140 Chrys C. Caragounis (καθὼς παρελάβετε παρ᾿ ἠμῶν), the content of the charge (τὸ πῶς δεῖ ὑμᾶς περιπατεῖν καὶ ἀρέσκειν τῷ Θεῷ), and their having already been active in fulfilling it (καθὼς καὶ περιπατεῖτε), three elements that belong closely together56. Having thus praised them for their exemplary life, and thereby already used the verb he had intended for his ἵνα-clause, he now chooses another verb, not merely an equivalent but an advance on it, a climax, to present his request, not, indeed, to do something new, but to increase and intensify what they have been doing all along. In this way he achieves a much higher effect, as the ‘exhortation’ takes the form of praise for their conduct. The composition technique of Paul’s paraenesis undoubtedly has important implications for its function. vs. 2 has a double function: one, to remind them of the injunctions he had given them with a view to the exhortations to follow, and two, through οἴδατε to help them realize that what he is asking of them is no new demand. These two verses form the matrix for the paraeneses of chs. 4 and 5, and thus also the context for the interpretation of our text, which consti- tutes the first paraenetical section. Our paraenesis is structured in the following way: τοῦτο of vs. 3 intro- duces the first exhortation (3-8). The anarthrous θέλημα is intentional, limiting God’s will to this particular paraenesis, in which it is described by the apposition ὁ ἁγιασμὸς ὑμῶν. Through its climactic position the apposition ὁ ἁγιασμὸς ὑμῶν has a powerful and elevated effect. In itself ἁγιασμὸς is a wider concept, but here it is limited to sexual purity. 3b explains in a more prosaic way the implications of ἁγιασμός here, i.e. to abstain from πορνεία. What is meant by abstention from πορνεία is explained by the three infinitive clauses of vv. 4-6. Vs. 4: εἰδέναι … κτᾶσθαι (building one compound idea), presents the matter positively, i.e. how to actively pursue sanctification. Vs. 5: μὴ [κτᾶσθαι, understood from vs. 4] ἐν πάθει ἐπιθυμίας explains negatively what is to be avoided, while vs. 6a: τὸ μὴ ὑπερβαίνειν καὶ πλεονεκτεῖν, brings a new factor into the picture, a third party that is being injured by the action here criticized. Vs. 6b is a solemn warning that no one can infringe God’s ordinances with impunity. This is related specifically to vs. 6a. Finally, vs. 7 summarizes the contents of 3b-5 as ἀκαθαρσία, and constitutes an inclusio with ἁγιασμός. Vs. 8 is a stern warning against anyone who Both R. F. Collins, Studies on the First Letter to the Thessalonians 328 f. and G. P. 56 Carras, “Jewish Ethics and Gentile Converts. Remarks on 1 Thess 4,3-8” in R.F. Colins, The Thessalonian Correspondence, Leuven 1990, 306-15, have stressed the Jewish element in Paul’s paraenesis.