1195. Crook, Advocacy, 66.
1192. From Craig S. Keener, “Paul’s Positive Madness in Acts 26:24–25,” pages 311–20 in Goldene Anfänge und Aufbrüche: Johann Jakob Wettstein und die Apostelgeschichte (Arbeiten zur Bibel und Ihrer Geschichte; edited by Manfred Lang and Joseph Verheyden; Lepizig: Evangelische Verlagsanstalt, 2016). Reprinted by permission from Manfred Lang on behalf of the publisher. This material also appears in Keener, Acts, 4:3533–41 (published after the article was submitted but before the article was published).
1193. On interruption in speeches, see e.g., Haenchen, Acts, 688; Aune, Environment, 127; Keener, Acts, 1:970–71; esp. Smith, Rhetoric of Interruption.
1194. With questions or objections, e.g., in Rhet. Alex. 18, 1432b.35–40; 1433a.14–25; Caesar Civil War 2.33 (favorably); Cicero Or. Brut. 40.138; Prov. cons. 8.18; Seneca Controv. 3. pref. 4–5; Plutarch Lect. 4, Mor. 39CD; 11, Mor. 43BC; 18, Mor. 48AB; Demosth. 6.3; 8.5; Cic. 16.3; Dio Chrysostom Or. 15.26–32; Aulus Gellius 8.10; 16.6.1–12; 18.13.7–8; 20.10.1–6; Pliny Ep. 3.9.25; 3.20.3–4; 9.13.19–20; Lucian Demonax 14; Z. Rants 41; Diogenes Laertius 7.1.19; Philostratus Vit. soph. 2.30.623; Eunapius Lives 460; cf. also ‘Ab. R. N. 6A.
1195. Crook, Advocacy, 66.
1196. Cf. Lucian Prof. P. S. 20. For friends of a defendant interrupting a prosecutor in this way, cf. Pliny Ep. 3.9.25–26; for an accuser interrupting a defendant, see Philostratus Vit. Apoll. 8.7.
1197. The opening words of Ps.-Sallust Inv. M. T. 1; Lucian L. Lies 5.
1198. Acta Appiani, cited by many commentators here, including Munck, Acts, 244–45; Conzelmann, Acts, 212; Pervo, Acts, 635.
1199. E.g., Hermogenes Issues 58.19—59.3; Schiemann, “Furor” (citing Gaius Inst. 3.106); Libanius Invect. 5.18; cf. Euripides Herc. fur.; Libanius Descr. 20.3; 23.1. Despite lack of legal liability, one deemed insane might be physically restrained (Robinson, Criminal Law, 16), sometimes by the family (Libero, “Disability,” 535).
1200. Cf. Noah in Sib. Or. 1.172; possibly the condemnation of pagan prophecy in Wis 14:28.
1201. Probably 2 Cor 5:13 relates to Paul’s personal spiritual experience; see Keener, 1–2 Corinthians, 183–84.
1202. Note prophetic “madness” in e.g., Ovid Metam. 2.640–41.
1203. See e.g., Sophocles Antig. 955–65 (trying to restrain people inspired by Dionysus); Apollodorus Bib. 2.2.2; Hermogenes Inv. 2.5.117; cf. Ben Zoma, who witnessed more of God’s glory than was proper, in b. Hag. 14b, bar. People usually attributed madness to the gods (Quintilian Decl. 314.17–19; Libanius Sp. Ch. 6.1) or at least to Furies (Quintilian Decl. 314.17).
1204. E.g., Philo Heir 264–65.
1205. See Philo Plant. 39; see further Isaacs, Spirit, 49–50.
1206. Philo Heir 265; QG 9. For Philo’s own experience, see Migr. 35; Aune, Prophecy, 147.
1207. Foakes-Jackson, Acts, 226–27, applies the charge of madness here to Paul’s oratory. Paul’s term applies to inspiration positively in the LXX of 1 Chron 25:1; and negatively in Mic 5:12; Ezek 13:9, 19; Zech 10:2.
1208. See Cicero Or. Brut. 40.138; Plutarch Cic. 5.3; Dio Chrysostom Or. 18.11; Hermogenes Progymn. 8. On Syncrisis 20; Fredrickson, “Tears,” 175.
1209. See Seneca Ep. Lucil. 108.7; Anderson, Rhetorical Theory, 61; Kennedy, Classical Rhetoric, 30–31. Matters were often different for Cynics.
1210. Noted already by e.g., the ancient commentator, the Venerable Bede, Commentary on Acts 26.24.
1211. Luke’s characterization is consistent with Paul’s use of philosophic models in his letters; cf. e.g., Malherbe, Philosophers; Engberg-Pedersen, Paul and Stoics.
1212. For the attribution of insanity to Cynics, see also Malherbe, Philosophers, 159.
1213. Nevertheless, he thought it “insanity” to confront the masses too forcefully (Dio Chrysostom Or. 32.28), and suggests that it may be madness for him to speak to those who dislike Cynics (Or. 34.4).
