P 331 CHAPTER TWENTY-TWO name in the rst century.

e Pauline le ers, on the other

READING THE LETTERS hand, were wri en to specic congrega-
OF THE NEW TESTAMENT tions or individuals for particular rea-
sons. Almost all of Pauls extant corre-
spondence was responsive to specic
Rodney R. Reeves questions or situations; Romans may
have been the only le er sent by Paul to
LETTERS COMPRISE OVER ONE-THIRD of the
establish initial contact with a church.
New Testament canon, twenty-one of
Pauls le ers, therefore, represent only
its twenty-seven books. e epistles of
one part of an extended dialoguea
the New Testament are arranged
conversation that had been going on for
according to author, length, and recipi-
several years. Scholars try to recon-
ents. e rst section consists of thir-
struct the life situation that gave rise to
teen le ers, all a ributed to Paul, writ-
the apostles correspondence in order to
ten to churches (Romans to essaloni-
establish the historical context of his
ans) and individuals (Timothy to Phile-
teaching. If we knew something of
mon), arranged according to size. e
what the Galatians believed, for p
last eight le ers are named a er their
332 example, or the identity of the false
authors (except Hebrews), wri en to no
teachers, then we would know what
specic congregation, and follow the
Paul was reacting againstwhat was so
same order: from longest to shortest.
threatening about the Galatian contro-
ey have been called the general
versy. Of course, most of that informa-
epistles or the catholic le ers since
tion comes from the le er itself. Trying
they were originally addressed to Chris-
to read between the lines, inter-
tians in general, e.g., the twelve tribes
preters reconstruct the scenario that
who are dispersed abroad (James 1:1),
prompted Pauls response.
or the aliens sca ered throughout
For example, consider the situation
Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia, and
Paul faced among the Galatian church-
Bithynia (1 Pet. 1:1). Despite some clues,
es. Outsiders were encouraging the
the identity of the recipients of these
Galatians to be circumcised. Some of
le ers remains a mystery. For example,
Pauls Gentile converts were given to
we do not know the specic identity of
the idea of obeying Jewish law (Gal.
the Hebrews, the elect lady (2 John
4:21): Jewish circumcision (Gal. 5:2),
1), or the recipients of 1 John, 2 Peter,
Jewish calendar (Gal. 4:10), and Jewish
and Jude. e only personal le er, 3
identity (Gal. 3:29). e entire le er is
John, was wri en to Gaius, a common

Bruce Corley, Steve Lemke, and Grant Lovejoy, Biblical Hermeneutics: A Comprehensive Introduction to
Interpreting Scripture ( nd ed.; Nashville, TN: Broadman & Holman, ).
Exported from Logos Bible Software, 9:01 PM March 14, 2016. 1
devoted to explaining to these Gentile
Christians why they do not have to fol-
low Jewish law to be a child of Abra-
ham. Even though modern readers
never hear from the Galatians
rsthand, we know that their interest
in Jewish things made Paul angry (Gal.
3:1; 4:16, 20; 5:12).
Sometimes we are able to eavesdrop
on both parties. For example, the
Corinthians sent their own le er to
Paul, looking for clarication on certain
issues (1 Cor. 7:1; 8:1; 12:1; 16:1). First
Corinthians was wri en in response to
their questions and the unfavorable
report coming from the group that met
at Chloes house (1 Cor. 1:11). In this case,
it is easier to follow Pauls argument
knowing something of what the
Corinthians believed. Evidently, they
had taken issue with some of Pauls
teaching regarding marriage, eating
meat oered to idols, spiritual gi s, and
the relief oering for the church in
Jerusalem. Establishing the historical
context that prompted Pauls response
to these and other issues in Corinth
helps us understand be er what the
apostle meant and what the Corinthi-
ans were supposed to believe.
Most of the time it is harder to hear
both sides of the conversation. For
instance, in Philippians it is dicult to
determine when Paul is addressing his
opponents or when he is correcting his
converts. Were the opponents of Paul
Bruce Corley, Steve Lemke, and Grant Lovejoy, Biblical Hermeneutics: A Comprehensive Introduction to
Interpreting Scripture ( nd ed.; Nashville, TN: Broadman & Holman,
Exported from Logos Bible Software, 9:01 PM March 14, 2016.
in Philippi (Phil. 1:28) the same persons
who hoped to bring distress to the
apostle in his imprisonment, preaching
the gospel out of selsh
ambition (Phil. 1:17)? Or, were the
dogs of circumcision (Phil. 3:2), the
enemies of the cross (Phil. 3:18), the
main threat to the Philippian congrega-
tion, preaching Christ from envy and
strife (Phil. 1:15)?
In other words, were these oppo-
nents insiders or outsiders? What role
did the overseers play in the watch care
of the church (Phil. 1:1)? Since there
was some ecclesiastical hierarchy in
Philippi, why didnt Paul address his
le er to the bishop of the church, like
he did for Timothy and Titus? Why did
he feel it necessary to address the con-
gregation directly rather than via the
overseers? So many questions remain
unanswered. Consequently,
p 333
reconstructing the life situation of cer-
tain le ers like Philippians is more dif-
cult and less reliable because it
requires more speculation. It is harder
to tell what Paul is arguing for when we
cannot determine for certain what Paul
is arguing against. To understand why
Paul wrote Philippians (or any other
le er) helps modern readers to under-
stand what Paul meant in his le er.
