Corpus-Paul

[Richard Fellows <rfellows AT intergate.ca>]

I will argue that the deadly peril of 2 Cor 1.8-10 was before 1 Corinthians.

1. The affliction was life threatening (2 Cor 1.8). The fighting with wild
beasts (1 Cor 15.32) must have been life threatening, coming as it does in
the context of a discussion of resurrection. These situations can be
equated, and we have no evidence of any danger to Paul's life after 1
Cororinthians was written.

2. There are strong parallels between 2 Cor 1.8-10 (see also 4.7-5.10) and
Philippians (e.g. 1.20-30). Now, Philippians should be placed before 1
Corinthians, not only so that the life threatening situation can match the
fighting with beasts, but also because of the anticipated mission of
Timothy (Phil 2.19), which matches his land journey to Corinth when 1 Cor
was written. Note that in Phil 2.19 Paul expects to meet Timothy again
before going himself to Philippi, and this is fits well with 1 Cor
16.10-11). We have no evidence at all of any mission of Timothy to
Macedonia after 1 Corinthians. Now, even if 2 Cor 1.8-10 does not refer to
a situation that occurred during the imprisonment of Phil, it is unlikely
to have been later than it. The Paul of Phil is quite ready to die and has
already learned to rely on God who raises the dead. The affliction of 2 Cor
1.8-10 caused Paul to be unbearably crushed and to despair. It is difficult
to imagine the Paul of Phil responding in such a way to affliction. No, the
affliction of 2 Cor 1.8 influenced Paul's perspective, and Phil belongs
after that influence. 

3. 1 Corinthians was probably written around Passover, and Paul expects to
leave Ephesus at Pentecost. Therefore Paul was probably not in Asia for
very long after 1 Corinthians was written, so it is statistically rather
unlikely that the affliction fell after the letter. (Some hypothesise that
Paul changed his travel plans after writing 1 Cor, but there is no evidence
for this).

While none of these arguments is decisive, I think they make a strong case
together.

One consequence of placing the affliction before 1 Cor is that Paul could
not have visited Corinth between 1 Cor and 2 Cor 1-9. In 2 Cor 1.8 he
explains that he does not want them to be ignorant of the severity of the
affliction and it is very doubtful that they would have been ignorant of it
if Paul had visited them in the intervening period.

Richard Fellows
rfellows AT intergate.ca
Vancouver