in 158
Nerva 246n74 —gnostic ideas in see Gnosticism
New Testament 3–4, 19, 24–25, 29, —inscriptions 155
33, 35, 45–46, 138–139, 222 —place of composition 146
Neymeyr, U. 34–35, 130, 217, 260 —polemics 168, 173, 181, 192–193,
Neyrey, J.H. 245 197
—rhetorical concerns 156, 164, 172 2 Peter 243–246, 254, 258

—suffering in 171 Pharisees 27–28, 31–32, 39, 49, 51–
—teachers in 149, 153, 155, 159, 52, 77–81, 87–90, 238
163, 175, 207, 211 Philadelphia 182–184, 190
—women in see Women Philetus 147, 164–166
Patriarchs 221 Philip 142
Paul 1, 14–15, 30–31, 225, 244, 255, Philippians 185
257 Philo of Alexandria 41–42, 44, 51
—adversaries 146–156, 161–171, —on the Pentateuch 152
173–176 Philomelium 203
—and gospel transmission 23–24 Philosophers 151, 165, 174n162
—apostleship 24, 54–55, 140–141, Philosophic Schools 7, 20, 42–43, 45
156–157 Phygelus 164
—attacks against 151 Pius 215
—as author of epistles 30, 136, 146 Plato 41, 152
—commissioning 57 Πνευματικά 14
—commissioning of Timothy 142 Pneuma(tic) 13–14, 24
—communities of 14–15, 19–22, 37, Polybius 185
189, 198 Polycarp 255
—dispute with Peter 190n222 —as a teacher 198–201, 206, 209,
—ecclesiology 138 211, 257, 259
—journey with Barnabas 120, 123 —letters 185, 201
—as a teacher 57, 153–156, 166, —Martyrdom of 165, 171, 203–209,
197, 211, 225, 257–259 211–212, 257
—suffering of 96 —suspicion of dissidents 202
—succession from 156–157, 160, Preacher(s) 8
162–163 Practical teaching 34
—teaching 153, 157 Presbyter 1, 7–8, 12, 18, 23–25, 34,
—testament of 158–159, 164 39, 143, 201, 214, 237, 256–257, 259
— the triad in Paul’s thought see —as adversary of Paul see Paul
“triad, the” —appointment of 57, 59
—view of women 150 —authority 188, 203
—wisdom of 201 —disputing Marcion 231–232
—writing/teaching of 13, 16, 23, 28, —as heir to teachers 157, 168
30, 33 —relationship to bishops 160
Persecution(s) 22, 67–68, 71–76, 92– —relationship to shepherds 189
94, 165, 175, 196, 209, 256 —requirements on 163
—Nero’s 243 —in Rome 229–230
—of Hellenists 53 —salary 161–162
—of the prophet 95–96 —as successor to Paul see Paul
—of Polycarp 209–211 —in Judaism 18
Peter 36, 62–63, 243 Prophecy 8, 21, 23, 26, 192
1 Peter 244
Prophet 6, 8, 22–24, 80, 114, 214, —of Jesus 167, 225

216, 221, 237, 244, 251, 255–257 —denial of the bodily resurrection
—in Antioch 54–57 245
—apostles, teachers, and see “triad, Revelation 20–21
the” Rhode 213
—authority 189–190 Riesenfeld, H. 27
—Christian prophets 58 Riesner, R. 32–33
—in the Didache 120–124, 135 Righteousness (δικαιοσύνη) 253
—as discontinued role 201 —the way of 254
—docetic 179 —relationship to teachers 253
—in Ephesians 136–138, 140–142, Rome 1, 3, 98, 234–235–256, 258–
144 259
—of the Old Testament see Old —Christians in 213, 215n17, 218–
Testament 19, 229–230
—testing of 121–123 —Hermas in 213, 215, 241
—varied roles of 8 —Jews in 230
—violent death of 95–96 —teachers in 218–219, 229, 231–
—and transmission 26 232
—validation of 132–133
Protestant, Protestantism 11, 13, 15, Sadducees 44, 49, 78, 245
19 Salvation 13
Proto–rabbinate 31–33, 52 Samaria 142
Pseudo–Clementines 35–36, Satan 150
“School” tracts 251–252
Q source/material 17, 30 Schulbetrieb 251–252
Qumran 42, 46, 47, 67–69, 72–73, Schulz, S. 16
92, 99 Schürmann, H. 24–25
Schweizer, E. 13
Rabbi (‫)רבי‬ 82–83, 87–90, 103 Scribe (γραμματεύς) 3, 22, 76–81,
—and Christian teachers 175 87–90, 126, 151, 192, 238, 256, 259
—emergence 58, 89, 168 Scripture 14, 21–22, 25
—ordination 57, 158 Septuagint 40, 156, 173
—teachings 182 Seventy, the 12, 17
Rabbinic schools 91 Sex, sexual behavior 59, 244–245
Repentance 221, 239, 243 Sextus Empiricus 237
—after apostasy 240–241 Shem 221
—after baptism 220 Shepherd 213
Redaction Criticism 60–62 —as a title 137, 143–144, 256
Rengstorf, K. 19–21, 24, 35, 39 —relationship to presbyters 189
Resurrection 147, 225, 239, 245 Shepherd of Hermas, The 1, 213, 217,
—of the believer in Jesus 225 258
—of the body 167 —authorship of 213–215
—of the spirit 166–168, 170, 225 —place of writing 215
—reception of 219 —διδάσκαλος 3, 8, 19, 21, 25, 30–

