Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

corpus-paul - 11 Corinthians

corpus-paul AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Corpus-Paul

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: David Garland <David_Garland AT baylor.edu>
  • To: Paulinum Corpus <corpus-paul AT franklin.oit.unc.edu>
  • Subject: 11 Corinthians
  • Date: Wed, 19 May 1999 12:34:57 -0500


Frank Hughes wrote that Paul may not have “met Occam” and in another message
mentioned the complicated schema of Schmithals and Schenk in cleverly
dividing up 2 Corinthians.

I am not sure what Paul meeting Occam means. The “razor” is simply a means
of evaluating arguments that tends to hold true. For example, we used to
think that light, heat, and motion were three different things but now
theorize that they come from one. I take Frank to mean, perhaps, that
history is notoriously boggy and may be less amenable to simpler solutions

If the redactor of the letters, however, had access to a modern computer,
allowing him to move blocks of material around willy-nilly, I would find
Schmithals and Schenk more feasible, if psychologically implausible. But
Alistair Steward-Sykes, “Ancient Editors and Copyists and Modern Partition
Theories: The Case of the Corinthian Correspondence,” JSNT 61 (1996) 53-64
has attempted to show how physically impossible such an editing process would
have been.

Also, am I wrong in my impression that many partition theories show the
ancient redactor to be a dolt and the modern interpreter who uncovers it
comes out as ingenuous?



David E. Garland
George W. Truett Theological Seminary
Baylor University
PO Box 97126
Waco, TX 76798-7126
254) 710-3755
fax: (254) 710-3753





  • 11 Corinthians, David Garland, 05/19/1999

Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page