Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

corpus-paul - Re: [Corpus-Paul] protective anonymity in 2 Corinthians

corpus-paul AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Corpus-Paul

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: Richard Fellows <rfellows AT shaw.ca>
  • To: tim AT timgallant.org, Corpus-Paul <corpus-paul AT lists.ibiblio.org>
  • Subject: Re: [Corpus-Paul] protective anonymity in 2 Corinthians
  • Date: Sun, 18 Mar 2007 22:55:51 -0800

Tim, that was a fast reply!

> What about Acts 20.3 suggests the opposition was in any way related to the
> collection?

Two things about the plot make me suspect that it was related to the
collection. Firstly, the timing. It occurred just as he was about to sail.
Secondly, Acts does not even hint at a reason for the plot and this is
unusual. All the other attacks and plots against Paul are given a greater
degree of explanation, I think (9:22-23; 9:28-29; 13:45-50; 14:1-19;
16:19-21; 17:5-13; 18:7-17; 19:23-27; 21:27-30; 22:21-22; 23:6-15). This is
at least consistent with the suggestion that the plot was something to do
with the collection, which Luke chooses not to mention.

>To the contrary, we find non-Christian Jews repeatedly opposing
> Paul throughout the Acts record, and the motivation we see has to do with
> the related issues of Torah and Paul's Gentile focus. I see no evidence
that
> the plotting in 20.3 is collection-related.

But the collection WAS related to Paul's Gentile focus in one way or
another. Georgi writes: "an intimate connection between the collection and
the mission among the Gentiles had evolved, particularly in regard to the
latter's eschatological significance. This eschatological character of the
mission to the Gentiles was thus to attain its climax in the collection. The
collection, and most important its conveyance to Jerusalem by a major
delegation of non-circumcised Gentiles (a delegation composed of
representatives of various pagan peoples), simply had to revive in Jewish
eyes the old concept of the eschatological pilgrimage of the peoples... The
provocative nature of Paul's plan to convey the collection must have been
tremendous, especially if Paul were to arrive in Jerusalem - as he had
probably originally planned - during the Passover festival." (Remembering
the Poor p119). For another take on collection-related controversy, take a
look at Dave Hindley's email from 2001:
https://lists.ibiblio.org/sympa/arc/corpus-paul/20010217/002489.html

> Did the collection put Paul in danger. Sure. But not in the provinces.

I don't know how you know this to be the case.

> > I propose that this explains the very strange anonymity of the two
> > 'brothers' of 2 Cor 8:18-9:5. Why else would Paul not name those whom he
> > commends so highly? It also explains the equally strange anonymity of
the
> > brother of 2 Cor 12:18, who accompanied Titus on his earlier visit to
> > Corinth, in which he started the collection (2 Cor 8:6). If Paul had
named
> > these individuals the information could have leaked out to opponents, so
> > he
> > kept them anonymous so as not to expose them to possible persecution.
Not
> > only does Paul not name the individuals, he also fails to specify where
> > they
> > came from or give any information that could be used by opponents to
> > identify them. Moreover, he nowhere connects the collection with any
> > particular congregations, preferring to refer to provinces. In Romans he
> > uses the first person singular when talking about his anticipated visit
to
> > Jerusalem, and while he names Timothy and Sosipater, he does not mention
> > that they were to travel with him. In fact he nowhere implicates any of
> > his
> > friends in involvement in the collection, except the anonymous brothers.
>
> But this is completely explicable if "brothers" are visiting the
> congregations he is writing to for the sake of the collection, it seems to
> me. They were hardly "anonymous" if they were present in person.

I'm not sure that I understand your point here. The three anonymous brothers
are anonymous in the text. I am not suggesting that they withheld their
names when they arrived in Corinth. Rather I am suggesting that Paul omitted
their names in the letter as a precautionary measure in case the information
in the letter leaked out to people hostile to the collection project. By
withholding the names of the three people, Paul signals to the hearers of
the letter that they (the hearers) too should try to protect the identities
of the three, and not broadcast their presence from the rooftops. Remember
that the letter may have been circulated throughout Achaia (see 1:1).

Some have suggested that the two 'brothers' of 2 Cor 8 were actually named
in the original text, and that their names were erased when they fell out of
favour. This seems like a despirate measure. Others point out the anonymity
would not be a problem because Titus would be able to introduce them to the
Achaians. This is true, but it does not EXPLAIN the anonymity, and does not
apply to the brother of 12:18. In the ancient world anonymity was used for
enemies, and it seems disrespectful to omit names without good reason. It is
true that some commentators have attempted to gloss over the problem of the
anonymities, but they have not produced a single parallel example from any
other text, as far as I know. Can any listers think of any other case where
an anonymous person is recommended? We DO, on the other hand, have examples
of protective anonymity in the NT and elsewhere. See Gerd Theissen's "The
Gospels in Context" p 184-189, and Richard Bauckham's "Jesus and the
Eyewitnesses" p183-201.

> > Acts also seems to take pains to protect those who were involved in the
> > collection(s). Rather than omit the names, Luke chooses to omit all
> > reference to the collections, except where he can present them as very
> > innocent acts of charity (Acts 11:27-30; 24:17).
>
> I fail to see how Luke's records show a different sort of collection from
> Paul's.

I don't understand this point. I am not suggesting that Luke's records show
a different sort of collection from Paul's. Does that help?

Best regards,

Richard.






Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page