—teachers in 225, 232 31, 39–41, 43–44, 50–51, 62, 65,
Simeon 255 82–83, 116–117, 125–132, 213, 215,
Sin 220–221, 225 220, 235, 241, 255
—forgiveness of 218–219 —as expounder of scripture 91, 254
—post–baptismal sin 239–241 —as leaders 21, 23
Smyrna 180, 184–187, 193, 198 —as philosophers 33, 36
Sociological Models 15 —as tradents 21, 23–33, 39, 250–
Socrates 41 251, 253–254
Sohm, R. 8–9, 11, 15 —and transmission 25, 33, 169–170
Son of God 221–223 —as mediators 21
Spirit 6, 11, 19, 25, 225n58 —content of teachings 109–110,
—bringing heavenly life 167 220, 222, 241
—deceitful 149 —development of 31, 34
—gifts of 16, 157, 189–190 —demons as 149
—upon teachers 181 —disputing Marcion 231–232
Spiritual Exercises 42 —education of 259
Stephen 22, 31, 255 —in Ephesians 137
Stoic, Stoicism 25, 110 —God as teacher 250
—Chrysippus 20, 25 —gender of 2, 41, 134–135, 148–
Succession 15 150, 176, 259
“Suffering servant” 93–94 —pagan teachers 24–25, 39
Synagogue 11–12, 18, 47 —“of evil” 224–225, 229
Synoptics 20–21, 23 —“of the law” 147, 151–152
Syria–Palestine 1, 4, 17, 30–31, 39, —intellectualization of 20
47, 62, 65, 99–101, 111, 119, —relationship to apostles 12, 143,
215n17, 247, 252–256, 258–259 222, 228, 232
—relationship to bishops 1, 25, 34,
Tarsus 12, 14, 54 132, 135, 259–260
Theissen, G. 16–17 —relationship to disciples 1, 2, 5,
Teacher 11, 214, 216–21, 223, 237, 21, 37, 73–74, 246, 248–250, 254,
246, 252, 255–257 258–259
—in Antioch 54–59 —relationship to false teachers 244–
—apostles, prophets, and see “triad, 246
the” —relationship to leaders 242
—appointment of 14, 59, 107, 144, —relationship to presbyters 1, 25,
227, 230, 232 34, 258–259
—authority of 12, 35, 232, 259 —relationship to prophets 1–2, 5, 7,
—the Twelve as 11 12, 23, 30, 143, 258
— as apostles and prophets 8–9, 20 —relationship to shepherds 142
—criteria for assessment 127–131 —reputation of 106–108, 227, 248–
—in the Didache 133–134 249
—role of 2–3, 5, 8–9, 106, 142–144, —of tradition/teaching 21, 23, 39

242–243, 258–259 Troas 186
—schools of 12
—self–authenticating 226–228, 232 Valentinus 218
—social class of 37–38, 259
—teaching all creation 228 Wagner, J. 18
—title of 20, 25, 90, 97 Wayment, T.A. 36–37
—and transmission 22 Weber, M. 9–11, 16–17
—validation of 132–133 Weiss, A. 37–38
Temple, The 47, 49, 246 Widows 148–150
Tertullian 231 Wise Men 76, 80, 92, 256
Testament of Levi 92 Women
Testimonia 251, 252n104 —education 149
Theodicy 245 —enticed by false teachers 165
Thomas, Gospel of 26–37 —means of salvation 149–150
Thomas 36 —social status 148–150, 164
Timothy 142, 147, 150, 257 —teachers see Teacher, Gender of
—appointment of 148, 157–59
—the epistles see Pastoral Epistles Zeno 20, 25
—leadership role 155–157, 159, 172 Zimmermann, A.F. 29–32, 55, 57,
—relationship to Paul 169–171, 62–63, 82, 100, 108, 110, 258
174–176
—rhetorical function 156, 160, 162–
64
—teachings 173–174
Title 15–16
Titus 257
—the epistle see Pastoral Epistles
—leadership role 155
—relationship to Paul 174–176
—teachings 173–174
Torah 19, 27–28, 40, 45–47, 49, 79,
99, 101, 113, 128
“Twelve, The” 11, 17, 24, 28, 32,140
“Two Ways,” The 112–115, 125–
127, 238, 239, 248n85, 250, 252–253,
258
“Triad, the” 5, 7–8, 10, 12–13, 18,
22, 30, 38–39, 59–60, 62–65, 76, 111
Tradition 12
Trallians 185–186
Transmission
—theme of 11, 20, 22, 25–27, 33
Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen
zum Neuen Testament
Edited by Jörg Frey (Zürich)
Associate Editors:
Markus Bockmuehl (Oxford) ∙ James A. Kelhoffer (Uppsala)
Tobias Nicklas (Regensburg) ∙ Janet Spittler (Charlottesville, VA)
J. Ross Wagner (Durham, NC)
WUNT I is an international series dealing with the entire field of early Chris-
tianity and its Jewish and Graeco-Roman environment. Its historical-philolog-
ical profile and interdisciplinary outlook, which its long-term editor Martin
Hengel was instrumental in establishing, is maintained by an international
team of editors representing a wide range of the traditions and themes of New
Testament scholarship. The sole criteria for acceptance to the series are the
scholarly quality and lasting merit of the work being submitted. Apart from
the specialist monographs of experienced researchers, some of which may be
habilitations, WUNT I features collections of essays by renowned scholars,
source material collections and editions as well as conference proceedings in
the form of a handbook on themes central to the discipline.
WUNT II complements the first series by offering a publishing platform in
paperback for outstanding writing by up-and-coming young researchers.
Dissertations and monographs are presented alongside innovative conference
volumes on fundamental themes of New Testament research. Like Series I, it is
marked by a historical-philological character and an international orientation
that transcends exegetical schools and subject boundaries. The academic quality
of Series II is overseen by the same team of editors.
WUNT I: WUNT II:

