68 Erkki Koskenniemi paradox skillfully and with a certain sense of humor. However, the verse is fully in line with the main message of Tit, according to which a bishop should not be an empty-talker, but he should use self-control and offer a good example for everyone43. Regardless of whether the writer was aware of the logical problem or not, the context of the quotation in the letter is very interesting. The philosopher is not named, but he is characterized with the words εἶπέν τις ἐξ αὐτῶν προφήτης. Interestingly, the entire context speaks about intra-Christian relations, not about Greeks, but rather about Christians and especially about Jewish ones. Jews were numerous in Crete44, where Titus is supposed to be living. Why did the writer not consider it prob- lematic to use the well-known tradition, that is, to call the man a prophet and apply it to (Jewish) Christians? First of all, if we only read the passage in Tit, it is not certain that the words originate from a Gentile philosopher. Epimenides is not “men- tioned”, and consequently it is not certain that he is called a prophet. But who else could this τις ἐξ αὐτῶν προφήτης have been? In spite of the con- text, which unambiguously points to Jewish Christians, RENEHAN might be right when identifying the prophet with Epimenides45 – in truth, with an imprecise formulation46. The liar-paradox was certainly well-known, or, if one does not believe that the writer was aware of the paradox, at least the bad reputation of the Cretans was known. It is not proven that the writer used Epimenides’ work, and although it is probable that Epi- menides is referred to, this is not beyond reasonable doubt. Whatever the word προφήτης now denotes, a Greek proverb is used to characterize sectarian Christians. But why is the author of the verse called a prophet? There are several alternatives. Firstly, the simplest answer is suggested by DIBELIUS: The words were an exact characterization, and it was reason enough to call the speaker a prophet47. This alternative is valid even if THISELTON is right and the verse is not used to label Cretans: The logical problem was good enough to make the author a prophet, who- ever he was. But secondly, poets were often labeled with such epithets48, 43 OBERLINNER, Die Pastoralbriefe, 41. 44 On Jews in Crete, see Philo Legat. 282; Jos. Vita 76. 45 Similarly, for example DIBELIUS, Die Briefe des Apostels Paulus, 207 and OBERLINNER, Die Pastoralbriefe, 38-39. 46 According to RENEHAN, “Classical Greek Quotations in the New Testament”, 36 the author of Tit “believed that he was quoting Epimenides: the reference to an ἴδιος προφήτης of the Cretans shows that.” The word “quote” is problematic – the author may refer to a proverb. 47 DIBELIUS, Die Briefe des Apostels Paulus, 207; similarly OBERLINNER, Die Pastoral- briefe, 39.