Corpus-Paul

["Ian E. Rock" <irock AT caribsurf.com>]

I am a student at Codrington College, studying for the MA in new
testament under Dr. Frank Hughes.  I am away from the College which is
closed for summer recess, and do not have access to some of the texts
that I would have liked to quote.  So be it, I am writing from memory of
some of the texts I have studied.  Dr. Frank has posited partition
theories for both 1 and 2 Corinthians, and while accepting that the
arguments for partitioning 2 Corinthians have some validity, I am not so
convinced about the same for 1 Corinthians. I find Margaret Mitchell's
work on 1 Corinthians very challenging here, albeit that Margaret too
readily treats material that does not flow as a digression (though
perhaps that is probable.)

It seems to me that the argument for partition theories of 2 Corinthians
lie in finding sequential thought or thematic patterns in the body of
the letter, and then splicing the text and placing these pericopes in
sequence.  I have already noted to Dr. Hughes that one issue that has
not been resolved in his argument is the change in tense of the text
(from 1st person singular to 1st person plural) between some of these
splices.  

Dr. Sykes in his article examines the difficulty faced in editing
multiple rolls of text, albeit his article does not allude to the
possibility of cutting and pasting of the text. 

One aspect that seems to be overlooked is the state of Paul's mind at
the time of composition.  It is evident that the tone of Galatians
(anger and rebuttal) is completely different to the tone of Phillipians
(praise and commendation), say.  In 2 Corinthians however, there is
modulation of tone in the letter.  The question is whether this
modulation in tone is supportive of partition theories.  It can be
argued that as Paul dispenese with a matter of contention (the challenge
to his apostolicity) to deal with a more friendly statement his mental
state may also change.  

I would like to therefore invite comments on Paul's mental state with
respect to the composition of the text, since I feel that this is often
overlooked in the hermeneutics of the Corinthian correspondence.

Ian E. Rock
Ordinand and MA NT Student 
Codrington College
Barbados