Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

corpus-paul - RE: Opponents in 1&2 Corinthians

corpus-paul AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Corpus-Paul

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: Richard Fellows <rfellows AT intergate.bc.ca>
  • To: "Corpus-paul" <corpus-paul AT franklin.oit.unc.edu>
  • Subject: RE: Opponents in 1&2 Corinthians
  • Date: Thu, 24 Jun 1999 00:21:54 -0700


Jerry Sumney wrote:

>If I may be so bold as to suggest my own writings, I have addressed the
>question of the opponents of 2 Cor in _Identifying Paul's Opponents_
>(JSNTSup). There I assert that they are pneumatics who claim that the
>measure of the Spirit they enjoy makes them apostles and gives them
>powerful, successful lives. They argue that Paul is not an apostle in the
>sense they are because he lacks just these kinds of things. In a book
>which is now at the press, I argue that the opponents of 1 Cor are not
>opponents in the same sense those of 2 Cor are. That is, the problem of 1
>Cor does not involve `outside agitators' but rather the Corinthians' own
>mixing of their previous perspectives with the teaching the now absent Paul
>had left with them. The attitudes they developed about spirituality were
>VERY compatible with the teaching brought by those "apostles " who are
>causing problems in 2 Cor. Perhaps the opponents of 2 Cor intentionally
>tailored their message to the Corinthians' expectations????

I'm excited that you come to the conclusion that the attitudes of the
Corinthians shown in 1 Cor are very compatible with the teaching brought by
the "apostles" who are causing problems in 2 Cor. I have come across three
possible explanations for this:

1. That the external opponents in 2 Cor 10-13 arrived after 1 Cor was
written, and 'fished in troubled waters', or to use another metaphor -
fanned into flames the smouldering fires that they found. As you say, they
may have 'tailored their message to the Corinthians' expectations'.

2. That 1 Cor is a composite, and parts of it should be joined to parts of
2 Cor.

3. That the same people (or class of people) visited Corinth prior to 1
Cor and returned between 1 Cor and 2 Cor. Their second visit created a
bigger challenge to Paul's authority than the first.

But the fact that the attitudes of the Corinthians in 1 Cor are very
compatible with the teaching brought by the apostles of 2 Cor, suggests to
me that those attitudes arose out of their influence. That is to say, many
of the issues that Paul deals with in 1 Cor are a legacy of the visit of
the opponent to Corinth. This suggests that 2 Cor 10-13 was written BEFORE
1 Cor (though arriving in Corinth after 1 Cor). On this theory, the visit
of these apostles caused the Corinthians to question Paul's apostleship and
2 Cor 10-13 was Paul's reaction (perhaps over-reaction) to the news that he
received. After the departure of the visitors Paul received reassuring
news from Stephanus & co, and wrote in a calmer frame of mind. The
problems (from Paul's point of view) that the visitors caused are still in
evidence in 1 Cor. That is why most of the themes of 2 Cor 10-13 are
repeated in 1 Cor, albeit in more moderate language.

Am I right in saying that matters are simplified by placing 2 Cor 10-13
before 1 Cor, or have I missed something? Thoughts, anyone? Has anyone
else ever considered putting 2 Cor 10-13 before 1 Cor?

By the way, do let us know when your new book is available.

Richard Fellows
rfellows AT intergate.bc.ca





Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page