Reading New Testament
Conversations in Context
As we can see, the Pauline epistles
).
2
were not the result of some impetuous
desire to touch base with the church-
es. Paul had specic reasons for writ-
ing. In most cases, it was his absence
that created the need for correspon-
dence with his converts. His le ers
served as a substitute apostolic pres-
ence to speak directly to situations and
problems within the churches. e lack
of spiritual leadership among many of
these newly established churches
required his constant vigilance.
Without literary Gospels (Paul appar-
ently labored his entire ministry with-
out the benet of the four Gospels),
these new converts relied upon their
apostle as the gospel source for Gentile
believers (1 Cor. 4:1517; 2 Cor. 13:3). But
not everyone accepted Pauls apostle-
ship or his version of the gospel. ere-
fore, in addition to a acking his oppo-
nents, Paul spent much of his time
defending his right to apostolic min-
istry, defending his missionary deci-
sions, defending his gospel, defending
himself.
But the war between Paul and his
accusers was not his chief concern. e
integrity of his ministry, the integrity
of his gospel, depended upon the char-
acter of his converts. He wanted Gen-
tiles converted to Christ to live holy
lives, directed by the Spirit, faithful to
the end. eir obedience was his pas-
sion. Hence, throughout his le ers,
Paul talks much about what they should
Bruce Corley, Steve Lemke, and Grant Lovejoy, Biblical Hermeneutics: A Comprehensive Introduction to
Interpreting Scripture ( nd ed.; Nashville, TN: Broadman & Holman,
Exported from Logos Bible Software, 9:01 PM March 14, 2016.
think and what they should do. Yet, his
le ers were not mere recollections of
the gospel sermons he preached. To fol-
low that analogy, when we read a le er
of Pauls, we are not hearing the
sermon; the message had already been
proclaimed (as Paul reminds his con-
verts many times, e.g., 1 Cor. 2:15; 1
ess. 2:13; Gal. 3:1). Instead, the le ers
represent Pauls response to the ques-
tions prompted by the message. His
le ers were words on target for a
particular situation of particular con-
gregations trying to obey the gospel
according to Paul.
Sorting out the line of conversation
between author and recipient among
the general epistles, on the other hand,
is more dicult. In some cases, clues
given concerning the identity of the
readers and the occasion of the le er
help establish context. For example, the
le er to the p 334 Hebrews was wri en
to Jewish Christians who were partici-
pating in the Day of Atonement. Accus-
tomed to celebrating other Jewish holi-
days, these Christians saw no distinc-
tion between their profession of Jesus
and their Jewish heritage. Persecuted
by their neighbors, some of the Chris-
tians may have shi ed their allegiance
from the church to the synagogue (Heb.
10:25, 3235). e writer admonishes
them to leave the city of their honor-
able identity and join Jesus outside the
camp, bearing his reproach (Heb.
).
3
13:13). e entire le er was wri en to
keep Jewish Christians from reverting
to Judaism, so they would derive their
social identity from the Christian
community rather than the synagogue.
Even so, the specic historical cir-
cumstances that prompted the le er
are lost to us. Without additional infor-
mation we will never be able to answer
the simple questions of news reporting:
where? when? why? who? Instead, the
modern reader must be content with
discovering the general message of an
anonymous le er that was wri en to
nameless people. Hebrews was once a
word on target for its rst readers,
addressing a particular need of a speci-
c group of people. But now it is
assigned to a class of le ers wri en to
the universal church, the general epis-
tles.
Why is establishing the historical
context of New Testament le ers so
important? Why shouldnt we be con-
tent with interpreting the general
message of all le ers, including Pauls?
ere are two important reasons why
historical meaning ma ers.
First, since we do not know the his-
torical circumstances surrounding the
general epistles, certain enigmatic texts
are more dicult to interpret. For
example, the troublesome Hebrews 6
passage has spawned a multitude of
dierent interpretations. Who are the
persons described in verses 46? What
Bruce Corley, Steve Lemke, and Grant Lovejoy, Biblical Hermeneutics: A Comprehensive Introduction to
Interpreting Scripture ( nd ed.; Nashville, TN: Broadman & Holman,
Exported from Logos Bible Software, 9:01 PM March 14, 2016.
does it mean to fall away (Calvinists
would want to know)? Why is it impos-
sible to renew them again to repen-
tance (Arminians would want to
know)? By what actions do they cruci-
fy to themselves the Son of God? Some
details regarding the history of the
church(es) would help establish a con-
text for these words. Was falling away
a widespread problem among Jewish
Christian congregations? Or was the
author presenting a purely hypothetical
situationwe are convinced of be er
things concerning you (v. 9)? Since the
author is unknown, we cannot compare
his work to see if these expressions
were commonly used. With so many
unanswered questions, the vagaries of
the text remain. Obscure references do
not lead to condent interpretations. It
seems that Hebrews, the le er wri en
for the universal church, is not univer-
sally understood.
p 335 By contrast, consider the
advantages aorded the modern reader
of Pauls words to the Galatians or the
essalonians. Because we know the
identity of the author, because we
know something about the recipients,
and because we know the problems
Paul was trying to address in these let-
ters, his statements about falling from
grace (Gal. 5:4) and the apostasy (2
ess. 2:3) are pregnant with meaning
framed by what we know about the
historical context. Some of the Gala-
).