ISSN: 0512-1604 ISSN: 0340-9570
Suggested citation: WUNT I Suggested citation: WUNT II
All available volumes can be found at All available volumes can be found
www.mohrsiebeck.com/wunt1 at www.mohrsiebeck.com/wunt2
Mohr Siebeck
www.mohrsiebeck.com

Early Christian Teachers - Alessandro Falcetta

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Early Christian Teachers - Alessandro Falcetta

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen

zum Neuen Testament · 2. Reihe

ISBN 978-3-16-157578-5 / eISBN 978-3-16-157579-2

© 2020 Mohr Siebeck Tübingen, Germany. www.mohrsiebeck.com

This study is based on my postdoctoral dissertation submitted to the

Stavanger, 13 February 2020

Abbreviations and Note............................................................................. 1

Chapter 1: Scholarship on Early Christian Teachers .................. 5

2. Beginnings: 1883–1920s ................................................................... 5

3. Charisma and Office ....................................................................... 11

4. Teachers Move Centre Stage .......................................................... 19

5.2 Birger Gerhardsson .................................................................. 27

6. The Last Decades............................................................................ 33

7. Social Strata in Early Christianity ................................................... 37

8. Considerations for New Research ................................................... 38

Chapter 2: Teachers in non-Christian Sources ........................... 40

1. Education in the Greco-Roman World ............................................ 40

2. Education in Jewish Sources ........................................................... 44

Chapter 3: Sources on Syria............................................................ 53

1. Acts 13:1–3 .................................................................................... 53

2. 1 Corinthians 12:28–29 ................................................................... 59

2.3.1 Apostles ..............................................................................63

4.9 Conclusions............................................................................ 110

5. Didache ........................................................................................ 111

Chapter 4: Sources on Asia Minor .............................................. 136

2. Pastoral Letters ............................................................................. 145

2.4.1 Paul’s Adversaries ............................................................ 146

3. Letters of Ignatius ......................................................................... 176

4. Polycarp ....................................................................................... 198

4.3.3 Martyrdom of Polycarp 12 ................................................205

Chapter 5: A Source on Rome: The Shepherd of Hermas ..... 213

1. Introduction .................................................................................. 213

2. Authorship, Date and Place ........................................................... 213

3. Vision 3.5.1................................................................................... 215

4. Mandate 4.3.1 ............................................................................... 218

5. Similitude 8.6.5 ............................................................................. 220

6. Similitude 9.15.4 ........................................................................... 221

7. Similitude 9.16.5–7 ....................................................................... 223

8. Similitude 9.19.2 ........................................................................... 223

9. Similitude 9.22.1–4 ....................................................................... 226

10. Similitude 9.25.1–2 ..................................................................... 228

11. The Emergence of Teachers in Rome.......................................... 229

13. Conclusions ................................................................................ 232

Chapter 6: Sources of Uncertain Location ................................ 234

1.2 Hebrews 5:11–14 ................................................................... 235

2. 2 Peter .......................................................................................... 243

3. Epistle of Barnabas ...................................................................... 246

Conclusions .......................................................................... 255

Bibliography ......................................................................................... 261

Additional abbreviations are as follows:

JECS: Journal of Early Christian Studies

KAV: Kommentar zu den Apostolischen Vätern

MBT: Münsterische Beiträge zur Theologie

Scholarship on Early Christian Teachers

2.1 Adolf von Harnack

villages where he met presbyters and teachers (presbute,rouj kai. didaska,louj).

provide authoritative teaching, and are subordinated to prophets. In due course

2.3 Max Weber on Charismatic Leadership

also be interpreted as “authority” because authority is the external manifestation of

3. Charisma and Office

3.1 The Protestant-Catholic Divide

3.2 Catholic Scholarship after Vatican II

zum Neuen Testament · 2. Reihe

© 2020 Mohr Siebeck Tübingen, Germany. www.mohrsiebeck.com