1214. E.g., Epictetus Diatr. 1.12.9 (mainomenos); 1.21.4 (mainomenôn); Arius Didymus Epit. 2.7.5b13, p. 26.28–30; 2.7.5b13, p. 28.1–2; cf. Quintilian Decl. 283.1; Lucian Nigr. 38; Diogenes Laertius 1.87.
1215. Cicero Parad. 27–32; Musonius Rufus 20, 126.2–3 Lutz; Diogenes Laertius 7.1.124; cf. Cicero Tusc. 3.5.10. Cf. Seneca Ep. Lucil. 28, even regarding an ecstatic prophetess (in Virgil Aen. 6.78–79).
1216. Keener, “Spirit Perspectives,” 213–14.
1217. Others also associated behavior that they deemed foolish with insanity; see Dionysius of Halicarnassus Isoc. 17; Dio Chrysostom Or. 17.21; Alciphron Fishermen 12 (Charopê to Glaucippê), 3.2, ¶1; Philostratus Ep. 69 (15); Ep. Apoll. 86; cf. T. Job 38—38, where Job’s comforters test his sanity.
1218. Cf. also the reapplication of prophetic madness as early as Plato’s Phaedr.; see Evans, “Mad Ritual.”
1219. See e.g., Rhet. Alex. 18, 1433a.20–24.
1220. Commentators cite e.g., Xenophon Mem. 1.1.16; 3.9.6–7. Cf. also Dio Chrysostom Or. 32.28 (cf. Or. 77/78.26); Lucian Nigr. 5–6; Arius Didymus Epit. 2.7.5b13, pp. 26–27.30–31; Libanius Descr. 23.1–2 (explicit in 23.1).
1221. In detail, see further North, “Sophrosyne”; North, Sophrosyne; Marshall, Enmity, 190–94.
1222. Polybius 31.25.2, 4.
1223. E.g., Musonius Rufus 3, 40.17–22 (esp. 17); 3, 42.26; 4, 44.22; Dio Chrysostom Or. 32.56; Lucian Hall 7; Sentences of Sextus 237; Libanius Sp. Ch. 18 (esp. 18.3); Thesis 1.13, 26–27; perhaps 1 Tim 2:9, 15; cf. Winter, Wives, 101–3.
1224. Libanius Enc. 7.5; Comp. 5.8.
1225. Menander Rhetor 2.10, 416.19. For the impropriety of dignified persons laughing in public settings, see Aeschines Tim. 84. Not all, however, agreed (see e.g., Philostratus Her. 11.4). Roman men valued control of emotion; see Clark, “Poetics.”
1226. E.g., Rhet. Alex. 35, 1440b.17–19, especially 19; Dio Chrysostom Or. 39.2; 33.48.
1227. See e.g., Rhet. Alex. 35, 1440b.17–19 (with slightly different wording; cf. also the spurious addition in 38, 1447b.5–6); Aelius Aristides Defense 235, §72D; 382, §128D; Menander Rhetor 1.3, 361.14–17, especially 15.
1228. For the emperor, see Menander Rhetor 2.1–2, 373.7–8; 375.7—376.23; cf. 376.5–6. For the governor, see Menander Rhetor 2.3, 379.19—380.3; 2.3, 380.31—381.2; 2.3, 385.8—386.10; 2.10, 415.24—416.28. For friends, see Menander Rhetor 2.5, 397.21–24; cf. Pliny Ep. 3.2.2.
1229. For the value of truth in philosophic discourse, see e.g., Maximus of Tyre Or. 1.7; 18.5; Marcus Aurelius 1.14; Aelius Aristides Defense 11–12, 4D; Let. Aris. 206; cf. Dio Chrysostom Or. 4.15; Plutarch Is. Os. 1, Mor. 351C; Iamblichus Ep. 18.1–3. Of course, interest in truth was also not limited to philosophers (see e.g., 1 Enoch 99:2; Josephus War 1.30; Ag. Ap. 2.296; T. Reub. 3:9; 2 Bar. 39:6; Lysias Or. 4.13, §101; Symmachus Ep. 1.2.4).
1230. See e.g., Musonius Rufus 18B, 116.20; Arius Didymus Epit. 2.7.5f, 30–31.23; 2.7.11g, 72–73.15; Lucian Icar. 30 (Zeus complaining that they were not living accordingly). Cf. also the moralist Plutarch in Poet. 11, Mor. 32C.
1231. Plato Charm. 159B—176C; cf. Xenophon Mem. 1.2.23; Iamblichus Ep. 3, frg. 5 (Stobaeus Anth. 3.5.48). On Socrates’s view of sôphrosunê in Charmides, see e.g., Kosman, “Definition”; McKim, “Self-Knowledge.” Nevertheless, this dialogue quickly departs from this topic (so Van der Ben, Charmides).