4
tians were yielding to circumcision
without Pauls approval (Gal. 3:15;
4:215:8). Circumcision does not dene
the Christian communityit is irrele-
vant in Christ Jesus. Instead, faith
working through love, i.e., a law-free
gospel, is what Paul proclaimed. Other
le ers wri en by Paul conrm the
same (1 Cor. 7:19; Rom. 2:2629).
Furthermore, we know from Acts 15
that circumcision was the compelling
issue that separated Judaizers from the
majority opinion. e church came to
the conclusion that circumcision is for
Jews, not Gentiles (Acts 15:1920). When
Gentile Christians in Galatia, therefore,
entertained the idea of submi ing to
circumcision, Paul warned them of the
consequences. Obviously, fallen from
grace is a loaded expression that car-
ries the full weight of what was at
stake: the loss of freedom in Christ, the
forsaking of Christian identity, and the
credibility of the Pauline gospel. But
one thing it cannot mean: Paul was not
warning them of the risk of losing their
salvation. If circumcision caused some-
one to lose his inheritance in Christ
Jesus, then Paul would have never been
able to write, Neither circumcision
nor uncircumcision means
anything (Gal. 5:6; 6:15), because it
would have meant everything if eternal
life were in jeopardy.
Consider how what we know of the
situation at essalonica informs our
Bruce Corley, Steve Lemke, and Grant Lovejoy, Biblical Hermeneutics: A Comprehensive Introduction to
Interpreting Scripture ( nd ed.; Nashville, TN: Broadman & Holman,
Exported from Logos Bible Software, 9:01 PM March 14, 2016.
interpretation of these two epistles. A
few of the essalonians were leading
unruly lives, confused about the
parousia, the return of Christ (1 ess.
4:10b5:8; 2 ess. 2:23, 15; 3:612).
Since we know that Paul preached the
imminent return of Christ, and that the
expectation of his return should cause
Christians to make plans only for the
short term (1 Cor. 7:2935), then it comes
as no surprise that some of the apostles
converts would quit working to make
provisions for the future (2 ess. 3:11).
Once again, Acts provides vital informa-
tion. e rst generation of Christians
liquidated property in order to provide
food for the entire community of faith
(Acts 4:3235). Although such an action
eventually led to the impoverishment
of the Jerusalem congregation (Rom.
15:26), it is conceivable how some Gen-
tile Christians would imitate the moth-
er church, the rst p 336 model of
Christian living, even as they were
o en encouraged to do (1 ess. 2:14).
Acts also relates that Pauls rst
mission trip to essalonica did not last
long, perhaps only four weeks (Acts
17:2). Although it was enough time to
establish a church, the brevity of Pauls
stay coupled with the exuberance of his
preaching must have provided fertile
soil for confusion. eir undisciplined
life of relying upon others for food was
contrary to the tradition they received
from Paul (2 ess. 2:15; 3:6). Paul was
).
5
their model of imitation (2 ess.
3:89). To disobey his commandments
would lead to a life of lawlessness, the
rst sign of apostasy (2 ess. 2:37;
3:24, 14). Complete disregard for the
commandments, to live an unruly life,
was a sure sign that the mystery of
lawlessness is already at work (2 ess.
2:7). e essalonians simply failed to
remember that Paul had already
warned them about these things (2
ess. 2:5). And, who can blame them?
e essalonians were novices and
Paul was not the most gi ed speaker (1
Cor. 2:14; 2 Cor. 10:10). Such details are
hard to come by when we read general
epistles.
e second reason why establishing
the historical context for the le ers of
the New Testament is important is that
Scripture can never mean what it never
meant. Fee refers to this hermeneutical
principle as the basic rule of interpret-
ing le ers (Fee and Stuart, 60). We
must determine what a le er meant to
its rst readers before we can under-
stand what it means today. If we disre-
gard this rst step of biblical interpreta-
tion, sometimes referred to as exege-
sis or exposition, then we make the
arrogant assumption that Scripture
was wri en only for our benet.
Instead, as Hays prefers to put it, when
reading the le ers of the New Testa-
ment we must remember that we are
reading someone elses mail (Hays, 1).
Bruce Corley, Steve Lemke, and Grant Lovejoy, Biblical Hermeneutics: A Comprehensive Introduction to
Interpreting Scripture ( nd ed.; Nashville, TN: Broadman & Holman,
Exported from Logos Bible Software, 9:01 PM March 14, 2016.
Pauls le er to the Corinthians was
Gods Word rst of all for the Corinthi-
ans. Because the divine message
remains the same, then what God was
saying to the Corinthians is what God is
saying to all Christians for all time. If
modern readers fail to determine what
the le er meant in the past, then we
will have no surety of establishing
what the le er means in the present.
Without historical context, the mean-
ing of the text depends upon the inspi-
ration of the reader not the
writerauthorial intent is irrelevant.
And, without historical meaning, there
is no basis for determining the correct
interpretationevery reading becomes
idiosyncratic.
Paul wrote, When the fullness of
time came, God sent forth His Son, born
of a woman, born under the law (Gal.
