84 Jerome H. Neyrey uniqueness, we gave attention to the philosophers’ defense of god which purified god-talk of anthropomorphisms. This resulted in emphasis on god’s eternity, no beginning and no end; also, god could only be talked about in ways which assert that god is utterly different from mortals, hence the cascade of negative predication. But this development likewise honors god because it sets god apart from us, celebrates his superiority over us, and testifies to the inability of the human mind to grasp or circumscribe him. God, then, is one of a kind, unique, exclusive, superior, etc. 7. Conclusions, and Further Questions Our survey of the principle of uniqueness surfaced many forms of it. First and foremost we note the formula “first, only, one of a few ...” celebrated in epideictic rhetoric as the ideal way to amplify praise. In Greek hymns, the most frequent element of this formula was “alone/only”; but we found in abundance negative predicates which exalted a god with prefixes such as “all-” (all-powerful) and suffixes of “-all” (“master-of-all”). Before documents such as 2 Maccabees, Israelite formulae of uniqueness generally celebrate incomparability: “there is no one like you”; “who is like you?” and “no one can compare with you”. Finally, Greek philosophical discourse refined a language of uniqueness characterized by negative predication, which emphatically insisted on the incomparable distance between immortals and mortals. Within this discovery of the principle of uniqueness, we have focused on a conscious and consistent rhetorical tradition from Aristotle down to Theon and Menander Rhetor about uniqueness as expressed in the formula “first, only, one of a few”, the chief amplification of praise. In regard to 1 Timothy, we saw that most of the modes of proclaiming uniqueness in epideictic rhetoric are used in its two doxologies. God is the “only” (movno") Deity (1,17) and the “only” (mono") sovereign (6,15), who “alone” (movno") has immortality (6,16), v whom “no one” (oujdeiv") can see. In addition, God’s uniqueness is also articulated in two other ways: (1) by the use of superlatives such as “King of kings, Lord of lords” (6,15) which exalt God above all other rulers and (2) by the use of negative predicates such as im-mortal, in- visible, and un-approachable and the like. Shall we call this “one of a kind”? Although the names confessed of God are not strictly shaped by the principle of uniqueness, the piling up of names, titles and predicates points to the exclusive sense that God “most of all” rules the cosmos: “God of the ages”, “Sovereign”, “King”, “Lord”, and