Corpus-Paul

[Richard Fellows <rfellows AT shaw.ca>]

Richard,

since no-one else has responded to your most excellent email, I will do so.
If I may say so, your insights into the connections between 1 Corinthians
and 2 Corinthians are very important and the arguments seem strong. It is
interesting how you mend three apparent breaks in Paul's sequence of thought
with a simple and elegant theory. I am referring to the transition from
chapter 4 to chapter 5 of 1 Corinthians, the transition from chapter 8 to
chapter 9 of the same letter, and the place of 2 Cor 6:14-7:1 in 2
Corinthians. These apparent discontinuities should not be taken as evidence
to support partition theories. Rather we should ask what the readers may
have known that we do not, that would make the text flow more smoothly for
them. It is certainly interesting that in all three cases Paul is defending
his apostolic authority on one side of the break, and on the other side of
the break he is dealing with the issue of proper relationship to the pagan
world. As you say, Richard, it does seem very likely that the challenge to
Paul's apostolic authority had come from those who felt that they were free
to associate closely with pagan religious and sexual practices. Their
rejection of Paul had been catalyzed by the misunderstanding concerning what
Paul had written in the 'former' letter. This conjecture neatly mends the
apparent discontinuities in the text.

I fully support your project of interpreting 1 Corinthians in the light of 2
Corinthians and vice versa. This approach is surely the way out of the
impasse that research into the Corinthian correspondence is in, and I would
encourage all listers to lend their expertise to this endeavour.

Along similar lines Frances Young made some very perceptive comments in
"Meaning and Truth in 2 Corinthians":

"To get some perspective on what was going on in Corinth, it is essential,
we believe, to note the intimate connections of theme and language between
the two Corinthian epistles. Standard commentaries now seem to have reached
a consensus that a radical change has taken place between the situation in 1
Corinthians and that in 2 Corinthians. The chief reason for this seems to be
that everyone begins with 1 Corinthians, and faced by all the passages
discussing various ethical and doctrinal points, deduces that the
Corinthians were distracted by views of a gnostic kind. They then turn to 2
Corinthians and discover that rival apostles who do not appear to be gnostic
but rather Jewish and conservative (Judaizers?) are maligning Paul's
apostleship and elevating their own authority. A new situation is thus
deduced. However, if we reverse the procedure and read 1 Corinthians in the
light of 2 Corinthians the position appears very different."

Richard Fellows.

Richard Fellows wrote:
> To sum up:
> Paul wrote the former letter telling the Corinthians to dissociate
> themselves from immoral brothers. The main culprits rejected Paul's
> authority (for obvious reasons). His former letter had appeared to say
that
> the Corinthians were to dissociate themselves from immoral people in
> general. The culprits argued that such a request was obsurd and it
> undermined Paul's credibility as an apostle. The church then looked for
> alternative leaders and became very divided. Chloe's people gave Paul
> allarmist reports of the Corinthians' rejection of his authority. Paul
wrote
> a tearful letter which told them to shun the culprits and respect his
> authority. This letter was carried by Timothy, who was anxious about
whether
> the letter would work. While Timothy was on his way to Corinth, Stephanas
> arrived in Ephasus and brought reassuring news. He revealled to Paul that
> the situation was not quite as bad as he had been led to believe, and that
a
> misunderstanding of Paul's former letter was in large part responsible.
The
> former letter had caused confusion on what was Paul's stance on such
matters
> as sexual immorality, idolatry and idol meat. The Corinthians had writen a
> letter to Paul asking for clarification. Paul wrote 1 Corinthians to
> reassert his authority and answer the Corinthians' questions. The tearful
> letter arrived in Corinth shortly after 1 Corinthians. It caused great
> concern but had the desired effect: Paul's authority had been
re-established
> and the main culprit (or culprits) had been shunned.