4:4). According to p 337 the apostle,
timing is important to God. e histori-
cal circumstances surrounding the
Jesus movement were signicant. It
was the right time for the kingdom of
God to break into history. e story of
the New Testament involves certain
people of a particular time, of another
worldview, of a dierent era. When we
read a smoothly worded modern
English translation of the Bible, some-
times it is easy to forget that Paul,
James, Peter, and John did not think like
twentieth-century Americans. Even
though we can read their le ers, we
).
6
must remind ourselves that they didnt
speak our language. ey didnt dress
like us, work like us, travel like us, read
and write like us, or worship like us.
When we pick up the Bible, we are
entering a dierent world, a dierent
culture. erefore, if we are to read the
le ers of the New Testament on their
own terms, we must learn as much as
we can about the culture of their time.
Understanding the Customs,
Convictions, and the
Mediterranean World
Women covering their heads, eating
meat oered to idols, circumcision,
worship of angels, slaves obeying mas-
tersthe issues facing the rst-century
church seem so far removed from the
daily challenges of the church today.
Even a cursory reading of the New Tes-
tament le ers reveals a foreign world to
modern students of the Bible. Although
some things never change (divisions in
the church, immorality, racial preju-
dice, the rich taking advantage of the
poor), culturally conditioned passages
of the New Testament must be taken to
be equally relevant to the modern
church. e problem lies in translating
their life situation into the language of
our world. Readers must make the
quantum leap, going back in time, to
hear the le ers as if they were wri en
to them. Strapping on sandals, looking
through the eyes of rst-century
Bruce Corley, Steve Lemke, and Grant Lovejoy, Biblical Hermeneutics: A Comprehensive Introduction to
Interpreting Scripture ( nd ed.; Nashville, TN: Broadman & Holman,
Exported from Logos Bible Software, 9:01 PM March 14, 2016.
Mediterranean people, takes much
eort. eir ways are not our ways. But
if we are determined to discover what
God is saying to us through these le er-
s, we must rst nd out what he was
saying to them.
Social convictions shape human
behavior. Customs outline boundaries
of socially acceptable behavior. Of
course, these customs and convictions
derive from cultural norms that are
operative in any particular society.
Since the Mediterranean world consist-
ed of a diverse population of many dif-
ferent peoples, each land possessing
distinctive cultural habits, the chal-
lenge of founding social units (church-
es) in dierent parts of the world that
were to share uniform practices of
belief provided many occasions for
conict between apostle and converts.
Paul o en reminds his readers that a
cavalier a itude regarding the p
traditions he laid down for all the
338
churches was dangerous (1 Cor. 11:16).
Nonconformists were to be exiled as
social pariahs (1 Cor. 14:38; 2 ess. 3:14).
For Paul, then, social behavior was as
much a part of the gospel as theological
confession: For this reason I have sent
to you Timothy, who is my beloved and
faithful child in the Lord, and he will
remind you of my ways which are in
Christ Jesus, just as I teach everywhere
in every church (1 Cor. 4:17).
erefore, it should come as no
).
7
surprise that many directives regarding
social behavior for rst-century
churches were dressed in cultural
garments. Even though Paul avoided
imposing his Jewish ways on the pre-
dominantly Gentile churches (1 Cor.
9:21), he still was a man of his time, of
their timea time when controversies
surrounding head coverings, circumci-
sion, dietary regulations, and idol wor-
ship threatened the integrity of his
apostolic mission.
Discerning the dierence between
culturally conditioned instructions and
timeless application of the gospel is
crucial when reading New Testament
le ers. Because social convictions are
presented with the same passion as
theological arguments, a nave inter-
preter might regard all instructions as
directly applicable to the Christian life.
At the same time, there are those who
argue that certain Scriptures dealing
with moral issues must be seen as cul-
turally bound texts, having no rele-
vance for today (for example, questions
regarding homosexuality). How can we
tell the dierence between the archaic
and the timeless?
First, no text can be dismissed as
irrelevant simply because it carries
culturally conditioned arguments. Even
though we are not struggling over the
issue of eating meat oered to idols (1
Cor. 8:111:1), the principles behind
Pauls argument are universal, and they
Bruce Corley, Steve Lemke, and Grant Lovejoy, Biblical Hermeneutics: A Comprehensive Introduction to
Interpreting Scripture ( nd ed.; Nashville, TN: Broadman & Holman,
Exported from Logos Bible Software, 9:01 PM March 14, 2016.
can be applied in a variety of contexts
where liberty and legalism clash.
Second, culturally informed texts
usually deal with provincial issues. at
is to say, when Paul employs an argu-
ment based on social convictions, he is
usually addressing a local problem
indigenous to that region. For example,
it was evidently a shameful thing in
Corinth for men to wear their hair long
(1 Cor. 11:14). For Jews keeping the
Nazirite vow, on the other hand, long
hair was honorable, symbolizing
strength and holiness (Num. 6:5; Paul
may have kept a Nazirite vow himself,
Acts 18:18). Paul took every precaution
to protect the reputation of the church-
es in their community (1 ess. 4:12; 1
Cor. 14:23), at times correcting behavior
so as not to oend neighbors (1 Cor.
6:57; Rom. 15:12).
