Corpus-Paul

[Richard Fellows <rfellows AT intergate.bc.ca>]

David E. Garland wrote:

>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
>

Yes, the laws of probability theory would not cease to function if Paul or
Frank or anyone else were to fail to recognise them.  Certainly history CAN
be complex, so we should not expect to find simple solutions to every
historical puzzle.  But for the Corinthian correspondence a simple solution
HAS been found.

Just consider the journeys of Titus and Timothy that commentators propose
for the period between the writing of 1 Cor and 2 Cor (1.1-2.13, 7:5-16 at
least).  Most commentators hypothesise:

1) A mission of Timothy to Corinth (1 Cor 4:17, 16:10).
2) A separate journey of Timothy to Macedonia (2 Cor 1:1, Acts 19:22 and
perhaps Phil 2:22-23)
3) A mission of Titus to Corinth with the tearful letter.
4) An earlier mission of Titus to Corinth (2 Cor 8:6 or 12:18 or both).

But all the data can be explained by a single mission of Titus-Timothy.
The hypothesis that Titus and Timothy were different people has been
sustained only by multiplying journeys, changes of travel plans etc. etc.
Is the traditional view really credible in view of the alternative that is
now available?

Mark Matson and David Amador have been discussed 2 Cor 12:18.  I would
welcome comments on my treatment of this verse:

2 Cor 12.18 creates a difficulty for the identification hypothesis because
'Did Titus over-reach you' (MH TI EPLEONEKTHSEN UMAS TITOS) requires an
earlier visit by Titus to Corinth.  However, with the Titus-Timothy
hypothesis no extra visit is required as this can refer to the first visit
to Corinth by Timothy (Acts 18.5) while the rest of the verse can refer to
the present journey (with epistolary aorists).  The verse then reads, "I am
urging Titus to go and am sending the brother with him.  Titus did not take
advantage of you before, did he?"(This translation has been suggested by B.
Witherington, Community in Corinth A Socio-Rhetorical Commentary on 1 and 2
Corinthians, (Carlisle, Paternoster Press) 333.)  That Timothy did not
over-reach the Corinthians is also implied by 2 Cor 11.9, assuming that the
brothers in that verse are identified as Timothy and Silas.  The brother in
2 Cor 12.18 can be equated with Erastus (Acts 19.22).

Richard Fellows
Vancouver
rfellows AT intergate.bc.ca