Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

corpus-paul - 1 Cor 14:33b-36 (was Interpolation Solutions)

corpus-paul AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Corpus-Paul

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: "Jon Peter" <jnp AT home.com>
  • To: "Corpus Paulinum" <corpus-paul AT franklin.oit.unc.edu>
  • Subject: 1 Cor 14:33b-36 (was Interpolation Solutions)
  • Date: Mon, 7 Jun 1999 17:55:41 -0700


Frank wrote:

>
> I have argued against an interpolation in 1 Thess 2:13-16 in my article in
BETL 87. I
> have no opinion about Philippians, either re interpolations or the
integrity of the
> canonical form. How do you feel about 1 Cor 14:33b-36 which a number of
people
> identify as an interpolation? I think that is one of the best candidates
for an
> interpolation.
>

Yes it seems that, even to my untrained eye. It awkwardly contradicts Paul
in his other teachings. It interrupts the flow of another idea. If deleted,
the remaining verses run smoother.

Nevertheless, I have an alternative theory for this and similar cases. I
consider this an example of what I think of as a Pauline
'pseudo-remonstration.' I first noticed these a half-dozen years ago, and
have become convinced of this practice in his writing since then. In this
case I believe Paul or his collaborator actually did write 33b-36 , but not
with the intent that it be taken literally by his flock!

Rather, he inserted this as clever disinformation. It is aimed at potential
enemies who might be in attendance at semi-open epistle readings, or who
might otherwise be snooping around. Remember Gal 2:4
("pseudadelpho…pareisaktos… kataskopeo"). Paul at this stage is being
severely persecuted for what he's teaching. The counter-strategy he and
other church leaders have developed is explained in Acts 15, and it is to
(a) retain a few legal practices only, as a practical concession only, but
(b) to forego real Torah-keeping and (c) to deny accusations that they are
Torah-breakers, and rather (d) to put up a consistent front of piety.

So, I believe Paul also wrote epistles in that vein. He presented pious
legalisms which he didn't actually believe. In various other texts, he
would toss out shrill condemnations of certain immoral practices, which he
really didn't mean literally. Again, he preaches against the law, so he
can't very well condemn lawbreakers, and certainly not in the excessive
terms he uses. These passages are what I call his pseudo-remonstrations.

Now, according to a prior arrangement and code-system which he and the
Church worked out, such diversionary ruse statements were clearly marked in
his text by a signal known only to the faithful -- and it was, a redundancy
or pointless doubling of the reference of interest. Wherever this occurred
in his works, then, church insiders knew that Paul didn't mean what he was
saying. Others who may have been overhearing or spying, didn't know the
secret and were thus misinformed by what they heard. That is the case here
in 33b-36 and in every other pseudo-remonstration instance I've found.

In addition, insiders already knew perfectly well the nature of Paul's true
anti-Torahnic beliefs and practices, so such hearers could easily spot
whenever he was contradicting himself on purpose.

Thus Paul's letters could also be brought out and presented in the event
that evidence might be needed in some legal proceedings, ie. "See, right
here … Paul really is teaching Torah!"

I certainly don't rule out interpolation, but I like my theory better. The
problem in general with interpolation-finding is that whoever raises this
possibility should feel intellectually obliged to flesh out the argument
with a chain of events along with it, so that the theory can be evaluated,
improved, discarded, or whatever. For example, who supposedly did it (i.e.,
which group), why, what did interpolators think the alteration would
accomplish, didn't they think the news of the odd un-Paul-like teaching
might get back to him? When were the culprits supposedly able to get their
hands on an epistle and circulate it? Why didn't they do a whole bunch of
interpolations -- why go to the trouble of a complete revision, merely in
order to inject a few relatively minor ideas against the main stream of
thought? What about all the copies of the epistles lacking interpolations?
and so on. Many interpolation theories will fall when cross-examined. The
anachronistic assumptions become more apparent. Merely waving the wand and
saying 'interpolation' without giving the particulars I find is really
laughable sometimes.

Best regards,

Jon





  • 1 Cor 14:33b-36 (was Interpolation Solutions), Jon Peter, 06/07/1999

Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page