Finally, moral codes were not limit-
ed to a particular culture but were uni-
versally recognized. Paul and Peter
used familiar vice lists without p
339 explanation (Gal. 5:1921; 1 Pet. 2:1;
4:3). erefore, Paul could use an exas-
perated tone, pointing out to the
Corinthians that it is obvious to every-
one that neither fornicators, nor idol-
aters, nor adulterers, nor eeminate,
nor homosexuals, nor thieves, nor the
covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers,
nor swindlers shall inherit the kingdom
of God (1 Cor. 6:910). Vices and virtues
could be listed as common knowledge
).
8
since they were accepted as universal
maxims that transcend culture. Indeed,
their catalogue of moral failures still
describes the sins of humanity today.
At the same time, the rst-century
Mediterranean people shared certain
values that distinguished them from
other regions of the world. In many
respects, their worldviewwhat is
sacred and common, what is wise and
foolish, what is honorable and
shamefulis very dierent from ours.
Recently, biblical studies have applied
the research of current cultural anthro-
pological studies of the Mediterranean
people to the New Testament in order
to highlight the social convictions that
were operative in the time of Christ
(see Malina). Pa erns of cultural belief
emerged when the social world of the
Bible was compared to cultural trends
of certain contemporary Mediter-
ranean groups. e heuristic model,
when applied to New Testament le ers,
gives the modern reader invaluable
insights into why certain ma ers in the
life of the early church were so impor-
tant to apostles and converts.
For example, honor and shame were
powerful social convictions that Paul
used to get his converts to obey his
directives. To the modern ear, imitate
me sounds arrogant (1 Cor. 4:16).
Because our culture prizes individual-
ism, follow the leader is an oense to
those trying to establish their own iden-
Bruce Corley, Steve Lemke, and Grant Lovejoy, Biblical Hermeneutics: A Comprehensive Introduction to
Interpreting Scripture ( nd ed.; Nashville, TN: Broadman & Holman,
Exported from Logos Bible Software, 9:01 PM March 14, 2016.
tity. But for Pauls time, to follow the
leader was the most honorable thing to
do because a persons identity was
revealed by the company he kept. In
other words, honorable association
exceeded individual achievement in the
search for signicance. In fact, a
groups reputation was far more impor-
tant than any individuals quest for
recognition. To honor the head of the
group was to preserve the integrity of
every member (1 Cor. 4:15; see also Gal.
2:1214). ose who rebelled brought
shame to the honorable community (1
Cor. 15:3334). e shameless, those who
refused to repent and make reparations
to the group for their dishonorable
behavior, would be shunned (1 Cor.
5:1113; see also 2 Cor. 2:510). Paul was
the honorable head (apostle) of the
Gentiles. eir allegiance proved his
apostleship (1 Cor. 9:2). For the most
part, this is why he encouraged them to
imitate me. Children replicate the
qualities of their parents (Gal. 4:19).
p 340 Making sense of the social
world of the New Testament enables
the student of the Bible to read the epis-
tolary material on its own terms. e
temptation of every interpreter is to
read into the life situation of the
churches, basing observations on cur-
rent experiences and contemporary
social convictions. Eisegesis (reading
into) distorts the biblical picture. Exe-
gesis (taking from) is the goal of mod-
).
9
ern interpretation. Of course, complete-
ly objective interpretation is impossi-
ble; we are all subjects of the text
(James 1:2325).
Nevertheless, the le ers of the New
Testament can speak for themselves.
e Pauline epistles, as well as the rest
of the New Testament le ers, demon-
strate how the gospel of Jesus Christ
addressed the needs of dierent people,
under dierent circumstances, of a dif-
ferent time and place. It is up to mod-
ern readers, therefore, to learn how to
read the timely arguments of Paul as
contingent expressions of the timeless
truth of the gospel. Before we can know
what it means to walk in the Spirit,
we must know what Paul meant to
convey to the Galatians when he argued
against fullling the desire of the
esh (Gal. 5:16).
e Role of Literary Form and
Function
Biblical authors used dierent liter-
ary conventions in order to accomplish
dierent purposes. e psalmists used
poetry to encourage reection and
worship. e prophets anticipated
judgment and called for repentance
through divine speech, thus saith the
LORD. Each literary form reveals liter-
ary function. e same is true for the
le ers of the New Testament. ese
epistles were wri en to overcome limi-
tations of time and space. ey were
Bruce Corley, Steve Lemke, and Grant Lovejoy, Biblical Hermeneutics: A Comprehensive Introduction to
Interpreting Scripture ( nd ed.; Nashville, TN: Broadman & Holman,
Exported from Logos Bible Software, 9:01 PM March 14, 2016.
the only means of long-distance com-
munication in the hellenistic world (on
average, le ers traveled at a speed of
four hundred to eight hundred miles
per month). us, Pauls le ers allowed
the apostle to speak when absent (what
scholars call an apostolic parousia, 2
ess. 2:15). e Elder sent a le er in
the meantime to address immediate
concerns before his face-to-face visit (3
John 1314). Other hellenistic le ers of
that era wri en on papyri reveal the
same general purposeto deliver mes-
sages between correspondents separat-
ed by distance. Many of these le ers
were wri en to maintain long-distance
friendships. Especially among govern-
ing ocials, le ers of advice and media-
tion were circulated among those seek-
ing counsel in public aairs. In a world
where people of means competed for
commendation, le ers of praise and
blame were in constant circulation
(Stowers, 77).
