Robinson, “The Ephesian Artemis and 1 Timothy 2”

Jonathan Rivett Robinson, “The Ephesian Artemis and 1 Timothy 2: Assessing the Connection.” Pages 101–22 in Early Christian Communities in the Urban Contexts of Asia Minor and the Greek East. Edited by Katie Marcar, James R. Harrison, and John M. G. Barclay. Ancient Judaism and Early Christianity 125. Leiden: Brill, 2026.

This Festschrift for Paul Trebilco gives a slate of articles with interesting-sounding titles, and Robinson’s caught my eye immediately. To my knowledge, Robinson hasn’t published on the Pastorals before, but the sort of critical inquiry he’s engaging in provokes helpful give-and-take. In his words:

In this essay I examine recent arguments regarding Artemis worship in Ephesus as an explanatory background to 1 Timothy 2:9–15. While these arguments have had limited impact on the scholarship, they have strong popular appeal and have been effectively disseminated to a general audience in print and online. These publications promote research which has not been subjected to critical review in the literature. This essay seeks to address that lacuna.

The interested reader will want to know which “recent arguments” are in view. Robinson engages two interlocutors:

• Gary G. Hoag, Wealth in Ancient Ephesus and the First Letter to Timothy: Fresh Insights from Ephesiaca by Xenophon of Ephesus. Bulletin for Biblical Research Supplement Series 11. Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns, 2015. 
  • Note also Hoag, “Demystifying Gender Issues in 1 Timothy 2:9–15, with Help from Artemis.” Evangelical Review of Theology 44.3 (2020): 242–49. 
• Sandra L. Glahn, Nobody’s Mother: Artemis of the Ephesians in Antiquity and the New Testament. Downers Grove, IL: IVP Academic, 2023.  
  • Note also Glahn, “The First-Century Ephesian Artemis: Ramifications of Her Identity.” Bibliotheca Sacra 172.688 (2015): 450‒69; “The Identity of Artemis in First-Century Ephesus.” Bibliotheca Sacra 172.688 (2015): 316‒34. 

One sentence from the essay will give you a sense of where Robinson is going: “There is no distinctive feature in the text of 1 Timothy 2:9–15 that is illuminated or explained by reference to Artemis devotion, that is not more plausibly explained by other contextual factors” (115).

Robinson notes he was prompted to write the article by a review of Glahn’s book by Lyn Kidson, and he seems to subscribe to Kidson’s conclusions. I was able to read the entire essay on Google Books, though I can’t say you’ll be afforded the same opportunity.