150 Chrys C. Caragounis and honor. At this point a parenthesis intervenes, which in negative man- ner tells the Thessalonian Christians not to conform to gentile habits. Following this digression, Paul resumes the thought of πορνεία, and this time applies it to the other person that is thereby injured. In vv. 3-4 Paul spoke of the hypothetical Christian –man or woman– who might take the initiative in committing πορνεία, whether in the sense of fornication or of adultery. A Christian’s involvement in fornication or adultery implied that he or she did not live in holiness and honor. What is said in vv. 3-4 and by extension in vs. 5, is concerned with one’s personal standing with God. The standpoint here is that of personal purity (as in 1 Cor 6:15-16). However, in the case of adultery there is more damage that is being done over and above the damage done to one’s own self. So, in vs. 6 Paul takes up the injured person in the case of adultery. This means that Paul says nothing about the other person involved in the act of adultery. The rea- son why he does not explicitly point out the adultery partner, is that that person by having consented, obviously shares in the guilt of the initiative taker. There is, therefore, only reason to speak of the third party, the deceived husband, or the deceived wife. The term ἀδελφός is, of course, quite clearly not to be taken strictly sex-wise of a male member, but in accordance with the genius of the Greek language, as a generic depiction of an ἀδελφός or an ἀδελφή, according as the case may be. However, al- though both possibilities are contemplated, the greater likelihood is that a male member in the Church might take the initiative toward a female member, and in that case the person injured would be an ἀδελφός rather than an ἀδελφή. It seems to me that this is the most straightforward interpretation of Paul’s words, their collocation, and the structure of the passage. In my opinion this interpretation satisfies all the conditions, and interprets the text homogeneously, without leaving any loose ends. V. The Place of the Paraenesis in Chs. 4-5 Two points stand out immediately. The first is that unlike the other paraeneses of chs. 4-5, which are introduced by περὶ δέ, possibly implying the receipt by Paul of the Thessalonians’ queries on these various subjects, our paraenesis is not introduced by any such phrase. The second point is that the series of paraeneses of chs. 4-5 is introduced by precisely this paraenesis. Its position implies that it has a special place of importance. These two points, that our paraenesis is differently introduced from the others and that it heads the others, is also indicative of its being the most general paraenesis, and in this respect, too, we have another confirmation