Even though exchanging personal
le ers was a common means of com-
munication in the hellenistic world,
some of Pauls recipients saw p
341 another purpose in the apostles
epistolary eorts. ey claimed Paul
wrote le ers in order to avoid face-to-
face encounters. ey admi ed that he
was a persuasive writer. But some of
his critics remained unconvinced that
distance was the only reason Paul kept
sending le ers to correct behavior. Paul
).
10
was such a poor speaker, they argued,
that he used le ers to confront his
opponents (2 Cor. 10:911). At times,
even those loyal to the apostle seem
more confused than comforted by his
le ers (1 Cor. 1:13; 5:910; 2 Cor. 7:8; 10:1;
2 ess. 2:2).
Even though the Pauline epistles
exhibit a generic form common in the
rst century (introduction, main body,
and conclusion), some scholars main-
tain that these le ers possess distinc-
tive features which exemplify a unique
epistolary form. For example, Pauls
le ers are lengthier than the common
private le er and contain additional
epistolary features not found in typical
hellenistic le ers. In certain respects,
his le ers were public documents and
could be compared to the literary
essays that were published for a univer-
sal audience. He certainly expected his
le ers to be read by many groups, not
just by the addressees (Col. 4:16).
On the other hand, interjecting his
personal feelings into le ers that were
to be read publicly must have given
Pauls converts a clear indication that
these documents were not intended for
public consumption. His le ers were
private yet public, general yet specic,
personal yet corporate, timely yet time-
less. ese le ers were unusual. It is no
wonder certain readers/auditors (oppo-
nents?) were oended when the church
gathered to read/hear what intimate
Bruce Corley, Steve Lemke, and Grant Lovejoy, Biblical Hermeneutics: A Comprehensive Introduction to
Interpreting Scripture ( nd ed.; Nashville, TN: Broadman & Holman,
Exported from Logos Bible Software, 9:01 PM March 14, 2016.
things Paul had to say in a corporate
se ing. In these le ers he seemed more
absent than present, more teacher than
preacher, more father than colaborer.
Compared to the hellenistic litera-
ture of its time, the New Testament let-
ters defy classication. eir unique
literary form seems to anticipate a
specic function that was necessary in
addressing the special needs of the rst-
century church. Within the Pauline
corpus, le ers to churches consistently
follow an epistolary pa ern (salutation,
thanksgiving, body, practical advice,
closing). is form must not have been
too uncommon for the Christian com-
munity, since the Petrine le ers, 2 and 3
John, and Jude follow the same episto-
lary model.
On the other hand, some of the
general epistles fail to conform to the
familiar pa ern. Hebrews reads more
like a sermona monologue more than
a dialogue (the author o en refers to
his readers as auditors, Heb. 5:11). First
John looks more like a treatise than a
private le er (even though he does
refer to his readers with personal terms
of endearment, li le children). James
resembles a collection of wisdom p
342 sayings. Even some of Pauls le ers
defy stereotyping. e generic quality
of the Ephesian le er and the ecclesias-
tical tone of the pastoral epistles set
them apart from the authentic le ers of
Paul, according to some scholars. Yet,
).
11
for all their diversity, the le ers of the
New Testament share common literary
features. Generally, the New Testament
le ers follow the same form as other
hellenistic papyri of that time: greet-
ing, thanksgiving, main body, closing
remarks.
Although the salutation (grace to
you) was customary in the hellenistic
world, in most of the New Testament
le ers this greeting has been replaced
by the Christian salutation, grace and
peace to you (Rom. 1:7; 1 Cor. 1:3; 2 Cor.
1:2; Gal. 1:3; 2 John 3), which included
the Jewish salutation, shalom. Paul
used the standard writer-to-addressee
greeting. Yet, in some of his le ers,
Paul listed his partners as coauthors,
e.g., Paul and Silvanus and Timothy to
the church of the essalonians (1
ess. 1:1; see 2:18, for we wanted to
come to youI, Paul, more than once).
Others believe that Paul may have
included the names of his coworkers in
the address in order to identify them as
le er carriers, acknowledging their
authority to transmit apostolic mes-
sages.
Unlike the hellenistic papyri, Paul
would o en end his le ers with a dox-
ology (2 Cor. 13:14) or a prayer (Gal.
6:18). Sometimes Paul would even sign
o with his own pen (2 ess. 3:17; Gal.
6:11; Col. 4:18). Except for Galatians,
Paul also included in his le ers a
lengthy thanksgiving, sometimes as a
Bruce Corley, Steve Lemke, and Grant Lovejoy, Biblical Hermeneutics: A Comprehensive Introduction to
Interpreting Scripture ( nd ed.; Nashville, TN: Broadman & Holman,
Exported from Logos Bible Software, 9:01 PM March 14, 2016.
prayer to God, for the faithfulness of
the community. Although oering a
word of thanksgiving was not unique,
most hellenistic le ers included only a
brief acknowledgment of the goodness
of the gods.
Pauls epistolary creativity reaches
full expression in the main body and
paraenetic sections of his le ers. In the
body of the le er, Paul used a variety of
arguments to persuade his readers to
adopt his perspective. Since his le ers
to churches were wri en to be heard
more than read, Paul relied upon cer-
tain rhetorical strategies that were
commonly used in public speaking. e
three species of argument (rhetoric)
taught in the hellenistic schools were
judicial, epideictic, and deliberative.