1232. For possible logical inconsistency here, see Rosen, “Sophrosyne.”
1233. Schmid, “Moderation.”
1234. E.g., Philostratus Vit. Apoll. 6.11; Iamblichus Vit. Pyth. 1.1; 31.195; 8.41; 31.195; Iamblichus Ep. 3, frg. 2–3 (Stobaeus Anth. 3.5.45–46); the supreme virtue in Letter 3, frg. 5–6 (Stobaeus Anth. 3.5.48–49). Among a variation on the four virtues, see Iamblichus Vit. Pyth. 30.167—33.240, especially 31.187–213.
1235. Cicero Fin. 1.14.47 (temperantiam). Stoics were happy to emphasize this concession (Musonius Rufus frg. 24, 130n–31 Lutz).
1236. Ultimately they were said to go back to Socrates (Plato Rep. 4.428–34). The four virtues do not appear often in epigraphic sources (at least in Ephesus), however, except for “justice” and the funerary use of sobriety; see Judge, First Christians, 374–75.
1237. E.g., Musonius Rufus 4, pp. 44.10–22 esp. 16–22; p. 48.1, 4, 8, 13, especially 4; 6, p. 52.15, 17, 19, 21, especially 15; 7, p. 58.25–26 (minus “courage”); 8, pp. 60.22—64.9, especially p. 62.10–23; 8, p. 66.7–8, especially 8; 17, p. 108.9–10; as a summary of virtue in Musonius Rufus 5, p. 50.22–26. See also Marcus Aurelius 3.6; 8.1 (sôphrona); Arius Didymus Epit. 2.7.5a, pp. 10–11.7–9 (Zeno’s views); 2.7.5b1, pp. 12–13.13–22; 2.7.5b2, pp. 14–15.1–4 (esp. 3); 2.7.5b5, pp. 18–19.27–31 (with lines 21–26, 32–35). Cf. Musonius Rufus 7, p. 58.25–26 (esp. 26); 16, p. 104.32–34, especially 33; frg. 38, p. 136.3; Libanius Thesis 3.3. See discussion in Lutz, “Musonius,” 27, including n113. Cf. lists of virtues including at least three of these, e.g., Arius Didymus Epit. 2.7.5b, pp. 10–11.16–21 (esp. 17); 2.7.11e, pp. 68–69.12–16; Philostratus Vit. Apoll. 1.20.
1238. E.g., cf. Musonius Rufus 3, p. 40.20–22; 4, p. 44.18–22; 6, p. 52.15–17; 8, p. 62.14–17; 16, p. 104.33–35; 17, p. 108.11–14; frg. 24, p. 130; Arius Didymus Epit. 2.7.5b2, p. 14.6; cf. Libanius Anec. 4.8. See further Lutz, “Musonius,” 28 (noting esp. 6, p. 54.2–25). For the fullest definition, see Arius Didymus Epit. 2.7.5b1, p. 12.18–19; 2.7.5b2, p. 14.15–16, 31–35; p. 16.1–3; cf. also 2.7.5b, p. 10.21–25 (esp. 23); p. 12.1–2.
1239. Musonius Rufus 12, p. 86.13–16.
1240. Musonius Rufus 18A, p. 112.6–7 (cf. 112.29); 18B, p. 116.4–22, especially 19–20; 18B, p. 118.4–7, especially 5; p. 120.2–7, especially 6–7.
1241. Arius Didymus Epit. 2.7.5 L, p. 36.3–5.
1242. For the relationship, see e.g., Musonius Rufus 5, p. 50.22–26; 18A, p. 112.6–7; Iamblichus Vit. Pyth. 31.195; Iamblichus Ep. 3, frg. 5 (Stobaeus Anth. 3.5.48; see esp. comments of John M. Dillon and Wolfgang Polleichtner on Iamblichus’s adaptation of Xenophon Mem. 1.5.4); Philostratus Vit. Apoll. 1.20; in moral rhetoric, Dio Chrysostom Or. 1.56; 23.11; 29.14 (cf. 3.58, where it substitutes for sôphrosunê); Menander Rhetor 2.3, 385.22–23; 2.10, 416.18–23; cf. also Tit 1:8. See especially Arius Didymus Epit. 2.7.5b2, p. 14.15–16, where it is a category of sôphrosunê.
1243. E.g., Musonius Rufus 8, 66.8; Dio Chrysostom Or. 35.2.
1244. Creation 73; Allegorical Interpretation 1.63, 65; Cherubim 5; Birth of Abel 27, 84; Worse Is Wont to Attack the Better 18; Posterity of Cain 128; Agriculture 18; Drunkenness 23; Heir of Divine Things 209; Change of Names 197; Abraham 219; Moses 2.185; 2.216; Special Laws 2.62; Rewards and Punishments 160; Every Good Person is Free 67, 70, 159.