Judicial arguments, a defense or accusa-
tion regarding past actions, were used
in courts of law. Epideictic rhetoric used
praise and blame in order to persuade a
listener to adopt a current standard or
evaluation. ese speeches were nor-
mally delivered as tributes to honorable
citizens making signicant contribu-
tions as benefactors of cities, or were
given as customary funeral orations
memorializing the deceased. Deliberative
speech exhorts and dissuades concern-
ing future actions. p 343 Political
assemblies would gather to hear skilled
orators deliberate over ma ers of social
signicance in determining future poli-
cies. In many of his le ers, Pauls line of
).
12
argumentation conforms to these stan-
dard species of rhetoric.
First essalonians is a good exam-
ple of epideictic rhetoric. Notice how
o en Paul praises the essalonians,
that they are already doing the right
thing: You also became imitators of us
and of the Lord, Timothy has come to
us from you, and has brought us good
news of your faith and love, how you
ought to walk and please God (just as
you actually do walk), now as to the
love of the brethren, you have no need
for anyone to write to you for indeed
you do practice it toward all the
brethren, therefore encourage one
another, and build up one another, just
as you also are doing (1 ess. 1:6; 3:6;
4:1, 910; 5:11). Pauls strategy was to
correct some misunderstanding regard-
ing the parousia in the context of arm-
ing the essalonians in their commit-
ment to the gospel. He wanted them to
keep up the good work, and epideictic
rhetoric served his purposes well.
e situation in Galatia was alto-
gether dierent. Paul complains: You
were running well; who hindered you
from obeying the truth? (Gal. 5:7). e
future of the Galatian mission depend-
ed upon their heeding Pauls warnings:
Behold, I, Paul, say to you that if you
receive circumcision, Christ will be of
no benet to you (Gal. 5:2); you
observe days and months and seasons
and years. I fear for you, that perhaps I
Bruce Corley, Steve Lemke, and Grant Lovejoy, Biblical Hermeneutics: A Comprehensive Introduction to
Interpreting Scripture ( nd ed.; Nashville, TN: Broadman & Holman,
Exported from Logos Bible Software, 9:01 PM March 14, 2016.
have labored over you in vain (Gal.
4:1011). Deliberative speeches were
lled with warnings of harm and
reminders of advantages that came
with adopting a particular point of
view. In his le er to the Galatians, a er
he warns them of the perils of circum-
cision, Paul writes: I have condence
in you in the Lord, that you will adopt
no other view (Gal. 5:10).
All persuasive arguments, whether
judicial, epideictic, or deliberative, fol-
lowed a rhetorical pa ern in order to
achieve the most desired eect, i.e.,
moving an audience to the speakers
point of view. Ethos, logos, and pathos
comprise the track upon which the
rhetors train of thought would run.
First, he would build a rapport with his
auditors, building up his own ethos in
order to establish himself as a credible
speaker. Next, the logic (logos) of his
argument would be laid out in orderly
fashion. Finally, the speaker would
inject pathos into the argument, stirring
emotions to incite his listeners to act
out his proposal (Kennedy, 3739). e
outline of the argument would follow
these points:
p 344 exordium: encouraging
listeners to give a ention to the
speech, o entimes dening the
central issue of the debate
(ethos);
narratio: a summation of
events leading to the ma er at
).
13
 hand (ethos);
propositio: the central thesis
to be proved (ethos);
probatio: the argument
(logos);
refutatio: refuting the
opponents arguments (logos);
peroratio: a recapitulation of
the basic points of the
argument, including an
emotional appeal (pathos).
Galatians is one of the clearest
examples of Pauls rhetorical technique.
Notice the ethos of his argument in the
exordium (Gal. 1:110), the narratio (Gal.
1:112:14), and the propositio (Gal.
2:1521). e logic of the debate moves
constantly between the probatio and the
refutatio (Gal. 3:16:10). Finally, Paul
summarizes the essence of the debate,
and concludes with a warning not to
add to his suerings (pathos), since he
bears the stigmata of Jesus, peroratio
(Gal. 6:1118).
ere are several New Testament
le ers that do not necessarily conform
to the standard species of ancient
rhetoric. at is not to say, however,
that there is no inner logic to the pro-
gression of the argument. Most com-
mentators nd outlines in all of the
epistolary material. As a ma er of fact,
even a le er like James, which some
have taken to be li le more than a
haphazard collection of sayings, follows
a literary style similar to other exam-
Bruce Corley, Steve Lemke, and Grant Lovejoy, Biblical Hermeneutics: A Comprehensive Introduction to
Interpreting Scripture ( nd ed.; Nashville, TN: Broadman & Holman,
Exported from Logos Bible Software, 9:01 PM March 14, 2016.
ples of Jewish paraenesisa series of
exhortations that sometimes gathers
around a particular theme. roughout
the le er, James wants his readers to
know the dierence between saying
and doing. His diatribe on the tongue,
in the middle of the le er, anchors the
series of warnings about what people
should and should not say (James 1:13,
19, 26; 2:3, 12, 14, 16, 18; 3:2, 5, 9; 4:3, 11,
13, 15; 5:9, 12, 16). By the time his readers
nished the le er, they would have
been completely given to the idea that
they would have faults to confess to one
anotherthe last instruction of the
le er. Creatively, James has built an
argument around the premise: So
speak, so act (James 2:12). And that is
what biblical authors expectedfor
their converts to read or hear the entire
le er, to get the culminating eect of
the full argument before trying to
understand its parts.
With le ers divided according to
chapter and verse, probably the most
common mistake made by modern
readers is to read portions of a le er
without regard for the whole. Yet, it
follows that these le ers must be inter-
preted as wholes before a reader can
interpret its parts. Diving into the mid-
dle of a le er is akin to jumping into
the middle of p 345 an argument. We
cannot make sense of what is said
when we do not know what was said.
Since most of the le ers are arguments,
).
14
it is best to start at the beginningto
see how certain social, religious, moral,
and theological convictions of the
author were brought to bear on any
given subject.
Most of Pauls arguments were
based on theological convictions
derived from the Hebrew Scriptures
and his own religious experience. Occa-
sionally, Paul relied upon the authority
of the Jesus tradition (1 Cor. 7:10). What-
ever the basis of his argument, Paul
operated under the conviction that his
apostolic authority was sucient for all
his churchesthat he spoke on Christs
behalf (1 Cor. 7:12; Gal. 1:1, 1112, 16; 2
Cor. 13:3). Every contingency, every cir-
cumstance, every problem caused Paul
to relate his gospel message to the
needs of his churches.
As a result, one should not read the
le ers of Paul as an exhaustive com-
pendium of Pauline theology. We may
read all of the apostles le ersfrom
salutations to doxologybut we still
will not know everything Paul believed.
He rarely provides a full theological
treatment of a particular doctrine.
erefore, students should be careful to
recognize the dynamic nature of Pauls
theologizing. We may never recover a
systematic theology of Paul, but
through his le ers we can certainly see
how theology can be applied to the
questions of Christian living.
Communication requires three
Bruce Corley, Steve Lemke, and Grant Lovejoy, Biblical Hermeneutics: A Comprehensive Introduction to
Interpreting Scripture ( nd ed.; Nashville, TN: Broadman & Holman,
Exported from Logos Bible Software, 9:01 PM March 14, 2016.
elements: sender, receiver, message.
When it comes to reading the le ers of
the New Testament, students seek to
discover the identities of sender and
receiver in order to understand the
message. We need to know as much as
we can about the writer of the le er,
the recipients of the le er, and the occa-
sion for the le er in order to under-
stand the argument of the le er. If we
can determine why this author sent this
le er to this particular group/individu-
al, then we will be be er equipped to
hear what the Spirit is saying to the
church today. Times change, seasons
come and go, but the Word of God
speaks to anyone who has ears to hear
and eyes to read.
For Further Study
A ridge, Harold W. e Epistle to the
Hebrews. Hermeneia. Philadelphia:
Fortress, 1989.
Davids, Peter H. e First Epistle of
Peter. New International Commentary
on the New Testament. Grand Rapids:
Eerdmans, 1990.
Doty, William G. Le ers in Primitive
Christianity. Philadelphia: Fortress, 1973.
Dunn, James D. G. e Epistle to the
Galatians. Blacks New Testament
Commentary. Peabody: Hendrickson,
1993.
p 346 Ellis, E. Earle. Pauls Use of the
Old Testament. Reprint ed. Grand
Rapids: Baker, 1981.
).
15
 Fee, Gordon D., and Douglas Stuart. Stowers, Stanley K. Le er Writing in
How to Read the Bible for All Its Worth. Greco-Roman Antiquity. Library of Early
Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1982. Christianity. Philadelphia:
Hawthorne, Gerald F., and Ralph Westminster, 1986.
Martin, ed. Dictionary of Paul and His Witherington, Ben. e Paul Quest:
Le ers. Downers Grove: InterVarsity, e Renewed Search for the Jew of Tarsus.
1993. Downers Grove: InterVarsity, 1998.
Hays, Richard. First Corinthians.
Interpretation: A Bible Commentary for
Teaching and Preaching. Louisville:
John Knox, 1997.
Kennedy, George A. Aristotle on
Rhetoric: A eory of Civic Discourse. New
York: Oxford University Press, 1991.
Laws, Sophie. A Commentary on the
Epistle of James. Harpers New
Testament Commentaries. San
Francisco: Harper & Row, 1980.
Malina, Bruce J. e New Testament
World: Insights from Cultural
Anthropology. Louisville: John Knox,
1981.
Meeks, Wayne A. e First Urban
Christians: e Social World of the Apostle
Paul. New Haven: Yale University Press,
1983.
Moo, Douglas J. e Epistle to the
Romans. New International
Commentary on the New Testament.
Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1996.
Roetzel, Calvin J. e Le ers of Paul:
Conversations in Context. 3rd ed.
Louisville: Westminster/John Knox,
1991.
Smalley, Stephen S. 1, 2, 3 John. Word
Biblical Commentary. Waco: Word, 1984.

Bruce Corley, Steve Lemke, and Grant Lovejoy, Biblical Hermeneutics: A Comprehensive Introduction to
Interpreting Scripture ( nd ed.; Nashville, TN: Broadman & Holman, ).
Exported from Logos Bible Software, 9:01 PM March 14, 2016. 16